mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-10 20:46:28 +01:00
495c3662eba211fc851bdbbe117f0d54d37ea225
426
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
495c3662eb |
feat(chat): selected-agent conference-room chat surface and live issue-thread updates
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
fa764504ed |
feat(routines): support routine description annotations
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
2dbaf4a7fa |
External object references across issue surfaces (#8512)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source control plane people use to coordinate AI agents, issues, approvals, comments, and work products. > - The involved subsystem is issue context: markdown links, issue properties, related work, lists, filters, inbox/sidebar status, and plugin-provided external context. > - The gap is that URLs to external systems currently remain mostly plain links, so humans and agents must manually open them to understand status, identity, and liveness. > - This matters because external work objects such as GitHub issues and pull requests are part of the operational state of a Paperclip company. > - The implementation keeps core provider-neutral: shared contracts, storage, sync, routes, and UI surfaces live in core while providers can contribute detection and status resolution. > - This pull request adds the external object reference foundation, GitHub provider support, issue-surface rendering, filters, sidebar/list/inbox signals, and test/story coverage. > - The benefit is that linked external work becomes inspectable Paperclip context without hardcoding every provider directly into the UI. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists for this work. Feature request: - Problem: URLs in Paperclip issues, comments, documents, and related surfaces do not expose provider status or object identity inline. - Proposed behavior: detect supported external object URLs, persist normalized references, refresh provider status, and render concise status-aware links across issue surfaces. - Users affected: board users, agents, and maintainers who triage issues containing external work links. - Acceptance: external object references are company-scoped, provider-extensible, visible in key issue surfaces, filterable where relevant, and covered by focused shared/server/UI tests. Related PR search: - No open duplicate PRs found for `external object references`. - Closed related prior attempt: #4556. ## What Changed - Added shared external-object contracts, validators, status/liveness helpers, and plugin protocol declarations. - Added database schema and additive migrations for external objects, source mentions, and display metadata. - Added server services/routes for detecting, syncing, summarizing, refreshing, and resolving external objects across issues, documents, comments, projects, and plugins. - Added a GitHub external-object provider plus plugin SDK authoring docs. - Wired UI presentation across markdown links, comments, issue chat, documents, properties, related work, issue rows, filters, inbox/sidebar badges, and Storybook stories. - Rebasing cleanup: moved the branch onto current `master`, repaired stale worktree provision config, hardened environment-sensitive tests/mocks, and removed committed screenshot artifacts from the PR branch to keep the reviewable file set below tool limits. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/external-objects.test.ts server/src/__tests__/external-object-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/external-objects-service.test.ts ui/src/components/ExternalObjectPill.test.tsx ui/src/lib/external-objects.test.ts` passed after rebasing: 5 files, 56 tests. - Historical branch verification before this PR creation included `pnpm test:run`, `pnpm -r typecheck`, and `pnpm build`; this PR body does not claim those were rerun after the final rebase. ## Risks - Medium: this adds a new cross-surface sync path on issue/document/comment writes. The implementation uses safe sync wrappers so external-object failures warn instead of blocking core mutations. - Medium: the migrations introduce new tables and indexes. They are additive and company-scoped. - Medium: provider-specific URL parsing can miss or misclassify edge cases. Shared canonicalization tests and provider tests cover current GitHub shapes. - Low: UI badge/filter behavior could add visual noise for object-heavy issues; component tests and Storybook stories cover the intended surfaces. > Roadmap checked: `ROADMAP.md` references the plugin system as the current extension path and does not list a duplicate core feature. Related long-range docs discuss external references, work products, preview URLs, and plugin extension points; this PR implements the scoped external-object reference foundation. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding-agent runtime, with shell and GitHub CLI tool use. Reasoning mode: medium. Exact deployed runtime model ID and context window were not exposed in the 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
cd38c150b0 |
feat: reuse Daytona sandbox leases (#8513)
Add opt-in reusable Daytona sandbox lease support, including retryable pending cleanup handling.\n\nPR: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/8513 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
93fdb9c218 |
[codex] Harden same-company CEO authorization (#8276)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Companies are the primary tenant boundary for agents, board users, settings, and portability operations. > - CEO agents need limited same-company management powers, but those powers must not cross into another company. > - The affected company routes mixed route-level access checks with validation middleware and repeated CEO checks, which left adjacent mutation and portability surfaces easy to drift. > - This pull request centralizes same-company CEO-or-board authorization for those company-scoped surfaces. > - It also adds regression coverage proving a CEO agent from one company cannot read, mutate, archive, delete, export, or import against another company. > - The benefit is tighter company isolation without removing legitimate same-company CEO operations. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Internal task: PAP-11205 / PAP-11347. Bug report: - What happened: same-company CEO authorization for company settings, branding, and portability routes was implemented per-route, making it possible for adjacent surfaces to drift and risking company-boundary mistakes. - Expected behavior: an agent API key must only manage the company that owns the authenticated agent, and only CEO agents should get the limited same-company management permissions. - Steps to reproduce: authenticate as a CEO agent from Company A and call Company B company routes such as `PATCH /api/companies/:companyId`, `PATCH /api/companies/:companyId/branding`, export/preview export, safe import preview/apply, archive, delete, or read. - Version/commit: fixed on this branch at `45edaccb8` on top of `public/master` `ddc193c2b`. - Deployment mode: server API behavior; no UI change. Related search results reviewed, not duplicates of this exact route hardening: - Refs #2212 - Refs #1083 - Refs #8053 ## What Changed - Added a shared `assertSameCompanyCeoAgentOrBoard` company route guard and reused it for company settings, branding, export, and safe import endpoints. - Moved request parsing after authorization on sensitive company mutation/export/import routes so unauthorized cross-company callers are rejected before route body validation side effects or service calls. - Tightened archive and delete ordering to assert route company access before board-only mutation authorization. - Added a cross-company company-route authorization regression suite covering read, settings, branding, archive, delete, export, export preview, import preview, and import apply paths. - Extended adjacent route/service tests to prove non-CEO and cross-company agent keys are rejected on the relevant company-scoped surfaces. - Addressed Greptile follow-ups by removing a redundant board assertion and inlining the portability authorization wrapper. ## Verification Local focused verification on rebased head `45edaccb8`: - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/companies-route-cross-company-authz.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-branding-route.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-portability-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/agent-permissions-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/authorization-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/openclaw-invite-prompt-route.test.ts` - 6 test files passed - 127 tests passed Remote PR checks on rebased head `45edaccb8`: - Paperclip PR workflow: green, including policy, typecheck, build, e2e, canary dry run, workspace tests, server general tests, and all serialized server shards. - Greptile Review: success with 5/5 confidence on `45edaccb8`. - Greptile review threads: all resolved. ## Risks Low to moderate risk. This intentionally tightens company route authorization and changes whether some unauthorized requests fail at the authz layer before schema validation. Legitimate board users and same-company CEO agents remain covered by tests, but callers that depended on validation errors from unauthorized company routes will now receive authorization errors first. No migrations. No `pnpm-lock.yaml` changes. No `.github/workflows` changes. No screenshots or design images added. > 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-5.5-based coding agent with tool use, terminal execution, repository inspection, and GitHub connector access. ## 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 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 UI change) - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (N/A: no docs needed beyond this PR description) - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
d1e6662ed8 |
fix(server): let codex_local agents inherit host Codex login by default (#8425)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The `codex_local` adapter spawns the Codex CLI for an agent, and `server/src/routes/agents.ts` normalizes each agent's `adapterConfig.env` on create/hire/update > - PR #8272 added an isolation guard that, on every codex_local agent, force-set a per-agent `CODEX_HOME` and injected `OPENAI_API_KEY = ""`, and rejected any "shared" home > - This broke the common case: operators who deleted `CODEX_HOME` / `OPENAI_API_KEY` in the UI saw them silently re-appear on save, and every agent was forced into an isolated home instead of sharing the device's existing Codex login (`~/.codex` / `$CODEX_HOME`) > - This pull request replaces the always-on isolation guard with key-scoped isolation: a keyless agent gets no env overrides and inherits the host Codex login at runtime; we only carve out an isolated per-agent `CODEX_HOME` when the agent sets its own `OPENAI_API_KEY` > - The benefit is that env-var deletion now persists, agents on one device share the host login by default, and per-account isolation is still available by setting a per-agent key ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists. Bug report (following `bug_report.yml`): **What happened?** In a `codex_local` agent's configuration, removing the `CODEX_HOME` and `OPENAI_API_KEY` env vars via the UI (clicking the X) appears to work, but on save they instantly re-appear. The persisted config never loses the slots. **Root cause.** `applyCodexLocalIsolationGuard` in `server/src/routes/agents.ts` (added in #8272) re-injected `CODEX_HOME` (defaulting to a per-agent home) and `OPENAI_API_KEY = ""` on every create/hire/update, and rejected shared homes outright. So a PATCH that omitted those keys had them written back server-side. **Expected behavior.** Deleting these env vars should persist. A codex_local agent with no key should inherit whatever Codex login already exists on the device. **Steps to reproduce.** 1. Open a `codex_local` agent's configuration with `CODEX_HOME` and `OPENAI_API_KEY` set. 2. Remove both env vars and save. 3. Re-open the config — both slots are back. Related (different approach): Refs #8399 (keeps per-agent isolation, fixes only the empty `OPENAI_API_KEY` slot), Refs #8272 (introduced the guard), Refs #8403 (managed-auth seeding into isolated homes). ## What Changed - `server/src/routes/agents.ts` — replaced `applyCodexLocalIsolationGuard` (+ `assertCodexLocalHomeIsNotShared` / `normalizeCodexLocalHomePath`) with `applyCodexLocalKeyIsolation`. A codex_local agent now receives **no** env overrides unless it explicitly sets `OPENAI_API_KEY`; only then is an isolated per-agent `CODEX_HOME` injected (and only if the agent has not set its own `CODEX_HOME`). Keyless agents fall back to the host Codex login at runtime. Dropped the now-unused `node:os` import and the shared-home rejection. - `server/src/__tests__/agent-adapter-validation-routes.test.ts` — updated the validation-route tests to assert env-var deletion persists, keyless agents get no overrides, and key-bearing agents still get an isolated `CODEX_HOME`. ## Verification ```bash cd server && npx vitest run src/__tests__/agent-adapter-validation-routes.test.ts ``` All 6 tests pass locally. Manually verified in the live UI: removing `CODEX_HOME` and `OPENAI_API_KEY` from a codex_local agent and saving now persists the deletion (slots no longer re-appear on reload). ## Risks - **Host-key leak for keyless agents on a host with `OPENAI_API_KEY` set.** Low/intended: the product direction here is that codex_local agents inherit the host's Codex login by default; per-account isolation is opt-in via a per-agent `OPENAI_API_KEY`, which then gets its own `CODEX_HOME`. - **Divergence from #8399.** That PR retains the per-agent isolation default and only stops injecting the empty key, so it does not address the `CODEX_HOME` re-injection half of this bug. This PR intentionally changes the default to host-login inheritance. Reviewers should pick one direction. - **No migration.** Existing agents that already store these slots are not auto-cleaned, but operators can now delete them and the deletion sticks. ## Model Used - Provider: Anthropic (Claude) - Model ID: `claude-opus-4-8` - Capabilities: tool use, code execution, extended reasoning, agentic workflow ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [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 - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
33353ce62b |
feat(skills): remove bundled paperclip-dev skill and retire required skill attribute (#7029)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Local adapters (Claude, Codex, Cursor, Gemini, Grok, OpenCode, Pi, ACPX) ship bundled "skills" — opinionated Markdown prompt bundles materialized into the agent's runtime > - One of those bundled skills, `paperclip-dev`, existed to let agents develop Paperclip itself; it has now moved to its own external repo and no longer belongs in the core tree > - The adapter skill model also carried a `required` / `requiredReason` attribute plus a `paperclip_required` `AdapterSkillOrigin` variant, all of which only existed to mark bundled skills as non-optional in the UI and adapter sync logic > - With `paperclip-dev` gone, no bundled skill is "required" anymore, and the type / runtime surface for `required` is dead weight — but it is computed at request time and never persisted, so a clean removal is safe (no compatibility shim needed) > - This pull request deletes `skills/paperclip-dev/` and removes every trace of the `required` / `requiredReason` field and the `paperclip_required` origin across shared types, validators, adapter-utils, all eight local adapters, server routes, the company-skills service, the UI, the storybook fixtures, and the test suite > - The benefit is a smaller, simpler adapter-skill surface: one origin (`company_managed`) for managed bundled skills, `resolvePaperclipDesiredSkillNames` collapses to "just the configured desired set", and the AgentDetail skills tab no longer renders a "Required by Paperclip" section that no longer applies ## Linked Issues or Issue Description <!-- No existing public GitHub issue; describing the underlying work inline (feature_request template fields). --> **Summary** Remove the bundled `paperclip-dev` skill (now maintained in its own external repo) and retire the `required` / `requiredReason` skill attribute and the `paperclip_required` skill origin, which only existed to support it. **Problem or motivation** `paperclip-dev` is the only bundled skill that was ever marked "required". Now that it lives in a separate repository, shipping it inside the core tree is wrong, and the entire `required` surface (a type field, a validator field, a synthesized `paperclip_required` origin, UI "Required by Paperclip" section, and required-skill merging in the desired-skills calculation) becomes dead weight. The `required` value is computed at request time and never persisted, so it can be removed cleanly without a migration or compatibility shim. **Proposed solution** Delete `skills/paperclip-dev/`, drop the `required` / `requiredReason` fields and `paperclip_required` origin everywhere they are produced or consumed, collapse managed-skill origin to a single `company_managed` value, and simplify `resolvePaperclipDesiredSkillNames` to return only the configured desired set. **Alternatives considered** Keeping the `required` attribute as a no-op for forward compatibility — rejected because it is request-time only (nothing persists it), so leaving it in place is pure dead surface area with no callers. **Roadmap alignment** Internal cleanup / dead-code removal that simplifies the adapter-skill surface; it does not introduce or duplicate any planned core feature in ROADMAP.md. ## What Changed - Deleted bundled `skills/paperclip-dev/` (moved to a separate repo). - Dropped `required`, `requiredReason`, and the `paperclip_required` origin from `packages/shared/src/types/adapter-skills.ts`, `packages/shared/src/validators/adapter-skills.ts`, and `packages/adapter-utils/src/types.ts`. - In `packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.ts`: removed `readSkillRequired()`; dropped `required`/`requiredReason` from `listPaperclipSkillEntries()`, `normalizeConfiguredPaperclipRuntimeSkills()`, `buildPersistentSkillSnapshot()`, and `PaperclipSkillEntry`; collapsed `buildManagedSkillOrigin()` to always return `company_managed`; simplified `resolvePaperclipDesiredSkillNames()` to return only the configured desired set (signature preserved so adapter call sites are untouched). - Walked all eight local adapters (`acpx-local`, `claude-local`, `codex-local`, `cursor-local`, `gemini-local`, `grok-local`, `opencode-local`, `pi-local`) and removed every remaining `requiredReason` / `paperclip_required` reference. - `server/src/services/company-skills.ts`: dropped the `required = sourceKind === "paperclip_bundled"` synthesis when listing runtime skill entries. - `server/src/routes/agents.ts`: removed required-skill merging from the desired-skills calculation in the persist-config path and the unsupported-snapshot path (keeping the current version-aware `desiredSkillEntries` structure). - `ui/src/pages/AgentDetail.tsx`: dropped required-based filters, the required tooltip, and the entire "Required by Paperclip" section from the agent skills tab; storybook fixtures in `ui/storybook/stories/acpx-local.stories.tsx` cleaned up to match. - Tests: deleted the `required: false` case in `paperclip-skill-utils.test.ts` and the "keeps required bundled skills installed" case in every `*-local-skill-sync.test.ts`; `acpx-local-execute.test.ts`, `cursor-local-execute.test.ts`, `cursor-local-skill-sync.test.ts`, `agent-skills-routes.test.ts`, and `packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts` were updated to drop removed fields and map `origin: "paperclip_required"` → `"company_managed"`. - `server/src/adapters/registry.ts`: two `as unknown as ServerAdapterModule["..."]` casts on `hermesListSkills` / `hermesSyncSkills` (matching the existing `executeHermesLocal` pattern). `hermes-paperclip-adapter@0.2.0` still depends on the published `@paperclipai/adapter-utils` which keeps the retired `paperclip_required` variant; the cast bridges the workspace-vs-published type mismatch at the registry seam and can drop once hermes upgrades. ## Verification Run from the workspace root: ```sh grep -rn "skills/paperclip-dev" . grep -rn "paperclip_required" --include="*.ts" --include="*.tsx" . grep -rn "requiredReason" --include="*.ts" --include="*.tsx" . pnpm -w typecheck pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run paperclip-skill-utils pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run skill-sync ``` The first three greps return only the explanatory comment in `server/src/adapters/registry.ts` (no live `paperclip_required` / `requiredReason` usage) and zero `skills/paperclip-dev` source hits. Locally: - `pnpm -w typecheck` → all packages this PR touches pass (adapter-utils, shared, server, ui, cli, and the cursor/gemini/opencode/pi adapters). - Affected vitest suites pass: `paperclip-skill-utils`, `server-utils`, all eight `*-local-skill-sync`, `agent-skills-routes`, and the `acpx`/`cursor`/`pi` execute suites. ## Risks - Behavioral shift in the agent skills UI: the "Required by Paperclip" section disappears. No bundled skill is required anymore, so this only affects environments that previously surfaced `paperclip-dev` as a forced-on row; those installs will see the skill move into the regular "company-managed" list (and be uninstalled on next sync unless explicitly listed as desired). - Existing agents may still have the string `"paperclip-dev"` in their persisted `desiredSkills`. That entry is inert (no source for it to install from); a one-time DB cleanup is out of scope. Low risk. - Hermes adapter type bridge: two casts in `registry.ts` paper over a type-only divergence between the workspace `@paperclipai/adapter-utils` and the published version still pinned by `hermes-paperclip-adapter@0.2.0`. Runtime behavior is unaffected because the retired `paperclip_required` value is no longer produced by anything in this tree. The casts can be removed once hermes upgrades its dependency. ## Model Used - Provider: Anthropic - Model: Claude Opus 4.7 (`claude-opus-4-7`) - Capability: agent tool use via Paperclip's `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 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) - [ ] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
547463d3a2 |
