PaperClipAI

Jannik/PaperClipAI

0 Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git synced 2026-10-22 16:51:28 +02:00

Commit Graph

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	a65ca09508	fix(runner): settle accepted results after shutdown failures (#15217 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and the tasks they perform. > - The native runner saves tool results and completion reports before it releases a session. > - Large project discovery responses can exceed the durable command limit. > - A shutdown failure can leave a saved answer waiting for workspace repair. > - Recovery reused the old assessment for a different status decision, which violated a database constraint. > - This pull request bounds discovery responses and lets recovery commit the saved result after workspace repair. > - The benefit is a task that reaches its correct final status without another provider turn. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What happened? A native run can save its final answer, fail during shutdown, and leave the task In Progress after workspace repair succeeds. Reconciliation tries to reuse the failed-workspace assessment for a new decision. The one-decision-per-assessment constraint rejects the write. Replaying the old decision can also retain a fresh coordinator lease. Separately, retained session cleanup only recognizes the old `adapter_failed` label. The project-list tool returns full project records, including large descriptions and workspace configuration. A large response exceeds the runner's durable command limit. The settlement diagnostic previously recorded only a failure flag. Expected behavior Project discovery stays within the command limit. Recovery finishes the saved result after workspace repair, releases its lease, and preserves the original error for inspection. It does not repeat provider work or relax session ownership checks. Steps to reproduce 1. Return large project records from `list_projects` and observe an oversized semantic result. 2. Persist an accepted native completion result, then record a shutdown failure. 3. Finalize with a failed workspace, repeat that attempt, then record successful workspace repair. 4. Reconcile the run. Before this fix, the issue stays In Progress. Paperclip version or commit Reproduced on `a386a599983519eb1d399f8b770bfccdb2a74762`. Deployment mode Self-hosted server with Paperclip Runner. Related transport work: #12208 drains queued events; #12241 resumes interrupted semantic calls. This change addresses bounded project discovery and accepted-result finalization. ## What Changed - Read bounded project summary projections from the database and return at most 50 authorized summaries with a continuation cursor and explicit description truncation. Agent and run trust boundaries narrow the database candidates; project-specific policies still receive full authorization. Only visible projects determine continuations. The default project-list API remains unchanged. - Record bounded, content-free settlement failure causes for command limits, storage errors, and rejected dispatch. - Include workspace state in assessment identity. Preserve the initial assessment for interrupted finalization, and commit replacement assessment and decision references together. - Release the coordinator lease when an existing decision is replayed, without repeating its effects. - Clear stale errors when recovery succeeds and retain them in `recoveredExecutionFailure`. - Accept both current and legacy close-failure labels in the existing exact-state cleanup path. - Add regression tests and update the tool contracts and recovery documentation. ## Verification - Red: the new project paging, settlement diagnostic, current cleanup label, and repaired-workspace regressions failed on the original implementation. - Green: protocol/catalog/tool checks (117 tests), the full project-tool and finalizer suites (47 tests), cleanup ownership cases (70 tests), and cleanup sweep cases (4 tests) pass. Database-backed pagination covers large descriptions/configuration, complete enumeration, uppercase cursors, agent/run restrictions, project-policy scope contributions, and identical results/cursors when hidden projects are added. - The initial CI failures in interrupted Board waits, contended endpoint proof, and semantic schema validation were reproduced and fixed; all affected cases pass locally. - `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed. - `pnpm build` — passed. - `pnpm test:run` — started before the review corrections; it spanned several source revisions and was stopped after reporting old-behavior and timing failures. It is not claimed green. Fresh project and recovery suites pass; the recovery suite also passes all 25 cases with the broad runner’s isolated home/config. The Slack timing case passed in isolation. Latest-head CI is the authoritative complete test matrix. - Existing authorization suite — 66 tests passed. - Latest-head CI on `8e5763d915aa6f375bdab6601996899ea01496fc` — 55 checks passed, 4 intentionally skipped, no pending or failing checks. - Greptile — 5/5, zero unresolved threads on the same commit. - `git diff --check` — passed. ## Risks - `list_projects` now returns summaries. Callers must follow `nextCursor` and use the authorized project API for full records. Candidate narrowing is only an optimization: project policy and responsible-user authorization remain authoritative. - Assessment identity changes for workspace finalization. Existing evidence remains intact; no migration is needed. - Cleanup still requires matching identities, settled tool evidence, and verified process ownership. Unknown tool outcomes remain blocked from session reuse. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, code execution, and GitHub tools. The exact serving 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>	2026-10-05 10:31:11 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	018993140f	feat: let agents name prompt-only tasks (#14761 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Users create tasks with a title and a description. > - A required title adds work when the prompt already explains the request. > - An agent can name the task once it reads that request. > - This pull request accepts prompt-only tasks and starts them with a short prompt slice. > - A scoped title tool lets the assigned agent replace that slice early without changing execution state. > - A live browser eval checks the real agent call, saved title, audit entry, and preservation of user titles. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Subsystem affected Cross-cutting: task creation, shared contracts, database, server, runner tools, and board UI. Problem or motivation Users must currently write a title before they can submit a detailed task prompt. The agent has enough context to write a useful title itself. Proposed solution Make the title optional when a description is present. Save the first 120 characters of the normalized prompt as a provisional title. Ask the assigned agent to call `set_task_title` early. Use an atomic provisional-title guard to preserve titles supplied or edited by users. Keep explicit titles supported. Related: #14543 and #14556 concern empty-title submission. This change intentionally enables that submission when a prompt is present, instead of requiring a title. ## What Changed - Add the `titleNeedsGeneration` field with an idempotent migration. Keep existing titles unchanged. - Add `PUT /api/issues/:id/title` and the native and legacy `set_task_title` tool. Enforce company access, active-run ownership, shared, bounded retry receipts across native/HTTP calls, and transactional audit logging. Refresh external-object links after commit, with the same feature gate and plugin detectors as ordinary title edits. - Add early naming guidance in Standard, Ask, and Plan task context. Preserve the description, status, and assignment. - Allow prompt-only root and child task creation, plus draft restoration in the New Task dialog. Keep user titles supported. - Add an opt-in Product E2E suite for prompt-only Standard and Ask tasks, plus an explicit-title control. It checks actual provider calls within the first five tools, persisted state, audit attribution, and the reloaded UI. - Preserve a closed vocabulary of API key maintenance phrases in declared prose while rejecting opaque credential suffixes. Add one bounded naming retry after wording is rejected, without treating the rejected call as a saved title. - Repair the native cleanup receipt check exposed during full verification: accept matching input digests, retain legacy input checks, and reject conflicting receipts. ## Verification - Live Product E2E on `f43478473800e3a46b85c5ee79677efdb15108e7`: 3/3 passed with native Codex `gpt-5.4-mini`, first attempts only, automatic retries disabled. Standard and Ask each saved “Rotate expired API key” on their first tool call, with matching persisted state and a single same-run audit entry. The explicit-title control retained its user title with zero title writes. All three verified the reloaded browser UI. - Campaign: `local-2026-09-30T21-30-11-021Z`. Earlier failed campaigns are retained separately; they exposed credential-prose handling and prompted the naming recovery fix. No failed result was regraded or deleted. - Reproduce with `pnpm test:e2e:runner -- --id task-titles.runner-codex-mini.local.prompt-title-standard --id task-titles.runner-codex-mini.local.prompt-title-ask --id task-titles.runner-codex-mini.local.preserve-explicit-title --max-automatic-retries 0` and an authorized provider key. - Full `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on the latest commit. The runner build used the configured external eval source tree. - Product E2E unit suite: 61 files, 818 tests passed; E2E typecheck and UI token gates passed. - Title API/native regressions cover prompt-only and explicit child creation, user edits, ownership/company isolation, external reference refresh, cross-surface retry replay, and the 64-key limit without receipt eviction. All passed. Prompt-context coverage: 44 tests passed. - Rust credential regressions: 35 tests passed, including benign maintenance qualifiers and opaque credential rejection in every declared prose field. Catalog/report reconciliation: 28 tests passed. Native recovery: 560 tests passed. - Broad local `pnpm test:run`: 14,555 tests passed in the general server group; two suites failed to initialize embedded PostgreSQL and the existing 40,000-file Git streaming stress test exceeded its 300-second macOS timeout. All three suites then passed in isolation (5 tests passed) without code or timeout changes. The original full local command exited nonzero and is not being represented as a clean full run. - Latest-head GitHub checks are green: 53 passed, 4 skipped, zero failed or pending, including all test shards and the canary packaging dry run. Greptile reviewed the same commit at 5/5, with zero unresolved review threads. ## Risks - The additive database field must reach the server and UI together. The migration uses `IF NOT EXISTS` and defaults existing tasks to a final title. - Title generation depends on the assigned agent running. Tasks without a run keep their provisional title. - Live qualification covers the native Codex path in Standard and Ask modes. API/legacy and Plan behavior have deterministic coverage. - The credential-prose exception validates the entire suffix against a closed maintenance vocabulary. Unknown suffixes, assignments, quoted values, credential prefixes, and diagnostics retain strict checks. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact deployment ID and context window are not exposed in this session. The live eval uses the native Codex `gpt-5.4-mini` profile. ## 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>	2026-09-30 16:48:24 -05:00
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>	2026-09-12 08:56:04 -05:00

