mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-30 13:20:54 +01:00
aa75ec9d56ee4e045cc06daa9fb0ffe8dc8a793a
8
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
6cc765bd81 |
feat(live): deliver recoverable transcripts to interested views (#17456)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip should show live agent output without repeating presentation work for every view. > - Execution, acknowledgements and durable checkpoints must remain independent of browser interest. > - The server already owns authorization and redaction at delivery. > - A shared browser connection can declare which visible runs need full transcripts. > - Catch-up must handle subscription races, disconnects, terminal output and slow consumers. > - This PR delivers the backend and UI contract together without a database migration. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Visible transcript consumers receive recoverable output through one shared browser connection. **Current behavior** Independent views can create duplicate connections, presentation work and recurring history reads. A subscription race or filtered native history can lose the saved tail. **Proposed behavior** Negotiate run interests, subscribe before catch-up and retain independent canonical recovery cursors. Keep lightweight lifecycle and attention events available without full transcript delivery. PR 4 of #17097 → #17439 → #17455 → #17456. The runtime feature is independent of hot-upgrade recovery; the stack order is for review convenience. ## What Changed - Add additive WebSocket capability negotiation, replacement interests, revision acknowledgement and resynchronization notices. - Reference-count visible consumer interests on one company-scoped browser connection. Preserve older-client/server behavior. - Reuse canonical structural/current-user/registered-secret redaction for plugin run notifications through the same bounded delivery queue. Keep producer and uninterested streams free of recipient lookups. - Refresh application queries after the matching recovery acknowledgement, including one follow-up after an older in-flight read. Ordinary interest acknowledgements add no refresh. - Keep authorization and redaction at delivery. Browser interest cannot change harness execution, PRP ACKs, checkpoints, accounting or canonical logs. - Deduplicate by sequence and log identity. Catch up terminal output and saved tails without recurring reads during healthy negotiated streaming. - Bound delivery to 1,000 items and 1 MiB. Overflow requires resynchronization; persistent congestion closes the connection. - Preserve compact-history expansion from current master across paginated catch-up. Snapshot the original read window before React can defer its update. ## Verification On current source `f6710f0b3c`, Linux [job 122604880503](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40624101891/job/122604880503) executes all five run-read permission cases successfully (2.574 seconds), including grant and revocation on the same connection. Its shard passes all 2,430 cases. Current [server-shard job 122604880416](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40624101891/job/122604880416) has 1,513 passes, one failure and three skips: an unchanged nested-clone expiration/restore test exceeds its 15-second deadline. The preceding `5efc6c48bf` source has identical non-document bytes; [its corresponding job 122601359272](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40623017917/job/122601359272) passes all 21 nested-clone cases, including that case in 9.505 seconds. The exact timing cause is unproven. The single diagnostic [retry job 122609332597](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40624101891/job/122609332597) passes all 21 nested-clone cases (61.316 seconds), including the formerly timed-out case in 7.003 seconds, and all 1,514 shard cases (three skips). The failure remains recorded; no timeout or assertion was changed. After the server squash merge and qualification retarget, all 50 focused server cases and all 91 focused UI cases pass again, with both typechecks and token gates. Runner vendor preparation rebuilds current master inputs before those tests. This source needs fresh CI and reviews; prior CI and browser receipts do not qualify it by inference. Current candidate `f6710f0b3c` now targets master `6987c2f20b`, after merged #17097, #17439 and #17455. Its diff contains only transcript delivery and its documentation. It adds no database migration. Retargeting changes only the evidence document; all production and test code is byte-identical to `5efc6c48bf`. On the eighth integration, all 50 focused server delivery cases and all 91 focused UI cases pass, with both typechecks and token gates. The following 35-case receipt belongs to the earlier delivery correction. Four low-queue authorization/decoration stall variants and the late-rejection case fail before correction. They now verify the five-second read deadline, old and negotiated clients, revisions that cannot reset the deadline, unaffected sibling connections, rejected late results, and timer cleanup. The first combined toast run has four loopback EPERM failures and 31 passes; its permitted repeat passes all 35. Earlier 28-case evidence excluded the toast file. The permission correction requires the current HTTP company-scope transcript permission, plus task access, for both native events and legacy logs. Prior Linux source `49a8783e9b`, job 122549913643, executes all five run-read cases, including grant/revocation on the same connection, successfully. That source placed this file in server shard 