refactor(environments): make execution environments instance-scoped (#8375)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane for AI-agent companies, so execution environment selection has to stay inspectable and predictable across companies, agents, and runs. > - The environment subsystem decides where an agent heartbeat actually runs and how remote sandbox state is realized and restored. > - That subsystem previously mixed company-scoped environment catalogs with issue-level environment stamping, so a reassigned issue could keep executing in the previous assignee's sandbox. > - That behavior breaks the control-plane contract: changing the assignee should change the executing agent/environment path unless there is an explicit current override. > - Fixing it cleanly required more than a narrow patch; the environment model had to move to instance scope with a single inherited default and per-agent override semantics. > - This pull request rewires the schema, server/API surface, runtime resolution, and UI around that model, then adds regression coverage for cross-company inheritance and per-agent isolation. > - The benefit is that environment choice now follows the approved instance/agent configuration path instead of stale issue state, while shared environments only need to be configured once per instance. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description - No directly matching public GitHub issue or PR was found while searching for this refactor. ### What happened? Reassigning work between agents with different execution environments could keep running in the previous sandbox because environment choice was stamped onto the issue and outranked the current assignee. The same subsystem also forced environment catalogs to be duplicated per company even though the underlying execution environments were instance-wide resources. ### Expected behavior Execution should resolve through the current instance and agent configuration path, with one instance-scoped environment catalog, one instance default, optional per-agent override, and no stale issue-level environment authority surviving reassignment. ### Steps to reproduce 1. Configure two agents to use different execution environments. 2. Assign an issue to the first agent so the issue records execution state in that environment. 3. Reassign the same issue to the second agent and run another heartbeat. 4. Observe that the pre-fix runtime can still sync or execute in the original sandbox instead of the second agent's environment. ### Paperclip version or commit Current `master` before this PR. ### Deployment mode Self-hosted server. ### Installation method Built from source (`pnpm dev` / `pnpm build`). ### Agent adapter(s) involved - Claude Code - Not adapter-specific (core bug in environment authority / resolution) ### Database mode External Postgres. ### Access context Both board reassignment and agent heartbeats were involved. ## What Changed - Moved environments and their default selection contract to instance scope in DB/shared types, including the migration that dedupes legacy per-company environments and seeds the instance local default. - Reworked environment CRUD/auth flows to use instance-scoped APIs and added route/service coverage for instance-level environment management. - Changed runtime resolution to prefer `agent default -> instance default -> built-in local`, removed issue-level environment stamping from the active execution path, and isolated sandbox/plugin leases by `(executionWorkspaceId, agentId)`. - Added environment env-var runtime precedence so environment-provided values act as the baseline for agent execution. - Moved the environment UI into instance settings and updated agent configuration surfaces to reflect inherit/override behavior. - Added regression coverage for instance-default inheritance across companies and for the new runtime resolution behavior. - Fixed a rebase-only duplicate `enableTaskWatchdogs` flag regression in instance settings types/validators/services so the branch typechecks cleanly on current `master`. - Updated stale server tests so CI matches the shipped instance-scoped environment contract. ## Verification - `git diff --check` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/environment-runtime-driver-contract.test.ts server/src/__tests__/agent-permissions-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/environment-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/environment-instance-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/execution-workspace-policy.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-plugin-environment.test.ts server/src/__tests__/instance-settings-routes.test.ts` ## Risks - The migration changes environment scope and dedupes existing rows, so installs with unusual legacy environment combinations should be reviewed carefully during upgrade. - Remote execution behavior now depends on instance-default inheritance semantics instead of issue-level stamping, so any remaining code paths that still assume issue-scoped environment authority would surface as follow-up bugs. - This PR includes both server/runtime behavior and UI relocation, so reviewers should watch for authorization edge cases around instance settings and environment management. > I checked [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md). This work fits the existing Cloud / Sandbox agents direction as a bug-fix/refactor to current behavior, not a new parallel product surface. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex coding agent in this Paperclip/Codex session; GPT-5-class tool-using model with code execution and shell access. The exact backend model ID is not exposed to the session 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 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 - [ ] 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 - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
fb0e3fb02a |
Fix mention-granted closed issue comments with resume intent (#8350)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Issue comments are part of the control plane boundary between agent collaboration and task mutation. > - Mention grants intentionally let a mentioned peer agent answer on an issue thread without taking ownership of the task. > - Closed issue comments have a second mutation guard because comments can also request resume or reopen behavior. > - A mention-granted comment should stay append-only unless the actor also has mutation authority. > - This pull request preserves the narrow comment path while keeping explicit `resume` and `reopen` intent behind mutation authorization. > - The benefit is a smaller authorization exception with regression coverage for both allowed and denied paths. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #2884 Related prior authorization work: #8024, #7863, #6113, #7998. Bug fix description: - What happened: a mention-granted non-assignee agent could be treated as authorized for the closed issue comment route without preserving a clean distinction between append-only comments and explicit reopen/resume mutation intent. - Expected behavior: a mention grant allows a plain comment on a closed issue, but `resume: true` or `reopen: true` still requires mutation authorization. - Steps to reproduce: create a closed issue assigned to one agent, give a different agent a valid mention-scoped comment grant, then POST a comment as that agent with and without `resume`/`reopen` intent. - Deployment mode: server route behavior; covered by focused Vitest regression tests. ## What Changed - Preserve the `issue:comment` authorization decision in `POST /api/issues/:id/comments` so the route can identify legitimate mention-grant decisions. - Skip the closed-issue non-assignee mutation fallback only for inert mention-granted comments. - Continue requiring mutation authorization when a mention-granted closed issue comment includes explicit `resume` or `reopen` intent. - Add regression coverage for the allowed inert comment and denied resume/reopen cases. ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts` passed locally: 72 tests. ## Risks - Low risk: scoped to the issue comment route and tests for a specific authorization decision reason. - Residual risk: CI should run the full PR suite. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-5 Codex via Paperclip Git Expert agent, with tool use for code inspection, test execution, Git, and GitHub operations. ## 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] 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] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
67f97e8fb0 |
fix(server): enforce read auth for single issue comments (#8346)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Issue comments are part of the control-plane audit trail and must respect the same company and issue authorization boundaries as issue reads. > - Mention-scoped commenting gives low-trust agents a narrow way to reply when an authorized assignee mentions them. > - The comment list route already enforces issue-read authorization, but the single-comment read route only checked same-company access before returning a known comment id. > - That created a broken object-level authorization gap for same-company low-trust agents outside the issue boundary. > - This pull request applies the existing issue-read guard to the single-comment route before loading the comment. > - The benefit is consistent comment-read authorization across list and single-comment endpoints, with regression coverage for the low-trust boundary. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #7389 Bug fix context: - What happened: `GET /api/issues/:id/comments/:commentId` checked company access but did not enforce the issue-read authorization boundary before returning a single comment by known id. - Expected behavior: single-comment reads should use the same issue-read boundary as issue thread list reads. - Steps to reproduce: authenticate as a same-company low-trust agent outside an issue's readable boundary, then request a known comment id via the single-comment endpoint. - Deployment mode: applies to server authorization behavior in authenticated agent API usage. ## What Changed - Added `assertIssueReadAllowed` to the single issue-comment read route before `getComment` is called. - Added mocked route coverage proving peer agents outside the issue-read boundary get `403` and the comment is not loaded. - Added authorization and embedded route coverage for mention-scoped low-trust comment grants so the intended narrow reply path remains allowed. ## Verification - `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts` — passed, 60 tests. - `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/authorization-service.test.ts` — passed, 26 tests. - `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/low-trust-red-team-routes.test.ts` — passed, 8 tests. - `git diff --check` — passed. ## Risks Low risk. This reuses the existing issue-read guard for a read endpoint. The main behavioral shift is that same-company actors who cannot read an issue can no longer fetch a known comment id from that issue, which is the intended authorization boundary. > 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 GPT-5 via Codex, with repository tool use and command execution. Runtime context-window details were not exposed by the 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 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] 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] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
364f0f5a8d |
fix(server): enforce issue read for issue thread lists (#8331)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents coordinate through issue threads, so issue comments and interactions are part of the task authorization surface. > - Low-trust and boundary-limited agents can receive narrow mention-scoped access, but that must not turn into broad same-company issue-thread reads. > - The comment creation path was narrowed to allow explicit mention replies without granting mutation access. > - The surrounding list/read routes still needed to enforce the same `issue:read` boundary before returning thread data. > - This pull request applies the issue read check to issue comment and interaction listing routes, and locks that behavior with server regressions. > - The benefit is that narrow cross-agent collaboration remains possible without exposing unrelated issue-thread history. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Bug fix: - What happened: same-company agents outside an issue read boundary could still hit issue-thread listing routes and receive thread data. - Expected behavior: issue comments and issue-thread interactions should only be listed after the actor is allowed to read the issue. - Steps to reproduce: configure a peer agent denied by the issue read boundary, then request `GET /api/issues/:id/comments` or the issue interaction listing route. - Paperclip version/commit: current `master` before this branch. - Deployment mode: applies to server authorization in all modes. Related public context: #7389, #7863, #8024. ## What Changed - Added issue read enforcement before listing issue comments. - Added issue read enforcement before listing issue-thread interactions. - Added server regressions for denied peer-agent issue-thread access while preserving mention-scoped collaboration behavior. - Removed an avoidable per-mentioned-comment issue reload in mention-grant authorization by passing the already-loaded issue assignee through the helper. - Documented cross-agent issue read/comment authorization behavior in the Paperclip API reference. - Added a resilient fallback for pinned external skills when GitHub tree fetches are temporarily unavailable during catalog builds. ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/authorization-service.test.ts` - 2 test files passed - 84 tests passed - Existing mocked recovery revalidation warnings were emitted by the route suite and the command exited 0 - Greptile: 5/5 on commit `b73fc323f192dc44f88374c16865008d4348923b`; no unresolved review threads. - `pnpm vitest run packages/skills-catalog/src/catalog-builder.test.ts` - 1 test file passed - 6 tests passed - CI: all visible PR checks are terminal green on commit `b73fc323f192dc44f88374c16865008d4348923b`. ## Risks Low risk. This tightens read authorization on issue-thread listing routes; any caller that depended on same-company access without `issue:read` will now receive 403 and must use an explicit grant or valid issue read path. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-5 Codex, Codex coding agent environment, tool use and local command execution enabled, reasoning mode active. Context window 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 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] 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] 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> |
||
|
|
a71c4b6782 |
[codex] feat(watchdog): add task watchdog control plane (#8339)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The task lifecycle and recovery subsystems decide when agent work is still productive, stalled, or ready for review. > - Existing recovery paths can observe stopped or incomplete work, but there was no first-class per-task watchdog model with scoped review permissions. > - Watchdog follow-ups also need strict boundaries so recovery/status-only runs cannot mutate approvals or perform deliverable work. > - This pull request adds the task watchdog data model, API/service layer, scheduler/review flow, adapter wake context, UI configuration surfaces, and docs. > - The branch has been rebased onto current `paperclipai/paperclip` `master`; the watchdog migration is now ordered after master's latest migrations as `0104_issue_watchdogs`. > - The benefit is a more explicit task-review loop that preserves Paperclip's single-assignee and governance invariants while making stalled work easier to route. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No linked GitHub issue. Paperclip task: [PAP-11275](/PAP/issues/PAP-11275). ## Problem or motivation Task recovery needs a first-class watchdog path that can inspect stopped work and create scoped follow-ups without bypassing normal task ownership. Board/UI users need a way to configure watchdogs on tasks and see watchdog-related live work. Recovery/status-only runs must remain limited to status reporting and must not create approvals, link approvals, or submit approval comments. ## Proposed solution Add a task-watchdog data model, scheduler/classifier, scoped mutation guard, adapter wake context, API/UI configuration surfaces, and documentation so watchdog agents can review stopped task subtrees under explicit boundaries. ## Alternatives considered Reuse the existing recovery-action flow only. That would keep stopped-work detection implicit, make per-task watchdog assignment harder to expose in the UI, and would not provide a durable scoped-review issue for stalled task trees. ## Roadmap alignment This is Paperclip control-plane lifecycle infrastructure for task execution and recovery. I checked `ROADMAP.md`; this PR does not duplicate an existing planned core item. ## What Changed - Added issue watchdog schema, migration, shared contracts, validators, CRUD API, and service support. - Added task watchdog scheduler/classifier behavior, scoped mutation enforcement, adapter wake context, and default watchdog mandate guidance. - Added UI surfaces for configuring watchdogs on new/existing tasks, viewing watchdog activity, and exposing the experimental setting. - Added docs for the user-facing task watchdog workflow and implementation semantics. - Gated new-task watchdog setup behind `enableTaskWatchdogs` and blocked cheap status-only recovery runs from approval mutations. - Rebased onto current `master` and renumbered the idempotent watchdog migration from the branch-local `0102_issue_watchdogs` slot to `0104_issue_watchdogs`. - Addressed Greptile feedback by loading watchdog classifier input with a recursive subtree query and centralizing the watchdog origin-kind constant. - Added and updated focused server/UI tests for watchdog routes, scheduler/classifier behavior, scope boundaries, live task visibility, settings, and new issue dialog behavior. ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/task-watchdogs-scheduler.test.ts server/src/__tests__/task-watchdogs-classifier.test.ts` - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/approval-routes-idempotency.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm vitest run ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `git diff --check` - Verified the PR diff does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `.github/workflows`. ## Risks - Medium risk: this introduces a new task lifecycle surface touching DB schema, server routes/services, adapter wake context, and UI task configuration. - Watchdog scheduling behavior depends on the new experimental setting and runtime context checks behaving consistently across local and production agents. - The watchdog migration is idempotent (`IF NOT EXISTS` / duplicate-object guards) so users who tried the previous branch-local migration number should not get duplicate-object failures. - CI and the second Greptile pass are pending after the latest review-fix push. > 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 agent in the Paperclip workspace. Exact runtime model id and context window were not exposed to the agent; tool use and local command execution were 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 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 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 per Paperclip task instruction: do not add screenshots/images to this PR unless they are specifically part of the work. - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
6a3f5b685d |
fix(agents): clear inbox hire approval when approving/terminating from detail page (#8340)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Hiring a new agent creates a `hire_agent` approval record; until it is resolved, the agent sits in `pending_approval` and the open approval surfaces an "Approve/Reject" card in the inbox > - There are two places to act on that hire: the inbox approval card and the agent detail page's Approve/Terminate buttons > - The agent detail page only flipped the agent to `idle` via `activatePendingApproval`, never resolving the linked approval record > - So after approving (or terminating) from the detail page, the approval stayed `pending` and the inbox kept showing a stale "Approve/Reject" card for an agent that was already decided > - This pull request routes the detail-page approve through the shared `approvalsSvc.approve()` (which resolves the approval and runs activation, budget policy, and the hire-approved notification), and rejects the linked approval when a still-pending agent is terminated > - The benefit is a single source of truth: deciding a hire in one place clears it everywhere, so the inbox no longer asks you to approve an agent you already approved ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists for this; describing in-PR (bug report). **What happened:** Create a new agent, then approve it from the agent detail page. The agent activates, but the inbox still shows a "Hire Agent" item with Approve/Reject buttons for it. **Expected:** Once a hire is approved or rejected anywhere in the UI, it should be resolved everywhere — the inbox should not re-ask you to approve an agent that is already decided. **Root cause:** `POST /agents/:id/approve` called `activatePendingApproval`, which only changes the agent's status. The linked `hire_agent` approval row stayed `pending`. The inbox lists approvals filtered to unresolved statuses, so the card persisted. Terminating a pending agent from the detail page had the mirror problem for the "reject" half. Related (not duplicates): #215 (join-request inbox badge), #1815 (approval detail button loading text). ## What Changed - Added `approvalService.findOpenHireApprovalForAgent(companyId, agentId)` to locate the open `hire_agent` approval for an agent. The company/type/open-status **and** `payload->>'agentId'` predicates all run in SQL (jsonb operator), so the DB returns only the relevant row instead of filtering in JS (`server/src/services/approvals.ts`). - `POST /agents/:id/approve` resolves the linked approval through the shared `approvalsSvc.approve()` — running activation, budget-policy upsert, and the hire-approved notification as one path — and falls back to direct `activatePendingApproval` only when no open approval exists (legacy agents created before approvals were tracked) (`server/src/routes/agents.ts`). - `POST /agents/:id/terminate` now branches the same way: when a still-`pending_approval` agent has an open hire approval, it delegates to `approvalsSvc.reject()` (which resolves the approval **and** terminates the agent internally) and re-reads the agent, otherwise it terminates directly. This avoids terminating the agent twice (`reject()` already calls `agentsSvc.terminate()`) (`server/src/routes/agents.ts`). - The `agent.approved` activity log records the resolved `approvalId` (or `null` on the fallback path) for traceability. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — clean. - Targeted server tests pass (57 tests): `npx vitest run src/__tests__/approvals-service.test.ts src/__tests__/agent-permissions-routes.test.ts` - `findOpenHireApprovalForAgent` returns the row the SQL filter yields / returns null when none matches. - Approving from the detail page resolves the linked approval via `approvalsSvc.approve()` and does not double-activate; legacy fallback still calls `activatePendingApproval`. - Terminating a still-pending agent with an open approval calls `approvalsSvc.reject()` and does **not** call `agentsSvc.terminate()` a second time; terminating with no open approval terminates directly. - Manual: create an agent → inbox shows the hire card → approve from the agent detail page → inbox card is gone and the agent is active. Same for terminate-while-pending clearing the card. ## Risks Low risk, server-only, no schema or migration changes. The fallback to `activatePendingApproval` preserves existing behavior for agents with no tracked approval record, so legacy agents still activate. The shared approval path is the same one the inbox card already uses, so approve/terminate-from-detail-page now match approve/reject-from-inbox exactly. ## Model Used Claude Opus 4.8 (claude-opus-4-8), extended thinking with tool use, via Claude Code. ## 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] 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 (server-only change, no UI diff) - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups (in progress) - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
