The embedded-Postgres support probe returned a promise that was never
awaited, so `supported` was always falsy and all 4 gate tests skipped.
QA (PAP-13227) validated this fix; committing it so the suite stays live.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Add suggest/change permission keys for agent and skill configuration, route protected mutations through authorization.decide, repair default root and reflection-coach grants, and carry agent permission grants through company portability.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Normalize built-in routine defaults through the same projection used by persisted routine status checks so pristine bundles do not report operator_modified after a clean reconcile. Add regression coverage for the status read path after Reflection Coach materialization.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Implements the bundle status panel for the Reflection Coach built-in agent on
AgentDetail, per the PAP-13097 UX spec and the PAP-13098 server contract:
- ResourceStatusChip: readiness + drift chip grammar (ready/needs-setup/missing/
update-available/drifted/schedule-off), token-only via brandChipBadge, glyph +
word so state is never color-alone (WCAG 1.4.1).
- BuiltInBundlePanel: adapter/skill/instructions/routine rows with per-resource
Update/Reset/Recreate actions (confirm dialogs, ux-spec §8 copy), View links,
and the zero-token-by-default routine row. Adapter readiness derives from the
agent lifecycle status; skill/instructions/routine from state.resources.
- Scoped per-resource reset wired to built-in-agents/:key/reset { resources:[kind] }
(re-materializes one resource to the newest shipped default, preserving other
edits and adapter credentials); Configure opens the existing modal.
- API client: BuiltInAgentBundleMeta + BuiltInManagedResourceState types,
resources[] on BuiltInAgentState, scoped reset + reconcile.
- Storybook board + BuiltInBundlePanel.test.tsx (7 tests). tsc, token-gates,
and tests green.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
The Reflection Coach built-in source bundle (bc944f529) added the bundled
reflection-coach skill and regenerated catalog.json, but the shipped-catalog
enumeration test still expected the prior 12-key bundled set. Add the new key
so the catalog key-set and count assertions match the shipped catalog.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Phase 1 of PAP-13031: markdown-backed shipped defaults for the built-in
Reflection Coach — agent AGENTS.md, paused-by-default recent-agent-reflection
routine template, and the bundled reflection-coach operations skill. Grounded
in the live coach but cleaned up: adds the interaction-gated apply model
(displayed diff + accepted interaction + separate follow-up run) now that the
built-in ships with skill/instruction update permissions.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
At narrow widths the agent name could collapse when the built-in badge and setup chip cluster stayed at full width. Give the name a readable floor and let the lower-priority chip cluster wrap instead.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Implements all UI surfaces for built-in agents (PAP-12978) against the P3
ux-spec (PAP-12977):
- InlineBanner: token-backed info/warning banner primitive (brandBanner tokens)
- BuiltInAgentBadge / BuiltInLifecycleChip: provenance + lifecycle chips
- Roster (Agents page + org tree + sidebar): Built-in badge, Needs-setup /
Pending-approval chip, inline Set up button, and a Built-in filter tab
- AgentDetail: provenance banner, Reset to defaults, pause-confirm dialog with
dependency warning, Terminate hidden for built-ins
- ConfigureBuiltInAgentModal: reuses AgentConfigForm adapter/model pickers
(no second model picker), optional budget, provisions via the API
- BuiltInAgentGate: loading / setup / pending-approval / paused / ready states
- Use-while-paused toast helper (single View-agent link, per D9)
- EmptyState gains an optional title; AgentActionButtons gains pauseConfirm +
hideTerminate; forward-compatible with the server's board-approval flow
- Component tests for gate states + modal submit path; Storybook story +
/design-guide entries for the new components
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The Agents index (`ui/src/pages/Agents.tsx`) is the main roster
view, with both a list layout and an org-tree layout
> - On mobile viewports the roster could render rows with no visible
agent names because shrink-resistant trailing controls competed with the
fixed-width title cell
> - A roster where names are unreadable is unusable on phones, and the
org-tree view had a related narrow-width overflow risk for deeply
indented names
> - This pull request lets the list title flex below `xl`, hides
nonessential row controls on mobile, keeps Join/Leave reachable, and
truncates org-tree names safely
> - The result is a readable agents index on mobile while preserving
desktop meta-column alignment and truncation
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No existing public GitHub issue; describing the bug per the bug report
template:
**What happened?**
On a mobile-width viewport, the agents index showed rows where agent
names could become unreadable or disappear because trailing controls
consumed the available row width. In the org view, deeply indented names
could overflow the row.
