Commit Graph
2273 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandPaperclip 51b56706fb fix(grok): verify file completion and recover failed sessions (#16305)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages work and authority for AI agents.
> - Grok Bot runs outside Paperclip and uses authenticated upload grants
for files.
> - Native completion requires a verified file publication receipt.
> - The upload saved the file but did not create that receipt. Real Grok
work could not finish.
> - A failed run also left an assignment that the Stop action could not
fence.
> - This pull request connects verified uploads to normal completion and
repairs that recovery action.
> - The result preserves file integrity and current work-session
authority.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #16219, #16274.

**What happened?**

A real Grok Bot saved a task document and CSV. Semantic completion
rejected the CSV because its upload had no verified publication receipt.
After the managed run failed, Stop rejected its remaining assignment as
a changed session. The driver also discarded the remote monitor's known
failure reason.

**Expected behavior**

An authenticated upload of the exact requested bytes can satisfy normal
completion. Stop can fence the remaining assignment of the selected
failed run. An old Stop action cannot stop newer work. Known remote
lease and reconnect errors remain visible without raw diagnostics or
credentials.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Connect an experimental Grok Bot agent and verify its routine.
2. Assign a task that requires a document and a file.
3. Upload the file through its accepted assignment and cite the
attachment in semantic completion.
4. Observe the missing publication receipt error on the previous
implementation.
5. For recovery, select Stop after that run fails but its assignment
remains active.

**Paperclip version or commit**

The live defects were observed after #16274. The current candidate
merges master `739f9e40a4` and is
`26c5b9601d1cb2b8f5bb7fcf730f019523763f5b`.

## What Changed

- Record a server-owned publication receipt in the verified upload
transaction. Bind it to the real native Grok run and exact stored file
metadata.
- Validate external publication against the actual upload and admitted
assignment. Keep existing native and person upload rules.
- Recover the committed receipt after a lost response. Reverify the same
bytes when an older upload lacks proof.
- Hold assignment authority through publication with
grant-before-assignment and task-before-run lock order. Disconnect does
not wait for remote file storage.
- Allow Stop to fence the exact lingering assignment of a terminal run.
Reject stale Stop calls for successor work.
- Preserve only known lease/reconnect failure codes from the remote
monitor. Do not expose raw stderr.
- Extend real Rust, overlapping document/upload and disconnect/upload,
file retry, completion and Stop regressions. Document setup, files and
recovery.

## Verification

- The real Rust Grok regression requests a file, checks an overlapping
native document save, concurrent retries and lost-response recovery,
rejects missing delivery evidence, then uses normal semantic completion
and finalization.
- Focused tests cover person MCP, native file handoff, completion, Stop
and both external driver providers.
- Local repository typecheck and production build pass on the current
candidate. The five focused protocol suites pass (264 tests); all 17
external Runner driver tests pass, with the driver unchanged since the
master merge.
- Token gates and Storybook build pass. Nine existing Grok fixture
journeys pass their browser interaction assertions; the static probe
separately records five fixture API routes returning 404. This is UI
fixture evidence only.
- Full repository coverage passed in CI. The duplicate local `pnpm
test:run` was interrupted after CI completed; its partial log is
retained and is not reported as a local full-suite pass. The earlier
aggregate invocation was interrupted for the second review fix.
- All CI gates pass on `26c5b9601d1cb2b8f5bb7fcf730f019523763f5b`: 55
successful checks and two skipped Storybook jobs (no UI diff). This
includes the complete sharded repository suites, native Runner, release
checks, build and security scans.
- Current-head Greptile is 5/5 with zero unresolved findings. The PR has
no merge conflicts.
- The prior live attempt is failed acceptance evidence. Real Grok
requalification, proactive work, controller restart and active-session
Stop remain release gates. This PR does not claim those passed.

## Risks

- Upload and completion now share a durable run receipt. Lock order and
current assignment authority must remain consistent with native
mutations.
- Publication fails closed if the file, run or grant changes. A retry
must keep the same upload identity and bytes.
- Person connections gain no agent authority. No database migration is
required.
- Known exit diagnostics do not prove global Grok termination. Grok
spending remains unreported.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools, code
execution and computer use. The exact deployment model ID and
context-window size are not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 12:54:05 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip ad0bd26bb7 perf(heartbeat): avoid Git inspection for stored workspace reads (#16306)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Heartbeat selects and restores a saved execution workspace before
dispatch.
> - These reads used the workspace detail reader, which also scans Git
and resolves delivery state.
> - Configuration reads do not use those live display fields. Each extra
process can delay other controller work.
> - This pull request adds a stored-record reader and uses it in
configuration, environment selection, and finalization.
> - It also derives ancestry from the existing ahead/behind result and
skips delivery HEAD reads for unfinished tasks.
> - The benefit is fewer Git processes while live execution and cleanup
guards remain in place.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Related: #16282, #16302, #13619. Those changes reduce background or
display scan demand. This change removes live display inspection from
execution configuration reads.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Heartbeat workspace configuration reads and workspace close-readiness
checks.

**Current behavior**

Reading saved workspace configuration also loads runtime health, Git
status, ancestry, and delivery state. Close readiness walks history
twice to determine ancestry.

**Proposed behavior**

Execution reads stored configuration through a company-checked method.
Live branch validation and destructive cleanup still inspect current Git
state. Close readiness uses its ahead/behind result to determine
ancestry.

**Reason and benefit**

A synthetic benchmark of the actual service returned identical stored
fields for 20 workspaces. Detail reads launched 60 Git commands and took
689 ms. Stored reads launched zero Git commands and took 8 ms. This was
a local macOS measurement, not an end-to-end cloud latency claim.

**Breaking changes**

None to public APIs or saved data. Workspace detail responses keep their
live fields.

## What Changed

- Add `getStoredById(companyId, id)` and use it in three heartbeat
reads.
- Preserve the access-denied error for a foreign-company workspace.
- Remove the extra `merge-base` process and the unused HEAD read for
unfinished tasks.
- Add recovery, company-boundary, ancestry, and cleanup regressions.
- Add a repeatable database/Git benchmark and document the read
boundary.

## Verification

- The new environment-selection regression failed before the fix with
`Live Git inspection is unavailable` and passes after it. All eight
environment-selection tests pass.
- On the final rebased commit, workspace service, environment selection,
and branch finalization: 89 tests passed. Branch-containment,
runtime-execution, and display-cache suites also passed during
development.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed.
- `pnpm build`: passed.
- `pnpm test:run`: started locally, then stopped after all full-suite CI
test shards passed on the final commit. The complete local run was not
finished; CI provides the full-suite result.
- Final commit `9a13ef0481b7bf6a60b2b7ac13f35f78a14e232c`: 55 successful
checks and 2 expected skips. Greptile: 5/5, no actionable findings.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsx
../scripts/benchmark-workspace-record-reads.ts`: identical stored
fields, 60 to zero Git commands, 689 ms to 8 ms for 20 reads.

## Risks

- Execution callers must use saved fields only. Detail readers and live
branch and cleanup guards remain separate.
- A failed ancestry comparison stays unknown. Automatic cleanup still
rejects unknown delivery state and rechecks Git before deletion.
- This patch has not been deployed. It does not prove the full slow-run
latency is resolved.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact model identifier and context window are
not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, repository inspection, code
editing, 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 not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 12:53:41 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 4460785534 fix(skills): preserve referenced files in large repository imports (#16308)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agents use skills imported from project repositories.
> - Large repositories fall back to isolated skill folders.
> - That fallback drops shared files and turns advisory links into
import failures.
> - This pull request retains bounded referenced files and keeps missing
references advisory.
> - Users can import valid skills such as test-audit without editing the
source repository.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16066. Refs #16256. Refs #16288. Related draft #15730 adds
optional reference selection to individual skill packages. This fix
applies automatic repository fallback and does not add that selection
UI.

**What happened?**

A project source showed 86 warnings. It rejected 23 skills solely
because references were absent from the isolated package. It also
treated web routes and inline Markdown examples as files. For
test-audit, repository scripts were resolved inside the skill folder.

**Expected behavior**

Retain referenced files that fit the package limits. Missing references
must not block an otherwise valid selected skill. Preserve content
validation and installed shared files.

**Steps to reproduce**

Import paperclipai/paperclip at commit
09a2f0b7b0 as a repository source. Select
test-audit. Inspect its references and saved files. Repeat with a skill
whose optional reference is missing.

## What Changed

- Add a bounded fallback that keeps skill folders and transitive
Markdown references with their original repository paths.
- Resolve existing repository-root resource paths. Ignore site-relative
web links and inline Markdown examples.
- Keep missing references advisory, including explicit imports and
automatic project imports.
- Share fallback with file previews. Reinspect cached dependency
failures at an unchanged upstream commit.
- Retain existing versions when fallback cannot preserve installed
shared files. Keep file limits, content audits, authorization and work
budgets.
- Update product contracts and Skills maps. No schema or public API
changes.

## Verification

- Red/green: three original regression cases failed before the fix and
passed afterward. Two review controls also reproduced omitted directory
siblings and duplicate blob reads before their fixes.
- Focused scanner, repository package, persistence, project
synchronization and GitHub access tests: 126 cases passed across local
and isolated Linux runs.
- Full recursive typecheck and `pnpm build` passed locally on
`555bd3fc90314dbf23ed0ffe7034429946c1a471`. The [full Paperclip CI
workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38596749890)
passed on that head, including all general, serialized, Runner and eight
browser test shards. The duplicate local `pnpm test:run` was stopped
after CI completed (exit 143); it is not claimed as a completed local
full-suite pass.
- Real GitHub scan at the pinned public commit: 77 skills, 454 retained
files, 9,117,635 bytes. test-audit has no missing references. The full
source reports 23 warnings, including remaining file validation and
genuine missing-reference notices.
- Local browser: scanned the public repository, selected test-audit and
create-issue-interaction-ui, and imported both. The second skill
retained an advisory missing-reference warning. Both remained installed
after reload. The saved package exposes `scripts/run-vitest-stable.mjs`
(25,813 bytes) and `scripts/general-server-shard.mjs` (2,813 bytes). No
GitHub responses were mocked. No model execution was needed for this
import fix.
- Map checks and Git whitespace checks passed. Greptile is 5/5 on the
current head with both review findings resolved. The external Superagent
security scan concluded neutral/inconclusive after its agent exceeded
the prompt deadline. A check-run retry request returned HTTP 404. All
Paperclip CI gates passed, but merge is held pending a conclusive
security scan; this is not an all-checks-green claim.

## Risks

- Dependency detection covers explicit Markdown links and resource
paths. It does not infer all script imports or runtime dependencies.
- Referenced content can exceed package limits. The existing bounds
still apply, and warnings disclose omissions.
- Content validation still rejects invalid entrypoints and omits
rejected support files. This change does not make every upstream skill
importable.
- No migration is required. Existing sources with the old dependency
error are inspected again on refresh.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The runtime did not expose the exact serving
model ID or context window. Used reasoning, code editing, terminal
execution and browser tools. No subagents were used.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 12:53:04 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 5b29b9062e fix(server): compact finished task worktrees and shorten the reaper cooldown (#16304)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Each task can run in its own isolated Git worktree, and each
worktree installs its own dependencies
> - The terminal-workspace reaper removes a worktree only when the task
tree is finished, the delivery is merged, the files are clean, and a
7-day cooldown has passed
> - A recurring task that runs every hour keeps a week of worktrees, and
each worktree holds gigabytes of `node_modules`. A finished task with no
merged pull request, or with leftover agent files, keeps its worktree
forever
> - On a busy instance this fills the disk in days, and a larger volume
only delays the next failure
> - This pull request adds compaction: one hour after a task tree
finishes, the reaper removes regenerable directories from the worktree
and keeps the workspace, the branch, and all source changes
> - The benefit is that finished tasks stop holding gigabytes of disk,
and no work is lost because a resumed task regenerates the files when
its workspace is provisioned again

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #2022 (retention for workspace cleanup). Related: #11936 and #14608
add external reclaim scripts (a scheduled tool and a disk-guard step).
This pull request does the reclaim inside the server's
terminal-workspace reaper instead. That way it uses the reaper's
lifecycle lock, issue-tree checks, and live-run checks, and needs no
extra scheduler.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**
Disk retention of execution workspaces after their tasks finish.

**Current behavior**
A finished task keeps its full worktree, including installed
dependencies and build output, for at least 7 days. If the delivery is
not merged, or the worktree has uncommitted or untracked files, the
reaper never removes it. On one instance, an hourly recurring task
created about 22 worktrees per day at about 3 GB each (about 2.8 GB of
that was `node_modules`). Together with finished tasks that had no
merged pull request, they filled a 100 GB volume in about two days.

**Proposed behavior**
One hour after a task tree becomes terminal, the reaper removes
regenerable directories (installed dependencies, build output, tool
caches) from the worktree. It keeps the worktree, the branch, the
commits, and every tracked, untracked, or other ignored file. When the
task resumes, the existing reuse path runs the provision step, which
reinstalls the dependencies. Clean, merged worktrees are archived after
1 day instead of 7.

**Reason and benefit**
Most of a finished worktree's size is regenerable. Compaction removes
that part without the risk of deleting work, so it can apply to
workspaces that the reaper must keep (no merged pull request, leftover
files). The shorter cooldown limits the cost of the source checkouts
that stay.

**Breaking changes**
None. The default archive cooldown changes from 7 days to 1 day.
`PAPERCLIP_WORKSPACE_REAPER_COOLDOWN_DAYS` still overrides it.
`PAPERCLIP_WORKSPACE_COMPACTION_ENABLED=false` turns compaction off.

## What Changed

- New `server/src/services/workspace-compaction.ts`:
- Finds directories with a regenerable name (`node_modules`, `dist`,
`build`, `coverage`, `storybook-static`, `target`, `.cache`, `.next`,
`.nuxt`, `.parcel-cache`, `.svelte-kit`, `.turbo`, `.vite`).
- Keeps only the directories that the repository's own `.gitignore`
files ignore and that hold no tracked file. A negated pattern
(`!build/`), a global excludes file, and `.git/info/exclude` do not
count. Each candidate is checked per path, so dependencies below an
ignored parent (`vendor/tool/node_modules`) are found.
- Searches inside a regenerable-named directory that does not qualify
(for example a tracked `build/`), so its ignored dependencies still go.
- Never enters `.git` or `.paperclip` (the worktree instance data), and
never follows a symlink.
- Each Git read has a 60-second deadline and stops when the sweep is
aborted.
- Moves the directories into `.paperclip-compaction-trash` beside the
worktree with a same-filesystem rename, and can restore them.
- `sweepTerminalWorkspaces` compacts each terminal workspace once per
terminal cycle, after the compaction delay and before the archive
cooldown check:
- Only isolated linked Git worktrees qualify. A shared workspace, a
project's main checkout, or a row whose `.git` is a directory is never
compacted.
- The move runs inside a transaction that holds the workspace lifecycle
lock. The guard checks a fresh row and the same lifecycle generation. It
also checks that the issue tree is terminal, that no queued or running
run works on the tree or the workspace (by checkout or execution run, or
by run context), and that no runtime service runs from the workspace.
- The guard runs before the move and again after it. If the second check
fails (for example, the task reopened or a run started), the directories
move back. Otherwise the trash is deleted.
- The worker wakes at the compaction deadline, not only at the archive
deadline.
- Stale trash from an interrupted compaction or a failed delete is
purged by later sweeps. The sweep checks each worktree parent at most
every 30 minutes, whether or not anything is left to compact.
- New counters `compacted` and `compactionFailed` in the sweep result.
The activity log gets an `execution_workspace.regenerable_files_removed`
entry with the removed paths.
- Config: new `PAPERCLIP_WORKSPACE_COMPACTION_DELAY_HOURS` (default `1`)
and `PAPERCLIP_WORKSPACE_COMPACTION_ENABLED`. The default for
`PAPERCLIP_WORKSPACE_REAPER_COOLDOWN_DAYS` changes from `7` to `1`. Both
new keys are added to the run-failure diagnostics allowlists.
- Docs: `doc/DEVELOPING.md` documents the new variables and has a new
"Terminal workspace compaction" section. `doc/SPEC-implementation.md`
describes compaction.
- `execution-workspaces.ts` was already above 1,000 lines. The
file-system logic is in the new module. Only the guarded orchestration,
which uses the existing lifecycle lock and run predicates, is in the
service.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run src/__tests__/workspace-compaction.test.ts
src/__tests__/execution-workspace-compaction.test.ts` (in `server/`): 27
passed. `workspace-reaper-cooldown-config.test.ts`: passed.
- Unit tests: directory selection (ignored, untracked, regenerable name
only, `.env` and local data kept, tracked `coverage` kept, `.paperclip`
skipped, symlinks not followed), nested candidates under a source
`build/` and under an ignored `vendor/`, a negated `!build/` kept,
global and `info/exclude` rules ignored, glob characters in names,
abort, main checkout vs linked worktree, move and restore, restore that
keeps a recreated directory, and stale-trash purge.
  - Embedded Postgres tests:
- A no-PR, unmerged, dirty workspace is compacted. HEAD, the branch ref,
`git status --porcelain --untracked-files=all`, untracked notes, `.env`,
local data, and `.paperclip` data stay the same, and the row stays
active.
    - A delivered workspace inside the cooldown is compacted.
    - The delay is respected, and the worker wakes at the delay.
- An active checkout run, a queued run found through its context, an
unfinished child issue, and a running runtime service all block
compaction.
- The task reopens during the move: the files are restored and
unchanged.
    - A run starts during the move: the files are restored.
    - A shared workspace and a main checkout are never compacted.
- Compaction runs once per terminal cycle and again after a later cycle.
    - Disabled compaction does nothing.
- End to end: `realizeExecutionWorkspace` creates a worktree, the sweep
compacts it, and a second `realizeExecutionWorkspace` reuses the same
worktree. The provision command regenerates `node_modules`, and the
untracked notes and the unmerged commit are still present.
- Leftover trash is purged when the workspace has nothing left to
compact.
- Mutation checks: when the post-move guard is disabled, both race tests
fail. Without the negation fix or the repository-only source fix, their
tests fail.
- `pnpm exec vitest run` for `execution-workspaces-service.test.ts`,
`terminal-workspace-work.test.ts`, `execution-workspace-reopen.test.ts`,
`server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts`, and
`workspace-runtime.test.ts`: 335 passed. Two `workspace-runtime.test.ts`
cases fail locally with and without this change (`does not diagnose a
missing remote branch as a rejected credential`, `rejects explicit main
on a master-only remote ...`). They also fail on unmodified `master` on
the same machine, so the cause is the local Git environment.
- `pnpm typecheck` in `server/`: passed. `pnpm check:module-boundaries`:
passed.

## Risks

- A repository can keep something that is not regenerable in an ignored
`dist`, `build`, `target`, or `.cache` directory. Compaction removes it.
The fixed name list, the ignore check, and the tracked-file check limit
this. `PAPERCLIP_WORKSPACE_COMPACTION_ENABLED=false` turns compaction
off.
- A repository without a provision command does not get dependencies
back automatically. This is the same state as a new worktree for that
repository, where the agent already installs them.
- A resumed task pays for a dependency install again. This happens only
for tasks that finished more than an hour earlier.
- The shorter default cooldown removes clean, merged worktrees after 1
day instead of 7. An operator who wants the old hold can set
`PAPERCLIP_WORKSPACE_REAPER_COOLDOWN_DAYS=7`.
- Self-hosted instances get the same behavior. There is no schema
change.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), 1M context, through Claude Code
with tool use (shell, file edits, test runs). A separate Claude agent
read the reaper code during the diagnosis.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 09:49:04 -07:00
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>
2026-10-14 11:33:02 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 21ee5c9c85 feat(sentry): add opt-in run failure reporting with saved run references (#16300)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agent runs retain execution results and output in the instance.
> - Operators can report run failures to Sentry for investigation.
> - A backend Sentry DSN currently enables those reports with no
separate choice.
> - A repair bot also needs the exact instance, company, agent, and
saved run.
> - This pull request adds an explicit reporting mode and authenticated
run references.
> - The benefit is that operators can investigate every failure on
selected deployments while keeping other deployments quiet.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Optional server reporting of terminal agent run failures to Sentry.