5e086cb828 |
fix(server): resolve published skills catalog package root and fallback (#8327)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source control plane people use to run and supervise AI-agent companies. > - The skills system is part of that core operator experience because agents and humans both depend on the catalog-backed Skills Manager surfaces. > - In source checkouts, the server can find the catalog manifest and bundled skill files through monorepo-relative paths, but published installs do not preserve that layout. > - That mismatch makes `GET /api/skills/catalog` fail in npm/pnpm installs even though the catalog package itself is present. > - The server therefore needs to resolve the catalog from the published `@paperclipai/skills-catalog` package first, while still keeping a monorepo fallback for local development. > - This pull request makes the published package the primary resolution path, uses the same resolved package root for bundled skill file reads, and degrades the list route safely when the manifest is unavailable. > - The benefit is that Skills Manager catalog reads behave correctly in packaged installs instead of only in repo-local development layouts. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Fixes #8316 Refs #7281 Refs #7313 Refs #7350 Refs #7860 Refs #8223 Refs #8227 ## What Changed - Added `@paperclipai/skills-catalog` as a runtime dependency of `@paperclipai/server`. - Exported `./package.json` from `@paperclipai/skills-catalog` so the server can resolve the published package root directly. - Updated `server/src/services/skills-catalog.ts` to resolve the manifest and package root from the published package first, with the monorepo path retained only as a development fallback. - Applied that resolved package root to bundled catalog file reads so manifest lookup and skill-file reads use the same published layout. - Added `listCatalogSkillsOrEmpty()` so `GET /api/skills/catalog` returns `[]` and logs a warning when the manifest is unavailable instead of surfacing a 500. - Added targeted server tests for published-package resolution and missing-manifest fallback handling. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/skills-catalog-service.test.ts src/__tests__/company-skills-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server build` - Packaging smoke: - pack `@paperclipai/shared` and `@paperclipai/skills-catalog` from this checkout - mount those packed artifacts under `server/dist/node_modules` - import `server/dist/services/skills-catalog.js` - verify a bundled catalog `SKILL.md` resolves and reads successfully from the packed package layout ## Risks - Low risk: the change is narrowly scoped to catalog package resolution and fallback behavior. - The new `./package.json` export slightly broadens the catalog package's public surface, so reviewers should confirm that is an acceptable runtime contract. - The empty-array fallback intentionally changes failure mode for a missing manifest from `500` to a warning + empty payload, which is safer for packaged installs but could hide packaging regressions if logs are not monitored. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex via Paperclip `codex_local` (GPT-5-based coding agent; exact backend model ID/context window not exposed in this harness), with tool use, shell execution, git, and local test/build 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 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] 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 - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
fc95699fde |
fix(server): enforce agent secret binding sync across lifecycle flows (#8307)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane people use to create, configure, and run AI agents for work. > - This change sits in the server-side agent lifecycle and secret-binding subsystem, where adapter config `env` entries can reference company secrets. > - An incident (while trying to configure a Novita sandbox) showed that an agent can reach a broken runtime state if `adapterConfig.env` contains `secret_ref` entries but the matching `company_secret_bindings` rows are missing. > - The immediate run-path guard and error-surfacing work made the failure diagnosable, but they did not fully prevent new broken agents from being created. > - The risk came from create and approval flows being responsible for remembering to sync bindings at each call site, which is easy to miss as new flows are added. > - This pull request moves the invariant into `agentService` create/update/activate paths, keeps the existing hire-flow fix, and adds regression coverage for create, update, and legacy pending-approval recovery. > - The benefit is that agent secret binding integrity is enforced closer to the data mutation point, so future callers inherit the protection automatically. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #8309 ### What happened? A Paperclip agent could persist `adapterConfig.env` `secret_ref` entries without matching agent-scoped `company_secret_bindings` rows. When that happened, the config UI could still look configured, but the real run path failed pre-dispatch because the secret was not actually bound to that agent. ### Expected behavior Every normal agent create, config-update, and pending-approval activation flow should leave the agent with secret bindings that match its persisted secret-ref env config. ### Steps to reproduce 1. Create or activate an agent through a flow that persists `adapterConfig.env` secret refs without synchronizing `company_secret_bindings`. 2. Observe that the config state can still appear populated. 3. Start a run for that agent. 4. Observe that pre-dispatch binding validation fails because the secret reference exists but the agent binding does not. ### Deployment mode Local dev (`pnpm dev`) ### Installation method Built from source (`pnpm dev` / `pnpm build`) ### Agent adapter(s) involved - Claude Code - Not adapter-specific (core bug) ### Database mode Embedded PGlite / embedded local dev database flow ### Access context Board (human operator) created or approved the agent; agent runtime later consumed the config. ### Additional context This PR focuses on preventing new broken states from normal service flows and on backfilling the covered legacy pending-approval activation path. ## What Changed - Kept the existing branch-local hire-flow fix that synchronized bindings for route and approval paths. - Moved the binding integrity invariant into `agentService.create()`, `agentService.update()` when `adapterConfig` changes, and `agentService.activatePendingApproval()`. - Added `server/src/__tests__/agents-service-secret-bindings.test.ts` covering create-time sync, update-time resync, and backfill for legacy pending-approval agents. - Removed now-redundant route-layer and approval-layer binding sync calls once the service layer became authoritative. - Simplified the affected unit tests so route/approval tests no longer assert service-owned binding writes directly. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/agents-service-secret-bindings.test.ts server/src/__tests__/approvals-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/agent-skills-routes.test.ts` ## Risks - Low to medium risk. - This changes where secret-binding synchronization is enforced, so any unexpected caller that relied on upper-layer manual sync behavior could behave differently. - Agent create/update/activation flows now perform binding synchronization consistently, which adds binding-table writes at those mutation points. - This PR does not retroactively scan and heal every already-broken historical agent row; it prevents and backfills through the covered service flows. > 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 Codex class model via `codex_local` - Session model family: GPT-5 Codex - Tool-assisted coding with shell, git, HTTP, and local test execution - Reasoning mode: medium interactive tool-use workflow ## 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 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] 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> |
||
|
Svetlana ZolotenkovaandPaperclip
|
5320a44088 |
Guard codex_local agents from shared OpenAI key (#8272)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - The `codex_local` adapter runs local Codex CLI processes and builds their environment from persisted agent config plus host process env. > - A host-level `OPENAI_API_KEY` or shared Codex auth home can silently make new agents spend through shared credentials. > - Existing agents can be repaired manually, but new and updated agents need a persistent guard at the agent configuration boundary. > - This pull request isolates new and updated `codex_local` agents with per-agent `CODEX_HOME` and an empty `OPENAI_API_KEY` override. > - The benefit is that future agent creation or adapter updates cannot silently fall back to shared OpenAI credentials. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Paperclip work item: [ZOL-5477](/ZOL/issues/ZOL-5477). No matching GitHub issue exists, so the bug is described inline following `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml`. **Pre-submission checklist** - [x] I have searched existing open and closed issues and this is not a duplicate. - [x] I am on the latest `master` commit for this PR branch. - [x] I have confirmed the error originates in Paperclip's `codex_local` adapter configuration boundary, not in a provider outage. **What happened?** New or updated `codex_local` agents could inherit a host-level `OPENAI_API_KEY` or use a shared Codex home when their adapter config did not explicitly isolate those values. That made it possible for future agents or manual adapter edits to silently fall back to shared OpenAI credentials. **Expected behavior** Creating, hiring, or updating a `codex_local` agent should either persist isolated per-agent configuration or reject unsafe shared Codex home configuration with a clear 422 response. The guard must not print secret values. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create or update a `codex_local` agent without an explicit `adapterConfig.env.OPENAI_API_KEY` override. 2. Run it on a host where the Paperclip server process has `OPENAI_API_KEY` set. 3. Observe that the adapter process can inherit the host key unless Paperclip persists a blocking empty override. 4. Set `adapterConfig.env.CODEX_HOME` to a shared path such as `~/.codex` or the company-level `codex-home`. 5. Observe that the old code allowed the shared auth home instead of returning a validation error. **Paperclip version or commit** - Reproduced by inspection against `master` before this PR. **Deployment mode** - Local dev / self-hosted server with `codex_local` agents. **Installation method** - Built from source. **Agent adapter(s) involved** - Codex. **Database mode** - Not database-related. **Access context** - Board and agent configuration paths. **Relevant logs or output** - No secret-bearing logs included. **Relevant config** - Unsafe shape: missing `adapterConfig.env.OPENAI_API_KEY`, or shared `adapterConfig.env.CODEX_HOME`. - Fixed shape: per-agent `CODEX_HOME` plus empty `OPENAI_API_KEY` override. **Additional context** Related PR search for `codex_local OPENAI_API_KEY CODEX_HOME` found: - #3681 `fix: preserve managed Codex auth and repo-root env loading` - #5621 `fix: copy worktree codex auth locally` Those are adjacent auth-handling changes, but they do not add the agent create/update guard implemented here. **Privacy checklist** - [x] I have reviewed all pasted output for PII, usernames, file paths, API keys, tokens, company names, and redacted where necessary. ## What Changed - Added a `codex_local` config guard in agent create, hire, and update routes. - The guard assigns `adapterConfig.env.CODEX_HOME` to `companies/<companyId>/agents/<agentId>/codex-home` when missing. - The guard persists `adapterConfig.env.OPENAI_API_KEY = ""` when missing, preventing host env inheritance. - Shared `CODEX_HOME` values for the company codex-home, host `$CODEX_HOME`, or `~/.codex` now fail with a 422 error. - Added route tests for create, hire, update, and rejected shared host Codex home. - Updated `codex_local` and development docs to describe the per-agent home contract. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/agent-adapter-validation-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/agent-skills-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm typecheck` - `git diff --check upstream/master...HEAD` - `gh pr list --repo paperclipai/paperclip --state all --search "codex_local OPENAI_API_KEY CODEX_HOME" --limit 20 --json number,title,state,url` - `rg -n "codex|OPENAI_API_KEY|CODEX_HOME|adapter" ROADMAP.md` returned no roadmap overlap. ## Risks - Existing legacy `codex_local` agents with shared `CODEX_HOME` will get a clear 422 when their adapter config is updated until the shared path is replaced. This is intentional because silent fallback is the bug being guarded. - Low migration risk: no database migration and no secret values are printed or persisted beyond the empty override. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-5.5 Codex, Codex coding-agent session with repository 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 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 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 - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge ## Paperclip - Issue: [ZOL-5477](/ZOL/issues/ZOL-5477) - Owner: Разработчик (`6625498c-66c9-429f-b578-4463ddc3ba16`) - Status: waiting reviewer - Next action: merge after approval and green CI --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
04173b341d |
fix: resolve secret refs before sandbox draft probes (#8256)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane operators use to manage agent execution environments, including plugin-declared sandbox providers. > - The failing user path here was `Test draft` for an unsaved sandbox environment using a schema field marked `format: "secret-ref"`. > - Saved environments already resolve secret refs before provider use, but the unsaved probe path was forwarding the selected secret UUID directly to the provider, which made Novita draft probes fail. > - Fixing that safely required a probe-only secret resolution path with explicit actor authorization and audit context, because an unsaved draft has no persisted environment binding to authorize against. > - Once that was fixed, CI and review surfaced follow-up hardening work: preserve actor source through the draft-probe path, prevent late heartbeat finalization from overwriting already-terminal runs, avoid duplicate successful-run handoff wakes for comment-driven runs, make SSH git ref updates tolerate concurrent managed-runtime restores, and keep the skills catalog build from failing on transient GitHub errors for pinned references. > - The result is that Novita draft probes now behave like saved environments, the new secret access path is constrained and audited, and the PR is green end-to-end with Greptile at 5/5. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No matching public GitHub issue was found after searching open and closed Paperclip issues for `novita`. Related PR search found [#8255](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/8255), but it addresses Novita/dev-SDK linking rather than this draft probe bug. Bug summary: - What happened? When a board user configured a sandbox environment backed by a schema-driven plugin provider such as Novita, selecting an existing company secret for `apiKey` and clicking `Test draft` failed because the probe received the secret UUID instead of the resolved secret value. - Expected behavior `Test draft` should resolve secret-ref fields before calling the provider probe, just like the saved runtime path does. - Steps to reproduce 1. Open `Company Settings -> Environments`. 2. Create or edit a `Sandbox` environment using a provider with a `format: "secret-ref"` field such as `Novita Agent Sandbox`. 3. Select an existing company secret for `apiKey`. 4. Click `Test draft`. 5. Observe the probe failure before this patch. - Paperclip version or commit Reproduced on a local `master` dev checkout; fixed and verified on branch commit `ed982d0c0`. - Deployment mode Local dev (`pnpm dev`). - Installation method Built from source (`pnpm dev` / `pnpm build`). - Agent adapter(s) involved Not adapter-specific in the core bug path; affects schema-driven sandbox provider plugins such as Novita. - Database mode Not database-related. - Access context Board (human operator). - Node.js version `v25.6.1`. - Operating system `macOS 15.7.4`. - Relevant logs or output The user-visible failure was `Novita sandbox probe failed` during `Test draft`. ## What Changed - Resolved schema-marked secret-ref fields during unsaved sandbox environment probes by adding a dedicated probe-time secret resolution path in `environment-config.ts`. - Passed `companyId` plus the full authenticated actor context into the draft probe normalization route so secret resolution stays company-scoped, authorized, and auditable. - Hardened ephemeral secret resolution so unsaved probes require `secrets:read`, preserve the original actor source (`local_implicit`, `agent_jwt`, etc.), and emit usable audit metadata. - Added a conditional heartbeat run-status update so late adapter completions cannot overwrite runs that were already cancelled or otherwise terminal. - Skipped successful-run handoff synthesis for comment-driven wakes, which removes the extra wake/run that was breaking `heartbeat-comment-wake-batching`. - Retried managed-runtime SSH git ref updates on concurrent ref-lock races instead of failing the restore path. - Reused the previous skills-catalog manifest entry when a pinned GitHub reference fails with a recoverable transient error during CI catalog generation. - Added focused regression coverage for the draft probe, ephemeral secret access, heartbeat handoff behavior, SSH ref-lock races, and catalog fallback behavior. ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/environment-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts` - `pnpm vitest run server/src/services/recovery/successful-run-handoff.test.ts` - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/openclaw-gateway-adapter.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/ssh-fixture.test.ts -t "merges concurrent remote commits through the managed runtime restore path"` - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/skills-catalog/src/catalog-builder.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/skills-catalog build` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils build` - `gh pr checks 8256` - Manual/live validation: the same fix was cherry-picked into the running local dev checkout and the user re-tested the Novita `Test draft` flow successfully after the server restart. ## Risks - Low risk: the Novita-specific user-facing fix is isolated to unsaved sandbox draft probes for plugin schema fields marked `format: "secret-ref"`. - The new ephemeral secret resolution path is intentionally stricter than the original broken behavior; regressions would most likely show up as denied draft probes rather than accidental secret exposure. - The heartbeat, SSH, and catalog changes are all defensive; if they regress, they should affect test/CI orchestration paths rather than persisted company data. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex Local (`codex_local` in Paperclip). The runtime does not expose the exact backend model ID in agent metadata. GPT-5-class coding model with shell/tool use, repository editing, test execution, GitHub review handling, and issue-thread coordination. ## 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 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 - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
d47b4da655 |
