PaperClipAI

Jannik/PaperClipAI

0 Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git synced 2026-10-29 21:07:40 +01:00

Commit Graph

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
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>	2026-10-24 10:29:15 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	9966f31bee	fix(chat): keep permission failures scoped to the rejected operation (#16847 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - External channels deliver agent replies through a durable publication queue. > - A provider can reject one operation while other operations remain allowed. > - The shared error classifier treated generic 403 and permission errors as failures of the whole connection. > - Failure handlers then changed the user's enabled setting and removed all assigned channel tools. > - This pull request limits permission failures to the rejected operation and preserves connection intent during authentication failures. > - Unrelated work can continue, while confirmed authentication failures still stop endpoint traffic. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16137. Follows #16138, which distinguishes local authorization errors from provider errors. This change also narrows provider permission failures. Related #16806 handles a separate task-continuation tool-binding defect. A provider 403 or missing-scope response currently disables a connection that may still support other operations. The expected behavior is a visible operation failure with unrelated work preserved. Confirmed authentication failures must stop sends without changing the user's enabled setting. ## What Changed - Classify generic 403, adapter permission errors, and Slack missing-scope/no-permission responses as failed operations. - Preserve rate-limit retries, known destination quarantine, and confirmed authentication failures. - Preserve connection status and enabled intent when publication, provider-reply, or form-open authentication fails. The endpoint still enters attention and its runtime stops. - Add GitHub regressions for retained discovery and successful later publication after 403, and no further sends after 401. - Mark authentication health failed and fence persistent receiver startup, background reconciliation, and receiver callbacks. Keep signed GitHub lifecycle events available during an authentication stop. Verify Discord reconciliation and Photon restart preserve the stop, while transient Discord disconnects still recover. - Update provider, publication, and modal regression expectations and the execution contract and verification maps. ## Verification - Red: five new classifier cases returned endpoint attention before the repair. The signed-installation-removal regression also reproduced a blocked lifecycle event after a 401 before narrowing the receiver guard. - Green: all 35 classifier tests pass. - Green: 19 PostgreSQL-backed cases pass through the production channel services, including GitHub discovery/publication, Slack provider replies and question modals, Telegram credential/destination failures, rate limiting, and Discord/Photon authentication-stop persistence. - Map structural checks and `git diff --check` pass. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. All CI gates are green on `7e379bcd98aa8363e42efe7f8a4b2589b7111ae6`; Greptile is 5/5 on that exact commit with no unresolved findings. - The monolithic local `pnpm test:run` was started, then stopped after its revision passed the full CI matrix and was superseded by the authentication-stop repair. Final full-suite verification passed in CI shards; all 19 final local provider regressions pass. - The tests run from this source checkout on macOS arm64 with isolated PostgreSQL and controlled provider failures. They do not prove live GitHub recovery or deployment. No live connection settings were changed. ## Risks - Permission failures now leave unrelated work available. The rejected operation remains failed and is not automatically replayed. Provider authorization still applies to every request. - Keeping a connection enabled must not bypass an authentication stop. GitHub verifies blocked tool discovery and later sends; Discord and Photon verify background reconciliation and restart cannot clear the stop. Failed connection health is an execution gate while the endpoint requires attention. - Explicit disable, disconnect, signed installation revocation, and existing destination-specific denial handling remain unchanged. No migration or API schema change is required. - Previously disabled connections are not automatically re-enabled because an upgrade cannot safely infer the user's intent. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The runtime does not expose the exact deployment model ID or context-window size. Used reasoning, shell tools, repository edits, and test execution. ## 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>	2026-10-19 09:54:22 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	eb06c9fedd	refactor(server): split chat channel workflows into provider and shared modules (#16080 ) Move provider operations into channel folders and shared chat work into named interaction, setup, admission, delivery and publication workflows. Consolidate reviewed PRs #16085, #16089, #16096 and #16105. Preserve upstream execution-default and recovery behavior. The main service is 7,917 lines. All 55 current-head CI checks pass, with two optional Storybook skips. Greptile is 5/5 with no findings. All 1,294 current chat integration cases, repository-wide typecheck and build pass locally. Broad local tool-route timing/socket failures are recorded in the PR. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-13 07:26:32 -05:00

