mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-23 09:07:46 +02:00
40cd83b53cbbd09f9e047dfd22531339a3afebab
2533
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Dotta
|
40cd83b53c | Remove Briefs plugin from PR | ||
|
Dotta
|
68a07334d3 | Cover Briefs plugin in Docker deps | ||
|
Dotta
|
e39e9d57e6 | Remove design artifacts from PR | ||
|
Dotta
|
c67ed74400 | Add Briefs plugin package | ||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
be11fe3b00 |
Fix markdown code block wrap action
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
4ec7f4569b | Address Greptile authorization audit feedback | ||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
58efb5a093 |
fix: allow auth cookies on http worktrees
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
9f178521cc | Fix startup test service mock | ||
|
Dotta
|
bdd73f7f0b | Add permissions design artifacts | ||
|
Dotta
|
bca338c19a | Backfill principal access compatibility | ||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
996c0e95e0 |
fix: avoid wildcard websocket hosts
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
3463456bee |
test permissions upgrade boundaries
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
ebc4d9a5ac | Fix owner admin environment permission defaults | ||
|
Dotta
|
124c5a08f1 | test: cover plugin authorization compatibility | ||
|
Dotta
|
908da11e00 | Fix route auth service test mocks | ||
|
Dotta
|
f51ec23cab | Address Greptile authorization feedback | ||
|
Dotta
|
d764e42fea | Move EE permissions plugin out of core PR | ||
|
Dotta
|
eca62a83e4 | Cover EE permissions plugin in Docker deps | ||
|
Dotta
|
26baa20b0b | Honor protected assignment policies | ||
|
Dotta
|
181574d66f | Fix plugin bridge invocation scope propagation | ||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
f640d16607 |
Add retry-now action to next-step notice
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
079daa7d66 | Polish EE permissions plugin UX | ||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
776ad609c5 |
Simplify core company access UX
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
cdee5ea706 |
Port advanced company access UX to EE permissions plugin
Adds members + roles/grants/scopes editor to the Paperclip EE permissions plugin company settings page so EE can edit member access through capability- gated SDK methods. Companion test harness improvements let plugin tests seed members and grants and observe persisted writes through `access.members.*` and `authorization.grants.*`. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
022616389c | Add EE permissions policy editor surfaces | ||
|
Dotta
|
980af5e3ab | Add access authorization plugin SDK APIs | ||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
67f90ccde6 |
Add company settings plugin slot
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
860a5d0e8b |
Lock simple-mode assignment defaults
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
15cf25b794 |
Route agent permissions through authorization service
Land the PAP-9413 follow-on by routing agents.ts permission checks through the central authorization decision service and hardening Codex managed-home auth symlink creation against the concurrent EEXIST path. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
c1e801c82b | Enforce scoped task assignment grants | ||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
c91a062326 |
[codex] Runtime control-plane fixes (#6380)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a server-side control plane > - That control plane depends on reliable issue state transitions, plugin lifecycle behavior, import limits, and startup/shutdown handling > - Several small runtime fixes had accumulated on the working branch and were mixed with larger feature work > - Keeping them separate makes the correctness fixes reviewable and mergeable without waiting for cloud-sync UI work > - This pull request groups the server/runtime control-plane fixes into one standalone branch > - The benefit is a tighter, safer runtime baseline for retries, imports, plugin migrations, feedback flushing, and trusted cloud import handling ## What Changed - Fixed updated issue list pagination sorting and scheduled retry comment handling. - Re-applied pending plugin migrations during hot reload and fixed plugin-schema worktree seed restore. - Hardened public tenant DB startup, portable import body limits, trusted cloud import errors, and trusted cloud tenant import mutation access. - Expired stale request confirmations after user comments. - Added feedback export shutdown hardening so database-unavailable flush loops stop cleanly. - Guarded plugin worker `error` event emission when no listener is registered. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk build` - `npm run install --prefix node_modules/.pnpm/sqlite3@5.1.7/node_modules/sqlite3` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/plugin-lifecycle-restart.test.ts server/src/__tests__/server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interactions-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/body-limits.test.ts server/src/__tests__/feedback-flush-controller.test.ts server/src/__tests__/error-handler.test.ts server/src/__tests__/board-mutation-guard.test.ts packages/db/src/backup-lib.test.ts` initially exposed local setup issues and two 5s test timeouts. - Rerun after local prereq build: `pnpm exec vitest run --testTimeout 15000 server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/feedback-flush-controller.test.ts server/src/__tests__/server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts` passed. - Some embedded Postgres-backed tests skipped on this host because local Postgres init was unavailable. ## Risks - Runtime-touching branch: startup/shutdown and issue interaction behavior should be reviewed carefully. - The feedback export change disables repeated flush attempts only for database connection-refused failures; other upload failures still log normally. - The plugin worker error guard avoids process crashes from unhandled EventEmitter errors but may hide errors from code paths that expected an emitted listener. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent with local shell/git/tool use. Exact hosted model ID and context-window size are not exposed by the local Paperclip adapter runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.520.0-canary.0 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
f257530537 |