**Current behavior**

A backend DSN enables run failure reports. Known account, quota, and
connection failures are excluded. Reports omit company and agent
references. Runs without a task are skipped. Tool-name collision errors
omit the conflicting bindings.

**Proposed behavior**

Set `PAPERCLIP_SENTRY_RUN_FAILURES=unexpected` to retain the existing
filters. Set it to `all` to report every failed or timed-out run,
including known setup and quota failures. The default is `off`. Expected
stops stay excluded. Each report supplies identifiers and API paths that
a bot can use with its own authorized Paperclip connection.

**Reason and benefit**

Operators can enable broad failure reporting on one staging deployment.
A bot can fetch the saved run, events, and logs instead of relying on a
short error label or copying complete transcripts into Sentry.

**Breaking changes**

A backend DSN alone no longer enables run failure reports. Existing
operators must set `PAPERCLIP_SENTRY_RUN_FAILURES=unexpected` to retain
the previous policy. Ordinary server exception capture remains enabled
by the DSN. Failure grouping gains the phase and original cause code
when available.

Refs #16281, #16297, #16298. These cover related tool discovery and
failure diagnostics. This change retains their existing boundaries and
does not depend on their open changes.

## What Changed

- Add `off`, `unexpected`, and `all` modes. Missing and invalid values
keep reporting off before diagnostic reads.
- Keep the Sentry backend DSN and audited optional SDK requirements.
- Include company, agent, run, and optional task identifiers. Include
versioned paths for the saved run, events, log, and task. Add absolute
run URLs only for a valid public HTTP(S) origin.
- Report company runs without a task. Prefer the first-class issue
binding when selecting the task reference.
- Select saved native provider/model settings, timestamps, and original
failure codes. Preserve gateway reason codes through redacted exception
projection.
- Group by error code, adapter, and available phase/cause. Keep run IDs
and error text out of grouping.
- Include the tool names and connection bindings in collision errors
without copying tool schemas or provider metadata.
- Document configuration, upgrade behavior, bot access, redaction,
retention, and best-effort delivery.

## Verification

- All 56 checks passed for `cccb47a721eaa1cc36e63278fc177b9101477541`.
Two unrelated Storybook jobs were skipped by their path filters. No
checks remain pending.
- Complete [Paperclip CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38591422284):
passed. This covers general and serialized tests, Runner checks, browser
E2E shards, typecheck, build, release-registry checks, canary dry run,
and Docker checks.
- Greptile reviewed that exact head: 5/5, with no unresolved threads or
actionable findings. Superagent, Socket, and Snyk checks passed.
- Local focused reporting, diagnostics, collision, and real SDK contract
tests: 410 passed across five suites. This includes the external-wake
filter in both reporting modes.
- The audited `@sentry/node@10.71.0` tests use an in-memory transport.
No events were sent to Sentry.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`: passed locally after the final
rebase.
- `node scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs` and `git diff --check`:
passed.
- The full local `pnpm test:run` command was stopped to avoid
duplicating the complete CI shards. It did not finish locally. The full
suite passed in CI.

## Risks

- The new default disables existing run failure exports until the
operator selects a mode. The upgrade setting is documented.
- `all` can increase event volume and include known user-action
failures. Secret redaction and diagnostic limits still apply.
- Reporting remains asynchronous and best effort. This PR adds no
durable delivery queue and does not install a bot or Sentry alert rule.
- API references grant no authority. Existing company, private-task, and
run-output checks still apply. Complete transcripts stay in Paperclip.
- This changes optional Sentry error reporting. It changes neither
first-party Telemetry nor OpenTelemetry span exports. It adds no
database migration.

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, shell, file editing, and
test execution. The exact backend deployment ID and context window are
not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 10:56:40 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 09a2f0b7b0 refactor(server): isolate provider message admission and runtime policies (#16289)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents for work.
> - Chat channels turn external messages into shared task workflows.
> - The main service still contains some provider decisions.
> - These decisions belong with the existing channel modules.
> - This pull request isolates provider message-admission and runtime
policies.
> - Shared authorization, persistence, and runtime ownership keep their
current order.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #16235. Stack part 3/3. Base: `master`. #16276 and #16283 are
merged.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Provider ownership and readability in the chat channel service.

**Current behavior**

The entry point combines shared workflows with provider decisions.

**Proposed behavior**

Provider modules own their decisions. Shared modules own product state
and authorization.

**Reason and benefit**

Maintainers can find provider behavior in its channel folder.

**Breaking changes**

None intended. Public service methods and durable data shapes stay
compatible.

## What Changed

- Move Discord SDK admission and its barrier to the Discord message
module.
- Move Photon live-message eviction and startup recovery policy to its
runtime callbacks module.
- Move Slack mention eligibility and Teams setup-channel eligibility to
their message modules.
- Keep Photon deferred ingress and Speko conversation policy with their
provider modules.
- Keep ordered SDK message batching in a shared runtime module with a
live per-message ingress callback.
- Keep receiver leases, cache lifetime, startup failure cleanup,
authorization locks, and transaction ownership shared.
- Reduce `chat-channels.ts` from 3,570 to 3,548 lines.

## Verification

- The same 46 runtime/admission integration cases and all 18 Photon
channel cases passed before and after in the owned Linux container.
- The existing first-channel Teams orphan-admission case passed before
and after moving its eligibility predicate.
- The same 94 SDK adapter and lifecycle-normalization tests passed
locally.
- Server typecheck and module-boundary checks passed.
- Token comparison confirms ordered SDK batching and every processor
argument, plus Photon invalidation and its live runtime lookup.
- The shared factory creates no cache or worker. It reads the ingress
policy for each message and awaits processing in order.
- The extraction rebased without conflicts onto master after #16276 and
#16283 merged. Git range-diff reports the same patch. Final head
`7b63b569e2a0dbcc959310f565f77f367fa64aa0` has the same patch by
range-diff. The 94 SDK/lifecycle tests, server typecheck, and boundary
check passed on the final head. All CI gates pass on that exact head.
Greptile reviewed it at 5/5 with no inline findings or unresolved review
threads.
- One Runner CI test failed its original short timing window. The
unchanged test passed earlier-head CI and local reproduction. The single
failed-job retry passed.
- Cumulative `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. All 1,321
channel integration cases passed. The normal UI, CLI, database, adapter,
plugin, and serialized API test selections ran.
- The first Linux `pnpm test:run` returned 1. Original-source runs
reproduced the local failures. Container-only repairs supplied missing
tools, process reaping, and sufficient Node heap. The existing
mocked-fetch CLI telemetry fixture passed with the image opt-out flag
overridden only for that fixture.
- One local venue limitation remains: adapter-utils T24 fails unchanged
on both original and final source in the Linux container. Its entire
56-case suite passes before and after on the host. All other failed or
aborted suites passed in repaired reruns. No test assertion or timeout
changed.
- These fixtures prove application integration. They do not prove live
provider execution.

## Risks

- A captured option value or changed callback order could affect
deferred ingress or stale-runtime handling.
- The ingress callback and runtime getter remain live. Core maps and
receiver lease operations keep one owner.
- No schema migration or public API change is included.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6, running in Codex with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact deployment identifier and context-window size are
not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 10:50:34 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 7df55f3dcc refactor(server): isolate provider webhook lifecycle decisions (#16283)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents for work.
> - Chat channels turn external messages into shared task workflows.
> - The main service still contains some provider decisions.
> - These decisions belong with the existing channel modules.
> - This pull request moves webhook recovery and payload-scope decisions
to their provider modules.
> - Shared authorization, persistence, and runtime ownership keep their
current order.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #16235. Stack part 2/3. Base: `master`. #16276 is merged.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Provider ownership and readability in the chat channel service.

**Current behavior**

The entry point combines shared workflows with provider decisions.

**Proposed behavior**

Provider modules own their decisions. Shared modules own product state
and authorization.

**Reason and benefit**

Maintainers can find provider behavior in its channel folder.

**Breaking changes**

None intended. Public service methods and durable data shapes stay
compatible.

## What Changed

- Move GitHub revoked-installation recovery classification to
`github/webhook-scope.ts`.
- Move Teams payload-scope validation to its message module.
- Record normalized GitHub, Telegram, and Teams lifecycle events through
one shared durable call.
- Keep Slack callback ordering and persistence failures outside parser
catches.
- Reduce `chat-channels.ts` from 3,598 to 3,570 lines.

## Verification

- The same 86 selected webhook/lifecycle integration cases passed before
and after in an owned Linux container.
- The same 17 selected Telegram edit and Teams edit/delete/restore cases
passed before and after in that container.
- The same 94 SDK adapter and lifecycle-normalization tests passed
locally before and after.
- Server typecheck and module-boundary checks passed.
- Token comparison confirms the shared recording payload and runtime
fence, plus the Teams scope and parser inputs.
- The host database baseline failed before assertions because System V
shared-memory IDs were exhausted. No other PostgreSQL server or host
setting was changed. Database verification used an isolated container
under its unprivileged user.
- The extraction rebased without conflicts after #16276 merged. Git
range-diff reports the same patch. The 94 SDK/lifecycle tests and server
typecheck passed on this base. All CI gates pass on rebased head
`d835d7c3815c168226fa646aec6370b6a8ac94c1`. Greptile reviewed that exact
head at 5/5, with no inline findings or unresolved review threads.
- Cumulative `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. All 1,321
channel integration cases passed. The normal UI, CLI, database, adapter,
plugin, and serialized API test selections ran.
- The first Linux `pnpm test:run` returned 1. Original-source runs
reproduced the local failures. Container-only repairs supplied missing
tools, process reaping, and sufficient Node heap. The existing
mocked-fetch CLI telemetry fixture passed with the image opt-out flag
overridden only for that fixture.
- One local venue limitation remains: adapter-utils T24 fails unchanged
on both original and final source in the Linux container. Its entire
56-case suite passes before and after on the host. All other failed or
aborted suites passed in repaired reruns. No test assertion or timeout
changed.
- These fixtures exercise application state and the service entry point.
They do not prove live provider execution.

## Risks

- A scope or ordering error could record an event for the wrong provider
context.
- The selected parser returns normalized data. The shared service keeps
durable recording and runtime fencing.
- No database migration or API change is included.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6, running in Codex with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact deployment identifier and context-window size are
not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 10:38:12 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 74ba530b9e fix(workspaces): keep cleanup Git scans fresh and dedupe page reads (#16302)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages execution workspaces for agent tasks.
> - It must preserve work when it closes a workspace.
> - The terminal-workspace worker checks Git before it decides whether a
workspace can close.
> - A request for fresh Git status could join a scan that started before
a file changed.
> - Several records for one directory can also repeat the same Git work
in a bounded page.
> - The worker already reads the task tree before Git, then reads it
again for delivery assessment.
> - This pull request fixes the fresh-read boundary and removes those
repeated reads.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

- Refs #14759 and #14423 for the background Git scan load.
- Refs #16282 for the merged event-driven terminal-workspace worker.
- Refs #13619 for the original community investigation and tests. Thanks
to @fayonation for identifying the shared-directory and in-flight scan
cases. This implementation starts from current master and adapts those
ideas to the new worker.

## What Changed

- Give correctness-sensitive Git status requests their own scheduler
scan. They skip completed cache entries and older scans in progress.
- Share compatible Git readiness results across workspace records in one
bounded worker page. The key includes company, path, branch, base ref,
and runtime ownership. Each record keeps its own task and delivery
assessment.
- Reuse the task tree already read by the worker during delivery
assessment.
- Add regression tests for a file created during an older scan,
compatible scan sharing, and company and branch separation. Update
developer and workspace map documentation.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/workspace-git-operation-scheduler.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/execution-workspaces-service.test.ts` — 92 tests
passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed with the repository's pnpm 9.15.4.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` — passed.
- `pnpm build` — passed.
- The full local `pnpm test:run` was interrupted when its original
worktree disappeared. All PR test shards passed in GitHub CI.
- Latest commit `e7622127c7d978a9a90857112675834725965d72`: 53
successful PR checks, 2 expected skips, and no failures. Greptile
reviewed this commit at 5/5 with no open findings.

## Risks

- A shared page inspection can become stale if the directory changes
before the next record is assessed. The final cleanup still starts a
separate Git scan and checks current task, ownership, and lifecycle
state under the existing guards.
- The new scan key changes request coalescing for correctness-sensitive
callers. They still use the scheduler's concurrency and queue limits.
There is no database migration or API 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 GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, code editing, and shell
tools. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed in
this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 10:36:41 -05:00
bcfc03bc94 fix(sentry): keep provider-rejected Grok wakes out of run failure reports (#16297)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The Paperclip Runner can run an external Grok bot. Paperclip offers
the bot an assignment and sends a webhook wake. The bot must accept the
assignment in 10 minutes.
> - When the Grok endpoint rejects every wake with HTTP 4xx, the bot
never sees the work. The offer expires and the run fails with `Dot
assignment acceptance or execution authority expired.`
> - Paperclip already records each wake in `grok_bot_dispatches` with
its HTTP status. The operator sees the rejection and can retry it. Thus
Paperclip operates correctly in this case.
> - But `reportRunFailure` sends this run to Sentry as an unexplained
backend error. This makes noise and hides real defects.
> - This pull request skips the Sentry report only when durable receipts
prove that the Grok endpoint rejected every wake.
> - The benefit is a cleaner Sentry signal. Local defects, uncertain
delivery, and accepted work stay visible.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Sentry issue `PAPERCLIP-BACKEND-3M` (staging, 1 event).

**What happened?**
A Grok bot run on staging failed after 10 minutes in the `preparing`
stage. Sentry got the error `Dot assignment acceptance or execution
authority expired.` with the code `native_provider_terminal_failed`. The
stored receipts show two `mailbox_updated` wakes for the assignment. The
Grok endpoint rejected both wakes with HTTP 400: the first wake and one
operator retry. The assignment was never accepted. Wakes with the same
shape got HTTP 200 before and after this run.

**Expected behavior**
The run fails, and the operator sees the rejected delivery. Sentry does
not get a backend error for a proven external rejection.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Connect a Grok bot agent and verify its routine.
2. Make the Grok endpoint return HTTP 400 for work wakes.
3. Assign a task to the agent and wait 10 minutes.
4. See that the run fails and that a Sentry event is sent.

**Paperclip version or commit**
`f69c6a8` (master).

## What Changed

- `server/src/services/run-failure-report.ts`: Add
`isRejectedExternalBotWake`. It returns true only when all of these
conditions are true:
- The run failed in native mode with `native_provider_terminal_failed`.
- The finalization `failureDetail.originalFailureCode` is
`dot_assignment_expired`.
- The run has exactly one Dot assignment, and that assignment was never
accepted.
- The assignment has at least one `mailbox_updated` wake, and each wake
has the status `rejected` with an HTTP 4xx status.
- `captureTerminalRunFailure` skips the Sentry capture when the check is
true. If the receipt check itself fails, it logs a warning and the
failure stays reportable. The run status, the task, and the operator
recovery do not change.
- `packages/db`: Add the index `grok_dispatch_assignment_kind_idx` on
`grok_bot_dispatches (assignment_id, kind)` (migration `0346`). The
receipt lookup and the dispatcher's per-assignment checks use this
index.
- `server/src/services/__tests__/run-failure-report.test.ts`: Add one
test for the skipped case. Add nine tests for cases that must stay
reportable: no wake, a local rejection with no HTTP status, a delivered
wake, uncertain delivery, accepted work, a different provider failure
code, no finalization, more than one offer, and a receipt read that
fails.

## Verification

- `pnpm --dir server exec vitest run
src/services/__tests__/run-failure-report.test.ts`: 208 tests pass.
- I removed the new catch and ran the tests again. The
receipt-read-failure test failed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db run check:migrations` and
`src/migration-snapshot-drift.test.ts` pass.
- I removed the source change and ran the new tests again. The
skipped-case test failed and the six reportable cases passed. This shows
that the test proves the change.
- I did not run the full `pnpm -r typecheck` locally. The server
`typecheck` script needs `cargo` to build the Runner binary, and the
sandbox stopped `tsc` with SIGKILL. CI runs the full typecheck.

## Risks

- Low risk. The change only removes one Sentry report. It does not
change run state, recovery, or what users see.
- The check uses durable receipts, not message text. A wake with no HTTP
status (local validation or credential failure) stays reportable, so a
Paperclip defect cannot hide behind this rule.
- For failed native runs with `native_provider_terminal_failed`, the
check adds up to three indexed reads. Other runs do no extra reads.
- Migration `0346` builds one index in a transaction.
`grok_bot_dispatches` was created in `0344` and is small, so the build
lock is short. The table is not on the migration gate's large-table
list.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic. Agentic tool use with
shell, code search, and test execution.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-10-14 08:32:48 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip f16c0ad5c8 refactor(server): isolate chat conversation and control policies (#16276)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents for work.
> - Chat channels turn external messages into shared task workflows.
> - The main service still contains some provider decisions.
> - These decisions belong with the existing channel modules.
> - This pull request separates conversation binding and Telegram
control policy.
> - Shared authorization, persistence, and runtime ownership keep their
current order.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #16235. Stack part 1/3. Base: `master`.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Provider ownership and readability in the chat channel service.

**Current behavior**

The entry point combines shared workflows with provider decisions.

**Proposed behavior**

Provider modules own their decisions. Shared modules own product state
and authorization.

**Reason and benefit**

Maintainers can find provider behavior in its channel folder.

**Breaking changes**

None intended. Public service methods and durable data shapes stay
compatible.

## What Changed

- Keep shared conversation lookup and completion in
`inbound/conversation-binding.ts`.
- Move Photon binding-completion policy to its messages module.
- Move Telegram command classification, forum behavior, and chronology
exemptions to its commands module.
- Keep the original conversation generation separate from the retained
task binding.
- Reduce `chat-channels.ts` from 3,649 to 3,598 lines.

## Verification

- The same 62 selected Telegram/Teams integration cases passed before
and after extraction.
- All 18 Photon channel integration cases passed before and after
extraction in separate test processes.
- The initial combined baseline command had a Photon database-startup
hook timeout. No Photon assertion ran in that invocation. The unchanged
Photon suite then passed in isolation with its existing timeouts.
- Server typecheck and the module-boundary check passed.
- A token comparison confirms the moved lookup, completion, and
generation logic, after normalizing the explicit policy callbacks.
- All current-head CI checks passed. Greptile reviewed this exact head
at 5/5 with no findings.
- Cumulative `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. All 1,321
channel integration cases passed. The normal UI, CLI, database, adapter,
plugin, and serialized API test selections ran.
- The first Linux `pnpm test:run` returned 1. Original-source runs
reproduced the local failures. Container-only repairs supplied missing
tools, process reaping, and sufficient Node heap. The existing
mocked-fetch CLI telemetry fixture passed with the image opt-out flag
overridden only for that fixture.
- One local venue limitation remains: adapter-utils T24 fails unchanged
on both original and final source in the Linux container. Its entire
56-case suite passes before and after on the host. All other failed or
aborted suites passed in repaired reruns. No test assertion or timeout
changed.
- These fixtures exercise the assembled service and persisted state.
They do not prove live third-party execution.