**Expected behavior**
Agent names remain visible on every viewport, Join/Leave stays
reachable, and desktop rows continue to align and truncate as before.
**Steps to reproduce**
Open Paperclip in a browser at a narrow viewport, navigate to the Agents
index, and observe rows with long names or left-membership controls.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproducible on `master` prior to this fix.
**Deployment mode**
Local dev instance. The bug is viewport-width dependent, not
deployment-mode dependent.
## What Changed
- `EntityRow` now lets callers control title text, subtitle text, and
the meta spacer classes while keeping the default truncation behavior
unchanged.
- Agents list rows now use `flex-1 xl:flex-none xl:w-56`, so names get
mobile width while desktop meta columns keep their aligned fixed title
column.
- Long list-view names/subtitles wrap below `xl` but return to
truncation at `xl` and above.
- Join/Leave stays visible on mobile; run/status/star row controls stay
hidden on mobile to avoid squeezing names.
- Org-tree rows use `min-w-0 truncate`, so deep indentation shortens
names with an ellipsis instead of overflowing.
- Regression tests cover mobile name visibility, left-membership
dimming, responsive title/meta behavior, and mobile Join/Leave
reachability.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/components/EntityRow.test.tsx src/pages/Agents.test.tsx` — 2 files,
18 tests passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — all gates clean.
- `git diff --cached | rg -n "(AKIA|ASIA|SECRET|TOKEN|PASSWORD|PRIVATE
KEY|BEGIN RSA|BEGIN
OPENSSH|api[_-]?key|bearer|paperclip_api_key|DATABASE_URL|postgres://|sk-[A-Za-z0-9]|xox[baprs]-)"`
— no matches before push.
## Risks
- Low risk: UI-only change scoped to the agents index. The main behavior
change is that nonessential row controls remain hidden on mobile while
Join/Leave remains available there and all controls remain available on
larger screens/detail pages.
## Model Used
- OpenAI GPT-5 via Codex (`codex_local` adapter), agentic code editing
and local/GitHub verification.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Auto-generated lockfile refresh after dependencies changed on master.
This PR only updates pnpm-lock.yaml.
Co-authored-by: lockfile-bot <lockfile-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The Skills Manager gives operators a reusable skill layer, but
iteration still required manual edits, ad hoc prompts, and indirect run
inspection.
> - Skill authors need a focused workflow for editing skill files,
saving representative test inputs, and running those inputs through an
agent without exposing harness tasks as normal company work.
> - The backend therefore needs durable test inputs, reusable run
templates, hidden harness issues, scoped run execution, retention
metadata, and read-containment rules around hidden work.
> - The frontend needs a three-pane Studio that keeps skill files, saved
inputs/templates, and run output/history visible together while
preserving the existing design system and token rules.
> - This pull request ships that Skill Studio surface end to end:
database migrations, shared contracts, server APIs/services, hidden
harness execution behavior, UI routes/components, and focused tests.
> - The benefit is faster and safer skill iteration, with inspectable
outputs and fewer ways for internal harness work to leak into normal
task lists, costs, or adjacent read APIs.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this feature. Feature request summary:
- Problem: Skill authors need to edit and test company skills in one
place instead of switching between the skill detail page, task creation,
run output, and manual prompt history.
- Proposed solution: Add a Skill Studio workbench with saved inputs,
reusable templates, hidden sandboxed test runs, live run status, output
inspection, run history, rerun/delete controls, and frontmatter-aware
editing.
- Expected users: Paperclip operators and agent-company maintainers who
create, fork, import, and tune skills.
- Related public PRs: Supersedes #9205, which was replaced so the public
PR branch name follows contributor policy.
- Duplicate search: searched public GitHub issues and PRs for "Skill
Studio"; no other active public issue or PR directly covers this
feature.
## What Changed
- Added database migrations for Skill Studio test inputs, test runs,
test run retention, and reusable run templates.
