Commit Graph
246 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandPaperclip 4e27a82a42 fix(server): wake approval queue seeding from committed changes (#17510)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages work and human decisions for AI-agent companies.
> - Automatic decision queues store membership for pending attention
sources.
> - The old attention maintenance scan created that membership as a side
effect.
> - Moving approval retention out of the scan also removed approval
queue discovery.
> - Queue API consumers do not build the attention feed first, so they
can miss pending PR approvals.
> - This pull request gives approval queue discovery its own worker and
commit signals.
> - The worker becomes quiet after it saves every missing membership.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #17497. Stacked on #17508, following #17505.

This is a correctness dependency for the approval retention migration in
#17497. Do not treat that migration as complete without this
queue-population path. A real PostgreSQL regression found no PR queue
when a pending approval had a linked PR work product and the maintenance
feed excluded approvals.

Related: #13364 proposes pruning stale seeded memberships. This PR
preserves existing membership retention and does not implement pruning.
#15149 documents the decision-queue APIs.

## What Changed

- Add an approval queue worker that selects missing PR-queue memberships
from existing durable records. Bound each pass to 100 rows. Continue
past failed rows and revisit them on retry.
- Reuse the queue service's seed writer through a normalized source
contract. Keep queue rules, uniqueness, and audit writes in that
service. Keep feed readers compatible.
- Wake from committed approval and link changes, issue/company
visibility, PR work-product changes and imports, and queue-rule changes.
Reuse the existing transaction boundaries.
- Recheck approval status under a row lock. Serialize queue-rule changes
with the seed writer. Preserve required recovery during drain and
shutdown.
- Register startup reconstruction under the existing maintenance switch.
Leave other attention-source seeding with its current owner until its
own migration.
- Document the complete producer audit and stack dependency. Add a
validated external PostgreSQL option to the existing queue route suite
so it runs on hosts without embedded database support.

## Verification

Current tested revision: `7948136ef8`. This PR targets master after
#17508 merged as `8406047b4e`. Normal ancestry reconciliation preserved
the complete tested integration tree, before the review repairs below.
Only the original 25 seeding paths differ from master, and database
schema/migration metadata is identical.

- **56 cases pass in the three complete affected suites:** 28 approval
seeding, 6 queue routes and 22 task-watchdog cases. Server typecheck and
production build pass.
- Three real PostgreSQL retry regressions failed then passed: new
matching arrivals cannot postpone a recovered failure indefinitely;
successful partial progress resets old failure penalties; an empty
cursor rollover does not reset outage backoff. Exact one- and two-second
retry assertions, eventual complete recovery and existing
capped-backoff/company isolation tests pass.
- Three genuinely empty external databases failed before setup repair
because tables were missing. Each suite now applies migrations itself.
All 55 cases passed on a second set of fresh databases; adding the final
rollover guard then passed all 56 cases using those now-migrated
fixtures. No production migration or table is added.
- The initial expanded fresh run passed 54 cases but failed a cleanup
expectation that omitted a required cursor rollover pass. The fixture
now permits that explicit continuation while preserving exact deadline
and complete-membership assertions. All failure records remain in
`doc/idle-approval-queue-seeding.md`.
- The prior integrated revision `4e725e2055` passed **522 cases in
fifteen complete producer/consumer suites**, plus types/build. Its
unchanged consumer code and historical deadlock, cross-company
amplification, backoff, gateway integration and setup evidence remain
documented; those counts are not relabeled as current acceptance.

Commands: server Vitest for approval queue seeding, queue routes and
task watchdogs; server typecheck/build. Fresh exact-head
Greptile/Ponytail reviews and all CI checks remain required. No full
local repository-suite, deployed suspension or cost claim is made.

## Risks

- Signals cover the supported in-process service writers. Independent
SQL writers and multiple server replicas need a separate notification
contract.
- The source predicate must stay aligned with unscoped attention
maintenance. The first linked issue, company scope, pending status, and
execution visibility are tested. A pending approval itself keeps its
linked external conversation active.
- Existing enabled seed rules can re-add manually removed matching
memberships. This preserves the old scan's behavior. Completed or
archived membership is not pruned.
- Queue seeding and retention are separate owners. Other attention
sources still need their own event-driven discovery before the aggregate
scan can be retired.
- This PR does not extend Cloud wake coverage, relax sleep admission, or
claim measured host/database suspension.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning and code execution. The exact
serving model identifier and context window were not exposed.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-27 20:33:01 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 553a004926 fix(server): schedule approval retention from durable deadlines (#17497)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agent work and should become idle when it owes no
background work.
> - The attention feed archives old pending approvals under the existing
90-day policy.
> - The server rebuilds the feed on each maintenance tick, even when
approval state has not changed.
> - Some approvals have never been read, so retention rows alone cannot
define the work.
> - Approval records and committed eligibility changes define the real
deadline and wake triggers.
> - This PR gives approval retention its own deadline worker and reuses
the existing retention and archive-delivery contracts.
> - The approval lane stops idle scans while other attention sources
remain separate migration work.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Stacked on #17490. This PR owns approval retention only. Archive
notification delivery is already separated in #17475. Other
attention-source retention and remaining recurring server duties remain
in the stack inventory. The related-PR search found no overlapping
approval-retention worker migration.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**
Automatic archival of old pending approvals from attention.

**Current behavior**
The shared maintenance tick builds the attention feed for each active
company. That query discovers pending approvals and materializes
retention records before checking their age. An unchanged or empty
approval source is read repeatedly.

**Proposed behavior**
Reconstruct eligible approvals at startup. Schedule the earliest
approval activity timestamp plus 90 days. Wake after committed changes
to approvals, links, issue visibility, company activity, or retention
controls. Stop scheduling when no eligible approval remains. Archive
records through the existing version checks, audit writes, and
notification outbox.

**Reason and benefit**
Idle approval retention should generate no recurring SQL. Unseen
approvals still need eventual archival. A stale candidate must not
archive an approval that was resubmitted while the worker waited for its
source lock.

**Breaking changes**
None intended. The archive age, eligibility, keep controls, audit, and
notification policy remain. Normal attention reads still include
approvals. No Cloud sleep blocker is relaxed.

## What Changed

- Restrict tool-review signals to their existing terminal transition
owners (approve/reject/cancel). Creation/link/revision/resubmit signal
retention only.
- Coalesce retention notifications under one thirty-second aggregate
read budget. Known deadlines still preempt it; no notification or
durable deadline means no scan.
- Add a bounded approval-retention worker. It uses the shared deadline
coordinator and reads pending approvals directly.
- Share first-linked-issue ordering and execution visibility through
`approval-visibility.ts`, used by both the feed and worker. Preserve
actor-specific read filtering and locked archival rechecks.
- Materialize unseen approvals on demand inside manual
keep/archive/revive transactions. Use the saved activity timestamp and
existing versioned state; retain company scoping and rollback on
failure.
- Add awaited pre-write signals to approval, budget, tool, link,
visibility, company, and retention mutation owners. Preserve outer
transaction ownership; keep provider calls outside SQL wrappers.
- Narrow retention inputs to the source fields the existing service
uses. Signal materialization only for inserted or changed state so
unchanged reads converge.
- Exclude approval collection from the maintenance feed before its
query. Other source kinds remain in that sweep.
- Add the pending-only approval deadline index with concurrent,
idempotent creation. Keep the five newest migration snapshots.
- Add real-Postgres lifecycle tests and startup wiring tests. Enable
validated external test databases for existing attention and budget
suites.
- Document producer coverage, quiet conditions, recovery and remaining
scope in `doc/idle-approval-retention.md` and the stack ledger.

## Verification

Current test revision: `dd844f4e8cbbf1db681a774dc31cd552301bef48`,
followed by docs-only `3efda33812`, which received both 5/5 reviews and
passing CI. This candidate normally integrates landed Grok `2adcde162e`.
All runtime and acceptance-test sources are byte-identical to that
tested/reviewed tree; only four independent Runner E2E accounting files
and the ledger differ. Migration 0392 and the parent journal prefix are
unchanged. Local checks are reused for their unchanged source; fresh
final-head CI and reviews are required against master. This remains the
approval-retention duty.

- **315 cases pass** across eight complete suites: approval
retention/service, attention, decision retention, budgets, tool gateway,
server startup and scoped deadlines. All 30 real-PostgreSQL lifecycle
cases pass. Server production typecheck and build pass.
- **Four regressions failed before repair**: unseen young
keep/archive/revive returned 404; the manual keep rollback case could
not reach its update. They now pass. A failed keep update leaves no
retention row or audit; retry succeeds with one audit.
- Both linked-issue orders are checked against the feed: hidden
first/visible later is excluded; visible first/hidden later remains
eligible. The feed and worker use the same owner query, with actor read
filtering preserved.
- Generated concurrent/idempotent migration
`0392_small_frightful_four.sql` adds only the pending approval index.
Every historical parent SQL migration and all 390 parent journal entries
are unchanged. Five generated snapshots remain (0388–0392). Schema
drift, migration safety/numbering and actual fresh apply/replay on five
isolated PostgreSQL databases pass.
- Existing precision, transaction, drain/resume, failure fairness and
shutdown tests remain. Earlier transaction-stub, budget-import,
diagnostic-client and CI failures are recorded in the owning audit and
stack ledger; later passes do not erase them.

- Three additional real regressions failed before the wake repair:
ordinary mutations emitted tool-review signals in both resolution cases,
and sequential tenant writes caused repeated global reads. Tests now
prove terminal approve/reject/cancel signals and one aggregate
reconciliation per thirty-second window with a different company's
pending approval retained. The aggregate budget is stricter than a
separate per-company budget and matches the old default cadence; known
deadlines preempt it.
- The initial coalescing fixture expected the concrete pending-work hold
to clear before reconciliation; it now preserves that hold and measures
SQL. The first broad repair passed 313 cases but failed the existing
parked-review cancel case. The original cancel producer is restored; all
315 now pass without weakening assertions. At old head `5991f257bb`,
security was action-required and Greptile returned service error
`8fb1835c-e564-476b-b802-d5be164ea915`. Fresh repaired-head results are
required, not assumed.

Commands: server Vitest for `approval-retention-work`,
`approvals-service`, `attention-service`, `decision-retention-service`,
`budgets-service`, `tool-gateway-service`,
`server-startup-feedback-export`, `scoped-deadline-work`; server
typecheck/build; DB snapshot drift, migration checks and fresh
apply/replay. Fresh exact-head Greptile/Ponytail and CI remain merge
gates. No full local repository suite or deployed host suspension/cost
claim is made.

Earlier stack verification below is historical evidence at the
explicitly named revisions, not this head's acceptance:

Approved delegated Test-tab calls now evaluate caller and target
policies in the existing claim transaction. Real HTTP regressions first
showed a missing caller charge and shared-limit self-rejection. All 78
connection-management cases and 92 gateway cases now pass on the owning
branch, along with server production typechecking. All 78
connection-management cases also pass at combined tip
`d25f830db89c1623bff3547bfc68015c1c66e0cf`. The three new cases cover
shared charges, separate charges, rollback on denial, duplicate
approval, and rejection of a later authorized call. Intermediate
counter/identity fixture failures and a reused-database Slack collision
are recorded in [the owning
audit](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/20557d2c3dd0949c734eaa8095fd78b9b07d7fd5/doc/idle-approved-tool-recovery.md#delegated-test-tab-admission-after-policy-changes).
The earlier combined checks below remain evidence for their stated
revisions. Current-head CI and review remain required.

Earlier published head: `20557d2c3dd0949c734eaa8095fd78b9b07d7fd5`. This
remains a single-duty PR stacked on #17490.

- Integrated pinned master `8548173fc9efdc0fa07644fb92dcc0b6851a95e5`
with normal merges. Every branch passed generated-schema checks and its
target-branch migration-order gate. Existing SQL is unchanged; the 25
stack migrations follow master’s new migration.
- Duty-specific producer coverage, lifecycle tests, and earlier failure
records:
[2026-10-24-recurring-server-sleep-stack.md](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/76a49810c7ff403ae7720bef0d453747bd844731/doc/plans/2026-10-24-recurring-server-sleep-stack.md).
- Combined tip `51e6cbe67979b55b340ea9f0f434c5b5c682ccd6`: **355
startup/cancellation/recovery/dispatch/preservation tests**, **75
connection-management tests**, and production server typechecking pass.
These combined checks do not mean every intermediate PR independently
ran the full repository suite.
- Real master-to-stack database upgrade passes: **379 unchanged prior
migration receipts plus 25 new migrations**, with the gateway
responsibility fixture preserved.
- Owning-branch checks: 84 runner installation/settlement cases plus
runner typechecking and generated TypeScript/Rust profile agreement; 253
GitHub review workflow cases. Stop-attribution and held-worker readiness
regressions failed before their fixes.
- Failure accounting: the initial combined run passed 349 cases and
failed six idle assertions in a reused preservation database containing
old cancelled runs. Repeating the combined command with a fresh
preservation database passed. Earlier invalid project selection, merge
import/type errors, and the interrupted full local suite are not counted
as passing checks.
- **Latest-head CI and review remain required.** Prior CI findings
include GitHub idle observation, route teardown, attention cleanup,
touch-picker E2E, workspace health, and voice-cleanup timing; local
passes do not erase those failures. No full local repository-suite,
deployed sleep, fleet cost, or live Copilot qualification claim is made.

## Risks

- Signals cover the application database owner and its child pools.
Independent SQL writers and other active processes need an explicit wake
integration. Startup reconstructs committed durable state.
- The source row lock prevents stale approval-activity archival. It does
not add cross-table serializability for concurrent link, visibility, or
company-policy changes.
- Newly changed eligibility can wait up to the thirty-second
notification window, matching the former default maintenance cadence.
Saved deadlines still preempt; no new idle polling is added.
- Failed records retain recovery debt. Bounded cursor progress lets
later rows proceed without dropping failures.
- The shared retention transaction now groups materialization and
activity-version updates. Existing attention and retention consumers are
tested against PostgreSQL.
- Kept, archived, resolved or inactive-company approvals can become
quiet, but their supported mutations must retain their wake
notifications.
- The local scheduler cannot wake stopped compute. This PR neither adds
approval deadlines to Cloud's external alarm contract nor claims
measured host or database suspension.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning and code execution. The exact
serving model identifier and context window were not exposed.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-27 19:23:24 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 8dfed893d8 fix(server): wake decision target checks from committed changes (#17486)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Decisions can depend on strict references to other tasks.
> - A cancelled, deleted, or completed target can make a decision
obsolete.
> - The server currently scans open decisions on every maintenance tick
to find those changes.
> - The owning issue writes already have transaction boundaries that can
signal the change.
> - This pull request reconciles affected decisions after commit and
reconstructs open targets at startup.
> - Valid open decisions and completed history stop causing periodic
SQL.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**
Decision target invalidation. This is slice 12 of the recurring-server
sleep stack, based on #17482. TTL expiry is #17479 and continuation
delivery is #17478. Retention remains separate work.

**Subsystem affected**
Server decision policy, issue mutation and deletion, and startup wiring.

**Current behavior**
The aggregate sweep repeatedly reads open decisions and their strict
targets. It shares a maintenance tick with unrelated jobs even when
every target remains valid.

**Proposed behavior**
Committed decision creation and terminal issue updates request a scoped
check. Deletion requests a bounded full scan because its target links
can cascade away. Startup reconstructs open target state. Once
reconciliation settles, no target scan remains scheduled.

**Reason and benefit**
Remove normal empty polling without losing target invalidation,
transactional delivery, or restart recovery. Reuse existing decision
rows and target links instead of adding a table.

**Breaking changes**
No API or schema change. The main tick stops calling the combined
decision sweep after its four duties have separate owners. The public
combined method retains its default behavior.

**Additional context**
The initial decision implementation stored secondary links as well as
primary links. This migration does not assume a new legacy backfill.
Independent SQL writers still require an explicit signal integration.

## What Changed

- Replace the periodic target scan with committed-change activation and
bounded startup reconstruction. Keep the existing decision policy and
expiry/activity owner.
- Require production notifications to identify an issue or decision.
Before deletion, lock the issue and capture its linked open decisions in
the same company; emit their IDs before links cascade. This avoids
resetting full scans and fences concurrent proposal creation.
- Reuse that owner helper for issue removal and routine failure cleanup.
No linked decisions means no target signal. Remove company deletion's
ineffective global signal; its pre-existing restrictive decision foreign
keys remain unchanged.
- Retain PostgreSQL timestamp text in paging cursors so rows within one
millisecond cannot repeat indefinitely.
- Remove the unused combined internal decision sweep after its final
duty is split; exercise each owner directly in the existing behavioral
tests.
- Keep query policy and notification discovery in `decision-targets.ts`.
The coordinator registration contains lifecycle wiring only. Add no
queue table, per-route recovery wrapper or external-wake exemption.

## Verification

Current candidate normally integrates landed effect recovery
`e9e84bb8a1`. Its runtime and acceptance tests are byte-identical to
tested target head `85ce6545bf`; the only new source files are four
independently merged Runner E2E accounting files, preserved exactly. The
248-case/type/build evidence comes from test revision
`54936a919f36c2ea421e7ce8e15912b1105b8dcc`, followed by
documentation-only changes. Fresh current-head CI and reviews are
required. This remains the target-invalidation duty only.

- **248 cases pass** in all seven complete suites: 25 target, 80
routine, 54 decision, 26 effect-recovery, 20 expiry, 42 startup and one
scoped-deadline case. Database suites use separate migrated PostgreSQL
fixtures. Server production typecheck and build pass.
- **Four regressions failed before repair:** paging across microsecond
timestamps, deletion behind a full valid startup page, unnecessary
global work from unrelated deletion, and unnecessary work after deleting
an empty company. All four pass.
- A real concurrent proposal is observed waiting on the issue-row lock
between pre-delete discovery and deletion commit. Removing that lock
made the test fail because the proposal committed instead of waiting.
Restoring the implementation passes. The mutation was restored before
commit.
- Existing real producer tests cover commit/rollback, deletion with
scoped hints in one outer transaction, secondary targets, re-opened
tasks, valid/lenient history quietness, startup paging, failure retry,
drain/resume and shutdown. The routine failure case now requires no
signal when its cleanup has no linked decision.
- The earlier dropped-hint and drain-fixture failures remain in [the
behavior audit](doc/idle-decision-targets.md). Extra upstream
embedded-only tests attempted on the parent could not initialize
locally; CI must cover that environment. No new schema migration or
table is added.

The final review cleanup removes the combined internal `sweepExpired`
method, cursor, flags and unused target-policy export. A
repository/package/SDK audit found no remaining production caller or
public exposure. Behavioral tests now call the dedicated workers;
isolation tests prove TTL does not recover stale effects and effect
recovery does not expire open decisions. HTTP and plugin SDK contracts
are unchanged. The full 248-case selection passes after this cleanup and
parent reconciliation; types/build pass with the updated Runner vendor.


Current-head CI run 40602159553 (attempt 1) failed in the workspace CLI
group: company import/export startup exceeded its 30-second health
deadline, and the dense ZIP case exceeded its unchanged five-second
timeout. The preceding UI group passed all 4,169 cases. Both CLI files
and the transfer implementation are unchanged from the landed parent.
The complete ZIP-transfer file passes all 17 cases locally on this exact
head; the CLI startup E2E is skipped because the host's embedded
PostgreSQL bootstrap fails. This does not prove Linux startup locally.
The failure logs remain recorded; no timeout or assertion is changed.
One bounded retry of the failed jobs is requested after the workflow
completed. Its result and the current-head gates remain required before
merge.

Commands: server typecheck/build and Vitest for `decision-target-work`,
`routines-service`, `decisions-service`,
`decision-effect-recovery-work`, `decision-expiry-work`,
`server-startup-feedback-export` and `scoped-deadline-work`. Local
targeted acceptance does not establish deployed suspension or fleet
savings. Fresh exact-head CI and Greptile/Ponytail remain merge gates.

## Risks

- Deletion now holds the issue row lock while discovering dependent
decisions and completing the existing removal transaction. This is
needed to serialize new FK references. Provider calls are not placed
inside that transaction.
- Company deletion with decision-origin references still has the
pre-existing restrictive FK limitation. Removing the futile notification
does not implement a new company-data cleanup policy.
- Supported writers share the application DB owner and maintain existing
target links. Independent SQL writers, damaged links or multiple active
processes need their own wake contract; startup still reconstructs all
open targets.
- Cloud sleep blockers and durable external alarms are unchanged. Worker
quiet is not proof of deployed host/database suspension.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning and code execution. The exact
serving model identifier and context window were not exposed.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-27 18:53:50 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 3d07e06be7 perf(chat): project reply lineage run context (#17932)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - A run can continue a task that began in an external chat.
> - The reply router follows durable lineage to find the authorized
conversation.
> - Each lineage hop reads the full run context, although it uses only
nine keys.
> - Wide prompts and workspace data make that read transfer far more
data than the router needs.
> - This pull request selects those keys inside PostgreSQL and preserves
their exact JSON values.
> - The benefit is less database transfer with the same reply
destination and authorization checks.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #17255, #17894. The first owns related chat review delivery. The
second is an independent result-projection optimization. This PR has no
dependency on another open PR. A public issue and PR search found no
duplicate change. The roadmap does not list this query optimization as
planned core work.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The server resolves the conversation that may receive a reply after one
or more task continuations.

**Current behavior**

Each hop reads agent identity, responsible user identity, and the
complete context snapshot. The snapshot can contain large prompts and
workspace data that the router never reads.

**Proposed behavior**

Select only the nine context keys that this function consumes. Preserve
missing keys, explicit JSON nulls, arrays, objects, and scalar values.
Keep non-object contexts unchanged. Keep all durable authorization
queries and the cycle-safe traversal.

**Reason and benefit**

A synthetic wide context needs 262,402 DataRow bytes before the change
and 244 after it. A valid 24-continuation lineage needs 6,560,338 bytes
before and 6,388 after it. The reduction occurs before PostgreSQL sends
the result.

**Breaking changes**

None. The public API, stored context, reply bindings, tenant checks, and
admission proofs retain their existing behavior.

## What Changed

- Project an object context through `jsonb_each` and `jsonb_object_agg`.
Retain only the nine consumed keys. Preserve all selected JSON values
and key presence.
- Keep the agent and responsible-user columns. Keep the company and run
predicates.
- Add 22 real PostgreSQL tests for routing, malformed JSON, strict
tool-action receipt comparisons, tenant boundaries, 24 valid
continuation hops, and an authorized cycle.
- Add a synthetic benchmark that loads the pinned baseline service,
captures its generated SQL, compares complete bindings and selected
columns, and measures text-format PostgreSQL DataRow frames.
- Run owned resource cleanup in nested `finally` blocks so fixture
deletion or client close failures cannot skip cluster and scratch
cleanup. Preserve the original benchmark failure alongside a cleanup
failure.

