Commit Graph
961 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandPaperclip 7eea9d8214 fix(github): use bot names in review summaries (#16212)
## Thinking Path

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

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

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

**Current behavior**

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

**Proposed behavior**

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

**Reason and benefit**

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

**Breaking changes**

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

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

## What Changed

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

## Verification

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

## Risks

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

## Model Used

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

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 15:33:05 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 433d94ee0b refactor(maps): generate indexes from local story and feature metadata (#16214)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Feature recipes and Storybook help contributors find behavior,
examples, and verification steps.
> - Independent feature changes currently update shared catalogs,
indexes, and review hashes.
> - Those shared files cause merge conflicts and repeated bookkeeping
during parallel work.
> - This pull request stores metadata in each feature recipe and story,
then generates the combined views.
> - Contributors can merge independent work without editing a common
index. Git and PR evidence retain change and review history.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Maintaining the product, agent-access, and Storybook maps while multiple
agents change different features.

**Current behavior**

A story or recipe change can update `catalog.json`, `INDEX.md`, review
hashes, verification tables, and tracked generated navigation. Two
unrelated changes then conflict in the same files.

**Proposed behavior**

Each story declares capability links and classification in
`parameters.paperclip`. Each feature recipe declares its navigation and
optional verification guidance. Startup, build, and UI typechecking
discover these sources and generate ignored indexes and Storybook pages.

**Reason and benefit**

A routine change edits its own source files. Aggregate metadata is
rebuilt from the merged checkout. There is no sidecar registry, shared
review journal, or hash acknowledgment to maintain.

**Breaking changes**

The tracked Storybook catalog and index paths are retired. Consumers use
`ui/storybook/generated/` or `maps/generated/` after generation.
Contributor instructions and the existing feature-gap browser suite use
the new paths. Story and overview IDs remain stable.

## What Changed

- Move the existing annotations into 262 story files. Preserve
classifications, capability associations, exports, and explicit IDs.
- Discover all 35 feature recipes. Store section/order beside each
recipe and move durable verification routes out of the shared table.
- Remove tracked catalogs, inventories, overview pages, and inline
preview ordering. Keep authored preview behavior in `preview-base.tsx`.
- Generate the Storybook guide, feature/access Markdown indexes, gap
report, page-reference inventory, and preview wrapper automatically.
- Update the map contracts and maintenance skills to use Git history and
revision-specific PR/CI evidence.
- Add schema, identity, regeneration, and actual Git merge tests. Run
these through the existing UI Vitest suite. Add focused browser
navigation checks.

This is one coordinated migration. Most of the 367 changed files contain
only moved metadata or deleted generated content. Review the generator
scripts, map contracts, Storybook configuration, and tests first. No
product API or authorization behavior changes.

## Verification

Passed:

- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`: 35 paired areas and 175 capabilities.
- `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --check`: 262 suites and 2,485
authored stories after incorporating current master.
- `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs
scripts/storybook-catalog.test.mjs
scripts/storybook-feature-index.test.mjs`: 28 tests, including
independent branches merged in both orders with identical generated
output and no tracked changes.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
storybook/map-tooling.test.ts`: the CI entrypoint runs those map tests.
- `pnpm check:token-gates`.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` before the final master rebase.
- `pnpm build-storybook`: all 2,517 original story/docs URLs retained.
Current master contributes exactly four additional recovery stories.
- Focused Playwright navigation checks: search and open a feature
without examples; expand verification guidance and check source links;
retain capability order and follow a related Foundations suite.

The final clean Storybook build passed after deleting every ignored map
output. Post-rebase UI typechecking and both browser tests passed. The
working tree stays clean after generation. The concurrent-cleanup
regression fails with `ENOENT` without the fix and passes with it.

All GitHub CI gates passed on `00fc7ec18e`, which also received Greptile
5/5 with no unresolved findings. The final merge commit `1c3c5143a6`
incorporates master and resolves only the two modify/delete conflicts by
retaining removal of the aggregate index and catalog. Master’s new
workspace feature and access guidance is preserved. Map validation,
catalog generation, overview generation, all 28 map tests, and diff
checks pass after conflict resolution. The maintainer explicitly
requested merging without another Greptile review. CI has not been rerun
to completion on this merge commit. The local repository-wide `pnpm
test:run` was stopped before completion after the earlier CI matrix
passed; it is not reported as a local pass. No screenshot baselines or
production acceptance are claimed.

To repeat the browser check against an owned Storybook server:

```sh
PAPERCLIP_GAP_STORYBOOK_URL=http://127.0.0.1:6136 pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/storybook-visual/feature-gap-stories.config.ts map-navigation.spec.ts
```

## Risks

- Existing branches need a one-time rebase to move their catalog changes
into local annotations. The PR incorporates the recovery changes from
current master.
- Changing the same story or capability can still produce a meaningful
conflict. This removes the shared aggregate bottleneck.
- The generator uses Storybook's existing CSF parser. Literal-only
annotations and parser regression tests protect the current contract.
- Generated Markdown is available after running the generator; the
published Storybook provides a browsable guide.
- Shared source changes still require review. Removing hashes removes
mechanical acknowledgments; it does not establish runtime parity.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository inspection, code
execution, and browser-test tools. The exact deployment model ID and
context window were not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green on the previously reviewed head
`00fc7ec18e`; final conflict-resolution checks are documented above
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
on `00fc7ec18e`; another review was waived by the maintainer
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 15:27:23 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip c7f4b74111 fix: isolate fresh task sources from restricted project workspaces (#16095)
## Thinking Path

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

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

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

**Expected behavior**

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

**Steps to reproduce**

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

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

## What Changed

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

## Verification

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

## Risks

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

## Model Used

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

## Checklist

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

---------

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

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

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

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

**What happened?**

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

**Expected behavior**

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

**Steps to reproduce**

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

## What Changed

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

## Verification

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

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

## Risks

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

## Model Used

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

## Checklist

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

---------

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

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

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

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

**Expected behavior**

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

**Steps to reproduce**

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

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

## What Changed

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

## Verification

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

## Risks

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

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 (`gpt-6`), used through Codex with reasoning, repository
tools, code editing and test execution. The exact context window size is
not exposed by this environment.

## Checklist

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

---------

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

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

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

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Agent lifecycle, plugin contract, and native secret storage.

**Problem or motivation**

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

**Proposed solution**

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

**Alternatives considered**

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

**Roadmap alignment**

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

## What Changed

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

## Verification

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

## Risks

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

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

## Model Used

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

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 10:13:42 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip e67db42dc9 docs: define heartbeat execution design principles (#16190)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip coordinates AI agents and their work.
> - Heartbeat controls when that work starts, who owns execution, and
how it settles.
> - The extracted modules need shared architectural guidance as they
evolve.
> - Rules should protect those boundaries without freezing the current
implementation.
> - This PR adds scoped heartbeat principles for contributors and
reviewers.
> - The rule helps future changes preserve execution authority and
recoverable work.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Issue type**

Missing documentation.

**Where is the issue?**

The heartbeat service has a module map but no scoped architectural rule
under `rules/`.

**What's wrong?**

Changes span admission, execution, completion, and recovery. Reviewers
need shared principles for authority, ownership, and settlement across
these boundaries.

**Suggested fix**

Add a concise heartbeat rule, route contributors to it from `AGENTS.md`,
and register the same scope for Greptile. Keep implementation details in
the code and existing developer documentation.

Related: #16172 established scoped repository rules. #15984 completed
the latest heartbeat extraction. Searches found no duplicate
heartbeat-guidelines PR.

## What Changed

- Add `rules/heartbeat-execution-boundaries.mdc` with a folder guide, a
concise map of existing module responsibilities, and six design
principles.
- Keep `heartbeat.ts` focused on coordination: extend an existing owner
or extract cohesive modules when new behavior would substantially grow
it, with tests and explicit contracts.
- Cover current execution authority, explicit ownership, distinct
completion obligations, recovery intent, durable state, and visible
uncertainty.
- Register matching paths in `.greptile/files.json` and link the rule
from `AGENTS.md` and `doc/DEVELOPING.md`.
- Include behavioral review criteria and flag substantial coordinator
growth or mixed responsibilities while allowing justified cohesion and
ordering exceptions.

## Verification

- Parsed the rule YAML and Greptile JSON. Confirmed that the rule globs
exactly match the Greptile scope.
- Checked 14 positive and negative scope cases with Node's
`path.matchesGlob`, including nested heartbeat modules, sibling
services, regression tests, and unrelated paths.
- Verified local links and heading anchors, including the existing
heartbeat module map, and confirmed all 20 named modules exist. Reviewed
their responsibility descriptions against the current code and developer
documentation.
- `git diff origin/master --check` passed after rebasing onto current
master.
- Reviewed the principles against the current heartbeat code and tests.
The diff changes four documentation and review-configuration files.
- Application typecheck, runtime tests, and build were not run locally.
This worktree has no installed dependencies. CI and review status are
tracked below.

- CI passed on `a17f5a2cc82b7bb7e4629d4a2d9e3a766e27c5c0`: 55 successful
checks, two skipped, no failures or pending checks. This includes
typecheck, build, server/runner tests, and browser tests.
- Greptile reviewed the same commit at 5/5 with no findings or
unresolved review threads.

## Risks

The rule can influence later implementation and review decisions. It
applies to changed heartbeat behavior and permits justified contract
changes with tests. The scoped globs exclude unrelated subsystems. This
PR does not change application behavior. Hosted loading of the new rule
has not been demonstrated by the local configuration checks.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 Astra (`gpt-6-astra`) via Codex, with repository
inspection, file editing, and command execution. The context-window size
was not exposed to this session.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 10:48:17 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip e3029c632b feat: trace controller preparation before agent dispatch (#16178)
Trace eleven controller preparation operations with the existing hashed run correlation and preserve errors without exporting exception text. Verify asynchronous child-span parenting with a real OpenTelemetry SDK and context manager.

Full exact-head CI and E2E passed after one documented fixture-startup retry; Greptile Apex 5/5.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 10:16:10 -05:00
0b0e53029f fix: recover saved workspace results automatically (#15824)
## Thinking Path

- Paperclip preserves accepted agent results before workspace copyback
and result commitment.
- A replaced controller can leave a physical copyback owner receipt
behind. A lost database lock or expired lease cannot prove that its
tar/Git children stopped.
- Infrastructure recovery should belong to the runtime and deployment
harness; task users should not investigate processes or attest shutdown.
- New receipts record the exact deployment. The harness independently
verifies that deployment fully stopped and signs a short-lived proof
bound to the stack, run, owner and deployment.
- The existing guarded reconciler then finishes the same accepted result
without a new agent turn. Legacy receipts retain the documented
administrator API after independent platform verification.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

An accepted native result can remain at `workspace_finalizing` with an
abandoned physical copyback owner. Repeated recovery sweeps could
replace specific instructions with advice to start new agent work. The
first version of this PR exposed a shutdown-evidence form in the task;
that asks end users to resolve infrastructure details.

**Expected behavior**

Automatically verify and recover the exact stopped deployment, preserve
the original accepted result and existing approval/monitor waits, and
show only a quiet task status. Unknown or live workers must remain
fenced. Older receipts without platform identity need independently
verified operator assistance through the administrator API.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Persist an accepted native result and a copyback receipt from a prior
controller.
2. Replace that deployment before workspace finalization commits.
3. Let the normal finalization reconciler revisit the saved result.
4. With a platform-bound receipt and a fully stopped deployment,
recovery should finish automatically. With missing, live, unverifiable
or changed ownership, it must not write files or create another provider
turn.

Related public work: #14402 introduced copyback ownership; #9687 handles
dead-run finalize barriers; #15795 handles terminal stale-run cleanup.
This change addresses an accepted result whose physical copyback owner
prevents commitment.

## What Changed

- Record Railway project, environment, service and deployment identity
on new physical copyback owners.
- Request read-only platform verification from the managed cloud
harness. Require an Ed25519 stop receipt with a disjoint purpose,
configured signing key, exact stack/run/owner/deployment binding and
valid expiry.
- Keep live, unknown, malformed, unavailable and legacy owners fenced.
Compare the whole prior receipt during ownership takeover, under the
existing dedicated advisory lock.
- Persist platform proof and audit automatic takeover. Resume normal
finalization of the same saved result, preserving task ownership,
approved boundaries, monitors and pending confirmations.
- Remove process metadata, shutdown evidence, confirmation checkboxes
and infrastructure-repair forms from task views. Suppress the duplicate
technical owner-recovery card. Show “Restoring saved work…” only from
server-confirmed recovery or queued operator recovery; platform identity
alone shows the operator-assistance fallback. Remove the status when
recovery resolves.
- Share current-task, current-running-execution, accepted-result,
authoritative-reviewer and newer-execution checks between automatic and
operator recovery. Validate after the provider lookup, atomically with
the owner claim, and again before file publication; closed or superseded
tasks cannot start copyback.
- Keep the separately authorized exact-owner API for operator recovery
of legacy receipts, with active-lock, live-controller, stale-result and
newer-execution rejection. Generic dismissal cannot bypass the copyback
fence.
- Replace obsolete form stories with production-backed automatic,
queued, legacy, completed and mobile examples; retain stable suite IDs.
Update the operator runbook and scoped Storybook catalog.

## Verification

- Red/green: new platform-proof tests failed before implementation; the
database takeover regression failed against the original ownership
guard; reduced-UI assertions failed against the original form. All pass
after the changes.
- Passed: 59 physical-owner/finalization database tests using isolated
PostgreSQL, including real reconciler commitment from all three
saved-result phases through both automatic and operator recovery. They
preserve result identity, exact saved file bytes, pending approval and
overdue monitor waits, and create no new run or wake request. Unknown
evidence and changed ownership remain fenced.
- Passed: 162 focused proof, cloud identity, recovery route,
recovery-card and reduced-UI tests.
- Passed: full workspace typecheck and build, final server/UI
typechecks, token gates, and Storybook build.
- Browser inspection: desktop task composition shows only the quiet
status; completed example removes it and retains the approval-wait
message. Mobile shows the existing bottom navigation with no horizontal
overflow. These are fixture UI observations, not live provider
acceptance.
- A companion harness change implements the actual provider check,
signed receipts, server-token authentication and bounded/coalesced
provider reads. Its full typecheck and test suite passed: 3,240 passed,
92 skipped, zero failures. This application alone cannot enable platform
verification.
- The updated full application `pnpm test:run` was stopped after
repeated local embedded-Postgres startup failures; it is not claimed
green. The same affected recovery suites pass against isolated
PostgreSQL. CI passed on final head `9ad5c3529e`: 54 successful checks,
two intentional skips, and successful legacy Snyk status. Greptile is
5/5 with no unresolved findings.
- Global Storybook catalog validation is green: 225 files, 2,224
stories. Its 17 catalog/index tests pass. Master was merged and the
inherited index metadata was reconciled after source review.
- Review correction red/green: two UI and two database assertions
reproduced misleading progress / missing server recovery state; all pass
after server-confirmed state was added. All 153 focused server tests and
68 UI tests pass on the final recovery code, including repeated-sweep
idempotence. Full workspace typecheck/build, token gates and Storybook
build also pass.
- Safety regression red/green: stale-task copyback and publication tests
failed against the previous guard. The final suite covers changes during
proof lookup, closed/cancelled tasks, replaced execution/checkout, newer
and queued legacy runs, reassignment and rejected/unbound results, plus
the real reconciler selecting closed or superseded tasks. Files remain
untouched and no workspace operation starts.
- No staging mutations, deployment, live provider probes or live
production recovery were performed. The three historical receipts lack
deployment identity and still require independent operator proof.

## Risks

Automatic takeover requires the companion harness release and configured
runtime-identity keys. Deploying only this application leaves
unavailable evidence fenced. Legacy receipts are not retrospectively
assigned a deployment identity. An authorized operator can still make an
incorrect attestation through the fallback API; its administrator gate
and exact-owner safeguards remain. Provider history that is missing or
deeper than the bounded lookup defers automatic recovery. Copyback can
still fail under its existing retained-workspace policy.

No migration, telemetry change or cloud provider credential delivery is
required. The companion harness PR also has passing CI and a 5/5 review;
neither branch is deployed.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with repository inspection, browser verification,
tool use and code execution. The exact serving model ID and
context-window size were not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run the relevant 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: Paperclip <paperclip@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Devin Foley <devin@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 10:14:45 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 833769ab55 perf(chat): schedule Telegram maintenance from commits and deadlines (#16094)
Replace periodic Telegram discovery and maintenance scans with bounded startup recovery, connection-specific commit notifications, and durable action deadlines. Preserve ownership, inactive subscription parking, retry and cleanup recovery, and atomic credential binding updates.

Verified full typecheck/build, 30 focused scheduler tests, 12 database-backed recovery cases, all current-head CI checks, and Greptile 5/5 with no unresolved threads.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 07:55:27 -07:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip a0651c96f8 Add database-free process liveness probes (#16101)
Expose process liveness without database or credential queries while preserving hostname and runtime identity guards. Deep health and sleep/wake readiness checks retain their existing behavior.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 07:43:46 -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
DottaandPaperclip 2ad36f4ff2 Fix skill source removal with a keep-or-delete choice (#16150)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - GitHub sources import skills and keep their updates together.
> - Disconnect only disabled a source and kept its read-only imports.
> - A disabled source could not be removed or imported again.
> - Removing a source needs an explicit decision about its imported
skills.
> - This pull request removes the source after the user keeps editable
copies or deletes the imports.
> - Existing disabled sources use the same removal flow.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15731, #14713.

**What happened?**

Disconnect left the repository on Sources. Its Disconnect action was
then disabled. The saved repository still blocked a new import.

**Expected behavior**

Remove the repository from Sources. Require a choice to keep editable
copies or delete its imports. Allow removal of sources that are already
disconnected.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Import a repository in Skills → Sources.
2. Choose Disconnect source.
3. Observe the disconnected row and disabled removal action.
4. Try to import the repository again.

**Paperclip version or commit**

d67e3507b2.

## What Changed

- Add one confirmation with a required keep-or-delete choice.
- Remove the source and entries, including legacy disabled sources.
- Keep complete editable copies in My Skills, including shared
repository files and executable modes. Preserve skill IDs, keys,
versions, and agent assignments.
- Delete imported skills and source in one transaction with its activity
record. Check policy for every linked skill, including deselected
entries. Reject deletion of skills still used by agents.
- Fence removal with the source revision. Reload stale confirmations and
require a new choice. Prevent an in-flight refresh from restoring
removed imports.
- Reject incomplete legacy copies with a recovery message. Lock copied
skill rows against concurrent deletion and check publication succeeded.
- Add regression tests and production-page Storybook examples. Make an
initially unselected radio-card group keyboard accessible.

## Verification

- Workspace typecheck and build passed. Final affected server/UI
typechecks passed.
- Focused server, UI, and API suites passed: 114 tests initially. After
review fixes, all 21 source persistence and 58 route authorization tests
passed, including the complete repository copy regression; affected
server/UI typechecks and token gates passed again.
- Design token gates passed.
- Real isolated app: imported a public repository, assigned bro to the
CEO, verified that deletion reports the assignment, kept an editable
copy, observed the source disappear, opened the copy in My Skills, saved
an edit, and refreshed. The assignment remained. Re-imported the same
repository, deleted its new unused import, and verified the original
editable copy and assignment remained. No model tasks ran.
- Full local Vitest was attempted but terminated with exit 137 before
completion; it is not counted as a pass. Current-head sharded CI is
pending. Greptile reviewed the current head at 5/5 with no new
actionable comments. The final workspace build passed again.
- Storybook catalog aligned. The legacy removal example was inspected in
the browser; the Delete choice enables removal.
- Storybook: Skills / GitHub-synced skills / Sources · Disconnect source
and Sources · Remove disconnected source.