[codex] UI and dev ops quality-of-life (#6384)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip operators spend most of their time scanning the board, inbox, sidebar, and local dev status surfaces > - Small UI and dev-ops frictions make repeated operator workflows feel slower than they need to be > - The working branch contained several independent quality-of-life improvements mixed with larger cloud work > - Grouping these smaller UI/dev-ops changes together keeps review overhead reasonable without merging them into feature PRs > - This pull request collects the operator-facing QoL polish into one standalone branch > - The benefit is a cleaner board navigation and local dev recovery experience without depending on cloud upstream sync ## What Changed - Relaxed forced 44px touch targets for small inline widgets. - Fixed mobile mention menu scrolling and sidebar spacing on touch/mobile layouts. - Synced inbox hover state with j/k selection. - Moved plugin sidebar entries into the Work section. - Added manual dev-server restart action/banner behavior. - Logged plugin bridge 502 causes for better diagnosis. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk build` - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx ui/src/components/Sidebar.test.tsx ui/src/components/SidebarProjects.test.tsx ui/src/pages/Inbox.test.tsx ui/src/components/DevRestartBanner.test.tsx server/src/__tests__/dev-server-status.test.ts server/src/__tests__/health-dev-server-token.test.ts server/src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts` initially failed only because plugin SDK `dist` was not built in the fresh worktree. - Rerun after build: `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts` passed. - The remaining targeted UI/dev-server tests passed on the first post-install run. ## Visual Evidence - Sidebar layout and plugin Work section:  - Inbox/task row selection and hover-state surface:  - Dev restart banner desktop:  - Dev restart banner mobile:  ## Risks - Mostly UI/dev ergonomics with low data risk. - Sidebar and inbox changes touch frequently used navigation surfaces, so visual review on desktop/mobile is still useful. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent with local shell/git/tool use. Exact hosted model ID and context-window size are not exposed by the local Paperclip adapter runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.519.0-canary.5 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
43c5bb81b6 |
[codex] Workspace diff polish (#6383)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip gives operators a workspace diff plugin so they can inspect agent changes before review > - The diff view needs reliable base-ref defaults and controls that stay usable while scrolling large diffs > - The working branch mixed those plugin improvements with unrelated server and cloud work > - Keeping the workspace diff plugin changes isolated makes them easy to test and review > - This pull request polishes the workspace diff plugin controls, base-ref behavior, and sticky headers > - The benefit is a more predictable diff review surface for agent workspaces ## What Changed - Fixed workspace diff default base-ref resolution. - Improved split/unified and working-tree/against-ref pane controls. - Made workspace diff headers stay sticky while scrolling. - Added a review screenshot at `screenshots/PAP-9841-workspace-diff.png`. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk build` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-workspace-diff exec vitest run tests/plugin.spec.ts` - Result: 9 tests passed. ## Risks - UI-only plugin branch with low data risk. - The default base-ref inference should be reviewed against unusual worktree/upstream combinations. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent with local shell/git/tool use. Exact hosted model ID and context-window size are not exposed by the local Paperclip adapter runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d67347be77 |
[codex] Provider vault secrets UX (#6381)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents that need scoped, auditable access to secrets > - Hosted and external deployments need provider vault configuration without exposing secret values in Paperclip metadata > - AWS Secrets Manager vault setup previously required too much manual operator knowledge > - Provider vault discovery and removal belong together as an independent secrets-management improvement > - This pull request adds AWS provider vault discovery/prefill plus vault removal flows > - The benefit is a safer operator path for configuring external secret storage before higher-level cloud workflows depend on it ## What Changed - Added shared validators/types for AWS provider vault discovery payloads and safe provider metadata. - Implemented AWS provider vault discovery preview on the server. - Added provider vault removal service/route behavior. - Added Secrets page UI for discovery prefill, removal messaging, and related rendering coverage. - Added Storybook provider-vault fixtures and captured screenshots for the new UX states. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts` - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/secret.test.ts server/src/__tests__/aws-secrets-manager-provider.test.ts server/src/__tests__/secrets-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts ui/src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx` - Result: 4 files passed, 1 embedded Postgres-backed file skipped on this host because local Postgres init was unavailable. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - Storybook screenshot capture against `Product/Secrets` on `http://127.0.0.1:60381/iframe.html?id=product-secrets--secrets-inventory&viewMode=story&globals=theme:dark` ## Screenshots Provider vaults tab after this change:  AWS discovery candidate flow:  Provider vault removal confirmation:  ## Risks - Secret provider metadata handling must remain non-sensitive; validators reject credential-bearing Vault URLs and sensitive AWS discovery keys. - AWS discovery depends on deployment credentials being configured correctly outside Paperclip-managed company secrets. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent with local shell/git/tool use. Exact hosted model ID and context-window size are not exposed by the local Paperclip adapter runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.519.0-canary.4 |
||
|
Dotta
|
9c29394f4d |
[codex] Allow cloud tenant import mutations without browser origin (#6378)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - Paperclip Cloud imports local company data into tenant Paperclip stacks through trusted server-to-server calls. > - Tenant imports authenticate as board actors with `source: "cloud_tenant"` because they act on behalf of an authorized stack user. > - The board mutation guard correctly protects browser session mutations with trusted `Origin`/`Referer` checks. > - But the guard treated trusted Cloud tenant calls like browser session mutations, so server-to-server imports without a browser origin failed with `403 Board mutation requires trusted browser origin`. > - This pull request exempts trusted Cloud tenant actors from browser-origin enforcement while preserving the session-backed browser guard. > - The benefit is that authorized Cloud imports can persist into tenant Paperclip storage without weakening browser CSRF protections. ## What Changed - Allow `req.actor.source === "cloud_tenant"` through `boardMutationGuard` without requiring browser `Origin` or `Referer` headers. - Add a focused regression test for Cloud tenant POST mutations without an origin. - Preserve the existing session-backed rejection test for board mutations that lack a trusted browser origin. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/board-mutation-guard.test.ts` - Result: 10 tests passed. ## Risks - Low risk: this only expands the existing non-browser exemption list to trusted Cloud tenant actors that have already passed tenant-server-token authentication. - The browser-session path remains covered by the existing rejection test, so missing-origin browser mutations still fail. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent, tool-enabled local repository editing and shell verification. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting mergecanary/v2026.519.0-canary.3 |
||
|
Dotta
|
bfe6369ef5 |