The complete consumer-key audit is:

| Context keys | Consumer |
| --- | --- |
| `issueId`, `taskId` | Task identity fence, with the existing fallback
order |
| `wakeCommentIds`, `wakeCommentId`, `commentId` | Board reply and root
comment provenance |
| `source`, `sourceRunId`, `interactionId` | Durable continuation
branches and tool-action receipt checks |
| `endpointId` | Root destination fence |

Missing `interactionId` stays absent. It does not become JSON null. This
matters because the tool-action branch compares it strictly with the
durable wake payload. The tests cover absent, null, string, number, and
object values. They also remove the delivery receipt to prove that
context alone cannot authorize a reply.

## Verification

Baseline: `3cd3af5d75f200185ed4d9703a3145594a489b13`. Treatment:
`3439ba7b714090d9f251816efec26622b3df223b`. PostgreSQL 17.11, Node
26.4.0. All data is synthetic. The benchmark holds imported helpers and
fixtures identical and loads only the baseline `issues.ts` from history.
It records generated SQL, parameters, plans, source SHA-256, and the
initial worktree state before scratch creation. The committed final
measurement reports a clean worktree and source SHA-256
`cd7e955179118fda12f6b2e981a17efff54137cbf241019785a3f8d16a7dcbb8`.

Reproduce the benchmark:

```sh
node --import ./server/node_modules/tsx/dist/loader.mjs scripts/benchmark-chat-reply-lineage.ts --baseline-ref=3cd3af5d75f200185ed4d9703a3145594a489b13
```

The default creates disposable embedded PostgreSQL.
`PAPERCLIP_CHAT_LINEAGE_BENCHMARK_DATABASE_URL` can name a dedicated
external database that ends in `_test`. The harness applies migrations
and removes its own fixture rows. It never uses an application database
by default.

Each wide run has 192 KiB of random bytes encoded as base64. This
produces a 262,144-byte incompressible body. Two warmups precede seven
timed samples. Baseline and treatment alternate order. Every scenario
returns the same complete bindings. Every retained SQL column matches
its baseline value, and the context matches the exact key projection.
The acceptance check requires removal of every unrelated synthetic body
byte.

| Scenario | Baseline DataRow bytes | Changed DataRow bytes | Baseline
SQL median ms (range) | Changed SQL median ms (range) |
| --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: |
| small | 282 | 244 | 0.927 (0.900–1.455) | 1.027 (0.801–1.063) |
| wide | 262,402 | 244 | 2.618 (2.440–4.831) | 1.490 (1.400–1.815) |
| wide-24-continuations | 6,560,338 | 6,388 | 87.450 (80.103–130.197) |
43.103 (38.549–52.864) |

These bytes are exact text-format DataRow frame sizes. They exclude row
descriptions, command metadata, TLS, and TCP. Timings cover the captured
lineage SQL, including all hops. They exclude the other authorization
queries. The small control is neutral and timing ranges overlap on wider
cases. An earlier loaded run had a small-control median of 1.15 ms
before and 1.33 ms after. No deployed latency or billing improvement is
claimed. The byte reduction is the primary result.

Local checks:

- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links`: passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/chat-reply-lineage-context.test.ts`: 22 passed on
the committed rebased head.
- The existing `chat-interaction-continuation.test.ts` file: all 28
tests passed. These cover confirmation, verdict, connection, and
invalid-authority paths.
- Five selected cases in `chat-channels.integration.test.ts`: passed in
a fresh dedicated database. They cover closed-choice question delivery
and steering, Telegram confirmation, ambiguous close control, and both
fresh-after-close authorization paths.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`: passed again after the master
rebase.
- `node scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs` and `git diff --check`:
passed.
- Cleanup repair at `3439ba7b714090d9f251816efec26622b3df223b`: all 22
focused PostgreSQL tests, the benchmark above, and server `tsc --noEmit`
passed. Six controlled cleanup-failure cases confirmed later finalizers
run; benchmark and cleanup errors remain visible together.

The unchanged baseline failed the wide-result regression: 262,383 value
bytes exceeded its 1 KiB bound. The treatment passes. Initial fixture
setup needed a required conversation label and explicit foreign-key
cleanup. The first full typecheck found a row-type mismatch in the new
capture helper; that helper was corrected. The complete typecheck then
passed. No production logic changed for those setup repairs.

A prior assembled run reused the interaction test database. Its retained
running fixtures caused a global milestone-count assertion to fail.
Later reuse exposed retained bot registration and identity state. An
attempted manual reset named a nonexistent table and did not complete.
These failed attempts are not acceptance evidence. The final five-case
assembled proof used a newly created and migrated database and passed
every assertion. No existing assertion was changed.

The full local `pnpm test:run` was not run. Focused tests used the
coordinated disposable PostgreSQL server to avoid uncontrolled
embedded-cluster concurrency on this host. The full final-head CI matrix
passes on `3439ba7b714090d9f251816efec26622b3df223b`: 55 successful
checks, one neutral check, and two optional Storybook skips. Greptile
completed at 5/5 on that exact head, with zero unresolved findings. The
existing interaction and assembled cases ran before the unrelated master
rebase; the measured service source is unchanged. Focused tests,
benchmark, full typecheck, and build passed on the rebased
production-change head. The current cleanup-only head reran focused
tests, benchmark, and server TypeScript validation; production service
source is unchanged.

## Risks

- Future lineage consumers must add any new context key to the SQL
projection and the correctness oracle.
- Selected values retain their complete JSON content. Non-object
contexts pass through unchanged. Savings depend on unrelated object data
being present.
- PostgreSQL must still read the stored object to make the projection.
The change reduces returned data, rather than removing all server-side
JSON work.
- Question delivery, tool action, connection, monitor, publication,
company, and agent proofs retain their existing owners. No hop limit,
cache, schema change, startup task, or deployment is added.
- Benchmark usage and the result contract are documented here. No public
command or API contract changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The exact runtime model ID and context
window are not exposed by this environment. Capabilities used: source
analysis, code editing, shell tools, real PostgreSQL experiments, and
automated tests.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-27 16:31:40 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 50b932a142 fix(server): require approval before onboarding task creation (#17914)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start -->
https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/78/changes/paperclip/78
<!-- entire-trail-link-end -->

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agent work and human decisions.
> - Onboarding asks the first agent to propose a task before it starts
work.
> - The first-task skill requires human acceptance before task creation.
> - The native tool could create and schedule that task without
acceptance.
> - REST task creation had the same gap.
> - This change checks saved acceptance in the shared creation
transaction.
> - Valid approvals and ordinary delegation keep their existing
behavior.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

An agent could create a task from the canonical onboarding first task
before the user accepted its proposal. A real journey caught this after
the agent read the first-task skill. A local database regression
reproduces the missing check in the native tool and both REST creation
endpoints.

**Expected behavior**

New task creation must wait for saved human acceptance of the latest
ordinary proposal. A different parent or a standalone task must not
bypass that check.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Bind an authenticated agent run to a server-created onboarding first
task.
2. Leave its proposal unaccepted.
3. Call native `create_task`, `POST /api/companies/:companyId/issues`,
or `POST /api/issues/:issueId/children`.
4. Before this fix, creation succeeds. After this fix, it is denied
before a child or wake is committed.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced on `3be54534c24fc279533ff421e62a77ad15b72954` before the fix.

## What Changed

- Add a shared check for new task creation from an authenticated
onboarding run.
- Read the latest ordinary confirmation across both confirmation kinds
under the source task lock.
- Require a human card decision or validated conversational acceptance.
Require the current revision for a saved plan.
- Preserve ordinary delegation, committed replay, and dispatch recovery.
- Add database regressions and update execution and onboarding map
documentation.

## Verification

- Real PostgreSQL regression before the fix: 17 failures and four
passing approval/delegation controls. No skips.
- Exact published source: 102 tests passed across admission,
conversational confirmation, and project tools, including all 25
admission regressions. Real Linux PostgreSQL, no skips.
- `pnpm build` and `pnpm -r typecheck` passed locally.
- Map checks and `git diff --check` passed.
- `pnpm test:run` was attempted locally. Existing suites failed because
the host exhausted PostgreSQL semaphore sets. The remaining owned test
process was stopped; its failed log is preserved. No unrelated database
was stopped. Current-head Linux CI passed, including build, typecheck,
and browser E2E. The first CI attempt lost runners; its evidence is
preserved, and interrupted jobs passed one CI rerun.
- The live Cloud attempt remains failed. Local tests do not qualify
Cloud onboarding, artifact delivery, or native tracing. No deployment or
model retry is part of this change.

## Risks

A stricter creation check could reject a valid approval. Tests cover
direct, conversational, checkbox, dismissed-card, and clock-skew cases.
The check applies only to new tasks from the canonical onboarding run.
It does not change existing task updates, execution policy, or wake
recovery.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool use and code execution. The
session does not expose a more specific serving model ID or
context-window size.

## Checklist

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

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-27 12:30:50 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 5061ab7b35 perf(ui): speed up task and inbox cold opens (#17756)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Task lists and inboxes are the main entry points to that work.
> - Cold opens fetch overlapping task lists, task descriptions, and run
details before useful rows settle.
> - Independent responses can insert rows above content that a person
has started to read.
> - This pull request loads a small task index first and adds details
only for visible rows.
> - It keeps row order and geometry stable while those details arrive.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Cold opens of Tasks and Inbox, including the shared navigation badge.

**Subsystem affected**

Server list reads, shared response contracts, and the React UI.

**Current behavior**

The badge fetches full task bodies. Mine fetches several overlapping
lists. Historical diagnostics and row metadata add work before the first
useful list. A fast failed-run response can appear before task rows,
then move down when tasks arrive.

**Proposed behavior**

Load the selected inbox source and its required context together. Use an
index without task descriptions or recovery diagnostics. Fetch
diagnostic details for up to 50 visible rows. Keep skeletons, recovery
indicators, external status, and live metadata in fixed space.

**Reason and benefit**

Reduce work on a cold open and prevent loading-induced row movement. On
the same 100 local fixture tasks, the compact response was 262,441
decoded bytes and the index was 110,909 bytes. This comparison excludes
compression and is not a page latency benchmark.

**Breaking changes**

Existing full and compact responses remain available. New index/row
projections are opt-in and marked as partial data. Mine keeps its
existing most-recent-100 display limit, now selected on the server.
Existing filters and group preferences remain in the client. No database
migration.

**Additional context**

Refs: #17593. Related: #13095, #17428, #13803. This change addresses
collection overfetch and layout stability. It does not replace the
blocked-inbox query work or the database activity-index work.

## What Changed

- Add authorized index and row projections, with bounded task and parent
ID batches.
- Replace badge list downloads with unread IDs and aggregate counts.
Preserve actor privacy, dismissals, and local archive behavior.
- Load only the selected inbox source, plus bounded parent and
failed-run context. Return only relevant failures from the bounded run
window.
- Batch hierarchy reads, including at most one authorized child per
collapsed parent in one request. Collapsed markers do not consume the
expanded row budget, and partial descendant counts are not shown as
totals. Enrich visible rows without replacing membership, ordering,
titles, or read state.
- Reserve row geometry on desktop and mobile. Reveal the initial inbox
only after its sources settle. Preserve legacy task-list reads.
- Start collection module downloads during access checks. Keep partial
rows out of the task-detail cache.
- Keep ETags and concurrent request sharing for the new projections, but
skip the short server response TTL so archive undo sees fresh state.

## Verification

- On final head `ef6afb2a56`, the full CI workflow passed, including
build, typecheck, server/workspace/runner suites, and all eight browser
shards. A server shard reported **1,489 passing tests** before runner
shutdown canceled the job; its single infrastructure retry passed. Both
Greptile and Paperclip Review are **5/5**, with zero unresolved review
threads.
- The optional external **Entire Gates** check remains `unassessed`
because it has no active assessed Change for this comparison. Entire is
not set up in this checkout. The repository ruleset requires `ci /
verify` and `ci / e2e`; both passed. No gate configuration was changed.

- Passed workspace typecheck after the final API batching change. The
full production build also passed on the final commit; the exact-retry
E2E run built the shipped UI.
- Passed token gates and map validation. The final batch-preview pass
has 91 passing route/hierarchy/component tests, including privacy,
request bounds, 30 collapsed parents in one read, and a 120-child parent
alongside a sibling.
- Passed the 166-test focused UI/inbox/badge run, 47 additional UI
regression tests, and 34 issue-list route tests. The latest regressions
cover low-trust agent badge IDs, cold company selection, 30
description-only Mine matches with archive actions, retrying optional
row details, and collapsed/expanded siblings.
- The full local `pnpm test:run` spanned the rebase and reported
failures in five suites before it was stopped; it is not claimed as a
complete pass. A fresh serial rerun of all five suites passed
**452/452** tests (tool gateway, native resume, project repositories,
workspace recovery, and runner selection). Full current-commit coverage
is checked by CI.
- Real browser: delayed index and row-detail responses on Tasks and
Mine. The first placeholder and first row had the same origin and
44-pixel height. Twelve rows on each page had zero position, height, or
title-width change after recovery details arrived.
- Real browser: reviewed long titles and recovery status at a 390 by 844
viewport. Task text stays on one line and recovery uses a compact
indicator.
- Three fresh document loads per page on final commit `260893bf92`, with
HTTP cache retained on a warm local development server: Tasks
1.031–1.190 seconds; Mine 0.999–1.193 seconds. Browser-control overhead
is included. These values must not be compared directly with staging
latency or the earlier local samples taken during a full test run.
- The browser archive test exposed stale results after Undo. The new
projections now bypass the server TTL; immediate-mutation regression
tests pass. The final browser retry passed: Archive followed by Undo
restored exactly one row and the badge count.

- CI exposed a hook-order crash when company selection resolved after
the first inbox render. The hook now runs before the empty-company
return. All seven affected exact-retry and legacy-continuation browser
scenarios pass locally after the fix.
- Real browser review regressions: 97 description-only source matches
retained Archive actions; deliberately failed optional row reads
displayed a retry notice while all 12 observed row positions and heights
stayed unchanged. Retry restored the recovery indicator. Network fault
injection was removed.

- The final production build and workspace typecheck passed. Final
focused verification passed 153 UI/helper tests and 26 heartbeat privacy
route tests. Final review regressions cover newer diagnostics arriving
during the index read, reloading diagnostics when the same task ID
changes version, optional source failure/retry without hiding available
rows, and required external-status filter failure. The latest-failures
route test verifies bounded selection, agent filtering, success
suppressing an older failure, and private-run redaction.
- Real browser: deliberately failed the run source, then retried it.
Twelve available task rows kept the same position and 44-pixel height
before, during, and after retry. No loading skeleton replaced them.
Fault injection was removed.
- Hierarchy review decision: the cold-open barrier stays because
inserting ancestors or expanded children after revealing index rows
would cause layout shifts. Existing hierarchy context now survives
subsequent requests, with a regression proving a new ancestor read does
not blank the list. The bounded recursive tree read can still add
latency for unusually deep expanded trees.

- Tasks now handles a failed external-status filter with an explicit
error and Retry, suppressing a false empty state. All 52 Tasks component
tests pass, including failure-to-success retry. One existing large-tree
test timed out while workspace typechecking ran concurrently; the whole
component suite passed when rerun without that competing work. Workspace
typecheck, the full production build, and token gates passed for this
fix.

## Risks

- Saved filters and grouping still operate on the existing bounded
collection. This is not a new global server pagination model.
- Fixed row slots reduce available title width. Long titles remain
accessible through task navigation.
- Recovery and related diagnostics arrive after core rows. Their
responses cannot replace ordering fields, and stale versions are
rejected.
- Index/row requests now revalidate against current data instead of a
short server TTL. They still share concurrent reads and use ETags.
- This has not been deployed by this pull request. Staging latency must
be measured after deployment under comparable conditions.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact runtime model ID and
context-window size are not exposed in this session. Used code editing,
terminal execution, and real-browser diagnostics.

## 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>
2026-10-26 14:29:20 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip a1f77821b9 perf(tasks): show recent conversation before historical activity (#17593)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - A task page must show the instruction and current conversation
quickly.
> - The current page waits for related task data and historical run
transcripts.
> - These reads grow with task history, even when the reader only needs
the latest answer.
> - This pull request gives cold opens a small initial view and loads
older history on demand.
> - Messages and runs observed while the page stays open remain visible.
> - The benefit is a readable task before historical diagnostics finish
loading.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Related: #14667 and #16229. The first changes the reveal gate and scroll
anchors. The second adds general history pagination. This PR adds a core
task read and a folded recent-conversation view. It preserves the
default full-read API contracts. The shared files will need coordination
if either related PR lands first.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Cold opening an ordinary task with a long conversation or large run
logs.

**Current behavior**

Task enrichment and historical transcripts delay the readable
conversation. A cold open can fetch several megabytes of tool activity
before revealing saved messages.

**Proposed behavior**

Show the task instruction, recent saved replies, latest human input, and
the latest run's conversation data first. Fetch older messages and full
run activity when the reader chooses **More messages**. Retain new
messages while the page stays open.

## What Changed

- Add an authorized core issue view that skips related enrichment. Keep
enrichment on the existing detail read. Share task mutation, rollback
and invalidation updates with the core cache.
- Add a bounded recent-comment read. Preserve the first human
instruction when no description exists, including legacy rows with a
NULL author type. Keep company and task access checks and comment
redaction.
- Add optional recent activity and run-summary views. Fetch original
input receipts for visible comments separately so delivered messages
stay out of the queue. Reconcile watched unfinished runs after a
reconnect beyond the preview window, removing deleted runs after
reconciliation.
- Filter the latest native run's initial events to assistant messages,
request lifecycles and terminal results. Full event reads remain
available on expansion. Legacy fallback reads use a small tail extended
to the first complete record. HTTP cancellation aborts the storage read.
- Retain observed messages across cursor catch-up and new runs. Apply
local cancellation and deletion to both caches and their task aliases.
Refetch locally seeded history pages on expansion. Preserve expansion
across identifier and UUID links. Keep deep links, classic tasks and
Agent Chat on their existing full-history path.
- Update API documentation, design guidance, capability maps and
regression coverage.

## Verification

- Final acceptance on `9ea0b15ae44d9f6d2c9a9f824b4835f299f92979`: all CI
gates passed, including server/UI tests, all eight browser shards,
runner checks, full typecheck and build. [Final CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40326990328).
GitHub reports 55 successful checks, two intentionally skipped checks,
and one neutral Paperclip Review check described below. No checks are
pending or failed; Greptile is 5/5 and no review threads remain open.
- October 26 merge update: merged current `master`. The only conflict
was in task-page imports; both the compact-history hook and the new
live-update hooks remain. All CI tests and build jobs passed on
`044fd6733d`. Fresh review found canceled-comment cache drift, legacy
human-comment filtering, send-then-expand truncation, and partial legacy
log records. These defects were fixed in `af3d66a5bd`.
- Review-fix verification: 470 tests pass across ten affected suites,
including all six PostgreSQL cold-open tests without a helper override.
Cancellation/delete and send-then-expand regression tests failed before
the fixes and pass afterward. Coverage includes task identifier/UUID
reopen, stale in-flight reads, legacy NULL author types, local-file and
object-storage tails cut inside UTF-8 text, route forwarding, and
request cancellation. Full workspace typecheck and production build,
token gates, map validation and diff checks pass.
- Follow-up review found that a failed expanded legacy read lost its
record-alignment state on retry. `9ea0b15ae4` commits the expanded
window only after a successful read. The new regression fails before the
fix and passes afterward; all 19 transcript tests, UI typecheck, UI
build and token gates pass. Greptile reviewed this commit at 5/5 with no
actionable findings, and all review threads are resolved.
- The final Paperclip Review check ended neutral because its execution
did not complete; no passing Paperclip assessment is claimed. Its
earlier four concrete findings were fixed and regression-tested.
Greptile and the security scans completed successfully on the final
commit.
- The preceding `af3d66a5bd` CI run was canceled when superseded by the
retry fix. Its server shard 11 check briefly reported failure, but the
job API records cancellation and its test step passed all 1,750 tests.
This superseded run is not used as final CI acceptance.
- 549 focused tests pass on the final implementation across nine task
UI, activity-route, OpenAPI and PostgreSQL suites. These cover pending
history, desktop/mobile visibility, expansion, retained runs, message
bursts, cancellation recovery and queued-comment removal in both views.
- Legacy expansion keeps the latest answer visible while fetching and
deduplicating older output.
- Five PostgreSQL tests pass for core access denial, recent comments,
missing-description instructions, event paging and bounded activity/run
reads. macOS could not start another PostgreSQL cluster because it
exhausted its semaphore limit. These tests used a separate disposable
database on an existing local server through a temporary test setup
override. The helper was restored afterward.
- Full workspace typecheck and build pass with the final state fixes, as
do token gates and capability-map validation.
- Token gates, capability-map validation and `git diff --check` pass.
- Browser proof used a disposable task with 80 comments and six large
run histories. The cold view showed the instruction and recent exchange.
**More messages** revealed older comments. Navigation away and back
preserved expansion.
- Local HTTP sample: core 50 ms, recent comments 24 ms, recent run
summaries 17 ms. The latest native conversation response was 839 JSON
characters / 8 ms; its full event response was 1,099,005 / 86 ms.
Browser content paint was 1.34 seconds with development assets cached.
These are local observations, not staging latency claims.
- The first CI run passed every job except four board-send browser cases
and the review threshold. Those browser fixtures only mocked the old
comments endpoint; they now serve both recent and full reads, retaining
all message and attachment assertions. Both initial review findings were
fixed with regression tests. The next CI run passed every job. The
deeper review identified core-cache mutation, older delivery receipt and
retained run-status gaps; those are now fixed with regression coverage.
Final review is 5/5 with zero unresolved findings. Final-head CI
initially failed one unchanged runner shutdown test
(`runnerd-codex-transport.test.ts`, timeout-attachment case) with
`NativeSessionCloseUnrecoverableError`; all other CI jobs passed. The
same runner code passed on 971a762f80. A targeted local reproduction
also failed during provider drain. The failure is outside the changed
task loading paths; its underlying cause remains unresolved. The single
failed-job retry passed on the same head; this demonstrates recovery,
not a root-cause fix. All CI gates passed on the previous implementation
head `9004f94f28`: [CI run and
retry](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40192334629).
- `pnpm test:run` was attempted and stopped after repeated embedded
PostgreSQL startup failures. The native session suite recorded 15
database-related failures; other database suites could not start. No
complete local suite pass is claimed.

