mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-28 20:21:50 +01:00
3d07e06be7ff24c04e8143eda1e893cf54349652
193
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
f60ac29cf1 |
fix(runner): migrate Grok Build with native reasoning effort (#17922)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Harness selection maps supported agents to Paperclip Runner. > - The native Runner already supports Grok Build, but its migration mapping excludes Grok. > - Grok agents also have a thinking-effort setting that the native execution contract does not carry. > - This pull request adds the migration path and preserves explicit Grok effort through startup and resume. > - Operators can upgrade an existing Grok agent without silently losing its model, account, or effort. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Existing Grok Build agents have no Runner selector or upgrade action. Adding only the mapping would route conversion through the Codex fallback and lose Grok execution semantics. Native execution also ignores the legacy reasoning-effort field. **Expected behavior** A qualified Grok agent can explicitly upgrade. The saved model, account, instructions, history, and supported effort remain intact. Unsupported legacy settings fail before saving. The provider must acknowledge the selected effort before inference. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open the runtime page of an existing Grok Build agent on a qualified Linux x64 or macOS ARM64 computer. 2. Observe that the Runner selector and upgrade action are absent. 3. Compare the native execution input with the saved legacy reasoning-effort setting. Related work: #13882 introduced native Grok Build. #15422 covers the earlier default-runner work. This change extends the current shared selection contract. ## What Changed - Add the Grok harness mapping, qualified platform limits, upgrade action, and company-scoped computer qualification. - Translate Grok settings to ACPX without changing the selected account or explicit model. Resolve the legacy default model to the native default. Preserve the effective legacy search policy. Reject incompatible command, argument, permission, and turn-limit settings. - Add native execution input v10 for explicit Grok effort and search policy. Preserve historical schemas. Enforce disabled search through Grok requirements and bind it across startup and recovery. - Apply and verify ACP `reasoning_effort` before prompting. Bind the value to provider descriptors, checkpoints, runtime identity, and resume checks. - Use the Grok catalog and effort choices in the task composer. Apply task model and effort overrides while retaining the agent account and search policy. Update runtime controls, portability/default handling, documentation, and capability maps. - Advance Pi and Copilot source attestations for changed shared transport and recovery code. Keep historical identities intact and update all Rust integration fixtures. ## Verification - Migration and review regressions were reproduced before the fixes. Coverage includes the Grok mapping, default model, explicit effort, implicit search policy, task overrides, and incompatible legacy settings. The broad migration, route, immutable-input, and composer check passed 478 tests. The final catalog and task-input check passed 135 tests. - Runner startup, recovery, search policy, and profile checks passed 361 tests, with one platform skip. The final source-identity, search-admission, and transport event-pump check passed 89 tests. - All 757 Rust workspace tests passed for the broad implementation. After the final source attestation update, all 55 ACPX profile/session tests passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed for the implementation. Server and Runner typecheck passed after the final production change. Server `tsc --noEmit` passed after the final test-fixture change. Docker context integrity, token gates, maps, generated protocol data, and replay goldens passed. - The v10 startup fixture initially used an ambient local Grok login and failed on CI. An explicitly empty credential home reproduced all four failures. The fixture now supplies a synthetic key and a private empty home. A separate case checks that missing credentials fail closed. All seven selected Grok v10 and Claude v9 startup cases pass without host credentials. - The full local suite could not complete because embedded PostgreSQL failed before database-backed fixture setup. The broad executor-suite attempt hit the same limit and was stopped. Neither attempt is counted as passing. Current-head CI must verify those paths before merge. - Earlier CI found missing Rust input fields, stale source attestations and exact fixture pins, a missing Docker context entry, and an outdated import expectation. Those failures were fixed and checked locally. The CI logs retain the original failures. - Different earlier CI runs also failed unchanged cleanup pagination, device-login timeout, and chat lost-response recovery cases. Later attempts passed the cleanup and login cases without changes to those implementations. Their causes remain unproven. The original evidence remains in [the first run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40563402840), [the login run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40571128328), and [the chat run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40573072163). A passing retry does not establish a root-cause fix. - Both reviews rate current head `16fba9b4cdf12bc7945e6628912e79da42959f35` 5/5. All current-head CI gates pass in [run 40576580699](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40576580699). All 60 check runs completed cleanly, including the four intentional skips and the neutral 5/5 Paperclip review. The legacy security status is successful. No review threads remain unresolved. - Staging migration and a real shell task are pending deployment. This PR does not claim full Grok provider qualification. Reviewers can verify the operator path by upgrading a qualified Grok agent, checking its saved model and effort, and running a shell task through native execution. ## Risks - Explicit effort and search policy require the matching Runner and sidecar build. Older immutable execution inputs keep their existing schemas. - Providers that omit or reject the selected effort fail before a prompt. Unsupported effort does not fall back silently. - Existing agents retain their saved runner until an explicit change. New Grok agents use native execution only on qualified platforms. - Grok token and cost reporting remain unverified, as before. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact serving model ID and context-window capacity are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, source editing, shell execution, and browser inspection. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and the focused suites pass; the full local suite has the environment limitation recorded above - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
50b932a142 |
fix(server): require approval before onboarding task creation (#17914)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start --> https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/78/changes/paperclip/78 <!-- entire-trail-link-end --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agent work and human decisions. > - Onboarding asks the first agent to propose a task before it starts work. > - The first-task skill requires human acceptance before task creation. > - The native tool could create and schedule that task without acceptance. > - REST task creation had the same gap. > - This change checks saved acceptance in the shared creation transaction. > - Valid approvals and ordinary delegation keep their existing behavior. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** An agent could create a task from the canonical onboarding first task before the user accepted its proposal. A real journey caught this after the agent read the first-task skill. A local database regression reproduces the missing check in the native tool and both REST creation endpoints. **Expected behavior** New task creation must wait for saved human acceptance of the latest ordinary proposal. A different parent or a standalone task must not bypass that check. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Bind an authenticated agent run to a server-created onboarding first task. 2. Leave its proposal unaccepted. 3. Call native `create_task`, `POST /api/companies/:companyId/issues`, or `POST /api/issues/:issueId/children`. 4. Before this fix, creation succeeds. After this fix, it is denied before a child or wake is committed. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on `3be54534c24fc279533ff421e62a77ad15b72954` before the fix. ## What Changed - Add a shared check for new task creation from an authenticated onboarding run. - Read the latest ordinary confirmation across both confirmation kinds under the source task lock. - Require a human card decision or validated conversational acceptance. Require the current revision for a saved plan. - Preserve ordinary delegation, committed replay, and dispatch recovery. - Add database regressions and update execution and onboarding map documentation. ## Verification - Real PostgreSQL regression before the fix: 17 failures and four passing approval/delegation controls. No skips. - Exact published source: 102 tests passed across admission, conversational confirmation, and project tools, including all 25 admission regressions. Real Linux PostgreSQL, no skips. - `pnpm build` and `pnpm -r typecheck` passed locally. - Map checks and `git diff --check` passed. - `pnpm test:run` was attempted locally. Existing suites failed because the host exhausted PostgreSQL semaphore sets. The remaining owned test process was stopped; its failed log is preserved. No unrelated database was stopped. Current-head Linux CI passed, including build, typecheck, and browser E2E. The first CI attempt lost runners; its evidence is preserved, and interrupted jobs passed one CI rerun. - The live Cloud attempt remains failed. Local tests do not qualify Cloud onboarding, artifact delivery, or native tracing. No deployment or model retry is part of this change. ## Risks A stricter creation check could reject a valid approval. Tests cover direct, conversational, checkbox, dismissed-card, and clock-skew cases. The check applies only to new tasks from the canonical onboarding run. It does not change existing task updates, execution policy, or wake recovery. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool use and code execution. The session does not expose a more specific serving model ID or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
6e781e0ab2 |
fix(connections): preserve removed grants when saving installs (#17906)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Connections give agents access to external tools through access
profiles.
> - Operators can remove a broad app profile and keep a limited profile.
> - Saving a connection's agent list restored the broad profile to
existing installation targets.
> - Those restored grants could permit write tools that the limited
profile omitted.
> - This pull request grants the app profile only to new installation
targets.
> - The benefit is stable permission choices when an operator edits an
installation list.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
`PUT /api/tool-connections/{connectionId}/installs` attached the app
profile to every target in the submitted list. An existing target
received the profile again if an operator had removed it. Adding an
agent, removing another agent, or saving the same list could therefore
restore broad tool permissions. The activity log recorded each restored
binding as `tool_connection.install_access_extended`.
**Expected behavior**
Targets that remain installed keep their saved profile assignments. A
removed app-profile assignment stays removed. New installation targets
receive the current app-profile defaults. Removing an installation still
removes its install-derived binding.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Install a connection with read and write tools on two agents.
2. Give one agent a read-only profile and remove its broad app-profile
assignment.
3. Save the installation list, add an agent, or remove the other agent.
4. Check the first agent's permission to use the write tool.
Before this change, the write tool becomes allowed again. After this
change, it stays denied.
Related: #17422 adds an agent-edit permission check to direct profile
bind and unbind operations. This PR preserves removed assignments during
installation-list updates. The duplicate search found no open PR for
this defect.
## What Changed
- Attach app-profile bindings only for new installation targets.
- Preserve removed grants for existing agent and company installations.
- Keep legacy connection-wide include cleanup on every non-empty
installation save, including saves with no added targets.
- Add six PostgreSQL regressions. All six use the real install HTTP
route with a local operator fixture.
- Check effective read/write decisions, saved assignments, new-agent
defaults, uninstall cleanup, legacy-rule cleanup, and access-extension
audit records.
- Document the behavior in the connector runbook and both access maps.
## Verification
- Red: all four new regressions fail before the fix. The policy returns
`allow_profile` where the tests require `deny_default`.
- Review regression: the two legacy-rule cases fail before the review
correction. The original four cases still pass.
- Green after review: all six regressions and five existing
profile-precedence tests pass after the correction.
- Command: `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/tool-connection-installs.test.ts
server/src/services/tool-profile-binding-precedence.test.ts`.
- The local regression used `PAPERCLIP_TOOL_ACCESS_TEST_DATABASE_URL`
with a separate, fully migrated PostgreSQL 17 test database. Embedded
PostgreSQL could not start because the host had reached its semaphore
limit. Skipped tests were not counted as a regression pass.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed for the initial fix.
Server `tsc --noEmit` also passes after the review correction.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, `node
scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs`, and `git diff --check` pass.
- `pnpm test:run` was started, then stopped after 16 tests in the
native-session suite failed during embedded PostgreSQL startup. A
focused rerun of its `collect` case confirmed the database startup
error. Direct `initdb` output reported `could not create semaphores: No
space left on device`. The full local suite is incomplete. All six new
regressions executed against the separate test database and passed.
- [Initial-fix
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40541191695)
passed at `23253ee332b90f142e48df3f553aeaaa7f6fa298`. Greptile gave that
commit 5/5. Ponytail found the legacy cleanup gap; this revision
restores that cleanup and adds both regression cases.
- [Current-commit
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40547366181)
passes for `729c487cf2ffaae261a820de0cf9a033a0365fd4`, including type
checks, build, test shards, and both `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`
aggregate checks.
- The first CI attempt hit a 30-second module-import timeout in the
unchanged `issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts` suite. All 179
tests passed locally. One [job
retry](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40547366181/job/122349226221)
passed without a code change. The cause of the import slowdown was not
established. The failed attempt remains recorded in CI history.
- Greptile and Ponytail both give the current commit 5/5 with no
actionable findings. Ponytail confirms the legacy cleanup finding is
fixed. The review thread is resolved, and the PR has no merge conflicts.
Ponytail's advisory check has a neutral conclusion with a 5/5
assessment.
## Risks
- New installations retain the current app-profile defaults. Removing
and then reinstalling a target is a new installation.
- A repeated installation save no longer restores a missing profile
assignment. Operators must use an explicit profile assignment when they
want to restore that grant.
- Existing unwanted grants still require a separate access review and
repair. This PR does not change stored grants, reconnect identity
behavior, or the default access model.
- No database migration or API schema change is required.
## Model Used
- OpenAI GPT-6 in Codex, with reasoning, repository tools, and code
execution. The session does not expose the exact routed model ID or
context-window size.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
585b4e6af8 |
fix(chat): preserve deferred Retry source batches (#17883)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agent work through tasks and governed execution. > - Connected conversations retain the source and authority for each request. > - Task Retry pins the full saved GitHub input batch before it waits for cleanup. > - Resuming that wait could append an independent board queue after authorization. > - Dispatch then rejected the changed batch before the provider started. > - This pull request keeps the authorized batch intact and restores certified undelivered input from historical failed attempts. > - Each board message retains a separate turn and its own admission checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A deferred GitHub task Retry could consume a separate board message while promoting its saved receipt. The new run then failed with `chat_failed_run_retry_not_authorized`. A second Retry could also fail because the historical run retained the mixed batch. **Expected behavior** Retry must preserve the source batch it authorized. Separate board input must keep its own execution path. Historical input may be restored only when durable evidence proves that the rejected attempt never started a provider. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Retain ten authorized GitHub requests behind a failed native turn. 2. Start task Retry while the predecessor still lacks its exact termination receipt. 3. Save an independent board message. 4. Complete cleanup and resume the same Retry receipt. 5. Observe the mixed batch rejected during dispatch. Retry that failed attempt to reproduce the second refusal. Refs #17725 for the existing saved-input Retry contract. This change repairs the later queue merge and its retained failed state. Related #17878 covers snapshot continuation and later turns in recovered directories; its workspace repair can be reviewed independently. ## What Changed - Keep deferred chat Retry promotion scoped to its exact receipt. Ordinary board Retry coalescing retains its existing behavior. - Let a new explicit task Retry restore a historical mixed batch only after strict never-started, source, ownership, allocation, board-comment and prior-delivery checks. - Preserve failed-run history and original budget-skipped receipts. Record restored queue ownership in activity. - Add production queue and HTTP-route regressions. Update the execution contract and verification maps. ## Verification - Before the repair, the deferred ten-input batch failed before identity initialization. The same regression now reaches the real initializer with the exact GitHub batch. The independent board message then reaches its own initializer in a separate turn. - Before historical recovery, ordinary task Retry refused the persisted mixed failed batch. The repair passes that case without changing the failed run. HTTP duplicate requests retain one Retry owner. An additional compatibility probe restored the old queue candidate predicate and removed all historical mixed-state fixture writes: the real producer created the exact batch and the complete historical HTTP recovery case passed (1/1). The fixed-source historical fixture now uses the production serializers. - The affected Retry group passes 86 cases on commit `325c00158df5569f5b42731cda4ecc4584909d99`, including already-coalesced external receipts. Refusals cover edited sources, active controllers, unresolved allocations, changed receipts, foreign external receipt ownership and prior delivery of either board or GitHub input, including immutable budget-skipped receipts. - Full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass with these source changes. Map, module-boundary and diff checks pass. - Full local `pnpm test:run` was started. The host cannot create additional PostgreSQL semaphores; database-dependent suites fail or skip at startup. The affected database group runs against a separate migrated PostgreSQL 17.10 test database with Node 24.22.0 on macOS arm64. - The regression deliberately stops after the real identity initializer to avoid provider allocation. It proves HTTP, queue, source authorization, identity and separate continuation behavior. It does not claim a live model result, GitHub publication, deployment or recovery of the original hosted task. - Current head `325c00158df5569f5b42731cda4ecc4584909d99`: all checks are terminal with no failures or pending checks; required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e` pass. Conditional Storybook checks are skipped. Greptile and Paperclip each reviewed this exact commit at 5/5. Both earlier review threads are resolved. Paperclip retains one optional robustness suggestion for batch ordering; the verified historical producer order remains a strict recovery contract. ## Risks Restoring input could repeat work if the prior turn had executed. The existing strict bootstrap proof rejects provider output, native state, process or controller evidence, and allocations. Restoration also checks current external authority, unchanged board revisions and other run history. An uncertain executor remains held. No migration, provider fallback or relaxation of dispatch validation is included. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository inspection, code editing and test execution. The exact runtime model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. A separately shared regression supplied independent reproduction evidence. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (affected database regressions; full local suite has the host limitation described above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
2f3516f6fd |
fix(github): authenticate external contributor lookups (#17902)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their access to external services. > - A GitHub bot connection can add external contributors by username. > - The lookup sent an anonymous request even when the bot had an App installation. > - Anonymous requests share the server IP quota and can fail for a valid username. > - This pull request uses the selected bot installation for the lookup. > - It also gives users clear errors without exposing credentials or provider response text. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** The Access tab could reject a valid external contributor username with a generic GitHub error. The lookup did not use the connected bot's identity. **Expected behavior** The lookup uses the selected bot's active App installation. It returns the numeric user identity or a clear account, rate limit, or installation error. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Configure a GitHub review bot and open its Access tab. 2. Exhaust the server IP's anonymous GitHub quota. 3. Look up a valid external contributor username. 4. Observe the generic rejection even though the bot has an installation. The original provider HTTP status was not retained. Source inspection proves the anonymous request. The historical cause remains unconfirmed. **Paperclip version or commit** The defect is present at `eda2a03bfe5213ffef2fbbdefdf572be775f1e14`. **Deployment mode** Server deployment with an active GitHub App bot connection. ## What Changed - Pass the endpoint ID from the existing authorized lookup route. - Issue a short-lived installation token with metadata read permission. - Reject inactive connections and invalid installation IDs without an anonymous fallback. - Distinguish missing accounts, rate limits, and installation access failures. - Add 25 lookup tests and update the connector guide and both access maps. The GitHub management service owns the provider behavior. The shared route only passes its authorized endpoint ID. The request body and response shape stay the same. ## Verification - Passed: [full CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40535979115) on `38d1ebcebb08553f159b3b81ee1bb31d1fbbba8e`, including typecheck, build, server and workspace tests, Runner checks, serialized suites, eight E2E shards, and the final verification gate. - Passed: Greptile 5/5 for the same head, with no open review threads. - Passed: 25 lookup regression tests on the final test fixtures. - Passed: 91 tests across five GitHub service suites before the fixture-only change. - Passed: `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check`. - The tests exercise actual GitHub request construction with provider response fixtures. They assert the installation identity, metadata-only token request, request count, and sanitized error details. - `pnpm build` and `pnpm -r typecheck` could not complete because this environment has no Cargo executable. - Two standalone server TypeScript attempts were killed. The second ran after the full suite was stopped, with a 5120 MiB Node heap limit. The 8 GiB container recorded two OOM kills. Neither attempt produced a typecheck verdict. - `pnpm test:run` was started, then interrupted after resource exhaustion. Its first server phase did not produce a final verdict. These local attempts remain incomplete. Full CI later passed for the same head. A live authenticated bot lookup remains unverified. - The initial frozen install stopped on an existing patch configuration mismatch. Installation then succeeded with lockfile writes disabled. No dependency or lockfile changes are included. - GitHub documents installation-token support for [Get a user](https://docs.github.com/en/rest/users/users#get-a-user) without extra user permissions. ## Risks - The lookup now requires an active bot connection and a saved installation ID. - GitHub rate limits can still occur. The error keeps the retry metadata and tells the user to retry. - No database migration or permission-policy change is included. - This PR does not prove that a deployment contains the fix. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with code editing, tool use, and test execution. The recovered implementation was assisted by `gpt-6.1-sol`. This session does not expose its exact model ID or context window limit. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
663fe667d6 |
fix(recovery): reconstruct missing native workspace obligations (#17877)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - A failed native run can still own prepared files in a remote sandbox. > - Cleanup must preserve those files before another executor can start. > - Older failure producers can omit the preservation record. > - A saved message then waits for cleanup without a recovery owner. > - This change reconstructs that record during user continuation and orphan cleanup. > - The existing worker saves the files, verifies stop, and returns input to normal admission. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A failed native run retained a prepared workspace and an active sandbox lease. It had no file-preservation obligation. Cleanup protected the files. The next user message waited for a stop receipt that no worker owned. **Expected behavior** A new message registers the missing maintenance work at once. Existing orphan cleanup recovers historical saved input. Ordinary Retry remains available. Saved input can start once, after verified preservation and containment. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Persist a failed native run with an exact prepared remote workspace and its active lease. 2. Leave its finalizer terminal and unowned. Omit the workspace recovery record. 3. Send a user comment or run orphan cleanup. 4. Observe that no preservation worker starts and the comment remains deferred. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on `bd382eee536f4ada680072b1cc19100163c3d04a`. **Deployment mode** Native Runner with a remote sandbox. Local verification uses disposable PostgreSQL 18 and real temporary workspace files. Refs #17788 and #17800. Those fixes preserve future deadline failures and register historical preservation on Retry. This change adds automatic recovery for new and saved messages. Refs #17839 for the separate restart-failure producer repair. ## What Changed - Register missing preservation before an authenticated continuation waits for remote cleanup. - Reconstruct the same exact-source obligation during the existing orphan lease sweep. - Notify the existing preservation worker in the registration transaction. Do not add a timer or history scan. - Test ephemeral and reusable sources, live owners, active executors, mismatched sources, rollback, lock contention, Retry and saved-input delivery. - Document the recovery contract and feature-map behavior. ## Verification - Red: both new orphan-recovery cases fail on unchanged production code. Four ownership and source negative controls pass. - Red: a new comment starts no preservation work without the admission repair. - All 461 test cases across five affected suites pass across the local runs. One existing 30-second timing case timed out under concurrent verification; its isolated rerun passed with the same deadline and assertions. - The three final-head entry journeys pass again: HTTP Retry, HTTP comment creation, and historical saved-input recovery. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass on final head `8fab8b2ba9049f640fd884094a2007a69465e6da`. The affected server typecheck and build also pass. - The integration journey holds the provider stop reply, checks that no successor starts, preserves real files and newer host edits, and checks one saved-input successor. - Module-boundary checks, map checks and `git diff --check` pass. - Native macOS PostgreSQL cannot start because host semaphore capacity is exhausted. Database verification uses separate disposable PostgreSQL databases for each suite. An earlier shared-database attempt caused fixture interference and is not counted as a pass. - Greptile gives 5/5 with no findings or unresolved threads on `8fab8b2ba9049f640fd884094a2007a69465e6da`. All final-head GitHub checks are settled: 55 passed, two Storybook checks skipped, and one neutral Paperclip review. Full CI test, build, typecheck, Runner and browser lanes pass. No full local `pnpm test:run` pass is claimed. The fix is not deployed. This PR makes no claim of a live hosted model turn or recovery of the original incident. ## Risks - Registration grants maintenance authority only. Existing coordinator, descriptor, allocation, stop, file-receipt and execution gates remain effective. - A locked source remains held. Its one-second lock timeout does not prevent an unrelated source from registering recovery. - New preservation writes wake existing work. Settled sources produce no new recurring work. Historical discovery uses the existing orphan cleanup lifecycle and its backoff. - Provider lifecycle is simulated in local integration. PostgreSQL, HTTP routing, file export/merge, the worker and queue admission are real. - No schema, credential, model, trust, retry-budget or assignment change. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository inspection, tool use and code execution. The runtime does not expose the exact model ID or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
b8f6d9b23f |
docs: clarify delegated connection feature and access maps (#17882)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The feature and agent access maps describe user journeys and their permission boundaries. > - PRs #17737 and #17739 added delegated connection setup across several existing areas. > - The maps include those operations, but some recipes and board-only statements are stale. > - This PR adds usable setup recipes and corrects the access descriptions. > - The benefit is a clearer verification path that preserves human and agent authority boundaries. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #17737, #17739. Related: #17862 changes connection setup advice and catalog choices. This PR only clarifies the existing maps. **Issue type** Outdated and missing documentation. **Where is the issue?** The paired connection setup, app permissions, chat channels, model accounts, and gateway maps under `maps/`. **What's wrong?** Delegated setup guidance sits under Gotchas without a matching driving recipe. Some model-account text still groups supported account sign-in with board-only host controls. A few callback, privacy, and native admission descriptions omit important limits. **Suggested fix** Add the missing recipes. State the current route and service boundaries. Keep existing capability IDs and distinguish source review, fixture tests, and live provider proof. ## What Changed - Add paired entry points and driving recipes for delegated setup, permission changes, and managed AI sign-in. - Describe Google consent restoration, GitHub requested credential fields and saved rotation, and Vercel personal credential attribution. - Correct the Vercel callback state checks and chat conversation/test-status privacy scope. Name the separate GitHub registration handoff endpoint. - Replace blanket board-only AI login wording with the specific managed-account and host/session boundaries. - Link the five access maps to shared native admission and work-mode limits. State the permitted self-targeted policy administration boundary. ## Verification - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed: 35 paired areas and 192 stable capability IDs. This checks structure and references. - `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs` passed. Generated output remains ignored. - `git diff --check` passed. - Eleven selected cases in `server/src/__tests__/connection-management.integration.test.ts` passed on source `db70c5acd9`, the unchanged base of this documentation commit. They use a fresh PostgreSQL database, actual agent keys/run JWTs, human sessions, and deterministic provider fixtures. The other 61 cases were not selected. - The selected cases cover connection/profile creation, Google saved choices, native API entry points, Slack caller/target policy, GitHub import and identity confirmation, durable gateway authority, AI accounts/pools, saved human handoffs, revocation, scope, trust, and Ask/Plan denial. - Read-only source reviews checked all five areas. The disposable database was removed after the run. - Full workspace typecheck, build, and test sweep were not rerun for this Markdown-only change. Live provider login and browser journeys were not run. Per-operation source-only/not-run labels remain unchanged. ## Risks Low risk. Incorrect documentation could misstate a permission boundary or imply broader verification. The changes cite the owning routes and services and retain fixture and live-provider limits. No runtime, schema, lockfile, or workflow files change. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and read-only source-review agents. The session does not expose a more specific deployment ID or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable — existing fixtures verify this documentation-only change - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green — CI is running and Paperclip Review is queued on the current head - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups — exact head `4d16f101968d6908f90f72b6ff6ecbb79037f168` - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
bd382eee53 |
