mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-22 00:30:19 +02:00
bbcf5dfe98b7913a157c4edf1d60cd7019a2b053
5477
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
bbcf5dfe98 |
fix(heartbeat): renew legacy controller leases on a private pool (#17032)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - A legacy (non-native) agent run keeps a controller lease on its `heartbeat_runs` row. The server renews the lease every 10 seconds. If no renewal succeeds in 60 seconds, the watchdog stops the run with `renewal_deadline`. > - #16359 added timings to lease-loss reports. The first staging event with these timings shows `deadlineLateMs=0`, `renewalPendingMs=50000`, and 108 renewals in about 22.5 minutes, where about 135 are expected. Thus the event loop was not blocked. One renewal UPDATE was in flight for 50 seconds, and renewals were slow for a long time before the loss. > - The agent had exited with code 0. The run was in post-execution `sync_back`. Other runs on the same host completed. No code path held a lock on the run row across slow work. A later `instruction_save` UPDATE on the same row completed while the earlier renewal was still pending, so a row-lock wait does not explain the stall. > - postgres.js 3.4.9 sends a new query to a busy connection when no connection is idle (`handler` → `go(busy.shift(), query)` in `src/index.js`). The query waits behind the statement that is in flight on that connection. The renewal had no timeout, and the `pending` flag stopped all later renewals. Thus one slow unrelated statement on the shared pool can stop a healthy run. > - This pull request moves lease renewal to a small private pool, bounds each attempt with a statement timeout, and retries a timed-out attempt until the existing lease deadline. > - The benefit is that slow application queries on the shared pool can no longer cancel a healthy legacy run. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16359 (lease-loss timings that identified this cause) Refs #16358 (pre-dispatch lease loss becomes retryable; different path) Refs #16917 (open: keeps a clean adapter result after a lease lapsed; it does not prevent the loss) Refs #13389 (open: host sleep / late timers; different cause) **What happened?** A staging legacy `claude_local` run was cancelled with `Legacy controller lease lost (renewal_deadline)` after the agent exited with code 0. The timings show that the deadline timer ran on time, and one renewal UPDATE was pending for 50 seconds. **Expected behavior** A live controller keeps its lease. Slow unrelated database work does not cancel the run. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a database client with one pooled connection. 2. Start `select pg_sleep(5)` on that client. 3. Call `watchLegacyControllerLease(...).assertOwned()` with the same client. 4. Before this change, the renewal waits about 5 seconds behind `pg_sleep`. With a long enough slow statement, the lease deadline stops the run. ## What Changed - `packages/db`: Add `livenessDb(db)`. It gives each `createDb` client a private pool of at most 2 connections (`application_name=paperclip-controller-lease`). The pool is created on first use. Test doubles and transactions get the original client back. - `packages/db`: Add `closeLivenessDb(db, timeoutSeconds)`. The server calls it in `closeDatabaseClients`, so shutdown and failed startup end the private pool too. - `legacy-controller-lease.ts`: The watchdog renews in a transaction on the private pool. Each attempt sets a transaction-local `statement_timeout` of 10 seconds. A timed-out attempt (`57014`) is retried. After a successful retry, the local deadline is measured from that attempt's start, because that attempt's UPDATE wrote the fresh 60 second lease. The existing 60 second deadline, the abort race, and the `renewal_rejected` / `renewal_error` attribution do not change. `renewLegacyControllerLease` itself does not change, so the runtime-selection caller inside its own transaction is not affected. - Tests: a saturated shared pool no longer delays renewal; a renewal that times out on a locked run row retries and keeps the lease; the private pool is cached per client, has its own `application_name`, and closes; after a 45 second timed-out attempt and a successful retry, the next deadline is a full 60 seconds after the retry. The existing test doubles now model the transaction. - `docs/deploy/database.md`: Count the up to 2 extra connections per server process when you size `max_connections`. ## Verification - `cd server && npx vitest run src/services/legacy-controller-lease.test.ts`: 20 passed, on embedded Postgres. - Red/green: with the old `legacy-controller-lease.ts` and the new tests, the saturated-pool test fails with `expected 5018 to be less than 2000`. With the fix, it passes. - Red/green for the retry deadline: with the deadline measured from the first attempt, the retry-deadline test fails (`expected true to be false`) because the run is aborted 15 seconds after the retry. With the fix, it passes. - Mutation check: when the timeout retry is removed, the locked-row test fails with `canceling statement due to statement timeout`. - `npx vitest run src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts -t "lease|dispatch|controller|interaction"`: 43 passed. - `npx vitest run src/services/heartbeat/run-completion.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-orphaned-active-lease-sweep.test.ts`: 53 passed. - `npx vitest run src/__tests__/server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts`: passed. - `cd packages/db && npx vitest run src/work-signals.test.ts src/client-options.test.ts src/client-teardown-registry.test.ts`: 24 passed. `npx tsc --noEmit` for `packages/db` passed. - Not run locally: the full server `tsc` and the full server suite. The sandbox has a 4 GB memory limit, and `tsc` was killed (exit 137). CI is the gate for the server typecheck, the full tests, and the build. ## Risks - Each server process can open up to 2 more Postgres connections. Deployments that are at their `max_connections` limit must allow for them. The docs now say this. - A renewal attempt is now 4 statements (BEGIN, `set_config`, UPDATE, COMMIT) instead of 1. Each statement is a short primary-key operation on a dedicated connection. - If many runs wait on locked run rows at the same time, renewals for other runs can queue on the 2 private connections. The 10 second statement timeout limits each wait, which is less than the 60 second lease. - Behavior for a real lease loss does not change. A rejected renewal and a non-timeout error still stop the run at once, and the 60 second deadline still applies. ## Model Used - Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, used through Claude Code in agent mode with tool use (shell, file edit, and test execution). A read-only subagent helped with code search. ## 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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
e5351b240a |
Verify native Runner setup through plugin tasks (#17029)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work for AI agents. > - An environment plugin can own a Runner task. > - The merged launch-preparation contract lets the execution owner build the provider configuration. > - Core still needs a task process owner and a setup test that uses that configuration. > - This PR connects the task API to the Runner process-owner contract. > - Operators can test a plugin environment before Core sends it task work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Runner, plugin SDK, and agent environment tests. **Problem or motivation** A task-only environment cannot use the shell-based setup path. Core must verify the Runner hello exchange and process cleanup through dedicated task operations. **Proposed solution** Add a lease-bound task driver and use it for a bounded setup probe. Keep heartbeat admission and task execution in #16978. This PR follows the merged launch-preparation contract in #16997. **Alternatives considered** A provider declaration alone cannot prove that Runner and the provider connect. A shell bridge would give the plugin an unnecessary command interface. ## What Changed - Pass structured Runner launch data to process owners. Support an external connection and explicit detach. - Add typed launch authentication checks and checkpoint operations. Check lease, run, project, and retained-task authority. - Connect launch preparation, PRP, termination proof, and credential handoff to the task driver. Reject local environment overrides during installed-account setup. Pass saved-account identity and credential