mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-19 20:44:16 +02:00
a91cf8a8019dc52ae26af3ce50f4cc2a537db06f
4866
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
a91cf8a801 |
test(runner): assert provider-selected models and shared launch pins
Replace obsolete single-model and duplicated-digest expectations with open model selection and byte-to-manifest integrity checks. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
91dfaa7d61 |
fix(runner): let ACP providers verify any requested model
Remove hardcoded Codex and Pi model admission and keep qualification selections in evaluation fixtures. Preserve explicit provider verification, runtime pins, and persisted recovery identities. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
6f4a5e9e2a |
refactor(server): delegate ACPX model admission to the runner
Keep product defaults separate from qualification metadata and preserve explicit Cursor and Codex ACP model selection. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
30875812d2 |
Merge current mainline preserving Cursor and public MCP fixtures
Retain authenticated API session headers, bounded polling errors, and both sets of qualification flows. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
dc36755e13 |
fix(server): expose shared release declarations through vendor shim
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
e34abee670 |
feat(mcp): connect assistants to a team with user OAuth (#14846)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip gives teams durable tasks, agent execution, budgets, and approvals. > - People also use assistants in Codex, Claude, and other MCP clients. > - Those assistants need a scoped connection that preserves the person’s permissions and attribution. > - Delegating a task must not turn the assistant into the assigned agent. > - This PR adds opt-in user OAuth, ten first-party tools, browser consent, and workflow packages. > - Paid product evals verify the resulting tasks, documents, attribution, retries, and access boundaries. > - The team keeps working after the assistant conversation ends. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Problem or motivation** A person cannot connect an external assistant to an existing team through browser consent and safely delegate durable work as themselves. **Proposed solution** Expose an opt-in `/mcp/paperclip` endpoint with individually described first-party operations. Bind every connection to a person, client, company, resource, and scopes. Reuse domain authorization and scheduling. Package shared team-review, delegation, and follow-up workflows for OpenAI/Codex and Claude. **Alternatives considered** Related PRs #9393 and #12549 cover earlier remote MCP and board-operator approaches. This change uses user OAuth and a bounded public catalog. It does not expose a generic executor, operator administration, static shared board credentials, or external agent execution. Registry listing work in #9851 is a separate distribution step. **Roadmap alignment** This maintainer-requested implementation extends the governed MCP gateway, activity attribution, durable work products, and hosted deployment direction in `ROADMAP.md`. It implements the first release of the saved design plan; external agent participation and granted third-party tools remain later releases. ## What Changed - Add MCP 2.0 discovery and task status/comment/document Events on the same authenticated endpoint. Persist subscriptions and delivery receipts, verify HTTPS callbacks, sign Standard Webhooks, encrypt callback material, recheck permissions/Cloud membership, and bound retries/expiry. Older MCP clients keep their existing tools. - Add discovery, dynamic client registration, S256 PKCE, resource validation, rotating refresh tokens, revocation, and company consent. Store credentials as hashes and recheck membership at execution. - Add tools for connection identity, agents/projects, task search/read/create, human comments, documents/deliverables, and pending-approval links. Preserve current domain permissions and scheduling. - Add durable mutation receipts across reconnects. Matching retries replay results; uncertain outcomes keep the same request ID and require inspection. - Add consent and connection-management pages, OAuth log redaction, shared plugin workflows, and separate OpenAI/Codex and Claude package outputs. - Add eight paid Product E2E cases across three models, independent durable-state grading, usage evidence, cleanup, and report integration. Add task-document guidance and regenerate the runner capability inventories. - Add migrations 0301 and 0302, the dated implementation plan, result notes, and direct-client setup instructions in `doc/public-mcp.md`. ## Verification - Merge integration `e180b1948`: resolved conflicts with current master, preserved both eval registries, regenerated capability catalogs, and regenerated migrations as 0301/0302 while keeping the original replay-safe SQL byte-identical. Local migration safety/snapshot tests (26), MCP/OAuth tests (38), redaction/OpenAPI tests (71), and eval catalog/grading tests (198) pass. Token and capability gates pass. Full recursive typecheck passed. Fresh Greptile review is 5/5 with no unresolved findings. CI is green on this exact head (55 successes, two intentional skips, one neutral result): one unchanged Cursor sandbox test timed out at 10 seconds, then passed locally in 856 ms. A single retry of that failed shard and the aggregate workflow passed. Merge remains blocked on the repository code-owner approval rule. Earlier checks passed at `6aa0962d4fb715f2190bb7bb22efacab2e58495d`: 55 successes, two intentional skips and one neutral result. [The earlier CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36901592350) includes all test shards, browser tests, typecheck, build and canary dry run. Greptile was 5/5 on that commit with no unresolved review threads. GitHub still requires code-owner review under the repository merge rules; passing checks do not bypass that approval. Paid source fingerprints remain separate below and in the dated result note. - Paid Events qualification passes **3/3**: GPT-5.4 Mini, Claude Haiku 4.5 and Claude Sonnet 4.6. Each uses a real public HTTPS callback, signature verification and report retrieval in a fresh conversation. A final Mini regression passes after the quota/status fixes. All evidence validates. Bounded tunnel startup retries occur before provider calls and remain visible; failed earlier attempts retain their original grades. - The earlier complete seven-case matrix passes **21/21**, with a separate **3/3** delegation regression. Two preceding matrices also passed 21/21 each. A complete 24-cell matrix including Events has not been run. [The dated results](doc/plans/2026-10-01-public-mcp-paid-eval-results.md) retain exact source fingerprints, failures, model IDs and partial costs. - Node 24: repository-wide `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass after merging master. Server typecheck passes after the final quota/status changes. Eval typecheck and all 892 eval-support tests pass. - All 33 real MCP/OAuth tests pass. The preceding combined MCP, redaction, private-address and DNS-rebinding run passed 129 tests; two later MCP regressions cover quota reuse and unchanged-status suppression. All 28 adjacent issue-tree/stale-lock route tests pass. CI then found a null checkout result in the existing concurrent-workspace path; logging now uses optional status access. All 12 closed-workspace tests and all 33 MCP tests pass after that correction. The exact-start event calibration exposed a timestamp gap; scanning now includes the subscription start, with all 33 MCP tests and server typecheck passing. These two narrow corrections follow the paid regression. - A real Core → Cloud → Core authority round trip passes OAuth, MCP 2.0 subscription/delivery, current membership loss, unsubscribe, legacy SDK tools, refresh and revocation. Its callback transport is a fixture with independent HMAC verification. The paid Events campaigns separately prove public HTTPS delivery. - Earlier component qualification passed UI 7,117 tests, CLI 502, shared 832, skills catalog 20, database 160 and OpenAPI 10. Token gates, module boundaries, migration order and plugin regeneration passed. CI covers general/serialized suites, eight browser shards, runner checks, typecheck, build and canary dry run. - **Local full-suite limitation:** the earlier monolithic run was not clean. It encountered overlapping schema rebuilding, Mac database shared-memory limits and isolated CLI/fixture failures. Targeted reruns passed. The existing >32 MiB Git filename stress test still hit its 300-second Mac timeout. The additional serialized sweep stopped after 62 passing suites once CI passed. Original failures and partial logs remain; this PR does not claim a wholly green local monolithic run. - Local Codex CLI and Claude Code OAuth login and MCP SDK interoperability were verified. Public-store installation, actual ChatGPT Work Cloud Events UI, staging HTTPS client behavior and hosted newcomer provisioning remain release gates. Enablement is moving to **Settings → Experimental → Assistant connections (MCP)** in the stacked follow-up [#14933](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/14933). Merge both for the intended setup experience. This foundation branch alone still uses `PAPERCLIP_PUBLIC_MCP_ENABLED=true`. After deployment, set `PAPERCLIP_PUBLIC_URL` to the authenticated instance's HTTPS origin, and connect to `/mcp/paperclip`. Select a team and allow writes in browser consent. Configure an available agent and budget, then delegate and retrieve results later. For Events, rescan the deployed plugin catalog in ChatGPT Work Cloud; the host supplies its webhook credentials when the user asks to watch a task. See [the setup runbook](doc/public-mcp.md). ## Risks - Events are at-least-once and may arrive out of order. No replay cursor is advertised. Clients must refresh finite subscriptions, read current state and avoid comment feedback loops. Callback material uses the instance secrets master key; hosted subscriptions require the updated Cloud broker and are bounded to five minutes/the access proof expiry. - ChatGPT Work Cloud/dot event UI, plugin rescan and a hosted staging subscription remain deployment gates. Local signed-webhook and paid model evidence does not claim those surfaces have been exercised. - Disabled by default. Merging adds schema and opt-in code; it does not deploy a public endpoint, publish a store listing, create a team, or start paid agents. - Migrations 0301 and 0302 are additive and idempotent. Their SQL is unchanged from the earlier preview numbers, so hash-aware upgrade reconciliation preserves prior staging applications. Normal instance upgrades must apply it before enabling MCP. - Task creation and comments can schedule paid agent work. Consent and tool descriptions disclose that effect. Revocation blocks future calls but does not undo delegated work. - Public deployments need edge rate limits and credential-safe logging. Internal dispatch is restricted to the closed catalog and carries a request-local verified actor. - Hosted onboarding requires the companion Cloud broker, encryption-key configuration, and tenant rollout. Self-hosted direct connections can use this PR alone. - Store acceptance and agent-mode participation are not claimed. Checked-in plugin endpoints are development defaults; rebuild packages for a real deployment before installation. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 in Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. A more specific serving version and context-window size were not exposed by the session. Paid eval models: `gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17`, `claude-haiku-4-5-20251001`, and `claude-sonnet-4-6`. ## 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 (targeted/component checks; full local-run limitations are recorded above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
824d0790d9 |
Merge current mainline while preserving accepted-plan waits
Retain provider-capacity retry handling alongside the server-authorized plan wait check. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
fb25904052 |
refactor(runner): generate shared ACPX release declarations
Consolidate runtime pins and explicit model admission policy across Rust, TypeScript, and packaging while preserving recovery identity. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
202c2d307e |
fix(server): leave unclaimed warm Cloud databases idle (#15314)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work performed by AI agents. > - Managed deployments prepare empty applications before an owner claims them. > - Those applications start database pollers even though no company can have work. > - Health probes also query SQL, so idle databases cannot remain suspended. > - This pull request adds an explicit standby marker for empty, unclaimed Cloud apps. > - The existing signed, durable claim resumes normal processing without restarting the app. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** An empty, unclaimed warm application runs recurring chat, email, plugin, heartbeat, cleanup, and reconciliation queries. Its health route also opens the database. This prevents idle database compute from suspending. **Expected behavior** An explicitly marked unclaimed application should keep its HTTP process and sandbox provider plugins ready while leaving the database idle. A successful signed claim should resume normal API behavior and background processing. Claimed and self-hosted instances should keep their current behavior. **Steps to reproduce** Start an empty Cloud-managed application and leave it unclaimed. Observe database activity while repeatedly requesting `/api/health`. Before this change, periodic queries continue without company data. Related: #15153 reduces allocation during chat polling. This change suppresses polling only for explicitly marked, empty, unclaimed Cloud apps. ## What Changed - Add `PAPERCLIP_CLOUD_WARM_STANDBY=1`. Check company emptiness once after restoring the persisted Cloud runtime identity. Missing Cloud configuration, existing data, or a persisted claim leaves normal processing active. - Gate recurring database pollers with an in-memory predicate. Keep startup preparation and sandbox provider plugin loading intact. - Serve unclaimed health probes without session or database reads and report `warmStandby: true`. Serve standby pages/assets directly from the UI router, bypassing session, bearer, tenant, and dynamic handlers. Refuse API requests and all WebSocket upgrades before authentication can query SQL or seed company data. - Exit standby after the existing signed identity assertion commits. Normal timers resume at their next tick; a restart restores the claim even with stale provider variables. - Document the marker, readiness semantics, rollout checks, and rollback. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. A final server typecheck also passed after adding tests. - `pnpm build` passed. - Focused standby, signed claim, restart, health, static/Vite routing, hostname, HMR, and live-events suites: 72 passed after the review fixes. Includes real HTTP upgrade admission before/after claim. - `pnpm test:run` was attempted locally; both superseded runs were stopped after encountering checkout/platform failures. A clean-checkout rerun eliminated ancestor skill-directory lookup failures. The company-skills/runtime-cache families encounter macOS read-only-directory rename failures (`EACCES`); all three company-skills failures reproduce on unmodified base `bf14f803d5`. The initial full run also reported one native runner API test failure; an isolated comparison on both revisions was blocked by local embedded PostgreSQL startup failures. The full [Linux CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37423263993) passed on final commit `5016c415ea`, including all server and workspace test shards, browser suites, typecheck, build, and release canary. This is not a claim that the full local suite passed. - Isolated full server with local PostgreSQL: after startup and connection expiry, 70 health probes, 70 page requests carrying valid synthetic tenant credentials, and 70 rejected WebSocket upgrades over 70 seconds observed zero app database connections. The signed claim completed in 62 ms and normal polling resumed (475 database transactions over 12 seconds). Restart with stale provider variables restored the durable claim. The latency is local-only, not a provider wake measurement. - Apex review: **5/5** on `5016c415ea`, both earlier threads resolved, no open recommendations. - No live-provider test or production deployment was performed. An actual database suspension/resume canary remains required before enabling the control-plane switch. ## Risks - Standby health reports HTTP readiness rather than current database connectivity. The signed claim still requires a durable database write; claimed health checks retain the SQL probe and 503 failure behavior. - Pollers resume at their usual intervals. A suspended database may add claim latency. Validate the real provider before enabling the marker. - Startup preparation and sandbox plugins remain loaded. New plugins or background loops must respect the same standby contract. - The marker is off by default. Remove it or set it to `0` and restart to roll back. No schema migration or claimed-workspace inactivity policy changes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6. The exact serving snapshot and configured context-window size are not exposed in this session. Assistance included source review, TypeScript changes, command execution, and PostgreSQL tests. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` 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 — targeted tests pass; full local suite limitations are documented above, and full Linux CI is green - [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/v2026.1006.0-canary.17 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