## Risks

- DELETE of a skill source now requires the saved revision and an
explicit copy/delete choice. Old callers must update their request body.
- Deletion removes imported skills and their records. Assigned skills
must be detached first.
- Incomplete legacy versions must be refreshed before keeping copies;
removal does not silently discard supporting files.
- Copies intentionally stop receiving upstream updates. Their IDs and
keys remain stable for assigned agents.
- No database migration. Copy writes use new managed directories and
clean up on failure. Delete restores quarantined files before releasing
publication locks on failure.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, configured model `gpt-6-astra`. The runtime
does not expose the context-window size. Used shell tools, code editing,
tests, and browser interaction.

## 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 07:53:13 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip df06df2306 fix(slack): allow direct messages without at-mentions (#16151)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Slack connections let people start and continue agent tasks.
> - The Require at-mention setting currently applies to channels and
direct messages.
> - A person who sends a direct message has already selected the agent.
> - This pull request exempts direct messages from mention checks,
including queued work.
> - People can talk normally in DMs while channel messages keep the
configured mention rule.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15612, which introduced the Require at-mention setting. Searches
found no duplicate PR for the DM exemption.

**What happened?**

With Require at-mention enabled, a plain Slack DM does not start or
continue agent work. New Slack connections enable the setting by
default.

**Expected behavior**

Direct messages do not need an at-mention. Top-level DM replies remain
top-level. Channel messages and channel thread replies still follow the
saved mention setting.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Enable Allow direct messages and Require at-mention on a Slack
connection.
2. Send a plain DM from an authorized sender.
3. Confirm the agent responds without an at-mention. Send a plain
follow-up and confirm it also works.
4. Confirm unmentioned channel messages remain filtered when Require
at-mention is enabled.
5. Disable Allow direct messages and confirm new DMs remain blocked.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Source baseline: `eb06c9fedd`.

**Deployment mode**

Built from source. Automated tests use disposable local Postgres and
provider fixtures. This change has not been deployed or retested in live
Slack.

## What Changed

- Exempt DMs at inbound admission, task mutation, work authorization,
and heartbeat queue claim.
- Keep channel mention checks and all existing sender, endpoint, and
destination checks.
- Update regressions for new connections, follow-ups, deferred delivery,
and coalesced queued messages.
- Clarify the Slack settings copy, connection documentation, and
verification maps.
- Refresh the affected Storybook review references after source
inspection.

## Verification

- Passed 55 Slack and durable scheduler tests with Vitest on the current
rebased commit, including admission through the extracted inbound
module.
- Passed `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` on the rebased PR commit.
- Passed token gates and map checks.
- Passed Storybook catalog validation after rebase: 223 files and 2,210
stories.
- Full local `pnpm test:run` was stopped before completion after three
failures in the unchanged tool-access suite. All 418 tests in that suite
passed in a standalone rerun. The focused regressions passed; full
GitHub CI remains the merge gate.
- Greptile reviewed commit `b0293fa6571403c5e01c30bb7b5fcc5e91b88c97`:
5/5, with no findings or unresolved review threads. All 55 GitHub checks
passed on this commit; two optional Storybook jobs were skipped.
- No live Slack messages were sent during implementation verification.

## Risks

Existing Slack connections now accept authorized plain DMs even when
Require at-mention is enabled. Allow direct messages and sender
authorization still apply. Queued DM work follows the same exemption.
Channel behavior and DM reply routing are unchanged. No schema or
migration change is required.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6, running as Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. 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>
2026-10-13 07:40:46 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip fc3b15537b fix(runner): match call_api to existing agent REST permissions (#16040)
Route native call_api through existing agent REST permissions. Preserve admitted credentials across restarts, protect sensitive replies and private snapshots, and compare saved completion with provider history through the same redaction projection. Add permission, privacy and recovery regressions and update the access map and run-log guide.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 07:34:15 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip eb06c9fedd refactor(server): split chat channel workflows into provider and shared modules (#16080)
Move provider operations into channel folders and shared chat work into named interaction, setup, admission, delivery and publication workflows. Consolidate reviewed PRs #16085, #16089, #16096 and #16105. Preserve upstream execution-default and recovery behavior. The main service is 7,917 lines.

All 55 current-head CI checks pass, with two optional Storybook skips. Greptile is 5/5 with no findings. All 1,294 current chat integration cases, repository-wide typecheck and build pass locally. Broad local tool-route timing/socket failures are recorded in the PR.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 07:26:32 -05:00
9bd820e687 feat(storybook): mirror the complete feature-map index (#16052)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The feature map describes its user-facing capabilities and
verification recipes.
> - Storybook provides isolated UI examples for those capabilities.
> - The previous organization showed only features with primary story
suites.
> - This pull request derives the complete Storybook index from the
upstream map.
> - Readers can find the same features in both places and see related
examples or explicit gaps.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16046 and #16049.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Storybook navigation and the downstream feature catalog.

**Current behavior**

The sidebar has 28 primary feature homes. The feature map lists 35. The
main guide groups suites alphabetically by area slug. Related examples
can live under a different feature.

**Proposed behavior**

Use the feature map's eight sections and 35 features in the same order.
Give each feature an Overview page with all its capabilities, related
example links, and missing-example messages. Keep shared foundations
outside the product index. Preserve all existing stories and URLs.

**Reason and benefit**

Readers can move between the feature map and Storybook without learning
a second index. A feature without cataloged examples remains visible.

**Breaking changes**

None to existing story IDs or product behavior. Storybook start and
build now reject stale generated feature pages and ordering. Run the
catalog generator after upstream changes, inspect the output, and review
affected source fingerprints.

## What Changed

- Generate 35 feature Overview stories and capability data from the
upstream map. Generate the inline sidebar order required by Storybook.
- Replace the main guide with the full ordered feature index and search.
Link all related suites from feature pages, even across primary homes.
- Preserve all 223 authored files, 2,210 story IDs, and the existing
docs ID. Keep status, implementation, and fixture classifications
visible.
- Put the generated Markdown catalog in feature-map order. Keep
generated guides outside example counts.
- Update maintenance and review skills, documentation, and generator
tests. Keep the feature map independent of Storybook.

## Verification

- Passed: 16 catalog and generator tests; map checks; token gates; both
skill validators.
- Passed: `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and the Storybook build.
- Built-index comparison preserved all 2,211 previous entries and added
only 35 feature overviews. Feature order matches the map.
- Browser: inspected the complete index and sidebar, searched for Goals,
opened its overview, and followed a related suite under Projects. The
original suite renders.
- Passed: all 8,170 UI tests in 728 files. Browser checks also covered
empty search, capability-ID search, missing-example pages, the original
editable-text bookmark, the CLI sidebar label, and searching/opening
shared foundations.
- The broad local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after a failure in the
unchanged GitHub chat test `authorizes description edits as the editor,
never inheriting the original author's access`. That exact test passed
alone without code or expectation changes. A complete local repository
suite pass is not established.
- Original revision CI passed after one runner retry. The merged
revision `5ca01c70716f23974680a8019ddc613035d11bc4` passed fresh CI.
Local UI typecheck, catalog checks, 16 generator tests, map checks and
token gates pass.
- Greptile: 5/5 on final commit
`5ca01c70716f23974680a8019ddc613035d11bc4`, with all findings resolved.
- Master merge: inspected source drift in 61 catalog entries and
regenerated INDEX, preserving upstream notes. Marked the sidebar suite
that mounts IssueDetail unreviewed for the new activity query; recorded
limits for composer and channel-default changes. No stories removed.
- Final Storybook build passed. Browser filename searches for
`new-task-composer` and `forms-editors` return the expected feature and
shared example.
- No visual-baseline or full production acceptance claim. The deeper
authored scenario groups remain intact.

## Risks

- The parser depends on the feature-map Markdown contract. It rejects
unknown index rows, omitted feature recipes, and unexpected generated
files.
- A suite can reference several capabilities. A link proves catalog
association, not complete behavior coverage or production parity.
- Storybook treats `/` as a folder separator. Sidebar labels use a comma
for that character; the guide and page headings retain the upstream
name.
- No database, API, authorization, or production component changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, code execution, and browser
inspection. The exact runtime model ID and context window are not
exposed in this session.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: copilot-swe-agent[bot] <198982749+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-10-13 07:01:29 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip d67e3507b2 feat(runner): qualify Codex platform packages and cache hosted builds (#16028)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Native execution needs a compatible installed daemon and provider
dependency.
> - The Codex-default work found missing platform packages and
clean-install startup failures.
> - Release builds also repeat dependency compilation and run
preparation serially.
> - This prerequisite packages four daemon targets and verifies
installed native startup.
> - It also caches hosted Cargo dependencies and overlaps JavaScript
preparation with compilation.
> - Agent creation defaults and experimental gates stay at the current
master behavior.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15683. Refs #15555. Refs #15422. Refs #15926. Refs #15932.

Extract runtime and installation support from #15683. This prerequisite
has 65 changed files. Creation, onboarding, imports, UI runner selection
and graduation remain in the dependent PR. Feature/access maps and the
Storybook source catalog stay synchronized. Existing agents keep their
execution choices.

## What Changed

- Correct the existing runner test fixtures. Reserve owned credential
quorum listeners through the existing bounded fixture helper. Keep
foreign listeners intact, run actual credential staging once, and
preserve its rejection and unchanged-auth assertions. Reuse the
durable-resume outer-limit correction. Wait for actual warm-completion
and held-authorization callback entry under the existing recovery
deadline and surface early request errors. Preserve every semantic
assertion.
- Retain bounded installation failure diagnostics through the existing
qualification receipt upload. Keep the original error, 10-minute
deadline and all success checks.
- Keep startup ownership until credential preparation and registration
drain. Reject duplicate and post-close startup/resume work. Observe
shutdown during normal and adopted authentication readiness. Preserve
the primary failure and retain private state when cleanup is
unconfirmed.
- Package Linux x64/ARM64 and macOS Apple Silicon/Intel daemons. Verify
target headers, source identities, manifests, and hashes before assembly
and installation.
- Reuse the existing release producer/consumer workflows. Cache Cargo
dependencies by target, OS, compiler, lockfile, and contract inputs.
Rebuild workspace binaries. Permit trusted cache writes only for
canonical exact-source master pushes.
- Overlap JavaScript preparation with native compilation. Join both
commands and failure/cancellation cleanup before artifact verification.
- Preserve shell positional arguments in the shared SSH runner and apply
environment assignments correctly. Reject environment option keys. Six
before/after controls and two real SSH subprocess paths pass with zero
provider calls; this fix lands before both Codex and Claude defaults.
- Admit verified suspended SSH backups during cold controller
continuation, using the same full-scope, integrity and lifecycle checks
as sandbox targets. Two positive SSH cases fail before; all 14
positive/negative matrix cases pass afterward. Active ownership and
corrupt/malformed/nonempty state remain rejected.
- Record measured sandbox platform facts through the existing explicit
environment probe. Bind facts to the company, effective provider
configuration, immutable OCI image and actual captured image binding.
Check the returned cleanup receipt. Reject client-authored proof and
stale or named boot identities. Creation and discovery allocate nothing.
Preserve connection-only behavior.
- Resolve the actual remote Codex target and preserve same-host
development overrides. Preserve runtime artifact verification. Use
actual protocol/model compatibility rather than a numerical CLI version
fence.
- Resolve the installed Codex login dependency on 64-bit Linux and Mac
independently of the daemon libc baseline. Preserve account homes and
safe errors.
- Fix actual clean-install TOML table comparison. Preserve strict
semantic checks, comments, private writes, and malformed-input
rejection. Preserve primary startup failures and bounded cleanup.
- Document GNU libc 2.39+ and stock Ubuntu sandbox prerequisites.
Qualify ARM startup with a scoped distribution profile and unchanged
global restrictions. Preserve Windows and Alpine deferral.
- Preserve selected and saved native Codex reasoning effort in the
existing UI builder, while excluding it from other providers. This small
shared correction prevents import edits higher in the stack from
dropping effort.
- Reuse existing installed-package checks and assertions. Paperclip
tarballs contain no Codex native payloads. Official npm dependencies
supply the consumer's Codex binaries. All Docker and native builds stay
remote.

## Verification

Candidate: `271d434c170e74bdedde65d0b13059a55419c943`. It includes
current master `e168512f7bdbb6af6ea01954c6d7ed80b91e903e` and preserves
prior candidates through ordinary commits.

Current [full
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38346601686)
is successful on attempt 2. GitHub reports 54 successful checks and four
conditional skips, including required verify and browser aggregates,
workspace typecheck/tests/build, Linux DB controls, both runner shards
and [isolated native
compilation](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38346601609).
Fresh current-head Greptile is 5/5 with all four threads resolved. The
passing build's clean Grok/Codex report records CI merge source
`7a82a37438e6e448abc7cc5caa60dc2519a97be0`, 18 installed packages,
omitted Codex payloads, official host-only npm dependencies and zero
provider calls. Pi setup and its no-prompt lease verification also pass.
The first attempt's single 60-second Node archive download timeout
remains retained; its DNS/TLS/download cause remains unknown. One
unchanged-source retry was requested through the normal Build-job dialog
with debug logging disabled. GitHub's attempt 2 graph reports the other
CI jobs as well; no second retry or source/deadline relaxation was made.

The [final exact-source package
campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38347027535)
is successful on literal `271d434c170e74bdedde65d0b13059a55419c943`. It
passes all four native producers, public Linux package assembly and
clean installed consumers on Apple Silicon, Intel Mac and Linux ARM64.
The nine qualification-mode skips are intentional; full CI above covers
their ordinary gates. Native builds and Docker assembly ran remotely.
The predecessor [`dae808` package
campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38342104102)
remains literal historical evidence. Only tests and the dated record
differ from that source; runtime, package and workflow code is
unchanged. The reused credential fixture correction passes all 42
canonical Node 24 controls with synthetic data and independent
matching-source review, and the current hosted runner shard passes.
Production credential behavior is unchanged.

**Merge hold:** current-source CI, fresh 5/5 review and exact-source
package qualification pass. Actual code-owner approval and normal
protected merge remain pending. No slice has merged or deployed. GitHub
CLI authentication needs refresh; the normal signed-in embedded GitHub
UI provided this status without credential workarounds.

- The master merge preserves both Storybook source-review appendices and
the guarded test-home cleanup. All six existing cleanup controls pass
without skips. Master's isolated-home helper/test/setup are
byte-identical. The two existing whitespace lines in master's unrelated
privacy test remain outside this PR's diff.
- Canonical Node 24 passes all 24 existing public-install helper tests.
Three narrow added cases prove bounded/redacted failure metadata,
symlink exclusions, original exception identity, failed diagnostic
writes and no false failure on success. The Mac installer now uses
`--timing`; at most two 16 KiB tails and 32 structured entries per tail
enter the existing receipt upload. Raw argv, URLs, environment, error
text and stacks are omitted. A failed receipt explicitly remains
FAILED/unqualified/runtime-not-attempted. The 600,000 ms install
deadline and every real package/hash/payload/lock/lifecycle/runtime
oracle are unchanged.
- Canonical Node 24 reproduces the durable-resume outer timeout under
controlled fake latency. Only its outer test limit changes to 15
seconds; internal 500 ms/5 second deadlines and usage/effect assertions
remain. Controlled warm-recovery and before-bootstrap authorization
scheduling delays reproduce their callback polling failures, while the
explicit entry signals pass. Early recovery errors surface unchanged.
Independent review is clear. Historical mock binaries support the
fixture controls; fresh full hosted CI remains decisive. The original
hosted callback failure cause is inconclusive.
- The composed runner/surfaces/server/E2E TypeScript checks pass. Map
checks pass 35 areas/171 capability IDs. Token gates pass. The existing
Storybook catalog passes 223 files/2,210 stories; story IDs and
classifications remain intact. The current master had 25 inherited stale
fingerprints from three changed map recipes. Only those guarded
fingerprints and a source-only review note change; all 92 non-map
story/component/fixture inputs remain unchanged. Existing
classifications are retained. This proves source structure, not visual
or live acceptance.
- The 65-file contribution audit has no code file crossing from below
1,000 lines to above the limit. Earlier comment cleanup preserves
executable emissions, parsed workflows and action pins. Independent
cleanup/catalog and three-file reporting reviews are clear. No new
workflow, suite, grader or local native/Docker build was added.

**Prior `dae808` gate evidence:** fresh Greptile is 5/5 with four
resolved threads, isolated native compilation and the browser aggregate
pass. Its first runner shard passes the previous two corrections but
fails a different held-authorization cell at the implicit one-second
polling deadline. It records 1,672 passes/one failure/three skips. This
candidate applies the verified entry-signal correction without changing
production deadlines or any semantic assertions. Its original hosted
cause remains inconclusive until fresh CI.

**Previous-source evidence, kept literal:** the [exact `16a532` package
campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38338806076)
passes all four native producers, public Linux package assembly, Apple
Silicon, Intel Mac and Linux ARM64 installed consumers. Its fresh review
is 5/5 with all four threads resolved. Full CI records 52 successful
checks, four conditional skips and the two fixture failures corrected
here. This is not a green full-CI candidate or proof for the new source.

`64c074fb8da1b31f8d6042c4fef48dc4164e759b` passed [full
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38332726938),
54 checks/four conditional skips, [isolated native
compilation](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38332726787/job/115085895328),
and fresh Greptile 5/5/all four resolved threads. The hosted transport
suite passed 246 tests and startup trust passed 22, closing that
source's local fake-binary limitation. These are historical after
reconciliation.

The [previous exact-source package
campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38332921463)
built all four platform daemons and passed public Linux package assembly
plus Apple Silicon and Linux ARM64 installed consumers. **Intel Mac
failed:** its initial scripts-disabled npm install timed out before
lifecycle/runtime assertions. The underlying download/resolution/host
cause is unknown because the old helper deleted the npm logs. This is
the concrete baseline for the diagnostic change. The failed campaign
remains failed; no all-platform signoff or automatic retry is claimed.

The earlier `a200495` [four-target
campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38283695248)
and [scoped ARM
qualification](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38291535914)
remain component evidence. Cargo restores were cold misses; no
warm-cache speedup is claimed. Paperclip tarballs contain no Codex
payloads. Official npm dependencies supply Codex on the user's platform.

Current-source full workspace typecheck/tests/build, Linux DB controls,
static/Rust/native tests, all browser shards and exact-source package
consumers must pass. New-agent defaults and final managed onboarding
belong to #15683. Actual private Cloud composition, warm/cold signup,
task/follow-up and rollback compatibility remain later release gates.
Source audits found that ordinary managed onboarding does not run the
saved platform probe and Cloud distributes named snapshots without a
verified final boot-image binding. These dependent release blockers
remain open; prequalified E2E fixtures do not close them. Master adds
task-workspace migrations; the final image/migrator and previous-image
checks must include them. ARM paid task/follow-up and ordinary OS APT
installation are not proven.

