Commit Graph
134 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandPaperclip 5d3e2ba5d0 docs: link calibrated native candidate campaign
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-03 00:07:53 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 0e3650d87b docs: publish calibrated native launcher admission
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-03 00:05:23 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 402ee94c52 docs: retain hosted calibration setup failures
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 23:51:07 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip bcf524fa90 Link immutable native qualification dispatch receipts
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 23:39:43 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 67830d0f61 Publish immutable native recovery admission and bounded manifest
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 23:36:17 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 27653eb1a8 Preserve all twelve provider-free hosted native setup failures
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 22:15:52 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 7dbc3c4594 Record concurrent immutable native qualification dispatches
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 22:01:21 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 93f6fc9356 Publish isolated native qualification manifest and exact admissions
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 21:58:16 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 2d6fc5eb03 docs(evals): keep unclosed ACP delivery regression visible
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 21:02:22 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 9d7c8a1b61 docs(evals): qualify retained browser failure evidence
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 20:11:13 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 64986c5f25 docs(evals): preserve limited sidecar and strict action results
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 19:53:48 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip a6ca91266d docs: publish native hiring read-evidence carrier audit
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 19:30:54 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 8eb517ca14 test(evals): retain bounded hiring lifecycle accounting
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 18:48:10 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip f051264765 docs(evals): publish complete original hiring pairs
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 18:38:09 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip c897bea111 docs: publish original paired Claude hiring failures and coverage limits
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 18:21:09 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip e3720f369d docs: publish pending matched hiring qualification evidence
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 18:02:20 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 430db408d5 Combine hiring templates with the qualified stock instruction context
Unfrozen comparison preparation; no provider qualification claimed.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 17:37:52 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip f46492a453 Align native qualification docs with the integrated 29-cell catalog
Record the two classic document repair cells and preserve the distinction between original native grades and analytical regrading.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 17:31:40 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 664c1899ef Fix blocker browser grading and retain the complete native comparison
Accept the requested marker plus concrete blocker explanation, calibrate contradictory and future-condition replies, and clarify future fixture punctuation. Preserve every original paid failure and label retained-DOM replay separately from live qualification.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 17:31:40 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 44b06c53fd docs(evals): publish first native completion result and pending matrix
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 17:31:40 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip f592498fce test(evals): require a useful visible native blocker explanation
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 17:31:40 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 12d9276baf test(evals): qualify native blocked reports with persisted outcomes
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 17:31:40 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 0afb70c59e Record native completion guidance verification
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 17:31:21 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip c0861720ba Clarify native Runner completion tool guidance
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 17:31:21 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 2d6e27f47e Support unnumbered issues in the document link recipe
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 17:29:55 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 5b05d9dcf9 test(evals): qualify production hiring templates
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 17:22:39 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 826799311b fix(agents): keep hiring instructions focused on roles
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 17:22:39 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 74d0d3d945 Derive document handoff links from the current issue and saved key
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 17:17:24 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 51b63829d4 Retain matched OpenCode routing results and original handoff defects
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 17:13:15 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip fe9dc1e3c5 Route legacy task work to the operational skill and show clickable delivery
Use stock discovery metadata and an actual Markdown document-link example. Clarify the future explicit UI-link fixture and retain the original task request and all measured failures.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 16:48:49 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip b85668c406 Fix skill capability metadata and publish the bounded repair comparison
Regenerate both capability inventories for the early issue-document recipe and reject stale derived manifests before stock-harness provider admission. Preserve the eight measured repair results, automatic recovery cost, and OpenCode delivery diagnosis.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 16:30:31 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 19b22b907a Clarify legacy issue document delivery in the operational skill
Preserve the tiny hire manual and original assigned-skill case. Add a focused public document/revision/link oracle and explicit presence/absence provenance for a matched skill-only comparison.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 16:29:38 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip ee26b2caf5 docs(evals): keep timeout document outcomes unknown
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 16:29:38 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 374e000601 docs(evals): close the unchanged-source baseline recovery
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 16:29:38 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 9ab1714bee docs(evals): retain matched stock-harness results and failures
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 16:29:38 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip f65f1b9454 fix(evals): prepare cold prerequisites and fingerprint connection guidance
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 16:29:37 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip a2b9d62e52 test(evals): enforce exact-source stock harness prerequisites
Run credential-free gates before live admission and verify retained evidence in direct browser execution. Include evaluated instruction sources in suite revisions and calibrate stale/missing evidence rejection.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 16:29:37 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 668d8d9591 test(evals): cover production default hires across stock harnesses
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 16:29:37 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 408f70e69f fix(runner): preserve stock Codex base instructions (#14920)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The native Runner connects Paperclip tasks to Codex app-server.
> - Paperclip passed its runtime context as `baseInstructions`.
> - That field replaces the stock Codex base prompt.
> - This pull request sends the same Paperclip context as additive
developer instructions.
> - Codex keeps its stock prompt and still receives Paperclip task
instructions and tools.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

The native Codex driver and Rust provider sent Paperclip context through
`baseInstructions` on thread start and resume. Codex used this text in
place of its stock base instructions. Direct-chat resume also sent an
empty replacement base. The Runner Lab session path used the same
replacement field.

**Expected behavior**

Codex should retain its stock base prompt. Paperclip should add its
runtime context through `developerInstructions`. Other provider facades
should retain their current instruction handling.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create a native Codex session through Paperclip Runner.
2. Inspect the `thread/start` request in the native provider trace.
3. Resume the session and inspect `thread/resume`.
4. Before this fix, these paths set `baseInstructions`. After this fix,
the Codex paths set `developerInstructions` and omit `baseInstructions`.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced against master at `cad26c6bfb736039c8ed5743da650a44792a083c`.

**Deployment mode**

Built from source. Native Codex app-server and runnerd paths. A local
protocol probe used codex-cli 0.153.4 and a localhost Responses stub.

No duplicate fix or matching public issue was found in the GitHub
search.

## What Changed

- Send additive developer instructions on Codex start and resume in the
TypeScript driver, Rust provider, and Runner Lab session path.
- Carry the additive fragment through runnerd, including runtime asset
path mapping.
- Preserve existing instruction fields for other provider facades,
including OpenCode.
- Add start/resume/direct-chat regression coverage and check the actual
Rust provider request.
- Document the historical option and trace field names. Record progress
and follow-ups in the working checklist.

## Verification

- `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm build` — passed.
- Targeted Codex driver lifecycle, driver, and live-session Vitest
suites — 139 tests passed.
- `cargo test --manifest-path
packages/paperclip-runner/runner/Cargo.toml --locked -p
paperclip-runner-core --test codex_provider` — 91 passed, 2 ignored
subprocess helpers.
- Real app-server probe: a localhost Responses stub captured identical
14,732-character stock base instructions on fresh start and cold resume.
Both requests retained the Paperclip marker in developer input. Both
stub turns completed. No paid inference was used.
- Runnerd transport Vitest suite — 182 tests passed.
- The initial `pnpm test:run` attempt reported local dependency-loading,
embedded PostgreSQL startup, and macOS `/var` versus `/private/var` path
failures. It was stopped after those failures. Loading-suite reruns
passed 1,428 tests after the build; native interaction/finalization
reruns passed 38 tests. A seven-suite diagnostic rerun passed 463 tests
and isolated the remaining path and PostgreSQL setup failures.
- With `TMPDIR=/private/tmp`, workspace, gateway, interaction, and
attachment suites passed all 356 tests. The remaining environment-image
and native-session-resumption suites passed all 44 tests with the same
canonical temp path. All affected suites passed on rerun. The original
full local command was stopped after failures and is not claimed as
passing.
- All 55 PR checks passed at `83281439456181396f3707eecda5d2ebc90bd14d`.
Greptile scored 5/5 with no open review threads.
- No paid live campaign or Product E2E browser suite was run. This
change has protocol and regression coverage; it does not claim improved
task quality.