f2715e02bb |
fix(native): surface model capacity errors and retry automatically (#15347)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native runs preserve provider events and results, then decide task state. > - Codex can fail a turn because the selected model is temporarily at capacity. > - Paperclip displayed a generic native-session failure and left the task in recovery. > - A known capacity failure needs a clear message and a durable delayed retry. > - This pull request uses committed terminal evidence, the status-effect ledger, and existing dispatch gates. > - The task can continue automatically without an unbounded retry loop or a model switch. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #13993 adds launcher capacity deferrals before provider startup. This change handles a committed native Codex `serverOverloaded` terminal after provider work has started. **What happened?** A native Codex turn ended with `codexErrorInfo: serverOverloaded` and “Selected model is at capacity. Please try a different model.” Paperclip saved the result, showed a generic failure, and required recovery instead of waiting and retrying. **Expected behavior** Show the capacity error directly. Schedule bounded retries after a short delay. Preserve saved work and honor current execution gates. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run a native Codex task. 2. Commit a `turn.failed` event with `serverOverloaded`, then accept a failed result for the same turn. 3. Inspect the task error and its recovery state. The regression test reproduces this without a paid provider call. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced against master `16b7db35ffa0f9a95913c8cbdeea3d595435691f`. ## What Changed - Classify capacity failures from committed runner events and the pinned execution identity. Preserve accepted results and display the specific capacity error. - Atomically persist one scheduled successor with the status decision. Retry after one minute, then two minutes. Share the existing failure budget and stop after two automatic retries. - Reuse dispatch gates for ownership, task holds, dependencies, budget, and locks. Wait for predecessor execution, finalization, and cleanup before claiming a retry. - Preserve pending reviewer authority and suppress retries after reassignment or a successor claim. - Consume the failed run's resume receipt and delivered wake input. Rebuild ordinary continuation from the failed run so explicitly resumed tasks can retry without borrowing one-run authorization. - Label scheduled retries “Model at capacity.” Add a Storybook example and avoid duplicate punctuation in the existing retry card. - Add regression coverage and document the runtime contract. ## Verification - Targeted recovery and UI suites: 125 tests passed. Additional final cleanup and lock regressions passed. - Latest-head continuation and authorization regressions: 57 tests passed, including all four capacity integration tests against an isolated PostgreSQL database. - Rechecked all four capacity integration tests with the full runner's isolated `PAPERCLIP_HOME`, config, temporary directory, and serial fork settings: passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. Final server typecheck passed. - `pnpm build`: passed. - `pnpm check:token-gates`: passed. - Browser: checked the real Storybook card. It shows the capacity message, automatic retry time, and existing Retry now action. - `pnpm test:run`: attempted and restarted after an interruption. The resumed run started before the final review correction and was stopped after recorded workspace/native test failures and the five-minute Git streaming timeout already documented on master. Exit 130; no complete local full-suite pass is claimed. Current-head isolated capacity tests and the complete CI suite pass. - A combined local recovery-suite attempt also hit PostgreSQL initialization failures at this macOS host's global shared-memory limit (32 slots). The focused recovery suites passed separately; final-head capacity tests also pass with the full runner's isolated environment settings. - Latest-head GitHub checks: all 56 checks green, including general and serialized test shards, browser E2E, typecheck, build, Runner verification, and canary dry run. No merge conflicts. - Greptile: 5/5 on `813a470b8c18c05aeb7e31e63e573c3a3a2f5cac`, with zero unresolved findings after fixing the resumed-task continuation issue. ## Risks - Capacity retries can repeat a task turn after partial work. They start a fresh provider session with task history and wait for predecessor cleanup. They do not resume the failed turn. - Retries retain the configured model unless an operator changes configuration. Persistent overload consumes the existing failure budget and then needs an explicit retry or model change. - Only run-bound native Codex `serverOverloaded` failures qualify. Usage-limit exhaustion, model/account incompatibility, unbound text, and unknown provider failures retain their current recovery behavior. - No schema migration is required. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The exact model ID and context-window size are not exposed to this session. Used reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser verification. No 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 - [ ] 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/v2026.1006.0-canary.16 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
e75fde6098 |
Use the server suite timeout for Cursor sandbox qualification
The loaded CI shard exceeded this test's shorter 10-second override. Inherit the existing 15-second server test limit, matching the adjacent sandbox case, while retaining all command and environment assertions. Record the original CI interruption and timeout separately from live qualification. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
67aff7ad16 |
Merge mainline and record final Cursor installed-release qualification
Resolve the two Runner fixture conflicts while preserving selected native response waits. Record all 18 passing local/Daytona cells, five original failed attempts, immutable package/image identities and clean installation evidence. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
646795e8f9 |
Wait for the selected native response in live qualification
Hydrate the final run receipt while polling persisted comments so an earlier deliverable-preparation comment cannot end the response consistency wait. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4bdbee9100 |
Recognize provider-neutral permission decline in live fixtures
Keep exact historical wording readable while requiring the same declined request, terminal event and unfinished task state. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
16b7db35ff |
Shorten planning skills and measure task decomposition (#15296)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work for AI agents. > - Planning guidance helps agents choose owners and dependencies. > - The runtime skill favors few tasks, but the catalog skill requires a child-task breakdown. > - Both add repeated process instructions that can distract from the requested outcome. > - This change keeps the ownership and dependency rules and removes the required matrix and repeated checklist. > - A bounded Product E2E comparison measures saved outcomes and task handoffs before qualification. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #11057. Related measurement work: #15218. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Planning and delegation through the runtime plan-to-tasks and bundled task-planning skills. **Current behavior** The two skills contain about 1,900 words and conflicting guidance on whether plans require child tasks. **Proposed behavior** Keep cohesive work with one owner. Split only for a real owner, parallel output, dependency, independent review, or follow-up lifecycle. Preserve existing authorization and planning mechanics. ## What Changed - Shorten both skills to about 400 words combined. Preserve their keys and installed-version behavior. - Remove the duplicate operational-skill pointer and regenerate affected source metadata. - Add twelve explicit Product E2E cells: four scenarios with current, short and disabled planning skills. - Use the current task composer and actual create-response ID; calibrate public skill APIs and browser creation without providers. - Eliminate an observed collision in chat-test company prefixes with a per-suite sequence. - Grade saved documents, exact author/run attribution, child count, prerequisite execution order, review boundaries and completion handoffs. - Retain current skill bytes and report source, selections, run accounting and failures. ## Verification - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`: pass. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit`: 1,287 Vitest tests and 128 Node checks pass. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner -- --list --suite plan-task-guidance`: twelve local Codex cells. - Archived current skills match master `72ff3a9f27e581a27acb49771e8658bbb0bbaa47` exactly. - Corrected fixture: three real public-API/database calibrations pass with zero provider runs; all 35 evaluator checks and Product E2E typecheck pass. - Setup campaign [37399550253](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37399550253) was canceled after source review found unsupported bundled edits and automatic core reinstallation. Its paid-cell step was skipped: zero provider runs, no behavioral grade. - The next setup [37401094799](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37401094799) failed before task creation on the old title-field selector: zero actual runs, original FAIL retained, cleanup passed. A real browser/API calibration of the new helper passes with paused non-provider agents and zero runs. - Full local typecheck/build pass. Full local tests retain one unchanged five-minute Git streaming timeout (also fails isolated), 9,591 passes and 5,796 skips. CI's chat failure was a proven random fixture-prefix collision; five affected cases pass after the test-only repair. - Paid behavior comparison and new-head CI/review remain pending. This PR remains a draft. ## Risks - The shorter text may change delegation decisions. Live outcomes are not yet qualified. - The initial comparison uses one profile and one attempt per cell. It cannot establish cross-model reliability or cost trends. - Disabled means unassigned company-owned copies; the company library remains discoverable. This does not qualify global removal, automatic accepted-plan wiring changes, or installed-copy migration. - Skill availability does not prove a model read or cognitively used it. - No provider/tool protocol, permission, timeout or runtime lifecycle behavior changes in production. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with repository inspection, code editing and tool use. The exact backend model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. The declared eval model is native Codex `gpt-5.6-sol`. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9a1d25c7c6 |
Create explicit titles for native permission fixtures
Use the public Search creation action to preserve a user title before the provider starts, preventing an unrelated naming permission from blocking strict native-operation cases. Keep prompts, permission policy and native evidence assertions unchanged. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
44e4979d23 |
Capture project and repository update lifecycle events (#15306)
## Thinking Path > - Existing lifecycle capture records agent transitions and project creation. > - Project and repository edits need matching project update records. > - The record must commit with the mutation so failed writes cannot lose a hook. > - Creation with repositories is one creation, and repository replacement is one update. > - Archive-only changes preserve project state without creating a hook. > - Plugin consumption and provider behavior are separate work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Problem or motivation** Project edits and repository/workspace changes lack durable lifecycle records. A future resource plugin needs those changes captured alongside the existing project creation hook. Archive-only changes must produce no hook. **Proposed solution** Allow project `update` records in the existing lifecycle journal. Record project and workspace mutations in their database transaction while holding the project row lock. Suppress intermediate workspace hooks during project creation and aggregate repository replacement. **Alternatives considered** Route-only hooks miss shared service callers. Recording after commit can lose an event. Emitting a hook for each child mutation exposes intermediate repository state. **Roadmap alignment** This completes project lifecycle capture begun in #15280. Plugin delivery, VM/volume provisioning, and backfill remain separate. Searches found no duplicate project lifecycle work; related #13306 concerns decision events on the in-process plugin bus. ## What Changed - Record project edits and workspace additions, updates, and removals as project `update` events. - Commit each event atomically with its mutation under the project row lock. - Keep project creation with repositories to one creation event and repository replacement to one aggregate update. - Ignore archive-only changes and retain workspace records. - Extend the journal action constraint and document project update capture. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed on the narrowed scope. - 57 tests passed across six lifecycle, project, repository, and chat-project suites. - Seven managed-sandbox workspace route tests and the CLI lagging-worktree migration regression passed (65 targeted tests total). - Full GitHub CI passed on `8ba6f97f22`; all required gates are green. - Greptile scored the final project-only commit 5/5 with zero unresolved review threads. - The branch is current with `master` and has no merge conflicts. - `git diff --check` and a local secret/PII scan passed. ## Risks - Apply migration `0300_chunky_chamber.sql` before running the new server. It permits project update actions and tolerates older JavaScript worktree backups that omitted the prior CHECK constraint. - Event-write failure intentionally rolls back the project or repository mutation. - Records contain identity and action; future consumers must load current authorized project/workspace data. - Plugin consumption, provider calls, volume cleanup, and backfill are outside this PR. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and tool use. The exact deployment model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1006.0-canary.15 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
b255f5512a |
Handle remembered projects in Runner browser fixtures
Verify repeated task creation and switching projects without starting a provider. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
|
1477d1ecea |
test: remove the no-op sequential describe modifier (#15286)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Paperclip runs the server and runner test suites with Vitest. > - Vitest 5 removes the deprecated `describe.sequential` property, so the pending Vitest 5 upgrade fails the type-check and test jobs. > - `describe.sequential` only changes behaviour inside a `describe.concurrent` suite, or when `sequence.concurrent` is on. > - This repository has neither, so the modifier changed nothing at run time. > - The benefit is that the Vitest 5 upgrade can land, and the test files lose a modifier that did no work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #12969 ## What Changed - Replace every `describe.sequential` use with a plain `describe` call. - Drop the `{ concurrent: false }` suite option from the two runner test files. - Add a comment to `server/vitest.config.ts` that records why these suites must run one test at a time. - Leave the package manifests and the lockfile unchanged. ## Why the modifier did nothing The Vitest documentation states that `describe.sequential` is useful to run tests in sequence inside a `describe.concurrent` suite, or with the `--sequence.concurrent` option. `sequence.concurrent` defaults to `false`. This repository satisfies neither condition: - No test file uses `describe.concurrent`, `it.concurrent`, or `test.concurrent`. - `server/vitest.config.ts` sets `sequence.concurrent: false`, with `maxWorkers: 1`, `maxConcurrency: 1`, and `isolate: true`. - `packages/paperclip-runner/vitest.config.ts` sets no `sequence` block, so the `false` default applies. `packages/db` and `cli` already run the same embedded-Postgres suites with a plain `describe`, and those jobs are green. The server package was the only outlier. The modifier did carry one real piece of knowledge: these suites need their tests to run one at a time. The new comment in `server/vitest.config.ts` records that reason next to the setting that enforces it. ## Verification - `git grep` for `describe.sequential` returns nothing outside `node_modules`. - The author ran the changed server test files under the installed Vitest 4, and the results match the results without this change. - Two very large embedded-Postgres test files exceeded the author's local memory limit, so the CI test jobs cover those two. - The two changed runner test files have pre-existing local failures caused by a missing Rust toolchain and a missing global `pnpm` binary. The failures are identical with and without this change. - The author type-checked the changed files and found no new error. - CI must pass the typecheck, build, server test, and runner verify jobs. ## Risks - Low risk. Suite execution stays serial, because the Vitest config enforces it. - The change adds no dependency and changes no package manifest or lockfile. - A future change that turns `sequence.concurrent` on would break these suites. The new config comment warns against it. ## Model Used - Claude Sonnet 5 — code edits and local verification. - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 — the earlier revision of this branch. ## Test plan - [x] Every CI check reaches a terminal green state. A pending or queued check is not a pass. - [x] The `Typecheck + Release Registry` job passes. This change must not introduce a type error. - [x] The `Build` job passes. - [x] The server test jobs and the runner verify jobs pass. - [x] Greptile re-reviews this commit set and posts a passing verdict. The dependabot waiver does not apply to this pull request. - [x] `mergeable` reads `MERGEABLE` as a terminal value. ## 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 linked the related public issue with `Refs: #12969` - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-Authored-By: Priya Raman <priya.raman@paperclip.ing> --------- Co-authored-by: Priya Raman <priya.raman@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-authored-by: nickyleach <331803+nickyleach@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d0341c36b9 |
