mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-06 21:05:21 +02:00
8c89340444cfcf7438ac81c211d243f189cedd1d
4102
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
8c89340444 |
fix(onboarding): preserve draft through company refetch (#12735)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Onboarding creates an organization in the browser. > - The browser keeps onboarding drafts for the same origin. > - A new data directory does not clear that browser data. > - The organization create request refreshes the company list. > - The old gate unmounted the live wizard during that refresh. > - This pull request keeps the wizard mounted after its first draft check. > - The customer can continue to the agent step after the organization is created. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No matching public issue was found. Related earlier fix: Refs #12667. **What happened?** A local canary install could create an organization through the API and then return the browser to an empty organization-name screen. **Expected behavior** The wizard must continue to the agent step after it creates the organization. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Keep a Paperclip onboarding draft in the browser. 2. Run npx paperclipai@canary onboard with a new data directory. 3. Open /onboarding. 4. Enter an organization name and select Continue. **Paperclip version or commit** 2026.902.0-canary.7. The fix is based on current master. **Deployment mode** Local trusted mode through the Paperclip CLI. **Install method** npx package install. **Agent adapter(s) involved** Not adapter-specific. **Database mode** Embedded PostgreSQL. ## What Changed - Keep the onboarding wizard mounted after its first successful draft ownership check. - Keep a failed ownership check retryable, so a later verified fetch restores the saved draft. - Add component, source E2E, and published-canary coverage for the retained-draft refetch case. ## Verification - Confirmed that the new canary scenario fails against 2026.902.0-canary.7 before this fix. - pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/OnboardingWizard.test.tsx - PAPERCLIP_E2E_PORT=3245 pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts tests/e2e/onboarding.spec.ts --reporter=line - pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck - pnpm check:token-gates ## Risks Low risk. The initial ownership check still waits for a fresh company list. A later successful retry can restore a retained draft. Later background refetches preserve live wizard state. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. Reasoning, tool use, code editing, terminal execution, and browser testing were used. The execution environment does not expose a context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used with version and capability details - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the bug 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 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> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
9064cfd09e |
feat(codex-local): give each Codex account its own home and path secret (#12709)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane for companies that use AI agents for work > - Local adapters connect Paperclip agents to provider command line tools > - The Codex adapter stores login data in a shared company home > - A shared home cannot keep credentials for more than one Codex account > - This pull request gives each account a safe home and a matching company secret > - The benefit is that one company can use multiple Codex accounts at the same time ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Problem or motivation** A company can hold only one Codex subscription credential because device login uses one shared home. A second account cannot log in without replacing or conflicting with the first credential. **Proposed solution** This change validates the vendor account identifier, stores each credential in its own home, and creates a company secret that points to that home. Repeat login calls return success when the matching secret already exists. **Roadmap alignment** The change supports the roadmap goal for centrally managed secrets with scoped access and audited resolution. **Additional context** The security review returned approve with no blocking finding. The branch adds shared account-handle validation and tests for device login and the Codex local adapter. ## What Changed - Add strict allowlist validation for Codex account handles. - Store each Codex account credential in a separate home under the Codex cache root. - Verify that the resolved account home stays inside the cache root. - Create the `CODEX_HOME_<handle>` company secret for each account. - Keep repeat and concurrent login calls safe and idempotent. - Add shared helper and route, adapter, and validation tests. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-codex-local test` passes with 343 tests. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server test src/__tests__/agent-device-login-routes.test.ts` passes with 25 tests. - The adapter suite passes with 23 tests. - The shared package and Codex adapter typechecks pass. - Continuous integration must pass on every check before merge. ## Risks The account handle becomes part of a directory path and secret name. The strict allowlist and root containment check reduce path traversal risk. Existing single-account homes remain unchanged unless a new device login creates an account-specific home. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-5 (exact runtime model ID: gpt-5), with tool use and code execution. The runtime context window is not exposed in this run. ## 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 - [ ] 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> |
||
|
Michael NguyenandPaperclip
|
dfdfc8664e |
feat(claude-local): add Claude Fable 5.1 support (#12730)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The Claude local adapter lets operators select a Claude model for an agent. > - Claude Fable 5.1 was absent from the adapter model lists. > - The adapter runtime also used a Claude Code build that rejected Fable 5.1. > - This pull request adds the direct Anthropic ID and the AWS Bedrock inference profile ID. > - It also updates the Claude ACP runtime and keeps the Paperclip usage and isolation patches. > - The benefit is that operators can select and run Claude Fable 5.1 through the Claude adapter. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #8810. That issue covers related model ID handling. This change does not change provider-prefixed model IDs. **Agent or provider** Claude Code through the built-in `claude_local` adapter. The requested model is Claude Fable 5.1. **Why this adapter is useful** Operators can use Fable 5.1 without entering an undocumented model ID. The configured model also reaches both supported Claude execution lanes. **How the agent is invoked** The CLI lane sends `--model claude-fable-5-1`. The ACP lane sends `ANTHROPIC_MODEL=claude-fable-5-1` to `@agentclientprotocol/claude-agent-acp`. **Are you willing to implement it?** Yes. This pull request includes the implementation and tests. **Additional context** Claude Code 2.1.232 rejected Fable 5.1 and required version 2.1.251 or newer. ACP package 0.73.0 includes Claude Code 2.1.257. The update keeps Paperclip's usage metadata and isolated-context behavior. ## What Changed - Added `claude-fable-5-1` to the direct Claude fallback list. - Added `us.anthropic.claude-fable-5-1` to the AWS Bedrock list. - Kept the existing default model at the first position in each list. - Updated the Claude ACP dependency from 0.70 to 0.73. - Carried the Paperclip usage and isolated-context changes into the 0.73 patch. - Added a Claude Code 2.1.251 minimum-version preflight for Fable 5.1 when using the standard `claude` executable, surfaced in both adapter Test and execution. Explicit custom wrappers retain their existing compatibility contract. - Kept local adapter Tests from executing caller-selected binaries: when runtime `PATH` selects a different Claude executable than the trusted probe, the Test warns and defers the authoritative version check to execution instead of approving or rejecting the alternate installation. - Added tests for model listing, discovery deduplication, Bedrock filtering, model pass-through in both execution lanes, old-CLI rejection before launch, custom-wrapper compatibility, and local runtime-PATH mismatch handling. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-claude-local typecheck` - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/execute.remote.test.ts packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/test.remote.test.ts packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/test.probe.test.ts packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/acp.test.ts server/src/__tests__/adapter-models.test.ts` (72 tests passed) - `node --test scripts/acpx-patch-packaging.test.mjs` (13 tests passed) - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm build` - A local Paperclip agent run completed with `usageJson.model` set to `claude-fable-5-1` through ACP 0.73.0 and its bundled Claude Code 2.1.257. - `pnpm test:run` completed 5,638 passing tests and 24 skipped tests. It also found 24 failures in unrelated workspace-runtime, path-canonicalization, and runtime-exposure tests on macOS with Node 26. These failures do not touch this diff. Clean pull request CI is the final full-suite gate. ## Risks - The ACP dependency update can change Claude runtime behavior outside model selection. Focused ACP tests, the full typecheck, the production build, and a real local Fable run reduce this risk. - The 0.73 patch must stay aligned with the installed ACP version. Dependency-resolution CI verifies the manifest and patch pair. - Fable 5.1 adds a short `claude --version` preflight to standard CLI-lane Tests and runs. The result is intentionally not cached so an in-place Claude Code upgrade takes effect without restarting Paperclip. Explicit custom wrappers are not version-probed because their output and compatibility contract can differ from the standard executable. - Local Tests preserve the existing deny-by-default probe boundary and do not execute a binary selected by caller-controlled `PATH`. A mismatched runtime binary produces an explicit warning without blocking an otherwise valid setup; execution independently validates the actual runtime-selected CLI before launch. - The AWS Bedrock identifier differs from earlier IDs because Fable 5.1 has no `-v1` suffix. The model-list test locks this exact value. - There is no schema change or migration. > 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 Provider: OpenAI. Model: GPT-5 Codex. The host did not expose a more specific model ID or context-window size. Capabilities used: agentic reasoning, repository editing, shell execution, web research, and local runtime 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
0f94521017 |
fix(runner): restore local session and task integrity (#12721)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane for agents that perform work. > - Paperclip Runner connects durable provider sessions to individual task runs through PRP. > - Provider continuity and per-run authority are different lifetimes. > - The existing implementation mixed those lifetimes and lost event metadata between provider frames, runnerd, persistence, API sanitization, and the task thread. > - That caused failed continuation, missing progress and Plans, duplicate replies, hidden failures, and unsafe recovery. > - This repair gives every heartbeat fresh authority, preserves qualified provider-session continuity, and restores one lossless presentation path without changing direct adapters. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A second native heartbeat could reuse tickets, leases, command receipts, sequence state, and run identity from the first heartbeat. Provider phase and item identity could be lost before the UI read them. Redaction could corrupt protocol discriminators while still missing malformed credential tails. The task thread could fold progress into the final response, hide failures, or show more than one final answer. Native Codex also exposed approval modes that do not yet have a durable approval bridge. **Expected behavior** Each heartbeat uses a new PRP authority epoch. Codex and OpenCode preserve exact qualified provider sessions; ACPX emits an explicit continuity event when its qualified process-replacement policy is used. Every accepted provider event is presented, classified as internal, or surfaced as unsupported. The task page shows chronological progress, reasoning summaries, activity, Plans, interactions, terminal failures, and exactly one final reply. Direct adapters retain their existing path. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Enable the unified experimental Paperclip Runner setting. 2. Create a local native Codex, OpenCode, ACPX Claude, or ACPX Codex agent. 3. Run response, Plan, structured-question/resume, restart, cancellation, and failure scenarios. 4. Reload the task while active, waiting, failed, and settled. 5. On the old implementation, observe stale run authority, missing classifications, incomplete output, or duplicated/folded replies. **Paperclip version or commit** The repair is based directly on `master` at `87d05e194b643810d16d20612115acd01d735d43`. **Deployment mode** Local development with the embedded database. Related work: Refs #12616, #12646, #12666, #12685, and #12700. ## What Changed - Rotates PRP control-plane, outbox, ticket, lease, command, receipt, and sequence authority for each heartbeat while carrying forward only a validated provider-session identity. - Reads `control-plane-state.json`, validates both durable schemas and lifecycle values, resumes coherent current runs, archives qualified settled authority, and quarantines malformed or mismatched scoped state without moving ambiguous live legacy state. - Preserves Codex provider phase and stable item identities so commentary remains progress and only `final_answer` becomes final. - Adds raw OpenCode HTTP/SSE boundary coverage and canonical reasoning lifecycle mapping. - Makes ACPX normalization lossless for visible reasoning, tool lifecycle metadata, stable bounded identities, Plan revisions, structured requests, failures, and qualified process replacement. Only the compatible terminal assistant message is promoted as final. - Applies schema-aware redaction before generic JWT-shaped detection and scans every diagnostic string leaf. Malformed raw/escaped quoted credential tails are redacted in both server and durable Rust state. - Restores snapshot-style chronological task presentation, expandable tool activity, inline Plan cards, visible waiting/resume/cancel/failure states, and exactly one final answer. - Makes `never` the only qualified native Codex permission mode and rejects unsupported persisted native modes with remediation. OpenCode and ACPX policies remain intact. - Keeps the unified experimental Runner setting as the only enablement flag. Onboarding and direct Codex, Claude, and OpenCode stay on their legacy execution/finalization paths. - Adds cross-language goldens, authority/recovery/fault coverage, exact response/count assertions, and native plus legacy acceptance scenarios. ## Verification - Pull-request GitHub Actions run Rust formatting/tests, TypeScript checks, server/UI tests, builds, protocol drift checks, browser E2E, and security scans. - A separate workflow-only validation ref is pinned directly on this PR head and runs the 35-cell paid local matrix: three core scenarios plus structured-question resume and restart/resume for native Codex, native OpenCode, ACPX Claude, ACPX Codex, and direct Codex/Claude/OpenCode. Run: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33682434315 - Acceptance requires exact single visible replies, monotonic sequences, matching envelope discriminators, one semantic terminal, one run terminal, no unresolved interaction, no duplicate mutation, no secret leakage, provider continuity, and zero native rows for direct adapters. - Per maintainer direction, tests are running in GitHub Actions rather than on the slower local host. Only formatters and static diff checks were run locally. ## Risks - Recovery from old or partial filesystem state is sensitive. The repair fails closed, preserves active or unverifiable authority, and quarantines only state whose scoped ownership is safe to move. - Provider event formats can change. Closed validators and boundary goldens turn new or malformed events into visible diagnostics instead of silent drops. - Shared task presentation could affect direct adapters. Runtime-fact gating plus the direct-adapter matrix protect the existing path. - Managed and remote providers are not qualified here. Shared code continues to compile and fail safely, but live qualification is deferred. > 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 based on GPT-5. The exact deployed snapshot and context-window size are not exposed to this task. It used agentic reasoning, repository inspection, code editing, Git, parallel subagents, and GitHub Actions. ## 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 - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass (intentionally deferred to GitHub Actions) - [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 - [ ] The paid local-provider matrix is 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 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
87d05e194b |
feat(work-products): add rich cards and run artifact inventory (#12717)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane for AI-agent companies. > - Agent outputs must remain visible after a run and easy to inspect from a task. > - The thread and artifact inventory need one consistent rich-card vocabulary. > - Run uploads also need durable artifact registration and producing-run context. > - Reviewers need deterministic examples for each rich-card kind and state. > - This pull request adds the shared presentation, registration, inventory, and Storybook review coverage. > - The benefit is a complete output path that reviewers can inspect without seeded data. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** This change improves work-product presentation in task threads and the task Artifacts tab. **Subsystem affected** The change affects shared work-product contracts, the runner diff path, server attachment and work-product services, GitHub metadata refresh, the React board UI, and Storybook. **Current behavior** The thread used generic cards. Some files uploaded by a run existed only as message attachments. The Artifacts tab showed a flat list without run context or filters. Storybook showed only one resting card per kind. **Proposed behavior** The thread uses rich cards for supported work-product types. Each run-produced file registers one attachment-backed artifact work product. The Artifacts tab groups outputs by run and supports filters. Storybook shows every kind and requested state, PR lifecycle states, stats variants, truncation, mobile layout, and message-tail media. **Reason and benefit** Users can identify outputs quickly. Reviewers can inspect all card permutations without creating task data. **Breaking changes** None. The metadata fields and automatic artifact registration are additive. Existing attachments and work products keep their current behavior. ## What Changed - Added a shared rich work-product card with kind-specific content and a compact inventory variant. - Added pull-request and commit diff metadata plus bounded GitHub state refresh. - Added media strips and typed file chips to message-tail attachments. - Registered each run-produced attachment as an artifact work product in the same server transaction. - Grouped task artifacts by run with agent and timestamp headings. - Added type and run filters, image thumbnails, compact cards, and a company Artifacts link. - Added a Storybook kind-by-state matrix with stats variants for all eight visual kinds. - Added PR open, draft, merged, and closed examples, long-title truncation, an exact 375-pixel viewport, and message-tail overflow coverage. - Closed reconciled runtime work products when the linked runtime stops or disappears, so the card shows `Stopped` instead of `Unhealthy`. ### Screenshots Before: one resting card per kind.  After: the kind and state matrix.  After: message-tail media at 375 pixels.  [Open the Storybook evidence viewer](https://pages.paperclip.ing/rich-work-product-storybook-20260902/). The earlier artifact inventory comparison remains available in the [artifact inventory viewer](https://pages.paperclip.ing/rich-artifacts-inventory-proof-20260902/). ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` passed. - `pnpm check:token-gates` passed. - `pnpm build-storybook` passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/work-product-runtime-reconciliation.test.ts` passed with 5 tests. - Chromium visual checks passed at desktop and 375-pixel widths. - All 30 latest-head GitHub checks passed. One unrelated annotation test was flaky and passed on its single retry. - Greptile passed at 5/5 with zero unresolved threads. ## Risks - Low risk. The Storybook change adds review fixtures only. The runtime fix changes read-time reconciliation without database writes. - The matrix is intentionally large so every permutation stays visible in one review surface. > I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This work does not duplicate planned core work. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex with GPT-5 and GPT-5.6-sol across this pull request. Reasoning, tool use, and code execution were enabled. The context-window size is 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 public branch name describes the change and contains no internal task id - [x] I have run tests locally and the changed-path tests 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 - [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>canary/v2026.902.0-canary.8 |
