Jannik/PaperClipAI
1
0 Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git synced 2026-10-23 09:07:46 +02:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
5,471 Commits 1,261 Branches 2,025 Tags
572bef4ba7679451ac1543db25cb8ebd533bf919
Commit Graph
3 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
Dotta 0a422fda52 feat(runner): add remote execution substrate (#12638) 
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Paperclip Runner gives native runs a durable and governed execution
path.
> - The current native path runs on the control-plane host.
> - Remote environments need an authenticated execution-target contract.
> - The contract must not change direct adapters or enable new runtimes
by default.
> - This pull request adds the remote execution substrate and Daytona
ingress.
> - The benefit is a bounded base for later remote runner transport
work.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #12616.
Refs #12352.

**Subsystem affected**

Cross-cutting. This change touches runner transport, server
orchestration, plugin contracts, and shared settings.

**Problem or motivation**

Native execution cannot resolve an authenticated runner ingress through
a remote environment. The server also lacks one provider-neutral
contract for remote execution targets.

**Proposed solution**

Add a default-off runner preview ingress capability. Add
transport-neutral runner connectivity. Add remote execution target and
lifecycle handling. Add a Daytona ingress implementation with redacted
credentials.

**Alternatives considered**

A provider-specific server path would duplicate orchestration and
authorization. A public endpoint without an environment contract would
weaken the trust boundary.

**Roadmap alignment**

This work supports the Cloud and Sandbox agents milestone. It also
supports self-healing runs and governed tool access.

## What Changed

- Added execution-target traits for local, SSH, and sandbox
environments.
- Added plugin RPC contracts for runner ingress endpoints.
- Added authenticated Daytona preview ingress.
- Added transport-neutral PRP outbound connections.
- Added remote runner artifact verification and fail-closed provider
selection.
- Added bounded native session resume, cancellation, and lifecycle
recovery.
- Preserved Codex-only selection for fresh experimental runner starts.
- Preserved all direct adapter execution and finalization paths.
- Removed stale Pi provider-pack requirements that security review
rejected.
- Kept the rollout controls off by default.
- Did not change pnpm-lock.yaml, Cargo, database migrations, or GitHub
workflows.

## Verification

- GitHub Actions will run the repository test, typecheck, build,
security, and policy gates.
- Focused tests cover ingress validation, redaction, execution targets,
remote lifecycle, cancellation, resume, and legacy adapter selection.
- Local tests were not run. The requested verification policy uses
GitHub Actions for this series.
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` passes.
- The diff contains 52 files.

## Risks

- Remote execution crosses a trust boundary.
- The implementation validates target capabilities, artifact digests,
provider-pack pins, and connection metadata.
- The feature remains default-off.
- Fresh native selection remains Codex-only.
- Existing direct adapters remain on the legacy path.
- This PR does not yet make remote Codex runnable. The next PR adds the
Rust WSS and TLS transport.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex with GPT-5.6. The work used high-reasoning agent mode,
repository tools, GitHub tools, and parallel code-audit agents.

## 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 or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id
- [ ] 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 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
 2026-09-01 01:29:06 -05:00
DottaandDev Agent 25cf079ec5 feat(runner): add Codex-native application integration (#12591) 
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The runner package is useful only when the application can start,
observe, and recover a native Codex run safely.
> - Existing direct adapters must keep their current execution and
finalization paths.
> - The application boundary therefore needs additive persistence,
authorization, coordination, and recovery behind an explicit
experimental adapter.
> - This pull request adds that Codex-only boundary without activating
generalized providers, remote environments, or the later task/SDK
surfaces.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Shared contracts, database persistence, adapter utilities, server
native-runtime services, and the experimental Paperclip Runner adapter.

**Problem or motivation**

The already-landed runner package has a qualified Codex path, but the
application needs durable native-run state, guarded runtime selection,
authenticated coordination, tool security, finalization, and recovery
before the experimental adapter can be exercised safely.

**Proposed solution**

Add a Codex-only `paperclip_runner` application path behind the existing
default-off native-runner setting. Bind native state and coordination to
company/run identity, preserve persisted-run recovery, and leave every
direct adapter on its existing legacy execution path.

**Alternatives considered**

The earlier stack boundary introduced a generalized executor and
remote-environment lifecycle here. That made this PR depend on
implementations in higher PRs and changed reusable sandbox behavior
globally. Those pieces are now deferred together to #12592.

**Roadmap alignment**

ROADMAP.md does not list a conflicting native-runner integration
project. This change adds the application boundary for the existing
Runner architecture.