## Risks

- Multi-target packages require source and header agreement. Missing or
mismatched artifacts fail explicitly. Existing execution choices remain
unchanged.
- Linux requires GNU libc 2.39+ and compatible sandbox prerequisites.
The scoped hosted ARM preparation does not qualify arbitrary containers
or kernels. Windows, 32-bit ARM, and Alpine remain deferred.
- Only dependency crates are cached. Preview jobs cannot write trusted
caches. Concurrent command cleanup must preserve the primary failure.
- Native-free Paperclip packaging retains official Codex npm
dependencies. No Codex payload bundling, schema migration, automatic
agent migration, or production deployment is included.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools, code
execution, and parallel agents. The exact serving model snapshot and
context-window size are not exposed.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with 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 06:24:07 -05:00
Dotta 4a641d0980 fix(ui): default human task replies to the latest assigning agent (#15594)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Tasks let agents ask a person for input.
> - The reply composer needs a useful default recipient.
> - A recent comment does not identify the agent that assigned the task.
> - The old fallback can select the person who is writing the reply.
> - This change uses the latest agent assignment and keeps manual
choices.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
When an agent assigns a task to a person, the reply composer can select
that person or a different commenter. A data refresh can also replace a
manual selection.

**Expected behavior**
For a task assigned to the current person, select the latest agent that
assigned it to them. If no such assignment exists, use the latest other
commenter. If neither exists, leave the recipient empty. Keep explicit
choices during refreshes.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Have agent Alpha assign a task to a person.
2. Assign it to agent Beta, then have Beta assign it to the same person.
3. Open the task as that person.
4. Check that the reply composer selects Beta.
5. Select another recipient. Refresh task data. Check that the selection
stays.

Related work: #15091 shares task composer controls. This change fixes
recipient defaults.

## What Changed

- Read real assignment changes from REST and native runner task
activity, in time order.
- Record human assignee fields in native create and reassign activity.
- Ignore unchanged assignment fields and assignments to other people.
- Use the assigning agent before comment hints for human-owned tasks.
- Connect the suggestion to current and classic task composers and
pipeline replies.
- Keep manual selections when suggestions change.
- Add regression tests and document the fallback.
- Use tasks with no assignee in the attachment receipt tests. This keeps
the tests on the comment route. Dismiss announcements through the real
UI.
- Record human and agent assignees in REST creation receipts. Include
child creation in the assignment history resolver.

## Verification

- Focused tests cover assignment order, creation, other recipients,
unchanged fields, fallback, and manual selections.
- Browser fixture uses the real composer and assignment resolver. It
selects Beta and keeps a manual human selection after history refresh.
- Passed: 223 focused tests across four suites.
- Passed: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`.
- Passed: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build`.
- Passed: `pnpm check:token-gates`.
- The initial CI run passed full build, typecheck, Rust, unit tests and
seven E2E shards. The attachment shard exposed tests that relied on the
old self-selection default. The tests now select the recipient
explicitly.
- Native assignment regression tests and resolver tests pass: 40 tests.
- Attachment E2E suite: 10 passed; one page-load timing failure passed
on an isolated rerun. All 11 cases passed across the suite and rerun.
- Previous full CI passed at cc7ed05. New CI must pass on the current
head.
- Latest local checks: 16 resolver tests and 7 workspace policy tests
pass. REST creation audit tests cover both creation routes.
- The latest browser check could not start. The UI build exceeded the
local memory limit (exit 137). Full typecheck, tests, build, and browser
checks will run in CI.

## Risks

- Old activity rows without previous assignment values cannot prove a
reassignment. They use the comment fallback.
- An empty fallback requires the person to choose a recipient or use the
existing no-assignee flow.
- No database or API schema changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The session does not expose an exact model build or
context window. Used code editing, shell tools, tests, and browser
verification.

## Checklist

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


Final validation at f83f2f6: 55 checks passed. Two optional Storybook
checks were skipped. All browser shards passed. Both review threads are
resolved. Classic attachment tests use the real no-assignee
confirmation.
2026-10-13 00:56:15 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip d837b65be8 refactor(server): move provider setup, inventory and delivery into channel folders (#16058)
Consolidate the ten reviewed provider-folder extractions. Preserve the verified source tree and current master changes.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 00:26:33 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 7d7f55e4be fix(apps): show user avatars and center access rows (#15577)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their access to apps.
> - The app access page shows people with linked chat accounts.
> - The identity response omitted the user's saved image.
> - The row placed the avatar beside only the first name line.
> - This change returns the image and centers the avatar beside both
name lines.
> - People can recognize linked accounts and still see initials when no
image is available.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

The app access page showed initials even when the linked Paperclip user
had a profile image. The avatar was above the vertical center of the
Disconnect button.

**Expected behavior**

Show the linked user's saved image. Center it beside the Paperclip and
chat names. Keep initials when no image is available.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Link a Slack account to a Paperclip user with a profile image.
2. Open the app's Access tab.
3. Inspect the person's avatar and the two name lines.

Searched public issues and pull requests. No duplicate fix was found.
Related avatar work in #15095 concerns agent uploads, not linked user
profiles.

## What Changed

- Return `paperclipUserImage` from the chat principal service and
declare it in the API and client types.
- Use the shared avatar primitives and center the avatar beside the full
name block. Keep full names available in hover text.
- Add image and initials examples to the existing Storybook access
story, with image and alignment checks.
- Extend the service test to check saved images and missing images.

## Verification

- Token gates and `git diff --check` pass.
- The 33 existing chat setup and identity-link UI tests pass.
- The OAuth installer service regression test passes.
- Chromium rendered the Storybook Access story at desktop and mobile
sizes. The avatar, name block, and Disconnect button centers all
measured 307 CSS pixels on desktop.
- UI typecheck passes. Full repository typecheck and build stop at the
Rust runner because this workspace has no `cargo`. The initial parallel
typecheck also exceeded the 4 GiB workspace limit. The full local test
attempt was stopped as memory approached the 4 GiB limit; it has no
complete verdict. CI passed the full build, typecheck, test, and E2E
lanes on the initial commit. The previously reviewed commit passed 54
checks with two intentionally skipped Storybook checks. Master was
merged on October 10 to resolve an import conflict; fresh CI is running
for `24badb742d331c1b6ee3e90cbd06defefe5cd634`. Token gates and
whitespace checks pass after conflict resolution. The single retry after
CI runner shutdowns passed. Greptile gives this commit 5/5, with both
review threads resolved.

### Screenshots

The Storybook fixture shows an image, fallback initials, and a pending
account.

![Desktop access
rows](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/fix/app-access-user-avatar/doc/screenshots/app-access-avatar/desktop.png)

![Mobile access
rows](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/fix/app-access-user-avatar/doc/screenshots/app-access-avatar/mobile.png)

## Risks

Low risk. The API field is additive and needs no migration. The image
uses the same avatar primitive as other user identities. Missing or
failed images retain the initials fallback. Other chat providers share
this access row.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. Tool use and code execution. 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
- [ ] 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 23:54:01 -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
DottaandPaperclip e168512f7b perf(chat): stop polling failed run retries (#15871)
Stop one-second scans of failed chat-run retries. Wake the existing retry queue after transaction commits and at saved retry or stale-claim deadlines. Preserve claim fences, authorization, recovery, and idempotent agent admission.

Resolve conflicts with the current chat-service extraction by applying the retry signals and shared deadline predicate in the failed-run retry module.

Verified with pnpm typecheck, pnpm build, all 1,328 chat and coordinator regression tests, and current-head CI. Greptile reviewed the final head at 5/5 with no unresolved threads.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-12 19:49:47 -07:00
56a0bf0d49 Support test Cloud connector identities (#16033)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Its Cloud connector uses an environment-bound identity to call a
hosted broker.
> - The identity parser and enrollment flow accept development, staging,
and production.
> - A separate test broker needs its own environment identity.
> - This pull request accepts test identities and maps the test broker
to that environment.
> - Known hosted brokers still reject identities from other
environments.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Cloud connector configuration and self-host enrollment.

**Current behavior**

The app rejects an identity with environment `test`. Self-host
enrollment infers development for the test broker.

**Proposed behavior**

Accept `test` identities at `https://test.paperclip.app`. Infer test
during self-host enrollment. Reject development, staging, and production
identities at that broker. Continue to reject test identities at the
production and staging brokers.

**Reason and benefit**

Branch testing needs a separate broker so test identities and requests
stay in their selected environment. The existing identity, enrollment,
and signature flow can provide that isolation with a new allowed
environment value.

**Breaking changes**

Existing environment values and broker checks keep their current
behavior. Older app versions cannot use test connector identities.

## What Changed

- Add `test` to managed and self-hosted connector environment types and
validation, and to the board API enrollment status type.
- Infer test from its hosted broker and enforce the matching
environment.
- Test enrollment persistence, signed request environment/audience
claims, and broker mismatch rejection.
- Document test broker configuration in the development guide.

## Verification

- Connector, enrollment, and board API-client suites passed: 63 tests
across three files. Board UI typecheck and token gates passed after
synchronizing its enrollment response type.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed, including after rebasing
onto current master.
- `pnpm test:run` completed its general server stage: 17,867 passed, 105
skipped, and 9 failed across 5 files. The runner stops at that failing
stage, so it did not run subsequent workspace/serialized stages locally.
All nine failures also reproduce on the unchanged base commit in a
separate checkout. Five skill-related cases resolve an unrelated
ancestor skills directory; two workspace cases accept a remote main
branch that their fixture expects to be absent; two permission-cleanup
cases return macOS `ENOTEMPTY` instead of the expected permission error.
- Current-head GitHub CI passed, including full general and serialized
test suites, typecheck, build, runner checks, and browser e2e. Greptile
is 5/5 with no unresolved comments.
- `git diff --check` and Gitleaks passed.

## Risks

The new environment value is additive. The test broker must support test
identities before use. This change preserves existing signature
handling, managed identity overrides, and rejection of mismatched
identities at known hosted brokers. A local full-suite pass is not
claimed; the nine failures above also occur without this change.

## Model Used

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

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] 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: Dotta <34892728+cryppadotta@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-10-12 19:32:33 -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 64bd6e9e07 refactor(chat): extract delivery, reaction, and setup boundaries (#16024)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - Chat channels connect that work to provider conversations.
> - One shared service contains callback, delivery, reaction, and setup
logic.
> - These responsibilities have distinct contracts and existing
public-path tests.
> - This PR moves ten cohesive responsibilities into focused modules.
> - The service retains shared runtime ownership and scheduling.
> - Provider behavior is easier to locate and review.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15995, #16026, #16027, #16030, #16031, #16035, #16037, #16038,
#16041, #16043.

This PR consolidates the reviewed extraction stack. The plan is
`doc/plans/2026-10-12-chat-channel-delivery-boundaries-refactor.md`.

## What Changed

- Move Slack callback verification into the Slack folder.
- Move Discord Gateway events and root-thread admission/recovery into
the Discord folder.
- Extract durable receipt reactions and inbound reaction
admission/replay.
- Extract inbound attachment ingestion and outbound integrity-checked
hydration. Preserve the public hydration export.
- Extract durable provider effects. Keep Telegram callback notices in
the Telegram folder.
- Extract conversation/activity reads and setup qualification. Keep
Slack and Teams projections in their channel folders.
- Preserve the merged managed Slack setup behavior, shared workers,
credential leases, and transaction boundaries.
- Reduce `chat-channels.ts` from 26,493 lines / 1,048,769 bytes to
21,460 lines / 862,284 bytes. This removes 5,033 lines from the service.

## Verification

- Each extraction passed its selected existing tests before and after
through public service paths.
- On updated master, all 55 selected Slack cases passed before
extraction. All 194 selected chat/managed-Slack cases passed on the
final stack tip.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, module-boundary checks, and
whitespace checks passed on that tip.
- The normalized syntax audit verifies 69 moved declarations and all
retained statements, including their relative order, against updated
master.
- The eight earlier stack merges retain the exact validated repository
tree. The combined root equals the validated tip merged with current
master. All chat-channel files remain byte-identical to the validated
tip. Current combined-root CI and review are pending.
- Full local verification remains unverified. The unchanged
`workspace-git-snapshot-streaming.test.ts:56` stress test timed out at
300,000 ms in a clean run and again in isolation. The full run was
stopped after the reproduced failure. No timeout or assertion was
weakened.
- These checks use assembled services, real local databases, and
provider fixtures. They do not prove live third-party execution.

Reviewers can run the public-path suites:

```sh
pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/chat-channels.integration.test.ts server/src/services/chat-outbound-attachment-hydration.test.ts server/src/__tests__/slack-development-manager.test.ts
```

## Risks

- Factory wiring must preserve live values, shared state, and
initialization order. Identity-link construction retains deferred access
to the provider-effects callback.
- Credential fences, authorization transactions, and delivery settlement
must keep their original ordering. Syntax parity and public-path
integration cases cover these boundaries.
- Full local verification has the recorded Git-streaming timeout. The
combined PR must pass master’s required CI before merging into master.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning and repository tools. The
exact runtime model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this
session. No separate agent was used.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] 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>
2026-10-12 22:46:25 +00:00
DottaandPaperclip 88bf4c6c1d refactor(storybook): organize folders and navigation by feature map (#16049)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The feature map describes product areas and verification entry
points.
> - Storybook has 223 story suites that show production components,
proposals, and retained history.
> - The parent PR maps those suites to features, but their folders and
sidebar still use unrelated groups.
> - This pull request puts the existing suites under feature folders and
uses the feature map's names and order in the sidebar.
> - Explicit meta IDs preserve existing story links while the titles
change.
> - Contributors can find stories through the same product structure
without losing examples.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16046. This is the requested follow-up. Parent #16046 is merged.
This PR now targets master, with its single follow-up commit rebased
onto the parent squash merge. The Storybook implementation is unchanged
by that rebase. Related open Storybook PRs were checked; this change
organizes existing suites and adds no product capability.

## What Changed

- Move all 223 story files into folders named for their primary feature
area. Keep useful scenario groups below the feature's sidebar label.
- Order the sidebar by the eight feature-map sections. Put Overview
first and shared Foundations last. Leave areas with no stories out of
the sidebar.
- Move 19 support files into `ui/storybook/support/` and update relative
imports and active documentation.
- Preserve all 2,210 story IDs and the single docs ID through explicit
CSF meta IDs. Keep all entry names and story exports.
- Record stable IDs and sidebar titles in the downstream catalog.
Validate feature folders, title prefixes, and IDs. Update the
maintenance skill and review evidence.

## Verification

- Storybook build passed. Built index comparison against parent
`75bd3c977cd828d5222823850339e8204f40eb47` found the same 2,211 entries,
IDs, and names.
- UI typecheck passed (`ui/node_modules/.bin/tsc -b` from `ui`, invoked
as `./node_modules/.bin/tsc -b`).
- UI Vitest project: 728 files and 8,176 tests passed.
- Catalog checker and its nine tests passed. Feature-map checks, token
gates, and the maintenance-skill validator passed.
- Chromium: nine existing play cases and one render case reached
`storyFinished: success` with no page exceptions. The guide rendered,
sidebar sections followed map order, and a search for `steering/queue`
opened its preserved story link.
- Source comparison found only meta title/ID changes, rebased relative
references, and updated fixture path text in story files.
- To inspect: build Storybook, start `node
scripts/serve-storybook-static.mjs --port 6136`, and open the Overview
guide. Expand feature folders and use existing story links.
- The complete repository suite was not repeated for this organization
change. The parent records a backend timeout that passed in isolation,
without a complete broad-suite pass. Visual comparisons remain blocked
by the unpublished empty baseline. The separate fixture-server story was
not run.

## Risks

- Open branches that add stories under old paths will need to choose a
feature folder and update the catalog. Cross-feature suites have one
primary home and retain related capability references.
- Sidebar paths change; story and docs IDs remain stable. Automated
references to source paths may need the new location.
- This is one requested follow-up with 258 changed files, mostly moves.
It exceeds the usual review-size guideline because splitting it would
leave the sidebar and folder convention partly migrated.
- Browser verification samples ten stories, not all 2,210. Existing
production/prototype classifications and review gaps remain unchanged.
- Required CI gates and a 5/5 review passed on the original head. Fresh
checks and review are running for the rebased head. Catalog validation
and all nine checker tests passed after rebase; UI, map, skill, and
checker contents are identical to the original reviewed head.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact runtime model ID and context-window
size are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, repository
inspection, code execution, and local browser automation.

## 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>
2026-10-12 22:29:22 +00:00
DottaandPaperclip dabb8c5daf test: remove repeated setup and strengthen regression proof (#16022)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Its tests protect company boundaries, approvals, durable tasks,
credentials and the board UI.
> - Several owner suites repeat large database fixtures and render
frames.
> - Some tests repeat stronger proof or pass when the behavior they
describe is broken.
> - This pull request shares exact setup, removes proven duplicate cases
and repairs weak observations.
> - It preserves distinct security, lifecycle, concurrency and
user-facing contracts.
> - The benefit is 5,027 fewer test lines and stronger regression
checks.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15978. This continues the merged test-audit cleanup in [PR
#15978](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15978), which
removed 11,976 test/support lines. The savings in this pull request are
additional.

Related open work: [PR
#13460](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13460) changes
legacy OAuth parent/version lock ordering. This pull request retains
those production paths and the existing lock-order test. Its secrets
changes compact fixtures and repair the two AWS wrapper exclusion
observations.

Scoped title searches found no open duplicate audit or
fixture-consolidation PR and no matching audit issue. The problem is
described here using the enhancement template.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The maintenance and regression value of the existing server, UI, CLI,
shared and wiki-plugin test suites.

**Subsystem affected**

Cross-cutting test code. Two UI modules also lose unused test inspection
exports.

**Current behavior**

Owner tests repeat database rows, service inputs, HTTP setup and render
frames. Some cases repeat stronger assertions. Two AWS lock tests record
only cleanup events, so an AWS provider write can happen inside the held
lock without failing those observations. Several other negative tests
accept or do not observe the wrong result. Worktree fixtures also use a
temporary path alias that conflicts with the existing canonical-path
checks on macOS.

**Proposed behavior**

Use small local helpers that preserve exact inputs, fresh allocations,
callbacks, query order and await positions. Remove only cases with named
stronger keepers. Tighten negative assertions and observe actual AWS
provider entry while a confirmed lock holder remains parked. Resolve
temporary fixture roots to their canonical paths.

**Reason and benefit**

Remove 5,027 net test lines and 15 redundant registered executions.
Remove 11 lines of unused UI inspection exports. Keep every distinct
company, actor, approval, credential, persistence, stale-write and
concurrency contract. No wall-time speedup is claimed for setup
compaction.

**Breaking changes**

None for application behavior, APIs or stored data. The removed exports
expose private UI test state and have no remaining callers.

