122 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	b11010b0d4	Simplify failure banners and show only the latest error (#16982) ... Remove dashed failure dividers and show only the latest adjacent run or recovery error. Preserve permitted retries, pending state and unrelated notice boundaries. Add production-component Storybook examples and browser regression coverage. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-20 14:29:39 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	2b16262280	Improve runner E2E report navigation and local previews (#16996) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app that people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Product E2E campaigns check user journeys across agent profiles and environments. > - Readers use the campaign history and reports to inspect results and retained evidence. > - The reports showed image summaries, many unselected suites, and a long sticky index. > - Individual case cards also showed routine diagnostics before the visual evidence. > - This pull request adds text summaries, feature filters, folding case indexes, and simpler cards. > - A local preview uses retained public data so designers can change reports without another paid campaign. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Current behavior** The report is hard to scan as the journey catalog grows. Suite links can point into hidden results. Case indexes do not show whether a case passed across its configurations. Design changes also need a realistic local preview. **Proposed behavior** Show the selected campaign as text. Link journeys to current feature-map capabilities. Add folding case indexes with status indicators, reliable section links, and a back-to-top control. Keep failed outcomes visible and put routine diagnostics under Test details. Render retained public campaign data with local templates. **Reason and benefit** Readers can find a feature or failed case faster. Designers can iterate against real retained data without starting an application instance or using provider credentials. **Breaking changes** No result schema or grading change. The report stops embedding the generated summary PNG. The publisher still produces that artifact for existing consumers. Related work: #12889 added the existing matrix browser. #12846 concerns the public image publication boundary. This PR changes report presentation and local preview behavior. ## What Changed - Replace image summaries with shared HTML suite summaries on the history and campaign pages. - Show selected executions and preserve missing results for selected cells. - Add explicit journey-to-capability associations, feature filters, and a coverage view with unmapped journeys. - Add folding case indexes, section case lists, and red, green, or amber status indicators across matching configurations. - Fix anchor navigation through filters and add a floating back-to-top control. - Simplify case cards. Keep failure reasons visible. Fold routine checks, billing, and context into Test details. - Add an original-image link to the gallery. - Add a local preview utility with public data caching and offline mode. Document the direct Node command. - Test manifest-listed evidence, rejection of unlisted files and encoded traversal, cache reuse, and offline misses with a real loopback server and a stub downloader. ## Verification - Focused report, history, and preview tests: 75 passed in 6 files. - Report Playwright spec: 4 passed in Chrome with a standalone config that does not start the application server. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`: passed. - `git diff --check`: passed. - Manually checked retained campaign reports, feature filters, folding indexes, failure links, card details, gallery links, mobile layout, and keyboard navigation. - `pnpm build`: passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm test:run`: stopped after 15 native session database cases failed. The local Postgres package first lacked dynamic-library links. After link hydration, the same cases still failed. A direct `initdb` check then reported `could not create semaphores: No space left on device` and identified the macOS semaphore limit. The complete local suite has not passed. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit`: 3,250 passed, 6 failed, 2 skipped. All six failures reproduced against unchanged `origin/master` report sources with the same installed dependencies. They concern Copilot admission and its Daytona image input, plus the launcher test that runs those assertions. No report or history test failed. - No live provider evaluation was run for this presentation change. - CI on `b1a9c06823` first failed browser shard 3/8. The agent-chat split-handoff test reached cleanup, where cancelling a run returned HTTP 500 from a Postgres deadlock. Cleanup did not restore the experiment setting, and a later test failed its initial setting check. This shard does not contain the report spec. One targeted rerun passed, and that full workflow then passed. This shows recovery; no production fix was made for the deadlock. The later preview-test commit requires its own fresh checks. To review the design, run `node --watch --import ./cli/node_modules/tsx/dist/loader.mjs tests/runner-e2e/preview.ts`. Open the history address printed by the command, then open a campaign. The README covers offline mode and cache refresh. ## Risks - Feature associations use the current map. They describe linked scenarios, not proof that a whole capability is covered. Historical grades remain unchanged. - New or unfamiliar cases remain unmapped until their assertions are inspected. - The preview needs the public history host on first access. Offline mode requires cached files. It binds to the loopback interface and serves manifest-listed public evidence. - Hiding routine diagnostics adds one disclosure step. Failed or incomplete outcomes remain visible. This is report polish. It does not duplicate planned core work in `ROADMAP.md`. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, tool use, code execution, and browser automation. 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 - [ ] 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>	2026-10-20 14:02:19 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	4145b5048a	docs: deepen task, approval, secret, and recovery maps (#16994) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Its feature map describes user journeys. Its access map describes the matching agent paths. > - The recent index and capability additions improved discovery and breadth. > - Broad baseline records still combined operations with different actors, permissions, and retry behavior. > - This pull request reviews the existing task, approval, secret, and recovery capabilities at operation level. > - Each operation now has its own access boundary, source evidence, and verification recipe. Source review remains separate from live proof. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #16987, #16990, #16025. These related pull requests are merged. The search found no open duplicate or matching issue. **Issue type** Missing documentation. **Where is the issue?** The paired task, questions-and-approvals, secrets, and recovery files under `maps/feature-map/` and `maps/agent-access-map/`. **What's wrong?** Baseline records do not show enough detail to verify who can perform each action, which state must persist, or what happens after a denial, race, or retry. A declared scenario tool can also be mistaken for an admitted production tool. **Suggested fix** Split the four areas into source-reviewed operation records. Add compact checkpoints to their user recipes. Preserve existing capability IDs and the map schema. ## What Changed - Promote 27 existing capability records to `operation-reviewed`, with 125 operation records: tasks 32, questions and approvals 39, secrets 28, recovery 26. - Give each operation its own API, agent surface, policy, source evidence, verification recipe, and remaining gap. - Separate human, legacy agent, run JWT, native binding, mode, and resource authority. Split operations where those rules differ. - Correct production completion paths, plan acceptance and handoff, question dismissal and withdrawal, secret proposal authority, runtime recovery grants, and explicit duplicate-risk decisions. - Preserve access gaps found in source, including the binding-proposal dependency cascade and narrower native/CLI fields. - Add one checkpoint table per product recipe for saved results, denial, races, and retries. - Keep all 191 existing capability IDs. Change only eight Markdown files. Keep every operation's evidence `source-only` and verification `not-run`; the subset below does not prove an entire operation across its actors and surfaces. ## Verification Source review uses revision `3bbc2104b65caf9f7763938a01260a5673e12f7a`. Read-only area reviews and a second source review covered the changed pairs. Passed: - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`: 35 paired areas, 191 capability IDs, valid references and fields. This is structural verification. - `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs scripts/storybook-feature-index.test.mjs`: 17 passed. - `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs`: 308 files, 2,899 stories. Generated outputs remain ignored. - Capability comparison with the base: all 191 IDs unchanged; the four reviewed areas contain 27 capabilities and 125 source-only operation records. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. - `git diff --check`. - Focused existing interaction and proposal route tests: 80 passed. The two selected DB-backed suites skipped 119 tests because local embedded PostgreSQL could not start. These skipped tests are not passes. Live subset on a fresh local instance with a disposable PostgreSQL container: - Created the company and an unassigned task through the browser. Added a comment and completed the task. The saved status and comment survived reload. - Created a managed secret with inert dummy data through the browser. Its metadata and version survived reload. The metadata response did not contain the dummy value. - Created a question fixture through board REST. Invalid input returned 422 and left it pending. Browser dismissal kept it pending and preserved the draft. Reopening restored the choice. Submission survived reload. A duplicate response returned 409 and left the saved answer unchanged. - Used a real issued legacy agent API key. Task read and safe company-secret catalog returned 200. Full secret listing and run-only secret list/value routes returned 403. Revoked the key after the checks. - Read an empty recovery projection. Resolving a nonexistent action returned 404 and left the task unchanged. This did not execute recovery. - Closed the owned browser tab and stopped only the verified test runtime and labelled database container. Evidence survived cleanup. No provider or model ran. Limits and retained failures: - Native embedded PostgreSQL launch failed because the host could not allocate semaphores. The container-backed app was the successful alternate environment. - Full `pnpm test:run` was attempted. Fifteen DB-dependent native-session cases failed at database startup, and several DB suites skipped. The run was stopped after repeated failures of that prerequisite. The full local suite did not pass. - The sandboxed build attempt failed at the local tsx IPC socket. The required build passed outside the sandbox. - The first CI build job passed compilation and production boot, then its npm-install check was interrupted when the runner received a shutdown signal. The corrected head passed the full CI run, including the build and public-install checks. - Initial Greptile review found the recovery note field and native search/history limits were inaccurate. Corrected `resolutionNote` and the production cap of 100, then reran the map checks. Greptile reviewed the corrected head at 5/5; both earlier threads are resolved. - An initial harness used a nonexistent generic secret-value URL and received 404. The actual mapped agent routes were then checked separately. An initial recovery assertion expected 409; the actual missing-action contract returned 404. These were harness corrections, not product fixes. - Native run bindings, two-person ownership, secret delivery/rotation, external vaults, provider-stop proof, workspace repair, and actual recovery execution remain unexecuted. The map does not claim those journeys passed. The separate external **Paperclip Review** check is still in progress on `904509df80cc6de16d36906a410a66786f619b20`. The reviewer reports that its full changed-file request is pending. CI is green and Greptile is 5/5, but this external review has not published a final assessment. Its review service must finish that request and assessment. ## Risks Documentation can become stale as policy and runtime bindings change. Each operation cites source and retains its verification gaps. The records describe observed enforcement; they do not authorize broader access or certify live behavior. This pull request changes no product code, schema, or permission enforcement. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, `gpt-6.1-sol`; 475,000-token context window; xhigh reasoning; tool use and code execution. Read-only source agents assisted the area reviews. ## 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 (focused map and route checks; full-suite host blocker recorded above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable (existing map regression tests cover this documentation-only change) - [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>	2026-10-20 13:59:25 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip	a2d26a83fe	fix(inbox): keep automatic work out of Mine by default ... Keep channel and routine attribution out of Mine unless the person participates directly, is assigned the task, or receives a current addressed request. Apply the same source rules to unread state, archives, and task notifications. Preserve direct comments and current human action requests. Restore the two expressions damaged by redaction during the earlier master merge. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-20 13:46:10 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	3bbc2104b6	docs: map missing product and operator capabilities (#16990) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The feature map records product entry points and verification recipes. > - The paired agent access map records APIs and permission boundaries for the same capability IDs. > - The new index in #16987 made several missing capabilities easier to find. > - Those gaps hid existing assistant, privacy, cost, and operator workflows. > - This pull request adds 15 capabilities with source references, test scope, and manual checks. > - Readers can find these workflows without treating documentation or structural checks as live proof. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #16987. Related map work: #16025 and #16214. A search of related pull requests found no duplicate of these additions. **Issue type** Missing documentation. **Where is the issue?** `maps/feature-map/` and `maps/agent-access-map/`. **What's wrong?** The maps omit public assistant MCP connections, private task and project sharing, subscription fees, cost-recording recovery, agent API keys, keyboard entry points, and several operator CLI workflows. **Suggested fix** Add product recipes and matching access records. Show the full capability IDs in the README index and each page. Keep the existing ID format and all 175 existing IDs. Exclude AI account pools. ## What Changed - Add the `assistant-connections` family with setup, consent, device login, client use, and revocation. - Add `tasks/privacy`, `projects/privacy`, `budgets-costs/subscriptions`, and `budgets-costs/accounting-recovery`. - Add `agents/api-keys`, `agents/managed-agent-setup`, and `navigation-preferences/command-palette`. - Add `cli-operations/feedback-export`, `chat-channels/outbound-email`, and `instance-operations/runtime-setup`. - Pair all 15 additions with access rules, source evidence, manual checks, and explicit coverage gaps. Update the visible index to 35 families and 190 capability IDs. - Add cross-links from existing access, connection setup, search, and CLI recipes. Do not change the schema or add AI account pools. - Clarify that the task Share sheet displays direct and inherited access. Manage inherited access at its ancestor or project source. ## Verification - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passes: 35 areas and 190 paired capability IDs, with valid references and contract fields. - `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs scripts/storybook-feature-index.test.mjs` passes: 17 tests. - `node scripts/storybook-feature-index.mjs` and `git diff --check` pass. - A comparison with the base confirms all 175 existing IDs remain and exactly the intended 15 IDs were added. The README index matches the discovered feature metadata. - `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs` cannot run because this checkout lacks `storybook/internal/csf-tools` and installed workspace dependencies. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm test:run`, and `pnpm build` were attempted. All stopped before their task ran: the pnpm 9.15.4 bootstrap could not fetch and verify its registry packages in this environment. - Source review covers the documented UI, CLI, routes, services, and existing tests. No live browser, provider, or authorization journey was run. New access records remain `baseline`, `source-only`, and `not-run`. - Greptile and the Paperclip reviewer both rate current commit `bb8eb797b0a1dc26256faf2f0e57cbe7abc9adcf` 5/5. The inherited-access review thread is resolved. - [GitHub CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39466772379) passes for that commit, including typecheck, build, unit tests, Runner checks, and browser tests. Browser shard 7 passed after one retry for a runner shutdown. All PR checks are successful, neutral, or skipped. ## Risks - Low runtime risk: this change only edits maps. No application behavior, API, dependency, or schema changes. - Source-reviewed recipes can drift or miss deployment-specific behavior. The records state their limits and require live checks before a capability is marked verified. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, model ID `gpt-6.1-sol`, 475,000-token context window, xhigh reasoning effort, with tool use 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>	2026-10-20 12:47:41 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	505e1a5582	feat(cases): add persistent workflows with same-task agent handoffs (#16959) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - An agent workflow needs persistent facts and a safe way to transfer work. > - Creating a task for each phase splits the objective, discussion, workspace, and review policy. > - A case can retain the facts while one primary task moves between agents. > - Transfers must survive process failure and preserve private access, budgets, and completion gates. > - This pull request adds durable case handoffs, native case tools, and read-only case pages. > - Prompts describe the workflow. Existing task controls decide when work can run and finish. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Problem or motivation** Prompt-driven agent teams need a persistent record that can move through triage, implementation, verification, and correction. Ordinary reassignment does not provide a durable instruction, safe release barrier, or recoverable delivery receipt for an agent handing off its own running task. **Proposed solution** Extend standalone cases with one primary task, a descriptive phase, retained access sources, and a handoff ledger. Apply assignments after source execution and workspace settlement. Deliver each transfer through the existing durable wake queue. Provide `create_case`, `read_case`, `update_case`, and `handoff_case` in the native runner. Creation requires kickoff and explicit workflow text. An explicit handoff to `done` closes the case when normal task completion is accepted. **Alternatives considered** Do not add a workflow engine, filesystem queue, configured state graph, or one task per phase. The workflow document combines transition prose with an optional Mermaid `stateDiagram-v2` map. The server does not execute the diagram. The Pipelines experiment removed on master stays removed. **Roadmap alignment** This extends Agent Reviews and Approvals, Enforced Outcomes, Bounded Run Recovery, and Activity Log attribution. Existing approval, review, budget, privacy, workspace, and responsible-user rules remain authoritative. Related work: [ordinary handoff wake recovery](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15019). This feature adds a separate persisted case-handoff receipt and release barrier. ## What Changed - Add case routing fields, retained access sources, durable handoff history, delivery leases, and replay-safe migrations. - Keep the same primary task across agent phases. Preserve each returning agent's own session and the task's workspace. - Fence outgoing mutations, wait for provider and workspace release, and recover delivery without duplicate task comments or runs. Recheck current assignment permissions as the original caller before applying a delayed transfer. Scope a run Stop to that run’s own handoff intents, so repeated old Stop requests preserve newer work. Cancelling terminal intent without a source run also requires fenced current task ownership, including native retries and preparation with an old checkout. For Cloud callers, revalidate current stack membership with an uncached Cloud RPC and derive owner elevation from the current managed setting. - Keep case reads, documents, assets, Audit, and live events inside retained task/project permissions. - Add native case creation/read/update/handoff tools. Store required workflow text and initial documents on the first task. Page oversized case facts and referenced document bodies through the dedicated tool with bounded UTF-8 JSON, current routing versions, snapshot conflicts, and current source authorization on every page. - Add read-only case lists and detail pages, task-style list controls, compact dotted field tables, linked handoff tasks, and case filters in Audit. - Add native/legacy integration tests, migration/restart tests, browser coverage, and bounded live receipt fixtures. Extend the trusted sandbox condition to cover the new subscription fixture profile. - Hide obsolete paused-agent warnings on completed or cancelled task threads. - Synchronize the company-switch settings test with React effects after a CI failure. Preserve its security assertions and production remount behavior. ## Verification The branch directly includes master `9ef434fe79`. The required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e` gates pass on head `765fccd67c`. [Current-head CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39464348614) passes typecheck, build, tests, and all eight browser shards. Security checks pass. [Greptile gives this exact head 5/5](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16959#issuecomment-6291156549), with no unresolved review threads. The optional Paperclip Review check remains queued because its assigned agent is paused. It is not a required branch check. No check result was overridden. Local workspace typecheck and build pass after the master merge, along with database migration checks, token gates, map checks, Storybook catalog checks, and the Copilot profile identity check. Standard builds refresh Runner vendor output. Focused checks pass 2,008 API/paging/context tests and 7 strict case protocol tests. The final commit changes one test fixture only; its ten tests, UI typecheck, and token gates pass. No production source changed in that commit. On current head `765fccd67c`, all **194 critical workflow tests** executed and passed with no skipped tests in those files: - 38 Stop/ownership tests, including board completion intent, native retries, stale Stop, and preparation with an old checkout. - 2 actual legacy process/HTTP handoff tests, including scratch failure, a closed-stdio child that continues writing, and recovery through a fresh worker after the process group stops. - 5 migration tests, including SQL column metadata, preserved null authority context, and all six prior-numbering receipts. - 3 process-settlement and 5 scratch tests. - 88 handoff-service, 18 heartbeat handoff, and 21 native case-tool integration tests. - 7 bounded case/document-read projection tests and 7 strict protocol-contract tests. The current CI checkout was `fed65d49`, merging `765fccd67c` into master `9ef434fe79`. Its new document regressions reconstruct exact Unicode/escaped bodies and revisions through real native authority and authenticated HTTP with generic API tools disabled. They cover case-owned, primary-task, and linked-task documents; routing on every page; stale document snapshots; access loss and unlinking; unrelated/foreign/private sources; system documents; and quarantined content. Active-task document tools retain their existing behavior. These are current-head test results from the first CI attempt; the browser-only retry did not rerun these suites. The full `64fdd3403f` CI failed one separate settings test: after a company switch, it observed an unsettled API-key draft. The production component and test were unchanged from prior green source. Production switches remount both keyed settings layers; the test directly reused an unkeyed view and used a timer tick instead of waiting for React effects. The final commit replaces that fixture synchronization with React `act`. The exact secret-clearing assertions and all timeouts remain unchanged. The original assertion failure remains recorded; no unchanged retry was used. The narrow unchanged baseline and fixed fixture each pass 10 tests. The upstream result-paging merge preserves case capture namespaces and current asset privacy. Its API integration suite executed 39 of 41 tests successfully, with two skipped; the optional assigned-result PRP integration test was skipped. Neither skipped suite is counted in the 194 critical tests or as live provider proof. All 361 upstream migration entries and SQL bodies remain unchanged. Six case migrations follow master as 0363–0368 with identical SQL hashes. Official Drizzle generators produced the combined metadata and five retained snapshots. Generation reports no schema changes, and the snapshot drift test passes. The earlier `ce361ae5d0` CI passed on attempt 1, including its then-current 179 critical tests. Fresh review later identified unusable document references with generic API tools disabled; the bounded document reads and ten additional authenticated HTTP tests address that finding. The full local `pnpm test:run` attempt was cancelled after this Mac exhausted PostgreSQL semaphore capacity; it is **not** counted as a pass. Later database attempts also stopped before assertions or skipped, including one sandbox socket denial. Two original stale-Stop regressions did reproduce the bug against the old source. A REST serialization assertion passed after two preserved database-startup failures. No test timeout was increased. All 194 assertions listed above executed and passed in current-head CI. The complete 385-file, 3,963-test UI shard also passed after the fixture repair. A configured-provider receipt workflow passed 13 backend checks across triage → implementation → verification → correction → done, using one task and four work runs. The saved receipt is revision 2 with total 6 USD; case and task both closed. The original canonical attempt remains failed because its browser assertion confused the terminal destination with completed-task tooltips. The corrected full browser verifier passed on the same retained database and original runs, with no additional provider calls. The last clean-build browser readback is on `6a86c54a53`; later changes affect recovery, authorization, bounded reads, and settlement. Accounted work cost is a $1.010574 rate-card estimate; provider billing and setup-probe usage are unavailable. Copilot profile 49 passed the unchanged seven-fixture private protocol pack (46/46 checks, no retries) and the product file-edit canary after master's completion-replay change. All 60 bound implementation hashes remain unchanged on the current source. Historical profile-47/48 identities and results remain intact. See the [profile-49 compatibility record](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/codex/persistent-case-handoffs/doc/plans/2026-10-20-copilot-completion-recovery-compatibility-v49.json). This is bounded compatibility evidence, not a fresh full matrix, installed-package product test, or Daytona rollout. Preserved CI failures and retries: - On `20662930ac`, Slack managed setup failed a five-second success assertion after reload. Its test/application path was unchanged from a prior green head. One unchanged-source retry passed all 25 tests in that shard; no source or timeout changed. - On `9402b4f17a`, two CI workers received shutdown signals at 15:24:19 UTC. Neither log had an assertion failure before interruption. One unchanged-source retry of each passed all Runner static checks and all 32 tests in browser shard 6; both aggregates passed. The next head, `7b4374edaf`, passed all CI without retries. - On `295f289b5a`, serialized shard 9 timed out during its first device-login test, then the next test found an active login lease. Direct login/test paths were unchanged from a prior green head. Cold import plus a timed-out async body using the next test's mutable actor/store is the supported fixture-race explanation; no request trace proves that sequence. The original failure remains recorded. One unchanged-source retry passed all 294 tests in 19 files, including all 41 device-login tests. No login source or timeout changed. The subsequent `ce361ae5d0` CI passed without retries. - On `64fdd3403f`, one company-switch settings assertion observed an unsettled draft. The final test-only commit uses React `act` without changing assertions, timeouts, or production code. On `765fccd67c`, all ten settings tests and the complete 385-file, 3,963-test UI shard passed. - On `765fccd67c`, browser shard 3 completed the split-handoff assertions, then cleanup received HTTP 500 from run cancellation after a one-second PostgreSQL row-lock timeout. The extra chat run was reporting completed work while teardown began. Cleanup stopped before restoring a global experiment flag, causing a later assertion to fail. Relevant production and test paths are unchanged from an earlier green commit. Stop's lock order is consistent, and no nested self-lock was found; the exact PostgreSQL blocker was not recorded. One unchanged-shard retry passed. The original failure, trace, and downstream flag failure remain recorded. No Stop implementation, cleanup assertion, or timeout changed. The retry supports intermittent cleanup contention; it does not identify the original blocking transaction. ## Risks - Local process transfers require host-owned PID/group absence. Missing or uncertain termination evidence keeps delivery pending, independently of scratch setup. - Handoff admission and task cancellation share execution ownership. New regression tests cover temporary holds, late source writes, and uncertain provider termination. - Retained private sources use an intersection of existing permissions. This intentionally fails closed when a source is missing or an existing task cannot preserve that boundary. - Migrations add tables and indexes. They preserve master history and can replay over prior feature installs. Migration 0368 adds nullable internal authorization provenance with no default or authority backfill. Historical transfers still awaiting release without this context fail closed; an operator must cancel them and request a new handoff. - Delayed Cloud handoffs depend on the current Cloud membership RPC. An unavailable, ambiguous, expired, or mismatched response holds the handoff for retry; it does not reuse cached authority or grant access. - Bounded reads reload and reauthorize the selected projection per page. Underlying work grows with the data size and number of pages. Changed data or routing requires restarting from offset zero without the old snapshot. - Phase names and workflow diagrams remain advisory. They do not satisfy review or approval gates. - This is a large, cross-cutting PR. The maintainer requested one PR for the whole feature; the commits separate data, runtime, UI, and qualification work. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with tool use, code execution, and delegated code review. The exact deployment model ID and context-window size were not exposed in the session. Live fixture agents used the explicitly configured provider model recorded in their test evidence. ## 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>	2026-10-20 12:46:14 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	9ef434fe79	docs: expose feature map IDs and add a recipe index (#16987) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Its feature map describes user journeys and their verification paths. > - The map already defines feature IDs and full capability IDs. > - The README and child pages did not show those IDs consistently. > - Readers need those IDs to connect issues, tests, stories, and evidence. > - This pull request adds a recipe index and displays the existing IDs. > - The benefit is clear references across the product and agent access maps. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Issue type** Missing documentation. **Where is the issue?** `maps/feature-map/README.md`, the child recipes, and their agent access companions. **What's wrong?** The README sends readers to Storybook to browse features. Child pages show local keys, such as `installation`, without the full `plugins/installation` ID. Readers must inspect the generator to find the full reference. **Suggested fix** List recipe links and existing IDs in the README. Show each feature ID and full capability ID in its child pages. Explain capability IDs and entry-point references. Keep the current keys and anchors. Related work: Refs #15288. Refs #16052. Refs #15983. No duplicate open PR or issue was found by title search. ## What Changed - Add an index grouped by feature area. It lists every recipe, feature ID, and full capability ID. - Explain how IDs are formed and used in issues, tests, Storybook, and evidence. - Add feature IDs to all product recipes and agent access companions. - Show full capability IDs beside recipe keys and below access and Storybook guidance headings. - Preserve existing keys, heading anchors, and generated ID values. Keep the latest upstream company capability in the index. ## Verification - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passes for 34 feature families and 175 capability IDs. - `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs scripts/storybook-feature-index.test.mjs` passes all 17 tests. - `node scripts/storybook-feature-index.mjs` passes on this checkout and generates the feature indexes and overview inputs. - `git diff --check` passes. - A source comparison confirms that the README matches the recipe index. After removal of the added ID labels, all 68 child pages match the upstream prose and headings. - Full workspace checks were attempted: `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm test:run`, and `pnpm build`. They could not start because the local pnpm wrapper could not fetch and verify the pinned pnpm 9.15.4 release. This checkout also has no workspace dependencies installed. - `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs` could not run because `storybook/internal/csf-tools` is not installed. The direct map and index checks above pass without that dependency. - Remote typecheck, release-registry, and full build checks passed. The first attempts of [server shard 3/12](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39460473910/job/118758430448) and [server shard 12/12](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39460473910/job/118758429932) stopped after their runners received a shutdown signal. The test steps were canceled. GitHub rejects the rerun request with HTTP 403: "The workflow run containing this job is already running". Five other CI jobs remain active. The next action is to rerun the two interrupted shards after workflow 39460473910 ends. No application changes were made to address these runner interruptions. - To inspect the result, open the feature-map README, follow a recipe link, and compare its full capability IDs with its access companion. ## Risks - Low risk. The change updates map documentation only. It changes no application code or ID schema. - The readable README index and child labels repeat source IDs. Keep them aligned when a capability changes. - Generated capability descriptions now include the visible ID prefix. Generated IDs, labels, navigation order, and verification fields remain the same. - Full local workspace checks and catalog generation remain unverified for the environment reasons above. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, model `gpt-6.1-sol`, with a 475,000-token context window and `xhigh` reasoning effort. The model used local file tools, shell commands, and GitHub CLI access. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have 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>	2026-10-20 12:00:36 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	9225796a4e	fix(runner): page oversized assigned tool results (#16980) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native agents receive assigned app-tool results through the durable Runner protocol. > - The assigned-tool bridge returned complete provider responses without a size bound. > - A large response could exceed the encrypted command limit after the upstream call had completed. > - The provider then waited for a result that the controller could not deliver. > - This pull request saves large governed responses and returns a small reference with a scoped page reader. > - Agents can retrieve the full result without repeating the original action. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Large app-tool responses could leave native tool calls pending even though the upstream service completed. The durable command limit is about 510 KiB. The assigned-tool bridge did not account for that limit. A 720,048-byte regression response failed the delivery-size assertion before this change. **Expected behavior** Deliver a bounded response and a way to retrieve all saved content. Keep the original action at one execution. Preserve task, agent, company, responsible-user, and current-run access checks. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run a native agent with an assigned tool that returns more than 510 KiB of JSON. 2. Let the upstream tool complete. 3. Observe that the original bridge returns the oversized object directly, so the durable controller cannot queue its result. Related: #14734 preserves uncertain tool outcomes across shutdown and restart. This change keeps that protection. #16517 handles native MCP content projection on a different transport; it does not bound native assigned-tool results. ## What Changed - Save governed assigned-tool responses above 500,000 encoded bytes using the existing response asset storage, quotas, and audit path. - Add `read_tool_result` for UTF-8 JSON pages from the same task and agent. Each encoded page is capped at 500,000 bytes, including JSON escaping and metadata, with remaining content available through the next byte offset. It works when generic API tools are disabled. - Reuse existing authenticated asset reads and responsible-user checks. Retrieval does not invoke the upstream service. - Preserve uncertain delivery if storage fails after an action completes. - Add regression, fault, authorization, and opt-in live Codex checks. Document the transport and access contract. ## Verification - Red: the original integration regression returned 720,048 bytes against unchanged production code and failed its bounded-response assertion. The follow-up regression also showed that a 480 KB result was unnecessarily saved under the original 24 KiB policy. - Green: results through 500,000 encoded bytes stay inline. Larger responses are saved in full. Real HTTP integration tests reconstruct the complete Unicode result after controller recreation in exactly two pages, in both standard and low-trust configurations, with one upstream execution. - The encoded-size boundary and escape-heavy Unicode tests verify that every page fits 500,000 bytes, cursors advance on valid UTF-8 boundaries, and concatenating pages exactly reconstructs the original JSON. Storage-failure tests preserve an uncertain outcome without repeating the action. - The focused unit/API run passes 1,957 tests; the changed real HTTP tests pass. `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `git diff --check` pass. - Real Codex acceptance passes with `gpt-6.1-sol` through Codex CLI 0.160.0 and native Runner, on macOS ARM64 with `low_trust_review` and generic API tools disabled. Codex requests every page in order, receives all 660,098 original bytes, and returns the final verification field. The two encoded pages are 500,000 and 160,543 bytes; the upstream operation executes once. Runner closes successfully in a 34.1-second probe. Only the disposable database's connection/worker counts were reduced to fit the host's remaining semaphore capacity. - The native-PRP regression also passes with escape-heavy Unicode pages over 1 MB in total and a separate inline result containing 200,000 backslashes. A scripted provider verifies both complete results by SHA-256. It proves the intermediate text wrapper can exceed 700 KB because the native transport decodes it before queuing the bounded PRP result; every result object stays within 500,000 encoded bytes. Native binaries are required for the local run, preventing a silent skip. - A second real-Codex probe with escaped Unicode, quotes, backslashes, newlines, and NULs also passes: every original byte of a 720,098-byte JSON response is retrieved in two encoded pages of 500,000 and 460,543 bytes. The model returns the final field, the upstream call executes once, and Runner closes in 32.6 seconds. This uses the same production source with only the synthetic fixture content varied. - The live probe exercises real PRP, persistence, and authenticated asset reads. It does not claim the original staging task resumed or full heartbeat checkpoint acceptance. - Earlier broader local testing passed 103 tests but could not start the second database for the existing `rejects a stale source-run question over public HTTP and accepts it from the next run` test. Extending its timeout exposed PostgreSQL initialization failure on this semaphore-exhausted host. The earlier local `pnpm test:run` attempt was interrupted and is not claimed as passing. Full CI passes on current head `cd32237ee5429765b8f349402ac3c79cceec3e6b`. GitHub reports 55 successful checks, two skipped Storybook checks, and one neutral Paperclip agent review. Greptile is 5/5 on this head with no review threads. - Additional Paperclip agent review is incomplete: it withdrew the earlier double-escaping finding after inspecting the native regression, found no new actionable defects, and reported stalled large-source reads prevented independent inspection of the transport decoder. Its neutral assessment is [recorded here](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16980#issuecomment-6295579705). This limitation remains separate from the passing local native transport, real Codex acceptance, full CI, and Greptile results. ## Risks - Large responses now consume existing response-storage quota and require page reads. Larger pages use more provider context. Results are preserved in full; each encoded page leaves about 22 KiB below the PRP command limit for the command envelope. - A storage failure after execution retains an uncertain delivery outcome. The bridge must not report that the upstream action failed or invite a replay. - The dedicated reader grants access only to saved responses for the current task and agent. The asset route also checks the original responsible user. - Runner command limits and receipt rules remain unchanged. No migration or separate Runner protocol rollout is required. - This PR does not deploy the repair or resume an existing blocked task. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. The opt-in acceptance probe requests `gpt-6.1-sol` through Codex CLI 0.160.0. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass for the changed behavior (focused unit/API, real HTTP, and real Codex acceptance); the broader local database limitation is documented above - [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>	2026-10-20 11:52:59 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	2c96f76780	feat(connections): add model-backed prompt injection prevention ... Add opt-in OpenRouter checks at existing tool-result boundaries with regex fallback, service accounting, and settings on Connections. Make migration 0362 safe to replay over existing or partially applied schema state. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-20 11:32:25 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	98d17da1e2	Fix native monitor dispatch and finalization recovery (#16975) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native runs persist their results and workspace before they release execution. > - A task monitor must wait for that settlement before it starts the next run. > - The scheduler checked provider status but did not check unfinished finalization. > - A timer could dispatch too early, then its old finalizer could no longer find the consumed schedule. > - This pull request delays dispatch and reconciles prior delivery from server records. > - The task can continue without repeating the provider turn or removing a newer run's ownership. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A native run saved a yielded monitor result while workspace finalization needed recovery. Its timer dispatched after the provider stopped. The follow-up failed because the earlier run still held workspace recovery. The old finalizer then retried `monitor_wait_authority_lost` indefinitely. **Expected behavior** Timer dispatch waits for native finalization. If an older timer already dispatched, the finalizer uses its saved scheduling receipt and admitted successor to settle the old result. It preserves current task state and ownership. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Schedule a task monitor from a native run and save a yielded result. 2. Leave native finalization retryable after the provider reaches a terminal state. 3. Let the monitor become due. Before this change, the scheduler consumes it. 4. Restore workspace persistence and retry the old finalizer. Before this change, the missing schedule leaves it retryable. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced against master `34be1b831bcaba070264ae8d214ceffe6a8f9eab`. **Deployment mode** Self-hosted server built from source, with PostgreSQL and the native runner. Related recent recovery work: #16962 and #16963. No duplicate repair found for this failure. ## What Changed - Scheduled and manual monitor dispatch wait for unfinished native finalization. If the monitor expires during workspace recovery, the accepted result can settle into the persisted schedule, and the scheduler then applies its existing expiry policy. New monitor-wait results still require an unexpired, unexhausted schedule. - A narrow reader joins the run's server-issued monitor receipt to its durable wake and admitted successor. - The finalizer and locked status commit verify that evidence and preserve current task ownership. They do not create another wake. - Monitor delivery participates in assessment identity, so recovery can replace a prior error decision without violating the decision ledger's uniqueness constraints. - PostgreSQL regressions cover saved-result replay, active successors, wrong task or agent, missing receipts, unadmitted wakes, ownership races, and failed workspace persistence. - The execution contract and verification maps describe the recovery boundary. ## Verification - Red: the saved monitor regression remained `retryable_failure` instead of `committed` on unpatched code. - Red: the scheduler admitted a wake while terminal-run finalization remained retryable. - Red/green: two PostgreSQL cases reproduce timeout during workspace recovery for scheduled and manual checks. Before the review repair, both remain `retryable_failure` with `monitor_wait_authority_lost`. Afterward, both commit, apply board escalation once, preserve the saved result, and enqueue zero provider wakes. New completion still rejects the expired schedule. - Typecheck: `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. - Build: `pnpm build` passed. - Maps: `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed. - Review: Greptile 5/5 and Ponytail Paperclip Review 5/5 on the current head, with no unresolved findings. Both reviews are static; execution evidence is recorded separately above and below. - Linux staging: the original repair passed 170 tests across monitor integration, scheduling, status arbitration, and workspace finalization. The expanded suite passes all 172 tests, including both new timeout regressions. - Live acceptance: deployed the original repair to the authorized Linux ARM64 self-hosted instance. The stranded saved result finalized automatically; the original task then completed through normal admission, with its final answer persisted after browser reload. The other original task was already complete and its external delivery was verified without repeating it. - The initial Mac regression run passed 68 tests, but three suites failed during embedded PostgreSQL startup. A subsequent focused run confirmed the host had exhausted its PostgreSQL semaphore allowance. Linux verification uses isolated databases; the local failure logs remain preserved. - The local full test suite is not claimed as passed. It is blocked by the same PostgreSQL startup limitation; full-suite CI passed on head `8bc29d1b7783446f397b858e558083570a96bb66` ([run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39447913466)). ## Risks - A delivery match must not grant new execution authority. The lookup requires the original run's server receipt and a matching company, agent, task, wake, and admitted successor. The locked commit rejects old-run checkout ownership and permits no status effects. - Workspace persistence must succeed before settlement. Its existing failure path remains effective. - The scheduler waits while a native finalizer is unfinished. Workspace recovery must settle before dispatch; elapsed monitor limits transfer to the existing scheduler recovery policy instead of stranding the result. Neither settlement path renews a deadline or changes budget, approval, pause, or provider authority. - No schema, migration, credential, or provider configuration change. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with tool use and code execution. The exact backend model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (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>	2026-10-20 10:58:41 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	4b05795712	fix(github): reuse review instructions across native turns (#16971) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - GitHub events continue an ordinary task and can reuse its provider conversation. > - Each automatic event appended the full review policy and PR description. > - Native GitHub follow-ups also repeated task history because only Slack used the compact path. > - This pull request separates admitted review configuration from commit updates. > - A verified resume sends the current messages and changed configuration. A fresh session gets full context. > - This reduces repeated input while retaining review rules and current tool checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13959, #16645, #16901. **What happened?** Opening a PR and pushing twice stored three full review prompts. A later native turn repeated all three in a retained provider conversation. **Expected behavior** A new event supplies its commit and event data. The harness delivers stable review instructions once per retained conversation and configuration. Fresh sessions receive full instructions. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Enable automatic GitHub reviews for a repository. 2. Open a PR, let the review finish, and push two new commits. 3. Inspect task messages and the native submitted envelopes. Before this fix, the policy and old requests repeat. ## What Changed - Store compact automatic event messages. Fetch the PR description through the existing metadata tool when needed. - Load review instructions from processed deliveries bound to the company, task, agent, and source comments. Preserve each admitted policy snapshot. - Use the existing verified native continuation path for complete GitHub text batches. Deliver configuration changes using a key over endpoint, PR conversation, revision, and instructions. - Keep full bootstrap input for fresh sessions and failed resume, including board follow-ups with no new GitHub event. Retain existing framing for incomplete batches, attachments, interactions, and recovery. - Keep the same configuration identity across automatic review, discussion, and automatic review. Coalesced requests use the last accepted request's admitted policy. - Add regression and database coverage. Update the execution contract and verification recipe. ## Verification - Red: the new event-size regression failed because policy and PR body repeated. The GitHub continuation regression failed because it returned no compact prompt. - Green: focused policy, continuation, native input, and adapter prompt tests passed (231 tests). Native resume/fresh-bootstrap cases passed (9 tests). - The signed-webhook/database case passed at `6296168253`. It checks configuration edits, queued older snapshots, coalesced policy selection, discussion continuity, board follow-ups, and company/task/agent/comment boundaries. The private PostgreSQL template used 12 connections because the host reached its semaphore limit with the default settings. - The earlier broad channel/session integration run passed 1,432 tests. Later review fixes invalidated that run. The latest focused database case passed after those fixes. - Reviewer regressions failed against the previous lookup, then passed with the fix: a mixed-revision batch delivered multiple policies, and a discussion lost the configuration identity. The board wake-to-rendered-prompt regression also failed before repair. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `git diff --check` passed on the final source. - Full local `pnpm test:run` exposed follow-up/fixture failures during development. Those cases are fixed and pass separately. The stale run was stopped after source edits. Full-suite validation for the final commit passed in CI. - All required CI checks passed for `6296168253`, including tests, typechecks, build, and clean public npm install checks. The two unrelated Storybook checks were skipped. - A live two-turn Codex smoke could not start: the local macOS sandbox helper rejected execution of the installed Codex 0.153.4 binary. No live GitHub/provider acceptance or deployment is claimed. ## Risks Skipping instructions is safe only after a verified checkpoint resume with the correct previous run. The full bootstrap remains available if resume fails. Changed or previously unknown configuration is sent again. Tests cover these cases. Tool authorization and publication checks still run under the current server policy. No database migration is required. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool use and code execution. The exact deployment model identifier and context window are not exposed in this session. No delegated agents 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>	2026-10-20 10:39:17 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	813e808af4	Remove filesystem history authorization from workspace preparation (#16963) ... Remove physical-root source/reader authorization and sticky directory classifications from workspace preparation. Preserve current task/run authority, app-record privacy, credential authorization, containment, and lifecycle/publication integrity. Validate replacement selections against persisted new inputs and refresh verified checkout ownership so bounded reuse survives earlier workspace relocation. Add real PostgreSQL/Git regressions, a reproducible history-scaling benchmark, and documentation. Full CI passed all 48 jobs and Greptile scored 5/5 at 3d5da6c259. Five preparation-guard medians improved from 20,512.99 ms to 52.22 ms on the 8,500-workspace fixture; these are not end-to-end startup timings. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-20 09:19:59 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	d84061b923	fix(runner): recover journaled completion proposals (#16962) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Native runs preserve provider sessions across controller restarts. > - A completion event can reach durable storage before the next session checkpoint. > - Recovery advanced the event cursor but lost the saved completion proposal. > - The completed turn then appeared to need another provider turn to report its result. > - This change restores the exact active turn's proposal before advancing the cursor. > - Recovery can finalize completed work without repeating its external actions. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** After a controller restart, a native run could fail with `native_finalization_missing` even though `run.result.proposed` was already durable. The recovered driver skipped that event when its cursor advanced, so the result was absent from its state. Automatic disposition retries could then encounter outstanding tool receipts and exhaust recovery. **Expected behavior** Restore the saved result for the exact active turn. Wait for provider termination, then use normal finalization. Do not start another provider turn to repeat completed work. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a native Codex task and save its active-turn checkpoint. 2. Persist its completion proposal, then lose the controller before another checkpoint. 3. Recover the same run after the provider completes. Before this change, finalization reports a missing result. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on `92b238137b`. The repair is based on `7c247243e5`. **Deployment mode** Native Runner with Codex. The incident used a remote sandbox; the regression covers controller event recovery. Related: #12845 and #15297. The older #12241 addresses provider process continuity; this change repairs the controller's saved event projection. ## What Changed - Restore valid completion proposals for the checkpoint's exact active turn during event replay. - Reject conflicting, invalid, or incorrectly bound proposals. Ignore proposals from another turn and prevent adoption after a newer turn starts. - Keep provider termination and normal finalization as separate requirements. - Add eight behavioral cases using the real Codex driver and a simulated transport, and document the recovery contract and verification scope. ## Verification - Red: the new restart regression failed with `native_finalization_missing` before the production change. - Green: 254 tests passed across the native runtime, backend adapter, and Codex recovery suites. The new cases check no repeated provider work, no early finalization, duplicate proposals, conflicts, invalid proposals, and stale turn/session bindings. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed locally. All CI gates passed on `2ac025a15c`; Greptile rated that commit 5/5 with no outstanding findings. The full local `pnpm test:run` was started after completing the embedded PostgreSQL installation, then stopped while still running once the complete CI test matrix passed; it is not reported as a completed local run. - Real local acceptance passed on `2ac025a15c` with the production Rust Runner transport, Codex CLI `0.160.0`, and `gpt-6.1-sol` on macOS arm64. Persisted the completion proposal while retaining the older active-turn checkpoint; let the provider finish without persisting its later controller events; stopped the exact owned runner/provider; recovered the same provider session and turn. Observed one accepted result, one durable `turn.start` command, and one line in the receipt file. Hosted sandbox restart and recovery of the original stopped task have not been performed. - Initial setup failures are retained: dependency drift caused diff-viewer type errors, and skipped PostgreSQL postinstall links prevented database startup. Dependency alignment and the package postinstall repaired those local prerequisites. Probe setup iterations failed on a direct-provider response schema, invalid probe input fields, and an original provider that still held its writer lock. Acceptance uses the production transport, validated input, and exact-owner shutdown. No production code changes were made for those probe setup failures. ## Risks - A stale proposal could finalize the wrong work. Recovery requires the checkpoint's active turn and matching run, session, and source. It rejects conflicting results and waits for provider termination. - The change uses the existing paginated recovery scan. It adds no database query per event or new retry allowance. - No schema migration or change to task authorization is included. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6, running as Codex with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact served model snapshot and context-window size are not exposed in this session. The live acceptance probe uses `gpt-6.1-sol`. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal 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>	2026-10-20 09:09:22 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	0b266bd084	fix(workspaces): keep source preparation locks active (#16956) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Each task prepares its workspace before it starts the provider. > - Source preparation holds a transaction-scoped advisory lock on a dedicated database connection. > - Preparation can use other connections and the filesystem for longer than PostgreSQL allows that lock connection to stay idle. > - PostgreSQL then closes the connection and releases the lock while preparation still runs. > - This pull request reuses the workspace lock keepalive during source preparation. > - Slow preparation retains exclusion and returns its original result or error. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Tasks failed during workspace preparation with `CONNECTION_CLOSED` at the configured 60-second idle transaction timeout. No provider had started. A live retry showed the source-lock transaction idle while authorization reads ran on another connection. Its advisory-lock key matched the task's source-preparation key. PostgreSQL closed that transaction at the timeout. The same defect remains on current master. A real PostgreSQL regression also shows that another preparation can enter after the timeout while the original callback still runs. **Expected behavior** Source preparation must keep its advisory lock until the callback and any pending keepalive query finish. The ordinary pool must remain usable. The original preparation result or failure must survive. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Set `idle_in_transaction_session_timeout` to one second in a disposable PostgreSQL database. 2. Call `withIsolatedRepositorySourceLock` and keep its callback active for longer than one second without querying the lock connection. 3. Try to acquire the same source lock from another operation. 4. On the old code, the second operation enters and the first transaction fails with `CONNECTION_CLOSED`. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on source at `cde944ed75648adfb569e86133adc8b118b55dd6`. The repair is rebased onto `d855e550ad`. **Additional context** Refs #16340. That change introduced the keepalive for workspace copyback. This PR applies the existing helper to the source-preparation transaction. ## What Changed - Read the configured idle timeout in the same query that acquires the source lock. - Keep that dedicated connection active during source preparation with the existing helper. - Add two real PostgreSQL regressions for exclusion, company independence, a one-slot ordinary pool, nested acquisition, cleanup, and preservation of callback errors. - Update the execution contract and workspace verification maps. ## Verification - Red before the production edit: both new tests failed. A competing operation entered after the lock expired. A callback failure was replaced by `CONNECTION_CLOSED`. - Green after the repair: 86 tests passed across the source lock, source admission, keepalive, and heartbeat workspace preparation suites. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed on final commit `2b5000ce25`. - `git diff --check` passed. The lockfile is unchanged. - After rebase, the same 86 focused tests passed. The two source-lock tests passed again after the review cleanup change. - Live acceptance on `7df94d7a06`: a fresh local instance on macOS arm64, Node v26.4.0, native Codex `gpt-6.1-sol`, and permission mode `never`. PostgreSQL had a one-second idle transaction timeout. A temporary Git wrapper delayed repository reads by four seconds. Workspace preparation after environment acquisition took 8,297 ms. The real task completed, wrote and attached the correct line-count/SHA-256 report, reached `done` with native phase `committed`, and cleared its execution lock. The attachment matched the workspace file and survived browser reload. No dedicated lock connections remained. - The live probe initially used `gpt-5.4`, which the ChatGPT account rejected. Selecting the reported task model, `gpt-6.1-sol`, resolved that readiness failure. The local Claude CLI has no login, so no live Claude run is claimed. - Full CI passed on `2b5000ce25`: all general, chat, workspace, serialized-server, Runner, and E2E test shards, plus typecheck, build, and canary packaging. Both Greptile and Paperclip Review rated this commit 5/5 with no open findings. The Paperclip check concluded neutral; two unrelated visual checks were skipped. - The duplicate local `pnpm test:run` serial invocation was stopped with SIGINT after the complete CI test shards passed. It did not finish locally; no local full-suite pass is claimed. Local proof consists of the focused real PostgreSQL tests, typecheck, build, map checks, and the real task above. - The final commit changes test teardown only; production code matches the live acceptance commit. - Initial sandbox runs could not open test database ports or build IPC sockets. The same commands ran with local process access. The frozen install also found an existing manifest/lockfile mismatch; dependency resolution was local and the lockfile was restored. ## Risks - The lock connection sends one small query per keepalive interval. The helper derives that interval from the configured timeout and caps it at 30 seconds. It does no polling when the timeout is disabled. - The helper joins an in-flight query before the transaction ends. A slow database can therefore delay cleanup. - This change does not disable database deadlines, retry preparation, or recover an unexpected connection loss. It preserves existing admission checks and company/source lock keys. - Deployment and recovery of the reported tasks remain separate from code verification. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository tools, code execution, and browser verification. The exact served model 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>	2026-10-20 07:01:17 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	fc0d390d98	fix: enforce Cloud-enabled features on every managed stack (#16953) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Cloud sets managed feature values for each tenant stack. > - Staging lets admins change experimental features. > - The staging exception also let old tenant false values override Cloud true values. > - This could disable required features such as isolated workspaces. > - This pull request keeps every Cloud-enabled feature on and rejects attempts to disable it. > - The same rule applies to staging, production, and managed stacks without a hostname. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #16876 **What happened?** The staging override added in #16876 treats managed true values as editable defaults. A stored tenant false value can disable a feature that Cloud enables. Settings writes also accept attempts to disable Cloud-enabled features. **Expected behavior** If Cloud sets a feature to true, the tenant reads true and cannot turn it off. This applies to every managed stack. Staging can still change allowed experiments that Cloud has not enabled. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Set a managed staging primary hostname and enable isolated workspaces in `PAPERCLIP_MANAGED_CONFIG`. 2. Start with `enableIsolatedWorkspaces: false` in the tenant settings row. 3. Read `/api/instance/settings/experimental`. Before this fix, staging returns false. 4. Try to PATCH that flag to false. After this fix, the API returns 403 without saving, and reads return true with managed control metadata. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced against master at `cde944ed75648adfb569e86133adc8b118b55dd6`. ## What Changed - Keep managed true values in the staging read overlay. They override old tenant values and lock the existing UI controls. - Reject attempts to set any Cloud-enabled feature to false before writing settings. - Cover every managed feature in service tests across staging, production, and an absent hostname. Add real-service HTTP tests for isolation on staging and production. - Update operator documentation and the feature and access maps. ## Verification - Confirmed the new service regression fails before the fix: staging returns stored false, and writes can attempt to disable enabled flags. - Passed all six focused settings suites: 168 tests. Passed the final route and overlay suites after adding the HTTP regression: 109 tests. - Passed existing experimental settings UI tests: 54 tests. These cover the existing managed-control behavior. - Passed `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check`. - Passed `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. The first typecheck used an install that did not honor locked versions and hit an unrelated `@pierre/diffs` API mismatch. Reinstalling from the lockfile resolved it; no lockfile changes are included. - Full CI passed on `f43136812a92ec838a24f0c423270e4fbd997c28`: 55 successful checks, one neutral review check, and two expected skips. This includes typecheck, build, general and serialized tests, runner checks, and E2E shards. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39411907756). - The duplicate local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after the complete CI matrix passed. It is not counted as a completed local full-suite pass. - Greptile reviewed `f43136812a92ec838a24f0c423270e4fbd997c28`: 5/5 with no outstanding findings. The only finding on the first review was the repository rule against new code comments; those comments were removed. ## Risks - Staging users can no longer disable a feature that Cloud enables. This is the intended behavior. - Clients that send a stale full settings form containing false for a Cloud-enabled feature receive 403 and must reload. - No database migration is needed. Stored false values remain in the database, but cannot override an active Cloud true value. - Cloud-disabled staging experiments remain editable. Production restrictions and self-hosted settings remain unchanged. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, `gpt-6.1-sol`, with reasoning, repository tools, and test execution. The 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-20 06:14:52 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	bc091f0a21	fix(recovery): recover retained workspaces before saved messages (#16906) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - A stopped run can leave useful files in its original sandbox. > - The server keeps that sandbox when it cannot confirm file copyback. > - The task can then save new user input but offers no safe way to recover the files. > - A retry of the old agent turn can repeat work that already finished. > - This pull request recovers files through the existing workspace owner and delivers only saved human input. > - The user can recover a task without certifying infrastructure facts or losing completed work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16883 and #16835 for publication receipts and verified process termination. Related: #16478 clears stale holds after copyback already succeeded. This change performs the missing export and records its proof. #16901 manages the main GitHub response comment and does not perform workspace repair. **What happened?** A failed run retained its workspace. A later user message stayed saved behind a file-repair hold. The task asked the user to verify process termination and file recovery but offered no repair control. Sending a message could show an optimistic Working state and move the task to Todo before admission succeeded. **Expected behavior** The harness should recover the original files when it can prove ownership and termination. It should preserve newer edits and completed operations. Only waiting user input may start another turn. Missing evidence must keep the source held with a specific explanation. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Interrupt a sandbox run before workspace finalization succeeds. 2. Retain its exact allocation and save a user follow-up. 3. Observe the file-repair hold and missing end-user repair path. ## What Changed - Add source-bound background recovery for native and legacy runs. An accepted native result is not required. - Share the physical copyback lock and durable owner. Resume only the exact stopped allocation, export files, verify persistence and obtain a fresh stop receipt. - Persist retry limits and idempotent requests on the existing recovery record. Limit each server to two background exports. Add an indexed candidate scan and a separate cleanup obligation. - Add a task-editor recovery endpoint. Deny agents and viewers. Reject caller-supplied stop or repair claims. - Deliver waiting human input once through ordinary admission. Preserve pause, approval, budget and assignment gates. Require historical conversational-adapter evidence for legacy-to-Runner continuation. - Include exact GitHub publication receipts in continuation context. Preserve unknown effects and the original failed run. - Show observed recovery progress, a transient-failure retry action and specific service blockers. Keep saved messages visible. Suppress false startup feedback and implicit Todo promotion behind a file hold. Hide unavailable workspace links. - Update execution semantics, capability maps and production-component stories. ## Verification - Red: the original read model failed the new recovery-progress assertion; the other 23 checks in that file passed. - Passed: recovery regressions with 28 cases with real PostgreSQL, files, tar and Git operations. Lifecycle provider calls are controlled test boundaries. Coverage includes native/legacy export, concurrent owners, rollback after export, interrupted archive export with a new database connection, lost replies, historical discovery, durable retry limits, separate cleanup and saved-input delivery. The actual candidate query uses its partial index with 3,000 unrelated history rows. A first automatic repair can bind verified old-controller stop proof without an accepted native result. Review also reproduced and fixed export-only continuation and cleanup lost after a committed repair. Cleanup remains discoverable without waiting input and after task reconciliation. - Passed: two GitHub integration cases verify that continuation context carries the existing publication receipt and does not write another response. Company and task boundaries are checked. - Passed: 293 continuation, workspace-sync, platform-receipt and OpenAPI checks. After file repair, actual dispatch retains pause, cancellation, approval, real budget-policy and assignment gates. - Passed: 174 route checks, including editor admission, agent/viewer denial and rejection of fabricated repair claims. - Passed: 351 task detail, workspace properties and comment-reopen checks after updating the new read boundaries and asynchronous workspace-link expectations. Two new route cases keep held tasks Blocked when a comment is saved. - Passed: 265 task-thread and recovery-notice checks. The broader continuation suite also passed; its new legacy migration case first exposed a gap that the focused recovery suite now covers. - Passed after rebase: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. The later master merge adds an unrelated permission migration; recovery migration generation and safety checks passed after the merge. - Passed: token gates, module boundaries, map structure and migration checks. The recovery index is migration 0360 after current master. - Browser: inspected the production recovery component and its retry-to-queued transition with fixture data. The first dev dependency load failed; a reload after optimization resolved it. This is UI evidence, not a live provider recovery claim. - Every test shard passed on final commit `bbbc09efb4`. The older local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after the complete CI test matrix passed. Local full typecheck and production build passed. The first CI build compiled and booted, then lost its runner during the clean public npm-install check. An isolated retry passed the build, production boot and clean public npm-install verification. - Greptile reviewed final commit `bbbc09efb4` at 5/5. All review threads are resolved. - The change is not deployed. Hosted recovery remains unverified until the served revision includes this change. ## Risks - Recovery crosses process, provider and persistence boundaries. Missing or mismatched ownership, stop, descriptor or file evidence keeps the hold. It never selects a replacement allocation or silently starts over. - File recovery does not certify external action outcomes or authorize replay. New input still uses normal execution admission. - Historical sources without sufficient durable evidence can remain blocked. Destructive reconstruction stays separate. - The index migration is idempotent. It changes no task data. Snapshot pruning follows repository policy. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, `gpt-6.1-sol`, with code execution and browser tools. `gpt-6-astra` assisted earlier investigation. 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>	2026-10-19 21:51:46 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	3b8324a233	fix(github): keep one main PR review comment and reconcile stopped work (#16901) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - GitHub connections send review requests to an assigned agent. > - A PR needs one main comment that shows its current review state. > - The response ledger used one comment per incoming request. Pushes and follow-up messages created more placeholders. > - Thread subscriptions also accepted requests addressed to external bots. Recovery could leave an acknowledged request without a final notice. > - This pull request shares the main PR comment, filters other recipients, and reconciles stopped work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #16874 showed the repeated placeholders. #15416 introduced the per-request response path. The prior summary path used one PR-level marker. **What happened?** Repeated pushes created new main PR comments. A subscribed `@greptile review` message also woke the Paperclip bot. If execution stopped before staging a milestone, its comment could keep claiming that work was active. **Expected behavior** One bot keeps one main comment per PR. Progress and review results update it. A message addressed to another recipient does not wake the bot unless it also explicitly mentions this bot. Stopped work gets an accurate notice. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Accept two review requests in one PR conversation. 2. Add `@greptile review` to that subscribed conversation. 3. Fail the assigned run before it stages a milestone. Run channel maintenance. ## What Changed - Add a durable main PR response target. Keep per-request receipts and the existing publication lease. - Recover the target from App-owned provider markers. Adopt older placeholders and point verified duplicates to the current review. - Use a queued notice before a PR run starts. Preserve version ordering and final responses. - Filter leading mentions addressed to another recipient. Explicit mentions of this bot take precedence. Incidental mentions keep normal thread behavior. - Reconcile acknowledged requests after terminal execution. Show paused state for saved requests on a blocked task. Preserve newer work and confirmed or uncertain tool delivery. - Keep a request open when its stale acknowledgement is suppressed. Close placeholders after replies published elsewhere. Retire old coalesced placeholders before replacing their receipts. Resolve native request identity when legacy wake fields are absent. - Update guidance, connection documentation, and feature/access maps. ## Verification - Red: all three behavioral regressions failed on the original code. A second review created a second comment; an external-bot request was processed; stopped execution retained its working placeholder. - Green: the same three cases passed after the fixes. - Review regressions also failed before their repairs: a delayed acknowledgement closed a new request; normal and stored formal-review receipts left a live placeholder; coalesced completion lost a duplicate receipt; native terminal work without legacy wake fields stayed queued. All 13 combined regression and safety cases passed after repair. - The same legacy receipt-loss bug was also reproduced in the superseded-acknowledgement branch. Its four affected cases passed after adding retirement before that receipt replacement. - A further review regression reproduced paused requests rejecting resumed progress and skipping stopped-run cleanup. Four cases failed before repair; all eight resume and neighboring safety cases passed afterward. Both paused-notice branches keep the request open. - Repeated paused maintenance reproduced two needless GitHub edits. The writer now skips an identical complete comment body. Nine affected cases passed, covering repeated maintenance, resumption, stopped work, final assessment preservation, and main-comment reuse. - Safety cases cover lost receipts, legacy adoption, newer progress, published assessments, provider-verified mention aliases, and old replies that must not complete new requests. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, map validation, and module boundaries passed. The server TypeScript check passed after the final repair. The broader local GitHub workflow and policy run passed 188 tests. Full CI passed on the final commit (`554979d79285b68bcbf90cd639e3d2d053f4ea4b`), including all three chat shards, server/workspace/Runner suites, typecheck, build, and E2E gates. Greptile is 5/5 with no open review findings. One serialized job received a runner shutdown signal mid-test; its single retry passed. - Preserved failure evidence: the first CI run exposed an overbroad recipient filter and an old queued-text assertion. The next commit passed all three CI chat shards. Greptile then found the receipt transitions covered by the new regressions above. Local full-suite runs were stopped when those defects required source changes; no clean full local pass is claimed. - Tests use real PostgreSQL and controlled provider responses. They do not establish a live GitHub App rollout. The original instance needs the fixed server before its comments change. ## Risks - Leading mentions now select a recipient even when that account has no Paperclip connection. A leading human mention also selects that person. Mid-message incidental mentions retain normal subscription behavior. - Existing comment adoption edits only comments proven by this endpoint's request ledger or prior summary marker and App identity. Deleted and replaced comments remain protected. - Failure cleanup uses current authority and does not replace newer progress or unresolved provider writes. It does not restart failed execution. - No schema migration is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. The model used reasoning, tools, code execution, and browser inspection. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 21:51:20 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	16689de291	fix: add one-click retry for restricted workspace setup (#16909) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Tasks need a clear way to resume after a setup failure. > - A shared repository can contain another task that the assigned agent cannot read. > - Paperclip correctly stops before the agent starts, but the user must then understand workspace settings to recover. > - This pull request gives that failure a single Retry button and selects a clean copy of the configured repository through normal admission. > - The task keeps its assigned agent and execution settings, while access checks and existing work remain protected. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #16895 classifies the restricted source failure. This change adds the user recovery action. #16906 handles retained files after execution; this change handles a setup failure before execution starts. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Recovery of a task whose shared repository includes a task workspace the assigned agent cannot read. **Current behavior** The task stops before provider work and asks the user to understand workspace choices or access grants. **Proposed behavior** Show Retry above the task message box, independent of loaded conversation history. One click requests one attempt using a clean checkout of the configured remote. Show Retrying while the request is pending. Show an error only if the request fails. **Reason and benefit** The user can resume work without understanding repository isolation or changing access to another task. **Breaking changes** None. The recovery source value is server-owned. The public workspace selection request does not accept it. No migration is required. ## What Changed - Add one Retry control above the composer in both task conversation views. It stays available when an older notice is outside the loaded comment pages. - Bind recovery to the latest failed run, current assignee, and recorded proof that provider work did not start. - Use the existing atomic recovery route and pending workspace selection. Normal admission clears the old session and creates the isolated checkout. - Choose a fresh task-owned branch for recovery, including fixed project branches, existing task branches, and adapter branch overrides. Preserve the model, environment, setup commands, pending user workspace choices, previous files, and all execution gates. - Update execution documentation and both workspace maps. ## Verification - Passed all 461 tests in the eight affected database, Git, HTTP, workspace binding, and conversation suites after the review fixes. An additional 292 tests passed after the final compatibility fixes, including IssueDetail and recovery action routing. - Concurrent HTTP retries produce one wakeup. Paused projects and runs that started provider work reject recovery without changing the workspace. - Real Git tests exclude private files, private commits, and unpublished original files from the clean checkout, preserve the original, and exercise reuse, cleanup, and reopen. - Verified in a running local app: a task failed twice, displayed only Retry, and reached Done after one click. A second browser test put the failure notice behind 501 newer comments and used a fixed project branch. Retry stayed visible and the task reached Done. The credential-free process worker used the selected checkout and wrote its result there. This does not claim a live model-provider run. - The first manual fixture lacked a responsible-user membership and failed after successful workspace recovery. Corrected the fixture, retained that failure evidence, and verified the full flow with ordinary authorization. - Full typecheck, build, token gates, and map checks passed. The full local suite was stopped after review changed its source during execution; current-head CI provides the complete suite result. - An earlier unrelated peer-comment read test hit a socket hangup. The next complete affected-suite run passed; the first failure is retained in local evidence. - Current-head CI hit an unchanged runner credential-concurrency test failure. That lane passed on the preceding commit, and all 42 credential tests passed locally. The original failed job is retained; the one-time rerun passed. All latest-head CI checks are green (55 success, 2 skipped, 1 neutral), and Greptile is 5/5 with both review threads resolved. ## Risks - A remote repository outage can still prevent the next attempt. Retry does not grant access or copy unpublished files from the old checkout. - Recovery accepts only the latest recorded pre-provider failure and preserves normal execution gates. This limits duplicate work and stale recovery requests. - No database migration, dependency, or lockfile change. - The first review found fixed-branch retry loops and dependence on paginated notice history. Both had failing regressions before the fixes and now pass targeted tests and the combined browser journey. - Full CI then caught assumptions about missing run evidence and unrelated recovery actions. The final changes tolerate absent evidence and scope the new lookup to board-owned actions with valid run IDs. The previously failing suites now pass locally. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser verification. 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>	2026-10-19 21:49:44 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	d9bcf4dfe8	fix(auth): let Cloud stack admins manage experimental settings (#16907) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - People use experimental settings to opt into product features. > - Cloud stack Admins can manage their company, but cannot save an experiment. > - Requiring an Owner role adds unrelated privileges to this workflow. > - This pull request gives trusted Cloud stack Admins permission to update experiments. > - Other instance administration and platform settings keep their existing checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A person with the Cloud stack Admin role receives “Instance admin access required” when they enable an experimental setting, such as Fast responses. **Expected behavior** Cloud stack Admins can save editable experimental settings. This permission does not grant general instance-admin authority. Members, Support users, and agents cannot change experiments. Cloud-managed and operator-hidden settings remain protected. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Sign into a Cloud staging workspace as a stack Admin. 2. Open Settings → Experimental. 3. Enable Experimental fast responses. 4. Observe the permission error instead of a saved setting. **Additional context** Related: #10343 introduced computed Owner elevation. #15748 added Fast responses and the company Connections settings page. The roadmap and existing PRs were checked. This is a small authorization fix for the existing settings path. ## What Changed - Derive experiment-management authority from the current trusted Cloud stack Admin role on each request. - Apply that authority only to the experimental settings PATCH route. Keep general settings, environment defaults, and task drain restricted to instance admins. - Preserve existing hidden-setting checks, managed feature restrictions, and activity records. - Add role and role-downgrade regressions, allowed and denied route cases, staging coverage, and updated OpenAPI and access documentation. ## Verification - Before the fix, the Admin fast-response request returned 403 and the new role assertions failed. The first sandboxed HTTP run could not bind local sockets; the regression run outside that sandbox reached the expected authorization failures. - Focused Cloud actor, settings route, managed-overlay, and health tests: 149 passed. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` pass. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. - Greptile reviewed commit `7c33b90066121f03183579d2fae2650755e025e4` at 5/5. Its one style finding is fixed and resolved. - The full local `pnpm test:run` did not pass. It reported two early collection failures before workspace build outputs were ready and a 15-second timeout in the unchanged AgentMail recovery test. The run was stopped after those failures while the full CI suite continued. No full local-suite pass is claimed. - The first current-head CI attempt failed the unchanged Runner test “preserves a real listening process and its marker when a health RPC times out” with `runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable` / `process_identity_changed`. The test passes in a local isolated run. This recovery does not establish the CI failure's cause. [Failed job](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39332989655/job/118336142261). The failed shard passed on its single rerun. The failure cause remains unconfirmed. All CI checks on commit `7c33b90066121f03183579d2fae2650755e025e4` are now green. [Final CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39332989655). - No deployed staging behavior is claimed. Manual acceptance after deployment: as a stack Admin, enable Fast responses, reload, and confirm Connections appears. Confirm Members and Support users still cannot save experiments. ## Risks - This intentionally extends experimental settings write access to Cloud stack Admins. It does not persist an instance-admin role or expand other instance controls. - Production retains its existing managed feature policy. Staging retains its editable experiment allowlist and protected execution and owner-elevation settings. - No database migration or UI change is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser inspection. The runtime does not expose an exact model snapshot 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>	2026-10-19 21:48:00 -05:00