## Risks

- Stock Codex behavior may differ from behavior under the previous
Paperclip replacement prompt. Restoring that behavior is the intended
change.
- Existing Codex threads retain their saved replacement base prompt.
They need a provider session reset to receive the stock base. This PR
does not reset active sessions or alter recovery rules.
- The legacy `baseInstructions` option and trace field names remain for
compatibility. They now describe the additive Paperclip fragment for
Codex.
- The separate Codex-through-ACP dependency patch remains a follow-up in
the harness coverage checklist. This PR covers native app-server
execution.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact runtime model variant and context window
are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, repository inspection,
code editing, shell execution, and test tools.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 08:53:47 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip d72389bee2 feat: add Browser Use Cloud connector and live task browsers (#14627)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The Apps gateway gives agents governed access to external tools.
> - Browser Use Cloud can run browser work, but a tool result alone does
not let a person watch or take over.
> - A task needs a durable browser session, a visible viewer, and
recorded costs.
> - This pull request adds a Browser Use Cloud v4 connection and
interactive browser tabs on tasks.
> - People can follow the work, interact with the page, and retain the
browser after the agent finishes.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Problem or motivation**

Agents need governed access to Browser Use Cloud. People need to see and
interact with the same browser from the task. A browser must remain
available after a run finishes and appear at the correct point in the
task feed.

**Proposed solution**

Add a native REST connection for the v4 API. Bind each session to its
company, task, agent, and credential grant. Open its interactive viewer
in the task side panel. Record provider costs as financial events. Use
`browser-use-cloud` as the app and connector key. Keep its skill with
the connector and deliver it only with authorized connection tools.

**Alternatives considered**

A v3 MCP connection would expose tools without the v4 lifecycle
integration. An external viewer link would leave the task. A fixed
viewer size would prevent pages from responding to changes in the task
pane.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends the governed Apps gateway and Connected Apps roadmap. It
uses the existing task, grant, secret, approval, and financial records.
The work was requested by the maintainer. A search found no duplicate
Browser Use connector PR or issue.

## What Changed

- Add the Browser Use Cloud app, brand asset, API-key connection, and
profile settings under the `browser-use-cloud` key.
- Bundle the `browser-use-cloud` skill with the connector. Keep it out
of global `skills/` discovery. Deliver it only with authorized task/run
connection tools. Remove retired connector skill keys from runtime
overlays and preserve unrelated browser skills.
- Expose seven v4 tools through the governed gateway and deliver them to
native and CLI agents.
- Persist sessions, browsers, runs, event and recovery cursors, shutdown
leases, and cumulative cost accounting. Recover uncertain paid starts
without replaying them.
- Enforce task ownership, credential grants, approvals, revoked access,
and budget limits.
- Add interactive task browser tabs and compact chronological feed
entries. Retain the viewer across tab switches and keep visible idle
browsers open.
- Add debounced automatic viewport fitting, standard size presets, and a
viewer ownership lease.
- Add lifecycle, authorization, accounting, viewport, UI, and Storybook
coverage.
- Add an idempotent database migration after the current master
migration. Preserve deployed migration hashes. Migrate pre-release Cloud
connection and financial keys without replacing grants, credentials, or
browser history.
- Document provider behavior, live acceptance results, and the lack of
documented passkey forwarding.

## Verification

- Full workspace typecheck and production build pass on the updated
branch.
- Token gates, brand asset validation, module boundaries, and migration
ordering pass.
- Cloud tests verify global skill exclusion, authorized task/run
delivery, unassigned agents, disabled connections, revocation, adapter
isolation, and secret exclusion. The existing AgentMail connector
assignment test also passes.
- Migration replay runs twice against existing browser work and
financial records. It preserves the records and avoids duplicate costs.
- The focused provider, app catalog, OpenAPI, connection gateway, and
migration regression suites pass. Recovery coverage includes lost
replies, process crashes, provider rejection, and browser arrival
acknowledgement.
- All 54 checks pass on `2974b5f03641ad0cea3c941d8c02579316fa8c92`,
including the full test matrix, browser E2E shards, build, typecheck,
security, and release canary. Two optional Storybook jobs are skipped.
- Greptile is 5/5 on the same commit, with zero unresolved review
threads. The corrected review uses the actual master-to-head diff.
- The local `pnpm test:run` started and was stopped after the full CI
matrix passed. It did not complete locally; the full-suite result above
comes from CI.
- Earlier live acceptance used an isolated company with a capped
provider credential. The agent opened paperclip.ing, the embedded viewer
accepted navigation, and the same browser stayed available after
completion and tab switches.
- The local Storybook build passes. Stories cover the panel, footer,
feed entries, settings, lifecycle failures, and viewport modes with an
offline viewer fixture.

## Risks

- Browser Use charges for hosted work. Provider caps and local budget
checks reduce exposure; reported costs can arrive after work completes.
- Viewer and CDP URLs grant access to the browser. The server validates
and restricts them. They are excluded from agent results and durable
event data.
- Runtime resizing of v4 agent browsers uses a provider option confirmed
by live testing but absent from its published agent schema. Resizing
during a click may invalidate coordinates. Fixed presets remain
available.
- Viewport ownership is process-local and resets on restart. The
lifecycle and accounting records remain in the database.
- The original intermittent embedded-viewer stall has not been fully
diagnosed. A bounded reconnect and active-session recovery cover the
observed failure paths.
- Live tests did not cover every revocation, approval, rate-limit, or
restart case. Deterministic integration tests cover those paths. Passkey
forwarding is not claimed.
- Unknown create outcomes keep the credential available for cleanup.
Run-list absence cannot prove a paid POST was rejected, so recovery
stays pending until it can identify provider work.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. Used reasoning, repository search, code execution,
browser interaction, and test tools. The exact serving model ID and
context-window size were 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>
2026-09-30 07:13:16 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 83076d7e7c feat: return completed handoffs to Agent Chat (#14408)
Return completed Agent Chat handoffs through a durable outbox and scope each generated update to its supplied tasks. Add recovery, browser delivery, result access, and calibrated quality coverage.

Validated with two consecutive ten-case Claude/Codex campaigns, all CI checks, and a 5/5 review.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-29 10:25:52 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 24beb00575 feat(runner): add rich ACP transport and durable interaction foundation (#14430)
Add shared rich ACP transport, durable questions and permissions, verified provider packaging, and bounded activity and plan presentation. Keep Cursor, Copilot, and Pi pending their separate provider qualification.

Persist interaction settlement before publication, fence failed writes until fresh recovery, and preserve owned-process cleanup. Incorporate reviewed mainline integration with extended harness coverage.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-29 08:56:21 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 992f720262 fix: make runner task context ownership explicit (#13753)
<!-- Write all pull request text in Simplified Technical English
(ASD-STE100). -->

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Task descriptions, comments, continuation data, skills, and
execution rules enter several agent adapters.
> - The same source can be rendered by more than one automatic input
carrier.
> - Failed resumes can also rebuild input from stale or compact context.
> - This pull request gives each Paperclip-owned source one delivery
owner and preserves the required transport boundaries.
> - It adds deterministic adapter, interaction, runner, and browser
tests for these boundaries.
> - The benefit is more predictable context delivery with explicit
evidence for later live qualification.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Related: #13144 removes a duplicate environment payload and bounds wake
lists. Related: #11360 addresses Hermes resume behavior. This pull
request preserves compatible active-session formats while repairing
context ownership and stale question creation.

**What happened?**

Task descriptions and comments could enter more than one automatic
context block. Native transports could wrap a complete model input in a
second task envelope. Some legacy and gateway adapters could omit the
owned assignment on ordinary tasks or rebuild a failed resume with stale
compact context. A continuation could also request a question after
newer human comments had arrived.

**Expected behavior**

Each task or comment source has one automatic model-facing owner.
Distinct comment IDs and repeated wording remain distinct. Fresh
fallback attempts rebuild the required full context. A question request
is rejected when newer queued human direction makes it stale. Harness
access policy remains owned by execution configuration.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Build a task with a description and current comments.
2. Capture the actual adapter or runner input.
3. Compare source ownership and task-envelope nesting.
4. Queue a human comment before a continuation requests a question.
5. Trigger a failed resume and inspect the fresh retry input.
6. Run the focused adapter, interaction, runner, and browser checks.