home directly from Core. - Run a short-lived setup probe through the existing agent environment test API. Require a verified provider hello and cleanup. Keep saved Copilot account checks metadata-only through a dedicated task operation. - Update the Copilot source identity because the shared transport source changed. Keep provider behavior and the earlier identity fixture. ## Verification - CI passes on `f987adec7`: 55 successful checks and 5 expected skips. Standard Greptile and Apex are both 5/5 with no open findings. The branch merges cleanly with current master. - Repository typecheck and build pass after the rebase onto the workspace-provider contract. Server typecheck and build also pass after the final setup fix. - The 110 focused lease, SDK, setup, Copilot, and route cases pass after the rebase. All 14 setup cases pass after the final change. These include a real local Runner with a test provider. The saved-agent model-discovery case also passes. - Apex found that Core's relative workspace marker failed the driver path check, and non-Codex sessions omitted the observed model. Both failures were reproduced and fixed. The probe leaves physical workspace selection to plugin preparation. The transport reads each provider's observed model and exposes it to the driver. All 14 setup cases, 6 transport peer cases, and both existing real Runner/OpenCode cases pass. Runner build and server typecheck pass. - The coverage audit removed two redundant cases, repeated fixture code, and two extra real Runner launches. It kept authorization, credential selection, cancellation, lost replies, termination proof, checkpoint identity, and provider setup checks. - The Copilot source-identity check passes. The added-line secret and PII scan passes. The unmerged v52 attestation was regenerated after the shared transport fix. - CI on `13faeff02` caught one stale Copilot digest assertion after attestation regeneration. The literal now matches the candidate attestation, and all 49 installation cases pass. That CI lane otherwise passed 1,818 cases. - An earlier CI run hit an unchanged UI toast timing test. The separate fix is tracked in #16952. Current CI passes that shard. CI also caught a stale model-discovery assertion in this change; the assertion is fixed. - The local full-suite run was stopped when master changed. The final CI run supplies exact-head full-suite validation. No live Cloud or provider test was run. ## Risks - Native hello tests require a saved Core account or the installed account. Local environment overrides are unsupported for installed-account probes and fail before the provider runs. - A native task provider must declare launch preparation and authentication-check version 1. It must keep the checked configuration fixed through submission. Core rejects providers that cannot make this guarantee. - A lost task reply does not prove process termination. Core retains grants until the provider proves termination and Core saves required state. - This PR does not enable native heartbeat dispatch through plugin environments. Cloud deployment and live provider validation remain separate. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. Tool use includes code editing, local tests, and the GitHub CLI. ## 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 described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal issue details - [x] I have run focused 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> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
79b2bf78dd |
Create agent records when onboarding names are submitted (#17005)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Core onboarding selects an agent and connects its provider account. > - The current flow creates the agent record after authentication. > - Setup needs a stable agent identity as soon as the user submits its name. > - This PR saves a paused setup record on name submission and finishes the hire on that same record. > - The existing sandbox authentication and approval paths continue to apply. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Core agent lifecycle, shared validators, and onboarding UI. **Current behavior** Onboarding creates the database record at the final hire step. Earlier authentication and saved setup have no agent record. **Proposed behavior** Create a paused agent with a setup hold when the user submits its name. Do this before adapter selection or authentication. Update that same record after adapter selection. Reuse its ID on retries and saved setup. Finish that record through the existing hire path. **Reason and benefit** Give setup a stable identity without coupling this refactor to computer provisioning or a new execution backend. **Breaking changes** Incomplete setup now leaves an inactive agent record. Existing clients can still create and hire agents without the new optional fields. The sandbox authentication flow and API key support remain in place. **Additional context** Requested Core-only refactor. Related work: #15422 changes runner defaults. This PR preserves those choices. No duplicate early-record refactor was found in the issue and PR search. ## What Changed - Save the agent when the user submits its name in both onboarding entry points. Use a provisional adapter until the user chooses one. Reopen name-only drafts at adapter selection. - Add retry-safe setup creation and same-record hire completion. Keep approval checks at final hire. - Save and restore setup configuration in both onboarding entry points. Show Finish setup for paused setup agents. - Restrict setup changes to authorized board users. Block generic resume until setup finishes. - Add lifecycle, authorization, connection, and UI coverage. Update the specification and feature maps. ## Verification - Latest focused server run: 126 lifecycle and AI-connection tests passed after the Apex fixes. An earlier broader run passed 301 lifecycle, instruction, adapter-validation, and AI-connection tests. Earlier authentication, retry, cross-company, and direct-create regressions also passed. - Name-save verification: 336 tests across the wizard, naming dialog, New agent, action-button, and wizard-step suites passed. Coverage includes retry identity, repeated submission, closing during a save, saved-model restoration, and a disabled process adapter. - Shared, server, and UI TypeScript checks passed. The latest UI package check and direct server TypeScript check passed. The server package preparation command could not finish locally because Cargo is unavailable; full build preparation runs in CI. Map checks, token gates, and `git diff --check` passed; each pushed diff was scanned for credentials and PII. - All six onboarding browser tests passed together with installed Chrome against a fresh throwaway instance after the Apex fixes. They include numbered duplicate names, first-time Copilot without a connected account, and Grok’s saved model. They verify early persistence in both entry points, closing and reopening a name-only draft, same-record adapter selection, sandbox sign-in, login reload, and failed-connection gating. Provider responses are simulated; Core persistence is real. - Regression coverage includes incomplete Copilot creation versus final validation, Kimi settings through redacted responses, stale local drafts, company switches during creation, saved environments, and provider changes with personal/shared old bindings. - Apex found five name-only setup gaps: numbered names, early Copilot account validation, the Grok model default, same-name draft ownership, and provisional runner restoration. The fixes preserve server names, defer implicit account binding until hire, set Grok’s model, avoid name-based reuse of unfinished records, and restore Auto for pending adapter choices. UI, database, and browser regressions cover these cases. - Standard Greptile found a Grok provider mismatch in the new adapter save. The save now uses ACPX with the Grok profile. Both the 129-test dialog/setup run and a real-API browser regression passed after the fix. The first browser attempt stopped on an ambiguous empty-roster button selector; it now scopes the click to the toolbar. - Moving the save point exposed a saved-model reset and timing assumptions in the same-name and portal fixtures. The source choice now preserves the restored model, and tests cover same-name recovery without a second hire. - Initial CI exposed direct-create compatibility, concurrent setup effects, fixture assumptions, and a missing-fields assumption in the provider-validation guard. These were fixed and verified locally. Review findings were