- Added shared Skill Studio types, validators, route helpers,
frontmatter utilities, and status handling.
- Added server services and routes for saved inputs, test runs,
templates, reruns, terminal-run deletion, hidden harness issue
execution, and run-detail hydration.
- Strengthened hidden-issue read containment across issue-adjacent
routes and cost rollups used by skill test harness work.
- Added the Skill Studio UI with skill file editing, frontmatter
editing, saved inputs, templates, run creation/cancel/rerun/delete
flows, output rendering, history, route support, and responsive pane
behavior.
- Added focused backend, shared, and UI tests for the new APIs, routing
logic, editor/run behavior, hidden-issue containment, and migration
safety.
- Rebased onto current `master`, removed the generated lockfile diff
from the PR, and verified no workflow files are changed.
## Verification
- [x] `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db check:migrations`
- [x] `pnpm check:token-gates`
- [x] `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/company-skills-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/company-skills-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/company-skill-test-runs-service.test.ts
ui/src/lib/skill-studio.test.ts ui/src/pages/SkillStudio.test.tsx` — 5
files, 132 tests passed
- [x] Greptile review on the latest PR head
- [x] GitHub PR checks on the latest PR head
## Risks
- Medium risk because this is a broad feature touching database schema,
server orchestration, issue visibility, and a large UI surface.
- Hidden harness issue containment is security-sensitive; this PR
includes regression coverage for adjacent read paths and cost rollups.
- The new migrations are additive and use idempotent guards where
applicable, but deployed databases that previously tested draft
migration numbers should still be checked carefully.
- The UI depends on a new resizable panels package in `ui/package.json`;
the lockfile is intentionally left to repository automation.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent with shell, git, and GitHub CLI tool
use. Earlier feature commits include assistance from other Paperclip
coding agents; this PR preparation, rebase, cleanup commit, and PR body
were completed by OpenAI Codex in a Paperclip worktree.
## 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>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agent runtimes are selected through adapters, and each adapter
exposes the model IDs an operator can pick in the UI
> - The `codex_local` and `opencode_local` adapters hardcode those
lists, so a newly released model stays unreachable until it is added
> - `gpt-5.4-mini` is available via both the Codex CLI and the OpenCode
CLI, but neither adapter lists it; `openai/gpt-5.5` is likewise missing
from `opencode_local`
> - This pull request adds those entries, and deliberately keeps
`gpt-5.4-mini` out of the Codex Fast mode allowlist because the model
does not support Fast mode
> - The benefit is that operators can select these models from the UI
instead of falling back to a manual model ID, and Fast mode fails closed
rather than sending unsupported overrides to the CLI
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No existing issue covers this. Describing it inline, following the
feature request template:
### Problem or motivation
`gpt-5.4-mini` is absent from the `models` list of both the
`codex_local` and `opencode_local` adapters, and `openai/gpt-5.5` is
absent from `opencode_local`. (`codex_local` already ships `gpt-5.5` —
it is the default model on master.) Operators who want these models must
type a manual model ID.
For `codex_local` that has a real side effect.
`isCodexLocalFastModeSupported` treats any *unknown* model as
Fast-mode-capable and passes `service_tier="fast"` and
`features.fast_mode=true` through to the CLI. Because `gpt-5.4-mini`
does not support Codex Fast mode, an agent configured with a manual
`gpt-5.4-mini` model ID and `fastMode` enabled silently sends overrides
the CLI cannot honor.
### Proposed solution
Add the three missing entries to the two `models` lists, and leave
`CODEX_LOCAL_FAST_MODE_SUPPORTED_MODELS` untouched. Listing
`gpt-5.4-mini` in `models` is precisely what makes it a *known* model,
so `isCodexLocalFastModeSupported` returns `false`, `buildCodexExecArgs`
omits the Fast mode overrides, and `fastModeIgnoredReason` is surfaced
to the operator.
### Alternatives considered
Adding `gpt-5.4-mini` to `CODEX_LOCAL_FAST_MODE_SUPPORTED_MODELS` as
well — rejected, because the model does not support Fast mode and the
overrides would be rejected at run time. Leaving the models unlisted so
operators keep using manual IDs — rejected, because that is the path
that silently enables Fast mode for a model that cannot use it.