## What Changed

- Add shared prompt-section selection at the provider-attempt boundary.
- Deliver owned assignment context through native, legacy CLI, ACP,
gateway, cloud, Pi, Kimi, Grok, Gemini, OpenCode, Cursor, OpenClaw, and
Hermes paths.
- Rebuild full or compact context after resume recovery changes the
attempt. Add native and Claude ACP tests of actual recovery requests.
- Preserve custom templates, loaded instruction files, execution
policies, and older active-session formats.
- Record continuation source metadata and reject stale question creation
under the issue-row lock.
- Add explicit Product E2E context-integrity profiles, prerequisite
gates, credential-isolation checks, and report fixtures.
- Bypass service-worker forwarding for same-origin Vite development
modules. A real Chromium test fails with resource exhaustion before the
repair and passes after it. Production asset caching keeps its existing
policy.
- Add browser diagnostics and service-worker module-loading regressions.
- Add an explicit zero-retry eval option. The default retry behavior
remains unchanged. Each campaign records its effective policy.
- Remove the model-facing working-directory sentence from four prompt
builders. Existing workspace, sandbox, permission, and custom-template
configuration remains unchanged.
- Align the everyday workflow assertion with the current 47-entry
catalog.

Compared with current upstream master, the branch carries the
context-ownership implementation and its tests, the explicit
context-integrity catalog and evidence harness, and the focused browser
regression checks.

## Verification

**Merge assessment:** focused regression evidence supports merge. This
is not full completion of the original broad qualification matrix. The
maintainer has authorized merge after fresh verification of the master
integration.

- Current head: `bbd52f82114eabf09bc7b1a7e97d54a5b43bbc00`. This
integrates current master `2f585ef26a1814fa209715242d1ca791b63e4c4e`.
All 14 conflicts are resolved. Cancellation checks, workspace
finalization, native Grok support, and both sets of tests are retained.
- Current-head Greptile: **5/5**, with no blocking findings. The review
names this exact commit. All **59 reported checks are terminal: 55
successful, 4 skipped, zero pending or failing**. This includes the full
root general and serialized suites, separate runner checks, typecheck,
build, canary, browser E2E, Docker, and security checks. The successful
legacy security status is included in that total.
- After integration: workspace typecheck and full build passed. Separate
runner checks passed: **2,160 TypeScript tests (10 skipped), 582 Rust
tests, and 39 preparation checks**. Other passing checks include 621
Product E2E harness units, 376 focused shared/adapter tests, 160
real-database/API tests, 86 Hermes tests, 18 browser-support checks, and
Product E2E typechecking. The complete root suite passed in CI. The
duplicate local monolithic root run was stopped after that CI result; it
is not counted as a completed local pass.
- New native recovery coverage retains full assignment, completion
contract, and explicit skill selection after safe replacement, for old
and prepared input formats. Full native session test file: **136/136
passed**.
- New Claude ACP coverage captures actual fresh, resumed, and
missing-session fallback requests. It verifies one assignment copy,
comment order, identical text under distinct comment IDs, and full
fallback context. Full file: **33/33 passed**. Both affected TypeScript
checks passed.
- Existing deterministic tests cover source revisions, approval and
trust boundaries, completion validation, custom templates, compatible
sessions, standalone driver wrapping, and maintained adapter transport
requests.
- Provider-free browser support: **17/17 passed** after the master
merge. Service-worker unit tests: **33/33 passed**. The module-overload
regression failed before the repair and passed after it in real
Chromium.

### Fresh live comparisons

The new batch ran exactly four Product E2E attempts. **All four passed
on the first attempt; no retries.** Each has six terminal matchers plus
the existing browser lifecycle and invariant checks.

| Exact case ID | Control | Candidate |
|---|---|---|
| `core-compatibility.runner-codex.local.plan-revise-accept` | Passed |
Passed |
|
`local-session-integrity.runner-acpx-claude.local.structured-question-restart-resume`
| Passed | Passed |

The plan case checks a revised canonical plan and revision-bound
approval before completion. The question case restarts the server before
submitting the answer, then verifies the continuation completes.

Control source is `dfa4e1bda8d50a1a01746603251a9128dbe9d0d6`. Candidate
source is `79fcdb5dece501d28064ea9da306603881b46f0c`. They use identical
frozen definitions and provider versions: Codex `0.156.0` with
`gpt-5.6-sol`; ACPX `0.13.1` / Claude ACP `0.73.0` with
`claude-sonnet-5`. The September 24 head added master browser recovery
and test-only changes. The September 28 head also integrates newer
master changes, including cancellation, workspace finalization, and
native Grok. These are frozen-source live results, not exact-head live
runs.

The candidate received one description copy where the control initially
received three. The submitted initial plan envelopes were 7,969 versus
19,097 characters. Question envelopes were 7,592 versus 18,919. These
are structural measurements, not whole-provider token or dollar savings.

### Earlier evidence and failed attempts

- The preceding fresh batch has four effective passing pairs: OpenCode
comment continuation and assigned skill, native Codex comment
continuation, and native Claude comment continuation. It retains **11
attempts: eight passed and three failed**.
- Original failures remain recorded: missing local PostgreSQL library
links before task creation; host-sleep cleanup after task/page checks
passed; and a Claude **control** session-open rejection before a model
turn. Setup was repaired identically on both worktrees. The permitted
unchanged infrastructure retries passed. The underlying Claude provider
startup error was not retained and remains unknown.
- Older R2 retains **17 passes and one failure** across 18 attempts,
including eight both-pass native/legacy Codex/Claude pairs. Its OpenCode
blank-page failure led to the service-worker repair. R2 is historical
evidence: master changed the native fixed prompt and removed duplicate
wake environment data afterward.
- The September 24 CI run initially failed one unrelated preview
readiness test (`ECONNREFUSED` on its local fixture). Its test and
production code match master. Isolated local verification passed **28
tests, 3 skipped**. One unchanged CI retry passed the full shard: **831
passed, 1 skipped**, including all **31 preview-exposure tests**. The
aggregate CI gate passed afterward. The precise startup cause remains
unknown; a port race is a hypothesis, not a proved cause.

### Limits

The original wider profile/workflow matrix, repeated trials, and remote
Daytona qualification are incomplete. These results support a focused
merge recommendation, not statistical equivalence or universal harness
qualification. Some usage receipts are missing in both variants, so no
token or dollar savings are claimed. The $500 ceiling was preserved
using conservative allowances; failed attempts and unknown charges
remain in the ledger.

Reproduce the focused additions with `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/acp.test.ts` and `pnpm
--filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner exec vitest run
src/native-session-runtime.test.ts`. Full checks use `pnpm -r
typecheck`, `pnpm test:run`, `pnpm build`, and the separate runner
checks. Paid evals require the frozen definitions, profiles, and
credentials; do not use `--all` as a substitute for the selected cases.

## Risks

- Context placement changes can affect model behavior. Deterministic
checks cover the selected paths, but live qualification remains
incomplete.
- The stale-question guard can reject a request when queued human
comments arrived during the run. This is intended.
- New stored inputs and model envelopes retain compatibility readers for
older active sessions.
- Custom templates may intentionally repeat content.
- Removing a model-facing working-directory sentence does not change
filesystem, command, sandbox, or permission configuration.
- The worker bypass applies only to same-origin development module
paths. Cache-policy tests preserve private-response handling and
production asset caching. Mounted HTTP fixture changes remain test-only.
- This PR does not claim measured token savings or statistical
equivalence across every harness.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, exact model gpt-6-astra, with repository tools and code
execution. Bounded supporting work used gpt-5.6-luna and gpt-6-luna. The
serving context-window size is not exposed in this task.

## 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 described the issue in-PR using the required issue fields
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
ticket id
- [x] I have run the focused local checks and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect these changes
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [x] All current-head Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
for the current head
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-28 14:49:14 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 96bf004a79 fix: use persisted state for lifecycle continuation and retry budgets (#13888)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Its control plane decides when a task can continue, wait, stop, or
complete.
> - Legacy continuation could change when an agent changed its wording
without changing task state.
> - Shared attempt counts also let repair and infrastructure retries
affect each other's limits.
> - This pull request uses persisted state and separate, bounded
allowances for these decisions.
> - If automatic repair stops, the task explains what happened and
offers a guarded retry.
> - Paired tests and real-provider evaluations verify that Stop,
approvals, ownership, and spending limits remain authoritative.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Related work: Refs #13761, Refs #11126, Refs #13610. These cover
obsolete continuation dispatch and retry storms. Open and closed issues
and PRs were searched for related lifecycle, continuation, and retry
work.