||
|
TonioandClaude Fable 5
|
141c5b1340 |
feat(onboarding): Figma pass over the tenant arc (#12726)
Takes the four tenant onboarding steps to the design, and makes the model choice explicit. **Nothing is preselected on the connect step.** It arrived with a source already chosen, which made the row read as a confirmation rather than a question and let a customer pass the step having touched none of it. The step now opens unanswered and cannot advance until a source is selected in the visible row. Two defects fell out of that, both found by Greptile in review: - A saved draft can name an adapter the row does not show — one the registry dropped, or one in the advanced list. The gate asked `sourcePicked`, which only means "a draft named something", so Next stayed live on a step that had visibly asked nothing and would hire against the hidden name. It now asks `sourceSelected`, read off the visible row, and the snap that replaces an unofferable adapter clears the pick rather than presenting its replacement as chosen. - Cmd+Enter bypassed that gate entirely, because the condition was written out twice and drifted. Both paths now ask one predicate. Also: selection is a fill rather than a border; the input canvas opens only for a chosen source; the close control is gone from every step (nothing downstream of the connect step works until a model is connected); the arc draws to the design's 424px column with a filled 44px name field; the CTA reads "Next" through the arc and "Get started" at the end; the login spinner reads "Preparing..."; the OAuth panels number their fields and show the URL above the code. Storybook: the arc stories waited for a button named "Connect" and had been silently rendering the wrong step since the CTA was renamed. They now wait on the destination heading. Three e2e specs had the same fault and now select a source before advancing. One test was removed rather than replaced — `hydrates again when the same company comes back through onboarding` drove the close control, and three substitutes each passed against a wizard with the behaviour deleted. The reason is recorded where it stood. Known and not fixed here: SidebarCompanyMenu opens the wizard at step 1 for "create a new organization", and with no exit an existing user who changes their mind is trapped. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>canary/v2026.902.0-canary.7 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8c3b8c432a |
Simplify app connections and enable managed Google access (#12728)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The Apps subsystem gives humans and agents governed access to external tools. > - The current connection flow hides Apps behind an experimental gate and repeats setup text. > - Google sharing choices and generic MCP permissions do not use one consistent opening model. > - Self-hosted installs also need a safe default origin for managed OAuth without a manual config file. > - This pull request makes Apps available, simplifies connection setup, and applies one governed permissions model. > - The benefit is a shorter connection flow that works on a clean self-hosted install. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** This improves the Apps connection setup flow, managed Google connection flow, generic MCP connection flow, navigation, and runtime origin discovery. **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting. This changes `ui/`, `server/`, `packages/shared/`, connector documentation, and browser tests. **Current behavior** Apps require an experimental switch. Setup pages repeat titles and explanatory copy. Connection names require manual input. Google credential sharing does not always offer both personal and organization access. Generic MCP providers do not start with the same permission choices. Managed OAuth needs a public URL setting even when the request already has a safe HTTPS origin. **Proposed behavior** Apps are available by default. Setup asks only for required permissions and sharing choices. Paperclip creates conflict-free connection names. Google apps and generic MCP providers use the same human and agent access model. Managed OAuth derives a validated same-origin HTTPS URL when no explicit public URL is set. **Reason and benefit** A clean self-hosted install can connect a managed Google app without hidden setup. Humans can share a service account with their organization. The shorter flow reduces duplicated choices and setup errors. **Breaking changes** The Apps experimental switch is removed. Existing connection APIs remain compatible. New connections can receive a numeric suffix when a name already exists. No duplicate or related public issue was found. ## What Changed - Removed the Apps experimental gate and the breadcrumb that leaves the Apps section. - Simplified all connection setup pages and moved optional provider requirements into one small link. - Added consistent human and agent access choices for Google apps, Zapier, and generic MCP connections. - Added organization sharing to Google Workspace credentials while keeping personal access available. - Generated connection names automatically and resolved name conflicts with numeric suffixes. - Derived a validated public HTTPS origin from the request for config-free managed OAuth. - Updated connector contracts, tests, browser coverage, and authoring documentation. ## Verification - `pnpm check:token-gates` - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm build` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/generic-mcp-connection.test.ts` (273 passed) - Targeted UI/service regression suite (308 passed) - Six targeted Playwright connection journeys on a fresh onboarding instance (6 passed) - Fresh-install browser proof through Tailscale HTTPS: enrolled with Paperclip Cloud, connected managed Google Drive, and completed a real read operation. - [Exact-head CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33669760711): all 23 matrix jobs passed, including build, typecheck, server, serialized, canary, and all browser shards. - Greptile 5/5 on `0ae2a859f269984ee950d0af231a5b09a06f3dfd`, with no unresolved review threads. ## Risks Apps are now visible to all operators. The removed experimental flag no longer hides unfinished app definitions. Managed Google availability still depends on the Cloud profile rollout and active instance enrollment. Automatic conflict handling changes only the display name of a newly conflicting connection. > I checked [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md). MCP Tool Gateway and Apps are shipped. Connected Apps is planned, and this change improves the existing shipped connection flow. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, with reasoning, browser control, 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 - [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>canary/v2026.902.0-canary.6 |
||
|
Dotta
|
5716fe907e |
test(runner): add full-stack acceptance and eval gates (#12700)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The runner subsystem executes agent work across local and managed provider backends. > - The lower pull requests restore the task runtime, provider backends, and managed-provider control plane. > - The restored system needs repeatable full-stack checks before it can ship safely. > - Paid live checks also need clear access, cost, and secret controls. > - This pull request adds acceptance, live evaluation, chaos, and release gates for the restored runner stack. > - The benefit is measurable runner parity with safer release decisions. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting. This change covers runner tests, release workflows, server contracts, and evaluation tools. **Problem or motivation** The runner stack did not have one complete acceptance surface for native Codex, ACPX, Claude Managed, and AWS AgentCore. Release checks could miss provider drift, task-view regressions, cost-policy errors, and destructive cleanup errors. **Proposed solution** Add a 57-cell full-stack catalog, a Daytona image, and opt-in paid workflows. Add live evaluation, chaos, cost-limit, redaction, and release contract checks. Add AWS AgentCore infrastructure and guarded provisioning tools. Keep the native runner experimental flag off by default. **Alternatives considered** We considered manual smoke tests only. They do not give repeatable evidence and they do not protect release branches. We also considered one large pull request. The stacked pull requests keep each review below the Greptile file limit. **Roadmap alignment** This work supports the shipped Cloud / Sandbox agents milestone and the shipped Agent evals & feedback milestone in `ROADMAP.md`. Related stack: - #12699 adds managed provider backends and lifecycle support. - #12691 adds qualified OpenCode and ACPX provider backends. - #12685 restores task runtime rendering and steering. ## What Changed - Add the runner full-stack harness with 57 catalog cells and 60 unit tests. - Add a Daytona runner image with digest-pinned base images and base-aware image-content checks. - Add guarded live evaluation and chaos workflows with a fixed 40-execution matrix; live and full-stack paid schedules now run only on Sundays or by manual dispatch. - Add in-flight reported-usage cost stops, post-turn cost caps, exact-threshold failure classification, secret redaction, retry classification, and actor authorization. - Reattach stream and hard-budget listeners before restart-recovery continuations so restored paid sessions cannot bypass in-flight interruption. - Preserve OpenCode usage and cost across tool-loop messages and turns while exposing an explicit current-run delta to durable accounting. - Keep PNG/WebM evidence in access-controlled artifacts only, reject SVG, and publish only pruned inert structured per-attempt evidence. - Add AWS AgentCore infrastructure, provisioning checks, and smoke tools; reject unsafe model identifiers, require exact stack ownership markers, and make failed-stack replacement explicit. - Add evaluation-session contracts and capability reports. - Add release workflow checks for immutable action pins, frozen dependency installs, exact weekly cron shape, paid-run guards, provider-secret isolation, and chaos test paths. - Reauthorize the original and triggering numeric actor IDs as the first step of every provider-secret job, including partial reruns, before checkout or provider access. - Give each full-stack matrix cell only its matching provider credential, expose Daytona only to Daytona cells, and disable shared dependency caches anywhere paid credentials or OIDC write access are present. - Protect the legacy manual E2E workflow with the same default-branch, allowlist, environment, and per-job authorization boundary. - Rotate live-eval candidates by week and retain 120 days of compatible history so the seven-week trend window remains viable. - Restore the root runner-acceptance commands and reconcile reported snapshots, raw receipts, and terminal usage without double counting or losing late usage. - Mark ACPX token deltas exact only when every budget field is present, keep cumulative cost/request authority separate, reject non-USD cost labeling, and include thought tokens in output-token budgets. - Keep `enableNativeRunner` off by default. The acceptance harness enables it only in its isolated test instance. ## Verification Passed locally: - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner typecheck` - `pnpm test:runner-acceptance:typecheck` - `pnpm test:runner-acceptance` (19 tests) - focused OpenCode proxy, driver, runnerd transport, live-session, and turn-stream tests (106 tests) - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner exec vitest run src/live/clean-room-server.test.ts` (22 tests) - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck` - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit` (62 tests) - `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:runner-workflow-evals` (22 tests) - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm build` - `node --test packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/aws-agentcore-provisioning.test.mjs` (6 tests) - `git diff --check` - `cargo test --manifest-path packages/paperclip-runner/runner/Cargo.toml -p paperclip-runner-core --lib --locked` (161 tests) - focused ACPX provider-event tests (10 tests) - The rebased PR changes 92 files. `pnpm-lock.yaml` is unchanged. I did not run paid live provider jobs or provision AWS resources. Those checks need credentials and can create cost. ## Risks The paid workflows can create provider cost. They require an allowlisted original and triggering actor, the protected `runner-e2e-paid` environment, explicit opt-in variables, and cost limits. The four provider credentials exist only in that master-only environment, which requires allowlisted reviewer approval and disables administrator bypass; repository and organization Actions scopes contain no copies. Provider usage arrives after a billable request, so the live guard cannot prevent one request from crossing a threshold. It interrupts immediately on the first reported threshold hit and permits no continuation. Visual evidence can contain secrets rendered as pixels. PNG/WebM remain only in access-controlled workflow artifacts; SVG and per-attempt XML are excluded, and S3/Pages receive a pruned structured dashboard. The AWS scripts can create cloud resources. They use explicit commands, least-privilege roles, KMS encryption, saved nonsecret metadata, and explicit teardown. This pull request does not enable the experimental native runner for existing instances. > 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-5. The model used extended reasoning, tool use, code execution, and parallel subagents. ## 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 mergecanary/v2026.902.0-canary.5 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
109d81db4f |
Add task workspace picker to properties pane (#12693)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The task properties pane lets an operator change the settings for one task. > - The pane did not let an operator select the execution workspace for the next run. > - The existing workspace card had selection rules that another control could copy by mistake. > - This pull request adds one shared selection module and one compact property picker. > - The picker keeps the current workspace active until the next run. > - The benefit is a clear workspace choice in the task properties pane without an API change. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** ui/ — React + Vite board UI **Problem or motivation** An operator cannot set the execution workspace from the new task properties pane. The existing task workspace card also owns selection rules that a second control could copy and change over time. **Proposed solution** Add a compact workspace property picker. Put the shared selection and update rules in one UI module. Show the picker only when isolated workspaces and the project workspace policy are enabled. **Alternatives considered** The existing workspace card could remain the only control. This would leave the new task interface incomplete. The picker could also copy the card logic, but that would create two sources of truth. **Roadmap alignment** This is a small UI improvement for existing workspace controls. It does not duplicate a planned item in `ROADMAP.md`. Related workspace work: Refs #12682. That pull request changes runner recovery and other workspace controls. It does not add this task property picker. ## What Changed - Added shared helpers for the current workspace selection and its issue update payload. - Updated the existing workspace card to use the shared helpers without changing its project-default behavior. - Added a gated workspace property picker with mode and workspace search steps. - Added unit and component tests for visibility, selection payloads, search, and workspace reuse. - Rebased onto the upstream native-run teardown fix so CI drains background heartbeat writes before PostgreSQL cleanup. ## Verification - `NODE_ENV=test pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/lib/issue-workspace-selection.test.ts src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx src/components/RoutineRunVariablesDialog.test.tsx` — 74 tests passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed. - `pnpm check:token-gates` — passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed. - `pnpm build` — passed. - `NODE_ENV=test pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/services/native-runtime/native-question-bridge.test.ts` — 8 tests passed on the rebased head. The upstream teardown drain prevents the prior PostgreSQL cleanup deadlock. ## Risks - Low risk. This is a gated UI-only change. - A wrong selection payload could change the next workspace mode. Exact payload tests cover every mode. - The old card must keep its existing project-default payload. A shared-helper test covers that payload. > 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-5. The exact serving revision and context window are not exposed. The agent used 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 - [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> |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
8eaa5caa05 |
docs(release): add v2026.831.1 stable notes to master (#12710)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The release pipeline keeps a canonical stable note at `releases/vX.md` on master for every published stable. > - Stable `2026.831.1` was a hotfix cut from a branch off `v2026.831.0`, with its notes committed into the source tree. > - In that path the workflow resolves notes in `source_tree` mode and skips `canonicalize_stable_notes`, which is the job that normally copies the note to master. > - As a result `releases/v2026.831.1.md` exists on the tag but never landed on master, so the stable-notes history has a gap. > - This pull request adds the canonical copy of that note to master. > - The benefit is a complete, consistent stable-notes history for readers and for the release tooling. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No separate issue. Describing the gap in-PR with the docs template fields: **Issue type** Documentation gap in the release-notes history on master. **Where is the issue?** `releases/` on the master branch — the file `releases/v2026.831.1.md` is missing, although the stable `2026.831.1` release has already published. **What's wrong?** The `2026.831.1` patch was published from a hotfix branch whose notes lived in the source tree (`source_tree` notes mode). That mode skips `canonicalize_stable_notes`, the job that copies a stable's note onto master. So every other stable has a `releases/vX.md` on master, but `2026.831.1` does not. **Suggested fix** Add the canonical `releases/v2026.831.1.md` to master, identical to the copy published with the tag. ## What Changed - Add `releases/v2026.831.1.md` to master, copied verbatim from the published `v2026.831.1` tag. ## Verification - `diff` of the added file against `git show v2026.831.1:releases/v2026.831.1.md` is empty (identical to the shipped note). - Docs-only change: no code, tests, or build outputs are affected. ## Risks - Low risk. The change adds one Markdown file and touches no code, schema, or configuration. ## Model Used - Claude (Anthropic), model id `claude-fable-5` (Claude Fable 5), used with tool use, shell commands, and file editing.nightly/v2026.902.0-nightly.0 canary/v2026.902.0-canary.4 |
||
|
Dotta
|
fdf8c8464d |