11; later shard assignments can differ and must be checked against their actual inventories. The older `405bedd189` receipt retains a separate scheduled-retry teardown race and inherited fixture collision; neither is waived. The new head must pass again in Linux CI. The seven extracted stream-recovery tests preserve their assertions. All 39 related legacy/native cases, UI typecheck and token gates pass after restoring the initially missed fixture helper. Earlier full workspace build/typecheck and Chrome journeys at `445a76563c` cover two views, company switches, reconnect, terminal catch-up, reload and zero recurring healthy transcript reads. Those browser receipts are historical source evidence and do not qualify this new head by inference. The [qualification record](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/f6710f0b3c84c6fdb2021df67206261b446dfc97/doc/plans/2026-10-22-hot-upgrade-qualification.md) retains exact earlier UI/history, source-boundary and cleanup failures with their fixes and limits. The workload-cost test preserves bounds and authorization callback counts for zero interests, one viewer, multiple browsers and a slow viewer. Its socket congestion is simulated. It measures neither SQL nor network costs. Current permission checks and the final hosted active-agent/viewer matrix remain unmeasured; no production savings are claimed. Fresh exact-head CI, legacy status, completed Greptile 5/5, resolved feedback and ordinary merge eligibility remain required. The earlier recipient corrections pass all 47 registry/plugin/delivery/WebSocket/toast cases and all 174 UI provider/recovery/interest cases, both typechecks and token gates on source `b202e59a25`. A real bus/host-service test registers a synthetic run secret through the production registry and reproduces its raw notification before the fix; native/legacy/final notifications now redact it, disposal prevents late worker notification. A later P1 review reproduces lost final notifications on settings-read and secret-resolution failure. Both cases fail before correction. Any delivery failure or subscription timeout now sends one content-free stream error and removes the plugin subscription. It never changes the agent execution or run status. Later events start no new redaction reads. The final integrated six-file server lane passes all 50 cases, with server typecheck and token gates. Existing browser delivery behavior is unchanged. Storage and secret-provider seams are scripted. Two real React Query/provider regressions first miss a run during resync; both now refresh after the valid replacement ACK, including pending-read and stale-scope cases. The prerequisite qualification batch passes all 118 cases and E2E typecheck after master integration. Fresh CI, security scan and reviews remain pending on this head. The contribution-rule review correction removes 104 explanatory comments introduced by this slice and keeps the ordering, deadline and plugin-delivery explanations in the delivery document. Existing comments and functional test/lint directives remain. All edited source files have identical parsed non-comment tokens before and after the change. All 50 server delivery cases and all 91 cases in six affected UI suites pass, along with token gates. The new head requires fresh CI, security and review. ## Risks A slow or disconnected viewer must resynchronize from authorized canonical history. It may see a display gap until catch-up completes. Company changes and revoked access must remove delivery interests. This slice adds no database migration and cannot change execution or recovery authority. Full transcript delivery evaluates current company-scope permission per delivery. Active plugin recipients also perform canonical redaction reads; viewer-load database costs on this final source remain unmeasured. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools and code execution. The runtime does not expose a more specific model ID or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [ ] 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
|
d33b40a5c3 |
fix: recover saved work and provide reliable task Retry (#16965)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The control plane must retain work when an execution or workspace export fails. > - Retained-workspace holds can leave saved input waiting with no usable Retry action. > - Users cannot verify process ownership or repair provider allocations. > - This pull request gives system recovery a durable budget and gives each deliberate Retry a durable intent. > - Safe recovery can preserve files, settle an accepted result, or prepare an independent workspace. > - One task state keeps infrastructure diagnostics out of the ordinary conversation while preserving real permission and approval gates. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A task with a retained workspace can show recovery, failed-run and saved-message warnings at the same time. Historical runs without native workspace descriptors cannot use the native restore path. Old recovery metadata can prevent a new attempt even when an independent workspace would be safe. **Expected behavior** Paperclip owns bounded infrastructure retries and file preservation. A user can request another attempt with ordinary Retry. Thinking appears immediately. The service preserves completed effects and current user controls. It does not claim that starting fresh recovered the old files. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Retain a failed run and its workspace after export or process-stop failure. 2. Save a follow-up while the recovery hold is active. 