## Risks

- The compact view intentionally omits older diagnostics until
expansion. Existing open questions and approvals still use the current
interaction and run paths.
- Previously observed comment and activity rows remain cached while
open. The newest preview and incoming cursor pages refresh; this does
not add a general historical-edit synchronization protocol.
- Recent views are optional. Existing full API callers retain their
response shape and behavior. No migration is required.
- A legacy tail can exceed the requested byte limit by the prefix of its
first log record. Backward reads stop at the preceding record boundary
and honor cancellation.
- Staging has not been deployed or qualified with this change. Instance
startup latency is separate from task history loading.
- The related open PRs touch the same task-history files.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository editing, shell
tools and browser testing. The exact serving model identifier and
context-window size are not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass — 549 affected task tests;
the full local suite and unrelated runner failure are documented above
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-26 08:11:39 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 7ae81c9fa7 fix(slack): support rich questions and complete review delivery (#17255)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Questions and review decisions must work in the conversation where a
task started.
> - Slack omitted question context and did not publish several review
kinds.
> - Some answers saved in Paperclip also lost their authorized
continuation or their final Slack reply.
> - A settled card and a successful run did not prove that the user
received the result.
> - This pull request preserves complete questions and follows the
existing answer and delivery receipts through continuation.
> - Users can read the request, submit an authorized decision, and
receive the resumed task's result in the same conversation.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #17045 and #17218.

**What happened?**

Slack question cards could omit instructions and editable starting text.
Checkbox reviews, item verdicts, task suggestions, and connection
requests had no publication path. Complex question answers submitted in
Paperclip could fail continuation authorization. Several review
continuations completed without delivering their result to Slack.

**Expected behavior**

Show the actual question and context. Use native Slack controls when
they preserve the form contract. Otherwise provide an explicit Paperclip
review link. Persist one authorized response, resume through the
existing delivery path, settle the card, and deliver the useful result
to its originating conversation.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Start a task in Slack and ask a text or choice question with
instructions and help text.
2. Submit native text and choice responses, then submit a complex form
through Paperclip.
3. Accept a checklist, submit item decisions, select suggested tasks, or
decline a connection request.
4. Inspect the saved answer, continuation run, original Slack card, and
final Slack reply independently.

## What Changed

- Preserve full prompts, context, descriptions, recommendations, help,
and editable starting text. Use direct buttons for short choices, inline
searchable selects for longer lists, and native checkboxes with explicit
submission for multiple choices.
- Add native custom-answer and validated-text modals, ordinary
confirmation buttons, checklist decisions, per-item verdicts with
reasons, suggested-task creation/dismissal, and connection decline. Keep
governed approvals, permission grants, and forms that cannot be
represented faithfully in the full Paperclip review surface.
- Keep Slack-specific canonical-validation feedback in its owning
platform module. Shared callbacks delegate without interpreting provider
presentation.
- Reuse the existing canonical interaction transactions, callback
receipts, publication queue, and continuation delivery. Share ordinary
confirmation handling across Telegram and Slack. Recheck current
authorization and commit response receipts atomically.
- Settle cards with the saved answer and remove stale controls. Ignore
passive Slack link callbacks so opening a task does not display a false
answer error.
- Validate exact multi-select receipt mappings during native
continuation. Recover automation-origin connection replies from their
published prompt after validating the durable connection receipt.
- Keep oversized multi-select handoffs free of unused native tokens, and
retain the complete Paperclip form for 101–128 choices plus Other. Make
the original-conversation audience explicit before submitting a Slack
modal.
- Add rollback, provider serialization, callback, continuation, and
negative authorization regressions. Update the connector playbook and
feature/access maps. No React or application UI changes are included.
- Add a durable Q01–Q11 qualification index and provider coverage
matrix. Require distinct functional, good-experience, and
best-available-control assessments; real unanswered/answering/settled
evidence; saved results, continuation and navigation proof; and retained
failures. Mark other providers unaudited rather than assuming Slack
parity.

## Verification

Candidate: `e0017d446b1016a38d65382366cd1408cce33039`. The
eleven-core-format live Slack gallery is pinned to
`c3d458b2a06b660448940fd8cf33c5906f0058d5`; subsequent boundary fixes
and the sharing notice have automated verification, not new live
screenshots.

- Real Slack UI testing covered all 11 formats: text, closed choice,
long single select, multiple choices, choices with a custom answer,
pattern-validated text, confirmation, checklist, item verdicts,
suggested tasks, and connection requests. Each has
unanswered/answering/answered screenshots as applicable, an inspected
saved result, one continuation, and an individual experience review in
the local HTML gallery.
- The dedicated private QA app/channel used signed callbacks to the
local candidate. A separately approved password-protected, read-only
preview proved connection-review, suggested-task review, and
created-task navigation. Anonymous access, writes, and credential routes
were denied. No OAuth grant was attempted.
- Real testing exposed and repaired a multi-select continuation failure
and a misleading error on link-button clicks. Failed attempts remain in
the evidence. The final navigation replay opened the exact pending
connection request and declined it in Slack without granting access.
Suggested-task creation produced the selected child with the correct
parent and description.
- Final review-fix verification: **32 form tests**, **28
provider/form-rendering tests**, **30 publication tests**, and **171
native continuation/authorization tests** passed. Earlier **3
atomic-resolution rollback**, **9 targeted
callback/publication/Telegram**, and **28 review-continuation** cases
passed. The final Slack/Teams modal subset also passed. The
automation-origin connection cases, 101/128 custom-choice cases, and
oversized multi-select continuation reproduced before their fixes and
passed afterward; failing logs remain retained. These counts describe
relevant runs, not a reliability percentage.
- CI on `b5885b85fd` exposed a test fixture that assumed every Slack
modal block was an input; the new sharing notice correctly renders a
non-input block. The fixture now selects input blocks safely. The exact
signed-modal correction/one-continuation test passed locally, together
with 14 Slack form/modal tests. The failing CI log and its specific
cause remain recorded.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. Server typechecking was
repeated after the final source changes. Map and module-boundary checks
and `git diff --check` passed.
- The full `pnpm test:run` was attempted and stopped after repeated
embedded PostgreSQL semaphore exhaustion on this host. Its 1,395-test
chat suite found two stale native-control assertions; both were
corrected and re-tested in a focused run. Focused database suites used
separate disposable databases on existing local PostgreSQL. The full
suite is not claimed green; new-head CI must complete before merge.
- Final-head CI passed on `e0017d446b1016a38d65382366cd1408cce33039`:
all test/build jobs and required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e` gates are
green
([run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40115430194)).
Greptile and Ponytail both reviewed this exact head at 5/5, the security
scan passed, and all review threads are resolved.
- All three QA app callbacks were restored to staging. Both temporary
tunnels and local proxies were closed. The local endpoint was archived
and its local credential copies removed. The candidate app was stopped.

Limits: provider execution used a deterministic Claude protocol fixture,
not an LLM. This is local real-provider UX proof, not deployed staging
or broader Codie/Claude qualification. The public preview intentionally
blocked ancillary artifact routes, so its destination pages could show a
partial-history warning. The complete permission-grant flow and every
oversized/mixed-form branch were not driven manually. Earlier fixture,
test, and provider failures remain recorded.

## Risks

- New reply routes require durable origin proof. Incorrect receipt
matching could lose a reply or route it incorrectly. Tests cover
missing, forged, mismatched, and revoked authority.
- Governed forms keep their Paperclip resolution checks. This change
does not grant new approval authority to Slack.
- Existing completed review results can become deliverable through the
repaired publication path without another provider run.
- No schema, lockfile, workflow, public task-status model, or
runtime-instruction change is included. This branch is not deployed.

## Model Used

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

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-24 10:29:15 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 4173059081 fix(inbox): keep advisory GitHub review waits quiet (#17318)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Mine shows a person's participation and requests that need their
response.
> - Automatic GitHub reviews should remain quiet until the assigned work
needs human input.
> - Review bots used completion requests to keep tasks in review while
CI or a PR was still open.
> - Those requests correctly entered Mine, despite the automatic-work
filter from #16356.
> - This pull request gives published reviews an existing provider-event
wait in the in-review state and withdraws superseded completion
requests.
> - Real input requests and separate approval gates keep their current
behavior.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16356
Refs #13314

An advisory score below 5/5, pending or failed CI, or an unmerged PR
does not by itself require a person's approval in Paperclip. The bot can
track those conditions without adding a completion card to Mine.

## What Changed

- Explain the quiet review lifecycle in the GitHub review instructions.
Use a yielded provider-event wait, or an existing saved monitor, after
publication. Report done when the configured completion conditions are
met.
- Keep a confirmed, published review in `in_review` during that wait.
Reuse existing authorization and monitor delivery. Add no schema, timer,
or polling loop.
- Recognize the committed external wait in review attention and
recovery. Shared execution receives a verified publication flag; GitHub
receipt lookup stays with the GitHub module. Other chat waits keep their
current status.
- Withdraw an older system-created completion request only when the same
bot has published both reviews and its new report has no attention
request. Keep explicit cards, separate approval gates, and requests
without the prior review evidence. Finish validation stays read-only;
withdrawal commits atomically with the new status after checking current
governance, the admitted result, and both low-risk contracts.
- Update the product rule, capability maps, and regression coverage.

## Verification

- Final commit `7c502118eec36028d1b4537bb8797ef893940bf0`: 54 GitHub
checks passed, two intentionally skipped, none pending or failed.
Greptile is 5/5, the security scan passed, and all review threads are
resolved.

- Passed: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. Rechecked server
typecheck and build after the final authorization guard.
- Passed: 195 tests across `external-chat-wait.integration.test.ts`,
`status-arbiter.test.ts`, `review-instructions.test.ts`, and
`issue-liveness.test.ts`. The database suite used an isolated PostgreSQL
18 container through `PAPERCLIP_TEST_DATABASE_URL`.
- Acceptance coverage: 3/5 stays in review outside Mine; 5/5 with
pending completion conditions stays in review; 5/5 with satisfied
conditions finishes quietly; a real repository-access request enters
Mine until resolved. Also covers obsolete-card withdrawal, transaction
rollback, rejected reports, separate approval gates, multiple reviewed
heads, saved monitors, and revoked endpoints, repositories, or
membership.
- Passed: `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, `node
scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs`, and `git diff --check`.
- The initial acceptance run exposed a missing authenticated user in the
test fixture. Added the user required by the existing addressee
authorization check. All 154 tests in that database suite then passed,
including the final rerun.
- Review found premature withdrawal during validation, stale repository
access, and a missed receipt when a run reviewed multiple heads. The
revision fixes all three and includes acceptance regressions. The
saved-monitor commit guard now accepts the verified published-review
state.
- `pnpm test:run` was attempted but could not complete on this Mac.
Embedded PostgreSQL failed to allocate semaphores (`semget: No space
left on device`); a direct initialization probe confirmed the host
resource limit. The isolated database run proves the affected suite, not
the full repository suite.
- These tests exercise persisted review receipts, finalization, and Mine
queries. They do not prove a live model followed the new instructions or
submit a live GitHub review.

## Risks

- The bot must follow the new lifecycle instructions. A real explicit
attention request still enters Mine.
- Existing obsolete cards are withdrawn when the same bot publishes a
later review and reports no human dependency. This change does not run a
bulk cleanup of historical inbox entries.
- Review attention now recognizes an external response path. It requires
an applied current status decision, a successful bound run, and current
conversation, repository, and principal authorization.
- No migration or UI change. The full local test suite is unverified
because of the host database limit; CI passes on the final commit.

## Model Used

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

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (195 focused tests;
full-suite limitation above)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-23 07:14:40 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip 6204239cfc Support installed default project workspace providers (#17247)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Storage plugins already own project storage and task checkout
preparation.
> - Core only selected these plugins through an explicit project policy.
> - Installation could therefore leave new and existing projects on
incompatible Core preparation.
> - This pull request adds one generic manifest declaration and one
shared effective-policy resolver.
> - Project configuration shows inheritance while durable workspace
bindings retain their owners.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Plugin contracts, project configuration, and execution workspace
preparation.

**Problem or motivation**

An installed storage provider cannot become the company default.
Projects without an explicit provider keep Core preparation, even when
their execution environment cannot use a Core Git checkout.

**Proposed solution**

A provider declares supported `workspaceProvider.defaultForProjects`
mode and strategy. Company-enabled installations supply inherited
defaults. Explicit plugin selections and explicit Core/local
(`storageProviderPluginId: null`) win. Conflicting defaults require an
operator choice. The declaration and implementation contain no
provider-specific identifiers.

**Alternatives considered**

Rewriting every project would lose the distinction between inheritance
and overrides. Selecting by worker health would silently change storage
on an outage.

**Roadmap alignment**

Extends the existing workspace and sandbox provider contracts. The
roadmap has no duplicate default-provider implementation. Related public
work includes #17243, which covers prepared execution directories rather
than provider selection.

## What Changed

- Add a validated generic default-provider declaration and document it
in the SDK.
- Resolve provider selection and Git defaults consistently in project
responses, source selection, heartbeat source resolution, reservation,
and preparation.
- Keep stored policy separate from effective configuration. Add the
normal project configuration selector for inheritance, explicit plugins,
and Core/local.
- Preserve existing local and plugin workspace ownership. Pin selection
through preparation and keep provider failures visible.
- Add database, API, manifest, heartbeat, and UI regressions. Update the
verification maps.

## Verification

- Targeted Vitest runs cover manifest validation, project defaults and
API access, explicit overrides, existing ownership, new/imported task
inheritance, heartbeat routing, source-free tasks, selection pinning
during setup, and UI configuration.
- Combined policy, provider integration, and heartbeat run: 58 tests
pass; 60 unrelated cases excluded. After the final shared-provider
fallback fix, all 47 policy tests pass, including shared and
operator-mode regressions.
- Server and UI TypeScript checks, SDK build, verification-map
validation, credential-pattern scan, added-comment scan, and `git diff
--check` pass.
- A downstream integration uses this Core resolver and preparation
service with a real storage hook and mocked remote infrastructure. A new
Git project reaches the hook without a stored provider ID.
- Standard Greptile and Apex both scored 5/5 on
5d42998466. All review threads are
resolved.
- Final GitHub CI is fully green on
5d42998466. Browser shard 3 initially hit
a PostgreSQL deadlock during cleanup cancellation, which left an
experiment flag enabled for a later test. A failed-job retry passed all
26 browser tests. The workflow completed successfully on attempt 2. Full
final verification was delegated to CI at the user's request.
- No live provider or hosted tenant run was performed.

## Risks

- Installing one default-claiming provider changes effective selection
for unconfigured projects. Existing explicit settings and workspace
ownership remain intact; incompatible explicit settings fail clearly.
- Each configuration/admission resolution reads installed plugin
metadata and the selected company's enablement. Project list reads share
one catalog query. Selection does not call workers or external
providers.
- Deploy the Core contract before any downstream manifest uses the
declaration. No migration or backfill is required. A downstream
immutable image pin must include this change before packaging its
declaration.
- No merge or deployment is authorized by this PR.

## Model Used

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

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue
template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
ticket id
- [x] I have run targeted tests locally and they pass; full gates are
delegated to CI at the user's request
- [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 on
5d42998466ad42400564ba34f48124f40c53fbc5; the branch has no merge
conflicts
- [x] Standard Greptile is 5/5 on 5d4299846 after all fixes, with no
unresolved threads
- [x] Apex is 5/5 on 5d42998466, after
standard Greptile 5/5 on that same head
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-22 17:12:29 -07:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 12bb7e1976 feat: track git workspace restore points and apply their retention (#17241)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Closed issues' git worktrees pile up on disk because they can only
be removed once the remote reproduces them exactly
> - #17238 adds restore points: encrypted saves of the unpushed and
uncommitted parts of a worktree, so the worktree itself can be removed
> - Those saves live in file storage and must be deleted on a schedule,
and promptly when their issue or company is deleted
> - This pull request adds the table that tracks restore points and a
deadline-driven retention worker, with nothing creating restore points
yet
> - The benefit is a reviewable lifecycle foundation before capture is
wired into expiration

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #17238 (restore point library). Bug report described in-PR (bug
report template).

**What happened?**
Closed issues' worktrees accumulate without bound. For example, one
instance's last 111 git cache expiration checks removed nothing, because
each worktree held unpushed commits or uncommitted files. Restore points
(#17238) will let those worktrees be removed safely. That needs a
durable record of every stored restore point and a retention policy for
deleting them.

**Expected behavior**
- A restore point is kept while its work can still resume.
- It is deleted a fixed time after its issue tree closes.
- It is deleted promptly when its issue or company is deleted.

**Steps to reproduce**
Not applicable on its own: this adds the lifecycle that the capture
integration will use.

**Paperclip version or commit:** `master` at def4726bea.
**Deployment mode:** any.
**Agent adapter(s) involved:** not adapter-specific (core).

## What Changed

**New table `execution_workspace_restore_points`** (migration `0372`,
schema `packages/db/src/schema/execution_workspace_restore_points.ts`):
- **Columns:** storage key, sha256, size, generation, source issue,
`status`, closing time, review/deletion time (`delete_after`), a
`review_generation` counter and last error.
- **Statuses:** `pending`, `active`, `expiring`, `superseded`,
`delete_requested`, `deleted`.
- **No foreign keys:** a row outlives the deletion of its workspace,
issue or company long enough to remove the stored object.
- **Indexes:**
  - the storage key is unique;
  - live generations are unique per workspace;
- an index on status and deadline serves the worker, and a partial index
on active rows' source issue serves the trigger.

**Issue tree trigger** (same migration):
`paperclip_restore_point_tree_changed` runs after an issue's `status` or
`parent_id` changes, and after an issue is deleted. It walks up from the
issue and from its old and new parents (at most 64 levels). For every
active restore point whose source issue is in that set, it makes the row
due now (keeping an earlier due time) and increments
`review_generation`. This happens in the same transaction, so a child's
deletion or move still reaches its former parent's tree.

**New `server/src/services/git-restore-point-ledger.ts`:**
- **`gitRestorePointRetentionService(db, { storage, retentionDays,
beforeExpire })`.** Each `tick` handles only due work, in batches of 50:
- **Review:** an active restore point is checked when its `delete_after`
time arrives. The due check compares against the later of the worker's
clock and the database clock, so a row the trigger just marked is never
skipped. At review:
- **Tree still open:** clear `delete_after`. The trigger marks it due
again on the next relevant issue change, so open trees cause no
recurring checks.
- **Tree `done` or `cancelled`:** expire
`PAPERCLIP_GIT_RESTORE_POINT_RETENTION_DAYS` (default `90`, minimum `1`)
after the tree's latest close. Expiry moves the row to `expiring`, then
runs an optional `beforeExpire` hook, which the capture integration will
use to mark the workspace no longer restorable. Only then does it
request deletion. An `expiring` row's object is never deleted: after a
restart, or if the hook fails, the hook is retried (after 15 minutes
when it failed).
    - **Source issue gone:** delete.
- **Concurrency:** a review result is written only if
`review_generation` is unchanged since the worker read the row. If the
trigger fired in between (for example, the tree closed or reopened), the
write is skipped and the row stays due for the next run. Expiry and
orphan deletion claim the row under the same check before the expiry
hook runs.
- **Abandoned captures:** a `pending` row older than one hour is
deleted.
- **Deletion:** `superseded` and `delete_requested` rows have their
object removed. They become `deleted` only once `headObject` reports the
object gone. Failures, including a local unlink error the provider
swallows, are recorded in `last_error` and retried after 15 minutes.
- **`nextDeadlineAt`** returns the earliest real deadline, or `null`
when nothing is due.
- **`requestRestorePointDeletion(tx, { sourceIssueId } | { companyId
})`** registers a delivery-work notification and marks the matching
`pending`/`active` rows `delete_requested` in the caller's transaction.

**Deletion hooks:**
- `issueService.remove` and `deleteCompany` call
`requestRestorePointDeletion` in their transactions, so a deleted
issue's or company's objects are removed promptly.
- Child issues cannot be deleted with their parent (the parent link
restricts deletion), so each issue removal goes through this hook.

**Scheduling** follows `rules/sleep-aware-background-work.mdc`:
- `registerGitRestorePointWork` registers a `git-restore-points` queue
with the shared delivery-work coordinator.
- The worker keeps no in-memory inputs. Due work is recorded in the
table, by the trigger or by deletion requests. Each run handles it and
schedules only `nextDeadlineAt`, so a failed run loses nothing and is
retried by the coordinator.
- It runs at startup, at real deadlines, and when terminal-workspace
notifications settle after issue changes, but only while restore points
exist. With nothing due, it schedules nothing. A full batch continues
immediately. There is no timer.