fix(recovery): explain retained source verification failures (#17773)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Workspace recovery must prove the identity of retained work before it uses an allocation. > - The verifier rejects several different contracts with the same `source_binding_invalid` code. > - A saved Retry can therefore stop before file preservation without enough evidence for a safe repair. > - Operators need a bounded observation of the selected source without another attempt or weaker guards. > - This pull request records closed failure reasons and adds an explicit read-only inspection on the run page. > - The benefit is a precise next diagnostic step while the saved work, intent, and ownership fences remain intact. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #17741, #17053. This is a diagnostic follow-up. It does not change recovery admission or the retained-source acceptance policy. **What happened?** A retained-source recovery exhausted in `verify_execution` with only `source_binding_invalid`. Run and task diagnostics could not distinguish an invalid reference, lease policy, source binding, or reopened allocation. The normal recovery-actions read can also revalidate recovery state, so it was not a safe substitute for a current read-only inspection. **Expected behavior** Record an allowlisted reason at the rejected guard. Allow a reader to inspect one exact task/run/action without changing its attempts, saved input, receipts, or ownership. Clearly separate the recorded failure from current identity observations. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Prepare a terminal native run with a retained-source action and a lease policy of `reuse_by_environment`. 2. Attempt source verification. The guard must still reject that policy. 3. Open the failed run and choose Inspect recovery, then Inspect current source. The diagnostic should name `lease_policy_not_retained` and the allowlisted policy. ## What Changed - Split existing source-binding guards into closed reason codes. Keep each acceptance predicate and physical recovery action unchanged. - Persist validated, path-free reason/policy detail with future system recovery failures. Keep historical generic records compatible. - Add an explicit query on the existing task recovery-actions GET. Exact company/task/run/action selection bypasses read revalidation. Run selection lists at most 20 actions; inspection stops before per-lease lookup when a record has more than eight sources. - Add a manual inspection control on native export-failure run pages. Keep resolved retained actions inspectable. Show recorded failure and current recorded-source identity separately. - Update execution semantics and feature/access recipes. The shared type is the normalized server/UI contract; it contains no provider payload or secret. ## Verification - RED: the prior verifier failed both reason assertions for rejected warm policy and foreign-run lease binding. GREEN: the final focused source/HTTP, system-state, and UI suites pass 23 tests. The UI follow-up passes 8 tests after the review fixes. - HTTP tests prove exact selection, cross-company denial, resolved-action access, reused-allocation rejection, redaction, and unchanged actions, runs, leases, tasks, wakeup receipts, workspace operations, and activity. A nine-source case proves bounded inspection while the existing worker verifier still accepts all nine valid sources. - Review follow-up: show allowlisted saved detail beside a changed current observation, preserve all listed actions, and follow exact-action selection in verified/limited/error tests. The prior component fails the saved/current drift regression in an in-memory RED control; the current component passes. UI typecheck/build pass again. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. Token gates, maps, module boundaries, and `git diff --check` pass. - Rebased onto master `46de15ff4b` without conflicts. Range-diff proves both diagnostic commits are unchanged. On new head `a7e2bc87fcea75e76b6b736304d1287257f71174`, all 23 focused tests, full typecheck/build, token gates, maps, and module checks pass again. Both fresh reviews are 5/5 with zero unresolved threads. Final exact-head GitHub status is CLEAN: 55 success, 2 skipped, 1 neutral, no pending checks or failures. The [ci / verify aggregate](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40387002325/job/121802415824) passed in eight seconds. All test/build/typecheck/E2E lanes passed. - Existing full workspace recovery suite: 56/56 pass (103.5 seconds) before the byte-equivalent rebase. `pnpm test:run` hit repeated embedded PostgreSQL initialization failure before database-suite assertions and was stopped. No full local suite pass is claimed. The owned external `_test` database provided the focused HTTP/source verification. The prior browser attempt also stalled at Network.enable before its click; that attempt did not establish browser acceptance. - Current-head local browser acceptance passes through the actual run page: Inspect recovery lists the exact action, Inspect current source shows recorded generic failure separately from the current rejected policy, and reload resets inspection to the explicit control. Explicit selection works again after reload. The app used isolated data, an empty inherited environment, a paused synthetic agent, and no provider credentials. Final state remains failed/exhausted with zero attempts, zero wakeup receipts, zero workspace operations, and unchanged original generic failure. The local app and temporary tab were stopped. This proves the diagnostic journey, not the deployed source's actual lease policy or its recovery. - Final merge verification at `a7e2bc87fcea75e76b6b736304d1287257f71174`: GitHub reports CLEAN and mergeable. Both repository-required checks, `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`, pass, as does the exact-head Greptile check (5/5, zero unresolved threads). The separate [Entire trail](https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/paperclip/trails/7) has no recorded reviewer approval; no such approval is claimed. It is not a configured GitHub merge gate. - Initial local setup failures were distinct from product assertions: localhost sandbox EPERM required scoped local access; a browser harness import path was corrected. A test UUID type inference error and historical native-export UI selection gap were corrected before the green run. The live task remains blocked; this diagnostic does not claim it recovered. ## Risks - This change improves evidence. It does not prove provider termination, local descriptor integrity, or successful file preservation, and it does not repair the original source. - Current inspection spans multiple database reads. It is an observation, not a historical cause or execution authority. It performs no provider/filesystem calls and starts no retry or executor. - The optional persisted detail is backward compatible. Unknown values and extra fields are excluded. Oversized source lists remain uninspected through this explicit diagnostic path; physical recovery rules do not change. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex based on GPT-6, with code execution and browser tools. The exact serving model ID and context window were not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
0c9d10d695 |
feat(connections): complete saved setup guidance and coverage maps (#17739)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Product and agent access maps describe the same capability IDs. > - Agent connection management changes the callable operations and permission boundaries. > - Reviewers need an operation inventory that distinguishes API access, human handoffs, and fixture evidence. > - This pull request adds saved setup screens and updates the maps for #17737. > - The benefit is that users and contributors can inspect the coverage and remaining boundaries. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Product and permission documentation, saved authentication setup UI and consent metadata, and product/agent access maps. **Problem or motivation** The current maps describe board-only management paths. They need to match delegated connection management and distinguish administration from ordinary tool execution. **Proposed solution** Record route operations, required grants, responsible-user limits, transport, saved authentication handoffs, provider-fixture evidence, and explicit local-operator boundaries for every connection family. **Roadmap alignment** This is the documentation companion to #17737. It covers existing Connected Apps, governed MCP gateways, chat channels, and personal/shared AI accounts. It uses existing server setup operations and adds their saved handoffs to the existing UI. ## What Changed - Show saved AI sign-in and connection setup handoffs in the existing UI. - Open GitHub import and rotation links at the required human step. Resume a committed rotation after reload without asking for another secret. - Restore saved Google service choices for the addressed user while preserving newer consent. Successful direct/cloud consent records its own timestamp, independently of refresh or lease writes; existing refresh paths preserve it. - Update product, implementation, and permission-default documentation. - Reconcile app permissions, connection setup, chat channels, profiles/gateways, and model account coverage. - Use matching capability IDs in the product and agent access maps. - Label source-reviewed operations separately from fixture-tested operations and live provider setup. - Preserve catalog creator attribution under the responsible user, with the actual agent still recorded. This follow-up moved from the implementation to keep both reviews below 100 files. This companion now changes 38 files, including the preserved Vercel personal-credential and OAuth callback attribution follow-ups alongside consent and catalog ownership. - Name the addressed-human browser-session and consent step for Slack managed authorization and installation. Preserve source-only evidence for those individual operations. ## Verification - Current companion head: `04d40cdd605452d91cf4931476eb292a210825af`, including implementation `2ecd6451d0` and master `ea727dc3c2`, 38 files. All intended companion files survive: 35 are byte-identical to the previous companion; two chat maps and qualification add current evidence. Exact-head Superagent passed and Paperclip Review supplied an actual neutral5/5 assessment with no findings and explicit no-independent-runtime/live/current-CI verification limits. Exact-head Greptile also completed at5/5 with no findings; both formerly failed shards and their verification aggregate passed on attempt2; full exact-head Linux CI workflow40446969603 completed SUCCESS. All current checks and statuses are terminal clean, with no unresolved findings. This PR remains dependent on #17737 and needs fresh checks after its required post-squash replay. The preceding 605 head’s reviews are historical after this update. Older b0ea Linux workflow success after its single rerun also remains historical. - Earlier preserved-stack verification passed **2,165 tests**: 70 assembled-server actual-auth scenarios, 27 OpenAPI contracts, 2,022 native API tests and 46 saved GitHub wizard cases in fresh PostgreSQL. The parent also passed **141 existing gateway/policy tests**. Workspace typecheck/build, maps and token gates passed. The initial typecheck IPC denial and all material intermediate regressions remain in the qualification record; no full local sweep or live provider setup is claimed. - Operation maps now cover issuer/target gateway policy intersection and post-approval revocation, bounded activity pagination through private-only windows, and native local-login encrypted receipts. The companion preserves the Vercel OAuth callback ownership change with its existing credential ownership follow-up. - Parent CI has one retained connection-intent e2e failure from a periodic-recovery timing race. GitHub refused the first job-rerun attempt while its workflow was nonterminal. Once completed, the single failed-job rerun was accepted as attempt 2 and passed, including the full parent Linux workflow. - Companion Linux server shard 4/12 retained a cleanup-idleness timeout in `login-cleanup-work.test.ts` (active work was still 1 after its five-second wait). The same unchanged cleanup suite passed all 16 cases in the parent Linux job 121950185096 and all 16 cases locally against a fresh disposable PostgreSQL database. Relevant cleanup/reaper/scheduling runtime code is unchanged. The single unchanged-code failed-job rerun was accepted as **attempt 2** on the previous `b0ea3c940f` head (workflow 40431671705). The failed shard and complete Linux workflow passed on attempt 2; no additional unchanged-code rerun was used for this failure. The first local attempt failed the existing dedicated `_test` database-name guard before running tests; the correctly named fixture passed without weakening the guard. - **Earlier 82 GitHub UI tests passed**. All three new replacement cases were red before the fix. A confirmed unchanged generation preserves the earlier copy; a changed or unreadable generation blocks copying and reconnecting. An explicit status check can restore the copy when it is still current. All earlier import, rotation, verification, and retry states remain covered. - The complete stack passed **82 API/OpenAPI tests** in fresh PostgreSQL, including 55 scenarios with real agent keys, run JWTs, human sessions, production defaults, persistence, and deterministic providers. The parent also passed **60 Copilot installation tests**, preserving published v62 and binding combined guidance as v63. - **Earlier 10 focused Google/OAuth tests passed**: eight picker cases and two local-HTTP protocol cases proving consent metadata survives concurrent token refresh. The refresh and legacy UI cases were red before the fix. These protocol fixtures use the existing injected board actor and do not count as agent-authenticated proof. - Workspace typecheck/build passed after the consent change; normal migration generation reported no SQL changes for the additive JSON metadata. The parent's latest caller-authorization correction passed server typecheck/build. Map validation and token gates passed. Maps cover 35 areas and 192 capability IDs. The specification names migration `0380_broken_aqueduct.sql`. - The test-call operation maps now record the full caller/target tool access decision (profiles, policies, and explicit grants), credential identity for every auth label, approval, and rate checks. The profile-only precondition was removed after the new permitted-access cases failed; those cases and the no-auth identity regression now pass. Saved test status requires its originating principal and current linked-task access; actual key/JWT privacy-denial evidence is recorded. - Tool-connection activity is now operation-verified: 100 events over two tasks require two capability decisions and at most two run captures (previously 100/102), preserve private-event filtering, and deny the next request after audit revocation. The regression was red before the fix. - Cloud enrollment creation and callback entries now name instance-administrator and company/principal checks. The callback is a browser return with HTML or a 303 redirect. Status reads retain their separate board-actor rule. - Operation maps identify the API, transport, authorization, evidence, and human/operator boundaries. Structural checks do not establish live provider behavior. Earlier failures and fixture corrections remain in `doc/plans/2026-10-13-connection-api-parity.md`. - An earlier companion head (`26edbe17`) received an actual Paperclip Review assessment of 5/5 with no actionable findings, published with neutral status. That review did not run tests or confirm CI, and it is historical for this new head. The prior incomplete execution result is not counted as a passed assessment. Fresh review remains pending. The duplicate enrollment findings have explanatory replies and are resolved. - The latest implementation correction passed all 55 actual-auth scenarios and 27 OpenAPI contracts (separate commands). It repairs unavailable old credential material, preserves fresh import versus configured reconnect links, and distinguishes credential field sets/completion modes in handoff keys. The new fresh-link and collision cases were red before the fix. All 41 GitHub wizard tests now pass, including filling the fresh saved handoff and asserting App import rather than reconnect; UI typecheck, maps and token gates also pass. Qualification retains the earlier failures and an incorrect OpenAPI filename that selected only the integration module before the correct separate contract run. - Configured GitHub credential-entry links carry canonical requested fields and all/any mode. The form displays and submits those values through human reconnect while retaining other saved credentials. Two webhook/client-secret cases were red before the fix; combined all/any and legacy-link cases also pass. The current UI fixes the old |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
0cb3fc7db5 |
fix(runner): retain ACPX transport failure details (#17837)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Paperclip Runner reports provider failures to the execution and recovery services. > - Those services read the terminal event's structured `error` field. > - The ACPX transport-failure path wrote its code and message only at the top level. > - The session facade therefore replaced that cause with `error: null` and the generic message "Provider turn failed". > - This pull request uses the existing structured error contract while retaining the old fields. > - Recovery can retain the actual redacted cause without reopening the failed provider or assuming a retry is safe. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A native ACPX run can lose its failure details between runnerd and the session facade. The transport-failure producer emits a failed turn with top-level `code` and `message`. The facade reads `error`. The server receives a generic provider failure and cannot use the original cause to explain or classify recovery. **Expected behavior** Retain the transport code and redacted cause in the structured terminal error. Keep failed sessions closed, provider termination unproven, and automatic replay disabled. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open a native ACPX session and start a turn. 2. Send malformed activity from the sidecar after it acknowledges the turn. 3. Poll the native provider events. 4. Observe that `turn.failed.error` is absent even though the producer has a transport code and cause. Refs: #16366, #17543. Those changes cover legacy process-session diagnostics and session-ensure errors. This change repairs the native ACPX polling terminal contract. ## What Changed - Add the existing transport code and redacted message to the terminal event's structured `error` field. - Mark that error as non-recoverable. Keep the previous top-level fields for existing readers. - Add a real sidecar fault fixture and a native-provider regression. It checks one failed terminal, retained error details, a closed session, and no provider reopening. - Document the failure contract and verification scope in execution semantics and the recovery map. ## Verification - Red: the new fault test failed because the structured transport error code was null on the original code. - Green: all 26 native-provider integration tests pass with the fix. - Three session-facade terminal tests and three native-runtime provider-failure classification tests pass. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. - Hosted test partitions, native Runner checks, typecheck, build, browser shards and canary passed. Two final aggregate jobs received no runner for several minutes. The first CI attempt was cancelled after saving its status, and only those two cancelled jobs were resubmitted. Both aggregate jobs passed on attempt 2. The current head has 55 successful checks, four expected skips and successful Snyk status. - `git diff --check`, `node scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs`, and `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` pass. - The full local Vitest suite is not run for this patch. The local filesystem fell below 500 MiB free during verification. The preceding full-suite attempt crashed embedded PostgreSQL; focused checks and CI are used without claiming that attempt passed. - Live incident: verified the exact predecessor sandbox was destroyed and workspace recovery completed. An audited user retry through the normal task-retry service started one new native run. That attempt preserved the original question but failed before provider startup with a missing workspace-sync descriptor binding. The startup race is fixed separately in #17838. A later audited retry completed successfully, saved its useful answer and restored its workspace. The agent API handoff failed; an audited operator repair through the normal issue service completed the required user assignment in Review without repeating the comment or provider work. This verifies recovery admission on the existing deployment; the new Runner change is not deployed yet. - Evidence limit: the historical terminal had `error: null` and its raw sidecar frame was not retained. Fault injection proves this producer defect and the same loss of diagnostics. It does not establish which transport fault caused the historical turn to end. ## Risks - Recovery now receives a specific transport failure code. The error remains non-recoverable and `providerTerminalObserved` remains false. Stop proof, effect reconciliation, workspace preservation, retry limits, and normal execution authority still govern any successor. - This change preserves diagnostics. It does not make a malformed or lost provider connection healthy. - No schema migration, credentials, provider selection, or model settings change. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, source inspection, tool use, and code execution. The runtime does not expose the exact model ID or context window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
94819b6ded |
fix(recovery): preserve live heartbeat preparation ownership (#17838)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Heartbeat prepares each run before it starts the native provider. > - Startup recovery can run while that preparation is still active. > - The native input and coordinator exist before workspace synchronization saves its descriptor. > - Recovery checked the later native executor registry but missed the earlier heartbeat execution registry. > - It could claim the live run and dispatch a second executor against incomplete workspace state. > - This change gives the recovery claim the existing live heartbeat registry and checks it before changing ownership. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Startup recovery can claim a native run that the same server is still preparing. The second execution reads the admitted native input before workspace synchronization has saved its descriptor. It fails with `native_workspace_sync_descriptor_binding_missing`. The original preparation then finds a failed run and cannot start the provider. **Expected behavior** Leave live preparation with its current executor. Do not change its native coordinator or dispatch another executor. An inactive run must still pass the existing recovery checks. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start heartbeat runtime selection for a remote sandbox. 2. Hold workspace synchronization after native input and coordinator persistence. 3. Run native startup recovery with the heartbeat execution still active. 4. Observe an unintended `bootstrap_incomplete` claim and a second execution. Refs #17439 for broader remote controller recovery. This change repairs the current heartbeat startup race. It does not add checkpoint storage or remote adoption. A separate diagnostics correction is in #17837. ## What Changed - Pass the existing heartbeat live execution registry to native recovery claims. - Check the current registry after locking the run and before any takeover or coordinator change. - Return the existing waiting disposition for live preparation. Keep workspace descriptor validation unchanged. - Add a PostgreSQL regression at the real runtime-selection boundary and an assembled heartbeat recovery regression with the real claim service. - Document the preparation interval and its recovery behavior. ## Verification - Red: the new runtime-selection test observed an unintended bootstrap claim on the original code. The heartbeat regression also failed because recovery dispatched the live run. - Green on current head `88bec51f10d61eb851eec849e82a80bb198555c7`: all 144 runtime-selection, heartbeat recovery, workspace-preparation and restart-policy tests pass. - These cases check an unchanged coordinator, no duplicate recovery dispatch, a running source run, and normal recovery after the execution leaves the registry. - The full native restart integration file passes all 22 available cases. Nine real-runner process cases are skipped because local Runner test binaries were removed to recover disk space. The passing cases include remote startup, old preparation fencing, ownership conflicts, Stop, and concurrent recovery. - Direct full server TypeScript check passes: `pnpm exec tsc --noEmit -p server/tsconfig.json`. Hosted CI passes on this head, including full test partitions, typecheck, build, native Runner checks, serialized suites, browser shards, canary and both aggregates. Apex is 5/5 with no actionable findings. The current head has 54 successful checks, two expected skips and successful Snyk status. - `git diff --check`, module boundary checks, and map checks pass. - A wider local safety run stopped with PostgreSQL error 53100 and ENOSPC after 64 tests passed. Recursive typecheck also stopped with ENOSPC. These attempts did not pass. Generated files in this worktree were removed to free space. The full local test suite and build have not been run for this change; hosted CI must supply those results. - Live evidence: a production startup recovery claimed a new run during outward workspace staging. The second preparation failed before provider startup. Its exact sandbox was later destroyed with successful cleanup. The patch is not deployed. A later audited retry on the existing deployment completed successfully and saved the requested answer once. An audited operator repair through the normal issue service completed the final user assignment in Review after the agent API handoff failed. This acceptance verifies recovered work, not deployment of the new guard. ## Risks - A live heartbeat remains responsible for its own completion and cleanup. Recovery must not compete with it. The registry is process-local; existing durable ownership checks still govern other controllers. - An executor that is still active remains protected until its cleanup removes its registry entry. This adds no timer, polling loop, schema or credential change. - Missing or corrupt workspace descriptors still fail closed. This change does not authorize replay of unknown provider actions. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, source inspection, tool use and code execution. The runtime does not expose the exact serving model ID or context window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
db32bdf98b |
fix(github): recover review replay and preserve passive summaries (#17726)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start --> https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/8/changes/paperclip/8 <!-- entire-trail-link-end --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - GitHub tools save review assessments and publish their confirmed receipts. > - A timeout before publication staging can leave an invocation with no saved publication. > - Exact replay must repeat only the authorized preflight and converge on one publication. > - PR requests also share an App-owned summary comment. Progress and maintenance must preserve its final content. > - A native turn can intentionally wait for an author without sending another reply. > - This pull request repairs unstaged replay and prevents queued or passive-wait notices from replacing a published assessment. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related repairs: Refs #16883, Refs #16284, Refs #16275 recover saved publication receipts. Refs #17183 covers unavailable approved replay output. Refs #17714 fixes a separate publication lock-order problem. **What happened?** Exact review retries can return null `begin_review` output or `github_publication_unavailable` after an upstream read times out before publication staging. Separately, response maintenance can replace a completed PR assessment with “Review queued…” or a generic missing-response notice after an authorized no-new-work reply. The latter run can correctly commit a passive wait while its external summary is still overwritten. **Expected behavior** Exact retries repeat only the authorized preflight. A saved or uncertain publication keeps its existing recovery owner. Queued acknowledgements preserve final App-owned summary content. A committed native passive wait settles its current acknowledgement without writing a response or treating an old summary as a new-run reply. Success before presentation remains held until a durable decision exists; exact current-run confirmed receipts can retire their placeholders. Genuine missing/error responses retain fallback handling. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Hold a GitHub metadata read until an authorized gateway call times out before publication staging. Repeat the exact request. 2. Publish a valid PR assessment. Send an ordinary author reply that asks for no new work and no duplicate comment. 3. Commit the native `response_wake` with a no-comment server presentation decision. Run response maintenance twice. 4. The base returns the invalid replay result or replaces the assessment with progress/fallback text. **Paperclip version or commit** Replay regression: `41c42895fa862c586ff841f8c50200d93ffc83a4`. Maintenance regression: the previous PR head `c7553d2325df53d98d9febff7023ade4b1e704eb`. Both use real PostgreSQL and simulated GitHub responses. The maintenance failure was also observed in normal hosted use. **Deployment mode** Source checkout on macOS arm64 with isolated PostgreSQL 18, followed by a dedicated QA qualification. No production rollout is included. ## What Changed - Route exact `begin_review` replay through its typed owner. Repeat unstaged preflight only with the complete request digest and no successful invocation result. - Preserve current policy, immutable assessments, unique action keys, receipt recovery, and provider leases. - Preserve a verified App/marker-owned final shared PR comment during acknowledgements. New canonical assessments can still replace it at the same or a new head. - Project only a bounded server-committed native wait decision. Settle the current main-PR acknowledgement without provider writes or a fabricated current-run reply receipt. - Hold succeeded native runs while presentation is undecided, including the committed-before-presentation window. An exact current-run confirmed receipt can still retire its placeholder. - Keep missing/error fallback and uncertain publication checks. Update the bot guide, execution semantics, maps, and real-database regressions. ## Verification - **Causal RED:** exact begin replay returned null; exact unstaged submit replay returned unavailable. The new real-database maintenance test then reproduced the exact generic summary overwrite. Its first repair also exposed an earlier queued-acknowledgement overwrite. Both publication boundaries are repaired. Four additional ordering regressions reproduced the generic PATCH while native presentation was undecided; the corrected tests hold until the same row settles. - **Local GREEN:** 196 complete GitHub workflow cases pass on an empty migrated PostgreSQL fixture. This includes queued/running preservation, both success-before-presentation windows, null/scalar/invalid decisions, exact-current versus predecessor receipts, durable acknowledgement settlement, repeated no-op maintenance, eventual genuine missing/error fallback, pending writes and same/new-head canonical replacement. Workspace typecheck, exact-head build, maps and whitespace checks pass. The real database respects the actual selected-column projection. - **Command:** `PAPERCLIP_TEST_DATABASE_URL=<owned-postgres-18> pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/chat-channels.integration.test.ts -t 'GitHub agent review workflow'`. - **CI/review:** historical heads `c7553d2325df53d98d9febff7023ade4b1e704eb` and `4d00d3af6f2ccbda8f38a98f81d392d82dd3c59c` had Greptile 5/5. Final readiness head `2d267f1e4aa0b835a11aede97798fbd800d9cd96` passed independent source review with no actionable finding and fresh Greptile 5/5 with zero unresolved threads; all 54 check runs pass with 2 intended skips; Snyk is successful and the merge state is CLEAN. The dedicated QA destination acceptance also passed. - **Full-suite limitation:** the earlier `pnpm test:run` attempt produced no final summary. Its retained log reports failures in unchanged workspace-runtime tests and 15-second gateway-audit and stale-question timeouts. Their cause remains unknown. Do not treat the targeted results as a full local-suite pass. - **Live evidence and limits:** normal native OpenCode/DeepSeek review delivery published a useful assessment, inline finding and App check at the exact reviewed head. A separate ordinary author reply delivered a useful answer and settled. Those are ordinary delivery proofs, not live injected-timeout proofs. A later no-new-work reply exposed the maintenance overwrite. The final combined source `070e9c4ead9341cd497b23f533a91bf194475e79` includes the exact publication repair and passed normal review → ordinary author reply → quiet destination acceptance. A normal current-head review restored the legitimate assessment; the ordinary no-new-work reply then committed a passive wait without new GitHub tools. The same 1,436-character summary stayed identical while queued/running, after terminal settlement, and more than 3 minutes 50 seconds after successful cleanup. Review rows and receipts stayed unchanged, with no owner, live run or queued input. The timeout fault fixtures prove replay and single-publication safety. The historical first upstream timeout producer remains unknown. The live board reads do not expose the raw acknowledgement action row: its terminal cancellation and next-pass no-op are real-PostgreSQL fixture proofs, while the hosted checks prove actual destination stability. The hosted journey did not inject a timeout or pause the terminal/presentation writer window. Private destinations, raw receipts and internal task identifiers remain outside this PR. ## Risks - Original and repeated metadata reads can overlap. The immutable assessment, action uniqueness and publication lease must remain authoritative. - Missing complete request identity or a deleted completed receipt remains held. The gateway does not reconstruct receipts or relax approval. - Passive suppression requires actual native mode/committed phase, current source ownership and the server's no-comment decision. It applies only to the main PR review surface. Uncertain current writes stay held; other surfaces keep normal placeholder retirement. - There is no migration, credential change, dependency or new retry scheduler. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6.1 Sol (`gpt-6.1-sol`) in Codex assisted with diagnosis, implementation, tests, and source review. It used reasoning, repository tools and code execution. The context window size is not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
208a093d19 |