feat(runner): add managed provider backends (#12699)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The Paperclip Runner provides durable, provider-neutral agent execution. > - The current stack supports qualified local providers but omits the managed provider paths from the integration branch. > - Claude Managed Agents and AWS AgentCore need explicit profile qualification, durable recovery, usage accounting, and cleanup controls. > - This pull request adds those managed backends as the third part of the Runner parity stack. > - The benefit is managed execution without weakening the default-off Runner rollout gate. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting: Runner, server orchestration, database profiles, CLI, and adapter configuration UI. **Problem or motivation** The current Runner stack cannot select or execute the managed Claude Agents API or AWS Bedrock AgentCore Harness backends. It also lacks qualified profile storage and recovery checks for those remote resources. **Proposed solution** Add qualified managed and remote profiles, API and CLI management, exact provider selection, durable lifecycle handling, cumulative usage accounting, bounded cleanup, and retention acknowledgement. Keep `enableNativeRunner` default-off. **Alternatives considered** A direct copy of the old integration branch was rejected because its provider contracts, model values, credential flow, and migration history no longer match the current base. A single large parity pull request was also rejected because stacked review keeps each subsystem bounded. **Roadmap alignment** This continues the existing Runner architecture and rollout work. It does not introduce a separate execution system. **Additional context** This pull request is based on the merged #12691 and #12685 stack. It also closes the delayed security-review findings reported on #12691 by binding qualified ACPX and OpenCode launch artifacts to the bytes actually executed. A GitHub search for managed agent, AgentCore, and Claude managed work found no duplicate public issue or pull request. ## What Changed - Add Claude Managed Agents and AWS AgentCore provider executors to runnerd. - Add qualified managed and remote profile storage, routes, OpenAPI contracts, CLI commands, and migration 0237. - Validate profile ownership, enabled state, exact qualified revision, model, agent version, and secret binding before persistence and recovery. - Persist durable provider session and owned skill state for restart-safe cleanup. - Reconcile uncertain create responses and delete remote sessions before owned skills. - Track cumulative provider usage and enforce positive session spend caps. - Recover interrupted AgentCore usage at the next turn boundary by charging the prior invocation ceiling exactly once; keep the session gated until an explicit monotonic budget raise. - Isolate AgentCore AWS configuration from host profiles and credential-process/SSO configuration while preserving workload identity. - Require OpenCode 1.18.17 and fixed build-owned provider-pack artifact paths; remove the ambient executable override. - Snapshot and content-verify ACPX and OpenCode commands, scripts, and provider executables before launch. Linux executes sealed inherited descriptors; macOS uses authenticated private snapshots with retry-safe rematerialization at the spawn boundary. - Persist canonical ACPX and OpenCode launch-profile digests, reject drift across fresh recovery, and make recovery failures sticky. - Close and journal unsafe ACPX active-turn recovery before any provider bootstrap or reconnect. - Add managed provider fields to the Runner configuration UI and permission projection. - Preserve the default-off `enableNativeRunner` experimental flag. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm build` - Focused managed server, database, CLI, Runner TypeScript, Rust, Claude, AgentCore, ACPX, OpenCode, process-supervisor, and durable-recovery tests passed. - `cargo test -p paperclip-runner-core --lib --locked` (160 tests) - `cargo check --workspace --all-targets --locked` - Native Codex integration tests passed (60 tests); native provider tests passed (7 tests); server native-runtime tests passed (87 tests). - Verified-launch replacement, nested-spawn retry, exact-version, profile-drift, sticky-failure, and no-bootstrap active-recovery tests passed. - `git diff --check` - The PR changes 91 files. `pnpm-lock.yaml` is unchanged. The Rust workspace lockfile adds the approved `rustix` dependency used for safe descriptor handling while `#![forbid(unsafe_code)]` remains enabled. ## Risks - The provider APIs can change while they are in beta. Exact qualification and fail-closed recovery checks limit drift. - Remote cleanup can fail after a partial create. Durable ownership inventories and retry-safe deletion preserve recovery state. - Migration 0237 adds profile tables. The generated migration and snapshot pass the repository migration checks. - Managed execution can incur provider cost. Positive default spend caps and explicit retention acknowledgement limit accidental use. - An interrupted AgentCore invocation without final metadata is conservatively charged to its active session ceiling. This can overstate cost, but cannot undercount it; later work requires an explicit budget increase. - Linux qualified launches use sealed memory descriptors. macOS lacks executable-descriptor APIs, so the runner uses owner-only private snapshots and minimizes linked-path lifetime; hostile same-UID processes remain outside the documented local-host trust boundary. - The global Runner feature remains default-off. > 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 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 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 |
||
|
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 mergecanary/v2026.902.0-canary.3 |
||
|
Dotta
|
72b9f92d76 |
fix(runner): restore task runtime parity (#12685)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The task view shows a running agent and lets an operator guide that agent. > - The merged runner stack lost parts of the accepted task experience. > - Native event errors could hide current reasoning from the operator. > - Queued message steering had no server route on `master`. > - This pull request restores the task-runtime behavior and keeps the runner experimental gate. > - The benefit is a visible and steerable native run with durable fallback behavior. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** The task view could stop showing current runner reasoning. The steering action also failed because the server route was absent. Runner instruction files were not declared as supported. **Expected behavior** The task view must show current provider activity. It must use the live log when durable native events are empty or unavailable. The operator must be able to steer a queued message into the active native turn. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Enable the Paperclip Runner experimental setting. 2. Start a native runner task. 3. Open the task view while the run emits reasoning. 4. Queue a message and select the steering action. **Paperclip version or commit** The regression reproduces on `24a674f8858060e77ea1beb50689d26473e91431`. **Additional context** Related closed work: Refs #12592. ## What Changed - Restored the queued-comment steering route for active native sessions. - Added durable and queue-bound steering acknowledgements for safe retries. - Restored runner instruction bundle support. - Added live-log fallback when native events are empty or unavailable. - Restored the compact live reasoning ticker in the task view. - Added a visible temporary-unavailable state when both activity sources fail. - Kept the unified Paperclip Runner experimental gate unchanged. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm check:token-gates` - `pnpm build` - Seven focused test files passed with 140 tests. - The final steering regression file passed with 12 tests. - The broad local test run reached unrelated workspace, port, and shared database failures. The changed-area tests remained green. ## Risks - The steering route changes queue and run records in one transaction. Tests cover stale targets, unavailable sessions, lost responses, and wrong-queue acknowledgements. - Native events remain the primary transcript source. The live log is used only when event data is absent or its poll fails. - The experimental gate still hides and rejects the runner when the setting is off. > 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 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 - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes — no documentation change is required for this regression repair - [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 mergecanary/v2026.902.0-canary.2 |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
b4f302d040 |
feat(grok-local): copy a refreshed sandbox credential back to the host (#12696)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Paperclip runs agents through provider-specific adapters in local and remote environments > - A remote Grok run can refresh its credential inside its sandbox > - The host copy can become stale when teardown discards that refreshed credential > - This pull request copies the refreshed credential back through a locked, fail-closed teardown path > - The benefit is that later Grok runs can use the refreshed host credential without another login ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #12618 **Agent or provider** Grok local adapter. **Why this adapter is useful** A remote Grok run can refresh its access token during a run. Copying the refreshed credential back to the host keeps later runs ready to use. **How the agent is invoked** Paperclip invokes the Grok local adapter through its remote subscription run path. The adapter stages the company Grok home as a sandbox asset. The change adds a copy-out step on the teardown path. ## What Changed - `grok-auth-merge-decision.cjs` adds a host predicate in its own process. It compares the whole `<issuer>::<uuid>` identity key of the two files. It reads `expires_at` as an ISO-8601 string, an epoch-seconds number, or an epoch-milliseconds number. It exits 10 to use the source, 20 to keep the destination, 21 when the expiry shape is unreadable, and 22 when the source expiry sits more than 400 days after the host clock. It fails closed in every unclear case: an unusable side, a different identity, an absent expiry, a tie, an unreadable expiry, and an implausible expiry all keep the destination. - `grok-auth-merge-decision.ts` adds a wrapper that runs the predicate and maps the exit code to a typed result. - `grok-auth-copyback.ts` adds `copyBackGrokAuth({ hostHomeDir, readSandboxAuth, log, env })`. It locks on `hostHomeDir` with `withDirectoryMergeLock`, stages the sandbox bytes into a private `0600` temporary file, runs the predicate, and installs the file with an atomic rename in the same directory. It keeps no backup of the displaced credential. It leaves no temporary file on the success path, the keep path, or an error path. On an error it logs the `errno` code only, then re-throws. - `execute.ts` adds a `restore` callback to the Grok `home` asset. The callback takes the destination from `resolveManagedGrokHomeDir(process.env, agent.companyId)`, never from `env.GROK_HOME`. A copy-out failure does not fail the run. - `package.json` updates the `build` script to copy `grok-auth-merge-decision.cjs` into `dist/server/`, because `tsc` does not copy a `.cjs` file. **The credential shape this predicate reads** A redacted sample of a real vendor credential answered four structural questions. The answers hold no credential bytes, no account identifier, no file path, and no timestamp value. 1. `expires_at` is present. 2. `expires_at` sits inside the value object, under the `<issuer>::<uuid>` key. It is not a top-level field. 3. `expires_at` is an ISO-8601 string. It carries UTC time with a trailing `Z` and six fractional-second digits. 4. A normal run rewrites `auth.json`. The value object carries a `refresh_token` next to `expires_at`, so the client refreshes the access token and rewrites the file. ## Verification - [x] `pnpm vitest run packages/adapters/grok-local` — 114 tests in 12 files pass. - [x] `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-grok-local typecheck` — clean. - [x] `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-grok-local build` — succeeds, and `dist/server/grok-auth-merge-decision.cjs` exists after the build. - [x] Continuous integration is green on every check. ## Risks The predicate keeps the host credential when identity, expiry, file access, or freshness data is unclear. The copy-out path can log an error and leave the run successful when it cannot install the refreshed credential. The atomic rename and directory lock protect the host file from partial writes and concurrent copy-out actions. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-5, current deployment. The exact runtime version and context window are not exposed to this agent. The model used tool calls and code inspection. ## 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>canary/v2026.902.0-canary.1 |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
0b00029672 |
docs(release): canonicalize stable notes for v2026.831.0 (#12708)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The release process drafts stable notes under a beta-keyed path during the soak and renames them to the versioned path after the stable ships > - Stable v2026.831.0 published, but its release run failed at the tag push (workflows-permission error), so the automated canonicalize job never ran > - The canonical layout requires the notes at `releases/v2026.831.0.md` > - This pull request performs the rename the skipped job would have pushed > - The benefit is that the repository returns to the canonical release-notes layout ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Issue type** Missing content **Where is the issue?** `releases/` — the stable notes for v2026.831.0 still live at the beta-keyed path `releases/beta/v2026.828.0-beta.0.md`. **What's wrong?** The stable release run failed at the tag push, so the `canonicalize_stable_notes` job was skipped and the rename branch was never pushed. The published GitHub Release points at content that should live at `releases/v2026.831.0.md`. **Suggested fix** `git mv releases/beta/v2026.828.0-beta.0.md releases/v2026.831.0.md`, exactly as the workflow's canonicalize job does. ## What Changed - Renamed `releases/beta/v2026.828.0-beta.0.md` to `releases/v2026.831.0.md` (pure rename, no content changes) ## Verification - `git show --stat` reports a 100% rename with no content delta - The file matches the published GitHub Release body for v2026.831.0 ## Risks - Low risk: a pure file rename restoring the canonical layout. ## Model Used - Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-fable-5` (Claude Fable 5), extended thinking enabled, tool use via Claude Code ## 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 |
||
|
TonioandClaude Fable 5
|
889f5853f9 |
Onboarding: count the whole walk on a cloud tenant (#12706)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - A cloud customer meets it as one walk that crosses two applications: Cloud names the organization, then hands off to the tenant for the agent, the model and the review > - The tenant's progress strip counted only its own three steps, so the count restarted at the crossing — four dots on the naming screen, then three beginning again at one > - The strip that spans the whole walk already existed and simply was not chosen on that path, which made the walk read as two products rather than one > - This pull request picks the four-step strip when the run came from Cloud, so the count runs 1, 2, 3, 4 straight through > - The benefit is that the hand-off stops announcing itself ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The onboarding progress strip on a cloud tenant. It restarted its count at the hand-off from Cloud, so a customer went from "1 of 4" to "1 of 3" mid-walk. **Subsystem affected** Tenant onboarding wizard — `ui/src/components/OnboardingWizard.tsx`. **Current behavior** `showsAgentArcStepper` is `isAgentArcStep && entryStep >= 3`. Every run entering on the agent step gets the three-step strip, including a cloud tenant whose organization was named one screen earlier in Cloud. **Proposed behavior** A cloud tenant gets the four-step strip, positioned 2, 3 and 4. A self-hosted run entering on the same step keeps three. **Reason and benefit** The count describes the walk the customer is on rather than the half of it this application happens to render. **Breaking changes** None. No API or schema change; the self-hosted path is unchanged. ## What Changed - Adds `enteredFromCloud`, read from `enableManagedSandboxOnly` — the cloud-tenant shape the connect step already resolves its login environment through. - Excludes that case from `showsAgentArcStepper`, so it falls to the existing four-step strip. `ONBOARDING_STEP_LABELS` and `onboardingStepPositionFor` already produce 2, 3 and 4; neither needed changing. - Widens the experimental-settings query from step 4 to steps 3–5, so the strip can read it on every step of the arc. - Adds tests for both strip lengths. ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run src/components src/adapters storybook` in `ui/` — 2309 tests pass. - `pnpm typecheck` in `ui/` — clean. - Storybook, `Onboarding/Agent arc`: its fixture is cloud-shaped, so the three steps now announce "Step 2 of 4", "Step 3 of 4" and "Step 4 of 4" with four dots. - The two new tests fail without the change — the cloud case reports `expected 'Step 1 of 3' to be 'Step 2 of 4'`. ## Risks - **The two runs entering on the agent step are genuinely different, and only one signal separates them.** A cloud tenant walked a naming screen in Cloud; a self-hosted company with no agents walked nothing before this. Getting it backwards would either restart the count or credit a step nobody walked. Both directions are now tested, which they were not before — the suite covered `agentArcStepFor` but nothing asserted which strip renders. - `enableManagedSandboxOnly` is being read as a proxy for "came from Cloud". It is the same signal the connect step already trusts for its environment, so this does not introduce a new dependency, but it is inference rather than a fact passed at the hand-off. If the step count ever needs to vary, Cloud should seed the position explicitly instead. - The widened query means the value can be unresolved on first paint, and the strip briefly renders three dots before settling to four. The query key is shared and usually already cached, so this is rare rather than routine — worth watching on staging, and the fix if it shows is to hold the strip until the value resolves. - Cosmetic only. Nothing here changes which steps run, what they collect, or where the walk goes. ## Model Used Claude Opus 5 (`claude-opus-5`), via Claude Code with extended thinking, tool use, and browser-driven verification of the rendered strip. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>canary/v2026.902.0-canary.0 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8f9f850c20 |
fix: limit plan-to-auto transition to plan confirmation (#12695)
<!-- This pull request uses ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical English. --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The issue thread controls plan review and agent work modes. > - A user can accept a full plan or confirm a smaller checkbox action. > - Only full plan acceptance must start automatic agent work. > - The current transition did not check the interaction kind. > - This pull request limits the transition to an accepted plan confirmation. > - The benefit is a safe and clear start of agent work after plan approval. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** An accepted confirmation that targeted a plan could change an issue from planning mode to standard mode. This included a checkbox confirmation. A checkbox action is not approval of the full plan. **Expected behavior** Only acceptance of a current full-plan confirmation starts automatic agent work. Other interaction kinds and rejected confirmations keep the current work mode. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Put an issue in planning mode. 2. Create a checkbox confirmation that targets the current plan revision. 3. Accept the checkbox confirmation. 4. Observe that the issue enters standard mode before this fix. **Paperclip version or commit** The problem was present on `master` before this change. **Deployment mode** The problem is in the core server logic and is not deployment-specific. ## What Changed - Require a full `request_confirmation` interaction before plan acceptance starts automatic work. - Add service tests for acceptance, rejection, stale interaction kinds, and unchanged standard-mode behavior. - Check the route activity log for the planning-to-standard mode change. - Document the plan acceptance transition in the V1 contract. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interactions-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts` passes 140 tests. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passes. - `pnpm build` passes. - `pnpm test:run` was also started. Unrelated workspace-runtime tests failed because fixed local runtime ports were occupied or offset on the shared host. The same failures reproduce alone. The changed test files pass alone. ## Risks - Risk is low. The change adds one interaction-kind guard to the existing transition. - A full accepted plan confirmation still changes planning mode to standard mode and an eligible review issue to todo in one transaction. - Checkbox confirmations, questions, rejection, and standard-mode issues keep their previous behavior. > 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-5, reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The runtime does not expose the exact model suffix or context window. ## 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>canary/v2026.901.0-canary.14 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4b6de5327e |