**What happened?**
Legacy continuation depended on English wording and progress heuristics.
Repair, failure retry, and productive continuation could consume shared
counts. When bounded repair stopped, the task showed a technical
recovery message without a clear next action.

**Expected behavior**
Persisted disposition and owned execution paths determine the next
action. Missing disposition prompts bounded agent repair. Explicit work
mode determines planning mode. Narrative changes and raw activity counts
cannot replenish allowances. An exhausted repair shows a readable
notice. An explicit retry checks current controls and preserves the
assigned agent.

**Steps to reproduce**
Run `pnpm test:lifecycle-baseline`. The paired probes keep structured
state constant while varying completion, planning, blocker, and progress
prose. Run the explicit `lifecycle-baseline` and
`continuation-accounting` Product E2E suites for real-provider coverage.
In Storybook, open **Design previews / Recovery notice** to inspect the
production component's normal, pending, acknowledged, unavailable,
failure, and mobile states.

## What Changed

- Hide the image attachment button, icon, and drop/paste hint in answer
composers. Image paste and drop support remains available.
- Merge current master and retain both browser regression sets. Use a
production-stamped service worker in the offline recovery browser
fixture.
- Share one state-based legacy continuation decision across immediate,
delayed, and recovered dispatch. Bind bounded repairs to their source
run and episode.
- Remove title and description wording from work-mode authority. Agents
can still write requested plans in execution mode.
- Persist separate failure-retry and productive-continuation counters.
Disposition repair and resource waits cannot consume or reset those
allowances.
- Validate delayed repair identity, then recheck current gates before
provider dispatch. Fence native startup cancellation.
- Show **Agent needs attention**, a plain-language explanation, **Retry
agent**, and expandable details in both task interfaces. Report request
progress, acknowledgement, and errors inline.
- Store typed recovery notice metadata. Recognize older active notices
only through exact stored action and run IDs. Notice text never grants
retry authority.
- Use the existing recovery-action endpoint for retry. Recheck current
action, status, owner, agent availability, dependencies, active runs,
pending questions and confirmations, approvals, pause controls, and
budget. Duplicate requests do not wake twice.
- Add component, page, route, database, contract, and Storybook
coverage. Keep the scenario inventory and executable evals here.
Historical reports and snapshots live in the [commit-pinned
paperclip-evals
archive](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-evals/blob/ce3e5afcd4a1184650f586a2b5b8be5874c66c8b/experiments/2026-09-lifecycle-authority/README.md).
- Preserve unsaved project fields while the same project URL changes to
its canonical alias. Do not reuse data across projects or companies.
This separate fix addresses the repeated repository-editor browser
failure without changing the browser test.
- Keep the development service worker from intercepting Vite module
reloads. Update the connection-intent browser fixture to record progress
and completion through the agent API.

## Verification

Merge preparation on September 25, commit
`c1e8e4b7ddd9fbc4913ed55ce21b8e12906c2f97`:

- Merged master `bd2030932` and resolved the browser test-list conflict
by keeping both sets of regressions.
- Deterministic lifecycle baseline: 1,090/1,090 assertions passed; no
failures, skips, or missing selected evidence. Unit 423, runner 184,
database integration 397, grading 86.
- Browser support: 17/17 passed. The offline recovery test first failed
with an unstamped development worker, then passed with the production
stamp. Its assertions are unchanged.
- Focused interaction UI and offline fallback tests: 19/19 passed.
Verified the custom-answer composer in Storybook: no attachment controls
or hint; entering an answer enables Next.
- Recursive typecheck, production build, token gates, and diff checks
passed. The worktree is clean. No new real-provider campaign was run.
- Current CI and review: [Current PR CI
passed](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36166011243):
55 successful checks and two optional Storybook skips. Greptile scored
this exact commit 5/5. Hiding the question attachment controls is an
intentional UI change; paste/drop remains available.

Earlier recovery UI verification, commit
`21be0fec0e90e86b6d662b8ee4831847cd041cdb`:

- Recursive typecheck, production build, token gates, and diff checks
passed.
- Focused UI coverage: 338 tests passed across six suites (336 before
the interaction guard, with the two affected suites rerun at 149 passed
after it). Covers both task interfaces, the real page mutation,
pending/error acknowledgement, stale state, and unavailable controls.
- Recovery database integration: 352 tests passed before the interaction
guard. The complete recovery-action and mutation-route suites passed 181
tests after it. The two new pending question/confirmation regressions
failed before the fix and passed afterward, including
resolved-interaction controls. Shared validator suite: 31 passed. E2E
catalog suites: 34 passed.
- Browser inspection passed for light/dark themes, mobile layout,
expandable details, pending retry, acknowledgement, failure, and
disabled retry. Storybook renders the production component; its request
is simulated.
- The broad local run hit two chat callback-order wait failures and was
stopped after all CI unit/database/runner shards passed. Both local
failures passed when rerun without the competing full-suite process.
- CI exposed a repeated project-repository draft-loss race during
canonical redirects. A new unit regression failed before the fix; all
nine project-page tests now pass, including controls for other projects
and companies. Both unchanged repository browser tests passed against a
fresh local server. UI typecheck, production UI build, and token gates
passed after this fix.
- [Earlier PR CI
passed](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36072486798)
on `21be0fec0e90e86b6d662b8ee4831847cd041cdb`: 55 successful checks, two
optional Storybook skips, and no failed or pending checks. The
repository browser shard passed with the production fix. Greptile is 5/5
on this exact commit with no unresolved review threads. The PR is
mergeable.

Historical, source-qualified lifecycle evidence:

- Lifecycle baseline: 1,074 assertions. Native session coverage: 447
tests. Product E2E support: 515 tests. Browser support: 11 tests. Full
earlier verification is retained in the archive.
- [Real-provider campaign: 8/8 passed, zero
retries](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-35881382080-1/index.html),
source `e88d210417280140b44a36449027290adcb1aeaa`. Evidence and cleanup
checks passed. This includes deliberately exhausted repair cases that
correctly remain blocked; it does not mean every task finished Done.
This campaign predates the recovery UI change.
- Archive migration verified all 16 original JSON files byte-for-byte
and all 24 checksum entries. App tests do not need private archive
access. [Archive PR
#27](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-evals/pull/27) is merged.

## Risks

- Agents that omit durable disposition receive at most two repair
attempts by default. Prose-only completion exposes missing state rather
than silently changing scheduling.
- A retry is an explicit board action. The server rechecks current
controls. A successful response confirms the task returned to To do; it
does not claim that the provider has already started.
- Existing notice metadata remains valid. Only older active notices with
matching structured evidence receive the new UI. Historical notices
without that evidence keep their existing rendering. No schema migration
is required.
- Old run records require conservative retry accounting. Tests cover old
counters, alternating retry lanes, restarts, and exhausted repairs.
- Historical snapshots require private `paperclip-evals` access. The app
index retains public campaign links. Live campaigns qualify specific
sources and scenarios; no new real-provider campaign has run for the
recovery UI commit.

> This fixes existing lifecycle and recovery behavior and does not
duplicate planned core work.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex assisted implementation, reasoning, code
execution, and review. The exact serving model ID and context window are
not exposed in this task. Historical real-provider evaluations used
Codex model `gpt-5.6-sol`, separately from the implementation assistant.

## 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>
2026-09-25 15:28:11 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip aa8fc86331 feat(connections): prefer native apps and ask users to choose external providers (#13941)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Connections give agents governed access to external services.
> - Native connections should remain the first choice for a supported
app.
> - Other apps may be available through an external MCP provider.
> - The user must know which external provider handles the connection
and choose it before setup.
> - This pull request adds ranked alternatives and server-authored
instructions to connection search.
> - Agents can follow the returned instructions while Paperclip
validates saved choices and access.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Related: #13879, which fixed inline MCP provider setup. This PR adds
discovery and provider selection on top of that work.