Bind runner browser fixtures to prompt-only task creation
Use current composer controls and creation response IDs so generated titles cannot break task lookup. Verify standard, Plan, and Ask creation with paused agents before paid qualification. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
90182b4f8b |
Report bounded Cloud portfolio failure diagnostics (#15340)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work for AI agents and their companies. > - Cloud instances proxy a trusted user's portfolio through the control plane. > - A failed request returns a generic error to the client. > - That replacement error loses the failure phase and network code in Sentry. > - Operators need bounded evidence without upstream messages or credentials. > - This PR adds safe diagnostics while preserving the existing request behavior. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #10850, which added the portfolio proxy. No open PR for this diagnostic gap was found. **What happened?** A rejected portfolio fetch becomes a generic 502 in Sentry. The event cannot distinguish a connection reset, deadline, HTTP response failure, or body failure. The route's previous warning also included the original error and a stack identifier. **Steps to reproduce** Make the portfolio proxy's fetch reject with a TypeError whose cause has `code: ECONNRESET`. The client correctly receives the generic 502, but the captured replacement error loses that code. **Expected behavior** Keep the existing client response. Attach only bounded server-side diagnostic fields to the failure event. Do not retry the request or expose the original error. ## What Changed - Add a typed portfolio error with a private frozen diagnostic record: phase, upstream HTTP status, elapsed milliseconds, and an allowlisted network code. - Read at most four error/cause objects through own data properties. Unknown codes, messages, getters, and out-of-range values do not enter the record. - Replace the route's raw-error warnings with safe fields. Send a plain error plus event-local context through the existing optional Sentry gate. Keep the route callsite and default fingerprint policy. - Preserve authentication, trusted headers, cookies, exact HTTP error bodies, cache behavior, the ten-second deadline, and one fetch per request. Public responses receive no diagnostic fields. - Document the fields and test HTTP behavior, privacy, and event isolation with the real Sentry SDK. ## Verification - `PAPERCLIP_REQUIRE_SENTRY_TEST_SDK=1 pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/cloud-portfolio-error.test.ts server/src/__tests__/cloud-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/sentry.test.ts server/src/__tests__/run-failure-sentry-real-sdk.test.ts`: 65 passed, with the audited optional SDK installed. - Full local `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on Node 24.21.0 and pnpm 9.15.4. - Independent review found no blockers and independently passed all 65 tests, including the real SDK checks, on this exact commit. - Full Linux CI passed on this exact commit and provides aggregate suite coverage (54 successful checks, 2 intentional skips). A duplicate full local aggregate was not run. - The first SDK contract job failed before tests when npm could not resolve an OpenTelemetry transitive package. A subsequent empty-cache install first encountered a missing tarball, then succeeded after the registry artifact became available. All 6 real-SDK tests passed against that fresh install; the single unchanged-head CI retry passed. The SDK pin, workflow, and dependency files are unchanged. - The first browser shard 8 run timed out waiting for the inbox retry reply after 45 seconds. The unchanged isolated case passed (1/1), and the test, UI handler, fixture, and recovery files match the base commit. The failed log contains no wakeup POST before the test's immediate navigation; a navigation/request timing race is suspected but unproven without a trace. The single unchanged-head shard retry passed (20 passed, 1 skipped); no timeout or source change was made. - Greptile reviewed this exact commit at 5/5 with no unresolved review threads. - No live portfolio request was replayed. Route tests use controlled local upstream responses. - The added diff passed the secret and PII scan and `git diff --check`. ## Risks This is a diagnostic change. It does not identify or repair the origin of a connection reset. Unknown transport failures remain `unknown`. Elapsed values outside 0–60,000 ms become null. Default Sentry fingerprinting remains enabled; exact historical group membership is not guaranteed. No retry, migration, deployment, or configuration change is included. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository editing, code execution, and independent agent review. The exact deployment model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
3d0c9b7761 |
Align Cursor plan qualification fixture with generic mode
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
3290d97417 |
Scope the release smoke opening question to its card (#15339)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The release lane checks onboarding before it promotes a nightly candidate. > - The first task shows an unanswered-question summary and an open question card. > - Both display the same prompt, so the smoke test's page-wide text locator fails strict matching. > - This pull request scopes that assertion to the open interaction card. > - The smoke still requires the actual prompt and verifies that onboarding does not start an agent run. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** [Scheduled release run 37441718130](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37441718130) failed `smoke_nightly / smoke` on both attempts. The page-wide `getByText("What would you like to do?")` matched two elements: the timeline summary and the open question card. This skipped `publish_nightly`. **Expected behavior** The test confirms that the seeded task's open question card displays the exact prompt. A summary row alone must not satisfy that check. **Steps to reproduce** Run the Docker onboarding smoke against published candidate `2026.1006.0-canary.11`, then run the release-smoke Playwright spec. The old assertion fails after the greeting appears. **Paperclip version or commit** Release workflow commit `f858207161ba29c01c82f4674aef83d91b74480f`; published candidate `2026.1006.0-canary.11`. The assertion is unchanged on the current master base `9b3fe260bac576d622ffdfefb923db73cc5273f7`. **Deployment mode** Docker smoke harness, authenticated/private, with its existing mock provider. Related: #13166 added the first-task chat assertion. I also reviewed open #12316, which fixes a separate bootstrap race and does not change this selector. Searches found no duplicate selector fix or public issue. ## What Changed - Scope the exact opening-prompt text to `task-chat-interaction`. - Explain why the timeline summary cannot satisfy the assertion. - Preserve the rest of the smoke flow, including the 15-second check for no agent runs. ## Verification - Local Docker harness ran the exact failed published candidate, `2026.1006.0-canary.11`, with the existing mock provider. - The old spec reproduced the same two-element strict-mode error in Chrome. - The fixed spec passed the full authenticated onboarding flow and the 15-second no-run check: 1/1, 32.6 seconds. The executed spec copy was byte-identical to the changed repository file; only artifact output paths and the local port were overridden. - Independent Chrome checks: the scoped locator passes with both summary and card present. Summary-only, wrong prompt, hidden prompt, and duplicate active prompts each fail as intended. - `pnpm typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on Node 24.21.0. Canonical Linux CI passed all 55 checks (53 success, 2 intentional Storybook skips), including the full aggregate tests, build, typecheck, all eight E2E shards, and post-ready security scan. - Greptile scored the exact head `5a30e667396600a052a4041c819652c19b8c68ff` at 5/5 with no actionable issues. Independent review found no issues; there are no review threads. - `git diff --check` passed. The diff and PR text were scanned for secrets and private identifiers. ## Risks Low risk: one assertion in a release smoke test changes. A missing or hidden prompt still fails, and multiple matching prompts in interaction cards still fail strict mode. This does not change the product, release selection, or publishing. The scheduled release lane still needs its next normal successful run to prove nightly recovery. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, shell tools, and an independent Codex review. The exact serving model identifier and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` 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
|
9b3fe260ba |
fix(tasks): surface Codex ChatGPT model rejection (#15299)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native Runner runs report provider errors and can also save a structured failure result. > - Codex rejects a model that the user's ChatGPT account cannot use. > - Master now diagnoses this rejection, but the task's compact run data omits its message. The thread can still call it a generic run failure. > - Users need the account restriction and a clear step to repair the model selection. > - This pull request shows the existing diagnosis as “Model unavailable” on the task. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Codex returns HTTP 400 with `invalid_request_error` and the message `The 'gpt-6.1-sol' model is not supported when using Codex with a ChatGPT account.` Master now stores an actionable diagnosis for this rejection. The task thread still labels it “Run failed” and does not receive its error text in compact run data. **Expected behavior** Show the account restriction on the task and in the run error. Tell the user to choose a supported model or clear the task's model override before retrying. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Use a Native Runner Codex agent signed in with a ChatGPT account. 2. Select a model that produces the rejection above and start a task. 3. Let the runner save its generic failed result. Inspect the task's failure marker and recovery notice. **Additional context** Refs: #15304. That merged PR diagnoses the provider failure and preserves worker and review recovery rules. This PR adds its task-facing message and guidance without changing that diagnosis or those rules. Refs: #13134. That PR improves model discovery for ChatGPT accounts. This PR exposes the rejection when a configured model still fails at execution time. ## What Changed - Return a bounded model rejection message in compact issue-run data. - Show “Model unavailable” and model-change guidance in the task thread and recovery notice. - Add database and UI regression tests, including both the original rejection text and master's fixed diagnosis. Document the new failure message. ## Verification - Focused merged-branch validation: 279 tests passed across activity service, native provider failure observation and PostgreSQL integration, TaskChatThread, and ExecutionBlockerNotice. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `pnpm check:token-gates` passed on the merged source tree. - Greptile reviewed conflict-resolution commit `1db39c4e636a92e2e76ba224b71c6f1e2f556c81` at 5/5 with no findings or inline comments. - All 55 check runs completed without failure on that commit. The two optional Storybook jobs were skipped. The legacy Snyk status passed. The branch has no merge conflicts. - UI regression assertion: the task's failure marker says “Model unavailable” and retains the account restriction. It no longer says that this failure happened after a final response. ## Risks - Provider recognition and recovery are owned by the existing master implementation. This PR exposes only bounded error text for failed runs with `native_provider_model_rejected`. - Historical runs with the generic `adapter_failed` code are not reclassified. No stored run is rewritten. - Existing retry and reconciliation gates remain in place. No schema migration or model configuration change is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, code execution, and browser inspection. The exact deployment model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d7b696f9b8 |
Merge current mainline recovery fixes into Cursor integration
Preserve provider-neutral plan settlement alongside model-rejection ownership checks. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
c1e86a87fa |
Keep provider lifecycle semantics behind adapter boundaries
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
63f3aa2dbf |
fix(runner): continue restart-interrupted Codex turns (#15297)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native runs retain their provider conversation across server restarts. > - A dead runner can restore a Codex conversation after its active turn is lost. > - The old recovery path synthesized a failed task result from that interruption. > - The task then required operator action even though its conversation and workspace were available. > - This pull request preserves the interruption cause and uses the admitted restart attempt for one continuation in the same conversation. > - The agent can reconcile unfinished actions and complete the current request without resending the original task. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #12845 added native restart recovery. #15042 covers admission during shutdown. #14796 covers legacy shutdown recovery. This change covers a lost native Codex turn after successful conversation restoration. **What happened?** After a server restart killed the local runner, Paperclip restored the saved Codex thread. Runnerd found that the old turn was no longer active. It synthesized a failed terminal and a needs-review result from the last progress message. The transport also discarded the terminal error when it reconstructed thread history. The task failed instead of continuing. **Expected behavior** After proving that the old process stopped and admitting a bounded recovery attempt, resume the current request in the same conversation. Preserve the workspace. Inspect unfinished actions before proceeding. Keep real provider failures, accepted results, intentional stops, unknown unreconciled effects, and exhausted attempts subject to their existing rules. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a local native Codex run and leave its turn active. 2. Kill the isolated runner and provider processes, as can happen during a server restart. 3. Restore the same provider thread with no active turn. 4. Observe the synthetic task failure. The new real-process regression reproduces this boundary with a scripted provider. ## What Changed - Record an explicit recoverable process-loss cause without inventing a task result. - Preserve terminal errors and prior turns in reconstructed provider history. Recover the authoritative saved result when adopting an accepted continuation. - Send one continuation in the same conversation for an admitted dead-runner recovery. Require reconciliation of unfinished commands and external actions. - Persist the interrupted terminal before submission and retain the existing recovery marker across another controller loss. - Keep provider attempt limits, terminal failures, and intentional cancellation behavior. - Add red/green regressions, real process-kill coverage, restart checkpoint coverage, and retry-budget coverage. Document the behavior and run-log evidence. ## Verification - Red: the new native runtime regression rejected with `NativeProviderTerminalFailure` on the original code; the Rust restore regression found a missing recovery cause. - Red/green: if restoring the conversation fails and replacement is allowed, the replacement receives the full task and fresh-session handoff. Both prepared and legacy execution inputs are covered. - Red: a second controller crash after the provider accepted the continuation caused an extra `turn/start`. The regression now proves there are exactly two submissions total: the original and its continuation. - Green: focused runtime, backend, driver recovery, and real-process restart suites (207 tests). After the final history/result changes, driver recovery and real-process restart suites passed again (36 tests). - Green: complete Codex transport suite (186 tests), server restart classification/database integration suites (34 tests), and Rust Codex provider suite (92 passed, 2 ignored). - Full `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on `60141e649`. The subsequent replacement-prompt guard passed the Runner TypeScript check and the complete runtime plus process-restart suites (148 tests). - Local full-suite attempt: `pnpm test:run` reported two failures in the untouched chat integration suite. Both passed individually, and the complete chat suite passed on rerun (1,063 tests). After all remote test shards passed, the duplicate serial local run was stopped with SIGINT; it is not claimed as a full local-suite pass. - Latest-head CI (`b1297dcd4`): 55 successful checks and 4 intentionally skipped checks, including all test shards, typecheck, build, native Runner verification, end-to-end tests, and canary dry run. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37405346303). - Greptile: 5/5 on the latest head, with no unresolved review threads. The PR is mergeable. - The process tests use the real runner binary and a scripted Codex provider. They do not call a live model service. ## Risks - This changes local Codex recovery after process loss. A continuation can execute more work in the retained conversation. Its prompt requires state inspection before repeating an uncertain action; the system does not replay tool calls. - Recovery shares the existing three-attempt budget and one-shot continuation marker. Real failures and older unmarked failed checkpoints are not reopened. - No database migration or API change is required. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6. The exact model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. - Capabilities: reasoning, source inspection, tool use, code editing, code execution, and test analysis. ## 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/v2026.1006.0-canary.13 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
a1ab55a56d |
fix(agents): grant configuration access by default (#15283)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agent work and permissions for a company. > - Agent setup can require one agent to configure another agent. > - New standard agents could create agents, but they had no direct configuration grant. > - Existing agents must keep their current permissions after an upgrade. > - The requested new-agent defaults include 13 more direct permissions for suggestions, skills, tools, audit, inbox, and task assignment. > - This pull request adds the 14-grant set at creation and approval activation, retains it through invitations, and keeps existing agents unchanged. > - The change keeps low trust and built-in agents on their narrower permissions. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The agent creation and approval flows, and the agent configuration authorization path. **Current behavior** A new standard agent can create an agent. It cannot make protected changes to a peer agent unless an operator adds an `agents:configure` grant. **Proposed behavior** Add direct grants for `agents:configure`, `agents:suggest-changes`, `skills:create`, `skills:suggest-changes`, `tools:manage_connections`, `tools:manage_profiles`, `tools:view_audit`, `audit:view_agent_actions`, `tools:use`, `tools:manage_runtime`, `inbox:manage`, `tasks:assign`, `tasks:assign_scope`, and `tasks:manage_active_checkouts` to new standard agents. Scope `tasks:assign_scope` to the agent’s reporting subtree. Keep existing agents and their grants unchanged. **Reason and benefit** New standard agents can complete agent setup and the requested tool, skill, inbox, and task workflows under existing route, scope, and approval checks. **Breaking changes** Existing agents keep their current permissions. There is no permission migration. Related PR: #12212 adds scoped grant routes. This PR changes the default grant. ## What Changed - Add the 14 requested direct grants in agent creation and approval activation. Keep them when invitation approval replaces grants, preserving explicit scopes. Remove them when an agent is deleted. - Apply defaults only to new agents. Remove the existing-agent permission migration, its snapshot, and its journal entry. Preserve existing scoped grants. - Add permission, scope, invitation, and existing-agent regression tests. Document all default and excluded permissions. - Prevent agent keys from creating, changing, or restoring host-executed process or local adapter command settings, and from restoring workspace commands through rollback. ## Verification - Run `node_modules/.bin/vitest run server/src/__tests__/agent-default-configure-grants.test.ts server/src/__tests__/invite-join-grants.test.ts packages/db/src/migration-snapshot-drift.test.ts`. All 15 tests pass. These cover new-agent defaults, unchanged existing grants, pending approval, invitation grants, and migration history. - Run `node_modules/.bin/tsc -p server/tsconfig.json --noEmit`. It passes. - Run `packages/db/node_modules/.bin/tsx packages/db/src/check-migration-numbering.ts` and `packages/db/node_modules/.bin/tsx packages/db/src/check-migration-safety.ts`. Both pass. - Confirm that this PR has no files under `packages/db/src/migrations/` in its final diff. - GitHub CI at `e8173b2c41` passes build, typecheck, server suites, browser shards, and canary verification. One unchanged OpenCode transport test reached its five-second timeout in the first Runner shard run. That test passes locally in 2.55 seconds. The shard passed on one retry. All 54 checks pass, with two expected skips. - Greptile gives this exact head 5/5. Security review passes. The PR has no unresolved review threads or merge conflicts. ## Risks - The 14 default permissions apply only to new standard agents. Existing permissions stay unchanged. Low trust and managed built-in agents are excluded. - New grants include connection, runtime, and active-checkout management. Existing company, responsible-user, scope, and approval checks remain in force. The default inbox grant carries a responsible-user-only scope so it cannot override another user's inbox settings. - Protected changes still need the responsible user's authority when that check applies. Company boundaries and approval gates still apply. - Agent-authenticated requests cannot configure process adapters or host command settings on local adapters. Known provider credential references remain allowed, as do narrow plain authentication overrides on new peers when the caller uses an AI connection pool. Arbitrary environment settings remain blocked. Board operators retain the host configuration paths. > I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This is a narrow fix to existing agent configuration behavior. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 series. This runtime did not expose its exact hosted model ID or context window. This revision uses OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex with tool use, code execution, and tests. The runtime does not expose the exact hosted model ID 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/v2026.1006.0-canary.12 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
f858207161 |
Guard routine UUID lookups without narrowing valid inputs (#15313)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work for AI agents and their companies. > - Routines expose details, triggers, and management actions through resource IDs. > - These resource IDs are UUIDs. The UI and CLI do not resolve short prefixes. > - A malformed ID reaches a PostgreSQL UUID comparison and returns a server error. > - A lookup guard can return the existing not-found response before that query. > - This PR preserves valid PostgreSQL UUID input forms and the existing access checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #11471. This is a credited continuation of the lookup-guard approach from @mv2woods. That older PR remains open and unchanged. Its review requested the required PR description sections. This continuation uses current master and adds UUID compatibility and authorization coverage. The earlier `isUuidLike` guard restricts UUID versions to 1–5 and trims input. The database currently accepts other UUID values and input forms. This guard preserves the existing [PostgreSQL UUID input contract](https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/datatype-uuid.html), including uppercase, paired braces, omitted hyphens, and hyphens after groups of four digits. It rejects whitespace and short prefixes without rewriting the value sent to the database. ## What Changed - Guard the shared routine and private-trigger UUID lookups. Malformed resource IDs return null, so existing routes return their normal 404 response. - Keep company access, assignee permissions, body validation order, and database error propagation unchanged. - Add real PostgreSQL tests for stored UUIDv4, UUIDv7, nil, and max values in six input forms. Add no-query checks for malformed input and HTTP coverage across all 15 root-resource route handlers. - Document complete resource IDs and distinguish them from opaque public webhook IDs. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/routines-e2e.test.ts`: 91 passed, including the new PostgreSQL and HTTP regressions. - Independent review found no blockers and passed all 9 focused PostgreSQL and HTTP regression cases on this commit. - Full local `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on Node 24.21.0 with pnpm 9.15.4. - Full Linux CI passed on `0a2990eca2f904335821027a322e4db868151eb3`: 53 successful checks and 2 inapplicable Storybook skips. No retries were needed. This provides aggregate suite coverage; a duplicate full local aggregate was not run. - [Greptile reviewed this exact commit](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15313#issuecomment-6010222312) at 5/5 with no findings or unresolved threads. The PR is ready for review and has no merge conflicts. - `git diff --check` and the added-diff secret and PII scan passed. ## Risks Malformed routine and private-trigger IDs now return 404 instead of a database error. Full UUIDs retain the existing company and assignee checks. This change does not add prefix lookup, alter public webhook IDs, or validate unrelated nested revision/thread IDs or query parameters. No migration is required. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository editing, code execution, and independent agent review. The exact deployment model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1006.0-canary.11 |
||
|
Barış ÖZDEMİR
|
bf14f803d5 |
fix(ssh): transport project repositories as their own git checkouts (#14782)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - A project can attach more than one repository. The task workspace keeps the selected repository at its root and puts the other project repositories under `.paperclip-repositories/<name>-<key>`, each with its own `.git` > - Agents can run on an SSH execution environment. Paperclip copies the task workspace to the remote host before the run and restores it after the run > - The SSH copy excludes `.git` at every depth, but the restore baseline excludes it only at the workspace root > - So the other project repositories reach the remote host without Git, and the restore then deletes their `.git` directories on the Paperclip host > - The next run of the same task fails during workspace setup, and the agent cannot commit to those repositories on the remote host > - This pull request transports each project repository as a Git workspace of its own, the same way the sandbox path already handles them > - The benefit is that multi-repository projects work on SSH environments across consecutive runs ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #11632 (SSH workspace transfer exclude list). Related SSH workspace PRs: #14233, #14428, #14472. I found no issue or PR for this bug. **What happened?** A project has two repositories and its agent runs on an SSH environment. After the first run, the second repository under `.paperclip-repositories/` has no `.git` directory on the Paperclip host. The next run of the same task fails during setup with `Managed workspace path "…/.paperclip-repositories/<repo>" already exists but is not a git checkout.` On the remote host, `git` inside that repository resolves to the parent repository. **Expected behavior** Each project repository reaches the remote host as a Git checkout with its local changes. Remote commits and edits come back after the run. The next run of the same task starts normally. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a project with two repositories. 2. Configure an SSH execution environment and make it the agent's default environment. 3. Assign a task to the agent and let it run once. 4. Look at `.paperclip-repositories/<repo>` in the task workspace: `.git` is gone. 5. Wake the agent on the same task again: the run fails with `setup_failed`. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on `v2026.916.1` and on `master` (`5edf55d73`). **Deployment mode** Self-hosted (Docker), authenticated, with an SSH execution environment. ## What Changed - `ssh.ts`: `prepareWorkspaceForSshExecution` lists the project repositories under `.paperclip-repositories/`. It applies the discovery rules of `readGitWorkspaceSnapshot`: each entry must be a directory with a valid name and must be a Git repository root, else the prepare step fails before any transfer. - `ssh.ts`: the anchor copy leaves `.paperclip-repositories/` out. Each project repository then gets the same import, sync, and deleted-path steps as the anchor. The remote anchor repository ignores `/.paperclip-repositories/`, as the local checkout does. - `ssh.ts`: `prepareWorkspaceForSshExecution` returns the transported repositories (the field is present only when there are repositories). `restoreWorkspaceFromSshExecution` accepts them with their baselines. It validates each path and baseline first, then restores the repositories before the anchor and stops at the first failure, as the sandbox restore does. - `remote-managed-runtime.ts`: the anchor baseline excludes `.paperclip-repositories/`, and each project repository gets its own baseline for the restore merge. - `ssh-fixture.test.ts`: regression tests for two consecutive managed runs and for the direct restore path, on a workspace with a project repository (commits, dirty edits, and a deleted file). Two tests for the new validation. - `docs/guides/board-operator/execution-workspaces-and-runtime-services.md`: one line about project repositories in the SSH round trip. ## Verification - The new regression test fails on `master` (`expected 'backend initial\n?? ../\n' to contain 'frontend initial'`) and passes with this change. - `PAPERCLIP_ENABLE_DARWIN_SSH_ENV_LAB=1 npx vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/ssh-fixture.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/remote-managed-runtime.test.ts`: 32 passed, with the sshd fixture running. - `tsc --noEmit` passes for `packages/adapter-utils` and `server`, and `pnpm -r typecheck` passes for the other workspaces. The Rust step of `@paperclipai/paperclip-runner` did not run locally because `cargo` is not installed. - `node ./scripts/check-no-git-push.mjs` and `pnpm check:module-boundaries` pass. - `pnpm test:run` did not complete locally. Before it stopped, 5 tests failed: 2 in `server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts` and 3 in `server/src/__tests__/company-skills-service.test.ts`. The same 5 tests also fail on the base commit `5edf55d73` without this change. CI runs the full suite. - `pnpm build` passes for all workspaces except `@paperclipai/paperclip-runner` and `server`, because their build compiles the Rust runner binary and `cargo` is not installed. `tsc --noEmit` passes for `server`. - Manual test on a self-hosted `v2026.916.1` instance with the same change applied: a project with two repositories and an SSH environment. Two runs on the same task passed. After each run, the second repository keeps its `.git` on the host. On the remote host it is a Git checkout, and the remote anchor ignores it. ## Risks - Low risk. Workspaces without `.paperclip-repositories/` take the same path as before, and the return value is unchanged for them. - A workspace with an invalid entry under `.paperclip-repositories/` now fails the SSH prepare step. The sandbox path already rejects such entries. - If one repository fails to restore, the restore stops, as in the sandbox path. The remote run directory keeps the agent's work. - Each project repository adds one bundle import and one restore per run. The time grows with the number and size of the repositories. - Out of scope: other nested `.git` directories (for example a vendored checkout inside a repository) keep the existing SSH behavior. ## Model Used - Provider and model: Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), in Claude Code. - Capabilities: extended thinking, tool use, and code execution. The context window size was not recorded. - Use: the model investigated the bug, wrote the change and the tests, and ran the checks. A separate Claude Code agent reviewed the diff. The author reviewed the change. The manual test ran on the author's self-hosted instance. ## 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/v2026.1006.0-canary.10 |
||
|
Valentin PalkovicandClaude Opus 5.5
|
bb73f2fe39 |
feat(exe-dev): copy a source VM with exe.dev cp (#14975)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The exe.dev sandbox provider plugin gives each run its own exe.dev VM > - Today the plugin always creates that VM with `exe.dev new`, so every run starts from a bare image > - Large repositories need a long setup on each VM: toolchain, agent CLIs, package caches, and browsers for tests > - exe.dev has a `cp` command that copies an existing VM, disk and config included > - This pull request adds an optional `sourceVm` setting. When it is set, the plugin copies that VM with `exe.dev cp` instead of creating a new one > - The benefit is that operators prepare one VM once, and each run starts from it ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13575. That open PR rewrites this plugin for durable exe.dev environments. It does not add `cp`. The two changes touch the same files and can conflict. I found no issue for this. Feature description: **Subsystem affected** packages/plugins: the exe.dev sandbox provider plugin (`packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/exe-dev`). **Problem or motivation** Each run gets a fresh exe.dev VM from `exe.dev new`. We use a large monorepo (Storybook). Before the agent can work, each run must install Node, the agent CLIs, and Playwright browsers. Each run must also fill the package manager cache. This setup takes a long time on each run. **Proposed solution** Add a `sourceVm` setting ("Source VM" in the environment form). When it is set, lease acquisition and probes run `exe.dev cp <sourceVm> <generated-name> --json`. The command also sends the configured `cpu`, `memory`, and `disk`. The VM name, the SSH setup, the workspace, and the release and destroy steps do not change. When the setting is blank, the plugin uses `exe.dev new` as before. **Alternatives considered** - A custom image with `--image`: the operator must build and push a large image for each change. A private registry needs `--registry-auth`, and the plugin does not support it. - `--setup-script`: it runs on every new VM, so each run still pays the setup cost. It also has a 10 KiB limit. - `reuseLease`: it keeps one VM for one lease. It does not give each run a fresh copy of a prepared VM. **Roadmap alignment** The change stays inside an existing sandbox provider plugin. `ROADMAP.md` lists "Cloud / Sandbox agent support" as done and does not plan VM copies. CONTRIBUTING.md asks to discuss features in Discord `#dev` first. I open this pull request as a draft and start that discussion in `#dev`. **Additional context** exe.dev documents `cp` here: https://exe.dev/docs/cli-cp. exe.dev token permissions are documented here: https://exe.dev/docs/https-api. ## What Changed - `plugin.ts`: add `sourceVm` to the driver config. - `plugin.ts`: `buildCreateCommand` sends `cp` when `sourceVm` is set. - `plugin.ts`: config validation rejects `sourceVm` together with settings that `cp` cannot apply (`image`, `command`, `comment`, `env`, `integrations`, `tags`, `setupScript`, `prompt`). The error names the settings to clear. The server shows validation errors in the form, but it does not show warnings after a successful save. - `manifest.ts`: add the "Source VM" field to the "VM creation" group. Its description says that the API token must allow `cp`, because exe.dev returns 403 for a command that the token does not list. The API key description now also mentions `cp`. - `README.md`: document `sourceVm`, its limits, and the token permission. - `plugin.test.ts`: add tests for the `cp` command, the validation error, and the form field. Add `sourceVm: null` to the expected normalized config. ## Verification - `vitest run --config vitest.config.ts` in `packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/exe-dev`: 38 tests pass. The three new tests fail without the change. - `tsc --noEmit -p packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/exe-dev`: no errors. - Manual test on a self-hosted Paperclip instance (2026.1001.0). I applied the same change to the installed plugin. I prepared a source VM and set "Source VM" on an exe.dev environment. Then I ran agent tasks. Each run copied the source VM and ran in the copy. Paperclip deleted the copy at release. - With an API token that does not list `cp`, the run fails with `exe.dev API command failed (403) for: cp '<source>' '<name>' --json ...`. The new field description tells operators about this. ## Risks - Low risk. The new code runs only when `sourceVm` is set. The `new` path is unchanged. - `cp` uses the same `/exec` endpoint and its 30-second request limit. A copy of a very large disk can take longer than the limit. - Every copy inherits the source VM disk. The README tells operators not to keep secrets on the source VM. - Can conflict with #13575. ## Model Used - Provider and model: Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5. - Model ID: `claude-opus-5-5`. - Tool: Claude Code, with tool use (shell commands and file edits) and extended thinking. - Context window: the tool does not report it. - The model wrote the change and the tests. A human tested the feature on a real exe.dev setup. ## 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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) <img width="1166" height="852" alt="Bildschirmfoto 2026-10-02 um 23 04 32" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/c057bee4-9f27-4a69-945e-0f71d5bcc1ba" /> --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>canary/v2026.1006.0-canary.9 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
1d5a439e2b |
Diagnose native model rejections and preserve repairable reviews (#15304)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agent execution and recovery. > - A native provider can return a failed turn with an accepted result. > - This path replaced a structured model rejection with a generic failure. > - Finalization could also queue the same failed request for recovery. > - This change retains a bounded model and authentication diagnosis. > - Workers wait for a configuration fix; reviews retain their assignment. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Describe the bug** A native Codex turn can report HTTP 400 because the selected model is not supported by its ChatGPT connection. When the turn also returns a failed semantic result, the run shows `Native session failed` and `adapter_failed`. The native failed-result finalizer can create a retry intent before the adapter error is saved. **To Reproduce** Use a native Codex session that returns a structured `invalid_request_error` model/ChatGPT rejection and an accepted failed result. The regression tests reproduce this with a stub provider and a real isolated PostgreSQL database. No provider account or live request is needed. **Expected behavior** Show an actionable error and stop automatic retries of the rejected request. Block the current worker for a configuration fix. Preserve a pending review so its reviewer can explicitly retry after repair and resolve the original assignment. A stale run must not block a new task owner or override a completed review. **Version and deployment mode** The affected source path is present at `858094ba81`. This change applies to native Codex execution in local and remote environments. Related work: #13853 covers CLI protocol compatibility, #14942 refreshes runtime/model pins, and #12767 proposes legacy adapter model validation. This change concerns accepted native failed results and does not replace those changes. ## What Changed - Recognize only a bounded structured HTTP 400 provider error for the exact selected model and failed turn. - Save a fixed actionable error and four fixed diagnostic fields. Exclude raw provider text and model names from the new diagnostic. - Re-derive finalization evidence from the pinned execution and committed runner event, including its canonical hash and identity bindings. - Block only the current worker. For a current pending reviewer, preserve the original review decision and status version, release execution, and create no automatic recovery action. Recheck execution ownership under the issue lock. Preserve superseded and completed reviews. - Keep unknown failures, accepted results, cleanup, and ownership fences intact. Advance the status policy version to `phase6-v8`. - Route this exact failure code through the existing configuration recovery path. Permit an authenticated Board retry of this native failure only for its saved, still-pending review; discard caller review markers and revalidate at dispatch. ## Verification - Node 24: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. - Independent focused validation: 222 tests passed across the new observer and PostgreSQL integration suites, status arbiter, diagnostic redaction, recovery classification, wake policy, and wake use cases. - The integration tests use actual result persistence, finalization, and the wake dispatcher. They cover zero retry dispatch for an authorized rejection, repeated reconciliation, pending/superseded/resolved reviews, reassignment, and a same-agent successor at an unchanged status version. - Final-commit verification: full typecheck and build passed; independent route/integration/arbiter/review validation passed 136 tests with no remaining source findings. This includes authenticated retry refusals, actual heartbeat retry admission, atomic queued-review claim, and acceptance of the original review. - The local aggregate test run was stopped to avoid duplicating the canonical Linux CI aggregate on this development host. Its partial log showed no failures; no full local-suite pass is claimed. The full hosted Linux CI aggregate passed on the final commit. - No live provider calls, runtime changes, or schema changes were made. ## Risks The classifier is intentionally narrow. A changed provider response format remains an unknown failure. No global model restriction is introduced. The worker blocker requires current task authority and does not replace newer assignments or completed review decisions. A pending review remains in review and requires an explicit retry after configuration repair; it is not rebound to a new status decision. The retry decision is durable. There remains a small existing gap between status/effect commit and diagnostic metadata persistence; a crash there can leave a generic diagnostic while preserving the blocked decision. No schema migration is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact serving model suffix and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #123` / `Refs #123` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub references) - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run focused tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [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/v2026.1006.0-canary.8 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
7eadc714d2 |
Verify native semantic input against its raw wire digest (#15301)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Native runners send authenticated semantic tool inputs to the control plane. > - The runner hashes the complete input, but the receiver used a redacted receipt hash. > - Protected fields and credential-like document text can therefore fail integrity validation even when the input is unchanged. > - This pull request verifies the complete input with the existing canonical hash function. > - Receipt redaction and permanent rejection of altered input remain in place. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** The Rust runner preserves tool arguments and hashes their canonical JSON. The TypeScript receiver instead redacts the input before hashing. A valid input such as a synthetic document containing `Bearer fixture_token_123456` fails with `native_event_replay_conflict`. A digest of redacted input can also pass without proving the original protected values. **Expected behavior** Verify the complete transmitted input after authentication and exact scope checks. Reject any incorrect digest before durable commit, dispatch, or ACK. **Steps to reproduce** Run the new authenticated controller regressions against the prior receiver. The protected-field and credential-like document cases fail, and the redacted-digest rejection case receives an ACK. The same tests pass with this change. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced from source at `858094ba8123c7edb56623597cd96f0391f7e2d4` with synthetic fixtures. Applies to native runner deployments. Related: #14937 preserves semantic input bytes for execution. GitHub issue and PR searches found no duplicate fix; #14591 touches a separate question-draft contract. ## What Changed - Use the existing bounded raw canonical digest for incoming semantic and MCP tool inputs. - Keep receipt and diagnostic redaction unchanged. - Share four digest fixtures between Rust and the authenticated TypeScript controller, including protected fields, document text, Unicode keys, and number boundaries. - Test raw acceptance, altered protected values, forged and redacted digests, canonicalization limits, permanent reconnect fences, and authentication/scope rejection. - Document the separate wire and receipt contracts and the unchanged recovery fence. ## Verification - Before the production fix, the new selected regressions produced three expected failures and eight passes. - Focused controller, receipt, and semantic-tool suites: 138 tests passed. - Rust shared digest fixture test: 1 test passed. - Full workspace typecheck and build passed; the final receiver delta also passed its TypeScript typecheck. Canonical Linux PR CI passed the full aggregate test gate, runner checks, build, and canary dry run at `efcd38e2d8a9fa6340db4f4e863b6febbe8ca32a`. - Independent review passed, including 18 independently run authenticated regressions and the Rust golden test, plus both matching-digest size-limit cases after the test-only follow-up. Greptile is 5/5 on the current head with no unresolved threads. Diff whitespace and local secret/PII scan passed; fixtures are synthetic. ## Risks The verifier remains strict: there is no redacted-digest fallback. Existing authentication, scope, sequence, replay, settlement, and authorization checks remain in force. Receipt storage and redaction behavior are unchanged. This patch does not clear failed-run fences or replay prior work. Synthetic tests prove the protocol mismatch; they do not identify the contents of any historical rejected input. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with reasoning, code execution, and independent agent review. The exact serving model identifier and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [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/v2026.1006.0-canary.7 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
d21fe31243 |
Retry pooled execution projection reads after disconnects (#15300)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task run lists show current execution and recovery state. > - Their execution projection reads runs, finalizations, pending interactions, and recovery records. > - A temporary database disconnect in one lookup makes the run list fail. > - This pull request uses the existing bounded retry policy for these read-only lookups. > - It keeps transaction reads, authorization, and liveness writes outside the retry scope. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15248. This extends the same bounded SELECT retry policy to the execution projection used by task run lists. A wrapped `CONNECTION_CLOSED` error from the pending-interaction SELECT makes `GET /issues/:id/runs` fail. These lookups are safe to repeat on the pooled database connection. The shared projection helper also serves transaction callers, so retries must remain an explicit opt-in. ## What Changed - Opt the activity run list into per-query projection retries. Keep the default path single-attempt for transaction callers. - Rebuild only the failed SELECT. Use the existing three-attempt limit and 50/100 ms delays. - Keep completed reads, route authorization, and liveness backfill writes outside the retry callbacks. - Test each query, exhaustion, exact error preservation, non-transient errors, empty results, transaction defaults, run-list backfill behavior, and denied route access. - Document the pooled-read boundary. ## Verification - Frozen install passed with Node 24.21.0 and pnpm 9.15.4. - 92 focused tests passed across execution projection, activity service/routes, prior service-read retries, and the shared retry policy. - Independent review passed 56 projection, retry-policy, and route authorization tests with no blocking findings. - `git diff --check` and the staged diff and PR-text secret/PII scan passed. - Full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. - Greptile scored exact head `78783e84a5` 5/5 with no findings or open review threads. - Initial CI had one Runner test timeout: `stops and closes a timed-out consumer even when the caller requested a warm session` exceeded 5 seconds. Its fixture uses a 1 ms session timeout. The Runner package is unchanged from the base. The focused case passed locally (1 passed, 138 skipped). One unchanged-head rerun of that job passed all 1,219 Runner tests and the additional native-runtime integration test. All other CI lanes passed on the initial run. - Full Linux CI passed on exact head `78783e84a5`: 53 successful checks, two intentional Storybook skips, and no pending checks. It provides aggregate test coverage. A full local aggregate was not launched. The same host's prior aggregate exposed three known macOS immutable-cache rename failures in unchanged company-skills code, documented in #15298. ## Risks - An affected lookup can take up to two additional connection attempts plus 150 ms of delay. Persistent failures still return the final error. - The opt-in is only used by the pooled activity read path. No transaction, mutation, full request, or provider action is replayed. - No schema or response-shape changes. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository editing, code execution, and independent agent review. The exact deployment model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub references) - [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 (focused suites; aggregate coverage is described above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1006.0-canary.6 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
858094ba81 |
