4 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Dotta	84bedd4ca1	feat(runner): activate qualified OpenCode and ACPX providers (#12691) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Paperclip Runner is the experimental native runtime for governed agent work. > - The runtime contracts already describe Codex, OpenCode, and ACPX providers. > - The merged control plane still rejected OpenCode and ACPX for new runner agents. > - Runnerd also selected only the Codex provider implementation. > - This pull request activates the qualified OpenCode and ACPX paths from the form to runnerd. > - The benefit is one durable runner path with provider-specific permissions and recovery. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #12685 **Subsystem affected** This change affects the runner package, server orchestration, adapter configuration, and UI configuration. **Problem or motivation** Paperclip Runner stores provider contracts for OpenCode and ACPX. New agents cannot select those providers. Runnerd cannot execute those stored provider descriptors. The UI also shows only Codex. **Proposed solution** Accept the qualified OpenCode 1.18.17 profile and the fixed ACPX Claude and Codex profiles. Route them through runnerd. Keep provider selection, model selection, permissions, credentials, events, and recovery inside closed provider-specific boundaries. **Alternatives considered** One option was to keep the contracts dormant. That option leaves stored configuration and runtime behavior out of sync. Another option was to enable every ACPX agent. That option is not safe because Pi does not yet have the same verified launch path. **Roadmap alignment** This change supports the completed cloud and sandbox agent milestone. It also supports self-healing runs and governed agent execution. It does not add a new roadmap surface. ## What Changed - Add one server profile resolver for Codex, OpenCode, and qualified ACPX descriptors. - Keep `adapterConfig` as the provider and permission authority for fresh runs. - Add Paperclip Runner provider, ACPX agent, and provider-specific permission controls to the UI. - Reset the model to a compatible qualified value when the provider changes. - Route Codex, OpenCode, and ACPX through the durable runnerd provider selector. - Add a durable ACPX executor with bounded state, recovery, events, tool receipts, and identity checks. - Remove Codex labels from OpenCode events, results, evidence, and recovery diagnostics. - Pass only provider-specific credential names to child processes. - Keep ACPX Pi unavailable and reject it before process launch. - Keep the existing Paperclip Runner experimental flag unchanged. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/paperclip-runner/src/backends/native-backend-factory.test.ts packages/paperclip-runner/src/live/runnerd-codex-transport.test.ts packages/adapters/codex-local/src/ui/build-config.test.ts ui/src/adapters/codex-local/config-fields.test.tsx server/src/__tests__/adapter-registry.test.ts server/src/__tests__/adapter-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/agent-adapter-validation-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts server/src/services/native-runtime/runtime-mode.test.ts server/src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.test.ts server/src/services/heartbeat-runner-provider-config.test.ts` - The focused TypeScript, server, and UI suites passed 274 tests. - `cargo test -p paperclip-runner-core --test native_provider_backend` - The executable native provider integration suite passed 4 tests. - `cargo test -p paperclip-runner-core --lib` - The Rust unit suite passed 91 tests. - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm check:token-gates` - `pnpm build` - `git diff --check codex/runner-parity-task-runtime...HEAD` ## Risks - This changes provider process selection and durable recovery. The experimental flag still gates every fresh Paperclip Runner run. - OpenCode requires a model in `provider/model` form and stays pinned to version 1.18.17. - ACPX accepts only exact Claude and Codex profile versions and models. Pi stays unavailable. - ACPX steering stays unavailable and reports that limit through the driver capabilities. - Child processes receive explicit environment allowlists. They do not inherit the full server environment. - This pull request has no database migration. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, with tool use, code execution, and subagent review. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-09-01 21:54:30 -05:00
Dotta	ee2a190626	Unify Paperclip Runner experimental controls (#12666) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Paperclip Runner is an experimental execution adapter. > - The adapter and its required sandbox ingress had separate settings. > - A user could enable one setting and still have an unusable runner configuration. > - The runtime already makes one durable native or legacy decision for each run. > - This pull request uses that runtime decision for ingress authorization. > - The benefit is one clear opt-in with safe recovery for existing native runs. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** This improves the experimental settings and transport authorization for Paperclip Runner. **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting. This change affects the React settings UI, shared settings contracts, adapter utilities, and server runtime selection. **Current behavior** Settings shows separate Paperclip Runner and Runner Preview Ingress controls. A user can enable the runner but leave required sandbox ingress disabled. **Proposed behavior** Settings shows only Paperclip Runner. Its native runtime decision also authorizes provider WebSocket ingress when the execution target requires it. A persisted native run keeps its recovery transport after the setting is disabled. **Reason and benefit** Paperclip Runner is one experimental capability. One opt-in removes an invalid partial configuration and makes the rollout boundary easier to understand. **Breaking changes** The Runner Preview Ingress card is removed. The old `enableRunnerPreviewIngress` key remains accepted in stored settings and managed configuration, but it has no server runtime effect. The public adapter-utils input remains compatible through a deprecated alias. **Additional context** Refs: #12638, #12641, #12656. ## What Changed - Removed the separate Runner Preview Ingress card from Experimental Settings. - Made resolved native runtime selection authorize required provider ingress. - Preserved ingress recovery for persisted native runs after the rollout flag is disabled. - Kept the old settings key and adapter-utils input as deprecated compatibility contracts. - Added focused UI, runtime policy, transport, stored-settings, and managed-config regression tests. - Updated deployment documentation and feature descriptions. ## Verification - GitHub Actions will run typecheck, tests, build, policy, and browser shards. - Focused tests cover the single settings control, runtime authorization, fail-closed transport selection, the deprecated public input, and old managed configuration. - No local tests were run, per the maintainer request to use GitHub Actions for verification. - `git diff --check` passes. ## Risks Low to moderate risk. The effective ingress gate changes from a separate stored flag to the resolved native run decision. Fresh runs still require `enableNativeRunner`. Persisted native runs remain recoverable. Legacy adapters never receive ingress authorization. > 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, GPT-5, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [ ] 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	2026-09-01 09:21:23 -05:00