addressed with authorization, recovery, credential-persistence, and restored-configuration regressions. - The final desktop capture passed after host resource cleanup. A repeat first failed before Core started because macOS had exhausted shared-memory IDs. Standalone PostgreSQL initialization reproduced the same error. Releasing only unattached control segments from this task’s stopped test databases allowed the unchanged revision to pass. No Core or system setting changed. - Local database tests required port access outside the sandbox. Missing declared development dependencies were supplied outside the branch. No live provider sign-in was tested locally. - [Full monorepo CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39522434236) is green on `82b82fec189a172a885d4dd565ae2f4a18c73efc`. Standard Greptile scored 5/5 with zero new comments (check `118969424903`). The subsequent Apex review also scored 5/5 with zero new comments (check `118972866331`) on that same commit. All review threads are resolved. - The separate Superagent Security scan returned neutral/inconclusive because its pinned merge-base checkout failed or timed out. GitHub returned 404 for check and suite rerun requests. This is not a successful security scan; the CI workflow and other security checks passed. ## Risks - Users can leave inactive setup records behind, including after name submission alone. These records cannot run until hire completes. - Setup completion touches hiring and approval boundaries. Tests cover retries, company isolation, creator permissions, and approval snapshots. - An uncertain credential-save result retains its new secret reference for retry. A confirmed client rejection removes only credentials staged by that attempt. - No schema migration or VM provisioning change is required. Agent-computer integration is out of scope. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository search, code editing, and tool execution. The exact deployment 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] Apex Greptile is also 5/5 on the same commit as standard review and green CI - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d33b40a5c3 |
fix: recover saved work and provide reliable task Retry (#16965)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The control plane must retain work when an execution or workspace export fails. > - Retained-workspace holds can leave saved input waiting with no usable Retry action. > - Users cannot verify process ownership or repair provider allocations. > - This pull request gives system recovery a durable budget and gives each deliberate Retry a durable intent. > - Safe recovery can preserve files, settle an accepted result, or prepare an independent workspace. > - One task state keeps infrastructure diagnostics out of the ordinary conversation while preserving real permission and approval gates. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A task with a retained workspace can show recovery, failed-run and saved-message warnings at the same time. Historical runs without native workspace descriptors cannot use the native restore path. Old recovery metadata can prevent a new attempt even when an independent workspace would be safe. **Expected behavior** Paperclip owns bounded infrastructure retries and file preservation. A user can request another attempt with ordinary Retry. Thinking appears immediately. The service preserves completed effects and current user controls. It does not claim that starting fresh recovered the old files. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Retain a failed run and its workspace after export or process-stop failure. 2. Save a follow-up while the recovery hold is active. 3. Open the task and try to continue without infrastructure credentials or operator certification. Refs #16906, #16835, #16883. This extends their recovery and receipt contracts. Related work: #16962 and #16963. ## What Changed - Add task-level Retry with company-scoped authorization, all-status idempotency and durable admission before physical work. Keep exact-run Retry compatible. - Add typed recovery phases, finite persisted backoff, historical adoption and durable local failure diagnostics. - Preserve native workspaces or verified historical snapshots. Admit an independent fresh workspace only after execution containment. Keep old-source preservation and cleanup obligations separate. - Carry completed publication and API receipts forward. Fence uncertain mutation retries across replacement runs. Preserve connected-chat identity and authorization. - Re-enter normal dispatch for saved input. Reuse accepted results through the existing finalizer. - Use one task interruption projection across the thread, composer and task list. Show optimistic Thinking, ordinary Retry and genuine user gates. - Add PostgreSQL, filesystem, API, browser-fixture and controlled provider coverage. Document the behavior and update the feature/access maps. ## Verification - All GitHub Actions CI jobs pass on `6d8c6d27d50586d8548b31d03b47f6d73a0ee11d`: typecheck, all server/chat/workspace and serialized suites, Runner checks, eight browser shards, canary and build. The required merge gate passes. - Greptile reviewed the final commit at 5/5, with no actionable findings or unresolved review threads. Its two earlier P1 findings are fixed. - Full recursive typecheck and build pass locally on the final commit. All 16 task Retry cases pass against isolated real PostgreSQL. The unrelated-success case and both stale Retry cases fail on the previous code and pass after the fix. - The corrected gateway fixture passes its uncertain-mutation and independent-read case. Four real HTTP API cases pass for definite 403/422 rejection, completed-effect reuse, and uncertain-effect fences across deliberate and automatic retries. These focused gateway/API checks used a temporary database lifecycle harness on an existing healthy local PostgreSQL process. The standard repository helper is unchanged. - Earlier qualification covers 291 task UI cases, saved-file copyback and ancestry, current Agent Chat ownership races, nine chat Retry API browser cases, and six assembled browser recovery fixtures. A real API/PostgreSQL/native-runner journey showed Thinking in 25 ms despite a delayed response, admitted one successor in a separate workspace, retained original files, and survived reload. - The controlled Daytona test interrupts export, joins the controller, restarts it in a separate process, and verifies one agent start, one external sentinel operation, retained file contents and no premature cleanup. It does not establish abrupt-kill or live LLM/GitHub acceptance. - The full local `pnpm test:run` was attempted and was not green: an OAuth row-lock timing assertion failed, and a later suite exhausted macOS PostgreSQL semaphores. The ten OAuth timing cases passed on rerun against a separate database. Later embedded database initialization failures remain recorded; the final CI matrix passes. - Security scanning passed on production-code commit `63953edf069b111c6becc3144dffa6deb52f68b5`. Its only successor changes one test-fixture identity line. The final scan is neutral/inconclusive because its pinned merge-base checkout failed or timed out. Both rerun API requests returned 404, so no fresh successful scan is claimed. Socket and Snyk checks pass on the final head. - The optional Paperclip Review remains queued behind an earlier run in workspace finalization. Its prior completed assessment was incomplete because a comparison tool was blocked by the platform filter. It is not counted as a completed code review. GitHub does not require this check for merge. - Hosted acceptance remains pending deployment. Local and CI results do not establish recovery of a hosted task or its retained files. ## Risks - Recovery changes span admission, physical ownership and dispatch. Incorrect evidence could permit overlapping work. Existing physical locks and authoritative stop requirements remain in place. - The migration adds concurrent indexes. It requires the existing top-level migration runner and retries incomplete index creation safely. - A fresh attempt can complete while old-source preservation remains unresolved. The service retains that obligation and does not report those files as recovered. - Unknown tool mutations remain blocked until their authoritative receipt owner resolves them. Generic upstream tools have no universal result-query protocol. - Recovery and diagnostics stay inside the stack. No Cloud incident endpoint, notification worker or new outbound reporting channel is included. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The runtime does not expose a more specific model version or context-window size. The model used reasoning, shell execution, source editing and browser tools. No model subagents were used for this implementation. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused suites; the full local run limitation is documented above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