Guard cheap recovery model usage (#6371)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane that coordinates AI-agent work through issues, heartbeats, comments, approvals, and auditable recovery paths. > - The affected subsystem is heartbeat/recovery orchestration, especially the optional cheap model profile used for operational recovery overhead. > - Cheap recovery should repair status and liveness, but it must not become the worker lane that writes deliverables, continues source work, or propagates cheap execution hints into downstream retries. > - The gap was that cheap-profile hints could follow recovery wake contexts and assignment overrides farther than intended, making real work eligible to run on the cheap model. > - This pull request separates status-only cheap recovery from normal source-work continuations, adds route guards for deliverable mutations during cheap status-only runs, and documents the invariant. > - The benefit is safer retry/recovery behavior: cheap runs can clean up control-plane state, while any remaining source work resumes through a normal/original model path. ## What Changed - Added recovery model-profile work classes so status-only recovery carries explicit guard context and normal-model continuations scrub cheap hints. - Updated heartbeat, productivity review, liveness continuation, and recovery service wakeups to request cheap only for bounded status-only recovery work. - Blocked cheap status-only recovery runs from writing issue documents, plans, attachments, work products, or assigning downstream work back to `modelProfile: "cheap"`. - Added/updated server tests for cheap profile propagation, artifact/document guards, route authorization, retry scheduling, and successful-run handoff behavior. - Documented the recovery model-profile lane in `doc/SPEC-implementation.md` and `doc/execution-semantics.md`. - After rebasing onto current `public-gh/master`, stabilized the new `InstanceSidebar` plugin-filter tests so the PR check lane stays green. ## Verification - Local: `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts src/services/recovery/model-profile-hint.test.ts src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/issue-document-restore-routes.test.ts` from `server/` - 3 files, 37 tests passed after final edits. - Local: `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` from `server/` - 44 tests passed after rerunning the cleanup-sensitive file alone. - Local: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/components/InstanceSidebar.test.tsx` - 4 tests passed. - Local: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - passed. - Local: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - passed. - PR checks on latest head `6f8c3b1380f5bd872c6f49f6f7188ecf3bb6d263` - all green, including `verify`, build, typecheck, server/general/serialized tests, e2e, Snyk, and policy. - Greptile: pass 3 returned Confidence Score 5/5 with zero unresolved Greptile review threads. ## Risks - Medium risk: recovery behavior is intentionally stricter, so any path that incorrectly relies on cheap recovery to keep doing source work will now need to hand back to a normal-model run. - Low migration risk: no schema changes. - No product UI changes; the UI file touched is a test-only stabilization after rebasing onto current `master`. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex coding agent, GPT-5 model family (`gpt-5`), tool use and local code execution enabled; context window not exposed in this environment. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots (N/A: no product UI changes) - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting mergecanary/v2026.519.0-canary.2 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
24748de421 |
fix(ui): hide sandbox-provider plugins from Instance Settings sidebar (#6341)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Plugins extend Paperclip with new capabilities; the Instance Settings sidebar exposes per-plugin settings pages under a "Plugins" group > - Some plugins contribute only sandbox-provider drivers (E2B, exe.dev, Modal). They have no per-plugin settings UI — `PluginSettings` already redirects sandbox-provider-only plugins to the Environments page > - As a result, listing them as their own sidebar rows produced confusing entries that visually nested below the "Adapters" group and only lead to a stub redirect — there was no value to the user > - This pull request hides sandbox-provider-only plugins from the Instance Settings sidebar, and reorders the indented plugin list so it sits directly under the "Plugins" group it actually belongs to > - The benefit is a cleaner sidebar that only surfaces plugins with real per-plugin settings, and removes the visual mis-nesting under Adapters ## What Changed - `ui/src/components/InstanceSidebar.tsx`: filter out plugins whose only contribution is `sandboxProviders` (hybrid plugins that contribute sandbox providers *plus* something else still get a sidebar entry). Move the indented plugin list so it renders between the "Plugins" row and the "Adapters" row instead of after Adapters. - `ui/src/components/InstanceSidebar.test.tsx`: new test file with 4 cases — sandbox-only plugins hidden, hybrid plugins shown, ordering (plugin list appears under Plugins and before Adapters), and the existing non-plugin sidebar items still render. ## Verification - `pnpm -C ui vitest run src/components/InstanceSidebar.test.tsx` → 4/4 pass. - `pnpm typecheck` clean on the changed files. - Manual: visit `/instance/settings/plugins` — "E2B Sandbox Provider" and "exe.dev Sandbox Provider" rows no longer appear in the sidebar; remaining plugins are listed directly under the "Plugins" group, not below Adapters. **Before:** see the screenshot embedded in the linked issue (`PAPA-375`) — sandbox-provider plugins show as sidebar rows visually nested under "Adapters". **After:** sandbox-provider-only rows are gone; plugin list sits directly under the "Plugins" group. (A live runtime screenshot was not captured for this PR because the local server requires an authenticated browser session not currently available to the agent — happy to add one on request.) ## Risks - Low risk. Pure UI filter + reorder, scoped to `InstanceSidebar.tsx`. No backend or plugin-loader changes. Hybrid plugins that legitimately need a settings entry are explicitly preserved by the filter. Covered by 4 new unit tests. ## Model Used - Claude Opus 4.7 (`claude-opus-4-7`), Anthropic, via Claude Code in a Paperclip heartbeat. Standard tool-use mode (no extended thinking). 200K context. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots — before is in the linked issue; after pending live capture (see Verification) - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Closes PAPA-375. Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
c0c5a8263d |
feat(ui): wire SecretBindingPicker into JsonSchemaForm secret-ref fields (#6339)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - Plugin authors expose configuration via JSON schemas, including
secret fields marked `format: "secret-ref"`
> - At the same time, Paperclip already has a first-class secrets store,
and `SecretBindingPicker` is the canonical UI for binding to one of
those stored secrets
> - But `JsonSchemaForm`'s `SecretField` rendered only a plain password
input, so configuring an E2B (or Modal / Cloudflare / Daytona) sandbox
required leaving the form, copying a secret UUID, and pasting it back
> - This pull request wires `SecretBindingPicker` into `SecretField` so
every plugin secret-ref field gets the picker plus an optional raw-value
fallback
> - The benefit is that secret reuse becomes one click instead of a tab
switch, and the raw-paste path still works for one-off keys or long
SSH-style secrets
## What Changed
- `ui/src/components/JsonSchemaForm.tsx` `SecretField` now renders
`SecretBindingPicker` above the existing password/textarea input.