Dotta	0a422fda52	feat(runner): add remote execution substrate (#12638) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Paperclip Runner gives native runs a durable and governed execution path. > - The current native path runs on the control-plane host. > - Remote environments need an authenticated execution-target contract. > - The contract must not change direct adapters or enable new runtimes by default. > - This pull request adds the remote execution substrate and Daytona ingress. > - The benefit is a bounded base for later remote runner transport work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #12616. Refs #12352. **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting. This change touches runner transport, server orchestration, plugin contracts, and shared settings. **Problem or motivation** Native execution cannot resolve an authenticated runner ingress through a remote environment. The server also lacks one provider-neutral contract for remote execution targets. **Proposed solution** Add a default-off runner preview ingress capability. Add transport-neutral runner connectivity. Add remote execution target and lifecycle handling. Add a Daytona ingress implementation with redacted credentials. **Alternatives considered** A provider-specific server path would duplicate orchestration and authorization. A public endpoint without an environment contract would weaken the trust boundary. **Roadmap alignment** This work supports the Cloud and Sandbox agents milestone. It also supports self-healing runs and governed tool access. ## What Changed - Added execution-target traits for local, SSH, and sandbox environments. - Added plugin RPC contracts for runner ingress endpoints. - Added authenticated Daytona preview ingress. - Added transport-neutral PRP outbound connections. - Added remote runner artifact verification and fail-closed provider selection. - Added bounded native session resume, cancellation, and lifecycle recovery. - Preserved Codex-only selection for fresh experimental runner starts. - Preserved all direct adapter execution and finalization paths. - Removed stale Pi provider-pack requirements that security review rejected. - Kept the rollout controls off by default. - Did not change pnpm-lock.yaml, Cargo, database migrations, or GitHub workflows. ## Verification - GitHub Actions will run the repository test, typecheck, build, security, and policy gates. - Focused tests cover ingress validation, redaction, execution targets, remote lifecycle, cancellation, resume, and legacy adapter selection. - Local tests were not run. The requested verification policy uses GitHub Actions for this series. - `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` passes. - The diff contains 52 files. ## Risks - Remote execution crosses a trust boundary. - The implementation validates target capabilities, artifact digests, provider-pack pins, and connection metadata. - The feature remains default-off. - Fresh native selection remains Codex-only. - Existing direct adapters remain on the legacy path. - This PR does not yet make remote Codex runnable. The next PR adds the Rust WSS and TLS transport. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex with GPT-5.6. The work used high-reasoning agent mode, repository tools, GitHub tools, and parallel code-audit agents. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with Fixes: / Closes / Refs OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-09-01 01:29:06 -05:00
Dotta	51ad751e0b	feat(runner): integrate Codex native execution (#12616) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source control plane for teams of AI agents. > - Agent runs currently use direct adapters and their established finalization paths. > - The new runner package needs one production integration before it can execute a real provider through the server. > - That integration must not change direct adapters or expose unsupported providers. > - The rollout must also preserve native runs that were already recorded when the feature flag changes. > - This pull request adds a default-off, Codex-only native execution path and its authority boundary. > - The benefit is a recoverable production vertical slice with explicit compatibility guards. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting server orchestration and adapter selection. **Problem or motivation** The runner package exists, but the server cannot yet start and recover a governed Codex run through it. A careless integration could also route existing direct adapters into the native runtime or lose cancellation and finalization state. **Proposed solution** Add a hidden `paperclip_runner` adapter for Codex. Keep it behind the default-off instance flag. Bind native execution, resume, cancellation, semantic tool authority, and finalization to the recorded company, issue, run, and coordinator identities. Leave every direct adapter on its existing path. **Alternatives considered** A multi-provider launch was rejected because only Codex has the complete production bridge in this series. Replacing direct adapter execution was rejected because the runner remains experimental. **Roadmap alignment** This work supports governed tool access, action attribution, and self-healing runs. It keeps the integration narrow and default-off. ## What Changed - Add the Codex-only native session executor and persisted resumption path. - Add run-scoped semantic tool projection, authorization, receipts, and idempotency. - Add audited native cancellation with durable issue and coordinator binding. - Add result fencing so a recorded result cannot reacquire the provider and run twice. - Reject fresh runner starts when the rollout flag is off while preserving recorded native recovery. - Keep direct adapters outside native status, cancellation, record creation, and finalization. - Add focused conformance, recovery, cancellation, status, portability, and compatibility coverage. ## Verification - GitHub Actions is the authoritative test environment for this large stack. - The PR policy and lightweight stack checks run while this is a middle PR. - The full required suite runs when this PR becomes the lowest unmerged or top PR. - Greptile will review this exact delta after the branch is pushed. ## Risks - The main risk is routing a legacy adapter into native execution. Runtime selection and heartbeat tests cover that boundary. - The next risk is stale or cross-company cancellation. Durable binding checks and transactional audit persistence cover it. - The adapter remains hidden and default-off. Only Codex is admitted. - There are no database migration, lockfile, or GitHub workflow changes in this PR. ## Stack 1. [Runner package, SDK, and developer tools](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12608) 2. This PR: Codex production server integration 3. [Provider-neutral task-thread UI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12617) ## Model Used OpenAI Codex with GPT-5, extended reasoning, repository tools, and parallel review agents. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/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	2026-08-31 22:51:17 -05:00