3. Open the task and try to continue without infrastructure credentials or operator certification. Refs #16906, #16835, #16883. This extends their recovery and receipt contracts. Related work: #16962 and #16963. ## What Changed - Add task-level Retry with company-scoped authorization, all-status idempotency and durable admission before physical work. Keep exact-run Retry compatible. - Add typed recovery phases, finite persisted backoff, historical adoption and durable local failure diagnostics. - Preserve native workspaces or verified historical snapshots. Admit an independent fresh workspace only after execution containment. Keep old-source preservation and cleanup obligations separate. - Carry completed publication and API receipts forward. Fence uncertain mutation retries across replacement runs. Preserve connected-chat identity and authorization. - Re-enter normal dispatch for saved input. Reuse accepted results through the existing finalizer. - Use one task interruption projection across the thread, composer and task list. Show optimistic Thinking, ordinary Retry and genuine user gates. - Add PostgreSQL, filesystem, API, browser-fixture and controlled provider coverage. Document the behavior and update the feature/access maps. ## Verification - All GitHub Actions CI jobs pass on `6d8c6d27d50586d8548b31d03b47f6d73a0ee11d`: typecheck, all server/chat/workspace and serialized suites, Runner checks, eight browser shards, canary and build. The required merge gate passes. - Greptile reviewed the final commit at 5/5, with no actionable findings or unresolved review threads. Its two earlier P1 findings are fixed. - Full recursive typecheck and build pass locally on the final commit. All 16 task Retry cases pass against isolated real PostgreSQL. The unrelated-success case and both stale Retry cases fail on the previous code and pass after the fix. - The corrected gateway fixture passes its uncertain-mutation and independent-read case. Four real HTTP API cases pass for definite 403/422 rejection, completed-effect reuse, and uncertain-effect fences across deliberate and automatic retries. These focused gateway/API checks used a temporary database lifecycle harness on an existing healthy local PostgreSQL process. The standard repository helper is unchanged. - Earlier qualification covers 291 task UI cases, saved-file copyback and ancestry, current Agent Chat ownership races, nine chat Retry API browser cases, and six assembled browser recovery fixtures. A real API/PostgreSQL/native-runner journey showed Thinking in 25 ms despite a delayed response, admitted one successor in a separate workspace, retained original files, and survived reload. - The controlled Daytona test interrupts export, joins the controller, restarts it in a separate process, and verifies one agent start, one external sentinel operation, retained file contents and no premature cleanup. It does not establish abrupt-kill or live LLM/GitHub acceptance. - The full local `pnpm test:run` was attempted and was not green: an OAuth row-lock timing assertion failed, and a later suite exhausted macOS PostgreSQL semaphores. The ten OAuth timing cases passed on rerun against a separate database. Later embedded database initialization failures remain recorded; the final CI matrix passes. - Security scanning passed on production-code commit `63953edf069b111c6becc3144dffa6deb52f68b5`. Its only successor changes one test-fixture identity line. The final scan is neutral/inconclusive because its pinned merge-base checkout failed or timed out. Both rerun API requests returned 404, so no fresh successful scan is claimed. Socket and Snyk checks pass on the final head. - The optional Paperclip Review remains queued behind an earlier run in workspace finalization. Its prior completed assessment was incomplete because a comparison tool was blocked by the platform filter. It is not counted as a completed code review. GitHub does not require this check for merge. - Hosted acceptance remains pending deployment. Local and CI results do not establish recovery of a hosted task or its retained files. ## Risks - Recovery changes span admission, physical ownership and dispatch. Incorrect evidence could permit overlapping work. Existing physical locks and authoritative stop requirements remain in place. - The migration adds concurrent indexes. It requires the existing top-level migration runner and retries incomplete index creation safely. - A fresh attempt can complete while old-source preservation remains unresolved. The service retains that obligation and does not report those files as recovered. - Unknown tool mutations remain blocked until their authoritative receipt owner resolves them. Generic upstream tools have no universal result-query protocol. - Recovery and diagnostics stay inside the stack. No Cloud incident endpoint, notification worker or new outbound reporting channel is included. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The runtime does not expose a more specific model version or context-window size. The model used reasoning, shell execution, source editing and browser tools. No model subagents were used for this implementation. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused suites; the full local run limitation 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
|
1fb3f9746e |