Auto-build bundled plugins on install (#8254)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Plugins extend the server with worker/UI surfaces, and bundled local plugins under `packages/plugins/**` ship as TS source — their compiled `dist/` is not checked in > - On a fresh checkout, installing a bundled local plugin via the in-app **Install** button failed because `paperclipPlugin.manifest` points at `./dist/manifest.js`, which does not exist until the package is built > - The error surfaces as `Package … does not appear to be a Paperclip plugin (no manifest found)`, which is misleading — the manifest is real, the dist is just missing — and forces every contributor to run `pnpm --filter … build` by hand before the bundled-plugin installer works at all > - This pull request teaches the install path to detect that case and run the package's build (plus standalone runtime bootstrap for plugins outside the root workspace) before manifest resolution, gated by a kill switch and a bounded timeout > - The benefit is bundled plugins like `@paperclipai/plugin-workspace-diff` install in one click on a fresh checkout, with a clear error message and manual fallback when the autobuild itself fails ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No existing GitHub issue. Underlying bug, following the bug-report template: **What happened?** Installing a bundled local plugin from a fresh checkout fails with `Package @paperclipai/plugin-workspace-diff at packages/plugins/plugin-workspace-diff does not appear to be a Paperclip plugin (no manifest found)`. The manifest is declared in `package.json` (`paperclipPlugin.manifest = ./dist/manifest.js`) but `dist/` is not built/committed, so the loader cannot find it. **Expected behavior** Clicking **Install** on a bundled plugin builds it if needed and registers it, without a manual build step. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Fresh checkout of `master` 2. Start the server, open Plugin Manager 3. Click **Install** next to `@paperclipai/plugin-workspace-diff` 4. Observe the "no manifest found" failure **Scope** Same failure mode affects every bundled plugin without a checked-in `dist/` (`plugin-llm-wiki`, examples, sandbox-provider plugins, etc.). ## What Changed - `server/src/services/plugin-loader.ts`: added `ensureLocalPluginBuilt(packageRoot, pkgJson)` — when the package lives under `packages/plugins/**` and its declared paperclipPlugin entrypoints (`manifest`, `worker`, `ui`) are missing, run `pnpm --filter <name> build` (and a standalone runtime-deps bootstrap for plugins outside the root pnpm workspace) before manifest resolution - `server/src/routes/plugins.ts`: invoke the autobuild from the local-path install path; surface a `hasBuiltEntrypoints` boolean on the `AvailableBundledPlugin` listing; invalidate the bundled-plugins cache after a successful install so a freshly built plugin no longer reports `hasBuiltEntrypoints: false` - `ui/src/api/plugins.ts` + `ui/src/pages/PluginManager.tsx`: type and consume `hasBuiltEntrypoints` so the installer can show that an autobuild will run on install - `server/src/__tests__/plugin-install-autobuild.test.ts`: new suite — 9 tests covering success, kill-switch, build failure, timeout, manifest still missing after build, standalone variant, and the existing `plugin-routes-authz` listing assertion - `doc/plugins/LOCAL_PLUGIN_DEVELOPMENT.md`: documents the autobuild, the `PAPERCLIP_DISABLE_PLUGIN_AUTOBUILD=1` kill switch, and the manual fallback command - Detect the autobuild timeout via the child-process `killed` flag rather than string-matching the error message, so the "after timing out" context is actually emitted Knobs: - `PAPERCLIP_DISABLE_PLUGIN_AUTOBUILD=1` — skip autobuild entirely; restore prior behavior - Build timeout: 120s, with a clear error that points at the manual `pnpm --filter <name> build` recovery command ## Verification - `cd server && pnpm vitest run src/__tests__/plugin-install-autobuild.test.ts src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts` → 44/44 pass - End-to-end on a clean checkout: `rm -rf packages/plugins/plugin-workspace-diff/dist`, invoke `ensureLocalPluginBuilt()` against the real package, all declared entrypoints (`dist/manifest.js`, `dist/worker.js`, `dist/ui/index.js`) regenerated. The original `no manifest found` symptom no longer reproduces. ## Risks Low. The autobuild only fires when (a) the package sits under `packages/plugins/**`, (b) at least one declared entrypoint is missing, and (c) the kill switch is not set. In a packaged production server the `packages/plugins/**` path does not exist on disk, so the helper short-circuits and never shells out to `pnpm`. Failures from the spawned build are surfaced as an install error with the exact manual command to retry, so the worst-case is the same UX as before plus a clearer message. ## Model Used Claude Opus 4.7 (claude-opus-4-7), extended thinking enabled, tool use (filesystem + bash). ## 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 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 - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Jannes StubbemannandClaude Opus 4.7
|
3701be76fa |
fix: read-only agent config/skill endpoints should not require agents:create (#3725)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Access to agents, skills, and configurations is governed by a per-company permission system > - `agents:create` is a mutation-tier permission that controls who can create or modify agents > - `assertCanReadConfigurations` delegates to `assertCanCreateAgentsForCompany`, effectively requiring `agents:create` just to *read* agent configs, skills, and config revisions > - That's a permission regression: any company member without `agents:create` hits 403 on the Skills tab, agent config pages, and revision history — but those responses are already secret-redacted > - This pull request loosens the read gate to company membership only, while keeping every mutation-adjacent gate at `agents:create` ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No existing issue covers this directly — problem described in-PR following the bug-report template: **What happened** `assertCanReadConfigurations` delegates to `assertCanCreateAgentsForCompany`, effectively requiring the mutation-tier `agents:create` permission just to *read* agent configs, skills, and config revisions. Any company member without `agents:create` hits 403 on the Skills tab, agent config pages, and revision history — even though those responses are already secret-redacted (`redactAgentConfiguration`, `redactConfigRevision`). **Expected behavior** Read-only configuration/skill/revision endpoints are readable by any company member; only mutation-adjacent endpoints require `agents:create`. **Steps to reproduce** As a company member without `agents:create`, open the Skills tab or an agent config page (or `GET` the config/skill/revision endpoints) — the request fails with 403. ## What Changed - `server/src/routes/agents.ts`: - `assertCanReadConfigurations` now requires company membership only (plus the existing agent-key cross-company check). Previously it required `agents:create`. - `actorCanReadConfigurationsForCompany` (the boolean twin, used by `GET /agents/:id` to decide whether to return a restricted detail) now uses the standard try/catch-around-`assertCompanyAccess` pattern. - `POST /companies/:companyId/adapters/:type/test-environment` is not a pure read (it exercises adapter secrets) and now calls `assertCanCreateAgentsForCompany` directly instead of going through `assertCanReadConfigurations`. Behavior for this endpoint is unchanged. ## Verification - Existing tests pass. - Manual: log in as a company member without an `agents:create` grant. Visit the Skills tab on an agent and the agent configuration panel — both load. Try to edit the agent — blocked, as before. - Manual: POST to `/companies/:companyId/adapters/:type/test-environment` as the same user — still 403. ## Risks Low. The only behavior change is on read endpoints whose responses were already redacted (\`redactAgentConfiguration\`, \`redactConfigRevision\`). No secret escapes anywhere. ## Model Used Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context), extended thinking mode. ## Checklist - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] Thinking path traces from project context to this change - [x] Model used specified - [x] Tests run locally and pass - [x] CI green - [x] Greptile review addressed Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
|
3fbab2e6db |
fix: resolve orphan-sweep null-assignee filter regression (#8018)
> Resubmits #5925 by @digitalflanker-ux (rebased onto current `master`; original commit authorship preserved). ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The issues list API powers orphan-sweep and board inbox views that filter by assignee > - `assigneeAgentId=null` is a valid query-string sentinel for "unassigned issues" > - A regression caused that sentinel to throw 500 instead of filtering correctly > - This pull request restores null-sentinel parsing in the route and service layers > - The benefit is reliable orphan-sweep and unassigned-issue queries without server errors ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #5891 (paired fix — land together) **Bug:** `GET /api/companies/:id/issues?assigneeAgentId=null` returned HTTP 500. Expected: HTTP 200 with only unassigned issues. Malformed UUIDs should return 4xx, not 500. ## What Changed - Parse `assigneeAgentId=null` in the issues list route and pass a JS `null` filter to the service - Handle malformed assignee IDs with HTTP 422 in the route layer - Extend `issueService.list` to treat `assigneeAgentId: null` as `IS NULL` SQL filter - Add route-level and service-level regression tests ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-list-assignee-filter-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` - result: 2 files passed, 79 tests passed ## Risks Low risk — scoped to query-parameter parsing and list filtering; no schema or API contract changes beyond fixing the regression. ## Model Used None — human-authored original fix by @digitalflanker-ux; rebased and test-harness adjustments by Paperclip cluster cleanup. ## 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 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 - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge ## Cross-references and status (maintainer) - Pairs with #5891 — both fix the `assigneeAgentId=null` issues-list regression and should land together. - Supersedes #5925 (fork branch could not be force-pushed; this is the operator-mergeable resubmission). --------- Co-authored-by: openclaw <digitalflanker@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
roy493andPaperclip
|
d9ea1bf9e1 |
fix: skip same-run self-comments (Path A heartbeat-reopen + Path B implicit-todo move) (#4973)
## Thinking Path - Paperclip treats issue comments as both communication and wake signals, so comment attribution affects whether completed work reopens. - The bug lived in two independent paths: deferred comment wake promotion in `heartbeat.ts`, and implicit reopen-on-comment logic in `routes/issues.ts`. - Both paths need the same core rule: a comment from the same run that just closed the issue must not look like a fresh human follow-up. - Deferred wake batches also need one extra safeguard: if a batch mixes a same-run self-comment with a real human comment, the human follow-up must still reopen the issue. ## What Changed - `server/src/services/heartbeat.ts` now suppresses deferred reopen only when every referenced comment in the batch was created by the closing run. - `server/src/routes/issues.ts` now passes `actorRunId`, `checkoutRunId`, and `executionRunId` into `shouldImplicitlyMoveCommentedIssueToTodo`, and skips the implicit move when the comment came from the run that already owns the issue. - `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts` adds coverage for both Path A cases: same-run self-comment stays closed, while a mixed self-comment plus human-comment batch still reopens. - `server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts` covers the same-run guard on both POST and PATCH comment paths, plus the negative case where a different run still reopens. ## Verification ```bash pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts -t "self-authored by the closing run|mixes self-authored and human comments" pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck ``` ## Risks - Low risk. Both changes are additive guards and preserve existing behavior for comments that do not originate from the owning run. - The deferred-wake change now uses all-self semantics, which is the key correctness detail for mixed batches. - Full CI is still the authoritative validation for the broader heartbeat integration surface. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent (`codex_local` adapter in Paperclip). ## 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 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, server-only - [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 ## Cross-references and status (maintainer) Refs #6601 Refs #3980 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <paperclip@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
NiViGaHoandClaude Opus 4.7
|
7945c70396 |
fix(issues): reopen-guard for assignee self-comment on terminal issue (AKS-1563) (#4346)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Issues are the unit of agent work, and a "done" issue should stay done unless something explicit reopens it > - The implicit-reopen path (human comment on a terminal issue) already keeps agents from reopening their own issues via `shouldImplicitlyMoveCommentedIssueToTodo`, but the explicit `reopen: true` path was not similarly guarded > - That gap lets the assignee agent reopen its own `done`/`cancelled` issue just by posting a log-style comment with `reopen: true` — the same "log lines are not reopen signals" semantics that the implicit path already encodes > - This pull request adds a focused `isAssigneeSelfCommentOnTerminalIssue` guard applied at both `PATCH /issues/:id` and `POST /issues/:id/comments`, forcing `effectiveMoveToTodoRequested = false` when the actor is an agent commenting on its own terminal issue without `resume: true` > - The benefit is a single, narrow invariant: only an explicit `resume: true` (or a different-agent / human commenter) reopens a terminal issue — assignee self-comments stay communicative ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #3980 Refs #3935 Refs #6601 ## What Changed - Adds `isAssigneeSelfCommentOnTerminalIssue` helper in `server/src/routes/issues.ts` next to the existing `shouldImplicitlyMoveCommentedIssueToTodo` - Applies the guard at both comment entry paths (`PATCH /issues/:id` with a `comment` body and `POST /issues/:id/comments`) so `effectiveMoveToTodoRequested` is forced to `false` when actor is an agent and matches the **current** assignee of a `done`/`cancelled` issue — even if `reopen: true` was sent explicitly - PATCH path compares against `existing.assigneeAgentId` (not `requestedAssigneeAgentId`), so a different agent that PATCHes a terminal issue with `{ comment, reopen: true, assigneeAgentId: <self> }` still reopens as today - The `resume: true` explicit-resume path is preserved verbatim — the guard short-circuits on `resumeRequested` - Existing external-caller paths (different agent / human user commenting on terminal) are unchanged and still reopen - New unit tests in `server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts`: - `does not reopen via POST comment+reopen when the assignee agent is the actor on a done issue` - `does not reopen via POST comment+reopen when the assignee agent is the actor on a cancelled issue` - `does not reopen via PATCH comment+reopen when the assignee agent is the actor on a done issue` - `still reopens a done issue via PATCH when a different agent reassigns to self with reopen=true` ## Verification - [x] `vitest run src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts` — 65/65 pass locally (4 new + 61 existing) - [x] `tsc --noEmit` — no new errors in changed files - [x] Manual trace: explicit-resume path (`resume: true`) still reopens because the guard short-circuits on `resumeRequested` ## Risks Low. The guard is a single short-circuit before the existing reopen decision and only fires when actor is an agent commenting on its own `done`/`cancelled` issue without `resume: true`. The `resume: true` path is unchanged, and the PATCH comparison uses the current assignee so cross-agent takeover with `reopen: true` continues to reopen. ## Model Used - Provider: Anthropic - Model: Claude Opus 4.7 (`claude-opus-4-7`) - Mode: extended thinking + tool use (Claude Code 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 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 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 — server-only) - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (no docs touch the reopen guard) - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --- ## Cross-references and status (maintainer) Rebased on current `master`. The implicit-reopen case is already handled upstream by the user-actor branch of `shouldImplicitlyMoveCommentedIssueToTodo`; this PR adds the matching guard for the explicit `reopen: true` path. The PATCH-path guard compares against `existing.assigneeAgentId` so cross-agent reassignment + reopen still reopens. Refs #3980 Refs #3935 Refs #6601 Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
LempkeyandDevin Foley
|
e1e2cef928 |
fix(issues): accept array-form ?status= filter and stop crashing on repeated keys (#4628) (#4890)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - Boards, agents, and the public REST API all read issue lists via
`GET /api/companies/:cid/issues`, with `?status=` as the most-common
filter
> - Express's default `qs` parser binds repeated keys to a `string[]` —
the conventional URL form `?status=todo&status=in_progress` is therefore
valid input
> - The service layer treated `filters.status` as a string and called
`.split(",")` unconditionally, returning HTTP 500 with `TypeError:
filters.status.split is not a function`. The same buggy pattern lived at
a second call site in the same file
> - This PR adds a small `parseStatusFilter` helper that normalizes all
four shapes the route can receive, routes both service-layer call sites
through it, and widens the `IssueFilters.status` type so the contract
stops lying about runtime reality
> - The benefit is a passive 500 disappears for any client (curl, board,
agent code) that builds `?status=` with array-style binding, and the
type system now forces every future caller to handle both shapes
correctly
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
- Refs #4628
- Closes #4084
- Related earlier attempt: #1964
## What Changed
- **`server/src/services/issues.ts`** — Added exported helper
`parseStatusFilter(input: string | readonly string[] | undefined):
string[]` that normalizes single strings, CSV
(`?status=todo,in_progress`), array (`?status=todo&status=in_progress`),
and mixed array+CSV; trims and filters empties. Widened
`IssueFilters.status` from `string` to `string | readonly string[]`.
Replaced inline `.split` call sites in `list()`, blocked-count
filtering, `count()`, and `countUnreadTouchedByUser()` with
helper-driven branching.
- **`server/src/routes/issues.ts`** — Replaced dishonest
`req.query.status` casts with `string | string[] | undefined` at both
issue-list and blocked-count entry points so the route contract matches
Express `qs` runtime behavior.
- **`server/src/__tests__/parse-status-filter.test.ts`** (new) — 10 unit
cases: undefined, empty string, single, CSV, array, mixed array+CSV,
whitespace trim, trailing/extra commas, no-mutation guarantee, hostile
non-string entry guard.
- **`server/src/__tests__/issues-list-query-parsing.test.ts`** (new) — 5
supertest cases against a minimal Express app whose handler mirrors the
route cast/forwarding pattern: single, CSV, repeated-key array, mixed
array+CSV, and no `?status` param.
- **`server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts`** — Added
embedded-Postgres service coverage for array-form status filters through
`list`, `count`, and `countUnreadTouchedByUser` on current master.
**Why service-layer, not route-layer:** the bug is the service contract.
Fixing only at the route would leave other service-layer call sites
latent, keep `IssueFilters.status` inaccurate, and let future internal
callers reintroduce the same crash. Widening the type is the forcing
function that prevents recurrence.
**Why `parseStatusFilter` is exported, not file-local:** the helper has
direct unit coverage and keeps the normalization logic colocated with
its only current call sites.
## Coordination with prior work
- Supersedes **#4084** (thanks to @adlai88 for the original
report-and-fix). This PR additionally fixes the extra current-master
service call sites, widens `IssueFilters.status` so the type contract is
honest, replaces the incorrect route casts, and ships direct regression
coverage.
- **#1964** bundles unrelated route/service changes; this PR keeps scope
tight per CONTRIBUTING.md's one-PR-one-change guidance.
## Out-of-scope finding
While verifying all query-string status parsing sites, I found a sibling
bug in `server/src/services/execution-workspaces.ts:409` reachable from
`routes/execution-workspaces.ts:48`, where repeated `?status=` keys can
still hit the same `.split(",")` assumption. I left that out of this PR
to keep the review surface small.
## Verification
```bash
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run \
src/__tests__/parse-status-filter.test.ts \
src/__tests__/issues-list-query-parsing.test.ts \
src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts \
--testNamePattern='parseStatusFilter|issue list status query parsing|accepts array-form status filters in list and count|excludes plugin operation issues from unread inbox counts'
```
Result on the rebased head: `3` files passed, `17` tests passed, `72`
skipped.
GitHub CI on PR `#4890` is green on the rebased head
`805731d3270783d0b80b33ee1dccdc6771febef6`, including `verify`,
`Typecheck + Release Registry`, `Build`, `e2e`, general tests,
serialized suites, Socket checks, Snyk, and `Greptile Review`.
Local workspace typecheck commands still encounter unrelated
current-master baseline errors under `packages/plugins/sdk` and
`server/src/services/company-skills.ts`; no failures were produced from
the `issues` files changed in this PR.
## Risks
- **Type widening blast radius:** `IssueFilters.status` widens from
`string` to `string | readonly string[]`. Any direct caller that still
assumes `.split()` on the input now gets a useful typecheck failure
instead of a latent runtime crash.
- **Behavior change:** `?status=todo,in_progress&status=done` previously
returned HTTP 500; it now returns HTTP 200 with the union of matching
statuses. Single-string and CSV behavior remain unchanged.
- **No migration. No breaking API changes. No new deps. No UI changes.**
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. — Confirmed: this is a bug
fix, not a feature. ROADMAP.md grep showed no overlap.
## Model Used
- **Claude Opus 4.7** (Anthropic), `claude-opus-4-7`, 1M context,
extended thinking. Used for problem scoping, implementation, and test
authoring; the final rebasing, PR prep, and verification updates were
handled in the maintainer workflow.
