PaperClipAI

4,440 Commits 1,422 Branches 2,269 Tags

3 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	7ed122911b	Add end-to-end session goals to Paperclip Runner Add capability-aware slash-goal controls, durable provider goal state, PRP v2 negotiation, autonomous goal execution, and safe local session recovery. Integrate with current master, preserve provider session identity, and verify the browser goal/chat/replacement/clear workflow and unsupported-agent rejection. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-09-08 16:18:47 -05:00
Dotta	131f5c4065	feat(runner): add administration and observability (#12641 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Administrators need bounded controls for experimental native execution. > - The lower stack adds remote Codex execution and the task workspace. > - Operators need to configure Codex safely and inspect provider traces. > - Unsupported providers must not appear as runnable choices. > - This pull request adds Codex-only administration and observability. > - The benefit is a default-off operational surface for production diagnosis. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #12640. Refs #12616. Refs #12352. Subsystem affected Agent configuration, instance experimental settings, run ledger, provider trace inspector, and administrator actions. Problem or motivation The native runner lacks one safe operator surface for Codex permissions, lifecycle, raw trace capture, and run inspection. The integration branch also contains provider choices that the production backend cannot execute yet. Proposed solution Expose only the qualified Codex controls. Keep Paperclip Developer Mode and runner preview ingress off by default. Gate raw trace actions by administrator access and existing trace authorization. Alternatives considered Exposing unfinished providers would create configurations that fail at runtime. Always-on tracing would increase sensitive data and storage risk. Roadmap alignment This work supports governed Cloud and Sandbox agents and production diagnostics. ## Stack - Base PR: #12640. - Lower PRs: #12639 and #12638. - This PR contains only its 54-file administration and observability delta. - This is the final feature PR in the Codex production stack. ## What Changed - Added Codex-only Paperclip Runner permission and lifecycle controls. - Added bounded warm idle configuration. - Kept the provider field fixed to Codex. - Added administrator-only one-run raw trace requests. - Added a persistent future-run raw trace toggle. - Added trace status, metadata, ledger, and canonical runner inspection. - Added JSON-RPC request-origin grouping and finalization lineage. - Restored the stateful PRP transcript parser and focused projection tests required by trace inspection. - Added default-off Paperclip Developer Mode. - Added Honeycomb run links for authorized developer mode. - Disabled the legacy operational skill for `paperclip_runner`. - Did not expose OpenCode, ACPX, Pi, Claude Managed, or AWS runner choices. - Did not change migrations, workflows, dependencies, or `pnpm-lock.yaml`. ## Verification - GitHub Actions will run UI tests, server tests, repository typecheck, build, browser tests, security, and policy gates. - Tests cover Codex configuration defaults and bounds, administrator trace actions, persistent settings, ledger inspection, trace lineage, and Honeycomb links. - Existing server trace authorization and retention tests remain the backend authority. - Local tests were not run. The requested verification policy uses GitHub Actions for this series. - `git diff --check runner/task-workspace-experience...HEAD` passes. - The delta contains 54 files. ## Risks - Raw provider traces can contain sensitive provider data. - Existing server authorization controls access, reveal, download, retention, and deletion. - The UI gates trace actions by administrator access and developer mode. - All new instance settings remain off by default. - Fresh Paperclip Runner configuration remains Codex-only. - Direct adapters and legacy task behavior do not change in this PR. > 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 with GPT-5.6. The work used high-reasoning agent mode, repository tools, GitHub tools, and parallel code-audit agents. ## 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 or instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id - [ ] 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 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	2026-09-01 03:41:23 -05:00
Dotta	06f8773097	feat(runner): add Codex session driver (#12371 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The package now has bounded Codex transport, security, question, diff, value, and thread helpers > - Those isolated boundaries can now be composed into one provider session lifecycle > - The driver must preserve controller-owned identity, results, terminals, and recovery invariants > - Unsupported or mismatched provider traffic must fail closed without weakening legacy adapters > - This pull request adds only the Codex app-server driver and its package-local tests > - It does not expose or enable the Paperclip Runner adapter ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Subsystem affected `packages/paperclip-runner` Codex app-server session driver. Problem or motivation The runner needs a production-shaped Codex session implementation that turns provider facts into canonical PRP events while keeping task identity, semantic completion, runtime input, and recovery under controller authority. Proposed solution Compose the previously reviewed transport and normalization boundaries into a Codex-only harness driver with session open/resume, turns, streaming events, semantic tools, structured questions, goals, lineage, usage, cancellation, reconciliation, and deterministic persisted snapshots. Alternatives considered Keeping the full implementation in one initial transport pull request would obscure the trust boundaries. Adding the deferred ACPX or OpenCode paths here would also broaden the provider scope beyond the Codex-first series. Roadmap alignment This implements the Codex provider slice inside the package. It does not enable the runner adapter or change any existing direct adapter path. ## What Changed - Added the Codex app-server harness driver and session lifecycle. - Added controller-bound semantic completion and terminal handling. - Added runtime requests, structured questions, goals, lineage, usage, steering, interruption, and recovery. - Added workspace diff and file-reference projection. - Connected bounded/redacted provider data and notification identity checks. - Kept deferred provider identities and replacement behavior out of the Codex-only driver. - Added 62 focused driver cases covering lifecycle, security, recovery, and protocol failures. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:typescript` (34 files, 337 tests) - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm build` - The focused Codex driver suite has 62 passing cases. ## Risks The main risks are accepting provider events from the wrong session, duplicating terminal facts, retaining unsafe provider data, or resuming a different session. Tests cover pre-turn, cross-thread, stale-turn, post-terminal, duplicate-result, cancellation, transport loss, provider identity, workspace, redaction, structured input, and recovery cases. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex with GPT-5.6 and repository tool use. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-08-30 01:39:42 -05:00