Remove cheap model profiles (#12683)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents that use different model providers and adapters. > - Paperclip must keep agent execution rules clear and predictable. > - The cheap-model profile added a second execution mode across adapters, task recovery, APIs, and the UI. > - That mode increased configuration and recovery complexity. > - This pull request removes the cheap-model profile as a product feature. > - The benefit is one model-selection path for normal work and recovery work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** This change simplifies model selection across agent configuration, task execution, recovery, and adapter capabilities. **Current behavior** Paperclip exposes cheap-model profiles in adapter metadata, agent runtime configuration, task overrides, recovery rules, APIs, and the board UI. Recovery work can select a different model profile from the agent's configured model. **Proposed behavior** Paperclip uses the agent's configured model for normal work and recovery work. Status-only recovery stays limited to coordination work. The API rejects legacy model-profile configuration. A migration removes stored model-profile values from existing agent, issue, and historical revision records. **Reason and benefit** One model path reduces configuration, API, UI, and recovery complexity. It also prevents status recovery from becoming a separate product-level model-routing feature. **Breaking changes** This change removes model-profile fields and adapter capability metadata. Existing stored model-profile values are removed by an idempotent migration. The validators reject new legacy profile values with clear errors. ## What Changed - Removed model-profile types, adapter capabilities, API fields, and model selection logic. - Removed cheap-model controls from agent and task UI surfaces. - Kept status-only recovery limited to coordination context while normal continuations use the configured agent model. - Added an idempotent migration that removes stored model-profile values from agents, issues, and configuration revisions without changing issue update timestamps. - Updated tests and product documentation for the single-model behavior. ## Verification - `pnpm check:token-gates` passes. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passes. - `pnpm build` passes. - `pnpm test:run` completed with 5,607 passing tests and 8 environment-sensitive failures in unrelated fixed-port and database-deadlock suites. The same failures repeated in an isolated rerun. CI is the final clean-room result. ## Risks - This is an intentional breaking change for clients that send model-profile fields. - The migration changes legacy agent, issue, and configuration-revision JSON. It is idempotent and preserves unrelated fields and issue update timestamps. - The change is cross-cutting because the removed feature existed in adapters, shared contracts, the server, plugins, and the UI. > 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-5`. Reasoning and tool use were enabled. The runtime did not expose the context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [ ] 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> |
||
|
Dotta
|
1ab159d3a7 |
feat(apps): consolidate connector management (#12684)
Completes the post-managed-OAuth connector lifecycle, Paperclip Cloud provisioning defaults, governed test flows, and consolidated Apps UI.\n\nCo-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
141f202e40 |
Clean up experimental settings features (#12681)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app that people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Instance settings control optional product features and developer tools. > - The experimental settings page mixed active experiments, internal tools, and old recovery controls. > - Some workspace links also used the selected company instead of the workspace owner. > - These problems made settings hard to scan and could send users to the wrong company route. > - This pull request removes old controls, groups developer settings, and resolves workspace links from workspace data. > - The benefit is a smaller settings surface and correct workspace navigation. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** This improves the instance experimental settings page, task watchdog controls, dependency wake recovery, and execution workspace routes. **Current behavior** The settings page shows old recovery controls and mixes product experiments with internal developer settings. Task watchdogs require an extra feature flag. Some direct workspace links use the current company prefix instead of the company that owns the workspace. **Proposed behavior** Remove the old task recovery experiment and its unused API surface. Make task watchdog controls available without the removed flag. Put worktree execution and managed environment controls in the developer section. Resolve direct workspace links from the workspace owner and reject a company prefix that does not own the workspace. **Reason and benefit** The smaller settings page is easier to understand. The server keeps only the dependency wake backstop that it still uses. Workspace links open under the correct company route. **Breaking changes** This removes the experimental issue graph recovery preview and run endpoints. It also removes the task watchdog feature flag. Task watchdog data and dependency wake behavior remain available. ## What Changed - Removed the old task watchdog and issue graph recovery feature flags. - Removed the old issue graph recovery preview, run controls, API contracts, and unused recovery implementation. - Kept resolved dependency wakes as the scheduler backstop. - Grouped product experiments and Paperclip developer settings on the instance settings page. - Made task watchdog controls available without an extra experimental flag. - Added owner-aware redirects and company checks for execution workspace routes. - Hid the false stopped-state badge while a workspace has no active runtime state. - Updated focused server and UI tests for the new behavior. ## Verification - `pnpm check:token-gates` - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm build` - `pnpm test:run` completed with 5,620 passing tests and four failures in unchanged workspace runtime port tests. The same four failures repeat when the two files run alone. - The complete GitHub CI matrix passed, including all server, serialized server, build, canary, and end-to-end jobs. ## Risks - Clients that call the removed experimental recovery endpoints must stop calling them. - The route checks depend on workspace detail access. An unknown or cross-company workspace returns the global not-found page. - There are no database migrations, lockfile changes, workflow changes, or design image changes. > 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-5. The exact deployment ID and context window are not exposed. Reasoning, tool use, and code execution were enabled. ## 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>canary/v2026.901.0-canary.13 |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
24a674f885 |
fix(runner): stop capability live-session tests from failing on unhandled turn-timeout rejections (#12676)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The Paperclip Runner package manages live sessions and durable command recovery > - Capability live-session tests can fail when a turn-timeout rejection has no handler > - A resumed session can also stall when the durable control plane rejects an indeterminate command result > - These failures make valid tests fail or hide the turn that stalled > - This pull request captures timeout rejections early and accepts indeterminate recovered commands > - The benefit is stable tests and clearer timeout failures after a runner restart ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Capability live-session tests failed intermittently on loaded CI hosts. A timer could reject a turn promise before the test attached its assertion. A resumed session could also stall after a runner restart because the durable control plane rejected the indeterminate command status. **Expected behavior** The test must handle a timeout rejection at promise creation. The durable control plane must accept an indeterminate recovered command and allow the session to continue. A configured timeout must persist in the checkpoint and identify the stalled turn. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run the capability live-session test file on a loaded host. 2. Create a turn promise with a timeout and delay before attaching its assertion. 3. Resume a session after a runner restart with a journaled but unconfirmed command. 4. Observe the unhandled rejection or the stalled resumed session. **Paperclip version or commit** Commit `ede642e57e22ea3fb0a73590fca8bcc994f1a47f` on `master`. **Deployment mode** Built from source. **Installation method** Built from source. **Agent adapter(s) involved** Not adapter-specific. The tests use the Paperclip Runner package. **Database mode** Not database-related. **Additional context** Pull request #12646 also updates durable recovery for indeterminate command results. If it lands first, this pull request must retain the compatible behavior without duplicate edits. ## What Changed - Add a helper that captures a turn rejection before any await step. - Update three live-session test sites to assert the captured rejection value. - Add a helper test that waits past the turn timeout before it asserts. - Accept indeterminate as a terminal recovered-command status. - Add tests for acceptance, duplicate absorption, and reload from persisted state. - Add an optional turnTimeoutMs value to resume and pin its checkpoint behavior. ## Verification - `npx vitest run src/live/live-session.test.ts` from `packages/paperclip-runner`: 19 passed, 1 skipped. - `npx vitest run src/control-plane/durable-prp-control-plane.test.ts` from `packages/paperclip-runner`: 5 passed. - The live-session file passed 10 of 10 runs with 30 competing workers on a 32-core host. - TypeScript reported five pre-existing errors in `src/eval/workflow-harness.ts`. - CI must run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner check:all`. ## Risks The durable control plane now accepts one additional terminal recovery status. The change affects only recovered command handling and capability live-session tests. The main risk is overlap with pull request #12646 if that pull request lands first. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, with 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 - [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>canary/v2026.901.0-canary.12 |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
ed3559dd21 |
feat(server): split the Sentry DSN into front-end and backend variables (#12678)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Paperclip reports server and browser errors through optional Sentry monitoring > - One environment variable sends both error types to one Sentry project > - Operators need separate control for browser and server error data > - This pull request adds specific variables and keeps the existing variable as a fallback > - The benefit is separate monitoring without breaking current deployments ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The Sentry configuration for server and browser monitoring uses one environment variable. **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting (multiple of the above) **Current behavior** `SENTRY_DSN` supplies the server and browser clients. Both clients therefore report to the same Sentry project. **Proposed behavior** `SENTRY_DSN_FRONTEND` supplies the browser client. `SENTRY_DSN_BACKEND` supplies the server process. `SENTRY_DSN` remains a fallback for either component. **Reason and benefit** Operators can send browser and server errors to separate Sentry projects. Operators can also activate only one component. **Breaking changes** None. Existing deployments can continue to use `SENTRY_DSN`. ## What Changed - Add `resolveSentryDsns(env)` and use it in the server and browser configuration paths. - Add precedence, empty-string, fallback, and route tests. - Update the README, observability guide, and stale code comments. - Log one warning when the server uses the legacy fallback without exposing a DSN value. ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run --project server sentry-dsn` — 8 tests pass. - `pnpm vitest run --project server auth-routes` — 21 tests pass. - The earlier run of the three targeted suites passed 40 tests. - `tsc --noEmit` passes for the files in this diff. - All required GitHub Actions checks pass, including the full continuous-integration suite. ## Risks The main risk is an incorrect environment variable precedence rule. Unit tests cover specific values, empty strings, and legacy fallback behavior. The existing `SENTRY_DSN` path remains compatible. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex — GPT-5, current runtime, 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 - [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> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
314ff24b7a |
refactor(docker): declare the build stage's C toolchain explicitly (#12673)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The Docker images compile the Rust runner (paperclip-runnerd) during the build stage > - The previous change replaced apt's cargo/rustc with a pinned rustup install > - apt's cargo package pulled gcc in as a dependency; rustup does not install a C toolchain > - Every master docker build now fails with "linker `cc` not found" in the build scripts > - This pull request installs gcc, libc6-dev, and pkg-config explicitly in the build stage > - The benefit is that the build stage declares its own C toolchain instead of inheriting one by accident ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Master `docker.yml` builds fail in `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server build`: cargo build scripts (`libc`, `quote`, `proc-macro2`) die with `` error: linker `cc` not found ``, and the job exits with code 101. **Expected behavior** Master docker builds compile the runner and publish images. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run the `docker.yml` workflow on current `master`. 2. Observe the `build-and-push` job fail with the linker error above. **Paperclip version or commit** `master` after commit `317394456` (the rustup change); example failing run: docker.yml on `86ebdf842`. ## What Changed - The build stage installs `gcc`, `libc6-dev`, and `pkg-config` explicitly, with a comment recording why: the old apt cargo brought gcc in as a dependency and the pinned rustup install does not. ## Verification - Replicated the build stage's exact package sequence in `node:24-trixie-slim` — base-stage packages only (which include no compiler), then this new line, then the pinned, checksum-verified rustup install: the runner compiles (`Finished release`) with `rustc 1.97.1` and `cc 14.2.0`. - Note: `docker.yml` triggers only on master pushes, so a PR run cannot exercise the image build itself; the container replication above is the pre-merge check. No test files: build-infrastructure fix (`fix:` on the Dockerfile only). ## Risks - Low risk. Three packages added to the build stage only; the production stage is unchanged. ## Model Used - Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), Anthropic — Claude Code harness, extended thinking + tool use. ## 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 Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
ccf3355b2e |
feat(grok-local): stage a curated Grok home into remote subscription runs (#12618)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Local adapters run agents in local or remote sandboxes. > - A remote Grok subscription run needs its credential file inside the sandbox. > - The adapter did not stage the Grok home, so the sandbox had no credential file. > - This pull request stages only the allowed Grok credential file and sets the reported home path. > - The adapter removes the temporary staged home before teardown completes. > - The benefit is reliable Grok subscription authentication with limited credential exposure. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A remote Grok subscription run had no credential file in its sandbox. The adapter sent no Grok home asset. **Expected behavior** The adapter should stage the allowed Grok credential file and set `GROK_HOME` to the reported sandbox path. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a remote Grok run in subscription mode. 2. Inspect the sandbox environment and home asset. 3. Confirm that the run has `GROK_HOME` and `auth.json`. **Paperclip version or commit** `3df33b5b8f49063a5d1ab608f8ce372572ef09d1` **Deployment mode** Remote sandbox run. ## What Changed - Stage a private temporary Grok home for remote subscription runs. - Copy only the allowed `auth.json` file and set its mode to `0600`. - Pass the staged directory as the remote `home` asset. - Set `GROK_HOME` to the path that the remote runtime reports. - Remove the staged directory before awaited teardown calls. - Keep the API-key lane free of credential staging. - Add tests for the allowlist, file mode, empty source home, run lanes, and teardown cleanup. ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run packages/adapters/grok-local` passes. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-grok-local typecheck` passes. - `grok-home.test.ts` covers the allowlist, mode `0600`, and empty source home. - `execute.test.ts` covers the remote subscription lane, the API-key lane, and cleanup after restore failure. ## Risks - The change affects only remote Grok subscription runs that use a credential file. - The allowlist limits the staged content to `auth.json`. - The API-key lane does not stage a home or set `GROK_HOME`. - CI must confirm adapter behavior across the supported runtime matrix. ## Model Used - Codex, GPT-5, current 2026 model version, large context window, reasoning mode, and tool use assisted the repository handoff and pull request management. The implementation author supplied the code and local 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
|
0cc40037ac |
fix(runner): accept the indeterminate command result after a runner restart (#12646)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The runner subsystem pairs a Rust runner process with a durable
control plane in TypeScript. The control plane is the authority for
every command the runner executes
> - That pair has a crash-recovery contract. If the runner dies between
journaling a command and confirming the command's effect, it must not
run the command twice
> - The runner keeps its side of the contract. On restart it promotes
such a command to the `indeterminate` status and reports that status
back
> - The control plane did not accept `indeterminate`. It closed the
connection without a diagnostic, the runner reconnected and replayed the
same result, and the loop repeated forever
> - This pull request accepts `indeterminate` as a terminal command
status
> - The benefit is that a session survives a runner crash during a tool
call, instead of hanging until a 30 second deadline expires
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public issue exists for this defect, so it is described here.
**What happened?**
A live session cannot resume after the runner process is killed during a
governed tool call. The resumed transport waits for the provider
identity for
30 seconds and then fails with `runnerd did not report its provider
identity`.
`packages/paperclip-runner/src/live/live-session.test.ts` covers this
exact
sequence in "terminates real runnerd after a durable receipt and resumes
its
exact provider thread". That test has a 15 second budget, so it reports
the
defect as `Test timed out in 15000ms` and reads like a flake.
**Expected behavior**
The resumed control plane accepts the runner's recovery report, the
runner
reports its provider identity, and the session resumes on its original
provider thread.
**Steps to reproduce**
Build the runner binary, then run the test:
```
cargo build --manifest-path packages/paperclip-runner/runner/Cargo.toml --locked --workspace --bins
cd packages/paperclip-runner
npx vitest run src/live/live-session.test.ts -t "terminates real runnerd"
```
It fails every time on an idle machine. It also fails at `560e7e48b`,
the
commit that added the test, so the defect is not a recent regression.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduced on `master` at `0a422fda5`, which is the base of this branch.