3 people	7b9334cd10	Draft: Build agent-ready design proposal system (#16875) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work. > - People need consistent UI patterns to review and control that work. > - The current board uses related layouts and controls with different spacing, type, and behavior. > - That drift makes it hard for a designer or an agent to build a new page from a reliable reference. > - Storybook can show the shared patterns and the states they need to support. > - This pull request adds design proposals, a local sandbox, and reusable UI controls so people can compare the patterns in context. > - The benefit is a clearer design system that agents can use to build consistent UI. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** `ui/` — React board UI and Storybook. **Problem or motivation** Board pages repeat visual and interaction decisions. Storybook did not provide a complete reference for task views, conversation states, typography, toolbars, tabs, and light/dark colors. People could not compare a proposed pattern with the running board in one place. **Proposed solution** Add a staged Design Proposals catalog with foundations, components, layouts, and page specimens. Add an opt-in sandbox. Reuse production components where possible. Include synthetic conversation states and shared controls so reviewers can compare and refine them. **Alternatives considered** Separate static mockups would not show keyboard behavior, responsive layout, or real component states. Rebuilding each page only in Storybook would allow the reference to drift from the board. **Roadmap alignment** This improves existing board UI and Skills Manager surfaces. It does not add a new control-plane capability. ## What Changed - Added dark and light color references, typography and conversation specimens, and component stories for buttons, tabs, toolbars, sidebar, popovers, activity, and task lists. - Added a local design sandbox with synthetic task conversation playback and representative states. - Shared collection toolbars and navigation patterns across task, agent, project, routine, skill, connector, and artifact pages. - Added the streamlined Skills tabs and a My Skills collection that uses the shared skill cards. - Restored saved-thread access during synthetic playback, kept connector searchbox semantics, and updated reproduction checks after moving trial stories. - Documented the proposed patterns and added focused UI, catalog, and browser checks. ## Verification - `pnpm check:token-gates`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --check` passed. - Full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed after merging master. After the review fixes, focused UI typecheck, `pnpm build-storybook`, 23 Skills Sources tests, and all 15 Storybook typography browser tests passed. - Focused task-thread and system-notice suites passed: 251 tests. Connector Browse passed 84 tests; the connector, attachment, recovery, and Storybook flyout browser journeys passed locally. - A local full Vitest run hit one intermittent chat-channels integration failure; that test passed in isolation. GitHub CI [39347996059](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39347996059) passed on the exact latest commit: 55 successful checks and two skipped draft-only Storybook jobs. - Greptile reviewed the exact latest commit at 5/5 with no new comments or open review threads. GitHub reports the branch as cleanly mergeable. ## Risks - This PR changes 206 files and exceeds the repository's 100-file review target. Review by commit and consider a scoped split before merge. - Design Proposals are staged references. Fixture interactions do not prove API behavior, permissions, or provider execution. - UI changes to shared controls may affect pages outside the proposal sandbox. Focused browser checks and the full CI matrix passed. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact runtime model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. The model used reasoning, code execution, browser inspection, and local tests. Earlier branch commits were also AI-assisted in this Codex conversation. ## 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 available in this session) - [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 where applicable - [x] I have either linked existing issues or described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket id - [x] I have run focused tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented 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: Scott Tong <scott@scotts-mbp-m5-max.local> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 17:45:26 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	7ec6e1a237	fix(runner): explain invalid arguments for assigned tools (#16905) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip coordinates agents through authorized tools. > - The native runner validates arguments before it dispatches a tool call. > - Schema failures give repair guidance for only five built-in tools. > - Assigned-tool discovery receives a generic rejection, so an agent can mistake invalid arguments for missing access. > - This PR applies the existing safe schema feedback to every authorized tool. > - Agents can correct their calls while authorization, approval, and replay checks remain in force. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** An invalid `paperclip_search_assigned_tools` call returned only `Paperclip rejected this semantic tool call`. The call never reached the assigned-tool gateway. The same feedback gap affects arbitrary assigned app tools. **Expected behavior** Identify argument validation as the cause. Return bounded schema locations and ask the provider to correct its arguments. Do not expose submitted values or grant access to unassigned tools. **Steps to reproduce** Prepare an authorized discovery tool. Submit an invalid query or optional argument through the native runner. Observe the generic error before this fix. Correct the arguments and confirm one dispatch after this fix. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on master at `4970d5ed3d`. The incident did not retain its rejected arguments, so the tests cover representative invalid inputs rather than claim to replay that exact payload. **Deployment mode** Native runner with the Codex app-server driver. Local verification uses macOS ARM64 and controlled provider fixtures. Related: #16868 added bounded monitor validation feedback. #16723 changes runtime MCP catalog loading; this PR changes the Rust runner validation response and does not depend on that work. ## What Changed - Supply generic repair guidance for any authorized tool whose arguments fail JSON Schema validation. Preserve specific built-in hints. - Keep the existing three-location and 512-byte limits. Do not include input values or unknown keys. Preserve generic authorization failures and the existing retry flag. - Cover missing fields, wrong types, null optional fields, bounds, unknown fields, unchanged rejected-call state, corrected calls, and completed-call replay protection. - Exercise rejection, correction, one dispatch, and successful completion through the real Codex driver with a controlled provider subprocess. - Document the behavior and its verification scope in execution semantics and the agent access map. ## Verification - Red: both new runner regressions failed on the original generic rejection. The existing API-validation regression passed. - Green: all seven selected validation tests passed. The new Codex transport regression passed with one rejection and one corrected dispatch. - `cargo fmt --manifest-path packages/paperclip-runner/runner/Cargo.toml --all -- --check`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `git diff --check` passed. - Full Rust workspace tests, the repository build, and sequential repository typecheck passed. The existing assigned-tool gateway suite passed all 30 tests. All hosted test and end-to-end jobs passed on this head. The duplicate local `test:run` was interrupted after the hosted suites passed; its local result is incomplete. The hosted build and clean public npm installation check also passed. All current-head CI gates are green, including the final verify and e2e aggregates. - Greptile reviewed commit `3e2743e1e15b3b13a7d803ce4d828510e41fb22a`: 5/5, no actionable findings. - Setup evidence: master has a stale dependency lockfile. Dependencies were resolved with the pinned pnpm 9.15.4; lockfile changes are excluded. The first full typecheck overlapped the build and failed copying a generated shared-package file. The sequential rerun passed with no source change. The initial copy failure remains recorded here; the concurrent build-output race was not separately reproduced. - The provider is simulated. This proves runner validation and transport recovery, not that a live model always retries or that GitHub credentials work. ## Risks The provider now sees schema locations for all authorized tools. The existing sanitizer and bounds still apply. Unknown input keys and values remain excluded. No schema, permission, approval, automatic tool replay, database, or connection-auth changes are made. Unauthorized tools still get a generic rejection. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with reasoning, source inspection, and tool execution. The exact runtime 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>	2026-10-19 17:03:42 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	e5927e1db9	fix: give commentary its own default read permission (#16903) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and inspect their work. > - Commentary collects agent suggestions and complaints for company members. > - Commentary used the permission for detailed agent-action audits. > - Owners, admins and viewers could therefore receive a permission error when they opened Commentary. > - This pull request gives commentary its own permission and enables it for all human company roles. > - Members can read feedback while task privacy and detailed audit access keep their own checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16884, which added the Commentary browser. A search found no open PR for this permission fix. **What happened?** Commentary returned `Missing permission: audit:view_agent_actions` for company members without the detailed audit grant. Default owners, admins and viewers did not receive that grant. **Expected behavior** All human company roles can read commentary by default. A separate `commentary:view` permission controls this access. Private source tasks remain private. Commentary access does not grant detailed agent-action audits or CSV exports. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Sign in as an active company owner, admin or viewer without `audit:view_agent_actions`. 2. Open Audit, then Commentary. 3. Observe the permission error before this change. **Paperclip version or commit** Base commit: `7c58ea07b2`. **Deployment mode** Authenticated server or Cloud tenant. ## What Changed - Add `commentary:view` to the shared permission contract and all human role defaults. - Require that permission for commentary list and detail reads. - Add an idempotent upgrade migration for existing active human members. Preserve existing grants and scopes. - Add the commentary default when approving saved human invitation grants that omit it, including pre-upgrade invitations. Preserve explicit commentary scopes. - Add regression coverage for role defaults, permission removal, audit separation, private tasks and migration replay. - Update the API description, specifications, database notes and access maps. ## Verification - Passed 68 tests across commentary reads, role grants, old-invitation HTTP acceptance, migration replay, agent audit routes, access services and migration snapshot drift under the repository's locked dependencies. - Confirmed the new role and read tests failed before the implementation. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed. - Migration numbering and safety checks passed during the build. - Full `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed locally after the invitation fix. - The final-commit CI matrix passed, including all test shards, typecheck, build, public-install checks and canary smoke. The redundant local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after the full CI matrix completed; the 68 focused local regressions passed separately. - The first install bypassed the stale lockfile and selected a newer diff-viewer API. The initial typecheck and build failed in that unrelated plugin. Installing the locked versions cleared both failures; the tracked lockfile is unchanged. - The first locked-dependency regression run hit the 15-second limit while importing the audit route graph in its first test. Moving that import into suite setup fixed the timeout; all 58 regressions then passed. - Greptile found that pre-upgrade invitations retain old grant lists. New helper and HTTP regressions reproduced this gap before the fix, then passed after approval added the missing commentary default. - Greptile reviewed the final commit at 5/5 with no remaining actionable findings. Its earlier thread is resolved. - No UI code changed. The permission tests use real disposable PostgreSQL databases and HTTP routes. ## Risks - The upgrade deliberately enables commentary for every existing active human company member, including viewers. Existing commentary grants retain their saved scopes. - Source-task privacy still filters previews, counts, searches and full messages. Agent-authenticated browsing remains denied. - Agent-action audit grants, detailed filters and CSV export permissions keep their current behavior. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository editing and command execution. The exact runtime model ID and context window are not exposed to 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>	2026-10-19 16:58:17 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	4970d5ed3d	fix(skills): unblock agent attachment and preserve Latest selections (#16899) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Operators attach company skills to agents from the skill library. > - Attachment first reads the agent's skill snapshot to preserve other assignments. > - That read materialized and validated repository files for the entire library, even in read-only mode. > - The response also treated resolved runtime versions as stored pins. Saving could then fail with beta pins disabled. > - This pull request makes version-cache inspection lightweight and returns the stored assignment choices. > - The benefit is a responsive attachment flow that preserves Latest and explicit pins. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Adding a repository skill to an agent could stall before the save request. The prerequisite snapshot read projected or checked every file in every installed repository skill. Once it returned, an existing Latest assignment could become a version pin in the save payload. The server then rejected that save when beta skill pins were disabled. **Expected behavior** Reading assignments must not prepare all repository snapshots for execution. Adding a skill must preserve the other assignments and their Latest or pinned choices. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Install repository-backed skills with stored immutable versions and cold disk caches. 2. Assign one repository skill to a Claude agent with Latest selected. Leave beta skill pins disabled. 3. Open another skill, select Add to agent, choose the same agent, and save. 4. Observe the expensive prerequisite read and the beta-pin rejection after that read completes. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced from master at `ac9459bae3329395f10bc81c638a374eef152baa`. **Deployment mode** Observed in hosted staging. Reproduced with a disposable local instance, embedded PostgreSQL, and the Claude local adapter on macOS arm64 with Node 26.4.0. Related: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/9995 adds a separate read-only assignment endpoint for peer-agent access. This fix keeps the existing configuration-gated snapshot and its permissions. ## What Changed - Respect read-only listing for current and pinned version caches. Check directory and entrypoint safety without projecting repository contents, reading all support files, or updating cache access records. - Keep complete snapshot restoration and byte validation at run preparation. Missing caches are restored from stored data. Corrupted files are repaired there. - Return stored assignment version choices in both list and sync responses. Keep runtime version details in the snapshot entries. - Add database-backed regressions for cold and warm reads, pinned versions, execution repair, and unsafe entrypoints. Add HTTP regressions for save round trips and explicit pins. - Update developer documentation and verification recipes. ## Verification - Red: both latest and pinned read-only cache regressions failed on the original code. The original code created caches during listing. - Red: the HTTP save-roundtrip regression returned 400 with the beta-pin error. The explicit-pin regression also failed. - Green: the updated API and cache suites passed all 145 tests. The three related company-skill service suites also passed. - Real browser: attached a repository skill to a paused test agent with another repository skill already set to Latest and beta pins disabled. The success toast appeared. The skill's Agents tab retained the assignment after reload. API reads confirmed both assignments remained unpinned and no repository version caches were created. - Local synthetic fixture: six skills share a 606-file repository snapshot. A cold HTTP skill-list request completed in 241 ms. This is local evidence, not a staging latency measurement. - Real service comparison on that fixture: the baseline cold list wrote 3,648 version/cache files. A warm baseline list read 3,642 version files and wrote six access records (457 ms). The fixed warm list read and wrote zero version/cache files (61 ms). Both services returned the same 16 library entries. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. The final API edit also passed the server typecheck. - `pnpm build` passed. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` passed. - The broad `pnpm test:run` invocation reported six failures in the untouched `tool-gateway-service.test.ts` suite. An isolated rerun passed all 59 tests. The broad run was stopped after recording those failures, so it is not a green full-local result. The PR CI matrix separately passed those suites. Greptile completed on the current commit with 5/5, zero comments, and no open threads. - One CI shard was interrupted by runner shutdown, with no failed assertion in its log. A single failed-job retry passed on the same commit. The aggregate CI gate passed. All current-head PR checks are complete with no failing or pending checks. - This PR does not claim that the fix has been deployed to staging. ## Risks - Settings reads check cache locations and entrypoints. They defer full support-file validation to execution. Regression tests verify that execution still repairs corrupt bytes and restores missing versions. - The response now distinguishes stored pins from resolved runtime versions. Explicit historical pins remain intact. Company, configuration, connector, and beta-pin authorization gates keep their existing behavior. - No schema migration or dependency change. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, code execution, and browser tools. The exact runtime build 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>	2026-10-19 16:33:02 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	7c58ea07b2	fix(issues): guard prepared task promotion by status version (#16893) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Integrations can prepare a backlog task before its assigned agent starts. > - A person can change its status or assignment during preparation. > - An unconditional promotion can replace that newer decision. > - Safe promotion needs a saved revision that includes every assignment path. > - This pull request checks that revision under the task row lock and derives policy cleanup from the locked row. > - The benefit is safe initialization recovery with the existing company, task, and run authority. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Prerequisite #16896 has merged. This PR now targets master and contains only the conditional promotion API. The prerequisite fixed the confirmed baseline first-upload browser regression. **What happened?** A client that saves a task's initial documents and then sends an unconditional status update can override a concurrent status or assignment decision. The update validator previously dropped an expected version, so clients could not make this promotion conditional. Some direct assignment and release paths also did not advance the revision. **Expected behavior** A prepared task moves from backlog to todo only if its original status and assignment revision still matches. A stale request returns 409 before a task mutation, audit publication, or wake. Policy cleanup preserves unrelated saved settings. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a backlog task and save its statusVersion before preparing it. 2. Release its assignment, or change an assignee and then restore that assignee. 3. Send `{ "status": "todo", "expectedStatusVersion": <original revision> }` to its PATCH endpoint. 4. The stale promotion must return 409. A matching revision on an unchanged backlog task must succeed. Duplicate and related PR searches found no existing prepared-task promotion fix. ## What Changed - Accept an optional nonnegative expectedStatusVersion for exactly a status-only backlog-to-todo promotion. Reject extra public fields before parsing can discard them. - Check the current revision and backlog state under the issue row lock. Reject stale requests before checkout adoption or execution-control effects. - Add SQL migration 0358 to advance the revision for both assignee fields at the database boundary. Release, administrative release, direct writes, and assignment round trips now invalidate an old version. - Derive guarded policy cleanup from the locked row. Preserve review limits and protected authorization when removing a monitor. Reject derived ownership changes or review decisions. - Add schema, real HTTP/PostgreSQL, concurrency, migration replay, and policy regression coverage. Update the response type, OpenAPI, developer docs, and access map. ## Verification - Red before the initial fix: stale requests returned 200 instead of 409, validation removed the expected version, and a stale active task could adopt a checkout. - Review found two further defects. Four new release/direct-assignment tests showed unchanged revisions. The real HTTP/service test returned 422 for a valid two-field promotion after monitor cleanup. Helper tests also proved that cleanup lost valid review limits and protected authorization. All now pass after focused repairs. - Green: 124 route and policy tests, including 7 real Express/PostgreSQL cases, 37 existing route tests, and 80 policy/helper tests. The real row-lock race preserves a policy edit committed while promotion waits. - Green: all 23 database client tests, plus 9 focused assignment and replay checks. Historical migration 0227 receipt recovery cannot remove the new assignment trigger. Reapplying migration 0358 leaves existing rows unchanged and installs one trigger. Combined status/assignment writes increment once; unchanged assignees do not increment. - Earlier verification passed all 218 schema/route/service cases and the generated OpenAPI capability test. Rebased focused regressions passed all 27 selected cases. Final server TypeScript passed after all repairs; shared TypeScript passed. Migration safety/numbering, five-snapshot retention, map validation, and diff checks pass. - The baseline browser attachment case failed twice on the earlier head. Separate #16896 proved the lost-composer cause, passed 335 component tests and the real first-upload journey, and has green CI with a 5/5 review. No assertion or timeout was weakened. - Some early local checks were blocked by missing or stale sibling dependency artifacts. This worktree now has its own frozen offline install and standard SDK prerequisites. The failures and successful reruns remain in the task evidence. - Before rebasing, head `3304bb00de6ad6a248b5e046c008072ad20ac8f5` passed all CI (55 successful checks and one neutral), Greptile 5/5, and a secondary source review at 5/5 with no unresolved findings. The secondary reviewer did not execute project tests, inspect CI, or exercise a live agent journey. Earlier incomplete and must-fix assessments remain visible; both established findings are repaired above. - After #16896 merged, all five CAS commits were rebased onto master `87d9386ae637c652d1fed09d2046be1bcaeb413b`. Migration 0358 was regenerated because master added another 0357. Range comparison shows no other change to the CAS patches; inherited UI commits are absent. The original head is preserved locally. - Rebased head `1c0264e51a280b1dbf597725a7e42e72d4be1b1b` passes all 124 route/policy tests, 9 selected assignment/promotion tests, and all 24 database client/snapshot-drift tests. Database build, migration checks, generated snapshot linkage, five-snapshot retention (0354–0358), maps, and diff checks pass. Fresh-head CI and review are pending. No deployment or live agent journey was performed for this API. ## Risks - The guard supports prepared backlog promotion only. Other statuses or mixed public mutation fields return 422. A stale revision or non-backlog row returns 409. - Preserve the original version from a server that already advertises this guard before initialization. Older versions did not track every assignment path. Reconcile older or uncertain initialization instead of fetching a new revision and blindly retrying. - Migration 0358 is SQL-only and idempotent. It adds no table, column, or task backfill. Its separate trigger survives historical status-migration replay. - Existing authorization and unguarded updates remain in place. Guarded promotion does not provide a general lifecycle or review-stage control API. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed by this session. Used tool calls, code execution, and test-first regression 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 - [ ] 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>	2026-10-19 16:27:11 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	c145475cae	fix: admit documented sandbox task context routes (#16892) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip agents use task context to complete assigned work. > - Sandboxed agents reach the controller through a bounded callback bridge. > - The bridge rejects several documented context routes before controller authorization runs. > - An authorized agent cannot read a task screenshot or referenced skill file, or inspect a missed monitor wake. > - This pull request admits only the exact context routes and supported methods. > - The controller continues to enforce company, resource, task and monitor authority. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Both callback transports return `Route not allowed` for task asset content, company skill detail and files, wake diagnostics, and the monitor check-now action. These operations already exist in the controller. **Expected behavior** A sandboxed agent can use these documented operations when the controller authorizes its request. Other methods, deeper paths, skill mutations, and recovery resolution remain restricted. **Steps to reproduce** Use a sandbox callback to read an asset URL from a task description, read a company skill's referenced file, or inspect a task's wake diagnostics. The baseline bridge rejects each request. The new regression matrix runs all five operations against both transport allowlists. Related: #16772 documents refused callback routes. This PR fixes the context routes listed above; it does not add company-wide activity or labels access. ## What Changed - Admit asset content, skill detail/files, and wake diagnostic reads. - Admit the existing monitor check-now action with controller authorization. - Add a focused allow/deny matrix for both transports. - Update the operational API reference and access maps. ## Verification - With the pre-fix bridge rules, all 10 allowed-request cases fail with `Route not allowed` across the two transports; all 24 deny controls still pass. - With the fix restored, all 34 route cases pass. The matrix plus existing callback suite passes 119 tests across two files. - Local `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. - The access-map checker, capability contract generation check, and capability inventory check pass. - Full repository CI passes on `97f9f06b2c`: typecheck/release registry, all test shards, build, Docker context, canary dry run, and aggregate verify. - The duplicate local full-suite run was stopped after 24 minutes once full CI passed; it is not claimed as a completed local pass. - Greptile is 5/5 on the current head with no inline findings. Independent source review checked asset, skill, wake-diagnostic, and monitor controller authorization and found no actionable issues. - The secondary Paperclip automated review is neutral/incomplete. Independent review covered its missing controller checks; the real Vitest cases and full CI provide execution evidence. ## Risks This widens transport admission for five existing operations. It does not change controller authorization. Asset reads still check company/task visibility; skill reads keep source policy; monitor checks keep ownership and management permission. No schema or UI change is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with tool use and code execution. The session does not expose the exact serving model ID or context window. The work used failing-before and passing-after regression tests. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 16:27:05 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	87d9386ae6	fix(ui): retain first-chat uploads through task creation (#16896) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agent Chat lets a person attach files before the first message. > - The first upload creates the saved chat task while the upload is still pending. > - Initial history loading used that new task ID to reset the open composer. > - Resetting the composer discarded its pending upload even when the server saved the file. > - This pull request uses the conversation's stable draft key for its history readiness. > - The benefit is a first message that retains its selected files and their saved references. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** The first file upload in a new Agent Chat saved on the server but disappeared from the composer. The initial history change in #16878 can unmount the active composer when an empty chat receives its task ID. The pending upload belongs to that unmounted composer, so the new composer has no selected file. **Expected behavior** The same conversation keeps its active composer and pending file while the task is created. Sending the message binds the saved attachment once. Initial history loading for an existing conversation and ordinary task still waits before mounting its composer. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open Agent Chat for an agent with no saved conversation. 2. Attach a text file before sending a message. 3. Let chat creation finish while the upload is pending. 4. Observe that the file chip disappears, although the attachment POST returns 201. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced by a deterministic real-composer regression on master 2e5bf12411. The existing browser case also failed twice in #16893 before this prerequisite fix. **Deployment mode** Built from source. Browser acceptance uses a disposable local-trusted server, embedded PostgreSQL, Chromium, and a simulated agent. Related: #16878 added the initial history gate. #15769 covers durable writes during disconnects; this change fixes an in-flight upload lost during first-chat creation. Duplicate searches found no existing fix for this transition. ## What Changed - Use the stable conversation draft key for readiness and timeout state when available. Ordinary tasks keep their task ID as the readiness key. - Add desktop and mobile regressions with a deferred real-composer upload. Check the same editor, file receipt, and one send after chat creation. Keep coverage for deferred initial history on saved conversations. - Update the Agent Chat feature map with the first-upload journey and its verification scope. ## Verification - Red: both new desktop and mobile tests found that the editor became null during the draft-to-saved-chat transition, losing the pending file. - Green: `node node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run ui/src/components/TaskChatThread.test.tsx ui/src/components/task-chat/TaskChatComposer.test.tsx --maxWorkers=2` passed all 335 tests. - The existing Chromium first-upload journey passed after the fix. It checks the visible chip, saved attachment, no premature agent run, and the attachment count after send and reload. Command: `pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts tests/e2e/agent-chat-projects.spec.ts --grep 'first upload creates the chat' --workers=1`. - The browser run built the shipped UI. Token gates, palette and character checks, map validation, and diff checks passed. - Earlier local browser attempts did not reach the assertion: dependencies installed without lifecycle scripts lacked the packaged PostgreSQL library symlinks, then an anchored title filter matched no test. Ran the native package's setup, corrected the filter, and preserved both setup logs. The deterministic component regression supplies the local failing-before proof. - An initial direct UI typecheck lacked generated Storybook catalogs. The standard `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` generated them and passed. - Independent source review found no actionable issue. The readiness key matches the parent thread key, and conversation changes retain their existing remount boundary. - Review found one documentation overstatement: the browser test checks the attachment count after reload, while the component test checks the submitted Markdown reference and receipt ID. Corrected the map and this description to separate those assertions. No production code or browser assertions changed. - Current commit c6a2734311 has 55 successful checks and 2 skipped checks. Greptile is 5/5 with the finding resolved. The separate Paperclip review is neutral/incomplete: it inspected the changed code but its reads of the parent IssueDetail source stalled. It reported no actionable defect. The independent source review described above did inspect the parent identity boundary. - Full current-commit CI is the repository-wide gate. No deployment or live model was used. ## Risks - A conversation draft key must stay stable while its task is created. Agent Chat already uses that key for its composer draft and thread identity. - A different conversation key resets readiness. Existing conversation and ordinary task history still use their initial loading gate. - No visual values, API contracts, upload retries, or attachment authorization changed. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed by this session. Used tool calls, code execution, and test-first regression 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>	2026-10-19 16:11:36 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	b928c6698f	fix(heartbeat): explain deferred monitor dispatch (#16891) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - One-shot task monitors request future work through the normal heartbeat queue. > - Queue admission can hold execution until recovery or ownership is reconciled. > - The scheduler retained those monitor schedules but recorded no monitor diagnostic. > - Agents could repeatedly reschedule the same blocked check without seeing why it did not run. > - This pull request records safe deferral and failure activity while retaining all execution gates. > - Agents and operators can inspect the actual blocker and use its existing recovery path. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #15556 handles transient monitor client errors. #14590 handles parked monitor wakes. This change records the diagnosis when queue admission defers or fails; it does not change their admission or monitor consumption policies. **What happened?** A due monitor on a task with an unresolved execution-recovery hold was claimed, passed to queue admission, and released without monitor activity. The saved monitor continued to look scheduled. Unexpected dispatch errors had the same audit gap. Repeated rearming could not clear the recovery hold. **Expected behavior** Keep the monitor and the recovery hold. Record the reason that prevented its wake. Do not execute uncertain work or consume an attempt. Limit repeated identical diagnostics. If audit storage fails, release the claim so a later tick can retry. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Schedule a due monitor on an agent-owned task in progress. 2. Add an active recovery action for an interrupted legacy execution. 3. Run the monitor scheduler twice. No provider may start while the hold remains. 4. Before this fix, neither attempt writes monitor deferral activity. 5. Resolve the hold through its existing recovery path. The saved monitor can then request one wake. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on master 5739a53f5f with real PostgreSQL and the assembled heartbeat service. **Deployment mode** Built from source. This affects the server monitor scheduler. ## What Changed - Pass the existing execution blocker cause to the monitor scheduler through a server-owned diagnostic callback. - Record issue.monitor_deferred for held admission and issue.monitor_dispatch_failed for unexpected admission failures. - Keep activity to known reason codes and allowlisted blocker causes. Do not copy raw provider messages. - Fence claim release and activity against replacement, reassignment, completion and competing scheduler instances. - Limit identical activity for one schedule and cause to one record per five minutes. - Keep claim release functional when diagnostic storage fails. - Update execution documentation and the task verification maps. ## Verification - Red: explains held monitor dispatch without replaying uncertain execution failed because it expected one deferral activity row and received none. The fixture used the real queue, persisted source run and recovery action. - Red: records bounded dispatch failure diagnostics while retaining the schedule failed because no failure activity was recorded. - Green: both regressions pass after the fix. The held-source test proves no successor while held, no monitor attempt consumed, and one wake after explicit hold resolution. - Passed: all 43 tests in heartbeat/scheduling.test.ts and issue-monitor-scheduler.test.ts, with at most two workers. - Additional coverage uses real PostgreSQL for diagnostic rate limits, replacement races and an audit-insert trigger failure. Audit failure must not retain the monitor claim. Private error and unknown blocker text do not reach activity. - Passed: node scripts/check-maps.mjs and git diff --check. - Greptile: 5/5 with no actionable issues on 1d0aec738c. - Latest-head checks: 55 successful, two skipped, and one neutral. No check remains pending or failed. The branch has no merge conflict. Paperclip Review ended neutral because its agent did not return a complete assessment; it is not counted as a validated review pass. - The dependency added on deferral is one bounded recent activity query and at most one audit insert. Successful admission adds no new database read. Existing queue authority checks still decide admission. - The process fixtures validate queue admission and persisted state. They log workspace setup errors after admission; this report does not claim a live provider turn succeeded or that an existing deployment was repaired. - Passed: pnpm --dir server exec tsc --noEmit. The wrapper typecheck was stopped because it started a redundant cold native Runner build. Full repository checks run in PR CI; no local full-suite or full-build pass is claimed. ## Risks - Audit work must not strand a monitor. The storage-failure regression verifies that rollback is followed by a claim-fenced release. - Recovery holds still require their current reconciliation path. This change makes their effect visible and does not bypass ownership, budget, pause, Stop or company checks. - Activity can be stale after a later repair, so each entry includes the checked time and the exact saved deadline. A replacement cannot inherit an old dispatch diagnostic. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, tool use and code execution. The exact runtime model suffix and context window are not exposed to 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>	2026-10-19 16:11:31 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	370fb50ad4	fix(mcp): keep sibling tools available after transient calls (#16890) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents use remote MCP tools through a governed gateway. > - The gateway lists tools only while their shared connection is healthy. > - One failed call currently marks the whole connection as unhealthy. > - Later calls to healthy sibling tools then fail with `tool_not_found`. > - This pull request keeps non-authentication call failures on their invocation. > - Agents can continue their work while credential and access gates remain in force. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #10147. Related work: #15462 fixed oversized and malformed response handling. #15448 covers timeout and JSON-RPC health handling together with separate SSE and catalog discovery changes. Its patch still marks fetch failures and HTTP failures as connection errors. #15325 proposed a transport failure counter; it has merge conflicts and has not changed since October 6. #11910 is an older timeout fix with merge conflicts. This PR covers the remaining fetch and HTTP failure paths on current master, with the same narrow call-health rule for timeouts and JSON-RPC failures. It does not include the SSE or discovery changes from #15448. The timeout session-reset check follows the recovery case discussed in #15448. **What happened?** A shared remote MCP connection works until one call has a network failure, timeout, HTTP 503, or JSON-RPC error. Every later call on that connection returns `tool_not_found`, including healthy sibling tools. Connection setup then asks for user attention even though the failure did not prove that credentials need repair. **Expected behavior** The original invocation retains its failure. Authorized sibling tools remain callable. The gateway does not replay an ambiguous action. HTTP 401/403, missing credentials, and explicit insufficient scope keep their access gates. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Give an agent access to two read tools on one remote MCP connection. 2. Make one tool fail with a network error or HTTP 503. 3. Call the other tool in the same gateway session. 4. Before this fix, the second call fails with `tool_not_found` before provider dispatch. **Paperclip version or commit** `master` at `e6dcd1e8e9`. The regression runs against source with synthetic data. **Deployment mode** Any deployment that uses a shared remote MCP connection. This is a core gateway issue. ## What Changed - Preserve connection health after a network failure, timeout, non-authentication HTTP error, or JSON-RPC error from one tool call. - Retain HTTP 401/403 and insufficient-scope health gates. - Retain HTTP 401/403 gates during MCP initialization and its initialized notification, with HTTP 503 controls for both stages. - Discard only the upstream session used by a network failure or timeout. Let the next explicit call initialize again. - Add sibling-tool regression cases, authentication controls, and real HTTP header/body timeout checks. - Update runtime recovery guidance and the feature and access maps. ## Verification - Red: the four new sibling-tool cases failed on the original implementation. Each second call returned HTTP 404 with `tool_not_found`. HTTP 401/403 control cases passed. - Green: the same six-case selection passed after the production change: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/tool-gateway-service.test.ts -t 'keeps sibling MCP tools usable|keeps the connection blocked' --maxWorkers=1`. - The regression checks the actual gateway and embedded PostgreSQL. The injected provider fault preserves the call boundary. It checks failure recording, no automatic replay, catalog retention, and successful sibling dispatch. - The real local HTTP fixture checks cancellation before headers and during a body, then a successful explicit call with a fresh MCP session. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` pass. - Complete nearby suites pass: 166 tests across `tool-gateway-service.test.ts`, `tool-gateway.test.ts`, `remote-mcp-protocol.test.ts`, and `mcp-http.test.ts`, with one test worker. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsc --noEmit` passes after refreshing Runner TypeScript declarations. The first package typecheck used declarations from before the rebase and failed two unchanged native-session call sites; rebuilding that dependency resolved both errors. - The rebased head also passes all 11 selected sibling/authentication/session regressions. - Review regression red: setup-stage HTTP 401/403 controls failed because connection health stayed `ok`; the two setup-stage HTTP 503 controls passed. Green: all six setup controls and the complete 166-test nearby run pass. The fix separately handles typed initialization authentication failures and preserves the existing caller error. The server compiler also passes after this change. - Full repository CI passes on `256a65ccc302c1c31a80e87f1f91411d955028de`: typecheck, build, test shards, Runner checks, browser checks, Canary dry run, and aggregate gates. All checks are terminal: 55 successful, 2 expected skips, and the separate Paperclip Review check is neutral. Greptile is 5/5 on this exact head, with no open findings. - Full repository checks were run in CI. Local verification in this worktree used the focused suites and server compiler to keep parallel work bounded. - This change has no live provider or staging deployment proof. ## Risks - A provider that remains unavailable can stay listed until a health check detects the outage. Each call still fails with its original controlled reason code. - No automatic retry occurs because a failed remote action may already have run. - Already unhealthy connections still need a successful health check after an upgrade. - No schema, credential policy, or permission contract changes. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with tool use and code execution. The runtime does not expose the exact serving model ID or context window. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 16:11:15 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	24067a16b5	fix(workspaces): classify restricted shared repository admission (#16895) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents, their tasks, and their saved work. > - Workspace preparation must check access before an agent starts. > - A shared project checkout can contain another task's private worktree. > - The access guard correctly rejects a run that cannot read that work. > - The isolated-source path reports this as a configuration blocker after #16545. > - Shared project repository admission missed that classification and returned a generic setup failure. > - This change uses the same blocker at that boundary so recovery names the required workspace repair. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16545 and #16095. The open retained-reader repair in #16832 addresses deleted identities, a separate condition. **What happened?** A task reused a shared project workspace. Another worktree in that checkout retained a private task that the run could not read. Repository admission rejected access before provider startup. The run reported `setup_failed`, and recovery showed a generic no-live-execution notice. **Expected behavior** Keep the access denial. Report `configuration_incomplete` with reason `workspace_source_restricted`. Preserve the workspace and files. Give the owner the existing workspace repair action. Do not queue an automatic failure retry or report this expected blocker as an unexpected Sentry failure. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Bind a task to a shared project checkout. 2. Add a private task worktree beneath that checkout. 3. Continue the shared task as an agent that cannot read the private task. 4. Inspect the run result and recovery action. **Version and deployment** Reproduced in the full heartbeat service from source revision `06d4fe3121`, with PostgreSQL and real Git worktrees on macOS. The provider never starts. The regression also covers the existing Git-worktree path. ## What Changed - Apply the existing restricted-source classifier to task repository admission. - Extend the heartbeat regression to shared project workspaces. - Assert one run and one recovery action, no provider start, no unexpected Sentry report, and preserved binding and files. - Update the workspace documentation and both capability maps. ## Verification - Red: the shared project regression returned `setup_failed`; the Git-worktree control passed. - Green: the same two cases pass after the change. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` passed. - Current head `e26cdd45da76c6edaa1622856f9c69e9f48b81fb`: 55 successful checks, one neutral check, two skipped Storybook checks. Greptile 5/5, no review threads, mergeable. - All 337 tests passed across `heartbeat-workspace-branch-containment`, `heartbeat/workspace-preparation`, `run-failure-report`, and `recovery/stranded-notice`. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. All full current-head CI suites passed in [run 39315969013](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39315969013). The duplicate local full Vitest run was stopped after 11 minutes when CI completed; it has no local full-suite completion claim. The 337 affected local tests completed successfully. - Running-app acceptance at `e26cdd45da76c6edaa1622856f9c69e9f48b81fb`: a synthetic private Git worktree caused the shared task to stop with the visible Workspace source restricted notice and no process start. The normal workspace API selected a separate task directory. Resolving the recovery action resumed the same assignee. A real process fixture completed, the output persisted after reload, and both source files remained intact. Checkout and execution locks cleared. There were no automatic failure retries. - The first recovered process wrote its report to the command cwd. This was a fixture output-path mistake. The corrected fixture reads the selected workspace from the authenticated API before writing. One explicit additional admission verified that output. The record retains both successful process runs and the earlier configuration-blocked run. This is local process-adapter acceptance, not live Codex/provider qualification. - Staging diagnosis confirmed a retained private source and failure before provider startup. The original task has not been recovered. The deployed UI hides its workspace selector, and no authenticated task-write API is available in this session. No live Codex recovery is claimed. ## Risks The same exact 403 denial is now a configuration blocker during shared repository admission. Other failures retain their original type. Access policy, cloning, credentials, provider execution, and workspace contents do not change. An existing task still requires a permitted workspace repair before it can run. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, code execution, and browser tools. 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>	2026-10-19 16:03:16 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	ac9459bae3	feat: configure company agent observability (#16874) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Companies use several agent harnesses and execution environments. > - Operators need one place to select where native agent logs and traces go. > - An inference proxy would add a dependency to the agent request path. > - This pull request supplies native OpenTelemetry settings to managed Codex and Claude Code processes. > - Company secrets protect destination credentials. Export failure does not change the task result. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Company settings, shared contracts, database, server, adapters, and runner. **Problem or motivation** An operator cannot configure a company destination for native agent logs and traces. Manual harness configuration is hard to apply across local and remote execution. **Proposed solution** Add one company destination: Braintrust or a custom OTLP HTTP/protobuf endpoint. Apply a transient snapshot when execution preparation starts. Keep credentials out of API reads, task environment manifests, recovery files, and command arguments. Replace a warm process when its export settings change and preserve its conversation. **Alternatives considered** Multiple destinations can use a user-operated collector for fan-out. This change does not add a collector, an inference proxy, or transcript scraping. **Roadmap alignment** This extends company settings, secret management, and support for multiple harnesses. The maintainer requested this implementation. Searches for observability and Braintrust found no duplicate company destination feature. Related infrastructure tracing work in #16236 has a separate content-free contract. ## What Changed - Add strict schemas, revision checks, encrypted secret storage, activity records, and board-only settings routes. - Add explicit synthetic logs and traces tests with a bounded HTTP request and sanitized results. - Supply native Codex configuration and Claude Code environment values through local and remote launch paths. - Preserve Codex login refresh through the existing managed credential link. Retain unsaved drafts across background reads. Require complete custom header re-entry when the endpoint origin changes. - Separate process export compatibility from conversation identity. Isolate generated Codex configuration and preserve resumable sessions, including remote home refresh after export changes. - Advance the immutable Pi/Copilot source attestations for shared environment and sidecar code changes. Keep their provider payloads unchanged and retain prior identities for decoding. - Redact destination credentials throughout launch diagnostics and HTTP logs. - Add the production settings form, Storybook states and journey, documentation, and feature/access map entries. ## Verification - Real managed local Codex 0.160.0 and Claude Code 2.1.286 tasks exported to Braintrust. API readback and the Braintrust UI showed the test records. A real remote Daytona Codex task exported through the legacy `exec` path. - Live tests exercised content capture off, export disabled, warm conversation reuse, and a destination that accepted connections but never replied. Agent work succeeded and export requests stopped at the configured three-second timeout. The UI connection test returned “Test payload accepted”; the saved API key stayed masked after reload. - All current-head CI test lanes, typechecks, packaging/build checks, and required aggregates passed on `71e994b2be9c8fb6d6e938a4ad7cf4c95fdafe31` ([CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39319194318)). Greptile completed on that exact commit at 5/5, with zero unresolved review threads. The additional optional Paperclip Review check remains queued waiting for its assigned agent. - Local workspace typecheck and build passed. Focused verification included 239 combined runner tests, 789 API/native-session tests, 107 Codex home/ACP/sandbox-site tests, 204 feature/privacy tests, and the affected Rust suites. Migration, token, map, Storybook catalog, and Storybook build checks passed during acceptance. These checks ran at the relevant implementation or merge boundary; the current-head CI is the complete final gate. - Managed AI credential projections now receive enabled and disabled company export settings; genuine caller-owned Codex homes remain untouched. Two regressions reproduced the skip before the repair. All 276 engine/lifecycle tests and adapter-utils typecheck pass afterward. The launched TOML retains provider/MCP settings, credential continuity, and redaction. - Settings saves, removal, and the real company-deletion owner acquire secret mutation ownership before database locks. PostgreSQL NOWAIT probes cover all three paths; concurrent save/rotation/removal/deletion requests settle correctly. The affected suites passed 137 tests, followed by all 32 service/connection cases after expanded deletion coverage. Server and Codex adapter typechecks pass. - Codex source profiles use the effective CLI argument list. A spawned fixture CLI reproduced both ignored-argument failures; all three precedence/fallback cases now pass. - Real tar staging reproduced remote conversation loss in both API-key and subscription modes before the repair. Both now pass: changing managed settings preserves sessions, archives, native indexes, and refreshed subscription credentials. A corrupt upload preserves the prior config and conversation. - Preserved failure evidence: initial CI caught stale Pi/Copilot source attestations, a missing test-harness helper, and packaging fixture/probe mismatches; those were corrected and covered by focused checks. Superseded heads had intermittent attachment-composer timeouts despite successful uploads; [the original trace and screenshot remain available](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39309701089/artifacts/12215109203). The same attachment case passed on the final head: [25/25 tests in shard 3](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39319194318/job/118288637051). - A connection-fault fixture also exposed a stale pooled socket after its hang case; closing fixture responses isolated scenarios and the full affected suite passed. - The broad local test run was not clean: database resource failures, timeouts, an older cached module graph, and a stale optional-resource manifest assumption were recorded. Focused checks passed after the documented fixes. This does not establish a clean full local pass. - Native remote Codex, remote Claude, and the full ACPX Codex bridge remain unqualified. The direct Codex resume test does not establish full bridge acceptance. ## Risks - Native exporters perform network requests from each execution environment. A server connection test does not prove remote reachability. - Prompts, assistant responses, and tool content are enabled by default when supported. Native caps and harness-specific controls still apply. - Caller-owned Codex homes are unsupported for automatic configuration and remain untouched. - Native harnesses and their tool processes can inspect export credentials. The settings form and documentation advise using ingestion-scoped credentials. Retained headers remain bound to their saved scheme, host, and port; changing origin requires fresh values or removal. - Migration 0357 adds a company-scoped row and secret reference. It is safe to reapply. Secret removal and company deletion use the existing secret lifecycle. - Slow or unavailable destinations must not block task settlement. Export settings take effect at the next execution preparation boundary. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, code execution, and browser verification. The exact serving model ID and context window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 15:36:04 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	8a3d2cb04f	fix(recovery): avoid recursive holds for undispatched waits (#16894) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Queue admission must stop work while a previous execution needs recovery. > - The final dispatch gate can cancel a queued run before it starts. > - Legacy recovery treats this known wait as an unknown provider outcome and creates another hold. > - The extra hold can survive repair of the original execution and leave saved messages stuck. > - This pull request uses one database proof to prevent the extra incident and recognize old false holds. > - Saved input can then pass through normal admission with the original work and safety gates intact. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15483. **What happened?** The dispatcher writes an `execution_reconciliation_required` cancellation when an existing recovery hold denies a queued run. No runtime is selected and no provider starts. Legacy recovery later creates a `legacy_execution_requires_reconciliation` action for that cancelled admission. Its settled `replay: blocked` record remains an effective hold after the real source recovery finishes. The task has saved messages but no eligible Retry or Continue action. **Expected behavior** A verified admission denial stays a wait. It must not create another provider-outcome incident. Existing false incidents must stop blocking after the server verifies their recorded source. Real execution, uncertain outcomes and file recovery stay held. The harness determines these infrastructure facts; the user does not certify them in a form. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Persist a queued-run gate cancellation with its task-bound `executionWait` receipt and no execution authority or resource evidence. 2. Run legacy reconciliation. On the old code, it creates a second incident. 3. Persist the old incident as resolved with replay blocked, then clear the original source hold. 4. Restart queue recovery with saved user messages. On the old code, no successor is admitted. Related work: #15965 covers other pre-start dispatch cancellations but explicitly excludes this existing-hold code and leaves historical holds unchanged. #16634 covers stale-cancel classification and queue drain, without re-evaluating historical effective holds. #15383 covers an operator Stop during conversation startup. This change addresses the existing-hold receipt and its persisted false incident; it does not copy those broader changes. ## What Changed - Add one database proof for a legacy admission denied by an existing execution hold. Require the exact dispatcher receipt, matching task identity, no runtime or process claim, no lease or finalization coordinator, and no execution events. - Use the proof before legacy recovery creates an incident and when it computes effective historical holds. Keep the old audit rows. - Preserve source file obligations and the original recovery action. Keep the normal queue, pause, ownership, company and budget checks. - Add real PostgreSQL regressions for incident prevention, old state, concurrent queue recovery, message order, conflicting evidence and scope boundaries. - Update the execution contract and both recovery maps. ## Verification - Red: the regression on unfixed source fails on incident classification, historical hold projection and actual periodic saved-message admission. The other 24 safety cases pass. - Green: all 27 new database cases pass. Two safety assertions were aligned with the existing contract: daily limits stop dispatch after queue promotion; a human comment can intentionally reopen a terminal task. The final regression checks the real daily dispatch gate and agent pause. - Existing `explicit-native-continuation.test.ts`: 255 tests pass. Existing legacy recovery and PostgreSQL dispatcher suites: 61 tests pass. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` pass. - GitHub PR CI run `39313204660` passed on `ef6009e656b7c9b4c788480dce322874565960ac`. All 54 successful check-runs and the Snyk status are green. Two optional Storybook checks were skipped. The independent Paperclip Review completed with a neutral check and a 5/5 assessment with no findings. Greptile also reports 5/5 on the same commit. There are no unresolved review threads. - `pnpm test:run` is still running locally. Its overall result is pending; no full local suite pass is claimed. The exact-head GitHub CI suite passed. - A read-only probe of an affected hosted task verifies the same database proof and projects no false blocker with the working source. No live rows were changed. Deployment and a real resumed provider run remain unverified. ## Risks - An incorrect exclusion could admit work with uncertain effects. The proof fails closed on missing receipts, source mismatches, runtime/process ownership, any retained lease, coordinator, execution event or file obligation. Real upstream file recovery remains blocking in the regression. - The effective-hold query adds indexed existence checks scoped to the recorded run and company. It makes no provider calls and performs no database repair writes. - Historical audit records keep their recorded outcome. Only their effective blocking status changes when the server can prove the admission never ran. - No schema, permission, credential or UI form changes are included. Live recovery still needs verification after rollout. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, model ID `gpt-6.1-sol`, with reasoning, tool use 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>	2026-10-19 15:26:39 -05:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	313fb265db	feat(plugins): invalidate runtimes when connector access changes (#16605) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Runtime preparation depends on access and credential state as well as tool definitions. > - Grant, membership, secret, and endpoint changes need committed invalidation. > - Their writers must acquire locks before journal fanout can lock agent rows. > - This pull request adds access hooks with the corresponding transaction guards. > - Plugins can refresh preparation immediately while task-time authorization remains authoritative. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Grant changes, credential rotation and revocation, company access changes, and connector endpoint configuration do not request runtime synchronization. Journal fanout exposes lock inversions between credential persistence, access cleanup, and connection assignment writers. **Expected behavior** Committed access changes request runtime preparation without polling or credential values in the journal. Agent-specific secret bindings and new personal delegations affect their target agent. Company access changes remain conservative. Provider bookkeeping does not create preparation work. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Change an audience, delegation, membership permission, referenced credential, vault configuration, or endpoint instruction. 2. Expect a committed runtime event in the correct company and scope. 3. Run reconnect, credential refresh, SSH setup, or membership cleanup concurrently with related writes. 