**Subsystem affected**

Cross-cutting: shared connection contracts, server search and intent
services, native runtime, CLI, inline setup UI, and evals.

**Problem or motivation**

An agent cannot offer a clear external-provider choice when Paperclip
has no native connection for an app. Adding provider-specific branches
to the core prompt would make those instructions harder to maintain.

**Proposed solution**

Prefer a native connection. Otherwise return verified alternatives in
Composio, Arcade, Executor, Zapier order. Include an external-service
disclosure, a question with None, and the next instruction in the search
result. Validate the saved human choice before creating a selected
fallback setup card. Reuse existing provider accounts and verify
underlying app access separately.

**Alternatives considered**

Do not silently choose a provider. Do not claim that broad execution
tools prove support for every app. Reuse existing questions and
connection intents rather than add another connection model.

**Roadmap alignment**

Extends the existing MCP Tool Gateway & Apps and Agent evals & feedback
capabilities. The MCP aggregators experiment remains the gate. No
duplicate provider-routing PR was found in the public search.

## What Changed

- Add a dated support index and authorized cached-tool evidence for
external routes.
- Return provider questions and next-step instructions from
`connections_search`.
- Preserve pending choices and declines across continuation. Validate
company, task, agent, human, app, and current route eligibility.
- Carry the selected app into new setup and account reuse, validate
explicit provider requests against persisted human messages, and
distinguish provider readiness from app authorization.
- Sync native, MCP, REST, and CLI contracts. Keep core agent
instructions provider-neutral.
- Add production-component Storybooks, focused database tests, and three
real-agent browser eval cases.
- Record the plan, observed failures, fixes, passing evidence, and
acceptance limits.

## Verification

- Latest head `586f0e6cd`: 54 checks passed, 2 skipped; Greptile 5/5 and
all review threads resolved.

- After rebasing on master `18dac1e1e`: 64 focused shared, validator,
route-contract, and database tests passed; server typecheck passed.
- Embedded-browser test drive on the rebased head: native Jira card,
HubSpot external-provider question, Arcade account reuse, one actual MCP
read against a local synthetic fixture, reload persistence, and None
preventing further calls. A real OpenAI-backed agent performed discovery
and continuation.
- UX observation: the agent initially combined mutually exclusive
request fields; the server rejected it and the agent recovered without
changing access. This extra retry remains visible in the transcript.
- After rebase: 23 focused eval grader/catalog tests, affected
TypeScript checks, token gates, production UI build, and Storybook build
passed. Full local tests are intentionally excluded at the maintainer's
request.
- Before rebase: four browser/real-agent attempts passed: native Jira,
None, and reuse of the second provider on two Codex profiles.
- Browser evals used an isolated deterministic MCP fixture through the
real Paperclip gateway. They do not prove production compatibility with
all four providers.
- Review `Apps / Connections / Provider choice` in Storybook. Choose
Arcade, continue through Access, and verify the app name,
external-service disclosure, and URL configuration.
- The detailed verification report is
`doc/connections/2026-09-23-aggregator-routing-verification.md`.

## Risks

- The public support index is finite and can age. Account capability and
app authorization still require verification after selection.
- Existing installed-tool permissions remain in effect. Provider choice
is not a new execution permission boundary. An early Mini attempt
skipped search; clearer provider-neutral instructions made the targeted
rerun pass. This is not a measured reliability rate.
- Explicit requests skip provider confirmation only when a clear
persisted human message or saved provider choice supports them. Other
phrasing falls back to confirmation; the agent query alone is not
consent. These routes do not add tool permissions.
- No database migration or legacy Composio broker is added.
Real-provider acceptance remains separate from fixture proof.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools, code
execution, and browser tools. The exact deployment variant and
context-window size are not exposed in this session. Product evals
separately used the repository's primary Codex and Codex Mini profiles;
those agents supplied test behavior, not independent provider
compatibility proof.

## 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>
2026-09-24 16:36:49 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 24429024e7 feat: add Fireflies connector and summary-ready routines (#13890)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Apps gives agents governed access to external tools through stored
credentials.
> - Routines start work when an external service sends an event.
> - Fireflies provides meeting transcripts and summaries through an
official hosted MCP server.
> - This PR adds that connection and accepts signed meeting events
through the shared app webhook flow.
> - Agents can review completed meetings with the same permissions and
audit records as other work.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Problem or motivation**

Operators need agents to read Fireflies meetings and start follow-up
work when a summary is ready. The Apps catalog lacks Fireflies. The
shared app webhook flow needs to accept its signed deliveries.

**Proposed solution**

Use the official Fireflies MCP endpoint with OAuth or a vaulted bearer
API key. Extend the existing Another app or script flow with signed
webhook support. Verify the raw-body signature and pass the JSON payload
as external data. Select Meeting Summarized in Fireflies. Deduplicate
identical signed deliveries, including setup deliveries.

**Alternatives considered**

A separate REST connector would duplicate the governed MCP path.
Polling, legacy V1 payloads, and automatic provider-side webhook
registration are outside this change.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends the existing MCP Tool Gateway & Apps and Scheduled Routines
surfaces. It adds a provider to those systems. It does not introduce a
second integration framework.

**Additional context**

A GitHub search found no existing Fireflies issues or PRs. Provider
references and verification limits are in
`doc/connections/FIREFLIES.md`.

## What Changed

- Add the official Fireflies catalog definition, generated registry,
provider evidence, and branded artwork.
- Reuse Access → Connect, dynamic discovery, Permissions, vault storage,
policy, and audit behavior.
- Classify Fireflies sharing, movement, and access revocation as writes.
- Preserve Off and Ask first restrictions during OAuth reauthorization
and API-key replacement. New actions retain normal defaults.
- Add `app_webhook` authentication to the shared Another app or script
flow. Accept bearer tokens or raw-body HMAC-SHA256. Preserve earlier
`fireflies_hmac` triggers and revision snapshots for compatibility.
Existing text columns need no migration.
- Verify `X-Hub-Signature` or `X-Hub-Signature-256` against the exact
request body. Preserve generic event payloads and deduplicate identical
signed requests.
- Keep the routine wizard generic. Show one webhook URL and secret in
Another app or script. Keep all new app webhook event names
provider-neutral. Keep provider setup instructions in the connector
documentation.
- Pass generic webhook JSON to the task in an explicit external-data
block, capped at 16,384 characters. Keep strict meeting validation for
existing legacy Fireflies triggers.

## Verification

- Feature implementation commit `0882dc8a1`: all 54 CI checks passed;
two conditional Storybook checks skipped. This includes full tests,
typecheck, build, browser E2E, canary dry run, and security checks.
Greptile rated this commit 5/5; all review threads are resolved.
- Full local `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and token gates passed
on the final code. Targeted connector, gateway, webhook, revision, and
UI suites passed during implementation. After the provider-neutral
follow-up, all 84 app-webhook and routine-service tests passed; the
final payload-to-task assertion also passed in the 72-test routine suite
and a clean-config rerun.
- The long local `pnpm test:run` invocation started before the final
edits and was stopped after the final-commit CI suites passed. It
reported one generic webhook test failure while those files were
changing; that test and the entire routine suite passed on the final
source, including a clean-config reproduction. The interrupted local run
is not counted as a full-suite pass.
- In the embedded browser, completed official OAuth consent and
discovered 20 live actions. Real meeting listing, transcript retrieval,
and summary/action-item retrieval succeeded as the selected agent.
Turning a live read Off blocked its test; catalog refresh preserved the
restriction.
- Embedded-browser Another app or script setup, back/save/resume, narrow
layout, and a signed synthetic Fireflies delivery succeeded. The UI
reported authentication passed without creating a task. Fixtures cover
signature tampering, malformed requests, ordinary app event names,
duplicate/setup deliveries, rotation, revisions, pause/archive, and
company isolation.
- Existing MCP browser suite: 8 passed and 2 provider-dependent cases
skipped. Branding checks passed; connector artwork and webhook setup
were checked at desktop/mobile widths and in light/dark modes.
- An unauthenticated POST to a correctly formatted public webhook URL
reached the staging tenant verifier through the existing Cloud gateway.
- A real Fireflies webhook delivery remains unverified. A staging
callback is available for the operator walkthrough. Live API-key
authorization, credential expiry, and a new meeting's summary completion
were not tested against the provider. Fixtures cover these protocol and
lifecycle paths where applicable.