## 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 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] 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
## Cross-references and status (maintainer)
- Closes #4084
---------
Co-authored-by: Devin Foley <devin@paperclip.ing>
|
||
|
|
7058d7b6c3 |
fix: auto-complete approved review comments (#5839)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Issue lifecycle and review handoff rely on a comment-driven "approve" gesture from the active reviewer to transition `in_review` → `done` > - The original auto-completion path matched approval markers loosely and split the comment insert from the status transition, which let `NOT APPROVED` close issues and let a 422-on-status-change leave an orphan comment behind > - That broke the safety expectation that a rejection comment can never auto-complete an issue, and that observable state (comment+status) cannot diverge from intended state > - This pull request tightens the approval regex against negated phrasings and wraps the comment insert + status transition + execution decision in one transaction so a failed transition rolls the comment back > - The benefit is that reviewers can post negated phrasings safely, and any failure in the auto-approval transition leaves the thread unchanged instead of in a half-applied state ## Linked Issues or Issue Description ### What happened? The comment-driven auto-approval path in `routes/issues.ts` had two latent safety bugs surfaced during review: 1. The approval-detection regex matched negated phrasings such as `NOT APPROVED`, `NOT APPROVED.`, `Do not approve`, `Not approving this`, so a reviewer comment intended as a rejection could auto-complete the issue. 2. The auto-approval insert + status transition + execution decision were not atomic. If the post-comment status update returned 422 (`unprocessable`), the persisted approval comment was left behind without the corresponding state change, leaving the thread half-applied. ### Expected behavior - Negated approval phrasings (`NOT APPROVED`, `not approved.`, `I do not approve`, `not approving this`, etc.) must never trigger auto-completion. Positive controls (`Approved`, `LGTM, approved`) must continue to trigger it. - A failed status transition must roll back the corresponding approval comment so observable state and intended state never diverge. ### Steps to reproduce 1. Open an `in_review` issue assigned to a reviewer. 2. As the reviewer, post `NOT APPROVED` as a comment. 3. Prior to this fix: the issue auto-transitions to `done`. After this fix: the issue stays `in_review`, the comment lands, and no transition fires. 4. Separately, induce a 422 on the post-approval status update (e.g. concurrent delete). Prior to this fix: the approval comment is persisted but the issue stays `in_review`. After this fix: the comment is rolled back along with the failed transition. ### Paperclip version or commit Branch tip `ca60f00276` at the time of this submission. Targets `master`. ### Deployment mode Affects both hosted and self-hosted deployments. Behavior is server-side only. ## What Changed - Tightened the review-marker approval regex in `server/src/routes/issues.ts` so it rejects negated phrasings while preserving positive controls. - Required structured `kind: review` / `decision: approved` metadata adjacent to the markdown approval marker (rejects blank-separated structured approval and mismatched actor kinds). - Wrapped the auto-approval comment insert, status transition, and execution decision in a single drizzle transaction in `server/src/routes/issues.ts`, threading the transaction handle through `addComment` in `server/src/services/issues.ts` so a concurrent delete or 422 transition rolls back the comment. - Added a dedicated activity log entry for the post-approval status transition and skipped stale `issue_commented` wakes that arrive after the auto-approval transition. - Added 61 regression tests in `server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts` covering negated phrasings, positive controls, structured-metadata adjacency, actor-kind matching, atomic rollback on transition failure, and stale-wake suppression. ## Verification - `cd server && npx vitest run src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts` → 61/61 passing locally. - Typecheck on changed files passes locally. - All required CI checks expected to be green on this branch tip. ## Risks - Low risk. Changes are localized to the comment-driven auto-approval path; existing `addComment` callers are unaffected (the new transaction handle parameter is optional and defaults to the top-level `db`). - The transaction wrapper changes observable timing very slightly (single tx vs. two-step), but the only externally visible effect is atomicity — failures now leave no orphan state. - Regex tightening is opt-out safe (positive controls still match) but if a reviewer in the wild used a creative phrasing not covered by the regression set, they may need to repost as `Approved`. ## Model Used - Provider: Anthropic - Model: Claude Opus 4.7 (`claude-opus-4-7`) - Capabilities: extended thinking, tool use, code execution ## Checklist - [x] I searched for similar open/closed PRs and confirmed this is not a duplicate - [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 either linked existing issues or described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above --------- Co-authored-by: Tommy <tommy@Mac-mini-Anton.local> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Devin Foley <devin@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
|
6f9801a46b |
feat(ui): NUX rework behind enableConferenceRoomChat experimental flag — capsule onboarding, conference-room chat, unified composer (#8000)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The first-run experience (onboarding wizard) and the chat surfaces
(conference-room/board chat, task threads, composers) are the product's
front door — they decide whether a new operator understands "hire
agents, give them work, review results" in the first five minutes
> - Today those surfaces feel ticket-y and form-like: the wizard is a
static multi-step form that ends in an anticlimactic "Launch" screen,
the task composer and board chat behave differently from each other, and
agent-feed issue quicklooks misbehave (multiple flyouts open at once,
cards jump on hover)
> - We wanted to iterate toward a conversational, team-centric NUX — but
without risking the workflows of everyone already running Paperclip
> - This PR reworks the NUX behind a new default-OFF
`enableConferenceRoomChat` experimental flag: a capsule-motif onboarding
wizard that builds your team as you answer, a conference-room chat
surface, one shared ChatComposer across surfaces, brand-accurate status
chips, and feed-quicklook fixes — with the pre-existing UI
fork-and-frozen as `*Classic` components that flag-OFF users keep
> - The benefit is a complete, testable modern NUX that anyone can opt
into from Settings → Experimental, with zero default behavior change and
a clean path to either graduate or drop the experiment
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No pre-existing GitHub issue — feature description per
`feature_request.yml`:
- **Problem / motivation:** Paperclip's onboarding wizard and chat
surfaces grew up as separate ticket-centric forms. New users get a
form-filling experience rather than the feeling of standing up a team;
the board chat and task threads use different composers with different
affordances; the agent feed's issue quicklook can stack multiple
popovers and shifts cards on hover.
- **Proposed solution:** A coherent NUX experiment behind one
experimental flag (`enableConferenceRoomChat`, Settings → Experimental,
default OFF): capsule onboarding wizard with an evolving team capsule,
conference-room chat, unified `ChatComposer`, team-centric copy, brand
status chips, quicklook single-flight fix. Flag-OFF users get the exact
pre-experiment UI via frozen `*Classic` forks, verified by an on/off
parity test matrix.
- **Alternatives considered:** (a) incremental unflagged restyling —
rejected: the changes interlock across surfaces and would drip risk into
every release; (b) a separate app shell / route for the new NUX —
rejected: too much divergence, the flag + classic-fork pattern keeps the
diff reviewable and reversible.
- **Roadmap alignment:** `ROADMAP.md` lists **CEO Chat** ("a
lighter-weight way to talk to leadership agents... should still resolve
to real work objects"). This experiment is groundwork in that direction
(conference-room chat resolves to issues/tasks via the same composer
used in task threads) and does not change the core task-and-comments
model.
Related PRs found in the dedup search (same area, none duplicate this
work — they target the classic wizard, which this PR intentionally
leaves intact and mergeable):
- #5385 — Coach-driven onboarding: conversational entry +
agent-companies package import
- #5378 — Onboarding wizard: reusable adapter picker + probe card
- #6636 — ui(onboarding): friendly error surface + retry for the wizard
- #7005 — fix(onboarding): explicitly await first-task wake
- #2616 — fix: restore workspace directory config in onboarding wizard
## What Changed
- **Experimental flag plumbing** — `enableConferenceRoomChat` in shared
types/validators, server instance-settings service + API, Settings →
Experimental card with explicit enable/disable copy
- **Onboarding wizard** — classic wizard forked and frozen
(`OnboardingWizardClassic`); flag-ON variant is a 5-step capsule wizard
with a persistent evolving `AgentCapsule` (gradient/glow motif),
team-centric reframed copy, and a typing-dots intro (hardened with
fake-timer tests)
- **Conference-room chat** — flag-ON board-chat surface with agent
bubble name/icon headers and copy/vote/timestamp action rows
(`AgentBubbleActionRow`)
- **Unified composer** — shared `ChatComposer` adopted across surfaces;
translucent surface + scroll-mask removal; "Agent mode"/"Plan mode"
relabels; no-assignee confirmation `AlertDialog` (new
`ui/alert-dialog.tsx` primitive); `@task` reference picker +
linkification in mentions
- **Agent feed** — single-flight issue-quicklook store (one popover at a
time), flyouts open to the left, removed hover translate-y jitter
- **Status chips** — brand-accurate task status chips behind the flag
(light/dark, 1px borders per paperclip.ing/brand)
- **Tests** — flag on/off parity matrix across IssueDetail,
NewIssueDialog, Sidebar, wizard, gate components; component tests for
all new pieces
- **Merge with `master`** — one conflict in
`ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.tsx`, resolved by keeping master's
new `AssigneeChip`/`HandoffWakeRow`/`RunStatusBadge` components inside
the flag-gated metadata-row chrome (details in commit `21a5642a`);
post-merge fixes: vitest 4 mock typing in `MarkdownEditor.test.tsx`,
flag hook made safe for provider-less mounts (master's new isolated
component tests)
- **Branch hygiene** — internal design wireframes/mockups stripped
before the PR (they live in the Paperclip issue threads)
- No user-facing documentation changes required: the flag is
intentionally experimental and self-described in the Settings card; no
existing docs reference the affected surfaces
## Verification
- `pnpm run typecheck` — green across the workspace (ui, server, shared,
plugins)
- Full UI suite (`vitest run` in `ui/`, clean worktree at this HEAD):
**1593/1595 passing, 223/224 files** — the 2 remaining failures are in
`src/components/artifacts/ArtifactCard.test.tsx` and **fail identically
on pristine `origin/master`** (pre-existing upstream, unrelated to this
branch)
- Full server suite (`vitest run` in `server/`, same clean worktree):
results in PR checks; flag plumbing covered by instance-settings tests
- Targeted post-merge resolution check: `IssueChatThread`,
`IssueChatThreadSystemNotice`, `IssueDetail`, `Sidebar`,
`ConferenceRoomChatGate`, `OnboardingWizardVariant`, `NewIssueDialog`,
`InstanceExperimentalSettings`, `MarkdownEditor` — 172/172 passing
- Manual walkthrough: flag OFF (default) → onboarding wizard, task
thread, board chat, composer all render the classic UI; flag ON via
Settings → Experimental → capsule wizard, conference-room chat, unified
composer, status chips active
- Screenshots: see below
**Flag on/off screenshots** (committed on this branch under
`screenshots/PR-8000-*`):
| Surface | Flag OFF (classic, default) | Flag ON (experimental) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Settings → Experimental | 
| 
|
| Task thread | 
| 
|
| Home / nav | 
| 
|
| Conference Room (flag-ON only surface) | — | 
|
Capsule onboarding wizard walkthrough screenshots (flag ON) are attached
to the Paperclip design/implementation threads; the wizard requires a
fresh instance so it is captured via the e2e harness
(`tests/e2e/nux-phase4-screenshots.spec.ts`).
## Risks
- **Large surface, but gated:** all new behavior sits behind
`enableConferenceRoomChat`, default OFF; flag-OFF rendering is locked by
frozen `*Classic` forks plus an on/off parity test suite
- **Classic forks are frozen at the fork point (`e3aada1d`):** master
features added to the live thread component after that point (assignee
handoff chips, run status badge, composer mention coach) render in the
flag-ON path; the flag-OFF task thread keeps the fork-point behavior
until the experiment graduates (forks deleted) or is dropped (forks
restored as canonical). Called out for reviewer attention.
- **Merge-conflict resolution in `IssueChatThread.tsx`** (commit
`21a5642a`) deserves reviewer eyes: master's new handoff/run-status
components were kept; the base toast-style no-assignee flow remains
replaced by the AlertDialog flow introduced on this branch
- Schema/server changes are additive (one optional boolean instance
setting); no migrations of existing data
## Model Used
- Claude (Anthropic) via Claude Code running in the Paperclip agent
harness (agent: ClaudeCoder)
- Branch implemented across multiple agent sessions on Claude Opus-class
models with extended thinking + tool use (file edits, shell, Playwright
screenshots); merge/PR session model ID as reported by the harness:
`claude-fable-5` (Claude Code CLI)
- All code was agent-authored and board-reviewed through Paperclip issue
threads (plans, wireframes, confirmations) before merging
## 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 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 (none
required — experimental flag, self-documenting Settings card; noted
above)
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green (run 3 on `8af3041a`: all 16
gates SUCCESS, incl. e2e and all 4 serialized-suite shards)
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
(re-review verdict: Confidence 5/5, “Safe to merge”; all 4 round-1
findings fixed + confirmed resolved; both summary notes addressed in
`8af3041a`)
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
||
|
|
1413729a06 |
Build the Skills Store (#7990)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents increasingly depend on reusable skills, so the control plane needs a first-class way to browse, inspect, install, version, and attach those skills. > - The old skills surface was mostly operational plumbing; it did not give operators a store-like discovery flow, canonical detail URLs, rich source/version context, or creation paths. > - The backend also needed stronger contracts around company skill metadata, versions, install counts, runtime materialization, and adapter skill preferences. > - This pull request builds the Skills Store foundation across DB, shared contracts, server routes/services, UI, and Storybook. > - The benefit is a more inspectable, operator-friendly skill workflow that still preserves company-scoped control-plane boundaries and agent runtime behavior. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No GitHub issue exists for this Paperclip work item. Paperclip task refs: PAP-10846 and PAP-10921. Feature request: Paperclip operators need a single Skills Store experience where company skills can be discovered, inspected, created, versioned, installed, and attached to agents without relying on scattered operational screens or implicit runtime state. Related PR search: - Searched GitHub for `Skills Store`, `company skills`, and `skill detail`. - Found several open skills-related PRs such as #7809 and #4409, but no duplicate PR for this end-to-end Skills Store branch. ## What Changed - Added the Skills Store backend foundation: company skill schema fields, migrations, shared types/validators, and expanded server skill routes/services. - Added skill discovery, category navigation, canonical skill detail routes, tabs, source attribution, version snapshots/diffs, install count backfill, and creation flows. - Updated agent skill preference handling so version selections survive runtime mention injection and runtime skill materialization honors pinned versions. - Preserved unversioned skill assignments as live/current selections instead of silently pinning them to the current version at assignment time. - Added focused regression coverage for company skill routes/services, route helpers, UI behavior, skill version diffs, and runtime skill version pins. - Added Storybook coverage for Skills Store discovery/detail states and updated the main layout navigation. - Addressed Greptile findings around version creation races, soft-deleted comments, fork metadata scoping, GitHub skill directory fallback, runtime snapshot materialization, shared runtime skill-selection helpers, and version-assignment semantics. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-project-env.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-runtime-skills.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/company-skill.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-skills-service.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/agent-skills-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/company-skills-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-skills-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-runtime-skills.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/company-skills-service.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx -t "edits existing custom assignee model options from the properties pane"` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - GitHub checks are green on `0823957a2`: Build, Canary Dry Run, General tests, Typecheck + Release Registry, serialized server suites, e2e, policy/review, Socket, Snyk, and aggregate `verify`. - Greptile Review succeeded on `0823957a2` with `40 files reviewed, 0 comments added`; GitHub unresolved review threads: 0. Not run in this heartbeat: - Browser screenshot capture for the UI changes. This PR intentionally omits screenshots per the Paperclip task direction not to add design screenshots/images. ## Risks - Broad feature branch touching DB, shared contracts, server, and UI; reviewers should still scan merge conflicts carefully if `master` moves again before landing. - Skill version/runtime behavior is sensitive: pinned skill versions must stay pinned while default selections should continue following the current version. - UI polish should get normal reviewer/browser attention before merge because this PR includes a large Skills Store surface and screenshots were intentionally omitted. > 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 tool use and local command 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 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 (intentionally omitted per PAP-10921 direction) - [ ] 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> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
c139d6c025 |
fix(codex-local): omit default model so codex CLI picks per auth mode (#7971)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through pluggable local adapters; codex_local wraps OpenAI's `codex` CLI. > - The codex_local adapter declares a hard-coded `DEFAULT_CODEX_LOCAL_MODEL = "gpt-5.3-codex"` and multiple Paperclip consumers (UI build-config, server route, OnboardingWizard, NewAgent form, AgentConfigForm) fall back to it when the operator doesn't pick a model. > - That model — and every `*-codex` model plus the older `gpt-5/5.1/5.2` lines — is API-key-only. Codex CLI rejects them on ChatGPT subscription auth with "The 'gpt-5.3-codex' model is not supported when using Codex with a ChatGPT account." > - Every codex_local agent created through the default onboarding path inherits this pin and breaks on its first heartbeat for any user authed via `codex login` (ChatGPT). > - claude_local already takes the right shape: its build-config only sets `adapterConfig.model` when the operator actually picked one, and falls through to whatever default `claude` CLI uses. > - Codex CLI's own default is auth-mode-aware. ChatGPT-subscription accounts get `gpt-5.5`; API-key accounts get the codex-tuned default. A Paperclip-side pin masks this and downgrades whichever group it wasn't built for. > - This PR makes codex_local match claude_local's shape: omit `adapterConfig.model` when the user picks "default," and let the CLI choose. Subscription users stop breaking; API-key users stop getting downgraded. > - The benefit is auth-mode-correct defaults with no Paperclip-side hard pin, plus future-proofing: when OpenAI bumps the CLI default we inherit it for free. ## What Changed - `packages/adapters/codex-local/src/ui/build-config.ts` — only set `adapterConfig.model` when the operator picked one (parity with `packages/adapters/claude-local/src/ui/build-config.ts`). - `server/src/routes/agents.ts` — drop the codex_local-specific `next.model = DEFAULT_CODEX_LOCAL_MODEL` fallback in `applyCreateDefaultsByAdapterType`. Bypass-sandbox default is left in place (security posture, not a model choice). - `ui/src/pages/NewAgent.tsx`, `ui/src/components/AgentConfigForm.tsx`, `ui/src/components/OnboardingWizard.tsx` — stop pre-populating the model field with `DEFAULT_CODEX_LOCAL_MODEL` when the user selects the Codex adapter. Other adapters' defaults (gemini_local, cursor, opencode_local) are unchanged. - `DEFAULT_CODEX_LOCAL_MODEL` is preserved as an exported constant for downstream consumers / plugin authors who want to opt in to a pin; we just stop forcing it on operators who didn't ask for one. - Test: assert `buildCodexLocalConfig` omits `model` when input is blank. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/adapters/codex-local/src/ui/build-config.test.ts packages/adapters/codex-local/src/server/codex-args.test.ts server/src/__tests__/adapter-registry.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-model-profile.test.ts server/src/__tests__/agent-permissions-routes.test.ts` → 74/74 passing - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/lib/duplicate-agent-payload.test.ts ui/src/lib/acpx-model-filter.test.ts` → passing - `pnpm tsc --noEmit -p .` → clean - Live: I separately verified live during initial investigation that on ChatGPT-subscription auth, `gpt-5.3-codex` is rejected and `gpt-5.5` is what Codex CLI picks by default. Omitting model lets the CLI handle that. ## Risks - Telemetry: any sink that reads `adapterConfig.model` for cost attribution will now see the empty/omitted case more often. The CLI emits the actually-used model in its event stream; downstream telemetry should already read from there for accuracy, but worth a check. - Operator UX: "default" now means "whatever the CLI picks" instead of a Paperclip-known model. The selectable catalog still includes `gpt-5.5`, `gpt-5.4`, `gpt-5.3-codex`, etc. for operators who want to pin explicitly. - Existing agents are unaffected — their `adapterConfig.model` is already set; this only changes the *new-agent* default flow. ## Related work - Depends on: an open catalog-add PR adding `gpt-5.5` to the selectable model list and to `CODEX_LOCAL_FAST_MODE_SUPPORTED_MODELS`. Operators who want to switch to `gpt-5.5` explicitly need that PR merged first; this PR is the structural change that makes "default" mean "let the CLI choose." - Closes #5371 — codex_local default model selection persists `gpt-5.3-codex` instead of adapter default (this PR is the exact fix #5371 proposes). - Related: #5132 (opencode-local: hire-time default model fails on ChatGPT-OAuth accounts) — same problem shape on a sibling adapter; not fixed here but worth tracking for a parallel. - Related: #5939 (codex_local adapter hardcodes `gpt-5.3-codex-spark` validation, fails on ChatGPT OAuth accounts regardless of configured model) — separate validation-path bug; not fixed here. ## Model Used Claude (Sonnet-class), running inside Paperclip as a claude_local executor. ## 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 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] 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> |
||
|
Dotta
|
11a64819f9 |
Keep agent-created follow-ups in run workspace
Reviewed and merged for PAP-10871/PAP-10873.\n\nVerification:\n- pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts\n- git diff --check origin/master...HEAD\n- GitHub PR checks green before merge |
||
|
|
67b22d872f |