## Risks

- Changing query order or losing the original generation could bind a
message to the wrong task.
- The workflow retains the original lookup result and all existing query
and write conditions.
- No schema migration or API change is included.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6, running in Codex with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact deployment identifier and context-window size are
not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 10:21:48 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip bd64eb27b0 perf(recovery): use indexed execution identity lookups (#16291)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their execution.
> - Recovery must keep old execution ownership visible before new work
starts.
> - Ownership reads filter large run contexts through a combined text
expression.
> - Recovery and status delivery also cast indexed UUID columns to text.
> - These reads can scan history before finding the requested execution.
> - This pull request preserves identity and ownership rules while using
existing indexes.
> - The benefit is less database work during recovery and task polling.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #14406. Related community report: #15275. This is an independent
implementation. It does not use that pull request's code or commits. It
covers the reported execution joins and the additional ownership query
hotspot.

**What happened?**

Accumulated staging query statistics showed 11,782 ownership reads at 51
ms each. A paired recovery-action read averaged 22 ms. Both queried
large run JSON. Text casts also prevented indexed UUID lookups in
recovery and status delivery.

**What did you expect to happen?**

Recovery must find the same execution evidence through existing indexes.
Malformed identifiers must match nothing without a cast error. Native
issue bindings must retain precedence. Missing termination evidence must
continue to block new work.

**Steps to reproduce**

Run the disposable benchmark below. It loads the original service
modules from the baseline revision. It compares their exact ownership,
blocker action and status-delivery SQL with the current modules on 1,400
synthetic runs, 350 historical recovery actions and 192 KiB contexts.

## What Changed

- Convert saved text to UUID only after checking its canonical lowercase
form.
- Keep indexed run and task UUID columns unchanged in execution joins.
- Split native and legacy issue predicates so existing indexes can
filter ownership candidates.
- Preserve company scope, native precedence, process and lease holds,
recovery eligibility and delivery receipts.
- Add real PostgreSQL identity and ownership regressions, a reproducible
benchmark and database documentation.

## Verification

- Local service SQL benchmark: ownership 78.30 ms to 1.14 ms, with the
same two complete rows. Blocker action read 76.94 ms to 22.55 ms, with
the same complete row. These are synthetic SQL timings, excluding
process probes, provider calls and HTTP.
- Status delivery returned the same 100 rows. Timing was neutral on the
small-task fixture: 7.85 ms before and 8.30 ms after. No speedup is
claimed for that case.
- 231 local tests passed across six server suites. They cover malformed
identifiers, canonical spelling, company scope, native precedence,
retained processes, workspace restore, native replacement, conversations
and delivery.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed.
- `git diff --check` passed.
- All current-head CI and security checks passed, including the full
general and serialized suites, browser shards, Runner verification and
build. Greptile reviewed the exact commit at 5/5 with no actionable
findings.
- The older full local sweep in the companion worktree was stopped after
final-commit complete CI passed. It is not claimed as a completed local
pass. The 231 focused tests above passed locally on this branch.

```sh
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/services/conversation-continuation.test.ts src/services/legacy-execution-recovery.test.ts src/__tests__/legacy-workspace-restore-recovery.test.ts src/__tests__/chat-completion-delivery.test.ts src/__tests__/agent-conversations.test.ts src/services/native-runtime/native-safe-replacement.test.ts
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsx ../scripts/benchmark-recovery-queries.ts --baseline-ref=1e731520bb
```

## Risks

- PostgreSQL accepts more UUID spellings than the old text joins. The
explicit guard preserves the old lowercase spelling requirement.
- Query plans depend on the data distribution. Small task sets can show
neutral status-delivery timing. The benchmark is not a production
latency claim.
- Recovery ownership checks remain conservative. Process, lease,
workspace and no-replay rules are unchanged.
- No migration, new index, cache, cleanup change or lock removal is
included.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, shell
tools and local code execution. The runtime does not expose a more
specific backend model ID or context-window size.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 10:14:58 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip ebeac833a6 perf(runs): bound history and reduce repeated context reads (#16286)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps operators manage AI agents and inspect their work.
> - Run history supplies recent execution records to the board and API
clients.
> - The list repeats eight reads of a large stored JSON context.
> - A caller can also omit the limit and read the complete history.
> - This pull request expands context fields once and bounds every list
read.
> - The benefit is lower database cost and bounded redaction work.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #958. Related community reports: #13962 and #10631. This is an
independent implementation. It does not use their commits or code. It
covers the history bounds reported in both. Process memory monitoring
from #10631 is outside this change.

**What happened?**

The run-history query repeatedly extracts fields from large context
JSON. Requests without a limit also load every historical run before
authorization and redaction. Accumulated staging query statistics showed
271 ms for summary history and another 58 ms for its redaction lookup.

**What did you expect to happen?**

Normal reads must use a bounded recent history. Context projection must
preserve the existing values and privacy behavior with less repeated
database work.

**Steps to reproduce**

Run the disposable benchmark below against the baseline revision. It
creates 1,400 synthetic runs with 192 KiB contexts. It compares the
exact service SQL and every returned column for both summary and full
history.

## What Changed

- Expand context fields with one lateral record projection. Preserve
non-object legacy contexts and the first-class issue binding.
- Enforce a 200-row default and a 1,000-row maximum in the route and
service.
- Apply the default in the shared UI client, including both agent detail
implementations.
- Preserve response arrays, authorization, result projection and secret
redaction.
- Fetch older linked runs by ID in both agent pages. Check company and
agent scope, navigation races and visible retry errors.
- Update OpenAPI, data-path documentation and capability maps.
- Add real PostgreSQL and HTTP regressions plus a reproducible
benchmark.

## Verification

- Local benchmark: summary history 37.72 ms to 19.34 ms; full history
37.84 ms to 19.01 ms. All 200 complete positional rows match in each
comparison. These are synthetic local SQL timings, excluding HTTP and
redaction.
- History, route, privacy and redaction suites: 160 server tests passed
across six files. Twenty-two UI API, selection, run-panel and
log-visibility tests passed. Both agent-page variants render an older
linked run with an empty history page on desktop and mobile.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed.
- Map validation and `git diff --check` passed.
- All current-head CI and security checks passed, including the full
general and serialized suites, browser shards, Runner verification and
build. Greptile reviewed the exact commit at 5/5 with no remaining
findings.
- The full local sweep began before the final compatibility fixes. It
was stopped after the final commits passed complete CI. The focused
local suites listed above passed on the final code. Before interruption,
the broader local sweep passed 31,743 tests across the general server,
UI and several package groups, with no reported failures. The full local
command is not claimed as a completed pass.

```sh
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/services/heartbeat/run-state.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-list.test.ts src/__tests__/agent-live-run-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/run-secret-redaction.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-run-privacy-routes.test.ts
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/api/heartbeats.test.ts
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsx ../scripts/benchmark-run-history.ts --baseline-ref=1e731520bb
```

## Risks

- Clients that relied on an unbounded array now receive 200 rows by
default. Explicit limits allow up to 1,000. This change does not add
pagination.
- Legacy context conversion must stay identical. Real database
regressions cover null, array, scalar, nested values and native issue
precedence.
- No schema migration or persistent cache is introduced. Redaction and
access checks remain active.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, shell
tools and local code execution. The runtime does not expose a more
specific backend model ID or context-window size.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 10:14:41 -05:00
03fcd3c1fb fix(native-runtime): report which close barrier failed (#16298)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Native agent runs use the Paperclip runner. When a run ends, the
controller closes the session. Close must prove that the runner durably
suspended before the controller releases its checkpoint.
> - If close cannot prove this, the run fails with
`provider_transport_failed: runner did not durably suspend before
checkpoint`.
> - The runner knows which barrier was not proven. It writes that
settlement only to the instance run log.
> - The Sentry report for the failed run has no settlement evidence.
Operators cannot tell a stuck suspend command from an undrained
provider, an unreadable provider state, or unsettled tool results.
> - This pull request sends that settlement to the run failure report as
closed labels and counts.
> - The benefit is that the next occurrence shows which barrier failed,
so the root cause can be fixed instead of guessed.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No public issue exists. This describes the bug.

**What happened?**

Hosted staging native Codex runs failed with `provider_transport_failed:
runner did not durably suspend before checkpoint`. This happened on two
runs, on 2026-09-30 and 2026-10-14. The second run used a release from
2026-10-14. The Sentry events contain only the error code, run phase,
driver kind, and duration. They contain no stack and no settlement data.
The native executor calls `reportRunFailure(db, run)` without the caught
error, and the runner settlement is never read.

**Expected behavior**

A failed close report should tell an operator which barrier was not
proven: runner suspension, provider drain, provider state, or semantic
tool settlement. It must not expose tool identities, digests, provider
turn IDs, or unredacted error text.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Run a native Codex session whose close cannot prove durable runner
suspension. For example, the runner suspend command does not complete
before the close deadline.
2. Observe the Sentry run failure event. Before this change,
`run_execution` has no close settlement fields.

## What Changed

- `collectRunFailureDiagnostics` accepts a new `nativeCloseFailure`
option. It reads only a `native_session_close_unrecoverable` error,
directly or up to four `cause` levels deep.
- It adds closed labels and counts to `run_execution`:
`closeRunnerSuspended`, `closeProviderDrained`,
`closeSuspendCommandStatus`, `closeRunnerLifecycle`,
`closeRunnerIdentityMatches`, `closeProviderState`,
`closeProviderPendingEventCount`, `closeProviderTurnActive`,
`closeSemanticResultPersistenceFailed`, `closeSemanticToolsPending`,
`closeSemanticToolDeliveriesOpen`, and `closeSemanticResultFailures`.
- Values outside the known vocabularies are dropped. Getters that throw
are contained.
- The native session executor passes the caught error as
`nativeCloseFailure` when it reports a terminal run failure. It does not
pass the error as `error`, because the raw error text and stack bypass
the executor's identity redaction.
- `doc/observability.md` documents the new fields and the privacy
boundary.

## Verification

- `cd server && npx vitest run
src/services/__tests__/run-failure-diagnostics.test.ts
src/__tests__/run-failure-sentry.test.ts`: 130 tests pass.
- New tests check the full label set, a wrapped cause, null suspension
and provider states, unrelated error codes, hostile and unknown values,
and a missing settlement. They also check that no tool identity, digest,
turn ID, or error text leaves the module.
- Negative control: with the reader disabled, the new main test fails.
- A scoped `tsc` run on `run-failure-diagnostics.ts`, its test, and
`run-failure-report.ts` passes. The full server `tsc` and `pnpm build`
were not run locally. The sandbox has a 4 GiB memory limit and no
`cargo` for the runner binary. CI runs the full checks.

## Risks

- Low risk. The change only adds Sentry context fields for one error
code. Close, quarantine, retry, and recovery behavior do not change.
- Sentry grouping does not change. The fingerprint stays `[errorCode,
agentAdapter]`, and no exception chain is added.
- The data path is Observability (Sentry error reporting, gated by the
operator DSN). It does not change Telemetry. The fields contain only
booleans, fixed labels, and counts. The DSN gate is unchanged.
- These fields are observations. They do not prove a root cause by
themselves.

> 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

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), run through Claude Code
as an agent with tool use (shell, file edits, test execution, Sentry and
GitHub connectors). Context window and reasoning mode are not exposed in
this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-authored-by: Devin Foley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-10-14 07:57:21 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip df4ee06e2f feat(skills): select and validate tracked GitHub branches (#16288)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Skills can track a branch in an authorized GitHub repository.
> - Sources previously offered only a default-branch repair action.
> - People need to select a listed branch or enter a branch that GitHub
has not listed.
> - The server must validate the selected ref with the caller's
authorized connection.
> - This pull request connects the approved branch picker to production
APIs.
> - Installed skills remain usable while the source changes its tracked
ref.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Skills UI, shared API contracts, GitHub source services, and agent API
discovery.

**Problem or motivation**

The default-branch repair action does not let people choose another
branch. The settings service also validates the old ref when a caller
supplies a new ref other than HEAD. A missing tracked branch can prevent
connection repair even when the selected account has repository access.

**Proposed solution**

Load a bounded branch list with the authorized connection. Mark the
default branch. Search listed branches or accept a typed ref. Validate
the selected ref before saving. Keep the chosen value after a load
error, invalid ref, or concurrent update. Save the selected connection
and branch together during connection repair.

**Alternatives considered**

A default-branch button does not support a named branch. A text field
alone does not help people find the repository default or available
branches.

**Roadmap alignment**

This improves the existing Skills source manager. It does not add a new
skill import system.

**Additional context**

Refs #16066 and #16256. This is the production implementation of the
approved branch-selection Storybook journeys.

## What Changed

- Add an authorized branch-list endpoint and shared response/query
types. Register it in agent API discovery.
- Validate the requested ref, including the returned commit SHA.
Preserve source leases, revision checks, project ownership, skill
identities, selections, and installed versions.
- Add the searchable branch picker to Sources and connection repair.
Allow typed refs during branch discovery and after discovery fails.
- Keep save errors in the dialog. Retain the selected branch through a
concurrent source update.
- Use the production components and API client in Storybook. Add
keyboard, touch, loading, retry, invalid-ref, connection-repair, and
concurrent-update browser journeys.
- Update product documentation and the feature/access maps.

## Verification

- Red/green: two new database regressions fail against the previous
service and pass against the implementation.
- Linux database/service suite: 85 tests passed. This includes source
visibility, human/agent authorization, selected connections, immutable
versions, and invalid refs.
- Rebased branch and review fixes: 94 focused UI, route,
branch-validation, and fixture tests passed. Two conflict-message
regressions and the stale-retry fixture regression fail before the fix
and pass after it.
- Storybook build passed. All 26 focused browser journeys passed.
- Repository typecheck and build passed. Final UI typecheck passed after
the review fixes.
- The full local Vitest run was interrupted when the checkout and its
dependencies disappeared. It reported missing working-directory/Postgres
files and worker startup errors. Its two timed-out tests pass after the
checkout was restored. The complete CI suite passed on the final head,
`cf5d4c8f0a`: [CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38571068332).
One unchanged workspace timestamp test required a single rerun. Its
release-minus-one-millisecond value can equal the original confirmation
time. The rerun passed.
- Live acceptance passed on implementation head `5dd935bf14` in an
isolated macOS arm64 instance with Node 24.21.0 and an authorized
private GitHub repository. The UI loaded the actual default branch,
saved branch and selected connection together, and preserved the
installed skill/version IDs after reload. An invalid typed ref retained
the draft and showed the provider error. A valid typed HEAD ref then
saved successfully. The owned runtime and database were stopped after
the test. Focused unit, Linux database, and browser suites passed again
after the error-handling review fixes.
- Greptile reviewed final head `cf5d4c8f0a` at 5/5. Both review threads
are resolved; the fresh review has no remaining findings.
- Token gates and map/catalog checks passed.
- Review entry points: `Skills / Project repository skills / 03 Branch
selection components` and `04 Branch selection journeys`. Run `pnpm
storybook` to inspect them.
- Browser command: `pnpm exec playwright test --config
tests/storybook-visual/playwright.config.ts
tests/storybook-visual/skill-source-branch-selection.spec.ts
tests/storybook-visual/project-repository-skills.spec.ts`.
- Manual check: open an independent GitHub source, choose a new branch,
select the default or type a ref, save, and reload. Try an invalid ref
and confirm the selection remains in the dialog. For a project-bound
source, change its ref in project settings.

## Risks

- GitHub discovery is bounded to 100 listed branches. The default branch
is always included. Typed refs remain available.
- A source can change while the dialog is open. The API rejects a stale
revision and the UI keeps the draft for retry.
- A ref change schedules the existing refresh pipeline. Installed
versions remain available until a successful refresh imports new
content.
- No database migration or credential storage change is required.
Existing HEAD requests remain supported.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The serving model's exact identifier and
context-window size are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning,
repository tools, code execution, and browser tools.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 09:55:43 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip d4892d4761 fix(observability): sample native runs independently of triggers (#16285)
Start native background run traces under the operator's root sampling policy and link them to valid trigger contexts. Preserve child parenting and silent unconfigured tracing.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 09:49:08 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip f69c6a8a35 fix(github): retry and recover review publication (#16284)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agent work and its published results.
> - GitHub review bots publish task-bound assessments through governed
tools.
> - A review can survive a caller timeout because its publication intent
is durable.
> - A transient provider failure still returned a failed receipt before
recovery.
> - Gateway replay could return an empty cached result, and publication
retries had no dedicated scheduler deadline.
> - This pull request adds bounded retries, receipt recovery, and an
independent durable worker.
> - A temporary GitHub failure can recover without another review or
duplicate publication.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16275. That change increased the GitHub tool deadline. This change
repairs retry and recovery behavior.

**What happened?**

A one-off GitHub HTTP 503 or 429 left the caller with a failed
publication receipt. The saved retry did not have its own scheduler
worker. An identical gateway call after a timeout could return an empty
cached result instead of the saved publication receipt.

**Expected behavior**

Temporary failures should retry under current authority. Pending work
should resume at its saved deadline after restart. Exact retries should
return the current receipt. Lost responses must not create duplicate
comments, findings, or checks.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Admit an advisory PR review request and begin its assessment.
2. Return HTTP 503 or 429 for the first summary-comment PATCH, then let
GitHub succeed.
3. Submit the assessment through the run-scoped tool gateway.
4. On master, the result says publication failed. With this change, the
same call returns the processed receipt and neutral check.
5. For receipt recovery, use a shorter caller deadline and repeat the
exact call after publication finishes.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced on master at `6cb6ac3b8e40cb90d734ba115a2f22f850ff9477`.

## What Changed

- Classify transient transport, server, and rate-limit failures. Honor
Retry-After and primary reset deadlines. Stop retries for permanent
permission and validation errors.
- Retry safe reads and installation-token issuance within a bounded call
window. Retry publication writes through the existing outbox and
provider receipt checks.
- Wait for up to three publication attempts within a 45-second retry
window. Keep the durable eight-failure cap and enforce saved deadlines
on explicit retries.
- Register an independent GitHub publication worker with
transaction-owned wake notifications, startup recovery, and per-PR lease
deadlines.
- Recover exact comment, progress, and assessment gateway calls from
their stored publication. Require the same company, agent, task, run,
connection, tool, arguments, and current policy. Clear stale timeout
errors after recovery. Approved exact retries read the current receipt
through the existing signed replay path; the worker retains the verified
approval for deferred writes and still rejects revocation.
- Add regression coverage and update the connector guide and
feature/access maps.

## Verification

- Red: both one-off HTTP 503 and 429 regressions failed on master with a
failed publication receipt.
- Green: the same tests passed after the change.
- GitHub review workflows: 133 covered against isolated PostgreSQL 18.
The final combined run passed 132 and hit one fifteen-second timeout
under concurrent build load. All three variants of that workflow passed
in isolation. The earlier combined run passed all 131 workflows before
the two approval regressions were added.
- Retry policy and delivery coordinator tests: 35 passed.
- Additional focused checks passed for the actual eight-failure cap,
exact-argument conflicts, policy revocation, and timeout receipt
recovery. The approved deferred-publication and revocation regressions
failed before the review repair and passed after it, with one approval
request preserved.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. `pnpm build`: passed. `node
scripts/check-maps.mjs`: passed.
- The broad local `pnpm test:run` path remains blocked by the host's
exhausted PostgreSQL shared-memory slots. The changed database-backed
workflows use an isolated Docker database instead. All Paperclip CI jobs
passed at a6d81b67cb, including the required verify and E2E gates.
Greptile is 5/5 at the same head, with the approval-recovery finding
resolved. The external Superagent Security Scan also passed.
- Live acceptance passed on a dedicated single-repository local test App
and native Paperclip Runner. A test-only preload returned one HTTP 503
before the final summary PATCH. One submit_review call completed in
17.305 seconds; the bot published its 3/5 advisory review and neutral
check, then automatically finished the task. [Published
review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-permissions-smoke-20260926-pap57-fee7428e/pull/9#issuecomment-6168809007),
[neutral
check](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-permissions-smoke-20260926-pap57-fee7428e/runs/115863564014).
This live test ran at de6862072c; approval-specific recovery is covered
by the later regressions. The preload is excluded from the repository
and removed from the running local instance.