**Deployment mode**
Local development, running the package test suite.
**Root cause**
`DurablePrpControlPlane.#commandResult` accepted only `completed`,
`failed`
and `rejected`. The runner reports a journaled-but-unconfirmed command
as:
```json
{ "status": "indeterminate",
"result": { "code": "execution_indeterminate",
"message": "runner recovered after journaling this command; it will not execute twice" } }
```
That status fell through to a silent `connection.close()`. The runner
reconnected after 250 ms, replayed the same result, and was closed
again. No
durable event ever reached the control plane, so the transport never saw
`harness.ready`.
`indeterminate` is a deliberate part of the runner's contract. See
`reconcile_pending_commands` in
`packages/paperclip-runner/runner/crates/runner-core/src/durable/state.rs`.
The rest of the TypeScript code already models the status; only this
control
plane did not.
## What Changed
- `DurablePrpControlPlane.#commandResult` accepts `indeterminate` as a
terminal command status.
- The persisted-state validation accepts `indeterminate`, so a control
plane
restarted over the same directory can read its own saved state back.
Without this, accepting the status would make the next restart throw.
- `DurableRecoveryCoreCommand.status` includes `indeterminate` in both
declarations of that interface.
- Added an integration test that drives the exact recovery frame the
runner
sends. It asserts the connection stays open, the next command is
delivered,
the status is persisted, a restarted control plane reloads it, and a
replayed duplicate is absorbed rather than treated as a conflict.
## Verification
All commands run from `packages/paperclip-runner`.
- New test fails before the change and passes after it. Before:
`expected null to match object { kind: 'command' }` — `null` is the
closed
connection.
`npx vitest run src/control-plane/durable-prp-control-plane.test.ts`
→ 4 passed.
- The live runner test that exposed this reproduced
**deterministically** on an
idle machine before the change, and now passes in 3.3 s, well inside its
existing 15 s budget. Ran it 10 times in a row: 10/10 pass, 0 failures.
`npx vitest run src/live/live-session.test.ts -t "terminates real
runnerd"`
- Full package suite: `npx vitest run` → 1298 passed, 1 failed. The one
failure is `src/mock-core/local-runner.test.ts > cleans up the harness
process group when the controller closes`. It fails identically on an
unmodified checkout in the same container, so it is a pre-existing
environment issue and not related to this change.
- Typecheck: `tsc -p tsconfig.json --noEmit` → clean.
I did **not** raise the test's timeout. The budget was never the problem
—
with a 600 s budget the same test still failed, at 31 s, with the real
error.
## Risks
Low risk, and it widens rather than narrows what is accepted.
- Behaviour only changes for a status that is currently rejected, so no
previously working path is affected.
- `indeterminate` is terminal, not successful. A caller waiting on such
a
command still receives an error from the transport, which is correct:
the
effect is genuinely unconfirmed. This change does not make an
unconfirmed
command look like it succeeded.
- The persisted-state change only widens an allow-list, so existing
state
files stay valid.
Open topics for a reviewer:
- The control plane closes connections without any diagnostic. That
silence is
why this defect looked like a flaky test. Adding a diagnostic channel is
a
larger change and is not included here.
- `DurableRecoveryProcessedCommand` in
`src/contracts/durable-recovery.ts`
drifts from the Rust `StoredCommandResult` by more than this status: it
declares `commandDigest` and `logicalEffectCount`, which Rust does not
have,
and omits `commandType`, which Rust does. That is a separate correction
and
is deliberately not folded in here.
## Model Used
Claude Opus 5 (`claude-opus-5`), extended thinking, with tool use and
code
execution.
Depends-on: none — this is a self-contained fix with no dependent
changes.
## 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: zannis <1011451+zannis@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
canary/v2026.901.0-canary.11
|
||
|
Zannis Kalampoukisandzannis
|
584031af66 |
test(runner): bound codex provider exit polls by wall clock (#12596)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The runner subsystem drives a Codex provider process and reads its events with `CodexProvider::poll` > - The Codex provider integration tests wait for those events in poll loops > - Two of those loops count iterations instead of measuring time, so they stop waiting too early > - This makes `cargo test` fail at random on branches that change no Rust code > - This pull request bounds the two loops by wall clock, like every other wait in the same file > - The benefit is that a red CI job now means a real defect ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** `packages/paperclip-runner/runner/crates/runner-core/tests/codex_provider.rs` fails `cargo test` at random. The failure appears in the `ci / Build` job with exit code 101. It appears on branches that change no Rust code. Two tests fail: - `ambiguous_or_dead_replacement_start_preserves_result_not_exit_authority` at line 1274 - `ambiguous_replacement_turn_adopts_one_later_completion_identity` at line 1443 Both assertions report `left: None`. The value is not wrong. The loop never saw the `CodexProviderEvent::Exited` event at all. **Expected behavior** The tests must wait for the provider process to exit. A test must fail only when the provider gives a wrong result. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Build the integration test: `cargo test --test codex_provider --no-run`. 2. Run one of the two named tests 25 times in a row. 3. About 8 of the 25 runs fail with `left: None`. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on `master` at `2e5a24e17`. **Related pull requests** Refs #12241. That pull request also edits `packages/paperclip-runner/runner/crates/runner-core/tests/codex_provider.rs`. It does not fix these two loops. The two changes may need a merge if both land. **Root cause** `CodexProvider::poll` (`crates/runner-core/src/codex_provider.rs:824`) reads with a 1 ms timeout. That timeout does not apply on every path. `ProcessSupervisor::receive_stdout_line` (`crates/runner-core/src/process_supervisor.rs:293`) returns at once, and uses none of the 1 ms budget, in two cases: `StdoutClosed` at line 309 and `RecvTimeoutError::Disconnected` at line 315. A child process closes its pipes before its exit status is ready to reap. In that window every `poll()` call returns `Ok(None)` in nanoseconds. A loop of 64 or 128 iterations then ends in microseconds, before the exit status is available. The failing run above ends in 0.06 s. ## What Changed - `tests/codex_provider.rs`: bound the exit wait at line 1256 by a 5 second deadline instead of 64 iterations. - `tests/codex_provider.rs`: bound the exit wait at line 1397 by a 5 second deadline instead of 128 iterations. - Both loops now sleep 1 ms when `poll()` returns no event. This copies the pattern that the same file already uses at line 1511 and in every `wait_for_*` helper. - No production code changes. The change is test-only. ## Verification Measured before and after the change. Each test ran 25 times in sequence, on an idle machine, with `--test-threads=1`. | test | before | after | |---|---|---| | `ambiguous_or_dead_replacement_start_preserves_result_not_exit_authority` | 8 / 25 failed | 0 / 25 failed | | `ambiguous_replacement_turn_adopts_one_later_completion_identity` | 9 / 25 failed | 0 / 25 failed | The full `codex_provider` suite also ran 12 times with `--test-threads=4` after the change. Every run passed. Commands: ``` cargo test --test codex_provider --no-run cargo test --test codex_provider ``` ## Risks Low risk. The change touches test code only. It makes two waits longer in the failure case: a genuinely broken provider now takes up to 5 seconds to fail these two tests instead of microseconds. Every other wait in this file already uses the same 5 second deadline. ## Model Used Claude Opus 5 (`claude-opus-5`), extended thinking, with tool use and code execution. Depends-on: none — this is a self-contained test-only change with no prerequisite pull request. ## 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) - [ ] 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 — none apply. This change is test-only and alters no public interface, so no docs page and no end-to-end test change is needed. - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: zannis <1011451+zannis@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
TonioandClaude Opus 5
|
42c6f8a424 |
Onboarding: model source tiles, one input canvas, and Storybook coverage for the agent arc (#12613)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - New customers meet it through onboarding, whose last three steps run
inside the tenant: create an agent, connect a model, review
> - The connect step is the one that decides whether the agent can run
at all, and it had drifted — three contributors changed it in parallel,
and its visual language no longer matched the rest of the flow
> - It also could not be looked at without a provisioned stack, so
defects in it were only found by walking a real signup, and the review
step behind it could not be reached at all when it failed
> - This pull request brings the visual work onto the sign-in behaviour
that already shipped, and adds Storybook coverage for all three steps
> - The benefit is that the step is easier to read, and that it can now
be inspected and driven before it ships rather than after
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The onboarding connect-a-model step. It presented the model choice as a
dropdown plus an "Advanced settings" disclosure, and put each credential
type in a different place, so the controls below moved whenever the
choice changed.
**Subsystem affected**
Tenant onboarding wizard (`ui/src/components/OnboardingWizard.tsx`) and
its Storybook coverage.
**Current behavior**
The step offered every registered adapter through a disclosure.
Credential entry appeared in a different shape per source. None of the
three agent-arc steps could be rendered outside a provisioned cloud
stack, so the sign-in panel and the review step were only reachable by
walking a real signup.
**Proposed behavior**
Two brand tiles for the recommended sources, a link that switches
between subscription and API-key credentials, and one canvas that holds
whichever input the current choice needs. Storybook stories mount the
real wizard against fixtures and walk it forward, so every step and its
states can be inspected locally.
**Reason and benefit**
The step reads as one decision rather than three scattered ones, and its
furniture stays still while the choice changes. The stories mean a
regression in it is visible before release instead of during a signup.
**Breaking changes**
No API or schema change. One behavioural narrowing, described under
Risks.
## What Changed
- Replaces the adapter dropdown and "Advanced settings" disclosure with
`ModelSourceTiles` — brand tiles for Claude Code and Codex.
- Adds `CredentialModeLink`, a text toggle between subscription sign-in
and API keys, replacing the disclosure.
- Adds `ConnectInputCanvas`: one surface that holds the sign-in panel or
the API-key field and resizes between them, so the Connect button below
does not move.
- Keeps the existing sign-in behaviour unchanged. `AgentConfigForm`
changes are presentation only — the provider name in the title, the CTA
wording, and `space-y` to `gap`. No change to the login mutations,
queries, or session handling.
- Restores the sleep marks on the dormant agent for the two steps before
the hire.
- Adds Storybook stories for all three agent-arc steps, with fixtures
for the environments, auth signal, both adapters' login flows, and the
hire.
- Copy: names the provider being signed in to ("Sign in to
Anthropic"/"Sign in to OpenAI"), and drops "Clippy" from the agent-name
helper text.
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run src/components storybook` in `ui/` — 139 tests over
the touched suites, 1986 across `src/components`.
- `pnpm typecheck` in `ui/` — clean.
- Storybook, `Onboarding/Agent arc`: walk each story. Step 1 has no Back
button, steps 2 and 3 do.
- The sign-in gate: on `Connect a model`, press Connect without signing
in. It holds on step 2 and reports "No working authentication was
found." On `Review`, which fixtures an authenticated signal, Connect
reaches the review step.
- Both providers' login flows: press Sign in on the Claude tile for the
authorization URL and browser-code field, and on the Codex tile for the
device URL and code.
- The Claude sign-in was also walked end to end on a staging tenant,
including the OAuth redirect and pasting the code back.
## Risks
- **Onboarding now offers two model sources instead of every registered
adapter.** `ModelSourceTiles` is fed the `recommended` set, which is
`claude_local` and `codex_local`; Gemini, Cursor, Grok, Kimi, OpenCode
and Paperclip Runner are no longer selectable *during onboarding*. This
is deliberate. The full list is unchanged in agent settings, which is
where an adapter can still be switched after the agent exists, and
adding a source back is one `recommended: true` in
`adapter-display-registry.ts`. Flagging it because it is the one
behavioural narrowing here and it is not visible from the diffstat.
- The API key entered on this step is held in component state and
deliberately never written to the onboarding draft, because that draft
is `localStorage`. A customer who leaves mid-step re-enters the key;
that is the intended trade.
- Storybook-only risk: the fixtures now answer the environment test from
the story's auth state. If a future change moves the hire's gate off the
`adapter_auth_missing` check code, the stories would keep passing while
the product regressed. The gate is asserted in the adapter packages' own
tests, not here.
- Motion changes are low risk and reversible: the input canvas animates
its contents only, and its container was deliberately left unanimated
after an animated wrapper clipped the sign-in panel.