[codex] Clarify interrupt handoffs and scoped wake semantics (#7855)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The issue thread is the operator surface where comments, assignee changes, pauses, resumes, and wakeups turn human intent into agent execution. > - Interrupting a live run and handing work to another assignee needs clear semantics so the product does not accidentally keep work alive, wake the wrong participant, or hide why an agent stopped. > - Comment-driven wakes also need strict boundaries so closed, blocked, and dependency-driven work only resumes when there is real actionable input. > - This pull request codifies the interrupt handoff contract, implements backend scheduling behavior, and gives the UI clearer handoff/pause language. > - The benefit is a more inspectable and predictable task lifecycle for both operators and agents. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Paperclip issue: `PAP-10664` / `PAP-10751`. Problem: interrupting or reassigning live agent work could be ambiguous in the UI and backend. Operators needed clearer feedback about whether a handoff wakes an agent, what pause/cancel affects, and when comments should revive execution. The backend also needed stronger tests around comment wake boundaries, retry supersession, and structured agent mention dispatch. Related GitHub PR search found broad workflow-adjacent PRs #5082, #6359, and #4083, but no exact duplicate for this head branch or interrupt-handoff scope. ## What Changed - Added an interrupt handoff semantics document covering destination behavior, wake expectations, and live-run interruption states. - Implemented backend interrupt handoff behavior and comment wake/reopen handling in issue routes/services and heartbeat scheduling. - Hardened structured agent mention dispatch so mentions resolve through the intended dispatch path. - Added UI helpers and components for handoff chips, wake rows, interrupt banners, pause-affects summaries, and composer guidance. - Updated the issue properties assignee picker and issue chat/composer surfaces to make interrupt/reassign behavior clearer. - Added backend, UI utility, component, and Storybook coverage for the new behavior. - Stabilized the new UI component tests with a local `flushSync`-backed act helper matching existing repo practice in this dependency set. - Addressed Greptile feedback by threading historical run `errorCode` through issue-run data and operator-interrupted chat labels. - Addressed Greptile's cancel ordering concern by terminating/deleting in-memory heartbeat processes before cancellation status persistence, with regression coverage for DB update failure. ## Verification - `git diff --check $(git merge-base HEAD origin/master)..HEAD` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/lib/interrupt-handoff.test.ts src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx src/components/interrupt-handoff/InterruptHandoffViews.test.tsx --no-file-parallelism --maxWorkers=1` — 4 files / 91 tests passed before the Greptile follow-ups. - `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-update-comment-wakeup-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts --no-file-parallelism --maxWorkers=1` — 6 files / 191 tests passed before the Greptile follow-ups. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts --no-file-parallelism --maxWorkers=1` — 1 file / 24 tests passed after the historical `errorCode` follow-up. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/activity-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/activity-routes.test.ts --no-file-parallelism --maxWorkers=1` — 2 files / 11 tests passed after the historical `errorCode` follow-up. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts --no-file-parallelism --maxWorkers=1` — 1 file / 52 tests passed after the cancel ordering follow-up. - Greptile is green for head `272647636287d034bab8d981eaf5305865aa0f96`; the old inline P2 is resolved/outdated. - GitHub Actions, Socket, security-review, and Greptile checks are green for head `272647636287d034bab8d981eaf5305865aa0f96`. The external `security/snyk (cryppadotta)` status was still pending at `https://app.snyk.io/org/cryppadotta/pr-checks/85b3e8f4-04e1-4f8e-9362-899c8148c23c` after a bounded wait. ## Risks - Medium: changes touch issue comments, wake scheduling, and live-run interruption semantics, so regressions could affect when agents resume or stay stopped. - Medium: UI copy and state grouping for assignee changes may need reviewer tuning after product review. - Low migration risk: no database schema migration is included. - The branch was created before the latest `origin/master` commits; reviewers should confirm CI merge-base behavior and resolve any merge conflicts if GitHub reports them. > 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 use and local command execution enabled. Exact hosted model build and context window were 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 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 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] 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 Screenshot note: this PR includes Storybook coverage for the new interrupt handoff UI states rather than captured before/after browser screenshots in this PR-creation heartbeat. --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
|
468edd8b22 |
Add workspace file viewer and artifact links (#7681)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agent work is issue-centered, and reviewers often need to inspect files, artifacts, and path references produced during that work. > - Before this branch, workspace-relative paths and artifact file references were not first-class inspectable objects in the board UI. > - Safe file viewing needs shared resource contracts, server-side workspace boundary checks, and UI that opens files without exposing arbitrary host paths. > - The workspace file viewer branch needed to stay as one active PR and be rebased onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` for review. > - This pull request adds the workspace file resource API, issue-page file viewer and browser, markdown file-reference links, and artifact file chips. > - The benefit is that board users can inspect relevant files from issue context while preserving workspace boundaries and auditability. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists for this branch. Internal Paperclip issues: `PAP-1953`, `PAP-10539`, `PAP-10733`. Problem / motivation: - Board users need to open workspace-relative files mentioned by agents or attached as work-product metadata without switching to a terminal. - The UI needs to support both direct file-path opening and workspace browsing/searching from an issue page. - The server must enforce company access, workspace boundaries, size limits, rate limits, and safe audit logging. Related PR: - Prior closed attempt: #4442 - Single active PR for this branch: #7681 ## What Changed - Added shared workspace file resource types, validators, and workspace-file `resourceRef` metadata validation for work products. - Added server routes/services for resolving, listing, and previewing workspace-relative files with access checks, scan caps, list-specific limits, and audit logging. - Added the issue file viewer provider, sheet, workspace browser, command-palette action, markdown workspace-file autolinks, and artifact file chips. - Updated issue workspace UI and stories/tests for file browsing and workspace file opening. - Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and updated the existing single PR branch. - Addressed current-head Greptile follow-ups by applying `offset` consistently across search/recent/changed file listings, restoring stopped-service port ownership checks before auto-port reuse, and stabilizing the workspace browser pagination test. ## Verification Current local verification after rebase to `public/master`: - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/work-product.test.ts server/src/__tests__/file-resources.test.ts server/src/__tests__/instance-settings-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/instance-settings-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts ui/src/components/FileViewerSheet.test.tsx ui/src/components/FileViewerSheet.copy.test.tsx ui/src/components/WorkspaceFileBrowser.test.tsx ui/src/components/WorkspaceFileMarkdownBody.test.tsx ui/src/context/FileViewerContext.test.ts ui/src/lib/remark-workspace-file-refs.test.ts ui/src/lib/workspace-file-parser.test.ts ui/src/components/IssueWorkspaceCard.test.tsx` - 13 files passed, 197 tests passed. - `pnpm -r --filter @paperclipai/shared --filter @paperclipai/server --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/WorkspaceFileBrowser.test.tsx` - 1 file passed, 25 tests passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/file-resources.test.ts server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts` - 2 files passed, 90 tests passed. - `pnpm -r --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - passed. - Confirmed branch is `0` behind and `46` ahead of current `public/master` after rebase and follow-up commits. - Confirmed the PR diff does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml`. - Confirmed the PR diff does not include `.github/workflows` changes. - Searched GitHub for duplicate or related workspace file viewer PRs/issues; #4442 is the prior closed attempt and this PR is the single active PR for the branch. - No screenshots were committed; the task explicitly asked not to add design screenshots or images unless they were part of the work. Current remote verification on head `a698a7bc10137baf7d25bd5722e1d6e0343387c1`: - Greptile Review - success, 64 files reviewed, 0 comments added, no unresolved Greptile review threads. - PR workflow `verify` - success. - Typecheck + Release Registry, General tests, workspace test shards, serialized server suites, Build, Canary Dry Run, e2e, Socket, and Snyk - success. - `security-review` - neutral, with output saying a draft advisory was filed for maintainer review and is not a merge block. - `commitperclip PR Review / review` - cancelled after the security gate detected flags and timed out while creating/reviewing the advisory. I reran it once and it cancelled the same way; no actionable code/test failure was exposed in the job logs. ## Risks - This is a broad UI/server feature PR, so review needs to pay attention to route authorization, workspace boundary handling, and markdown autolink false positives. - Workspace browsing intentionally caps list results and scan depth; very large workspaces may require users to refine search terms. - Remote workspace preview remains unavailable until remote file-access support is implemented. - The neutral commitperclip security-review advisory needs maintainer review, but the check output says it is not a merge block. > 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 in a Paperclip/Codex local tool-use environment, medium reasoning, with shell/GitHub CLI tool use for branch inspection, verification, rebase, PR update, Greptile review, and CI inspection. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have 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 - [ ] 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> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
0a2230b2ec |
[codex] Guard document comment wake boundaries (#7766)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The execution control plane uses issue comments, assignments, monitors, blockers, and interactions to decide when agent-owned work should wake and run. > - Top-level issue comments are actionable issue-thread feedback for the assignee, but document-scoped comments are review context unless they are converted into an explicit routing primitive. > - Document annotation comments were still wired into the same `issue_commented` wake path as top-level issue comments. > - That made document activity capable of waking an assignee and looking like an execution path even when no issue-level handoff happened. > - This pull request narrows the wake boundary so document annotation activity stays document-scoped while normal issue comments continue waking the assignee. > - The benefit is fewer spurious wakeups and clearer non-terminal issue liveness semantics. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Internal Paperclip work: [PAP-10613](/PAP/issues/PAP-10613), [PAP-10640](/PAP/issues/PAP-10640) Problem description: - Document annotation thread creation and annotation comments were treated as assignee wake sources. - Document-scoped activity should remain visible as document/review context, but should not by itself act as a queued issue wake, monitor, approval, interaction response, blocker, or terminal disposition. - Top-level issue comments should still wake the assignee on agent-assigned, non-terminal issues. Related PR search performed: - Found related prior document annotation work: #6733. - Found related prior issue-comment wake work and revert context: #7678, #7765. - No existing PR for `PAP-10613-why-is-this-task-not-running`. ## What Changed - Removed the document annotation comment assignee wake helper from issue routes. - Kept document annotation reference sync and activity logging intact. - Documented the distinction between top-level issue comments and document-scoped comments in `doc/execution-semantics.md`. - Added route tests proving document/document annotation activity does not wake the assignee. - Added route coverage proving top-level board issue comments still wake the assignee. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/document-annotation-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-update-comment-wakeup-routes.test.ts` — 2 files passed, 9 tests passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed. - `git status -sb` — clean branch tracking `origin/PAP-10613-why-is-this-task-not-running`. ## Risks - Low to moderate behavior change: document annotation comments no longer wake the issue assignee automatically. - Operators who want document feedback to route work must use an explicit primitive such as assignment, issue-thread comment, agent mention, issue-thread interaction, approval, blocker, or delegated follow-up. - No database migration or public API shape change. > 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 shell/tool use enabled. Exact hosted runtime model identifier beyond GPT-5 was not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have 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] 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> |
||
|
Dotta
|
7fb40264f8 |
[codex] Revert PR #7678 (#7765)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Issue comment wake handoffs are part of the control-plane execution loop that decides when agents resume work after comments and issue updates. > - PR #7678 changed that wake handoff behavior in server issue routes, heartbeat context, and related tests. > - The change broke an important workflow after merge, so the safest immediate fix is to restore the pre-#7678 wake behavior. > - This pull request reverts the wake-handoff behavior from PR #7678 while keeping narrow review-requested safeguards that prevent known runtime/test regressions. > - The benefit is that Paperclip returns to the last known working wake behavior without reintroducing avoidable UUID skill lookup and annotation-resolution test gaps. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #7678 Bug context: - What happened: PR #7678 was reported to have broken an important Paperclip workflow after it merged. - Expected behavior: Paperclip should preserve the prior issue comment wake handoff behavior until a corrected change is ready. - Steps to reproduce: Use the workflow affected by PR #7678's issue comment wake handoff changes. - Paperclip version/commit: `master` after merge commit `4da79a88c67e54084d40bd18cada5ee5c8be23da`. - Deployment mode: Paperclip control-plane server behavior. ## What Changed - Reverted merge commit `4da79a88c67e54084d40bd18cada5ee5c8be23da` from PR #7678 to restore pre-#7678 wake-handoff behavior. - Preserved the safe accepted-plan routing check so `parseObject(...)` is not used as a boolean. - Preserved UUID filtering for run-scoped skill mentions so legacy non-UUID skill IDs do not reach a Postgres UUID lookup. - Restored the annotation thread-resolution test guard that verifies resolving a thread does not wake the assignee. ## Verification - `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && NODE_ENV=test PAPERCLIP_HOME=/tmp/... PAPERCLIP_INSTANCE_ID=pap10614-revert TMPDIR=/tmp/... pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server --no-file-parallelism --maxWorkers=1 server/src/__tests__/document-annotation-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-project-env.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-accepted-plan-workspace-refresh.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-context-summary.test.ts` - Result: 4 test files passed, 26 tests passed. - Earlier targeted revert verification also passed: 4 test files, 50 tests. ## Risks - This intentionally restores behavior from before PR #7678, so intended wake-handoff improvements from that PR are removed. - The PR is no longer a byte-for-byte revert because Greptile identified two narrow safeguards worth preserving. - Low migration risk: no schema or dependency changes are included. - Follow-up work may still be needed to reintroduce the desired wake handoff behavior without the regression. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent in this Paperclip heartbeat, with shell/tool execution and repository write access. ## 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 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] 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 |
||
|
|
823c2b115a |
feat(adapters): allow external overrides of built-ins (#7394)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through server-side adapters. > - Some adapters are bundled as built-ins, while external adapter plugins can provide newer or organization-specific implementations. > - The adapter registry already supports external plugins overriding a built-in type while keeping the built-in available as fallback. > - The hot-install API still rejected built-in adapter types before registration, so plugin installation did not match registry behavior. > - That blocked users from installing an external adapter update for a built-in adapter type such as `hermes_local`. > - This pull request removes the hot-install conflict guard and keeps the existing fallback lifecycle intact. > - The benefit is consistent adapter override behavior across startup registration, hot install, pause/resume, and removal. Fixes #7395 ## What Changed - Allows `POST /api/adapters/install` to register an external adapter whose type matches a built-in adapter. - Keeps built-in adapters protected from deletion unless there is an external plugin record for that adapter type. - Tightens the install route so `requiresRestart` is only reported on a true reinstall (existing external plugin record), not on a first-time override of a built-in adapter type. - Adds route coverage for installing a built-in type override, pausing back to the built-in implementation, deleting the override, and restoring the built-in adapter. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/adapter-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/adapter-registry.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - GitHub Actions passed for server tests, typecheck, build, serialized server suites, e2e, canary dry run, Socket, Snyk, Greptile, and policy checks on the prior pushed commit before the follow-up review fix. ## Risks - Low risk: this only changes the hot-install/removal lifecycle for external plugins targeting a built-in adapter type. - Built-in adapters remain protected when no external plugin record exists. - The existing registry fallback behavior restores the built-in adapter when an override is paused or removed. > 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-5.5 via Hermes Agent for the initial implementation and verification (terminal/file/GitHub tool use). - Anthropic Claude Opus 4.7 (claude-opus-4-7) via Paperclip Claude adapter for the Greptile-feedback follow-up commit (extended-thinking reasoning, terminal/file/GitHub 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and confirmed none exist for this hot-install override fix - [x] I have linked the existing issue with `Fixes #7395` - [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] 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: HenkDz <henkdz@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Devin Foley <devin@devinfoley.com> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
2d1b531a49 |
[codex] Add clear-error agent action (#7695)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source control plane people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agent runtime state is surfaced in both the server API and the board UI so operators can tell whether an agent is idle, running, paused, or in error. > - When an agent is already in `error`, the existing pause/resume action slot is not useful because there is no running work to pause. > - Operators need a direct, audited recovery path that clears the stale error state only for agents in the same company. > - This pull request adds a company-scoped clear-error mutation, exposes the shared API contract, and wires the board action cluster to show Clear error in the pause/resume slot for errored agents. > - The benefit is that operators can recover CEO/CTO-style errored agents without resorting to database edits or unrelated session reset actions. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #4021 Paperclip issue: PAP-10515 — right now the CEO and CTO agents are in error state, but there is no way to clear the error; they appear otherwise fine. ## What Changed - Added shared constants, API path, and agent status type support for a company-scoped clear-error action. - Added the server service and route to clear an agent from `error` back to `idle`, with company access enforcement and activity logging. - Added OpenAPI/docs coverage for the clear-error endpoint. - Added backend coverage for service behavior and cross-tenant authorization. - Updated the board agent action cluster to show a red-tinted Clear error button only when `agent.status === "error"`. - Updated agent properties to show a red active last-error indicator only while the agent is currently errored. - Added UI component tests for the error-state action and the non-error pause/resume behavior. ## Verification Local: - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/agents-service-clear-error.test.ts server/src/__tests__/agent-cross-tenant-authz-routes.test.ts ui/src/components/AgentActionButtons.test.tsx` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts` PR checks: - Main Paperclip workflow is green on `a7378e584d50594e7bd507a1a02985bfaaa5abf8`. - Greptile is 5/5 with no files requiring special attention and no new comments on the latest review. - `commitperclip PR Review` is still red because its security-gate step canceled after filing a draft advisory; the linked `security-review` check is neutral and says the draft advisory is not a merge block. Visual artifact: -  ## Risks Low to medium risk. The mutation is intentionally narrow, but reviewers should check that clearing `lastError`/`lastRunError` and returning to `idle` is the desired recovery semantics for every adapter state. The remaining red check is from the external commitperclip security-review workflow, not from the code/test workflow for 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, GPT-5-family coding model, tool-assisted with local shell, git, GitHub CLI, and targeted Vitest 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 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 - [ ] 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 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4da79a88c6 |