**Config and docs:**
- `server/src/config.ts` adds
`PAPERCLIP_GIT_RESTORE_POINT_RETENTION_DAYS`.
- `doc/recoverable-disk-cleanup.md` gains a "Git workspace restore
points" section; `doc/DEVELOPING.md` documents the variable.
- `drizzle-kit generate` pruned `meta/0367_snapshot.json`, following the
repository's snapshot-retention convention.
- No code comments were added.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run src/__tests__/git-restore-point-ledger.test.ts`
(in `server/`): 26 passed against embedded Postgres, stable across
repeated runs. The cases:
- **Review outcomes:** an open tree clears its deadline and schedules
nothing; a closed tree is scheduled 90 days after its close; a
long-closed tree expires and is deleted; a missing source issue is
deleted.
- **Expiry durability:** a failing hook keeps the row `expiring` with
its object until a retry succeeds; an `expiring` row left by a restart
resumes the hook before deletion; an `expiring` row's object is never
deleted while its hook fails.
- **Trigger:** the last open child closing, a child being deleted, a
child moving to another parent, and the source issue's own status change
all mark the restore point due. Unrelated issues, inactive rows and
already-due rows are untouched. End to end, an open tree's restore point
waits without a deadline, then is scheduled 90 days after its tree
closes.
- **Races:** closing the tree, or reopening it, between the worker's
read and write leaves the row due, and the next run resolves it
correctly. A reopened tree's restore point is not deleted.
- **No rescanning:** 60 retained restore points with future review times
are not evaluated. A backlog of 60 due ones is processed as 50, then 10,
then nothing.
- **Captures and deletion:** abandoned pending rows are deleted while
recent ones are kept; superseded rows are deleted; an object still
present after deletion is not marked deleted; a failed deletion is
retried only after its 15-minute deadline.
- **Deadlines:** the next deadline is correct for each obligation, and
`null` when idle.
- **Deletion hooks:** `issueService.remove` marks only that issue's
restore points, and `deleteCompany` marks all of the company's; the
worker then deletes their objects.
- **Worker:** schedules nothing when idle, and only the next deadline
otherwise; wakes on issue changes only while restore points exist.
- **Mutation checks:** each of these fails at least one case:
  - removing the issue hook or the company hook;
  - making the trigger ignore former parents;
- removing the worker's generation check or the trigger's generation
bump;
- letting storage cleanup delete `expiring` rows, or not resuming the
hook;
  - ignoring open trees;
  - removing the deletion verification;
  - evaluating rows that are not due;
  - dropping the retry deadline.
- `pnpm exec vitest run company-deletion issue-delete issues-service
delivery-work issue-tree` (in `server/`): 190 passed.
- **CI note:** one earlier `Typecheck + Release Registry` run was
cancelled when the GitHub runner received a shutdown signal; it is not a
code failure.
- `pnpm exec vitest run` (in `packages/db`): 211 passed. One run had a
single failure in `issue-comment-derived-attribution-migration.test.ts`,
an older migration's test unrelated to this change. It passed alone and
on the full re-run.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/git-restore-point-ledger-config.test.ts`: 5 passed.
- `pnpm run check:migrations` (in `packages/db`): numbering and safety
checks pass.
- `pnpm run typecheck` (in `server/`): pass.

## Risks

- **No behavior change today:** nothing creates restore points yet. The
worker runs once at startup, finds no rows and schedules nothing. The
capture integration follows in a separate PR.
- **Trigger cost:** every issue status change, parent change or deletion
now runs a short ancestor walk, plus an `UPDATE` on the new table that
matches only active restore points through a partial index. With no
restore points, the `UPDATE` matches nothing.
- **Missed wakes:** if a wake is ever missed, for example because the
process exits after commit, the due row stays in the table. The worker's
startup run or next deadline processes it.
- **Deletion paths:** issue and company deletion each gain one `UPDATE`
on the new table inside their existing transactions.
- **Migration:** `0372_mature_the_initiative.sql` creates one empty
table, its indexes, and the trigger function with two triggers on
`issues`; nothing is rewritten.
- **Rollback:** revert. The table can stay, since nothing else reads it.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), 1M context, through Claude Code
with tool use (shell, file edits, tests, read-only measurements on live
instances).

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-22 15:52:04 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip c6ee96a3df fix: stop idle MCP event polling (#17036)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - MCP task subscriptions and Dot mailboxes notify external clients
when work changes.
> - Their delivery workers queried SQL every two seconds, including when
no work existed.
> - Those queries prevent idle databases from becoming quiet across many
hosted instances.
> - Existing activity, mailbox, subscription, and delivery records
already preserve the work.
> - This pull request uses committed-write signals and saved retry
deadlines to drive delivery.
> - Idle subscriptions become quiet while startup, retry, drain, and
shutdown recovery remain supported.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Related sleep migrations: #15625, #17000, #17008. Searched open PRs and
issues for MCP event sleep/polling work; no duplicate found.

**What happened?**

Each public MCP and Dot event service started a two-second interval. It
checked settings, scanned subscriptions, created delivery receipts,
cleaned expired records, and attempted delivery even without changes.

**Expected behavior**

An empty or subscribed-but-idle service produces no recurring SQL or
network traffic. Committed events trigger prompt delivery. Only
unfinished work retains a retry deadline.

**Steps to reproduce**

Configure a public MCP origin and start the server. Observe recurring
settings queries with MCP disabled, or subscription/queue queries with
it enabled. No incoming task changes are required.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Initially inspected master at
`8b4ab65b1c3d863d282752e83307943720a5c85c`; rebased onto `c2daf906d9`
after master advanced. The only conflict was overlapping imports in the
heartbeat queue; both were preserved.

## What Changed

- Register separate MCP and Dot workers with the existing delivery
coordinator. Remove both unconditional intervals.
- Notify from committed activity, comment, mailbox, subscription, and
experimental-settings writes. Centralize comment insertion in one small
helper so normal callers do not manage recovery state.
- Preserve outer transaction ownership, uncertainty reconciliation, and
requests deferred during drain or standby.
- Restore delivery retry/abandoned-claim deadlines on startup. Scan
subscriptions in pages of 20; drain full source and delivery batches
without another external event. Scope subscription refreshes to their
subscription or shared Dot binding, issue activity to its task, comment
discovery to its company, and mailbox/assignment changes to their
binding. Retry deadlines do not rescan unchanged sources.
- Run expired-record cleanup opportunistically. Preserve on-use expiry
checks and the existing one-time automatic Dot challenge behavior.
- Add real PostgreSQL lifecycle coverage and guarded external test
database options for existing MCP/Dot integrations. Document producers
and the supported writer model.

## Verification

- Final head `e54fb34485921016ef988f7df9cca173a9ebdfc8`: all CI checks
passed (55 successful checks/statuses, one neutral review, two
intentionally skipped Storybook checks). Mergeable with no unresolved
review threads. Greptile: 5/5 on this exact commit; security scan
passed.
- All 284 affected tests passed in one local run after rebasing: 16
real-PostgreSQL lifecycle tests, 24 coordinator/scheduler/standby tests,
84 public MCP tests, 54 Dot runner tests, and 106 interaction-service
tests.
- Server TypeScript passed after refreshing generated Runner/plugin SDK
dependencies from master. Full workspace typecheck and build passed
before the rebase; final CI repeated typecheck and build successfully on
the rebased head.
- Coverage includes SQL/network quiet with configuration and history,
committed writes, outer commit/rollback, drain/standby, retry
restoration, reenable/unsubscribe, concurrent writes, shutdown,
source/delivery/subscription batch boundaries, Dot challenges and
reconnects, native broker fences, comment discovery, and
company-isolated scans.
- CI exposed an existing lock-order test whose insert proxy missed
nested transactions and waited indefinitely. The fixture now observes
nested inserts, preserves the lock assertion, and fails explicitly if
interception is missed. The complete 106-test interaction suite and the
formerly hanging CI shard pass. The warm-standby/settings test doubles
were also updated for the new coordinator/transaction boundaries.
- Earlier fixture failures (required timestamps, cleanup, external
database selection, async waits) were corrected. One existing OAuth
first-poll timing assertion and one E2E company-cleanup race passed on
single reruns; the final full CI run passed without a rerun. No OAuth or
company-deletion behavior was changed.
- The local full `pnpm test:run` attempt could not initialize embedded
PostgreSQL after five attempts. It was stopped; affected integrations
were verified with separate disposable PostgreSQL 17 databases, and
final CI supplied the full-suite result. Embedded-only local skips are
not counted as passes.

## Risks

- Notifications use one live server/database scope. Independent SQL
writers and separate live replicas do not trigger these process-local
workers. Startup recovers durable state; continuous multi-writer
discovery needs a notification/ingress contract.
- Idle physical cleanup waits for startup or another enabled sweep.
Subscription and authorization expiry remain enforced on use.
- Existing delivery claims, retry bounds, signatures, and receipt
deduplication remain in place. No new tables or migrations.
- Host sleep-safety checks remain conservative. MCP/Dot retry deadlines
are not yet covered by Paperclip Cloud's scheduled-wake contract. This
proves worker quiet, not deployed host suspension or fleet savings.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with reasoning, local code execution, and tool
use. The runtime does not expose a more specific model version or
context-window size.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-21 07:55:09 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip dff63551fe fix: resume unfinished work after repository preparation (#17047)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agents that perform work for a company.
> - Task repositories are prepared at normal run admission.
> - A running native task can stage a repository while its work remains
unfinished.
> - The controller did not offer that saved setup as a continuation.
> - The agent could add a timer or wait for a user restart.
> - This change uses the existing same-agent continuation and status
ledger.
> - The accepted explanation and proven conversation remain available
after setup.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #17045. That prerequisite has merged. This PR targets master.

**What happened?**

A projectless native task can request a repository for the next
admission. An unfinished task has no server-selected repository
continuation. An explicit same-agent continuation also loses chat
provenance.

**Expected behavior**

An unfinished standard task can yield and resume through the existing
admission queue. Its explanation and final result retain the authorized
conversation. A task that only stages a repository can complete without
another run.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Start a native standard task in a task directory.
2. Request an authorized repository through prepare_repository.
3. Yield with unfinished work and no explicit continuation.
4. Observe that the former driver rejects the yield, although the
pending repository is saved.

## What Changed

- Offer a saved same-agent continuation for the current task's pending
repository.
- Accept that current server continuation in the shared provider driver.
- Resolve chat provenance through applied status decisions, delivered
effects, and admitted wakes.
- Preserve accepted setup explanations without repeating an owned
question card.
- Document optional reproduction details and configured repository
discovery.
- Extend database regressions and workspace access maps.
- Preserve Copilot profile v52 and bind the shared continuation source
in v53. Include the active identity in the QA image fingerprint.

## Verification

- Five focused server suites: 100 checks pass.
- Shared continuation driver: 12 checks pass.
- Server typecheck passes.
- Map contract and whitespace checks pass.
- Existing API and driver assertions fail on the former implementation.
- Real dispatcher and queue cohort: 43 checks pass. The original
reply-loss regression fails before the dispatch receipt fix.
- Continuation driver and installation identity cohort: 62 checks pass.
- Regenerated capability inventory and contract checks pass.
- Final response precedence cohort: 109 checks pass. The stale-comment
case fails on the former implementation.
- All required CI checks, build, and both source reviews pass on
b9c8677635.
- Live provider journeys and deployed acceptance remain pending. No live
qualification is claimed.

## Risks

A pending repository now offers a next admission when unfinished
standard work yields. Incorrect eligibility could create unwanted work.
The lookup requires the current workspace and task. Explicit completion
does not use it. Existing Stop, admission, approval, and transport
authorization remain authoritative. No schema or public task-status
change is included. The shared continuation change requires a new
Copilot source identity. This PR preserves v52 history and does not
claim fresh Copilot live qualification.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with repository tools and code execution.
The runtime does not expose its exact deployment ID or context-window
size. Those values are not inferred.

## 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>
2026-10-21 07:17:50 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip c2daf906d9 fix: preserve task continuation and question delivery (#17045)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agent work and delivers its results.
> - One task can need several runs and a saved workspace.
> - A run can succeed while the task waits for its next run.
> - Chat fallback treated that success as completion and dropped useful
status.
> - Monitor runs also lost their conversation origin, and text-question
cards lost their prompt.
> - This change preserves the task outcome and exact delivery authority
across those boundaries.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A Slack task requested a repository, yielded to a scheduled
continuation, and showed only a generic completion message. The next run
could not publish through the original conversation. A later text
question showed its title and Respond button without the question
context. Workspace recovery could commit the saved monitor result
without restoring its explanation.

**Expected behavior**

The original conversation shows the accepted continuation explanation,
receives the resumed result, and displays the full question when input
is needed. A successful provider run does not claim that unfinished work
is complete. Recovery delivers saved output once without another
provider result.

**Steps to reproduce**

Start an authorized chat task, prepare a repository for a later
admission, save a monitor wait, and let that monitor resume the task.
Repeat with workspace finalization interrupted and with a free-text
question. Inspect the originating conversation and the persisted output.

Related merged work: #16806 and #16975. The open monitor and recovery
changes found during duplicate search address different status and
liveness policies.

## What Changed

- Keep committed monitor summaries visible through the shared board and
chat response resolver. Preserve interaction ownership and comment
reuse.
- Recover a saved monitor explanation after finalization, with no
repeated provider result.
- Prove monitor publication origin from the admitted wake and matching
scheduling receipt. Match company, task, agent, requester, and schedule;
reject ambiguous sources.
- Include monitor continuations in the existing publication scan and use
the canonical task binding. Keep current transport authorization.
- Suppress completion fallback for yielded results. Explain missing
final output without claiming completion.
- Include question summaries, prompts, and help text in modal-backed
cards. Keep answered text private.
- Update execution semantics, capability maps, and the bounded
reliability plan.

## Verification

- Original source fails four composed PostgreSQL regressions: monitor
origin, yielded completion, question body, and saved-summary recovery.
The shared response resolver also fails before the repair.
- Repaired focused cohort: 148 tests pass across publication, question
privacy, scheduler, and native monitor suites. These use real disposable
PostgreSQL; they do not qualify live Slack.
- Full workspace typecheck and production build pass locally. Map checks
and whitespace checks pass.
- All CI gates pass at 1701c48f17.
Greptile reports 5/5. Both review findings are resolved. The local
full-suite run remains separate.
- The added 21-admission lineage and cycle regressions pass with the
complete 11-test database suite.
- The larger live Codex/Claude qualification and deployed staging
acceptance remain in progress. This PR does not claim that milestone is
complete.

## Risks

- Incorrect lineage could disclose output to another conversation. The
resolver requires one exact receipt-backed source and the worker still
checks current delivery authority.
- Status recovery could duplicate output or compete with a question. The
source-run presentation marker, saved-comment reuse, interaction
arbitration, and replay tests protect those boundaries.
- No database migration or public task-status change is required.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with repository editing, terminal tests, and
browser inspection. The runtime does not expose an exact deployment
model ID or context-window size.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-20 20:43:17 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip a2d26a83fe fix(inbox): keep automatic work out of Mine by default
Keep channel and routine attribution out of Mine unless the person participates directly, is assigned the task, or receives a current addressed request. Apply the same source rules to unread state, archives, and task notifications. Preserve direct comments and current human action requests.

Restore the two expressions damaged by redaction during the earlier master merge.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-20 13:46:10 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 505e1a5582 feat(cases): add persistent workflows with same-task agent handoffs (#16959)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - An agent workflow needs persistent facts and a safe way to transfer
work.
> - Creating a task for each phase splits the objective, discussion,
workspace, and review policy.
> - A case can retain the facts while one primary task moves between
agents.
> - Transfers must survive process failure and preserve private access,
budgets, and completion gates.
> - This pull request adds durable case handoffs, native case tools, and
read-only case pages.
> - Prompts describe the workflow. Existing task controls decide when
work can run and finish.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Problem or motivation**

Prompt-driven agent teams need a persistent record that can move through
triage, implementation, verification, and correction. Ordinary
reassignment does not provide a durable instruction, safe release
barrier, or recoverable delivery receipt for an agent handing off its
own running task.

**Proposed solution**

Extend standalone cases with one primary task, a descriptive phase,
retained access sources, and a handoff ledger. Apply assignments after
source execution and workspace settlement. Deliver each transfer through
the existing durable wake queue. Provide `create_case`, `read_case`,
`update_case`, and `handoff_case` in the native runner. Creation
requires kickoff and explicit workflow text. An explicit handoff to
`done` closes the case when normal task completion is accepted.

**Alternatives considered**

Do not add a workflow engine, filesystem queue, configured state graph,
or one task per phase. The workflow document combines transition prose
with an optional Mermaid `stateDiagram-v2` map. The server does not
execute the diagram. The Pipelines experiment removed on master stays
removed.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends Agent Reviews and Approvals, Enforced Outcomes, Bounded Run
Recovery, and Activity Log attribution. Existing approval, review,
budget, privacy, workspace, and responsible-user rules remain
authoritative.

Related work: [ordinary handoff wake
recovery](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15019). This
feature adds a separate persisted case-handoff receipt and release
barrier.

## What Changed

- Add case routing fields, retained access sources, durable handoff
history, delivery leases, and replay-safe migrations.
- Keep the same primary task across agent phases. Preserve each
returning agent's own session and the task's workspace.
- Fence outgoing mutations, wait for provider and workspace release, and
recover delivery without duplicate task comments or runs. Recheck
current assignment permissions as the original caller before applying a
delayed transfer. Scope a run Stop to that run’s own handoff intents, so
repeated old Stop requests preserve newer work. Cancelling terminal
intent without a source run also requires fenced current task ownership,
including native retries and preparation with an old checkout. For Cloud
callers, revalidate current stack membership with an uncached Cloud RPC
and derive owner elevation from the current managed setting.
- Keep case reads, documents, assets, Audit, and live events inside
retained task/project permissions.
- Add native case creation/read/update/handoff tools. Store required
workflow text and initial documents on the first task. Page oversized
case facts and referenced document bodies through the dedicated tool
with bounded UTF-8 JSON, current routing versions, snapshot conflicts,
and current source authorization on every page.
- Add read-only case lists and detail pages, task-style list controls,
compact dotted field tables, linked handoff tasks, and case filters in
Audit.
- Add native/legacy integration tests, migration/restart tests, browser
coverage, and bounded live receipt fixtures. Extend the trusted sandbox
condition to cover the new subscription fixture profile.
- Hide obsolete paused-agent warnings on completed or cancelled task
threads.
- Synchronize the company-switch settings test with React effects after
a CI failure. Preserve its security assertions and production remount
behavior.

## Verification

The branch directly includes master `9ef434fe79`. The required `ci /
verify` and `ci / e2e` gates pass on head `765fccd67c`. [Current-head
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39464348614)
passes typecheck, build, tests, and all eight browser shards. Security
checks pass. [Greptile gives this exact head
5/5](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16959#issuecomment-6291156549),
with no unresolved review threads. The optional Paperclip Review check
remains queued because its assigned agent is paused. It is not a
required branch check. No check result was overridden.

Local workspace typecheck and build pass after the master merge, along
with database migration checks, token gates, map checks, Storybook
catalog checks, and the Copilot profile identity check. Standard builds
refresh Runner vendor output. Focused checks pass 2,008
API/paging/context tests and 7 strict case protocol tests. The final
commit changes one test fixture only; its ten tests, UI typecheck, and
token gates pass. No production source changed in that commit.

On current head `765fccd67c`, all **194 critical workflow tests**
executed and passed with no skipped tests in those files:

- 38 Stop/ownership tests, including board completion intent, native
retries, stale Stop, and preparation with an old checkout.
- 2 actual legacy process/HTTP handoff tests, including scratch failure,
a closed-stdio child that continues writing, and recovery through a
fresh worker after the process group stops.
- 5 migration tests, including SQL column metadata, preserved null
authority context, and all six prior-numbering receipts.
- 3 process-settlement and 5 scratch tests.
- 88 handoff-service, 18 heartbeat handoff, and 21 native case-tool
integration tests.
- 7 bounded case/document-read projection tests and 7 strict
protocol-contract tests.

The current CI checkout was `fed65d49`, merging `765fccd67c` into master
`9ef434fe79`. Its new document regressions reconstruct exact
Unicode/escaped bodies and revisions through real native authority and
authenticated HTTP with generic API tools disabled. They cover
case-owned, primary-task, and linked-task documents; routing on every
page; stale document snapshots; access loss and unlinking;
unrelated/foreign/private sources; system documents; and quarantined
content. Active-task document tools retain their existing behavior.
These are current-head test results from the first CI attempt; the
browser-only retry did not rerun these suites.

The full `64fdd3403f` CI failed one separate settings test: after a
company switch, it observed an unsettled API-key draft. The production
component and test were unchanged from prior green source. Production
switches remount both keyed settings layers; the test directly reused an
unkeyed view and used a timer tick instead of waiting for React effects.
The final commit replaces that fixture synchronization with React `act`.
The exact secret-clearing assertions and all timeouts remain unchanged.
The original assertion failure remains recorded; no unchanged retry was
used. The narrow unchanged baseline and fixed fixture each pass 10
tests.

The upstream result-paging merge preserves case capture namespaces and
current asset privacy. Its API integration suite executed 39 of 41 tests
successfully, with two skipped; the optional assigned-result PRP
integration test was skipped. Neither skipped suite is counted in the
194 critical tests or as live provider proof.

All 361 upstream migration entries and SQL bodies remain unchanged. Six
case migrations follow master as 0363–0368 with identical SQL hashes.
Official Drizzle generators produced the combined metadata and five
retained snapshots. Generation reports no schema changes, and the
snapshot drift test passes. The earlier `ce361ae5d0` CI passed on
attempt 1, including its then-current 179 critical tests. Fresh review
later identified unusable document references with generic API tools
disabled; the bounded document reads and ten additional authenticated
HTTP tests address that finding.

The full local `pnpm test:run` attempt was cancelled after this Mac
exhausted PostgreSQL semaphore capacity; it is **not** counted as a
pass. Later database attempts also stopped before assertions or skipped,
including one sandbox socket denial. Two original stale-Stop regressions
did reproduce the bug against the old source. A REST serialization
assertion passed after two preserved database-startup failures. No test
timeout was increased. All 194 assertions listed above executed and
passed in current-head CI. The complete 385-file, 3,963-test UI shard
also passed after the fixture repair.

A configured-provider receipt workflow passed 13 backend checks across
triage → implementation → verification → correction → done, using one
task and four work runs. The saved receipt is revision 2 with total 6
USD; case and task both closed. The original canonical attempt remains
failed because its browser assertion confused the terminal destination
with completed-task tooltips. The corrected full browser verifier passed
on the same retained database and original runs, with no additional
provider calls. The last clean-build browser readback is on
`6a86c54a53`; later changes affect recovery, authorization, bounded
reads, and settlement. Accounted work cost is a $1.010574 rate-card
estimate; provider billing and setup-probe usage are unavailable.

Copilot profile 49 passed the unchanged seven-fixture private protocol
pack (46/46 checks, no retries) and the product file-edit canary after
master's completion-replay change. All 60 bound implementation hashes
remain unchanged on the current source. Historical profile-47/48
identities and results remain intact. See the [profile-49 compatibility
record](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/codex/persistent-case-handoffs/doc/plans/2026-10-20-copilot-completion-recovery-compatibility-v49.json).
This is bounded compatibility evidence, not a fresh full matrix,
installed-package product test, or Daytona rollout.