Author

SHA1

Message

Date

DottaandPaperclip

7ed122911b

Add end-to-end session goals to Paperclip Runner

Add capability-aware slash-goal controls, durable provider goal state, PRP v2 negotiation, autonomous goal execution, and safe local session recovery. Integrate with current master, preserve provider session identity, and verify the browser goal/chat/replacement/clear workflow and unsupported-agent rejection.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>

2026-09-08 16:18:47 -05:00

Dotta

131f5c4065

feat(runner): add administration and observability (#12641 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Administrators need bounded controls for experimental native
execution.
> - The lower stack adds remote Codex execution and the task workspace.
> - Operators need to configure Codex safely and inspect provider
traces.
> - Unsupported providers must not appear as runnable choices.
> - This pull request adds Codex-only administration and observability.
> - The benefit is a default-off operational surface for production
diagnosis.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #12640.
Refs #12616.
Refs #12352.

**Subsystem affected**

Agent configuration, instance experimental settings, run ledger,
provider trace inspector, and administrator actions.

**Problem or motivation**

The native runner lacks one safe operator surface for Codex permissions,
lifecycle, raw trace capture, and run inspection. The integration branch
also contains provider choices that the production backend cannot
execute yet.

**Proposed solution**

Expose only the qualified Codex controls. Keep Paperclip Developer Mode
and runner preview ingress off by default. Gate raw trace actions by
administrator access and existing trace authorization.

**Alternatives considered**

Exposing unfinished providers would create configurations that fail at
runtime. Always-on tracing would increase sensitive data and storage
risk.

**Roadmap alignment**

This work supports governed Cloud and Sandbox agents and production
diagnostics.

## Stack

- Base PR: #12640.
- Lower PRs: #12639 and #12638.
- This PR contains only its 54-file administration and observability
delta.
- This is the final feature PR in the Codex production stack.