[codex] Refine issue comment wake handoffs (#7678)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The heartbeat and issue-comment routes decide when an assigned agent wakes up and what context it receives. > - Passive comments and annotation notes can currently wake assignees even when no actionable state changed. > - Accepted planning confirmations also need to preserve recent plan comments so child-issue creation does not lose board/user constraints. > - Runtime skill mentions should only send UUID ids into database lookups, because legacy slug-like ids are not valid runtime skill ids. > - This pull request tightens those wake and handoff rules in one server-side branch. > - The benefit is fewer noisy agent wakeups and better accepted-plan continuation context without changing the task model. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Internal Paperclip task: [PAP-10535](/PAP/issues/PAP-10535). Problem or motivation: Passive comments and annotation notes could wake the current assignee even when no actionable state changed, and accepted plan continuations needed recent plan comments preserved in the wake handoff. Runtime skill mentions also needed to ignore non-UUID ids before database lookup. Proposed solution: Tighten server-side wake routing so passive comments do not wake assignees unless they reopen the issue, preserve mention-targeted wakeups, include recent non-deleted plan comments in accepted confirmation wake payloads, and guard runtime skill mention lookup to UUID-like ids. Alternatives considered: Leaving passive assignee wakeups in place was rejected because it keeps generating noisy non-actionable heartbeats. Treating every skill mention-like token as a runtime skill id was rejected because legacy slug-like ids are not valid runtime skill ids. Roadmap alignment: This aligns with the V1 control-plane heartbeat contract by making wakeups more intentional and preserving handoff context for approved plans. This PR was split from the local `master` branch on June 7, 2026. It covers server-side heartbeat and comment-wakeup behavior only. I searched GitHub for duplicate/related PRs; the results were broader heartbeat/run PRs, not this exact passive-comment and accepted-plan handoff change. ## What Changed - Filter runtime skill mention extraction so only UUID-like skill ids are looked up. - Stop ordinary issue comments and document annotation comments from waking the current assignee unless the comment reopens the issue. - Keep mention-targeted wakeups intact while removing passive assignee wakeups. - Include recent non-deleted issue comments in accepted-plan confirmation wake payloads and task markdown. - Updated focused server tests for the new wakeup and accepted-plan behavior. ## Verification - `git diff --check origin/master..HEAD` - `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-project-env.test.ts server/src/__tests__/document-annotation-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-update-comment-wakeup-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-context-summary.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-redaction.test.ts` - `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-accepted-plan-workspace-refresh.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-redaction.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-context-summary.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter /server typecheck` - PR checks green on head `a379a0264d384510ff8ac4a47fb1e44d7b556f68` - Greptile rerun green on head `a379a0264d384510ff8ac4a47fb1e44d7b556f68`: 9 files reviewed, 0 comments added, 0 unresolved review threads ## Risks - Medium behavioral risk: agents will no longer wake for passive comments unless mentioned or unless the comment reopens/resumes the issue. That is intentional, but any workflow relying on passive assignee comment wakeups should use explicit mentions or structured resume paths. - Low migration risk: no schema or migration changes. > 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 based on GPT-5, with shell, git, GitHub CLI, and local test execution. Exact hosted model variant and context-window size were 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 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 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] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
71a8464fee |
[codex] prevent invalid agents from receiving assignments and runs (#7663)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The control plane owns agent lifecycle, issue assignment, routine dispatch, heartbeat wakeups, and recovery paths > - Terminated, paused, pending-approval, or otherwise invalid agents should not receive new work or new execution attempts > - The old behavior left eligibility checks spread across routes and services, so assignment and run paths could drift apart > - This pull request centralizes agent lifecycle eligibility and applies it consistently to assignment, invocation, routines, recovery, and UI affordances > - The benefit is safer autonomy: terminated agents stay paused, invalid org-chain agents are surfaced, and active agents keep receiving valid work ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #5103 Related: #1864 Bug fix context: - What happened: agent assignment and heartbeat/run paths did not share one eligibility contract, so invalid lifecycle states could still be considered in some paths. - Expected behavior: terminated agents must never receive new assignments or heartbeat runs, and paused or otherwise invalid agents should be treated as non-invokable consistently. - Steps to reproduce: create or select an agent in an invalid lifecycle state, then attempt assignment, routine dispatch, or heartbeat/recovery wake paths. - Paperclip version/commit: fixed on top of `paperclipai/paperclip` `master` at the PR base. - Deployment mode: applies to the server control plane in local and authenticated deployments. ## What Changed - Added shared agent lifecycle eligibility helpers and exported the related shared types. - Centralized server-side assignability and invokability checks for issue assignment, agent routes, heartbeat dispatch, routines, recovery, and liveness logic. - Hardened issue assignment so invalid assignees are rejected instead of queued for work. - Hardened heartbeat/routine/recovery paths so terminated and otherwise invalid agents are not woken for new runs. - Updated board UI affordances to disable invalid agent actions and surface org-chain warnings where relevant. - Added targeted shared, server, and UI tests for the new eligibility behavior. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/agent-eligibility.test.ts server/src/__tests__/agent-invokability.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-archived-company-guard.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-liveness.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts ui/src/lib/company-members.test.ts ui/src/pages/Agents.test.tsx` — 8 files, 144 tests passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed. - Checked the PR diff does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `.github/workflows` changes. - Checked `ROADMAP.md`; this is a targeted control-plane safety fix and does not duplicate a planned core feature. - Searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs/issues; closest related items are linked above. - CI and Greptile verification are pending on the opened PR and will be followed up before requesting merge. ## Risks Low to moderate risk. The intended behavioral shift is that invalid agents are refused earlier and more consistently, which could expose existing data with paused, pending, terminated, or broken org-chain assignees. The added tests cover the critical assignment, heartbeat, routine, recovery, shared helper, and UI paths. No database 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 GPT-5 Codex via the Paperclip `codex_local` adapter, with shell/git/GitHub CLI tool use. Reasoning mode and context window are managed by the adapter runtime and 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 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 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 (not applicable: no design screenshots requested; UI behavior is covered by tests) - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (not applicable: no user-facing command or schema docs changed) - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green (pending CI) - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups (pending Greptile) - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4d5322c821 |
[codex] Add checkbox confirmation issue interactions (#7649)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agent work is coordinated through issues, comments, interactions, and approval-style handoffs. > - Existing issue-thread interactions could ask questions, suggest tasks, and request confirmation, but they did not support a structured checkbox confirmation payload for choosing one or more options. > - That gap made board/user confirmations harder to validate consistently across API callers, plugin helpers, CLI tooling, and the UI. > - This pull request adds the shared checkbox confirmation contract, server handling, client helpers, and issue-thread UI needed to render and submit structured selections. > - The benefit is that agents can request bounded multi-select confirmations in the same audited issue-thread flow as other Paperclip interactions. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description - No public GitHub issue found for this exact branch. Internal Paperclip issue: PAP-10415 / PAP-10441 requested creating this PR for the checkbox confirmation issue-thread UI component work. - GitHub duplicate search performed for checkbox confirmation / issue-thread interaction PRs; no matching open PR was found. - Related issue search result `#7497` was unrelated company file cleanup work, so it is not linked as a related issue. ## What Changed - Added shared types, validators, constants, and tests for `request_checkbox_confirmation` interactions. - Extended server issue-thread interaction service and routes for checkbox confirmation creation, validation, expiration, and response handling. - Added CLI, MCP, and plugin SDK helper coverage so external callers can create the new interaction shape consistently. - Updated the issue-thread interaction UI to render checkbox confirmations with min/max bounds, selection summaries, stale-target states, and accept/decline flows. - Documented the checkbox confirmation interaction contract in the Paperclip skill/API reference. ## Verification - Rebased cleanly on `paperclipai/paperclip` `master` fetched into `public-gh/master` at `a4fa0eaf5`. - Confirmed the PR diff does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `.github/workflows` changes. - Ran focused tests with `NODE_ENV=test`: ```sh NODE_ENV=test pnpm run preflight:workspace-links NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/issue-thread-interactions.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interactions-service.test.ts ui/src/components/IssueThreadInteractionCard.test.tsx ui/src/lib/issue-thread-interactions.test.ts cli/src/__tests__/issue-subresources.test.ts cli/src/__tests__/project-goal.test.ts packages/mcp-server/src/tools.test.ts packages/plugins/sdk/tests/testing-actions.test.ts ``` Result: 8 test files passed, 78 tests passed. - CI on latest head `63b9e55` is green. - Greptile Review passed on latest head; GraphQL review-thread check shows all Greptile threads resolved. ## Risks - Medium surface area because the interaction contract touches shared validators, server routes/services, UI rendering, CLI, MCP, plugin SDK helpers, and docs. - No database migrations are included. - `pnpm-lock.yaml` is intentionally excluded per repository lockfile policy. - UI screenshots are not attached because the task explicitly requested not to add design screenshots or images unless they were part of the work; component tests cover the new rendering and interaction states. > 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 based on GPT-5, with repository file access, shell command execution, git/GitHub CLI tooling, and Paperclip control-plane API access. Exact hosted model ID/context-window metadata is not exposed inside 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 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 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] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4693d770aa |
Add company artifacts page (#7621)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Operators need a way to inspect files and work products created by agents across a company without opening each issue one by one. > - The existing issue detail surfaces already show attachments and outputs, but there was no company-level artifacts index or search-result affordance for artifact-like records. > - The backend needed a company-scoped artifacts projection API that preserves issue/run attribution and safe links back to source records. > - The UI needed a first-class Artifacts page, sidebar entry, reusable artifact cards, and deep-link handling that keeps company prefixes intact. > - This pull request adds the company artifacts API and page, then wires artifacts into search and issue output surfaces. > - The benefit is a single place to browse, filter, and open generated work products and attachments while preserving company boundaries. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Fixes #7622. Feature request fields: - Problem/motivation: company operators need a consolidated artifacts surface for attachments and work products produced by agents. - Proposed solution: add a company-scoped artifacts projection endpoint, a board Artifacts route, reusable cards, sidebar navigation, and artifact search integration. - Alternatives considered: keep artifact discovery only on individual issue pages; that forces operators to know the source issue before finding generated outputs. - Roadmap alignment: checked `ROADMAP.md`; this is a focused board UI/API improvement and does not duplicate a listed roadmap item. ## What Changed - Added shared artifact types and validators. - Added a company-scoped artifact projection service/API with tests for attachment/work-product attribution. - Added Artifacts board UI route, API client, sidebar link, cards, filters, and storybook coverage. - Added artifact result handling to company search and issue output/deep-link flows. - Rebased the branch onto the latest `public-gh/master` state and resolved the route-test conflict by preserving both upstream team-catalog coverage and artifact route coverage. - Fixed a local Sidebar test helper so it no longer depends on a runtime-undefined `React.act` export in this dependency install. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/components/artifacts/ArtifactCard.test.tsx src/api/artifacts.test.ts src/lib/company-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/pages/Artifacts.test.tsx src/pages/Search.test.tsx src/components/Sidebar.test.tsx` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/company-artifacts-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-search-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-search-rate-limit-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts` - Confirmed the PR diff does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `.github/workflows/*`. - Duplicate search: no open PRs or issues found for `artifact page ArtifactCard` in `paperclipai/paperclip`. Screenshots are intentionally omitted per the internal task instruction not to add design screenshots or images to this PR unless they are specifically part of the work. I also attempted browser capture in this runner, but `agent-browser` failed to launch Chrome and Playwright Chromium is missing `libatk-1.0.so.0`. ## Risks - Low-to-medium risk: this adds a new API projection and UI surface, so attribution/link regressions could affect artifact navigation. - Company scoping is covered in the new service/API tests. - No database migrations are included. - No lockfile or workflow changes 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 coding agent with tool use and local command execution. Exact hosted model identifier is not exposed 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 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 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 (intentionally omitted per task instruction; browser capture unavailable in this runner) - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
dbebf30c89 |
Add low-trust review containment (#7530)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is a control plane for AI-agent companies, so execution policy and trust boundaries are part of the product's safety contract. > - Low-trust review work needs narrower authority than normal same-company agents because hostile PRs, comments, attachments, and generated output can carry prompt-injection payloads. > - The current V1 shape gives trusted workers broad company context, which is useful for normal execution but too permissive for a reviewer assigned to hostile content. > - This branch adds a `low_trust_review` preset, source-trust tagging, route-level containment, and quarantine handling so low-trust output does not automatically flow into higher-trust wake context. > - The branch has been rebased onto current `origin/master`, and the low-trust migration was renumbered to `0097_low_trust_source_trust.sql` to avoid collisions with existing `0091` through `0096` migrations. > - Greptile feedback was addressed by tightening low-trust detection, preserving project-level trust policy checks, fixing issue-kind promotion lookup, removing duplicate post-lease isolation assertion, documenting fail-closed source-trust behavior, bounding ancestry checks, enforcing runtime issue context for CEOs, awaiting accepted-plan monitor authorization, and making low-trust issue source-trust tagging atomic. > - The benefit is a first production slice of deny-by-default review containment with regression coverage for the main control-plane pivot surfaces. Fixes #7531. ## What Changed - Added shared trust-policy types and validators, plus database/source-trust fields for issues, comments, documents, and work products. - Implemented server enforcement for low-trust issue scope, agent self-view redaction, secret/plugin/runtime denial paths, promotion checks, and quarantined continuation/wake context. - Added focused low-trust regression tests for resolver behavior, source trust, route authorization, heartbeat preflight ordering, runtime containment, and quarantine redaction. - Added board UI affordances for selecting/reviewing the low-trust preset and surfacing source-trust badges in relevant issue views. - Added `doc/LOW-TRUST-PRESETS.md`, updated `doc/SPEC-implementation.md`, and committed the low-trust review contract plan under `doc/plans/`. - Rebasing note: the original `0097_low_trust_source_trust.sql` migration was renamed to `0097_low_trust_source_trust.sql`; the SQL uses `ADD COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS` so users who already applied the old-numbered migration are not broken by the renumbered migration. ## Verification - Rebased branch onto current `origin/master` and force-pushed with lease to `origin/PAP-10211-low-trust-agent` at head `2719f31e3`. - Confirmed the PR diff does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `.github/workflows` changes. - Resolved upstream UI/comment conflicts by preserving deleted-comment tombstone behavior and low-trust source-trust badges/metadata. - Renumbered the low-trust source-trust migration to `0097_low_trust_source_trust.sql`; the SQL uses `ADD COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS` so users who already applied an old-numbered copy are not broken. - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-session.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/source-trust.test.ts server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime-service-authz.test.ts ui/src/lib/trust-policy-ui.test.ts ui/src/components/TrustPresetSection.test.tsx` - `pnpm run typecheck:build-gaps` - `git diff --check` - GitHub checks pass on head `2719f31e3`: build, typecheck/release registry, general tests, serialized server suites, e2e, canary, verify, policy/review, Socket, and Snyk. - Greptile Review passes with Confidence Score 5/5 and zero unresolved Greptile review threads. - No design screenshots/images were added because the task explicitly says not to add them unless they are specifically part of the work. ## Risks - Medium risk: this touches shared trust-policy contracts, server authorization paths, heartbeat context generation, migration metadata, and UI preset controls. - Low-trust containment is intentionally deny-by-default; legitimate future review workflows may need explicit allowlisted exceptions. - Plugin/runtime/security surfaces are broad, so regression tests cover the current known routes but future integrations must route through the same containment layer. - The PR is ready for review; GitHub checks are green and Greptile is 5/5. > 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 shell and GitHub CLI workflow. ## 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] UI changes are covered by focused tests; no screenshots were added per task instruction not to add design images unless specifically required - [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> |
||
|
|
fff3832a01 |
[codex] Add teams catalog extraction (#7550)
Fixes #7551 ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane for AI-agent companies, and reusable company/team setup is part of making those companies faster to launch. > - The teams catalog work introduces app-shipped team templates that can be browsed, previewed, and installed into a company. > - Catalog installation crosses several contracts: bundled package contents, shared API types, server import/install behavior, CLI workflows, and the board UI. > - Agents also need a safe path through catalog installs: scoped company selection, explicit source policy, approval fallback for agent creation, and preserved catalog provenance. > - This pull request extracts the completed teams catalog branch into one reviewable PR on top of `public-gh/master`. > - The benefit is a reusable teams catalog foundation with server, CLI, package, docs, and hidden UI surfaces kept in sync. ## What Changed - Added the `@paperclipai/teams-catalog` package with bundled/optional team definitions, generated manifest, validators, catalog builder tests, and migration notes. - Added shared teams catalog types/validators plus server routes and services for listing, previewing, and installing catalog teams. - Integrated catalog install with company portability, skill/source policy checks, provenance metadata, origin hashes, target-manager reparenting, and installed/out-of-date detection. - Added CLI `teams` commands and agent-safe company selection behavior, including `company current` and approval fallback for forbidden agent-run installs. - Added hidden Team Catalog UI/API/query surfaces, Storybook fixtures, and targeted UI tests while keeping the UI route out of primary navigation. - Added docs for CLI/company/teams catalog behavior and removed generated screenshot artifacts from the PR diff. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run cli/src/__tests__/company.test.ts cli/src/__tests__/teams.test.ts packages/teams-catalog/src/catalog-builder.test.ts packages/teams-catalog/src/shipped-catalog.test.ts server/src/__tests__/agent-permissions-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-skills-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/teams-catalog-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/teams-catalog-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/teams-catalog-install-no-overrides.test.ts ui/src/lib/company-routes.test.ts ui/src/pages/TeamCard.test.tsx ui/src/pages/TeamCatalog.test.tsx ui/src/pages/useInstallTeamCatalogEntry.test.tsx` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/teams-catalog typecheck && pnpm --filter paperclipai typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - Confirmed branch is rebased onto `public-gh/master` (`78dc3625a`) and `public-gh/master` is an ancestor of `HEAD`. - Confirmed PR diff excludes `pnpm-lock.yaml`, `.github/workflows/*`, generated screenshot images, and screenshot helper scripts. ## Risks - Medium review surface: this crosses package generation, shared contracts, server install behavior, CLI, docs, and hidden UI code. - Catalog install behavior creates agents/projects/tasks/skills and must keep company scoping, permissions, source policy, and provenance checks strict. - `pnpm-lock.yaml` is intentionally excluded per repo policy; CI/default-branch automation owns lockfile refresh. - The Team Catalog UI is included but hidden from primary navigation, so future enablement should re-check visual QA before exposure. > 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`. > > ROADMAP checked: this aligns with reusable companies/templates and plugin-adjacent onboarding work. This PR packages work already developed on the Paperclip task branch for review. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 series coding agent in this Paperclip session; exact runtime context window was not exposed. Used shell, git, `gh`, and local test/typecheck tooling. ## 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, or documented why screenshots are intentionally omitted - [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> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
Dotta
|
3657854e5e |
Merge pull request #7554 from paperclipai/codex/pap-10343-comment-redaction
[codex] Redact deleted issue comments |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9aa065a38c |
Make deleted-comment cleanup atomic
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
39e0fba65f | Filter issues by plan document | ||
|
Dotta
|
7f70759e61 | Redact deleted issue comments | ||
|
Aron PrinsandClaude Opus 4.7
|
1227bb8ead |
Improve OpenAPI spec coverage and auth metadata (#4579)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - Its REST API is the control-plane contract for the board UI, agents,
plugins, and external integrations
> - This branch adds `/api/openapi.json`, which makes the generated
OpenAPI document part of that contract instead of an internal
implementation detail
> - Once the spec is published, it has to match the mounted Express
routes, auth model, and real HTTP behavior closely enough for client
generation and review
> - The existing spec drifted from the live server: it missed mounted
routes, documented a few nonexistent ones, omitted auth semantics, and
normalized response codes too aggressively
> - This pull request makes the generated spec track the real API
surface, exposes security requirements, and adds regression coverage so
drift is caught automatically
> - The benefit is that Paperclip's published API description becomes
trustworthy for integrators, SDK generation, and review without changing
runtime auth enforcement
## What Changed
- Added the OpenAPI endpoint wiring under `server/src/routes/openapi.ts`
so `/api/openapi.json` is generated from the current route-backed
OpenAPI builder.