### Roadmap alignment
Not core roadmap work. `ROADMAP.md` does not plan adapter model-list
maintenance; this is routine upkeep as upstream CLIs ship new models.
## What Changed
- Add `gpt-5.4-mini` to the `codex_local` adapter's `models` list,
positioned after `gpt-5.4` (newest-first ordering).
- Add `openai/gpt-5.5` and `openai/gpt-5.4-mini` to the `opencode_local`
adapter's `models` list.
- Add a `buildCodexExecArgs` test asserting Fast mode is ignored for
`gpt-5.4-mini`.
`CODEX_LOCAL_FAST_MODE_SUPPORTED_MODELS` is intentionally unchanged. No
behavior changes to existing models or adapter logic.
## Verification
```
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-codex-local --filter @paperclipai/adapter-opencode-local typecheck
npx vitest run packages/adapters/codex-local packages/adapters/opencode-local
```
Both pass: typecheck clean on both packages, and 22 test files / 133
tests green, including the new `ignores fast mode for gpt-5.4-mini`
case.
## Risks
Low risk. The change is additive: three entries appended to two
model-selection lists, plus one test. No default model changes, no
adapter logic changes, no migrations.
One behavioral shift is intended. An operator who had `gpt-5.4-mini`
configured as a *manual* model ID with `fastMode` enabled was getting
Fast mode overrides passed through to the Codex CLI. After this change
`gpt-5.4-mini` is a known model, so those overrides are dropped and
`fastModeIgnoredReason` explains why.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex CLI with GPT-5 / GPT-5.5-assisted code editing (the
original commits on this branch).
- Anthropic Claude Opus 4.8 (`claude-opus-4-8`, 1M context, extended
thinking, tool use) for the master merge, conflict resolution, and the
scope reduction in the latest commit.
## 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 the GitHub PR list for similar or duplicate PRs
and confirmed this one is not a duplicate
- [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 (N/A;
the adapter docs describe Fast mode support, which is unchanged)
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Andrew Aymeloglu <aaymeloglu@gmail.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Operators rely on the issue detail thread to understand whether a
task is blocked, live, or waiting on another task.
> - A blocked issue can have a healthy blocker chain where downstream
work is actively running and the parent will resume automatically.
> - Showing that case with the same amber blocked notice as a stalled or
attention-needed blocker makes the state look more severe than it is.
> - The UI already receives blocker-attention state, blocker summaries,
and company live-run ids, so this can be clarified without a new API
shape.
> - This pull request adds a blue "Waiting on live work" notice for
covered blocker chains while preserving the existing amber notice for
the other blocked states.
> - The benefit is that operators can distinguish healthy queued work
from blocked work that needs intervention.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #3820
Refs #8271
Related PR: #3877
Supersedes #9295
## What Changed
- Added a blue `IssueBlockedNotice` variant when
`blockerAttention.state` is `covered` and the blocker chain has live
work.
- Rendered blocker-chain progress as done, running, and queued steps,
including a "Now running" row for live terminal blockers.
- Preserved the existing amber blocked notice for stalled,
attention-needed, ordinary blocked, and successful-run handoff states.
- Plumbed the existing `liveIssueIds`, `blockedBy`, and
`blockerAttention` data from issue detail into the chat-thread blocked
notice.
- Added regression coverage around the covered live-work state, the
no-confirmed-live fallback, numeric step ordering, and amber fallback
states.
- Hardened a low-trust server route test cleanup helper so CI deletes
heartbeat run events before deleting heartbeat runs.
## Verification
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/IssueBlockedNotice.test.tsx`
- GitHub PR workflow is green on head
`52ab6d9076ce233c183bf7133fa666e8597b6765`.
- Greptile check is green on head
`52ab6d9076ce233c183bf7133fa666e8597b6765` with zero unresolved review
threads.
## Risks
Low runtime risk: the product change is frontend-only and uses data
already returned to the issue detail page. The main risk is visual
regression in the blocked notice; the change keeps non-covered states on
the existing amber path and adds focused regression coverage. The
server-side change is test-only cleanup for an existing CI shard
failure.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex using GPT-5, tool-use enabled in a repository workspace.