UUID-shaped values are treated as bound refs (no raw input shown).
Non-UUID values keep the password/textarea visible (auto-opened) for SSH
keys and other long secrets. Empty fields show the picker plus a small
"Or paste a raw value" toggle.
- Selecting a secret writes the secret UUID to the form value — the
server-side resolution in `server/src/services/environment-config.ts`
(`resolveConfigSecretRefsForRuntime` / `collectEnvironmentSecretRefs`)
is unchanged. The version selector on the picker is suppressed
(`allowVersionSelector={false}`) because plugin secret refs always
resolve at `"latest"`.
- `ui/src/components/JsonSchemaForm.test.tsx` mocks the picker (which
requires `CompanyContext` + `QueryClient` providers) and adds coverage
for: picker render, UUID-bound state hides the raw input, picker
selection writes the UUID through `onChange`, raw text keeps the
password fallback. The original multiline (SSH key) case still asserts a
textarea + no password input.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui test
src/components/JsonSchemaForm.test.tsx` → 4/4 passing
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui test src/pages/PluginSettings.test.tsx`
→ 5/5 passing (existing consumer of `JsonSchemaForm`)
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec tsc --noEmit` → clean
- Manual: in the company Environments page, edit an environment with a
sandbox driver that exposes a `secret-ref` field (e.g., E2B `apiKey`).
The field should render the secret dropdown above the raw-value toggle;
selecting an active secret persists its UUID, and saving the form
continues to resolve the secret at runtime.
Before/after screenshots: deferred — change was validated by
[@devinfoley](https://github.com/devinfoley) on the main Paperclip
instance before this PR was opened. Happy to add screenshots if a
reviewer wants them.
## Risks
- Low risk. The change is additive in the SecretField: the raw-value
password/textarea path is preserved and auto-opens whenever the stored
value is not a UUID, so existing SSH-key entries and unsaved raw values
are untouched.
- The new heuristic is "if `value` is a UUID, treat it as a bound
secret". A user who somehow pasted a UUID as a literal value (not as a
secret ref) would now see it rendered as a bound (possibly missing)
secret in the picker. The previous UI already treated UUID values as
opaque secret refs at save time (server converts UUIDs straight
through), so the runtime behavior is unchanged.
- Picker pulls company secrets via the existing `secretsApi.list` query.
No new endpoints, no migrations.
## Model Used
- Provider: Anthropic
- Model: Claude Opus 4.7 (`claude-opus-4-7`)
- Capabilities: tool use, extended reasoning
- Surfaced through: Claude Code via Paperclip heartbeat (issue PAPA-377)
## 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots — deferred; user validated locally before opening the PR.
Will add if requested.
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (no
docs needed — internal behavior of an existing form field)
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
canary/v2026.519.0-canary.1
|
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
f343bae119 |
fix(ci): copy link-plugin-dev-sdk.mjs into Docker deps stage (#6338)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Releases ship via a Docker image built in the `build-and-push` CI workflow > - A recent change added `plugin-workspace-diff` to the pnpm workspace; its `postinstall` hook calls `scripts/link-plugin-dev-sdk.mjs` > - The Dockerfile's `deps` stage runs `pnpm install` before the full repo is copied, so the script was missing and `pnpm install` failed with `Cannot find module` > - Sandbox-provider plugins have the same hook but are excluded from the pnpm workspace, so they were unaffected — this was specific to `plugin-workspace-diff` > - This pull request copies `scripts/link-plugin-dev-sdk.mjs` into the `deps` stage alongside the package.json files > - The benefit is restoring the `build-and-push` CI workflow with a minimal one-line change ## What Changed - Add `COPY scripts/link-plugin-dev-sdk.mjs scripts/` to the Dockerfile's `deps` stage so the `plugin-workspace-diff` postinstall hook succeeds during `pnpm install`. ## Verification - Reproduces the original failure on `master` by running `docker build --target deps .` — fails at `pnpm install` with `Cannot find module '/app/scripts/link-plugin-dev-sdk.mjs'`. - With this patch, `docker build --target deps .` completes successfully through the `deps` stage. - CI `build-and-push` job (previously failing on https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/26055610103/job/76602841176) should now pass. ## Risks - Low risk. One-line addition that copies a single script earlier in the Docker build. No runtime behavior changes, no app code changes, no schema changes. ## Model Used - Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-opus-4-7`, extended thinking enabled, 200K context. Used via Claude Code CLI with tool use (Bash, Read, Edit, Grep) running inside the Paperclip agent harness. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.519.0-canary.0 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
a07e6cef7b |
[codex] Fix new issue autocomplete pointer selection (#6311)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - Human operators create and edit issues through modal-heavy board UI workflows. > - The new-issue dialog embeds markdown editors that render autocomplete menus through body-level portals. > - Radix Dialog treats those portal clicks as outside-dialog pointer events and prevents their default behavior. > - That prevention made completion items hard or impossible to select from inside the new-issue dialog. > - This pull request marks the markdown editor floating autocomplete menu as allowed dialog-external UI and extends the dialog outside-pointer handler to preserve those interactions. > - The benefit is that users can click/tap autocomplete completions while keeping the existing modal behavior intact. ## What Changed - Added a stable `data-paperclip-floating-ui` marker and explicit pointer event handling to the markdown editor mention/autocomplete portal. - Updated the new issue dialog outside-pointer guard so editor autocomplete portals are handled like Radix popover portals. - Added regression coverage for markdown editor portal markup and new issue dialog completion selection behavior. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx` passed: 2 files, 38 tests. - Confirmed the branch is rebased onto current `public-gh/master` before opening this PR. - Confirmed the diff does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `.github/workflows` changes. ## Risks - Low risk. The change is scoped to allowing pointer events from known body-level UI portals while keeping other outside-dialog pointer events under Radix Dialog control. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent with repository tool use and local command execution. Exact hosted context window is not surfaced in this runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Screenshot note: this is an interaction/event-handling fix with no visible UI change; verification is covered by the focused regression tests above. Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
988689947a |
fix(release): publish modal plugin from ci (#6290)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip keeps its core release process declarative through
`scripts/release-package-manifest.json`, which decides which packages CI
is allowed to publish.