refactor(heartbeat): extract prepared runtime execution (#15803)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Heartbeat prepares, dispatches, and completes each agent run. > - After the runtime-selection extraction, the main service still had 7,295 lines. > - Provider dispatch and workspace finalization formed one large block with shared cleanup rules. > - This pull request moves that block into a typed runtime-execution module. > - The service now has 6,417 lines. Readers can follow admission and outer cleanup without reading the provider execution details. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Follow-up to #15746. I searched open heartbeat PRs and issues. I found no competing runtime-execution extraction. **What existing behavior does this improve?** The organization and test coverage of native and legacy heartbeat execution. **Current behavior** The heartbeat service contains a 912-line block for provider dispatch, usage capture, workspace finalization, and instruction cleanup. **Proposed behavior** Move that block to `server/src/services/heartbeat/runtime-execution.ts`. Keep the atomic dispatch gate, admission, terminal run status, and outer lease cleanup in the service. Preserve run behavior. **Reason and benefit** This gives runtime execution a named boundary and direct tests. It removes 878 lines from the main service in one bounded change. **Breaking changes** None intended. There are no schema, API, or policy changes. ## What Changed - Add `executeHeartbeatRuntime` for prepared native and legacy execution, usage capture, workspace finalization, and gateway/instruction cleanup. - Return an explicit dispatch result. Update outer ownership state through immediate callbacks, including before exceptions. Read instruction state through live getters. - Move the two internal recovery error classes with their existing behavior. The caller imports the same classes for `instanceof` checks. - Add 15 database-backed execution tests. Keep the existing heartbeat regression suites. - Repair the native Stop acceptance fixture: installed Codex now takes precedence over `PATH`. A test-only loader pins the fake provider. An isolated home and dummy key keep readiness offline. Add four loader tests. - Document the module boundary and fixture setup. ## Verification - Passed: eight focused heartbeat suites (483 distinct tests, including 15 new execution tests). The boundary suite passed again after adding the failed-restore retention case from review. - Passed: `node --test tests/e2e/fixtures/composer-stop-codex-loader.test.mjs` (four tests). - Passed: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. - Passed: AST comparison of all 912 moved lines after the explicit boundary substitutions. SQL template text, recovery class bodies, public exports, and the rest of the executor match the baseline. - Passed: browser Stop journeys for legacy process and native Paperclip Runner (two tests). The native fixture log proves provider `turn/start` before Stop and `turn/interrupt` after Stop. - Passed: all three ACP continuation browser journeys (same-session queued input, no replay of an interrupted write, and a new direction after composer Stop). Five relevant browser journeys passed in total. - Passed: the full CI test groups, including all server, chat, workspace, serialized-server, runner, and browser shards. - Local full-suite limitation: `pnpm test:run` first hit the macOS shared-memory segment limit while starting embedded PostgreSQL. After releasing only this task’s unused acceptance-server segments, the retry progressed without reported failures. I stopped that duplicate run after the full CI test groups passed. - Passed: all 56 PR checks/statuses on `8694c116e8d43ed8ac11bc4c58623ea3af34a675`. Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved review threads. ## Risks - Cleanup depends on state written before an error. The module reports dispatch, retention, and recovery ownership immediately. Tests cover early returns and exceptional cleanup. - Instruction callbacks can replace saved metadata during execution. Live getters preserve those changes. - Native acceptance uses a real server, database, browser, and Rust runner with a deterministic provider. It does not verify a live provider service. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning and repository/tool access. The exact serving model ID and context-window limit were not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [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
|
2ca0d26a99 |
fix(connections): recover missing personal AI credentials in chat (#15376)
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
ab15aff390 |
feat: add experimental persistent agent chat (#13284)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Conversations must use the same tasks, controls, and execution history. > - Users need an ongoing chat with an agent without managing task properties. > - Agents should clarify and plan work, then hand execution to assigned project tasks. > - This pull request combines the reviewed Agent Chat stack for one squash merge. > - The benefit is persistent conversation with normal task governance and shared UI. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Task lifecycle, agent runtime tools, shared task UI, and browser/paid runner tests. **Problem or motivation** Users need one persistent conversation with each agent. A separate chat store or renderer would duplicate task behavior and bypass existing controls. **Proposed solution** Use a task-backed chat per company, user, and agent. Reuse the task composer and transcript. Clarify and plan in chat, then create assigned project tasks with the relevant plan. Keep Agent Chat behind its own disabled-by-default experimental setting. **Roadmap alignment** This implements the task-backed direction in [CEO Chat](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/master/ROADMAP.md#-ceo-chat). Related proposals: #2504 and #9693. Related request: #7981. The maintainer requested one squash merge of the complete stack. Consolidates the reviewed runtime [#13281](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13281), backend [#13282](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13282), and UI [#13283](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13283) layers with this PR's E2E coverage. All four layers passed CI and received Greptile 5/5 before consolidation. This PR targets master and includes the complete feature. ## What Changed - Add personal canonical chat tasks with ordinary company visibility, immutable identity, idempotent first sends, and an idle waiting state. - Process `/new` in queue order. Preserve history, release a chat pause, and fence old provider context and delayed writes. - Keep chat lifecycle rules across recovery, finalization, assignment, task lists, and rollups. - Support research and plan revision in chat. Hand plans to ordinary assigned project tasks before execution starts. Reject new chat subtasks. - Add repository-aware project creation and discovery tools, including multiple repository IDs and GitHub URLs, authorization, idempotency, and durable project-created cards. - Reuse task UI components for chat, with starred/recent agent navigation and a separate `enableAgentChat` experimental flag. - Add deterministic browser tests and 24 paid chat cells across four Codex/Claude profiles, with validated reports and screenshots. - Integrate current master recovery, controller lease, queued-message, and task UI changes. Gate chat interruption and deferred promotion on ownership/feature policy. Guarantee lease renewal and active controls are stopped even if teardown fails. - Preserve master's migration 0273 and generate chat migration 0274 with idempotent replay for development databases. ## Verification - Prior exact heads of all four PRs passed Linux CI, including build, typecheck, general/serialized tests, and browser E2E. Each had Greptile 5/5 and no unresolved findings. - Integrated local verification passed: full repository typecheck and production build, Storybook build, token gates, 340 focused UI tests, all 20 deterministic chat browser tests, two migration replay tests, 88 focused chat/queue/native/controller tests, and provider/session regressions including real lease expiry. These include the three lifecycle regressions for the final admission/teardown fixes; server typecheck also passes. Current head `1268eda16cc2af892055917e7292f068820be135` has Greptile 5/5 with no unresolved findings and passing security scans. All final-head CI gates passed: build, full Runner verification, typecheck/release registry, canary, all general/serialized test shards, and all browser E2E shards ([CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34696739927)). Local PostgreSQL startup contention required serialized retries; skipped fixtures do not count as passing coverage. - The earlier paid campaign passed all 24 chat cells and retained 32 screenshots: [report](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-34648511170-1/index.html?report=agent-chat#suite-agent-chat). It tested `abacbdfd2f660709ec37312cdb758284c8399d04`; it is prior evidence, not a paid run of this integrated head. - Manual check: enable Agent Chat in Experimental settings, open an agent, clarify and revise a plan, then hand off to an assigned project task. Stop a reply, send `/new`, and verify fresh context with retained history. Disable the setting and verify agent shortcuts/new chat turns are blocked. ## Risks - Queue/session integration can affect retries and delayed writes. Tests cover ownership, cancellation, reset boundaries, idle recovery, and ordinary task behavior. - Migration 0274 adds conversation fields and constraints. Replay is idempotent and preserves existing development chat history. - This combines the previously reviewed stack at the maintainer's request. Agent Chat remains off by default and is separate from Conference Room. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 Astra (`gpt-6-astra`), with reasoning, code execution, browser tools, and parallel review. The exact context-window size is not exposed in this session. Codex and Claude also ran as test subjects in the linked paid campaign. ## 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
|
ca96e1eb0a |
fix(runner): keep streaming after task completion tools (#13108)
Keep receiving provider events after paperclip_finish, drain pending event persistence, and select the final assistant answer after the provider turn ends. Preserve cancellation, failure, and governed-wait behavior. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
35fdc0c66b |
fix: make task recovery durable and preserve current requests (#13075)
Make task recovery durable and preserve the latest user request across native and legacy continuations. Keep routine recovery quiet and prevent replay when action outcomes are uncertain. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
e095b84dab |