Preserved CI failures and retries:

- On `20662930ac`, Slack managed setup failed a five-second success
assertion after reload. Its test/application path was unchanged from a
prior green head. One unchanged-source retry passed all 25 tests in that
shard; no source or timeout changed.
- On `9402b4f17a`, two CI workers received shutdown signals at 15:24:19
UTC. Neither log had an assertion failure before interruption. One
unchanged-source retry of each passed all Runner static checks and all
32 tests in browser shard 6; both aggregates passed. The next head,
`7b4374edaf`, passed all CI without retries.
- On `295f289b5a`, serialized shard 9 timed out during its first
device-login test, then the next test found an active login lease.
Direct login/test paths were unchanged from a prior green head. Cold
import plus a timed-out async body using the next test's mutable
actor/store is the supported fixture-race explanation; no request trace
proves that sequence. The original failure remains recorded. One
unchanged-source retry passed all 294 tests in 19 files, including all
41 device-login tests. No login source or timeout changed. The
subsequent `ce361ae5d0` CI passed without retries.
- On `64fdd3403f`, one company-switch settings assertion observed an
unsettled draft. The final test-only commit uses React `act` without
changing assertions, timeouts, or production code. On `765fccd67c`, all
ten settings tests and the complete 385-file, 3,963-test UI shard
passed.
- On `765fccd67c`, browser shard 3 completed the split-handoff
assertions, then cleanup received HTTP 500 from run cancellation after a
one-second PostgreSQL row-lock timeout. The extra chat run was reporting
completed work while teardown began. Cleanup stopped before restoring a
global experiment flag, causing a later assertion to fail. Relevant
production and test paths are unchanged from an earlier green commit.
Stop's lock order is consistent, and no nested self-lock was found; the
exact PostgreSQL blocker was not recorded. One unchanged-shard retry
passed. The original failure, trace, and downstream flag failure remain
recorded. No Stop implementation, cleanup assertion, or timeout changed.
The retry supports intermittent cleanup contention; it does not identify
the original blocking transaction.


## Risks

- Local process transfers require host-owned PID/group absence. Missing
or uncertain termination evidence keeps delivery pending, independently
of scratch setup.
- Handoff admission and task cancellation share execution ownership. New
regression tests cover temporary holds, late source writes, and
uncertain provider termination.
- Retained private sources use an intersection of existing permissions.
This intentionally fails closed when a source is missing or an existing
task cannot preserve that boundary.
- Migrations add tables and indexes. They preserve master history and
can replay over prior feature installs. Migration 0368 adds nullable
internal authorization provenance with no default or authority backfill.
Historical transfers still awaiting release without this context fail
closed; an operator must cancel them and request a new handoff.
- Delayed Cloud handoffs depend on the current Cloud membership RPC. An
unavailable, ambiguous, expired, or mismatched response holds the
handoff for retry; it does not reuse cached authority or grant access.
- Bounded reads reload and reauthorize the selected projection per page.
Underlying work grows with the data size and number of pages. Changed
data or routing requires restarting from offset zero without the old
snapshot.
- Phase names and workflow diagrams remain advisory. They do not satisfy
review or approval gates.
- This is a large, cross-cutting PR. The maintainer requested one PR for
the whole feature; the commits separate data, runtime, UI, and
qualification work.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with tool use, code execution, and delegated
code review. The exact deployment model ID and context-window size were
not exposed in the session. Live fixture agents used the explicitly
configured provider model recorded in their test evidence.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-20 12:46:14 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 813e808af4 Remove filesystem history authorization from workspace preparation (#16963)
Remove physical-root source/reader authorization and sticky directory classifications from workspace preparation. Preserve current task/run authority, app-record privacy, credential authorization, containment, and lifecycle/publication integrity.

Validate replacement selections against persisted new inputs and refresh verified checkout ownership so bounded reuse survives earlier workspace relocation. Add real PostgreSQL/Git regressions, a reproducible history-scaling benchmark, and documentation.

Full CI passed all 48 jobs and Greptile scored 5/5 at 3d5da6c259. Five preparation-guard medians improved from 20,512.99 ms to 52.22 ms on the 8,500-workspace fixture; these are not end-to-end startup timings.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-20 09:19:59 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 7c58ea07b2 fix(issues): guard prepared task promotion by status version (#16893)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Integrations can prepare a backlog task before its assigned agent
starts.
> - A person can change its status or assignment during preparation.
> - An unconditional promotion can replace that newer decision.
> - Safe promotion needs a saved revision that includes every assignment
path.
> - This pull request checks that revision under the task row lock and
derives policy cleanup from the locked row.
> - The benefit is safe initialization recovery with the existing
company, task, and run authority.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Prerequisite #16896 has merged. This PR now targets master and contains
only the conditional promotion API. The prerequisite fixed the confirmed
baseline first-upload browser regression.

**What happened?**

A client that saves a task's initial documents and then sends an
unconditional status update can override a concurrent status or
assignment decision. The update validator previously dropped an expected
version, so clients could not make this promotion conditional. Some
direct assignment and release paths also did not advance the revision.

**Expected behavior**

A prepared task moves from backlog to todo only if its original status
and assignment revision still matches. A stale request returns 409
before a task mutation, audit publication, or wake. Policy cleanup
preserves unrelated saved settings.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create a backlog task and save its statusVersion before preparing it.
2. Release its assignment, or change an assignee and then restore that
assignee.
3. Send `{ "status": "todo", "expectedStatusVersion": <original
revision> }` to its PATCH endpoint.
4. The stale promotion must return 409. A matching revision on an
unchanged backlog task must succeed.

Duplicate and related PR searches found no existing prepared-task
promotion fix.

## What Changed

- Accept an optional nonnegative expectedStatusVersion for exactly a
status-only backlog-to-todo promotion. Reject extra public fields before
parsing can discard them.
- Check the current revision and backlog state under the issue row lock.
Reject stale requests before checkout adoption or execution-control
effects.
- Add SQL migration 0358 to advance the revision for both assignee
fields at the database boundary. Release, administrative release, direct
writes, and assignment round trips now invalidate an old version.
- Derive guarded policy cleanup from the locked row. Preserve review
limits and protected authorization when removing a monitor. Reject
derived ownership changes or review decisions.
- Add schema, real HTTP/PostgreSQL, concurrency, migration replay, and
policy regression coverage. Update the response type, OpenAPI, developer
docs, and access map.

## Verification

- Red before the initial fix: stale requests returned 200 instead of
409, validation removed the expected version, and a stale active task
could adopt a checkout.
- Review found two further defects. Four new release/direct-assignment
tests showed unchanged revisions. The real HTTP/service test returned
422 for a valid two-field promotion after monitor cleanup. Helper tests
also proved that cleanup lost valid review limits and protected
authorization. All now pass after focused repairs.
- Green: 124 route and policy tests, including 7 real Express/PostgreSQL
cases, 37 existing route tests, and 80 policy/helper tests. The real
row-lock race preserves a policy edit committed while promotion waits.
- Green: all 23 database client tests, plus 9 focused assignment and
replay checks. Historical migration 0227 receipt recovery cannot remove
the new assignment trigger. Reapplying migration 0358 leaves existing
rows unchanged and installs one trigger. Combined status/assignment
writes increment once; unchanged assignees do not increment.
- Earlier verification passed all 218 schema/route/service cases and the
generated OpenAPI capability test. Rebased focused regressions passed
all 27 selected cases. Final server TypeScript passed after all repairs;
shared TypeScript passed. Migration safety/numbering, five-snapshot
retention, map validation, and diff checks pass.
- The baseline browser attachment case failed twice on the earlier head.
Separate #16896 proved the lost-composer cause, passed 335 component
tests and the real first-upload journey, and has green CI with a 5/5
review. No assertion or timeout was weakened.
- Some early local checks were blocked by missing or stale sibling
dependency artifacts. This worktree now has its own frozen offline
install and standard SDK prerequisites. The failures and successful
reruns remain in the task evidence.
- Before rebasing, head `3304bb00de6ad6a248b5e046c008072ad20ac8f5`
passed all CI (55 successful checks and one neutral), Greptile 5/5, and
a secondary source review at 5/5 with no unresolved findings. The
secondary reviewer did not execute project tests, inspect CI, or
exercise a live agent journey. Earlier incomplete and must-fix
assessments remain visible; both established findings are repaired
above.
- After #16896 merged, all five CAS commits were rebased onto master
`87d9386ae637c652d1fed09d2046be1bcaeb413b`. Migration 0358 was
regenerated because master added another 0357. Range comparison shows no
other change to the CAS patches; inherited UI commits are absent. The
original head is preserved locally.
- Rebased head `1c0264e51a280b1dbf597725a7e42e72d4be1b1b` passes all 124
route/policy tests, 9 selected assignment/promotion tests, and all 24
database client/snapshot-drift tests. Database build, migration checks,
generated snapshot linkage, five-snapshot retention (0354–0358), maps,
and diff checks pass. Fresh-head CI and review are pending. No
deployment or live agent journey was performed for this API.

## Risks

- The guard supports prepared backlog promotion only. Other statuses or
mixed public mutation fields return 422. A stale revision or non-backlog
row returns 409.
- Preserve the original version from a server that already advertises
this guard before initialization. Older versions did not track every
assignment path. Reconcile older or uncertain initialization instead of
fetching a new revision and blindly retrying.
- Migration 0358 is SQL-only and idempotent. It adds no table, column,
or task backfill. Its separate trigger survives historical
status-migration replay.
- Existing authorization and unguarded updates remain in place. Guarded
promotion does not provide a general lifecycle or review-stage control
API.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact serving model ID and context
window are not exposed by this session. Used tool calls, code execution,
and test-first regression verification.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-19 16:27:11 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 9077748894 Remove the Pipelines experiment and preserve its data (#16834)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - Pipelines was an unused experiment with its own UI, API, CLI, and
automation.
> - Keeping it leaves unsupported product surfaces and extra task-detail
queries.
> - Removing the experiment must preserve data that users already saved.
> - This pull request removes the feature and keeps its database schema
and migration history.
> - Cases and Routines remain available as separate features.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Remove the unused Pipelines experiment across the application.

**Current behavior**

The experiment includes pipeline boards, stage settings, case
automation, review queues, learnings, permissions, and CLI commands.
Task detail also queries pipeline links.

**Proposed behavior**

Remove all these product surfaces and their implementation. Preserve
existing tables, records, and documents. Ignore the retired boolean in
older managed configurations so upgrades still start.

**Breaking changes**

Pipeline URLs, API endpoints, CLI commands, and `pipelines:write` are
removed. Task detail no longer includes the old `linkedCases` field. The
independent Cases API remains available. No database migration or
cleanup is included.

Related feature work: #7907, #9110, #10905, #11375, #13004, #14671,
#16133. Related issues: #9663, #10310, #10312. This removal supersedes
the feature; it does not implement those pending enhancements or delete
their saved data.

## What Changed

- Remove Pipeline UI pages, navigation, gates, clients, query keys,
helpers, and unused design tokens.
- Remove Pipeline REST routes, services, automation dispatch,
task-detail queries, and OpenAPI discovery.
- Remove the CLI commands, shared contracts, experimental flag, catalog
entry, and permission defaults.
- Remove feature-specific tests, tutorials, smoke scripts, maps, and
Storybook examples.
- Preserve database schema, migration history, and the reserved document
key used by old records.
- Keep Cases routes independent and cover obsolete stored and managed
settings.

## Verification

- Passed: `pnpm build` and `pnpm -r typecheck`.
- Passed: targeted settings, managed configuration, sidebar, settings
UI, routing, and feature-catalog tests. A first sidebar run caught a
shared Workspaces icon import; the import was restored and the sidebar
rerun passed.
- Passed: 40 tests covering Cases routes, OpenAPI discovery, retained
Pipeline table constraints, and schema snapshot drift.
- Passed: token gates, map validation, generated API metadata check,
Storybook catalog validation, and 28 map/catalog tests.
- Passed: isolated local browser verification of navigation and
Experimental settings with Pipelines absent; Cases and Routines still
open normally. Live GET/POST requests to retired Pipeline endpoints
return 404, and the retired setting is absent. CLI help has no Pipeline
commands.
- Passed: 22 access-service and agent-default-grant tests after
restoring unrelated permission assertions flagged in review.
- Local full run: `pnpm test:run` reported one failure in the unchanged
workspace-runtime port-allocation test. That test passed in an isolated
rerun. The long local run was stopped after full CI passed; it is not
reported as a complete local pass.
- Passed: all 56 checks on `def9181f3a4491d95fca1d38e9739f5b821aae3e` (2
conditional checks skipped), including build, typecheck, test shards,
and browser suites. Eleven interrupted CI jobs reported “The operation
was canceled”; their one-time retry passed. [CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39255211006).
- Greptile: 5/5 on the final commit, with the only review finding fixed
and resolved.
- Sandbox socket restrictions affected the first build/API test
attempts. The same commands ran with local sockets available.

## Risks

- Existing Pipeline clients must stop using the removed endpoints and
commands.
- Existing data remains in the database and backups, but the removed UI
no longer displays it.
- Historical boolean `enablePipelines` values are ignored. They cannot
restore the feature.
- Cases and Routines must retain their separate behavior. Targeted route
tests cover this boundary.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with repository inspection, editing, shell
execution, and browser verification. The exact deployed model ID and
context-window size are not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-19 08:09:46 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 78b833c495 Dispatch routine and monitor work at saved deadlines (#16514)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages work that agents run for a company.
> - Routines and issue monitors store their next run time in the
database.
> - The app currently waits for the heartbeat interval to find that
work.
> - This can delay work after a workspace wakes before its saved
deadline.
> - This pull request uses the existing work coordinator to schedule
each known deadline.
> - It also parses each cron expression once, so sparse schedules do
less work on the event loop.
> - Agents can start due work sooner while the existing execution checks
stay in place.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Routine and issue-monitor dispatch depends on the heartbeat scan
interval. A workspace can wake early and still wait for the next scan. A
sparse cron search also parses the same expression for every minute it
checks. In a local annual-schedule test, the deadline callback ran on
time but schedule calculation delayed the routine record by 13.6
seconds.

**Expected behavior**

Use a saved future deadline to request the existing dispatch scan.
Restore deadlines at startup and update them after a producer
transaction settles. Do not let future timers keep an idle workspace
active. Parse a cron expression once for each search.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Set an active routine and an assigned issue monitor to the same
future deadline.
2. Choose a deadline between heartbeat scans. Use an annual routine
expression to exercise a sparse search.
3. Compare the saved deadline with the routine firing and agent start
times.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Source checkout based on c7ea5c0216.

Related public changes: #16215 reports routine deadlines for external
wake. #8034 caches time-zone formatters in the cron search. This change
reuses those contracts.

## What Changed

- Register separate routine and issue-monitor workers with the existing
delivery coordinator after startup housekeeping.
- Restore the earliest eligible future deadline from the database after
each scan.
- Notify the matching worker when routine or monitor writes settle,
including the native `set_task_monitor` tool. Keep the heartbeat
interval as a recovery scan for blocked or externally written work.
- Retain the scan-start cutoff so a deadline crossed during a slow scan
receives an immediate follow-up scan.
- Retain the coordinator gates for standby, idle drain, and shutdown.
Future timers do not count as active work. Bound expired deadline
retries during idle reconciliation so a paused worker cannot spin.
- Parse a cron expression once during a next-run search. Skip impossible
UTC dates before time-zone formatting. Preserve the existing calendar
and time-zone matching.
- Add clock, transaction, failure, SQL eligibility, and producer
notification tests. Document the scheduler behavior.

## Verification

- `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed.
- `pnpm build`: passed.
- Full CI, browser tests, and security scan: passed on final head
9fc857dcec. Greptile Apex is 5/5 with no
unresolved comments.
- Final focused startup, deadline, routine, SQL eligibility, native
monitor, cron, and coordinator tests: 159 passed across seven suites.
The crossed-deadline and native-notification regressions failed before
their fixes.
- CI caught the existing startup suppression assertion. It failed
locally before restoring the outer timer-dispatch guard; all 38 startup
tests now pass.
- A canceled-drain regression also failed before the fix. Future timers
keep their saved time; only expired deadlines use the bounded idle
retry. Server typecheck and build passed again.
- The idle-drain regression reproduced 22 checks in 20 ms before its
fix. After the fix, 43 coordinator and related worker tests passed.
Server typecheck and build passed again after the review fixes.
- The broad local `pnpm test:run` attempt reported existing
host-sensitive failures. Two Git fixture tests fail identically on
unchanged c7ea5c0 because the host default `main` leaves an extra branch
in an intended master-only remote. Both pass with a command-scoped
`init.defaultBranch=master` setting. No Git settings were changed on
disk.
- A diagnostics test also fails on both unchanged master and this branch
because its broad `private` substring assertion matches the canonical
macOS temporary source path in an error stack. A local Anthropic hire
assertion failed only in the broad run; all 70 tests in that file pass
on both source revisions when run separately. Its broad-run cause is not
determined. These failures remain recorded. The full exact-head CI
matrix passed; the broad local development attempt was then stopped.
- An earlier full run was interrupted after PostgreSQL reported host
shared-memory exhaustion. One retry was stopped when timing required the
UTC optimization. Acceptance then used an owned database on the existing
local PostgreSQL service. No shared services were stopped or reset.
- Local dispatch: routine record at +0.102 s, routine agent start at
+0.171 s, monitor agent start at +0.159 s. Both scripted agents
succeeded using real run-scoped API authentication. No model provider
was called. No duplicate runs occurred during the 70-second follow-up.
Platform: macOS, Node 25.6.1, isolated database on local PostgreSQL 16,
source checkout. The final run used a fresh database and a clean
checkout of 9fc857dcec.
- The first timing run exposed the repeated cron parsing described
above. A diagnostic run showed the timer fired 1 ms after the deadline
while the annual search blocked the event loop. Parsing once reduced
local dispatch to 5.9 seconds, which still missed the five-second test
target. The next change skips impossible UTC dates before formatting. A
second regression failed before that fix. The final timing result and
duplicate check passed.
- A separate acceptance setup failed because the direct local server had
no agent signing key. That owned fixture was removed. The retry uses an
ephemeral key in its isolated process environment.
- Owned fixtures were deleted, the local runtime exited normally, and
the disposable databases were dropped. Shared services remain running.
- No production deployment or npm publication is part of this PR.

## Risks

- Known deadlines now trigger a scan between heartbeat ticks. Existing
atomic claims, suppression checks, budgets, and execution rules still
decide whether work runs.
- Direct database writers rely on the heartbeat recovery scan. Overdue
blocked work also retains that recovery interval to avoid a tight retry
loop.
- This is not a hard real-time guarantee. Provider startup, queue load,
and other synchronous work can still delay agent execution.
- No database migration or API schema change. Revert this commit to
restore interval-only dispatch.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 (Codex), with reasoning, repository tools, terminal
execution, and automated tests. The session does not expose a more
specific model version or context-window size.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-15 22:44:17 -07:00
23e7ee9a2d fix(issues): exclude terminal children from helper cap (#11542)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The issue service lets agents create bounded child work through a
helper.
> - The helper counted completed and cancelled children against its
safety limit.
> - A recurring coordinator could reach the limit even when almost all
historical children were terminal.
> - The safety limit must still bound current delegated work.
> - This pull request counts only non-terminal children when it applies
the limit.
> - The benefit is that recurring parents can keep their lineage without
losing the active-work guardrail.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

The child-creation helper rejected a new child after a parent had 25
historical children. It counted children with `done` and `cancelled`
status.

**Expected behavior**

The helper must apply its limit to non-terminal children. Terminal
children must remain attached to the parent for lineage and audit
history.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create one parent issue.
2. Create 25 child issues and move them to `done` or `cancelled`.
3. Use the issue-service child helper to create another child.
4. Observe that the current code rejects the new child.

**Paperclip version or commit**

`1a17cbf23`

## What Changed

- Exclude `done` and `cancelled` children from the helper cap query.
- Keep the limit at 25 non-terminal children.
- Add a regression test with terminal history and the active limit
boundary.
- Clarify the limit error so it says `active child issues`.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts -t
"counts only non-terminal children toward the helper child limit"`
passed: 1 test passed and 118 skipped.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm build` passed.
- `pnpm test:run` completed the general server and UI groups
successfully. The CLI group then reported one unrelated environment
failure because port 3199 was already in use. The failing test was
`doctor > re-runs repairable checks so repaired failures do not remain
blocking`.

```test-evidence:
sha: 071edbf019
command: pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts -t "counts only non-terminal children toward the helper child limit"
exit: 0
totals: 1 test passed; 118 skipped; 1 test file passed
worktree: clean before and after; local == remote == PR head
finished_at: 2026-08-17T14:03:53Z
```

## Risks

- Low risk. The change affects only the helper-specific count query.
- The helper still rejects creation when 25 non-terminal children exist.
- No schema or migration changes are present.

> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-5 Codex with reasoning, repository tools, code execution,
and test execution.

## Checklist

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

Co-authored-by: Codex Engineer <agent+codex-engineer@agents.techwright.io>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: commitperclip-bot <305974387+commitperclip-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-10-15 14:36:48 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip cccde7122b Trace execution preparation and durable response persistence (#16419)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The server prepares an execution environment before it starts an
agent.
> - Operators need to distinguish preparation, provider wait, and
response persistence.
> - Existing preparation phases start separate traces, and the native
session trace ends before the final response is saved.
> - This pull request adds an execution-attempt trace and detailed spans
at the existing work boundaries.
> - The benefit is a measurable startup and settlement path without
changing execution policy.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Operator-configured OpenTelemetry tracing for agent preparation,
startup, and durable response storage.

**Subsystem affected**

Server orchestration, native Runner startup, and the Honeycomb run link.

**Current behavior**

Preparation phases start independent roots. Workspace lock waits,
authorization groups, runtime asset work, provider-pack fallback, and
the gap after provider completion are hard to attribute.

**Proposed behavior**

Use a server-owned async context for each execution attempt. Parent
nested work to that attempt. Link the separately sampled native session
because its ingress and queue history can begin earlier. Record
transaction entry, lock waits, grouped authorization, asset preparation,
artifact fallback, copyback, and response commit.

**Reason and benefit**

Operators can identify expensive work from recorded boundaries instead
of inferring the cause from elapsed time. Nested and concurrent
durations remain visible and must not be added together.

**Breaking changes**

No API or execution-policy change. New Observability span names and
closed count attributes are documented. The existing local
run-performance schema also records the additional provider-pack and
harness measurements.

Refs: #16178, #16205, #16330.

## What Changed

- Add `task.execution_attempt` with same-run async ownership,
independent root sampling, and native-session links.
- Measure workspace transaction entry and settlement, advisory and row
waits, source scans, reader groups, notifications, and writes.
- Measure runtime selection and each concurrent instructions, skills,
and MCP branch. Separate manifest, cache, materialization, and
verification work.
- Measure provider-pack discovery, verified reuse or upload, final
verification, and remote harness state checks.
- Measure workspace settlement, accounting, liveness, response
authorization, comment commit, and publication enqueue.
- Preserve the silent endpoint-off path, including when another library
has registered a tracer. Bound repeated detail spans to 16 per name per
attempt.
- Extend the Honeycomb run link and document the actual coverage and
remaining gaps.