> - The Modal sandbox provider now exists as a first-party plugin
package under `packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/modal`.
> - The original Modal PR intentionally left `publishFromCi` disabled
until the package had been published and the registry bootstrap concern
was cleared.
> - The latest reviewer comment confirms that bootstrap step is
complete, so the remaining gap is only release automation configuration.
> - This pull request flips the Modal manifest entry to `publishFromCi:
true` so future CI-driven releases can publish
`@paperclipai/plugin-modal` the same way the other releasable packages
do.
> - The benefit is that Modal releases no longer require a manual
exception in the release pipeline.
## What Changed
- Updated the `@paperclipai/plugin-modal` entry in
`scripts/release-package-manifest.json` to set `publishFromCi` to
`true`.
## Verification
- Ran `node -e 'const
m=require("./scripts/release-package-manifest.json"); const
e=m.find(x=>x.name==="@paperclipai/plugin-modal");
if(!e||e.publishFromCi!==true){throw new Error("modal publishFromCi not
true")}; console.log(JSON.stringify(e))'`
## Risks
- Low risk. This only changes release-manifest metadata; the main
failure mode is CI attempting to publish the Modal package before
registry credentials or release conditions are ready.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex local agent, GPT-5-based coding model in the Codex
runtime (exact deployment model ID not exposed in this workspace), with
tool use and shell 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
canary/v2026.518.0-canary.7
|
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
e5a0f5debd |
fix(plugin): raise environmentProbe RPC timeout to 120s for cold-start sandboxes (#6289)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - Companies provision execution environments via sandbox provider
plugins (Modal, Daytona, E2B, etc.)
> - At provision time, the server probes each plugin's environment /
sandbox-provider driver over a worker RPC to validate config
> - `workerManager.call()` defaults to a 30s timeout, but cold-start
sandboxes — Modal in particular — take ~31s to boot
> - Result: every fresh Modal environment probe fails with a worker RPC
timeout, blocking environment provisioning end-to-end
> - This PR passes `timeoutMs=120_000` to the two probe call sites
(`probePluginEnvironmentDriver`, `probePluginSandboxProviderDriver`)
> - The benefit is Modal — and any future provider with similar
cold-start latency — can be successfully probed without false-negative
timeout failures
## What Changed
- Pass `timeoutMs=120_000` to `workerManager.call()` in
`probePluginEnvironmentDriver`
(`server/src/services/plugin-environment-driver.ts`)
- Pass `timeoutMs=120_000` to `workerManager.call()` in
`probePluginSandboxProviderDriver` (same file)
## Verification
- Targeted unit tests:
```
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run \
src/__tests__/plugin-environment-driver-seam.test.ts \
src/__tests__/heartbeat-plugin-environment.test.ts
```
5/5 tests pass.
- Manual: provision a fresh Modal sandbox environment from the UI.
Previously failed with a worker RPC timeout at ~30s; now succeeds.
## Risks
- Low risk. The change only raises a per-call timeout (default 30s →
explicit 120s) on two probe call sites. Fast providers are unaffected
since probe completes well below either bound. Worst case: a genuinely
hung worker now blocks the probe for 120s instead of 30s before giving
up — still bounded, and only on the provision-time probe path (not the
heartbeat/run path).
## Model Used
- Provider: Anthropic
- Model: `claude-opus-4-7` (Claude Opus 4.7, 1M context window)
- Capabilities: extended thinking, tool use, code execution
- Scope of AI assistance: the underlying 4-line code change was
human-authored by the committer; this PR (verification commands, message
structuring, and submission) was prepared with Claude per the
`paperclip-dev` skill.