feat(connections): connect services from native task feeds (#13058)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Agents use connections to reach external services. > - A fresh native task can have no service tools installed. > - The agent needs a way to discover services and ask the responsible person for access. > - This pull request brings the existing connection-intent flow into native task execution. > - The person can connect from the task, and the agent can continue with updated tools. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Native runner tool authority, connection intents, task interactions, and shared connection setup. **Problem or motivation** A task that needs an unconnected service cannot finish its work. Leaving the task to configure access also loses context. A resolved request must survive a restart and resume the correct agent once. **Proposed solution** Expose connection discovery and access requests as server-owned native tools. Render a durable task card and use the shared setup dialog. Persist outcome delivery and start a fresh provider session after access is ready. **Alternatives considered** Sending the person to the Connections page adds navigation and does not solve continuation. Polling for authorization consumes runs and can create duplicate requests. **Roadmap alignment** This extends the existing connection-intent runtime and setup experience. It reuses the shared access model and the native runner. Related: #12345, #12347. The service-slug fix in #12906 is related but separate. Companion evaluation PR: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-evals/pull/21. ## What Changed - Expose `connections_search` and `connection_request` with server-bound company, task, agent, and responsible user. Preserve the legacy entry points. - Discover catalog services and authorized custom connections. Check installation, identity, health, and executable permissions before reporting ready. - Keep pending cards through ordinary messages. Reuse requests and retire stale ownership. Put Connect at the right of Not now. - Reuse the shared setup flow in a task dialog. Keep access additive and default to the requesting agent. Recover from cancelled or blocked OAuth windows with a new-tab fallback. - Persist outcome delivery with an idempotent wake key. Resume in a fresh session and recheck ownership before dispatch. - Add native browser fixtures, offline Storybook states, server contracts, and evaluation fixtures. Update guidance and documentation. ## Verification - `pnpm build`: passed after replaying the change on current master. - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm check:token-gates`: passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build-storybook`: passed. - New continuation-policy regression cases: 16 passed. - Docker-backed PostgreSQL regressions passed for requester-only OAuth access, assignment-only expiry, terminal expiry, and credential-free setup metadata. - Shared setup and task-card UI tests: 121 passed, including configured MCP reconnect URL recovery and preserving user edits across refetch. - Storybook browser checks: all 119 passed on the latest reconnect fix. - `pnpm test:run`: 4,734 tests passed in the first server group, but embedded PostgreSQL startup failures and resulting cleanup errors prevented a complete local pass. All Linux CI lanes passed on the latest reviewed commit. One external-object route test returned an unexplained 500 on the first run; it passed twice locally and the failed shard passed on retry without code changes. - Earlier feature-checkout evidence: three deterministic native browser journeys passed, including restart delivery and an actual fixture tool result. Legacy scripted coverage also passed. All 59 added stories were inspected in light and dark themes. - Live Notion testing recorded successful provider reads. The manual test used a local-trusted instance. It does not prove authenticated/cloud deployment or every provider journey. - Native browser rerun reached the embedded PostgreSQL startup limit before bootstrap, so the latest checkout’s full native browser journey remains unverified. Both OAuth page/task regression cases passed against isolated Docker-backed PostgreSQL 17. They verify no premature task access, requester-only completion, additive retries, and reconnect preservation. - Applied both new migrations twice to isolated PostgreSQL 17. Foreign keys remained intact, duplicate active delivery keys were rejected, and failed delivery records did not block retries. Reviewer path: start a fresh test drive, enable the native runner, use an agent that can perform work directly, and ask it to summarize a Notion page. Connect from the card, then verify the resumed provider call and source-linked answer. The default test-drive CEO is instructed to delegate, so it can introduce an unrelated hiring step. ## Risks - Two additive migrations create durable deliveries and a partial unique wake index. They are idempotent. The wake index can require a maintenance window on large tables because migrations run in a transaction. - OAuth and continuation cross asynchronous boundaries. Tests cover ownership changes, retries, additive access, and restart delivery; live provider behavior still varies. - The latest requester-scope fix has not yet been exercised through live OAuth. GitHub, API-key, authenticated-user, and all recovery journeys are not claimed as verified. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6-based Codex assisted with implementation, tests, and review using tools and code execution. The runtime does not expose the exact model version, context window, or reasoning setting. Live evaluation used `gpt-5.6-luna`; manual native testing used `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 and disclosed unavailable runtime details - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this extends existing connection work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the feature issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket id - [ ] I have run all required 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 risks - [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> |