4. Expect both operations to preserve access checks and finish without a lock-order cycle. **Additional context** Final feature extraction from #16503. The earlier slices, #16604, and the separate delivery-test correction #16871 are merged. This PR is now the active change against master. The rebase preserves the merged assignment and definition recipient rules, Unicode selector semantics, and profile/reference transaction guards. ## What Changed - Add migration 0356 for grants, audiences, delegation, membership/permissions, secret bindings, referenced credentials and vaults, and chat/email endpoint configuration. - Keep events content-free. Ignore health, delivery, publication, Vercel verification, and GitHub webhook bookkeeping while retaining credential and repository-access changes. - Target agent secret bindings and all personal delegation changes to their old and new target agents. Coalesce delegation changes per transaction. - Lock existing grants before connections and credential persistence in OAuth and cleanup writers. - Reject superseded refresh leases before rotating stored credentials. Ignore lease acquisition and release when access metadata is unchanged. - Serialize audience replacement, validate membership, and preserve unchanged audiences. - Lock membership before permission-only saves and grant before Railway SSH setup. Individual delegation revocation locks its grant and target. Whole-grant and membership cleanup lock company recipients before deleting scoped delegations. - Lock grants and connection inputs before static-key reconnect writes. Lock company agents before cascading secret deletion; use a nonblocking secret lock and bounded retries to avoid a new cycle with credential writers. - Add PostgreSQL concurrency coverage for access writers and endpoint publication/configuration behavior. - Preserve the owner lock for plugin instance-secret removal; these secrets cannot use ordinary bindings. - Align Slack search refresh, callbacks, and disconnect with grant-before-connection locking. Recheck newly discovered grants without waiting before provider work. - Retry complete membership transactions when a credential deletion candidate is busy. Cover all four cleanup entry points and process company access in ID order. - Document final invalidation coverage and task-time authorization boundaries. ## Verification - Current head: `78aace55bef7f52bc5742b131e0b3961eb5c0f11`. All 1,061 tests across 23 affected suites pass. The named Slack authorization integration scenario also passes; it exercises authorization, refresh, disconnect, and rejection of a late callback. Server/database typechecks, migration safety and numbering, five-snapshot retention, feature maps, and diff checks pass. The complete PR diff was reviewed for secrets and personal data before push. Final acceptance: [CI run 39308303837, attempt 2](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39308303837) is green, with 55 successful checks and two optional Storybook skips. The current-head Greptile reassessment returned **Apex 5/5** at 19:16 UTC on 2026-10-19. Its full summary reports no actionable issues. Security passed, all threads are resolved, and GitHub reports no merge conflicts. The reassessment was requested as a standard review after the fixes; Greptile retained the Apex tier. - On this head, [CI run 39308303837](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39308303837) failed the unchanged adapter-utils HTTP/2 fixture with `EADDRINUSE` before READY. Its closed probe left a port handoff race. That test and its gateway are byte-identical on master. No upstream fix was found. The deterministic fixture correction is isolated in #16888; no adapter test changes are included here. The failed jobs recovered on retry without a feature source change. The original failure remains documented here, and #16888 carries the fixture correction separately. That retry demonstrates recovery; the held-probe negative control establishes the port handoff race. - Rebased onto master `194fc11406`, including merged #16604 and #16871. Replayed only the access-hook commit. Resolved OAuth, test, and documentation conflicts while retaining both sets of tests. Migration 0356 preserves the merged assignment/definition recipient rules, Unicode selector semantics, and profile/reference guards. - Apex returned 3/5 on `0fb65bc27`. Negative controls reproduce its Slack delegation and member-cleanup deadlocks (`40P01`) and unwanted Vercel/GitHub bookkeeping events. Slack grant writers now take their locks before the connection. A separate late-grant control reproduces `40P01` without the post-lock recheck; the complete guard passes. All four membership cleanup commands retry from a fresh transaction when the credential is busy. Tests verify successful cleanup and no journal rows from failed attempts. Credential IDs and repository-access changes still notify runtimes. - Earlier review corrections remain covered: static-key reconnect and cascading secret removal each reproduce `40P01` without their guards. Grant lease acquisition/release is ignored. Secret removal releases agent locks when a credential writer is busy. Instance-secret removal retains the owner lock and passes its public plugin API contention regression. Delegation updates and revocations target old/new agents; unrelated-peer, coalescing, unchanged-update, and rollback cases pass. Three negative controls verify the required whole-grant and membership cleanup guards after narrowing delegation scope. - Preserve prior acceptance failures: the first rebased 20-suite run passed 1,025/1,026; its only failure was a draft uninstall fixture blocking a random peer. Blocking the assigned agent corrected that assumption, and all 44 access/assignment tests passed. Later, all 1,044 tests across 21 suites, [CI run 39302185527](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39302185527), standard Greptile 5/5, and security passed on `0fb65bc27`. That did not clear the later Apex findings described above. Draft run 38975428081 failed a server shard; its cause was not re-investigated. A later green run does not establish that earlier cause. - Local fixture corrections are recorded separately from product failures: an assignment filename filter initially matched no file; the actual suite was included in full runs. A delegation fixture omitted its required creator, and a guard run omitted a query import. The new global-access cleanup fixture now uses its own user to avoid earlier fixtures' memberships. All were corrected before publishing their final iterations. - Local checks target affected services and real PostgreSQL boundaries. A full local build and repository-wide test run were not performed. Hosted CI supplies broader verification. Provider responses in tests are controlled; live provider behavior was not qualified. ## Risks Migration 0356 adds triggers without changing table schema. Apply it through the normal migration flow. Most access changes retain synchronous company-wide invalidation. Company fanout takes O(eligible company agents) locks and journal rows, without a fanout ceiling or mutation quota. Agent secret bindings and individual delegation changes retain narrower recipients. Events contain no credentials. Physical removal of non-instance secrets takes ordered locks on all company agents before cascading into bindings. This costs O(company agents) locks even for an otherwise unreferenced secret. Instance secrets cannot use ordinary bindings and retain their owner lock. A busy secret lock releases the transaction guards and retries up to three times. Continued contention returns a retryable conflict. Provider deletion stays outside that transaction; a retry resumes removal of an already disabled secret. Membership cleanup uses nonblocking credential guards and retries the full membership transaction. Slack search adds two grant queries, scoped to the subject and connection. Its retries occur before provider work or credential persistence. Each retry loop is limited to three attempts. Invalidation requests preparation; task-time authorization and provider session activation remain authoritative. Provider calls use fixtures; no live provider qualification is claimed. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and testing. 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>	2026-10-19 12:49:11 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	e6dcd1e8e9	feat: add Commentary to Audit with filters and shareable messages (#16884) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents can submit suggestions and complaints while they work. > - Operators currently need database access to read those messages. > - That makes it hard to find feedback from one agent or share a specific message. > - This pull request adds a standard Commentary tab in Audit. > - Operators can filter messages, browse 50 at a time, and share links to full message dialogs. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15367, which added feedback storage and agent submission. The duplicate search found no open PR for a commentary reader. **Subsystem affected** Server, shared API contracts, and the board UI. **Problem or motivation** Agent suggestions and complaints are stored but have no board reader. Operators must query the database to inspect feedback. **Proposed solution** Add Commentary to Audit without an experimental toggle. Show previews, agent and message-type filters, text search, and 50-message pages. Opening a row updates the URL. A copied URL opens the full message with its agent, task, and run context. **Alternatives considered** Direct database queries remain useful for operators, but do not provide a normal product workflow. An experimental setting would add setup to a read-only audit page. **Roadmap alignment** This completes the operator view for the existing feedback feature. It supports human oversight and does not change agent execution or task ownership. ## What Changed - Add company-scoped, board-only list and detail endpoints with audit permission and source-task privacy checks. - Return bounded previews and counts. Fetch full bodies only when a message opens. - Add the Commentary tab, search, filters, 50-row pagination, and URL-based selection. Audit tab destinations work in both layouts, with a classic sidebar entry for Commentary. - Add production Storybook examples for populated, filtered, linked, long, paginated, empty, loading, failed, denied, mobile, and light states. - Update API documentation and the feature and agent access maps. ## Verification - Final head `abc4a251c14cfbfec007542214beec528f2b18bf`: 55 checks pass; two conditional Storybook checks are skipped. The PR workflow is successful. Greptile is 5/5 with all findings resolved. - Focused database, HTTP, submission, OpenAPI, and UI regression tests cover company isolation, task privacy, filter bounds, 50-row pagination, and copied message links. - Browser Storybook journeys cover row opening, direct links, combined filters, search, and pagination. Storybook uses synthetic API fixtures; database authorization is tested separately. - Token gates, feature maps, and Storybook catalog validation pass. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `pnpm build-storybook` pass on the rebased branch. All 80 focused tests and all 37 Audit tests pass, including the real App route table in both layouts, task grant/revocation through HTTP, deleted-task privacy, and URL UI regressions. The full suite passes in the parallel PR CI matrix. The local serial full-suite run was stopped before completion after checking the recorded 94-minute serial duration. Local focused tests, workspace typecheck, production build, and final server/UI checks pass. - The linked-message Storybook test initially asserted against the loading dialog. It now waits for the message body; both direct-link and row-open journeys pass. - Native and legacy deleted-task privacy regressions failed before the fix and pass afterward. The reader checks the run task binding after the task foreign key clears. - A rapid search-then-agent-filter browser regression reproduced the search overwriting the selected agent. The pending search now restarts when URL filters change. The same browser test passes with both filters applied. - CI found two existing AuditHub assertions that still expected five tabs. They now assert the six-tab model and selected-company Commentary rendering. All 37 Audit tests pass. All other test and build jobs passed before this test-only correction. - The [agent-chat attachment browser test](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39307881171/job/118250189664) timed out waiting for an attachment preview. The [same shard passed on the prior head](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39306658703/job/118245498343) with identical application code; the intervening change only updates AuditHub unit tests. The single retry passed on the same head. The precise cause of the earlier failure remains unconfirmed. ## Risks - Commentary may contain sensitive task context. The reader requires board access and audit permission, and filters source-task visibility before returning previews, counts, or full bodies. - Text search scans stored message bodies. Pages are bounded and full bodies are fetched on demand. - Offset pagination can shift if new messages arrive while paging. Ordering uses timestamp and ID for stable ties. - No database migration or agent submission behavior changes are required. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, tool use, browser interaction, and code execution. The exact backend model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 14:21:13 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	8193abb936	feat(claude): default qualified macOS and Linux targets to Paperclip Runner (#15997) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip must run the selected agent on its selected host. > - Claude needs verified packages for each supported target. > - A Mac controller must select the correct Linux provider pack. > - New defaults must follow package and execution evidence. > - This PR adds Claude platform packaging and target-specific pack selection. > - Existing Codex Linux ARM64 behavior remains intact. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15683. This PR depends on #15993 and #15994. Related scope: #15422 and #15224. ## What Changed - Reuse the merged four-target daemon producer/consumer matrix. Add target-owned Linux provider packs and carry their immutable identities through release assembly and vendoring. - Reuse master’s landed pinned Claude SDK ARM64 executable admission and retain package-integrity, architecture and no-follow admission. - Select target-specific remote packs so Mac controllers can use Linux hosts without a development pack override. - Preserve read-only runtime context on SSH startup and resume without accepting unverified old content. - Check ordinary installed Claude readiness without injected package authority. Retain Codex and Linux x64 consumer checks. - Extend Claude automatic target selection for the remaining qualified package targets. Retain unsupported-platform and external-override behavior. - Qualify managed Daytona snapshot names through provider IDs during Claude Connect. Pin native acquisition to the measured ID. Preserve a revocation marker after failed probes or target edits, and block native acquisition until requalification instead of falling back to a mutable name. Preserve immutable-image proof, company and account boundaries, and Legacy acquisition. ## Verification - Reconciled with master `9179d8dcc3e908c217fde4f63c9d08ccf8132eeb` through the prerequisite stack, retaining the merged startup fix and latest Codex Linux ARM64 behavior. - [Four-target exact-source package qualification](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39267321383) passed on source `04e0202ca81387b17cbe7fd094a8338648356fe9`: all four native builds, public-package assembly, Linux x64 verification and clean installed consumers on Apple Silicon, Intel Mac and Linux ARM64. The later master reconciliation adds shared OpenRouter attribution and changes runtime source. This historical result keeps its original source identity; [later qualification](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39281100929) passed at `dca62c7aeb4b45f0dd91a8e18d386a16a2658ef8`. It predates the subsequent TypeScript startup fix. - Fresh local product acceptance on integrated source `b2c9fe43f9cd3bc5dd9d22552da0148845ba71a4` completed a useful file and follow-up through native Claude/Opus 5.5, High effort and the API-key connection. Both actual browser downloads were independently checked; the revision preserves the original body and session continuity. Total task estimates: $0.518432800. Ordinary web and API creation saved defaults with the native experiment disabled. - Local focused verification passed 993 startup/session tests, 243 UI tests, 12 workflow security tests, direct server/UI TypeScript checks, and token/palette gates before the last review changes. Initial DB-backed snapshot pin/revocation coverage passed 18 cases; the final serial route suites pass 122 credential/permission and 232 snapshot/environment cases after correcting a test hook timeout. Current-head cloud suites pass. - Preserved the failed pre-provider local fixture and its full pending reservation. The successful fixture has no unpriced or pending usage. Historical failed Cloud journeys, accounting holds, source identities and subscription limitations remain in the dated plan. - All Docker/Rust release production was performed in cloud CI. No local Docker image was built. An inadvertently invoked local Rust prerequisite was stopped. - Current-head cloud CI is green. All three stack PRs have fresh Greptile 5/5 reviews and zero unresolved review threads. Required typecheck, test and build gates ran in cloud CI; Docker work stayed remote. Earlier failed checks remain in their original runs. - The final master merge preserves task-loading, permission, skill-retention and OpenRouter changes. Pi uses a fresh combined profile 27, preserving both historical profile-24 declarations; Copilot remains profile 22. Focused protocol checks passed 155 cases (one skipped), the updated Pi attestation check passed 18 (one skipped), and 91 evaluation/catalog checks passed. - Latest-application manual continuation passed in 37.942 seconds on `695e5c005a85bddc8711d3fcddcaf6b7e1fb64d0`, with High effort, native Opus 5.5, Anthropic API attribution, the same resumed Claude session, an independently checked 635-byte file and persisted Done status. It uses the earlier verified Mac daemon; the preceding-source package qualification passed at `dca62c7aeb4b45f0dd91a8e18d386a16a2658ef8`. That package run predates the small TypeScript startup fix and is not relabeled as qualification for it. - Upgrade limitation: changed compiled sidecar identity rejected old durable launch state and recovery hit session-open bounds before eventually resuming. That attempt was operator-cancelled and retained; the successful manual continuation does not qualify seamless upgrades. - Local latency profile, Opus 5.5/High unchanged: three alternating real-ACP loopback samples per variant reduce median provider-ready time from 5.081s to 4.034s. The matched real API task startup improves from 5.533s to 4.348s, but total reply time changes from 17.933s to 20.221s because agent work varies. This establishes a startup saving of about one second, not a consistent total-reply speedup. A real candidate follow-up passed in 20.146s and resumed the same saved session. The loopback fixture makes no external model requests; failed initial probes remain retained. - The startup change passes 107 focused runtime/effort/lease tests, 53 profile checks (one skipped), TypeScript checking and the TypeScript-only runtime build. Native hire fixture checks pass 70 tests; their first local run retained a socket-hangup failure and stale OpenCode expectation, both accounted for before the passing rerun. Broader required checks run in cloud CI. ## Risks - **Experience needs improvement:** successful connection setup still shows “Connection needs attention” because runtime checks are deferred. Cold provider-pack upload took 122–126 seconds per run while the task mainly showed “Thinking.” The tested Core-only preview excludes private Cloud UI plugins; this is not full Cloud distribution or subscription qualification. Desktop dark theme was tested; mobile and comprehensive accessibility were not. The portable report validates, but gallery interaction could not be inspected because host preview was queued. - The optional supply-chain scan returned neutral/inconclusive because GitHub Actions package coverage and infrastructure parsing are unavailable. It is not counted as a successful supply-chain qualification. Exact package, daemon and image integrity checks passed. - A stale, missing or wrong-architecture pack must fail admission. It must not change runner or target silently. - Provider-pack source changes invalidate affected earlier execution results. Existing unknown-cost and cleanup holds remain intact. - Live subscription execution remains unverified under the API-key qualification direction. Built-in authentication flows are retained. ARM64 cloud-image production is deferred. Merge and production deployment remain separate. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution and browser testing. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (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 - [ ] Focused local tests and final cloud verification pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 14:17:24 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	45b67f1d93	feat: default new Apple Silicon Claude agents to Paperclip Runner (#15993) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets users choose an agent harness and account. > - The server resolves the runner for new agents. > - Claude still needs the same ordinary native-default journey as Codex. > - Existing agents must retain their runner, model and account. > - This PR defaults new Apple Silicon Claude agents to Paperclip Runner with Opus 5.5. > - Users can connect and work without a runner override. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15683. This PR depends on #15994 and precedes #15997. Related scope: #15422, #13978 and #15224. ## What Changed - Resolve new Apple Silicon Claude agents to `paperclip_runner`, `provider: acpx`, `acpxAgent: claude`. Keep explicit Legacy, models, provider routing and saved execution. - Use `claude-opus-5-5` for ordinary Claude defaults and retain explicit overrides. - Reuse existing API-key/subscription connections, credential storage and checks. Generalize the shared Advanced runner control with Claude branding. - Carry configured effort into the shared v9 contract. Preserve compatible permissions, instructions, skills, timeouts and session behavior. Require Legacy for unsupported settings. - Qualify a new immutable managed Claude target at explicit Connect through the existing permission-gated probe. Use fresh scoped discovery for test and hire. Discard stale results and require an explicit Connect after settings change. - Retain merged Codex onboarding recovery, auth preparation, import/effort corrections and Grok Bot gates. - Check the Claude first-task wizard's saved default directly. Update configuration/runtime documentation and exact Opus 5.5 accounting. - Align hire fixtures with the merged host-environment restriction. Native agent-authenticated hires cannot inject host env settings; both creation endpoints verify that no extra agent is saved. ## Verification - Updated onto master `9179d8dcc3e908c217fde4f63c9d08ccf8132eeb` through #15994. Native input v9 carries effort while preserving v7 home modes and v8 Muse. Codex defaults remain unchanged. - Focused local verification passed 285 server tests, 323 UI tests, 124 setup/registry tests, and two v9 permission-pin transport cases. Direct server/UI TypeScript checks passed. An initial 30-second hook timeout was resolved by serial verification with a longer hook budget: all 122 credential/permission cases and 232 snapshot/environment cases pass. Direct server TypeScript checking also passes. - Ordinary web creation with the experiment disabled saved native Claude, Opus 5.5 and High effort without runner/model overrides. The actual product task and follow-up both succeeded on integrated source `b2c9fe43f9cd3bc5dd9d22552da0148845ba71a4` with the cloud-built daemon from `04e0202ca81387b17cbe7fd094a8338648356fe9`. The final master reconciliation also changes shared runtime source. Historical proof retains its source identity; a final-source cloud qualification is running before refreshing the preview daemon. - Both actual browser downloads were checked: v1 has three sections/six checkboxes (451 bytes); v2 preserves the original body and adds two Rollback checks (612 bytes). The original attachment stayed byte-identical. The follow-up records session resume and the same provider session. Total estimated API usage: $0.518432800, with no pending/unpriced usage in the successful fixture. - Fixed the live-discovered setup incompatibility: native API-key validation no longer depends on the global Legacy Claude CLI. The existing provider endpoint verifies the key without a paid prompt; subscription/custom routing probes remain intact. - Fixed security review's native-hire credential redirection: agent-supplied URLs, proxy/launch settings and other host environment controls are rejected before inheritance. Native credential references remain supported and partial edits use the saved harness. Added create/hire/update regression coverage. - Current-head cloud CI is green. All three stack PRs have fresh Greptile 5/5 reviews and zero unresolved review threads. Required typecheck, test and build gates ran in cloud CI; Docker work stayed remote. Earlier failed checks remain in their original runs. - Docker and native release builds ran in cloud infrastructure. An inadvertent local Rust prerequisite was stopped; no local Docker build was run. - The final master merge preserves task-loading, permission, skill-retention and OpenRouter changes. Pi uses a fresh combined profile 27, preserving both historical profile-24 declarations; Copilot remains profile 22. Focused protocol checks passed 155 cases (one skipped), the updated Pi attestation check passed 18 (one skipped), and 91 evaluation/catalog checks passed. - Latest-application manual continuation passed in 37.942 seconds on `695e5c005a85bddc8711d3fcddcaf6b7e1fb64d0`, with High effort, native Opus 5.5, Anthropic API attribution, the same resumed Claude session, an independently checked 635-byte file and persisted Done status. It uses the earlier verified Mac daemon; the preceding-source package qualification passed at `dca62c7aeb4b45f0dd91a8e18d386a16a2658ef8`. That package run predates the small TypeScript startup fix and is not relabeled as qualification for it. - Upgrade limitation: changed compiled sidecar identity rejected old durable launch state and recovery hit session-open bounds before eventually resuming. That attempt was operator-cancelled and retained; the successful manual continuation does not qualify seamless upgrades. - Local latency profile, Opus 5.5/High unchanged: three alternating real-ACP loopback samples per variant reduce median provider-ready time from 5.081s to 4.034s. The matched real API task startup improves from 5.533s to 4.348s, but total reply time changes from 17.933s to 20.221s because agent work varies. This establishes a startup saving of about one second, not a consistent total-reply speedup. A real candidate follow-up passed in 20.146s and resumed the same saved session. The loopback fixture makes no external model requests; failed initial probes remain retained. - The startup change passes 107 focused runtime/effort/lease tests, 53 profile checks (one skipped), TypeScript checking and the TypeScript-only runtime build. Native hire fixture checks pass 70 tests; their first local run retained a socket-hangup failure and stale OpenCode expectation, both accounted for before the passing rerun. Broader required checks run in cloud CI. ## Risks - Missing packages, authentication rejection, unsupported settings and unavailable models must fail explicitly. Existing agents retain saved execution; explicit runner changes use existing revision/session invalidation. - Subscription follow-up remains unverified; remaining live acceptance uses API keys per human steering. Historical accounting holds and the separate $50 ceiling remain intact. - The subscription acceptance limit remains explicit for review. No Claude database migration is introduced. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution and browser testing. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (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 - [ ] Focused local tests and final cloud verification pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 13:58:52 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	9e8a9f28d5	fix(github): recover long publications from durable receipts (#16883) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents publish GitHub reviews through governed tools. > - GitHub can accept a publication before the caller receives its result. > - Exact retries must return the existing publication receipt. > - The gateway compared a shortened audit hash with a complete request hash. > - Long reviews therefore failed the retry check even when their content was unchanged. > - This pull request checks the complete saved publication and returns its current receipt. > - Agents can confirm their work without another provider write. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16284, which added durable publication recovery. Refs #16275, which extended the GitHub tool deadline. **What happened?** An exact review retry returned an idempotency conflict after GitHub had published the review. The invocation hash uses an audit preview that shortens strings to 500 characters and arrays to 50 entries. The gateway compared that hash with the complete request hash. The earlier retry tests used short assessments. **Expected behavior** An unchanged request returns its durable receipt. Changed content, changed authority, or a missing publication must not cause another write. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Submit a review with a summary and rationale longer than 500 characters. 2. Let publication finish after a short caller deadline. 3. Repeat the exact request. Before this fix, the gateway returns an idempotency conflict. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on master at `c5226daf7a37559ddc007446681717791d80a223`. ## What Changed - Use the durable publication's complete request check for GitHub retries. Keep run, agent, task, connection, tool, and current authority checks. - Return the saved receipt through normal gateway validation and bookkeeping. Leave pending provider work to the durable worker. - Refuse retries without a saved publication. Keep existing invocation keys and audit previews unchanged. - Cover long reviews, comments, progress updates, text suffix changes, nested coverage changes, pending receipts, missing publications, and revoked access. - Document the recovery contract and verification recipes. ## Verification - Red: both long-review receipt cases failed on unchanged production code with the expected idempotency conflict. - Green: all 144 GitHub review workflow tests passed on the final source. This includes long reviews, comments, progress updates, pending and missing receipts, revoked policy, and the native assigned-tool entry point. - Server and workspace typechecks passed. The production build passed. - Map checks passed. These are structural checks. - The first broad run found an incorrect new fixture assumption: its discovery query returned two review tools. The fixture now selects the exact submission tool. An existing description-edit polling test also timed out; it passed separately without a production change, then passed in the complete 144-test rerun. Both earlier failures remain recorded. - Final commit `7cdcdc3a1ac79cb4ed77510a32d795228e3315e8` passed all 55 CI checks. Two optional Storybook jobs were skipped. [Complete CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39304187397). Greptile is 5/5 on this exact commit, with zero unresolved review threads. - The earlier local full-suite attempt was stopped after the fixture correction. The final local full-suite attempt was stopped after complete final-head CI passed. No complete local full-suite pass is claimed; full-suite acceptance uses the current-head CI matrix. - Provider responses are controlled fixtures. Native assigned-tool coverage uses the production gateway and disposable PostgreSQL. No live GitHub fault injection, deployment, or historical task recovery is claimed. ## Risks A pending receipt remains pending. It does not complete the task. Caller retries no longer dispatch provider work; the durable worker retains that responsibility. A missing durable publication returns a conflict because the gateway cannot establish the original write's outcome. Existing approval and revocation checks remain effective. No database migration or audit hash change is required. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The session does not expose a more specific serving model ID or context-window limit. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 13:54:42 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	95672307f4	feat(runner): carry acknowledged Claude effort through native resume (#15994) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - The native runner must carry each supported agent setting. > - Claude effort must reach its ACP session before a prompt and after resume. > - Installed Claude setup must find the owning server package without a qualification override. > - This PR adds those shared contracts and preserves historical readers. > - The Claude default change can then use the same runner path. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15683. This prerequisite follows the actual Codex squash `adb69e8f09852c772d9901ae270e5b2d66e39c77`. Consumers: #15993 and #15997. Related scope: #15422, #13978 and #15224. ## What Changed - Add native-input v9 for Claude effort. Preserve v1–v8 readers, including v7 explicit home modes, v8 Muse, Dot and Grok Bot. - Preserve prepared task input and constraints through the newer contracts, including completion-only continuation without wrapping compact model input again. - Carry effort through daemon/sidecar admission; require provider acknowledgment before prompting and after resume. - Find installed server package authority through the verified canonical layout. Retain package-integrity, digest, architecture and no-follow checks. - Return Claude startup cancellation promptly while retaining unfinished settings writes and the lifetime lease through cleanup. Preserve merged Codex close/cleanup behavior. - Retain both independently authored historical Pi profile-24 declarations. Combined master/Claude source attestations use Pi profile 27; pending Copilot remains profile 22. This does not expand either provider's qualification boundary. - Avoid a spare verified executable snapshot when Claude effort control reuses its initialized provider. Preserve cold-control snapshot renewal and acknowledged effort. ## Verification - Reconciled with master `9179d8dcc3e908c217fde4f63c9d08ccf8132eeb`, retaining its task-loading, progress, skill-retention, permission and OpenRouter changes. - Final focused protocol/provider checks passed 155 tests (one skipped), the updated Pi attestation check passed 18 (one skipped), and 91 evaluation/catalog checks passed. Generated TypeScript/Rust profile checks and Rust formatting pass. The integrated consumer's TypeScript-only runtime build also passes. - Earlier branch checks passed 369 protocol tests (one skipped), 72 catalog checks and TypeScript checks/build; their source identities remain historical. No Rust compilation or Docker build is needed locally for this proof. - Current-head cloud CI is green. All three stack PRs have fresh Greptile 5/5 reviews and zero unresolved review threads. Required typecheck, test and build gates ran in cloud CI; Docker work stayed remote. Earlier failed checks remain in their original runs. - [Earlier four-target package qualification](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39267321383) passed on source `04e0202ca81387b17cbe7fd094a8338648356fe9`; it is not relabeled as proof for the final merge. Existing failures and unknown-cost holds remain preserved. - Current-head cloud CI is green. All three stack PRs have fresh Greptile 5/5 reviews and zero unresolved review threads. Required typecheck, test and build gates ran in cloud CI; Docker work stayed remote. Earlier failed checks remain in their original runs. - Latest-application manual continuation passed in 37.942 seconds on `695e5c005a85bddc8711d3fcddcaf6b7e1fb64d0`, with High effort, native Opus 5.5, Anthropic API attribution, the same resumed Claude session, an independently checked 635-byte file and persisted Done status. It uses the earlier verified Mac daemon; the preceding-source package qualification passed at `dca62c7aeb4b45f0dd91a8e18d386a16a2658ef8`. That package run predates the small TypeScript startup fix and is not relabeled as qualification for it. - Upgrade limitation: changed compiled sidecar identity rejected old durable launch state and recovery hit session-open bounds before eventually resuming. That attempt was operator-cancelled and retained; the successful manual continuation does not qualify seamless upgrades. - Local latency profile, Opus 5.5/High unchanged: three alternating real-ACP loopback samples per variant reduce median provider-ready time from 5.081s to 4.034s. The matched real API task startup improves from 5.533s to 4.348s, but total reply time changes from 17.933s to 20.221s because agent work varies. This establishes a startup saving of about one second, not a consistent total-reply speedup. A real candidate follow-up passed in 20.146s and resumed the same saved session. The loopback fixture makes no external model requests; failed initial probes remain retained. - The startup change passes 107 focused runtime/effort/lease tests, 53 profile checks (one skipped), TypeScript checking and the TypeScript-only runtime build. Native hire fixture checks pass 70 tests; their first local run retained a socket-hangup failure and stale OpenCode expectation, both accounted for before the passing rerun. Broader required checks run in cloud CI. ## Risks - Explicit Claude effort needs a daemon and sidecar that support input v9. Historical readers stay available; downstream builders and permission-pin transport checks must also use v9. - Source-bound profile changes may require reopening older Pi/Copilot sessions. Copilot remains pending and executable package closures remain unchanged. - This prerequisite changes shared runtime behavior; Claude default selection remains in #15993/#15997. No database migration or Codex default change is introduced. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution and browser testing. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 13:31:09 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	c5226daf7a	fix(cloud): enable experimental toggles on staging (#16876) ... Allow instance admins to change approved experimental feature controls on managed Cloud staging. Preserve production restrictions and managed access and execution policy. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 13:04:07 -05:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	194fc11406	feat(plugins): invalidate runtimes when tool definitions change (#16604) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Lifecycle plugins must refresh runtime preparation when tool definitions change. > - Standing assignments alone do not cover catalogs, profile entries, or policies. > - New journal hooks must preserve the order used by setup finalization. > - This pull request adds tool-definition invalidation and its required writer guards. > - It leaves credentials and provider access changes for the next independent capability. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Catalog, profile-entry, policy, gateway, and connection-configuration changes do not request agent runtime synchronization. A new profile-entry trigger also exposes a deletion/finalization deadlock if the child row is changed before its parent is locked. **Expected behavior** Committed tool-definition changes advance runtime revisions without polling. Bookkeeping does not. Entry changes and profile replacement use a consistent parent/reference lock order and commit atomically. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Change a catalog descriptor, profile entry, policy, or connection configuration. 2. Expect committed runtime events for the affected agents. 3. Run profile-entry deletion concurrently with setup finalization while both wait for an agent row. 4. Expect both operations to complete without PostgreSQL deadlock 40P01. **Additional context** Extracted from #16503. Catalog publication #16602 and standing assignments #16603 are merged. This PR is rebased onto master and is the active review. It addresses the original Apex profile-entry deletion finding. Credential/access hooks #16605 remain a draft without review requests. ## What Changed - Add migration 0355 for application/connection configuration, catalog, profile-entry, policy, and MCP gateway invalidation. - Preserve transaction coalescing and ignore health bookkeeping and trust-rule usage counters. - Keep credential-only fields outside this migration's coverage. - Preserve merged recipient scoping for bindings and installations. Profile-entry edits resolve old/new standing profile bindings. Policy edits resolve old/new agent selectors with their intersection/list semantics. - Lock old and new profile-entry references before parent profiles and child mutations. Recheck the reference set under the parent lock, retry changed snapshots up to three times, and merge unspecified fields from the locked profile. - Make entry add/edit/delete and profile replacement transactional, including validation and profile reads on the reserved connection. - Lock policy rows in ID order and change priorities in one statement so scoped agent locks are ordered across the full set. - Lock the managed profile before connection removal deletes its entries in the same transaction. - Update assignment tests whose old absence assertions are superseded by expanded configuration coverage. - Document the supported capability and the remaining credential/access boundary. ## Verification - Final head: `809fcb11794bfb12c545af0a2f96ab9bc2b570a2`. It is rebased onto master with merged #16623. GitHub reports no merge conflicts. [CI run 39293925136](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39293925136) has 55 successful checks and two optional Storybook skips. - Standard Greptile returned an independent 5/5. The final Apex review returned 5/5 on this exact head at 17:47 UTC on 2026-10-19. Its summary explicitly clears this PR for merge independently of draft #16605. The security scan passed. All review threads are resolved. - Two real-PostgreSQL negative controls reproduce `40P01` without the old-reference guard or the concurrent-snapshot check. Both regression tests pass with the final correction. Server typecheck, migration safety and numbering, five-snapshot retention, journal history, feature maps, and diff checks pass. The actual PR diff was scanned for secrets and personal data before push. - The final 15-suite local run passed 821/822 tests. The one failure was in the unchanged runtime-delivery test: a startup callback changed its global callback count during an independent transaction. The test-only correction is isolated in #16871. That PR passes all 17 runtime-hook tests, server types, hosted CI, and standard Greptile 5/5. Its notification-disabled control fails at the independent event-delivery assertion. No changes from #16871 are included here; this feature head passes hosted CI independently. - Earlier affected-suite runs passed 814 tests after rebase and 820 tests after recipient and whitespace corrections. Four affected suites passed 514 tests before the second reference-contention regression was added. Single-connection tests cover entry add, edit, delete, and replacement. Validation and profile reads use the reserved transaction connection. - Review fixes have negative controls: the old code hangs with a one-connection pool; parent-lock omissions deadlock entry deletion or app removal against setup finalization; per-row policy reorder deadlocks under contention; unscoped triggers journal unrelated peers; default SQL trimming misses JavaScript whitespace. Corrected cases pass. Selector tests cover all 25 ECMAScript whitespace characters. Recipient tests cover repeated edits, old/new targets, ignored bindings, rollback, coalescing, and company scope. The definition suite now has 28 cases. - Earlier standard scores that depended on #16605 were not accepted as independent clearance. The first Apex review returned 4/5 for replacement versus application deletion. The final correction locks old and new references, checks the reference set again under the parent lock, and retries before any mutation. The final independent reviews clear that correction. - Preserve prior failures for acceptance: draft run 38975432017 had failures whose causes were not re-investigated. Run 38990400765 exposed the unrelated durable-resume watchdog race, fixed in merged #16623. In run 39287657148, two jobs reported cancellation without a failed-test summary; the cause remains unknown. Both passed on retry without source changes. Initial local fixtures and SQL bindings also needed correction: an internal helper name was replaced with public `archiveConnection`, unchanged priorities were changed to exercise reorder, a driver timestamp was bound as ISO text, and a superseded company-fanout assertion was updated. These recovered checks do not establish a cause for the unexplained CI failures. - Local checks target the affected services and real database boundaries. A full local build and repository-wide test run were not performed. Hosted CI supplies the broader checks. Provider responses in tests are controlled; live provider behavior was not qualified. ## Risks Migration 0355 adds statement triggers without changing table schema. Apply it through the normal migration flow. A tool-definition event can advance a runtime revision without changing the bounded assignment snapshot. Consumers still need authorized readers for definitions. Credential-only changes, grants, secrets, and endpoints remain for the access-hook migration. Profile replacement now rolls back as a unit if any entry fails. Binding and install notifications retain scoped recipients. Profile-entry changes use standing bindings, and policies use old/new agent selectors. Unscoped policies, company-bound profiles, and other conservative definition changes retain synchronous transaction-atomic company-wide fanout: O(eligible company agents) locks and journal storage, without a fanout ceiling or mutation quota. This retains the accepted tradeoff from #16603 for company-wide changes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and testing. 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 local checks; results and the isolated test failure are recorded above - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 10:56:08 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	985d3b12b6	fix(runner): explain rejected task monitor arguments (#16868) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents use task monitors to resume work after a future check. > - The runner rejects monitor arguments that fail the tool schema. > - It returned a generic error with no field or repair guidance. > - An agent could treat a repairable call as a scheduling outage and block its task. > - This pull request adds safe repair guidance and shows the nested request shape. > - Agents can correct the call and confirm a saved schedule before they yield. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #15446, #16686. **What happened?** A rejected native `set_task_monitor` call returned `invalid_tool_call` with only “Paperclip rejected this semantic tool call.” The agent could not identify the invalid field. A retry could fail again and leave unfinished work without a scheduled wake. **Expected behavior** Reject invalid arguments before any mutation. Give the provider bounded schema locations and clear repair guidance. A corrected call must save a monitor and allow one wake without duplicate effects. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Call `set_task_monitor` with `idempotencyKey`, `nextCheckAt`, and `notes` at the top level. 2. The schema rejects the call because scheduling fields belong inside `monitor`. 3. Before this change, the provider received no guidance about the required shape. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced against master `35c75b56d4` with a failing Rust regression. **Deployment mode** Source checkout. This affects the native runner tool bridge. ## What Changed - Add monitor-specific repair guidance to the runner's existing safe schema error path. - Keep feedback within 512 bytes and omit submitted values and unknown field names. - Show the nested monitor request in the production tool description. Refresh generated contracts and catalog identities. - Test flat and nested invalid input, private value handling, and unchanged authorization errors. - Test rejection, correction with the same key, saved schedule and audit, receipt replay, and one timer wake with real PostgreSQL and the native tool authority. - Update execution documentation and the task verification recipes. ## Verification - Red/green: the Rust provider error regression failed on master because monitor repair guidance was absent. It passed after the fix. - Passed: 29 PostgreSQL monitor and scheduler integration tests. These use the real tool authority and scheduler, with a no-op process agent for wake delivery. - Passed: the native Codex server vertical-slice test. It runs the rebuilt Runner binary with a fake provider and checks durable results and session resume. - Passed: map structure checks, Rust formatting, and `git diff --check`. - Passed locally: full repository `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and all 392 Rust library unit tests. - Passed on commit `3b667ad24763c1828edd48f56ef7a10766aeb946`: [CI run 39290889768](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39290889768), including all server, Runner, serialized, browser, typecheck, build, and canary gates. Across the PR, 56 checks passed and four conditional checks were skipped. No check remains pending or failed. - Greptile: 5/5 on that exact commit. The check concluded success, with no review comments or unresolved threads. - The duplicate local `pnpm test:run` attempt did not complete. It was stopped after the full CI suite passed; it is not counted as a local full-suite pass. - The first PostgreSQL attempt could not bind localhost inside the shell sandbox. It passed with normal localhost access. The first broader Rust attempt had 37 socket-permission failures and 355 passes; all 392 passed with localhost access and no code change. - Live model recovery was not run. Local execution policy did not authorize an extra acceptance run through the signed-in provider account. This PR does not include a deployment or recovery of an existing task. ## Risks - Error feedback must not reveal submitted values. Tests cover private values, unknown keys, nested constraints, length bounds, and unchanged generic authorization errors. - This changes guidance only. It does not relax the schema, retry calls automatically, or change scheduling authority. - A new runner binary and refreshed provider contract must reach the target instance before agents receive this guidance. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact runtime suffix 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>	2026-10-19 12:37:28 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	3e5a9f5afe	perf(ui): load recent tasks with bounded summaries (#16851) ... Replace passive recent-task detail reads with bounded, authorized summaries. Keep account isolation, stored history, task actions, and live recovery behavior. Overlap access checks with shell settings and avoid duplicate session and health reads on the first healthy socket opening. Retain domain reconciliation. Add focused coverage and local performance evidence. Isolate the existing cache capacity test from entry expiry on slow CI runners. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 12:13:28 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	5245959023	fix(github): simplify App reconnection and credential recovery (#16856) ... Show clear GitHub connection recovery guidance and reconnect the saved App before requesting replacement credentials. Preserve PEM bytes through paste, upload, and retry, with production-page Storybook and browser regression coverage. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 11:47:06 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	d20cb69ce5	fix(heartbeat): preserve active retries when comments arrive (#16855) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and their work. > - Heartbeat retries preserve task ownership after a recoverable failure. > - The issue read model includes retries that are scheduled, queued, or running. > - The human comment route treated every retry in that model as parked work. > - A normal status comment could therefore cancel a running continuation and return its task to Todo. > - This pull request limits comment supersession to parked retries and checks that state at the cancellation fence. > - The agent can keep working when a person adds context. Explicit Stop and Interrupt remain available. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A Board comment on an in-progress task cancelled its running recovery continuation. The handler read a live retry from `getCurrentScheduledRetry` but did not check its status. The cancellation also forced workspace recovery when copy-back did not complete. **Expected behavior** A comment must preserve queued and running execution. Only a retry that is still `scheduled_retry` may be superseded. If promotion wins the race, the comment must keep the task in progress and follow the normal wake path. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Let a task retry advance from `scheduled_retry` to `running`. 2. Keep its retry reason and source run identity in the stored row. 3. Post a normal human comment, without an Interrupt request. 4. Observe the old handler cancel the run and move the task to Todo. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on master base `9966f31bee`. The staging incident served `f3cd3f4ea89539b68410841d39ec15a5c626007f`. **Deployment mode** Staging server with a remote runner. The defect is in the core comment and cancellation path. Refs #16835 and #16843. Those repairs cover runner health and workspace preservation. This change prevents a normal comment from requesting the wrong cancellation. Related #9732 promotes human wakes on parked retries; it does not protect a retry that is already running. ## What Changed - Check the live retry status in both comment routes: POST comments and PATCH issue with a comment. - Add an optional expected-status fence to cancellation. A concurrent promotion or terminal outcome returns a no-op result. - Make due-retry promotion honor a cancellation claim under its issue and run row locks. A scheduler cannot promote work after cancellation has won. - Finish persisted cancellations of parked retries through the existing startup and periodic recovery sweep. Preserve their original request and retry a failed settlement without starting provider work. - Keep the task active when guarded cancellation does not win. Do not record a cancellation that did not occur. - Add route regressions, real PostgreSQL race tests, and pending-retry and explicit Stop safety coverage. - Exercise both normal HTTP comment routes with real services, stored Board membership, PostgreSQL, and a live child process. Assert that the process can still perform work, the task keeps its original execution, and no second executor starts. - Document the comment supersession contract and update the task feature/access maps with the local regression coverage and deployed acceptance recipe. ## Verification - Before the fix, all four POST/PATCH regressions cancelled queued or running work. - Before the fix, the real PostgreSQL race test cancelled a retry that became running after lookup. - The comment-route suite passes **103 tests**. The final dispatch, cancellation, restart recovery and HTTP/live-process suites pass **119 tests**, for **222 affected tests** across these runs. They cover comment delivery, both sides of the promotion race, concurrent terminal outcomes, pending retries, explicit Stop, and a live process that can continue work. - Command: `node node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts server/src/services/heartbeat/run-control.test.ts`. - The normal HTTP/live-process acceptance suite passes all **14 tests**, including both comment endpoints with stored Board membership and deterministic wakeup teardown. - Review exposed a second race after the cancellation claim. Its new PostgreSQL test failed before the dispatch guard with `promoted` and passes afterward with `not_promoted`, followed by completed cancellation. - A real PostgreSQL constraint interrupts the terminal cancellation write after its intent commits. The assembled recovery service failed to settle that row before the repair. Afterward a fresh service settles it, clears its task lock, cancels its saved wake, preserves the original request and leaves unrelated parked retries alone. A repeated database failure preserves the intent for a later successful sweep; a second successful sweep adds no duplicate event. - Full `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. Server typecheck and build pass again after the final server-only review fix. A local full-suite attempt started on `f8773bf` did not return an overall result; its log is preserved and no local full-suite pass is claimed. The new recovery change passes the focused suites and fresh server typecheck/build. Latest-head CI on `8f928adee67c089e1ac405d2ad3b169eedb8da27` is green: the full PR workflow and commitperclip review passed; only the two optional Storybook jobs skipped. - Greptile reviewed final head `8f928adee67c089e1ac405d2ad3b169eedb8da27` at **5/5**, with no unresolved findings. All actual latest-head CI checks passed; the two optional Storybook jobs skipped. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passes after the map updates (34 areas, 172 capability IDs); it checks structure only. - Fixed-revision staging acceptance is pending deployment. The original workspace remains held and its latest source checkpoint is backed up and verified. ## Risks - A promoted retry must keep its execution and ownership when a comment arrives. The database status predicate and route no-op handling enforce this at the race boundary. - A cancellation intent must prevent promotion without leaving work parked forever after a restart. The recovery sweep consumes at most 20 such intents per pass through guarded cancellation, and a failed settlement keeps its intent for retry. - A parked retry must still accept fresh instructions. Its existing cancellation and wake behavior remains covered. - Ordinary Stop and Interrupt calls omit the expected-status option. Their cancellation authority is unchanged and remains covered by the run-control suite. - No schema migration or API request contract changes are required. ## Model Used OpenAI `gpt-6.1-sol` in Codex, with extra-high reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The session does not expose its context-window limit. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 11:34:27 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	2cbca4ceb0	fix: retain channel tools across task continuations (#16806) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Chat channels give an agent tools for its assigned task. > - Each later run must resolve the task and its accepted requester again. > - Some native runs store the task in a database column without the older JSON fields. > - Tool discovery read only the JSON fields. GitHub calls also required a new inbound comment. > - This pull request uses the durable task binding and accepted request history. > - Later runs retain their channel tools while current access checks still apply. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A GitHub task can find `begin_review` on its first run, then receive an empty tool list on a later native run. If discovery is repaired alone, a call can still fail because the later run has no new inbound comment. Slack and voice tool access also read the older JSON task fields. **Expected behavior** A later run for the same task can find and call its assigned channel tools. The current requester, task, company, agent, endpoint, and access rules must still allow the call. Revoked access must fail. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a GitHub task and accept its linked requester. 2. Confirm that the runtime can find `begin_review`. 3. Start a later native run with `nativeIssueId`, accepted parent identity, and no JSON task ID or new wake comment. 4. Search for `begin_review` again. Before this change, the search returns an empty list. 5. Repair discovery alone and call `read_pull_request`. Before the request-history fix, the call fails with no active conversation capability. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced in source tests before this patch. The branch includes master at `fa50cab5685b9cdbb26ad9c610cc5b6c373d3ff4`. **Additional context** This is a core run-binding bug. The tests use PostgreSQL and synthetic provider responses. They do not send live reviews, Slack messages, or phone calls. ## What Changed - Resolve run task IDs from durable columns, with legacy JSON fields as a fallback. - Use the same binding in the gateway, access policy, identity service, and channel runtime preparation. - Recover accepted channel request history across later runs. Keep company, task, agent, and requester boundaries. - Recover older wake sources through verified parent runs, including after same-user board follow-ups. Clear the board message’s own legacy wake fallback. Keep cycle checks without a fixed limit on valid task history. - Retain the GitHub origin after a board comment from the same accepted user. Skip GitHub origin lookup results from other providers. - Keep ordinary board tools available when the requester changes. Accept legacy user comments without an author-type field. Still reject explicit malformed task IDs. - Prevent a later failure reply from replacing an earlier final GitHub answer. Recheck this rule under the publication lease. - Rotate the native tool contract to replace retained sessions with an older tool list. - Add continuation, publication, revocation, and boundary tests. Update the access and feature maps. ## Verification - Red: the later GitHub assigned-tool search returned an empty list before the binding fix. - Red: the later GitHub read failed with no active conversation capability before the request-history fix. - Green: runtime MCP discovery, GitHub read/begin/submit review, and response publication pass for monitor and same-user board continuations. - Green: Slack history, retained access controls, revocation, and voice gateway continuation pass. - Green: 35 channel, failure-publication, legacy-origin, long-history, and provenance tests pass. Both review findings had failing tests before their fixes. - Green: 107 gateway, operation-credential, identity, and provenance tests pass. These cover both first-run CI failures without changing their tests. - Green: 122 runtime, discovery-policy, and native-session tests pass; 2 unrelated tests are skipped. - Map checks and whitespace checks pass. - Updated to master in `cfcaba22628772d7fe1fb32b57ff7031c7072781`. The sole conflict was two tests added at the same location. Both the continuation test and the publication 403/401 test are retained. - Current local verification: all 179 gateway, credential, requester-identity, access-policy, runtime-context, and session-resume tests passed. Repository typecheck and build passed. Map and whitespace checks passed. - The new review regression first returned no source for a same-user board follow-up over legacy wake metadata. After the repair, all 27 provenance and channel cases passed. The combined GitHub discovery/read/begin/submit path and revoked access are covered. - The broader local channel run passed 176 cases and failed four timing/setup cases: a 15-second Slack authorization timeout, webhook-verification polling, a Slack acknowledgement deadline, and Discord setup polling. All four passed in isolation without source, assertion, or deadline changes. The earlier failure record is retained; the exact load/order cause is not established. Full CI must pass on the latest commit. - Current head: `7b9a08dcbc7b8140b589742f136944270b0496bb`. Repository typecheck and build pass on this commit. Greptile completed on this exact commit with 5/5; all four review threads are resolved. The final-head [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39278921653) passed: 55 checks passed and 2 intentionally skipped, with no failures or pending checks. This includes the full sharded test matrix, browser tests, typecheck, build, and Runner verification. Results were delayed during the [GitHub Actions incident](https://www.githubstatus.com/incidents/8tzbpcnl75jp). An additional unsharded local full test run has not completed; the completed full-suite evidence is CI. - Earlier verification: the first PR commit failed two server suites. Those failures were fixed and verified before this update. The original 4 GiB sandbox could not complete full local typechecking or tests; the current checkout completed typechecking and build. The full test suite runs through the CI shards. No full local test-suite pass or live provider delivery is claimed. ## Risks - Request history can restore the wrong authority if its scope is too broad. The resolver checks each accepted parent against the task, company, agent, and requester. Tests cover invalid and cyclic history. - The native contract change starts a new provider session for older contracts. - No database migration or public API schema changes are required. Each tool call still checks live access. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The runtime does not expose the exact deployment model ID or context-window size. The agent used reasoning, repository tools, code edits, and local test execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 11:20:39 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	9966f31bee	fix(chat): keep permission failures scoped to the rejected operation (#16847) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - External channels deliver agent replies through a durable publication queue. > - A provider can reject one operation while other operations remain allowed. > - The shared error classifier treated generic 403 and permission errors as failures of the whole connection. > - Failure handlers then changed the user's enabled setting and removed all assigned channel tools. > - This pull request limits permission failures to the rejected operation and preserves connection intent during authentication failures. > - Unrelated work can continue, while confirmed authentication failures still stop endpoint traffic. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16137. Follows #16138, which distinguishes local authorization errors from provider errors. This change also narrows provider permission failures. Related #16806 handles a separate task-continuation tool-binding defect. A provider 403 or missing-scope response currently disables a connection that may still support other operations. The expected behavior is a visible operation failure with unrelated work preserved. Confirmed authentication failures must stop sends without changing the user's enabled setting. ## What Changed - Classify generic 403, adapter permission errors, and Slack missing-scope/no-permission responses as failed operations. - Preserve rate-limit retries, known destination quarantine, and confirmed authentication failures. - Preserve connection status and enabled intent when publication, provider-reply, or form-open authentication fails. The endpoint still enters attention and its runtime stops. - Add GitHub regressions for retained discovery and successful later publication after 403, and no further sends after 401. - Mark authentication health failed and fence persistent receiver startup, background reconciliation, and receiver callbacks. Keep signed GitHub lifecycle events available during an authentication stop. Verify Discord reconciliation and Photon restart preserve the stop, while transient Discord disconnects still recover. - Update provider, publication, and modal regression expectations and the execution contract and verification maps. ## Verification - Red: five new classifier cases returned endpoint attention before the repair. The signed-installation-removal regression also reproduced a blocked lifecycle event after a 401 before narrowing the receiver guard. - Green: all 35 classifier tests pass. - Green: 19 PostgreSQL-backed cases pass through the production channel services, including GitHub discovery/publication, Slack provider replies and question modals, Telegram credential/destination failures, rate limiting, and Discord/Photon authentication-stop persistence. - Map structural checks and `git diff --check` pass. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. All CI gates are green on `7e379bcd98aa8363e42efe7f8a4b2589b7111ae6`; Greptile is 5/5 on that exact commit with no unresolved findings. - The monolithic local `pnpm test:run` was started, then stopped after its revision passed the full CI matrix and was superseded by the authentication-stop repair. Final full-suite verification passed in CI shards; all 19 final local provider regressions pass. - The tests run from this source checkout on macOS arm64 with isolated PostgreSQL and controlled provider failures. They do not prove live GitHub recovery or deployment. No live connection settings were changed. ## Risks - Permission failures now leave unrelated work available. The rejected operation remains failed and is not automatically replayed. Provider authorization still applies to every request. - Keeping a connection enabled must not bypass an authentication stop. GitHub verifies blocked tool discovery and later sends; Discord and Photon verify background reconciliation and restart cannot clear the stop. Failed connection health is an execution gate while the endpoint requires attention. - Explicit disable, disconnect, signed installation revocation, and existing destination-specific denial handling remain unchanged. No migration or API schema change is required. - Previously disabled connections are not automatically re-enabled because an upgrade cannot safely infer the user's intent. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The runtime does not expose the exact deployment model ID or context-window size. Used reasoning, shell tools, repository edits, and test execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 09:54:22 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	016e40d532	fix(recovery): preserve shutdown export ownership through finalizer drain (#16843) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Legacy adapters must save sandbox files before Paperclip releases their source. > - Graceful shutdown gave each adapter a shared 30-second settlement wait. > - When that wait ended, cleanup could stop the sandbox while the adapter still exported files. > - That race created a restore failure and blocked the next turn. > - This pull request keeps export ownership through the finalizer drain and renews its cleanup fence. > - A successful late export can release its source and schedule one bounded continuation. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15857. This corrects the timeout path introduced by the shutdown settlement fence. Refs #16478. That repair clears verified historical holds; this change prevents an active export from losing its source. Refs #16835. That merged fix handles remote native runner ownership. This change handles legacy shutdown settlement. ## What Changed - Keep a late adapter settlement in the shared execution finalizer set. Wait for it before lease release, recovery classification, and retry scheduling. - Renew the exact owned settlement fence every 10 seconds. Use a 30-second lease, one renewal in flight, a one-second database lock timeout, and a five-second statement timeout. Report bounded failure categories without raw database errors or credentials. - Refuse ordinary cleanup while the local adapter still owns settlement. Preserve the explicit owner stop-and-retain path. - Give the finalizer drain a further shared 30-second wait after the initial shutdown drain. - Document the ownership rule, the acceptance recipe, and the controller-loss limit. ## Verification - Red before the repair: the database-backed expired-wait regression expected cleanup denial but received permission to stop the still-owned source. - Green on `615a4382c5`: all 526 tests in `recovery.test.ts`, `legacy-workspace-restore-recovery.test.ts`, `shutdown.test.ts`, and `heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` passed. - The assembled heartbeat regression passed. It verifies no early release or retry, joining the late owner, successful cleanup, one durable scheduled continuation, and no duplicate after service reload. - Safety coverage includes other-controller fencing, controller loss, exact source retention, stop-only cancellation, completion winning the status race, and real database lock contention during renewal. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed on the final source revision. - A broad local `pnpm test:run` crossed the rebase and reported eight companion supervision failures. It was stopped and its log retained. The complete companion file then passed all 753 tests on current source. This is not a passing full local suite; current-head CI covers the complete repository checks. - The 34 recovery tests include real lock-timeout classification and credential-shaped error redaction. - Current-head CI: 53 checks passed; two optional Storybook checks skipped. Greptile is 5/5 on `615a4382c5`; no unresolved review threads. - Live sandbox acceptance remains unverified. Three disposable local-controller/Daytona attempts used legacy Codex ACP, `gpt-6-astra`, API-key authentication, and the verified image `ghcr.io/paperclipai/paperclip-daytona-runner@sha256:a2bd08cefb68d9217bdd75cf87a6b51f1705b18a4796eff3f97b2726a548b8fb`. ACP initialization exited before model execution on macOS Node 26.4.0 and again on Node 24.21.0; one attempt exposed a local process-session socket `ECONNRESET`. That does not establish the transport failure's root cause. No attempt reached the delayed export or second turn, so this PR remains draft pending faithful live acceptance. Probe setup defects were retained separately from product failures, and all test-owned sandboxes were cleaned up. ## Risks - Shutdown can spend up to 30 more seconds joining finalizers. The shipped Compose stop grace remains 90 seconds. - Renewal adds at most one database operation per owned run every 10 seconds during shutdown. Lock and statement deadlines bound database contention. The local adapter still protects its source if renewal fails. - Controller death or an export that outlives the whole process still needs retained-source repair. This change does not reconstruct a legacy export after process death or clear historical failed-restore holds. - No schema or public API changes. Native restart ownership, approval gates, and retry limits retain their existing behavior. - This PR has not been deployed. It does not recover an existing retained sandbox by itself. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and test tools. The exact backend model identifier and context window were not exposed to 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>	2026-10-19 09:19:09 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	f3cd3f4ea8	fix(runner): require confirmed exit before remote replacement (#16835) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Remote runs need one runner to own their process identity and listener. > - A health request can fail while that runner continues to work. > - The active monitor treated a failed request as a process exit. > - Recovery could then launch another runner against the occupied listener. > - This pull request retries health reads and requires proof of exit before replacement. > - A brief outage can recover on the same runner without replaying agent work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #16341 adds remote recovery diagnostics. Refs: #16686 retries verification when restoring a saved remote session. This change applies the shared probe policy to active process supervision. **What happened?** The active remote monitor settled its completion promise after a timed-out or rejected health request. The transport treated that result as an exit and started process recovery. An existing runner could still own the listener. Replacement then failed with `runner_ingress_bind_conflict` until the reconnect deadline expired. Missing or changed ownership markers also did not prove that the old process had exited. **Expected behavior** Retry transient read failures on the same runner. Require a matching ownership marker and proof of process exit before replacement. Preserve uncertainty when identity or liveness cannot be verified. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a remote runner and leave its listener alive. 2. Make one process-health request time out or reject. 3. Observe completion and the restart decision. Before this change, the monitor settles while the process is alive, and the restart wrapper permits another launch. **Paperclip version or commit** The defect was reproduced on master at `6e89919631`. The patch is based on current master at `c6a0cf4bce`. ## What Changed - Reuse the bounded read-only recovery probe for active supervision. Retry up to three reads within 30 seconds. - Check the saved process generation when available. Accept only the specific process-not-running receipt as exit proof. - Add an exit-confirmation contract to remote process handles. Require it for restart and shutdown completion. Preserve the cause of supervision errors. - Test transient failures, exhausted retries, conflicting identities, real listening processes, and an authenticated runner with a fake provider. Keep confirmed-exit replacement covered. - Document the recovery policy and coverage limits in the execution contract and maps. ## Verification - Red: the timeout and transport-error regressions failed before the patch because completion settled while the runner was alive. The restart-guard regression also failed because replacement was allowed. - Green: 14 server supervision cases passed, including a real listening process. All 120 shared control-plane tests passed. Focused Runner tests passed for authenticated live-runner fault injection and confirmed-exit replacement. - Review regression: a replacement-health test first failed because its error cause was lost. It passed after preserving the cause and detail. The four affected transport cases and Runner typecheck then passed. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed for 35 areas and 176 capability IDs. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed locally. The sequential local full-suite run was stopped before completion; no local full-suite pass is claimed. Final commit `bcc1b1d339` passed the complete CI matrix: 55 checks passed and two optional Storybook checks were skipped. Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved conversations. The PR has no merge conflicts. - The first real-listener attempt could not bind inside the execution sandbox. The same test passed with local socket access. The first package-test invocation used the root configuration and selected no tests; the package configuration ran all selected tests. - CI attempt 1: nine test jobs were cancelled together at 12:54:59 UTC. Their test steps report cancellation. The build and uninterrupted jobs passed. The interrupted jobs were retried once. That retry exposed one confirmed-exit message assertion failure in the Runner shard; the other jobs passed. The compatibility correction preserves the prior message. The failing case and four recovery cases then passed locally. The complete CI matrix passed after that correction. - No live sandbox restoration, deployment, or historical task recovery is claimed. ## Risks - A persistent outage now ends supervision with explicit exit uncertainty. It cannot authorize a competing process. Existing ownership and workspace recovery checks remain required. - Health reads can take up to 30 seconds before reporting an unavailable runner. Retries are read-only and bounded. - Local launchers keep their existing completion contract. No database migration or public API change is required. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact serving snapshot 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>	2026-10-19 08:19:37 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	9077748894	Remove the Pipelines experiment and preserve its data (#16834) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Pipelines was an unused experiment with its own UI, API, CLI, and automation. > - Keeping it leaves unsupported product surfaces and extra task-detail queries. > - Removing the experiment must preserve data that users already saved. > - This pull request removes the feature and keeps its database schema and migration history. > - Cases and Routines remain available as separate features. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Remove the unused Pipelines experiment across the application. **Current behavior** The experiment includes pipeline boards, stage settings, case automation, review queues, learnings, permissions, and CLI commands. Task detail also queries pipeline links. **Proposed behavior** Remove all these product surfaces and their implementation. Preserve existing tables, records, and documents. Ignore the retired boolean in older managed configurations so upgrades still start. **Breaking changes** Pipeline URLs, API endpoints, CLI commands, and `pipelines:write` are removed. Task detail no longer includes the old `linkedCases` field. The independent Cases API remains available. No database migration or cleanup is included. Related feature work: #7907, #9110, #10905, #11375, #13004, #14671, #16133. Related issues: #9663, #10310, #10312. This removal supersedes the feature; it does not implement those pending enhancements or delete their saved data. ## What Changed - Remove Pipeline UI pages, navigation, gates, clients, query keys, helpers, and unused design tokens. - Remove Pipeline REST routes, services, automation dispatch, task-detail queries, and OpenAPI discovery. - Remove the CLI commands, shared contracts, experimental flag, catalog entry, and permission defaults. - Remove feature-specific tests, tutorials, smoke scripts, maps, and Storybook examples. - Preserve database schema, migration history, and the reserved document key used by old records. - Keep Cases routes independent and cover obsolete stored and managed settings. ## Verification - Passed: `pnpm build` and `pnpm -r typecheck`. - Passed: targeted settings, managed configuration, sidebar, settings UI, routing, and feature-catalog tests. A first sidebar run caught a shared Workspaces icon import; the import was restored and the sidebar rerun passed. - Passed: 40 tests covering Cases routes, OpenAPI discovery, retained Pipeline table constraints, and schema snapshot drift. - Passed: token gates, map validation, generated API metadata check, Storybook catalog validation, and 28 map/catalog tests. - Passed: isolated local browser verification of navigation and Experimental settings with Pipelines absent; Cases and Routines still open normally. Live GET/POST requests to retired Pipeline endpoints return 404, and the retired setting is absent. CLI help has no Pipeline commands. - Passed: 22 access-service and agent-default-grant tests after restoring unrelated permission assertions flagged in review. - Local full run: `pnpm test:run` reported one failure in the unchanged workspace-runtime port-allocation test. That test passed in an isolated rerun. The long local run was stopped after full CI passed; it is not reported as a complete local pass. - Passed: all 56 checks on `def9181f3a4491d95fca1d38e9739f5b821aae3e` (2 conditional checks skipped), including build, typecheck, test shards, and browser suites. Eleven interrupted CI jobs reported “The operation was canceled”; their one-time retry passed. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39255211006). - Greptile: 5/5 on the final commit, with the only review finding fixed and resolved. - Sandbox socket restrictions affected the first build/API test attempts. The same commands ran with local sockets available. ## Risks - Existing Pipeline clients must stop using the removed endpoints and commands. - Existing data remains in the database and backups, but the removed UI no longer displays it. - Historical boolean `enablePipelines` values are ignored. They cannot restore the feature. - Cases and Routines must retain their separate behavior. Targeted route tests cover this boundary. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with repository inspection, editing, shell execution, and browser verification. The exact deployed 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>	2026-10-19 08:09:46 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	1a79c8bdc7	fix(runtime): honor provider startup budgets on sandbox resume (#16802) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their execution environments. > - Follow-up runs reuse saved sandbox computers to keep their workspace. > - Starting a stopped or archived computer can take more than one minute. > - Acquisition already uses the provider's startup budget, but reuse imposed a separate one-minute deadline. > - This pull request gives resume the configured or declared provider startup budget. > - The benefit is that a healthy slow start can continue on the same computer. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A follow-up run failed during setup with `ReusableSandboxResumeError`. The saved computer became ready just after the host stopped waiting. The environment had no explicit timeout. Its provider declared a five-minute startup default, which the resume path ignored. **Expected behavior** Resume must honor the configured startup budget or the provider's declared default. It must retain the same lease. Failed or uncertain resumes must keep the saved computer. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Use a reusable sandbox provider with a startup budget longer than one minute. 2. Retain its lease and start a follow-up run. 3. Make provider resume finish after 61 seconds, within that budget. 4. Observe that the old host rejects at 60 seconds. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on `aaeff418cf72341c674ff3393cd94f40dc4855f6`. **Deployment mode** Hosted sandbox execution. The regression uses a local isolated PostgreSQL database and controlled worker RPC timers. Searched open and closed PRs and open issues for sandbox resume and timeout fixes. No duplicate fix was found. Related acquisition timeout handling already exists on the base branch. ## What Changed - Use the provider's declared acquisition timeout when no explicit startup timeout exists. - Apply the resolved RPC budget to the shared resume/retry deadline instead of 60 seconds. - Add two deterministic 61-second resume regressions for declared and explicit startup budgets. Assert exact RPC budgets, including the 30-second margin, and check that the same lease remains active without replacement. - Document the timeout behavior, provider-author contract, and verification recipe. ## Verification - Red: both new cases failed before the production change with `ReusableSandboxResumeError`, caused by `Plugin RPC timed out`. - Green: `pnpm exec vitest run --fsModuleCache server/src/__tests__/environment-runtime.test.ts` passed all 163 cases. The final review follow-up also passed both slow-resume cases with exact RPC-budget assertions (330 seconds by declaration; 150 seconds by explicit config). - An earlier full run passed the 161 existing cases but timed out in the two new tests because their fake clock also captured database scheduling. The corrected test restores real timers before lease persistence. The complete rerun then passed. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed locally. - Started `pnpm test:run`, then stopped the duplicate serial run in favor of complete parallel PR CI. The repository timing data totals about 126 minutes for server suites alone. Full parallel CI passed on the final head. - CI attempt 1 had one unrelated failure: `FileViewerSheet.copy.test.tsx` expected the asynchronous `Copied link` confirmation before React rendered it. That test and component are unchanged from the base branch. All six cases passed unchanged locally. A single rerun of the failed shard passed; attempt 2 of the full workflow succeeded. The timing-race diagnosis is an inference from the test helper, not a claim that this PR repairs that UI test. - Greptile scored the final head 5/5. Both review findings are fixed and both threads are resolved. - The consequential assumption is that provider startup may exceed one minute. The test preserves the RPC timeout race with controlled timers and uses real lease persistence. Read-only provider evidence also showed the retained computer ready just after the failed run ended. The patch has not been deployed to that instance. ## Risks - A slow or unavailable provider may hold setup for its configured startup budget instead of one minute. Retries still share one finite deadline. Providers with no explicit or declared timeout keep the one-minute default. - Lease identity, company scope, backup validation, and replacement decisions use the existing paths. No schema or dependency changes are required. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. This session supports reasoning, tool use, code editing, and test execution. The exact runtime variant 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 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>	2026-10-18 22:04:23 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	3858d2341d	fix(recovery): default saved-monitor waits and keep task recovery quiet (#16686) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - A task must keep a durable path to its next action. > - A provider can save a task monitor, then fail to yield because it omits internal continuation fields. > - An interrupted provider-pack check can then be reported as permanent artifact incompatibility. > - The task asks its user to certify recovered workspace files, even though this is an operator responsibility. > - This pull request derives the saved monitor continuation, bounds verification retries, and removes that task form. > - Normal recovery stays quiet. Unresolved holds retain inspection and the existing safety checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A yielded completion without `continuation` is rejected even after the provider saves an eligible monitor on the task. Repeated attempts cannot finish. Remote verification also treats timeouts and missing exit status as artifact incompatibility. The task recovery notice exposes raw diagnostics and asks the task user to certify infrastructure files. **Expected behavior** Use current persisted task state to fill routine continuation fields. Retry interrupted verification reads within a fixed bound. Keep normal recovery in the working state. Show a compact notice only when work cannot safely continue. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Save an eligible monitor on the active task. 2. Call `paperclip_finish` with `reportedWorkDisposition: "yielded"` and omit `continuation`. 3. Return a timed-out remote provider-pack command with empty stderr during recovery. Inspect the resulting task notice. **Paperclip version or commit** Source baseline: `aaeff418cf` (master integrated with its current task visibility and saved-source reconstruction rules). Related changes: #15824, #16104, #16451, #16493, #16690. This fix complements saved-result recovery and verified pack reuse. It does not replace their workspace ownership checks. ## What Changed - Allow omitted or null continuation at the provider input boundary. Read current authorized task context and fill a monitor continuation only for the bound run and an eligible saved monitor. Keep accepted results strict. Apply this to Codex, OpenCode, both direct and production-sidecar ACPX paths, and external drivers. Reserve the semantic call identity during the saved-context read and reject cancellation or a changed run/turn. - Bind the shared completion change and continuation helper in a new Copilot v21 source declaration. Preserve v20 history and its decoder support. Qualification stays pending. - Expose the eligible continuation in task context. Completion admission still checks persisted monitor state. No schedule is created or renewed by the default. - Retry read-only provider verification at most twice per command. Hold exhausted reads with a distinct verification-unavailable cause. Reattachment cannot renew the read budget through an unchanged provider-attempt counter. Keep completed verification failures and wrong versions incompatible. - Remove the task file-certification form. Hide the notice only for a matching durable recovery path without an unknown-action replay hold. Keep missed retries, unsafe outcomes, and unresolved file holds visible. - Add production-component stories for automatic recovery, blocked and expired holds, reader access, persisted repair decisions, source reconstruction, queued continuation, and mobile. Preserve master’s guarded saved-source reconstruction choice after confirmed source destruction. Update the execution contract and access maps. ## Verification - Completion, helper, Codex, OpenCode, ACPX, and profile regressions pass. After the sidecar review fix, 271 tests across the production sidecar and three provider suites pass, plus 72 helper/profile tests. The real sidecar MCP bridge tests cover saved-monitor acceptance, no-monitor refusal, cancellation, duplicate call identity, and raw-versus-forwarded semantic receipt hashes. The OpenCode tests also cover eligible-monitor acceptance and refusal without one. - The fresh full native executor suite passes all 743 tests. Four profile, installation-integrity, and ACPX driver suites pass all 168 tests. The earlier CI fingerprint failure required a new immutable source declaration; its follow-up Docker failure required the matching context allowlist entry. Both fixes are verified locally. Targeted server monitor, tool authority, and provider verification suites pass. The probe tests include a real timed-out subprocess, an unrelated responsive timer, transport errors, and completed integrity rejections. - All 90 tests in the merged task notice, reconstruction choice, recovery display, and lineage suites pass. They cover reader access, live/missed/mismatched recovery, unknown outcomes, saved messages, retry refusal, and removal of the file form. Both review findings have failing-baseline/passing-treatment regressions: identical polling across retry expiry, and a failed refresh after cached running activity. - Browser walkthrough passed for automatic recovery, unresolved details, a 390px mobile story, and the merged saved-source reconstruction and queued states. The reconstruction control starts disabled and normal automatic recovery shows only Working. The stories use production components and fixture API data. They do not prove live cloud recovery. - Token gates, map checks, and Storybook catalog generation pass. The exact Docker context integrity command passes locally after adding the new build declaration to its allowlist. - Workspace typecheck and build pass on the final source, including the versioned identity update. The final server and UI guards pass their focused tests, typechecks, builds, and token gates. The final standalone Storybook builds. The saved-monitor default retains master’s stricter child-task visibility filter. Re-review caught an additional production-sidecar validator before forwarding; the fix now defaults at that boundary and has passing regression controls. After preserving master’s new reconstruction capability, 68 targeted reconstruction, tool-authority, and provider-verification server tests pass. The current-master integration at `2a80050a0d` has a fresh 5/5 review with zero unresolved threads. Its complete CI matrix, including Runner tests, is the merge acceptance record. - On the final master integration, local typecheck, build, and all 90 recovery UI tests pass. A concurrent runner run hit five 5-second sidecar startup timeouts; an isolated sidecar run passed 86 tests and timed out in the unrelated unsupported-bootstrap case. Those local deadline failures remain recorded; the canonical CI Runner lanes use their normal deadlines and pass. The unsharded local full-suite attempt did not complete. It spanned source edits; the fresh native executor run above passes. An unrelated workspace fixture timed out once and then failed to reserve 32 contiguous ports on this host. Its unchanged-base control and CI server suite pass. Full-suite acceptance uses the fresh latest-head CI matrix; this PR does not claim a passing unsharded local run. ## Risks The default applies only to an eligible persisted monitor. An explicit invalid continuation still fails validation. The added read occurs only when a yielded report omits its continuation. Admission rechecks current state after that read. An interrupted verification command can add one extra 30-second probe. Completed rejections stay closed. These probes do not change the pack, launch provider work, or replay external tools. Two inconclusive reads hold the original run. They do not schedule another reattachment with an unchanged provider-attempt counter. This PR’s pending Copilot v21 declaration binds the changed shared contract, resolver, direct driver, and production sidecar sources. The previous v20 declaration is immutable and remains decodable, but launch requires the new exact identity. Qualification remains pending. Task users lose the file-certification form. Board-authorized source-only repair remains available through the resolution API with the original evidence and stop-receipt requirements. This branch does not deploy or recover historical held runs. > This is a bug fix and UI polish within existing recovery behavior. ROADMAP.md was checked. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, `gpt-6.1-sol`, xhigh reasoning, with tool use and code execution. The host does not expose the context-window limit. ## 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 (changed-area suites; the full local run limitation is recorded above) - [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>	2026-10-18 21:43:15 -05:00