## What Changed

- Consolidate repeated runtime, workspace, portability, route,
tool-access, policy, gateway and state-service fixtures.
- Share repeated UI render frames and CLI/wiki-plugin setup while
retaining the original actions and expected results.
- Remove 15 repeated case executions only where the audit records an
exact stronger keeper.
- Repair weak HTTP/UI negative assertions and two AWS account-home lock
observations. Keep the existing durable results and cleanup behavior.
- Remove the unused `__inflightGetCount` and `__secondTickInternals`
inspection exports. Keep observable request coalescing and ticker
lifecycle checks.
- Canonicalize temporary worktree fixture paths without weakening
production path checks.
- Record the owner decisions, savings, independent preservation reviews
and validation in [the dated audit
report](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/58c5c4aa241c85f4665a3159c192888bbb2a5cfa/doc/plans/2026-10-12-test-audit-rounds.md)
and [the compact control
evidence](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/58c5c4aa241c85f4665a3159c192888bbb2a5cfa/doc/plans/2026-10-12-test-audit-controls.json).

## Verification

- Complete owner and retained-sibling baselines passed before each audit
cutover. Independent reviewers checked the full original tests, actual
helper bodies, exact inputs, receipt provenance, async order, fresh
allocations and case registrations.
- All 14 UI/route/wiki mutations failed at their intended assertions:
ten UI/API/ticker controls, one route control and three wiki
persistence/receipt controls. Each mutated production source was
restored to its exact original bytes.
- Both old AWS lock tests passed with their respective AWS-only lock
bypass. Both repaired tests failed at the intended assertions with the
same bypasses. These give 16 intended failures and two passing weak
controls across 18 executions. Each source was restored exactly.
- Final complete state-owner/sibling run: 329/329 passed at code
revision `64370831ebe191e5ce092f85f79b6fb661df7e16`.
- Final `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm check:token-gates` and `pnpm build`:
passed at the same code revision.
- Delivery head `58c5c4aa241c85f4665a3159c192888bbb2a5cfa` includes the
evidence commit and master `4b766b872993045a2e787404f0475503683e5ded`.
All 27 audited test files and both application files match the locally
verified code revision byte-for-byte. Current-head CI validates the
integrated branch, including the incoming master changes.
- All eight production-owner SHA guards for the 16 deliberate failing
mutation controls still match the integrated delivery checkout. The
mutation receipts therefore apply to those current owners.
- Full default `pnpm test:run`: **failed** with exit 1 at frozen code
revision `64370831ebe191e5ce092f85f79b6fb661df7e16`; HEAD and tracked
source bytes remained unchanged. The first general-server group reported
878 passing files, four failing files and six skipped files; 17,846
passing cases, 24 failing cases and 105 skipped cases. Later groups did
not run. Failures were `http-log-redaction` (socket hangup),
`public-mcp` (initial 15-second timeout followed by hosted token
“Refresh before subscribing” failures), `remove-test-home` (macOS
`ENOTEMPTY` where permission errors were expected, plus cleanup
failure), and `workspace-git-snapshot-streaming` (300-second timeout).
All four failing test files and the relevant cleanup/MCP production
owners are unchanged by this audit. Full local success is not claimed.
- Focused complete-owner diagnosis at the same frozen revision: 149/152
passed, three failed, zero skipped. `public-mcp` passed 82/82 and
`http-log-redaction` passed 66/66 unchanged. The two `remove-test-home`
cases reproduced macOS `ENOTEMPTY` against an expected `EACCES`/`EPERM`
contract; the 32 MiB workspace snapshot case reproduced its existing
300,000 ms timeout. HEAD and tracked files stayed clean. Exact blob
comparison confirmed all four test files and the relevant cleanup/MCP
owners match both inspected master
`4b766b872993045a2e787404f0475503683e5ded` and the frozen local
revision. The three remaining local failures are unresolved; no timeout,
retry or assertion was weakened.
- Current-head CI: [workflow
38299262149](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38299262149)
has passed runner selection and created all downstream
test/typecheck/build gates; those gates are queued, with no failures
reported. Greptile completed successfully at
`58c5c4aa241c85f4665a3159c192888bbb2a5cfa` with [5/5 and zero
comments](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16022#issuecomment-6131457592).
All review threads are resolved or absent. This pull request will remain
open after verification.

Reviewers can reproduce the required workspace checks:

```sh
pnpm -r typecheck
pnpm check:token-gates
pnpm test:run
pnpm build
```

Browser suites were not run. Their sources and user journeys are
unchanged by this audit.

## Risks

- A fixture helper can hide a specialized input or change object
freshness. Full-program expansion checks and independent reviews
preserve the exact old inputs and execution order.
- Removing duplicate proof can remove a distinct contract by mistake.
The audit records the keeper for each deletion; all distinct security
and lifecycle cases remain.
- Concurrency checks can miss progress during a fixed delay. The AWS
repairs record actual provider entry, confirm holder entry, use measured
entry windows, require exact final event order and drain both operations
in `finally`.
- The full local default run failed. Focused diagnosis reproduced two
macOS cleanup failures and one existing snapshot timeout in unchanged
owners; these remain unresolved. Current-head CI is pending. No test
deadline, retry policy, skip or CI shard was weakened to obtain a pass.

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

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex with GPT-6, reasoning, repository inspection, code
execution and delegated audit/review. The runtime does not expose the
exact served model identifier or context-window size; those values are
unavailable and are not inferred from the model catalog.

## 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
- [ ] 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 22:23:11 +00:00
DottaandPaperclip 9e721264e9 feat: maintain Storybook through a downstream feature catalog (#16046)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Storybook supports review of its production UI and proposed designs.
> - Its 223 story files have no consistent link to product capabilities
or record of component and mock provenance.
> - Old compositions can drift while they still look like current
product examples.
> - This pull request adds two maintenance skills and a catalog that
consumes the existing feature map.
> - The first audit preserves all stories and fixes proven fixture
drift.
> - Contributors can now find examples by feature and see what still
needs review.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Storybook maintenance, feature discovery, and the accuracy of isolated
UI examples.

**Current behavior**

Stories are already centralized under `ui/storybook/`, but their sidebar
has 51 top-level groups. Production components, local prototypes, and
historical designs are not consistently distinguished. The old guide
uses manual coverage claims. GitHub searches found no duplicate
feature-map catalog change.

**Proposed behavior**

Keep existing story locations and IDs. Add a downstream catalog keyed to
stable feature capabilities. Record product status, rendered subject,
data boundary, and declared review dependencies separately. Use
dedicated maintenance and review skills to reconcile drift and report
evidence.

**Reason and benefit**

The catalog makes existing examples reusable without treating mock
behavior or old designs as production acceptance. The feature map
remains independent of Storybook.

## What Changed

- Add `maintain-storybook` and `review-storybook` skills with
contributor guidance.
- Inventory all 223 story files. Generate a feature index and provide
searchable navigation in the existing Overview story. Track direct
subjects through relative imports and local wrappers, including the
primitives demonstrated by foundation suites.
- Add a checker for inventory, capability references, duplicate IDs, and
declared-source drift, with eight regression tests. The parser test
covers real nested CSF files, export filters, explicit IDs, and play
counts.
- Preserve historical designs and classify mixed wrappers. Record the
initial audit and remaining parity work.
- Align the question-dismiss/send fixture with production behavior. Add
dismissal and confirmation-reopen regressions and repair the editor
selector.
- Exclude three exported fast-response fixtures from story discovery and
add the missing render-time callback spy.

## Verification

- Passed: `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs`, `node --test
scripts/storybook-catalog.test.mjs` (8 tests), and `node
scripts/check-maps.mjs`.
- Passed: validators for both new skills, `pnpm check:token-gates`,
`pnpm -r typecheck`, and `pnpm build`.
- Passed: final Storybook build; nine selected browser `play` cases;
three fast-response render cases; feature-guide search/link navigation;
question-fixture reset on reload.
- Built-index comparison preserved all 2,208 original story IDs and
added only two new regression cases.
- Passed: `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui` (728 files,
8,176 tests).
- The full `pnpm test:run` has reported a 15-second timeout in the
untouched backend case `connects advertised Workspace gmail.read without
mutating definitions in authenticated`. The exact test passed standalone
without changing code, expectations, or timeouts. The remaining broad
run was stopped after this failure. The full suite is not verified.
- Visual comparison is blocked by the existing empty baseline manifest.
The managed-accounts API/DB fixture was not started. See
`maps/storybook-map/REVIEW.md` for exact scope.

## Risks

- This is an initial inventory and targeted audit. 188 suites still
require deeper state and fixture parity review.
- Review hashes cover declared dependencies. They do not follow all
transitive production imports or prove semantic correctness.
- The catalog requires upkeep when stories, mapped recipes, or declared
subjects change. Shared mocks still need feature-by-feature contract
review.
- No production application source, database schema, or upstream
feature-map contract changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex. Used reasoning, shell tools, file editing, and
Chromium browser verification. The exact runtime model ID and context
window are not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] 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>
2026-10-12 17:20:00 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip f5346c05b9 ci: route PR admission through reserved AWS capacity (#16042)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip uses CI to verify changes before release.
> - Trusted PR tests can run on isolated AWS workers.
> - Their runner-selection job currently waits for GitHub-hosted
capacity.
> - A large hosted test queue therefore blocks admission to AWS.
> - A dedicated routing workflow lets us reserve capacity for metadata
validation.
> - This PR moves the routing job to reserved AWS capacity after the
bootstrap workflow and pool are available.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Issue type**

CI reliability enhancement.

**Where is the issue?**

The Select trusted runner job in PR CI.

**What's wrong?**

The routing job competes with a large hosted test queue. Its sampled
median wait was about 20 minutes. AWS tests cannot begin before this job
finishes.

**Suggested fix**

Add a protected reusable routing workflow. Deploy its dedicated AWS
pool, then switch the PR caller in a follow-up PR. No overlapping open
PR or issue was found.

## What Changed

- Call ci-routing.yml on protected master from pr-trusted.yml.
- Check the canonical repository and approved PR author/sender before
allocating reserved AWS metadata capacity. Unapproved PRs continue to
use hosted routing.
- Permit approved manual routing canaries on protected master.
- Use a validated roster snapshot for placement. Invalid JSON, missing
settings, stale snapshots, and unapproved identities select hosted
routing without a placement-time JSON parse.
- Preserve the full in-job identity, rerun actor, repository, head,
merge, and stack checks.
- Update stack-scope and placement regression tests and document the
pool and rollback.

## Verification

- The routing scripts and placement expression tests passed (44 tests),
routing-plus-shard tests passed (56 tests), and the existing
.github/scripts suite passed (381 tests).
- Existing routing allow/deny scenarios passed with the extracted script
(16 cases).
- actionlint passed with the dedicated custom runner label declared in
its local configuration.
- git diff --check passed.
- Full pnpm typecheck/test/build cannot run in this worktree because
dependencies are not installed. The change is limited to workflow YAML
and Node tests.
- The dedicated pool is deployed with two warm On-Demand workers and a
four-worker ceiling. The routing qualification passed: it started about
five seconds after workflow creation, selected AWS, and finished while
the hosted gate in the same PR remained queued.
- Bootstrap https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16039 is
merged. The deployed group now authorizes only ci-routing.yml on
protected master, and its master canary passed.

## Risks

- The maintainer explicitly approved a queued-CI admin bypass after
current-head Greptile 5/5 and focused verification.

- Activation requires the deployed routing Fleet and its group to
authorize the routing workflow on protected master. Keep the bootstrap
dependency explicit.
- The group must authorize only ci-routing.yml on protected master and
canonical repository ID 1170821064.
- The routing workflow runs no checkout or PR code and has read-only
permissions. The test admission checks are unchanged.

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex, with reasoning, shell tools, and file editing.
The exact runtime model ID and context window are not exposed in this
session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused routing and
workflow tests; full pnpm commands are blocked by missing worktree
dependencies)
- [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] Required CI status checked; the maintainer explicitly approved
admin bypass for queued CI after clean current-head review and focused
verification
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 on 993fbe695a with
no open findings 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 16:47:57 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip f0e12c8519 Add managed Slack setup with an independent own-app path (#15679)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Slack connects a person to an agent through an installed app and a
verified identity.
> - Independent installations must remain usable without Paperclip Cloud
or manager credentials.
> - Approved Cloud deployments can use Slack manager grants to create
and install each agent's app.
> - Both paths should share credential storage, identity checks,
recovery, and the existing runtime.
> - This pull request adds gated managed setup and keeps independent app
setup under Advanced.
> - It also makes ongoing connection settings and personal test messages
easier to use.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Slack setup, connection settings, tenant credential storage, and the
Cloud connector handoff.

**Problem or motivation**

Approved deployments need an installation flow without pasted
configuration tokens. Open-source users must retain their independent
Slack app flow. A connection manager also needs a simple way to check a
bot from Settings.

**Proposed solution**

Use the managed path when the instance is configured to support it.
Choose agent and Connect are the two visible stops. Continue starts
authorization or installation. Use your own app remains under Advanced
before creation. Save personal manager grants by company, Paperclip
user, Slack user, workspace, and manager app. Reuse only verified
identities for test messages. Unknown identities must complete a private
Slack connection challenge before linking and receiving the test DM.

**Alternatives considered**

A shared bot would change each agent's Slack identity. Requiring Slack
CLI or a hosted service for self-hosted users would remove independent
installation.

**Roadmap alignment**

This maintainer-requested change improves Connected Apps and
experimental Agent Chat. It adds provisioning and management controls to
the existing Slack runtime.

**Additional context**

The companion Cloud broker profile is a separate deployment
prerequisite. Managed setup remains gated. Existing-app adoption is
deferred.

## What Changed

- Extract Slack registration, provider requests, completion,
customer-owned setup, managed setup, and personal manager grants into
focused services. Preserve the compatibility facade and independent
removal cleanup.
- Add company-scoped manager grants and a registration reference through
an additive, idempotent migration after current master. Keep runtime
credentials separate from app-registration secrets.
- Add authenticated manager authorization, sealed handoff, serialized
refresh and revocation, app creation, managed installation, and
installer-bound OAuth fallback.
- Preserve creation intent, block automatic uncertain recreation, save
credentials before downstream checks, and validate app, workspace, bot,
scopes, and installer identity.
- Add the two-stop production wizard and ordered stories. Keep the
own-app, manual, existing-app, and legacy-draft paths.
- Simplify Settings. Open Slack configuration targets the saved app. The
test-message action has its own row. Remove the old manual-avatar
section, channel-message section, and broken permissions link.
- Add paginated account discovery and a private connection challenge for
unknown accounts. Expired invitations stop waiting and offer a new
private invitation. Save send receipts before provider dispatch and
preserve confirmed delivery when activity logging fails.
- Reinstall the saved managed app on explicit reconnect, replace revoked
credentials, and resume completion. Persist reconnect intent and
duplicate-request receipts without creating another app.
- Update provider browser tests, recovery tests, secret redaction, setup
documentation, and the agent prompt. Preserve current master's durable
verification scheduling.

## Verification

- Full workspace typecheck and repository build passed on `56d389d47a`.
The subsequent reconnect retry fix in `288364eada` also passed UI
typecheck and UI build.
- 114 focused Slack registration cases and 13 production managed-wizard
cases passed, including fresh-token reconnect, retry after installation
failure, and duplicate reconnect requests.
- All nine affected Slack browser cases passed against the production UI
and a disposable fixture server. They cover managed setup, automatic
setup, own-app selection, refresh, recovery, mobile behavior, and
connection settings.
- Eight focused real-database test-message cases passed. They cover a
private ownership challenge, saved grant reuse, account pagination,
revoked and conflicting links, workspace mismatch, disabled DMs, revoked
membership, audit failure, ambiguous dispatch, and secret canaries.
- UI token gates and the production Storybook build passed.
- Greptile reviewed exact head
`288364eada5d9c114fad991ff634612639d06672` at 5/5 with no actionable
findings or unresolved review threads.
- The full repository test suite and current-head CI are running. Their
final results will replace this line before merge.
- Earlier live feature previews created two bots in the authorized
Paperclip Slack workspace and reused one personal manager grant. Local
managed Continue created and installed a bot without a configuration
token or a separate Add to Slack action. Avatars, welcome DMs, signed
callbacks, and direct replies were observed. A Settings test DM also
arrived in the signed-in user's Slack account.
- Earlier staging thread qualification required manual publication
recovery for one bot. Current-head live qualification remains required
before enabling the production default. Fixture results do not establish
Slack approval behavior in other workspaces.

## Risks

- Personal manager tokens can create apps. They stay in scoped vault
entries. The manager client secret stays at the broker. Company,
actor/session, origin, and app identity checks apply throughout setup.
- The additive migration must also work on qualification instances that
applied earlier branch migrations. Table, column, index, and constraint
creation is idempotent.
- Creation and message timeouts can leave uncertain outcomes. Saved
request IDs prevent automatic duplicate dispatch.
- Unknown Slack identities must receive and complete their private
challenge while signed in. Account selection alone does not grant
Paperclip permissions. Existing revoked or conflicting links are not
overwritten.
- A development-only manager transport uses an explicitly configured
private credential file for local qualification. Production ignores this
transport; no manager credentials are bundled with open source.
- Managed rollout requires Slack approval, the companion broker
deployment, configured secrets, and final live qualification. Removing a
connection does not delete its Slack app.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, code execution, and browser
tools. The session does not expose the exact 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
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-12 15:34:02 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 7d9b93aee2 docs: establish paired feature and agent access maps (#16025)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Contributors use the feature map to understand and verify product
capabilities.
> - Agents need APIs and usable entry points within their permission
boundaries.
> - Product recipes and agent access need separate records with shared
capability IDs.
> - This pull request establishes that contract and gives maintenance
ownership of both maps.
> - The benefit is repeatable access review without changing product
behavior or permissions.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #15983, which added the portable verification skills and updated
the feature map. This is its contract-only follow-up. Related: #15288
added the original feature map.

**Issue type**

Missing documentation and maintenance contract.

**Where is the issue?**

The product map, its missing agent access companions, and the
verification skills.

**What's wrong?**

There is no shared convention for API presence, agent entry points,
permission boundaries, access gaps, or evidence. An API declaration does
not prove that a permitted native or remote agent can use it.

**Suggested fix**

Keep the product and agent access maps as siblings under `maps/`. Reuse
capability IDs. Record representative source inventory separately from
operation review and live proof. Keep both maps aligned through the
maintenance skill.

## What Changed

- Move the existing product map to `maps/feature-map/`. Preserve its
recipes and Poteto format. Update relative links and add companion
links.
- Add `maps/agent-access-map/` with 35 area files and 171 matching
capability IDs. Seed representative API operations, agent paths,
policies and known gaps from the reviewed source inventory. Mark entries
as `baseline`, `source-only`, and live verification `not-run`.
- Define the shared contract in `maps/README.md`. Track API presence,
agent availability, policy, evidence and review depth separately.
Require operation enumeration before marking a broad capability
operation-reviewed.
- Extend `maintain-verification-skill` to reconcile both maps and
inspect actual route policy and production tool admission. Update
creation, verification, notices and contributor references to use the
shared contract.
- Add `scripts/check-maps.mjs` and ten regression tests. Check matching
areas/IDs, indexes, references, contract fields, API method/path
examples, justified exceptions and evidence-state consistency.
- Keep the coverage inventory unchanged. Preserve skill invocation
policies and both MIT license blocks. No product API, permission, UI,
runtime helper, migration, dependency or workflow changes.

## Verification

- Passed: `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` reports 35 paired areas and 171
matching capability IDs. All local map references resolve.
- Passed: `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs` runs ten tests.
Fixtures cover missing companions, renamed/orphan/duplicate IDs, broken
references, missing operation fields, empty exceptions, missing API
examples, empty policy fields, and verified evidence without passed
verification.
- Passed: metadata validation for all three verification skills. Skill
and contributor links resolve. Invocation policies and both license
blocks are unchanged.
- Compared relocated recipes with current master. Contents differ only
in relative links and companion links. `coverage.json` is byte-for-byte
unchanged. Master's updated read-only interaction test reference is
retained.
- Passed: `git diff --check`. The branch starts from current master and
contains only this contract change.
- Repository-wide typecheck, tests and build were not run locally for
this documentation and Node structural-check scope. Live agent access
was not exercised. Those gaps are explicit in the baseline entries; the
structural check does not certify behavior. CI and automated review are
pending.

## Risks

- The companions are representative source baselines. They are not
complete operation inventories or passed agent journeys.
- The checker cannot establish actual permissions, native tool
admission, operation completeness or truthful live evidence. Maintenance
must inspect source and verify with the actual permitted agent context.
- External links to the old product-map directory may need updates.
Repository references have been updated.
- Existing access gaps and board/user restrictions remain recorded. This
contract does not change authority or implement missing paths.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex assisted with this change. The session does
not expose the exact serving model ID, configured context-window size,
or reasoning setting. Capabilities used: source analysis, file edits,
shell commands, and structural regression tests.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] 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>
2026-10-12 14:52:28 -05:00
4b766b8729 fix(acpx): record turn activity at the moment a stop fires (#15962)
Record stop-time ACP turn diagnostics (last-event age, oldest pending tool age, pending tool kinds) so wall-clock timeout events show whether the turn was stalled. Diagnostics only.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <Paperclip-Paperclip@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-10-12 12:33:59 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 0d0e138dad refactor(chat): extract channel status, receipts, drafts and authority workflows (#15995)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - Chat channels connect that work to provider conversations.
> - Provider workflows still fill the shared service.
> - Their authority and recovery rules need clear homes.
> - This PR lands five reviewed extractions into channel folders.
> - Shared authorization, state and worker lifetime stay explicit.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15976, #15996, #15999, #16001 and #16002. This root PR now
contains all five extractions from batch three. The four upper PRs were
merged into their parents. The combined tree matches reviewed stack head
`789e918b5af49ec1958076ce4d22d31006205302` exactly.

## What Changed

- Extract Slack session status and accepted-file receipt recovery.
- Extract Telegram publication drafts and Stop handling.
- Extract Photon events and native responses.
- Extract Teams file-transfer authority.
- Reduce `chat-channels.ts` from 29,897 to 26,461 lines (3,436 lines,
11.5%).
- Preserve function bodies, runtime-map identity, leases and transaction
boundaries.

## Verification

- All 117 selected public-service cases passed before and after their
respective extractions.
- All 30 moved declarations and remaining service statements preserve
normalized syntax across the five slices.
- Server typecheck, module boundaries and whitespace checks passed.
- Cumulative `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. Combined-head
CI and review are pending on `5de1b0b99d71049a72440e8c131bf4bb30bdf3f3`.
- Fixtures exercise assembled services and disposable databases, not
live third-party providers.
- Cumulative local `pnpm test:run` on
`789e918b5af49ec1958076ce4d22d31006205302` exited 1: 32,414 passed, 125
skipped, one failure. `company-skills-routes.test.ts:1691` (`stars,
forks, and comments on skills through company-scoped endpoints`) failed
with `socket hang up`; that test and its route are unchanged by this
stack. The same 58-case suite then passed in isolation without code
changes. The original command did not reach 111 later serialized suites;
its failure is retained, so the full-local-test checklist remains
unchecked.

```sh
pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/chat-channels.integration.test.ts -t 'Slack session|Slack turns to Idle|signed Slack session stop|denies guest Slack stops'
```

- Combined-head CI attempt 1: five runners received a shutdown signal at
19:13:08 UTC (server shard 10/12, serialized shards 2/9 and 7/9, E2E
shards 3/8 and 7/8). These jobs stopped during execution without a
failing test assertion. [Original
workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38293566028).
The affected jobs will receive one unchanged retry after the other jobs
finish.

## Risks

- Changes cross durable provider recovery and authority boundaries. The
moved bodies preserve syntax, and 117 focused public-service cases
passed before and after their extractions.
- Shared workers, timers, runtime maps and generic authorization remain
in the service.
- The full local test run failed in an unchanged company-skills route
test; its result and the unrun suites are recorded above.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning and repository tools. The
exact runtime model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this
session. No separate agent was used.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] 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>
2026-10-12 19:26:54 +00:00
8227485372 perf(ci): cache the Runner's release crate artifacts keyed by their inputs (#15932)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Its trusted PR workflow builds the Runner's Rust binary in five
jobs: Typecheck + Release Registry, Build, Canary Dry Run, and the
`rust` and `vitest 2/2` lanes of Verify Paperclip Runner. The `Build`
job is the slowest check in almost every green run (461s, 489s and 515s
in runs 38180574768, 38182717052 and 38183149920 on 2026-10-11).
> - Each of those jobs restores master's `release-runner-v2` dependency
cache. That cache holds only third-party crates. `rust-cache` removes
workspace crates when it saves, and a fresh checkout invalidates cargo's
mtime fingerprints for workspace crates in any case. So cargo compiles
`paperclip-runner-core` in release mode from scratch on every run. The
job logs show one `Compiling` line and 28s to 49s for it.
> - 18 of the 239 commits on `master` in the seven days before this
change touched the crate's inputs. The other 221 compiled the same
sources to the same binary again.
> - This pull request adds a second cache that holds only that crate's
release artifacts (about 70 MB). The key is made from the compiler, the
checkout root and a hash of every input the build reads. The master Rust
lane writes it. A pull request whose merge tree has byte-identical
inputs restores it and marks the artifacts newer than the checkout, so
cargo keeps them. Every other pull request misses and compiles as
before.
> - The benefit is about 28s to 49s less on `Build`, which is the run's
critical path, and the same on Typecheck, Canary Dry Run and two Runner
lanes, for about nine of ten pull requests.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No GitHub issue exists for this. The description below follows the
enhancement template.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The time the trusted PR workflow spends to compile the Runner's own
crate on every run.

**Subsystem affected**

CI / build

**Current behavior**

Every PR job that builds the Runner binary compiles
`paperclip-runner-core` in release mode from scratch. The compile takes
28s to 49s on the `runs-on` fleet (one `Compiling paperclip-runner-core`
line, then `Finished release profile` in runs 38169436532 to 38183149920
on 2026-10-11). The shared Rust cache cannot help: it holds only
third-party crates, and a fresh checkout gives every source a new mtime,
which makes cargo discard the crate's fingerprints.

**Proposed behavior**

The master Rust lane in `release-verify.yml` saves the crate's release
artifacts under a key made from the compiler, the checkout root and a
hash of every input the release build reads. The PR jobs that build the
binary restore that entry read-only. On a hit, a script sets the mtime
of every restored artifact to now, so cargo sees every source as older
than the build and keeps the artifacts. `pnpm build` then prints
`Finished release profile` in under a second for that crate. On a miss,
cargo compiles the crate exactly as before.

**Reason and benefit**

About 28s to 49s off `Build`, the slowest check in almost every green
run, and the same off the Typecheck, Canary Dry Run and two Verify
Paperclip Runner lanes. The saving applies to every pull request whose
merge tree does not change the crate's inputs, which was 221 of 239
`master` commits in the week before this change.

**Breaking changes**

None. The checks are unchanged. A miss or an eviction costs the compile
time it costs today and nothing else.

**Additional context**

This is a workflow change. `pr.yml` calls `pr-trusted.yml@master`, so
this pull request's own run uses the current reader steps, and the
writer runs only on a master push. The saving becomes visible on the
first PR runs after the merge and after the next master push has written
the entry.

## What Changed

- `scripts/runner-release-crate-cache.mjs` (new): the one place that
defines the cached path list (`CACHED_PATHS`), the hashed inputs
(`HASHED_INPUTS`) and the files a restore must contain (`REQUIRED`). The
`scope` subcommand prints the platform, the `rustc --version --verbose`
release, commit and host, and a hash of the checkout root. The
`mark-current` subcommand sets the mtime of every restored artifact to
now and prints a `paperclip.runner-release-crate.v1` JSON line with the
file count and bytes. If the restored set lacks any of the seven files
cargo's freshness check reads or checks for (the fingerprint hash and
dep-info of each unit, the lib's rlib and rmeta, the binary under
`deps`), it removes the restored files, prints `action: discarded`
naming the missing file, and exits 0, so cargo compiles as on a miss.
- `.github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml`: after the `release-runner-v2`
restore in `typecheck_release_registry`, `build` and `canary_dry_run`,
and in the `rust` and `vitest 2/2` lanes of `verify_paperclip_runner`
(new matrix key `release_crate: true`), three steps: compute the key
scope, `actions/cache/restore` the crate under
`runner-release-crate-v1-<scope>-<hashFiles(...)>` with no
`restore-keys`, and run `mark-current` when `cache-hit == 'true'`. The
`hashFiles` list covers the toolchain pin, the manifests and lockfile,
the crate sources, the protocol tree and the three fixture trees the
test modules include (two under the Runner package and
`tests/runner-e2e/fixtures` at the repository root).
- `.github/workflows/release-verify.yml`: in the Rust lane of an
own-repository master push, after the debug warm-up: compute the key
scope, look the key up (`lookup-only: true`), and on a miss run `cargo
clean --release -p paperclip-runner-core` and `pnpm build:binary` (the
exact command the readers run, so the entry carries no test-profile
variants), then `actions/cache/save` the same path list under the same
key.
- `scripts/__tests__/runner-release-crate-cache.test.mjs` (new, 10
tests, in `test:release-registry`): the path list and hashed inputs are
the expected ones and exist; every `include_str!` and `include_bytes!`
in the crate sources resolves under a hashed input, whether its argument
is a literal or a `concat!` of literals, `env!("CARGO_MANIFEST_DIR")`
and macro metavariables, and any other form fails the test by name (this
guard found the `test/fixtures` tree during development and the
`tests/runner-e2e/fixtures` tree in review); the parser itself is tested
on a synthetic crate for each supported form and six rejected ones;
every PR reader restores after the dependency cache and marks before its
build command with the script's exact path list and key and no
`restore-keys`; the Verify lanes are gated by `release_crate`; the
writer runs after the checks with the lookup, the clean and build, and
the save under the readers' exact path list and key; the scope changes
with the compiler and the checkout root and survives a missing `rustc`;
`mark-current` makes every artifact newer than the checkout, leaves a
dependency's artifacts alone, discards a restore missing any one of the
seven required files (one case each, checking the named reason), and
still marks a restore missing any one of the seven files cargo does not
need.

## Review fixes

Greptile's two findings on the first commit were both valid and are
fixed in the second commit:

- **Incomplete caches looked usable.** `REQUIRED` checked four files,
but cargo's freshness check needs seven. Measured with cargo 1.97.1 on
the real crate (restore, touch the artifacts, delete one file, build):
without the lib's fingerprint hash, dep-info, rlib or rmeta it
recompiles the crate (24s to 27s); without the bin's fingerprint hash,
dep-info or the binary under `deps` it relinks (1.5s); without either
`.json` fingerprint record, either rustc `.d` file, the uplifted binary
or its `.d` it reports the crate fresh in 0.15s and recreates the
uplifted binary from `deps`, and the staging step then copies it.
`REQUIRED` now lists exactly the seven files, the glob for the binary
under `deps` excludes the `.d` beside it, and the test removes each of
the seven in turn (discarded, naming it) and each of the other seven in
turn (still marked).
- **Composed include paths escaped the guard.** The regex matched only
`include_str!("literal")` and skipped `include_str!(concat!(...))`,
which the crate uses four times (30 of 34 includes were checked). The
guard now parses every include argument and resolves the `concat!`
forms; one of them, in `provider_events.rs`, reads
`tests/runner-e2e/fixtures/native-completion/terminal-tool-carrier.json`
at the repository root, outside every hashed input. It is test-only, so
today's release binary does not read it, but the key is meant to cover
every include whatever its build, so `tests/runner-e2e/fixtures/**` (9
files, 80 KB) joins `HASHED_INPUTS` and the six key embeddings in the
two workflows. With the first commit's input list, the new guard fails
on exactly that include.
- `doc/RELEASE-AUTOMATION-SETUP.md`: a "Runner release crate cache"
section under the Runner verification dependency cache, with the key,
the writer, the readers and the trust boundary.
- `package.json`: the new test file in `test:release-registry`.

## Verification

- `node --test scripts/__tests__/runner-release-crate-cache.test.mjs`:
10 tests pass, three consecutive runs.
- The second commit, with the real toolchain on the real crate (`rustc
1.97.1`, cold build 2m20s, the crate's artifacts 74 MB): every source
touched to a fresh-checkout mtime and the archived artifacts restored,
cargo compiles (`Compiling paperclip-runner-core`, 24.8s and 25.1s, the
two controls); restored and marked by `mark-current`, `Finished release
profile in 0.16s` with no `Compiling`, and the same on a second build.
Then, for each of the fourteen files cargo wrote for the two units, one
at a time: restored, marked and that file deleted, cargo recompiles
without any of the seven `REQUIRED` files and reports fresh without any
of the other seven; restored with that file deleted and run through
`mark-current`, the seven required ones print `action: discarded` naming
the file and the others print `marked`. A restore holding only the seven
required files builds fresh in 0.15s, cargo recreates the uplifted
binary, and `stage-runner-binary.mjs` copies it into `dist/bin`.
- `node --test '.github/scripts/tests/*.test.mjs'`: 378 of 381 pass. The
3 failures are in `docker-canary-promotion.test.mjs` and fail the same
way on an unmodified `master` checkout in this sandbox (the stand-in
docker writes no `calls.jsonl`).
- `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs
scripts/__tests__/e2e-shard.test.mjs
scripts/__tests__/run-vitest-stable-shard.test.mjs`: 99 of 101 pass; the
2 failures spawn `pnpm`, which is not on this sandbox's PATH, and fail
the same way on `master`.
- Both workflows parse as YAML. No job has a duplicate step name or step
id.
- The mechanism, with the real toolchain (`rustc 1.97.1`, the package's
pin) on a copy of the crate: a cold `cargo build --release -p
paperclip-runner-core --bin paperclip-runnerd` (2m23s here). Then the
artifact set was archived with `tar`, removed, every source re-copied so
each had a new mtime, and the set restored:
- restored, not marked: `Compiling paperclip-runner-core`, 24.6s (the
control; this is what CI does today);
- restored and marked by `mark-current`: `Finished release profile in
0.15s`, no `Compiling`; a second build is the same;
  - one Rust source edited after a marked restore: `Compiling`, 24.0s;
- one protocol schema edited after a marked restore: `Compiling`, 23.9s
(the protocol files enter cargo's dep-info as absolute paths and are
hashed into the key);
- the rlib removed from a restored set: `mark-current` prints `action:
discarded, reason: incomplete: the lib rlib is missing` and removes the
rest, and cargo compiles.
- Not run here: the workflow steps themselves. `pr.yml` pins
`pr-trusted.yml@master`, so this pull request's own `Build` job runs the
current reader steps, and the writer runs only on a master push. The
first PR runs after the merge and after the next master push show the
`Restore the Runner release crate` step's result and the
`paperclip.runner-release-crate.v1` line in their `Build` logs.

## Risks

- Correctness: a reader can only restore artifacts that master built
from inputs byte-identical to its own merge tree, because every input
the build reads is in the key, and the key has no prefix match. A pull
request cannot write. The trust boundary is unchanged: master writes, a
pull request restores master's entry.
- An input the build reads that is outside the hashed patterns would let
a stale artifact pass. The release dep-info lists the crate sources and
the protocol schemas and fixtures; all are hashed. The guard test
resolves every `include_str!` and `include_bytes!` in the crate, literal
or `concat!`, and fails if one lands outside the hashed inputs or uses a
form it cannot resolve, so a new include form cannot slip past it by not
matching a regex.
- GitHub-hosted runners check out under `/home/runner/work`, the
`runs-on` fleets under `/home/runner/_work`. Cargo records the included
protocol files as absolute paths, so an entry from one root is useless
under the other. The checkout root is in the key, so the other root
misses instead of restoring something cargo then discards.
- A cache that does not keep mtimes on restore changes nothing: the
artifacts are then already newer than the checkout, and `mark-current`
sets them to now in any case.
- Cost: one new entry of about 70 MB per distinct input set, written
only by the master Rust lane on a miss, plus one `cargo clean` and
`build:binary` (about 40s to 50s) on that lane when the inputs changed.
The readers pay one restore of about 70 MB (two to three seconds at the
fleet's observed restore speed) and a sub-second `mark-current`.
- An incomplete entry (a writer that saved a partial set) is discarded
by `mark-current` and costs one compile, the same as a miss.

## Model Used

- Claude (Anthropic), model id `claude-fable-5-1` (Claude Fable 5.1),
extended thinking, with tool use (shell, file editing, GitHub CLI, a
local Rust toolchain for the experiment) in a Paperclip agent session.

## Checklist

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

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

---------

Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-10-12 11:25:31 -07:00
7df517d18f perf(build): reuse a current Runner build in the server's prepare:runner-vendor step (#15926)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Its CI runs a `Build` job on every pull request. That job runs `pnpm
build` and then verifies the public npm install. Since the server test
shards got faster, `Build` is the slowest check in most runs (419-497s
on the six fully green `master` runs created 2026-10-11 19:46Z to
20:17Z).
> - Inside `pnpm build`, the server package is the last package to
build. Its first step, `prepare:runner-vendor`, runs the full build of
`@paperclipai/paperclip-runner` so the server can vendor
`packages/paperclip-runner/dist`. In `pnpm -r build` that package was
built seconds earlier by the same command. The second build took 12-16s
on those six runs and sits on the critical path of the job.
> - The step cannot just be removed. A standalone `pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/server build` (the Dockerfile's path) must produce a
current vendored Runner on its own.
> - This pull request keeps that guarantee and skips only the build that
is provably redundant. The Runner's `build` records a digest of its
inputs, captured before its first step and confirmed after its last,
together with a manifest of every file it left under `dist`. The
server's `prepare:runner-vendor` reuses the build when the digest
matches, the stamp is for this platform, and every recorded output is
still there at its recorded size. Any other state runs the same full
Runner build as before.
> - The benefit is 12-16s off the `Build` job and off every other `pnpm
build` (the Canary Dry Run's `release.sh` build, local builds), with no
change to what a standalone server build produces. The PR's own first
run measured it: the server step reused the build in 56ms where `master`
runs rebuilt for 11-15s.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No GitHub issue exists for this. The description below follows the
enhancement template.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The server build's `prepare:runner-vendor` step, which builds
`@paperclipai/paperclip-runner` so the server can vendor its `dist`.

**Subsystem affected**

Build and CI (`server/package.json`,
`packages/paperclip-runner/package.json`, the `Build` job).

**Current behavior**

`prepare:runner-vendor` runs the Runner's full `build` every time.
Inside `pnpm -r build`, the Runner was already built by the same command
20 to 25 seconds earlier, with every check passing. On six fully green
`master` runs (2026-10-11, 19:46Z to 20:17Z) the repeated build took
11.8s to 15.9s, measured from the `server build$ pnpm run
prepare:runner-vendor` log line to the Runner's `Finished release
profile` line. The server package builds last, so that time is on the
critical path of `Build`, which is the slowest check in most pull
request runs.

**Proposed behavior**

- The Runner's `build` starts with `node scripts/record-build-inputs.mjs
--begin` and ends with `node scripts/record-build-inputs.mjs --finish`.
`--begin` removes the previous stamp and records a digest of every build
input before the first step reads anything. `--finish`, after every step
and check has passed, recomputes the digest and writes
`packages/paperclip-runner/node_modules/.cache/paperclip-runner-build-inputs.json`
only if the inputs are still the ones the build began with, together
with the path and size of every file under `dist`. A stamp therefore
exists only for a build that completed every step on inputs that did not
move while it ran.
- The server's `prepare:runner-vendor` becomes `node
scripts/prepare-runner-vendor.mjs`. It reuses the build if the stamp is
for this platform and architecture, every recorded output is still there
at its recorded size, and the recomputed digest matches. In every other
case it removes the stamp and runs `pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/paperclip-runner build`, the exact command the step ran
before.
- `PAPERCLIP_RUNNER_VENDOR_REBUILD=1` forces the rebuild.

**Reason and benefit**

12-16s off the `Build` job and off every other `pnpm build` (the Canary
Dry Run's `release.sh` build, local builds), with no change to what a
standalone `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server build` produces.

**Breaking changes**

None. The rebuild path runs the same command as before. A fresh
checkout, a changed input, a missing or truncated output, an edit that
landed during the build, or a stamp from another platform always
rebuilds.

## What Changed

- `packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/build-inputs.mjs` (new): defines
the input set, the digest, the output manifest and the reuse decision.
Inputs are every file under `packages/paperclip-runner` except `dist`,
`dist-browser`, `runner/target`, `node_modules` and dot-directories;
every file under `packages/paperclip-eval-kernel` except `dist` and
`node_modules` (the Runner's `build:typescript` builds it first); every
file under the root `patches` directory (`check:acpx-profiles` hashes
`acpx@0.13.1.patch`, and `build-verified-provider-entrypoints.mjs`
copies the `pi-acp` and `brace-expansion` patches into
`dist/cli/pi-provision-inputs`); and the root `package.json`,
`pnpm-lock.yaml`, `pnpm-workspace.yaml` and `tsconfig.base.json`. The
toolchain pins are inside the package (`rust-toolchain.toml`,
`runner/Cargo.lock`) and the TypeScript version is in the lockfile, so
both are covered. A symlink is hashed as its target path and is not
followed. Outputs are every file under `dist`, the tree the server
copies wholesale, recorded with their sizes. Exports `beginRunnerBuild`,
`recordRunnerBuild` and `assessRunnerBuild` (returns `current` plus a
stable reason code: `no_stamp`, `schema_mismatch`, `platform_mismatch`,
`missing_output`, `outputs_changed`, `inputs_changed`,
`inputs_unchanged`).
- `packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/record-build-inputs.mjs` (new): the
two phases, `--begin` and `--finish`, added as the first and last step
of the Runner's `build` in `packages/paperclip-runner/package.json`.
Each build chain has its own pending record under
`node_modules/.cache/paperclip-runner-build-inputs.pending/`, named
after the shell pnpm runs the chain in (the parent of both phases;
`--finish` also accepts a record named after its own pid, for a shell
that execs the last command of the chain), so two Runner builds running
at once in one checkout do not consume each other's record. `--finish`
without a pending record for its chain is an error, so the chain cannot
silently lose its first step; `--finish` after an edit that landed
mid-build prints `not recorded: inputs changed while the build ran` and
leaves no stamp. Records of builds that never finished are pruned by the
next `--begin` after a day.
- `server/scripts/prepare-runner-vendor.mjs` (new): the reuse-or-rebuild
step. It resolves the pnpm that is running it through `npm_execpath`
with the same rule as the CLI's `resolvePnpmInstallInvocation` (a
JavaScript entry runs through this Node, a native executable runs
directly, otherwise `pnpm` on PATH). It prints one
`paperclip.runner-vendor.timing.v1` line with `action`, `reason`,
`check_ms` and `build_ms`, so the saving is measured on this PR's own
`Build` job.
- `server/package.json`: `prepare:runner-vendor` now runs that script.
The `build` and `typecheck` scripts are unchanged.
- `server/src/__tests__/server-package-build-script.test.ts`: pins the
new indirection and the command behind it (imported from the script, so
the Dockerfile's standalone path stays pinned), and a new test asserts
the Runner's `build` starts with `--begin`, ends with `--finish`, and
has exactly those two record steps.
- Tests: `packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/build-inputs.test.mjs`
(node:test, added to `test:typescript:prep`) and
`server/scripts/prepare-runner-vendor.test.mjs` (vitest, in the server
lane).
- `doc/DEVELOPING.md`: a "Reused Runner build in the server build"
section under Test Commands.

## Review findings on the first head, all fixed in
[2d57542](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15926/commits/2d575425977f87b4612222d0a1961bc9cc5ba569)

Greptile scored the first head 2/5 with three P1 findings. All three
were valid.

| Finding | Fix |
| --- | --- |
| **Patch edits leave stale output.** The root patch files the build
reads were not in the digest. | Every file under the root `patches`
directory is an input. Tests assert the patches are in the input list
and that editing the pi-acp patch, the acpx patch, or adding a patch
changes the digest. |
| **Missing helpers pass the build.** Only four outputs were checked, so
a `dist` that lost `dist/cli/acpx-runtime-sidecar.cjs` still counted as
current. | `--finish` records the path and size of every file under
`dist`; reuse requires all of them intact and reports `outputs_changed`
naming the first missing or resized file. Schema bumped to
`paperclip.runner-build-inputs.v2` so an older stamp is rejected. Tests
cover a deleted helper, a truncated helper, and the server step
rebuilding on `outputs_changed`. |
| **New edits count as compiled.** The digest was hashed after the
build, so a source edited while `build:binary` ran was recorded as
compiled. | The build is bracketed: `--begin` captures the digest before
the first step, `--finish` compares after the last and writes nothing if
it moved. Tests cover the mid-build edit, the undisturbed build, and the
CLI in both orders. |

## Review finding on the second head, fixed in the third commit

Greptile scored the second head 4/5 with one P1, valid: two Runner
builds running at once in one checkout (server `build` beside
`typecheck`) shared one pending record, so the second `--begin`
overwrote it, the first `--finish` consumed it, and the second
`--finish` threw `no pending build inputs` after every step of its build
had passed. Reproduced on the second head's module: two
`beginRunnerBuild`, then the first `recordRunnerBuild` records and the
second throws.

| Finding | Fix |
| --- | --- |
| **Overlapping builds fail each other.** One pending file for every
build chain. | One record per chain, named after the shell pnpm runs the
chain in: `--begin` sees it as its parent, and so does `--finish`,
unless the shell execs the last command of the chain (bash can), in
which case `--finish` is that shell and finds the record under its own
pid. Pending records of builds that never finished are pruned after a
day. An edit between two overlapping starts leaves no stamp whichever
build finishes last: the build that began before the edit reports
`inputs_changed_during_build` and removes the stamp the other wrote, so
a stamp always means every build that wrote `dist` read the inputs it
names. Tests: both finishing orders with and without an edit, the
pruning, a `--finish` that cannot use another chain's record, and two
real `sh -c` chains (plus one under `bash`) held open at the same time,
both recording. On the real repo, two `pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/paperclip-runner build` chains started 8s apart with a
cargo stand-in both recorded (`files=1223 outputs=1434`) and left the
pending directory empty. |

## Measured on this PR's runs

The `Build` job ran `pnpm build` from the branch, so both builds of the
Runner in that job used the new chain.

First head (c23faab, run 38175281058), against the four fully green
`master` runs created 20:41Z to 21:37Z the same evening:

| | PR run 38175281058 | `master`, four runs |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Runner build inside `pnpm -r build` | 55.3s | 47.3-62.0s |
| Server step `prepare:runner-vendor` |
`action:reuse,reason:inputs_unchanged,check_ms:56,build_ms:0` | full
Runner rebuild, 11.0-14.8s |
| Server package build | 29.7s | 32.3-43.5s |
| `pnpm build` step | 114s | 102-135s |
| `Build` job | 411s | 409-474s |

Second head (2d57542, run 38178686999), against the two fully green
`master` runs created in the same half hour (38178951607 and
38180574768):

| | PR run 38178686999 | `master`, two runs |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Runner build inside `pnpm -r build` | 53.9s (`begin:` 22:03:04,
`recorded:` 22:03:57, digest 460e02616081 over 1231 files and 1434
outputs) | 62.2s, 64.6s |
| Server step `prepare:runner-vendor` |
`action:reuse,reason:inputs_unchanged,check_ms:109,build_ms:0` | full
Runner rebuild, 14.5s, 15.2s |
| Server package build | 27.4s | 43.5s, 44.8s |
| `pnpm build` step | 106s | 91s, 95s to the Runner's end plus the rest;
127s, 135s in all |
| `Build` job | 405s | 461s, 479s |

The rebuild is gone from the server build on both heads, and the check
costs 56-109ms where `master` rebuilds for 11-15s; the rest of the
spread between runs is runner speed on the `runs-on` fleet. The third
commit changes nothing on the reuse path: it only changes where the
pending record lives between `--begin` and `--finish`.

## Verification

- `node --test packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/build-inputs.test.mjs`:
11 tests, three consecutive runs clean. Two builds at once in one
checkout each keep their own pending record and both record, in either
finishing order; with an edit between their starts the build that began
before it leaves no stamp whichever finishes last. A build's start
prunes records older than a day and no others. A `--finish` cannot use
another chain's record. Two chains run by separate `sh -c` shells at the
same time (and one under `bash`) both record and leave the pending
directory empty. The input set is exactly the sources, the eval kernel,
the root patches and the root config, and skips outputs and caches. The
output manifest lists every file under `dist` with its size and nothing
outside it. The digest is stable across reads, does not change when
`dist`, `dist-browser`, `node_modules`, `.vite` or `runner/target`
change, and does change for a Runner source, a Rust source, an
eval-kernel source, the pi-acp patch, the acpx patch, a new patch, the
lockfile, the base tsconfig, a new file and a rename. A symlink changes
the digest but its target's files are not read. A build is current only
with a matching v2 stamp, the same platform and architecture, the four
named outputs present, and every recorded output intact (a deleted or
truncated helper is `outputs_changed`; a file the build did not produce
may appear). An input edited between `--begin` and `--finish` leaves no
stamp and removes the pending record; the next build records normally.
`--finish` without `--begin`, or after a build that left a required
output missing, throws and leaves no stamp. The CLI brackets the build
for the package it is pointed at, reports a mid-build edit, and rejects
`--finish` first, both flags, neither flag, and unknown arguments.
- `vitest run scripts/prepare-runner-vendor.test.mjs
src/__tests__/server-package-build-script.test.ts` in `server/`: 21
tests. The decision reuses a current build, rebuilds a stale one, and
rebuilds a current one only when `PAPERCLIP_RUNNER_VENDOR_REBUILD=1`.
The pnpm resolver covers a JavaScript entry, a native executable, a
Windows executable, no `npm_execpath`, and npm's `npm_execpath`. With an
injected build command: a current stamp runs nothing and prints
`action:reuse`; changed inputs run the exact command from `server/` with
the stale stamp already removed; a lost
`dist/cli/acpx-runtime-sidecar.cjs` rebuilds with
`reason:outputs_changed`; a failing build returns its status and leaves
no stamp. End to end, the CLI with a stand-in `pnpm` on PATH that
brackets its build the way the real one does rebuilds on the first call,
reuses on the second, rebuilds after a source change, rebuilds after a
lost output, and reuses again. The guard test asserts
`prepare:runner-vendor` is the new script, the rebuild command is still
`pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner build`, the server build
still starts with the step, and the Runner's `build` starts with
`--begin` and ends with `--finish` with exactly two record steps; it
fails against the previous build script on its first assertion.
- Real repo, this checkout, with `cargo` and `pnpm` stand-ins on PATH
(no Rust toolchain here; the stand-in writes the one file
`stage-runner-binary.mjs` copies): `pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/paperclip-runner build` ran the complete chain through the
real nested pnpm (every TypeScript step and check, the stand-in cargo,
the binary staging, the two binary-reading checks) and recorded
`files=1223 bytes=18735059 outputs=1434`; the stamp is 128 KB. `pnpm run
prepare:runner-vendor` in `server/` then printed
`action:reuse,reason:inputs_unchanged,check_ms:222,build_ms:0`.
Appending a newline to `patches/pi-acp@0.0.33.patch` made the assessment
`inputs_changed`; truncating or deleting
`dist/cli/acpx-runtime-sidecar.cjs` or
`dist/cli/opencode-app-server-proxy.cjs` made it `outputs_changed` in
1-5ms; restoring each made it current again. `--begin`, an edit to
`src/index.ts`, then `--finish` printed `not recorded: inputs changed
while the build ran` and left no stamp.
- The whole check on the real set (1223 inputs, 18 MB; 1434 outputs)
takes 165-227ms on this host and took 56ms on the CI runner; the output
manifest part is 1-5ms.
- Not run here: the real `cargo build`, and `pnpm build` end to end.
This PR's `Build` job runs `pnpm build` from the branch, so its log
carries the Runner's `begin:` and `recorded:` lines and the server
build's `paperclip.runner-vendor.timing.v1` line with the measured
result.

## Risks

- A build input outside the digest would let a stale Runner be vendored.
The digest covers the whole Runner package except its outputs, the eval
kernel the Runner builds first, the root patches, and the root files the
Runner's tsconfig and dependency graph read. The lockfile covers
dependency versions, and the pins inside the package cover the Rust
toolchain. An input missed here is a bug to fix by adding it to the set;
the fallback direction is always a rebuild, never a skip.
- The whole `patches` directory is an input, although the Runner build
reads three of its fourteen files. An edit to an unrelated patch
therefore costs one extra Runner rebuild, which is the safe direction
and avoids a hand-kept list of file names that could drift from the
scripts that read them.
- The stamp lives in `node_modules/.cache`, which pnpm does not manage
and `.gitignore` and `.dockerignore` already exclude. It is about 128 KB
with the output manifest. The Docker build has no stamp and no prior
Runner build, so it rebuilds exactly as before.
- A stamp is written only after the Runner's `build` passed every step
on inputs that did not change while it ran. The Runner's first step and
the prepare step both remove any existing stamp before a rebuild starts,
so a build that stops partway, or a build command that fails before its
first step, leaves no stamp.
- `node scripts/record-build-inputs.mjs --finish` on its own is an
error; the script is only meant to run as the two ends of the `build`
chain, and the guard test pins that.
- The pending record is keyed by the pid of the shell that runs the
chain. pnpm runs every script through a shell (`sh -c` on POSIX, `cmd`
on Windows), and both phases are children of that shell; a shell that
execs the last command of the chain is covered by matching the finishing
process's own pid too. A chain run some other way, with the two phases
under different parents, fails loudly at `--finish` rather than
recording. Two builds running at once still write the same `dist`, which
no stamp can make safe; what the record guarantees is that a stamp is
written only by a build whose own inputs did not move.
- The platform and architecture are part of the comparison, so a stamp
from another machine is never trusted; an older v1 stamp is rejected by
schema.
- The Typecheck job builds the Runner once, through this step, with no
prior `pnpm -r build`, so it gains nothing and loses nothing: there is
no stamp and it rebuilds as before.
- The step now spawns pnpm through `npm_execpath` instead of relying on
`pnpm` being on PATH, because under corepack the script shell has no
`pnpm`. Outside a pnpm script it still falls back to `pnpm` on PATH.

## Model Used

- Claude (Anthropic), model id `claude-fable-5-1` (Claude Fable 5.1),
extended thinking, with tool use (shell, file editing, GitHub CLI) in a
Paperclip agent session.

## Checklist

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

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

---------

Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-10-12 11:25:24 -07:00
Devin Foley 4f399cec9f fix(docker): skip the full-tree ownership walk on routine boots (#15992)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The Docker image keeps all instance state under `PAPERCLIP_HOME`,
and deployments mount a volume there
> - Before it drops privileges, the entrypoint makes sure that the
`node` user owns the home (#10530)
> - The ownership probe is a first-mismatch `find` over the whole tree.
When ownership is correct, `-quit` never fires, so every boot stats
every file on the volume
> - On homes with many agent worktrees and `node_modules` trees, this
walk takes minutes before Node starts. That is close to common 300s
healthcheck windows
> - This pull request keeps a cheap shallow probe on every boot. It runs
the full-tree probe only once per volume and node UID/GID, and records
the result in a marker file
> - The benefit is that routine boots no longer scale with the file
count, and the original root-owned-volume fix stays in place

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #10431 (the open follow-up about the remaining cost of the
ownership walk). Related: #10530 (the change that added the full-tree
probe).

**What happened?**
On a hosted multi-instance deployment, we measured the time from
container start to the first app log line. Instances with many files on
the volume (agent worktrees with `node_modules`) took about 190-235s.
Small instances took 5-22s. One 30 GB volume with few files took 24s, so
the cost follows the file count, not the volume size. Almost all of this
time is the `find "$home_dir" \( ! -user node -o ! -group node \) -print
-quit` walk in `scripts/docker-entrypoint.sh`. When ownership is already
correct, `-quit` never fires, so the walk stats every inode on every
boot.

**Expected behavior**
When ownership is already correct, the entrypoint pre-start phase is
short and does not depend on the number of files in `PAPERCLIP_HOME`. A
fresh root-owned volume, a UID/GID remap, and an upgrade from an older
image are still repaired before the privilege drop.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run the image with a volume on `/paperclip` that holds a few hundred
thousand files, all owned by `node:node`.
2. Restart the container.
3. Compare the container start time with the first server log line. The
gap grows with the file count, even though no `chown` runs.

**Paperclip version or commit**
`master` at a9830414c7

**Deployment mode**
Docker production image (any platform that mounts a volume on
`PAPERCLIP_HOME`)

## What Changed

- `scripts/docker-entrypoint.sh`: the ownership probe is now tiered.
- Every boot runs a shallow probe (`find -maxdepth 3`) over the home and
its first three levels. A fresh root-owned mount and a UID/GID remap
both change the owner of the home directory, so this probe catches them.
- The full-tree probe runs only when
`PAPERCLIP_HOME/.paperclip-ownership-verified` is missing or records a
different node UID/GID (format `v1 <uid>:<gid>`). This catches deep
mismatches, including the first boot after an upgrade from an older
image.
- Any mismatch repairs the whole tree with `chown -R node:node`, as
before. After a clean probe or a repair, the entrypoint writes the
marker as the `node` user (through `gosu`), so the marker never trips
the shallow probe. A failed marker write is ignored: the only cost is a
full probe on the next boot. If `find` exits non-zero without a mismatch
(for example, an I/O error), the walk is incomplete, so the entrypoint
does not write the marker and the next boot probes again.
- `scripts/docker-entrypoint.sh`: timestamped log lines at entrypoint
start, around the full probe and the repair (with durations), and right
before the `exec` of the server. You can now measure the pre-start phase
from the container log.
- `server/src/__tests__/docker-entrypoint.test.ts`: the `find` stub now
tells the shallow probe from the full probe. New tests cover each path
(see Verification).
- `doc/DOCKER.md`: documents the marker, how to force a full check, and
the new log lines.

## Verification

- `cd server && npx vitest run src/__tests__/docker-entrypoint.test.ts
src/__tests__/container-init-reaping.test.ts
src/__tests__/docker-build-stamp.test.ts`: 40 passed. New cases:
- correct ownership + current marker → shallow probe only, no full walk,
no `chown`
- current marker + deep-only mismatch → full walk skipped (this is the
documented trade-off)
- no marker (upgrade) → one full walk, no `chown`, marker written as `v1
1000:1000`
- no marker + deep mismatch → full walk finds it, `chown -R`, marker
written
- root-owned top level with a current marker → `chown -R` without a full
walk
- full walk fails without a mismatch → no `chown`, no marker, retry
logged
- marker for another UID/GID → full walk runs again, marker rewritten as
`v1 1001:1001`
- timestamped `starting`, `ownership repair finished in Ns`, and
`starting app as node` lines, in order, before the command runs
- The new tests fail against the old script. The 11 existing tests pass
unchanged.
- `cd server && npx tsc --noEmit`: passes.
- `shellcheck -s sh scripts/docker-entrypoint.sh`: clean. `dash -n`:
syntax OK.
- Manual run with the real `find` (BSD find, script run under `dash`)
against a 200k-file tree. Only `id`/`usermod`/`groupmod`/`chown`/`gosu`
were stubbed, and `node` was mapped to the local user and group:
- boot 1, no marker, one deep group mismatch → full probe, `chown -R`,
marker written
  - boot 2, marker present → no full probe, no `chown`
- boot 3, no marker, clean tree → full probe, no `chown`, marker written
  - boot 4, marker present, clean → no full probe, no `chown`
  - boot 5, top-level group mismatch with marker → `chown -R`
- I did not build the image or measure boot time in a container. Docker
was not available on the machine I used. On a warm local disk the full
walk is sub-second, so the local timings say nothing about cold network
block storage.

## Risks

- Once the marker is current, a mismatch deeper than three levels is not
detected automatically. Examples: files written as root by `docker exec`
or a restore run as root, after the first verified boot. Before this
change, those files were repaired on the next boot. The workaround is in
`doc/DOCKER.md`: delete the marker and restart. A remap, a fresh volume,
and a root-owned top level are still detected on every boot.
- On the first boot after an upgrade, each existing volume pays one full
walk (the same cost as today). Later boots skip it.
- The marker is a new dotfile in `PAPERCLIP_HOME`. Backups and copies
that include the home carry it along. This is safe, because the marker
records the UID/GID that it verified, and a different UID/GID forces a
new full probe.
- The non-root path (restricted PodSecurity, OpenShift) does not change,
apart from two new stdout log lines.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`, 1M context) via Claude Code, with
tool use (shell, file editing). Default reasoning mode.

## 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
2026-10-12 10:22:43 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip a2ac5c2715 refactor(chat): isolate Telegram, Slack, GitHub and Discord workflows (#15976)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - Chat channels connect that work to external conversations.
> - The shared chat service still contains provider-specific workflows.
> - Those workflows are hard to inspect in a 34,000-line file.
> - This stack extracts Telegram, Slack, GitHub and Discord workflows
into their channel folders.
> - Shared authorization and service lifetime remain explicit.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15823, #15834, #15836, #15844 and #15845. Root of the second
behavior-preserving channel-folder refactor stack. The dependent PRs
#15979, #15981, #15985 and #15987 have merged into this branch; this PR
lands all five extractions on master.

## What Changed

- Move Telegram maintenance and subscription repair into
`chat-channels/telegram/maintenance.ts`.
- Move Slack session stopping and task starts into
`chat-channels/slack/session-stop.ts` and `task-start.ts`.
- Move GitHub webhook intake and recovery into
`chat-channels/github/webhook-ingress.ts`.
- Move Discord command registration and handling into
`chat-channels/discord/commands.ts`.
- Share type-only runtime records while preserving shared authorization,
transactions, live lease checks and worker ownership.
- Reduce the original service from 34,603 to 29,897 lines, removing
4,706 lines (13.6%).

## Verification

- All 205 selected integration cases passed before and after their
respective extractions: Telegram 41, Slack session stop 2 multi-step
scenarios, GitHub 84, Slack task start 25 and Discord 53. Each dependent
PR records its focused reproduction command.
- Server typecheck, module boundaries and whitespace checks passed.
- Per-slice syntax comparisons passed for moved declarations and
remaining service statements, allowing only the documented live callback
substitutions.
- Tests exercise the public service with disposable databases and
fixture provider transports. They do not claim live third-party
execution.
- Cumulative workspace typecheck and build passed on the final stack.
- Current-head CI passed on the combined stack commit
`d5b37dbe512e3e199932b6608cdc17639eda555a`; Greptile is 5/5 with no
unresolved threads.
- The [original serialized
shard](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38266518817/job/114870022249)
timed out in unchanged `adapter-auth-signal-routes.test.ts`. The exact
case passed locally without changes, and the [single job
retry](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38266518817/job/114874019933)
passed. The original timeout remains recorded.

Reproduce the original Telegram slice’s focused suite:

```sh
pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/chat-channels.integration.test.ts -t 'Telegram durable private draft Stop|Telegram maintenance|Telegram webhook|Telegram.*(pause|remove)|Telegram.*commands'
```

- Cumulative local `pnpm test:run` exited 1: the first server group had
**18,770 passed, 105 skipped, and one timeout** in unchanged
`server/src/services/workspace-git-snapshot-streaming.test.ts:56`
(300,000 ms on macOS). The fail-fast runner did not reach its later
workspace and serialized groups. An unchanged isolated rerun passed
using the existing timeout; this does not turn the original full run
green. The test and its Git utility code are outside this refactor; all
current-head CI jobs passed.
- Reproduce that diagnostic alone: `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/workspace-git-snapshot-streaming.test.ts`.

## Risks

- Credential lease ownership and provider-confirmation ordering must
remain unchanged. Existing rotation, lease-loss, recovery and durable
Stop cases pass.
- The channel factories create no workers or timers and preserve live
runtime, shutdown and gateway-ownership reads.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning and repository tools. The
exact runtime model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this
session. No separate agent was used.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] 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 12:03:23 -05:00
Dotta a9830414c7 Preserve repository dependencies when importing GitHub skills (#15731)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Its Skills library imports reusable instructions from GitHub.
> - Some skills depend on shared files and sibling skills outside their
folders.
> - Directory-only imports lose those dependencies.
> - This pull request keeps repository files together and lets users
select which skills appear in the library.
> - Agents receive the original files and paths through the existing
skill delivery system.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #14713. Related: #13656.

**Current behavior**

GitHub imports copy independent skill directories. Shared scripts,
policies, helper skills, and credit files can be omitted. One
shared-file error can block every skill.

**Proposed behavior**

New imports keep repository files together at the scanned commit. Show
all skills with their folders and select every skill by default.
Collapse individual package files. Omit unsupported or oversized files
with a warning. Import available content without repair choices or an
extra confirmation. Keep warnings on the saved source.

**Reason and benefit**

Skills can read their shared repository files after Paperclip delivers
them to an agent. Original instructions stay unchanged. Users can
inspect included files and understand omissions before and after import.

## What Changed

- Store immutable company-scoped repository snapshots and associate them
with skill versions. Regenerate the migration after merging master.
- Preserve original bytes, binary encoding, and executable modes.
Shared-file changes version each usable selected skill. Pinned versions
retain their original files.
- Deliver a discovery wrapper with the original tree under
`.paperclip-repository/`. Preserve invocation policy when present. Fork
and create-from-existing retain repository files.
- Keep repository files together for new UI imports. Show every skill,
select all by default, and collapse package files. Remove the
packaging-mode menu. Keep the mobile import footer visible.
- Warn about symlinks, submodules, oversized files, missing references,
and invalid optional manifests. A malformed skill remains selected with
a Needs setup warning. Usable skills still publish, and its original
file remains repository support content. Source warnings persist through
refresh. Unsafe execution and secret-disclosure findings omit the
affected files before snapshot publication.
- Expose saved repository files in the installed skill viewer, including
binary encoding and executable flags. Reads use the immutable
company-scoped snapshot; relative instruction links resolve from their
original repository directory.
- Audit delivered inventories and derive trust from all repository
files. Accept evaluation prose while retaining dynamic-execution
findings. Read blobs in one bounded Git batch and check budgets before
reading support files. Imports never execute setup commands.
- Add scanner, database, delivery, UI, and browser regressions. Update
Storybooks, screenshots, and documentation.

## Verification

- 69 focused scanner, Git snapshot, delivery, and PostgreSQL lifecycle
tests passed. They cover partial imports, warning persistence, missing
references, binary files, executable modes, copies, pinned versions,
cancellation, company isolation, and batched Git reads.
- 110 import, skill-detail, selection-tree, saved-file link, and
Markdown renderer tests passed. A file-switch regression failed before
the resolver fix and passed afterward. Browser walkthroughs cover the
all-selected open tree, repository preview, non-blocking warnings,
missing references, setup problems, warning persistence, and mobile
layout.
- Full workspace typecheck and build passed. Runner E2E TypeScript
checks and design-token gates passed. The full serial local suite was
attempted and stopped after over an hour. The existing 40,000-file Git
streaming stress test failed after 303 seconds on macOS; the broad local
suite is not counted as passed. All 55 applicable PR checks passed on
the final commit, including the full sharded CI suite. Two optional
Storybook workflows were skipped; the five local Storybook walkthroughs
passed.
- On October 12, live campaigns imported the private Poteto repository
through the production GitHub Sources UI, selected architect and bro,
and invoked them with native Codex on local and Daytona. The source
connection was disabled before invocation. Independent filesystem
inspections matched every supported Git blob, size, and executable mode.
Both tasks completed and cleanup passed. Campaigns:
`local-2026-10-12T15-07-39-504Z` (both environments),
`local-2026-10-12T16-08-39-682Z` (local), and
`local-2026-10-12T16-03-33-938Z` (Daytona). Each of the two selected
skills received all 234 supported repository files. Later changes only
affect the installed-file viewer and documentation. This qualifies skill
delivery and instruction reads, not every Poteto workflow or adapter.
- A manual source-checkout test drive imported a synthetic private
GitHub repository with a symlink, an oversized file, a missing
reference, and malformed skill metadata. Available skills published with
their shared checklist. The walkthrough found duplicate warning text
after import; the final UI fix removes that duplicate. The file viewer
exposes saved repository dependencies and resolves authored relative
links without changing the instructions. A follow-up live refresh
omitted unsafe helper files with warnings, preserved every safe file
byte, and survived a server restart.

Screenshots below use the production UI with Storybook fixtures. They do
not replace the live GitHub and runtime checks.

<details>
<summary>All skills visible and selected by default</summary>

![Default repository
import](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/codex/skill-repository-packages/docs/pr-screenshots/pr-15731/repository-import.png?raw=true)

</details>

<details>
<summary>Import stays available with warnings</summary>

![Import
warnings](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/codex/skill-repository-packages/docs/pr-screenshots/pr-15731/repository-warning-details.png?raw=true)

</details>

<details>
<summary>Repository file inspector</summary>

![Repository
files](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/codex/skill-repository-packages/docs/pr-screenshots/pr-15731/repository-files.png?raw=true)

</details>

<details>
<summary>Mobile import</summary>

![Mobile
import](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/codex/skill-repository-packages/docs/pr-screenshots/pr-15731/repository-mobile.png?raw=true)

</details>

## Risks

- Each selected skill carries a repository copy in the runtime. The
database stores each snapshot once. Runtime transfer and storage
increase with the number of assigned skills.
- Runtime budgets remain: 9,990 repository entries, 1 MiB per file, and
61 MiB total. File omissions are recorded as warnings. Source-access or
download failures retain installed versions.
- Import success does not prove that every skill can run. Environment
dependencies, credentials, delegation tools, and schedules still need
configuration. Imported setup scripts are not executed.
- Live runtime coverage is native Codex on local and Daytona. Other
adapters use the shared delivery path but were not exercised in these
campaigns.

The roadmap marks Skills Manager as shipped. This extends the existing
importer. Related pull requests were checked.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository inspection, code
execution, automated tests, and browser tools. The exact deployment
identifier and context-window size were not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] 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
2026-10-12 11:30:20 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip ce08872dfb refactor(heartbeat): extract instruction working-copy lifecycle (#15984)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip runs agent tasks and preserves their managed agent files.
> - Heartbeat must prepare a private copy, collect stopped-provider
edits, and retain ownership during warm-session handoff.
> - That lifecycle is spread across preparation, adapter callbacks, and
cleanup.
> - A per-run controller can own the copy and receipt while the executor
retains teardown ordering.
> - This PR moves that coordination into a dedicated module.
> - Live getters preserve updated state and partially acquired
resources.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**
Maintenance of heartbeat instruction preparation. This is the second and
final PR in this batch, originally stacked on #15980. That dependency is
now merged; this PR is rebased onto its squash merge with an identical
patch and identical touched-file contents. Related-PR search found no
duplicate extraction.

**Current behavior**
After #15980, `heartbeat.ts` has 4,215 lines and 173,657 bytes. It
coordinates instruction-copy preparation, save receipts, warm handoffs,
and deferred cleanup inline.

**Proposed behavior**
`heartbeat/instruction-working-copy.ts` owns the per-run lifecycle in
233 lines. `heartbeat.ts` becomes 4,055 lines and 162,520 bytes. The
executor retains the outer release order, unavailable-copy reporting,
and environment/service cleanup policy.

**Reason and benefit**
The copy, save receipt, and warm ownership are readable together. The
remaining executor names preparation and dispatch phases without
obscuring teardown decisions.

**Breaking changes**
None intended. All 140 named public heartbeat exports remain unchanged.

## What Changed

- Extract copy preparation, save/checkpoint callbacks, warm
reservation/adoption, prompt guidance, and the deferred-release closure.
- Read the executor's current run row through a callback; expose current
copies, receipts, and acquired cleanup handles through live getters.
- Keep cleanup handles available after preparation failure, and preserve
release-before-retry on invalidated warm reuse.
- Add four public-path characterization tests with real disposable
PostgreSQL and files, plus four direct boundary tests.
- Add isolated browser acceptance with a real process that edits
instructions, completes its task, and reads the saved bytes on its next
task.
- Document the boundary and opt-in acceptance command.

## Verification

- **Before extraction:** four new public-path tests pass on the original
implementation, as do 108 existing
instruction-copy/directory/native-cleanup tests. The two-task browser
journey also passes on the baseline server.
- **After extraction:** all 112 baseline tests pass; all four new
boundary tests pass; 12 selected native-session ownership/retirement
cases pass (the other 670 cases were outside this focused selection).
- **Browser acceptance:** the fresh extracted-code server passes the
full two-task journey (25.9 seconds): real child-process edits,
saved/unchanged receipts, canonical bytes through the agent-file API,
next-task restore, completed task UI, and copy cleanup.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`, final server typecheck, and `pnpm build` pass.
Module-boundary and public-export checks pass.
- Normalized syntax comparison confirms all moved bodies and the
reconstructed executor match the base, accounting explicitly for live
run getters and delegation.
- Final rebased head: `a08872c97e587a21ffc0fc6b78f34b81e484e7b0`.
Combined entry-point and boundary regressions pass again (12/12); fresh
Greptile review is 5/5 with no findings. All 55 current-head checks pass
(two configured skips), including the hosted full-suite tests, build,
typecheck, and all eight browser shards. There are no open review
threads.

## Risks

- Acquisition can succeed before preparation throws. Boundary tests
verify that both the reservation and a transferred copy remain visible
to the cleanup owner.
- Callbacks can replace copy/save state during execution. Public tests
verify saved receipts; direct tests verify the current run row, warm
checkpoint receipt, and permission-root preservation.
- Missing edit authorization and cleanup failure must remain nonfatal.
Characterization tests revoke actual membership after dispatch admission
and inject a cleanup error while preserving the saved result.
- The browser uses a test-launcher-only instruction-capable wrapper
around the real process adapter. Production adapter capabilities are
unchanged. No live provider calls are made; native warm ownership is
covered by focused module and native-session tests rather than a live
provider browser run.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, assisted with reasoning, code edits, tool
execution, and verification. 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>
2026-10-12 10:52:32 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 1e0cfcb4fc test: retire redundant suites and consolidate owner coverage (#15978)
Retire duplicate ACPX and Codex proof after migrating unique assertions to their behavioral owners. Consolidate repeated fixtures and exact case matrices while preserving lifecycle, protocol, company, credential, approval, and ordering contracts. Remove the unused runtime-controls compatibility path and document test ownership and preservation evidence.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-12 10:44:02 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 94e4218310 refactor(heartbeat): extract runtime service coordination (#15980)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Heartbeat runs start workspace services and receive service reports
from adapters.
> - Service context updates and readiness notices are spread through the
executor.
> - These steps share a clear responsibility, while process and lease
ownership already live elsewhere.
> - This pull request puts service coordination in one module.
> - The executor retains the same dispatch and cleanup order.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**
Maintenance of heartbeat execution. This is the first of two final
focused extractions after #15973. Related #15653 changes runtime
callback origins; this PR preserves that policy.

**Current behavior**
`heartbeat.ts` has 4,372 lines and 178,459 bytes. It validates service
intents, starts services, persists adapter reports and primary URLs, and
posts readiness notices inline.

**Proposed behavior**
`heartbeat/runtime-services.ts` owns those steps in 212 lines.
`heartbeat.ts` becomes 4,215 lines and 173,657 bytes. Process registries
and leases stay in `workspace-runtime.ts`. The executor still releases
services in its original cleanup path.

**Reason and benefit**
Service coordination has named preparation and result phases. The
execution path is easier to read without changing service lifetime or
moving cleanup policy.

**Breaking changes**
None intended. All 140 named public heartbeat exports remain available,
including `postWorkspaceReadyComment`.

## What Changed

- Move service-intent validation, startup, adapter-result persistence,
and readiness notices into one module.
- Preserve mutable run context, primary URL selection, notice error
handling, and release ordering.
- Add four public-path tests using disposable PostgreSQL, real HTTP
service processes, and a fixture adapter.
- Extend browser recovery acceptance to fetch the actual service URL,
check the readiness notice, and verify listener cleanup.
- Update the module map and acceptance instructions.

## Verification

- Before extraction: all five tests pass, including the four new
characterization cases and existing notice formatting test.
- After extraction: all 17 tests pass across service coordination,
notice formatting, output recording, and runtime authorization.
- Structural comparison confirms that all moved bodies and the
reconstructed executor match the baseline. Module boundary checks pass.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass.
- Extended isolated browser acceptance: **2/2 pass** (3.7 minutes),
covering actual service readiness, recovery, bounded failure, and
cleanup. At `8e33e2032de681082f128470eb8ab0711b382afe`, all 55
current-head checks pass (two configured skips), including hosted
full-suite tests. Greptile is 5/5 with no findings or review threads.

## Risks

- Service context must be persisted before adapter dispatch and before
run completion. The tests inspect both phases and preserve the first
service URL when adapter reports arrive.
- Notice failures must remain nonfatal. The public-path test checks both
startup and result notices.
- Shared services must survive run cleanup; ephemeral services must stop
after success or failure. Tests use actual processes and HTTP requests.
- The fixture supplies UUID service report IDs, as required by the
database. The existing generated-ID fallback for reports without IDs is
outside this extraction.
- Test adapters and services are local fixtures; these tests make no
live provider calls.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, assisted with reasoning, code edits, tool
execution, and verification. 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>
2026-10-12 10:40:42 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 914b70572c refactor(heartbeat): extract execution configuration (#15973)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Heartbeat turns task, agent, environment, and account settings into
an executable run.
> - The executor still assembles scoped credentials and skill
configuration inline between environment selection and session
preparation.
> - That phase has a clear input/output boundary, but credential
acquisition must remain visible to cleanup even when later setup fails.
> - This pull request extracts configuration assembly and immediately
notifies the executor of acquired resources and redaction state.
> - The executor retains admission, dispatch, and cleanup, with the same
statement ordering and explicit busy-account deferral.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**
Maintenance of heartbeat execution. This PR follows #15969 and #15966,
both now merged. The branch is rebased onto `master`; `git range-diff`
confirms that the extraction patch is unchanged.

**Current behavior**
`heartbeat.ts` has 4,561 lines and 188,950 bytes. Configuration assembly
mixes workspace overrides, secrets, managed AI preparation, and skill
delivery into the executor.

**Proposed behavior**
`execution-configuration.ts` owns this preparation phase in 269 lines
and 16,204 bytes. The executor calls it between environment and session
preparation and retains immediate cleanup ownership. `heartbeat.ts`
becomes 4,372 lines and 178,459 bytes.

**Reason and benefit**
The execution path exposes another named phase, with tests that exercise
its effective configuration, resource lifetime, failure diagnostics, and
busy-account result through public heartbeat dispatch. Related work:
#11827 changes pre-dispatch secret refresh and #15355 changes GitHub
delegation; this extraction preserves current policies.

**Breaking changes**
None intended. Public exports remain available, and the original helpers
keep their modules.

## What Changed

- Move configuration merging, scoped secret resolution, managed AI
acquisition, runtime skills, connector instructions, and managed
identity preparation into one typed module.
- Notify the executor immediately when failure-redaction values, managed
credentials, and identity redaction become available. Returning
resources only after all preparation succeeds would lose cleanup on
partial failure.
- Preserve the live failure-secret getter for later runtime environment
changes. Return an explicit deferred result for busy accounts.
- Add four real-database characterization tests through
`heartbeat.wakeup`, using actual credential files and cleanup with a
fixture adapter.
- Update the developer module map.

## Verification

- Before extraction: all 45 tests pass across the new public-path tests
and existing project-environment tests.
- After extraction: 47 tests pass across execution configuration,
project environment, and runtime skills. No skips.
- Two additional real-process managed identity tests pass; nine
unrelated cases are deliberately filtered out.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass.
- Normalized syntax comparison confirms the moved body and reconstructed
executor match after accounting for immediate ownership callbacks and
the explicit prepared/deferred result.
- Isolated browser acceptance: 2/2 pass (3.9 minutes). A real process
worker completes after Git recovery, with persisted stdout and matching
final output byte counts. Persistent failures stop after three attempts.
Both outcomes survive reload. The disposable server was shut down after
verification.
- All eleven new public-path characterization cases across the three-PR
stack pass together on the final commit.
- All 140 named public exports from the batch baseline remain available.
- CI initially failed the legacy-continuation message browser case:
periodic recovery escalated the issue, then queue admission cancelled
the run with `execution_reconciliation_required` before configuration
preparation. The unchanged predecessor shard passes, and the exact case
passes locally (5 seconds in the browser). The original failing case
passed on its single rerun (8.2 seconds), but GitHub then shut down the
runner during a different test (`The runner has received a shutdown
signal`). The separate infrastructure restart completed: 24 browser
cases passed, with two existing optional cases skipped. Assertions and
timeouts are unchanged.
- Greptile: 5/5 on `27ab7e3df64c157ba1f00c5757db812ff7a4e5aa`, with no
actionable findings. Hosted full-suite CI passes on this exact commit:
all 54 check runs and the additional commit status are successful.

- Merge preparation: all eleven characterization tests pass after
rebasing onto `master`. Fresh full CI passes for
`1758673f87eaa76a8b2c520eac4b631ada5d9ba1`: 55 successful checks and two
optional Storybook skips, including all eight browser shards, typecheck,
tests, and build. Greptile is 5/5 on this exact commit with zero review
threads. All heartbeat source, tests, documentation, and browser
assertions are identical to the previously reviewed final stack.

## Risks

- A failure after AI acquisition must still remove the disposable
credential home. The new public-path failure test proves actual
filesystem cleanup and diagnostic redaction before the external
reporting sink.
- The baseline exposed an existing gap: arbitrary exception text in the
local `run.error` field can contain a credential even though the failure
reporter redacts it. This behavior is unchanged and merits a separate
fix; the test does not claim the local error field is sanitized.
- Account-busy deferral must return without dispatch while retaining its
scheduled retry. The new test checks the durable run states.
- Browser acceptance uses a real process fixture and disposable data,
without live provider calls.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, assisted with reasoning, code edits, tool
execution, and verification. 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>
2026-10-12 10:01:00 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 37913e4907 refactor(heartbeat): extract run output recording (#15969)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Heartbeat runs stream adapter output and persist execution results.
> - Output recording currently sits inside the executor beside admission
and cleanup.
> - Log handles, sequence numbers, progress writes, and excerpt buffers
share one attempt lifetime.
> - This pull request moves that state and its callbacks into a
per-attempt recorder.
> - The executor keeps dispatch and finalization visible, while
finalization reads live output values.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**
Maintenance of heartbeat execution. This PR follows #15966, which is now
merged. The branch is rebased onto `master`; `git range-diff` confirms
that its extraction patch is unchanged.

**Current behavior**
`heartbeat.ts` has 4,740 lines and 195,258 bytes. It directly owns log
handles, excerpt buffers, output sequence numbers, progress flushes, and
adapter event callbacks.

**Proposed behavior**
`run-output.ts` owns the per-attempt recorder. The main file has 4,561
lines and 188,950 bytes; the recorder has 209 lines and 7,757 bytes.

**Reason and benefit**
Output state has one explicit lifetime and interface. The shared log
store and finalization policy retain their original owners. Related open
output work includes #12539 and #15524; this PR does not change
redaction policy.

**Breaking changes**
None intended. Public flush constants and log formatting exports remain
available from `heartbeat.ts`.

## What Changed

- Move log initialization, redaction, excerpts, progress persistence,
live delivery, and adapter callbacks into `createHeartbeatRunOutput`.
- Preserve the acquired log handle if later setup fails. Bind callbacks
to the execution-start run row.
- Pass live excerpt getters to success and failure completion so output
arriving during finalization remains visible.
- Add three real-database public-path tests. Extend browser acceptance
to inspect persisted worker stdout and output byte counts.
- Update the module map.

## Verification

- Before extraction: 23 tests pass, including all three new output
characterization cases.
- After extraction: 45 tests pass across output, log formatting, event
sequencing, and run completion. No skips.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass.
- Normalized syntax comparison confirms the moved bodies and
reconstructed executor match. Reviewed the factory ownership, callback
binding, getter wiring, and constant re-exports separately.
- Isolated browser acceptance: 2/2 pass, including persisted worker
stdout and matching final byte counts. The process worker completes
after recovery; persistent timeouts stop after three attempts. Both
terminal states survive reload.
- Hosted full-suite CI passes on
`d32c8fc40e72b9766bdd9e191d777e8dc554e3f2`; all 55 reported checks are
successful. Greptile is 5/5 with zero review threads.
- The initial chat shard timed out waiting for GitHub mention admission.
Its fixture mocks heartbeat wakeup and never calls the output recorder.
Both parameterized cases passed locally; the unchanged shard passed on
one rerun. No test or timeout changes.

- Merge preparation: all seven session-preparation and run-output
regression tests pass after rebasing onto `master`. Fresh full CI passes
for `60e2a49ce2879645a9f618a801e0ba0903ede161`: 55 successful checks and
two optional Storybook skips, including all eight browser shards,
typecheck, tests, and build. Greptile is 5/5 on this exact commit with
zero review threads.

## Risks

- A stale excerpt snapshot could lose output that arrives while
finalization awaits I/O. Passing-before/passing-after tests exercise
this for both successful and failed runs.
- Per-attempt state must not become service-wide. Each executor
constructs its own recorder and keeps the existing shared store.
- Browser acceptance uses a real process fixture and disposable data; it
makes no live provider calls.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, assisted with reasoning, code edits, tool
execution, and verification. 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>
2026-10-12 09:51:17 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip d497d1ccec refactor(chat): extract failed-run retry coordination (#15845)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agent work and sends results back to chat.
> - A failed chat run can be retried only while its original source
remains authorized.
> - That decision includes persisted source evidence and native runtime
state.
> - Retry claims also share in-flight promises and depend on service
shutdown.
> - This PR groups retry authorization, execution and notices in one
module.
> - The service retains the live admission, runtime and shutdown
boundaries.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15844, #15836, #15834 and #15823. Stack slice 5 of 5, based on
`codex/chat-publication-replacement`.
Merge each predecessor first, then retarget this PR. Do not merge the
stack out of order.

Stack order: #15823 (provider messages) → #15834 (resource
reconciliation) → #15836 (identity links) → #15844 (publication
replacement) → #15845 (failed-run retries). GitHub native stack merging
preserves this order and automatically restacks the remaining branches.

## What Changed

- Extract failed-run retry admission and coordination while keeping the
in-flight map, cursor, error class and authority registrations scoped to
one chat service.
- Move the exact Teams uncertain-file continuation proof into
`microsoft-teams/file-transfer-source.ts`.
- Pass the existing transaction, explicit source identifiers and denial
factory. Return only the proven publication ID.
- Keep committed-result, complete source-batch, ancestor and
other-uncertain-effect checks in shared `failed-run-retry.ts`.
- Keep native execution recovery together; its provider references
describe runner backends, not chat channels.
- The retry coordinator is 1,825 lines and the Teams proof is 149 lines.
Restack on revised #15844 and record the reassessment.

## Verification

- Baseline: 59 retry cases and six negative Teams authority cases
passed. The combined 65 cases passed after the move.
- Cases cover retry ownership, service restart/lifetime, ambiguous Teams
receipts, sibling unknown effects, changed source authority and active
attempts.
- Teams guard, joins, locks, attempt checks and selected ID match after
explicit input substitutions. The shared coordinator retains its state
and cleanup ownership.
- Server typecheck, module-boundary and whitespace checks passed.
- Integration uses disposable databases and fixture provider transports;
no live third-party execution is claimed.

- Fresh Greptile review is 5/5 on
`4f7151409717458717633aa270441a8faf33664e`, with a successful check and
no open review threads.
- Final-stack `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed at
`57ec5ba94aecd860471f9b14db46f99120c7c790`.
- All CI checks passed on `57ec5ba94aecd860471f9b14db46f99120c7c790`.
- Full local `pnpm test:run` stopped in the general-server group: 18,763
passed, 105 skipped, and one test timed out after 20 seconds in
unchanged `workspace-runtime.test.ts` ("does not accept an occupied
allocated port when listener ownership is unavailable"). The same case
passed in an isolated rerun without code, assertion or timeout changes
(1 passed, 175 excluded). The original timeout is retained as a failed
full run; later workspace and serialized groups were not reached. The
full local gate remains unverified.

- Merge verification on the restacked tree: 118 focused identity,
publication, Photon and retry integration tests passed; server typecheck
and module-boundary checks passed. GitHub’s rebased trees exactly match
the previously reviewed file contents.

- All current-head required checks passed on
`4f7151409717458717633aa270441a8faf33664e`: full CI; Greptile 5/5 with
no unresolved threads.

## Risks

- Authorization must remain fail-closed across committed output and
retry admission. The helper proves only the Teams transfer; the caller
still checks the complete source and result in the same transaction.
- In-flight promises, error-class identity, registration cleanup, cursor
state and the live shutdown getter must remain per-service. Their code
is unchanged by this channel-folder move.
- This PR depends on #15844. Merge and retarget in stack order.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning and repository tools. The
exact runtime model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this
session. No separate agent was used.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] 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 09:49:34 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 5a72061ccc refactor(chat): extract publication replacement decisions (#15844)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip publishes agent progress and results back to chat.
> - Some updates replace an earlier message while others need a new
message.
> - The current outbound link and task generation determine that
authority.
> - These decisions are spread through the large chat service.
> - This PR groups publication replacement and supersession decisions in
one module.
> - Reviewers can follow those decisions without reading provider
transport code.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15836, #15834 and #15823. Stack slice 4 of 5, based on
`codex/chat-identity-links`.
Merge the predecessor first, then retarget this PR. Do not merge the
stack out of order.

Stack order: #15823 (provider messages) → #15834 (resource
reconciliation) → #15836 (identity links) → #15844 (publication
replacement) → #15845 (failed-run retries). GitHub native stack merging
preserves this order and automatically restacks the remaining branches.

## What Changed

- Extract shared publication replacement and supersession queries from
the large service.
- Keep exact outbound ownership, run/wake scope, consumed progress,
interaction replacement and retained-source authorization together.
- Put the iMessage typing-versus-progress policy in
`imessage-photon/publications.ts`.
- Preserve endpoint lookup timing and all ownership query bodies. The
multi-provider close allowlist remains shared dispatch metadata.
- Restack onto the revised #15836 and record why this boundary remains
mostly shared.

## Verification

- The same 49 existing publication and Photon integration cases passed
before and after the provider-policy move. Other cases were excluded by
the filter.
- Cases cover close-owned progress, ambiguous delivery, interleaved
Slack control, Telegram confirmation, FIFO replacement and Photon
channel behavior.
- Server typecheck, module-boundary and whitespace checks passed. Only
the iMessage predicate/reason moved; ownership queries are unchanged.
- Historical server shard 2 hit a cleanup deadlock; its unchanged
[isolated rerun
passed](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38134431077/job/114457999409).
[Original
failure](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38134431077/job/114455332022).
- Tests use disposable databases and fixture provider transports, not
live third-party execution.

- Fresh Greptile review is 5/5 on
`8e2da97b6dc11eb446128b61c789edb529c50d5a`, with a successful check and
no open review threads.
- Final-stack `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed at
`57ec5ba94aecd860471f9b14db46f99120c7c790`.
- Historical pre-restack CI failed on `ci / General tests (server
(11/12))` and its aggregate `ci / verify`. All 1,255 tests passed, but
worker-exit cleanup in unchanged
`server/src/__tests__/setup-supertest.ts:32` failed with EACCES removing
a temporary `paperclip-vitest-home-*` directory. The [original
job](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38256549828/job/114836065382)
and the [single unchanged
rerun](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38256549828/job/114839735273)
failed the same way. No further reruns were requested. After GitHub
automatically restacked the branches, the full cumulative run on #15845
passed this server shard. This middle PR uses the repository’s
policy-only stack CI scope; the top PR runs all suites.
- The final full-local-suite outcome for this cumulative stack is
recorded in #15845; do not infer that gate from the focused tests above.

- Merge verification on the restacked tree: 118 focused identity,
publication, Photon and retry integration tests passed; server typecheck
and module-boundary checks passed. GitHub’s rebased trees exactly match
the previously reviewed file contents.

- All current-head required checks passed on
`8e2da97b6dc11eb446128b61c789edb529c50d5a`: policy CI (middle-stack
scope; full cumulative suites passed on #15845); Greptile 5/5 with no
unresolved threads.

## Risks

- Splitting shared ownership queries per channel would duplicate
authorization rules. They remain in the shared module.
- Preserve the issue-to-run lock order and retained-source callback. The
factory creates no worker or mutable state.
- This PR depends on #15836. Merge and retarget in stack order.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning and repository tools. The
exact runtime model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this
session. No separate agent was used.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] 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 09:49:34 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip de79750939 refactor(chat): extract identity linking (#15836)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip connects provider identities to company members.
> - A confirmed identity determines whose permissions apply to chat
messages.
> - Token consumption and membership checks must remain atomic.
> - These operations currently share the large chat channel service.
> - This PR moves identity linking into one module with explicit runtime
callbacks.
> - Reviewers can inspect the complete identity-link flow together.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15834 and #15823. Stack slice 3 of 5, based on
`codex/chat-resource-reconciliation`.
Merge the predecessor first, then retarget this PR. Do not merge the
stack out of order.

Stack order: #15823 (provider messages) → #15834 (resource
reconciliation) → #15836 (identity links) → #15844 (publication
replacement) → #15845 (failed-run retries). GitHub native stack merging
preserves this order and automatically restacks the remaining branches.

## What Changed

- Extract company-scoped identity linking into shared
`identity-links.ts`.
- Move Slack connect receipt queries, access requests and
confirmation-notice staging into `slack/identity-links.ts`.
- Move GitHub identity fields into `github/identity-links.ts`.
- Preserve shared token consumption, link locks, membership checks and
revocation.
- Stage the Slack notice inside the original confirmation transaction.
Schedule delivery after commit. Keep runtime and public URL callbacks
live.
- Restack on the revised resource PR #15834 and record the architectural
reassessment in the plan.

## Verification

- Four existing service integration cases passed before and after. The
Slack connect case covers discovery, preview, access requests, duplicate
requests, member confirmation, provider notice, consumed tokens and
endpoint isolation.
- Receipt queries, the access-request transaction and notice payload
match the previous implementation with explicit parameter substitutions.
- Server typecheck, module-boundary and whitespace checks passed.
- These are local database and fixture transport tests, not live Slack
execution.

- Fresh Greptile review is 5/5 on
`7b44962f09fe8043c77ed40e05f761f31c64b33c`, with a successful check and
no open review threads.
- Final-stack `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed at
`57ec5ba94aecd860471f9b14db46f99120c7c790`.
- All CI checks passed on `62ee045a4728da2d756be3d2e40d13e592a0b5a9`.
- The [original workspace
shard](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38256203686/job/114834873234)
timed out waiting for the CLI import/export test server health endpoint.
Its [single unchanged rerun
passed](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38256203686/job/114838954081).
The original timeout remains part of the evidence.
- The final full-local-suite outcome for this cumulative stack is
recorded in #15845; do not infer that gate from the focused tests above.

- Merge verification on the restacked tree: 118 focused identity,
publication, Photon and retry integration tests passed; server typecheck
and module-boundary checks passed. GitHub’s rebased trees exactly match
the previously reviewed file contents.

- All current-head required checks passed on
`7b44962f09fe8043c77ed40e05f761f31c64b33c`: full CI; Greptile 5/5 with
no unresolved threads.

## Risks

- Confirmation must retain transaction and token ownership. The Slack
helper receives the existing transaction and stages the same effect;
scheduling remains after commit in the shared coordinator.
- This PR depends on #15834. Merge predecessors and retarget before
merging this PR.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning and repository tools. The
exact runtime model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this
session. No separate agent was used.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] 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 09:49:33 -05:00