fix(chat): preserve resumed review waits and retry newer saved input (#17725)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start --> https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/36/changes/paperclip/36 <!-- entire-trail-link-end --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - GitHub review agents publish findings and wait for an authorized reply or head change. > - Review tools could retain the requester after resume while completion lost that same wait proof. > - A yielded report could then queue its own continuation or repeat a missing-wait error. > - Ordinary Retry could also select an older failed turn while a newer saved request had no admission. > - This change shares the existing authority proofs and canonical admission owners. > - Current access, publication, execution and budget gates remain required. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17318. Builds on the canonical saved-input retry owner in #17733. Related #16550 covers deferred legacy comments after ownership waits. The separate recovery repair in #17724 owns the cleanup-to-saved-input handoff; this PR does not add a second admission owner. A resumed review could publish an assessment, then turn its `response_wake` into an immediate `issue_status_changed` wake. A provider that omitted its continuation could instead repeat a completion error. A newer linked-human message saved during a budget hold could also remain unstarted because Retry selected the older failed source. ## What Changed - Resolve passive review waits through the accepted requester ledger used by GitHub tools. Require the latest reviewed head, exact company, task, agent, repository and processed publication under current access. - Fill omitted/null yielded continuation from that server proof. Permit an inherited normal tree resume only through its accepted parent identity. Permit an ordinary follow-up only after this run has a processed useful reply linked to its exact inbound message. Reject acknowledgements, partial assessments, pending or uncertain writes as that reply proof. - Recheck the same run/review/head/source proof during feedback, finalization and final status commit. Preserve explicit malformed-input rejection and Done policy. Add no monitor permission or publication grant. - Keep heartbeat and publication projections narrow. Preserve both published Copilot v62 identities and generate source-bound v63 from the pinned merged base. No v63 live qualification is claimed. - Certify the structured isolated-directory binding failure only at its pre-allocation boundary and only through canonical task Retry. Other workspace validation reasons and unknown effects remain denied. - Route Retry to eligible newer saved input through the existing canonical owner. Preserve the old result and skipped receipt. Require current principal, source, App, runtime fence, budget, native ownership and exact cleanup proof. - Recover absent historical App metadata only through an earlier trusted processed response receipt and an immutable non-null endpoint claim. Explicit malformed or conflicting metadata stays denied. - Revalidate execution through the exact claimed wake, coalesced task Retry and resolved user-continuation receipt after admission. A second normal Retry can recover the exact never-started authorization failure with unchanged saved input. Require empty execution evidence, exact diagnostics and no allocated or active executor. - Explain when a recorded result prevents exact replay. Ordinary board Retry directs a new task message to continue from saved work. Inherited requester identity alone never grants replay. - Keep accepted board-message preparation failures with the canonical task Retry owner. Certify the exact unchanged comment, original user wake, accepted same-user identity and absence of provider execution. Pin that source, recheck it at admission, and bind identity initialization to the coalesced intent and exact claimed successor receipt. Uncertifiable sources retain an actionable fresh-message refusal. - Return safe named authority categories for board Retry refusals. Update execution documentation and capability maps. Add no schema or polling loop. ## Verification - A fresh external review request exposed a separate isolated-directory preparation failure before allocation. Its first normal Retry saved an intent but admitted no successor. This follow-up certifies only that exact structured preparation boundary through the existing canonical Retry owner, with trusted failed settlement and no executor, lease, result or output. A real HTTP/queue regression reproduces the missing successor before the repair. Twenty-three current-source safety cases and the final 98-case Retry/HTTP group pass, including a fresh click after a denied intent, source revocation, accepted results and the older direct API remaining denied. The warning case uses actual configuration preparation and production event append; unknown warning shape or provider provenance stays denied. Full workspace typecheck, build, maps and diff checks pass. Renewed hosted normal Retry now succeeds on the final combined source: it preserves the exact saved request and linked requester, starts one native successor in a fresh attempt workspace, publishes the current-head 2/5 assessment and commits In review with passive response wake. - A later hosted normal Retry published a low-score assessment but lost its accepted source identity because the previous attempt failed before identity initialization. It repeated continuation errors, then submitted Done. This is failed acceptance, not a successful qualification. The initializer now retains the exact source only after execution-time failed-chat Retry authorization; generic Retry and Done policy are unchanged. A real queue/initializer regression fails with a null source on the previous code and passes with the newer saved source. Two real database completion cases verify that source yields the authoritative wait and commits In review. Renewed hosted normal Retry now retains the accepted source and exposes the authoritative current-review wait. It completed after two semantic feedback corrections (wrong contract revision, then wrong criterion IDs); the correct contract was present in emitted input. The third finish was accepted and committed In review, with no missing-wait loop or Done escalation. - Repeated board-message preparation failures now walk their canonical intent, failed dispatch and accepted parent identity, rechecking each contained predecessor. A production queue regression fails the second ordinary HTTP Retry before the repair and passes afterward. Changed source, contradictory execution evidence and cyclic receipts remain denied; traversal stops after twenty links. - New inherited omission cases failed before the repair. The final full PostgreSQL 18 wait/status suite passes **252 tests** under Node 24.22. It covers omitted/null input, malformed-first recovery, same-head resume, exact-source replies, changed heads, revoked access, pending/uncertain/mixed publications, final commit revalidation, no duplicate review and no self-wake. - **15 existing publication tests passed before the pinned merge** on a separate fresh database. They retain default partial-delivery and failure-fallback behavior. Context reads remain below the unchanged 16 KiB heartbeat and publication response limits with large saved output present. - Saved-input tests cover a real signed PR webhook, production accounting-budget refusal, normal policy recovery and canonical Retry. Historical producer-shaped tests prove the missing-App case red, then check trusted prior receipts and malformed, late, revoked or mismatched proof. A broader order-coupled test was reproduced on the prior source; its global fault injector now targets its own authorization query. The 43-case sequence passes without changing production behavior or its safety assertions. - New signed-ingress and real heartbeat execution tests reproduced the admitted-successor failure, then the next normal Retry failure. The final pinned merged source passes 249 full GitHub review/publication and Retry cases on a fresh database, including all 49 saved-input cases. A separate 74-case Retry/HTTP run also passes. Exact dispatch negatives cover source, company, agent, task, successor, receipt, pause, assignment, accepted success, controller and cleanup proof. Bootstrap contradictions remain denied. The canonical Retry suite passes 16 cases through its supported external PostgreSQL test connection. - The normal board HTTP route reproduced the unusable inherited-result refusal. It now returns actionable guidance without starting a successor. The actual UI Retry hook and banner tests pass 12 cases. - A production-shaped accepted board comment followed by a pre-provider qualification failure reproduced HTTP 409 before the repair. The final real HTTP/queue test certifies one canonical successor and preserves the accepted identity. It rejects changed source, actor, task, agent, result, controller, process, profile, allocation and receipt evidence. A post-acceptance source change keeps the same intent pending. Execution revalidation rejects removed or mismatched proof. The probe stops deliberately after production identity initialization; it does not claim provider execution. The final source passes the 75-case Retry group, the focused two-case board/inherited-policy group and 19 canonical Retry cases. Full workspace typecheck, build and map checks pass. - Full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. Map, module-boundary and diff checks pass. Full local `pnpm test:run` remains unverified. The 256-case explicit-native suite cannot initialize its packaged PostgreSQL because libzstd is absent; an existing command-scoped fallback did not resolve it. Current-head remote full-suite checks are required. Merged-source full GitHub+Retry (249), separate Retry/HTTP (74), full wait/status (252), profile/history and completion (75), and visible Retry hook/banner (12) checks pass. The fresh owned PostgreSQL 18 databases applied all 377 migrations. - Actual Rust Runner, OpenCode 1.18.34 and exact DeepSeek used unchanged production-generated synthetic contexts. Resume finished with an explicit server wait. The author-reply trial omitted continuation twice: its first report failed the existing empty-criteria check; the corrected second report still omitted continuation and received the exact server wait. It completed once with no missing-wait loop or Done escalation. Controller acknowledgments were synthetic; these probes do not establish hosted publication or board state. - Hosted combined testing proved automatic admission of the exact saved author reply, a useful GitHub answer and committed passive wait. It required two malformed-continuation rejections before a nullish fallback succeeded. A later normal Pause/Resume completed in one finish with explicit response_wake and no new review/comment. The admitted normal Retry then exposed the execution guard gap repaired here. Those remain checkpoint results. On the final combined source, renewed normal Retry completed actual native provider work and GitHub publication, committed the passive wait, released ownership and cleaned up its environment. A subsequent ordinary unmentioned author reply woke once, made no GitHub tool calls or new assessment, and completed its first finish with an explicit response wake. Both exact leases expired with successful cleanup and the queue was empty. However, final destination inspection found a separate automatic fallback overwrote the existing summary with a generic no-final-response message. External summary preservation therefore remains failed acceptance; the separate publication repair in #17726 owns that producer. Full combined publication preservation has not passed. These hosted runs include the pinned-base native additions; they do not qualify Copilot v63. - Current-head automated review is 5/5 with zero unresolved threads. All current-head CI gates passed (54 successful checks/contexts, four skipped, none pending). The earlier login-cleanup idle-work assertion also reproduced locally while its controlled baseline passed; its cause remains unknown, but the exact assertion passed in the fresh current-head CI shard. No timeout, assertion or production workaround was added. This PR is ready for review within its source, authority, native finalization, state, wake and cleanup scope. The independent automatic fallback publication regression is tracked by #17726; no complete combined workflow pass is claimed. ## Risks - The latest saved review defines the durable head boundary. Ingress must record a new head before admission. A reply receipt proves delivery only for its exact saved source; a shared GitHub comment ID alone cannot authorize this wait. - Historical App recovery cannot infer identity without direct proof or an earlier valid server response receipt. It never replays that response. - This does not infer review-score policy from instructions or override Done. No deployment, merge or repair of historical tasks is claimed by the PR. ## Model Used OpenAI `gpt-6.1-sol`, with reasoning, repository inspection, code editing and test execution. The context-window size is not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused database and native suites; full local suite limitation described above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green (verified on immutable latest head) - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups (verified on the latest head) - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
f0877a9c7c |
fix: recover native work and requalify saved computers (#17724)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start --> https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/32/changes/paperclip/32 <!-- entire-trail-link-end --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and preserves their work after an interruption. > - Native Stop must confirm termination and save the workspace. > - Task and run views must show the current recovery receipt. > - A new external reply can arrive while that cleanup is pending. > - The reply must return to its original chat owner after cleanup. > - A successful fresh retry also becomes the task’s bound workspace for its next ordinary turn. > - Managed computer updates can invalidate a saved snapshot qualification. > - This pull request fixes those instructions, acknowledgements, handoffs and the existing native-agent Test path. > - The operator can continue with new input while the stopped turn remains preserved. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Stopped native runs could keep the initial workspace-repair instruction after files were recovered. Native Stop could also leave the shared cancellation state at requested after remote termination was confirmed. A new GitHub reply saved during cleanup could then remain queued because cleanup did not ask its original inbound owner to reconsider the receipt. After a managed snapshot update, an existing native agent could also need qualification while the generic environment Test required instance-admin access. **Expected behavior** Show the current saved-work state. Acknowledge Stop only after exact termination proof. Let an authorized operator use the existing saved-agent Run test to qualify its current computer. After cleanup, recheck the saved reply's current authority and admit it once as new input. Preserve the stopped run and uncertain external effects. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Stop an active native turn before it returns a semantic result. 2. Send a new authorized external reply while cleanup is pending. 3. Let workspace recovery and provider cleanup finish. Inspect the run instruction, Stop acknowledgement and queued reply. Related work: #17594 preserves native processes through controller outages. #17401 addresses a separate bootstrap failure. This pull request does not replace those fixes. ## What Changed - Use the exact run's workspace recovery receipt for task and run guidance, including the Activity ledger. - Retire an obsolete exact-session notice through the existing bounded reconciler. Preserve the separate no-replay hold. - Write the shared native Stop acknowledgement only after the audited Stop intent and every exact remote lease receipt match. - Delegate saved external input to the live inbound owner. Recheck its source, actor, endpoint, principal and conversation generation. Promote the same receipt in the transaction that creates its new run. - Use that owner from the cleanup callback and existing stranded-queue catch-up after a lost callback or restart. A denied source cannot abort other items. - Reuse the current private task directory after a successful fresh retry. Re-read the company/task/workspace binding and validate the canonical stable or attempt namespace without recreating missing files; keep a later fresh retry separate. - Extend the existing agent-scoped qualification owner to native agents. The clean saved-agent Test qualifies its exact computer before runtime testing. Reuse a current proof; require a real probe and verified cleanup for a stale proof. Preserve draft tests and metadata-only external/pool previews. - Update execution semantics, capability maps and the recovery verification recipe. Add a production-page Storybook interaction for the normal native Test. ## Verification - **Red:** persisted recovery states returned stale instructions; an exact terminated native lease left shared Stop requested; the real GitHub subscribed-message fixture left zero successors after cleanup. The controlled baseline restored the previous production source, reproduced the failure, then restored the fixed bytes with matching SHA-256 hashes. - **Green:** 382 durable-chat, native-continuation, Stop and recovery tests pass. The real GitHub/PostgreSQL handoff matrix passes 12/12. It covers callback, application restart, callback/sweep race, valid input behind a deleted source, and denial for unknown stop, wrong allocation, paused endpoint, revoked principal, deleted or changed source, changed conversation generation and foreign scope. Repeated callbacks preserve one receipt, its actor, one successor and the unchanged stopped predecessor. - **Workspace continuation red/green:** the real PostgreSQL preparation flow created a fresh attempt and saved a marker, then rejected the next ordinary turn with the same binding mismatch observed in deployed use. The repaired preparation and filesystem suites pass 86/86: stable and attempt-root reuse, saved-marker preservation, a later clean sibling, changed current bindings, foreign company/task, closed workspace, traversal, missing path and symlink refusal. No task row reset or old-turn replay is used. - **Qualification red/green:** a native saved-agent qualification returned 422, and its normal Test skipped qualification. The repaired path passes 224 qualification/immutable-snapshot/environment tests and 176 UI/upgrade tests. It covers revoked authority, foreign or changed computer, current-proof reuse, failed/missing proof, draft settings, settings changed during the probe, and external/pool previews. On exact current source, the real local Harness / Runtime UI also qualified a newly saved disposable Computer with missing proof through actual Daytona, then completed the actual OpenCode/OpenRouter hello probe using `openrouter/deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash-1017`. Supported availability changed from Legacy-only to Paperclip Runner after proof persistence. Qualification and runtime leases both completed normal release/cleanup. The five prior task run IDs were unchanged; no task wake was created. This is macOS source-server/UI with real Linux Daytona and provider services, not a hosted UI claim. Test probes are archived by the existing inspection contract; release does not claim physical deletion. - Full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, token, map and diff checks pass at `f6450f4739fc8141815b8b7c35fde22a655c5f90`. The broad local `pnpm test:run` passed 24,899 tests and reported one existing nested-clone test timeout at 15 seconds. The complete failing file then passed 21/21 with the normal timeout; the exact case also passed on the pinned earlier baseline. The broad runner stopped before its later groups. No timeout or production workaround was added. Prior head `f6450f4` has 53 successful checks, two conditional Storybook skips and Greptile 5/5 with no inline threads. New workspace-reuse head `fcb13399ec70f92f71bd8250081251dca3f48962` passes workspace typecheck, full build, 86 scoped tests, maps and diff checks; Current-head CI has 53 successful checks and two conditional Storybook skips; Greptile is 5/5 with no inline findings. Deployed ordinary-turn reuse acceptance passed as described below. - **Hosted Stop proof:** the real GitHub issue-mention path used native OpenCode, `openrouter/deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash-1017`, Daytona and an exact low-trust task boundary. Normal UI Stop interrupted an active Bash call. Native and shared acknowledgements matched the exact lease. Automatic recovery saved exactly `STARTED\n` (8 bytes), with no finish marker. Reload showed Stopped and saved work recovered. Only the original cancelled run remained. Normal five-minute cleanup completed its exact provider-destruction transition. - **Limits:** the provider buffered command output, so the marker was read after recovery. The approved local provider credential could not inspect the hosted sandbox; its 404 is not deletion proof. Cleanup success comes from the exact lease's platform destruction transition. An earlier hosted stale instruction disappeared after rollout with unchanged raw run/action data; that historical cause remains unexplained. Original incident holds and publication receipts were untouched. - **Hosted handoff proof:** after QA deployed the combined candidate containing `46b2e99`, startup admitted the previously saved GitHub author reply without another comment, Retry or manual action. The new native run used the exact original wake receipt and saved comment. It completed once, committed an external-response wait, preserved the stopped predecessor, emptied the queue and left the task In review. The answer appeared in the original GitHub conversation. Workspace finalization and the exact lease's normal destruction transition succeeded. - **Hosted workspace proof:** on the combined candidate containing `fcb13399`, normal Retry preserved the original authenticated GitHub request and completed a fresh native attempt. One later ordinary same-head author reply then completed in the exact same workspace ID and attempt directory, with no Retry/fresh directive. Its input tree digest matched the Retry's finalized digest; final copyback preserved that digest. The persisted assessment row and all five prior run records were unchanged, exactly one new reply run completed, and the task returned to In review with an empty queue and no live run. Both exact leases completed normal verified destruction. This used real native OpenCode, the exact DeepSeek/OpenRouter model and Daytona, without workspace-row repair or a new remote marker. - **Publication limit:** the workspace audit compares the persisted assessment and run history. The ordinary reply exposed a separate destination-summary fallback that changed the visible GitHub summary despite the preserved assessment row. The publication track is repairing that behavior; this proof does not claim the visible summary was preserved. - **Deployment boundary:** current-head CI/review and hosted same-source Retry/ordinary-workspace reuse acceptance passed. The separate visible-summary publication failure remains owned by the publication track. Combined hosted UI confirmation of the native-agent Test path is coordinated separately. Actual missing-proof UI/provider qualification has passed in the isolated local instance above; prior hosted Stop and same-input handoff proof remains separate. No merge or deployment is performed by this pull request. ## Risks Recovery state and termination receipts must match the exact source run and allocation. Missing or foreign proof keeps the hold. The chat owner must retain the original receipt and actor and recheck current authority. Cleanup cannot grant authority or replay the stopped turn. Existing native ownership, Stop, budget, permission and uncertain-effect guards remain in place. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6.1 Sol (`gpt-6.1-sol`) through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools, source editing and test execution. The context-window size is not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (affected suites and isolated failing file pass; broad timeout retained above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green (current fcb has 53 successful checks/two conditional Storybook skips) - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
832c44f26a |
fix: resume user follow-ups that reassign a task (#17821)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The execution control plane saves user messages while an earlier run needs recovery. > - A user comment can also assign a task back to its agent. > - That update creates an assignment wake, but continuation accepted only comment wake reasons. > - The saved question could stay blocked after workspace recovery and confirmed process cleanup. > - This pull request admits assignment wakes that carry a valid, undelivered user comment through the existing continuation checks. > - The same rule applies to new messages and saved requests already waiting for recovery. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A human follow-up that also assigns a task back to its agent produces `issue_assigned`. After a native run stops during handoff, the continuation policy rejects that wake reason. The question remains saved behind the execution recovery hold even after the workspace is recovered and the old sandbox is destroyed. **Expected behavior** Deliver the saved human question once after the existing stop, ownership, authority, and execution gates pass. Assignment alone must not grant permission to continue. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Finish task work by assigning it to a human for review. Let the native run stop with `issue_reassigned` and retain its recovery hold. 2. Recover the workspace and confirm destruction of the old sandbox. 3. Post a new human question while assigning the task back to the agent. 4. Observe that the assignment wake stays deferred instead of delivering the question. Refs: #17288, #14156. These related changes cover legacy reassignment and assignments without comments. This change covers a human comment carried by an assignment wake behind a native or legacy continuation hold. ## What Changed - Share the comment-bearing wake classification between continuation admission and saved-request recovery. - Accept `issue_assigned` only through the existing persisted user-comment validation and execution gates. - Add database regressions for new and saved assignment wakes, concurrent recovery, single delivery, and unchanged prior run results. - Check that bare assignments, invalid authors and comments, changed ownership, active execution, and pending approvals or questions retain their holds. Cover native and legacy cleanup paths. - Update execution semantics and both recovery maps. ## Verification - Red: both new and saved assignment-with-comment cases stayed deferred without a successor on the original code. - Green: the final continuation suite passes all 284 tests. The four companion recovery, retry, and queue suites pass another 208 tests. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. - `git diff --check`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `node scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs` pass. - Apex review is 5/5 on `56c9c2d90dcda55b3f760946c9aba6aee448c361`, with no unresolved review threads. The only earlier finding concerned the contribution rule against new source comments; those comments were removed. - Full `pnpm test:run` is still running locally. CI is waiting for the `paperclip-public-pr-x64` runner fleet; the superseded workflow was cancelled so the current head could proceed. No passing CI claim is made yet. - Live recovery: corrected one existing saved wake to the supported comment reason. The normal server admitted one successor with the exact saved question and prior-run context, then started real tool calls. This verifies admission on the existing deployment; the new source change is not deployed yet. The resumed turn later failed with a separate provider terminal event whose error was null, followed by a workspace restore failure. The task is blocked again on that failure. Its useful answer has not been delivered, so end-to-end completion remains unverified. ## Risks - Assignment wakes now reach continuation validation when they carry a comment. The persisted comment must still belong to the task and requesting human, follow the stopped run, and remain undelivered. - The existing stop proof, cleanup, current assignment, approval, pause, budget, and competing-execution checks remain effective. Regression cases cover both native and legacy paths. - No schema migration or data rewrite is required for saved requests. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, source inspection, tool use, and code execution. The runtime does not expose the exact model ID or context window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Nicky Leach
|
baec3abd67 | Authorize background project Git with explicit Connector consent (#17798) | ||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
32ec84db2e |
fix(native): restore plugin checkpoints for same-run retries (#17814)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Native sessions retain provider state across execution attempts. > - A same-run retry can receive a replacement plugin task lease. > - The executor loaded the old task checkpoint only for crash recovery. > - An ordinary retry could fail its local authority check before reading that checkpoint. > - This change restores the checkpoint through the existing authorized lease transfer. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A native provider turn ended without its completion result. Paperclip scheduled an exact-checkpoint retry on the same heartbeat run. The retry acquired a new plugin task lease, then failed with `runner_state_identity_mismatch: authority_indeterminate`. The checkpoint restore branch required a `resume_dead_runner` restart claim. Ordinary same-run retries have no such claim. A controlled fixture with a retained remote checkpoint and no local lifecycle receipt reproduces the error. The original controller file contents were unavailable, so that part of the incident mechanism remains inferred. **Expected behavior** Load the retained plugin checkpoint after the existing policy proves the lease transfer is safe. Keep the original run, session, and saved control journal. Reject an unverified predecessor or a changed checkpoint identity. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a native session through a plugin task environment. 2. End its provider turn without a completion result and retain its checkpoint. 3. Retry the same run on a replacement task lease without a restart claim. 4. With no local lifecycle receipt, observe the authority error before the checkpoint read. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced against source `507dc70be26c191e372f09e58dc0965e73bf8f57`. **Deployment mode** Native Runner with a plugin task environment. The observed provider used ACPX Claude. The controlled executor fixture uses the shared native boundary. Related work: #17439 concerns recovery after controller replacement. This fix uses the existing checkpoint contract and does not depend on that PR. ## What Changed - Restore prior plugin state for an ordinary same-run attempt when its lease changes. - Keep the existing company, agent, workspace, retained-state, and termination checks. - Extend executor regressions for ordinary retries, mismatched checkpoints, and missing stop proof. - Exercise the same-run checkpoint read through the database-backed task API. - Document the recovery rule and verification recipes. ## Verification - Failing before: the ordinary retry reproduces `authority_indeterminate`. Both new denial cases also fail because the old branch never reaches the transfer policy. - Passing after: all six focused checkpoint cases pass. The saved control journal stays byte-for-byte unchanged. Rejected cases do not construct a provider backend. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passes. - Map and module-boundary checks pass. - All 858 executor, database lease-authority, plugin task, and ownership tests pass. `pnpm build` passes. - The broad local `pnpm test:run` attempt did not complete. It hit a 20-second timeout in the existing historical workspace-recovery HTTP Retry case. That exact case then passed in isolation on the unchanged head. The broad local attempt was stopped after the full CI matrix passed; it is not counted as a local pass. - Greptile reviewed current head `5bc11fa978ab87d3d9c5d575fa9666185aaafc2c` at 5/5 with no actionable findings. The full current-head CI matrix passed on attempt 2: 55 checks passed, no pending or failed checks, and two expected Storybook jobs skipped. - The first broader local attempt could not bind embedded PostgreSQL inside the sandbox (`EPERM`). It was stopped and restarted with loopback access. This was a setup failure, separate from the observed red regression. - The first CI attempt failed two existing checks: the process-adapter signoff happy path exhausted its run wait budget, and the workspace export scheduler did not reach `complete` within 20 seconds. Both tests pass in isolated local runs on the unchanged head. Both failed shards passed on their single rerun without code changes. The initial failures remain recorded. Their timing cause is not proven by the later passes. - Live acceptance at the fixed revision has not run. The hosted workspace still serves the earlier release. No deployment or retry of the original task is claimed. ## Risks The new checkpoint read runs only for same-run plugin recovery with a replacement lease. Missing termination proof, changed scope, or a changed Runner identity still stops execution. The lease resolver owns these checks. The fix does not replay tools or change retry budgets. A turn that omitted its completion result still needs the existing bounded continuation to finish useful work. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools, and code execution. The runtime does not expose a more specific backend model ID or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
835966dec8 |
Prepare agent-owned environments during hiring (#17761)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start --> https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/1/changes/paperclip/1 <!-- entire-trail-link-end --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and their execution environments. > - New agent setup saves an inactive agent before model connection tests. > - Some plugins need that agent to prepare its execution resource. > - The wizard tested without the agent ID, while the setup hold prevented preparation. > - Environment changes also discarded the selected model account. > - This change prepares the saved draft during setup and keeps normal execution held. > - Users can test the prepared resource before they finish hiring. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** An agent-owned plugin environment could not acquire a test lease during hiring. Changing environments also returned the user to Connect and cleared the selected account. **Expected behavior** Keep the selected account, invalidate its test, and prepare the saved agent resource in the background. Test that same agent before finishing setup. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a new Claude or Codex agent and select a saved account. 2. Change to an agent-owned plugin environment. 3. Try to finish setup or reconnect the account. Related: #17750 defers probes until after hire submission. This change implements preparation during the wizard instead. The related PR search and ROADMAP review found no other implementation of this setup preparation path. ## What Changed - Add the optional `requiresAgent` driver declaration. Require agent lifecycle participation when it is set. - Prepare saved drafts on creation or environment changes. Keep the setup hold and wait in `verifying` without background verification scans. - Bind tests to the saved agent. Return a warning without allocating a lease when the required agent is absent or still preparing. - Preserve the account and configuration step when the environment changes. Save the selection and invalidate the old test. - Show active preparation and support authorized retries. Keep approval, company, budget, and normal task admission controls. - Document the contract and cover lifecycle, lease, manifest, and wizard behavior. ## Verification - Server and UI TypeScript checks passed. - 112 wizard and setup helper tests passed. The shared manifest suite passed. - 123 lifecycle, policy, lease, and environment-test API cases passed after the approval-gate fix. The diagnostic and driver suites and all 80 agent adapter route tests also passed. - Token gates, module boundaries, map validation, and whitespace checks passed. - All 66 lifecycle/policy cases passed after the stopping-draft permission fix. The new real-DB route case verifies creator success, other-creator denial, and refusal to complete a hire while stopping. - Full workspace typecheck and build were attempted. Both stop at the unchanged Rust Runner step because Cargo is not installed on this host. - CI on |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
c7c12dbc79 |
Support plugin panels in task sidebars (#17796)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Task side panels keep live work beside the conversation.