## 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [ ] I have added or updated tests where applicable — n/a, this is a
per-call timeout configuration bump; existing tests cover the probe call
path
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots — n/a, no UI change
- [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes — n/a,
the timeout is an internal worker-RPC tuning value with no documented
contract
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
canary/v2026.518.0-canary.6
|
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
4b1e92a588 |
feat(plugins): add Modal sandbox provider plugin (#6245)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through company-scoped control-plane workflows and extensible runtime integrations. > - Sandbox providers are part of that extension surface because they let agents execute isolated work without baking each provider into the core server. > - Modal already offers managed sandboxes with filesystem, process, timeout, and networking controls that map onto Paperclip's sandbox provider contract. > - The repo did not have a Modal provider plugin, so teams wanting Modal-backed sandboxes had no first-party integration path. > - This pull request adds a standalone `packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/modal` plugin that implements the provider contract, worker entrypoint, docs, and tests. > - The benefit is that Modal can now be installed as a provider plugin without expanding the core control-plane surface area. ## What Changed - Added a new `packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/modal` package with the plugin manifest, worker entrypoint, and exported plugin surface. - Implemented Modal-backed sandbox lifecycle support for creation, command execution, file operations, networking options, termination, and metadata translation. - Added focused Vitest coverage for config validation, env handling, lifecycle flows, networking behavior, and error mapping. - Documented installation, configuration, and usage requirements in the plugin README. - Removed misleading `MODAL_TOKEN_*` fallback behavior so authentication relies on supported Modal credentials only. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm test:run` - `pnpm build` - `cd packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/modal && pnpm test` ## Risks - Low to medium risk: this is isolated to a new plugin package, but runtime behavior still depends on live Modal account credentials and service-side sandbox semantics. - Modal's current docs target a newer Node baseline than the repo default, so the first live install should confirm credential loading and sandbox startup behavior in a real Modal workspace. - No UI or schema changes are included in this PR. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex via Paperclip `codex_local` agent (GPT-5-class Codex coding model; exact backend model ID is not exposed by the runtime), with tool use, shell execution, and code-editing capabilities enabled. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.518.0-canary.5 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8f45d12447 |
docs: update plugin authoring guide for managed resources (#6261)
## Thinking Path
<!--
Required. Trace your reasoning from the top of the project down to this
specific change. Start with what Paperclip is, then narrow through the
subsystem, the problem, and why this PR exists. Use blockquote style.
Aim for 5-8 steps. See CONTRIBUTING.md for full examples.
-->
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - The plugin system is how optional capabilities extend the control
plane without adding hidden core behavior.
> - Plugin authors need accurate guidance for the current managed
capabilities model.
> - The existing docs under-described managed skills and the
routine-first pattern for durable plugin automation.
> - Content-oriented plugins such as LLM Wiki should model recurring
work with visible managed agents, projects, routines, and skills.
> - This pull request aligns the authoring guide, local development
guide, and longer plugin spec with that model.
> - The benefit is clearer plugin guidance that preserves Paperclip
visibility, budgets, pause controls, and audit trails.
## What Changed
<!-- Bullet list of concrete changes. One bullet per logical unit. -->
- Documented plugin-managed skills alongside managed agents, projects,
and routines.
- Added guidance for content-oriented plugins to use managed projects,
agents, skills, and routines instead of private daemon-like state.
- Updated the manifest/spec examples and capability lists for current
plugin-managed surfaces.
- Clarified when to use managed routines instead of plugin runtime jobs
for board-visible recurring work.
- Added a short local plugin development note pointing authors toward
routine-first automation.
- Addressed Greptile docs feedback by marking top-level `launchers` as
legacy and removing a redundant `slug` from the managed skill example.
## Verification
<!--
How can a reviewer confirm this works? Include test commands, manual
steps, or both. For UI changes, include before/after screenshots.
-->
- `git diff --check public-gh/master...HEAD`
- Reviewed `ROADMAP.md`; this is docs alignment for the completed plugin
system milestone and does not add roadmap-level core feature work.
- Greptile Review: success on the latest head; `3 files reviewed, 0
comments added` after follow-up fixes.
- GitHub PR checks are green on the latest head, including Build,
Typecheck + Release Registry, General tests, serialized server suites,
e2e, Canary Dry Run, policy, Snyk, and aggregate `verify`.
## Risks
<!--
What could go wrong? Mention migration safety, breaking changes,
behavioral shifts, or "Low risk" if genuinely minor.
-->
- Low risk: documentation-only changes.
- Main risk is documentation drift if the plugin API changes again
before these docs are reviewed.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected - check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
<!--
Required. Specify which AI model was used to produce or assist with
this change. Be as descriptive as possible - include:
• Provider and model name (e.g., Claude, GPT, Gemini, Codex)
• Exact model ID or version (e.g., claude-opus-4-6,
gpt-4-turbo-2024-04-09)
• Context window size if relevant (e.g., 1M context)
• Reasoning/thinking mode if applicable (e.g., extended thinking,
chain-of-thought)
• Any other relevant capability details (e.g., tool use, code execution)
If no AI model was used, write "None — human-authored".
-->
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent with shell and GitHub connector tool
use.