## Risks

Retries make additional bounded provider requests. A provider write with
a lost response is recovered through its existing App-owned identity
before another write is permitted. The worker rechecks authority and the
PR head; revocation and superseded work stop publication. Calls can
still exceed their deadline, and repeated failures eventually exhaust
the retry cap. A pending publication is not a completed task. The agent
still owns task completion after receiving a confirmed receipt. No
schema migration is needed.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex (GPT-6 family), with code inspection, editing, and test
execution. The exact deployment model ID and context window are not
exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 08:40:32 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 7c016c049b perf(workspaces): wake terminal cleanup from committed changes (#16282)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agents use execution workspaces to retain their files and Git
branches.
> - A reaper closes eligible workspaces after their task tree is
terminal.
> - The reaper scanned every heartbeat tick and read Git before cheap
eligibility checks.
> - Permanent scans also query idle databases when no cleanup work
exists.
> - This pull request wakes cleanup after transaction settlement and
restores bounded work at startup.
> - The benefit is fewer scans while fresh cleanup guards continue to
protect retained work.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Related work: Refs #13619, Refs #11753. Those PRs bound scans or back
off unchanged candidates. This PR uses the transaction work coordinator
to remove the permanent reaper tick. It overlaps their early
terminal-state filtering but does not change their runtime restart
behavior or introduce a second Git scheduler cache.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Terminal workspace cleanup and Git inspection for workspace detail
reads.

**Subsystem affected**

Server orchestration, execution workspaces, and idle sleep admission.

**Current behavior**

The heartbeat tick scans workspace candidates every thirty seconds. It
runs Git before rejecting nonterminal trees, cooldowns, and active runs.
Display inspections expire after five seconds.

**Proposed behavior**

Recover workspace rows in bounded startup pages. Wake after relevant
issue, workspace, and pull-request work-product transactions settle.
Schedule the terminal tree cooldown or a five-minute eligibility retry.
Back off unchanged candidates across unrelated wakes, and invalidate
their backoff after relevant committed changes. Park empty and
nonterminal-only lanes. Reuse display inspections for thirty seconds.
Read fresh Git before destructive cleanup.

**Reason and benefit**

Avoid recurring database and Git work when no cleanup is possible.
Retain transaction admission holds, restart recovery, and fresh deletion
checks. Retention eligibility can wait for the next host wake; active
and failed recovery work still blocks sleep.

**Breaking changes**

No schema or API shape changes. Display Git state can lag by thirty
seconds. Cleanup eligibility retries can take five minutes.

## What Changed

- Add a terminal-workspace worker to the existing transaction work
coordinator and scheduler.
- Signal relevant writes before mutation on the owning transaction.
Outer transaction settlement wakes cleanup.
- Derive cooldown deadlines from the full company-scoped terminal task
tree. Continue bounded recovery pages without a permanent sweep.
- Bound unchanged candidate inspections to five minutes, retain at most
256 entries, and invalidate affected entries with scoped transaction
hints. Repeated wakes preserve the earliest inspection deadline.
- Collect deadlines from task trees already read by bounded pages.
Restore the cursor after a failed page and rescan commits received
during a rotation.
- Check terminal state, cooldown, and active runs before Git. Preserve
lifecycle locks, generation fences, and fresh final checks.
- Keep failed or incomplete recovery visible to idle admission. Preserve
the passive retention exception.
- Extend the bounded display cache to thirty seconds and document the
scheduling and wake limits.

## Verification

- Focused workspace, coordinator, cache, and local sleep suites: 111
tests passed with real local PostgreSQL and Git worktrees where
applicable.
- Final worker, display cache, and local sleep suites: 28 tests passed.
- The regressions prove three ineligible workspaces invoke zero Git
scans, cached clean display state cannot remove new untracked files, and
real producer notifications wait for outer transaction settlement.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed locally. Map and
module-boundary checks passed.
- Work-product and sleep-safety suites: 221 tests passed. Reopen and
issue-tree control suites: 46 tests passed. Final backoff, workspace,
worker, and work-product suites: 87 tests passed.
- Final workspace and worker suites: 81 tests passed. Deadline selection
performs zero database reads. A failed full page retries its unread
terminal workspace before recovery can park.
- Full CI coverage passed on head `2c397970f7`: general tests,
serialized server suites, runner verification, E2E shards, typecheck,
build, and the final verification gate. The duplicate serial local `pnpm
test:run` was stopped after full CI coverage passed; it is not reported
as a completed local pass.
- Greptile: 5/5 with both findings resolved. The security scan also
passed. No failing or pending PR checks remain.

## Risks

- Display state can be stale for thirty seconds. Destructive guards
bypass the display cache.
- Undelivered or otherwise ineligible terminal work retries after five
minutes instead of each heartbeat tick.
- Transaction signals cover the owning `createDb` scope. Direct SQL and
independent server processes require startup recovery.
- Local cooldown timers are maintenance hints. They do not establish an
external wake alarm or whole-instance sleep safety. Existing blockers
remain in force; failed bounded recovery keeps the host awake.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6, model ID `gpt-6`, through Codex. Reasoning, repository
inspection, shell execution, and browser tools assisted the change. The
runtime does not expose the context-window size.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 08:28:45 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 1e731520bb fix(mcp): deduplicate discovered tool descriptors (#16281)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agents receive governed app tools through the MCP gateway.
> - GitHub review tasks can contain a PR discussion and inline finding
threads.
> - Discovery repeated each tool for every conversation linked to the
task.
> - Native tool registration treated these repeated descriptors as a
fatal collision.
> - This pull request lists GitHub tools once and deduplicates identical
descriptors across providers.
> - Agents can continue work while conflicting definitions and normal
tool permissions remain enforced.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A follow-up run on a GitHub review task failed with
`assigned_mcp_tool_name_collision` before the provider started. The task
had a main conversation and an inline finding thread. Discovery returned
the same seven tools twice. Repeated descriptors from other providers
could cause the same failure.

**Expected behavior**

Discovery exposes each identical tool once. Separate connection names
remain separate tools. Conflicting definitions remain an error. Every
call still passes the gateway's policy, approval, revocation, and audit
checks.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Run a GitHub review and publish an inline finding.
2. Send a follow-up request on the same PR task.
3. Inspect the task-bound bot catalog and the next native startup.
4. Separately, return two identical descriptors from an assigned app or
plugin catalog.

Related: #13717 added the GitHub review workflow.

## What Changed

- Use a distinct GitHub discovery query across conversations that share
an endpoint and task. Keep both thread mappings.
- Deduplicate identical gateway descriptors by their full gateway name
across providers. Use this rule for MCP listings, plugin listings,
assigned-tool startup, and fresh assigned-tool discovery.
- Reject conflicting descriptors with `tool_name_collision`. Keep the
projected-name collision guard.
- Cover GitHub inline-thread discovery, repeated plugin/app tools,
direct and on-demand catalogs, revocation, conflicting bindings, and
separate connection names.
- Update the execution contract, GitHub documentation, and agent access
map.

## Verification

- Regression baseline: six new assertions failed on the original
implementation. GitHub returned fourteen entries, plugin discovery
repeated a tool, and native startup failed on repeated app tools.
- Focused verification passed: 272 GitHub cases, all 29 assigned-tool
cases, and all 88 gateway acceptance cases.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm build` passed.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed.
- Current-head CI passed: 55 checks passed, two inapplicable checks
skipped. Greptile scored the current head 5/5 with no unresolved
threads.
- Full local `pnpm test:run` encountered a 15-second timeout in the
existing bearer-auth throttling test, before tool discovery. That test
passed in the separate 88-case gateway run and on one isolated rerun.
The duplicate broad local run was then stopped; the complete
current-head CI matrix passed.

## Risks

- Deduplication keeps the first identical descriptor and preserves
listing order. Same-name descriptors with different definitions fail
with HTTP 409 rather than selecting an ambiguous binding.
- The GitHub query changes result cardinality. It retains the existing
task/company/agent filters and leaves conversation rows intact.
- No schema migration or credential change. Live staging recovery
requires deployment and a new authorized run.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with code inspection, editing, browser
investigation, and test execution. The exact serving model ID and
context window are not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 07:39:54 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip e9b6c4d44c perf: remove history scans from task and chat queries (#16278)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Task reads and external chat notices must remain responsive as run
history grows.
> - The chat notice sweep casts indexed UUID columns to text.
> - Run redaction and task provenance filter large JSON contexts with
expressions that lack matching indexes.
> - These queries scan history and read large stored contexts on common
requests.
> - This pull request adapts two existing fixes to current master and
adds the missing provenance index.
> - The benefit is less database work with the same query results and
access rules.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15927. This change adapts that chat sweep fix to the extracted
inbound notice module and retains the contributor credit.

Refs #12499. This change adds that missing nested-context index through
a current, concurrent migration. It retains the contributor credit.

This combined change replaces those older layouts for the measured query
paths. It also covers task creation provenance, which those pull
requests do not address.

**What happened?**

The chat notice sweep scans wakeup history. Issue redaction scans run
contexts because only one branch of its JSON condition has an index. The
task creation-source filter also scans contexts because its native and
legacy ID expression lacks an index.

**Expected behavior**

The queries use indexed lookups and return the same rows. Company
access, task origin precedence, secret redaction, and chat notice
ordering remain the same.

**Steps to reproduce**

Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsx
../scripts/benchmark-slow-queries.ts --baseline-ref=f8af817f8d`. The
benchmark creates disposable PostgreSQL data and compares the old query
with the current query on the same fixture.

## What Changed

- Compare chat UUID columns directly with safely parsed payload IDs.
Reject malformed and noncanonical IDs without a cast failure.
- Add the nested `paperclipIssue.id` run-context index and the exact
native/legacy task-provenance expression index.
- Build both indexes concurrently. Register the migration for top-level
execution and invalid-index retry repair.
- Extend chat payload and migration regression coverage.
- Add a repeatable synthetic SQL benchmark and document its scope and
command.
- Keep the five newest schema snapshots.

## Verification

- Focused local checks: 76 selected tests passed in five files. These
cover FIFO notices, malformed IDs, conversation state, redaction,
provenance, and company boundaries.
- Disposable PostgreSQL 18.1 fixture: 335 tasks, 1,400 runs, 13,000
wakeups, 377 actions, and 192 KiB synthetic contexts.
- Five warm samples per query, after two warmups. Every returned SQL
column matched before and after, compared as positional tuples so
duplicate unnamed projections are retained.

| Query | Before, median | After, median | Improvement |
| --- | ---: | ---: | ---: |
| Chat notice candidates | 26.21 ms | 6.43 ms | 4.1× |
| Task creation-source list | 159.69 ms | 6.51 ms | 24.5× |
| Issue redaction contexts | 131.88 ms | 0.34 ms | 389.1× |

The run-history context projection returned the same 200 rows and kept
the same index plan and buffer counts. Its timings were noisy (37.30 ms
before and 56.78 ms after in the last run; 34.25 ms and 34.14 ms in the
previous run). No improvement is claimed for this control. Its repeated
JSON projection remains a separate optimization opportunity.

The populated plans use the wakeup primary key, the provenance
expression index, and a BitmapOr over both redaction indexes. These are
local SQL measurements. They do not prove an equivalent change in hosted
API latency.

- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed locally.
- The full local `pnpm test:run` was started and then interrupted (exit
130) when the Mac reached its PostgreSQL shared-memory limit. It did not
complete and is not reported as passed. The final SQL benchmark passed
after its disposable database resources were released. The full general
and serialized test suites passed in CI.
- All CI checks for final head
`193acca6abaa992acad12f4b631bd31dd3234641` passed, including full Vitest
coverage, E2E checks, typecheck, build, migration order, and lifecycle
boundaries.
- Greptile reviewed that exact head at 5/5 with no actionable comments.


## Risks

- Both indexes add storage and write cost. Initial builds read stored
run contexts and can take time on large histories.
- Concurrent index builds avoid holding a write-blocking table lock for
the whole build. The existing migration retry path removes invalid
partial indexes before retrying.
- The chat parser accepts only canonical lowercase UUID text. This
preserves the prior text comparison, including rejection of uppercase
and malformed values.
- Staging has not been migrated or deployed. Local PostgreSQL and
synthetic data do not reproduce hosted load or network latency.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6. The exact serving model ID and context
window were not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, repository
tools, browser inspection, and local code execution. The adapted fixes
retain their original contributor credits.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 07:37:51 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip c80d93e14e fix(observability): time execution configuration steps (#16236)
Record optional execution-configuration timings before provider dispatch, with success, failure, sampling, cleanup, and silent-unconfigured controls.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 07:21:56 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 6cb6ac3b8e fix(github): allow review publication to finish before tool timeout (#16275)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agent work and its published results.
> - GitHub review bots publish task-scoped assessments through the tool
gateway.
> - A submission saves its assessment and publication intent before it
waits for GitHub.
> - The gateway's ten-second default can expire while those provider
requests continue.
> - GitHub can then show a completed review while the agent receives a
timeout and blocks its task.
> - This pull request gives GitHub bot tools the existing sixty-second
maximum by default.
> - The caller can receive the confirmed publication result without
manual task repair for ordinary slower responses.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A GitHub bot's `submit_review` call returned `504 tool_timeout`. Its
saved assessment continued to publish a summary and completed check
after the caller stopped waiting. The agent treated publication as
unconfirmed and blocked the task.

**Expected behavior**

A valid GitHub response that takes longer than ten seconds should return
its confirmed publication receipt within the gateway's supported
deadline.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Configure a report-only GitHub review bot and admit a PR review
request.
2. Delay the summary-comment PATCH response by eleven seconds.
3. Submit a complete assessment through a real run-scoped tool gateway.
4. Before this fix, the caller gets a timeout while the durable action
publishes one summary and a neutral check.
5. With this fix, the caller gets `completed`, `processed`, and the
assessment score. Retrying does not add another comment.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced from master at `2c17d3ca52a7840f280f1dd87975a2ad77de3b35`.

Related changes: Refs #16259 and #16263. Those changes repaired
connection recovery. This change addresses the subsequent submission
deadline.

## What Changed

- Use a sixty-second default for `paperclip_github_chat` tools in run
execution and board tool tests.
- Preserve explicit shorter deadlines and the existing maximum.
- Add PostgreSQL-backed regressions through the real gateway for delayed
publication, explicit deadlines, neutral checks, and duplicate
prevention.
- Document the deadline and the durable publication behavior.

## Verification

- Red: the eleven-second publication regression failed with
`ToolGatewayHttpError(504, tool_timeout)` after the summary and neutral
check were published.
- Green: the same regression passed after the repair.
- GitHub review workflow suite: 122 tests passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed.
- `pnpm build`: passed.
- `pnpm test:run`: running; results will be recorded before handoff.
- Live local verification is running against a dedicated test App on
[the disposable test
PR](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-permissions-smoke-20260926-pap57-fee7428e/pull/9).
A test-only preload delays one real GitHub PATCH response by eleven
seconds. It is not part of this change.

## Risks

GitHub bot calls can occupy their execution slot for up to sixty seconds
by default. Calls that exceed that limit can still time out. Durable
publication may continue after any caller timeout, so a timeout alone is
not proof of a failed write. This change does not add automatic task
reconciliation for arbitrarily slow or unavailable providers. No schema
or credential changes are required.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with code inspection, editing, test execution, and
browser verification. The exact deployment model ID and context window
are not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] 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>
2026-10-14 06:52:33 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 2c17d3ca52 fix(github): recover webhook verification in attention state (#16263)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - GitHub review bots require signed webhook delivery before
activation.
> - Cloud can deduplicate an old ping after a connection repair.
> - A fresh event could verify active connections, but an
attention-state connection discarded it before authentication.
> - This pull request allows signed delivery verification while the
connection needs attention.
> - It discards ordinary work until the manager completes the existing
reconnect and activation checks.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16259. Related: #16138 addresses the separate classification of
local authorization failures.

**What happened?**

Live verification of #16259 found that a GitHub App already marked as
needing attention remained stuck waiting for a signed ping. The Cloud
relay had already delivered that ping. New signed events were discarded
by the attention-state ingress gate before they could verify delivery.

**Expected behavior**

A fresh valid event from the bound installation verifies delivery. It
does not activate the connection, change repository access, or start
work. The manager can then complete the normal reconnect flow.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Put an existing App connection into attention state with webhook
verification cleared after repair.
2. Deliver a fresh signed comment event for its bound installation.
3. Continue setup. Before this fix, webhook verification remains missing
and reconnect cannot proceed.

## What Changed

- Use a content-free verification path for signed ordinary GitHub events
while the connection needs attention.
- Allow a fresh signed event from the same installation to verify
webhook delivery.
- Verify delivery even from disabled or unavailable repositories.
Discard the event before content storage, resource reconciliation, or
runtime creation.
- Keep newly verified connections in the provider-setup step. Later
installation events cannot activate them before reconnect. Preserve
normal installation recovery for existing qualified connections.
- Extend recovery regressions to cover attention state, foreign
installations, invalid signatures, missing installation IDs, unchanged
resources, no wakeups, and successful reconnect after verification.
- Document the recovery behavior.

## Verification

- The targeted regression reproduced the attention-state failure before
the change.
- All ten recovery cases pass after the change. The tests cover disabled
and unavailable repositories, content-free verification, and
installation events after verification.
- Server typecheck passed.
- All 260 GitHub integration tests passed after the review fixes. Final
server typecheck also passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed.
- The full local suite is running. One unrelated workspace-runtime
conflict-reference test failed and then passed on its isolated rerun.
Final totals and CI/review outcomes will be updated before merge.
- Live verification will use the existing advisory review bot after
deployment.

## Risks

- Attention-state ordinary events authenticate under the current
credential lease without creating a durable content record. They return
before resource reconciliation or runtime creation.
- Verification is still bound to the current credential lease, runtime
generation, valid signature, and installation ID. It does not activate
the bot or replace normal setup checks.
- Paused, revoked, archived, and unconfigured connections retain their
existing ingress rules. No schema changes or permission expansion.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with code inspection, editing, test execution, and
browser verification. The exact deployment model ID and context window
are not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] 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>
2026-10-14 05:23:42 +00:00
DottaandPaperclip c36281d639 fix(skills): repair missing branches and show grouped import progress (#16256)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and their reusable skills.
> - GitHub skill sources must keep their installed content usable during updates.
> - A source can track a branch that no longer exists.
> - The UI treats that GitHub error as a connection problem, so saving a valid account does not resolve it.
> - Project workspaces also show the same repository several times, and long imports give little feedback.
> - This pull request adds explicit branch repair, groups repository imports, and shows import progress.
> - People can repair the actual problem and see when their import is working.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16066 and #14713. This fixes the Sources experience introduced by those changes. Related adapter-source PRs #14340 and #14341 cover runtime mounting, not this source-management flow. No overlapping source-management fix was found.

**What happened?**

An installed source tracked `main` while its GitHub repository used `master`. GitHub returned HTTP 422. The UI showed a general read error and asked for a new connection after a valid account was saved. The project repository list repeated the same repository/ref for each project. Import had no spinner or explanation of queued work.

**Expected behavior**

Identify an unavailable branch and offer an explicit repair. Retain the selected connection and installed versions. Show one repository/ref row with its projects. Give immediate feedback and show the queued and active import states.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Install a source with an immutable commit and a saved tracked branch that does not exist.
2. Refresh it, or try to save a valid GitHub connection.
3. Add the same repository/ref to two legacy project workspaces and open Sources.
4. Import that repository and observe the row until installation completes.