> - Plugins can already provide agent detail tabs.
> - Those tabs have no generic way to appear beside the task that is
using the agent.
> - This pull request adds an optional task-side-panel declaration to
agent detail tabs.
> - The plugin owns the label, component and availability. Core supplies
the task's running agent.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
Access to plugin-contributed live views from task chat.
**Subsystem affected**
Plugin manifest validation, slot discovery, and task side-panel
UI/state.
**Current behavior**
Agent detail-tab contributions appear on agent pages. A task cannot
offer the same view through a plugin-owned availability decision.
**Proposed behavior**
An agent detail tab can declare `taskSidePanel: { availabilityPath }`.
Core substitutes the running agent into the plugin-local path. A
declared board GET route scoped to that agent returns `{ available:
boolean }`. Available contributions appear in desktop and mobile task
side panels.
**Reason and benefit**
Keep the task and its live plugin views together. Preserve plugin
ownership of provider protocols and product behavior. Core contains no
concrete plugin identifiers, routes, labels or readiness rules.
**Breaking changes**
None. The field is optional. Existing contributions remain unchanged.
Missing, disabled or unavailable plugins add no panel.
**Additional context**
Related: #17111 established the agent detail-tab and scoped API
extension surfaces. Roadmap and related PR searches found no duplicate
of this extension.
## What Changed
- Extend the manifest with optional task-panel metadata. Validate safe
plugin-local paths and require a declared board GET route with
agent-scoped authorization.
- Discover and load only opted-in agent contributions. Poll their
generic availability responses and mount the existing components with
agent context.
- Add generic panel tabs, launcher entries, dismissal and inactive-view
removal in desktop/mobile task chat.
- Reuse the existing live-run polling guard so idle tasks with a healthy
live connection stop polling.
- Add provider-neutral fixtures, schema/authorization tests, task tests
and SDK/feature documentation.
## Verification
- PASS: 301 focused tests including the full task-detail file, generic
panel discovery, persistence, slot loading and manifest validation.
Regressions cover POST-before-GET route order, mobile drawer dismissal,
recovery without focus and the absence of the hidden desktop task panel
on mobile.
- PASS: UI and shared-package typechecks; production UI build; token
gates, feature-map and module-boundary checks; diff and secrets/PII
review.
- PASS on final head: all 795 UI files / 9,186 tests, and all 95
shared-package files / 1,038 tests. Commands: `node
node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run --project @paperclipai/ui
--maxWorkers 3` and the corresponding `--project @paperclipai/shared`
command with local socket access.
- On the final head, server shards 7/12 and 10/12 and workspace shard
a-1/2 were interrupted by runner shutdown/communication loss. GitHub
reported infrastructure failures; no assertion failure was surfaced in
the available diagnostics. The queued summary was cancelled, then `gh
run rerun --failed` successfully requested retries for only those three
jobs. They are currently queued for CI runners; the 50 successful checks
remain passing. Interrupted attempts are not counted as passing.
[Final-head CI and
retry](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40396870920).
- Earlier verification exposed an empty-panel rerender loop, which was
fixed. The sandboxed combined run also failed five shared port-registry
tests because it could not bind loopback listeners; the full shared
rerun with socket access passed. These earlier failures are retained
here rather than reported as passing runs.
- Full workspace typecheck/build were attempted with pinned pnpm 9 after
resolving the initial local package-manager setup. Both stop at the
unchanged Runner Rust step because `cargo` is not installed. Full local
workspace checks are not reported as passing; final CI must provide
those broader checks.
- No live provider or plugin-specific transport acceptance is claimed by
Core's synthetic fixtures.
## Risks
- Availability is polled every three seconds only while an authorized
running agent exists. Plugins own the side effects and meaning of that
read.
- A view uses the running agent's context. It is not a separate per-task
resource.
- Optional metadata adds no backend endpoint or permission bypass. The
host requires existing board and agent authorization.
- Reverting the optional contract and UI integration removes task panels
without a data migration.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with reasoning, repository tools and code
execution. The exact backend snapshot ID and context window size are not
exposed by this session.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue
template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
ticket id
- [x] I have run focused tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
718c73dafe |
fix(native): require verified remote process exit receipts (#17799)
Require fresh ESRCH or an exact matching zombie generation before treating a remote Runner as stopped. Preserve uncertain ownership through adoption and transport close, retire local controller resources after failed close, and check Node before remote launch. Bind the shared transport change in Copilot profile 62 while retaining historical profile decoding. Add red-green process, permission, launch, adoption and cleanup regressions. Thanks to @hsm-lv for the original investigation in #17073. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8373d78679 |
fix(recovery): register missing native preservation on Retry (#17800)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage agents and their saved work. > - Native runs can leave a prepared remote workspace after a control deadline. > - The deadline repair in #17788 records preservation for future failures. > - Older failed runs can still have an active lease without a preservation owner. > - Retry correctly refuses another executor, but nothing can finish the missing preservation. > - This pull request registers the exact prepared source through the existing recovery services when the user retries. > - The bounded maintenance worker can then stop the provider and save its files before normal admission continues. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A historical failed native run has a prepared workspace and an active retained allocation. It has no workspace preservation record. Ordinary Retry cannot prove that the old executor stopped and has no maintenance owner to produce that proof. **Expected behavior** A deliberate Retry registers missing preservation for the exact unowned source. Existing recovery proves termination and saves the files. Existing admission then checks current user authority, effects, pause and budget gates before one successor can enter the queue. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Persist a failed native run with a prepared workspace, an active lease and a terminal, unowned finalization. 2. Omit the workspace preservation record, as an older deadline handler did. 3. Call the normal task Retry route. Before this fix, preservation remains absent and Retry cannot continue. **Paperclip version or commit** The regression fails on `46de15ff4b99bbee59c38f32f4f30b80ad5bbd24`, which already includes #17788. Related: Refs #17788 (future deadline failures), #17741 (committed recovery wakes), #17733 (connected Retry authority). #17773 adds source diagnostics and does not repair this missing registration. ## What Changed - Use native workspace preservation inside the existing issue-locked Retry transaction. A live finalization owner remains held. - Adopt a valid unowned preservation obligation through the existing bounded maintenance service. Bind it to the deliberate Retry intent without resetting an active generation. - Add real PostgreSQL regressions for exact, mismatched and owned sources. Verify that registration cannot create a termination receipt or a successor. - Exercise the HTTP route, worker, real temporary file merge and queue admission with the stop reply held. Duplicate requests admit one queued turn after preservation. - Extend connected GitHub and Telegram Retry coverage for missing historical preservation. Document the contract and access boundaries. ## Verification - Red: the new historical-state regression fails on the base commit because `workspaceRestoreRecovery` remains absent. The mismatched and owned negative controls pass. - Green: the three focused historical-state cases pass with the fix against isolated local PostgreSQL 17. - The local HTTP journey restores saved files and retains newer host edits. It admits no successor while the provider stop reply is held. It admits one successor after verified preservation. The real GitHub and Telegram admission paths wait behind that recovery. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` pass. - Green: 152 tests across four relevant suites, including all connected Retry safety cases. The six new cases pass again on final head `b8900801a3181fa673ea45f1129f968bbb08d1fd`. - Final-head GitHub checks: 55 successful, two intentionally skipped Storybook checks, and one neutral Paperclip bot review. Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved threads. The Paperclip bot stopped before finishing and supplied no approval. - The full local command imported an earlier fixture revision before its assertions were corrected. It reported those two stale connected-fixture assertions and later hit the host PostgreSQL semaphore limit again. It was stopped after final-head CI completed. It is not counted as a full local pass; the complete CI test lanes passed on the final head. - The first local rerun hit the Mac PostgreSQL semaphore limit before assertions. Verification moved to an isolated disposable PostgreSQL container. Early assembled fixtures also exposed the existing destruction-cleanup gate; the retained-workspace fixture now uses its actual `keep_running` disposition. This fix does not weaken cleanup. ## Risks - Retry now registers maintenance for historical native failures. Exact descriptor, allocation and coordinator checks remain owned by the existing preservation service. Physical recovery still requires its existing exclusive owner and provider stop receipt. Registration alone grants no execution authority. - No database migration or provider protocol changes. No model, trust, assignment, retry-budget or external identity changes. - Local recovery uses real database, filesystem, HTTP, worker and admission code. Only the provider lifecycle boundary is simulated. No hosted allocation or live model turn has been verified for this new change. - The workspace recovery test file crosses 1,000 lines because this case shares its real database, filesystem and assembled route fixture. Keeping it there avoids duplicating that fixture or extracting unrelated production behavior. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools and code execution. The exact model identifier and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
2ee36a4c0a |
test: add chat feature scenarios and real task workflow evals (#17794)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agent Chat lets a person assign work through a conversation. > - Feature and API maps do not prove that a natural request produces the right saved result. > - Product E2E already owns isolated fixtures, browser runs, evidence and cleanup. > - This pull request adds a chat scenario catalog and two real task workflows in that framework. > - Independent checks verify the task, its author, the saved output and the reply in chat. > - The benefit is a small executable foundation for broader chat coverage. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** It adds real task creation and delegation coverage for Agent Chat. **Current behavior** Existing maps describe features and agent access. Existing chat evals cover specific protocols and handoffs. They do not connect a broad human-request catalog to independent saved-state checks. **Proposed behavior** Keep 244 planned scenarios across 35 feature areas. Promote two requests into the explicit-only `chat-features` suite. One saves a backlog task without starting work. The other delegates an announcement and returns the saved result to the original chat. **Reason and benefit** A successful tool call or confident reply does not prove the requested result exists. These evals check public API state, attribution and browser access after a real model run. **Breaking changes** No API or data schema changes. Chat instructions now require actual relative task links. The local E2E private-state scanner recognizes Codex account ownership metadata while continuing to reject credentials and model-visible identity leaks. **Additional context** Related prior work: #13969 and #13762. This improves verification of the existing Agent Chat roadmap item. It does not add a new core product feature. ## What Changed - Add YAML scenarios with capability IDs, starting context, user requests and expected outcomes. Validate all area files against their schema, global ID uniqueness and exact feature-map capability coverage. - Add two local native Codex subscription cells. Send the exact catalog request once through Chromium. - Seed only prerequisites through public APIs. Use shipped agent instructions and explicit disposable budget policies for unpriced subscription usage. - Check task ownership, creation audit, no premature execution, current worker-authored output, automatic completion delivery and usable links after reload. - Keep private Codex account ownership metadata distinct from bearer credentials. Scan rollout message content, all tokens and published evidence as before. - Teach normal chat instructions to use relative task links instead of invented hosts. Update tests, maps and the runbook. - Repair existing E2E contract drift: include the active Copilot identity in the image digest and update Pi profile expectations. Keep global catalog cardinality in its owning catalog test. Product E2E owns the new flow and grader. Its existing launch and report paths remain in use. The shared scanner change is limited to owner-private temporary Codex runtime metadata. Other callers retain the full secret scan. No UI, endpoint, schema or permission behavior changes. ## Verification - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed: 35 areas and 191 capability IDs. - Product E2E typecheck and focused tests passed before rebase: 225 Vitest tests and 137 Node tests. Conversation service tests passed 40/40. Five existing runner turn-binding regressions passed. - Historical live measurement used real Chromium, server, database and native Codex with no automatic retries. The initial same-definition batch passed 5/6 cells. Backlog passed 3/3; delegation passed 2/3. One CEO startup failed because the runner did not receive a provider turn identity. The cause is unresolved. - An unchanged follow-up passed delegation three times and backlog twice. Combined evidence is backlog 5/5 and delegation 5/6. Each attempt passed cleanup. Later passes do not erase the earlier failure or prove a runner repair. - Earlier failed revisions exposed an invented task hostname, private account metadata false positives and missing funding for unpriced subscription usage. Those led to the specific changes above; the failed records remain retained locally. - The runbook records campaign identifiers and definition provenance. Generated result artifacts are not committed. Historical live results predate this branch rebase; fresh PR-source live evidence and final validation are recorded below. - Full workspace typecheck and production build passed on the rebased branch. Product E2E typecheck passed. - The full Product E2E support suite first reproduced four baseline failures: two missing active Copilot image-identity inputs and two stale Pi/catalog expectations. The narrow contract fixes above resolved them. The full rerun passed 4,282 Vitest tests plus 137 Node tests, with two skipped. Image checks verify mutation changes the hash, unchanged input stays stable, and an input closure without Copilot is unaffected. Original failed logs remain retained. - The repo-wide local Vitest run has reported two failures in unchanged service files. The Workspace connection test passed an isolated recheck and its full file passed 469/469 unchanged. The recovery test hit a 15-second timeout; its full file passed 89/89 unchanged. The run later hit explicit PostgreSQL `semget` resource exhaustion and was interrupted after those observed failures; no final aggregate counts or full local pass are claimed. Its complete available log is retained. No assertion or timeout was weakened. Matching remote server CI passed on the same source. - On clean PR head `39ad80b523ce194c90aafafd077d48dd9a36b4c5`, backlog passed in `local-2026-10-26T19-24-13-014Z`. The parallel delegation fixture failed during PostgreSQL initdb, before browser or model execution; its failed cleanup grade is retained. A disposable standalone initdb probe then passed. No semaphore sets or kernel settings were changed before that probe/recheck. After confirming no remaining fixture process, its private temporary files were removed. - One separate delegation recheck passed in `local-2026-10-26T19-29-24-800Z`, with one attempt, zero automatic retries and successful cleanup. Both passing current-source cells use definition `3f2c9ba2d03e3dcddde47ddab3b43bc52de977f25e256fceae0a24c9128e204b`. The earlier bootstrap failure and the historical provider startup failure remain distinct. These local results omit automatic source-SHA metadata; the clean checkout SHA is recorded here from the execution session. - The later broad local run reported `could not create semaphores: No space left on device`. A bounded cleanup removed 32 current-user PostgreSQL sets with 17 members, marker 537, a dead recorded creator and zero waiters. No live process or kernel limit was changed by that cleanup. The test process group was subsequently stopped; no broad rerun is planned. This direct later resource failure does not prove the precise cause of the earlier live initdb failure. - Review follow-up adds only static catalog validation and documentation of the existing five-minute journey bound. The executable definition is unchanged. Focused catalog/oracle tests passed 28/28; no redundant live run is claimed. - Final head `30fcb36ac9ae1f0270a589dbfafcec91ca6a03f3` passed all required and underlying CI checks in [run 40391402347](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40391402347), including `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`. Greptile and Paperclip Review both scored this head 5/5, with all review threads resolved. The static follow-up leaves every executable definition input byte-identical to the live-tested source at `39ad80b`. Normal squash auto-merge is enabled. Actual merge is pending eligible code-owner approval for the owned dependency manifest; no protection is bypassed. ## Risks - Live model behavior can vary. One missing turn-start event remains unexplained; this PR does not claim provider reliability or broad catalog qualification. - Subscription costs are unpriced. Explicit fixture funding admits that usage. Run counts and deadlines remain bounded, but the dollar limit cannot cap unknown cost. - Account identity exceptions apply only to known private Codex runtime files. Token reuse, unknown files and model-visible rollout content remain blocking findings. - Deterministic checks establish saved state, output structure, required brief facts and access. They do not score all prose quality. Initial samples also require human inspection. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, code execution, browser and repository tools. The precise model revision and context window are not exposed to this session. Live eval agents used `gpt-5.6-sol`; that is the evaluated model, not a claim about the authoring model. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run local tests; focused suites pass and the interrupted full-run failures are documented above - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
5061ab7b35 |
perf(ui): speed up task and inbox cold opens (#17756)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task lists and inboxes are the main entry points to that work. > - Cold opens fetch overlapping task lists, task descriptions, and run details before useful rows settle. > - Independent responses can insert rows above content that a person has started to read. > - This pull request loads a small task index first and adds details only for visible rows. > - It keeps row order and geometry stable while those details arrive. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Cold opens of Tasks and Inbox, including the shared navigation badge. **Subsystem affected** Server list reads, shared response contracts, and the React UI. **Current behavior** The badge fetches full task bodies. Mine fetches several overlapping lists. Historical diagnostics and row metadata add work before the first useful list. A fast failed-run response can appear before task rows, then move down when tasks arrive. **Proposed behavior** Load the selected inbox source and its required context together. Use an index without task descriptions or recovery diagnostics. Fetch diagnostic details for up to 50 visible rows. Keep skeletons, recovery indicators, external status, and live metadata in fixed space. **Reason and benefit** Reduce work on a cold open and prevent loading-induced row movement. On the same 100 local fixture tasks, the compact response was 262,441 decoded bytes and the index was 110,909 bytes. This comparison excludes compression and is not a page latency benchmark. **Breaking changes** Existing full and compact responses remain available. New index/row projections are opt-in and marked as partial data. Mine keeps its existing most-recent-100 display limit, now selected on the server. Existing filters and group preferences remain in the client. No database migration. **Additional context** Refs: #17593. Related: #13095, #17428, #13803. This change addresses collection overfetch and layout stability. It does not replace the blocked-inbox query work or the database activity-index work. ## What Changed - Add authorized index and row projections, with bounded task and parent ID batches. - Replace badge list downloads with unread IDs and aggregate counts. Preserve actor privacy, dismissals, and local archive behavior. - Load only the selected inbox source, plus bounded parent and failed-run context. Return only relevant failures from the bounded run window. - Batch hierarchy reads, including at most one authorized child per collapsed parent in one request. Collapsed markers do not consume the expanded row budget, and partial descendant counts are not shown as totals. Enrich visible rows without replacing membership, ordering, titles, or read state. - Reserve row geometry on desktop and mobile. Reveal the initial inbox only after its sources settle. Preserve legacy task-list reads. - Start collection module downloads during access checks. Keep partial rows out of the task-detail cache. - Keep ETags and concurrent request sharing for the new projections, but skip the short server response TTL so archive undo sees fresh state. ## Verification - On final head `ef6afb2a56`, the full CI workflow passed, including build, typecheck, server/workspace/runner suites, and all eight browser shards. A server shard reported **1,489 passing tests** before runner shutdown canceled the job; its single infrastructure retry passed. Both Greptile and Paperclip Review are **5/5**, with zero unresolved review threads. - The optional external **Entire Gates** check remains `unassessed` because it has no active assessed Change for this comparison. Entire is not set up in this checkout. The repository ruleset requires `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`; both passed. No gate configuration was changed. - Passed workspace typecheck after the final API batching change. The full production build also passed on the final commit; the exact-retry E2E run built the shipped UI. - Passed token gates and map validation. The final batch-preview pass has 91 passing route/hierarchy/component tests, including privacy, request bounds, 30 collapsed parents in one read, and a 120-child parent alongside a sibling. - Passed the 166-test focused UI/inbox/badge run, 47 additional UI regression tests, and 34 issue-list route tests. The latest regressions cover low-trust agent badge IDs, cold company selection, 30 description-only Mine matches with archive actions, retrying optional row details, and collapsed/expanded siblings. - The full local `pnpm test:run` spanned the rebase and reported failures in five suites before it was stopped; it is not claimed as a complete pass. A fresh serial rerun of all five suites passed **452/452** tests (tool gateway, native resume, project repositories, workspace recovery, and runner selection). Full current-commit coverage is checked by CI. - Real browser: delayed index and row-detail responses on Tasks and Mine. The first placeholder and first row had the same origin and 44-pixel height. Twelve rows on each page had zero position, height, or title-width change after recovery details arrived. - Real browser: reviewed long titles and recovery status at a 390 by 844 viewport. Task text stays on one line and recovery uses a compact indicator. - Three fresh document loads per page on final commit `260893bf92`, with HTTP cache retained on a warm local development server: Tasks 1.031–1.190 seconds; Mine 0.999–1.193 seconds. Browser-control overhead is included. These values must not be compared directly with staging latency or the earlier local samples taken during a full test run. - The browser archive test exposed stale results after Undo. The new projections now bypass the server TTL; immediate-mutation regression tests pass. The final browser retry passed: Archive followed by Undo restored exactly one row and the badge count. - CI exposed a hook-order crash when company selection resolved after the first inbox render. The hook now runs before the empty-company return. All seven affected exact-retry and legacy-continuation browser scenarios pass locally after the fix. - Real browser review regressions: 97 description-only source matches retained Archive actions; deliberately failed optional row reads displayed a retry notice while all 12 observed row positions and heights stayed unchanged. Retry restored the recovery indicator. Network fault injection was removed. - The final production build and workspace typecheck passed. Final focused verification passed 153 UI/helper tests and 26 heartbeat privacy route tests. Final review regressions cover newer diagnostics arriving during the index read, reloading diagnostics when the same task ID changes version, optional source failure/retry without hiding available rows, and required external-status filter failure. The latest-failures route test verifies bounded selection, agent filtering, success suppressing an older failure, and private-run redaction. - Real browser: deliberately failed the run source, then retried it. Twelve available task rows kept the same position and 44-pixel height before, during, and after retry. No loading skeleton replaced them. Fault injection was removed. - Hierarchy review decision: the cold-open barrier stays because inserting ancestors or expanded children after revealing index rows would cause layout shifts. Existing hierarchy context now survives subsequent requests, with a regression proving a new ancestor read does not blank the list. The bounded recursive tree read can still add latency for unusually deep expanded trees. - Tasks now handles a failed external-status filter with an explicit error and Retry, suppressing a false empty state. All 52 Tasks component tests pass, including failure-to-success retry. One existing large-tree test timed out while workspace typechecking ran concurrently; the whole component suite passed when rerun without that competing work. Workspace typecheck, the full production build, and token gates passed for this fix. ## Risks - Saved filters and grouping still operate on the existing bounded collection. This is not a new global server pagination model. - Fixed row slots reduce available title width. Long titles remain accessible through task navigation. - Recovery and related diagnostics arrive after core rows. Their responses cannot replace ordering fields, and stale versions are rejected. - Index/row requests now revalidate against current data instead of a short server TTL. They still share concurrent reads and use ETags. - This has not been deployed by this pull request. Staging latency must be measured after deployment under comparable conditions. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact runtime model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. Used code editing, terminal execution, and real-browser diagnostics. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
46de15ff4b |
fix(recovery): preserve native workspaces after control deadlines (#17788)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage agents and their saved work. > - Native runs can prepare a remote workspace before provider execution. > - A finalization deadline can stop a run outside its normal exception path. > - That handler marked the run failed without recording its prepared files for recovery. > - Retry then waited for a lease whose preservation had no durable owner. > - This pull request records the exact source in the deadline transaction through the existing recovery service. > - Existing containment and file recovery can then settle the source before another executor starts. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A native run failed at its control deadline with a prepared workspace and no accepted result. Its environment lease remained active. The run had no workspace preservation record. A saved Retry waited for remote cleanup without a preservation operation to finish that cleanup. **Expected behavior** Record unfinished files when the deadline marks a native run failed. Use the existing stop-and-retain worker. Keep accepted results, exact source binding, and current task ownership authoritative. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Persist a native run with a prepared workspace, an active lease, and an expired control deadline. 2. Reconcile the deadline twice. 3. Inspect the source lease and the run's workspace recovery record. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced against `a67a18c171816b097f46eae78fc58c7e55c9c565`. **Deployment mode** Hosted native Runner with a remote sandbox. The regression uses real local PostgreSQL and no provider mocks. Related: Refs #17741 for committed Retry delivery. Refs #17073 for remote process-exit verification. This change records file preservation after a deadline; it does not change either policy. ## What Changed - Call the existing native workspace preservation service in the transaction that fails an abandoned run. - Preserve files after reassignment without changing the current task owner or state. - Add real-database cases for prepared, finalized, mismatched, reassigned, and accepted-result states. Repeated reconciliation retains one source obligation and creates no successor. - Document the deadline behavior and its existing access boundaries. ## Verification - Red: on unchanged production code, the prepared-workspace case failed because its recovery record was null. Finalized and mismatched controls passed. - Green: all 10 deadline reconciliation tests pass. The existing native workspace recovery suite passes all 48 cases. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. - `pnpm build` passed. - Map checks, module-boundary checks, and `git diff --check` passed. - Current-head CI passes on `23bf2aa4b50d2c4b74a9ee2ee47034ae542d25c2`: all GitHub Actions CI lanes, including grouped/serialized tests, Runner verification, typecheck, build, E2E, and Canary Dry Run, succeeded. Two Storybook-only checks were skipped. Greptile is 5/5 with no findings. Superagent Security Scan also passed. Entire Gates reports passing checks/findings and fails only because no reviewer has approved trail #10. - The first server shard 11/12 attempt passed all 1,750 assertions but reported an unhandled early process-exit rejection in the unchanged workspace-exposure fixture. Its focused local suite passed (28 passed, 3 skipped); one CI rerun passed. - Full local `pnpm test:run` was started, then interrupted after the complete CI lanes passed to avoid duplicate work. No full local suite pass is claimed. Local targeted tests, typecheck, and build passed. - On the affected staging instance, the existing deployed preservation helper registered the exact failed source. Normal Retry then drove actual sandbox stop, file recovery, and a persisted successful recovery receipt. A successor reached a separate remote process-fingerprint failure before provider execution. The automatic deadline change is not deployed; task execution recovery remains incomplete. - Initial local setup attempts did not reach product assertions: skipped dependency lifecycle scripts left native PostgreSQL library links absent, and the restricted shell blocked localhost binding. The package's link hydration and an authorized isolated listener resolved those setup prerequisites. One new negative-control assertion also required null-safe access; the final red run retained only the intended behavioral failure. ## Risks - File preservation must not certify provider termination. The existing stop receipt, source binding, copyback, and admission checks remain in force. - Preservation failure rolls back the deadline transaction, leaving its durable deadline eligible for another bounded attempt. - Reassignment preserves old files without changing the new owner's task. Accepted results retain their current finalizer. - No schema, credential, provider, or polling change. Historical failed runs still require scoped recovery; this patch does not replay them. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and browser tools. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (targeted suites; full local suite interrupted after CI passed) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green (CI lanes pass; external Entire reviewer-approval gate remains pending) - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
a67a18c171 |