- Storybook follow-up `c54174faa`: 27 production-component stories cover
every UI change, with a source-to-story map in the connector
documentation. Static Storybook build, UI typecheck, token gates, and
Playwright checks for all stories and the mobile footer pass. All PR
checks passed for this Storybook follow-up; Greptile reviewed
`c54174faa` at 5/5.

## Risks

- Fireflies may change its hosted MCP tools or OAuth behavior. Tool
discovery stays dynamic. Experimental search/fetch tools are not
required.
- Public webhook setup requires HTTPS and a separate signing secret.
Fireflies normally emits events for meetings owned by the configuring
account.
- Reauthorization touches shared MCP permission code. Regression tests
cover existing restrictions, new actions, connection removal, and other
gateway callers.
- Webhook receipt grants no tool access. The routine agent still needs
an authorized Fireflies connection.

- New generic triggers rely on provider event subscriptions. Without a
sender-supplied idempotency key, changed request bytes count as a new
event. Existing legacy Fireflies triggers retain summary-only filtering
and per-meeting deduplication.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, model `gpt-6-astra`. Used reasoning, repository editing,
code execution, and embedded-browser testing. The runtime did not expose
a 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>
2026-09-23 17:11:16 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip a10702a878 feat(slack): add governed tools for Slack-origin tasks (#13828)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Chat connectors let people start and continue agent tasks from other
services.
> - A Slack conversation needs access to its surrounding discussion and
Slack collaboration tools.
> - The agent must use the linked requester's access and keep private
material within its permitted audience.
> - This pull request adds Slack tools through the existing connector
contribution and approval framework.
> - People can ask an invited bot to read a discussion, create follow-up
tasks, and collaborate in Slack.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Chat connectors, connector runtime, tool gateway, and connection
Settings/Access.

**Problem or motivation**

Slack-origin tasks can receive messages but cannot inspect the rest of a
channel or act through the originating bot. People must paste context or
configure a separate integration.

**Proposed solution**

Supply typed Slack tools and a bundled skill only to the originating
task and assigned agent. Resolve the linked requester on the server.
Check bot and requester access before reads and writes. Use existing
durable actions and approvals. Retrieved messages remain source
material.

**Alternatives considered**

Slack's user-OAuth MCP server does not replace the customer-created chat
bot. An unrestricted Web API proxy would not provide suitable permission
or publication boundaries.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends the existing MCP Tool Gateway & Apps work with a provider
contribution. It does not add a task dispatcher or a separate Slack task
lifecycle. Related: #11144 covers generic per-user MCP grant execution;
this change binds Slack bot operations to chat-origin tasks.

## What Changed

- Add 39 typed Slack tools, a method/scope matrix, a bundled skill, and
shared native/HTTP execution.
- Bind tools to company, endpoint, task, run, assigned agent, and
admitted linked requester. Check membership and revocation on each call
and before queued writes.
- Add paginated reads, bounded history search, source links, messages,
file uploads, reactions, pins, bookmarks, topics, canvases, lists, and
approved channel operations.
- Restrict private-source publication, including automatic replies and
uploaded deliverables. Keep other people's bot DMs inaccessible.
- Reuse action receipts, idempotency, approvals, and reconciliation.
Suppress an identical explicit-send/final-reply duplicate. Return
governed results through their verified originating conversation.
- Add endpoint-bound personal search OAuth storage and lifecycle. Keep
native real-time search disabled until a runtime meets Slack's
transient-result requirements. Current runtimes use bounded history
search.
- Show capabilities, scope upgrades, and personal search authorization
in Settings/Access and Storybook. Document provider and runtime limits.

## Verification

- Current head `0eb21cba4`: CI checks pass and Greptile is 5/5 with no
unresolved findings. One unchanged rapid-callback timing test passed on
a single CI retry.
- Approval presentation regressions cover board-comment precedence and
exact Slack publication; the expanded database assertion passed in CI.
The local PostgreSQL startup probe later became unavailable, so that
final assertion was verified in CI. Slack setup and failed-run retry
browser tests also passed locally.

- Full workspace typecheck and build passed. Server typecheck/build
passed again after the approval routing fix.
- Broad local suites passed in separate groups: server 12,958 tests, UI
6,555, shared 770, skills catalog 20, and other workspace packages
2,652. CLI and serialized server checks passed after environment/timeout
retries. These are composite results, not one uninterrupted green
full-suite invocation.
- PostgreSQL authority regression covers admitted identity,
cross-company/task/agent rejection, recovery, retained-session
revocation, OAuth refresh/disconnect races, approval execution, exact
publication lineage, retries, uncertain sends, and duplicate
suppression.
- Gateway/response regressions cover separate-origin approval batches
and durable continuation. Focused provider, access, search, native
runtime, route, and AgentMail regressions pass.
- Storybook capability, missing-scope, OAuth configuration,
authorization, and disconnect states were inspected in the browser.
- Live staging: read a channel decision and full thread, create exactly
two assigned backlog tasks, add a reaction, paginate discovery to
exhaustion, and return bounded search matches with source links and
coverage.
- Live staging: create/edit/read a canvas and list, inspect the canvas
in Slack, post/edit one message, and create a channel only after
approval. New channels remain disabled for responses.
- Live staging: read a response-disabled channel from the requester's
DM; writes to that channel were denied. The test setting was restored.
- Final live retest passed: explicit file upload and exact content
read-back; approved deletion of only the disposable bot message;
continuation confirmation returned to the original Slack thread without
repeating the action.
- Optional OAuth, private multi-user boundaries, native RTS, and CLI
provider execution are not fully live-qualified. The staging agent
initially supplied malformed tool arguments; valid arguments succeeded,
and the tool/skill descriptions now emphasize UUID write keys.

## Risks

- Existing Slack apps must add scopes and reinstall for new
capabilities. Provider plans and document permissions can still restrict
operations.
- Instances need an independent `PAPERCLIP_TOOL_ACTION_SIGNING_SECRET`
for governed tool actions. The staging instance was configured with
explicit operator approval; fleet provisioning is a separate gap.
- Native RTS is not exposed on current transcript-retaining runtimes.
Bounded history scans are deliberately reported as incomplete. Inline
file reads support text/canvas content up to 256 KiB; other types return
metadata.
- Private document edits fail closed when the full audience cannot be
verified. Uncertain effects other than posts/uploads require inspection
instead of blind retries.
- Shared approval-delivery code now separates outcomes by source run to
preserve origin boundaries. No database migration is required.
- A separate completion-validator gap remains when the agent cites a
prior run's registered artifact during finalization. It asked for
registration again even though Slack delivery was confirmed. This change
does not add a connector-specific task-completion policy.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository tools, code execution, and
browser testing. The exact deployed model identifier and context-window
size were not exposed in the 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>
2026-09-22 15:29:07 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 8813a50105 feat: run GitHub review bots through Paperclip agents (#13717)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agent work as tasks and runs.
> - GitHub chat brings repository conversations into those tasks.
> - A review bot needs the assigned agent, its authority, and governed
provider tools.
> - The existing channel connection did not supply that review workflow
or a complete setup journey.
> - This pull request adds GitHub App setup, account access, event
prompts, task-bound review tools, and exact-commit checks.
> - Operators can inspect each review through the same task, run, and
activity systems.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

GitHub chat, governed connection tools, task execution, shared/database
contracts, and connector setup UI.

**Problem or motivation**

Operators need a GitHub review bot that runs their assigned Paperclip
agent. Mentions and PR events must preserve task ownership and requester
authority. Provider publication must use the bot App identity and
enforce the configured permissions.

**Proposed solution**

Extend the existing GitHub chat connector with resumable App onboarding,
linked-member and sponsored-guest access, editable event prompts, and
governed review operations. Validate structured assessments on the
server and compute a stable Paperclip Review check for the exact head
commit.