## Model Used
Claude Opus 5 (`claude-opus-5`), via Claude Code with extended thinking,
tool use, and browser-driven verification of the Storybook stories.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
86ebdf842e |
fix(runner): keep agents running when app connections expire (#12670)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents can receive governed access to connected apps through the runtime MCP gateway. > - A connected app can become unavailable when its sign-in expires or its health state needs attention. > - The native runner treated that optional app state as a fatal runtime setup error. > - One unavailable app could therefore stop all unrelated agent work. > - This pull request removes the fatal dependency and keeps the available app assignment immutable. > - The benefit is that an agent can continue its work while the stream tells the user which app needs reconnection. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** An agent could not start a native run when one assigned app connection was disabled, degraded, failed, or missing its secret. Runtime context creation or MCP delivery threw an error before the agent could do unrelated work. **Expected behavior** The run must continue without the unavailable app. Healthy assigned apps must remain available. The stream must explain which app needs reconnection. A changed assignment must not give a native run new access after its immutable context is captured. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Assign an MCP app connection to a Paperclip Runner agent. 2. Set the connection to a state that needs attention, such as `degraded`. 3. Start a task run for that agent. 4. Observe that native runtime setup fails before the agent starts. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced from `ee2a19062`. The branch is rebased on `dda4dff64`. **Deployment mode** Local development from source with embedded Postgres. No matching public issue or open pull request was found in the GitHub search. ## What Changed - Filter unavailable assigned app connections from the immutable native runtime MCP snapshot. - Keep healthy assigned connections and their tools in the snapshot. - Replace the fatal native MCP availability check with an optional stream warning callback. - Withhold MCP delivery when the current assignment digest does not match the captured native context. - Prevent a warning delivery failure from stopping the agent run. - Add regression tests for disabled, degraded, mixed healthy and unavailable, and assignment-drift cases. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/services/native-runtime/runtime-context.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-runtime-mcp-servers.test.ts` passes with 8 tests. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passes. - `pnpm check:token-gates` passes. - `pnpm build` passes. - `pnpm test:run` was attempted. Unrelated workspace runtime and port-exposure tests failed on this macOS host. The same files also failed when run without the changed MCP tests. The changed MCP tests remained green. Clean GitHub CI is the final full-suite check. ## Risks - Low migration risk. This change has no schema or API contract migration. - An unavailable app is absent from the run MCP surface until it is reconnected and a later run captures it again. - Assignment drift fails closed. The agent keeps running, but the changed gateway is not delivered. - This pull request does not auto-block the issue before the agent decides that the app is required. It emits reconnect guidance in the stream. The existing connection-request interaction remains the path for a required app. > 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-5.6-sol`, with high reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser automation. The runtime did not expose the context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] 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>canary/v2026.901.0-canary.10 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
dda4dff645 |
fix(onboarding): restore browser launch and gate canaries (#12667)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The onboarding command starts the local server and opens the first-run wizard. > - Interactive onboarding stopped opening the browser by default. > - Organization creation could also succeed in the API while the wizard stayed on the name step. > - The npm canary workflow did not prove that the published package could complete this path. > - This pull request repairs the startup and organization transitions and adds an exact-version canary smoke gate. > - The benefit is a quickstart that works for users and is tested after each canary publish. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #12557 covers a separate final-route onboarding handoff. **What happened?** Interactive `paperclipai onboard` runs did not open the onboarding page. The organization API request could succeed while a same-company context update caused the wizard to stay on the organization step. The canary release lane did not test the exact published npm package through this path. **Expected behavior** Interactive onboarding must open the browser once. A successful organization request must advance to the first-agent step when the surrounding context adopts the same organization. Each published canary must install in a clean environment and reach the model connection step. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run `npx paperclipai@canary onboard --data-dir "$(mktemp -d /tmp/paperclip-canary.XXXXXX)"` in an interactive terminal. 2. Enter an organization name while the company context refreshes from the create response. 3. Observe that the browser does not open or that the wizard can remain on the organization step after the API creates it. 4. Inspect the canary release lane and observe that no post-publish onboarding test runs against the exact npm version. **Paperclip version or commit** The issue reproduced with `2026.901.0-canary.8` and the source state before this pull request. **Deployment mode** Local trusted quickstart with embedded PostgreSQL. The install source can be npm or a source checkout. ## What Changed - Open the browser once for interactive foreground onboarding. - Preserve explicit browser opt-outs and restore the prior environment value after startup. - Accept a same-company context update after organization creation and reject a different-company takeover with an explicit error. - Export the exact canary version from the publish job. - Install and test that exact npm version in a clean Playwright smoke job through the "Connect a model" step. - Upload server logs, traces, screenshots, and the Playwright report when the canary smoke fails. - Document the interactive default and headless opt-outs. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run cli/src/__tests__/onboard.test.ts ui/src/components/OnboardingWizard.step.test.tsx --reporter=dot` passes with 37 tests. - `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs` passes with 9 tests. - `pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts tests/e2e/onboarding.spec.ts` passes with 2 tests. - `PAPERCLIPAI_VERSION=2026.901.0-canary.8 pnpm run test:canary-onboarding-smoke` passes against the published npm package. - `pnpm check:token-gates` passes. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passes. - `pnpm build` passes. - A fresh interactive source run opens the browser and reaches "Connect a model" after organization and agent naming. ## Risks - Low risk. Automatic browser opening only applies to interactive foreground onboarding. - `PAPERCLIP_NO_BROWSER=1` and `PAPERCLIP_OPEN_ON_LISTEN=false` keep headless runs silent. - A different organization context still blocks the pending create transition. - The canary package is immutable before the smoke runs. A smoke failure leaves the package published but makes the release workflow red. - This change does not modify REST APIs, database schemas, or shared data types. > 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 based on GPT-5. The runtime does not expose the exact deployment snapshot or context-window size. The model used reasoning, browser automation, repository tools, shell commands, code editing, and test execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
14c7efa068 |
fix(workspaces): enable UI hot reload by default (#12612)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Managed worktrees can run a Paperclip development server for each task > - The managed runtime used the built UI when its service did not set the UI development middleware option > - This made new UI source changes require a manual build instead of a hot reload > - The runtime must supply the development default while it must keep an explicit operator choice > - This pull request enables the UI development middleware for new managed Paperclip development services > - The benefit is that UI edits appear in the managed worktree browser without a manual build ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A new managed Paperclip development worktree served the built UI by default. An operator had to set `PAPERCLIP_UI_DEV_MIDDLEWARE=true` before UI source changes could hot reload. **Expected behavior** New managed Paperclip development worktrees must enable the UI development middleware by default. An explicit `PAPERCLIP_UI_DEV_MIDDLEWARE=false` value must continue to disable it. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a managed Paperclip development service without `PAPERCLIP_UI_DEV_MIDDLEWARE`. 2. Open its UI. 3. Change a UI source file. 4. Observe that the browser does not receive the change until the UI is built again. **Paperclip version or commit** This was reproduced on `317394456` from `master`. **Deployment mode** Local development with a managed worktree runtime. ## What Changed - Set `PAPERCLIP_UI_DEV_MIDDLEWARE=true` for managed `paperclip-dev` services when the service does not set a value. - Keep explicit service values, including `false`. - Add a regression test and document the default and the opt-out. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts -t "enables UI dev middleware by default"` - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm build` - `pnpm test:run` completed with 5,397 passing tests. Four existing runtime-port tests could not use ports `42000` and `52000` because a live managed runtime owns those ports on this host. The new regression test passed separately. ## Risks - Risk is low. The change applies only to managed services named `paperclip-dev`. - A service can keep the built UI by setting `PAPERCLIP_UI_DEV_MIDDLEWARE=false`. - There is no database or API contract change. > 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-5.6-sol`, hosted Codex context window, high reasoning, tool use, code execution, and multi-file repository editing. ## 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> |
||
|
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 |
||
|
github-actions[bot]andlockfile-bot
|
1c499b6b4d |
chore(lockfile): refresh pnpm-lock.yaml (#12626)
Auto-generated lockfile refresh after dependencies changed on master. This PR only updates pnpm-lock.yaml. Co-authored-by: lockfile-bot <lockfile-bot@users.noreply.github.com>canary/v2026.901.0-canary.9 |
||
|
Dotta
|
1955b0e2d8 |
Gate Paperclip Runner setup behind an experimental flag (#12656)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agent adapters control how Paperclip starts and resumes an agent runtime. > - Paperclip Runner is an experimental Rust runtime and must stay opt-in. > - The server already rejected new runner selections when the flag was off. > - Some setup and onboarding views did not enforce the same boundary. > - This pull request exposes the existing flag and applies it to every new setup path. > - The benefit is a safe rollout with unchanged legacy onboarding and recoverable existing native runs. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** This improves experimental adapter selection in Settings, onboarding, new-agent setup, invite setup, and company import. **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting: the React UI and the server onboarding seed service. **Current behavior** The server defaulted Paperclip Runner to off, but Settings did not expose the flag. First-run onboarding could show the runner after opt-in. A direct new-agent URL and some setup pickers could also reveal native runner configuration before the availability check completed. **Proposed behavior** Settings has a default-off Paperclip Runner toggle. Explicit agent configuration shows the runner only after the server reports that the flag is enabled. First-run and invite onboarding always use legacy adapters. Existing native agents and runs remain readable and recoverable. **Reason and benefit** This keeps the experimental runtime out of normal onboarding. It also gives administrators one clear opt-in before users can create a native runner agent. **Breaking changes** None. Legacy adapter selection and execution stay unchanged. Existing native records remain available. ## What Changed - Added the Paperclip Runner opt-in to Experimental Settings. - Refreshed adapter availability after the setting changes. - Kept UI and server-seeded onboarding on legacy adapters. - Made native runner choices fail closed in new-agent, invite, and import setup. - Preserved edit and recovery behavior for existing native agents and runs. - Added focused regression tests for flag-off and flag-on behavior. ## Verification - GitHub Actions will run the repository test, typecheck, build, and policy gates. - Focused tests cover Settings, onboarding, agent creation, invite setup, import setup, and server-seeded onboarding. - No local test suite was run, per the maintainer request to use GitHub Actions for verification. - `git diff --check` passes. ## Risks Low risk. The change narrows new adapter selection only. The server remains the final enforcement point. Existing native records do not depend on the current flag value for read or recovery behavior. > 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 - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
Dotta
|
5458940a6e |
feat(runner): add offline evaluation tooling (#12653)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Paperclip Runner needs repeatable evaluation contracts. > - Evaluation code must stay separate from provider launch and production orchestration. > - Offline fixtures need stable compatibility, scoring, traceability, and report rules. > - Published Runner consumers need only the supported evaluation contract surface. > - This pull request adds offline evaluation tooling and a workspace-private matrix kernel. > - The benefit is deterministic evaluation without credentials or paid provider calls. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #11297 This pull request extracts the offline evaluation unit from the earlier aggregate Runner work. ## What Changed - Add a workspace-private, provider-neutral evaluation matrix kernel. - Add the public `@paperclipai/paperclip-runner/evals` compatibility and native execution contracts. - Add fail-closed runnerd artifact and protocol compatibility checks. - Add deterministic workflow catalogs, scoring, traceability, and report generation. - Add sanitized Codex, OpenCode, and ACPX fixtures. - Add package-boundary and clean-consumer checks. - Add the eval package manifest to the Docker dependency stage. - Add the generated protocol fixture digest without changing the lockfile. ## Verification GitHub Actions must run: - Runner TypeScript and Rust type checks. - Runner unit and protocol tests. - Evaluation kernel tests. - Workflow traceability checks. - Clean-consumer and package-boundary checks. - Repository test, type-check, build, policy, and security gates. No local test command was run. The repository owner requested GitHub-only verification. ## Risks This is a large greenfield review surface with 51 files. The code does not launch a live provider or load credentials. Package and protocol drift fail closed. The workspace lockfile remains under the existing CI-owned process. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex with the GPT-5 agent model. The work used high reasoning, repository inspection, tool use, and parallel code 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 - [ ] 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 mergecanary/v2026.901.0-canary.8 |
||
|
Dotta
|
1ed29abaa6 |
fix(runner): harden dormant provider boundaries (#12654)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Paperclip Runner currently enables only the Codex production path. > - The package also contains dormant OpenCode and ACPX provider boundaries. > - Dormant boundaries must still fail safe before later activation work. > - Provider children must not inherit unrelated server secrets or host homes. > - Permission defaults must require interaction instead of broad automatic approval. > - This pull request hardens those boundaries without activating them. > - The benefit is a safer base for later provider-specific runnerd work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** This improves the inactive OpenCode and ACPX provider boundary in Paperclip Runner. **Subsystem affected** The adapter permission contract, Runner provider environment, and native execution input builder. **Current behavior** Dormant OpenCode code can inherit the full server environment. Its default permission mode allows operations. ACPX also defaults to broad approval. The provider guard can accept inherited object property names. **Proposed behavior** Use exact provider identifiers. Use interactive defaults. Allow only required OpenCode environment keys. Reject invalid proxy permission modes. **Reason and benefit** This reduces accidental authority and secret exposure before future provider activation. **Breaking changes** No production provider is activated. Codex runtime selection and Codex credential-home discovery do not change. Dormant OpenCode and ACPX callers that omit permission modes now receive safer defaults. ## What Changed - Change dormant OpenCode and ACPX permission defaults to interactive modes. - Reject prototype property names as provider identifiers. - Default dormant ACPX input to the qualified Codex agent profile. - Add an explicit OpenCode runner environment allowlist. - Exclude host homes, server credentials, database values, and Node injection options. - Add a fail-closed OpenCode proxy permission parser. - Add focused tests for defaults, filtering, and invalid values. ## Verification GitHub Actions must run: - Adapter utility tests. - Paperclip Runner tests, type checks, and build. - Server native runtime tests. - Repository test, type-check, build, policy, and security gates. No local test command was run. The repository owner requested GitHub-only verification. ## Risks Future OpenCode credential providers must add required variables to the allowlist through review. The safer defaults can pause dormant internal scenarios that relied on implicit broad approval. Production Codex behavior is unchanged. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex with the GPT-5 agent model. The work used high reasoning, repository inspection, tool use, and parallel security 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 - [ ] 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 |
||
|
Dotta
|
bfb98aff5d |
test(runner): add credential-free acceptance foundation (#12652)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Paperclip supports direct adapters and an experimental native Runner path. > - These paths need one stable compatibility matrix. > - The matrix must not launch providers or load credentials during normal tests. > - Result handling must reject incomplete output and sensitive values. > - This pull request adds a credential-free acceptance foundation. > - The benefit is a reviewable contract for later end-to-end executors. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** This improves verification for direct adapters and Paperclip Runner providers. **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting test infrastructure for adapters, the server runtime, and the task thread. **Current behavior** The repository has subsystem tests. It does not have one declarative matrix for direct and native compatibility. **Proposed behavior** Add a pure acceptance catalog, result validator, redaction helpers, and failure classification. Keep all execution authority outside this change. **Reason and benefit** The matrix makes legacy isolation and native recovery requirements explicit. The helpers let later executors report safe and complete results. **Breaking changes** None. This change does not alter production runtime selection or start any provider. ## What Changed - Add a catalog for built-in direct adapters and qualified native provider profiles. - Add compatibility cases for runtime selection, task threads, questions, and flag-change recovery. - Add pure redaction and transient-failure classification helpers. - Add fail-closed Markdown and JUnit report aggregation. - Add isolated test and type-check commands. - Document the credential-free boundary and deferred live execution work. ## Verification GitHub Actions must run: - `pnpm test:runner-acceptance` - `pnpm test:runner-acceptance:typecheck` - The repository test, type-check, build, policy, and security gates. No local test command was run. The repository owner requested GitHub-only verification. ## Risks Low production risk. The change adds test-only files and root scripts. The catalog can drift when a built-in adapter changes. Its validation fails closed on that drift. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex with the GPT-5 agent model. The work used high reasoning, repository inspection, tool use, and parallel code 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 - [ ] 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 mergecanary/v2026.901.0-canary.7 |
||
|
Dotta
|
131f5c4065 |