fix(tasks): hide empty message history disclosure (#17751)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work. > - Each task page shows the instruction and saved conversation. > - Cold opens show recent content before older history. > - The page used any linked run as evidence of older messages. > - A task's first run therefore showed an empty More messages control. > - This PR shows the control only when the preview omits comments or runs. > - Fresh tasks stay clear, and older task history remains available. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #17593. **What happened?** A fresh task with only its first run displayed More messages, even though there was no earlier history to load. **Expected behavior** Show More messages only when older comments or runs are omitted. Runs observed while the page stays open must not create a false disclosure. The output control also uses actual skipped bytes, so a growing run does not gain an empty output control. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a task and let its first run start or finish. 2. Open that task with a fresh application cache. 3. Observe the empty More messages control below its instruction. ## What Changed - Keep omitted-run evidence with the cached recent run window. - Use omitted comments or runs to decide whether to show More messages. - Preserve run retention, reconnect reconciliation, and expansion of real history. - Offer More run output when a single legacy log exceeds the compact byte window. - Keep first-run native diagnostics accessible through More task actions → Show task activity. - Add regression coverage and update the task feature map. ## Verification - Passed the existing 9,168-test UI suite across 794 files, then all 504 focused task-detail, history-window, real thread, and log-transport tests after adding the activity-menu regression. - Passed workspace build, workspace typechecks, token gates, and map checks. - Reproduced the bug in the earlier UI using a disposable local task. The corrected UI hides the control with zero runs or only the first run. - In the local browser, expanded a long task to all 80 comments. The latest answer appeared once and the disclosure disappeared. No console warnings or errors occurred in that journey. - Expanded a saved 111 KB legacy log through More run output and opened its earlier activity in the local browser. - On a single saved native run, verified no More messages control. Used Show task activity to reveal its earlier tool output; the latest answer remained visible exactly once, with no console warnings or errors. - The first broad local run stopped because the fresh dependency install lacked PostgreSQL library symlinks. The normal package setup repaired that environment issue. - The next broad run hit one workspace-runtime timeout. Its focused rerun passed with unchanged server source; the original failure remains recorded. Stopped the already-failed broad runner after the previous revision passed full PR CI. All final-head build, typecheck, test, and policy CI jobs passed. Both automated reviewers scored the final head 5/5, with no unresolved threads. The separate Entire Gates check is pending because the PR has no active assessed Change for its current comparison. The installed Entire CLI reports no linked project trail and exposes no Change-assessment command; no gate or repository settings were altered. Browser verification used this branch's UI with the existing disposable test-drive API. No agent execution was started. ## Risks Low risk. This changes the recent run cache shape and the disclosure condition. The full run cache remains an array. Tests cover first-run states, observed new runs, omitted older runs, expansion, and reconnect reconciliation. No schema or API changes. A separate run-output control preserves access to a single truncated legacy log. The task menu preserves first-run native activity access without implying older messages exist. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with code execution and browser tools. A more specific model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
063a498b54 |
Bound native OpenCode assigned-tool catalog projection (#17740)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native agents use assigned connection tools through a governed gateway. > - OpenCode received the gateway catalog directly, outside the bounded server tool projection. > - A large catalog can exceed a provider grammar compiler's capacity even when it fits the transport limits. > - Synthetic requests reproduced the Fireworks grammar timeout on the configured DeepSeek model. > - This pull request gives OpenCode two assigned-tool discovery and call schemas through the existing server relay. > - The gateway keeps the same grants, validation, approvals, revocation, and audit rules. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A native OpenCode run could fail during provider grammar compilation before its first assigned-tool call. OpenCode advertised the full assigned gateway catalog. A synthetic catalog of 741 tool schemas reproduced `Grammar processing took too much time` on Fireworks through OpenRouter with `deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash-1017`. The same model and backend accepted a compact two-tool discovery/call catalog. This reproduces the mechanism; it does not replay a historical private request. **Expected behavior** Assigned-tool discovery must keep provider grammar size bounded. Every call must retain the run's original gateway binding and permissions. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Give a native OpenCode run a large assigned connection catalog. 2. Use a provider that compiles tool schemas into a constrained output grammar. 3. Observe the full catalog in the provider tool surface before this change. 4. After this change, observe only `paperclip_search_assigned_tools` and `paperclip_call_assigned_tool` for assigned tools. Discover and call a permitted tool through its pinned alias. **Paperclip version or commit** Source checkout based on current `master`. **Deployment mode** Native local or sandbox execution with OpenCode 1.18.34. Related work: Refs #14258 (discovery paging), #16678 (local adapter MCP launch), and #17688 (gateway capability advertisement). This change covers native OpenCode catalog projection. ## What Changed - Route native OpenCode assigned tools through the existing server-owned authenticated relay. - Use bounded discovery/call schemas for OpenCode, including small catalogs. Preserve transport capacity checks. - Keep assigned gateway credentials on the controller. Ignore gateway and credential values in tool arguments. - Preserve exact declared MCP operation names through admission and driver dispatch. Resolve transport prefixes only against the closed catalog. Reject unknown or shortened names. - Refresh former OpenCode direct-catalog and shortened-name checkpoints. Keep the existing fingerprints for other providers. - Add local and remote wiring, catalog capacity, alias, scope, work-mode, approval, and revocation tests. - Allow the native test files to use a validated dedicated external test database when embedded PostgreSQL is unavailable. - Document the assigned-tool execution contract. - Bound OpenCode discovery pages to 32 KiB and large-schema chunks to 16K characters. Keep other harness budgets unchanged. - Test medium pages and escaped large schemas through the actual HTTP MCP bridge on the explicit Runner testing surface. ## Verification - Red before the catalog fix: OpenCode did not create the server relay, and forced compact delivery advertised 1 or 741 direct schemas. - Red before the alias repair: HTTP MCP changed declared operation names, and the driver sent `search_assigned_tools` instead of the authorized `paperclip_search_assigned_tools`. - Current repair tests: 112 OpenCode/proxy tests pass, plus one actual Rust/proxy/HTTP MCP regression. Two checkpoint regressions fail with the former scoped revision and pass with the new revision. Other providers keep their prior fingerprints. - The combined QA candidate with this exact PR head passes all 916 native tests and all 113 transport tests on supported Node 24.22. An earlier Node 26.4/macOS run passed the 113 assertions but had an uncaught networking error. That non-clean run remains recorded; its stack matches [the upstream Undici defect](https://github.com/nodejs/undici/issues/5544). No production workaround or error suppression was added. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `git diff --check` pass on `bc41ba72be2195eabeb0d7727227ee0cd02e8532`. The maps structural check passes. - The local `pnpm test:run` attempt stopped after host embedded PostgreSQL initialization failures. The relevant database suites pass with isolated PostgreSQL 18. All repository CI gates, including aggregate `ci / verify`, pass on the current head. - Synthetic live provider comparison: 741 invented schemas produced the exact Fireworks grammar timeout in 20.9 seconds. Two compact invented schemas produced a discovery call in 585 ms on the same model and backend. - The first hosted QA attempt exposed the alias failure described above. On the patched source, a real local Rust runner → proxy → OpenCode 1.18.34 → exact DeepSeek smoke completed discovery, one synthetic gateway read, and `paperclip_finish`, then emitted `turn/completed`. It used the production compact projection and unchanged Rust allowlist. - Two earlier local smoke attempts exposed missing terminal authority and completion-contract fields in the smoke harness. Those failures remain recorded. The corrected ordinary bindings produced the clean result. - Fresh Greptile: 5/5 on `bc41ba72be2195eabeb0d7727227ee0cd02e8532`, with no new actionable findings or unresolved threads. - Hosted QA publication and lifecycle acceptance remain pending. The separate deployed-agent `Paperclip Review` check is also pending; it follows a task that failed on the earlier deployed runtime. - Local OpenCode/OpenRouter acceptance at `bc41ba72`: 530 synthetic tools were authorized and installed. A simple model-ID reply completed in 17.3 seconds with no app calls. A discovery task completed in 37.6 seconds, used the search/call relay, made one upstream call, and returned the exact synthetic value. This is local source acceptance, not a staging sandbox timing comparison. - The large-result review finding has a failing-before/passing-after HTTP MCP regression. Five medium schemas now page without invalid JSON. A large schema with escaped text reconstructs exactly through bounded chunks. All 35 assigned-tool tests and the server typecheck pass after this follow-up. - Final head `d84ce4856a6e65a35ad5fb8b561492598b525f4e`: all CI gates pass. Greptile and Paperclip Review both rate the change 5/5. No review threads remain open. The final full build, server typecheck, and 35 assigned-tool tests pass locally. ## Risks - OpenCode uses discovery before it calls an assigned tool, including for small catalogs. This can add a model turn. - An existing OpenCode provider checkpoint rotates once because it retains the former tool declarations. Paperclip task history remains available. - The historical filtered catalog was not captured. The synthetic comparison proves the failure mechanism, not the exact cardinality of an earlier private request. - No model, provider route, permission, or automatic retry policy changes. ## Model Used The bounded-result follow-up also used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6 family). The exact backend model ID and context-window size were not exposed for that session. It used reasoning, code execution, and tool use. OpenAI `gpt-6.1-sol` in Codex, with reasoning, tool use, code execution, and source inspection. The runtime does not expose the context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d64cb7be52 |
fix(ui): identify accounts in AI connection choices (#17738)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agent settings select an authorized AI account independently of the harness and model. > - Multiple accounts can have the same provider name. > - The account picker and legacy adoption dialog showed only that name. > - Operators could not distinguish a personal API key from a shared subscription during credential repair. > - This pull request shows the existing sign-in method, sharing scope, and available account identity before selection and adoption. > - Operators can select the intended account while the existing access and validation checks remain effective. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #14970 for the shared account selection control. No duplicate account-identity repair was found. **What happened?** Two authorized OpenAI accounts appeared as identical `OpenAI` choices. The adoption dialog repeated that ambiguous name. The list response already contained the account method, scope, and identity, but the UI omitted them. **Expected behavior** An operator can distinguish a personal API key from a company-shared subscription and confirm the selected account before saving. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Make a personal OpenAI API-key account and a shared OpenAI subscription available to an agent. Give both the name `OpenAI`. 2. Open Harness / Runtime and choose a managed connection for a legacy agent. 3. Inspect the two choices and the adoption confirmation. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on master `a1f77821b9cd5c9c846fdf7a0fa5cc620ad2b6bb`. **Deployment mode** Hosted staging and the source UI regression. ## What Changed - Show the sign-in method, personal/shared scope, and available account or owner identity in connection labels. - Use the same label in the selected value and legacy adoption confirmation. Match the confirmation to both the connection and grant. Wrap dropdown choices so narrow screens retain the account identity, and expose the full selected label in the trigger title. - Add a behavioral regression with duplicate provider names, exact grant selection, and disabled unavailable accounts. - Update affected Storybook interaction selectors, the account guide, and the agent verification recipe. ## Verification - Before the fix, the new regression fails because duplicate accounts have no distinguishing metadata. The other 13 field tests pass. - After the fix, all 67 tests in `ui/src/components/ai-connections` pass. The regression selects the exact personal grant and keeps the unavailable option disabled. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass locally. The full `pnpm test:run` command was stopped after embedded PostgreSQL failed to initialize after five attempts in an unrelated native-runtime suite. Its log is retained. Current-head CI partitions must establish full test coverage. - Token gates, map checks, Storybook catalog checks, and all 30 map/catalog contract tests pass. - In local Chrome, the existing production-component Storybook dropdown shows method and scope. Its nine interaction steps pass, as do all 19 steps in the new-agent connection-modes story. At a 320-pixel preview width, two shared OpenAI subscriptions show their distinct account identities in full, including during keyboard selection. These fixtures do not establish provider authentication. - Separately, the staging credential-repair workflow validated an existing authorized shared OpenAI connection, persisted the agent binding across reload, and resumed the original task into real provider/tool execution. This configuration recovery does not deploy this UI patch or establish task completion. - All CI completes on final head `a283bda2ad2f026f4f3c0fee03bf2962b0ad6e02`: 55 successful checks, the neutral Paperclip review, and two intentionally skipped Storybook checks; no pending or failed checks. This includes the partitioned tests, typecheck, build, runner suites, canary, and eight browser shards. Greptile and Paperclip review both rate this exact head 5/5 with no unresolved findings. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40338613167). - The review's selected-trigger truncation finding is fixed in the final head. Its title assertion failed before the fix, and all 67 account-selection tests, UI typecheck, and token gates pass afterward. ## Risks - Labels are longer and can truncate in narrow selected-value controls; the trigger title exposes the complete label. Dropdown choices wrap, and the adoption dialog uses the complete label. - The UI uses existing authorized account metadata. It adds no credential reads, access grants, provider fallback, or account selection policy. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6). The exact serving model identifier and context window are not exposed in this session. The agent used code editing, terminal tests, and browser tools. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
0373f9f261 |
fix(recovery): wake retained workspace preservation after Retry (#17741)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and their saved work. > - A stopped run can owe workspace preservation before saved input can continue. > - Retry saved a recovery request but did not wake the worker that owns preservation. > - Older recovery records could also take the bounded scan slots before a due request. > - A second Retry could change the revision while the physical owner was still saving files. > - This pull request wakes a separate worker after commit, selects due work first, and keeps the active owner's revision. > - Saved work can progress without replaying the stopped provider turn or blocking other finalization. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** An operator approved a saved design and selected Retry after native workspace finalization failed. The API accepted one canonical request. The source remained scheduled at zero preservation attempts for more than 30 minutes. No new provider turn started. A local regression also found that repeated Retry during export invalidated the physical owner's completion revision. **Expected behavior** Committed Retry must wake bounded source preservation. Due recovery must progress ahead of passive cleanup obligations and unrelated history. Duplicate requests must keep one physical attempt. Saved input must still pass normal admission after verified recovery. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Retain a terminal run with an exhausted workspace recovery and saved authorized input. 2. Let the delivery coordinator become quiet, then request Retry. 3. Observe the recovery state and physical preservation receipt. Repeat Retry while the export is held. **Paperclip version or commit** Observed on served commit `4b89eec644d6e1a99d58926e77ae58927c3fa87b`. Local baseline: `a1f77821b9cd5c9c846fdf7a0fa5cc620ad2b6bb`. Related work: Refs #17053, #17267, #17094. This change repairs explicit Retry delivery. It is separate from the run instruction projection in #17724 and historical unsafe-export discovery in #17687. ## What Changed - Notify a dedicated workspace recovery duty from the transaction that saves Retry, recovery admission, adoption, or recovery progress. - Reconstruct work and saved retry deadlines at startup. Fill each free export slot independently, track physical work for idle drain, and join the dedicated worker's exports on shutdown. - Drain one bounded pass through completed cleanup and saved-input obligations. Restart that pass after committed changes without repeatedly rechecking paused input. - Share source eligibility between deadline selection and candidate consumption. Keep resolved files-only obligations and ignore unrelated resolved or cancelled history. - Select due unfinished preservation before passive historical records. Rotate past source locks held by other workers and retain the indexed source lookup. - Bind the canonical Retry intent without changing an active physical attempt's generation or revision. Preserve that binding across later progress writes. - Add real producer, physical preservation, startup, deadline, idle, and independent finalization regressions. Document the delivery contract. ## Verification - Red controls: Retry without a notification stayed scheduled; duplicate Retry invalidated the active export; whole-batch waiting stranded a third Retry; a scan without cursor rotation starved a source behind two actual advisory locks. Removing unfinished-first selection left HTTP Retry scheduled behind five real recovered sources still owing cleanup. The fixture explicitly verifies their eligibility with the worker's actual query filter. - Further red controls: the previous worker visits only two of three eligible completed sources. Disabling the committed-change cursor reset misses a new earlier source arriving while two callbacks are held. Both pass with the final worker. - Green: the public Retry HTTP route, registered production worker, real file copyback, duplicate canonical receipts, and public recovery receipt reload passed on an owned local fixture. Its agent is paused to keep this files-only check from starting a provider turn. - Full workspace recovery suite passed 56 tests, including the foreign-lock regression. - Execution-control lifecycle suite passed 24 tests. It covers idle SQL, stored deadlines, cancelled and resolved history, independent finalization, and shutdown. One, three, and seven paused completed sources are each visited in a bounded pass, then stay deferred without a successor or SQL during 90 seconds of fake-clock idle time. A committed earlier source is evaluated when it arrives during two held callbacks. - Both GitHub and Telegram `automatic_running` continuation regressions passed with the new canonical intent binding. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. - `pnpm build` passed. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `node scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs` passed. - Local `pnpm test:run` could not complete: embedded PostgreSQL repeatedly failed to start. The owned run was stopped after this setup failure repeated. Latest-head CI supplies broad coverage. - Earlier setup failures included a localhost sandbox denial and loss of the owned disposable Docker database. These were separate from the product red controls above. - Local database tests use an explicitly named disposable PostgreSQL `_test` database. That opt-in database is reset before the suite. Default embedded test behavior is unchanged. - Exact-head CI is green at `ef7dcf1ba1060864c9d216c33b51f4d9f8f57fbd`; Greptile and Ponytail both rate it 5/5, with no unresolved review threads. Earlier CI caught the indexed discovery assertion and two exact chat intent-binding regressions; all three were fixed and pass locally and in CI. A separate chat shard lost contact with its self-hosted runner without a product assertion result. A later shared runner shutdown interrupted several jobs; one infrastructure rerun passed before the final test-and-worker follow-up triggered a fresh green run. - No staging deployment is part of this PR. The original approval remains saved; deployed recovery still needs acceptance after rollout. ## Risks - More recovery writes now wake a bounded maintenance duty. Completed history must not keep it active. Idle and deadline tests cover this boundary. - Resolved files-only obligations must remain eligible without granting replay. The startup regression checks that path. - Provider stop proof, copyback ownership, source binding, retry budgets, and normal execution admission remain required. There is no schema or public API change. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex based on GPT-6, with code execution and browser tools. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
338bf75761 |
fix(chat): admit task Retry after GitHub reconnect (#17733)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and their tasks. > - Task Retry must preserve saved input and enforce current access. > - A GitHub reconnect invalidates old runtime callbacks. > - Retry reused that old callback authority and rejected valid new intent. > - Retry also replayed an older failed request when a follow-up was already saved. > - This change admits a deliberate Retry under current authority and transfers saved input once. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16965, #17053 and #17317. These repairs preserve work and contain old executors. This change fixes the subsequent chat admission boundary. A search found no overlapping open reconnect/admission fix. **What happened?** Ordinary task Retry returned `chat_failed_run_retry_not_authorized` after the same GitHub App reconnected. The endpoint was healthy, but the saved request still carried its old runtime generation. A newer queued follow-up also made Retry reject the older failed request instead of continuing the follow-up. No successor was admitted. HTTP qualification found two related defects. Concurrent clicks could omit the canonical chat action from a response. Signed-in board dispatch also passed an incomplete task resource to the permission resolver, which rejected a permitted mutation. **Expected behavior** A deliberate Retry checks current authority for the same App, sender, repository, conversation and task. It continues saved input once. A later reconnect, changed App, revoked access or changed source prevents dispatch. Old runtime callbacks remain invalid. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Admit a GitHub request and record a failed native run. 2. Save a follow-up while execution is blocked. 3. Reconnect the same GitHub App. 4. Click ordinary task Retry. 5. Before this change, admission returns 409. Without reconnect, the newer input alone also causes 409. **Paperclip version or commit** Baseline source: `41c42895fa862c586ff841f8c50200d93ffc83a4`. **Deployment mode** Source checkout on macOS. Regressions use real PostgreSQL transactions and the assembled chat, HTTP route and heartbeat admission services. Provider boundaries are simulated. No hosted recovery is claimed. ## What Changed - Record the admitting App identity for new GitHub deliveries. Historical deliveries can use their original working-comment binding. Reauthorize deliberate Retry under a pinned current generation and credential-reference fingerprint. - Select the complete saved-input queue from the failed run's actual conversation before replaying the older failed batch. Keep exact-run Retry bounded while ordinary task Retry supports larger queues. Transfer its receipts with the dispatch transaction. Recover the same ownership after restart or a lost response. Release unadmitted input after a definitive rejection. - Preserve canonical chat action IDs across concurrent clicks. Supply current task status and assignment fields to board mutation checks. - Keep exact-run Retry, stale webhook, containment, source integrity, publication, pause and budget checks. Update recovery contracts and verification recipes. ## Verification - Red: all three new PostgreSQL regressions failed on unchanged production code. Reconnect failed at chat authorization. Newer input failed at the obsolete-source guard. The combined case also failed. - Green: 61 selected chat integration cases passed. These include 27 new cases and 34 existing cases for containment, retained-source recovery, exact batches and source revocation. - A further red/green PostgreSQL regression reproduces the 51-message overflow identified during review. All 51 messages reach one successor, including a later Retry of that successor. A separate 52-message consumed-batch regression also passes. - A competing conversation retains its own deferred message. Distinct automatic policy contexts are checked independently; revoking only the later policy blocks the whole unadmitted batch. Batch validation still rejects a later message with a changed App binding or deleted source. A real PostgreSQL query capture reduced the 51-message preparation from 1,103 calls to fewer than 180. - All 16 durable task Retry tests passed. - The real HTTP route returns 202 and admits one queued successor for concurrent deliveries. Fault injection covers rollback during input handoff, response loss after dispatch commit, and permission loss when resuming an existing durable wait. A wait only adopts input after current admission succeeds; a one-shot settlement marker keeps status projection read-only. A new deliberate Retry works after another reconnect or a failed successor. - Current-App, repository, sender, source edit/delete, reassignment, endpoint pause and board-permission controls passed. Historical deliveries remain unchanged. - Final-head CI: 55 checks passed, three expected skips. The unchanged minute-bucket rate-limit assertion passed locally against PostgreSQL and on its one CI rerun. Greptile reviewed the final commit at 5/5 with no unresolved threads. - Workspace typecheck and full build passed. Map alignment, module boundaries, UI token gates and `git diff --check` passed. - Hosted task recovery and a live provider turn remain unverified. The local tests hold agent capacity to inspect admission without starting a model or publishing a GitHub response. ## Risks - A deliberate GitHub Retry can admit old saved input under current connection authority. It requires the same App binding and current access. It pins that admission; it does not rewrite the historical delivery or make stale callbacks valid. - The durable chat queue has an optional admission callback. It transfers input only when the transaction contains a valid queued execution or saved wait. Other chat consumers have no callback and retain their behavior. - No migration, Cloud dependency, deployment, configuration change or workspace cleanup is included. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, source inspection, code execution and GitHub tools. The exact serving variant and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
ad861a7f94 |
fix(runner): allow bounded controller admission before welcome (#17735)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and preserves their work across execution failures. > - Native Runner authentication exchanges a one-use bootstrap ticket for a connection lease. > - The controller must admit the connection and persist that lease before it sends welcome. > - Runnerd waited only two seconds for welcome, even when its connection setup budget allowed more time. > - A slow valid welcome therefore looked like a consumed-ticket failure before provider work could start. > - This pull request uses the existing ten-second connection setup budget for welcome. > - The benefit is reliable startup during bounded controller delays, with the same authentication and replay checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A valid native Runner bootstrap can fail while the controller completes admission. The runner then reports `bootstrap connection failed closed; provide a fresh one-use ticket`. A later recovery attempt can report an indeterminate authority and hide the startup error behind a finalization deadline. **Expected behavior** A valid welcome can arrive within the connection setup budget. An earlier execution or reconnect deadline still ends the wait. A missing or invalid welcome never permits bootstrap-ticket replay. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run the real Runner WebSocket transport against an authenticated controller. 2. Hold the welcome for three seconds after the client proof arrives. 3. Before this change, authentication fails with `WebSocket authentication message deadline elapsed` and `bootstrap_maybe_consumed: true`. 4. With this change, the runner accepts the bound lease and restores the normal read timeout. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced against `a1f77821b9` before the production change. **Agent adapter(s) involved** Native Paperclip Runner. The transport is shared by its provider drivers. Related: #17401 reduces repeated work in warm-recovery admission. This change covers delayed welcome delivery for fresh authentication too. It does not replace that optimization. #17594 addresses a separate lifetime failure after controller outages. ## What Changed - Use the ten-second connection setup budget for the authenticated welcome. - Keep the execution/reconnect deadline as an earlier bound. - Add real WebSocket regressions for a delayed welcome and a shorter lifecycle deadline. - Add a real Runner process test proving a delayed admission starts one provider and keeps it through two turns. - Document the startup contract and its recovery verification scope. ## Verification - Red: the delayed-welcome regression failed against unchanged production code with a message deadline and `bootstrap_maybe_consumed: true`. - Green: all 402 Runner core library tests pass. The suite includes authentication, ticket fencing after a lost welcome, identity rejection, replay, and no repeated provider effects. - Map and module checks pass. - Workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. The new process integration test passes (one provider process, one thread, two turns, suspended with an empty outbox). - Live acceptance at this branch's production Runner build passes on macOS arm64 with pinned OpenCode 1.18.34 and `openrouter/deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash-1017`: delay admission by three seconds, create a file, suspend, resume the same provider session under a fresh run authority, read the first file, and write a second file. Both useful outputs match exactly; final runner state is suspended. - Preserved setup failures: a non-pinned executable was rejected, and the debug binary exceeded cold provider startup admission. The pinned executable and release binary passed. The first harness also tried to reuse a completed task object; the follow-up used the normal resume path. Exactly two paid model turns ran. - The full local `pnpm test:run` was attempted and stopped after the Mac exhausted PostgreSQL semaphore capacity (`could not create semaphores`); it is not a local full-suite pass. - Current-head CI is green at `df5d5494c9f9f444114aaf12e095a554110d2e14`: all checks passing or non-applicably skipped, zero failures or pending checks. The additional Superagent security scan triggered by ready-for-review also passed. These include all general/serialized test shards, Runner Rust/Vitest, E2E, typecheck, build, and the final verify gate. Greptile reviewed that exact commit at 5/5 with no findings or inline comments. - This proves the actual native Runner/provider path locally. It does not prove rollout or recovery on a hosted Linux/amd64 execution environment. ## Risks - A stalled welcome can take up to eight seconds longer to fail when the configured lifecycle allows it. Shorter execution/reconnect deadlines still take precedence. - Authentication proofs, credential expiry, identity binding, and one-use-ticket fencing remain enforced. - This does not repair provider-side grammar errors or authorize replay of an indeterminate historical run. Recovery of existing work requires the normal stopped-owner and retained-state checks. - No schema or migration change. A new Runner binary must reach the execution host before this change affects remote runs. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and browser tools. The exact serving submodel identifier and context window were not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
a1f77821b9 |
perf(tasks): show recent conversation before historical activity (#17593)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - A task page must show the instruction and current conversation
quickly.