**Alternatives considered**

A separate review scheduler would duplicate Paperclip execution and
permissions. Reusing personal GitHub credentials would change the bot
identity and credential boundary.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends the existing Connected Apps and governed-tool
infrastructure. The project owner requested and approved this design.
Related PR #8645 imports external Codex review feedback; this change
runs an assigned Paperclip agent and publishes its results through the
existing chat connector.

## What Changed

- Include the current Paperclip instance origin in the copied setup
prompt. Storybook uses its configured Paperclip origin; callback
parameters and URL credentials are excluded.

- Add a Claude/Codex copy button in the real setup and Storybook opening
step. Its detailed prompt asks four setup questions and guides
embedded-browser setup, verification, and optional required checks.
Clipboard failure exposes selectable instructions.
- Add a tutorial that explains why App installation, review scheduling,
and required checks are separate choices.

- Add manifest registration, an existing-App path, separate installation
and repository selection, repository refresh, and explicit account
confirmation.
- Add low-trust agent guidance, effective capability verification,
member selection, and explicit restricted guests with a sponsor.
- Add configurable PR events, prompts, repository overrides, rating
thresholds, and separate formal-review permissions.
- Give the assigned agent governed App tools to read PRs, comment, begin
an assessment, submit findings, and optionally submit a formal review.
- Bind review history, root PR events, and inline replies to ordinary
tasks. Deduplicate deliveries/findings and reject stale publication.
- Link check Details to the underlying task on the current trusted
hostname, or to Reviews before task creation.
- Add schema migration 0283, API contracts, production UI, and 49
interactive Storybook states.
- Repair local lease recovery. Keep the Cloud Dockerfile identical to
master; no provider-pack layer or runtime-default environment variable
is added.
- Retry only rolled-back wake-admission transactions after transient
endpoint-lock contention. A deterministic held-lock regression proves
one accepted wake.

## Verification

- Current head: `7ba761fe007bb798400d3e62346fa964f607f0f8`, rebased on
master `d9b3a5653e41f2ee5a1345b97c86a238f7a5c8e9`. Dockerfile has zero
diff against master. Final workspace typecheck and build passed. The new
PostgreSQL migration regression passed and preserves existing relation
and constraint identities after replay.
- Greptile reviewed this exact head at 5/5. There are zero unresolved
review threads and no merge conflicts.
- All current-head checks are green: 54 passed and two conditional
Storybook jobs skipped. This includes complete server/workspace test
suites, build, typechecks, policy checks, Runner suites, browser suites,
and security status. One timing-sensitive callback-ordering test passed
in isolation and its CI shard passed one retry. The duplicate local
full-suite run was stopped after CI completed; it is not counted as a
local full-suite pass.
- Before the final Slack rebase and migration renumbering, 186 focused
GitHub tests, 14 native bootstrap cases, token gates, and Storybook
build passed. The final rebase retained the new Slack communication
guidance.
- The embedded-browser setup test copied the full detailed prompt,
including the configured Paperclip instance URL. Desktop and narrow
layouts were checked. Component tests cover successful copying and
clipboard failure with selectable text and retry.
- Live local and hosted GitHub acceptance evidence refers to application
revision `cb703ac959876a07ebf3d7a295847f9f351eb6fc`. Real agent tasks
exercised issue mentions, automatic PR reviews, inline findings,
repeated mentions, task continuation, and failing-to-passing checks
after a push. The Storybook agent generated, built, and browser-rendered
pages; missing acceptance text failed, matching text passed, and broken
JSX produced an incomplete result.
- Live cases also covered independently disabled push events, prompt
injection, duplicate signed deliveries, rapid pushes, stale-result
rejection, finding deduplication, and restart recovery. Formal reviews
were denied while disabled and published only after explicit enablement.
Check Details links pointed to the underlying task on the trusted
hostname.
- Those hosted native Claude runs used the provider-pack layer now
removed from this PR. They do not prove native Claude works on the
standard Cloud image. A replacement hosted native Codex run is not yet
verified: the disposable QA tenant has only an Anthropic AI connection.
No new staging or production deployment was made for the packaging
removal.
- Required-check merge enforcement could not be tested because the
private disposable repository's GitHub plan rejected the rules
configuration. Published success/failure/incomplete check states were
verified directly.

## Risks

- Latest master allocated migration 0282 to Slack. The GitHub migration
is regenerated as 0283 with replay-safe table/index/constraint creation;
a PostgreSQL regression verifies existing relations and constraints are
preserved. Existing preview tenants remain subject to the fleet
migration-history compatibility preflight; no bypass is introduced.

- Migration 0283 adds company-scoped configuration, registration,
review, and publication records. Existing connections retain their
behavior until reviews/tools are enabled.
- Signed webhooks and expiring registration state remain required.
Hosted installations also need the companion narrow Cloud gateway
exemptions.
- Agent assessments can be incomplete or wrong. The server enforces
coverage/result structure, current-head publication, rating policy, and
separate formal-review permission; it does not replace code-review
judgment.
- No Cloud image packaging changes are included. Remote native
ACPX/Claude and OpenCode retain their existing operator-supplied
provider-pack prerequisite. Native Codex and Codex with managed MCP
tools do not require that pack. Earlier staging deployment evidence
refers to its stated revision, not this packaging-removal head.
Production rollout and merging remain outside this change.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository, code execution, API, and
embedded-browser tools. The exact serving model ID and context-window
size were not exposed by the environment.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] 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>
2026-09-21 14:41:19 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip e8c8ba3c19 feat(apps): add experimental MCP aggregator connectors (#13755)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Its tool gateway applies company access rules and approval controls
to connected apps.
> - MCP aggregators expose many apps through one provider endpoint.
> - Each aggregator needs its own credential, catalog, grants, and
lifecycle in Paperclip.
> - This pull request adds independent Zapier, Arcade, Composio Connect,
and Executor setup with a common Access → Connect layout.
> - A default-off MCP aggregators flag lets operators opt in while we
complete provider acceptance tests.
> - Agents use the normal Paperclip permissions, Test screen, and
gateway after setup.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Apps, connection setup, shared contracts, and the remote MCP gateway.

**Problem or motivation**

Aggregator endpoints need clear provider setup and correct MCP sessions.
Generic setup does not explain each provider's authentication or broad
execution tools. Provider approval must preserve the original execution
instead of replaying a write.

**Proposed solution**

Add four separate connectors behind Settings → Experimental → MCP
aggregators. Start with human and agent access, then connect the
endpoint and read its tools. Enable tools by default. Use the existing
Permissions and Test screens after setup. Keep legacy Composio API-key
and child connections intact.

**Alternatives considered**

A shared connection for all providers would mix credentials and access
rules. Separate provider-specific permission and test screens would
duplicate existing controls. Vercel Connect is outside this change.

**Roadmap alignment**

Extends the existing MCP Tool Gateway & Apps capability and the
Connected Apps roadmap area. This work was requested and reviewed by the
maintainer.

Related work: #11894, #12630, #12632, #12634, and #12906 concern the
legacy Composio broker. #13102 also covers remote MCP pagination. This
change preserves the broker path and adds initialized sessions, response
matching, and provider resume handling alongside pagination.

## What Changed

- Add branded setup and interactive Storybooks for Zapier, Arcade,
Composio Connect, and Executor. Use the existing access controls and
normal action tests. Do not request a connection name or action choices
during setup.
- Add the default-off `enableMcpAggregators` flag to settings, managed
feature metadata, the catalog, and setup guards. Hidden connections keep
running. Legacy Composio connections remain unchanged.
- Reuse the vault, grants, policy, and catalog models. Support OAuth
discovery, bearer tokens, custom headers, and credential-bearing URLs.
Add no database tables or migrations.
- Initialize and retain Streamable HTTP sessions by connection and
effective credentials. Read paginated catalogs and match streaming
responses to request IDs.
- Classify unfamiliar aggregator tools as writes despite upstream
read-only hints; only exact reviewed read capabilities enter the
read-only allowlist. Legacy Composio child behavior is preserved.
- Preserve provider authorization links and execution IDs. Support
Executor approve/resume, decline, and cancel without automatic replay of
uncertain writes.
- Preserve Off and Ask first choices during refresh and reconnect. Allow
new tools and retire removed tools. Keep agent access updates atomic and
preserve an empty agent selection.
- Document connector UX rules, provider branding sources, and live
acceptance results.
- Stabilize the existing Sentry release fixture after its repeated CI
failure by reusing one module mock; production Sentry behavior is
unchanged.