## Verification

- After resolving the conflict with retained-reader batching on
`b98cdaea531c8447637cd4dcc19c61b3f5f41844`, all 61 targeted query,
authorization, workspace-preparation and trace-boundary tests passed.
The server typecheck passed. Reader tests still bound query count, avoid
loading retained run payloads and enforce fresh project grants on every
publication attempt.
- Before that base integration, the tracing/exporter group passed 855
tests with 2 optional-SDK skips across 10 files and no inherited OTLP
endpoint. It covers real PostgreSQL waits/rollback, durable response
commit, assembled heartbeat preparation, concurrent parentage, sampling
and tracer failure isolation. Native workspace/history tests passed 23
cases. These results remain supporting evidence for the unchanged
tracing paths.
- Full workspace typecheck and build passed during implementation. Full
sharded CI, release validation, E2E and Apex 5/5 passed on prior head
`8cebad80f3856dbcff6f3a6d5d34880ff77a20f2`. Fresh CI, security and Apex
review are required on the current head before merge.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passed. No styles changed.
- Earlier CI runs exposed exact-source-expression assertions changed by
wrappers, missing run hashes on transaction-boundary spans, and sampling
fixtures without an enabled endpoint. The fixes preserve the calls, add
the declared hash and span cap, and enable tracing explicitly in the
sampling fixtures. Focused repairs passed; the full prior-head CI passed
after those repairs. Earlier failed run:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38729131366.
- The full local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after the base advanced
during that process. Its mixed-version results are not final-head
evidence. A full local-suite pass is not claimed.
- The old-head Superagent scan stalled at 35%. The current head has a
fresh scan; no security pass is inferred from the old pending result.
- No deployed Honeycomb acceptance is claimed by this code change.

## Risks

- Enabled tracing creates more spans. Repeated detail spans are bounded,
and inventories use group spans.
- The attempt and native session remain linked traces. Historical queue
time can precede the attempt, and nested intervals overlap.
- A committed comment proves durable server storage. Publication enqueue
and realtime dispatch do not prove external delivery or browser paint.
- New custom attributes use only the existing run hash and validated
file/byte counts. No SQL, paths, permissions, content, or exception text
is added.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The serving model ID and context window size
are not exposed in this session. The agent used reasoning, tools, code
editing, and code execution.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-15 08:13:53 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 7c016c049b perf(workspaces): wake terminal cleanup from committed changes (#16282)
## Thinking Path

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

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

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

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Terminal workspace cleanup and Git inspection for workspace detail
reads.

**Subsystem affected**

Server orchestration, execution workspaces, and idle sleep admission.

**Current behavior**

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

**Proposed behavior**

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

**Reason and benefit**

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

**Breaking changes**

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

## What Changed

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

## Verification

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

## Risks

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

## Model Used

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

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 08:28:45 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip c7f4b74111 fix: isolate fresh task sources from restricted project workspaces (#16095)
## Thinking Path

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

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

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

**Expected behavior**

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

**Steps to reproduce**

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

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

## What Changed

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

## Verification

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

## Risks

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

## Model Used

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

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 12:31:40 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip be380ba155 fix(ui): hide agent-created tasks by default (#16157)
Hide agent-created, system-created, and chat-channel tasks from independent collections by default. Preserve task hierarchy context and existing inbox participation. Add a saved opt-in checkbox without helper text.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 09:26:37 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip aded4197e5 fix: make multiplayer task toasts personal (#16153)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work.
> - A company can have several human users and shared agents.
> - Live task events currently produce toasts for any user who can read the task.
> - This makes unrelated work interrupt other users.
> - This pull request checks each user's task participation before it permits a toast.
> - Users receive relevant task notifications while company views continue to refresh.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Company task activity and agent failures produce noisy toasts for users who have no involvement in the task.

**Expected behavior**

A task qualifies when the viewer created it, commented on it, is its assigned user, deliberately acted on it under the Mine rules, or has an explicit user mention in its description or a non-deleted comment. Viewing, agent ownership, responsible-user attribution, and parent participation alone do not qualify.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Sign in as two users in the same company.
2. Have the second user create and update a task that does not involve the first user.
3. Observe a task toast in the first user's company view before this fix.

The duplicate PR search found no existing change for personal task-toast eligibility.

## What Changed

- Extract the existing Mine participation predicate without changing Mine behavior.
- Compute task eligibility from stored tasks, comments, and run associations after WebSocket access checks. Use an exact indexed comment-mention lookup with `LIMIT 1`.
- Add optional `toastEligible` metadata to each viewer's event copy. Keep it off the shared event bus.
- Require eligibility for live task activity and task-linked run errors. Suppress generic agent errors.
- Continue cache updates for quiet events. Refetch visible comments when authenticated events omit hydration details. Ignore stale socket callbacks after account or company changes.
- Document toast semantics and add feature-map and agent-access-map coverage.
- Add persisted-data, socket, UI, and authenticated browser regression coverage.

## Verification

- Final commit: `1dc4f9402c5883744738cfe236ad00fa0bb5ca4c`.
- All 55 current-head checks passed. Two Storybook checks were skipped because this change does not affect that coverage.
- Greptile approved this exact commit with 5/5. The security scan passed. Both review threads are resolved.
- Local `pnpm build`, `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm check:token-gates`, and `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed.
- The focused socket/UI suite passed 123 tests. The persisted eligibility suite passed 9 tests, including long history, exact viewer matching, and regex escaping. The existing Mine service suite previously passed 140 tests.
- The named browser case `task toasts follow personal involvement in multiplayer` passed against the final commit in an isolated authenticated instance. It used two real sessions, real WebSocket delivery, and persisted tasks, edits, comments, and mentions. It verified quiet unrelated activity, viewing alone, first and historical mentions, own-action suppression, visible-task suppression, and live cache refresh.
- A prior-head server shard passed its single rerun after a fixture-cleanup deadlock. The final-head CI run passed without a rerun.
- The broad local run remained in progress when CI completed the full test suite. Local focused checks and CI provide the completed test evidence.

## Risks

- This intentionally reduces live notifications. A new client stays quiet against an older server that omits eligibility.
- Eligibility queries add work to live event delivery. A lookup failure suppresses the toast and still delivers the authorized event.
- Deleted mentions cease to qualify unless another participation rule applies. Historical comment authorship retains the existing Mine behavior.
- No database migration or notification-settings change is required.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex with GPT-6 assisted with implementation, tests, documentation, and PR preparation. It used repository tools, shell commands, and browser automation. The runtime did not expose an exact backend revision or context-window size.

## Checklist

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


Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 08:09:19 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 6c198d616e fix(issues): preserve human handoffs from the active agent run (#16082)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Tasks have one owner, and the server records assignment changes.
> - An agent can finish its work by handing the task to a human for
review.
> - The assignment route stops the active run before it saves that
handoff.
> - When the caller is that run, a slow workspace restore can exceed the
stop timeout and prevent the assignment from saving.
> - Recovery can then mark the task Blocked while its comment says the
handoff succeeded.
> - This pull request lets the authenticated legacy run save a human
handoff and finish its turn normally.
> - Other actors and transfers to executable agents keep the verified
stop requirement.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #13730. Related: #13782, #14700, and #15094.

**What happened?**

An agent posted its review handoff, then sent `PATCH /api/issues/{id}`
to assign the task to its human creator with status `in_review`. The
route cancelled that same run before saving the assignment. Workspace
restore took 66 seconds. The stop limit is 60 seconds. The assignment
never committed. Recovery marked the task Blocked, and it stayed
assigned to the agent.

**Expected behavior**

The authenticated active legacy run can hand its own task to a human and
finish normally. The human assignment and requested review status must
save without waiting for workspace restore. Native runs, board
reassignment, agent API keys, and transfers to another agent still
require a verified stop.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Run a legacy agent on its assigned task with a signed run token.
2. Send a task PATCH from that run with a human `assigneeUserId`, a null
`assigneeAgentId`, and status `in_review`.
3. Make stopping the sandbox take more than 60 seconds. Before this fix,
the handoff fails before the task update. With this fix, the update
saves and the run finishes normally.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced in hosted execution. The patch is based on master at
`56a0bf0d492`.

**Deployment mode**

Hosted authenticated server with a legacy agent in a remote sandbox. The
same route serves local deployments.

PR #13782 proposes a broader exemption for all self-handoffs. This
focused change limits the exemption to human recipients and legacy runs.
It checks the exact active run, agent, company, and task, and it retains
the stop requirement before an executable successor can take ownership.
PRs #14700 and #15094 address later wake and recovery behavior after a
reassignment stop.

## What Changed

- Skip the reassignment cancellation only for an authenticated legacy
run handing its own task to a human.
- Reject later mutations from the outgoing run against its human-owned
task, both in route authorization and under the update transaction
locks.
- Keep assignment permission checks, goal control, and queued human
response protection.
- Add route regressions for slow stops, active-run lookup, actor and
runtime boundaries, recipient types, permission denials, and follow-up
edits, completion, and reassignment.
- Update the real HTTP low-trust handoff test to prove the run stays
alive, its late edit fails, and the human wake receipt remains
invalidated.
- Add Postgres tests for saved assignment, former-owner rejection, and
review state after the outgoing run succeeds or fails.
- Document the handoff rule and update the task feature and agent access
maps.

## Verification

- 328 relevant tests passed across the route, issue service, low-trust
HTTP, and legacy recovery suites. The route suite passed all 160 tests,
and all 13 low-trust HTTP tests passed after updating the obsolete
cancellation expectation.
- Removing the production guard makes both slow-shutdown handoff
regressions fail with HTTP 500.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm build` passed.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed.
- `git diff --check` passed.
- All 54 current-head checks passed; 2 optional Storybook checks were
skipped. The CI lanes cover the full Vitest suite, typecheck/build,
Runner checks, and product E2E checks.
- Apex reviewed `c68fbfb356c3d80eb7136babb49940709a3c3459` at 5/5 with
no findings; both earlier review threads are resolved.
- The complete test lanes passed in CI. The duplicate local full `pnpm
test:run` was stopped after CI completed; it did not finish locally. All
328 focused local tests and full local typecheck/build passed.

## Risks

- The outgoing legacy turn stays alive after the human takes ownership.
Route and transactional ownership checks reject its later mutations of
the human-owned task. Read and comment access follows normal policy.
Goal control still runs before the handoff.
- This exemption does not apply to native runs or another agent as
recipient. Those paths still stop the old execution before assignment.
- This fix prevents future failed handoffs. It does not infer or replay
old assignment requests.
- There is no schema change or API shape change.

## Model Used

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

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-12 20:34:28 -07:00
83e13db8fa fix(inbox): keep automatic recovery cleanup out of personal participation (#16063)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The personal inbox uses issue activity to identify a person's
participation.
> - Issue reads can cancel stale recovery actions and record that
cleanup as the reader's action.
> - This adds unrelated tasks to the inbox and refreshes their activity
timestamps.
> - A workspace owner hold can also alternate between creation and
cancellation after a task finishes.
> - This pull request corrects cleanup attribution, excludes historical
read cleanup, and retains one exact owner hold.
> - Agents can read authorized issue activity to diagnose the same
problem themselves.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15742 excludes logs by the execution-recovery actor from activity
timestamps. This PR covers reader-attributed stale recovery cleanup,
personal inbox participation, exact workspace owner holds, and sandbox
issue activity access. I searched open issues and PRs for recovery inbox
and activity bridge fixes. I found no duplicate for this defect.

**What happened?**

Loading issue lists cancels stale recovery actions under the reader's
identity. The personal inbox treats those rows as user participation.
One completed issue had hundreds of such rows and no edits or comments
by the affected reader. A retained native workspace owner repeatedly
creates a verification action that read projections then cancel. Sandbox
agents cannot inspect the issue activity because the reverse bridge
rejects the route.

**Expected behavior**

Automatic cleanup belongs to the system and does not add an issue to a
reader's inbox. Historical cleanup rows remain auditable but do not
count as participation or recent activity. An unresolved physical
workspace owner keeps one stable verification action. Agents can inspect
activity only for issues their identity may read.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Finish a task whose native run retains an unverifiable workspace
owner receipt.
2. Repeat workspace recovery checks and GET requests for issue detail,
compact lists, and recovery actions.
3. Observe new recovery action IDs and reader-attributed cancellations
in the activity history.
4. Query the personal inbox for that reader and observe the unrelated
task.
5. From a sandbox agent, request GET /api/issues/:id/activity and
observe Route not allowed.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Observed at f5346c05b9. Regression tests
use current master behavior.

**Deployment mode**

Authenticated hosted instance with native and legacy sandbox agents. The
inbox defect is independent of the adapter.

## What Changed

- Attribute automatic stale recovery cleanup to the recovery system
actor.
- Exclude exact historical read cleanup rows from personal inbox
membership, unread counts, and both activity timestamp queries. Keep all
audit rows and explicit user recovery decisions.
- Retain owner verification holds only while the exact company, run,
issue, and owner fingerprint still match. Apply the same rule to reads
and background recovery.
- Make repeated checks for the same owner hold leave its identity,
attempts, and timestamps unchanged. Keep physical takeover blocked.
- Allow GET issue activity through the sandbox bridge. Keep the existing
company and issue-read authorization and reject broader audit routes.
- Add regressions and update the runtime API and recovery documentation.
Refresh generated source references for the documentation edits. Update
the paired activity, inbox, and recovery maps.

## Verification

- Focused Vitest verification: 315 tests pass across five files. The
updated terminal owner hold regression also passes. The files cover
issue service, recovery routes, activity authorization, sandbox callback
bridge, and native workspace finalization.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass locally. The full general
and serialized unit test matrix passes in CI on the latest commit. The
duplicate local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after about 30 minutes once
that full CI coverage passed; it did not report a local full-suite pass.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passes for all paired areas and
capability IDs.
- Apex is 5/5 on commit 44c3787888. Its
access map finding is fixed and resolved. All CI checks are green on
this commit.
- The new regression repeats reads and background sweeps for done and
cancelled tasks. It checks one unchanged hold, zero physical copyback,
zero personal inbox participation, and system cleanup after the exact
receipt is cleared.
- Historical cleanup tests preserve explicit recovery decisions,
nullable metadata, unread counts, and the original audit rows.
- Authorization tests permit an authorized agent and reject
cross-company or issue-boundary reads. Bridge tests reject write
methods, extra path segments, and company-wide audit routes.

## Risks

Existing inbox items can disappear if their only participation evidence
was automatic read cleanup. No data migration or audit deletion is
needed. An unresolved workspace owner remains visible after task
completion; this preserves the physical writer fence. A stale or cleared
owner does not retain the hold. Issue activity access expands only the
sandbox transport allowlist and still uses existing controller
authorization.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code
editing, shell execution, and test tools. The session identifies the
model family as GPT-6. A more specific runtime model ID and context
window size are not exposed.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Amy (Opus) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-10-12 19:25:15 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip f329b24ee1 feat: give tasks durable project-optional workspaces (#15749)
Give tasks durable company-scoped workspace bindings independent of project assignment, channel defaults and authorized repository preparation. Reuse verified input seeds and sparse output recovery while preserving trust, privacy and controller provisioning boundaries.

Full CI and E2E, Superagent, legacy checks and Greptile Apex 5/5 passed on reviewed head 753680b61c. All review findings are resolved; the PR records focused verification and historical acceptance limits.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-12 20:45:18 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 19e9facc5b perf(chat): wake delivery queues from commits and deadlines (#15802)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Chat connectors store incoming messages and outgoing publications in
durable queues.
> - The app checks these queues every second, even when they are empty.
> - Empty scans keep the database active and hinder instance sleep.
> - This pull request wakes three queue workers after transactions
settle and at known retry or recovery deadlines.
> - Empty queues stop scheduling checks. Existing rows retain their
ordering, retry, and recovery rules.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Idle database activity from incoming chat deliveries, outgoing
publications, and Slack upload receipt recovery.

**Subsystem affected**

`server/` — chat delivery and background work scheduling.

**Current behavior**

The app's one-second chat timer scans the three queues together with
provider and action maintenance. Empty queues continue to query
PostgreSQL.

**Proposed behavior**

Register three independent workers with the existing delivery
coordinator. Producers announce work inside their database transactions.
Commit wakes the corresponding worker. Startup restores outstanding
work; persisted retries and stale claims supply the next deadline. An
empty queue has no recurring scan.

**Reason and benefit**

Remove avoidable queue reads without requiring a new table, an external
scheduler, or a persistent PostgreSQL listener.

**Breaking changes**

No schema or public API change. Work notifications are scoped to the
app's shared database owner. Direct SQL and independent database roots
do not send these notifications; startup still scans durable work.

**Additional context**

Refs #15625, #15750, and #15757 for the preceding sleep work. Related:
#15153 reduces chat query allocation while retaining polling. This PR
changes when the three queue workers run; it does not add query caching.

## What Changed

- Register independent incoming delivery, publication, and Slack receipt
workers on the shared scheduler.
- Add transaction work signals at queue writes, endpoint state changes,
and action transitions that unblock publications. Keep provider I/O
outside the added transactions.
- Restore deadlines from durable retry times, abandoned claims, and
publication lease expiry. Share publication and receipt eligibility
rules between dispatch and deadline queries. Respect incoming
conversation order and lifecycle dependencies.
- Exclude publications blocked by unresolved Slack tool sends. Wake them
when the tool receipt changes.
- Wake publication dispatch when an endpoint send finishes so free slots
refill. Preserve per-endpoint concurrency, conversation order, and
conservative handling of uncertain sends.
- Wake receipt recovery when a stale publication becomes
`delivery_unknown`, and wake queues when a provider connection recovers.
- Commit interaction publications with their callback tokens so dispatch
cannot see an incomplete card.
- Keep provider runtimes, other action outboxes, milestone and
wake-notice projection, Teams protocol maintenance, GitHub recovery, and
Slack session synchronization on their existing maintenance cadence.
This PR does not make the whole chat subsystem idle.
- Update the instance sleep inventory with this partial migration and
its remaining work.

## Verification

- All 1,225 PostgreSQL chat integration cases passed across the three
hosted chat shards. These cover retry and lease deadlines, blocked
followers, unresolved Slack sends, provider recovery, commit visibility,
and endpoint slot refill.
- 32 local app-wiring, queue-worker, and delivery-coordinator tests
passed after updating the wiring assertion for event-driven dispatch.
Fake timers cover an hour of idle time without queue scans.
- Related publication, interaction, receipt, and wake-notice tests
passed locally. The 13 interaction integration cases include atomic
rollback when callback-token storage fails.
- Local `pnpm typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and final server typecheck
passed. All hosted checks passed on the final commit, including build,
typecheck, test shards, release registry checks, and the canary dry run
(54 successful checks; two Storybook checks skipped for this backend
change).
- The last local PostgreSQL rerun was skipped because the embedded
database startup probe failed after five attempts. The hosted PostgreSQL
cases ran successfully; their skips only partition cases across shards.
- `git diff --check` passed. Greptile is 5/5 on the final commit with no
unresolved findings.

## Risks

- Every producer that makes queued work eligible must send a transaction
work signal. The tests exercise commit visibility, concurrent wakes,
worker failures, and restart recovery. Future direct SQL writers must
participate in this contract.
- The existing database work-signal layer reconciles uncertain
transaction outcomes. This PR adds no work-signal table or schema
migration.
- Provider and action maintenance still polls. Further changes are
required before an idle chat-enabled instance can sleep.
- Tests use real PostgreSQL with simulated provider responses; they do
not send messages through live provider accounts.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not
exposed in this session.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-10 09:13:44 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 5cf90417d6 fix(ui): confirm cancellation from monitor cards (#15735)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their tasks.
> - A task monitor schedules a later agent check.
> - The monitor card shows when that check will run.
> - The card has no direct control to cancel the monitor.
> - This change adds an X button and a confirmation dialog.
> - The operator can stop the scheduled check from the card.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The monitor card on the task page.

**Current behavior**
The operator must open task properties to clear a monitor.

**Proposed behavior**
Select the X in the top right of the card. Select Keep monitor to leave
the schedule in place. Select Cancel monitor to remove the scheduled
check.

**Reason and benefit**
The operator can cancel the monitor where its schedule is shown.
Confirmation helps prevent an accidental cancellation.

**Breaking changes**
None. The change uses the existing task update API.

## What Changed

- Add an accessible X button at the top right of the monitor card.
- Confirm cancellation before the task update.
- Keep the dialog open with an error if the update fails.
- Preserve the other execution policy settings and refresh the task
after success.
- Reject stale policy writes under the task row lock with an optional
expectedExecutionPolicy snapshot.
- Document the snapshot field and add a database test for stale
cancellation.
- Restrict snapshot requests to policy-only edits before
execution-control actions.
- Add seven route tests for rejected mixed requests and absent policy
updates.
- Keep automatic retry waits separate from monitor cancellation.
- Add component and task page tests.

## Verification

- `pnpm check:token-gates` passed.
- Monitor banner and task page tests passed: 199 tests. A targeted
database test and seven route tests also passed.
- UI typecheck and production build passed.
- Open a task with a scheduled monitor. Select X, then Keep monitor. The
schedule must remain.
- Select X, then Cancel monitor. The card must disappear after the
update.
- Local full build reached the Rust runner build but could not complete
because Cargo is absent. CI must verify the full build.
- Full repository typecheck, build, test suites, and E2E checks passed
in CI for the final commit. Local full checks were limited by missing
Cargo and workspace memory.

## Risks

- Low risk. Cancellation uses the existing company access checks and
activity log.
- A cancelled monitor no longer wakes the agent. The dialog explains
this effect.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The runtime does not expose a more specific model
ID or context window size. Used code editing, shell commands, and tests.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-09 16:38:04 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 1881894973 fix: prevent inbox archive deadlocks during completion (#15615)
Take a company-scoped parent lock before writing archive state and reuse the caller transaction. Preserve newer archive timestamps and attribution when a request waits, so completed tasks remain archived.

Verified with real PostgreSQL race, rollback, company isolation, concurrency, timestamp and visibility tests, independent review, full CI and Greptile 5/5.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-08 13:13:16 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 3a726e676f feat: enforce private task permissions across execution and data (#10633)
Enforce private task and project access across direct reads, search, execution, files, plugins, live delivery, and sharing mutations. Preserve downward-only sharing, current responsible-user authorization, and audited emergency access. Bind historical draft assets with migration 0314.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-07 07:06:40 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip b67db12d90 feat: add durable storage for private tasks (#14717)
Add private task and project ownership, downward access grants, and immutable run/workspace provenance. Apply migration 0313 with bounded batch commits and concurrent indexes. Keep the enforcement and sharing changes in their dependent PRs.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-07 06:53:20 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip faa8e452c7 fix(tasks): stop repeated reminders for historical questions (#15392)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Task questions remain saved so a person can answer them later.
> - The composer moves an old question into history after a newer human
message.
> - Native completion still treated every pending question as a required
response.
> - This caused agents to demand an old answer after the person moved
work forward.
> - This pull request shares the historical-question rule across context
and task execution.
> - Agents can finish verified work while the original question remains
answerable.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15229, Refs #14613, Refs #13130.

**What happened?**

An agent repeatedly asked a person to answer a question that had moved
into feed history. Completion feedback explicitly told the agent to
request a response. The saved pending row also blocked task completion.

**Expected behavior**

A question before newer human direction remains answerable in the feed.
Its pending state alone must not require another reminder or stop
completed work. A new input blocker, an approval, or a configured review
stage must keep its gate.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Let a task agent create an ordinary question.
2. Dismiss the question and send a newer task message.
3. Let the agent finish the requested work and submit its completion
report.
4. Observe a demand to answer the old question and a retained completion
gate.

## What Changed

- Add one company-scoped predicate for historical questions. Only later
human comments count. Exclude agent attribution, run attribution, system
notices, and untrusted source data.
- Apply the predicate to completion feedback, native waits,
finalization, commit validation, retry validation, blocked routing, and
successful-run handoff.
- Include question classification and guidance in heartbeat context and
both native task-context tools. Add the guidance to fresh and resumed
task prompts.
- Replace automatic reminders for current ordinary questions with
instructions to assess the real blocker, continue independent work, and
withdraw obsolete questions through the existing API.
- Preserve historical question rows during completion while cancelling
their live native source runs through the existing post-commit and
recovery paths. Let an authorized human answer them after completion
without reopening work or creating a response wake. Preserve
cancellation, current-input, approval, permission, credential,
connection, and review gates. Add no dismissal storage or migration.
- Document the rule in the execution contract and agent skill. Refresh
generated capability source anchors. Add database-backed status,
context, attribution, and governance regression tests.

## Verification

- `pnpm build` passed. The server rebuild also passed after the
lifecycle fix. Generated capability contract and inventory checks passed
after the agent documentation update.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. Final `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server
exec tsc --noEmit` also passed after the last test additions.
- Lifecycle and interaction regressions passed: 224 tests in 3 suites.
Context and prompt tests also passed. Final historical-question cases
passed (33 tests), native cancellation/recovery cases passed (6 tests),
and the existing interaction/confirmation suites passed (72 tests). The
full local `pnpm test:run` was attempted and stopped after more than two
hours with unrelated fixture/hook timeout failures; it did not pass. All
52 successful GitHub checks are green on the latest commit, including
the complete test matrix; no checks are pending or failing. Greptile is
5/5 and both review threads are resolved.
- Regression cases cover the old-question/new-human-message sequence,
final task status, answering after completion with no wake, live-run
cancellation and crash recovery, current input blockers, both
task-context tools, API context, timestamp precision, attribution
boundaries, and protected gates.

## Risks

- A later human task message makes an earlier ordinary question
historical even if its input is still missing. The agent must identify
the current blocker and ask only for information that still prevents
work.
- Browser dismissal remains a local preference. Dismissal without a
later human message is not recorded by this change.
- No schema change or data migration. Completion retains ordinary
historical questions; cancellation still expires them. A completed task
accepts historical answers only from an authorized human and creates no
response-delivery outbox row. Governed requests retain their gates.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with repository editing, code execution, and
browser diagnostics. The exact deployment model ID and context-window
size are not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-06 20:33:13 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 17fa718675 Retry transient disconnects in scoped read queries (#15248)
Apply existing bounded transient-disconnect retries to audited dashboard, heartbeat-list, and base issue reads. Rebuild each query per attempt and preserve authorization, company scope, enrichment, and final error propagation.

Validation: exact-head Greptile 5/5, passing CI, no unresolved review threads, and a clean merge. Detailed verification and limitations are recorded in the pull request.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-05 10:58:56 -07:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 2e67ea8dc7 fix: renew explicit continuation authorization for bounded retries (#14987)
Preserve exact user-authorized continuation receipts across bounded retries and retain the task claim through owned retry admission. Stop, reassignment, superseding input, and active cleanup continue to block unsafe continuation.

Validation: exact-head Greptile 5/5, passing CI, no unresolved review threads, and a clean merge. Detailed verification and limitations are recorded in the pull request.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-05 10:57:57 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 994d6edcdd Fix Markdown in provisional task titles (#15047)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip uses issues to organize work for AI agents.
> - Paperclip creates a provisional issue title from the issue
description.
> - A description can start with a Markdown image or other Markdown
syntax.
> - The old title logic truncated the raw Markdown source.
> - This pull request parses Markdown before it truncates the title.
> - The benefit is a short and readable provisional title.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

When an issue description started with a Markdown image, Paperclip used
the raw image syntax and URL in the provisional title. Other common
Markdown markers could also appear in the title.

**Expected behavior**

Paperclip must remove Markdown syntax before it creates the
120-character provisional title. It must keep useful text, such as link
labels and inline code content.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create an issue without an explicit title.
2. Start the issue description with a Markdown image.
3. Add Markdown text after the image.
4. Observe that the provisional title contains raw Markdown syntax or an
image URL.

**Paperclip version or commit**

The problem reproduces on `master` before this change.

**Deployment mode**

Local development with the embedded PGlite database.

## What Changed

- Parse the description and remove image nodes before title generation.
- Convert the remaining Markdown to plain text before the 120-character
limit.
- Keep link labels, inline code, and identifier punctuation.
- Use image alt text, or `Image`, for an image-only description.
- Fall back to a simple 120-character title if Markdown parsing or
conversion fails.
- Add regression tests for image and inline-code titles, parser
failures, and text-conversion failures.

## Verification

- `./node_modules/.bin/vitest run
server/src/__tests__/task-title-routes.test.ts`
- `./node_modules/.bin/tsc -p server/tsconfig.json --noEmit`
- Full GitHub CI matrix passed on commit
`663f3a0517c9e450f174b6c37970756457067ba5`.
- Greptile reviewed the latest commit with a 5/5 confidence score and no
unresolved findings.

## Risks

- Low risk. This change only affects generated provisional titles. It
does not change explicit titles or full issue descriptions.
- The implementation uses the Markdown parser and plain-text converter
that are already present in the server.

> This is a focused bug fix. It does not add planned core work from
`ROADMAP.md`.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex with GPT-5. The run used reasoning, tool use, code
execution, and repository access. The runtime did not expose the context
window size.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-03 21:19:55 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 4039d4f06b fix(auth): allow scoped low-trust work and owner-chat instruction edits (#14870)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Low-trust agents must work within their assigned scope.
> - Task creation currently rejects these agents before checking
assignment permission or scope.
> - Persistent instruction saves also reject direct requests from
authorized chat owners.
> - This PR checks the requested action and its recorded authority
instead of denying all such work.
> - Agents can organize permitted work and follow their owner's
instruction-edit requests while outside work stays restricted.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Low-trust agents cannot create self-assigned tasks or subtasks, even
within their allowed scope. An authorized user also cannot ask an agent
in their own Agent Chat to update its managed `AGENTS.md`. Agent-folder
collection can hide the permission rejection behind a generic save
failure.

**Expected behavior**

Allow task creation when assignment permissions and project or root-task
scope permit it. Allow instruction self-edits during authenticated
owner-chat execution, subject to the user's current edit permission.
Outside tasks, subtasks, connector messages, and peer agents do not
inherit that instruction authority. Explain the actual denial when a
save fails.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Configure an active agent with `low_trust_review` and a project or
root-task boundary.
2. Ask it to create an in-scope task assigned to itself, or a subtask of
its own task.
3. As a user with permission to configure that agent, ask it in your
Agent Chat to update its managed `AGENTS.md`.
4. Observe blanket permission denials rather than action-specific
checks.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Rebased onto master at `8ec4b84e1`. This is a core authorization change,
independent of adapter choice.

**Deployment mode**

Authenticated server. Regression coverage uses the server services, HTTP
routes, native tool authority, and embedded PostgreSQL.

Related work: #14775 adds human-directed task execution. #13599 concerns
instruction-path configuration; this PR leaves that configuration
restricted. #11988 proposes separate active-review instruction
protection. #10693 reports unclear authorization denials on a different
API surface.

## What Changed

- Apply task-assignment checks to both HTTP creation routes and native
task creation, including unassigned work. Preserve low-trust policy and
source attribution on the created task and its initial plan.
- Allow self-assigned decomposition within the permitted project or
root-task tree. Resolve workspace-derived project scope before
authorization, and reauthorize existing tasks before duplicate detection
returns them. Keep cross-project and peer-assignment checks.
- Derive instruction self-edit authority from the accepted run identity
and authenticated owner-message wake. Recheck current permissions at
save time. Bind retries to the same request and chat session.
- Reject inherited instruction authority from outside tasks, subtasks,
plugins, connectors, stale sessions, cancelled runs, and peer edits.
- Surface permission errors in instruction and agent-folder save
receipts. Tell chat agents to explain the rejected action and the
specific restriction.
- Update the low-trust policy and implementation documentation.

## Verification

- All 297 tests in 11 focused server suites pass after the rebase. These
cover owner-chat saves, private copies, warm agent directories, reset
and retry boundaries, permission revocation, task creation routes, and
native tool authority.
- After review fixes, all 126 tests in the four affected
authorization/chat suites pass. Workspace scope regressions and 146
existing creation/ownership/workspace-route tests also pass.
- The final duplicate-task and CI fixes pass all 39 tests across
chat-project tools, duplicate creation, environment-selection guards,
and assignee-invokability routes. The duplicate-task test reproduced an
unauthorized response before the fix and verifies denial plus permitted
reuse afterward.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passes after rebasing;
`pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsc --noEmit` also passes after
the review fixes.
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` passes.
- Final head `7e73270b86748792649e4ae6fbc6879f73b42b73`: all 54 checks
passed, with two expected skips and no pending or failed checks. This
includes builds, typechecking, the full test matrix, end-to-end tests,
runner verification, the canary dry run, and security scans.
- Greptile is 5/5 on that exact head, with no unresolved review threads.
This change has not been deployed to staging.

## Risks

This changes authorization behavior. The instruction exception must not
become an inherited task permission. The check uses server-owned
execution records, requires the agent's own chat and instructions, and
keeps normal protected-change and responsible-user checks. Saves fail
closed when current provenance or permission is missing. Owner chat
grants a turn-scoped capability; the server does not classify the
message intent or require approval of the exact new file bytes. Prompt
injection within an authorized owner-chat turn remains a model-level
risk. This is the requested owner-chat trust boundary, without a new
per-edit confirmation flow. No database migration or broad trust-preset
change is required.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, code editing, shell tools,
and test execution. The exact runtime model ID and context-window size
are not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-01 15:42:40 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 0829d94af2 fix(auth): derive low-trust human direction from existing execution records (#14775)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Low-trust review contains work that may include hostile input.
> - Its default intake boundary currently blocks direct human chat and
tasks outside that boundary.
> - Human direction should authorize the assigned work while preserving
containment.
> - Existing conversations and execution requests already identify
direct human instructions.
> - This pull request derives exact-task authority from those records
and the current assignee.
> - The agent can perform that work without gaining access to unrelated
tasks or privileged tools.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A low-trust agent with a project boundary rejects its owner's direct
Agent Chat before provider execution. Human-assigned tasks outside that
project fail the same check.

**Expected behavior**

An authorized human can talk to the agent or assign it a task. The exact
task runs with its existing sandbox, credential, and tool restrictions.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Enable Agent Chat and isolated workspaces. Configure a sandbox agent
with low-trust review scoped to an intake project.
2. Send the agent a direct board chat message, or assign it a
projectless task.
3. Observe `low_trust_boundary_mismatch` before execution.

Related: #14766 adds private task directories for repo-free low-trust
execution. It is now merged into master and included in the branch base,
so CI and staging verify the combined behavior.

## What Changed

- Derive owner-chat access from existing conversation identity.
- Derive exact-task access from the existing human requester and
server-owned request origin, including coalesced requests. Plugin and
external sender attribution do not authorize work.
- Follow existing `retryOfRunId` database links for automatic
continuations, checking company, agent, and task throughout; cancelled
ancestors cannot grant authority.
- Require a live run and current assignment. Preserve sandbox,
credential, privileged-tool, responsible-user, and quarantined-output
checks.
- Retain board backlog assignments in existing request records without
starting execution. Reassignment cancels old human requests in the
common service transaction, including plugin writes; late settlement
cannot revive them.
- Add real database and HTTP coverage for request provenance, retry
ancestry, cancelled runs, concurrent reassignment, spoofing, and
containment. Document the rule.
- Preserve legacy board assignment requests through their existing
source, reason, and human requester.
- Use the existing wrapped-error helper for concurrent chat-question
idempotency; a deterministic race test reproduces the CI failure before
the fix and passes after it.
- No new schema, migrations, or user-identity fields. Existing requester
columns hold attribution.

## Verification

- Passed the focused database, policy-retention, HTTP, and reassignment
tests locally. The HTTP test creates a task through the real board route
and checks the resulting persisted wakeup before exercising agent reads,
comments, mutations, and review handoff.
- Database tests hold a reassignment transaction open to verify coherent
authorization before and after commit, with a two-connection pool. They
cover retries, coalesced requests, cancelled ancestry, invalid
cross-company/agent/task links, cycles, and forged attribution.
- Full local `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on the final
commit (`d107c26df`). [Latest-head
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36815589542)
passed: 54 successful checks, two expected skips, including all eight
browser-test shards. Greptile is 5/5 on this exact commit with no
unresolved threads. Local tests were targeted; the full test suite ran
through CI’s test matrix.
- The revised HTTP suite passed all 13 tests; database authorization
tests passed all 11, including legacy compatibility and late watchdog
settlement; the backlog route contract passed all 3 tests. Another 102
tests covering durable chat admission, wake queues, and Cursor execution
passed.
- All 90 interaction-service tests passed with both create calls
deliberately held until their optimistic reads complete, forcing
duplicate-key recovery. That forced race failed before switching to the
shared wrapped-error helper.
- Previous staging proof covered owner chat and projectless task
persistence. The simplified revision has not been redeployed; that
earlier proof is not claimed for the new implementation.

## Risks

- This is an authorization change: only the live run's exact task
qualifies, and normal responsible-user restrictions still apply.
- Existing request and retry records are authoritative. Merely naming a
responsible/originating user or an external connector sender does not
qualify.
- Reassignment invalidates existing human request records
transactionally. A cancelled run or request cannot regain authority when
the task is assigned back.
- Ordinary task exceptions require server-owned origin or the legacy
board assignment source/reason/actor combination. Existing owner chats
use conversation identity.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 in Codex, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution,
and browser testing. The runtime does not expose a more specific model
ID or context-window size.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-01 09:45:18 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 018993140f feat: let agents name prompt-only tasks (#14761)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Users create tasks with a title and a description.
> - A required title adds work when the prompt already explains the
request.
> - An agent can name the task once it reads that request.
> - This pull request accepts prompt-only tasks and starts them with a
short prompt slice.
> - A scoped title tool lets the assigned agent replace that slice early
without changing execution state.
> - A live browser eval checks the real agent call, saved title, audit
entry, and preservation of user titles.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Cross-cutting: task creation, shared contracts, database, server, runner
tools, and board UI.

**Problem or motivation**

Users must currently write a title before they can submit a detailed
task prompt. The agent has enough context to write a useful title
itself.

**Proposed solution**

Make the title optional when a description is present. Save the first
120 characters of the normalized prompt as a provisional title. Ask the
assigned agent to call `set_task_title` early. Use an atomic
provisional-title guard to preserve titles supplied or edited by users.
Keep explicit titles supported.

Related: #14543 and #14556 concern empty-title submission. This change
intentionally enables that submission when a prompt is present, instead
of requiring a title.

## What Changed

- Add the `titleNeedsGeneration` field with an idempotent migration.
Keep existing titles unchanged.
- Add `PUT /api/issues/:id/title` and the native and legacy
`set_task_title` tool. Enforce company access, active-run ownership,
shared, bounded retry receipts across native/HTTP calls, and
transactional audit logging. Refresh external-object links after commit,
with the same feature gate and plugin detectors as ordinary title edits.
- Add early naming guidance in Standard, Ask, and Plan task context.
Preserve the description, status, and assignment.
- Allow prompt-only root and child task creation, plus draft restoration
in the New Task dialog. Keep user titles supported.
- Add an opt-in Product E2E suite for prompt-only Standard and Ask
tasks, plus an explicit-title control. It checks actual provider calls
within the first five tools, persisted state, audit attribution, and the
reloaded UI.
- Preserve a closed vocabulary of API key maintenance phrases in
declared prose while rejecting opaque credential suffixes. Add one
bounded naming retry after wording is rejected, without treating the
rejected call as a saved title.
- Repair the native cleanup receipt check exposed during full
verification: accept matching input digests, retain legacy input checks,
and reject conflicting receipts.

## Verification

- Live Product E2E on `f43478473800e3a46b85c5ee79677efdb15108e7`: **3/3
passed** with native Codex `gpt-5.4-mini`, first attempts only,
automatic retries disabled. Standard and Ask each saved “Rotate expired
API key” on their first tool call, with matching persisted state and a
single same-run audit entry. The explicit-title control retained its
user title with zero title writes. All three verified the reloaded
browser UI.
- Campaign: `local-2026-09-30T21-30-11-021Z`. Earlier failed campaigns
are retained separately; they exposed credential-prose handling and
prompted the naming recovery fix. No failed result was regraded or
deleted.
- Reproduce with `pnpm test:e2e:runner -- --id
task-titles.runner-codex-mini.local.prompt-title-standard --id
task-titles.runner-codex-mini.local.prompt-title-ask --id
task-titles.runner-codex-mini.local.preserve-explicit-title
--max-automatic-retries 0` and an authorized provider key.
- Full `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on the latest commit.
The runner build used the configured external eval source tree.
- Product E2E unit suite: **61 files, 818 tests passed**; E2E typecheck
and UI token gates passed.
- Title API/native regressions cover prompt-only and explicit child
creation, user edits, ownership/company isolation, external reference
refresh, cross-surface retry replay, and the 64-key limit without
receipt eviction. All passed. Prompt-context coverage: **44 tests
passed**.
- Rust credential regressions: **35 tests passed**, including benign
maintenance qualifiers and opaque credential rejection in every declared
prose field. Catalog/report reconciliation: **28 tests passed**. Native
recovery: **560 tests passed**.
- Broad local `pnpm test:run`: **14,555 tests passed** in the general
server group; two suites failed to initialize embedded PostgreSQL and
the existing 40,000-file Git streaming stress test exceeded its
300-second macOS timeout. All three suites then passed in isolation (**5
tests passed**) without code or timeout changes. The original full local
command exited nonzero and is not being represented as a clean full run.
- Latest-head GitHub checks are green: **53 passed, 4 skipped, zero
failed or pending**, including all test shards and the canary packaging
dry run. Greptile reviewed the same commit at **5/5**, with zero
unresolved review threads.

## Risks

- The additive database field must reach the server and UI together. The
migration uses `IF NOT EXISTS` and defaults existing tasks to a final
title.
- Title generation depends on the assigned agent running. Tasks without
a run keep their provisional title.
- Live qualification covers the native Codex path in Standard and Ask
modes. API/legacy and Plan behavior have deterministic coverage.
- The credential-prose exception validates the entire suffix against a
closed maintenance vocabulary. Unknown suffixes, assignments, quoted
values, credential prefixes, and diagnostics retain strict checks.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact deployment ID and context window are not exposed in
this session. The live eval uses the native Codex `gpt-5.4-mini`
profile.

## 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 16:48:24 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 1b48e73e0b feat(ui): add secondary navigation for agent chat (#14706)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agent Chat already provides a persistent conversation with each
agent.
> - Its shortcuts share the primary navigation and do not give chats a
dedicated place.
> - People need to find agents, start a chat, and switch conversations
without moving the page layout.
> - This pull request adds a secondary chat sidebar and a landing page
around the existing chat surface.
> - The same conversation, composer, history, and context panel remain
in use.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #13283 and #13420. This extends the existing experimental Agent
Chat navigation after review of the component and page stories. It
supports the CEO Chat roadmap item through the existing task-backed
conversation model.

**Subsystem affected**

The board UI and the company-scoped conversation list API.

**Current behavior**

Chat shortcuts sit inside the primary navigation. There is no dedicated
landing page with a searchable conversation list. A separate landing
header also moves the sidebar when an agent is selected.

**Proposed behavior**

Show a Chat entry in primary navigation. Keep a searchable agent sidebar
beside the chat content. The plus button starts or reopens the current
user's single conversation with that agent. Keep the header and sidebar
in the same positions before and after selection.

**Reason and benefit**

People can find agents and return to persistent conversations without
leaving the chat area or creating duplicate chats.

**Breaking changes**

The experimental chat navigation changes. Explicitly adding a chat now
resolves its conversation immediately. Direct visits to unused agent
chat URLs remain read-only. The existing per-agent routes and message
contracts remain compatible. No database migration is required.

## What Changed

- Add an account- and company-scoped conversation list endpoint with the
existing access checks, feature gate, and OpenAPI entry.
- Add the live secondary sidebar, landing page, avatars, search, loading
states, errors, and retry controls.
- Make the agent picker wait for chat creation and display failures.
Existing agents reopen the same conversation. A dismissed selection
cannot close a reopened picker or navigate over a newer choice.
- Preserve recent-activity ordering and terminated agents’ chat history.
Scope live list refreshes to the current user’s conversation events. A
failed historical-agent lookup leaves healthy chats usable and offers a
focused retry.
- Keep the sidebar and header stable across chat routes. Keep mobile
selection in the navigation drawer.
- Use the production components in Storybook. Prepare the theme and
mobile viewport before mounting the page to avoid the startup flash.
- Update product documentation, the design guide, and navigation tests.
Replace old browser expectations for stars and recent shortcuts with
persistent conversation and layout coverage.

## Verification

- `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `pnpm check:token-gates` pass
after rebasing onto master.
- Focused UI tests pass, including 105 sidebar, picker, and live-update
checks after review fixes. The 33 conversation service and route tests
and 10 OpenAPI checks pass, including ownership, feature gating, and
concurrent creation.
- The full local test run passed 14,163 server tests before three
environment or timeout failures. The embedded Postgres startup,
connector socket, and native runner failures all passed direct reruns.
- Browser test-drive verification covers a real provider reply, add and
reopen, persisted history after reload, no-match search recovery, mobile
drawer dismissal, and top-aligned context panels.
- Browser measurements confirm that the sidebar has the same position
and dimensions on the landing page and an agent conversation.
- Storybook builds and its add-and-reopen interaction passes.
- The revised browser regression passes locally against a freshly built
throwaway instance. It covers stable sidebar geometry, add/reopen
uniqueness, drafts, search, history, and terminated-agent history after
reload. The full CI browser suite also passes.
- Latest commit `b323577d9523180104df4000eaceedea2772608c`: all 54
completed checks pass, including the complete server/workspace/browser
suites, aggregate verification, build/typecheck, security scans, and
canary packaging. The two Storybook jobs are skipped by their workflow
conditions. [CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36714052050).
- Greptile reviewed this same commit at 5/5 with no remaining actionable
findings; all review threads are resolved.
- Reviewer path: enable Agent Chat, click Chat, use plus to choose an
agent, send a message, switch away, and reopen that agent. One
conversation must remain, with its history intact.

## Risks

- The new sidebar lists persistent conversations instead of starred and
recent shortcuts.
- Chat creation is asynchronous. Errors stay visible in the picker, and
delayed responses cannot navigate into a previous company or account.
- The shell adjustment is limited to chat routes and preserves the
existing conversation implementation.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, code execution, and browser
tools. The session does not expose the exact API model ID or
context-window size.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#123` / `Refs #123` 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 07:35:32 -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 c9b93d7e8c fix: preserve terminal task owners during release (#14561)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Tasks record an assigned owner and separate checkout and execution
locks.
> - A completed task must retain its owner after execution ends.
> - The release endpoint currently clears that owner when it clears the
locks.
> - This pull request preserves the assignee of Done and Cancelled tasks
during release.
> - Unfinished tasks keep the existing relinquishment behavior.
> - The benefit is stable task attribution without retaining execution
locks.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

An agent completed an assigned task, then called the release endpoint.
The task stayed Done, but its assignee became null. The same defect
affects Cancelled tasks. It caused the legacy Claude clarification/reuse
and multiple-repository handoff E2E assertions to fail.

**Expected behavior**

Release must clear execution locks on terminal tasks and preserve their
assignee, final status, and disposition timestamps. Release of
unfinished tasks must still clear the agent assignee. Only In Progress
work returns to Todo.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create an assigned task with checkout and execution locks.
2. Complete or cancel the task.
3. Call `POST /api/issues/:id/release` as the assigned agent.
4. Read the saved task. Before this fix, its assignee is null.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced on master commit `d172197117a14b80a1eb2d2835a0e7cce2679656`.

**Deployment mode**

Local tests against real PostgreSQL through the production issue routes
and services. This is a core lifecycle defect, independent of the agent
adapter.

Refs: #11689, #6899, #7769. These are related open release proposals.
This is an independent fix limited to terminal task ownership. It does
not include timer scheduling changes.

## What Changed

- Preserve the current assignee when releasing Done or Cancelled tasks.
- Keep all execution-lock cleanup and existing unfinished-task behavior.
- Cover all seven task statuses through the release API and read back
saved state.
- Check disposition timestamps, activity attribution, and repeated board
cleanup.
- Update the API contract, agent reference, and CLI help.

## Verification

- Red commit `ddaabb754`: the two terminal-owner regressions failed with
`assigneeAgentId: null`; 12 other route tests passed.
- Green: all 14 route tests pass, plus the existing successor-checkout
race test (15 selected tests total).
- Command: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-stale-execution-lock-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts -t 'stale issue execution lock
routes|does not let stale release clobber a successor checkout lock'`.
- The local host has exhausted its SysV semaphore pool. The red/green
runs used the existing test-provider hook to start disposable Docker
PostgreSQL 17 instances. Routes, services, migrations, and assertions
were unchanged. No database tests in the selected set were skipped. The
other 134 tests were excluded by the name filter.
- Capability contract and inventory drift checks pass.
- `pnpm build` and `pnpm -r typecheck` pass.
- The local `pnpm test:run` was interrupted after environment failures
while the complete sharded CI suite ran in parallel: native PostgreSQL
bootstrap fails under the host semaphore limit, and the large Git
fixture hits macOS `ENAMETOOLONG`. A focused rerun confirmed these
happen before the relevant assertions. The interrupted local run is not
counted as a full pass.
- Greptile completed on `1caeeb827e9cb658ddb71f16c2421ec20f80634e` with
**5/5**, a successful check, and no review threads.
- All CI gates pass on the current head: typecheck, build, general and
serialized tests, Runner checks, browser E2E, release packaging, and
security checks. Server shard 11 passed on one targeted retry; the first
attempt had 836 passing tests but an unhandled workspace-runtime startup
rejection caused by an existing timing window. All other successful jobs
were reused.
- No paid provider evaluations were run.

## Risks

- A caller that used release to erase ownership from terminal work will
now retain that owner. An explicit assignment update or the board
force-release option with `clearAssignee=true` can still clear it.
- No schema or migration changes. The transaction, company access,
assignee/run checks, and activity log remain in place.

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool use, code execution, and test
debugging. The session does not expose a more specific backend model
version or context-window size.
- OpenAI `gpt-6-luna` assisted with read-only test discovery and review.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (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>
2026-09-29 08:47:33 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 53aad90b9e fix: retry sandbox ACP input delivery after gateway failures (#14485)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip coordinates agent work through execution adapters.
> - Sandbox ACP sessions send ordered input through a remote file queue.
> - A temporary provider 502 currently closes the session during an
input upload.
> - A lost response can occur after the sandbox has consumed the
message, so a blind retry can duplicate input.
> - This pull request retries gateway failures with the same sequence
and drops consumed sequences at the receiver.
> - The session can continue through a brief provider failure without
repeating a tool call.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A sandbox ACP run can fail with `ACP agent disconnected during request
(connection_close, exit=null, signal=null)` when a provider input upload
returns HTTP 502. The bridge destroys its local socket on the first
failure and can discard the diagnostic before the proxy reads it.

**Expected behavior**

A temporary gateway failure should get a bounded retry. A lost response
after successful delivery must not duplicate input or reorder later
messages. Permanent failures must still close the session.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Run the real sandbox process bridge with an echo child and a local
test runner.
2. Inject a provider 502 before preparation, after a chunk upload, or
after final publication and consumption.
3. Send the next input message. Before this change, the connection
closes instead of delivering it.

Searched open and closed PRs for `ACP disconnect`, `bridge retry`, and
`502 sandbox`. Related work: #13287 covers shutdown after bridge loss;
#13793 covers large launch envelopes. This change covers ordered input
delivery within a running legacy ACP session.

## What Changed

- Retry input uploads up to three times for recognized Daytona and
Cloudflare HTTP 502, 503, and 504 diagnostics, with 250 ms and 500 ms
delays.
- Give each upload separate temporary paths and discard already-consumed
input sequences, including late publication from an earlier attempt.
Clean failed attempts in the background without removing a published
message or another attempt’s files. Cleanup cannot delay retries or
shutdown.
- Keep later input behind the retry. Stop queued input on permanent
failure and flush a fixed diagnostic before closing the socket. Neither
failure-diagnostic persistence nor shutdown-warning persistence can
block teardown.
- Add real-process regression tests for lost responses, late
publication, retry exhaustion, immediate permanent failure, and
diagnostic redaction.
- Give accepted run-log file appends up to three seconds to drain before
finalization computes the size, hash, and durable copy. Close the run
handle to later appends. This waits only for file writes, independently
of later DB progress or live-event persistence. If writes remain
stalled, return null size/hash metadata and skip the final durable copy
so the run can settle. Late writes cannot restart mirroring.
- Preserve legacy comment attribution when final log size is unknown by
reading existing entries within the unchanged 2 MB scan limit. Storage
errors or a three-second read deadline return the evidence already read
instead of failing the comment listing; pagination stops at the
deadline. The deadline requests cancellation of the underlying local
stream or S3 HEAD, GET, and response stream. A separate response timeout
returns partial evidence even when filesystem I/O delays cancellation;
late reads cannot append evidence or start another page. Each listing
retains its existing batches of eight reads, without a shared admission
cap that skips readable logs under contention.
- Document the retry and log-finalization boundaries in the development
guide.

## Verification

- Final commit `347daa564b`: [Linux
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36506995168/attempts/2)
passed. Greptile Apex review 13 scored this commit 5/5 with no new
findings; all 12 review threads are resolved.
- The final CI run initially hit a Cursor test timeout and four Discord
credential-lock contention failures. All five cases passed in isolation.
The two failed shards and their aggregate gate passed on retry without a
code change. Those intermittent failures are not claimed fixed by this
PR.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/adapter-utils/src/execution-target-stdin-race.test.ts
packages/adapter-utils/src/execution-target-sandbox.test.ts
packages/adapter-utils/src/sandbox-callback-bridge.test.ts`: 262 tests
passed on the final implementation, including 21 new regressions. The
original three fault-injection cases failed before the fix.
- The regressions cover failed and indefinitely stalled cleanup,
Cloudflare gateway responses and retry exhaustion, permanent errors that
must not retry, and teardown while failure logging remains indefinitely
stalled. Seven Apex regression cases failed before the review fixes.
Adapter-utils typecheck and build passed again after the final review
change.
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/services/run-log-store.test.ts
server/src/services/run-log-store-cancellation.test.ts`: all 25 tests
passed, including four new regressions that failed before the
finalization fix. They cover delayed and failed appends, late-write
admission, agreement between the local bytes/summary/durable copy, and a
stalled append that exhausts the three-second budget. The timeout case
verifies unknown metadata, no final upload, and no mirror restart after
late completion. New cancellation tests use the real AWS SDK against a
local HTTP server. They verify that stalled HEAD, GET, and response-body
connections close on abort and that a subsequent read succeeds. Local
range and already-aborted read cases also pass.
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts -t
'readIssueCommentRunLogText|deriveIssueCommentRunLogAttribution'`: 14
targeted tests passed. The null-size reader case, both storage-error
cases, the stalled-read case, and the cancellation/concurrent-listing
cases failed before their fixes. The new regressions verify that
timed-out reads are cancelled, subsequent listings recover, and two
concurrent listings both retain their attribution markers. A read that
ignores cancellation still returns partial evidence at three seconds and
cannot resume pagination when it finishes; this regression failed before
the response-timeout fix.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` and `pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/server build` passed after the response-timeout change.
- Full `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed earlier in this PR;
the affected packages were rechecked after review fixes.
- Full local `pnpm test:run` failed in the general-server group: 511
files passed, 40 failed, and 158 were skipped. Failures include embedded
PostgreSQL initialization, read-only cache directory renames, a macOS
long-path fixture, and a workspace exposure assertion. The PostgreSQL,
cache-permission, and long-path failures also reproduce with both
changed implementation files restored to baseline commit `24c58e479a`.
The exposure suite passes in isolation both on baseline and the fixed
branch (28 passed, 3 skipped). CI runs the full suite on Linux. Later
local test groups were not reached.
- An earlier CI run hit the Telegram retry-timing failure fixed upstream
in #14501. The branch includes that master fix. The selected recovery
test passed against a fresh, migrated PostgreSQL 16 database. The
embedded PostgreSQL runner is unavailable on this Mac; the isolated
database was stopped and removed afterward.
- No live agent turn was replayed. The tests use local child processes
and injected provider failures.

## Risks

Retries are restricted to recognized Daytona SDK and Cloudflare bridge
gateway-error messages, which survive plugin RPC serialization. Other
errors fail immediately. Temporary upload paths are now unique for all
command-managed queue writes. Receiver sequence checks prevent duplicate
input; retries do not restart an agent turn. Cleanup and failure logging
are nonblocking and best effort; session teardown remains the final
cleanup boundary. Log finalization now drains accepted local file writes
for at most three seconds and ignores later appends on the closed run
handle. A timeout leaves final size/hash unknown and skips the final
durable upload; an existing partial mirror may remain available, but it
is not claimed as a verified final snapshot. It does not wait for later
DB progress or live-event persistence. Optional attribution keeps
partial evidence when a read fails or times out. Cancellation closes S3
requests and response streams. Local filesystem I/O may finish after the
caller deadline, but a late read cannot change the returned evidence or
continue pagination. Later listings can retry after storage recovers.
There is no schema, authentication, or permission change. Revert this
commit to restore the previous behavior.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code
editing, and local test execution.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` 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; targeted tests pass and full-suite
limitations are documented above
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-28 19:15:33 -07:00
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
Devin FoleyandPaperclip b2e9e82f05 fix: stop remote Grok runs before continuing queued messages (#14100)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The execution service owns each run and saves messages sent while it
runs.
> - Interrupt must stop the current executor before it delivers those
messages.
> - Remote Grok commands did not register the host cancellation control.
> - A cancelled task run could still write Done and prevent queue
recovery.
> - This pull request connects remote cancellation and revokes cancelled
run writes.
> - Saved input can use the existing queue admission rules after
verified cleanup.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Interrupting a queued message marked a remote Grok run cancelled before
its sandbox stopped. The old run could still post a reply and mark the
task Done. Its saved follow-up remained deferred behind execution
recovery.

**Expected behavior**

Stop revokes run write authority and waits for verified termination.
Saved messages remain durable and enter one successor through normal
admission after cleanup.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Run a task with `grok_local` in a remote sandbox.
2. Send a follow-up and use Interrupt while the command runs.
3. Let the old command attempt a task status update after cancellation.
4. Observe the task disposition and the saved message queue.

**Paperclip version or commit**

The gap is present in master at `d3e0f0a238`.

**Deployment mode**

Authenticated server with a Daytona sandbox.

Related work: #14028 and #14046 handle bounded continuation. #13291
covers infrastructure interruption and verified remote cleanup. #13332
addresses atomic recovery holds. This change handles direct Grok
operator cancellation and stale task writes.

## What Changed

- Register remote Grok cancellation before preparation. Keep command
ownership until the host confirms sandbox termination.
- Reuse the sandbox cancellation boundary for the direct CLI invocation.
Reject fresh attempts after cancellation and preserve workspace restore
failure evidence.
- Reject writes from cancelled task JWTs and runs with a pending stop.
Preserve diagnostic reads and existing conversation error codes.
- Recheck run authority under a database lock before task updates and
interaction responses commit.
- Preserve authorized handoffs that stop their own run. Only the
server-issued stop receipt for that request permits the final task
update.
- Add tests for hung commands, unverified stops, early cancellation,
copy-back failures, late Done, late interaction responses, authorized
handoffs, exact lease receipts, and one queue successor across
concurrent restart sweeps.
- Document the cancellation and write-authority contract.

## Verification

- Targeted adapter, cancellation-boundary, authentication,
queued-message, interaction-service, and activity-route tests passed.
The expanded run passed 214 tests; one new test had an incomplete
fixture. After correcting the fixture, all 8 selected follow-up cases
passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed on
`179c86caf1bf0d89914a503d46e24af7e4b8c557`.
- `pnpm build`: passed on the same commit.
- `pnpm test:run`: the general-server group completed with 13,521
passed, 99 skipped, and 18 failed tests. It then stopped, so the
remaining local groups did not run. Five Slack, email, and wake-batching
failures passed on focused reruns after correcting the local
environment. The remaining 13 failures reproduce as `EACCES` on rename
in unchanged skill-cache code on macOS. Two custom-image suite setup
hooks also failed to start embedded PostgreSQL after the machine
exhausted shared-memory slots; all 31 tests in that file passed on rerun
after the local resource issue was resolved. CI covers all test groups.
- CI: 53 checks passed and 2 were skipped on the latest commit,
including the aggregate verification gate. The last server shard passed
on its single rerun after a preview-server startup timeout. The affected
file also passed locally with 28 passed and 3 skipped.
- Greptile: 5/5 on the latest commit. Both review threads are resolved.
- No live deployment or staging task mutation has been performed.

## Risks

- Stopping the sandbox can prevent file copy-back. The result preserves
workspace restore failure evidence; termination does not imply restored
files.
- If provider termination fails, the adapter keeps ownership of its
outstanding command and does not acknowledge Stop.
- The write restriction now applies to ordinary cancelled tasks. Reads
remain allowed. Task and interaction checks add a shared run-row lock to
agent mutations. An exact server-issued receipt permits the task request
that stopped its own run to complete its handoff.
- Existing terminal tasks are not reopened automatically. An operator
must correct a historical late Done before its saved queue can continue.
- No schema migration or UI change.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code
execution, and test tools. The precise backend revision and
context-window size are not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` 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>
2026-09-26 17:07:07 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip b0155a681a feat(slack): connect Paperclip conversations and scheduled messages (#13920)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Slack conversations use the same tasks and agents as the Paperclip
board.
> - A board reply must reach that Slack conversation and let the agent
continue the work.
> - An assigned agent also needs its Slack tools during normal tasks and
scheduled routines.
> - Both paths must keep the linked user's authority, delivery rules,
and conversation history.
> - This pull request adds those paths and reduces setup friction for
Slack bots.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Server orchestration, Slack connector tools, shared contracts, and chat
setup UI.

**Problem or motivation**

Replies entered in Paperclip did not provide a complete round trip to
the linked Slack thread. Slack and board wakeups could select different
model sessions for the same task. Agents also lacked their assigned
Slack tools outside Slack-origin work, which prevented a routine from
sending its responsible user a briefing. Inviting a bot could leave the
new channel disabled.

**Proposed solution**

Mirror human board messages with author attribution and route the agent
result to the same thread. Use the same session key across both entry
points. Supply Slack tools to the connection's assigned agent in normal
tasks and routines, using the current responsible user's verified link.
Enable newly invited channels while preserving explicit disabled
choices. Add a browser-agent setup prompt to the Slack wizard.

**Alternatives considered**

A separate Slack scheduler or task dispatcher would duplicate existing
Paperclip workflows. Reusing the connection owner's identity would grant
the wrong authority. Replaying old channel history could start
unintended work. This change uses ordinary task wakeups, routine
dispatch, and Slack's original invitation mention event instead.

**Roadmap alignment**

Extends the shipped Scheduled Routines and governed Apps capabilities.
It does not add a separate task lifecycle. Related work: #13828 and
#13809. Related test stabilization: #13877. The existing plugin
Slack-control proposals are separate from this built-in connector
change.

## What Changed

- Queue human Paperclip messages for the original Slack thread with
display-name attribution and stable delivery identities. Require the
author’s current linked Slack identity and recheck access before
delivering messages or agent replies.
- Apply pause, dependency, cancellation, and closed-workspace guards
before explicit Board sends request work and again when the durable
outbox dispatches it.
- Route agent results back to Slack and preserve model-session
continuity, including replies that reopen completed tasks.
- Resolve assigned Slack connections for normal agent tasks and
routines. Recheck the responsible user's link, membership, and
permissions at execution.
- Add `slack_open_dm` for the responsible user's bot DM and request the
`im:write` scope.
- Enable newly discovered invited channels. Keep explicit OFF choices
and normal admission and deduplication rules.
- Add a copyable Slack setup prompt for a computer-use agent, with
Storybook coverage. Share the prompt-button component with GitHub.
- Update Slack tool documentation and runtime instructions.
- Stabilize the mobile project browser test by waiting for the final
canonical route before editing, preserving all persistence assertions.

## Verification

- Live staging: invited the bot after the first mention. The channel
became enabled and the bot answered that original mention.
- Live staging: a normal Paperclip reply appeared in Slack with author
attribution. The agent completed the calculation and replied once in the
original thread and in Paperclip.
- Live staging: a codeword entered in Slack was recalled from Paperclip.
A following Slack calculation used the result from the Paperclip turn.
Run metadata confirmed the same model session for both entry points.
- Live staging: a scheduled routine used `slack_open_dm` and
`slack_post_message` to deliver one DM. The existing app was reinstalled
with `im:write`. The test routine was paused after verification.
- Before the master merge: 397 focused feature tests passed. The
continuity fix passed all 76 issue comment/update route tests and six
focused route/integration cases. Typecheck, build, and token gates
passed.
- Review fixes: 47 focused integration cases passed, covering link
revocation/replacement, private membership removal, guarded outbox
dispatch, concurrent workers, lost scheduler responses, a real
one-connection pool, exact reply provenance, and attachment retries. All
99 issue-comment route tests and the Slack catalog browser test passed.
- Full local typecheck, production build, token gates, and
module-boundary checks passed. The full local test command passed 25,915
tests before a 15-second timeout in
`issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts`; that entire suite passed on
isolated rerun (81 tests). Remaining serialized coverage is provided by
the current-head CI shards.
- An unchanged Cursor adapter test hit its 10-second limit in CI; all
five tests in that file passed on a local rerun in 3.11 seconds, and the
failed CI shard passed on its single retry.
- The preview-server readiness test passed a local rerun (28 tests). The
mobile-project readiness fix passed three repetitions of both browser
tests (6/6).
- Final commit `64ac0d9897f4353375996f1b1b38e5040bdeb0a0`: all CI gates
passed, including all eight browser shards, all server/chat suites,
typecheck, build, runner checks, and security checks. Greptile reviewed
this exact commit at 5/5; all review threads are resolved.

## Risks

- Human messages on a Slack-linked task now publish to its Slack thread.
The task banner states this behavior. Incoming Slack messages and
internal agent bookkeeping must not echo back.
- Normal tasks and routines can now use the assigned bot. Authority
remains bound to the current responsible user's link; it does not fall
back to the connection owner. Revocation, private-context limits, and
queued-write checks still apply.
- Existing Slack apps need `im:write` and a reinstall to open DMs. Other
existing capabilities remain available without that scope.
- New invited channels default to enabled. Explicit disabled choices
remain disabled. Channels created by bot tools still require a person to
enable responses.
- No database migration or new provider credentials are required.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, code execution, GitHub CLI,
and browser tools. The runtime does not expose a more specific model
build identifier or context-window size.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-24 10:51:45 -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 8725d6ce09 fix: make answered Slack conversations idle (#13809)
Settle published, successful Slack turns as Idle; resume the same conversation on an admitted message. Preserve unfinished work, delivery errors, and explicit dispositions.

Verified through focused lifecycle/API/UI tests, full CI, and a real staging Slack conversation in the embedded browser.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-22 10:35:33 -05:00