> - The current page waits for related task data and historical run
transcripts.
> - These reads grow with task history, even when the reader only needs
the latest answer.
> - This pull request gives cold opens a small initial view and loads
older history on demand.
> - Messages and runs observed while the page stays open remain visible.
> - The benefit is a readable task before historical diagnostics finish
loading.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Related: #14667 and #16229. The first changes the reveal gate and scroll
anchors. The second adds general history pagination. This PR adds a core
task read and a folded recent-conversation view. It preserves the
default full-read API contracts. The shared files will need coordination
if either related PR lands first.
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
Cold opening an ordinary task with a long conversation or large run
logs.
**Current behavior**
Task enrichment and historical transcripts delay the readable
conversation. A cold open can fetch several megabytes of tool activity
before revealing saved messages.
**Proposed behavior**
Show the task instruction, recent saved replies, latest human input, and
the latest run's conversation data first. Fetch older messages and full
run activity when the reader chooses **More messages**. Retain new
messages while the page stays open.
## What Changed
- Add an authorized core issue view that skips related enrichment. Keep
enrichment on the existing detail read. Share task mutation, rollback
and invalidation updates with the core cache.
- Add a bounded recent-comment read. Preserve the first human
instruction when no description exists, including legacy rows with a
NULL author type. Keep company and task access checks and comment
redaction.
- Add optional recent activity and run-summary views. Fetch original
input receipts for visible comments separately so delivered messages
stay out of the queue. Reconcile watched unfinished runs after a
reconnect beyond the preview window, removing deleted runs after
reconciliation.
- Filter the latest native run's initial events to assistant messages,
request lifecycles and terminal results. Full event reads remain
available on expansion. Legacy fallback reads use a small tail extended
to the first complete record. HTTP cancellation aborts the storage read.
- Retain observed messages across cursor catch-up and new runs. Apply
local cancellation and deletion to both caches and their task aliases.
Refetch locally seeded history pages on expansion. Preserve expansion
across identifier and UUID links. Keep deep links, classic tasks and
Agent Chat on their existing full-history path.
- Update API documentation, design guidance, capability maps and
regression coverage.
## Verification
- Final acceptance on `9ea0b15ae44d9f6d2c9a9f824b4835f299f92979`: all CI
gates passed, including server/UI tests, all eight browser shards,
runner checks, full typecheck and build. [Final CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40326990328).
GitHub reports 55 successful checks, two intentionally skipped checks,
and one neutral Paperclip Review check described below. No checks are
pending or failed; Greptile is 5/5 and no review threads remain open.
- October 26 merge update: merged current `master`. The only conflict
was in task-page imports; both the compact-history hook and the new
live-update hooks remain. All CI tests and build jobs passed on
`044fd6733d`. Fresh review found canceled-comment cache drift, legacy
human-comment filtering, send-then-expand truncation, and partial legacy
log records. These defects were fixed in `af3d66a5bd`.
- Review-fix verification: 470 tests pass across ten affected suites,
including all six PostgreSQL cold-open tests without a helper override.
Cancellation/delete and send-then-expand regression tests failed before
the fixes and pass afterward. Coverage includes task identifier/UUID
reopen, stale in-flight reads, legacy NULL author types, local-file and
object-storage tails cut inside UTF-8 text, route forwarding, and
request cancellation. Full workspace typecheck and production build,
token gates, map validation and diff checks pass.
- Follow-up review found that a failed expanded legacy read lost its
record-alignment state on retry. `9ea0b15ae4` commits the expanded
window only after a successful read. The new regression fails before the
fix and passes afterward; all 19 transcript tests, UI typecheck, UI
build and token gates pass. Greptile reviewed this commit at 5/5 with no
actionable findings, and all review threads are resolved.
- The final Paperclip Review check ended neutral because its execution
did not complete; no passing Paperclip assessment is claimed. Its
earlier four concrete findings were fixed and regression-tested.
Greptile and the security scans completed successfully on the final
commit.
- The preceding `af3d66a5bd` CI run was canceled when superseded by the
retry fix. Its server shard 11 check briefly reported failure, but the
job API records cancellation and its test step passed all 1,750 tests.
This superseded run is not used as final CI acceptance.
- 549 focused tests pass on the final implementation across nine task
UI, activity-route, OpenAPI and PostgreSQL suites. These cover pending
history, desktop/mobile visibility, expansion, retained runs, message
bursts, cancellation recovery and queued-comment removal in both views.
- Legacy expansion keeps the latest answer visible while fetching and
deduplicating older output.
- Five PostgreSQL tests pass for core access denial, recent comments,
missing-description instructions, event paging and bounded activity/run
reads. macOS could not start another PostgreSQL cluster because it
exhausted its semaphore limit. These tests used a separate disposable
database on an existing local server through a temporary test setup
override. The helper was restored afterward.
- Full workspace typecheck and build pass with the final state fixes, as
do token gates and capability-map validation.
- Token gates, capability-map validation and `git diff --check` pass.
- Browser proof used a disposable task with 80 comments and six large
run histories. The cold view showed the instruction and recent exchange.
**More messages** revealed older comments. Navigation away and back
preserved expansion.
- Local HTTP sample: core 50 ms, recent comments 24 ms, recent run
summaries 17 ms. The latest native conversation response was 839 JSON
characters / 8 ms; its full event response was 1,099,005 / 86 ms.
Browser content paint was 1.34 seconds with development assets cached.
These are local observations, not staging latency claims.
- The first CI run passed every job except four board-send browser cases
and the review threshold. Those browser fixtures only mocked the old
comments endpoint; they now serve both recent and full reads, retaining
all message and attachment assertions. Both initial review findings were
fixed with regression tests. The next CI run passed every job. The
deeper review identified core-cache mutation, older delivery receipt and
retained run-status gaps; those are now fixed with regression coverage.
Final review is 5/5 with zero unresolved findings. Final-head CI
initially failed one unchanged runner shutdown test
(`runnerd-codex-transport.test.ts`, timeout-attachment case) with
`NativeSessionCloseUnrecoverableError`; all other CI jobs passed. The
same runner code passed on
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4b89eec644 |
fix: check selected workspace projects before offering retry (#17552)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task recovery explains access failures before a user retries saved work. > - A task project and its selected workspace are separate settings. > - Moving a task can retain files from a project that the agent cannot access. > - The recovery notice checked only the task project or a past failure record. > - This pull request checks the projects required by the current workspace selection. > - The notice now offers Retry only after those project checks pass. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Follow-up to #17509. Related: #13230 concerns workspace binding consistency; this fix changes recovery presentation only. **What happened?** A task could show “Project access is ready” after moving to an allowed project while keeping a repository from a denied project. Typed failures could also keep the notice blocked after an authorized workspace replacement. **Expected behavior** Use the current task, workspace, and source project requirements. Honor a valid pending selection for the next admission. Keep stale, archived, or missing selections blocked without offering a project-permission repair. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Assign a low-trust agent to a task whose selected source belongs to a denied project. 2. Persist a project access failure. 3. Move the task to an allowed project without changing its selected files. 4. Reload the task. The notice must still explain the access block. 5. Select an allowed source through the workspace API. Reload the task. The notice must offer an explicit retry without starting work. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced after #17509 on master. The regression failed on the old projection and passed with this change. ## What Changed - Batch the current workspace project requirements for tasks with project access failures. - Check retained workspace and source projects, plus valid pending workspace selections. - Keep unknown historical denial projects unnamed. Do not expose unrelated project identifiers. - Keep unavailable workspace selections in the non-retryable failure state. Adding project permissions cannot repair these selections. - Add real database regressions for project moves, pending and applied repairs, stale revisions, archived pending selections, and foreign-company workspaces. - Update the recovery contract and verification recipe. ## Verification - Red-green regression with the real issue update service and execution access check. - Focused tests: 17 tests passed across `agent-project-access.test.ts` and `task-interruption-presentation.test.ts` after rebasing on current master. - Browser: the retained source stays blocked when the task project is allowed. Manage project access opens Permissions / Trust with Allowed projects and Add project. - The normal workspace API accepted an allowed pending selection. Returning to the task showed “Project access is ready” and Retry. Permissions and run count did not change. - Full repository typecheck and build passed before the final presentation adjustment. The final adjustment passed server typecheck, server build, and all 17 focused tests. The stale, archived, and foreign-workspace cases failed before this adjustment. Map and module-boundary checks passed. - Browser: an archived pending workspace shows the existing failure notice without Retry or a project-permission action. - `pnpm test:run` was attempted and stopped after 15 native runtime database tests failed because embedded PostgreSQL could not initialize on this host. The focused database tests passed on isolated PostgreSQL 18 in Docker. All technical CI checks passed on `a6e9f977`. Fresh CI and review are required for the presentation adjustment. One Runner shard passed on its single rerun after a provider shutdown failure. A fresh local Runner build also passed that case and its reuse sibling. The prior Paperclip Review could not publish its assessment. Its saved presentation finding is addressed. Merge waits for a fresh published review and all checks on the current head. ## Risks - Presentation must follow workspace selection precedence. Tests cover retained bindings, valid pending changes, stale changes, and company isolation. - This adds at most three bounded reads for tasks with a project access failure. It adds no reads for this purpose on unaffected tasks. - Dispatch remains the authorization authority. This change does not grant access, move files, or start execution. No migration is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and browser tools. The exact serving model identifier and context window were not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
5cea9c7c0e |
fix(ui): show eligible wake targets when resuming tasks (#17521)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and their assigned tasks. > - A task pause controls execution without changing task status. > - Resume can remove that pause and request work from eligible assignees. > - The preview counted blocked tasks and former executors as wake targets. > - The release route correctly skipped those targets, so the dialog promised work that did not start. > - Resume also trusted stale pause snapshots after tasks were reopened. > - This PR aligns preview with execution eligibility and rechecks current task state when releasing a pause. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Pause an assigned blocked task, then open Resume. The dialog says that one task will resume and offers to wake one agent. Applying it only removes the pause. The route skips blocked and backlog tasks. A former executor can also inflate the wake count after reassignment. **Expected behavior** The dialog must distinguish removing a pause from starting work. Its wake count must use the current assignees and statuses accepted by the release route. Blocked work must stay blocked. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open an assigned blocked task. 2. Choose Pause work, then Resume task. 3. Inspect the wake count and apply Resume work. Related runtime recovery work is tracked separately in #17097 and #17439. This PR does not change remote execution recovery. ## What Changed - Share the resume status list between preview and release. Count only current assignees on todo, in-progress, and in-review tasks for resume wakes. - Explain that Resume removes the pause. Show the existing preview warnings, including tasks that remain idle. - Disable and uncheck the wake option when no agents qualify. Send the same choice to the server. - Reevaluate previously skipped pause members after reopening or releasing another hold. Retain active-pause and unsafe-execution guards. - Add real PostgreSQL and HTTP-route regressions plus browser coverage for both task interfaces. Keep draft, ancestor-pause, and Stop/reconciliation coverage. - Update the task coordination maps. Add an opt-in dedicated test database URL for hosts where embedded PostgreSQL cannot start. ## Verification - Final head `9548eb16736f632cc111a5c13a9a994ec1d95a13`: all 55 completed checks pass, with two optional Storybook checks skipped. [CI 40188094904](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40188094904) passes, including typecheck, build, all general/serialized suites, and all eight E2E shards. Greptile is 5/5 on this commit; the reopened-task finding is fixed and resolved. - Red: the real PostgreSQL regression receives three agents instead of the one eligible current assignee on the original code. - Green: all 27 tree-control service, route, and unit tests pass. They cover current assignees, blocked/backlog exclusions, reopened tasks, company boundaries, remaining pause holds, and execution blockers. - The reopened-task route regression fails on the previous implementation: skipped members never reach preflight/wake, and an unsafe replay releases the hold instead of returning 409. All cases pass with the fix. - Browser: all five applicable cases pass together (90 seconds): blocked-work resume in both interfaces, draft/ancestor-pause cases in both interfaces, and the process Stop/pause/reconciliation/restart/cancel lifecycle. The optional native-runner fixture is skipped locally because its fixture binary is not configured. - All 157 task-page component tests pass on the prior commit; subsequent changes affect the server route and Stop fixture only. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass before rebase, and CI typecheck/build passed on the previous PR commit. Server typecheck passes again after the route fix. The final-head CI run also passes these full checks. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, `node scripts/check-token-gates.mjs`, and `git diff --check` pass. - Full `pnpm test:run` was attempted but did not complete: this host cannot initialize embedded PostgreSQL, and unrelated workspace-runtime tests timed out. The focused database tests and E2E suite use disposable PostgreSQL 18 instead. All general-test and serialized-test CI shards passed on the previous PR commit; the final-head CI run also passes every test shard. - The first CI run caught the existing Stop test trying to check a disabled wake option for blocked legacy work. It now asserts zero wake targets and retains the no-execution-before-reconciliation checks. - Earlier E2E attempts exposed fixture problems: assignment started the fixture before it was paused, and the classic interface had two matching editor nodes. The fixture now enables dispatch after the hold exists and scopes the final assertion to the task composer. No product assertion was removed. ## Risks Resume preview is a snapshot. The release route still checks current status, assignment, and execution blockers. It does not bypass approval, budget, or recovery gates. Pause, cancel, and restore keep their existing affected-agent semantics. The test database override only accepts a dedicated database name ending in `_test`; it runs migrations before the suite and closes its clients afterward. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools, browser control, and code execution. The runtime does not expose a more specific model ID or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8415f4a679 |
fix(github): drain queued pings during active App setup (#17551)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip connects external work to an agent and its ordinary tasks. > - A dedicated GitHub App must prove signed webhook delivery during setup. > - Cloud queues the original bytes until the tenant can authenticate them. > - An older personal connection can leave a long empty-queue backoff in that tenant. > - Active App setup can then time out before the queued ping is read. > - This change lets active setup request the existing event drain with a short rate limit. > - The same webhook handler still owns signature verification and setup state. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #17457, #17513. **What happened?** Cloud accepted a new App's ping, but the tenant read it only after the setup wait timed out and cleanup archived the draft. An existing personal GitHub connection had left an empty-queue backoff. The poller checked that deadline before it read the new App state. **Expected behavior** An active manager setup request must be able to read the queued ping promptly. It must not bypass signature checks or create another App. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Let a personal GitHub connection build its empty-queue backoff. 2. Start a dedicated App and complete its installation. 3. Return to the waiting setup screen while the signed ping is queued. **Paperclip version or commit** This behavior is present on the base commit of this PR. ## What Changed - Let the authenticated wizard request a queue drain only while its Cloud App still lacks signed-delivery verification. Existing manager, credential, and installation checks run first. - Register a narrow callback to the server-owned GitHub poller. Keep provider handling in the GitHub services. Remove the callback on server close. - Share one in-flight attempt between setup and background requests. Limit setup attempts to one per five seconds, including after errors. - Retain the existing passive backoff, sealed queue, acknowledgement rules, and canonical webhook signature handler. - Add regressions for the old backoff, concurrent requests, failed requests, and wizard signature verification. Update the setup documentation and map. ## Verification - Observed the backoff regression fail against the old service: active setup made no additional Cloud lease request. It passes with this fix. - Three focused event-poller tests pass. They use the real admission/backoff code with stubbed SQL and Cloud boundaries. - All 39 startup tests pass. Server TypeScript, map checks, and diff checks pass. - The Postgres integration suites could not start locally because this host exhausted its semaphore limit. They remain required CI checks. This is not a passing local integration result. - Full current-head CI passes, including the Postgres and chat integration suites. Greptile scored this exact head 5/5 with no unresolved findings. - The additional Paperclip review check ended neutral because its execution did not complete. It did not publish a validated assessment. - A fresh deployed setup attempt remains required before live qualification. ## Risks A waiting setup screen now makes a bounded readiness request to Cloud. The existing connector request timeout still applies. Concurrent calls share the same drain, and failures release it for a later retry. The request stops after persisted verification or when the browser stops advancing setup. No timer, durable queue, fleet setting, or sleep blocker is added or removed. The existing background reconciliation path still has its existing sleep restrictions. Live setup-to-review behavior is not established by these local tests. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6. The exact runtime model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. Used for code execution and regression analysis. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <paperclip@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
5c3dce09b5 |
fix(runner): preserve verified remote artifacts across controller releases (#17512)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and owns their task authority. > - Remote native agents can keep working while their controller restarts. > - The controller must authenticate the same runner and verify its provider files before recovery. > - The current path compares a retained provider pack with the new controller release. A release change can reject intact files. > - The new controller binary digest can also reject the original daemon during PRP authentication. > - This PR records the admitted release authority in private controller state and uses it for exact process reattachment. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A remote Claude session started and used tools. After controller shutdown, recovery failed with `runner_remote_provider_artifact_incompatible`. The transport combined stderr into stdout, so the error omitted the verifier reason. The historical rejected manifest is unavailable. This PR reproduces controller release drift as a cause; it does not claim that the historical mismatch is proven. Reaching pack verification implies the earlier exact-process/controller-identity checks passed. That supports a preserved-state recovery path but is not a direct inspection of the deployed volume. **Expected behavior** A compatible, unchanged remote runner can reattach after a controller release changes. Full package hashes, exact process scope, protocol capabilities, and authenticated runner identity must still pass. Fresh launches use the current release. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Verify and admit a remote native session with release A. 2. Preserve its runner process and replace the controller with release B. 3. Reattach the original process. The old path compares its pack with B and fails at `manifest mismatch`. 4. With this fix, the controller reads its saved A authority and verifies all A hashes. Changed files still fail. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced from master `470cb34c0e42cb9d0b232d0bcf5d45cc7b0a81ca`; rebased onto `a3675ddcdf`. **Deployment mode** Native remote runner on a Daytona-backed Paperclip Computer. Local acceptance uses isolated Linux containers and actual packaged artifacts. Related work: #17361 and #17448 handle runner upgrade and qualification permissions. #17097 and #17439 add durable controller checkpoints and server adoption. That stack can skip remote artifact preparation with a saved checkpoint. This PR fixes the current file-backed path and retains full provider-pack verification; it has no checkpoint schema or empty-disk controller recovery. ## What Changed - Save the complete verified pack manifest and authenticated runner version/digest after successful session admission. - Bind the receipt to company, agent, workspace, session, runner, environment lease, remote directory, and provider descriptor. Keep it outside guest backup directories. - Reuse the saved authority for exact reattachment. Keep current release selection for fresh launches and explicit session replacement. - Fail closed for mismatched or corrupt receipts. Historical sessions without a receipt retain the current release integrity gate. - Report bounded, redacted verifier output from both transport streams. Warn on receipt write failure while returning the already admitted session to its owner. - Add scope, persistence, replacement, storage failure, and backend wiring regressions. Update recovery documentation and the feature map. ## Verification - Test-first red: the original selection chose release B instead of A after controller recreation. The new receipt regression passes. A separate red test showed the missing stdout diagnostic; it passes after the diagnostic fix. - Authority and diagnostic suites: 49 tests pass. Backend pack, process adoption, and harness persistence selection: 47 tests pass. - Actual Linux provider image: complete A manifest/artifact verification passed; controller source-revision drift failed on the old path; saved A authority passed; a modified ACPX sidecar failed its SHA-256 check. - Actual native Linux runner: authenticated a session, detached the controller, changed the controller manifest and binary, then authenticated the original PID and provider session with saved authority. There were zero duplicate spawns, zero new provider turns, no stop/suspend, and the workspace file remained. This probe used the real runner with a deterministic Codex fixture; it is separate from the real ACPX package integrity proof. - Full workspace typecheck and build passed. The full native executor suite first hit host PostgreSQL semaphore exhaustion. The complete changed files then passed 864/864 tests with separate real PostgreSQL databases in a disposable Linux container. The temporary local fixture changed only database provisioning and used normal repository migrations. Current-head CI also passed the full required test, Runner, browser, typecheck, and build lanes. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` passed. These structural checks do not prove live recovery. - Current head `48fca2ae33d99f7f6d2fe12f431cf76d25185c70`: 55 successful checks, two conditional skips, no pending or failed checks; fresh Greptile 5/5 with zero findings and zero unresolved review threads. Commitperclip quality review passed. - No original task was retried or changed. Existing Daytona access could not resolve the original sandbox or its image; a fresh staging Claude recovery is not claimed. ## Risks This prevents recurrence for sessions admitted with the new receipt. It does not retroactively recover the historical failed run. Saved authority exists only after this change has admitted a session. It cannot repair an ambiguous historical launch or restore a receipt on an empty replacement controller. A stale protocol or modified pack remains a hard failure. Receipt write errors warn without losing the live session handle, but later recovery still needs matching authority. The broader checkpoint stack changes the same server preparation and runner-artifact option and will require a deliberate integration. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools, and code execution. The runtime does not expose a more specific model ID or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d0c8f0b090 |
fix: explain project access denials and add an authorized repair path (#17509)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Low-trust agents may read only the projects in their allowed scope. > - Workspace setup correctly stops a task outside that scope. > - The task previously showed a generic failure, and agent settings did not offer an additive repair. > - This pull request explains the denial and lets authorized operators add projects while preserving other restrictions. > - The saved task then offers an explicit retry. Saving access does not start work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A project access denial appeared as an ordinary failed attempt. Operators could not add a second allowed project from agent settings. **Expected behavior** The task should explain the denied access and link to a working permission editor. The editor should preserve existing scope and restrictions, enforce operator authority, and retain drafts after a failed save. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Assign a low-trust agent to a task whose project is outside its allowed projects. 2. Let workspace setup deny project access. 3. Open the task, follow Manage project access, add the project, save, reload, and return to the task. 4. Confirm that the saved message remains and Retry task is a separate action. ## What Changed - Record a typed, non-retryable project denial before provider dispatch. Project denials do not enter automatic continuation or provider comment policy. - Project current and historical setup denials into a safe task notice. Keep unrelated failures, prior assignees, and approval/pause/budget gates separate. Recheck current project authority, including standard trust and root-issue grants. Accepted retries keep their working state. - Add board-only project-access reads and additive saves under the agent row lock. Enforce company scope, agent-management authority, pending-approval restrictions, and an audit record for new additions. - Add the production notice and searchable multi-project editor, including read-only, saving, cancellation, and failed-save states. Preserve the return-to-task query through canonical agent redirects. - Register board-only project-access routes in OpenAPI with a strict request schema. - Add production Storybook examples and API/persistence/concurrency regressions. Retain the approved design snapshot and update the behavior maps and implementation contract. ## Verification - Passed: `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `pnpm build-storybook`, `pnpm check:token-gates`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs`. - Passed: 11 permission/projection tests and 30 run-completion tests against an isolated PostgreSQL database. These cover historical failures, concurrent additions, idempotent audit, preserved restrictions, foreign projects, read-only users, agent self-grants, and no automatic wakeup. - Passed: all 27 OpenAPI route tests, including route coverage and the new board-only request/response contract. - Browser: the real app displayed a historical denial; Manage project access opened the editor; saving retained the original project and survived reload; Return to task showed the ready notice. Saving created one audit event and zero runs. Explicit Retry returned 202 and reached the separate sandbox requirement, which remained enforced. No external provider was used. - All five production Storybook interaction checks pass: blocked task, save, cancellation, failed-save recovery, and read-only settings. These use fixture callbacks; durable authorization is covered separately above. - `pnpm test:run` was attempted locally but stopped after repeated embedded PostgreSQL startup failures caused by macOS semaphore exhaustion. Full-suite CI is required before merge. The separate UI suite passed all 9,095 tests. The 41 focused server regressions also passed after rebasing onto the latest master. A further 26 recovery-classification tests pass, including a red-to-green regression for automatic continuation after a project denial. ## Risks - No schema migration. The new endpoint only adds same-company project IDs and preserves the rest of the stored policy. - The historical notice recognizes one exact setup denial message. It does not display arbitrary run errors or disclose a different source project's identity. - The retry still passes all current admission and isolation checks. The notice does not promise that other execution requirements are satisfied. - Related open work: #13309 covers inherited secret restrictions; #11234 covers the broader repository catalog. This change does not replace either policy surface. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with code execution and browser tools. The precise runtime model ID and context-window size were not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused server and full UI suites; full-suite infrastructure limit above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
0eb2c964a7 |