feat(runner): add administration and observability (#12641)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Administrators need bounded controls for experimental native execution. > - The lower stack adds remote Codex execution and the task workspace. > - Operators need to configure Codex safely and inspect provider traces. > - Unsupported providers must not appear as runnable choices. > - This pull request adds Codex-only administration and observability. > - The benefit is a default-off operational surface for production diagnosis. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #12640. Refs #12616. Refs #12352. **Subsystem affected** Agent configuration, instance experimental settings, run ledger, provider trace inspector, and administrator actions. **Problem or motivation** The native runner lacks one safe operator surface for Codex permissions, lifecycle, raw trace capture, and run inspection. The integration branch also contains provider choices that the production backend cannot execute yet. **Proposed solution** Expose only the qualified Codex controls. Keep Paperclip Developer Mode and runner preview ingress off by default. Gate raw trace actions by administrator access and existing trace authorization. **Alternatives considered** Exposing unfinished providers would create configurations that fail at runtime. Always-on tracing would increase sensitive data and storage risk. **Roadmap alignment** This work supports governed Cloud and Sandbox agents and production diagnostics. ## Stack - Base PR: #12640. - Lower PRs: #12639 and #12638. - This PR contains only its 54-file administration and observability delta. - This is the final feature PR in the Codex production stack. ## What Changed - Added Codex-only Paperclip Runner permission and lifecycle controls. - Added bounded warm idle configuration. - Kept the provider field fixed to Codex. - Added administrator-only one-run raw trace requests. - Added a persistent future-run raw trace toggle. - Added trace status, metadata, ledger, and canonical runner inspection. - Added JSON-RPC request-origin grouping and finalization lineage. - Restored the stateful PRP transcript parser and focused projection tests required by trace inspection. - Added default-off Paperclip Developer Mode. - Added Honeycomb run links for authorized developer mode. - Disabled the legacy operational skill for `paperclip_runner`. - Did not expose OpenCode, ACPX, Pi, Claude Managed, or AWS runner choices. - Did not change migrations, workflows, dependencies, or `pnpm-lock.yaml`. ## Verification - GitHub Actions will run UI tests, server tests, repository typecheck, build, browser tests, security, and policy gates. - Tests cover Codex configuration defaults and bounds, administrator trace actions, persistent settings, ledger inspection, trace lineage, and Honeycomb links. - Existing server trace authorization and retention tests remain the backend authority. - Local tests were not run. The requested verification policy uses GitHub Actions for this series. - `git diff --check runner/task-workspace-experience...HEAD` passes. - The delta contains 54 files. ## Risks - Raw provider traces can contain sensitive provider data. - Existing server authorization controls access, reveal, download, retention, and deletion. - The UI gates trace actions by administrator access and developer mode. - All new instance settings remain off by default. - Fresh Paperclip Runner configuration remains Codex-only. - Direct adapters and legacy task behavior do not change in this PR. > 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-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 mergecanary/v2026.901.0-canary.6 nightly/v2026.901.0-nightly.0 |
||
|
Dotta
|
39206c0096 |
feat(ui): complete the task workspace (#12640)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The task page is the main place where people guide and review agent work. > - Native runner events already project into the existing task chat on the lower stack. > - The larger task workspace must support those events without breaking direct adapters. > - Legacy questions, final replies, empty transcripts, and classic controls must keep their behavior. > - This pull request completes the provider-neutral task workspace experience. > - The benefit is one coherent task surface for native and direct execution paths. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #12639. Refs #12617. Refs #12352. **Subsystem affected** Task chat, task detail, side panels, interaction forms, and transcript presentation. **Problem or motivation** The task page does not provide one complete workspace for live activity, plans, questions, queued guidance, files, and documents. Earlier native UI work also exposed compatibility risks in legacy question and reply paths. **Proposed solution** Add the task workspace components and provider-neutral protocol presentation. Keep runner-only controls behind runtime facts. Preserve all direct-adapter composer, transcript, interaction, and finalization behavior. **Alternatives considered** A separate runner page would duplicate task behavior. Replacing legacy transcript logic would create unnecessary adapter regressions. **Roadmap alignment** This work supports the unified task experience and the Cloud and Sandbox agents milestone. ## Stack - Base PR: #12639. - Lower PR: #12638. - This PR contains only its 119-file UI delta against `runner/remote-wss-transport`. - The next stack PR adds administrator and observability controls. ## What Changed - Added a reusable task workspace side panel for files and documents. - Added provider-neutral cards for tools, plans, questions, protocol activity, and progress. - Added queued guidance and richer composer state. - Added compact and expanded interaction presentation. - Added live activity, thinking, usage, recovery, and final reply presentation. - Added document annotations and task deep links. - Added bounded question validation and response handling. - Preserved native runner event projection from master. - Preserved legacy channel-less replies and explicit final reply precedence. - Preserved direct-adapter and classic-interface controls. - Did not change server execution selection, Rust code, migrations, workflows, or `pnpm-lock.yaml`. ## Verification - GitHub Actions will run UI tests, repository tests, typecheck, build, browser tests, security, and policy gates. - Tests cover active, settled, empty-transcript, interaction, queued-message, plan, question, file, document, and classic-interface states. - Compatibility tests cover direct adapters and native runner projection together. - Local tests were not run. The requested verification policy uses GitHub Actions for this series. - `git diff --check runner/remote-wss-transport...HEAD` passes. - The delta contains 119 UI-only files. ## Risks - This is a large task-page change. - Most files are new focused components and tests. - Shared transcript code keeps the lower native projection and legacy direct-adapter fallbacks. - Runner-only controls use adapter and runtime facts. - No execution path or rollout flag changes in this PR. > 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-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 mergecanary/v2026.901.0-canary.5 |
||
|
Dotta
|
0bdbf61564 |
feat(runner): add secure remote transport (#12639)
## 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 lower stack PR adds authenticated remote execution targets and provider ingress. > - The Rust daemon currently accepts only loopback plaintext WebSocket connections. > - Remote Codex needs authenticated WSS dialing and provider-ingress listener mode. > - This pull request adds the bounded Rust transport contract. > - The benefit is a secure transport layer for the Codex remote vertical slice. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #12638. Refs #12616. Refs #12352. **Subsystem affected** Paperclip Runner Rust transport and remote runner networking. **Problem or motivation** The runner daemon cannot connect to a public control plane with TLS. It also cannot accept a provider preview connection on the run-bound ingress path. **Proposed solution** Add WSS with native trust roots and an optional private CA bundle. Add a fixed authenticated listener mode for provider ingress. Advertise the exact transport contract through build metadata. **Alternatives considered** Plaintext public WebSocket connections would weaken the transport boundary. A general listener would expose more network surface than the run-bound provider ingress requires. **Roadmap alignment** This work supports the Cloud and Sandbox agents milestone. It also supports self-healing native runs. ## Stack - Lower merged PR: #12638. - This PR contains only its 13-file delta against `master`. - Later stack PRs add the task workspace and administrator UI. ## What Changed - Added WSS dialing with rustls and native certificate roots. - Added an optional bounded private CA bundle that augments native roots. - Kept plaintext WebSocket dialing restricted to loopback addresses. - Pinned resolved dial addresses for the process lifetime. - Added a fixed `0.0.0.0:43127` listener with an exact run-bound path. - Rejected listener queries, ambiguous paths, and WebSocket extensions. - Kept frame and message size bounds. - Added bounded reconnect grace and exponential jitter. - Retried bootstrap failures only before authentication proof transmission begins. - Kept post-proof failures fail-closed and bounded the welcome exchange at two seconds. - Added runnerd build metadata for the versioned transport contract. - Updated Rust dependencies and `Cargo.lock` only for TLS and certificate handling. - Did not add provider dispatch, Pi, AWS, `pnpm-lock.yaml`, migrations, or workflows. ## Verification - GitHub Actions will run Cargo formatting, Rust tests, repository tests, typecheck, build, security, and policy gates. - Rust tests cover URL validation, listener path validation, build metadata, durable recovery, and the existing Codex provider path. - Local tests were not run. The requested verification policy uses GitHub Actions for this series. - `git diff --check master...HEAD` passes. - The delta contains 13 files. ## Risks - TLS and listener changes affect the runner trust boundary. - Public plaintext transport remains rejected. - The listener uses one fixed port and one exact run-bound path. - PRP authentication remains required after the WebSocket upgrade. - The optional CA file uses the existing private-file checks and a 4 MiB limit. - This PR does not enable another provider or change direct adapters. > 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-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 mergecanary/v2026.901.0-canary.4 |
||
|
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 mergecanary/v2026.901.0-canary.3 |
||
|
Dotta
|
209680409d |
feat(ui): project native runner turns into task chat (#12617)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to supervise AI agents and their work. > - The task page is the established place to read run progress and answer agent questions. > - Native runner events use PRP envelopes instead of the direct-adapter transcript format. > - The task page needs a narrow projection for those events without changing legacy adapter behavior. > - Unknown event versions and fields must stay hidden until the UI supports them. > - This pull request adds a runtime-gated native turn projection and preserves the classic path. > - The benefit is one task thread for native Codex runs while direct adapters keep their current UI. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** `ui/` task chat and transcript projection. **Problem or motivation** The server can record native runner events, replies, usage, and structured interactions, but the existing task page cannot safely render those records. Reusing the native path for direct adapters would also risk the legacy question and finalization behavior. **Proposed solution** Project supported PRP v1 events into the existing transcript model only when runtime facts identify a native `paperclip_runner` run. Use an exact event and payload allowlist. Keep direct adapters on the existing transcript, composer, interaction, and finalization path. **Alternatives considered** A separate runner page was rejected because it would split task history. A universal transcript replacement was rejected because the experimental runner must not alter legacy adapters. **Roadmap alignment** This change supports activity attribution and recoverable runs. It does not replace the current task page. ## What Changed - Project supported native PRP v1 assistant, reasoning, tool, activity, usage, interaction, and result events. - Render a native runner turn only when both runtime mode and adapter type match. - Recognize the canonical `assistant_message` item kind and preserve final-reply precedence. - Fail closed for unsupported PRP versions, event types, payload schemas, and identity fields. - Keep explicit running and pending provider activities open until a real terminal state arrives. - Include channel and lifecycle identity in memoization so progress-to-final transitions rerender. - Add focused native, empty-transcript, interaction, final, memoization, and direct-adapter regressions. ## Verification - GitHub Actions is the authoritative test environment for this stack. - This top PR receives the full stack-aware CI suite. - Greptile will review this exact nine-file delta after the branch is pushed. ## Risks - The main risk is changing direct-adapter task behavior. The render gate requires both native runtime mode and the `paperclip_runner` adapter. - The next risk is exposing future provider payloads. Version, event, schema, and field allowlists fail closed. - There are no database, lockfile, workflow, build-system, or server changes in this PR. ## Stack 1. [Runner package, SDK, and developer tools](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12608) 2. [Codex production server integration](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12616) 3. This PR: provider-neutral task-thread UI ## 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 |
||
|
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 |
||
|
Dotta
|
560e7e48b5 |
feat(runner): add SDK and developer tooling (#12608)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The runner package already provides the production protocol and execution spine. > - Contributors still need stable SDK surfaces, deterministic test tools, and local inspection tools. > - Those surfaces share generated contracts and must change as one package boundary. > - This pull request adds the package-local SDK, labs, examples, and drift checks. > - The benefit is a reviewable developer platform that does not change application execution selection. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** `packages/paperclip-runner` — runner SDK, conformance tools, and developer tooling. **Problem or motivation** The production runner spine is present, but package consumers cannot build deterministic integrations, inspect sessions, or verify provider-neutral behavior through supported surfaces. **Proposed solution** Add browser, React, standalone, live-session, scenario, conformance, and evaluation surfaces. Add generated contract inventories and package-local verification scripts. Keep production application routing unchanged. **Alternatives considered** We considered splitting each generated catalog, SDK surface, and demo into separate pull requests. Those changes share exports, fixtures, and drift gates. Splitting them would create intermediate package states that do not build. **Roadmap alignment** No overlapping item appears in `ROADMAP.md`. This work extends the runner package that is already on `master`. ## What Changed - Add browser, React, standalone, live-session, and issue-thread SDK surfaces. - Add deterministic mock control-plane, scenario, conformance, replay, and evaluation tools. - Add bounded Codex, OpenCode, and ACPX development transports and fixtures. - Keep deferred managed-provider execution fail-closed. Persisted compatibility data remains readable. - Add generated capability inventories with their source files and drift checks. - Add examples, package documentation, browser checks, and clean-consumer checks. - Preserve the reviewed protocol bounds, replay compatibility aliases, process environment isolation, and semantic redaction limits. - Update the ACPX package patch that the existing workspace patch registry already tracks. - Do not change `pnpm-lock.yaml`, repository workflows, server runtime selection, or the application UI. ## Verification GitHub Actions is the verification authority for this pull request. The repository CI, package TypeScript and Rust checks, package tests, generated-output drift checks, browser checks, security scans, and Greptile review must pass on the exact head. Local test suites were not run because this series uses parallel GitHub Actions for verification. ## Risks This is a large greenfield package change. The main risks are public export drift, generated-output drift, and optional React consumer compatibility. Package boundary checks, clean-consumer checks, and browser tests cover those risks. Production adapter selection and server execution are outside this pull request. ## Stack 1. **This PR:** runner SDK and developer tooling. 2. [Codex production server integration](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12616). 3. [Provider-neutral task-thread UI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12617). ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, high-reasoning mode, with 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 described the issue in-PR following the feature request template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id - [ ] 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 mergecanary/v2026.901.0-canary.2 |
||
|
Devin Foleyandgithub-actions[bot]
|
b5fd13e09f |
docs(release): stable notes for the 2026.828.0-beta.0 soak (v2026.831.0) (#12610)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The release process promotes a soaked beta to stable; the stable's GitHub Release body comes from `releases/beta/v<beta-version>.md` on `master` > - The `draft_stable_notes` job seeded this file as a raw commit-log skeleton when `2026.828.0-beta.0` published > - The stable preflight fails without the merged file, and the skeleton is not fit to publish as release notes > - This pull request rewrites the skeleton into finished stable notes for the v2026.831.0 promotion > - The benefit is that the stable release ships with accurate, readable, user-facing notes on time ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Issue type** Missing content **Where is the issue?** `releases/beta/v2026.828.0-beta.0.md` — the drafted stable-notes skeleton for the `2026.828.0-beta.0` soak. **What's wrong?** The file holds the auto-generated skeleton (grouped commit subjects with nested PR summaries). The stable promotion publishes this file verbatim as the GitHub Release body, so it must be rewritten into release-notes voice before the stable dispatch. **Suggested fix** Rewrite the skeleton at full stable depth per `.agents/skills/release-changelog/SKILL.md`: verified breaking changes with upgrade paths, delta-aware highlights, grouped improvements and fixes with inline PR attribution, an upgrade guide covering migrations and new environment variables, and a contributors section. ## What Changed - Rewrote `releases/beta/v2026.828.0-beta.0.md` from the generated skeleton into finished notes titled `# Paperclip v2026.831.0` - Six breaking changes, led by the Node.js 24.11.0 minimum; each has an upgrade path - Five highlights: runtime skill delivery to agents, the Kimi Code adapter, operator settings-visibility controls, the HTTP/2 sandbox callback bridge, and the shortened onboarding arc - Upgrade guide covers migrations `0223`–`0230` (each attributed from its SQL) and the new `PAPERCLIP_HIDDEN_SETTINGS`, `PAPERCLIP_SETTING_DEFAULTS`, `SENTRY_DSN`, and `PAPERCLIP_WORKSPACE_REAPER_COOLDOWN_DAYS` variables - Entries already shipped to stable users in v2026.824.1 are noted as such instead of re-announced - Contributors section lists 7 verified community handles; core maintainers and bots are excluded per the canonical list ## Verification - Range verified as `664052f8e..dbf052577` (baseline v2026.824.1 merge-base to the `beta/v2026.828.0-beta.0` source commit); every entry traces to a commit in that range - Stable version confirmed with `./scripts/release.sh stable --date 2026-08-31 --print-version` → `2026.831.0` - Migration list confirmed with `git diff --name-only 664052f8e..dbf052577 -- packages/db/src/migrations/` and each file's SQL read at the source commit - Environment variable names confirmed against `docs/deploy/environment-variables.md` and source at `dbf052577` - Contributor handles confirmed via `gh pr view <n> --json author` for each attributed community PR ## Risks - Low risk: a single markdown file; no source changes. The main risk is a factual error in the notes — mitigated by verifying each claim against the source commit rather than commit messages alone. If the promotion date slips past 2026-08-31 UTC, the title needs a re-date (the beta-keyed filename makes this harmless). ## Model Used - Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-fable-5` (Claude Fable 5), extended thinking enabled, tool use (git/GitHub CLI research against the release range) via Claude Code ## 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: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>canary/v2026.901.0-canary.1 |
||
|
Dotta
|
0b73ebb86c |