6c9b87d092 |
trace(server): expose repository admission waits (#17040)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work performed by AI agents. > - The controller prepares a task workspace before it starts a provider turn. > - Repository admission also runs when a checkout already exists. > - One observed reuse took 16.877 seconds. Its child spans explained only 3.556 seconds. > - The missing detail covered repeated authority checks, catalog work, and publication waits. > - This change exposes those operations under the existing execution attempt. > - Operators can expand the slow phase before choosing a performance fix. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16963, #16330, and #16515. The provider-routing work in #17019 has a different scope. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Repository-admission traces for new and reused checkouts. **Subsystem affected** server/ orchestration and operator-configured OpenTelemetry tracing. **Current behavior** The admission span can contain a long interval without child spans. Existing project checks, HTTP requests, and checkout lookup do not explain current-task checks, database awaits, credential refresh, or publication locks. **Proposed behavior** Expose nested spans for current binding and task access, individual identity reads, catalog construction, credentials, grant transactions, filesystem validation, Git inspection, and directory-lock acquisition, work, and release. **Reason and benefit** The trace can distinguish repeated checks, remote calls, database awaits, and directory contention. A database-await span includes driver, network, pool, and server time. It is not isolated SQL execution time. **Breaking changes** None. No API, schema, permission, retry, lock, or repository behavior changes. ## What Changed - Add fixed admission phases beneath the existing execution attempt. Keep the existing project, checkout, and HTTP detail. - Trace current-task authorization stages only under workspace access. Unrelated decisions cannot consume that detail budget before admission. - Trace GitHub catalog reads, credentials, provider metadata, grant row locking and writes, transaction settlement, and webhook work. - Separate directory-lock acquisition, the protected operation, and release without changing the adapter lock contract. - Document the hierarchy and timing limits. Keep endpoint gating, span caps, and hashed run correlation. Add no span attributes or exception text. ## Verification - Nine new tests passed with real PostgreSQL, real Git, and SDK-exported spans. They cover directory contention, grant-row blocking, all three binding checks, reuse without cloning, dirty files, private-task denial, receipt repair, conflict retry, endpoint-off behavior, and parent IDs. - Twenty earlier unrelated authorization decisions do not exhaust the admission detail budget. - Existing authorization and trust suites: 105 tests passed. Existing timing/context suites: 26 tests passed. Existing repository-access tests: 6 tests passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on commit `5a986d8c86644dfb7ee39b3b832e2d7c86532598`. - `pnpm test:run` could not complete locally. The temporary five-connection cluster returned `sorry, too many clients already` in chat fixtures, and the run was interrupted. It is not a pass. The complete standard CI workflow passed on the same commit, including all 12 server shards and all three chat shards. - Final current-head checks: 54 success, two neutral, two skipped, zero pending or failing. The [CI aggregate](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39522187940/job/118971261973) passed. [Greptile](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/17040#issuecomment-6305066520) and [Paperclip Review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/17040#issuecomment-6305017182) both assessed this exact commit at 5/5 with no actionable findings or unresolved threads. - `node scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs` and `git diff --check` passed. - This macOS host exhausted its SysV semaphore quota. Database tests used a temporary command-scoped initdb preload with five connections, fewer workers, and a larger lock table. No repository test infrastructure or shared host settings changed. Initial skipped tests, focused-fixture failures, and clock-order assertion failures were corrected and rerun; they are not counted as passes. The complete local run remained connection-limited and was interrupted. - Local SDK export proves parentage and privacy. Hosted Honeycomb ingestion remains unverified until deployment. No deployment occurred. ## Risks Span recording requires an operator-configured OTLP endpoint. Each fixed detail name remains capped at 16 occurrences per attempt. Later operations still execute under their enclosing phase. Timing wrappers preserve the existing operations and their errors. No migration is required. The change does not itself reduce admission latency. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with tool use, code execution, and delegated agents. The exact hosted model identifier and context-window size 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>canary/v2026.1021.0-canary.1 |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
8b4ab65b1c |
Add plugin-owned project storage and task workspaces (#17001)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Tasks can use isolated repository workspaces. > - Core currently prepares those repositories on its own filesystem. > - A storage provider may only expose repositories inside remote agent computers. > - Project storage and task workspace preparation must have one provider owner. > - This pull request adds that contract and keeps execution as a separate plugin interface. > - Core keeps authorization, durable task bindings, and lifecycle fences. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Plugin SDK, project workspace policy, heartbeat preparation, execution leases, and workspace lifecycle. **Problem or motivation** Core cannot prepare a task workspace when its repository storage is unavailable on the Core host. An execution lease must not be required just to prepare persistent storage. **Proposed solution** Let one plugin provide project resource lifecycle and workspace prepare, inspect, restore, and remove behavior. Core reserves a task workspace before it calls the plugin. The plugin returns an opaque durable reference. The matching execution plugin receives that reference on its task RPC. **Alternatives considered** Preparing repositories on Core would require a provider mount on Core. Preparing them only during task launch would tie persistent workspace lifecycle to execution leases and agent availability. **Roadmap alignment** This extends the remote provider model in ROADMAP.md. Related execution work is in #16978. This PR does not replace that task bridge. Native execution of managed storage requires the bridge; this change fails closed when it is absent. ## What Changed - Add one storage provider declaration with supported modes/strategies, a capability, a validated RPC contract, and a test harness. - Persist provider ownership, repository revision, and execution-workspace identity before external effects. Reconcile retries with a stable operation ID. - Prepare provider storage before environment acquisition. Keep Core filesystem preparation out of this path. - Pin the durable reference to the matching execution plugin and validate the lease binding before task dispatch. - Route inspection, reopen, and removal through the existing lifecycle process. Keep local data when remote recovery is uncertain. - Keep the application database pool free during lifecycle locks. Preserve pending workspace selections, validate source edits before retirement, and retry unfinished closed storage cleanup. - Protect provider metadata and live repository sources from caller edits. Storage edits retire only closed records with confirmed removal; retired records cannot reopen. ## Verification - Current head `8214b3ca5`: all 25 provider lifecycle tests pass with `maxConnections=1`. They cover preparation, inspection, reopening, removal, a paused provider with