fix(agents): allow runner qualification with agent configuration permission (#17448)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agent owners configure the harness and computer used for that work. > - A legacy runner upgrade must first qualify an unverified sandbox. > - The upgrade called an instance-admin probe, so a company owner with agent configuration permission received HTTP 403. > - This pull request qualifies the saved computer through the agent's existing configuration authorization. > - Company owners can complete the upgrade while general instance environment management stays restricted. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17361. Related: #17122. **What happened?** Upgrade runner displayed for an existing Claude agent on a Daytona Paperclip Computer. Clicking it returned “Instance admin access required” for a cloud company owner. The agent remained on the legacy runner. **Expected behavior** A caller permitted to update the agent can qualify that agent's saved computer and upgrade. Instance-admin access is not required for this agent-scoped operation. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Sign in as a cloud company owner with `agents:configure` and no instance-admin role. 2. Open an existing legacy Claude agent on an unqualified Daytona snapshot. 3. Select Upgrade runner. ## What Changed - Add `POST /api/agents/{id}/qualify-runner` with the existing `agent_config:update` guard. - Reuse the server's effective environment resolver. The submitted environment ID only detects stale state; it cannot select a different computer. - Preserve company binding checks, check binding again at lease acquisition, and record agent-scoped audit activity. - Return qualification status and the lease receipt without instance-level provider metadata or raw provider errors. - Use the new endpoint for the existing-agent upgrade. Keep the generic environment probe restricted to instance admins. - Disable Upgrade runner when an unsaved computer change resolves to a different target, with a save-first explanation. Other draft settings still accompany an upgrade. - Add real-database authorization regression tests and update the API contract and access maps. ## Verification - Red: the existing UI called the instance-wide probe and failed the new agent-scoped call assertions in eight upgrade cases. - Green: 349 related route, provider qualification, runner selection, and UI tests passed. - Green: 12 authorization cases passed with real PostgreSQL, real HTTP routes, real saved role grants, and a simulated provider boot. They cover the cloud owner, removed grants, foreign agent/computer, inherited targets, stale target, invalid body, archived/local target, redacted failure, audit scope, and unchanged agent settings. - Review regression: two cases first reproduced the enabled upgrade button after an unsaved computer change; both now pass, along with all 168 related UI tests. Qualified/unqualified computers and restoring the saved selection are covered. - All 26 OpenAPI cases passed; the 12 real-database authorization cases also passed after rebase. - The host exhausted PostgreSQL semaphores. For the 12 cases, a temporary local-only setup used disposable PostgreSQL 18 in Docker instead of the embedded database launcher. The committed tests use the normal embedded database helper. No authorization decisions were mocked. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `pnpm check:token-gates`, map validation, module-boundary validation, and `git diff --check` passed. - `pnpm test:run` was attempted but did not establish a full local pass: the host could not start embedded PostgreSQL clusters. All current-head CI gates passed, including the full suite in CI. The commitperclip review workflow timed out before reporting any executed steps on its first attempt and passed on one retry. - Fresh staging acceptance remains pending deployment. Verify persisted native configuration and a successful runtime test on the existing Daytona computer after merge. Earlier live Daytona proof from #17361 is separate evidence. ## Risks - Qualification can start a fresh, temporary sandbox. It uses the existing probe lifecycle and cleanup contract. - The new path must remain scoped to the saved agent and its company. Denial and redaction tests cover that boundary. General instance probe authorization is unchanged. - No migration, role change, credential change, or automatic agent upgrade is included. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, code execution, and browser tools. The exact deployed model variant and context-window size were not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
7ae81c9fa7 |
fix(slack): support rich questions and complete review delivery (#17255)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Questions and review decisions must work in the conversation where a task started. > - Slack omitted question context and did not publish several review kinds. > - Some answers saved in Paperclip also lost their authorized continuation or their final Slack reply. > - A settled card and a successful run did not prove that the user received the result. > - This pull request preserves complete questions and follows the existing answer and delivery receipts through continuation. > - Users can read the request, submit an authorized decision, and receive the resumed task's result in the same conversation. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17045 and #17218. **What happened?** Slack question cards could omit instructions and editable starting text. Checkbox reviews, item verdicts, task suggestions, and connection requests had no publication path. Complex question answers submitted in Paperclip could fail continuation authorization. Several review continuations completed without delivering their result to Slack. **Expected behavior** Show the actual question and context. Use native Slack controls when they preserve the form contract. Otherwise provide an explicit Paperclip review link. Persist one authorized response, resume through the existing delivery path, settle the card, and deliver the useful result to its originating conversation. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a task in Slack and ask a text or choice question with instructions and help text. 2. Submit native text and choice responses, then submit a complex form through Paperclip. 3. Accept a checklist, submit item decisions, select suggested tasks, or decline a connection request. 4. Inspect the saved answer, continuation run, original Slack card, and final Slack reply independently. ## What Changed - Preserve full prompts, context, descriptions, recommendations, help, and editable starting text. Use direct buttons for short choices, inline searchable selects for longer lists, and native checkboxes with explicit submission for multiple choices. - Add native custom-answer and validated-text modals, ordinary confirmation buttons, checklist decisions, per-item verdicts with reasons, suggested-task creation/dismissal, and connection decline. Keep governed approvals, permission grants, and forms that cannot be represented faithfully in the full Paperclip review surface. - Keep Slack-specific canonical-validation feedback in its owning platform module. Shared callbacks delegate without interpreting provider presentation. - Reuse the existing canonical interaction transactions, callback receipts, publication queue, and continuation delivery. Share ordinary confirmation handling across Telegram and Slack. Recheck current authorization and commit response receipts atomically. - Settle cards with the saved answer and remove stale controls. Ignore passive Slack link callbacks so opening a task does not display a false answer error. - Validate exact multi-select receipt mappings during native continuation. Recover automation-origin connection replies from their published prompt after validating the durable connection receipt. - Keep oversized multi-select handoffs free of unused native tokens, and retain the complete Paperclip form for 101–128 choices plus Other. Make the original-conversation audience explicit before submitting a Slack modal. - Add rollback, provider serialization, callback, continuation, and negative authorization regressions. Update the connector playbook and feature/access maps. No React or application UI changes are included. - Add a durable Q01–Q11 qualification index and provider coverage matrix. Require distinct functional, good-experience, and best-available-control assessments; real unanswered/answering/settled evidence; saved results, continuation and navigation proof; and retained failures. Mark other providers unaudited rather than assuming Slack parity. ## Verification Candidate: `e0017d446b1016a38d65382366cd1408cce33039`. The eleven-core-format live Slack gallery is pinned to `c3d458b2a06b660448940fd8cf33c5906f0058d5`; subsequent boundary fixes and the sharing notice have automated verification, not new live screenshots. - Real Slack UI testing covered all 11 formats: text, closed choice, long single select, multiple choices, choices with a custom answer, pattern-validated text, confirmation, checklist, item verdicts, suggested tasks, and connection requests. Each has unanswered/answering/answered screenshots as applicable, an inspected saved result, one continuation, and an individual experience review in the local HTML gallery. - The dedicated private QA app/channel used signed callbacks to the local candidate. A separately approved password-protected, read-only preview proved connection-review, suggested-task review, and created-task navigation. Anonymous access, writes, and credential routes were denied. No OAuth grant was attempted. - Real testing exposed and repaired a multi-select continuation failure and a misleading error on link-button clicks. Failed attempts remain in the evidence. The final navigation replay opened the exact pending connection request and declined it in Slack without granting access. Suggested-task creation produced the selected child with the correct parent and description. - Final review-fix verification: **32 form tests**, **28 provider/form-rendering tests**, **30 publication tests**, and **171 native continuation/authorization tests** passed. Earlier **3 atomic-resolution rollback**, **9 targeted callback/publication/Telegram**, and **28 review-continuation** cases passed. The final Slack/Teams modal subset also passed. The automation-origin connection cases, 101/128 custom-choice cases, and oversized multi-select continuation reproduced before their fixes and passed afterward; failing logs remain retained. These counts describe relevant runs, not a reliability percentage. - CI on `b5885b85fd` exposed a test fixture that assumed every Slack modal block was an input; the new sharing notice correctly renders a non-input block. The fixture now selects input blocks safely. The exact signed-modal correction/one-continuation test passed locally, together with 14 Slack form/modal tests. The failing CI log and its specific cause remain recorded. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. Server typechecking was repeated after the final source changes. Map and module-boundary checks and `git diff --check` passed. - The full `pnpm test:run` was attempted and stopped after repeated embedded PostgreSQL semaphore exhaustion on this host. Its 1,395-test chat suite found two stale native-control assertions; both were corrected and re-tested in a focused run. Focused database suites used separate disposable databases on existing local PostgreSQL. The full suite is not claimed green; new-head CI must complete before merge. - Final-head CI passed on `e0017d446b1016a38d65382366cd1408cce33039`: all test/build jobs and required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e` gates are green ([run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40115430194)). Greptile and Ponytail both reviewed this exact head at 5/5, the security scan passed, and all review threads are resolved. - All three QA app callbacks were restored to staging. Both temporary tunnels and local proxies were closed. The local endpoint was archived and its local credential copies removed. The candidate app was stopped. Limits: provider execution used a deterministic Claude protocol fixture, not an LLM. This is local real-provider UX proof, not deployed staging or broader Codie/Claude qualification. The public preview intentionally blocked ancillary artifact routes, so its destination pages could show a partial-history warning. The complete permission-grant flow and every oversized/mixed-form branch were not driven manually. Earlier fixture, test, and provider failures remain recorded. ## Risks - New reply routes require durable origin proof. Incorrect receipt matching could lose a reply or route it incorrectly. Tests cover missing, forged, mismatched, and revoked authority. - Governed forms keep their Paperclip resolution checks. This change does not grant new approval authority to Slack. - Existing completed review results can become deliverable through the repaired publication path without another provider run. - No schema, lockfile, workflow, public task-status model, or runtime-instruction change is included. This branch is not deployed. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with code execution and tool use. The exact backend model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either linked existing issues or described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id - [x] I have run focused tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green on the new head - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups on the new head - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Nicky Leach
|
62f60bf158 | Measure first deliverable text in native run traces (#17434) | ||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
f66d590899 |
fix(ui): open the new-task form immediately (#17041)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - People use New task to send work to an agent. > - The board currently downloads the task dialog code after the first click. > - This shows a loading window before people can enter their request. > - The form already loads agent and project choices after it opens. > - This pull request loads the task dialog code with the board. > - People can start writing immediately and keep their text as choices arrive. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related change: #16849. Commit `fa50cab5685b9cdbb26ad9c610cc5b6c373d3ff4` added the deferred dialog and its loading window on October 19, 2026. **What happened?** The first New task click shows “Loading new task…” while the browser downloads the dialog code. **Expected behavior** The form opens on click. Agent and project choices load in place. Text entered during those requests stays in the form. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open the board in a fresh browser session. 2. Select New task before its code is cached. 3. Observe the loading window before the form appears. **Paperclip version or commit** Source baseline: `8b4ab65b1c3d863d282752e83307943720a5c85c`. **Deployment mode** The browser code applies to local and hosted boards. Verification used a source checkout. ## What Changed - Import NewIssueDialog with the board. Keep the existing mount and draft lifecycle. - Add a first-open test that fails if the form waits for an asynchronous render. - Cover text entry during delayed agent and project requests and defaults that arrive later. - Document the behavior and its verification recipe. ## Verification - Regression proof: the first-open test failed before the import change and passed after it. - All 125 tests in BoardDialogs, DeferredOverlay, NewIssueDialog and Layout passed. - The production UI build and UI TypeScript check passed. The typecheck passed with `NODE_OPTIONS=--max-old-space-size=2400` after the competing test process was stopped. - Token gates, map validation and Git diff checks passed. - The first UI typecheck could not resolve the unbuilt local plugin SDK. The SDK was then built. - Full typecheck and build attempts hit the sandbox's 4 GB memory limit when run with the full test suite. Two later UI typecheck attempts also hit that limit during other validation. The cgroup recorded four OOM kills in total. The full repository test attempt and a broader UI test attempt were stopped. No complete suite result is claimed. Serial repository typecheck reached the missing Rust `cargo` executable. Full CI passed on head `9dde4bc`; local limits remain recorded here. - First CI run at `e5a99b8`: typecheck, build, all unit-test shards and seven browser shards passed. Browser shard 2 failed at `chat-adapters-ui-providers.spec.ts:185`, waiting for Slack setup Success after reload. The saved page showed the working connection and Continue button. The cause is not confirmed; this failure is retained for follow-up. [Failed job](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39522214527/job/118968542923). - Removed the added import comment after Greptile review. Head `9dde4bc` changes only that comment. The review thread is resolved. Fresh CI passed on head `9dde4bc`. Greptile reviewed that exact head at 5/5 with no open findings. All eight browser shards passed, including the earlier Slack failure. The earlier failure remains unexplained; the only intervening code change removed a source comment. A passing retry establishes recovery, not its cause. - Component tests use mocked directory requests. No deployed latency or browser persistence claim is made. Latest CI: [run 39523376437](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39523376437). Reviewed head: `9dde4bc0caa3556e315a2fc197268b7c9879efa4`. ## Risks - Task dialog code is part of board startup again. This adds its dependencies to the initial code graph. No startup latency benchmark is claimed. - Other creation dialogs retain their existing lazy imports and loading behavior. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools and code execution. The runtime does not expose a more precise model ID or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
87bf89756e |
fix: support Daytona runner upgrades and ignore obsolete Claude options (#17361)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Existing Claude and Codex agents can upgrade to Paperclip Runner. > - A Daytona computer needs platform qualification before Runner becomes its default. > - The upgrade notice required that default, so it hid the action that could start qualification. > - Saved Claude turn limits also caused conversion to fail even though Runner can run without them. > - This pull request verifies the computer on click and ignores obsolete Claude options with a warning. > - Agents retain their model, account, environment, instructions, and permission policy. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #17122. **What happened?** A legacy Claude agent on a Daytona snapshot had no upgrade button until its environment had platform qualification. A saved `maxTurnsPerRun: 1000` then caused conversion to return HTTP 422. **Expected behavior** The upgrade action verifies a supported Daytona computer and converts the agent. Unsupported tuning options produce a visible warning and do not block execution. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a legacy Claude agent with `maxTurnsPerRun: 1000` on an active Daytona snapshot. 2. Open Runtime before the environment has platform qualification. 3. Try to upgrade to Paperclip Runner. **Paperclip version or commit** After #17122, reproduced against `9c442cf48e`. ## What Changed - Offer upgrade on probe-capable Daytona snapshots and immutable sandbox images. Perform the public environment probe only after a click. Save after fresh adapter discovery confirms support. - Resolve the actual computer for explicit, instance-default, and hidden managed environments. Preserve pending edits and reject stale probe results. - Ignore Claude `maxTurnsPerRun`, `chrome`, `warmHandleIdleMs`, and `acpWarmHandleIdleMs`. Return structured warnings from create, hire, and update. Show warnings in Runtime and after a save. - Keep validation for commands, credentials, filesystem, network, and permission settings. - Retain the legacy turn limit in the existing live conversion fixture. Update regression tests, upgrade stories, and capability maps. ## Verification - Red: the old route returns HTTP 422 for the saved turn limit; the old form hides the Daytona upgrade notice. - Green: 417 focused server and form tests pass. A further 188 tests pass after the review fixes. Qualification coverage includes failed probes, unsupported targets, changed settings, managed defaults, unsaved environment variables, and forced Kubernetes targets. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. Token gates, map checks, map tests, and Storybook catalog checks pass. - Real local Claude Opus 5.5 conversion and task pass, with the downloaded artifact checked against seeded source bytes, SHA-256, and Git commit. - Real browser upgrade and full Claude Opus 5.5 task on a disposable named Daytona snapshot pass at `b81cec7d8c`. The saved agent retains its model, high effort, credentials, timeout, and grace settings while dropping the turn limit with a visible warning. Exactly one successful run completed the task. The downloaded artifact matched independently seeded source bytes, SHA-256, and Git commit; the source was unchanged, no interactions remained pending, and the delivery link survived a browser reload. The snapshot used current runtime assets built from public source. The supplied Daytona account could not access the original staging snapshot, so this verifies an equivalent local fixture rather than that exact snapshot. Disposable test resources were cleaned up. - Earlier live attempts remain recorded: an image-based sandbox creation failed, and the first named-snapshot probe returned failure with unresolved provisional cleanup identity. Later named-snapshot probing and the task succeeded; the initial creation failures are not attributed to this PR or declared resolved. A separate attempt using the Oct 18 cached runtime failed the current provider-pack compatibility check; rebuilding the runtime from matching public source removed that mismatch. Owned resources were identified and cleaned up, with diagnostic databases retained. - 54 checks passed at `b81cec7d8c`, with no failed checks; Greptile and Paperclip Review both scored 5/5, with both review threads resolved. Master advanced during the live proof, so the branch was rebased with both sides of additive import/test conflicts retained. On the rebased head `2b74222b94`, 472 focused tests, UI typecheck, and UI build pass. All required CI gates pass; Greptile and Paperclip Review both score 5/5 on this head, with no unresolved review threads. The PR is mergeable. The serial local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after the CI test lanes passed; that local run is not claimed as a pass. ## Risks - An explicit upgrade can allocate a temporary probe sandbox and take several minutes. Probe failures leave the agent on its existing runner. - Ignored options no longer enforce a turn cap, Chrome integration, or legacy idle-time tuning. The UI warns about each active ignored option. - Unsafe or ambiguous execution settings still fail validation. This change does not weaken environment qualification or runtime artifact checks. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, code execution, and browser tools. The exact deployment model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
724fa6144d |
fix(opencode-local): preserve the agent during sandbox tool OOMs (#17398)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The Legacy OpenCode adapter runs an agent and its shell tools in the same sandbox. > - A large build can exceed the sandbox memory limit and trigger a kernel OOM kill. > - The kernel can kill OpenCode before its tool, which loses the active turn. > - OpenCode provides a shell environment hook that can change only the tool subprocess. > - This pull request uses that hook to prefer Bash tool processes as OOM victims. > - The benefit is that OpenCode can report a failed tool and continue the task. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** An OpenCode sandbox run ended with exit 137 after a TypeScript process had also been killed. Its cgroup limit was 4 GiB. It had completed useful tool work and had not reached its execution deadline. The original sandbox was deleted, so its historical OOM counters are unavailable. Memory pressure is the leading explanation, not a proven historical kernel diagnosis. **Expected behavior** When a shell tool exhausts sandbox memory, the kernel should prefer that tool over OpenCode where possible. The adapter must preserve configured shell startup, model, permissions and resource limits. **Steps to reproduce** Use a disposable 4 GiB Linux sandbox with OpenCode. Retain a 1,200 MiB buffer in the agent and run a Bash tool with fourteen 250 MiB workers. Compare the same workload before and after installing the generated hook. Record the cgroup memory events, agent exit and final response. Refs: #16844. That PR covers the same protection for Claude. This PR adds the OpenCode-owned hook. Refs: #17254 for the separate shutdown recovery path. This PR does not change retry policy. ## What Changed - Generate a dependency-free OpenCode `shell.env` plugin and a Bash startup file in the isolated runtime config. - Stage those assets only for sandbox execution. Resolve the startup file relative to the copied plugin. - Set child `oom_score_adj` to `1000` on Linux. Keep the parent environment unchanged and honor existing `BASH_ENV` values, including an empty value. - Keep command execution available if the optional plugin cannot be installed or the process priority cannot be changed. - Materialize linked plugin directories inside the isolated config before writing. Keep the operator directory and its plugins unchanged. - Cover relocation, shell output and exit status, operator settings, local execution, remote staging and failed installation. Update the adapter documentation and verification recipe. ## Verification - Red before the fix: the new runtime regression failed because the sandbox shell plugin was absent. The existing 15 runtime config tests passed. The same regression passes with the fix. - Apex first found a host-write risk through linked plugins directories (4/5). A new regression reproduced the host directory modification, then passed after the installer materialized the copied link. The finding is resolved. Apex reviewed current head `df82a8f51725a197c0ea3ebeb942488509f32b34` at 5/5 with no actionable issues remaining. - The full OpenCode adapter suite passes: 87 source tests. The adapter typecheck and map checks pass. - Real sandbox acceptance used the plugin generated from `df82a8f51725a197c0ea3ebeb942488509f32b34` and OpenCode 1.18.34 in a disposable 4 GiB Daytona sandbox. A controlled local model endpoint issued an actual Bash tool call; no real model credentials were used. The tool reported priority `1000`; the parent reported `0`. - Controlled OOM comparison: without the guard, OpenCode was killed by SIGKILL after 8.95 seconds and the cgroup recorded one OOM kill. With the guard, five workers were killed, OpenCode exited `0` after 21.87 seconds, and its final response was `fixture-complete`. The cgroup counter increased by five. Both attempts used the same allocation and workload. The fixture started with a linked operator plugins directory. The installer preserved that directory, staged a real plugins directory, and passed both the process-priority probe and OOM comparison. The fixture allocation was deleted afterward. - The first live probe was not accepted because the harness could not parse the provider response framing. After correcting the decoder, the unchanged plugin passed the probe and the controlled OOM comparison. Both initial disposable allocations were deleted. After the review fix, a third allocation repeated the probe and OOM comparison with a linked plugins directory. That allocation was also deleted. The initial comparison had the same agent-killed/agent-survived result (8.42 seconds without the guard; 19.42 seconds with it). - Repository `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. The full CI matrix passes on `df82a8f51725a197c0ea3ebeb942488509f32b34`, including tests, browser shards, Runner checks, build, policy and Apex. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40043947375). - The first full local test attempt had 15 embedded PostgreSQL startup failures. Direct `initdb --version` and `postgres --version` probes showed missing bundled library symlinks and SIGABRT. Running the bundled symlink hydration script restored both executables. All 15 affected cases pass after that setup repair. No product code changed for it. - Two existing workspace tests assumed that new Git repositories have no `main` branch. They failed under the host default branch setting of `main`, then passed with a per-command `init.defaultBranch=master` setting. The global setting was preserved. The full local test command was restarted with hydrated libraries and that controlled fixture default. It had no reported assertion failures when it was stopped after the complete CI matrix passed. It did not complete locally; full-suite verification comes from CI. The first failed invocation was also stopped. - The original tenant task has not been retried or recovered by this PR. Its board API credential is expired. The original hosted workflow and the separate shutdown recovery remain outside this acceptance result. ## Risks - This is a preference, not a memory reservation. It cannot guarantee that OpenCode survives every OOM condition, including memory growth inside OpenCode itself. - The guard applies to non-interactive Bash tools. Other shells ignore `BASH_ENV`. Existing operator startup settings take precedence. - Older OpenCode releases without the shell environment hook will not apply the preference. No model, permission, deadline, memory quota or retry limit changes. - No schema change or migration. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository tools and code execution. The exact deployment variant and context window are not exposed by this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
bf223596ab |
fix(runner): bootstrap fresh sessions in replacement sandboxes (#17320)
Reuse the untouched-session proof and atomic directory claim when a sandbox replacement carries a provider session that has never run. Retain verified restore for saved backups and all prior or ambiguous session activity. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4d90634f74 |
feat(connections): add 1Password service-account connector (#17249)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and govern their access to outside services. > - Apps connections keep provider credentials in the instance vault and mediate every action through grants, policies, and audit. > - Agents currently have no Apps connection for reading or managing 1Password items with an operator-supplied service-account token. > - 1Password supports this through its official SDK; its documentation MCP server does not expose vault operations. > - This pull request adds a one-field service-account connection and registers eight reviewed SDK actions through the existing native-provider catalog. > - Operators can select vault permissions in 1Password and agent/action access in Paperclip without installing a CLI or handing durable credentials to agents. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #16144 adds 1Password as Paperclip's secret-storage backend. This PR adds the separate Apps/tool-access flow with a per-connection credential; it does not change secret providers or use a server-wide ambient token. **Subsystem affected** Apps catalog, native tool-provider registry, and shared connection setup. **Problem or motivation** People need to paste their own `OP_SERVICE_ACCOUNT_TOKEN`, find official service-account setup instructions, and authorize agents to use the selected vaults through ordinary Paperclip governance. **Proposed solution** Add `1password/service-account`, with a password field labeled **Paste your 1Password Service Account token** and a link to [1Password's creation instructions](https://www.1password.dev/service-accounts/get-started#create-a-service-account). Use the pinned official `@1password/sdk` 0.5.0 for vault/item listing, item and secret-reference reads, and item create/update/archive/delete. **Alternatives considered** A remote MCP card would not provide vault access. A local CLI or a third-party MCP package adds installation and credential surfaces that the official SDK avoids. ## What Changed - Added the source and generated catalog definition, permission review, official light/dark artwork, documentation, and capability-map references. - Added a provider-owned SDK bridge with strict schemas, account-domain validation, contract hashes, fixed errors, bounded output, and disposable workers with cancellation/deadlines. - Registered the provider through master's native-provider catalog; existing setup, health, discovery, gateway, policy, and audit owners remain in place. - Labeled the single password field **Paste your 1Password Service Account token**. The shared formatter preserves explicit credential prompts; ordinary key labels retain their existing presentation. - Added credential-ownership, gateway read/write, policy/revocation, worker, setup UI, and interactive Storybook coverage. ## Verification - Final review follow-up: added two deterministic worker-entry tests for nested exact-token redaction and oversized-output rejection. Removing each guard caused exactly its regression test to fail. The focused provider suite passed **15 tests**, and the official server typecheck passed after rebuilding stale workspace SDK artifacts. Current head `569cb7f9bd57db791fb13a6034ce69bf50878cb1` passed the full [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40016166260), including typecheck, build, unit/integration tests, and all eight browser shards. The required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e` gates passed. [Greptile](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/17249#issuecomment-6353731805) and [Paperclip Review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/17249#issuecomment-6372165895) each rated this exact head **5/5**, with no open findings. Paperclip Review completed with a neutral check because its scoped reviewer could not inspect CI; the full CI result was verified separately. Other neutral checks and intentionally skipped Storybook jobs contain no actionable findings. - CI recovery on the same commit: the first attempt lost six jobs. Five logged simultaneous runner shutdowns at 18:49 UTC on 2026-10-23; the sixth stopped logging before a test result and its root cause was not established. No assertion failure appeared in the retrieved logs. All six jobs and the aggregate gates passed one failed-job retry. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40005754936). - Copy follow-up: the catalog, provider, and setup UI suites passed **275 tests**. The governed gateway lifecycle passed **3 tests** (one live-only test skipped), including create, update, archive, and delete. UI token gates and map checks passed. The branch was rebased onto `9c442cf48e` to resolve additive catalog conflicts while retaining the Vercel and Supabase entries. The existing live write proof below remains applicable; this follow-up changes presentation only. - Five affected suites, including the existing Daytona consumer, passed **290 tests** (one opt-in live test skipped in fixture mode). Full `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. The local broad-suite attempt could not complete because PostgreSQL semaphore exhaustion prevented a competing integration suite from starting; the complete affected-file retry passed after disposable-process cleanup. The prior commit `f208a8aff6dc28859cc3f343497e18d85f124579` passed the complete CI matrix. All CI build, typecheck, test, and browser gates also passed on the earlier commit `9e2f3d3140368a08da43b004b2e8d3a0f4c0fa4d`. The separate Paperclip Review reported a worker-result regression-test gap on that head; the follow-up above addresses it. Its review thread is resolved, and both fresh current-head reviews are clean as recorded above. - Token gates, module boundaries, brand validation, map checks, and Storybook catalog checks passed. - Direct SDK create/archive/delete and rejected-call coverage passed (13 provider tests); the Storybook Permissions/Test play completed successfully in Chromium. Server and UI typechecks passed after those fixes. Greptile passed prior commit `9e2f3d3140368a08da43b004b2e8d3a0f4c0fa4d` at **5/5**. Both reviewers also passed the worker-test follow-up at **5/5** as recorded above. - Live 1Password proof on 2026-10-22: connect, eight-action discovery, vault listing through an actual run-scoped gateway, refresh, reconnect preserving identity, another read, removal, and denial through the retained session passed. Credential absence was asserted in responses/audit; an exact-token scan of inspected logs and changed files passed. - Real browser: Connectors → 1Password → token entry → personal access limited to one disposable agent → completion → Permissions → Test `onepassword_list_vaults` succeeded. The disposable connection was removed afterward. - Compiled-worker smoke initially exposed inherited Node launch flags. Workers now use explicit empty `execArgv`; the compiled worker then authenticated successfully and listed one vault. - Live write proof on **2026-10-23**: the replacement Keychain token passed all eight actions through the actual run-scoped gateway for both personal and shared credentials. The test created, listed, read, updated, resolved a secret from, archived, and deleted two synthetic items. Both were absent from subsequent item lists. Refresh/reconnect, identity preservation, removal, retained-session denial, and credential absence passed. The live suite passed **3 tests** (one fixture-only test skipped) in 116.65 seconds. The expanded fixture suite passed **3 tests** (one live-only test skipped); the 13 provider tests and server typecheck passed. An exact-token scan passed over 64 source/log files. - Failure history: the original token denied creation on 2026-10-22 and created no item. The first 2026-10-23 attempt stopped before provider calls because host PostgreSQL semaphore limits prevented test-database startup. A temporary ten-connection test profile allowed the complete retry to pass without changing shared services or host limits. A new delete-result assertion also exposed an outdated fixture response (`success` instead of `deleted`); the fixture was corrected and the complete fixture suite passed. Official contract sources: [service accounts](https://www.1password.dev/service-accounts/get-started), [SDKs](https://www.1password.dev/sdks), [item management](https://www.1password.dev/sdks/manage-items), [official JavaScript SDK](https://github.com/1Password/onepassword-sdk-js). ## Risks - Authorized item/secret reads intentionally return secret values to the agent and ordinary tool-result history. Select trusted agents and use restricted service-account vaults; the connection token itself is redacted. - New connections retain existing Paperclip action defaults, including Allowed writes/destructive actions for selected agents. 1Password still enforces the token's permissions. - Service-account access cannot be changed in place. Create a replacement account and reconnect to change vault permissions; read-only keys can connect but cannot write. - SDK authentication happens per action in a disposable worker. Calls have a 30-second maximum; cancellation stops local work, while a mutation already accepted by 1Password can still finish. Writes are never automatically retried. - Additive dependency and catalog change; no database migration. Disable/remove the connection to withdraw access, or remove the provider from catalog visibility for rollback. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with code editing, shell/browser tools, and live provider verification. A more specific runtime model ID and context-window limit were not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