## Verification

- Final head `d11781970`: [CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35633534900)
passed, including broad typecheck, test shards, build, and E2E. All 54
checks pass; 2 optional checks are skipped. Greptile is 5/5, Security
Scan passes, and all review threads are resolved.

- Passed 27 focused connector Vitest checks and 18 connector-only
Storybook browser checks before the flag change. All 85 stories rendered
at desktop and narrow widths.
- Passed 5 connector lifecycle/server checks and 7 selected flag checks
after adding the flag. The latter cover settings, managed defaults,
cached catalog visibility, and all four setup routes.
- Review fixes passed 13 risk/handoff/lifecycle checks, dedicated
session-expiration and transport regressions, 13 selected
connector/gateway CI cases, and 10 selected setup/reconnect UI cases. A
real Composio connection-list call also succeeded through the refreshed
UI on `9ab115f71`.
- UI and server TypeScript checks passed. UI build, Storybook build,
token gates, and diff whitespace checks passed during implementation.
- Real browser and real Paperclip agent tests passed for Arcade,
Composio, and Executor. Tested action permissions, denied agent access,
reconnect, disconnect, and isolation. Tested Arcade catalog
additions/removal and Executor provider approve/resume, decline, and
cancel.
- Zapier live acceptance is incomplete. Its dedicated provider server is
configured, but its credential-copy dialog returned an empty clipboard
through browser automation. No live Zapier action is claimed.
- The three isolated Sentry release cases pass after the CI fixture fix.
- Local verification is deliberately narrow at the maintainer's request.
The full local suite, recursive typecheck, and repository-wide build
were not run. CI provides the broader checks.

## Risks

- Shared MCP transport changes affect other remote MCP servers. Protocol
fixtures cover initialized sessions, streaming response matching,
pagination, and isolation.
- Broad execution tools remain broad permissions. The provider governs
actions inside those tools.
- Provider handoff links are retained briefly in memory. After a server
restart, a one-time link may require reopening the provider dashboard.
Paperclip does not replay the original call.
- Zapier remains unproven live. Custom-header imports and self-hosted
endpoints have fixture coverage rather than a separate live account for
every variant.
- Turning the experimental flag off hides setup; it does not revoke
existing credentials or stop existing connections.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools, shell
execution, and browser automation. The exact runtime model ID and
context-window size are not exposed in this session. A separate
Anthropic-backed Paperclip agent performed live gateway acceptance
tasks.

## 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>
2026-09-21 12:53:11 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 6fe8e30625 feat(apps): add Railway connection and governed deployment tools (#13415)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Apps gives agents governed access to external resources.
> - Operators need to inspect Railway services, read logs, deploy code,
and run container commands.
> - Railway offers hosted MCP with OAuth, but broad remote actions hide
their internal operations.
> - This PR adds a branded connection and fixed direct operations
through the existing gateway.
> - Separate SSH keys enable container commands under the same grants
and policies.
> - Operators can require approval for an action and inspect the
resulting audit record.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Apps catalog, connection setup, gateway execution, and connection
documentation.

**Problem or motivation**

Agents need Railway access through Paperclip. Operators need to grant
and revoke that access, inspect available actions, and govern deployment
and container operations without giving agents provider credentials.

**Proposed solution**

Reuse hosted MCP OAuth, vault storage, catalog discovery, grants, and
the gateway. Probe the actual credential before enabling fixed GraphQL
operations. Use a dedicated grant-owned SSH key for bounded container
commands.

**Alternatives considered**

A catalog entry alone cannot execute the missing operations. The hosted
general agent has opaque internal effects. An unrestricted CLI runtime
can bypass action policy and inherit ambient credentials.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends the existing MCP Tool Gateway & Apps path and the Connected
Apps direction in ROADMAP.md. It does not add a plugin or parallel
connection service.

Related PRs #311, #939, and #7861 concern hosting Paperclip on Railway.
They do not add this outbound Apps connection. The separate shared
agent-picker fix is #13414 and is not included here.

## What Changed

- Add the generated Railway catalog entry, official marks, provenance,
and OAuth setup guidance.
- Add fixed service/deployment status, bounded logs, and
redeploy/restart/rollback tools. Block source deployment until the
provider can atomically bind the approved repository and commit.
- Verify API access with an explicit workspace before exposing direct
tools.
- Add grant-owned SSH key setup and a bounded runner with host
verification, target checks, isolated state, and cleanup.
- Block the opaque hosted railway-agent and accept-deploy actions.
Preserve normal Allowed defaults and Ask-first policies for other
actions.
- Quarantine new or changed Railway schemas after initial discovery,
including reconnect.
- Add provider, lifecycle, gateway, SSH, UI, and browser fixtures.
Document setup, limitations, and the release checklist.

## Verification

- Security follow-up: removed the unsafe source-deployment mutation.
Direct calls and old active catalog entries are denied before any
upstream request, including normalized aliases. Refresh marks retired
entries disabled. All 386 focused Railway, catalog and gateway tests
passed, and server TypeScript checking passed. Full [GitHub
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35139421144)
passed on d86530ab9, including typecheck, build, all tests, runner
checks, and browser tests. Superagent passed and confirmed the P2 fix.
Greptile reviewed the same commit at 5/5 with no findings.

- CI follow-up: fixed the missing Railway SSH operation in the OpenAPI
document, including its request schema, operator-only authentication,
and error responses. The failure reproduced locally before the fix; all
403 selected API, Railway, catalog, and artwork tests passed after it.
Synced current master and resolved the catalog/artwork conflicts.

- After rebase: 440 focused provider, lifecycle, gateway, catalog, and
container-panel tests passed. AppDetail and AppsConnect passed another
196 tests.
- Full typecheck, build, token gates, and the gallery browser check
passed after rebase.
- During implementation, full build and the gallery browser check
passed. Shared generic-MCP fixtures covered OAuth callback/state/issuer
binding and failure paths.
- Local live consent and tools/list succeeded. There were 44 active
hosted actions and two blocked actions. A workspace-bound API probe and
direct project/service/environment reads succeeded. The inspected
project had no deployed services. No provider mutation ran.
- Full GitHub CI passed on commit 303340f19, including all
server/workspace test groups, typecheck, build, runtime verification,
release dry run, and browser tests. The original local full-run attempt
was incomplete; the complete automated suite is now verified in CI.

Manual review: connect Railway, review the actual actions, install for
an agent, and run a resource read through the gateway. Choose Ask first
before testing a deployment mutation. Configure a dedicated key only
when container access is needed.

**Release qualification is still open.** Live agent gateway reads/logs,
rejected and approved deployment calls, refresh/revoke, public HTTPS
consent, and SSH enrollment/commands/cleanup need an authorized
disposable service. The passing API diagnostic does not replace those
tests. See doc/connections/RAILWAY.md and RAILWAY-REVIEW.md.

## Risks

Overall risk is medium. New runtime behavior is gated to Railway
connections, but the PR changes shared catalog, credential lifecycle,
and gateway code. A regression in those paths can affect other Apps
connections. The highest-impact operations are Railway deployments and
container commands.

- Provider consent can authorize an entire workspace. Catalog labels are
not local resource allowlists. Direct tools check target membership, and
provider permissions still apply.
- Shell commands have broad internal authority. Action policy cannot
approve each internal shell step. Timeouts close the local connection
but cannot guarantee remote child-process termination.
- Log and command output may contain application secrets that pattern
redaction cannot recognize.
- Source deployment is unavailable until the provider supports atomic
repository/commit binding. Existing deployments can still be redeployed,
restarted or rolled back.
- No database migration is required. Rollback can remove promotion and
direct dispatch while preserving connection data and the generic MCP
path.
- Live Railway qualification must still pass before release acceptance.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with code execution and browser testing.
An independent read-only security agent reviewed the local
implementation. The exact serving model ID and context window were 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>
2026-09-16 13:54:44 -07:00