## 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
canary/v2026.518.0-canary.4
|
||
|
|
32605b71ad |
Remove planning badge from inbox issue rows (PAP-9691) (#6269)
## Summary - Removes the amber "Planning" pill from inbox / issue-list rows in `IssueRow` - Updates the focused IssueRow test to assert the badge is no longer rendered - Per [PAP-9691](https://paperclip.ing/PAP/issues/PAP-9691): user just doesn't want to see the badge in list rows The underlying `issue.workMode === "planning"` data, the issue detail composer toggle, and the server/plugin/heartbeat work-mode contract introduced in #5353 are all untouched. Planning mode still functions; the list-row indicator is just gone. ## Test plan - [x] `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui ui/src/components/IssueRow.test.tsx` (11 passed) - [ ] Visual: open `/PAP/inbox` with a planning-mode issue assigned and confirm no amber Planning pill on the row 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>canary/v2026.518.0-canary.3 |
||
|
github-actions[bot]andlockfile-bot
|
85510f0e5b |
chore(lockfile): refresh pnpm-lock.yaml (#6263)
Auto-generated lockfile refresh after dependencies changed on master. This PR only updates pnpm-lock.yaml. Co-authored-by: lockfile-bot <lockfile-bot@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
5071c4c776 |
[codex] Add workspace diff viewer plugin (#6071)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - Operators need to inspect what agents changed inside execution and project workspaces. > - The existing workspace detail views did not provide a first-party rich diff surface for staged, unstaged, head, renamed, binary, oversized, and untracked changes. > - The plugin system is the intended extension point for optional rich UI surfaces. > - This pull request adds a workspace diff plugin plus host services and shared contracts so Changes tabs can render workspace diffs through plugin slots. > - The diff-renderer dependency should stay owned by the plugin package rather than the core UI app. > - The dependency surface must stay aligned with repository PR policy, including intentionally omitting `pnpm-lock.yaml` from the PR. > - The benefit is a more reviewable workspace surface without hard-coding the renderer into every page. ## What Changed - Added `@paperclipai/plugin-workspace-diff`, including diff normalization, plugin manifest/worker/UI entrypoints, and focused plugin tests. - Kept `@pierre/diffs` scoped to `@paperclipai/plugin-workspace-diff`; removed the core UI lab diff-renderer surface and direct UI package dependency. - Added shared workspace diff types and validators, plus plugin SDK surface for workspace diff host services. - Added server workspace diff service support and route coverage for execution/project workspace diff flows. - Wired Execution Workspace and Project Workspace Changes tabs to load the diff plugin, including loading/error fallback behavior. - Added UI tests and fixtures for the Changes tabs and plugin bridge behavior. - Added the new plugin package manifest to the Docker deps stage so PR policy can validate dependency coverage. - Addressed review hardening around empty untracked patches, workspace path exposure, project workspace read capability checks, and default base refs. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-workspace-diff test` - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/workspace-diff.test.ts server/src/__tests__/workspace-diff-service.test.ts ui/src/pages/ProjectWorkspaceDetail.test.tsx ui/src/pages/ExecutionWorkspaceDetail.test.tsx` - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/plugins/bridge.test.ts server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime-routes-authz.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-workspace-diff typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `node ./scripts/check-docker-deps-stage.mjs` - Browser screenshot captured from the local worktree dev server: https://files.catbox.moe/ofdpsp.png - Confirmed branch is rebased onto `public-gh/master`, `.github/workflows/pr.yml` is not included in the PR diff, `ui/package.json` is not included in the PR diff, and `pnpm-lock.yaml` is not included in the PR diff. ## Risks - Medium UI integration risk: the Changes tab depends on the plugin slot and host diff service path. - Medium dependency risk: this adds `@pierre/diffs` in the plugin package, but `pnpm-lock.yaml` is intentionally omitted per packaging instructions because repository automation manages lockfile updates. - Current CI blocker: downstream frozen installs fail until the repository policy path for new plugin package dependencies is chosen. - Diff rendering edge cases are covered for common working-tree and head diff states, but very large repositories may still expose performance limits. - No migrations are included. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 class coding model, tool-enabled local execution environment. Exact context window was not exposed by the runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.518.0-canary.2 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
242a2c2f2b |
fix(cli): stop worktree init --force from wiping repo worktrees/ (#6240)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - Each working tree gets an isolated Paperclip instance; the CLI's
`paperclip worktree init` is what bootstraps that instance and writes
`<repo>/.paperclip/config.json` + `.env`
> - When `--force` was passed, the init path tried to "start clean" by
recursively removing the entire `<repo>/.paperclip/` directory before
rewriting those two files
> - But `<repo>/.paperclip/` also holds `worktrees/`, which contains
every repo-managed worktree checkout (70+ on this machine). The
recursive rm silently nuked all of them.
> - This PR narrows the `--force` reset so it only deletes the two files
it's about to rewrite (`config.json`, `.env`), instead of wiping the
whole `repoConfigDir`
> - It also adds a regression test that drops a sentinel file into
`<repoConfigDir>/worktrees/` and asserts it survives a `--force` init
> - The benefit is that `worktree init --force` becomes safe to run from
inside the main repo without destroying every sibling worktree checkout
## What Changed
- `cli/src/commands/worktree.ts`: in the `--force` branch of
`runWorktreeInit`, replace `rmSync(paths.repoConfigDir, { recursive:
true, force: true })` with targeted removals of `paths.configPath` and
`paths.envPath`. `paths.instanceRoot` removal is unchanged — that path
is per-instance and safe to wipe.
- `cli/src/__tests__/worktree.test.ts`: new regression test that seeds a
fake `worktrees/<name>/` checkout inside the repo's `.paperclip/` and
verifies `runWorktreeInit({ force: true, ... })` does not delete it.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclip/cli test -- worktree` — the new regression
test fails on the old code and passes on the fix
- Manual: from a repo checkout, `npx paperclipai worktree init --force
…` no longer removes `<repo>/.paperclip/worktrees/`; only `config.json`
and `.env` are rewritten
## Risks
- Low. The change strictly narrows what `--force` removes. Any caller
that depended on `--force` also wiping unrelated files under
`<repo>/.paperclip/` (there shouldn't be any — it's documented as just
config + env) would see those files persist. `instanceRoot` cleanup is
unchanged.
## Model Used
- Claude (Anthropic), model `claude-opus-4-7`, ~200K context,
extended-thinking + tool-use enabled, run via the Paperclip
`claude_local` adapter.