## What Changed

- Distinguish a missing GitHub revision from access denial and temporary read errors.
- Validate both repository identity and the tracked revision when saving a connection.
- Offer Use default branch on independent sources and in connection repair. Keep `HEAD` as the default-branch alias after refresh. Preserve skill IDs, versions and selections.
- Keep active project refs under project configuration. Reject source-level changes that would alter their tracking. Recheck the ref under the source lock when project attachment races with branch repair.
- Group matching repository/ref workspaces. Adopt eligible workspaces and skip pending workspaces. Keep remaining project links inside the existing source card. Allow remaining imports while another workspace is pending.
- Show a spinner, busy state and queued/importing text. Keep the saved authorized account selected in connection repair.
- Update shared contracts, feature/access maps, database notes and production-component Storybook journeys.

## Verification

- Red/green: three local regressions failed on the original code: missing-ref classification, duplicate repository rows, and branch repair instead of another connection prompt. The changed UI/reader tests pass after the fixes.
- Live local app with a real authorized GitHub credential: reproduced HTTP 422 for the unavailable branch; used the UI to restore default-branch tracking; confirmed the same connection, skill ID and single immutable version remained.
- Live local grouped Paperclip import: one source, two project associations and 52 installed skills. Sources survived reload. No staging data was changed.
- All 16 project repository Storybook browser journeys pass on the final head, including keyboard focus recovery after branch repair. These include branch repair, grouped imports, connection selection, recovery, removal and responsive layouts.
- Repository typecheck, production build, Storybook build, token gates and 28 map/catalog tests passed. Final UI typecheck and build also passed after grouping remaining project links.
- Linux qualification: all 94 focused source, project import, GitHub reader and UI tests pass with supported Node 24. No database tests were skipped. Both review findings failed before their fixes and pass after them.
- The full local `pnpm test:run` attempt was stopped after macOS database suites exhausted the host shared-memory limit. The complete Linux CI matrix is the full-suite gate. The complete Linux CI matrix passes for head `f886e3ac073ec1c6f051fd6429496234f5143694`.
- Greptile rates head `f886e3ac073ec1c6f051fd6429496234f5143694` 5/5. Both findings are fixed and all review threads are resolved.
- Storybook: `skills-project-repository-skills-02-journeys--missing-branch` and `--duplicate-projects`.

## Risks

- Default-branch repair changes the tracked branch only after an explicit user action. Existing execution version pins stay intact.
- A selected connection now needs access to the tracked revision, not only repository metadata.
- Grouping is by repository and ref. Project access and provenance remain separate and are checked by the existing services.
- Legacy source errors contain safe text. The repair-action classifier maps known errors and treats other failures as retryable. No credentials or provider response bodies are returned.
- No schema migration, workflow change, lockfile change or staging deployment.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact serving model identifier and context-window size are not exposed in this session. Tool-assisted implementation, code execution and browser 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] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 22:27:11 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip a8b652b085 fix(github): preserve review delivery through reconnect (#16259)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - GitHub review bots turn authorized repository events into agent
tasks and publish the result on the pull request.
> - Cloud Apps send callbacks through a relay, but the direct callback
recovery worker reported that URL as broken.
> - Reconnecting the same App then prevented a new authorized
publication from updating its existing working comment.
> - Report-only runs could also produce an action-required check when no
complete assessment was available.
> - This pull request preserves comment identity across reconnects,
verifies fresh signed delivery after repair, and keeps report-only
results neutral.
> - Users can receive the review without changing repository access or
making an advisory bot block their pull request.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A review could be saved in Paperclip while GitHub kept showing “Working
on this…”. A same-App reconnect changed the runtime generation and the
existing response receipt then failed with “GitHub response binding
changed”. Cloud callback recovery also compared the relay URL with a
direct tenant URL. An incomplete or failed report-only run could produce
an action-required check.

**Expected behavior**

A fresh authorized attempt updates the same App-owned comment after
reconnect. Stale attempts and revoked people remain denied. Cloud relay
delivery does not produce a direct-callback mismatch. Report-only checks
remain neutral and explain incomplete work honestly.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Accept a GitHub request and publish its working comment.
2. Reconnect the same App before the agent publishes its result.
3. Submit the result and inspect the working comment and check.
4. Separately, let a report-only run end without an assessment and
inspect its check conclusion.

Related: #16138 addresses the separate classification of local
authorization errors as provider credential failures. This change fixes
the response binding and report-only paths themselves.

## What Changed

- Bind durable response comments to the App and agent. Keep per-attempt
runtime generation checks and provider comment ownership checks,
including legacy receipts.
- Exclude Cloud-managed Apps from the direct webhook recovery scan and
its stale callback-mismatch warning. The Cloud inbox owns relay retries.
- Let a fresh authenticated event from the bound installation verify
webhook delivery after repair. Keep signature, runtime epoch,
installation, and credential lease checks.
- Keep report-only assessment and terminal-run checks neutral. Preserve
incomplete/error text and gated-review behavior.
- Add integration regressions for reconnect races, legacy comments,
failed runs, Cloud recovery, and foreign or forged webhook traffic.
Update connector documentation.
- Correct the assigned-tool search guidance to name the actual input
fields (`offset` and `schemaOffset`) and show valid arguments. The
failed automatic review had an input-schema rejection before tool
execution; this clarifies recovery without expanding tool access.

## Verification

- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed.
- GitHub policy and integration suite: 291 tests passed (`vitest run
server/src/services/chat-github-review-policy.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/chat-channels.integration.test.ts -t
'GitHub|github'`).
- The report-only policy regression failed before the fix and passed
after it.
- `pnpm build` passed.
- Assigned tool discovery: 24 tests passed. Its guidance now maps
returned pagination offsets to the correct input fields and tells the
model to omit unused optional fields.
- Full `pnpm test:run` is running. It encountered a 15-second timeout in
the unrelated authenticated Workspace calendar-write test. That test
passed on one isolated rerun.
- After the review-requested module extraction, server typecheck and
both direct/Cloud recovery activity integration checks passed.
- All 55 non-skipped CI checks passed for
`32e690279d847e44a6946b6c7cfb110fb11aff79`. Greptile scored that commit
5/5 with no unresolved findings. Live staging publication verification
follows deployment.

## Risks

- A durable response can now survive a same-App reconnect. Fresh
authorization, runtime generation checks for each publication attempt,
App ownership, and the publication lease still fence writes.
- Report-only failures intentionally become neutral. The check still
reports the failure; it does not claim a complete assessment.
- Cloud-managed callbacks rely on their existing durable relay inbox.
The direct callback recovery worker remains unchanged for direct
installations.
- No schema migration or permission expansion.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with code inspection, editing, test execution, and
browser verification. The exact deployment model ID and context window
are not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 22:24:41 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 40ecacff4c fix(voice): accept authenticated Cloud callers (#16254)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agent work through company-scoped tasks.
> - Speko voice connections bind a caller to that work.
> - Private voice routes must recognize an authenticated human caller.
> - Cloud sign-in uses a trusted Cloud actor, rather than a local
session actor.
> - The voice caller check rejected that existing authentication type.
> - This pull request accepts authenticated Cloud callers and retains
the current access checks.
> - Cloud users can load call history and start private voice sessions.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15727, #15728, #15729.

**What happened?**

A signed-in Cloud user sees “Sign in to start a private voice
conversation” when the Speko connection loads call activity. The same
check prevents the user from starting a private voice session.

**Expected behavior**

The trusted Cloud user identity should have the same voice caller access
as a local authenticated session. The current company and user identity
checks must still apply.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Sign in to a Cloud workspace with experimental chat connectors
enabled.
2. Connect a Speko persona to an existing agent.
3. Open its call activity, or start a browser voice session.
4. Observe the sign-in rejection despite the authenticated workspace
session.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced on the voice route in master at b8ffeb973a.

**Deployment mode**

Paperclip Cloud with trusted tenant authentication.

## What Changed

- Accept `cloud_tenant` and `session` actors with a user ID as private
voice callers.
- Use current company membership for Cloud owners, including owners with
temporary administrator access. Retain local administrator authority,
company isolation, and credential-source restrictions.
- Add route regressions for call history, session creation,
administrator authority, missing identities, company boundaries, and
rejected caller types.
- Add Cloud authentication qualification steps to the Speko runbook.

## Verification

- Before the fix: 2 Cloud regressions failed; 9 boundary and local-user
tests passed.
- After the fix: all 100 voice caller and real-database persistence
regressions passed. The Cloud-owner route test covers history, session
creation, persisted caller authority, and membership revocation.
- Repository typecheck and build passed with the repository’s pinned
dependencies.
- All current-head CI gates passed. Greptile reviewed f84fee2605 at 5/5
with no remaining findings. The repaired local full repository test run
is still in progress. The first local full-suite attempt failed on
missing native database library aliases; those aliases were repaired
only in the isolated test dependency. No skipped run is counted as
database proof.
- On Cloud, verify that signed-in call activity loads and private
session creation reaches media setup. Real conversation and spoken
playback acceptance remain separate.

## Risks

The change accepts an existing trusted Cloud actor type. Authentication
still runs in the current middleware. Raw Cloud headers, board API keys,
MCP OAuth, Cloud control credentials, and agent callers cannot establish
private voice caller authority. No migration, UI change, credential,
transcript, or lockfile is included.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with tool use and code execution. The exact
serving variant and context window are not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 21:39:56 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 75189b8762 refactor(server): isolate channel runtime admission and maintenance (#16235)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents for work.
> - Chat channels turn provider messages into shared task workflows.
> - The main service still implements provider details beside common
authorization and persistence.
> - These details belong in the existing channel folders.
> - This pull request moves Discord runtime command capture and root
receipts, Speko runtime and authority, and GitHub maintenance scheduling
behind explicit typed functions.
> - The service keeps its shared workflow and selects the provider
implementation directly.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #16192. Stack part 5/5. Depends on #16233. Base: `master` (parent
PR merged).

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The ownership and readability of provider behavior in the chat channel
service.

**Current behavior**

The service implements Discord runtime command capture and root
receipts, Speko runtime and authority, and GitHub maintenance scheduling
inline.

**Proposed behavior**

Channel modules own these details. The core calls their typed functions.
Runtime and database effects retain their current order.

**Reason and benefit**

Maintainers can find channel behavior in its channel folder without
following a generic provider framework.

**Breaking changes**

None intended. Public service entry points and durable data shapes stay
compatible.

## What Changed

- Extract Discord runtime command capture and root receipts, Speko
runtime and authority, and GitHub maintenance scheduling into the
existing channel folders.
- Keep shared company scope, authorization, and transaction ownership in
their current workflow.
- Reduce `chat-channels.ts` from 3715 to 3649 lines.

## Verification

- The same 167 selected chat-runtime cases and 87 voice ownership cases
passed before and after extraction. Full workspace typecheck and build
passed. Token parity checks passed for six moved control-flow blocks.
- Server typecheck passed.
- `node scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs` passed.
- Full workspace typecheck and build passed on the cumulative stack. All
current-head CI gates passed. Greptile completed at 5/5 with no
findings.
- The full local `pnpm test:run` command exited with three database
fixture-startup hook timeouts. It reported 19,529 passing tests and 250
skipped tests. No assertion failed. Its later test groups did not run
because the driver stops on the first failing group.
- The timed-out files were `environment-custom-images-service.test.ts`,
`generic-mcp-connection.test.ts`, and
`modules/wake-queue/adapters/postgres.test.ts`. All 166 tests in these
files passed in isolation on both baseline `edcfcaf3f6` and stack head
`faaca26d46`, with existing timeouts and assertions. The tests and
database-startup helper are unchanged.
- Provider fixtures prove application integration. They do not prove
live third-party execution.

## Risks

- Incorrect inputs or changed await order could affect provider handling
and recovery.
- Existing integration tests exercise the assembled service before and
after extraction.
- No database migration or API change is included.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6, running in Codex with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact deployment identifier and context-window size are
not exposed in this session.

## Checklist


- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 21:39:08 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip c1994056f9 refactor(server): isolate channel registration and setup services (#16233)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents for work.
> - Chat channels turn provider messages into shared task workflows.
> - The main service still implements provider details beside common
authorization and persistence.
> - These details belong in the existing channel folders.
> - This pull request moves Slack registration, account linking,
test-message setup, GitHub setup progress, and Telegram webhook URL
restrictions behind explicit typed functions.
> - The service keeps its shared workflow and selects the provider
implementation directly.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #16192. Stack part 4/5. Depends on #16232. Base: `master` (parent
PR merged).

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The ownership and readability of provider behavior in the chat channel
service.

**Current behavior**

The service implements Slack registration, account linking, test-message
setup, GitHub setup progress, and Telegram webhook URL restrictions
inline.

**Proposed behavior**

Channel modules own these details. The core calls their typed functions.
Runtime and database effects retain their current order.

**Reason and benefit**

Maintainers can find channel behavior in its channel folder without
following a generic provider framework.

**Breaking changes**

None intended. Public service entry points and durable data shapes stay
compatible.

## What Changed

- Extract Slack registration, account linking, test-message setup,
GitHub setup progress, and Telegram webhook URL restrictions into the
existing channel folders.
- Keep shared company scope, authorization, and transaction ownership in
their current workflow.
- Reduce `chat-channels.ts` from 3813 to 3715 lines.

## Verification

- The same 97 selected setup integration cases passed before and after
extraction. The cases cover Slack installer linking and welcome
eligibility, GitHub registration, and Telegram webhook restrictions.
- Server typecheck passed.
- `node scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs` passed.
- Full workspace typecheck and build passed on the cumulative stack. All
current-head CI gates passed. Greptile completed at 5/5 with no
findings.
- The full local `pnpm test:run` command exited with three database
fixture-startup hook timeouts. It reported 19,529 passing tests and 250
skipped tests. No assertion failed. Its later test groups did not run
because the driver stops on the first failing group.
- The timed-out files were `environment-custom-images-service.test.ts`,
`generic-mcp-connection.test.ts`, and
`modules/wake-queue/adapters/postgres.test.ts`. All 166 tests in these
files passed in isolation on both baseline `edcfcaf3f6` and stack head
`faaca26d46`, with existing timeouts and assertions. The tests and
database-startup helper are unchanged.
- Provider fixtures prove application integration. They do not prove
live third-party execution.

## Risks

- Incorrect inputs or changed await order could affect provider handling
and recovery.
- Existing integration tests exercise the assembled service before and
after extraction.
- No database migration or API change is included.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6, running in Codex with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact deployment identifier and context-window size are
not exposed in this session.

## Checklist


- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 21:28:16 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 875943ac83 refactor(server): isolate provider webhook lifecycle processing (#16232)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents for work.
> - Chat channels turn provider messages into shared task workflows.
> - The main service still implements provider details beside common
authorization and persistence.
> - These details belong in the existing channel folders.
> - This pull request moves GitHub webhook runtime deadlines and Slack
lifecycle processing behind explicit typed functions.
> - The service keeps its shared workflow and selects the provider
implementation directly.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #16192. Stack part 3/5. Depends on #16231. Base: `master` (parent
PR merged).

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The ownership and readability of provider behavior in the chat channel
service.

**Current behavior**

The service implements GitHub webhook runtime deadlines and Slack
lifecycle processing inline.

**Proposed behavior**

Channel modules own these details. The core calls their typed functions.
Runtime and database effects retain their current order.

**Reason and benefit**

Maintainers can find channel behavior in its channel folder without
following a generic provider framework.

**Breaking changes**

None intended. Public service entry points and durable data shapes stay
compatible.

## What Changed

- Extract GitHub webhook runtime deadlines and Slack lifecycle
processing into the existing channel folders.
- Keep shared company scope, authorization, and transaction ownership in
their current workflow.
- Reduce `chat-channels.ts` from 3906 to 3813 lines.

## Verification

- The same 61 selected webhook/lifecycle integration cases passed before
and after extraction. They cover cold GitHub runtime startup, signed
ingress, installation recovery, Slack lifecycle effects, and
Telegram/Teams edits.
- Server typecheck passed.
- `node scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs` passed.
- Full workspace typecheck and build passed on the cumulative stack. All
current-head CI gates passed. Greptile completed at 5/5 with no
findings.
- The full local `pnpm test:run` command exited with three database
fixture-startup hook timeouts. It reported 19,529 passing tests and 250
skipped tests. No assertion failed. Its later test groups did not run
because the driver stops on the first failing group.
- The timed-out files were `environment-custom-images-service.test.ts`,
`generic-mcp-connection.test.ts`, and
`modules/wake-queue/adapters/postgres.test.ts`. All 166 tests in these
files passed in isolation on both baseline `edcfcaf3f6` and stack head
`faaca26d46`, with existing timeouts and assertions. The tests and
database-startup helper are unchanged.
- Provider fixtures prove application integration. They do not prove
live third-party execution.

## Risks

- Incorrect inputs or changed await order could affect provider handling
and recovery.
- Existing integration tests exercise the assembled service before and
after extraction.
- No database migration or API change is included.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6, running in Codex with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact deployment identifier and context-window size are
not exposed in this session.

## Checklist


- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 21:03:46 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip b8ffeb973a feat(runner): add experimental Grok Bot agent participation (#16219)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents that perform work for a company.
> - The shared Runner owns task admission, authority, receipts and
finalization.
> - An existing Grok Bot needs to receive assignments and return results
through that Runner.
> - The Bot also needs governed access when it starts work from its own
conversation.
> - This PR adds agent-purpose MCP access and routine webhook dispatch.
> - It reuses the external-agent Rust Runner and keeps Grok capabilities
explicit.
> - The provider stays experimental until the real-client managed
journeys pass.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Agent or provider**
Grok Bot, distinct from the Grok Build coding runtime in #13882.

**Why this adapter is useful**
Users can assign work to an existing Bot, receive progress, questions,
documents and files in Paperclip, and let the Bot initiate work under
its agent permissions.

**How the agent is invoked**
A webhook-only routine delivers bounded references. Dedicated
named-agent OAuth and MCP provide inbound calls. Setup follows [Grok
routines](https://cursor.com/help/grok-bot/routines) and [custom
plugins](https://cursor.com/help/grok-bot/connect-plugins). The current
desktop app needs its Bot-generated Webhook URL navigation link when
routine-row clicks fail.

The GitHub search found related Grok Build runtime work, but no existing
Grok Bot agent provider. This extends the roadmap’s existing agent,
Runner, governance and artifact foundations.

## What Changed

- Add default-off Grok Bot participation through the shared real Rust
external backend, preserving native provider identity guarantees and
distinguishing session closure from remote termination.
- Bind agent OAuth to company, agent, client, gateway and authorizer;
recheck permissions and task-bound execution authority without
manufacturing a native identity.
- Persist routine configuration, dispatch intents, authenticated
acknowledgement and recovery holds. Store URL/key together in encrypted
secret storage, use guarded public egress, and never automatically
replay ambiguous HTTP delivery.
- Reuse native tools, durable waiting, completion assessment and review.
Add task-bound file grants through existing artifact storage; suppress
proactive echo dispatch and synchronous result wake loops.
- Enforce the current native deliverable work-mode policy at file-ticket
issuance and use. Add operator retries for confirmed rejected wakes,
with retained receipts, stable retry intent and current-authority
checks. Recovery locks bindings before routine rows. Thread Stop
resolves the selected run and its agent.
- Cancel queued and preparing Stop targets before assignment creation,
restore saved setup after a failed request and successful retry, and
publish the Grok provider descriptor schema. Advance the versioned
Copilot source declaration for the shared schema change; its
qualification remains pending.
- Filter task summaries with the shared privacy policy, preserve
feedback admission when wake delivery is blocked, reconcile settled
delivery receipts without restoring work authority, and bind every Stop
control to its displayed run. Recovery records distinguish dispatch
uncertainty from a revoked session.
- Add resumable guided setup, credential replacement, consent,
management, observed work status and stop/recovery controls, plus an
interactive Storybook journey using the production task thread, question
form and report card. Grok’s own apps remain available; Paperclip
workspace and third-party tools are deferred.