responsive ordinary SQL and a competing source edit, pending selection preservation, rejected source edits, cleanup retry scheduling, and providers that cache operation results, and committed cleanup notifications for storage intent and recovered state. - Final frozen-tree lifecycle run on `8214b3ca5`: all 318 tests passed in 10 files, covering workspace services, reopen, compaction, task binding, project sources, heartbeat preparation, display caching, and source locks. - Direct server `tsc --noEmit` passes. The SDK build and all 128 SDK tests passed during initial verification; later SDK changes are documentation only. - Full CI on the previous head `ec5c7209a` passed all 55 applicable checks; 2 conditional checks skipped. Standard Greptile reviewed current head `342e6d9c3` at 5/5 with no unresolved threads. All 55 applicable CI checks passed on `342e6d9c3`; 2 conditional checks skipped. The Slack browser and CLI startup jobs passed on their single unchanged-head rerun. Its Apex review returned 4/5 with one pending-restoration issue. Commit `1b58943b1` reconciles that durable intent before cleanup, advances the generation without reopening the Core row, and blocks direct removal or retirement while intent remains unresolved. Standard Greptile reviewed `1b58943b1` at 5/5 with no new findings. All 54 applicable CI checks passed on `1b58943b1`; 3 conditional checks skipped. The chat job passed on its single unchanged-head rerun. Apex then returned 4/5 for a missing cleanup wake after recovery. Commit `8214b3ca5` atomically registers cleanup intent before storage intent and recovery-result writes. Its provider test observes real committed notification hints and the visible advanced generation. Standard Greptile reviewed `8214b3ca5` at 5/5 with no new findings. All 55 applicable current-head CI checks passed on the first run; 2 conditional checks skipped. Final Apex verification completed at 5/5 on this exact head: 38 files reviewed, no new comments, and no unresolved threads. The PR is ready for review and mergeable. - The first Apex review found five issues after a standard 5/5: application-pool starvation, stale pending selections, retirement during rejected source edits, lost cleanup retries, and reused inspection identities. Commits `6d72e7fd4` and `342e6d9c3` fix each with regression coverage. Archive lock waits use dedicated connections, and source edits fail promptly if the lifecycle is busy. Retirement compares normalized values. The normalized-source regression initially failed with the raw-value comparison; after moving the check after normalization, a clean provider-suite rerun passed all 24 tests at that stage. Those threads are resolved; the earlier Apex 0/5 is not a passing acceptance result. - Earlier local integration attempts could not bind localhost inside the sandbox. The same suites passed with permission to start local PostgreSQL. - The earlier broad local `pnpm test:run` overlapped edits and reported stale-revision and checkout-path/Git-fixture failures. It was not a final-tree result. Full CI subsequently passed; the original local failure remains part of verification history. - Local repository-wide typecheck/build cannot complete because `cargo` is unavailable. Direct server TypeScript checks and affected tests pass; full Rust and build validation comes from CI. - An earlier browser run on `ff918c5a8` failed in the unchanged case-filter journey: expected “Done,” received “All statuses,” with an announcement handler recorded during the assertion. The cause is not confirmed. [The failed job](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39500611857/job/118896954508) remains verification history. The unchanged shard passed in the next full CI run on `ec5c7209a`; no UI or fixture change was made. - Current-head browser shard 2 failed waiting five seconds for the mocked Slack setup Success heading. This PR changes neither that UI nor its fixture. [The failed job](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39506070513/job/118916021232) remains verification evidence. The cause is not confirmed; the single unchanged-shard rerun passed; no UI or fixture change was made, and the original cause remains unconfirmed. - The workspace test shard passed its 3,978 general tests, then its CLI company-import/export fixture timed out after 30 seconds waiting for startup health before creating any company or workspace. [The failed job](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39506070513/job/118916021855) remains verification history. The child reached external-PostgreSQL startup without exiting or reporting an exception. Its cause is not confirmed; the single unchanged-job rerun passed, including the CLI fixture. No startup or fixture change was made, and the original cause remains unconfirmed. - The new cached-removal regression initially failed because its fake worker advertised availability for unrelated fixture plugins, so another workspace changed its fake checkout state. Worker availability now matches the fixture plugin; the complete 25-test provider suite passes. - On `1b58943b1`, the chat shard timed out polling for one conversation after an authorized GitHub description edit. [The failed job](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39510521657/job/118930193418) remains evidence. The exact case passes locally against PostgreSQL (1 passed, 1,380 unrelated cases skipped), and this PR changes neither that test nor its handler. The original cause is unconfirmed; the single unchanged-job CI rerun passed without a code or fixture change. The original cause remains unconfirmed. - The diff was checked for credentials, private references, and generated artifacts. ## Risks This is an additive provider contract with no database migration. Existing projects keep their local behavior unless their policy selects a storage plugin. A selected provider must be ready and enabled. Unknown or unsafe cleanup fails closed. Managed native execution depends on #16978. Core refuses a host Runner fallback. Providers must fence lifecycle generations, preserve ambiguous retries, and report remote recovery honestly. Provider-specific live storage and guest mount qualification remain separate from these Core contract tests. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with repository inspection, code execution, and tests. The exact model variant was not exposed. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either linked existing issues or described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket id - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (affected suites; broad-run limits are documented above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1021.0-canary.0 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
572bef4ba7 |
fix: omit re-downloadable Codex remote plugins from failover backups (#17026)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Native Codex sessions in remote sandboxes copy the sandbox's Codex
home into a host-side failover backup after every turn
> - Ephemeral sandboxes restore that backup at the start of every turn,
so its size affects both disk use and turn latency
> - Most of each backup is remote plugin data that Codex itself treats
as a cache and re-downloads on startup
> - This pull request leaves that data out of Codex checkpoints, keeping
everything a resumed session needs
> - The benefit is backups roughly 80–90% smaller, less data moved per
turn, and much slower disk growth
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Bug report described in-PR (bug report template). Related: #16866
(expires failover backups after their issues close).
**What happened?**
Failover backups grow quickly because each Codex checkpoint includes
`$CODEX_HOME` remote plugin data. On one instance, 204 backups held 22.1
GB:
- `codex-home/plugins/cache/openai-curated-remote`: 8.3 GB (about 29 MB
per backup);
- `codex-home/cache/remote_plugin_catalog`: 6.1 GB (one 38 MB catalog
file per backup);
- `codex-home/sessions` (the conversation history): 0.31 GB.
About 80 new backups (9.8 GB) were written per day. Ephemeral sandboxes
also copy all of this into a fresh sandbox before each turn.
**Expected behavior**
Checkpoints keep what a resumed session needs and omit data that Codex
re-downloads itself.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run a Codex agent with ChatGPT auth in a remote sandbox environment.
2. Inspect
`<instance>/runtime/paperclip-runner/durable-sessions/*/failover-backups/current/codex-home`.
3. Most bytes are under `plugins/cache/openai-curated-remote` and
`cache/remote_plugin_catalog`.