## 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots (N/A — CLI-only fix)
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (no
doc surface affected)
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
canary/v2026.518.0-canary.1
|
||
|
Devin Foley
|
734385102c |
Fix new secret form textarea overflow (PAPA-348) (#6222)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Operators manage per-company secrets through the Secrets page in the web UI > - A long secret value pasted into the "New secret" textarea blew out the form's width, which pushed the Create/Cancel buttons off-screen and made the form unusable > - Root cause: the shadcn `Textarea` primitive sets `w-full` but does not constrain `min-width`, so a flex parent honors the textarea's intrinsic content width when a long unbreakable string is present > - This pull request adds `min-w-0 max-w-full` to the shared `Textarea` primitive and `min-w-0 overflow-x-hidden break-all` on the secret-value usage so a long token wraps inside the form bounds > - The benefit is the Create/Cancel buttons stay reachable regardless of pasted token length, and every other `Textarea` consumer also gets the flexbox-friendly width constraint ## What Changed - `ui/src/components/ui/textarea.tsx`: added `min-w-0 max-w-full` to the base shadcn `Textarea` so it cannot exceed its flex parent - `ui/src/pages/Secrets.tsx`: added `min-w-0 overflow-x-hidden break-all` on the new-secret value `Textarea` so long opaque tokens wrap instead of pushing the form - `ui/src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx`: new regression test that opens the New Secret dialog and asserts the value textarea carries the width-constraint classes ## Verification - `cd ui && npx vitest run src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx` — 3/3 pass - Manual: open the Secrets page, click "New secret", paste a long unbroken string (e.g. a 500-char token) into the value field. The form stays within its dialog and the Create/Cancel buttons remain in view. Before: <img width="1772" height="1432" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/cb31a290-f82a-41dc-9346-91d18cbb5911" /> After: <img width="672" height="734" alt="Screenshot 2026-05-17 at 5 39 38 PM" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/a08800c2-b09b-43be-b0e8-114d9149b8f5" /> After: the value field wraps with `break-all` inside the dialog; Create/Cancel stay clickable. Covered by the new render test which asserts `min-w-0`, `overflow-x-hidden`, and `break-all` are present on `#new-secret-value`. ## Risks - Low risk. The base `Textarea` change adds `min-w-0 max-w-full`, which only affects layouts where a textarea was previously allowed to grow past its parent — those cases were already buggy. `break-all` on the secret-value textarea is the right behavior for opaque tokens; it would be wrong for prose, but this field is explicitly a secret token. ## Model Used - Provider: Anthropic Claude - Model: claude-opus-4-7 (Opus 4.7) - Mode: standard Claude Code agent, tool use enabled ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting mergecanary/v2026.518.0-canary.0 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d734bd43d1 |
[codex] Roll up May 17 branch changes (#6210)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane for autonomous AI companies, so agent work needs visible ownership, recovery, and operator controls. > - This local branch had accumulated several related control-plane reliability and operator-experience fixes across recovery actions, watchdog folding, model-profile defaults, mentions, markdown editing, plugin launchers, and small UI polish. > - The branch needed to be converted into a PR against the current `origin/master` without losing dirty work or including lockfile/workflow churn. > - The safest standalone shape is a single rollup PR because the recovery/server/UI files overlap heavily across the local commits and splitting would create avoidable conflicts. > - This pull request replays the local branch onto latest `origin/master`, preserves the uncommitted work as logical commits, and adds a Zod 4 validator compatibility fix found during verification. > - The benefit is that the May 17 local branch can be reviewed and merged as one coherent, conflict-free branch under the 100-file Greptile limit. ## What Changed - Rebased the local May 17 branch work onto current `origin/master` in a dedicated worktree. - Preserved and committed previously dirty changes for recovery retry handling, plugin/sidebar launcher polish, and `.herenow` ignores. - Added recovery-action behavior for returning source issues to `todo` when retrying source-scoped recovery. - Included the existing local recovery/liveness/watchdog fold, Codex cheap-profile, markdown/mention, duplicate-agent, and UI polish commits from the branch. - Normalized shared validator `z.record(...)` schemas to explicit string-key records for Zod 4 compatibility. - Confirmed the PR has no `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `.github/workflows/*` changes and stays below the 100-file Greptile limit. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts` - `npm run install` in `node_modules/.pnpm/sqlite3@5.1.7/node_modules/sqlite3` to build the local native sqlite3 binding after installing with scripts disabled - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts packages/shared/src/project-mentions.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-model-profile.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-recovery-actions.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-active-run-output-watchdog.test.ts server/src/__tests__/plugin-local-folders.test.ts ui/src/components/IssueRecoveryActionCard.test.tsx ui/src/components/Sidebar.test.tsx ui/src/components/SidebarAccountMenu.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.test.tsx ui/src/lib/duplicate-agent-payload.test.ts ui/src/pages/Routines.test.tsx` - First pass: 13 files passed with 201 passing tests; 3 server files failed before sqlite3 native binding was built. - After rebuilding sqlite3: `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-model-profile.test.ts`, `server/src/__tests__/issue-recovery-actions.test.ts`, and `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-active-run-output-watchdog.test.ts` passed/loaded; embedded Postgres tests were skipped by the local host guard. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` ## Risks - Medium risk: this is a broad rollup PR across recovery semantics, server tests, shared validators, and UI surfaces. - Some embedded Postgres tests skipped locally due the host guard, so CI should provide the stronger database-backed signal. - UI changes were covered by component tests, but no browser screenshot was captured in this PR creation pass. - This branch may overlap with existing recovery/liveness PR work; merge this PR independently or restack/close overlapping branches rather than merging duplicate implementations together. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent, tool-enabled local repository and GitHub workflow, medium reasoning effort. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.517.1-canary.1 |