## Verification

- Five focused protocol, authorization, person MCP and Runner files: 192
tests pass. The Grok assigned-work case executes the actual Rust Runner,
saves a document, uploads/deduplicates a file and reaches ordinary
finalization.
- Proactive intake/deduplication and renewed-session recovery pass.
These use scripted clients and synthetic storage; they are not
real-provider acceptance.
- Repository typecheck, production build, token gates, map checks and
Storybook build/catalog checks pass. The local full-suite campaign was
stopped after macOS shared-memory exhaustion repeatedly prevented
embedded PostgreSQL startup. No local aggregate pass is claimed. The
first clean-worker CI run identified avatar fixture/configuration, flag
defaults, feature-card ordering and OpenAPI route-coverage gaps; all
four focused regressions pass after correction. Those regressions pass.
The latest clean-worker CI run also found a Copilot source-hash
declaration mismatch after the shared descriptor update; the corrected
declaration passes all 28 integrity tests. The next review corrections
pass 144 rendered UI tests, 21 OpenAPI tests and 82 Runner
contract/integrity/history tests. The latest database fixtures were
blocked at startup by host shared-memory exhaustion; clean-worker CI
must execute their new regressions. Full current-head CI now passes: 54
successful checks and four intentional skips. The database regression
uses the PostgreSQL driver result shape; file-policy, rejected-feedback
and lock-order cases pass on clean workers. Current-head Greptile is 5/5
with no unresolved findings.
- Rendered setup steps and outbound-only verification were walked
through in Storybook. Simulation cannot enable Done without an
authenticated-reply state.
- Actual client OAuth, continued access, reconnect and one routine wake
with an exact chat acknowledgement were observed separately. This
candidate’s live authenticated challenge, assigned/proactive workflows,
Linux managed artifact, restart and cleanup are not yet qualified. The
provider stays disabled by default.
- The separate Cloud ingress change forwards only exact task-bound
upload/download paths and preserves host identity and header stripping.
- Current Cloud policy reserves Test for pre-merge app/harness
experiments; Staging accepts only master-derived revisions. Real-client
qualification needs a supported, authorized deployment target and
remains outstanding.

## Risks

One append-only migration adds routine/dispatch state and extends shared
bindings and file tickets. The unshipped migrations were regenerated
after upstream consumed their original numbers. Rolling back code
retains the durable rows; revoke grants and inspect unknown remote
activity before resuming dispatch. Grok cannot confirm remote
termination, stream its complete transcript or report spending. Plugins
are account-wide and do not isolate credentials between Bots.
Real-client managed acceptance remains required before enabling the
experimental provider.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex based on GPT-6, with reasoning, code execution and
browser/native UI tools. The exact deployment model ID and
context-window size are not exposed by 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 not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 20:57:42 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip f6608f382f refactor(server): isolate GitHub task preparation and review containment (#16231)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents for work.
> - Chat channels turn provider messages into shared task workflows.
> - The main service still implements provider details beside common
authorization and persistence.
> - These details belong in the existing channel folders.
> - This pull request moves GitHub task prompts, review provenance, and
shared guest containment behind explicit typed functions.
> - The service keeps its shared workflow and selects the provider
implementation directly.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #16192. Stack part 2/5. Depends on #16230. Base:
`codex/chat-channel-inbound-policies`.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The ownership and readability of provider behavior in the chat channel
service.

**Current behavior**

The service implements GitHub task prompts, review provenance, and
shared guest containment inline.

**Proposed behavior**

Channel modules own these details. The core calls their typed functions.
Runtime and database effects retain their current order.

**Reason and benefit**

Maintainers can find channel behavior in its channel folder without
following a generic provider framework.

**Breaking changes**

None intended. Public service entry points and durable data shapes stay
compatible.

## What Changed

- Extract GitHub task prompts, review provenance, and shared guest
containment into the existing channel folders.
- Keep shared company scope, authorization, and transaction ownership in
their current workflow.
- Reduce `chat-channels.ts` from 3970 to 3906 lines.

## Verification

- The same 130 selected GitHub and low-trust integration cases passed
before and after extraction. Existing transactions still own
containment, authority receipts, and review rows.
- Server typecheck passed.
- `node scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs` passed.
- Full workspace typecheck and build passed on the cumulative stack. All
current-head CI gates passed. Greptile completed at 5/5 with no
findings.
- The full local `pnpm test:run` command exited with three database
fixture-startup hook timeouts. It reported 19,529 passing tests and 250
skipped tests. No assertion failed. Its later test groups did not run
because the driver stops on the first failing group.
- The timed-out files were `environment-custom-images-service.test.ts`,
`generic-mcp-connection.test.ts`, and
`modules/wake-queue/adapters/postgres.test.ts`. All 166 tests in these
files passed in isolation on both baseline `edcfcaf3f6` and stack head
`faaca26d46`, with existing timeouts and assertions. The tests and
database-startup helper are unchanged.
- Provider fixtures prove application integration. They do not prove
live third-party execution.

## Risks

- Incorrect inputs or changed await order could affect provider handling
and recovery.
- Existing integration tests exercise the assembled service before and
after extraction.
- No database migration or API change is included.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6, running in Codex with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact deployment identifier and context-window size are
not exposed in this session.

## Checklist


- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 20:54:18 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 3e8e1efb84 refactor(server): isolate inbound channel message policies (#16230)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents for work.
> - Chat channels turn provider messages into shared task workflows.
> - The main service still implements provider details beside common
authorization and persistence.
> - These details belong in the existing channel folders.
> - This pull request moves inbound message filtering, command
rendering, reply metadata, and setup-reply settlement behind explicit
typed functions.
> - The service keeps its shared workflow and selects the provider
implementation directly.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #16192. Stack part 1/5. Base: `master`.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The ownership and readability of provider behavior in the chat channel
service.

**Current behavior**

The service implements inbound message filtering, command rendering,
reply metadata, and setup-reply settlement inline.

**Proposed behavior**

Channel modules own these details. The core calls their typed functions.
Runtime and database effects retain their current order.

**Reason and benefit**

Maintainers can find channel behavior in its channel folder without
following a generic provider framework.

**Breaking changes**

None intended. Public service entry points and durable data shapes stay
compatible.

## What Changed

- Extract inbound message filtering, command rendering, reply metadata,
and setup-reply settlement into the existing channel folders.
- Keep shared company scope, authorization, and transaction ownership in
their current workflow.
- Reduce `chat-channels.ts` from 4082 to 3970 lines.

## Verification

- The same 14 selected chat/Photon integration cases passed before and
after extraction, including Telegram forum controls, guidance retries,
Teams setup replies, and Photon conversation reuse.
- Server typecheck passed.
- `node scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs` passed.
- Full workspace typecheck and build passed on the cumulative stack. All
current-head CI gates passed. Greptile completed at 5/5 with no
findings.
- The full local `pnpm test:run` command exited with three database
fixture-startup hook timeouts. It reported 19,529 passing tests and 250
skipped tests. No assertion failed. Its later test groups did not run
because the driver stops on the first failing group.
- The timed-out files were `environment-custom-images-service.test.ts`,
`generic-mcp-connection.test.ts`, and
`modules/wake-queue/adapters/postgres.test.ts`. All 166 tests in these
files passed in isolation on both baseline `edcfcaf3f6` and stack head
`faaca26d46`, with existing timeouts and assertions. The tests and
database-startup helper are unchanged.
- Provider fixtures prove application integration. They do not prove
live third-party execution.

## Risks

- Incorrect inputs or changed await order could affect provider handling
and recovery.
- Existing integration tests exercise the assembled service before and
after extraction.
- No database migration or API change is included.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6, running in Codex with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact deployment identifier and context-window size are
not exposed in this session.

## Checklist


- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 20:44:29 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 450d93d49d fix(auth): deduplicate run history permission checks (#16242)
Share matching run-history permission checks within one list operation while preserving current authorization, redaction, and fresh checks on subsequent requests.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 20:37:48 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 5ea3f905cf fix: preserve workspace finalization during watchdog recovery (#16247)
Keep task completion separate from runtime and workspace settlement. Permit verified board file-only repair of successful legacy retained-source runs without authorizing replay.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 18:35:27 -07:00
9cc979116e fix(server): stop reporting queries that outlive the database shutdown (#16243)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The server reports unexpected route errors to Sentry through the
shared error handler.
> - An orderly shutdown drains the HTTP listener, and then it ends the
database pool.
> - `server.close()` completes when the sockets close. A route handler
whose client disconnected, or whose socket the drain timeout closed, can
still run.
> - The next query of that handler fails with postgres.js
`CONNECTION_ENDED`, because this process ended the pool. The error
handler reports this as a 500 crash.
> - This pull request marks the pool as closing just before it ends. The
error handler then skips the error sinks for that one error code during
shutdown.
> - Public MCP calls run in their own internal Express app, so the flag
is also shared with that app.
> - The benefit is that a normal restart does not create false Sentry
crash reports. Real errors are still reported.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No public GitHub issue exists. This is the bug description.

**What happened?**

A staging server restarted. During the restart, `GET
/api/companies/:companyId/heartbeat-runs` failed in the per-row run
privacy check (`canActorReadHeartbeatRun`). The error was `Failed query:
select "id" from "issues" ...`. Its cause was `write CONNECTION_ENDED
<host>:5432`. postgres.js raises this code only for a query that starts
after the process called `sql.end()`. The error handler sent the error
to Sentry as a crash.

**Expected behavior**

A query that runs after the shutdown ends the pool is an expected part
of the shutdown. The server must not report it as a crash. If the
response is still open, the server answers `503`. The server must
continue to report all other errors.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Start the server, and send a slow request (for example, a large
heartbeat run list).
2. Close the client connection, or let the 5 second drain timeout close
it, while the handler still runs.
3. Send SIGTERM. The shutdown drains HTTP and ends the pool.
4. The handler's next query fails with `CONNECTION_ENDED`. Before this
change, the error goes to Sentry.

## What Changed

- `server/src/database-retry.ts`: Add `isEndedDbPoolError`. It finds the
postgres.js `CONNECTION_ENDED` code anywhere in the error `cause` chain.
`isTransientDbConnectionError` now uses the same chain walk. Its
behavior does not change.
- `server/src/index.ts`: The orderly shutdown sets
`app.locals.paperclipDatabaseClosing = true` immediately before it ends
the database pools.
- `server/src/middleware/error-handler.ts`: When the flag is set and the
error is `CONNECTION_ENDED`, the handler answers `503 { error: "Server
is shutting down" }`, or it ends the response if the headers are already
sent. It does not call Sentry or crash telemetry. This follows the
existing client-abort (`ECONNRESET`) case.
- `server/src/services/public-mcp/capabilities.ts` and
`server/src/app.ts`: `createMcpApiDispatch` takes the main app's locals.
Each per-call dispatch app reads `paperclipDatabaseClosing` through a
live getter, so a public MCP call that outlives the pool is handled the
same way (Greptile review finding).
- `server/src/__tests__/error-handler.test.ts`: Add tests for the 503
path, the headers-sent path, `CONNECTION_ENDED` outside shutdown (still
reported), and `CONNECTION_CLOSED` during shutdown (still reported).
- `server/src/__tests__/public-mcp-dispatch-shutdown.test.ts`: Send an
ended-pool error through the real MCP dispatch, both during shutdown
(503, not reported) and outside shutdown (reported).

## Verification

- `cd server && vitest run
src/__tests__/public-mcp-dispatch-shutdown.test.ts
src/__tests__/error-handler.test.ts
src/__tests__/cloud-tenant-transient-db-retry.test.ts`: 25 tests pass.
- With only the error-handler change reverted, the two new error-handler
shutdown tests fail. With only the dispatch change reverted, the MCP
shutdown test fails. The negative-control tests pass in both cases.
- I could not run the full `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm test:run`, and
`pnpm build` locally, or `public-mcp.test.ts`, which needs built
workspace packages. The sandbox has a 4 GB memory limit. CI runs the
full gates.

## Risks

- Low risk. The skip applies only to `CONNECTION_ENDED`, and only after
the shutdown starts to end the pools. postgres.js raises that code only
for a pool that this process ended. Network and database failures
(`CONNECTION_CLOSED`, `CONNECTION_DESTROYED`, and others) are still
reported.
- `CONNECTION_ENDED` outside shutdown (for example, a dedicated client
used after it ended) is still reported as a crash.
- The MCP dispatch app gets only the shutdown flag from the main app's
locals. It does not get any other locals.
- No schema, API contract, or UI change.

## Model Used

Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`) in Claude Code, with tool
use (repository inspection, shell, test execution) and the Sentry and
GitHub connectors.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-10-13 18:26:03 -07:00
ba4fac585d feat(agents): show who created an agent in shared companies (#16055)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A company in Paperclip can have more than one human member, and each
member can create agents
> - The app does not record which person created an agent
> - When two or more people share a company, members cannot see who
added an agent or who to ask about it
> - This pull request records the creator of each agent and shows the
creator on the agent Overview tab
> - The benefit is clear ownership of agents in shared companies, with
no change for single-user companies

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No public issue exists. This description follows `feature_request.yml`.

**Subsystem affected**

Agents: the agent data model, the agent create path on the server, and
the agent Overview tab in the board UI.

**Problem or motivation**

Paperclip does not record which human user created an agent. When more
than one human user works in a company, the agent page does not tell
members who created the agent.

**Proposed solution**

Record the user ID of the creator when a human creates an agent. Show
"Created by <name>" on the Identity card of the agent Overview tab. Show
this row only when the company has two or more human members. Do not
count the synthetic local Board principal as a human member. Do not show
the local Board as a creator.

**Alternatives considered**

Count human users across the full instance. We did not do this. An
instance-wide count tells a member of one company that other companies
have users. The creator is always a member of the agent's company, so
the company count is sufficient.

**Roadmap alignment**

`ROADMAP.md` has no item for agent ownership. This change is small and
additive.

## What Changed

- Add the nullable column `agents.created_by_user_id`
(`packages/db/src/schema/agents.ts`, migration `0343_new_mentor.sql`).
- Set the column in the single agent insert path
(`server/src/modules/agent-lifecycle/adapters/records.ts`). The value
comes from the authenticated user actor. The server ignores a creator
value in the request body. Agents that agents or the system create keep
`null`.
- Backfill existing agents in the migration. The backfill uses the
earliest `agent.created` or `agent.hire_created` activity row that a
user actor wrote in the same company.
- Add `createdByUserId` to the shared `Agent` type
(`packages/shared/src/types/agent.ts`).
- Add `ui/src/lib/agent-creator.ts`. It decides if the UI shows the
creator row and it resolves the creator name. If the creator left the
company, the row shows "Former member".
- Add the "Created by" row to the Identity card in
`ui/src/pages/AgentDetail.tsx`. If the company user directory request
fails, the row shows "Could not load creator". The row does not
disappear silently.
- Add the Storybook story `Pages/Agent Detail → Shared Company Shows
Creator`.
- Document the column in `doc/SPEC-implementation.md` §7.2.

## Verification

- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck` passes. This includes the
migration numbering and migration safety checks.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` passes.
- `ui`: `tsc --noEmit` passes.
- `server`: `vitest run
src/modules/agent-lifecycle/__tests__/lifecycle.test.ts` passes (49/49).
Two new tests:
- The server records the creator from the actor and ignores a creator
value in the request body.
- The backfill takes the earliest user activity row. It skips agent
actors and rows from other companies.
- `server`: `vitest run src/__tests__/built-in-agents.test.ts` passes
(40/40). A new test checks that a built-in agent enabled by a human
records that human, and that automatic provisioning stays unattributed.
The gated (pending-approval) provisioning test also asserts the creator.
`src/__tests__/built-in-agent-routes.test.ts` also passes.
- `ui`: `vitest run src/lib/agent-creator.test.ts
src/pages/AgentOverview.test.tsx` passes (10/10). The tests cover these
cases: the row shows with two or more humans, the row stays hidden with
one human plus the Board, the UI never shows the Board as the creator,
the row shows an error when the directory request fails, and the row
stays hidden (no error) for agents with no creator or the Board as
creator. The last case fails without the fix.
- The current Storybook catalog uses source annotations and generated
indexes. `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --check` passes (264 story
files, 2,514 stories). The merge keeps the authored catalog deletion
from master.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` is clean.
- Screenshots from the Storybook story (fake data: two human members,
Alice Admin and Bob Builder, plus the local Board). The red "Could not
load public key" text is a Storybook artifact: the story has no fixture
for the public key request. The existing `Dashboard` story shows the
same text.

  **Two or more human members: the Identity card shows "Created by".**

![Identity card with the Created by
row](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/9b62bd2ea6cf984ce6745f08cc45f44ddf00fb51/pr-16055/identity-created-by.png)

  **One human member plus the local Board: the row stays hidden.**

![Identity card without the Created by
row](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/9b62bd2ea6cf984ce6745f08cc45f44ddf00fb51/pr-16055/identity-single-human.png)

Full Overview tab:
[overview-created-by.png](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/9b62bd2ea6cf984ce6745f08cc45f44ddf00fb51/pr-16055/overview-created-by.png).
The images are on the separate branch `pr-assets/agent-created-by`. They
are not in this PR and do not go to `master`.
- Manual check: open Storybook at `Pages/Agent Detail → Shared Company
Shows Creator`. The Identity card shows "Created by Alice Admin". The
`Dashboard` story has one human, so it does not show the row.
- Final focused verification on
`5a02350cf16050a3cf3cb3f8dc061fe61758c60d`: all 99 tests pass across the
two UI suites, built-in-agent suite, and lifecycle suite. The backfill
test applies the complete migration twice. The migration uses `ADD
COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS` and preserves the company-scoped backfill.
Migration numbering and token checks pass.
- Full repository typecheck, build, and Storybook build pass. The
generated creator story ID is present. A Chromium check renders the
production agent page fixture and verifies the creator row and Alice
Admin name. Map checks and their 21 tests pass. A fresh Apex review is
5/5 on the current head with no unresolved findings. All 54 successful
CI checks pass on this head, with two intentional skips, including all
general and serialized test shards, E2E, typecheck, and build. The
workspaces-b job passed after rerunning a runner shutdown; no source
change was needed. The separate, unsharded local `pnpm test:run`
invocation has not completed; complete suite verification comes from CI.

## Risks

- Migration: the migration adds one nullable column and runs one
`UPDATE` on `agents` with a correlated subquery on `activity_log`. On an
instance with a very large activity log, the backfill can take some
time. The migration does not lock other tables and does not delete data.
- Backfill accuracy: agents with no user-authored create activity row
keep `null`. The UI then does not show a creator. This is the same as
the current behavior.
- Privacy: the row shows only names from the company user directory, and
only to users who can already see that directory.
- Low risk for single-user companies: the UI does not change for 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

- Provider: Anthropic, Claude Opus 5.5 (model ID `claude-opus-5-5`), run
as a coding agent through Claude Code with tool use (shell, file edit,
and test execution), standard context window.