The runtime did not expose a more specific model build id or
context-window size.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The work timeline helps operators understand what agents did, when
they did it, and who kicked off each run
> - Timeline statistics should describe the window the operator is
viewing, not hidden work outside the viewport
> - Kickoff chips should point to the run that was actually closest to
the triggering edge, not stale later runs on the same issue
> - This pull request scopes timeline summary stats to the visible
window and deduplicates kickoff attribution to the nearest matching run
> - The benefit is that operators get a more accurate, less misleading
timeline while scanning agent work
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No matching public GitHub issue was found. Public duplicate search found
no open PR for "work timeline visible window kickoff".
### What happened?
Work timeline summary stats could count hidden spans outside the
selected visible window, and kickoff attribution could appear on a stale
matching run instead of the closest run associated with the edge.
### Expected behavior
Visible timeline stats should reflect only the current visible range,
and each kickoff edge should attach to the nearest matching run.
### Steps to reproduce
1. View a work timeline with agent spans that begin before or end after
the selected visible window.
2. Compare the summary stats against only the spans visible in the
viewport.
3. View repeated runs for the same actor and issue that share a kickoff
edge.
4. Check which run gets the kickoff chip.
### Paperclip version or commit
Current `origin/master` before this PR.
### Deployment mode
Board UI.
## What Changed
- Filters timeline summary stats to the visible time window.
- Passes visible-window metadata into the work timeline chart and page
state.
- Assigns each kickoff edge to only the closest matching run, with
deterministic tie-breaking.
- Adds focused regression coverage for visible stats and stale kickoff
attribution.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
ui/src/components/timeline/WorkTimelineChart.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/timeline/layout.test.ts ui/src/pages/Timeline.test.tsx` -- 38
tests passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` -- all gates clean.
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` -- passed.
## Visual Evidence
Public review artifacts for the user-visible timeline behaviours. The
SVGs use sanitized run labels and no internal Paperclip issue
identifiers.
Artifact gist:
https://gist.github.com/cryppadotta/dc2645d54c4bc56ffc0323224b3ea4bf
## Risks
- Low risk. The change affects timeline rendering and summary
calculations only; the main risk is a subtle difference in which run
gets a kickoff chip when multiple runs are very close together.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex coding agent based on GPT-5, tool-enabled shell workflow.
Exact hosted model variant and context window were not exposed by the
runtime.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and 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>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents often run against managed workspace runtime services,
including reusable Paperclip dev servers
> - A running process and an open root URL are not enough to prove the
Paperclip API is actually ready
> - If the API health endpoint is still failing, agents can reuse a
service that looks alive but cannot safely serve the board or API
clients
> - This pull request makes Paperclip dev runtime readiness probe the
resolved `/api/health` endpoint
> - The benefit is that runtime service reuse waits for the same health
signal operators and agents depend on
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No matching public GitHub issue was found. Public duplicate search found
no open PR for "workspace runtime health readiness".
Bug report:
### What happened?
A managed Paperclip dev runtime service could satisfy HTTP readiness at
the exposed base URL even when the Paperclip health endpoint was
returning an unhealthy status.
### Expected behavior
Paperclip dev runtime services should not be considered ready until
their health endpoint succeeds.
### Steps to reproduce
1. Start a workspace runtime service named `paperclip-dev` whose base
URL responds successfully.
2. Make that same service return HTTP 503 from `/api/health`.
3. Ask Paperclip to ensure the runtime service for a run.
4. Observe that the service can be reused even though the API health
endpoint is not ready.
### Paperclip version or commit
Current `origin/master` before this PR.
### Deployment mode
Local workspace runtime service management.
## What Changed
- Resolve Paperclip dev runtime readiness checks to the service health
URL before polling.
- Surface readiness errors with the actual health URL that failed.
- Add a regression test that fails when `/api/health` returns HTTP 503
even if the service process is running.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts`
— 81 tests passed.
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` — passed.
## Risks
- Low to medium risk. This tightens readiness for Paperclip dev runtime
services, so a service that previously looked ready while unhealthy will
now fail fast instead of being reused.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex coding agent based on GPT-5, tool-enabled shell workflow.
Exact hosted model variant and context window were not exposed by the
runtime.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and 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>