**Paperclip version or commit:** `master` at
canary/v2026.1020.0-canary.15
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
f89c37791c |
Add campaign sidebar and case navigation to runner E2E reports (#17010)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Product E2E campaigns test runner behavior across agent profiles and environments. > - The retained reports contain many suites, cases, and execution previews. > - A long report makes it hard to find a case or return to the campaign context. > - This pull request adds campaign navigation, case breadcrumbs, and separate global history pages. > - Users can scan all execution previews or inspect one case without losing their place. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Navigation in the retained Runner E2E campaign reports and history homepage. **Subsystem affected** Test report infrastructure in `tests/runner-e2e/`. **Current behavior** Reports show a long configuration matrix. The suite index and campaign history share the same page. Case links do not provide a focused inspection view. **Proposed behavior** Global overview, history, and attention pages show global navigation. A specific campaign adds a folding suite tree. All results keeps the full scrollable report. A case opens with breadcrumbs and an execution picker. **Reason and benefit** Users can find a case, compare its executions, and return to their reading position. Global pages do not show suites from an unrelated campaign. **Breaking changes** The report HTML layout changes. Retained result schemas, execution identities, and suite and execution anchors remain unchanged. **Additional context** Refs: #16996. This extends the merged report navigation and local preview work. The duplicate PR and issue search found no open PR for this change. ## What Changed - Add shared report navigation with the Paperclip brand mark and wordmark. - Scope the suite tree to the current campaign. Keep global overview, history, and attention pages separate. - Group all execution previews by suite and case. Reuse the existing evidence cards and image gallery. - Add focused case inspection, configuration selection, breadcrumbs, filter handling, and scroll restoration. - Move historical trends to the global history page. Keep billing details, missing results, and failure evidence available. - Update report documentation and browser regressions for filters, status dots, configuration reloads, breadcrumbs, and scroll restoration. ## Verification - [Final CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39500401411) passes on `89a8b5c290de3cfb9bdc061be3c88a29fd160a62`. Typecheck, build, runner checks, server suites, and all browser shards pass. - All four report browser regressions pass. They cover filters, gallery navigation, repeated suite jumps, the folding sidebar, breadcrumbs, scroll restoration, configuration selection and reload, mobile navigation, and aggregate case status. - The 63 report, history, preview-boundary, and navigation tests pass. Runner E2E typecheck passes with `node node_modules/typescript/bin/tsc -p tests/runner-e2e/tsconfig.json`. - Manual browser checks covered desktop and a 390-pixel viewport. Retained campaigns covered 209 executions in eight suites, 179 executions in seven suites, and 15 executions in one suite. Browser fixture checks also confirmed filtered inspection and aggregate status. No paid evaluations ran. - The initial report browser tests still targeted the old layout and routes. They were updated for the new navigation. Review also exposed filtered-inspection and aggregate-status defects; both were fixed before the final passing browser run. - The unchanged Cases UI grouping test [failed once on the final head](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39500401411/job/118898559197). Its full file also failed locally, while the isolated test passed. The same UI code passed in earlier CI. A [single CI retry](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39500401411/job/118903333430) passed all 3,978 UI tests and 286 CLI tests without code changes. The cause remains unresolved. - Two jobs on an intermediate head were interrupted by runner shutdown signals. Those remain interrupted results. The complete final-head CI run supersedes them for merge verification. - Workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` also passed locally before the rebase. The full local `pnpm test:run` attempt encountered repeated embedded PostgreSQL startup failures and was stopped. It is not a passing local full-suite result; final CI provides the full verification. ## Risks - Navigation and hash handling can select the wrong case or hide results. Focused tests and browser checks cover these paths. - Historical campaign links must resolve from both the preview and published report locations. - The report layout changes. Graders, prompts, retained outcomes, and billing calculations do not change. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex with `gpt-6-astra` and `gpt-6.1-sol`. Used reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser verification. The runtime did not expose a 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>canary/v2026.1020.0-canary.14 |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
2a5a323e57 |
Add execution-owned Runner launch preparation (#16997)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work for AI agents. > - Runner can execute in a different environment from Core. > - Core owns provider selection, policy, and resource assignments. > - The execution environment must prepare its own files and paths. > - A shared contract must keep these responsibilities separate. > - This PR adds that contract to the Runner execution driver. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Problem or motivation** Runner transport prepares provider files on the controller before launch. An execution owner cannot prepare those files in its own environment through the existing driver. **Proposed solution** Add `prepareLaunch` to the execution driver. Supply versioned Core requirements. Accept a configuration ID, requirements digest, and ordinary provider descriptor. Validate Core policy and assignments before launch. Keep existing provider session checks. **Alternatives considered** Provider-specific ownership flags would spread the boundary across backends. Shell preparation would expose process details in the plugin API. Refs #16993, #16977. Both prerequisites are merged. This PR now targets master. Native plugin integration and execution-host preparation follow separately. PR #16978 contains an earlier, unmerged prototype. Its `persistentAgentHome` mode and skill path-map call will be replaced by this preparation contract before activation. This PR preserves current master callers of the skill helper. ## What Changed - Add the optional preparation callback and an explicit Runner artifact identity. - Keep the built-in preparation path as the default. - Validate provider policy and resource assignment identity. Preserve instruction text when resource locations change. - Persist the attachment seed after an authority epoch rotation, so a later controller restart can recover the same run. - Preserve explicit context removal on a new run. Only an omitted context can reuse the saved context. Remove its registered instruction framing when context is removed. - Save exact requirements and configurations in a private file outside Runner commands. Retain the active record across failed attachments. Use current grants for new runs. Keep incompatible session changes rejected. - Join delayed preparation during startup and warm attachment cleanup. Retain an unsettled checkpoint after a timeout. Prevent work after cancellation. - Use the supplied Runner artifact for interrupted handoff recovery. Restore the exact target configuration at each handoff crash boundary. Check the Runner state when the final ACK may be lost. - Bind the changed shared sources to Copilot profile v51. Preserve the v50 receipt and current integrity checks. ## Verification - Workspace typecheck passed. - All 487 affected Runner transport, control-plane, preparation store, builder, policy, and profile tests passed on commit `eaf8ae8d1`. - Workspace build and typecheck passed again on commit `eaf8ae8d12c7ef2d22d226e4b3f05fdbf79ef4cb`. - Both warm attachment cleanup regressions fail before the fix. They pass after the fix. The tests cover delayed preparation, timeout retention, and concurrent attachment rejection. - The routed handoff regression fails with a missing controller binary before the fix. It passes after the fix. The execution owner launches the real fixture Runner. - The 200,000-byte instruction regression fails before the fix and passes after it. Four prepared handoff crash cases verify exact request and configuration recovery. The store tests verify private file mode, conflicting records, corrupt data, and active-run retention. - A real Runner with a controlled fake provider verifies execution-host paths, exact recovery, warm reuse, incompatible profile rejection, and cancellation. It does not contact an external provider. - The regression found undefined settings in strict PRP command hashing. Requirements now contain only JSON values. The warm transition test passes without changing PRP validation. - The broader root suite on the prerequisite finished with 22,420 passing tests, seven failed tests in unchanged Git and diagnostic code, and two suite setup errors because Cargo was absent from its PATH. This PR does not claim a passing full root suite. - The CI Build job passed compilation and production runtime boot, then its runner received a shutdown signal during the clean public install check. Other jobs reported lost communication with their self-hosted runners. The failed jobs passed on retry on the same commit; successful jobs kept their results. - The current Superagent security scan is inconclusive because its pinned merge-base checkout failed or timed out. GitHub rejected the check rerun request through the available API. This is not a passing security scan. - Standard Greptile and Greptile Apex each returned 5/5 on `eaf8ae8d1`. All review threads are resolved. CI passed on attempt 2. Current checks have 55 successes, four optional skips, and the inconclusive security scan described above. The branch is ready, mergeable, and current with master. - No live provider qualification or deployment was run. ## Risks - A preparation owner must store configurations and keep retries bound to the same task and requirements. - Copilot source binding requires a new profile identity. This PR does not claim fresh live qualification. - The callback is an SDK extension. This PR does not connect it to a plugin task process owner or add a Launcher endpoint. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. Reasoning and repository tools. The exact serving model identifier and context size 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
15176963b1 |
fix: stop idle skill-source polling (#17008)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agent work and the skills that agents use. > - Project repositories create durable import jobs, and installed sources can refresh automatically. > - The server queried these records every five seconds, even when no work existed. > - Idle tenant databases need to stop receiving those discovery queries. > - This change uses the existing transaction notifications and delivery coordinator. > - Saved refresh, retry, and lease deadlines determine when the worker runs next. > - Cloud does not yet wake these deadlines, so outstanding skill work retains the instance. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Skill-source background synchronization. This continues the idle-work migrations in #15625 and #17000. A search found no overlapping open polling-removal PR. **Current behavior** On master `b11010b0d4`, startup installs a five-second skill-source interval and also calls it from the external-object scheduler. Each sweep queries active companies, import capacity, pending imports, and automatic refreshes. **Proposed behavior** Run at startup, after a relevant transaction settles, or at a saved deadline. Stay SQL-quiet when no eligible work remains. Preserve import admission, authorization, atomic claims, retry backoff, and the existing five-minute upstream check. **Reason and benefit** Remove recurring database activity from inactive tenant instances without requiring new tables or a new scheduler. ## What Changed - Replace both recurring skill-sync calls with one delivery-coordinator registration. - Notify from attachment/detachment, source creation/settings/manual refresh/disconnection, project/company deletion, and company status changes, including budget resume. - Restore the earliest eligible `nextSyncAt` or lease-expiry deadline. Due backlogs and conflicts retry after five seconds; no idle recovery cadence remains. - Admit deferred imports again after a batch frees capacity. Preserve requests through drain, standby, restart, and commits during a sweep. - Add sleep-safety predicates for imports and eligible automatic sources until Cloud supports these deadlines. - Document the lifecycle and process-local writer contract. No schema or API changes. - Guard external test database URLs before migrations or cleanup: require a `_test` database name and reject database/options overrides. ## Verification - 147 targeted tests pass: 39 server-startup tests, 14 new real-PostgreSQL lifecycle tests, 20 shared coordinator/scheduler tests, 63 existing import/refresh/retry regression tests, and 11 test-database guard cases. - CI exposed a stale startup mock without the new `start` method. The fixture is updated and all 39 startup tests pass locally. - Tests exercise real enqueue/settings/company-reactivation producers, nested commit, rollback, saved retry/lease restart, manual refresh failure, capacity admission, concurrent commit, shutdown cancellation, and SQL quiet after startup or pause. - Sleep-safety tests reject sleep for future imports and automatic refreshes, and accept inactive retained state. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. - `pnpm test:run` was attempted and stopped after repeated embedded-PostgreSQL startup failures in unrelated suites. The two existing import/refresh suites initially skipped for the same host limitation; after adding explicit disposable-database options, all 63 regression tests passed against PostgreSQL 17. Full CI passed on `ddb3ee51369baa8c7153bae9fd88efb8b903f2bc`: 55 successful checks, one neutral review check, and two intentional skips. ## Risks - Notifications are process-local. Independent SQL writers and separate live replicas do not wake this worker; startup reconstructs persisted work. - Enabled automatic sources still contact GitHub every five minutes. Their upstream changes have no event ingress here. - Cloud scheduled wakes currently cover routines and issue monitors, not skill sync. This change retains instances with outstanding skill obligations. It does not claim measured host/database suspension or fleet savings. - No change to source authorization, installed content on failure, or existing claim semantics. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools, and code execution. The host does not expose an exact model revision or context-window size to this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (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>canary/v2026.1020.0-canary.13 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
b11010b0d4 |
Simplify failure banners and show only the latest error (#16982)
Remove dashed failure dividers and show only the latest adjacent run or recovery error. Preserve permitted retries, pending state and unrelated notice boundaries. Add production-component Storybook examples and browser regression coverage. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1020.0-canary.12 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
cb2d6e80d3 |
perf: stop polling idle Muse maintenance (#17000)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Muse connects an external worker to a Paperclip agent. > - Its maintenance loop scans the database every five seconds, even without bindings. > - These empty scans prevent an otherwise idle database from sleeping. > - The shared delivery coordinator can react to committed writes and saved deadlines. > - This change uses that coordinator and retains recovery for unfinished assignments. > - Idle Muse maintenance can now stop querying the database. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Muse qualification, OAuth authority, and terminal assignment maintenance. **Current behavior** A claimed instance runs two empty scans every five seconds even when Muse has no bindings. This produces about 34,560 unnecessary queries per day. Warm standby suppression from #16974 does not cover claimed instances. **Proposed behavior** Recover once at startup. Wake after relevant transactions settle. Schedule qualification expiry at its saved deadline. Retain five-second recovery only for failures and unfinished assignments. **Reason and benefit** Remove recurring database traffic from idle Muse maintenance while preserving authority checks and recovery. Reuse the database work signal foundation from #15625 without adding tables. ## What Changed - Register Muse maintenance with the shared delivery coordinator and its idle admission rules. - Signal pairing, OAuth attachment and revocation, qualification changes, and new assignments before transaction writes. The existing transaction layer waits for outer commit. - Restore qualification deadlines from persisted bindings. Retry failed sweeps and unfinished assignments. - Add PostgreSQL tests for idle quiet, nested commit, rollback, deadlines, standby, drain, and failure recovery. Verify signals from actual Muse producers. Preserve startup, newly committed work, and failed sweep retries across idle drain without SQL polling. - Document the remaining recovery cadence and sleep limitations. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed before rebase. Server typechecking also passed after rebase and the drain fix. - `pnpm build`: passed before rebase. - Final change: 33 maintenance, delivery coordinator, and scheduler tests passed. Maintenance used a fresh disposable PostgreSQL 17 database. - Muse control-plane tests: 254 passed against the same disposable database. - `pnpm test:run`: attempted, then stopped after repeated embedded PostgreSQL startup failures from this host's semaphore limit. Native-session, Muse, and AI-connection suites could not create local clusters. The complete suite runs in CI. - `git diff --check`: passed. - Final commit `e106cbf20d`: all CI gates passed, including complete test suites, E2E, build, production bundle boot, public-install smoke test, and canary dry run. Greptile and Paperclip source reviews both rated 5/5, with no unresolved findings. The focused suites accept `PAPERCLIP_MUSE_MAINTENANCE_TEST_DATABASE_URL` and `PAPERCLIP_MUSE_CONTROL_TEST_DATABASE_URL`. Use a disposable test database; fixtures remove test data. ## Risks - Unfinished assignments retain five-second recovery. This change removes idle polling, not all Muse polling. - Signals are process-local. Independent database writers need explicit integration. Startup recovers persisted state. - Qualification deadlines depend on the running process. Existing durable Muse sleep blockers remain unchanged. - The receiver keeps its batching timer. An empty buffer already makes no database calls. - No schema migration or API change. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with code execution and repository tools. The exact model version is 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 (focused suites; full local run has the environment limitation above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