OpenAI GPT-6 (`gpt-6`) through Codex assisted conflict resolution,
regression tests, and repository verification. This session does not
expose an exact context-window size.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Amy (Opus) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-10-13 14:57:41 -07:00
a64969b288 fix(server): attribute legacy runs stopped by controller lease loss (#16084)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The heartbeat runner executes legacy agent runs. A controller lease
watchdog keeps durable ownership of each legacy run.
> - When the watchdog loses the lease, it aborts the adapter. The abort
reason was a plain `Error`, and nothing recorded why the run stopped.
> - Completion then saved the cancellation as source `unknown`. Sentry
got an unexpected cancel that it could not tell apart from other
unrecorded stops.
> - We saw this on a sandboxed Grok run. The system cancelled it after
about 22 minutes with `cancellationSource: unknown`. Workspace copy-back
then failed. Every `cancelRun` path records a stop request, so an
unrecorded stop this late points to the lease watchdog.
> - This pull request records a lease loss as its own cancellation
source, with a closed cause label.
> - The benefit is that the next event shows whether the lease loss
caused the stop, and which renewal failure caused it. That is the
missing fact to fix the root cause.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15790
Refs #15920

**What happened?**
A legacy sandbox run was stopped by the system while it was working. The
run record and the Sentry diagnostics show `cancellationSource:
unknown`, with no initiator. The controller lease watchdog aborts the
adapter with a plain `Error("Legacy controller lease lost")`. Completion
does not read the abort reason, so it records the stop as `unknown`.

**Expected behavior**
When the host stops its own adapter because it lost the controller
lease, the run records that cause. Diagnostics name the cause with a
closed label. A stop that a user or the control plane requested earlier
keeps its recorded source.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start a legacy run that has a controller lease.
2. Make lease renewal fail: the renewal query errors, the update matches
no row, or the lease deadline passes.
3. Let the adapter return its cancelled result.
4. Read `resultJson.cancellation` on the run. Before this change,
`source` is `unknown`.

**Agent adapter(s) involved**
Not adapter-specific (core bug). We saw it with `grok_local` in a
sandbox.

**Additional context**
This change adds diagnostics. It does not prevent the lease loss. #15920
retries a transient copy-back failure. It does not help here, because
the stopped sandbox rejects every retry.

## What Changed

- `legacy-controller-lease.ts`: The watchdog aborts with a new
`LegacyControllerLeaseLostError`. The error carries a closed cause:
`renewal_rejected`, `renewal_deadline`, or `renewal_error`.
- `run-cancellation.ts`: Add the `controller_lease` cancellation source.
Add `controllerLeaseLossCancellation()` and
`readControllerLeaseLossCause()`. The reader accepts only the
server-written reason text.
- `heartbeat/run-completion.ts`: When the outcome is `cancelled` and the
abort reason is a lease loss, record a `controller_lease` cancellation
(`expected: false`). This covers both an adapter that returns a
cancelled result (`completeRun`) and one that throws after the abort,
for example through `signal.throwIfAborted()` (`failRun`). A stop
request recorded earlier still takes precedence.
- `run-failure-diagnostics.ts`: Add `controllerLeaseLossCause` to the
execution diagnostics. Only the closed label goes to Sentry, never the
reason text.
- `heartbeat/run-state.ts`: preserve `controller_lease` in the bounded
SQL projection when saved results exceed 64 KB. A database regression
verifies the default run-detail read.
- `canContinueCancelledRun` stays unchanged. It does not accept
`controller_lease`, so a lease loss does not authorize automatic
continuation.
- `doc/run-log-events.md`: Document the new source and cause labels.
- Tests: unit tests for the cause on each watchdog path, completion
tests that record the source when the adapter returns and when it throws
the abort reason (both fail without the change), tests that a recorded
stop request takes precedence, and a test that the Sentry report
contains the closed label and not the reason text.

## Verification

- `cd server && npx vitest run src/services/run-cancellation.test.ts
src/services/legacy-controller-lease.test.ts
src/services/__tests__/run-failure-report.test.ts
src/services/heartbeat/run-completion.test.ts`: 238 passed, including
the embedded Postgres suites.
- I reverted only `run-completion.ts` and ran the new completion test.
It failed with `source: "unknown"`. With the change, it records
`controller_lease`.
- I removed only the `failRun` attribution and ran the new thrown-error
test. It failed without the `controller_lease` record, and passes with
it.
- Final full repository `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass.

- Final local regression verification: all 247 tests pass across
run-state, cancellation, watchdog, failure reporting, and completion
suites. The large-result test fails before the SQL allowlist change. All
latest-head CI checks pass (54 successes and two intentional skips).
Fresh Apex is 5/5 on `708856c568d07d7b446a4a4af2edc6d9eec7d155` with no
unresolved findings.

## Risks

- Low risk. The change adds a new source value to server-owned JSON. Old
rows keep their values. The readers accept the new value, and no UI code
switches on this field.
- A lease-loss cancel stays `expected: false`, so it is still reported
as unexpected, as before. Now it has a more specific source.
- The Sentry payload gets one new closed label
(`controllerLeaseLossCause`). It does not include reason text or IDs.

> 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

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`) in Claude Code, with
tool use (shell, file edits, test runs).

OpenAI GPT-6 (`gpt-6`) through Codex added the large-result regression
and SQL projection fix, with shell, file-edit, and test tools. The exact
context-window size is not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 14:50:40 -07:00
Harjoth KharaandClaude Opus 5 be3e614d61 fix(workspace-runtime): keep the real readiness failure when the deadline-clamped probe aborts (#11575)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and the services they use for work.
> - An agent can wait for a workspace service to become ready.
> - Each readiness probe has a time limit.
> - A final probe can expire and hide an earlier HTTP failure.
> - This pull request keeps that observed failure in the reported error.
> - Operators can then see why the service was not ready.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #11525. Related: #11494.

**What happened?**

A deadline-limited final readiness probe replaced an observed HTTP 503
with an abort message.

**Expected behavior**

Keep an earlier service failure when only the readiness deadline aborts
the last probe. Report normal connection failures and probe timeouts as
before.

**Steps to reproduce**

Return HTTP 503 from the first probe. Leave one millisecond in the
readiness budget. Abort the last probe. The reported error must still
contain HTTP 503.

## What Changed

- Track whether a readiness probe observed a service failure.
- Preserve that observation when the final probe expires at the
readiness deadline.
- Add a deterministic regression with an injected clock.
- Keep probe scheduling, request count and timeout limits unchanged.

## Verification

- Author verification: the readiness suite passed all nine tests; server
typecheck passed. The regression failed before the fix and passed after
it.
- The later task review recorded 172 passing workspace tests and seven
additional readiness checks. Historical author baseline failures are not
claimed as passing local runs.
- Latest head `936a374a08d0e74d87d588ba034f674388e8d508`: CI passed with
54 successful checks and two intentional skips. Fresh Apex review is 5/5
with no unresolved findings or recommendations.
- A test merge with current master is clean.

## Risks

- Error text changes when a service first fails and then hangs. The
earlier observed failure is retained.
- A hang without a prior service failure still reports the abort.
- No data model, API or permission change.

## Model Used

Anthropic Claude Opus 5 (`claude-opus-5`) authored the fix through
Claude Code with reasoning, file editing and test tools. OpenAI GPT-5.6
assisted the original diagnosis. OpenAI GPT-6 (`gpt-6`) through Codex
assisted this final review and PR preparation with repository and
terminal tools. This session does not expose an exact context-window
size.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-10-13 14:25:09 -07:00
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>
2026-10-13 16:11:43 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip de335b42d4 Expose signed routine wake deadlines during idle sleep checks
Expose signed routine wake deadlines during idle sleep checks

Report the earliest eligible routine deadline to an authenticated host scheduler, while preserving local execution, owned sleep leases and conservative blocking for unsupported work.

Verified with focused tests, typecheck, build, all required CI checks and Apex 5/5.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 14:09:16 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 7eea9d8214 fix(github): use bot names in review summaries (#16212)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - A GitHub bot can send a pull request to an agent and publish its
review.
> - Each bot has its own GitHub App identity, but every summary
currently starts with "Paperclip Review".
> - A generic heading makes it harder to identify reviewers when several
bots review the same pull request.
> - This pull request uses the bot display name in review summary
headings.
> - Users can identify each reviewer while required checks keep their
existing name.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The heading of a GitHub bot's published pull request review summary.

**Current behavior**

Every summary uses "Paperclip Review", regardless of the bot's name. The
check also uses "Paperclip Review" and must keep that name for existing
branch rules.

**Proposed behavior**

Complete and incomplete review summary headings use the GitHub bot
display name. The heading falls back to the bot login, then the assigned
agent name, when old connections have no display name. Separate GitHub
Apps keep independent checks with the same name.

**Reason and benefit**

Readers can identify each bot's review. A regression test confirms that
publishing a review does not update a check owned by another App or
endpoint.

**Breaking changes**

The summary heading changes. Consumers that parse the old heading must
accept bot names. No API, prompt configuration, database schema, or
check name changes are included.

No duplicate PR was found in the GitHub bot title search. ROADMAP.md
does not contain a duplicate of this change.

## What Changed

- Use the bot display name in complete and incomplete review headings.
- Escape Markdown in names and fall back to the bot login or agent name.
- Verify the heading through the publication workflow and keep check
updates scoped to the App and endpoint.
- Document bot-named summaries and independent checks. Update both
access maps.

## Verification

- Focused policy, heading, and existing UI tests: 67 passed.
- Database-backed regression cases: 2 passed, including bot-name
publication and independent checks.
- Map checks, token gates, and git diff --check passed.
- Typecheck and build passed on the final rebased branch. The final
focused run passed 44 tests; the two database-backed regression cases
also passed in a separate run. All final-head CI checks passed,
including full test suites, build, typecheck, E2E, and security scans.
Greptile reviewed the final commit at 5/5 with no actionable findings.
No review threads remain unresolved.

## Risks

- Consumers that parse the old summary heading must accept bot names.
- The GitHub check remains Paperclip Review. Multiple-bot check
isolation was tested with provider fixtures; a live two-bot GitHub test
was not run for this change.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The exact backend model ID and context
window are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, repository
tools, and code execution.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 15:33:05 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip c7f4b74111 fix: isolate fresh task sources from restricted project workspaces (#16095)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Each task must have an isolated workspace that its agent can read.
> - Older project checkouts can contain worktrees for restricted tasks.
> - The source access check correctly rejects these shared checkouts.
> - A fresh task then fails even when its agent can clone the project
remote.
> - This pull request gives fresh default tasks a separate clone of the
same remote.
> - The task can start while the restricted task files remain protected.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Fresh tasks fail with `Task workspace access is no longer available`
when their default project checkout contains a restricted task worktree.
The caller has access to the new task and its remote repository. The
shared local Git source is unsafe to copy.

**Expected behavior**

Use a separate clone of the same authorized remote for a fresh default
task. Keep source access checks and responsible-user Git credentials in
force.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Put a restricted task worktree inside a project checkout.
2. Assign a new default task to an agent that cannot read the restricted
task.
3. Start the new task. The current source check fails before workspace
creation.
4. With this fix, the task uses a separate remote source. The restricted
files are absent. Later runs reuse the same owned source.

Related work: Refs #15749, Refs #15528. This change keeps their source
retention and workspace ownership checks.

## What Changed

- Add a remote source path scoped to the company and task.
- Clone through the run’s Git connection after the shared source fails
its access check.
- Reject reused workspaces, explicit selections, pinned branches, local
sources, credential-bearing URLs, and symlink paths.
- Check source access again before publishing the workspace.
- Resolve later runs from the verified recorded source. Ignore leftover
clones that the saved workspace does not own.
- Record provenance for new implicit Git defaults. Read the current task
binding before fallback. Preserve explicit, inherited and ambiguous
legacy checkout choices.
- Keep the effective task strategy during startup validation of matching
implicit defaults. Preserve the existing explicit-selection write check.
- Add regression coverage and document the fallback.

## Verification

- Merged master `c8efdbfba43` and resolved both rounds of catalog/index
conflicts. All upstream suites, classifications, source references and
story IDs are preserved. Both fix branches combine cleanly in either
merge order, with no catalog fingerprint drift.
- Passed locally: 313 focused source-isolation, preparation,
task-creation, binding and trust tests before the final startup fix. The
final fix passes all 100 source-trust, task-binding and
environment-selection tests. Earlier workspace-resolution and
persisted-source suites also passed.
- Real-Git regressions cover all three review findings. Reconstruction
ignores an unrecorded clone and preserves unpublished commits/files.
Explicit and parent-inherited checkout IDs without typed selections
retain their denial and branch tips without cloning or acquiring an
environment. A protected-project heartbeat completes and resumes using
the task’s Git strategy with read access. Explicit selection still
requires writes, and a mismatched default is rejected.
- Passed: the complete Storybook catalog check with no drift errors,
feature and agent map structure checks, and all 17 catalog/index script
tests. The generated index counts match the merged catalog. The current
upstream verification-route inventory remains unchanged. The catalog
contains all 262 authored suites and 2,481 story IDs.
- Passed: full workspace typecheck and build after the final guard
changes, on latest head `79d2adadcb6d3d7a04b9943a91bdb8b0b6abea6d`.
- Latest head `79d2adadcb6d3d7a04b9943a91bdb8b0b6abea6d`: complete CI
passed (54 successful checks, two intentional skips), including the full
general/serialized suites and all eight browser shards. Fresh Greptile
Apex review is 5/5 on this same commit, with no unresolved findings or
recommendations. The full local test command was attempted earlier
without a complete aggregate result; the complete suite result is from
CI.
- Manual check: configure a shared project checkout with a restricted
task worktree. Admit a fresh default task using the authorized remote.
Confirm separate Git storage and no restricted local branch or file.
Reuse, close and reopen the task workspace. Confirm that explicit,
literal branch and low-trust selections retain the denied source.

## Risks

- A clean remote clone excludes unpublished local work. The fallback
applies only to fresh default tasks and rejects existing workspace or
branch selections.
- A private remote can fail to clone when the responsible user lacks Git
credentials. The run then reports the failure; access checks are not
bypassed.
- Older untyped checkout bindings cannot prove default provenance. They
keep the source denial instead of silently dropping unpublished work.
- New implicit Git defaults use the existing workspace-intent contract.
The source directory uses existing instance storage. No schema migration
is required.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6, model ID `gpt-6`, through Codex. Used reasoning,
repository inspection, code editing, terminal tools, and test execution.
The API session does not expose an exact context window size.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 12:31:40 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip db65a0863e Deliver durable resource lifecycle events to plugins without polling (#16203)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - Plugins keep external resources aligned with Paperclip projects and
agents.
> - The durable resource journal stores changes, but its plugin
interface requires polling.
> - Project deletion has no journal entry, so consumers must scan for
missing projects.
> - This PR delivers committed journal events through a native plugin
callback and records deletion.
> - Plugins can recover unfinished work without periodic change scans.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Related: #15343 introduced the durable inbox. #15631 added required
agent lifecycle participation. This change keeps both contracts and adds
automatic delivery for the resource inbox.

**What happened?**

Plugins must schedule reads of the durable inbox. A deleted project has
no durable deletion event. Consumers must scan saved bindings to detect
its removal.

**Expected behavior**

Core should deliver committed resource events and replay unfinished
work. Empty queues should have no polling timer. Project removal should
leave a durable event.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Install a plugin that consumes project lifecycle events.
2. Create or update a project. The plugin must call `listLifecycle` to
discover it.
3. Delete the project. The journal has no deletion entry.

## What Changed

- Add `resourceLifecycle` to the manifest and `onResourceLifecycle` to
the SDK. Require `events.subscribe` and a configured, enabled company
scope.
- Reuse transaction-aware work signals and the delivery coordinator.
Wake after commit, on startup and plugin activation, and after
configuration changes.
- Acknowledge only a matching successful result. Retry unfinished or
interrupted work. Retain deferred events without an idle retry timer.
- Wake again after successful worker configuration application, and
retain failed scans through idle drain (both Apex findings fixed).
- Keep ordering per resource and deliver past failed or deferred
resources. Keep the manual inbox methods for existing consumers.
- Record project deletion in the removal transaction. Extend the journal
constraint with a generated migration.

## Verification

- Apex follow-up: 129 focused worker, delivery, coordinator, and
application tests passed; server typecheck passed. Regression coverage
verifies configuration-application races and failed scans across idle
drain.

- Focused lifecycle, transaction coordinator, manifest, and SDK dispatch
suites: 105 tests passed, including single-connection saves, redacted
failure diagnostics, wakeups retained during idle drain, and per-event
retry deadlines.
- Complete SDK suite plus delivery database tests: 128 tests passed.
- Shared, database, and SDK typechecks passed. Direct server `tsc
--noEmit` passed against rebuilt SDK declarations.
- Full local `pnpm test:run` finished with 19,491 passed, 148 skipped,
and 6 failed tests across 5 files (plus two suite setup errors). This
run overlapped branch updates and is not final-head evidence: failures
included missing Cargo, local Git default-branch assumptions, and stale
in-process lifecycle modules. Final Apex-fix commit `75d028788` passed
all CI gates, including the full test shards, and received Apex 5/5 with
no unresolved comments.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` were attempted. Both stopped
because Cargo is unavailable locally. CI supplies the Rust toolchain.
- Local installation used the repository's documented lockfile fallback
because master has dependencies missing from its lockfile. No dependency
changes are included here.

## Risks

- Delivery is at least once. Plugins must re-read current state and make
external effects idempotent.
- Signals are process-local, like the other delivery queues. Startup
recovers committed rows. Independent database writers or multiple active
server processes require an explicit ownership and wake protocol.
- Apply migration `0340_open_warlock.sql` before running code that
records project deletion. Earlier deletions cannot be reconstructed.
- Automatic delivery selects plugins with company configuration rows.
`deferred` waits for a later startup, configuration change, or other
work notification.
- This does not replace required agent lifecycle participation or
establish that external mounts are unused.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with tool-assisted code editing, code inspection,
and test execution.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 12:00:30 -07:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 5a6d0d08a7 fix: record verified workspace file recovery from tasks (#16104)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Recovery must preserve files and show the next operator action.
> - A stopped run can leave a file repair hold after its recovery action
is resolved.
> - The task notice shows that hold but has no form to record verified
file recovery.
> - A chat connection can also replace the file repair instruction with
a chat retry instruction.
> - This pull request adds a file recovery form and preserves the file
repair instruction.
> - The form records evidence for the original run and keeps the current
task status.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A retained workspace file hold can block a task after its recovery
action is resolved. The task page offers no file recovery form. A chat
binding can hide the required file repair instruction.

**Expected behavior**

An authorized board member can record verified recovery of the original
files. The server checks the original stop proof. The task keeps its
current status and does not start another run. Chat instructions must
not replace file repair instructions.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create a stopped legacy run with a retained workspace recovery marker
and a resolved recovery action.
2. Open its task page, including a task with a chat connection.
3. Observe that the file hold has no supported form to record verified
recovery.

Refs: #15857, #15824, #16095. Those PRs address shutdown export, native
finalization and workspace source isolation. This PR uses the existing
file repair API.

## What Changed

- Add a board-only file recovery form with evidence and an explicit file
verification confirmation.
- Preserve the current task status when recording file recovery.
- Project whether the original recovery marker supports file recording.
- Keep file repair instructions when a task has a chat binding.
- Add UI, route and Storybook examples for success, denial and
chat-connected file holds.
- Document the recovery flow and update the affected Storybook catalog
entries.