## What Changed

- Added Codex-only Paperclip Runner permission and lifecycle controls.
- Added bounded warm idle configuration.
- Kept the provider field fixed to Codex.
- Added administrator-only one-run raw trace requests.
- Added a persistent future-run raw trace toggle.
- Added trace status, metadata, ledger, and canonical runner inspection.
- Added JSON-RPC request-origin grouping and finalization lineage.
- Restored the stateful PRP transcript parser and focused projection
tests required by trace inspection.
- Added default-off Paperclip Developer Mode.
- Added Honeycomb run links for authorized developer mode.
- Disabled the legacy operational skill for `paperclip_runner`.
- Did not expose OpenCode, ACPX, Pi, Claude Managed, or AWS runner
choices.
- Did not change migrations, workflows, dependencies, or
`pnpm-lock.yaml`.

## Verification

- GitHub Actions will run UI tests, server tests, repository typecheck,
build, browser tests, security, and policy gates.
- Tests cover Codex configuration defaults and bounds, administrator
trace actions, persistent settings, ledger inspection, trace lineage,
and Honeycomb links.
- Existing server trace authorization and retention tests remain the
backend authority.
- Local tests were not run. The requested verification policy uses
GitHub Actions for this series.
- `git diff --check runner/task-workspace-experience...HEAD` passes.
- The delta contains 54 files.

## Risks

- Raw provider traces can contain sensitive provider data.
- Existing server authorization controls access, reveal, download,
retention, and deletion.
- The UI gates trace actions by administrator access and developer mode.
- All new instance settings remain off by default.
- Fresh Paperclip Runner configuration remains Codex-only.
- Direct adapters and legacy task behavior do not change in this PR.

> 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 with GPT-5.6. The work used high-reasoning agent mode,
repository tools, GitHub tools, and parallel code-audit agents.

## 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 or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id
- [ ] 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 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

2026-09-01 03:41:23 -05:00

Dotta

06f8773097

feat(runner): add Codex session driver (#12371 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The package now has bounded Codex transport, security, question,
diff, value, and thread helpers
> - Those isolated boundaries can now be composed into one provider
session lifecycle
> - The driver must preserve controller-owned identity, results,
terminals, and recovery invariants
> - Unsupported or mismatched provider traffic must fail closed without
weakening legacy adapters
> - This pull request adds only the Codex app-server driver and its
package-local tests
> - It does not expose or enable the Paperclip Runner adapter

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

`packages/paperclip-runner` Codex app-server session driver.

**Problem or motivation**

The runner needs a production-shaped Codex session implementation that
turns provider facts into canonical PRP events while keeping task
identity, semantic completion, runtime input, and recovery under
controller authority.

**Proposed solution**

Compose the previously reviewed transport and normalization boundaries
into a Codex-only harness driver with session open/resume, turns,
streaming events, semantic tools, structured questions, goals, lineage,
usage, cancellation, reconciliation, and deterministic persisted
snapshots.

**Alternatives considered**

Keeping the full implementation in one initial transport pull request
would obscure the trust boundaries. Adding the deferred ACPX or OpenCode
paths here would also broaden the provider scope beyond the Codex-first
series.

**Roadmap alignment**

This implements the Codex provider slice inside the package. It does not
enable the runner adapter or change any existing direct adapter path.

## What Changed

- Added the Codex app-server harness driver and session lifecycle.
- Added controller-bound semantic completion and terminal handling.
- Added runtime requests, structured questions, goals, lineage, usage,
steering, interruption, and recovery.
- Added workspace diff and file-reference projection.
- Connected bounded/redacted provider data and notification identity
checks.
- Kept deferred provider identities and replacement behavior out of the
Codex-only driver.
- Added 62 focused driver cases covering lifecycle, security, recovery,
and protocol failures.

## Verification

- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:typescript` (34
files, 337 tests)
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- The focused Codex driver suite has 62 passing cases.

## Risks

The main risks are accepting provider events from the wrong session,
duplicating terminal facts, retaining unsafe provider data, or resuming
a different session. Tests cover pre-turn, cross-thread, stale-turn,
post-terminal, duplicate-result, cancellation, transport loss, provider
identity, workspace, redaction, structured input, and recovery cases.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex with GPT-5.6 and repository tool use.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

2026-08-30 01:39:42 -05:00