837add0caa |
fix(recovery): deliver review-path repair instructions to agent prompts (#17353)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip keeps agent tasks moving through owned execution and durable waiting paths. > - A consumed review path gets one repair wake before board escalation. > - That wake records an instruction to save a new monitor or another real review path. > - The canonical wake builder omitted that instruction from the agent prompt. > - This pull request delivers it through the existing disposition-repair section. > - The repair limit and execution authority stay unchanged. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** An agent opened a pull request and promised to watch CI and external review. It ended without scheduling a monitor. Its bounded review repair also ended without a maintained path, so the task became blocked for a board decision. The saved repair context contained the instruction, but the canonical wake payload and rendered prompt did not. **Expected behavior** The repair prompt tells the agent to save a one-shot monitor before promising another check. Both fresh and resumed sessions receive that instruction and the one-attempt limit. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a review-path recovery with `decideIssueReviewPathRecovery` for a task whose review path was consumed. 2. Pass its recorded context through `buildPaperclipWakePayload` and wake serialization. 3. Render a fresh or resumed prompt. Before this fix, it has the wake reason but no repair instruction. **Paperclip version or commit** Base: `9c442cf48e6`. Current head: `f38d65891c8d9f2b38eb76a8578e870debc2b1e6`. **Deployment mode** Observed on managed sandbox execution with the legacy Claude ACP adapter. The corrected canonical payload serves the shared adapter prompt path. Refs #15764 introduced the bounded exhausted-repair disposition. This change preserves that limit. Open monitor-retry work such as #17171 addresses an already scheduled check; this defect occurs before a check exists. Searches found no duplicate for this missing prompt field. ## What Changed - Build the review-path repair disposition in its owning recovery module, using the server instruction and fixed one-attempt bound. - Project it into the existing canonical `dispositionRepair` field. No new adapter field or execution protocol is added. - Ignore arbitrary replacement instructions and attempt-limit values. A pending repair keeps its instruction across a connection-pool retry that changes the wake reason. Ordinary wakes without the typed repair marker ignore raw instruction text. Existing legacy disposition repairs retain their values. - Add a regression across the real recovery decision, wake builder, serializer and fresh/resumed prompt selectors. Update execution guidance and the affected recovery maps. ## Verification - Verified red before the source fix: two regression cases failed because the instruction was absent; the sibling repair case passed. The same cases pass after the fix. - Passed 194 focused and safety tests across wake preparation, review recovery, adapter prompt handling, and database-backed liveness escalation. The connection-pool retry case also failed before its correction and passes after it. - Replayed the recorded incident wake through the fixed boundary. The old canonical prompt lacked its saved instruction. The corrected serialized prompt includes it with a 1/1 bound. This replay did not execute a provider turn or change the source task. Private evidence stays outside the repository. - Passed `pnpm -r typecheck` after the pool-retry correction. Passed `pnpm build` on final head `f38d65891c8d9f2b38eb76a8578e870debc2b1e6`. Map checks and `git diff --check` pass. - [Full CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40005890857) passed on that head: 54 checks passed and two optional checks were skipped. This includes the full test shards, typecheck, build, and browser suites. The local `pnpm test:run` attempt was stopped after the CI test shards passed. No complete local full-suite pass is claimed. - [Apex review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/17353#issuecomment-6372160694) is 5/5 on the final head, with no open findings. The first review found the pool-retry case. Its regression and correction are included. The branch has no merge conflicts. - Test setup first required the plugin SDK build, then an empty credential-history database boundary. Those setup errors are not the claimed red. The temporary recorded-wake probe was removed before final validation. - Hosted follow-up acceptance is not run. The source task remains blocked and needs a retry after rollout. This PR does not claim that prompt delivery itself schedules a monitor or that every model will follow the instruction. ## Risks - This fixes instruction delivery. The agent must still save a valid monitor or another waiting path. The existing bounded escalation remains if it does not. - The wake stays a normal-model repair. It does not become status-only recovery and can continue useful work. Existing ownership, approval, budget, pause, and monitor admission gates remain in place. - No schema, credential, telemetry, API, model, or retry-budget change. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, assisted with diagnosis, code editing, shell execution and verification. The exact serving model ID and context-window limit are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (194 focused and safety cases; full coverage passed in CI) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9c442cf48e |
feat(connections): deploy and configure Supabase and Vercel (#17217)
Add governed Supabase and Vercel deployment/configuration connectors with vaulted credentials, agent access policies, approvals, audit, and bounded provider operations. Deliver reviewed REST actions to native agents and guard Vercel preview intent on empty projects. Preserve secret-safe request identity and durable retry behavior. Verified by current-head CI, fresh Greptile 5/5 review, and real-agent deployment/configuration walkthroughs on disposable provider resources. Test resources and temporary provider tokens were removed after verification. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
3f1ad6b25b |
fix(chat): resume task Retry after retained-source containment (#17317)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agent work through task and execution ownership. > - A task Retry must retain the user's request while the system verifies an old executor. > - Connected conversations also retain their external principal and accepted source batch. > - Chat Retry admission required containment before it could save a wait for that recovery. > - A saved chat receipt could also remain deferred after containment became available. > - This pull request lets the exact recovery-bound request wait and resume through its chat owner. > - Normal admission still checks containment, current access and policy before one successor starts. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** An ordinary task Retry on a connected conversation failed with `failed_chat_retry_not_authorized` while its retained remote executor still needed verification. The new recovery generation existed, but the chat action failed before it could save a dispatch wait. This occurred after the repairs in #17267 were confirmed live. The local regression found a second gap. A processed chat action with a deferred wake was not reconsidered after containment. Re-entering normal admission also tried to insert its existing durable receipt again. A historical hold for the same failed run could also hide the current Retry's workspace strategy, so the request still waited after the old executor was contained. Preparation could then read that sibling instead of the recovery record that owned the fresh successor, losing the fresh-workspace decision. **Expected behavior** Save the exact authorized Retry while its matching recovery generation verifies the executor. Once containment is recorded, reconsider the same chat receipt through normal admission. Start one successor with the original source batch. Keep publication, principal, pause and budget checks. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Admit a GitHub or Telegram request and record a failed native run with a retained remote lease. 2. Leave the executor's termination unconfirmed and exhaust its prior recovery generation. 3. Use ordinary task Retry to create a new recovery generation. 4. Process the connected Retry. The old admission code fails instead of retaining a wait. 5. With a deferred receipt, record exact containment and reconcile again. The old dispatch path leaves it stranded. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced from `412914cfa78d5abefcc34d3eb8d4bb86e461caac`. The branch is rebased onto current master. **Deployment mode** Hosted tenant for the reported failure. Isolated local PostgreSQL and the assembled heartbeat/chat services for the regression. Refs #17267 and #16965. This change does not add a Cloud dependency or change the absence protocol. ## What Changed - Permit a saved admission wait only for the exact current task Retry and active source recovery generation. - Keep promotion and execution dependent on independent containment proof. - Bind a Retry to active automatic recovery without replacing its generation, attempt count or deadline. - Share the current exact Retry strategy across historical holds for the same run. Retain each hold's stop and effect checks. - Select the canonical recovery record that proves the committed fresh successor during workspace preparation. - Let task receipt reconciliation return the same deferred action to its chat owner. - Recheck current board and external authority, then update the existing wake atomically with its successor. - Preserve the exact chat source batch. Keep generic board-comment filtering unchanged. - Add GitHub and Telegram cases for waiting, containment, one successor, stale generations, source edits, endpoint pause and supersession. - Update recovery documentation and capability maps. ## Verification - Red: real PostgreSQL tests reproduced the admission rejection for GitHub and Telegram. Six active-recovery cases then failed on the generation-ID assumption. Two same-run historical-hold cases remained deferred after containment on the old strategy lookup. A preparation regression then returned no readiness when the historical hold was stored first. - Green: 73 selected chat integration tests and 394 continuation, task Retry, workspace recovery, recovery-state and workspace-preparation tests passed. The chat tests use the real chat admission and heartbeat queue. Unrelated capacity stays occupied so no real provider starts. They assert no executor before containment, one successor afterward, unchanged source leases while waiting, preserved recovery budgets, and denial after authority changes. A separate source hold still blocks work. Both sibling insertion orders pass through the committed-readiness lookup and real workspace preparation: the new directory has independent Git storage and files, and unpublished old work remains intact. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` passed after the review fixes. The source build passed on `f6660efa48e37a80cd9857217a537606de85b5c8`. - The local host reached its PostgreSQL semaphore limit. Successful runs used a test-only loader to reduce disposable cluster connection and worker limits. No repository database helper or application setting changed. - The full local `pnpm test:run` began before the final review edits, failed in its first server phase and was stopped after those failures. Later phases did not run. This is not a full local pass. The transient Retry-notice case passes after fixture isolation; the four Discord close-owned publication cases also pass in isolation. Other broad-run failure causes are not established. - Exact-head CI and security checks pass on `f6660efa48e37a80cd9857217a537606de85b5c8`; Greptile is 5/5 with zero unresolved review threads. Optional Paperclip Review completed neutral with a 5/5 static assessment of all 11 changed files and no findings; it did not run tests or hosted acceptance. All 57 current-head checks are terminal: 54 success, two skipped and the optional neutral review, with no failures or pending checks. - The real hosted workflow confirmed that the deployed absence repair recorded containment. A later ordinary UI Retry was accepted and saved a durable request, but it remains behind the historical source hold. The useful existing review remains unchanged. This follow-up is not deployed; a live successful successor and final task disposition remain unverified. No missing files are claimed recovered. ## Risks - The existing task reconciliation sweep can restage a deferred chat action. This reuses its receipt and generation; it does not grant new execution or publication authority. - Dispatch must keep the board Retry identity separate from the connected request's principal. The regression checks these bindings and preserves current chat authorization at each phase. - Historical holds reuse a strategy only from the locked same-run recovery that names the current Retry intent. A different run, malformed recovery record or independent source hold remains fenced. - Unknown executors without a matching active recovery still fail admission. Promotion and execution require containment even when admission saved a wait. - No schema or API shape changes. No credential changes, manual deployment or service restart. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository tools, code execution and browser verification. The exact served model variant and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4173059081 |
fix(inbox): keep advisory GitHub review waits quiet (#17318)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Mine shows a person's participation and requests that need their response. > - Automatic GitHub reviews should remain quiet until the assigned work needs human input. > - Review bots used completion requests to keep tasks in review while CI or a PR was still open. > - Those requests correctly entered Mine, despite the automatic-work filter from #16356. > - This pull request gives published reviews an existing provider-event wait in the in-review state and withdraws superseded completion requests. > - Real input requests and separate approval gates keep their current behavior. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16356 Refs #13314 An advisory score below 5/5, pending or failed CI, or an unmerged PR does not by itself require a person's approval in Paperclip. The bot can track those conditions without adding a completion card to Mine. ## What Changed - Explain the quiet review lifecycle in the GitHub review instructions. Use a yielded provider-event wait, or an existing saved monitor, after publication. Report done when the configured completion conditions are met. - Keep a confirmed, published review in `in_review` during that wait. Reuse existing authorization and monitor delivery. Add no schema, timer, or polling loop. - Recognize the committed external wait in review attention and recovery. Shared execution receives a verified publication flag; GitHub receipt lookup stays with the GitHub module. Other chat waits keep their current status. - Withdraw an older system-created completion request only when the same bot has published both reviews and its new report has no attention request. Keep explicit cards, separate approval gates, and requests without the prior review evidence. Finish validation stays read-only; withdrawal commits atomically with the new status after checking current governance, the admitted result, and both low-risk contracts. - Update the product rule, capability maps, and regression coverage. ## Verification - Final commit `7c502118eec36028d1b4537bb8797ef893940bf0`: 54 GitHub checks passed, two intentionally skipped, none pending or failed. Greptile is 5/5, the security scan passed, and all review threads are resolved. - Passed: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. Rechecked server typecheck and build after the final authorization guard. - Passed: 195 tests across `external-chat-wait.integration.test.ts`, `status-arbiter.test.ts`, `review-instructions.test.ts`, and `issue-liveness.test.ts`. The database suite used an isolated PostgreSQL 18 container through `PAPERCLIP_TEST_DATABASE_URL`. - Acceptance coverage: 3/5 stays in review outside Mine; 5/5 with pending completion conditions stays in review; 5/5 with satisfied conditions finishes quietly; a real repository-access request enters Mine until resolved. Also covers obsolete-card withdrawal, transaction rollback, rejected reports, separate approval gates, multiple reviewed heads, saved monitors, and revoked endpoints, repositories, or membership. - Passed: `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, `node scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs`, and `git diff --check`. - The initial acceptance run exposed a missing authenticated user in the test fixture. Added the user required by the existing addressee authorization check. All 154 tests in that database suite then passed, including the final rerun. - Review found premature withdrawal during validation, stale repository access, and a missed receipt when a run reviewed multiple heads. The revision fixes all three and includes acceptance regressions. The saved-monitor commit guard now accepts the verified published-review state. - `pnpm test:run` was attempted but could not complete on this Mac. Embedded PostgreSQL failed to allocate semaphores (`semget: No space left on device`); a direct initialization probe confirmed the host resource limit. The isolated database run proves the affected suite, not the full repository suite. - These tests exercise persisted review receipts, finalization, and Mine queries. They do not prove a live model followed the new instructions or submit a live GitHub review. ## Risks - The bot must follow the new lifecycle instructions. A real explicit attention request still enters Mine. - Existing obsolete cards are withdrawn when the same bot publishes a later review and reports no human dependency. This change does not run a bulk cleanup of historical inbox entries. - Review attention now recognizes an external response path. It requires an applied current status decision, a successful bound run, and current conversation, repository, and principal authorization. - No migration or UI change. The full local test suite is unverified because of the host database limit; CI passes on the final commit. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository inspection, code editing, and test execution. The exact deployment model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (195 focused tests; full-suite limitation above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
5ef385f7e6 |
Run reusable Product E2E journeys across deployment targets (#17262)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and their work. > - Product E2E tests check complete user journeys. > - The current harness prepares self-hosted instances. > - Hosted workspaces need separate authentication, setup, and cleanup. > - The same in-app story should run on either deployment. > - This pull request adds deployment targets and explicit prerequisites. > - The private Cloud adapter owns fleet access and lifecycle operations. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Product E2E harness, fixture registry, and reports. **Problem or motivation** Self-hosted test setup cannot qualify a deployed Cloud workspace. Copying each story into a second harness would make its assertions diverge. **Proposed solution** Add explicit deployment targets, setup recipes, and ordered campaigns. Reuse a no-model task-properties story on both deployments. Let fresh Cloud onboarding provide verified context for that same story. Keep Cloud lifecycle and credentials behind a private target provider. **Roadmap alignment** This supports Cloud deployment qualification and the existing agent eval system. It adds no application endpoint or scheduler. Related work: #17112. The separate onboarding gateway UI prerequisite is #17253. ## What Changed - Add explicit target configuration and a credential-free preparation preview. Keep historical selectors and the current `--all` matrix unchanged. - Resolve requested fixture prerequisites, including a run-owned backlog task prepared before measurement. Reuse verified onboarding context without counting recipe setup as onboarding coverage. - Add task assignment persistence and the actual onboarding parent/child first-task journey, with an independent artifact oracle and native trace requirement. - Preserve failed boundaries and blocked dependents, deployment identity, costs, phase outcomes, and private evidence in the existing dashboard. - Validate success assertions and accounting before successful cleanup. Bound collection by the campaign deadline and cleanup/evidence hooks by a separate ten-minute grace, with cancellation and stop-only fallback. - Stage dashboard rendering separately so a timed-out renderer cannot overwrite retained failure results. Add evidence finalization hooks so the private provider can save evidence before target deletion and lease release. - Reject private journey bundles in the public history publisher. Browser-only results have no model or provider. ## Verification - The unchanged task-properties story passed on managed self-hosted and a registered testing Cloud workspace. Authentication, setup, journey, collection, and cleanup passed. Model calls: zero. Earlier attempts remain private and retained. - Final journey and report tests: 96 passed in eight files. Catalog compatibility: 39 passed. The wider focused run exposed three stale master catalog expectations; these now match the already shipped case-handoff v4 metadata and four-cell matrix. The default 385-cell selection is unchanged. - Review regressions reproduced premature success for a zero-request receipt and a missing required assertion. Both now fail before success cleanup while retaining cost receipts. The initial lifecycle fixes passed 33 checks. A subsequent review exposed a late renderer write that could erase saved failures; rendering now writes into isolated staging and publishes HTML only after it settles. Combined campaign, fixture-contract, and retained-report checks: 67 passed, including late writes, delayed timer callbacks, stalled collection, release, stop, evidence hooks, and browser close. Harness typecheck passed after the fixes. - A broader harness unit attempt completed 3,601 passing cases, two failures, and two skips. The failures exposed a stale Pi count and an omitted active Copilot fixture in the Daytona image input closure. The focused compatibility fixes passed 83 tests. After all source fixes, the full harness support suite passed: 160 files, 3,621 tests, two skips, plus 128 native-source checks. The earlier failures remain recorded. - Harness typecheck, repository typecheck, repository build, map checks, and Storybook catalog checks passed on the rebased branch. - The required full `pnpm test:run` attempt timed out after 35 minutes. It had 1,195 completed passing cases and one chat integration failure before its first suite completed. That case and nine adjacent cases pass in isolation. The original failure remains unresolved and retained; this is not a full-suite pass. - Current-head remote checks (`39b2a1ed8c49222fabd1ba8e225cac81bff5c6f7`): 53 passed, two skipped, none pending or failing. Greptile completed successfully at 5/5 with no unresolved review threads. - Fresh paid Cloud onboarding, dependent reuse, and disposable cleanup have not been qualified live. They require deployment of the separate UI prerequisite and actual Cloud gateway budget admission. The trusted Cloud workflow remains disabled. - Final live verification at `39b2a1ed8c`: the unchanged shared story passed on managed self-hosted and the registered testing Cloud stack using the prepared backlog-task recipe. Both cleaned up successfully with zero model calls. Independent private S3 checks confirmed final evidence and released QA identity/stack leases. Cloud evidence remains private. ## Risks - A deployed UI or Cloud control-plane change can invalidate selectors or provider contracts. Version drift fails the attempt. - Cloud evidence and lifecycle recovery are private-provider responsibilities. A pending cleanup or evidence upload must keep the target unavailable for reuse. - No release is deployed or pinned by this change. No automatic story retry is added. The initial pilot retains its explicit $10, one disposable workspace, and 30-minute bounds. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and delegated agents. The runtime does not expose a more specific deployment model identifier or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4c57da3708 |
fix(recovery): continue Retry after verified sandbox absence (#17267)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Task Retry must reconcile a stopped native execution before starting another one. > - A retained sandbox can disappear while workspace preservation is pending. > - A tenant-key error does not prove absence, especially after credential rotation. > - This pull request accepts only a short-lived Cloud observation bound to the exact source and current preservation owner. > - Normal Retry admission can then continue in a fresh workspace without claiming that missing files were recovered. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A native run stops with workspace preservation pending. Its Daytona allocation no longer exists. Recovery tries to reopen it, then cannot confirm a stop. The ordinary Retry remains deferred behind cleanup and repeats a transient failure. **Expected behavior** Cloud must independently confirm absence in the recorded provider organization. Core must verify that proof and settle executor containment under the current physical owner. Normal Retry admission must enforce all existing gates and create at most one successor. The old run must remain failed and missing files must remain unavailable. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Persist a failed native run with a retained Daytona lease and an exhausted workspace-recovery generation. 2. Remove the exact provider allocation so reopen and stop cannot confirm it. 3. Request ordinary task Retry. 4. Observe that recovery reports `provider_unavailable` and leaves the Retry deferred. **Paperclip version/commit** Reproduced on source based on `6d44b80a5edbcc9f69bfc3d520994e70aa9fab6d` with the prior preservation and Retry repairs present. **Deployment mode** Cloud tenant with native Runner and a retained Daytona source. The local acceptance uses real Core, Cloud, PostgreSQL, signatures, native Runner and UI, with deterministic model and provider HTTP boundaries. Refs #16962, #16965, #17053. These repairs cover completion proposals, durable Retry and retained-source reopening. They do not establish absence of a missing provider allocation. Related #16809 preserves orphan sandbox leases; this change requires independent proof before settling an absent allocation. ## What Changed - Add an HTTPS client for a purpose-separated, host-bound Cloud sandbox-absence capability. - Verify signature, audience, stack, expiry, source identities and current physical-owner token. - Settle only executor absence with a metadata and owner compare-and-set. Preserve source protection and record that workspace contents are unavailable. - Leave successor creation, approval, pause, budget and uncertain-effect checks to normal Retry admission. - Document the protocol and update the recovery maps. ## Verification - Red: the new persisted-state regression returned `provider_unavailable` and scheduled recovery on the unfixed code. Expected: `source_unavailable` with a contained old execution. - Green: 384 focused tests pass across workspace recovery, signed absence, explicit continuation, ordinary Retry, workspace preparation and provider-owned fresh workspaces. - Signature tests reject forged, expired and mismatched proofs. HTTP failures or missing configuration grant no authority. - Two missing allocations are both reconciled before Retry. A simulated interruption reuses the first durable absence receipt. - Concurrent Retry admission produces one queued fresh successor. It records no successful old result and no recovered-file claim. - Browser acceptance at this change: one ordinary Retry, two provider absence reads for two retained sources, one fresh native execution, useful confirmation and Done after reload. The old run remains failed. Existing saved review and newer local file bytes remain unchanged. The deterministic model does not perform external publication; this is local protocol acceptance, not live provider recovery. - `pnpm typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` pass. - A complete local `pnpm test:run` pass was not obtained. The first run hit a 15-second timeout in an unchanged status-card test. It was stopped to apply review fixes before the remaining phases ran. The unchanged status-card suite then passed 25/25 in isolation with the repository short temporary-path convention. - CI exposed a chat nonduplication assertion that compared unordered database rows. The assertion now sorts both complete row sets by run ID. Its focused test passes. - All 58 current-head checks are terminal on `1e2e881f6b6b1ae1fbfe1f2b2922657ce46e1470`: 55 success, two unaffected Storybook skips, and one neutral advisory review. Required CI, build, E2E and security checks pass. Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved threads. The optional Paperclip review is neutral advisory 5/5 with nine-file source coverage and no findings; it did not independently run tests. - One unchanged native-runtime test timed out at five seconds on its first CI attempt. Its suite passed 33/33 in isolation; a single retry of that lane passed without code changes. ## Risks - The companion Cloud endpoint must ship before this consumer. Older or unavailable Cloud versions return no proof and retain the current hold. - A valid absence receipt permits a fresh workspace attempt. It cannot restore missing remote files, establish task success or authorize repeating an uncertain external effect. - This PR has not been deployed. The original task remains unrecovered pending rollout and reconciliation of its existing Retry. - No schema, credential, provider-resource or fleet changes are included. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, source inspection, code execution and browser tools. The exact backend variant and context-window size are not exposed by this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused scope above; full local run limitation recorded) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |