mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-04 11:01:16 +01:00
4e97daafa06a54f02027335437c4f48e50b84236
15
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
e8b78cce5b |
Isolate browser fixtures and reserve HTTPS test ports (#18128)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start --> https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/234/changes/paperclip/234 <!-- entire-trail-link-end --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and their tasks. > - CI verifies runtime setup and task execution in browsers. > - Shared fixtures and port collisions can fail unrelated changes. > - Copying configuration during navigation can observe incomplete state. > - This pull request isolates fixtures and waits for completed reloads. > - These changes make the existing checks more reliable. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Extracted from #18050 so test stability can be reviewed on its own. Searches for signoff fixture and HTTPS backfill port fixes found no separate duplicate of these three edits. **What happened?** The signoff suite shares company and agent state across scenarios. The HTTPS backfill fixture probes only one listener and can select ephemeral client ports. The YAML reload test reads before navigation and reload readiness are complete. **Expected behavior** Each scenario has its own state. Both app and HMR ports are available. The YAML test reads after the canonical route and reload action are ready. **Steps to reproduce** Run the signoff scenarios in sequence, run the HTTPS backfill test with other local sockets, or run the YAML lost-response reload case during navigation. ## What Changed - Create and clean up signoff company and agent fixtures for each scenario. - Probe both app and HMR ports below the ephemeral client range. - Wait for the canonical agent route and enabled reload action before checking the saved document. ## Verification - These exact fixture changes passed the selected HTTPS test and all 12 YAML/signoff browser cases in the combined change. Those results apply to that earlier source. - Fresh local checks and CI for this isolated branch are pending. No full pass is claimed for this new head yet. - No production source or dependency change is included. ## Risks Test isolation creates more fixture companies. Each case cleans its fixtures. Product behavior and assertions stay the same. No user documentation change is needed. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools and code execution. The exact serving snapshot is not exposed. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] 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
|
7d75ae0569 |
fix(server): recover Teams attempts from saved claim deadlines (#17592)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Teams file delivery saves a claim before each provider operation. > - A crashed operation can leave that claim unfinished. > - Periodic maintenance scans for abandoned claims even when none exist. > - This PR wakes recovery from committed changes and the saved claim deadline. > - Empty work becomes quiet while unknown effects remain safe to review. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Teams abandoned file-transfer recovery. This is slice 27, stacked on consent expiry #17590. **Current behavior** The remaining Teams maintenance callback scans every 30 seconds for expired transport claims. It runs from shared publication maintenance. **Proposed behavior** The Teams owner reconstructs existing claim deadlines at startup and reloads a transfer after its committed update. At expiry it clears the claim and preserves the existing unknown-outcome or conflict state. Normal receipt settlement removes the deadline. **Reason and benefit** Remove the last periodic Teams maintenance scan without resending a possibly delivered card or file. **Breaking changes** No schema or public API change. Explicit diagnostic recovery methods remain compatible. Consent expiry stays with its separate parent worker. ## What Changed - Add a Teams-owned worker for consent_sending, uploading, file_info_sending and conflict rows with a saved attempt expiry. - Notify from the existing versioned update before writes. Preserve transaction ownership and shared uncertain-write reconciliation. - Expose a narrow per-transfer recovery method that uses the existing lock order, integrity checks and atomic projection. - Remove the periodic Teams maintenance callback and its publication-maintenance invocation. - Add real claim, receipt, conflict, backlog, restart, precision, failure, drain and shutdown tests. Wire the owner through existing app admission gates. - Retain the existing signoff cancelled-run selection test and GitHub inline retry-window race assertion. - Document supported writers, remaining sleep limits and the failure ledger in `doc/idle-teams-attempt-recovery.md` and its linked audit. ## Verification Published head: `24c54399909105984e2a10f5869064984f69c472`, targeting master after consent #17590 merged at `4a89456bb3f9aef87cfe0e922e8b9d1a777a6c7e`. A normal ancestry merge reconciles the landed squash with the previously verified child. The complete 13-path binary patch is identical before and after reconciliation, and all 30 unrelated master paths are preserved. This adds no new worker behavior; the 239-case local evidence below belongs to the verified unchanged patch. All 58 current-head checks are now clean, including the complete required CI run. Greptile is 5/5 at this exact head. The current Ponytail turn is paused without a verdict, which is an explicitly authorized nonblocker; no failing review is waived. The complete 13-path slice preserves the reviewed attempt implementation and inherits the parent's report migration 0397, bounded consent worker and retention CI test repair. No new schema, queue table, shared scheduler contract, workflow or lockfile change is added by this duty. - **239 distinct selected cases pass:** 221 across five complete transfer/publication/consent/runtime/app-wiring suites, 16 selected real Board/Teams-authority/GitHub-retry integration cases, and two delegated Slack policy cases. Other chat integration cases (1,579) and connection-management cases (81) were skipped, not passed. Each database owner uses a new isolated PostgreSQL database. - Real Board publication saves an active attempt deadline; its confirmed receipt retires recovery, and SQL stays quiet afterward. The inherited consent producer and authority cases still pass. Lifecycle coverage exercises claim stages, unknown-outcome quarantine without repeating provider I/O, conflicts, rollback, restart, precision, backlog/fairness, failure recovery, drain and shutdown. The changed GitHub metadata/retry race passes without duplicate assessments. - The old server10 CI failure, run `40557802358` job `122390238707`, was a delegated Slack invitation rate-window assertion (2,122 passed/one failed/15 skipped in that shard). The verified parent already contains its Date-only fixture fix. Both linked and invitation cases now pass their full caller/target/shared-policy scenarios on a fresh server fixture; no duplicate policy change or new owned file was added. That old failure is preserved rather than called a pass. - Server production typecheck, build and module-boundary checks pass. Test files were executed; production typechecking does not statically check them. The existing test-only signoff cancelled-run selection fix is retained but was not executed locally in this acceptance; fresh remote E2E gates remain required. - [Current-parent acceptance and preserved failure ledger](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/24c54399909105984e2a10f5869064984f69c472/doc/plans/2026-10-25-teams-attempt-recovery-sleep-audit.md#current-consent-parent-preparation-and-acceptance-october-28) records current scope, commands, counts and limits. Earlier 235-case and combined-stack counts belong to their stated revisions and are not added to 239. The [stack ledger](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/24c54399909105984e2a10f5869064984f69c472/doc/plans/2026-10-24-recurring-server-sleep-stack.md) retains inherited failure history. No complete local repository suite, live Teams/Slack tenant, external wake, physical suspension or savings claim is made. - **Exact-head Greptile 5/5 and all 58 checks are clean.** Actual failing Ponytail findings must be repaired; a missing/stopped/paused turn without a verdict is an authorized nonblocker. An active no-verdict turn waits at most 30 minutes from its original request/start (25-minute monitor cutoff). Older reviews and parent checks are not treated as current passes. ## Risks - Recovery must not infer that an expired claim means a provider effect did not happen. It retains unknown outcomes and does not resend. - Late receipts must still match current claim identity. Current-state rechecks and existing protocol tests preserve this fence. - Supported deployment uses one active writer process through its owning DB client. Independent SQL and additional processes need a separate wake contract. - Cloud external alarm coverage and sleep eligibility are unchanged. Other chat duties still run periodically until their own migrations. - Voice-report parent review repairs are propagated: explicit single-active-writer scope and an indexed report window. Thirty report-worker/startup tests pass on the combined child. Fresh remote checks, older stack findings and final master reconciliation remain required. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository inspection, tool use and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either linked existing issues or described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
adb69e8f09 |
feat: default new Codex agents to Paperclip Runner on Linux and macOS (#15683)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source control plane for agent companies. > - People choose a harness when creating an agent. > - The server should resolve that harness to a qualified runner. > - Codex is the first harness in the staged default rollout. > - Saved agents must retain their execution choices. > - New Codex agents therefore use Paperclip Runner on qualified macOS/Linux targets, with an explicit Legacy override. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16028, #15555, #15673, #15422, #15631, #15926, #15932, #16149. The runtime/install prerequisite and release repair are merged. This slice owns Codex creation, setup, configuration and preservation. Other harness defaults remain unchanged. It adds no database migration; incoming master migrations, required maps and regression coverage are retained. ## What Changed - Resolve `runner: auto | paperclip | legacy` at the common creation boundary across onboarding, API/CLI, hires, built-ins, plugins and imports. Freeze pending hires and export resolved execution choices. - Preserve existing runners on upgrades, unrelated edits and import updates, including compatible accounts, workspace settings, Codex effort and intentional clears. - Use the underlying harness picker and branding; put the runner override in Advanced. Use the shared dropdown and update production-component stories and creation contracts. - Support qualified Apple Silicon, Intel Mac, Linux x64 and Linux ARM64. Linux requires GNU libc 2.39+. Disabled, external, unsupported and unqualified combinations retain their applicable Legacy execution. - Test the selected runtime/account/model/environment. Ordinary Connect probes eligible immutable managed targets and refreshes scoped discovery. Creation/discovery do not provision. Auth, dependency, incompatible-setting and cleanup failures remain actionable without changing runners. - Keep setup probes read-only, preserve local/SSH isolation and resolve packaged assets before staging credentials. Bound cleanup reads by the remaining absolute deadline; physically close every owned ingress socket before endpoint release. Unconfirmed cleanup retains recovery state. - Preserve validated completed-onboarding callbacks through startup recovery. First file-producing work belongs to the child task and uses the existing dependency/block handoff and task-scoped registration. - Reuse existing E2E fixtures, artifact checks, reporting and controls. Keep Docker/Cargo/native compilation remote. Paperclip tarballs contain no Codex payloads; official optional npm platform dependencies remain. ## Verification Current tested head: `1c03a8815672d82c264a9b08d4ea1984e8fae107`. **Merge-ready: required CI, fresh review, package qualification, Mac core acceptance and Test task/follow-up acceptance pass.** The existing attachment and native-continuity oracles independently verify both Test downloads, run attribution and unchanged native/provider/workspace identities. The maintainer authorized a code-owner-review exception for this PR only. The first Test setup failure and normal Board completion-review friction are retained below. Actual post-merge packages and private Cloud distribution remain separate qualification gates. - [Current CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38564241625): all 48 ordinary jobs and required verify/E2E pass. Attempt 1 retained six simultaneous host-shutdown cancellations. One failed-only retry passes those six lanes and two aggregates, preserving 40 successes. Actual integration checkout `53104c1` combines this head with master `c80`; it is not relabeled as the branch tree. Fresh exact-head Greptile 5/5, 30 resolved threads, no actionable findings. - [Exact-source package qualification](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38565287239): nine applicable jobs pass, nine conditional jobs skip. Four remote native producers; Linux x64 clean install; Intel Mac, Apple Silicon and Linux ARM64 native startup/physical cleanup controls. All 18 tarballs/four daemon source/hash/manifest bindings and 343 migrations through 0344 verify. No Codex payload is packed. These hosted tarballs are not a published npm canary. - Normal Apple Silicon installation and credential-free native startup/cleanup pass using the packaged daemon, with no source build or provider turn. Fresh installed DB initialization passes. Upgrade 651a→1c03 preserves all three complete execution configs, accounts, ten recorded run profiles, paused budgets, active incidents, cost summaries and two historical unpriced events. Historical recovery state is retained. - Cleanup regressions: four delayed-read baseline failures become 15 passing deadline/authority controls. No-acknowledgement and prior-error socket ownership regressions become 12 passing controls. Direct runtime/server types, maps: 35 areas / 176 IDs, diff checks and independent reviews pass. Permission/auth/reconnect policy and the 10-second setup budget remain intact. - Existing source coverage includes creation/selection/imports, pending approvals, recovery, account/lifecycle handling, mounted forms, dropdowns and E2E support. Full typechecks/tests/build/token and applicable Storybook checks pass in the recorded current CI; no duplicate suite or weakened grader. - Literal 9546 live Mac proof: ordinary Auto Codex onboarding, useful document, real completed-child callback/reply, seven successful native runs, manual follow-up and independently downloaded1,101-byte child file. Existing Legacy title edit/reload preserves execution; two real Legacy runs produce independently checked15/34-byte files. These remain historical source records. - Current literal 1c03 Mac core acceptance passes independent checks: ordinary Auto native Codex onboarding without runner override; only timeout 180 seconds/concurrency 1 saved; six successful native runs and six serialized turns (maximum overlap 1); both same-task continuity checks and five mechanical callback checks; actual rendered parent reply and exact child downloads. The useful handoff advances from revision 1 to 2. Both files are 48 bytes, SHA-256 `8b742bd4e8123a7c078f0a8d9f3449fbfa8a320d7d90be641a2818db3c53d92c` and `f42db9774fa06e804ab7d596fc8b922a2b638921c418b87d0111151d290a6afe`; exactly one byte changes and old history remains. The agent is paused with zero active runs/errors. Both artifact work products have `isPrimary=false`, and descriptive titles fail a stricter title-helper assumption; these retained results are scoped editorial follow-up, not new merge gates. Six source-bound screenshots are uploaded and verified in the private primary QA report. - [Literal 9546 managed proof](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-38485488621-1/index.html): original 19 assertions and completed judge pass, four native turns, child-bound240-byte file and session/workspace continuity. Checkout reports a verified generated target-lock mutation; full final porcelain was not retained. Signed execution-image identity remains separate from Core source. - Actual 651a Test deployment succeeds on one owned/pinned target. One ordinary Auto API-key Connect then fails native cleanup before hire. Controller turn/drain/suspend completion and service-recorded environment cleanup are observed; they do not certify physical deletion or native authority retirement. Failure/recovery/unknown holds are retained. No Legacy switch or unchanged paid retry. The two source repairs above require actual treatment. - [Current immutable Core preview](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38570365725) and matching DB/shared artifacts pass. One owned, pinned Test target serves exact `1c03`; identical migration history correctly skips the migrator. Ordinary Auto Codex Connect succeeds and hires native; saved native selection and QA bounds survive reload. The initial child preparation attempt fails before provider work, with actual stdout identifying `renewal_deadline`; its trigger remains unknown and the failure is retained. Normal Board **Try again** and **Resume** recover the child to Done, producing a browser-verified 44-byte file, SHA-256 `0a8458b1efcc2d7a0d815689458c4caab039a46c7c7a3e5805de6bc8b1a96ecc`. The actual parent callback reports the completed child document/file. The existing validator requires a parent-owned attachment, so recovery enters normal Review; after byte checking, normal **Approve completion** reaches parent Done. No forced status or duplicate parent file is used. The validator is unchanged from integrated and current master. Autonomous initial callback-to-Done is not proven. The same-child follow-up completes document revision 2 and publishes a second independently downloaded 44-byte file, SHA-256 `22022257300fae762784632d08d3bbe0bab61e2ce81f91864a14dcd7aa464591`; only the revision digit changes. The unchanged existing native-continuity and attachment oracles pass. All ten recorded runs are terminal: nine native successes and the retained pre-provider setup failure. The QA agent is paused with zero active runs. The pre-existing parent evidence scope mismatch is a separate follow-up, with ordinary completion review exercised rather than a forced status or relaxed validation. This unsigned Core preview remains distinct from post-merge private Cloud composition. ## Risks - Saved agents are not migrated. Explicit runner changes use normal configuration/session rules; historical runs retain their recorded execution. - Native readiness depends on verified assets and server-owned target qualification. A Legacy probe, HTTP200 or successful account save cannot prove native readiness. - Recovery exceptions remain restricted to validated completed-onboarding reports; process-loss, ownership and terminal-state safeguards remain active. Unexecuted live journeys stay open. - Linux ARM paid tasks, Windows, Alpine and 32-bit ARM remain deferred. Cold Cargo cache misses are recorded; no warm-cache speedup is claimed. - Historical invoices/physical cleanup remain unconfirmed and held. After merge, exact published npm canary, signed standard image/migrator, private composition and serving/live acceptance still require qualification. Production deployment/default promotion is not authorized. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, tools, code execution and parallel agents. Exact serving snapshot and context-window size are not exposed. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used with available 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 linked public issues or PRs above - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket id - [x] I have run the stated focused tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation - [x] I have considered and documented risks - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green on the current candidate - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open findings on the current candidate - [x] I will address all reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
473c80d13f |
Automatically import and update project repository skills (#16066)
Automatically import skills from new GitHub project repositories and update enabled sources in the background. Preserve project-derived access, saved selections, immutable execution versions and explicit pins; add legacy adoption, refresh and connection repair in Sources. Include durable scheduling and bounded work credits, production Storybook journeys, real GitHub-to-routine acceptance receipts and final-head CI/security/Greptile qualification. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
88b7bbb5e2 |
Stabilize task lifecycle browser fixtures (#15878)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and their tasks. > - Browser and runner tests check task recovery and user actions. > - Some fixtures act before a prior request or run has settled. > - Those races can report a product failure before the intended assertion runs. > - This PR binds each check to the exact request, run, or geometry snapshot it needs. > - The tests retain their existing budgets and negative assertions. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #15813, #15804. The draft stack is master → [fixture prerequisite #15878](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15878) → [runtime prerequisite #15880](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15880) → [Boat core #15813](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15813) → [UI #15804](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15804). GitHub confirms 5, 63, 97, and 75 changed files respectively, each below the 100-file limit. Existing commits and PR URLs remain intact. [Historical evidence](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/tree/5909bfac9fa41405beb3fe8a65253dc28ba52835/doc/plans/assets/2026-10-10-boat) remains pinned to its original commit; current proof files stay with the UI PR. This is the test-only prerequisite extracted from the experimental Boat work. It contains five existing test-file changes. It does not add the Boat adapter or change task admission. ## What Changed - Wait for the exact signoff fixture run and each replacement run to succeed before applying the next stage decision. - Wait for the inbox Retry response for the exact failed run before navigating away. - Compare task planning time with the first run that actually started, instead of assuming the first list item started. - Read the touch target, container, and scroll position in one browser evaluation. Keep strict containment and native gesture checks. - Bind the native recovery fixture to its disposable fake Codex executable so installed provider binaries cannot override it. ## Verification Draft branch: `codex/boat-fixture-prerequisite`, commit `e318850909c0777565b43644a4d8114c6006da60`. Base: master `e733bddc45e00efb1819fffa8677f7b0d07802c5`. Five changed files. The isolated fixture-plus-runtime stack passed 24 browser cases. Six legacy recovery cases could not reach their assertions because the fixture requires embedded PostgreSQL metadata. A normal embedded PostgreSQL attempt then failed during cluster setup on this host. These are not six passing cases. No test seam, timeout increase, or product-database fixture was used. The fixture-only commit has not yet had a separate complete local browser run. All six legacy cases subsequently passed on this exact fixture commit in PR CI browser shard 8 (20/20 total, job114470999277). The original local setup failures remain recorded. The full-stack typecheck/build results belong to the assembled fixture-plus-runtime tree and are not claimed as independent qualification of this smaller commit. Review the exact run/request filters and the unchanged rejection assertions. Run the four changed Playwright specs and the native-session-resume suite through the repository's normal fixture setup. At 13:03:24 UTC, this exact head had 53 successful checks and two skips, with no pending checks or failures. All eight browser shards passed. Greptile is 5/5 on the exact head with no unresolved threads. [Exact-head legacy browser proof](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/9eacca2c5321bb63f061eef4bb775b6951d5846d/doc/plans/assets/2026-10-10-boat/evidence/prerequisite-legacy-browser-ci-proof.json). Feature acceptance stays in the downstream report. Deployment29 verified `05f3725af838b5a074707df1d6ed1e193bdfe49e` at 12:23:23.944 UTC. Native Claude cold execution passed at 12:39:57.782 after 14m56s of first-use preparation. Warm continuation passed at 12:42:09.943 with the same owner, boot and session identities. Normal retirement and archive followed. The ordinary saved post-idle turn then failed: its primary attempt reported the closed `LINK_COUNT` module fence at `turn_ownership_verified` (3,711ms), and same-run recovery settled failed at 12:52:09 with identity/authority errors. Natural archive completed at 12:52:21. Numeric link counts and their direction are not yet proven. A narrower failure-only diagnostic and a bounded read-only probe are under review; neither establishes a fix for this live failure. Prior staging27/28 failures remain preserved. Local complete lifecycle passes and staging Codex/computer/HMR passes remain separate source-bound evidence. No session, quarantine, provider stop or migration history was reset. These live observations do not qualify this prerequisite by themselves. ## Risks - Waiting for the wrong run could hide a task race. The fixtures match task, agent, and replacement-run identity before proceeding. - A geometry helper could weaken touch coverage. This change preserves containment and gesture assertions and only makes their inputs one snapshot. - The six legacy browser cases passed in exact-head CI; their local PostgreSQL setup limitation remains recorded. No live Boat acceptance result follows from this test-only change. Documentation impact: no product command or behavior changes. This description records fixture scope and validation limits. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6 family) assisted with code, test execution, and review. The host does not expose the exact primary model ID or context window. The work used tools for source inspection and local execution. Prior architecture work used `gpt-6-astra`; an independent design review used `gpt-6.1-sol`. ## 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 issue id or instance-derived details - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
|
ceabc3bc88 |
fix(e2e): wait on the server's own deferral signal in the signoff wakeup helper (#15345)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip coordinates work for AI agents through server-managed tasks and heartbeats > - Signoff policy tests exercise stage transitions that wake the next participant > - A stage transition can defer a wake while the previous run still holds the issue execution lock > - The test helper used a fixed wait and could fail before the server released that lock > - This pull request waits on the server deferral signal and verifies the returned run identity > - The benefit is a stable test with clear failure details and no repeated wake request ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** The signoff policy end-to-end spec failed intermittently with `No issue-bound heartbeat run became available for agent <id>`. The server had deferred the wake while another run held the issue execution lock. **Expected behavior** The test helper waits for the named blocking run to finish, then reads and verifies the new run for the requested agent and issue. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run `npx playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts tests/e2e/signoff-policy.spec.ts`. 2. Exercise a signoff stage transition while the previous stage run still holds the issue execution lock. 3. Confirm that the helper waits on the server deferral signal and returns only a matching run. This change relates to [PR #11299](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/11299), which also touches the signoff policy end-to-end spec. ## What Changed - Call the wakeup endpoint that reports the server deferral reason. - Wait for the named blocking run instead of using a fixed delay. - Verify that each returned run belongs to the requested agent and issue. - Bound read and wait loops and report the last server signal and lock fields on failure. - Keep one wakeup request per helper call. ## Verification - `npx playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts tests/e2e/signoff-policy.spec.ts` passed locally. - All five signoff policy cases passed locally. - The spec keeps all 60 assertions. - The diff contains only `tests/e2e/signoff-policy.spec.ts`. - The full CI end-to-end shards must pass before merge. ## Risks - The helper now depends on the wakeup endpoint's deferral fields. - A server change to those fields can fail the test with a named diagnostic. - The change affects end-to-end test behavior only. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-5 Codex, exact runtime model `gpt-5-codex`, with tool use and code review assistance. The runtime does not expose a separate context-window value. ## 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: nickyleach <331803+nickyleach@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
f91a6e27c0 |
feat(issues): contain cross-issue agent side effects (#10837)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane that coordinates autonomous agent work. > - Agents need to collaborate on issues beyond their current assignment. > - Cross-issue comments and updates are useful, but an unbounded run can create cascading side effects. > - The control plane must preserve company-wide collaboration while containing each run's influence. > - Comment attribution must also show the responsible user and the acting agent in audits. > - This pull request adds run-bound cross-issue containment, attribution, and agent-class wake rules. > - The benefit is safer collaboration without restoring issue-assignee ownership restrictions. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Agent-authenticated issue comments, updates, reopen behavior, and assignee wake routing. **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting: server routes and services, shared contracts, database schema and migration, and implementation documentation. **Current behavior** An authenticated agent can collaborate across company issues, but one heartbeat run has no per-run side-effect boundary. Comment records also do not persist the responsible user separately from the acting agent. **Proposed behavior** Require a valid heartbeat run for agent cross-issue comments and updates. Audit each attempt and cap a run at 20 cross-issue effects. Keep the cap in log-only mode until it automatically changes to enforcement at 2026-08-11 00:00 UTC. Preserve same-issue writes. Use agent-class wakes for agent comments. Keep same-run completion comments from reopening completed work. Record the responsible user on agent-authored comments and activity. **Reason and benefit** Agents can collaborate on other issues without an assignment gate, while each run has an atomic and inspectable side-effect limit. Operators can identify both the acting agent and the responsible user. **Breaking changes** After 2026-08-11 00:00 UTC, the twenty-first cross-issue comment or update from one heartbeat run returns a containment error. Agent cross-issue writes without valid run context are rejected. The migration is additive and backfills existing agent-authored comment attribution where the source data is available. ## What Changed - Added an atomic per-run counter for cross-issue agent comments and updates. - Added audit events for allowed and rejected cross-issue effects. - Added the automatic log-only to enforcement flip at 2026-08-11 00:00 UTC. - Added responsible-user attribution to agent-authored comments, activity records, shared types, and validators. - Added an additive migration and migration coverage for existing comments. - Updated reopen, resume, and wake behavior so agent comments create agent-class wakes and same-run completion comments remain inert. - Updated the implementation specification and regression coverage. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/cross-issue-influence-limit.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-attribution-audit-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts packages/db/src/issue-comment-on-behalf-migration.test.ts` — 97 tests passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed, including migration safety checks. - `pnpm test:run` — server batch: 3,364 passed and 2 skipped; UI batch: 3,504 passed. One unrelated CLI doctor test warned because this agent runtime injects static AWS credentials. - `env -u AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID -u AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY pnpm exec vitest run cli/src/__tests__/secrets.test.ts` — 8 tests passed and confirmed the CLI failure was ambient-environment sensitive. - `pnpm build` — passed. ## Risks - The fixed enforcement timestamp changes production behavior automatically on 2026-08-11 00:00 UTC. Audit logs before that time provide rollout visibility. - The per-run counter serializes on the heartbeat-run row. This prevents concurrent attempts from racing past the cap but adds a small lock scope for cross-issue writes. - Existing comments can only be backfilled when their acting run or agent attribution is recoverable. > 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 in the Codex agent runtime. The runtime did not expose a context-window size. Reasoning, shell tools, code editing, and test 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 not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
91c79d28cb |
test(e2e): retry run-lock 409 in signoff-policy agentPatch (#10386)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane people use to manage AI-agent work across companies > - This repository's e2e suite verifies the execution and approval paths that keep the control plane reliable > - The signoff-policy flow uses a helper that runs a heartbeat and then PATCHes the issue with that run id > - That PATCH can race the heartbeat's run-lock ownership and intermittently receive a transient 409 > - When that happens, a single-positive transition fails the shard even though the underlying behavior is only a lock contention race > - This pull request makes the helper retry the 409 path by re-reading the current lock and re-PATCHing under the winning run id > - The benefit is a stable e2e shard without weakening the negative-path assertions that protect the contract ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists for this change. This PR addresses a flaky signoff-policy e2e transition where the helper can lose a run-lock race and receive a transient 409 while the issue is still assigned to the acting agent. ## What Changed - Added bounded retry/backoff handling in the signoff-policy `agentPatch` helper for transient run-lock 409 responses. - Re-read the issue's current lock before retrying so the helper can re-PATCH with the winning run id. - Kept the retry guarded so non-participant rejection and missing-comment 400s still surface unchanged. - Preserved the existing positive-path behavior without adding Playwright retries or weakening assertions. ## Verification - Reviewed the diff shape for a single-file change in `tests/e2e/signoff-policy.spec.ts`. - Verified the pushed commit matches the authorized submit SHA from the handoff. - Confirmed the branch contains only the expected commit and no unrelated history. - The handoff notes record deterministic harness evidence showing the pre-fix helper fails on the 409 race and the post-fix path passes. ## Risks - Low functional risk: the retry is narrowly scoped to the transient 409 lock-contention path. - If the lock semantics change server-side, the helper may need a follow-up adjustment. - The change only affects the e2e helper and does not alter production API behavior. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-5, tool-using coding agent) ## 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> |
||
|
|
b13eb5b2b5 |
Skill Studio: three-pane skill IDE with sandboxed test runs (#9241)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The Skills Manager gives operators a reusable skill layer, but iteration still required manual edits, ad hoc prompts, and indirect run inspection. > - Skill authors need a focused workflow for editing skill files, saving representative test inputs, and running those inputs through an agent without exposing harness tasks as normal company work. > - The backend therefore needs durable test inputs, reusable run templates, hidden harness issues, scoped run execution, retention metadata, and read-containment rules around hidden work. > - The frontend needs a three-pane Studio that keeps skill files, saved inputs/templates, and run output/history visible together while preserving the existing design system and token rules. > - This pull request ships that Skill Studio surface end to end: database migrations, shared contracts, server APIs/services, hidden harness execution behavior, UI routes/components, and focused tests. > - The benefit is faster and safer skill iteration, with inspectable outputs and fewer ways for internal harness work to leak into normal task lists, costs, or adjacent read APIs. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists for this feature. Feature request summary: - Problem: Skill authors need to edit and test company skills in one place instead of switching between the skill detail page, task creation, run output, and manual prompt history. - Proposed solution: Add a Skill Studio workbench with saved inputs, reusable templates, hidden sandboxed test runs, live run status, output inspection, run history, rerun/delete controls, and frontmatter-aware editing. - Expected users: Paperclip operators and agent-company maintainers who create, fork, import, and tune skills. - Related public PRs: Supersedes #9205, which was replaced so the public PR branch name follows contributor policy. - Duplicate search: searched public GitHub issues and PRs for "Skill Studio"; no other active public issue or PR directly covers this feature. ## What Changed - Added database migrations for Skill Studio test inputs, test runs, test run retention, and reusable run templates. - Added shared Skill Studio types, validators, route helpers, frontmatter utilities, and status handling. - Added server services and routes for saved inputs, test runs, templates, reruns, terminal-run deletion, hidden harness issue execution, and run-detail hydration. - Strengthened hidden-issue read containment across issue-adjacent routes and cost rollups used by skill test harness work. - Added the Skill Studio UI with skill file editing, frontmatter editing, saved inputs, templates, run creation/cancel/rerun/delete flows, output rendering, history, route support, and responsive pane behavior. - Added focused backend, shared, and UI tests for the new APIs, routing logic, editor/run behavior, hidden-issue containment, and migration safety. - Rebased onto current `master`, removed the generated lockfile diff from the PR, and verified no workflow files are changed. ## Verification - [x] `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db check:migrations` - [x] `pnpm check:token-gates` - [x] `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/company-skills-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-skills-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-skill-test-runs-service.test.ts ui/src/lib/skill-studio.test.ts ui/src/pages/SkillStudio.test.tsx` — 5 files, 132 tests passed - [x] Greptile review on the latest PR head - [x] GitHub PR checks on the latest PR head ## Risks - Medium risk because this is a broad feature touching database schema, server orchestration, issue visibility, and a large UI surface. - Hidden harness issue containment is security-sensitive; this PR includes regression coverage for adjacent read paths and cost rollups. - The new migrations are additive and use idempotent guards where applicable, but deployed databases that previously tested draft migration numbers should still be checked carefully. - The UI depends on a new resizable panels package in `ui/package.json`; the lockfile is intentionally left to repository automation. > 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 shell, git, and GitHub CLI tool use. Earlier feature commits include assistance from other Paperclip coding agents; this PR preparation, rebase, cleanup commit, and PR body were completed by OpenAI Codex in a Paperclip worktree. ## 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> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
|
ad961227f5 |
feat(secrets): add user-specific runtime secrets (#8825)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agent runs often need provider credentials, API tokens, and other environment-bound secrets. > - Company-level secrets work for shared credentials, but they do not model values that should differ by human operator. > - Without a user-scoped model, a run can dispatch without knowing whether the responsible human has supplied the needed value. > - Paperclip also needs run attribution to make those user-scoped runtime checks deterministic and auditable. > - This pull request adds user-specific secret definitions, per-user values, environment bindings, responsible-user attribution, and runtime resolution gates. > - The benefit is that teams can define the secret once, let each user provide their own value, and block runs before dispatch when required user secrets or active definitions are unavailable. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #224 Refs #6057 This PR implements user-specific secret support as a core secret-management capability rather than a one-off adapter setting. It is related to existing public work on company secrets UI and runtime secret refs, but is distinct because the value is owned by the responsible user and resolved at run dispatch time. Related PR search before opening found existing secrets work such as #1550, #8256, #8614, #8634, and #8647; none of those add the full user-secret definition/value/runtime gate covered here. ## What Changed - Added user-secret definitions and per-user "My secrets" values, keeping stored values out of access metadata. - Added `user_secret_ref` environment bindings and UI affordances to pick them alongside existing secret refs. - Added responsible-user runtime resolution so user-secret refs resolve against the human responsible for the run. - Added pre-dispatch missing-secret gates so runs fail before adapter dispatch when required user values are absent or definitions are inactive. - Added low-trust allowlist hardening for user-secret runtime access. - Added issue, routine, run, and agent API key responsible-user attribution and fail-closed dispatch behavior when attribution cannot be resolved. - Added denial-copy mapping so responsible-user authorization failures surface as actionable run outcomes instead of opaque setup failures. - Added OpenAPI documentation for the user-secret routes. - Rebases cleanly on current `master`; migrations were renumbered incrementally as `0128_user_specific_secrets`, `0129_agent_api_key_responsible_user`, and `0130_run_responsible_user_invariant` after upstream `0126`/`0127` migrations. - Removed previously committed local design screenshots so the PR contains code/docs/tests only. ## Verification - PASS: PR head `2527febd106bcf3ca264ca0da7fca491084192d6` is based on `paperclipai/paperclip:master`. - PASS: `git diff --check` - PASS: `git diff --name-only public/master...HEAD | rg '^(pnpm-lock\\.yaml|\\.github/workflows/|screenshots/)' || true` produced no files. - PASS: migration journal audit confirmed unique indexes through `130` with tail entries `0126_issue_comment_derived_attribution`, `0127_environment_custom_images_instance_scoped`, `0128_user_specific_secrets`, `0129_agent_api_key_responsible_user`, and `0130_run_responsible_user_invariant`. - PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/heartbeat-responsible-user-invariant.test.ts` - PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/heartbeat-active-run-output-watchdog.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-stale-queue-invalidation.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-finalize-branch.test.ts src/__tests__/issue-monitor-scheduler.test.ts` - PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-accepted-plan-workspace-refresh.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-plugin-environment.test.ts` - PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/low-trust-red-team-routes.test.ts` - PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` (55 tests) - PASS: `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/secrets-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` (89 tests after final Greptile cleanup fixes) - PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/heartbeat-issue-liveness-escalation.test.ts` (17 tests after the final rebase CI fix) - PASS: focused server Vitest batches covering heartbeat recovery, project env, plugin env, routines, low-trust, pipelines, monitors, watchdog, and stale queue paths. - PASS: GitHub checks are green on `2527febd106bcf3ca264ca0da7fca491084192d6`, including Typecheck + Release Registry, Build, General tests, serialized server suites, e2e, Canary Dry Run, verify, security checks, and Greptile Review. - PASS: Greptile Review completed successfully on `2527febd106bcf3ca264ca0da7fca491084192d6` with Confidence Score 5/5, and GraphQL review-thread audit returned zero unresolved non-outdated threads. ## Risks - Runtime behavior now depends on a run having a correct responsible user; missing or incorrect responsibility assignment can block runs before adapter dispatch. - `user_secret_ref` bindings intentionally expose metadata without values, but UI/API callers may need to handle the new binding kind explicitly. - External secret providers and IAM policies are not automatically provisioned by this PR; operators still need to configure provider-side access for non-local vaults. - The PR is broad across db/shared/server/UI/runtime paths, so release validation should include both API and UI secret workflows before merge. - The migration renumbering is intentionally incremental after upstream migrations; the branch migrations use guarded column/table/index/constraint creation so users who tested the older draft numbering should not hit duplicate DDL for the existing objects. > 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 (`gpt-5`), Codex local adapter with shell/tool use and code execution. Context window and internal reasoning mode are 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] 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> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
7a329fb8bb |
Harden API route authorization boundaries (#4122)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - The REST API is the control-plane boundary for companies, agents, plugins, adapters, costs, invites, and issue mutations. > - Several routes still relied on broad board or company access checks without consistently enforcing the narrower actor, company, and active-checkout boundaries those operations require. > - That can allow agents or non-admin users to mutate sensitive resources outside the intended governance path. > - This pull request hardens the route authorization layer and adds regression coverage for the audited API surfaces. > - The benefit is tighter multi-company isolation, safer plugin and adapter administration, and stronger enforcement of active issue ownership. ## What Changed - Added route-level authorization checks for budgets, plugin administration/scoped routes, adapter management, company import/export, direct agent creation, invite test resolution, and issue mutation/write surfaces. - Enforced active checkout ownership for agent-authenticated issue mutations, while preserving explicit management overrides for permitted managers. - Restricted sensitive adapter and plugin management operations to instance-admin or properly scoped actors. - Tightened company portability and invite probing routes so agents cannot cross company boundaries. - Updated access constants and the Company Access UI copy for the new active-checkout management grant. - Added focused regression tests covering cross-company denial, agent self-mutation denial, admin-only operations, and active checkout ownership. - Rebased the branch onto `public-gh/master` and fixed validation fallout from the rebase: heartbeat-context route ordering and a company import/export e2e fixture that now opts out of direct-hire approval before using direct agent creation. - Updated onboarding and signoff e2e setup to create seed agents through `/agent-hires` plus board approval, so they remain compatible with the approval-gated new-agent default. - Addressed Greptile feedback by removing a duplicate company export API alias, avoiding N+1 reporting-chain lookups in active-checkout override checks, allowing agent mutations on unassigned `in_progress` issues, and blocking NAT64 invite-probe targets. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-goal-context-routes.test.ts cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts server/src/__tests__/adapter-routes-authz.test.ts server/src/__tests__/agent-permissions-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-portability-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/costs-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/invite-test-resolution-route.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/agent-adapter-validation-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/invite-test-resolution-route.test.ts` - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm --filter server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter ui typecheck` - `pnpm build` - `pnpm test:e2e -- tests/e2e/onboarding.spec.ts tests/e2e/signoff-policy.spec.ts` - `pnpm test:e2e -- tests/e2e/signoff-policy.spec.ts` - `pnpm test:run` was also run. It failed under default full-suite parallelism with two order-dependent failures in `plugin-routes-authz.test.ts` and `routines-e2e.test.ts`; both files passed when rerun directly together with `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts server/src/__tests__/routines-e2e.test.ts`. ## Risks - Medium risk: this changes authorization behavior across multiple sensitive API surfaces, so callers that depended on broad board/company access may now receive `403` or `409` until they use the correct governance path. - Direct agent creation now respects the company-level board-approval requirement; integrations that need pending hires should use `/api/companies/:companyId/agent-hires`. - Active in-progress issue mutations now require checkout ownership or an explicit management override, which may reveal workflow assumptions in older automation. > 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-using workflow with local shell, Git, GitHub CLI, and repository tests. ## 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 - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
be82a912b2 | Fix signoff e2e for auto-checked out issues | ||
|
dotta
|
cb705c9856 | Fix signoff PR follow-up tests | ||
|
dottaandPaperclip
|
42b326bcc6 |
fix(e2e): harden signoff policy tests for authenticated deployments
Address QA review feedback on the signoff e2e suite (86b24a5e): - Use dedicated port 3199 with local_trusted mode to avoid reusing the dev server in authenticated mode (fixes 403 errors) - Add proper agent authentication via API keys + heartbeat run IDs - Fix non-participant test to actually verify access control rejection - Add afterAll cleanup (dispose contexts, revoke keys, delete agents) - Reviewers/approvers PATCH without checkout to preserve in_review state Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
dottaandPaperclip
|
97d4ce41b3 |
test(e2e): add signoff execution policy end-to-end tests
Covers the full signoff lifecycle: executor → review → approval → done, changes-requested bounce-back, comment-required validation, access control, and review-only policy completion. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |