2 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Dotta	b25f3e2af8	fix(onboarding): show native proposal confirmation recipes (#18025) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage agent work through tasks. > - First-task onboarding asks a new agent to propose work before it starts. > - The user must accept a saved proposal before the agent can create its child task. > - A native agent can ask for approval in a question card, which does not record proposal acceptance. > - The skill names confirmation cards but does not show their native tool arguments. > - This change adds executable native proposal recipes and checks their real approval path. > - The task admission rules and Product E2E assertions stay in place. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A fresh onboarding agent asked the user to approve a child task through an Approve/Revise question. The question looked like a decision, but its answer cannot authorize child creation. The first-task skill teaches native question calls for interviews and names proposal confirmation cards without showing the native mapping. **Expected behavior** The agent should create a confirmation card for a single-task proposal, or a checkbox card bound to the saved plan revision. Only the saved human acceptance should admit the child task. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start first-task onboarding with a native agent. 2. Choose one task and ask the agent to propose a child before it starts work. 3. Have the agent use a question card with Approve/Revise options. 4. Answer Approve. Child creation remains blocked because no proposal confirmation was accepted. Related public context: #17940, #13517. ## What Changed - Show the native `request_human_input` arguments for confirmation and plan-bound checkbox proposals. - Explain that question answers supply scope and cannot grant proposal authority. - Resume the agent after either acceptance or rejection, and use new proposal keys for revisions. - Parse the shipped recipes and execute them through the real native tool authority and interaction service. - Verify that pending proposals, agent-only acceptance, and an answered Approve/Revise question cannot admit child work. - Use the existing isolated PostgreSQL test helper when a local test database is supplied. - Fix the required clean Grok npm-install check to prefix synthetic revision identifiers with `g`. The former all-numeric, leading-zero identifier was invalid SemVer and caused a reproduced `ETARGET` failure. Customer release versions are unchanged. ## Verification - Red: both new executable recipe checks fail against the preceding skill. - Green: 44 focused tests pass with zero skips against a task-owned PostgreSQL server. The actual tool authority and approval service are exercised. - Human acceptance of either recipe admits the child. Agent-only acceptance does not. Answering the question leaves the issue set unchanged. - Red/green real HTTP checks prove rejection saves the assignee continuation, starts no extra model run, and still denies child creation. - `git diff --check` passes. - Full repository `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on the final approval-guidance revision. - The first full local test attempt used an unmigrated external fixture and was stopped after the cause was confirmed. A new migrated fixture resolved that setup error; the second full attempt reached its explicit 10-minute limit before finishing. Both attempts are preserved and are not claimed as passing. The temporary owned PostgreSQL container was removed. The complete Linux CI workflow passed on the final PR head. - The exact synthetic-version failure was reproduced with real npm and an empty local packed registry. The new maintained regression keeps the invalid-version negative control and installs corrected numeric-hash and normal-hash controls. All 27 existing Grok helper tests and three offline registry-boundary checks pass. - Final head `52d0b92a00dcb0653b6fb48415cfaea979b8f21f`: [CI 40706933035, attempt 1](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40706933035) passed; 55 successful checks, two skipped and one neutral. Greptile is 5/5 for this exact head with no unresolved threads. The original failed build remains preserved. - Live fresh-workspace acceptance has not passed yet. It follows the reviewed testing rollout; this source test does not prove model compliance. ## Risks The change guides model tool selection. An agent can still ignore the skill. Product admission remains the authority, and the live journey must still verify human approval, native child execution, downloaded artifact bytes, context reuse, and cleanup. There is no schema or API change. The CI helper changes only temporary verifier versions and preserves the existing registry integrity, install, lifecycle, and isolation checks. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex `gpt-6.1-sol`, with reasoning, source inspection, tool use, and code execution. The host does not expose its configured 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	2026-10-28 09:47:55 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	307eb16c0c	perf(ci): avoid duplicate extraction in public install checks (#16460) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents for work. > - Contributors wait for CI before they can deliver changes. > - After #16434, Build is the longest CI job. > - Its clean public npm install spends about 90 seconds installing packed artifacts. > - npm extracts local archives to read metadata before it installs them. > - Serve metadata from those same packed artifacts, then let normal npm verify and install their bytes once. > - Preserve the offline lifecycle and runtime checks, and measure the complete workflow. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16434 and #16429. **Current behavior:** The Linux Build check installs every staged package by local tarball path. npm's file fetcher extracts an archive to obtain its manifest. Installation then extracts it again. In the last green run, Build took 408 seconds; consumer installation took 89.7 seconds. The full workflow took 8m06s. **Proposed behavior:** Read manifests directly from the packed archives. Serve those manifests and their SHA-512-bound tarballs from a temporary registry on container loopback. Use normal npm installation into the empty consumer. Other packages still resolve from the public npm registry. **Alternatives:** More parallel jobs would add setup and transfer work. Skipping the install or runtime probes would remove useful coverage. This change removes duplicate extraction instead. It does not add a product feature or duplicate a roadmap item. ## What Changed - Build a registry catalog from the actual tarball manifests and archive hashes. - Run the short-lived registry and npm in the existing unprivileged download container. No host port is exposed. - Preserve public dependency tarball URLs, archive integrity checks, disabled initial lifecycle scripts, the offline rebuild, lock checks and all Codex, Grok and Pi probes. - Close the registry before offline verification. Keep native ARM and Mac install qualification unchanged. - Add real npm parity and failure tests. Record metadata preparation time in the existing timing receipt. - Fix an existing policy false positive: the filename `docker-compose-secrets.test.mjs` is not a workflow credential. Inspect GitHub expressions and retain rejection of Honeycomb keys, dot/bracket secret reads and `toJSON(secrets)`. ## Verification - 31 focused install-contract checks pass on Node 24.21.0. All 16 targeted CI profile-policy tests also pass. - Real npm file and registry installs produce identical installed files, bundled dependencies, optional dependencies and executable links. Both defer lifecycle execution; offline rebuild works after the registry closes and preserves the lock. - npm rejects an archive whose gzip header changes while its extracted payload remains valid. The CLI propagates the failure. - The permanent real-npm parity test now includes non-catalog `is-number@7.0.0`. Both paths install it from its official npmjs tarball, and the test asserts the lock URL. Fetches have a 10-second bound and no retries. This addresses the first Greptile finding. A separate live probe also confirmed public provenance. - The first local run hit the host sandbox's loopback `EPERM`; the same checks passed with local listener access. An initial corrupted-gzip negative fixture hit decompression failure before integrity verification; the final fixture preserves valid gzip and specifically proves integrity rejection. An old command-shape assertion was updated for the new entry point without removing its ordering checks. - The [first CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38778371043) passed all test lanes and Build, but the existing credential-guard false positive failed policy and both aggregates. Its 7m25s full duration is **not** counted as a passing performance sample. The guard repair and public-download regression are on the new head. - The real Linux install passed all 18 packed packages, the lifecycle sentinel, offline rebuild, unchanged lock, official Codex payload/lease checks, Grok missing/present checks and Pi admission. The receipt confirms `artifactTransport: loopback-registry`. No provider calls ran. - Compared with the previous green run, consumer install fell **89.72s → 66.29s** (26.1%), including 1.87s to prepare metadata. Build fell **408s → 374s**. Both Build hosts were `m7i-flex.xlarge`; these are separate runs, so registry/cache and upstream changes remain confounders. - The base advanced since the previous 8m06s run, including runtime and test changes. Treat that duration as historical context, not an identical-source control. - Pre-conflict head `d8f9de1c` [passes all 48 workflow jobs](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38779549190), including both required branch-protection checks. Greptile is **5/5** on this head; its review thread is resolved. The non-required Superagent Security Scan is still running. | Measurement | Previous green run | Final green run | Observed change | | --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | | Full CI, workflow creation through final aggregate | 8m06s | **7m35s** | **31s shorter (6.4%)** | | Build job execution | 408s | **389s** | **19s shorter** | | Clean consumer install, including catalog preparation | 89.72s | **69.69s** | **20.03s less (22.3%)** | The final catalog preparation took 1.87s and is included in the install figure. Both Build hosts were `m7i-flex.xlarge`. Build began 42 seconds after workflow creation instead of 53 seconds in the historical run, so faster queue/setup admission explains part of the 31-second total. Upstream code also advanced; these measurements are not a controlled causal estimate of the complete gain. The two candidate install measurements (66.29s and 69.69s) support the narrower reduction in install work. No tests or runtime probes were removed. - Conflict-resolution head `ea8287b81` [passes all 48 workflow jobs](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38789785045), including both required gates. Greptile re-reviewed this exact head at 5/5, with the sole earlier thread resolved. The conflict was the independent filename-policy fix; the stronger expression guard is retained. This run took **8m04s** overall, Build 423s, consumer installation 80.56s and bundled-server staging 31.17s. This confirms meaningful run variance: the earlier 7m35s is a sample, not a guaranteed new wall-clock duration. - A second independent master update touched the same credential test. Final head `1c740b73e` resolves that conflict while retaining the same stronger guard. [All 48 jobs pass](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38792983313); Greptile re-reviewed this exact head at 5/5. This run took **7m32s** overall, Build **385s**, consumer install **67.62s**. Auto-merge is enabled but GitHub requires code-owner approval. ## Risks The initial install now uses registry package specs instead of file specs. The parity test checks the resulting installed bytes. Full CI must still exercise real bundled provider graphs and all offline probes. The temporary consumer lock contains loopback artifact URLs; it is not exported or reused for another installation. Native release consumers retain their existing artifact install path. Queue, host and cache variance limit attribution from separate workflow runs. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository inspection, execution and GitHub tools. The serving model suffix and context capacity are not exposed to this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either linked existing issues or described the issue in this PR - [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no private ticket identifier - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation - [x] I have considered and documented the risks - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green (48 jobs and both required gates on conflict-resolution head) - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-15 14:52:15 -05:00