Author

SHA1

Message

Date

DottaandPaperclip

a65ca09508

fix(runner): settle accepted results after shutdown failures (#15217 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and the tasks they perform.
> - The native runner saves tool results and completion reports before
it releases a session.
> - Large project discovery responses can exceed the durable command
limit.
> - A shutdown failure can leave a saved answer waiting for workspace
repair.
> - Recovery reused the old assessment for a different status decision,
which violated a database constraint.
> - This pull request bounds discovery responses and lets recovery
commit the saved result after workspace repair.
> - The benefit is a task that reaches its correct final status without
another provider turn.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A native run can save its final answer, fail during shutdown, and leave
the task In Progress after workspace repair succeeds. Reconciliation
tries to reuse the failed-workspace assessment for a new decision. The
one-decision-per-assessment constraint rejects the write. Replaying the
old decision can also retain a fresh coordinator lease. Separately,
retained session cleanup only recognizes the old `adapter_failed` label.

The project-list tool returns full project records, including large
descriptions and workspace configuration. A large response exceeds the
runner's durable command limit. The settlement diagnostic previously
recorded only a failure flag.

**Expected behavior**

Project discovery stays within the command limit. Recovery finishes the
saved result after workspace repair, releases its lease, and preserves
the original error for inspection. It does not repeat provider work or
relax session ownership checks.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Return large project records from `list_projects` and observe an
oversized semantic result.
2. Persist an accepted native completion result, then record a shutdown
failure.
3. Finalize with a failed workspace, repeat that attempt, then record
successful workspace repair.
4. Reconcile the run. Before this fix, the issue stays In Progress.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced on `a386a599983519eb1d399f8b770bfccdb2a74762`.

**Deployment mode**

Self-hosted server with Paperclip Runner.

Related transport work: #12208 drains queued events; #12241 resumes
interrupted semantic calls. This change addresses bounded project
discovery and accepted-result finalization.

## What Changed

- Read bounded project summary projections from the database and return
at most 50 authorized summaries with a continuation cursor and explicit
description truncation. Agent and run trust boundaries narrow the
database candidates; project-specific policies still receive full
authorization. Only visible projects determine continuations. The
default project-list API remains unchanged.
- Record bounded, content-free settlement failure causes for command
limits, storage errors, and rejected dispatch.
- Include workspace state in assessment identity. Preserve the initial
assessment for interrupted finalization, and commit replacement
assessment and decision references together.
- Release the coordinator lease when an existing decision is replayed,
without repeating its effects.
- Clear stale errors when recovery succeeds and retain them in
`recoveredExecutionFailure`.
- Accept both current and legacy close-failure labels in the existing
exact-state cleanup path.
- Add regression tests and update the tool contracts and recovery
documentation.

## Verification

- Red: the new project paging, settlement diagnostic, current cleanup
label, and repaired-workspace regressions failed on the original
implementation.
- Green: protocol/catalog/tool checks (117 tests), the full project-tool
and finalizer suites (47 tests), cleanup ownership cases (70 tests), and
cleanup sweep cases (4 tests) pass. Database-backed pagination covers
large descriptions/configuration, complete enumeration, uppercase
cursors, agent/run restrictions, project-policy scope contributions, and
identical results/cursors when hidden projects are added.
- The initial CI failures in interrupted Board waits, contended endpoint
proof, and semantic schema validation were reproduced and fixed; all
affected cases pass locally.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm build` — passed.
- `pnpm test:run` — started before the review corrections; it spanned
several source revisions and was stopped after reporting old-behavior
and timing failures. It is not claimed green. Fresh project and recovery
suites pass; the recovery suite also passes all 25 cases with the broad
runner’s isolated home/config. The Slack timing case passed in
isolation. Latest-head CI is the authoritative complete test matrix.
- Existing authorization suite — 66 tests passed.
- Latest-head CI on `8e5763d915aa6f375bdab6601996899ea01496fc` — 55
checks passed, 4 intentionally skipped, no pending or failing checks.
- Greptile — 5/5, zero unresolved threads on the same commit.
- `git diff --check` — passed.

## Risks

- `list_projects` now returns summaries. Callers must follow
`nextCursor` and use the authorized project API for full records.
Candidate narrowing is only an optimization: project policy and
responsible-user authorization remain authoritative.
- Assessment identity changes for workspace finalization. Existing
evidence remains intact; no migration is needed.
- Cleanup still requires matching identities, settled tool evidence, and
verified process ownership. Unknown tool outcomes remain blocked from
session reuse.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, code execution, and GitHub
tools. The exact serving 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>

2026-10-05 10:31:11 -05:00

DottaandPaperclip

018993140f

feat: let agents name prompt-only tasks (#14761 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Users create tasks with a title and a description.
> - A required title adds work when the prompt already explains the
request.
> - An agent can name the task once it reads that request.
> - This pull request accepts prompt-only tasks and starts them with a
short prompt slice.
> - A scoped title tool lets the assigned agent replace that slice early
without changing execution state.
> - A live browser eval checks the real agent call, saved title, audit
entry, and preservation of user titles.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Cross-cutting: task creation, shared contracts, database, server, runner
tools, and board UI.