Fix browser polling for unsaved agent chats (#15298)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agent Chat uses the shared task surface and browser panel. > - An unsaved chat has a temporary ID instead of a stored task UUID. > - The browser poll sent that ID to a PostgreSQL UUID query and returned a server error. > - This pull request waits for a saved task and validates task IDs before the query. > - Saved chats keep their browser tools and access checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #14331. That report describes the same draft-ID problem in email requests. This change covers the browser routes; it does not change email behavior. Opening an unsaved Agent Chat sends `chat:<agent-id>` to `/issues/:issueId/browsers` every three seconds. PostgreSQL rejects this as a task UUID. The draft is only a UI view model. The first send or upload creates its stored task. ## What Changed - Disable browser polling for unsaved chat IDs. Resume polling when the chat has a task UUID. - Return the existing task-not-found response for malformed task IDs before database access. Keep board authentication first and company and credential checks unchanged. - Test all six task browser routes, draft-to-saved polling, normal tasks, saved chats, and denied access. Keep canonical UUID v4, v7, and nil values queryable. - Document the draft and saved-chat browser contract. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` passed with pnpm 9.15.4 and Node 24.21.0. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/browser-use-route-scope.test.ts server/src/__tests__/browser-use-connection.test.ts` passed all 35 tests. - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/hooks/useTaskBrowsers.test.ts` passed all 5 tests. - Independent review passed 14 hook and route tests plus both real task and saved-chat authorization cases. - `pnpm check:token-gates` and `git diff --check` passed. - Full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. - Full Linux CI passed on `dafff44a32`: 53 successful checks and two intentional Storybook skips. This includes all general and serialized test groups, UI and browser tests, typecheck, build, and the canary dry run. No CI retries were needed. - The full local `TMPDIR=/private/tmp pnpm test:run` started but did not complete. It was stopped after full Linux CI passed. Before the stop, three company-skills cache cases failed on macOS. A focused rerun reproduced all three as `EACCES` while renaming immutable cache staging directories. The test, company-skills service, and runtime cache files are byte-identical to the baseline previously reproduced on `e99854249c` for #15291. Other local groups were not reached; the full Linux CI run provides aggregate coverage. - Greptile scored the exact head `dafff44a32` 5/5 with no findings or unresolved review threads. ## Risks - Malformed task IDs now return 404 instead of reaching PostgreSQL and returning 500. The route does not map draft IDs to agents or tasks. - No schema, browser provider, task creation, or authorization policy changes. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository editing, code execution, and independent agent review. The exact deployment model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub references) - [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 (focused suites; full local run limitations are reported above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1006.0-canary.5 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
56ef7c2b2c |
Use provider-neutral modes in Runner contracts
Carry opaque mode identifiers through native execution, ACPX sidecar and Rust recovery. Delegate supported values and acknowledgement to provider adapters. Preserve exact historical plan waits and fence incompatible pre-release sessions. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
81cd03b3b5 |
test(ui): keep initial reasoning with the saved reply (#15107)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work. > - The issue thread shows saved replies and agent run history. > - History that appears after the reply can move the page. > - Master now waits for initial run history before it shows the thread in #15228. > - This pull request checks that reasoning and the saved reply appear together in the first visible frame. > - The test protects that behavior from a later change. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public issue tracks this report. This is a bug regression test. **What happened?** The issue thread showed a saved answer before its reasoning and tool history loaded. The later history moved the page. **Expected behavior** The first visible thread contains the initial reasoning and the saved reply in order. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open an issue with an agent run and a saved reply. 2. Delay initial run-history hydration. 3. Observe the saved reply before its reasoning appears. Related work: #15228 now contains the reveal gate. This PR adds a direct regression assertion for that gate. #14667 takes a different loading approach and remains open. ## What Changed - Add a saved agent reply to the initial-history test. - Assert that the native run's reasoning appears before that reply when the thread becomes visible. - Assert that the thread stays inert until history is ready. ## Verification - `vitest run ui/src/components/TaskChatThread.test.tsx ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx` passed: 353 tests. - `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` passed. - GitHub CI checks are in progress for the rebased head. ## Risks - Low risk. This PR changes only a test. - The production fix is already in #15228. This PR must not restore the older code from the previous branch head. > 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 CLI assisted with tool use and code execution. The exact model ID and context window were not exposed to this agent session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My remote 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 (no user-facing documentation changed) - [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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
45862dd210 |
docs: add a product feature map (#15288)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Its user journeys span tasks, agents, projects, connected apps, governance, and CLI operations. > - Existing tests do not provide a shared index of entry points and verification steps. > - Contributors need to see which surfaces a change affects and what evidence exists. > - This pull request adds an optional product feature map with recipes and explicit coverage gaps. > - The map adds no CI checks or required maintenance for future pull requests. > - Contributors can use it to find verification steps and state what they checked. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Issue type** Missing documentation. **Where is the issue?** User-journey verification guidance in AGENTS.md and doc/DEVELOPING.md. **What's wrong?** There is no shared index of product features, user entry points, available test evidence, and remaining coverage gaps. Shared components can hide differences between their hosts. **Suggested fix** Add a documentation-only capability index and verification recipes. The format takes inspiration from [Omnigent's feature map](https://github.com/omnigent-ai/omnigent/tree/91acfbbb59f6fc210ff95a9e9428aadd62e06582/feature-map). The recipes describe Paperclip's own behavior and tests. Searched GitHub PRs and issues for `feature map` and `feature-map`. No duplicate change was found. Checked ROADMAP.md. This PR documents existing capabilities. ## What Changed - Added 35 feature recipes, 171 named sub-features, and 91 entry points across product, CLI, operator, and developer surfaces. - Each recipe describes setup, expected results, existing automated evidence, manual verification, and coverage gaps. - Added a dated source snapshot of 185 non-test page TSX modules in 15 areas. The snapshot describes documentation coverage, not runtime health. - Included entry points within existing pages, CLI/API operations, and experimental surfaces. Identified helper-only test evidence where a rendered journey has no automated proof. - Linked the map from AGENTS.md and doc/DEVELOPING.md as an optional reference. - The final diff contains only Markdown and the inventory JSON. It adds no checker, tests, package commands, workflows, dependencies, scheduled work, or mandatory inventory updates. ## Verification - PASS: local documentation links resolve and the inventory JSON parses. Confirmed the final PR diff contains only 39 documentation files. - PASS: `node --test '.github/scripts/tests/*.test.mjs'` — 381 existing tests after removal of the feature-map tests. - PASS: `git diff --check`. - Earlier local build and typecheck passed. The full local test run was stopped after 26 minutes with failures in unchanged chat-channel and native-runner integration tests. It did not complete. These application checks were not repeated for the documentation-only removal. - [CI on the preceding head](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37398407523) passed all applicable checks. Checks on the final documentation-only head are pending. - PASS: Greptile review on final head `45c4b0aeb26540324825da43e81bee2336ad1c1f` is 5/5. There are no unresolved findings. - Live product/provider journeys were not run to author the map. The recipes identify available evidence and manual steps, not new qualification results. ## Risks Low product risk: the PR changes documentation only. Recipes and the source snapshot can become stale. Maintenance is optional and based on review. Linked tests do not prove that every documented journey works. The map states remaining coverage gaps. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with repository inspection, reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context window were not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] 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
|
0e0b63e5a5 |
feat(connections): add experimental task-pinned AI routing (#14967)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - AI Connections separate account access from models and harnesses. > - A pool must act as one connection while retaining each task’s account. > - Core must enforce member access and preserve session and recovery rules. > - A plugin supplies rotation policy without receiving credentials. > - This change adds durable routing and native connector setup and management. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** AI Connections, Connectors, plugins, run dispatch, and session compatibility. **Problem or motivation** Operators need to rotate new tasks across saved accounts while each task keeps its account and session. Pool setup must fit the existing connector catalog and account workflow. **Proposed solution** Add an experimental router binding, a capability-gated plugin hook, and transactional task pins. Plugins declare native pooled connectors through `aiConnectionRouter`. Core hosts the existing-account picker, ordering step, and account settings. Related usage contract: #14936. Companion private plugin: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-cloud/pull/643. **Roadmap alignment** This extends Apps and AI Connections. Core supplies generic enforcement and native connector UI; the private plugin owns rotation and quota policy. The prior duplicate search found no matching router implementation. ## What Changed - Add a router binding without changing existing concrete bindings. Keep the instance flag and new pools disabled by default. Require manual operator configuration. Show no routing toggle in Experimental settings on either open-source or Cloud installs, even after routing is enabled. - Persist company-scoped pools, one shared cursor per pool, and pins keyed by company, pool, agent, and task. Commit pins and cursor advances together with revision checks and bounded retries. Persist run-ID affinity before allocation. - Pass only authorized metadata and normalized usage to plugins. Core retains credential handling, member access checks, runtime qualification, and recovery evidence. Probe outside locks with a shared 15-second budget and freshness cache. - Resolve routing before credential preparation and backend selection. Preserve pins through turns, session resets, removed members, and quota waits. Retain admitted recovery after disable or uninstall. - Separate credential session epochs from token generations. Verified refresh preserves the epoch; reconnect and manual replacement change it. Include the credential slot ID in session and usage-cache identity, so reconnecting an indexed legacy account invalidates its old session even when both epochs are zero. - Validate pool member installations before accepting saved-agent bindings and recheck compatibility when the harness changes. Install only authorized members in the new-agent transaction and record their IDs in local activity. Pool membership cannot install a restricted shared connection. - Preserve pool bindings when agents hire teammates through either creation API or native caller runtime inheritance. Block stale manager credential references; retain explicit child authentication precedence and reject incompatible inherited pools. - Add native connector registration through plugin metadata. Reuse the Connectors catalog, setup header, account header, sidebar, dialogs, and usage display. Setup selects and orders saved connections. Advanced settings hold usage rules and member runtime defaults. New-account setup opens in another tab. - Use revision-checked pool archival from the Connectors catalog and account page. Keep task pins, cursors, recovery evidence, and underlying connections. Reject ordinary connection updates or removals that bypass pool revisions. - Add pool selectors, composer models, override notes, quota status, run details, activity records, and local run-log records. Keep session-adoption copy minimal. - Show **Used by** below the pool connections. List current company agents with shared avatars and profile links. Include paused agents; exclude terminated agents and agents using another pool. - Add Core stories for the generic connector workflow and runtime surfaces. Cloud stories reuse these production routes and tokens through a preview-only alias. ## Verification - Final head `73cb953bca30ed83e4505dd820edd9b5edffd28b`: full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `pnpm check:token-gates` pass locally. - All 422 focused connector/settings/shared-contract/migration tests and all 156 database-backed AI connection, hiring, reconnect, and durable-routing cases pass (69 hiring cases rerun after the final auth-precedence fix). The merged shared contract retains connection instructions and pool metadata. The pool migration is generated at sequence 0299 after the latest upstream migrations; this PR makes no lockfile changes. - All four full-app Playwright tests pass on the final head after a cold restart and migration, against the installed private plugin and isolated database, with no route or pool-API mocks. They cover hidden routing controls after manual opt-in, native pool creation, ordering, membership edits, rename, paused defaults, enabling/save/refresh persistence, stale edits, cancellation/removal, preserved underlying accounts, unavailable routers, and Used by avatars and profile links. Exact command: `PAPERCLIP_CONNECTION_POOL_E2E=1 AI_CONNECTIONS_TEST_COMPANY_ID=a37b9625-5ecf-4e29-8081-04df3d6e7d6f AI_CONNECTIONS_TEST_URL=http://127.0.0.1:3108 pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/ai-connections-app/playwright.config.ts connection-pools.spec.ts`. - [Native setup, ordering, and management screenshots](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/14967#issuecomment-6006976278) address the review follow-up. [Earlier selector, quota, and run-detail screenshots](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/14967#issuecomment-5971537316) show the runtime surfaces. Core previews: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui storybook`, then **Connectors / Pool host** or **AI Connections / Connection pools**. Cloud owns its host-backed plugin stories; both repositories’ Operator Setup Required story assertions pass. - Live acceptance used OpenAI/Codex and Anthropic/Claude ACPX, resumed both exact sessions after restart, preserved pinned accounts through explicit reset and controlled quota deferral/recovery, and committed only two allocations across fourteen runs. A later UI-created task test again rotated OpenAI then Anthropic and resumed OpenAI through follow-up/restart/quota recovery. That later Anthropic execution was blocked by its saved OAuth token expiring (provider 401). No live usage probes ran. - The full local `pnpm test:run` was attempted earlier and did not complete because of macOS embedded PostgreSQL bootstrap/shared-memory failures and the 40,000-file Git fixture timeout. The focused database suites above now pass; full-suite verification is provided by the split CI lanes. The preceding CI run had one runtime readiness timeout; it passes locally both alone and inside the larger runtime suite. That larger local suite also encountered an embedded PostgreSQL setup failure and two macOS temporary-path alias assertions; those two assertions pass with canonical TMPDIR=/private/tmp. All final-head CI checks are terminal green, including full general/serialized server suites, Runner checks, browser E2E shards, canary verification, build, and typecheck. Greptile is 5/5 on that exact head with no unresolved threads. ## Risks - The migration adds routing tables and a credential epoch column. Install the private plugin only with the compatible Core contract. - Routing and each pool require opt-in. Production distribution and fleet defaults remain unchanged. - Unknown usage stays eligible. Known pinned exhaustion waits; revoked access requires operator repair. - Legacy adapters require compatible members. Runner model and effort overrides remain limited by qualified backend support. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository editing, code execution, and browser testing. The exact deployment model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes:` / `Closes:` / `Refs:` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [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 (targeted suites; full-suite limitations are reported above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1006.0-canary.4 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