Author

SHA1

Message

Date

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>

2026-10-24 10:29:15 -07:00

DottaandPaperclip

9966f31bee

fix(chat): keep permission failures scoped to the rejected operation (#16847 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - External channels deliver agent replies through a durable
publication queue.
> - A provider can reject one operation while other operations remain
allowed.
> - The shared error classifier treated generic 403 and permission
errors as failures of the whole connection.
> - Failure handlers then changed the user's enabled setting and removed
all assigned channel tools.
> - This pull request limits permission failures to the rejected
operation and preserves connection intent during authentication
failures.
> - Unrelated work can continue, while confirmed authentication failures
still stop endpoint traffic.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16137. Follows #16138, which distinguishes local authorization
errors from provider errors. This change also narrows provider
permission failures. Related #16806 handles a separate task-continuation
tool-binding defect.

A provider 403 or missing-scope response currently disables a connection
that may still support other operations. The expected behavior is a
visible operation failure with unrelated work preserved. Confirmed
authentication failures must stop sends without changing the user's
enabled setting.

## What Changed

- Classify generic 403, adapter permission errors, and Slack
missing-scope/no-permission responses as failed operations.
- Preserve rate-limit retries, known destination quarantine, and
confirmed authentication failures.
- Preserve connection status and enabled intent when publication,
provider-reply, or form-open authentication fails. The endpoint still
enters attention and its runtime stops.
- Add GitHub regressions for retained discovery and successful later
publication after 403, and no further sends after 401.
- Mark authentication health failed and fence persistent receiver
startup, background reconciliation, and receiver callbacks. Keep signed
GitHub lifecycle events available during an authentication stop. Verify
Discord reconciliation and Photon restart preserve the stop, while
transient Discord disconnects still recover.
- Update provider, publication, and modal regression expectations and
the execution contract and verification maps.

## Verification

- Red: five new classifier cases returned endpoint attention before the
repair. The signed-installation-removal regression also reproduced a
blocked lifecycle event after a 401 before narrowing the receiver guard.
- Green: all 35 classifier tests pass.
- Green: 19 PostgreSQL-backed cases pass through the production channel
services, including GitHub discovery/publication, Slack provider replies
and question modals, Telegram credential/destination failures, rate
limiting, and Discord/Photon authentication-stop persistence.
- Map structural checks and `git diff --check` pass.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. All CI gates are green on
`7e379bcd98aa8363e42efe7f8a4b2589b7111ae6`; Greptile is 5/5 on that
exact commit with no unresolved findings.
- The monolithic local `pnpm test:run` was started, then stopped after
its revision passed the full CI matrix and was superseded by the
authentication-stop repair. Final full-suite verification passed in CI
shards; all 19 final local provider regressions pass.
- The tests run from this source checkout on macOS arm64 with isolated
PostgreSQL and controlled provider failures. They do not prove live
GitHub recovery or deployment. No live connection settings were changed.

## Risks

- Permission failures now leave unrelated work available. The rejected
operation remains failed and is not automatically replayed. Provider
authorization still applies to every request.
- Keeping a connection enabled must not bypass an authentication stop.
GitHub verifies blocked tool discovery and later sends; Discord and
Photon verify background reconciliation and restart cannot clear the
stop. Failed connection health is an execution gate while the endpoint
requires attention.
- Explicit disable, disconnect, signed installation revocation, and
existing destination-specific denial handling remain unchanged. No
migration or API schema change is required.
- Previously disabled connections are not automatically re-enabled
because an upgrade cannot safely infer the user's intent.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The runtime does not expose the exact
deployment model ID or context-window size. Used reasoning, shell tools,
repository edits, and test execution.

## 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>

2026-10-19 09:54:22 -05:00

DottaandPaperclip

eb06c9fedd

refactor(server): split chat channel workflows into provider and shared modules (#16080 )

Move provider operations into channel folders and shared chat work into named interaction, setup, admission, delivery and publication workflows. Consolidate reviewed PRs #16085, #16089, #16096 and #16105. Preserve upstream execution-default and recovery behavior. The main service is 7,917 lines.

All 55 current-head CI checks pass, with two optional Storybook skips. Greptile is 5/5 with no findings. All 1,294 current chat integration cases, repository-wide typecheck and build pass locally. Broad local tool-route timing/socket failures are recorded in the PR.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>

2026-10-13 07:26:32 -05:00