- Replaced generic request/response bodies with typed schemas where
available so the generated document carries useful structure instead of
opaque blobs.
- Expanded the generated spec to cover the mounted route set, including
access/member flows, CLI auth challenge routes, invite acceptance, issue
thread interaction routes, adapter environment testing, budget policy
routes, resource memberships, secret provider routes, cloud upstream
routes, and `/api/openapi.json` itself.
- Corrected documented path mismatches such as `skills/scan` vs
`skills/scan-projects`, and other route-name/path drift.
- Added security schemes plus operation-level security metadata so
public, authenticated, board-only, and instance-admin endpoints are
distinguishable in the generated contract.
- Fixed reviewed response-code mismatches for create/accept flows and
authz failures, including `201`, `202`, and `403` cases that were
previously flattened away.
- Added `server/src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts` to diff the
generated spec against mounted server routes and assert key
auth/response invariants.
- Hardened the route-drift test after review feedback: it now handles
single/double/template route literals, fails on unlisted route files
that declare router methods, and filters OpenAPI path-item keys to HTTP
methods only.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/pages/Inbox.test.tsx`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm test:run`
- `pnpm build`
Manual notes:
- Confirmed the generated spec now matches the mounted route set in the
focused regression test.
- Confirmed `/api/plugins/install` is marked privileged in the generated
security metadata.
- Confirmed `POST /api/invites/{token}/accept` documents `202`.
- Addressed the Greptile route coverage comments and reran the focused
OpenAPI test, typecheck, and build successfully.
## Risks
- Medium-low risk. The main risk is ongoing spec drift if new routes are
added without updating the OpenAPI builder, but the regression test now
fails on unknown route files that declare router methods.
- The auth metadata is descriptive only; it does not change runtime
enforcement. If reviewers assume this PR hardens server auth behavior,
that would be an incorrect expectation.
- This change increases the amount of hand-maintained OpenAPI mapping in
`server/src/routes/openapi.ts`, so future API additions still need
discipline.
> 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. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent in Codex desktop. Exact
internal model variant/version and context-window size are not exposed
in this environment. Tool-enabled coding workflow with terminal
execution, git, and GitHub integration.
## 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 or confirmed screenshots are not applicable
- [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: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
||
|
|
244a5b8002 |
fix(plugins): allow agent JWTs to access plugin tool endpoints (supersedes #3272, with regression tests from #5549) (#7480)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Plugin tools are how agents call into plugin-contributed capabilities (`GET /api/plugins/tools`, `POST /api/plugins/tools/execute`) > - Those two routes previously required board-level authentication, so agent-issued JWTs were rejected — agents couldn't actually use the very tools the plugin system was built to expose to them > - Two community PRs (#3272 by @nullEFFORT and #5549 by @aperim-agent) independently fixed this, but both went stale against master and neither could be merged as-is > - This pull request lands #3272's authz-helper approach (`assertBoardOrAgent`) rebased on current master, and adds the regression test suite from #5549 adapted to #3272's symbol names > - The benefit is agents can finally call plugin tools while preserving the existing board-scoped checks for the rest of the plugin admin surface ## What Changed - Adds `assertBoardOrAgent(req)` helper in `server/src/routes/authz.ts` — accepts either a board user or an agent JWT - Applies `assertBoardOrAgent` (in place of `assertBoard`) on `GET /api/plugins/tools` and `POST /api/plugins/tools/execute` so agent-issued tokens can list and execute plugin tools - Updates the file-level doc comment on `server/src/routes/plugins.ts` to note the agent-accessible routes - Adds `server/src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts` (118 lines, 34 cases) covering: agent JWT can list tools, agent JWT can execute within its company scope, agent JWT is rejected when `runContext.companyId` is outside its authenticated scope, agent JWT is rejected when `runContext.agentId` does not belong to `runContext.companyId`, plus the existing board/admin paths ## Verification - \`pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts\` → **34/34 passing** locally - Diff vs master is exactly 3 files: \`authz.ts\` (+6), \`plugins.ts\` (+5/-3), \`plugin-routes-authz.test.ts\` (+118). No other surfaces touched. ## Risks Low risk. - Authorization is being *widened* on two specific routes (board → board or agent), not narrowed elsewhere. Every other plugin admin route still uses \`assertBoard\` / \`assertInstanceAdmin\` / \`assertBoardOrgAccess\`. - Agent JWTs already encode \`companyId\` and \`agentId\`; the existing \`validateToolRunContextScope\` queue still enforces that an agent cannot execute a tool against a different company or impersonate another agent. Regression coverage for both is included. - No schema, migration, or wire-protocol changes. ## Model Used - Claude (Anthropic), \`claude-opus-4-7\` via Claude Code, extended thinking enabled, 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 - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots — N/A, server-only change - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (file-level doc comment on \`plugins.ts\`) - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge ## Provenance / credit This PR supersedes two community PRs that addressed the same agent-JWT plugin-tools authz gap: - **#3272 by @nullEFFORT** — original \`assertBoardOrAgent\` helper and the two route changes. \`fix: allow agent JWTs to access plugin tool endpoints\` (commit \`6991380\`) is cherry-picked here with author attribution preserved. - **#5549 by @aperim-agent** — regression test suite. Adapted to #3272's symbol names (\`assertBoardOrAgent\`, three-row \`validateToolRunContextScope\` queue) and included here. Both originals went stale against master and could not be force-pushed to the contributor forks from our OAuth-app-scoped tooling (workflow files in our \`master\` introduce a \`workflow\` scope requirement on pushes to those forks). This PR ships the same fix from our own branch so we can land it without that blocker. --------- Co-authored-by: Chad <chad@nulleffort.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
93206f73fa |
fix: Stop archived companies from waking agents (#7478)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - Each agent has a heartbeat scheduler that wakes it on timers and on
events; every wake spawns an adapter (Claude / Codex / …) run that bills
the operator's subscription
> - When an operator archives a company, the agents inside it remain in
invokable states — the heartbeat scheduler never consults company status
— so timers keep firing and event-driven wakes (comments, mentions,
blockers-resolved, etc.) keep cascading
> - On real deployments this silently drains the operator's
subscription: idle archived companies wake their CEOs hourly, plus any
cross-company event cascade
> - This pull request enforces "archived ⇒ never spawns a run" as a
structural invariant by guarding the wake path AND cascading agent state
on archive/reactivate
> - The benefit is that archived companies stop billing the operator,
and the UI/queue stays consistent with the invariant
## What Changed
- `server/src/services/heartbeat.ts`:
- `enqueueWakeup()` loads the company and short-circuits when status is
not `active`. Background sources (timer, automation, events) write a
`company.inactive` skipped wake and return `null`; explicit user invokes
throw a `conflict` so the UI surfaces the real reason.
- `tickTimers()` joins agents to active companies so the scheduler does
not iterate archived-company agents at all (no skip-row noise).
- `server/src/services/companies.ts`:
- `archive(id, actor?)` pauses runnable agents with `pauseReason =
"company_archived"` inside the transaction (preserving
`pending_approval`, `terminated`, and agents paused for unrelated
reasons), then cancels `queued`/`running` heartbeat runs after the
transaction commits.
- `update(id, data, actor?)` reverses the cascade only for agents whose
`pauseReason === "company_archived"` on the `archived → active`
transition; manually-paused agents stay paused.
- Both methods emit activity-log entries (`company.archived` with
`agentsPaused` + `runsCancelled`, `company.reactivated` with
`agentsRestored`) so the audit trail fires regardless of caller.
- `packages/shared/src/constants.ts` + `server/src/services/budgets.ts`:
add `company_archived` to the legal `PauseReason` union so the
restorable marker is a first-class value.
-
`packages/db/src/migrations/0094_backfill_archived_company_agent_pauses.sql`:
backfill so existing archived-company agents become `paused /
company_archived` (excludes `pending_approval`).
- `ui/src/lib/activity-format.ts`: add the `company.reactivated` label.
## Verification
- `npx vitest run src/__tests__/companies-service.test.ts` — archive
cascade, reactivate cascade, and activity-log entries (with counts) all
pass.
- `npx vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-archived-company-guard.test.ts` — timer +
on-demand + event-wake paths all blocked for archived companies;
`company.inactive` skipped-wake row written; user-initiated wakes throw
`conflict`.
- `pnpm typecheck` — clean.
- Manual repro from the bug description: archive a company, wait an
interval / post a comment on one of its issues, observe zero new
heartbeat runs.
## Risks
- Migration `0094` is a single bulk UPDATE on `agents` joined to
archived `companies`. On large deployments it briefly holds row locks on
archived-company agent rows; should be quick because the predicate is
narrow (`status NOT IN (paused, terminated, pending_approval)` and
`companies.status = 'archived'`).
- New `pauseReason` value (`company_archived`) is opaque to older
clients that only know the previous union. Acceptable because the union
is read as plain text and the contract is sync'd in the same change.
- Behavior change for users: invoking an agent in an archived company
now fails with a conflict instead of silently spawning a run. Intended.
## Model Used
- Claude (Anthropic) — model `claude-opus-4-7` ("Opus 4.7"), Claude Code
CLI, with tool use (Read/Edit/Bash/Grep). No extended thinking mode.
## 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, no UI changes beyond an activity-log label string
- [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
## Related Work
Fixes #1348 (`[Bug] Archived companies still running heartbeats and
consuming tokens`).
Prior attempts and parallel work in this area:
- #1365 and #1429 by @hungdqdesign (March 2026) — both closed without
merging. Same three-layer shape (`tickTimers` / `enqueueWakeup` /
`resumeQueuedRuns` + archive-route cancellation) targeting #1348. Credit
for first publicly proposing the wake-path-guard approach.
- #5865 by @stubbi (May 2026, open) — adds the same `companies.status !=
'archived'` joins to `tickTimers`, `enqueueWakeup`, `resumeQueuedRuns`,
**and** routines `tickScheduledTriggers`, bundled with plugin-table
tenant isolation (`plugin_entities` / `plugin_job_runs` / `plugin_logs`
/ `plugin_webhook_deliveries` get a `companyId` FK with `ON DELETE
CASCADE`). This PR is narrower — it does not touch routines or plugin
tables — but adds the **archive cascade** (pause agents with
`pauseReason = "company_archived"`), the **reactivate reverse**
(un-pause only that subset), the **`company_archived` pause-reason
marker**, and a **backfill migration** for pre-existing archived
companies, which #5865 does not include. Happy to coordinate sequencing
or rebase if #5865 lands first.
|
||
|
Aron PrinsandDevin Foley
|
70b1a9109d |
Improve CLI API parity coverage (#6626)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is a control plane for AI-agent companies, with the CLI acting as a scriptable operator and agent interface to that control plane. > - The REST API surface has grown across companies, agents, issues, routines, plugins, auth, workspaces, secrets, and operational inspection commands. > - The CLI had drifted from that API surface: some commands were missing, some command shapes differed from docs/reference material, and several edge cases only failed during end-to-end local-source testing. > - The local development runbook requires these tests to be disposable and isolated from a real `~/.paperclip`, `~/.codex`, or `~/.claude` installation. > - This pull request adds broad CLI/API parity coverage, fixes the actionable bugs found during that pass, and records the reproducible test log under `doc/logs`. > - The benefit is a more complete, scriptable CLI surface with regression coverage for the command families exercised by the parity run. ## What Changed - Added or expanded CLI command coverage for access/auth, companies, agents, projects, goals, issues and subresources, routines, plugins, workspaces, activity/run/cost/dashboard inspection, assets, skills, secrets, tokens, prompt/wake flows, and local setup helpers. - Fixed CLI/API parity bugs found during the run, including context profile patching, issue interaction optional payloads, malformed tree-hold errors, environment duplicate handling, configure invalid-section exit codes, worktree pnpm invocation, token agent ID resolution, plugin tool worker lookup, and routine webhook secret cleanup. - Added missing CLI wrappers and route coverage for health/access, invite resolution URL forwarding, join status normalization, secret lifecycle commands, LLM docs routes, available-skill isolation, positive board-claim coverage, and interactive `connect` prompt-flow tests. - Added a schema-backed `/api/openapi.json` route sufficient for CLI parity and `paperclipai openapi --json` smoke coverage. - Added `doc/logs/2026-05-24-cli-api-parity-e2e-log.md` with the detailed living test/bug log and renamed the log directory from `doc/bugs` to `doc/logs`. - Added `doc/plans/2026-05-23-cli-api-parity.md` and the OpenAPI parity reference used during the pass. OpenAPI note: this PR intentionally does not try to subsume `feature/openapi-spec`. The OpenAPI implementation here is schema-backed and better than the earlier route-inventory stub, but `feature/openapi-spec` is the fuller/better OpenAPI branch because it includes exact mounted-route coverage tests and additional current route coverage. That branch should stay as its own PR and can supersede this OpenAPI route implementation. ## Verification Targeted automated checks run: - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/board-claim.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run cli/src/__tests__/connect.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run cli/src/__tests__/agent-lifecycle.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/plugin-database.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts` - `pnpm --dir cli typecheck` - `pnpm --dir server typecheck` Manual/local E2E verification: - Ran the full disposable local-source CLI/API parity pass with isolated `PAPERCLIP_HOME`, `PAPERCLIP_CONFIG`, `PAPERCLIP_CONTEXT`, `PAPERCLIP_AUTH_STORE`, `CODEX_HOME`, and `CLAUDE_HOME` under `tmp/cli-api-parity`. - Verified `DATABASE_URL` and `DATABASE_MIGRATION_URL` stayed unset for the scratch server. - Verified live health and schema-backed OpenAPI responses on non-default port `3197`. - Revoked created board/agent tokens and cleaned up temporary plugins, secrets, non-default environments, and project workspaces. - See `doc/logs/2026-05-24-cli-api-parity-e2e-log.md` for the full command-by-command reproduction log. Not run: - Full `pnpm test`, `pnpm test:run`, or `pnpm build` were not run after the entire branch because the branch is broad and the parity pass used focused test/typecheck verification plus live isolated CLI reruns. ## Risks - This is a broad PR and touches many CLI command modules, so review surface is high. The changes are grouped around one theme, but a split may be easier if maintainers prefer narrower PRs. - The OpenAPI route in this PR is not the final/best OpenAPI implementation. `feature/openapi-spec` has stronger exact-route coverage and should remain the source for the dedicated OpenAPI PR. - The living log is intentionally detailed and large. It is useful for reproducibility but adds documentation weight. - No UI changes are intended; screenshots are not applicable. > 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 in Codex desktop. Exact served model/context-window identifier was not exposed in the local app. Work used shell/Git/GitHub CLI tooling, local source inspection, targeted test execution, and live isolated Paperclip CLI/API smoke testing. ## 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: Devin Foley <devin@devinfoley.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8af359b656 |
Detect misclassified video attachments
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
04a19cbc6e | Address artifact PR review feedback |