## Verification

- Merged master `c8efdbfba43` and resolved both rounds of catalog/index
conflicts. Upstream review notes and classifications are preserved,
together with all four retained-file recovery examples and their stable
story IDs. Both fix branches also combine without merge conflicts or
catalog fingerprint drift.
- Passed locally after conflict resolution: 47 tests covering the file
recovery UI, execution blocker notice and retained workspace repair
route. The earlier ownership-route pass also covered 196 tests.
- Passed: UI token gates, the complete Storybook catalog check with no
drift errors, feature and agent map structure checks, and all 17
catalog/index script tests. Verification inventory counts match all 262
authored suites and 2,485 story IDs. The upstream production
verification obligations remain intact.
- Passed: full workspace typecheck, build and Storybook build on latest
head `10ac22b35d0a4fe469cf620914845c509046da48`. The built index retains
all four file-recovery story IDs.
- Latest head `10ac22b35d0a4fe469cf620914845c509046da48` has 54
successful checks and two intentionally skipped Storybook checks. Apex
is 5/5 on that exact commit, with no unresolved findings. The full
general/serialized suites and all eight browser shards passed in CI.
Local tests use the focused suites above. Storybook browser interactions
have not been executed locally.
- Manual check: open a task with a retained file hold. Verify that
evidence and confirmation are required. Record verified file recovery.
Confirm that its status stays unchanged and no run starts. Repeat
without board runtime access and with an unverified stop receipt.

## Risks

- The form records an operator attestation. It does not recover files
itself or prove external action outcomes.
- A stale source or missing stop proof must remain rejected by the
existing server route.
- No database migration or automatic task retry is added.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 (`gpt-6`), used through Codex with reasoning, repository
tools, code editing and test execution. The exact context window size is
not exposed by 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 not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 13:47:10 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip ccdc6754b2 fix: retain background preparation traces from unsampled requests (#16205)
Start preparation phase root traces independently of request sampling and link each phase to its trigger. Preserve operator root sampling, concurrent child context, and silent unconfigured behavior.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 12:23:48 -05:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip da9af67415 Persist agent-owned instance secrets through lifecycle results (#16191)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip coordinates agents and controls when they can run.
> - Lifecycle plugins prepare and remove resources for each agent.
> - Those resources can require private connection credentials.
> - The current SDK can resolve configured secrets but cannot save these
credentials securely.
> - Ordinary company secrets can be bound to agents and do not provide
the required server-only boundary.
> - This change saves agent-owned instance secrets through the existing
local lifecycle result and native secret service.
> - The tenant can retain runtime credentials through restarts without a
separate encryption system or remote API.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Agent lifecycle, plugin contract, and native secret storage.

**Problem or motivation**

Lifecycle plugins need to save private runtime connection details for
the owning agent. Worker memory loses these details on restart. Plugin
state and company secrets do not provide a private runtime-only
boundary.

**Proposed solution**

Add optional instance-secret changes to lifecycle results. Save them
through the existing secret service and local encrypted provider before
accepting the result. Require company, agent, plugin, phase, operation,
revision, and current unexpired attempt ownership. Supply saved values
through the existing local preparation/resume request.

**Alternatives considered**

A separate encrypted store duplicates the native secret system. Generic
plugin company-secret writes proposed by #5007 do not supply agent
ownership or a server-only secret scope. This change does not add that
general write API.

**Roadmap alignment**

Extends the existing lifecycle contract from #15631. It does not add a
resource provider or select an execution backend.

## What Changed

- Add an instance scope to native secrets with mandatory agent/plugin
ownership, a company-qualified agent foreign key, and key uniqueness per
owner. Existing company and user scopes retain their constraints.
- Reuse native creation, rotation, deletion, secret versions, access
audit, and the local encrypted provider. Keep values out of company
catalogs, normal bindings, agent access, and public agent records.
- Accept local secret patches only after locking and checking the
current lifecycle operation and required plugin selection. Storage
failure or a stale reply cannot complete setup. Expired or replaced
attempt owners cannot overwrite a successor's credentials.
- Keep vault-import conflicts company-scoped. Protect instance-owned
account-home paths during failed device-login cleanup with a private,
fail-closed scan.
- Skip decryption on stop and cleanup so a lost key cannot block
removal. Cascade secret records when their agent or plugin is deleted.
- Log fixed provider diagnostics without raw errors that can contain
credentials. Document the local contract, runtime resolver, and
access-map exclusions. Retain the five latest migration snapshots
through the normal generator pruning.

## Verification

- 239 focused tests passed across agent-instance-secrets, lifecycle,
secrets-service, secrets-routes, plugin-secrets-handler, and
agent-device-login-routes. Used disposable PostgreSQL 18 clusters
through the existing test constructor seam because the bundled binary
cannot start on this macOS host. The temporary harness is outside git.
- Regression tests reproduced the vault-import conflict and missed
cleanup claimant before the fixes; both pass after the fixes.
- New coverage includes encrypted native versions, rotation, restart
recovery, company/agent/plugin isolation, ordinary-read and binding
denial, stale replies, storage failure, safe logging, cleanup without
the master key, and same-name secret isolation, native account-home
mutation guards, lease takeover/expiry, and live agent/plugin deletion
cascades.
- Direct server TypeScript check, DB/shared typechecks, migration
numbering/safety checks, module boundaries, and git diff check passed.
- Full workspace typecheck and build were attempted; both stop at the
missing local cargo toolchain. The full test command was started and
stopped after failures in unchanged native-runtime/workspace suites plus
bundled-PostgreSQL skips; it did not complete. CI must verify the full
toolchain paths.
- Current head `c0f8bfd12477ad509252ecd40e168a6c84dbeb36`: all 55 CI
checks passed, including the previously canceled e2e shard. Greptile
Apex reviewed this exact head at 5/5 with no unresolved threads. GitHub
reports the branch mergeable and clean.
- No live provider probe, production data access, or deployment.
Reviewed the diff for credentials, private references, and run
artifacts.

## Risks

Apply migration 0339_luxuriant_iron_monger.sql before deploying tenant
code. It adds nullable ownership columns, a partial unique index,
foreign keys, and a stricter scope constraint. Existing rows remain
valid. Keep the schema on application rollback. Preserve the existing
secrets master key through deployments and backup restoration.

The lifecycle request/result now has a sensitive, server-only field.
Plugins must never log it or return it to an agent or browser. Values
stay in the tenant database through the existing encryption provider.
Trusted runtime consumers must apply normal execution admission before
resolving them. Older hosts omit instanceSecrets; plugins that require
durable storage must reject those hosts.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code
editing, and local test execution. The exact serving model identifier
and context window are not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 10:13:42 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip e43af9770a refactor(server): isolate publication recovery and Board sends (#16192)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip publishes task messages through several chat providers.
> - Operator recovery must keep durable receipts and task authority
consistent.
> - The service combines shared publication transactions with provider
recovery details.
> - Provider-specific recovery belongs beside its transport
implementation.
> - This pull request extracts publication requests and resolution
workflows.
> - Shared workflows keep transaction ownership and delegate provider
operations.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Depends on #16187. Refs #16185, #16183, and #16180. Review against the
parent branch.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The structure of publication requests, Board sends, and operator
recovery.

**Current behavior**
Six public publication methods live in the main service and include
provider-specific transfer and receipt operations.

**Proposed behavior**
Move shared requests and resolution to publications modules. Move Teams
file resolution and Board preparation, Slack file receipts and Board
staging, and Photon retry records to their provider folders.

**Reason and benefit**
Provider recovery is easier to locate without moving transaction and
idempotency ownership into providers.

## What Changed

- Extract six public publication methods into two shared workflow
factories (629 and 467 lines).
- Reduce chat-channels.ts from 5,337 to 4,078 lines. The full stack
reduces it from 7,919 lines.
- Extract Teams transfer resolution and cold-runtime Board preparation.
- Extract Slack upload receipt resolution and Board send staging.
- Extract Photon operator retry records.
- Preserve the same public service API and keep provider operations in
the original transactions.

## Verification

- Merge preparation: replayed this stack onto current master after
#16180 landed. Preserve master's new Telegram scheduling methods and
connection-scoped Photon notifications. Server typecheck, callback
syntax audit, and module-boundary check passed. Fresh local integration
and wiring checks passed (1,318 tests). The dedicated Photon suite
passed 18 before and 18 after the conflict resolution. This final slice
was replayed onto merged #16187 with all chat-channel source unchanged.
Current-head CI and review are running. Earlier verification below
describes previous stack commits.

- Publication, attachment, Board send, and operator recovery baseline:
261 passed before and 261 passed after; 1,034 other cases excluded.
- Server typecheck, module-boundary check, and git diff --check passed.
- Syntax audit reconstructs all six public method bodies from the
provider helpers and matches the original AST. Unrelated service
functions and the public API match too.
- Final repository typecheck passed. Build passed. The broad local test
run encountered heartbeat fixture setup failures under the macOS
PostgreSQL shared-memory limit and was interrupted after 868 seconds
(exit 130). Four confirmed abandoned guard slots were reclaimed without
stopping active databases. The complete chat integration suite and
source-wiring checks passed separately (1,309 tests).
- Greptile rates current head 55417debfe 5/5 with zero inline findings.
All 55 CI checks pass on that head. Tests use local PostgreSQL and
fixture transports, not live provider execution.

- Previous stack validation on #16192 (55417debfe): repository typecheck
and build passed; all 1,295 chat integration cases plus 14 source-wiring
checks passed locally (1,309 total). All five PRs have current-head 5/5
reviews and 55 passing CI checks. The broad local pnpm test:run hit
PostgreSQL shared-memory fixture failures and was interrupted after 868
seconds (exit 130); it is not a local full-suite pass.

## Risks

Operator recovery can duplicate a send if receipt updates move out of
their transaction. The extracted helpers use the caller transaction.
Teams preparation remains outside Board locks, and repeated send
identities retain their existing receipt. Public method names and return
values stay the same.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex, with code execution and repository tools. The
precise serving variant and context-window size are not exposed in this
session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 11:48:07 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip f18247b7e7 refactor(server): isolate durable chat wakeup workflows (#16187)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip accepts chat messages as durable task input.
> - Wakeups must preserve current company, identity, and task
permissions.
> - The main service mixes those shared checks with provider message
rules.
> - Shared wakeup workflows should own persistence and queue ordering.
> - This pull request extracts wakeup authorization, processing, and
notices.
> - Slack and GitHub rules move into their provider folders.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Depends on #16185. Refs #16183 and #16180. Review against the parent
branch. Related open #13620 covers durable chat wakeup feature work;
this PR only moves existing behavior.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The structure of durable inbound wakeup processing.

**Current behavior**
The service contains authorization, durable wake receipts, queue
notices, and provider authority details.

**Proposed behavior**
Use three cohesive inbound modules and provider-owned authority
functions.

**Reason and benefit**
The shared transaction and company checks stay together while provider
rules have a clear home.

## What Changed

- Move wakeup authorization, processing, and notices into inbound
modules (245, 418, and 377 lines).
- Move Slack mention checks and GitHub automatic-event admission and
acknowledgements into provider folders.
- Preserve lock order, durable receipt ordering, notice cursor lifetime,
and the live heartbeat dependency.
- Reduce chat-channels.ts from 6,340 to 5,337 lines, including blank-gap
cleanup.

## Verification

- Merge preparation: replayed this stack onto current master after
#16180 landed. Preserve master's new Telegram scheduling methods and
connection-scoped Photon notifications. Server typecheck, callback
syntax audit, and module-boundary check passed. Fresh local integration
and wiring checks passed (1,318 tests). The dedicated Photon suite
passed 18 before and 18 after the conflict resolution. This slice was
replayed onto merged #16185 with its chat-channel source unchanged.
Current-head CI and review are running. Earlier verification below
describes previous stack commits.

- Existing wakeup, queue, retry, and authorization integration cases:
212 passed before and 212 passed after; 1,083 other cases excluded.
- Server typecheck, module-boundary check, and git diff --check passed.
- Syntax-tree audit compares all 12 moved functions, cursor state,
retained service functions, and public API after explicit provider
delegations.
- The first three stack PRs have 55 passing CI checks and current-head
5/5 reviews.
- Final stack checks are recorded below. The first broad local run
encountered a PostgreSQL shared-memory fixture limit and was interrupted
after that failure.
- Greptile rates current head 1462819f53 5/5 with zero inline findings.
All 55 CI checks now pass. Initial CI failures: the first workspace job
hit EADDRINUSE in sandbox-callback-bridge.test.ts, and
cloud-auth.spec.ts hit a disposed Playwright response. Both jobs passed
on retry without source changes. Integration uses local PostgreSQL and
fixture provider transports, not live providers.

- Previous stack validation on #16192 (55417debfe): repository typecheck
and build passed; all 1,295 chat integration cases plus 14 source-wiring
checks passed locally (1,309 total). All five PRs have current-head 5/5
reviews and 55 passing CI checks. The broad local pnpm test:run hit
PostgreSQL shared-memory fixture failures and was interrupted after 868
seconds (exit 130); it is not a local full-suite pass.

## Risks

Authorization and wakeups must retain the same locks and transaction
scope. Factories receive narrow dependencies and initialize before their
consumers. The notice cursor stays per service. Shutdown and heartbeat
reads remain live. Provider helpers do not own transactions.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex, with code execution and repository tools. The
precise serving variant and context-window size are not exposed in this
session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 11:36:35 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 721e87ac02 refactor(server): separate receiver ownership and provider callbacks (#16185)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip accepts provider callbacks as durable task input.
> - Runtime ownership prevents two servers from accepting the same
receiver stream.
> - Discord and Photon share the lease machinery but have different
callback details.
> - Moving that shared machinery into Discord would create the wrong
platform dependency.
> - This pull request extracts common receiver ownership and puts
provider callbacks in their own folders.
> - The service keeps startup and shutdown coordination.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Depends on #16183; review against the parent branch. Refs #16180 and
#16080. Related open work: #15532 changes Discord command reconciliation
scheduling. This extraction preserves existing scheduling.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The structure of shared receiver ownership and Discord/Photon runtime
callbacks.

**Current behavior**
The shared entry point mixes lease acquisition, renewal, provider
capability checks, and Photon checkpoint transactions.

**Proposed behavior**
Put the common lease operations in runtime/ownership.ts and the protocol
details in the provider folders.

**Reason and benefit**
The ownership lifetime stays explicit without making Photon depend on
Discord implementation code.

## What Changed

- Extract 11 receiver-ownership helpers into runtime/ownership.ts (397
lines). Expose only the operations used by the service.
- Extract Photon ownership checks and checkpoint callbacks (44 lines).
Retain the same runtime context object.
- Extract Discord command and capability reconciliation (112 lines).
- Keep the original service-owned lease map, runtime versions, stop
tasks, and shutdown sequence. Read shutdown and test overrides through
live accessors.
- Reduce chat-channels.ts from 6,880 to 6,340 lines, including removal
of blank gaps left by extractions.

## Verification

- Merge preparation: replayed this stack onto current master after
#16180 landed. Preserve master's new Telegram scheduling methods and
connection-scoped Photon notifications. Server typecheck, callback
syntax audit, and module-boundary check passed. Fresh local integration
and wiring checks passed (1,318 tests). The dedicated Photon suite
passed 18 before and 18 after the conflict resolution. Current head is
6d52aba35f; CI and review are running. Earlier verification below
describes the previous stack commits.

- Existing Discord, Photon, and runtime integration cases: 110 passed
before and 110 passed after; 1,185 other cases excluded.
- Server typecheck, module-boundary check, and git diff --check passed.
- Syntax-tree comparison: 11 ownership helpers, two Photon callback
bodies, Discord reconciliation, unrelated service functions, and the
full public API/shutdown return expression preserve structure.
Intentional binding changes are audited.
- Both preceding PRs have 55 passing CI checks and current-head 5/5
reviews.
- Repository typecheck and build passed earlier in this stack. Final
stack checks are recorded below. The first broad local run hit a macOS
PostgreSQL shared-memory fixture limit and was interrupted after that
failure.
- All 55 CI checks pass on df15f9dd9c. Greptile rates that head 5/5 with
no inline findings. Tests use real local persistence with fixture
runtimes; they do not prove live Discord or Photon execution.

- Previous stack validation on #16192 (55417debfe): repository typecheck
and build passed; all 1,295 chat integration cases plus 14 source-wiring
checks passed locally (1,309 total). All five PRs have current-head 5/5
reviews and 55 passing CI checks. The broad local pnpm test:run hit
PostgreSQL shared-memory fixture failures and was interrupted after 868
seconds (exit 130); it is not a local full-suite pass.

## Risks

Lease loss and partial startup can create overlapping receivers if
cleanup order changes. The service retains the same map objects and
shutdown ordering. The ownership module reads current shutdown state,
and Photon callbacks retain the exact mutable runtime context reference.
No new worker or timer starts during module initialization.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex, with code execution and repository tools. The
precise serving variant and context-window size are not exposed in this
session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 11:17:21 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip ba00e9ef1a refactor(server): isolate provider webhook handling (#16183)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip connects provider messages to governed agent work.
> - Webhooks must authenticate and persist messages before acknowledging
them.
> - The shared service still contains GitHub and Slack protocol details.
> - The platform-boundary rule places those details in provider folders.
> - This pull request extracts provider webhook handling behind typed
methods.
> - The service retains dispatch, runtime selection, and durable
lifecycle recording.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Depends on #16180; review this PR against its parent branch. Refs
#16080. Related open work: #16163 changes GitHub automatic-author
policy. This extraction preserves that policy implementation.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The ownership and readability of GitHub and Slack webhook handling.

**Current behavior**
The shared service implements GitHub signatures, replay fences,
automatic event messages, and Slack callback verification.

**Proposed behavior**
Place those details in the respective provider folders and keep the
common dispatcher small.

**Reason and benefit**
Provider code can be reviewed without reading the shared task service.

## What Changed

- Extract GitHub request-local deadline and replay scope (60 lines).
- Extract GitHub authentication and durable-ingress coordination (280
lines).
- Extract GitHub event admission, message construction, and policy-skip
receipts (140 lines).
- Extract Slack workspace validation and authenticated callback
observation (131 lines).
- Keep the same service-owned background task set and GitHub provenance
maps. Forward late-initialized callbacks without reading them during
construction.
- Reduce chat-channels.ts from 7,383 to 6,880 lines: 503 net lines
removed.

## Verification

- Merge preparation: replayed this stack onto current master after
#16180 landed. Preserve master's new Telegram scheduling methods and
connection-scoped Photon notifications. Server typecheck, callback
syntax audit, and module-boundary check passed. Fresh integration, CI,
and current-head review are running. Earlier verification below
describes the previous stack commits.

- Parent baseline: 544 selected GitHub, Slack, and webhook integration
cases passed; 751 other cases excluded.
- Initial extracted run: 543 passed and one idle-queue scan assertion
failed. The idle-queue case passed separately on both the parent and
extracted code. Its publication implementation is unchanged. The full
selected-suite retry passed all 544 cases; the initial failure remains
documented and its cause is not established.
- Server typecheck, module-boundary check, and git diff --check passed.
- Syntax-tree comparison verifies unchanged request-scope logic, durable
ingress, leased authentication, event handling, workspace validation,
and callback recording. All unrelated service functions remain
unchanged.
- Repository typecheck and production build passed for the parent
extraction. Full-stack verification will run at the final handoff. The
first broad local run hit a macOS PostgreSQL shared-memory fixture limit
and was interrupted after that failure.
- All 55 current-head CI checks passed. Greptile: 5/5 on f74ecb5094,
with zero inline findings. No live third-party execution is claimed.

- Previous stack validation on #16192 (55417debfe): repository typecheck
and build passed; all 1,295 chat integration cases plus 14 source-wiring
checks passed locally (1,309 total). All five PRs have current-head 5/5
reviews and 55 passing CI checks. The broad local pnpm test:run hit
PostgreSQL shared-memory fixture failures and was interrupted after 868
seconds (exit 130); it is not a local full-suite pass.

## Risks

Moving callback code can change initialization timing or lose
request-scoped state. The new factories retain live option getters, the
exact runtime context and provenance maps, and typed forwarding for late
initialization. Authentication stays inside the existing credential
lease. The common lifecycle write still completes before returning
provider success.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex, with code execution and repository tools. The
precise serving variant and context-window size are not exposed in this
session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 11:02:19 -05:00