Fix managed OAuth catalog activation (#12623)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The Apps system gives agents governed access to external services > - The managed OAuth callback discovers provider tools before it activates a grant > - Fresh managed connections kept every discovered tool in quarantine > - The Apps page also counted disabled tools as available actions > - This pull request makes setup activation atomic and keeps later catalog changes quarantined > - The benefit is a usable catalog after consent without weakening reauthorization safeguards ## Linked Issues or Issue Description N/A — no public GitHub issue exists for this follow-up. Related merged work: [#12619](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12619) and [paperclip-cloud #319](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-cloud/pull/319). **What happened?** A fresh Paperclip-managed OAuth connection discovered the correct Google Workspace tools, but it left every allowed tool in quarantine. The Apps page then reported zero actions for write profiles and counted disabled actions for read profiles. **Expected behavior** A fresh or revived managed connection must remain disabled until Paperclip stores credentials, discovers the catalog, reviews the profile allowlist, installs default policies, and activates the connection. A later reauthorization must preserve user choices. A later catalog change must quarantine new or changed tools. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Connect a managed Google Workspace write profile. 2. Complete provider consent and return through the instance callback. 3. Open the connection in Apps. 4. Observe that the connection is active but the allowed actions remain quarantined. **Paperclip version or commit** Commit `c7ebc089c` from merged pull request #12619. **Deployment mode** Self-hosted local development through Tailscale HTTPS. The same callback logic applies to Cloud-hosted instances. **Installation method** Built from source with pnpm. **Agent adapter(s) involved** Not adapter-specific. This change affects the core Apps and tool-access paths. ## What Changed - Kept fresh and revived managed connections in the draft state until catalog finalization succeeds. - Added a managed-draft refresh option that quarantines discovery results without changing generic draft behavior. - Activated reviewed profile tools, created bindings, and installed ask-first policies in the existing finalization transaction. - Preserved custom profiles, bindings, archived state, and policies during ordinary reauthorization. - Kept new or changed tools quarantined after activation and kept out-of-profile tools disabled. - Counted only active catalog entries as available actions in the Apps page. - Added retry, revival, reauthorization, policy, profile, and UI regression coverage. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts` — passed, 208 tests. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/pages/apps/AppDetail.test.tsx` — passed, 52 tests. - Server and UI typechecks passed. - `pnpm build` — passed on the final tree. - `pnpm check:token-gates` — passed. - `git diff --check` — passed. - Browser walkthrough — passed for all 16 enabled Google Workspace profiles through the staging Cloud broker and a self-hosted Tailscale HTTPS instance. Every final connection became active and exposed at least one allowed action. - `pnpm test:run` — the changed suites passed. The shared live-QA environment caused unrelated workspace-runtime concurrency and cleanup failures, so hosted CI is the clean-environment authority for the full suite. ## Risks - The change affects managed OAuth only. Customer-owned OAuth setup keeps its current behavior. - A failed initial finalization now leaves a safe draft that the callback can retry. - An ordinary active reauthorization does not rebuild defaults, so existing user policy remains intact. - There are no database migrations and no public API changes. > 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-5.6, with reasoning, repository tools, browser control, code execution, test execution, and parallel subagent review. The effective context window was managed by the Codex task runtime. ## 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 the changed suites 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 mergecanary/v2026.901.0-canary.0 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
c7ebc089cb |
fix(apps): complete managed Google Workspace rollout (#12619)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The Apps system gives agents governed access to external services > - The managed Google Workspace connector uses separate profiles for each app and access level > - Several app definitions and callback paths did not enforce the same profile contract > - The default method could also select a customer OAuth setup when a managed read profile was available > - This pull request aligns the profile contracts, setup guidance, default selection, and activity attribution > - The benefit is a consistent managed connection flow for every Google Workspace app ## Linked Issues or Issue Description N/A — no public GitHub issue exists for this follow-up. Related merged work: [#12600](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12600) and [#12609](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12609). This change follows the merged Paperclip Cloud managed OAuth broker work. It does not add a new broker or provider client. **What happened?** The Google Workspace connection definitions could drift from the shared connector profile registry. The callback activity always named Gmail. Google Sheets did not show the Developer Preview requirement. The setup flow could select a customer-owned write method when Cloud advertised only a managed read profile. The tool-access service had no non-Gmail managed callback test. **Expected behavior** Each managed Google Workspace profile must use its exact app slug, MCP URL, scopes, ownership, risk tier, and write-tool policy. Callback activity must name the correct app and profile. Every Google Workspace card must show the same Developer Preview prerequisite. An available managed method must be the default within the selected capability. The customer-owned method must remain available as a fallback. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Advertise only the `gmail.read` managed profile. 2. Open the Gmail connection setup. 3. Observe that the customer-owned draft method becomes the default. 4. Complete a managed Google Drive callback. 5. Observe that the activity row names Gmail instead of Google Drive. 6. Open the Google Sheets setup. 7. Observe that it does not show the Google Developer Preview prerequisite. **Paperclip version or commit** Current `master` at the start of this follow-up. **Deployment mode** Local development. The same connector definitions apply to Cloud-hosted and self-hosted instances. **Installation method** Built from source with pnpm. **Agent adapter(s) involved** Not adapter-specific. This change affects the core Apps and tool-access paths. ## What Changed - Added one table-driven invariant for all 16 Google Workspace profiles. - Verified each profile against its app slug, MCP URL, exact scopes, capability, ownership, grant kind, risk tier, and write-tool allowlist. - Kept the Google Chat write profile least-privilege because its only enabled write tool is `send_message`. - Added the Google Developer Preview prerequisite to Google Sheets. - Preferred an available Paperclip-managed method before a customer-owned method. - Preserved explicit capability selection and the customer OAuth fallback. - Switched managed-profile availability from the anonymous global capability document to the enrolled instance's signed status response, so internal-pilot profiles cannot be enabled locally without an authorized instance binding. - Replaced the Gmail callback activity constant with the validated app slug and connector profile. - Added connector and route coverage for signed per-instance capabilities, including inactive and malformed responses. - Added a Google Drive callback test that covers the signed profile request, personal vault refs, encrypted secret rows, catalog filtering, and non-sensitive activity details. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed across all workspaces before the signed-capability follow-up; final targeted shared and server typechecks also passed after it. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/services/paperclip-cloud-connector.test.ts` — passed, 9 tests. - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/app-definitions.test.ts` — passed, 19 tests. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts` — passed, 205 tests. - `pnpm test:run` — incomplete after the general server group reported five failures in `server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts`. The failures are outside the changed files. The run was stopped before the remaining serialized suites because the shared worktree was needed for a follow-up edit. - `pnpm build` — passed on the final tree. - `git diff --check` — passed on the final tree. The five full-suite failures were: - `records teardown and cleanup operations when a recorder is provided` - `does not accept an occupied allocated port when listener ownership is unavailable` - `backfills a pre-existing HTTP-only managed worktree runtime to verified HTTPS in place` - `re-adopts a live service whose shell command differs from the surviving process argv` - `reuses a registered legacy worktree that already has the branch checked out` ## Risks - The default setup method changes when at least one Paperclip-managed method is available. Explicit read, write, or draft choices still stay within the selected capability group. - Managed method availability now depends on Paperclip Cloud's signed enrolled-instance status. A Cloud outage or an inactive enrollment hides managed methods while leaving customer-owned OAuth available. - The callback activity schema gains a non-sensitive `profile` value. It does not include tokens, account identifiers, emails, tenant identifiers, or provider error text. - The profile invariant is strict. A future Google scope or tool change must update the shared registry and the matching app definition together. - There are no database migrations and no public API changes. > 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-5.6, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and test execution. The effective context window was managed by the Codex task runtime. ## 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> |
||
|
github-actions[bot]andlockfile-bot
|
9f9a950d05 |
chore(lockfile): refresh pnpm-lock.yaml (#12593)
Auto-generated lockfile refresh after dependencies changed on master. This PR only updates pnpm-lock.yaml. Co-authored-by: lockfile-bot <lockfile-bot@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
3475e33fc7 |
fix(connector): isolate broker enrollment targets (#12609)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets operators connect provider accounts for their agents. > - Self-hosted instances can enroll with the Paperclip Cloud OAuth broker. > - A local identity can remain on disk when an operator changes the broker from production to staging. > - The old code combined the new target with the old identity and produced a verification link that Cloud could not accept. > - The final enrollment callback also returned to an unscoped Apps path. > - This pull request binds each identity to one broker target and returns to the correct company route. > - The benefit is a fail-closed enrollment flow that works across Cloud targets and company-prefixed routes. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #12600 **What happened?** A self-hosted instance with a saved connector identity could switch its broker base URL and environment. Paperclip then used the saved identity with the new target. The enrollment page received an unknown draft. A successful callback also opened an unscoped Apps path, which the UI treated as a company prefix. **Expected behavior** Paperclip must use one atomic identity and broker target. A target change must never mix old keys with a new broker. A completed enrollment must return to the initiating company's Connections page. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a self-hosted Paperclip instance and create a pending connector enrollment against the production broker. 2. Set the connector base URL and environment to staging. 3. Start enrollment again and open the returned verification URL. 4. Complete enrollment and inspect the final browser route. **Paperclip version or commit** `300a89ec1` **Deployment mode** Local dev (`pnpm dev`) through private HTTPS. ## What Changed - Resolve the connector broker and environment as one target. - Rotate a non-active identity when an administrator explicitly starts enrollment for a different target. - Reject active target changes and broker/environment mismatches. - Treat managed environment identity fields as one atomic tuple. - Require the Cloud verification URL to contain only the exact enrollment identifier. - Validate the configured target again before the instance redeems an enrollment callback. - Return successful enrollment callbacks to the company-prefixed Connections page. - Add regression tests for target isolation, managed identity precedence, URL validation, and the return path. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/services/paperclip-cloud-connector-enrollment.test.ts server/src/services/paperclip-cloud-connector.test.ts server/src/routes/tool-access-connection-intent.test.ts` (31 tests passed) - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm build` - `git diff --check` - Completed a staging Cloud enrollment from a local Paperclip instance through private HTTPS. - Confirmed the instance reports an active staging enrollment for its exact HTTPS origin. - Confirmed the company-prefixed Connections route renders the enrollment success state. - `pnpm test:run` also reached five unrelated macOS harness failures. Two compare `/var` with `/private/var`. Three expect listener-fixture failures that do not occur on this host. The same five failures reproduce when the two workspace-runtime suites run alone. ## Risks - Low risk. The change affects only Paperclip Cloud connector identity selection and the enrollment return route. - An active identity now fails closed when an operator changes its broker target. The operator must restore the original target or perform a new enrollment flow. - Starting a new target replaces a non-active draft, so its previous one-time approval link no longer works. - This change does not alter provider tokens, grants, catalogs, or tool calls. > 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-5.6 Sol. The work used high-reasoning mode, repository tools, code execution, browser automation, and parallel review subagents. ## 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 the scoped tests 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>canary/v2026.831.0-canary.16 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
3173944561 |
refactor(docker): install rust via a verified rustup, pinned by rust-toolchain.toml (#12605)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The Docker images ship the server together with the Rust runner binary (paperclip-runnerd) > - The Dockerfile installed rust from Debian trixie's apt archive, which provides rustc 1.85 > - The runner's dependency tree and its `rust-toolchain.toml` now require rustc 1.97.1, so every master docker build fails while hosted CI (with a newer preinstalled rust) stays green > - No image has been published since the dependency refresh, so deployments cannot receive current builds > - This pull request installs rustup from a version-pinned, checksum-verified installer and defers the compiler choice to the runner's own `rust-toolchain.toml` > - The benefit is one toolchain pin, owned by the runner package, shared by CI and image builds, installed without executing an unverified remote script ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Every `docker.yml` build on `master` fails since the runner dependency refresh. The failing step is `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server build`, which runs `cargo build` for `paperclip-runnerd`. Cargo reports: `rustc 1.85.0 is not supported by the following packages: icu_collections@2.3.0 requires rustc 1.88` (and sibling icu crates). The build exits with code 101 and no image is published. **Expected behavior** Master docker builds compile the runner and publish images. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run the `docker.yml` workflow on current `master`. 2. Observe the `build-and-push` and `build-and-push-cloud` jobs fail in the server build step with the rustc version error. **Paperclip version or commit** `master` (first failing build ~2026-08-31 12:21 UTC; last successful image build `fd7cb77d8`). ## What Changed - The docker build stage downloads a pinned `rustup-init` (1.29.0) for the build architecture, verifies it against an embedded sha256, and installs with `--default-toolchain none`. - The compiler version comes from `packages/paperclip-runner/rust-toolchain.toml` (1.97.1) — one pin, no drift between the Docker layer and the runner package. - A comment records why apt rust is not used: Debian's archive lags the ecosystem. ## Verification - In the exact base image (`node:24-trixie-slim`): the checksum check passes, rustup installs with no default toolchain, and `cargo build --release --manifest-path runner/Cargo.toml --locked -p paperclip-runner-core --bin paperclip-runnerd` completes with `rustc 1.97.1` selected from the toml. - This PR's own docker build exercises the same path end to end for both architectures. - No test files: this is a build-infrastructure refactor with no runtime code change (hence the `refactor:` prefix); the docker build itself is the executable check. ## Risks - Low risk. The change is scoped to the docker build stage; the production stage is unchanged. The rustup installer version and checksums are pinned; bumping rust later means editing only `rust-toolchain.toml`. ## Model Used - Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), Anthropic — Claude Code harness, extended thinking + tool use. ## 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
300a89ec13 |
Detect the qualifier-less Claude usage-limit message in quota classification (#12475)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The heartbeat runtime classifies adapter run failures, and the
recovery service uses that classification to decide between automatic
retry, a timed provider-quota wait, and a board escalation
> - The Claude CLI changed its subscription-limit stop message to
"You've hit your limit · resets 2:30am (UTC)", and no quota matcher
knows this qualifier-less wording
> - A limit-hit run therefore classifies as `adapter_failed` (or
`claude_auth_required`), recovery burns its continuation retries against
a hard limit, and the issue blocks with the opaque "No live execution
path" notice instead of waiting for the reset and retrying automatically
> - This pull request teaches the adapter and the recovery service the
new wording, and titles stranded-escalation notices from the classified
run error code so operators see the cause at a glance
> - The benefit is that usage-limit stops self-heal at the provider
reset time, and the notices that do post say "Error: usage limit
reached" or "Error: not logged in to Claude" instead of a generic title
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public issue exists; the underlying problem follows the bug template:
**What happened?**
On a staging deployment, an assigned `in_progress` issue hit the Claude
subscription usage limit. The run recorded the error `Claude run failed:
subtype=success: You've hit your limit · resets 2:30am (UTC)`. The
automatic continuation retry failed the same way in 34 seconds with
`errorCode: adapter_failed`. Terminal-run recovery then escalated: the
issue moved to `blocked` with the notice "No live execution path" and a
board-owned recovery action. The notice gave the operator no indication
that the cause was a usage limit with a known reset time.
**Expected behavior**
A usage-limit stop classifies as `provider_quota` with the reset clock
parsed into `retryNotBefore`. The recovery service takes its
provider-quota wait path: a system-owned recovery action that waits for
the reset time and retries the original assignee automatically. If an
escalation notice does post, its title names the classified cause.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run a `claude_local` agent on an issue until the Claude subscription
limit is hit, so the CLI result is "You've hit your limit · resets
\<time\> (UTC)".
2. Let terminal-run recovery retry the continuation.
3. Observe the issue block with the "No live execution path" notice
instead of a timed quota wait. `classifyAdapterFailureForRecovery`
returns `null` for the recorded error text; `CLAUDE_PROVIDER_QUOTA_RE`
and `PROVIDER_QUOTA_ERROR_RE` both fail to match it.
## What Changed
- `CLAUDE_PROVIDER_QUOTA_RE` and `CLAUDE_EXTRA_USAGE_RESET_RE`
(claude-local adapter) accept "you've hit your limit" with no qualifier,
alongside the existing "session"/"usage" wordings, so the run classifies
as `provider_quota` and the reset clock lands in `retryNotBefore`.
- `PROVIDER_QUOTA_ERROR_RE` and `isProviderQuotaRecovery` (recovery
service) accept the same wording, so runs recorded before the adapter
fix (errorCode `adapter_failed` with the limit text in the error) also
route to the quota wait.
- `parseProviderQuotaClockReset` parses the "resets 2:30am (UTC)" clock
shape alongside the existing "try again at" shape.
- `buildStrandedRecoveryEscalationNotice` titles the notice from the
source run's classified error code when one is mapped: `provider_quota`
→ "Error: usage limit reached", `claude_auth_required` → "Error: not
logged in to Claude", `acpx_auth_required` → "Error: agent login
required". The raw failure text stays withheld from the issue thread;
only the server-classified code is surfaced. Unmapped codes keep the
existing seed/cause titles.
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run
packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/parse.test.ts
server/src/services/recovery/provider-failure-classification.test.ts
server/src/services/recovery/stranded-notice.test.ts` — 72 tests pass,
including 5 new cases that use the exact new CLI message.
- `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-recovery-actions.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` — 189 tests
pass (no reroute regressions from the widened matchers).
- `tsc --noEmit` clean for `@paperclipai/adapter-claude-local` and
`@paperclipai/server`.
## Risks
- Low risk. The regex widenings are additive; every previously matched
wording still matches, and the existing negative test ("Workspace
storage capacity limit reached." stays unclassified) still passes.
- Behavioral shift, intended: an `adapter_failed` run whose error text
is the new limit wording now routes to the silent system-owned quota
wait instead of a board escalation. This matches how the older limit
wordings already behave.
- The notice title change only affects escalations whose source run
carries one of the three mapped error codes; all other notices render
exactly as before.
## Model Used
Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`, Claude Code CLI, extended thinking
with tool use).
## 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
canary/v2026.831.0-canary.15
|