e9e8c98ecd |
Wait for injected cleanup failure in Runner fixture
Keep the child alive until process inspection reaches the intended failure rather than racing a fixed delay. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
175ca4b2a3 |
Merge current mainline into Cursor production integration
Preserve qualified Cursor behavior alongside current completion feedback, runtime pins and qualification fixtures. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
72ff3a9f27 |
Measure native tool context and expand bounded workflow evals (#15218)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages persistent agents and their assigned work. > - Agents receive both fixed instructions and tool definitions. > - Moving a procedure into a tool description still adds model context. > - We need to measure the complete delivered catalog and test real outcomes. > - The tested reductions saved little space and introduced failing outcomes. > - This PR keeps measurement, bounded eval coverage and the original evidence. > - Production prompts, tools and runtime behavior stay unchanged. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #15151, #14961, #14948, #14985. This adds the measurement and eval coverage needed to assess further native instruction changes. The attempted hiring and dependency reduction failed qualification and is excluded from the final diff. ## What Changed - Measure the actual standard-mode tool authority, including all 39 tools and their input schemas. Capture scripted native start, resume and continuation payloads and the OpenCode MCP declaration list. - Add OpenCode to the two explicit-only local hiring/reuse and delegation/feedback stories. Preserve the original task requests and independent oracles. - Apply one attempt per selected story and explicit company and lead-agent budget stops. - Select managed hiring credentials from the requested profile, including OpenRouter. - Run the existing Node test files under Node instead of collecting them as Vitest suites. - Retain sanitized comparison reports, original failed grades, source hashes and evidence gaps. ## Verification Final source: `2e7cef78eef7cdfe02265e0dcb03e855b8e50bd8`. Local verification passes: - Full repository `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. - Eval-support unit tests: 1,252 Vitest checks and 128 Node checks. - Eval TypeScript check and six final-source measurement tests. All 36 normalized components across nine scripted deliveries and the OpenCode MCP catalog match the baseline exactly; the complete standing projection is 49,200 bytes. Fresh review of this exact head is [5/5 with no remaining findings](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15218#issuecomment-5996723170); all three review threads are resolved. [Final-head CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37354539126) passes all 47 jobs, including repository typecheck, build, tests, runner checks, browser shards and the canary check. One initial annotation-test timeout is retained in attempt 1; its seven-test suite passed locally, and the affected CI lane passed on one targeted retry. No source or paid eval rerun was needed. Both ready-transition security scans passed with zero annotations. The PR is out of draft and conflict-free. GitHub still requires code-owner approval for the `package.json` test-script change; its requested reviewers are already set. A byte-for-byte comparison against master context `a65ca0950834a85bb93bcc4b4042ecacdebfef53` confirms no production changes under `packages/` or production `server/` paths. The only server addition is a measurement test. No new paid rerun is needed to compare unchanged production bytes. This does not claim that existing product defects have been fixed. The rejected corrected experiment had baseline **5 PASS / 1 FAIL** and candidate **3 PASS / 3 FAIL**, including **two newly failing pairs**. The later readiness experiment had candidate **3 PASS / 3 FAIL** and baseline **3 PASS / 2 FAIL / one setup cell without a behavioral grade**. Its five comparable pairs had two new failures, two new passes and one unchanged pass. The missing baseline Codex cell never reached its provider step because Docker setup timed out. The observed missing behaviors include parent continuation, waiting for the latest child revision, revised ZIP delivery and OpenCode credential persistence. Those failures remain failures. Source review and passing CI do not regrade them. The original reduction saved 460 bytes; its first repair saved only 125 bytes, and the larger unqualified runtime repair increased the full projection. None of those production changes is shipped here. Read the [report](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/2e7cef78eef7cdfe02265e0dcb03e855b8e50bd8/doc/plans/2026-10-05-native-procedure-guidance.md) and its linked sanitized receipts for exact sources, original campaign links, pair-level results and evidence limitations. ## Risks - Full-catalog bytes are not model tokens, invoices, private vendor prompts, lazy-loading behavior or truncation proof. - The two stories are explicit-only and do not prove general coding quality or arbitrary resume behavior. Single trials do not establish causation or performance trends. - The retained OpenCode candidate credential guard failed. Cleanup removed the original provider database, so the precise persistence mechanism remains unknown. The guard is unchanged. - ACPX provider-execution IDs lack proven host-call mapping. No extra-work or feedback-consumption claim is inferred by matching names, order or counts. - PostgreSQL cannot start locally while the host's shared-memory slots are exhausted. Hosted CI must supply the full database checks; the full local database suite is not claimed green. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository tools and code execution. The exact deployment model ID and context-window limit are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1006.0-canary.3 |
||
|
github-actions[bot]andlockfile-bot
|
5537d61794 |
chore(lockfile): refresh pnpm-lock.yaml (#14872)
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/v2026.1006.0-canary.2 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
efac8ff2f4 |
Add bounded Git integration restore diagnostics (#15291)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Sandbox runs must restore their workspace before finalization can succeed. > - Restore diagnostics identify the failed phase and operation. > - A Git integration exit code can still describe several different failures. > - This pull request adds fixed command labels and supported failure classes. > - Operators can distinguish these failures without collecting private Git output. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15005. This branch includes merged #15268. It labels that change's locked ref transaction and nested branch probe without changing their behavior. **What happened?** A failed Git integration can report only `git_integration`, `unknown`, and an exit code. That evidence does not identify the failed command. Some Git versions also return exit 1 for both a merge conflict and an invalid object. **Expected behavior** Record a fixed command family and a supported failure class. Keep unknown cases as `unknown`. Exclude command arguments, process output, paths, repository URLs, filenames, and ref names. **Steps to reproduce** The tests create local repositories with conflicting commits, a missing object, and an expected-old ref mismatch. They call the real Git operations and inspect the resulting diagnostic. No hosted workspace or external provider is used. **Paperclip version or commit** Base: `e99854249c`. **Deployment mode** Built from source. The diagnostic applies to sandbox workspace restore. ## What Changed - Label Git integration calls with a closed command enum. Preserve arguments, options, errors, and retry behavior. - Recognize supported object and ref errors and OS permission codes. Require both exit 1 and completed tree output for a merge conflict. - Carry the closed fields through the existing restore receipt, saved adapter result, and Sentry projection. Revalidate saved metadata before projection. - Test nested wrappers, parallel failures, reused errors, handled probes, result settlement, and privacy with the real Sentry SDK. - Document the field contract and its limits. ## Verification - Eight focused suites pass: 295 tests. These cover Git sync, restore diagnostics, result settlement, teardown, sandbox runtime, failure projection, the real Sentry SDK, and native warm-workspace Git history. - `PAPERCLIP_REQUIRE_SENTRY_TEST_SDK=1 pnpm exec vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/workspace-restore-diagnostics.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/workspace-restore-result.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/git-workspace-sync.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/workspace-restore-teardown.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/sandbox-managed-runtime.test.ts server/src/services/__tests__/run-failure-diagnostics.test.ts server/src/__tests__/run-failure-sentry-real-sdk.test.ts server/src/__tests__/native-workspace-sync-history.test.ts` - Local checks use Node 24.21.0 and the pinned pnpm 9.15.4. The optional Sentry SDK is pinned to the declared 10.71.0 and uses an in-memory transport. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`: pass on the rebased head. - The full local `pnpm test:run` was stopped before source changes when #15268 merged and required a rebase. It reported three pre-existing company-skill cache test failures on macOS. The same three cases fail on clean bases `2c43b39167` and `e99854249c` and the earlier head with `EACCES` when publishing a read-only cache directory. The relevant test, service, and cache source blobs are identical. No cache changes are included. Later local test groups were not reached. - All 54 checks pass on exact head `8448896bc6`, including the post-ready security scan, with two intentional Storybook skips. Greptile scores this head 5/5 with no review threads. Full Linux CI covers the local groups that were not reached. - Independent review found no blocker. Its diagnostics, Git workspace, and native history suites pass 115/115 on this head. - A source comparison confirms that removing only diagnostic wrappers yields the merged upstream Git integration code exactly, including ref locks, transaction protocol, arguments, options, and retry decisions. - The clean base has stale dependency overrides in its lockfile. Local installation resolved them as the existing PR CI fallback does. No manifest or lockfile change is included. - `git diff --check` and a local secrets/PII review pass. ## Risks A Git version or localized message may not match a known failure form. Such cases remain `unknown`. Up to 16 KiB of stderr and the bounded tree-ID prefix of stdout are inspected only in memory. The saved fields contain enum values only. These diagnostics do not establish workspace recovery or authorize retries. Restore decisions and Git mutations are unchanged. No schema migration is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The service does not expose the exact model deployment ID or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1006.0-canary.1 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
e99854249c |
fix(workspaces): restore rebased sandbox history against its starting snapshot (#15268)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and preserves their work across runs. > - Sandbox execution restores Git history and files to the host workspace. > - An agent can rebase or amend its branch before it finishes. > - Restore currently treats the original and rewritten tips as concurrent work. > - That merge can conflict even when the host has not changed. > - This change uses the starting Git snapshot to accept rewritten history safely. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A successful sandbox turn can end with `workspace_restore_failed` after the agent rebases and pushes its branch. The restore step merges the original host tip with the rewritten sandbox tip. This can recreate conflicts that the agent already resolved. **Expected behavior** Accept the rewritten history when the host still has the recorded starting branch and commit. Preserve concurrent host work through the existing merge and recovery paths. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a sandbox from a feature branch. 2. Rebase that branch onto an upstream commit that changes the same file. Resolve the conflict in the sandbox. 3. Restore the sandbox while the host remains on the original commit. 4. The old implementation attempts a conflicting Git merge and fails the run after the agent finishes. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on `cab4263dc9` with a real Git rebase fixture. **Deployment mode** Self-hosted server with sandbox execution. Related work: #15005 records restore failure stages. #11638 preserves unrelated imported history with a graft. #10601 handles bundle prerequisites. Those changes do not distinguish a rebase from a concurrent host edit. ## What Changed - Pass the run's starting Git branch and commit into sandbox history integration. - Adopt a related rewritten tip when the host still matches that snapshot. Keep the expected-old-value ref update and bounded retry. - Verify the branch attachment inside a prepared Git transaction while Git holds its ref locks. Abort if a checkout changed the branch. - Check host and sandbox Git identity before warm reuse, including nested repositories. Restage when their tips or branches differ. - Reject host branch changes and unrelated imports after a concurrent host commit. - Retain the existing unrelated-history graft for an unchanged host and the conservative behavior for callers without a snapshot. - Export a full bundle for an intentional reset to an ancestor so restore receives the actual sandbox tip. - Add real Git and sandbox restore regressions. Document the restore contract. ## Verification - Eight Git sync, sandbox restore, and native workspace suites pass: 255 tests. - The new checkout-race and warm-reuse regressions failed before the fixes. Real Git hooks verify that prepared transactions prevent a concurrent HEAD change. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed after rebasing onto `984f092ddf` and applying the Apex findings. - `pnpm build` passed on `f5132603d6`. - The earlier `pnpm test:run` attempt reported three `company-skills-service.test.ts` failures on macOS (`EACCES` renaming a read-only staging directory). The same failures reproduced on unchanged master. The broader run was stopped after confirming that baseline failure; it was not a full-suite pass. Those source and test files are unchanged in the current base. - [Apex review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15268#issuecomment-6002549219): 5/5 on `f5132603d6`, requested with `@greptileai apex review`. All three historical findings are addressed and all review threads are resolved. - All CI gates passed on `f5132603d6` (53 successful checks, two skipped). The signoff-policy browser fixture initially timed out waiting for a local process-agent run; its one retry passed without code changes. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37387511152) ## Risks - A recorded starting snapshot now authorizes replacement of related rewritten history. A stale or changed host tip retains the concurrent-history path. Ref writes still compare the expected old commit. - Branch changes and unrelated rewrites after host advancement require recovery instead of replacing host work. - An intentional reset to an ancestor uses a full bundle. Large histories can increase transfer time in that case. - The existing directory merge rules remain in force. The fix does not resolve an earlier failed restore or replay its external actions. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex, with reasoning, repository analysis, code editing, and local test execution. The exact deployment model ID and context window were not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass — 255 affected tests; the broader-suite baseline failure is documented above - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4857799a88 |
feat(connections): deliver saved instructions to authorized agent turns (#15216)
Persist optional connection instructions and deliver authorized snapshots to agent execution prompts. Keep provider templates with each app definition, preserve edits and opt-outs, and replace sessions when guidance or access changes. Use shared production settings across setup and Permissions, with source visibility in agent Instructions. Add the initial memory-provider defaults and managed Honcho workspace configuration. Include migration 0298 and regression coverage for generic providers, runtime delivery, authorization, and catalog regeneration. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1005.0-canary.5 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
2c43b39167 |
refactor(ui): share task composer and project/worktree controls (#15091)
Use the shared composer for new tasks, including project and worktree selection, rich mentions and slash commands, and remembered task settings. Save project preferences after successful task updates. Show known agent models by name and use Default for unknown runtime defaults. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1005.0-canary.4 |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
984f092ddf |