**Problem or motivation**

Users must currently write a title before they can submit a detailed
task prompt. The agent has enough context to write a useful title
itself.

**Proposed solution**

Make the title optional when a description is present. Save the first
120 characters of the normalized prompt as a provisional title. Ask the
assigned agent to call `set_task_title` early. Use an atomic
provisional-title guard to preserve titles supplied or edited by users.
Keep explicit titles supported.

Related: #14543 and #14556 concern empty-title submission. This change
intentionally enables that submission when a prompt is present, instead
of requiring a title.

## What Changed

- Add the `titleNeedsGeneration` field with an idempotent migration.
Keep existing titles unchanged.
- Add `PUT /api/issues/:id/title` and the native and legacy
`set_task_title` tool. Enforce company access, active-run ownership,
shared, bounded retry receipts across native/HTTP calls, and
transactional audit logging. Refresh external-object links after commit,
with the same feature gate and plugin detectors as ordinary title edits.
- Add early naming guidance in Standard, Ask, and Plan task context.
Preserve the description, status, and assignment.
- Allow prompt-only root and child task creation, plus draft restoration
in the New Task dialog. Keep user titles supported.
- Add an opt-in Product E2E suite for prompt-only Standard and Ask
tasks, plus an explicit-title control. It checks actual provider calls
within the first five tools, persisted state, audit attribution, and the
reloaded UI.
- Preserve a closed vocabulary of API key maintenance phrases in
declared prose while rejecting opaque credential suffixes. Add one
bounded naming retry after wording is rejected, without treating the
rejected call as a saved title.
- Repair the native cleanup receipt check exposed during full
verification: accept matching input digests, retain legacy input checks,
and reject conflicting receipts.

## Verification

- Live Product E2E on `f43478473800e3a46b85c5ee79677efdb15108e7`: **3/3
passed** with native Codex `gpt-5.4-mini`, first attempts only,
automatic retries disabled. Standard and Ask each saved “Rotate expired
API key” on their first tool call, with matching persisted state and a
single same-run audit entry. The explicit-title control retained its
user title with zero title writes. All three verified the reloaded
browser UI.
- Campaign: `local-2026-09-30T21-30-11-021Z`. Earlier failed campaigns
are retained separately; they exposed credential-prose handling and
prompted the naming recovery fix. No failed result was regraded or
deleted.
- Reproduce with `pnpm test:e2e:runner -- --id
task-titles.runner-codex-mini.local.prompt-title-standard --id
task-titles.runner-codex-mini.local.prompt-title-ask --id
task-titles.runner-codex-mini.local.preserve-explicit-title
--max-automatic-retries 0` and an authorized provider key.
- Full `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on the latest commit.
The runner build used the configured external eval source tree.
- Product E2E unit suite: **61 files, 818 tests passed**; E2E typecheck
and UI token gates passed.
- Title API/native regressions cover prompt-only and explicit child
creation, user edits, ownership/company isolation, external reference
refresh, cross-surface retry replay, and the 64-key limit without
receipt eviction. All passed. Prompt-context coverage: **44 tests
passed**.
- Rust credential regressions: **35 tests passed**, including benign
maintenance qualifiers and opaque credential rejection in every declared
prose field. Catalog/report reconciliation: **28 tests passed**. Native
recovery: **560 tests passed**.
- Broad local `pnpm test:run`: **14,555 tests passed** in the general
server group; two suites failed to initialize embedded PostgreSQL and
the existing 40,000-file Git streaming stress test exceeded its
300-second macOS timeout. All three suites then passed in isolation (**5
tests passed**) without code or timeout changes. The original full local
command exited nonzero and is not being represented as a clean full run.
- Latest-head GitHub checks are green: **53 passed, 4 skipped, zero
failed or pending**, including all test shards and the canary packaging
dry run. Greptile reviewed the same commit at **5/5**, with zero
unresolved review threads.

## Risks

- The additive database field must reach the server and UI together. The
migration uses `IF NOT EXISTS` and defaults existing tasks to a final
title.
- Title generation depends on the assigned agent running. Tasks without
a run keep their provisional title.
- Live qualification covers the native Codex path in Standard and Ask
modes. API/legacy and Plan behavior have deterministic coverage.
- The credential-prose exception validates the entire suffix against a
closed maintenance vocabulary. Unknown suffixes, assignments, quoted
values, credential prefixes, and diagnostics retain strict checks.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact deployment ID and context window are not exposed in
this session. The live eval uses the native Codex `gpt-5.4-mini`
profile.

## 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>

2026-09-30 16:48:24 -05:00

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>

2026-09-12 08:56:04 -05:00