## What Changed

- Added native run/result/finalization/provider-trace persistence,
shared validators, and idempotent migration/replay coverage.
- Added guarded Codex-only runtime selection, authenticated PRP
coordination, recovery, finalization, and interaction services.
- Added run/company-bound tool-gateway authorization, credential
redaction, SSRF protections, and replay-safe behavior.
- Added the explicit `paperclip_runner` adapter behind the default-off
rollout setting.
- Preserved legacy answered-question wake projection and direct-adapter
execution/finalization paths.
- Hardened cancellation so only owned in-memory child processes are
signaled; persisted recycled PIDs/process groups are never trusted.
- Retained the narrow Claude ACPX isolated-context security follow-up
discovered after #12590.
- Deferred the generalized executor, provider ingress, remote lifecycle,
SDK/lab/eval work, release-process changes, and lockfile.

## Verification

- Changed-file delta against `master`: 133 files.
- GitHub Actions is the authoritative verification environment for this
PR.
- Full CI, security, and Greptile review will run on this lowest
unmerged stack PR.
- Local tests/build/typecheck were not run because this checkout is
resource constrained.
- Static diff/reference checks pass, and `pnpm-lock.yaml` is unchanged.

## Risks

- This touches central heartbeat and agent-route code, so legacy
compatibility is the primary risk.
- Runtime selection remains Codex-only and explicit; direct Codex,
Claude, OpenCode, process, HTTP, and plugin adapters remain on their
existing paths.
- Fresh native starts fail closed while the rollout flag is off;
persisted native records remain readable and recoverable.
- Cancellation, company/run binding, tool calls, status decisions, and
completion writes are guarded or replay-safe.

> 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.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-5.6, with repository tools, code execution, and
parallel agent review.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either linked existing issues or described the issue in-PR
following the relevant issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass — GitHub Actions is
authoritative for this resource-constrained checkout
- [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
- [ ] All Paperclip CI and security gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open actionable findings
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before merge

## Stack

- Position: 3 of 5 overall; lowest of 3 currently unmerged
- Base: `master`
- Previous:
[#12590](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12590), qualified
Claude ACPX runtime — merged
- Next: [#12592](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12592),
generalized Codex executor, task experience, and developer SDKs

---------

Co-authored-by: Dev Agent <dev@paperclip.ing>
 2026-08-31 14:38:38 -05:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip a14e51d592 refactor(environment): classify environment capabilities from static driver definitions (#12045) 
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Environment runtime drivers provide workspace, lease, and custom
image behavior
> - Runtime code used driver identity checks and several
capability-specific members
> - These checks spread capability rules across the runtime and made new
drivers harder to verify
> - This pull request adds one general capability classifier and one
static driver support table
> - The benefit is one fail-closed capability model that keeps current
behavior and supports future drivers

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Environment runtime capability checks for workspace realization, custom
images, lease capabilities, and duplex authorization.

**Subsystem affected**

Cross-cutting (multiple of the above)

**Current behavior**

The runtime selects several capability paths from driver identity and
separate capability members. Custom image gates also trust provider
declarations without checking every matching live worker method.

**Proposed behavior**

The runtime uses one general capability classifier and one static
support table. Custom image gates require both the provider declaration
and every matching live worker method. The public capability names
remain unchanged.

**Reason and benefit**

The change keeps capability rules in one place. It removes identity
conditions from runtime consumers and makes unsupported drivers fail
closed.

**Breaking changes**

None. The public names sandboxCapabilities, sandboxProviders, and
EffectiveSandboxCapabilities remain available.

## What Changed

- Add classifyEnvironmentCapabilities and static support definitions for
all four driver families.
- Add resolveCapabilities to every environment runtime driver.
- Move driver traits into environment-driver-traits.ts and migrate
runtime consumers.
- Require provider declarations and matching live worker methods for all
custom image gates.
- Migrate duplex authorization to the general resolver and remove the
dead sandbox-only member.
- Delete the unused resolveEffectiveSandboxCapabilities wrapper and
update its test.

## Verification

- pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck
- pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/environment-capability-contract.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/environment-runtime.test.ts — 92 tests pass
- pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/environment-driver-traits.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/general-capability-classifier.test.ts — 12 tests
pass
- pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/environment-custom-images-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/environment-execution-target-capabilities.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/environment-execution-target-duplex.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/environment-execution-target-duplex-kill-switch.test.ts
— 66 tests pass

## Risks

The main risk is a capability gate that denies a valid driver or permits
an invalid driver. The static support matrix, live worker method checks,
and regression tests reduce this risk. No database, public API, or
published type name changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, with tool use and code execution. The deployment
does not provide a separate context-window value.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with Fixes: # / Closes #
/ Refs # OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue
template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub #NNN / github.com/paperclipai/paperclip URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (for example, docs/... or
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>
 2026-08-23 21:24:59 -07:00