Add project and agent resource lifecycle hooks (#15280)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and projects for work. > - Plugins need reliable lifecycle hooks for these resources. > - In-process notifications can disappear during a restart. > - A lifecycle record must commit with the resource change. > - This pull request adds a generic lifecycle journal without provider calls. > - A later plugin delivery layer can use these records without losing lifecycle changes. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Problem or motivation** Resource provisioning needs durable hooks for agent hiring, pause, resume, termination, and project creation. Hooks must cover shared service callers, budget actions, and approval paths. Capture should work for all plugins and deployment modes. **Proposed solution** Record content-free events in the resource transaction. Deduplicate creation and unchanged status. Preserve each pause/resume cycle. Commit approval, activation, and creation together. Commit termination and API-key revocation together. **Alternatives considered** Event subscriptions alone cannot survive process failure. Cloud-only capture would exclude other plugins. Provider calls inside tenant transactions would couple resource creation to external services. **Roadmap alignment** This is lifecycle infrastructure for the existing plugin system. It adds no provider, adapter, UI, or plugin read API. Repository mutations and backfill remain separate work. Searches found no duplicate lifecycle-journal PR. ## What Changed - Add a company-scoped lifecycle journal and an additive migration. - Record hired-agent and project creation from shared services. - Record agent pause, resume, and termination, including generic updates and budget actions. - Lock agent state changes to suppress concurrent duplicate hooks. - Make hire approval, rejection, and termination transactions atomic with their lifecycle records. - Document capture, ordering, future per-plugin acknowledgments, and migration scope. ## Verification - Full workspace typecheck: `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. - Production build: `pnpm build` passed. - Focused agent, project, approval, budget, and built-in regressions: 102 tests passed across 9 suites. - Final lifecycle journal check: 14 tests passed. It covers repeated/concurrent transitions, rollback, key revocation, self-hosted capture, and company boundaries. - Review regression: 32 lifecycle and approval tests passed, including rejected-hire rollback and retry; server typecheck passed after the fix. - The initial local `pnpm test:run` overlapped the rejection fix and reported the new rollback regression against the earlier service code. A fresh lifecycle run passed all 14 tests. Fresh full local shards were stopped once the complete CI test matrix passed on the final commit. - `git diff --check` and a local secret/PII scan passed. - Greptile: 5/5 on `3ee3903f8e1a171ea3ba2bea9caa2b5766a3f807`, with the review thread resolved. - [Complete CI passed](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37374227222) on `3ee3903f8e1a171ea3ba2bea9caa2b5766a3f807`: general server/chat/workspace tests, serialized server suites, runner checks, build, typecheck, canary, and all end-to-end shards. The requester waived CI during the Actions outage, but the workflow subsequently completed successfully. ## Risks - The migration creates an empty table. It does not scan or backfill existing resources. - Apply the normal database migration before running this server version. Event-write failure intentionally rolls back the resource change. - Pending hires cannot bypass approval through pause or resume. - Capture works on all deployments. Plugin delivery, retention, retries, and provider actions remain separate work. No plugin can read this journal through a new API in this PR. - Future delivery must enforce company scope, track acknowledgments per plugin, and preserve resource order. A global sequence cursor can skip uncommitted transactions. - A termination hook does not authorize deleting persistent volumes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and tool use. The exact deployment model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
ad0c4f0767 |
fix(ui): keep mobile task output above the composer (#15282)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - People read agent output in the task conversation. > - Mobile tasks scroll the document and keep the composer above the footer. > - The document body keeps a fixed height while the thread grows. > - The old observer misses late thread growth, and a layout scroll event can cancel follow mode. > - This pull request observes the thread and preserves follow mode until the reader scrolls up. > - The benefit is visible new output without repeated manual scrolling. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** New task output can move behind the mobile composer while the reader is already at the bottom. Late content layout does not resize the fixed-height body. A scroll event after layout growth can also clear follow mode before the resize observer runs. **Expected behavior** Keep new output visible above the composer while the reader follows the bottom. Hold the reading position after an upward scroll. Resume following when the reader returns to the bottom. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open a long task conversation on mobile and scroll to the bottom. 2. Let a streamed row or delayed content grow after the parent renders. 3. Check whether the latest output stays above the composer. 4. Scroll up to read earlier output, then return to the bottom. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced by regression tests against master at |
||
|
|
6c36c07a4f |
feat(adapters): add GPT-6.1 Sol and refresh shared coding harness pins (#14942)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents run through coding-agent adapters and the native runner. Both use the same installed provider CLIs, model catalogs, and reasoning controls. > - OpenAI released GPT-6.1 Sol (`gpt-6.1-sol`) in Codex. Anthropic released Claude Sonnet 5.5. The static Codex, Bedrock, and OpenCode catalogs do not list these IDs. > - The shared provider pack pins Codex 0.156.0 and OpenCode 1.18.32. The evaluation image pins older Grok, Gemini, Kimi, Cursor, and GitHub CLI releases. Codex 0.156.0 has no bundled metadata for GPT-6.1 Sol. > - A model entry without a current harness, or a harness pin without its runner integrity checks, fails at run time. > - This pull request adds the verified model IDs and moves the harness pins, executable digests, controller checks, and image pins together. > - The benefit is that operators can select the current models, and the native and local adapters share one current CLI installation. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13829 and #13838 (the September 22, 2026 model and harness refresh). Related pull requests: #14993 (merged October 5, 2026, superseding #14816) added the direct Claude Sonnet 5.5 entry and refreshed the Claude runtime to Agent SDK 0.3.286 / Claude Code 2.1.286. This pull request does not change the Claude runtime or the direct Claude model list; it keeps the #14993 pins and adds only the Bedrock Sonnet 5.5 ID. After #14993 merged, this branch was rebased onto `master` (October 5, 2026). The six overlapping pin regions (`docker/daytona-runner/Dockerfile`, `docker/daytona-runner/README.md`, `package.json`, `pnpm-workspace.yaml`, `packages/adapters/claude-local/src/index.test.ts`, `packages/paperclip-runner/src/backends/native-backend-factory.test.ts`) were resolved by keeping this pull request's Codex 0.160.0 and OpenCode 1.18.34 pins next to #14993's Claude 0.3.286 / 2.1.286 pins, taking the union of the Sonnet 5.5 model IDs in the Claude test, and merging both README paragraphs. The Sonnet 5.5 effort and CLI-gate lines in the Claude adapter were identical in both pull requests and merged without a diff. #14917 and #14918 reordered the Claude and Codex model lists earlier; the new entries sit where those ordering rules put them. Sources checked on 2026-10-02: - [OpenAI Codex models](https://learn.chatgpt.com/docs/models): GPT-6.1 Sol uses `gpt-6.1-sol`, supports reasoning efforts from Light to Ultra, and has Standard and Fast modes at launch. The page also records that `gpt-5.4` and `gpt-5.4-mini` retired from Codex with ChatGPT sign-in on August 31, 2026, and that `gpt-5.5` retires on October 14, 2026. Neither retirement applies to the OpenAI API. - [Codex CLI releases](https://github.com/openai/codex/releases) 0.157.0 through 0.160.0. The bundled model metadata in the 0.160.0 Linux binary contains `gpt-6.1-sol`. - [Claude Sonnet 5.5](https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/models/sonnet-5-5/overview): Bedrock ID `anthropic.claude-sonnet-5-5`, released September 28, 2026. - [OpenCode releases](https://github.com/anomalyco/opencode/releases) 1.18.33 and 1.18.34 (fixes only). The OpenCode model registry lists both added provider-qualified IDs. - npm `latest` tags for `@xai-official/grok` 1.0.46, `@google/gemini-cli` 0.62.0, and `@moonshot-ai/kimi-code` 2.1.1. [xAI](https://docs.x.ai/docs/models), [Google](https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/models), and [Kimi](https://www.kimi.com/code/docs/en/kimi-code/models.html) list no newer coding models. - Cursor CLI 2026.10.01-e373342 is the version the official installer resolves. The pinned digest is the SHA-256 of the versioned Linux x64 archive. - [GitHub CLI 2.102.0](https://github.com/cli/cli/releases/tag/v2.102.0) (security fixes). The pinned digest matches the release `checksums.txt`. ## What Changed - Codex adapter: add `gpt-6.1-sol` to the model list, the Fast mode list, and the Ultra effort set. It is the first entry: #14918 orders the list newest version first, and its description notes the ChatGPT app lists GPT-6.1 Sol first. Update the adapter documentation text. - Claude adapter: add `us.anthropic.claude-sonnet-5-5` (Bedrock Sonnet 5.5) to the Bedrock catalog in the newest-Sonnet slot after Opus 5.5; `us.anthropic.claude-sonnet-5` moves into the older-Sonnet group, matching what `sortClaudeModels` from #14917 produces at runtime. Any Sonnet 5.5 ID (direct or Bedrock-qualified) now gets the documented `xhigh` and `max` efforts and requires Claude Code 2.1.284 or later on the CLI lane (the Claude Code changelog entry for 2.1.284 adds `claude-sonnet-5-5`). These two lines are identical to the ones #14993 merged, so the branch carries no diff for them. - OpenCode adapter: add `openai/gpt-6.1-sol` and `anthropic/claude-sonnet-5-5` to the static fallback catalog. - Codex runtime pin 0.156.0 → 0.160.0 in the root and workspace overrides, the runner package, the Codex ACP package patch, the qualified ACPX profiles, the Linux x64 executable digest, the Rust provider backend and its tests, the provider-pack manifest pins, the remote controller pins, the sandbox npm install spec, and the opt-in qualification scripts. - Remote Codex compatibility window: upper bound 0.157.0 → 0.161.0. The minimum stays at 0.149.0. - OpenCode runtime pin 1.18.32 → 1.18.34 in the runner package, the materialization script, the server and Rust qualified versions, the eval and live-session labels, fixtures, and the configuration label. - Evaluation image (`docker/daytona-runner/Dockerfile`): Grok CLI 1.0.46, Gemini CLI 0.62.0, Kimi Code 2.1.1, Cursor CLI 2026.10.01-e373342 with its digest, GitHub CLI 2.102.0 with its digest, Codex and OpenCode version probes, and the refreshed lockfile digest. The Claude Code 2.1.286 probe comes from #14993 and is unchanged here. - `pnpm-lock.yaml` is not part of this pull request. The repository's pull request gate rejects lockfile edits, and the refresh bot regenerates the lockfile on master (the same flow #13838 used). The Dockerfile `PAPERCLIP_RUNNER_LOCK_SHA256` default is the digest of the lockfile that `pnpm install --resolution-only --ignore-scripts --no-frozen-lockfile` (the refresh workflow's command) produces for the combined pins on the rebased branch (`e1856797…`); that lockfile differs from master only in the `@openai/codex` 0.160.0 platform packages, the `@anthropic-ai/claude-agent-sdk` 0.3.286 override that #14993 introduced (the open refresh-bot pull request #14872 carries that part), `opencode-ai` 1.18.34 with its Linux x64 baseline, and the `codex-acp` patch hash. - Documentation: runner README, runner compatibility doc, environment variable example, and a new `doc/adapter-model-audit-2026-10-02.md` with sources and deferred items. - Tests: Codex adapter catalog, server adapter models, Codex compatibility window, native session executor pins, runner package contract, OpenCode materialization, and UI effort options. Unchanged on purpose: Claude Agent SDK 0.3.286 / Claude Code 2.1.286 (already on `master` from #14993), ACP bridges (`acpx` 0.13.1, `claude-agent-acp` 0.73.0, `codex-acp` 1.6.2; newer upstream releases need a separate qualification), the native Grok runtime 1.0.13, Pi 0.84.2 / 0.87.1 (the Pi 1.0 runner stack covers it), and Hermes 0.19.0 (current). `gpt-5.4` and `gpt-5.4-mini` stay in the picker because the OpenAI API still serves them. ## Verification Run on Linux x64 with Node 25.9.0 and pnpm 9.15.4 after `pnpm install --no-frozen-lockfile` (the refreshed lockfile stays local; see above). The results below were re-run on the rebased head (October 5, 2026) for the suites the conflict resolution touches; the other rows are from the original run and are covered by CI on every push: - Rebased head: `packages/adapters/codex-local` 482 passed; `packages/adapters/claude-local` 340 passed, 4 failed (`execute.remote`, `test.probe`, `execute.acp-fallback`, `acp` spawn/env-hardening cases that fail identically on unchanged `master` in this host environment); `server` adapter-models + codex-runtime-compatibility + native-session-executor + adapter-registry 607 passed, 1 failed (the same adapter-registry override-pause case as before, also failing on `master` here); `packages/paperclip-runner` native-backend-factory + qualified-profiles 36 passed; `ui` codex-reasoning-effort + config-fields + model-utils 19 passed. Rust, full typecheck, build, and the Docker image are left to CI as before. - `vitest run` in `packages/adapters/codex-local`: 13 passed. `vitest run` in `packages/adapters/claude-local` (whole package, including the new Sonnet 5.5 gate and effort tests): see the latest CI run and the comment below. `vitest run` in `packages/adapters/opencode-local`: 48 passed, 1 failed (`runtime-config.test.ts` reads the host `PAPERCLIP_OPENCODE_PROVIDERS` variable; it fails the same way on the unchanged base). - `vitest run src/__tests__/adapter-models.test.ts src/services/native-runtime/codex-runtime-compatibility.test.ts src/__tests__/adapter-registry.test.ts` in `server`: 84 passed, 1 failed (`adapter-registry.test.ts` override pause test; it fails the same way on the unchanged base). - `vitest run` in `ui` for `codex-reasoning-effort`, `agent-setup-fields`, `config-fields`, and `ComposerRunSettingsPicker`: 25 passed. - `node --test test/acpx-codex-package-contract.test.mjs scripts/materialize-opencode-binary.test.mjs scripts/runner-protocol-eval-campaign.test.mjs` in `packages/paperclip-runner`: 23 passed. The package contract test verifies the installed Codex ACP executable digest and the 0.160.0 patch pin. - `vitest run src/drivers/acpx src/backends src/drivers/opencode src/live/live-session.test.ts` in `packages/paperclip-runner`: 626 passed, 5 failed, 1 skipped. The 5 failures (`installation-integrity.test.ts` `/proc/self/fd` module loading and one OpenCode answer-selection test) also fail on the unchanged base under Node 25; Linux CI runs Node 24. - `pnpm run test:opencode:qualification` in `packages/paperclip-runner` against the installed OpenCode 1.18.34 executable: passed. - `codex --version` from the installed pack prints `codex-cli 0.160.0`. The Linux x64 executable digest `12eb3e81…652aad` was computed from the `@openai/codex@0.160.0-linux-x64` archive after checking its registry `dist.integrity`. - `pnpm check:token-gates`: all gates clean. - `pnpm run typecheck:typescript` in `packages/paperclip-runner`: passed. Package typechecks ran one at a time; see the comment below for the server and UI results. Not run here, and needed from CI: - Rust tests and `pnpm -r typecheck` / `pnpm build` for the server (no `cargo` in this environment; the server typecheck prepares the runner vendor build). - The Docker evaluation image build and the real-binary Codex startup and session-resume probes (no Docker; the probes need the compiled `paperclip-runnerd`). The trusted CI runner workflow covers them. - Authenticated inference with any new model. This change is metadata and startup validation only. ## Risks - Codex 0.160.0 changes the bundled model catalog and app-server behaviour (authoritative provider catalogs, incremental running-turn tracking). The patched `codex-acp` 1.6.2 bridge is unchanged and declares `^0.148.0`; it worked with 0.156.0 under the same override. If CI probes show a protocol change, the pin can return to 0.156.0 by reverting this pull request. - The compatibility window upper bound moves to `<0.161.0`. Remote images with Codex 0.157 to 0.160 become accepted. Older images stay accepted down to 0.149.0. - Until the refresh bot lands the regenerated lockfile on master, the Dockerfile lockfile digest default does not match the committed lockfile. The trusted CI workflow computes the digest from its own resolution at build time, so this affects only a local build that passes no digest. - Existing saved model selections and effort settings are not changed. Agents on `gpt-5.4` or `gpt-5.5` with ChatGPT sign-in need a model change before the OpenAI retirement dates; that is documented, not enforced. - Rollout order: deploy the controller and runner from this change before promoting a sandbox image that carries these pins. Older controllers reject the new provider-pack pins. ## Model Used - Claude Fable 5.1 (Anthropic, model ID `claude-fable-5-1`), 1M context window, adaptive thinking, tool use. The model ran as a Paperclip agent through the Claude Code harness, performed the web research, edited the code, and ran the tests listed above. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Bender (Fable) <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>canary/v2026.1005.0-canary.3 |