2b16262280 |
Improve runner E2E report navigation and local previews (#16996)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app that people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Product E2E campaigns check user journeys across agent profiles and environments. > - Readers use the campaign history and reports to inspect results and retained evidence. > - The reports showed image summaries, many unselected suites, and a long sticky index. > - Individual case cards also showed routine diagnostics before the visual evidence. > - This pull request adds text summaries, feature filters, folding case indexes, and simpler cards. > - A local preview uses retained public data so designers can change reports without another paid campaign. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Current behavior** The report is hard to scan as the journey catalog grows. Suite links can point into hidden results. Case indexes do not show whether a case passed across its configurations. Design changes also need a realistic local preview. **Proposed behavior** Show the selected campaign as text. Link journeys to current feature-map capabilities. Add folding case indexes with status indicators, reliable section links, and a back-to-top control. Keep failed outcomes visible and put routine diagnostics under Test details. Render retained public campaign data with local templates. **Reason and benefit** Readers can find a feature or failed case faster. Designers can iterate against real retained data without starting an application instance or using provider credentials. **Breaking changes** No result schema or grading change. The report stops embedding the generated summary PNG. The publisher still produces that artifact for existing consumers. Related work: #12889 added the existing matrix browser. #12846 concerns the public image publication boundary. This PR changes report presentation and local preview behavior. ## What Changed - Replace image summaries with shared HTML suite summaries on the history and campaign pages. - Show selected executions and preserve missing results for selected cells. - Add explicit journey-to-capability associations, feature filters, and a coverage view with unmapped journeys. - Add folding case indexes, section case lists, and red, green, or amber status indicators across matching configurations. - Fix anchor navigation through filters and add a floating back-to-top control. - Simplify case cards. Keep failure reasons visible. Fold routine checks, billing, and context into Test details. - Add an original-image link to the gallery. - Add a local preview utility with public data caching and offline mode. Document the direct Node command. - Test manifest-listed evidence, rejection of unlisted files and encoded traversal, cache reuse, and offline misses with a real loopback server and a stub downloader. ## Verification - Focused report, history, and preview tests: 75 passed in 6 files. - Report Playwright spec: 4 passed in Chrome with a standalone config that does not start the application server. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`: passed. - `git diff --check`: passed. - Manually checked retained campaign reports, feature filters, folding indexes, failure links, card details, gallery links, mobile layout, and keyboard navigation. - `pnpm build`: passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm test:run`: stopped after 15 native session database cases failed. The local Postgres package first lacked dynamic-library links. After link hydration, the same cases still failed. A direct `initdb` check then reported `could not create semaphores: No space left on device` and identified the macOS semaphore limit. The complete local suite has not passed. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit`: 3,250 passed, 6 failed, 2 skipped. All six failures reproduced against unchanged `origin/master` report sources with the same installed dependencies. They concern Copilot admission and its Daytona image input, plus the launcher test that runs those assertions. No report or history test failed. - No live provider evaluation was run for this presentation change. - CI on `b1a9c06823` first failed browser shard 3/8. The agent-chat split-handoff test reached cleanup, where cancelling a run returned HTTP 500 from a Postgres deadlock. Cleanup did not restore the experiment setting, and a later test failed its initial setting check. This shard does not contain the report spec. One targeted rerun passed, and that full workflow then passed. This shows recovery; no production fix was made for the deadlock. The later preview-test commit requires its own fresh checks. To review the design, run `node --watch --import ./cli/node_modules/tsx/dist/loader.mjs tests/runner-e2e/preview.ts`. Open the history address printed by the command, then open a campaign. The README covers offline mode and cache refresh. ## Risks - Feature associations use the current map. They describe linked scenarios, not proof that a whole capability is covered. Historical grades remain unchanged. - New or unfamiliar cases remain unmapped until their assertions are inspected. - The preview needs the public history host on first access. Offline mode requires cached files. It binds to the loopback interface and serves manifest-listed public evidence. - Hiding routine diagnostics adds one disclosure step. Failed or incomplete outcomes remain visible. This is report polish. It does not duplicate planned core work in `ROADMAP.md`. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, tool use, code execution, and browser automation. 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 - [ ] 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: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4145b5048a |
docs: deepen task, approval, secret, and recovery maps (#16994)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Its feature map describes user journeys. Its access map describes the matching agent paths. > - The recent index and capability additions improved discovery and breadth. > - Broad baseline records still combined operations with different actors, permissions, and retry behavior. > - This pull request reviews the existing task, approval, secret, and recovery capabilities at operation level. > - Each operation now has its own access boundary, source evidence, and verification recipe. Source review remains separate from live proof. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #16987, #16990, #16025. These related pull requests are merged. The search found no open duplicate or matching issue. **Issue type** Missing documentation. **Where is the issue?** The paired task, questions-and-approvals, secrets, and recovery files under `maps/feature-map/` and `maps/agent-access-map/`. **What's wrong?** Baseline records do not show enough detail to verify who can perform each action, which state must persist, or what happens after a denial, race, or retry. A declared scenario tool can also be mistaken for an admitted production tool. **Suggested fix** Split the four areas into source-reviewed operation records. Add compact checkpoints to their user recipes. Preserve existing capability IDs and the map schema. ## What Changed - Promote 27 existing capability records to `operation-reviewed`, with 125 operation records: tasks 32, questions and approvals 39, secrets 28, recovery 26. - Give each operation its own API, agent surface, policy, source evidence, verification recipe, and remaining gap. - Separate human, legacy agent, run JWT, native binding, mode, and resource authority. Split operations where those rules differ. - Correct production completion paths, plan acceptance and handoff, question dismissal and withdrawal, secret proposal authority, runtime recovery grants, and explicit duplicate-risk decisions. - Preserve access gaps found in source, including the binding-proposal dependency cascade and narrower native/CLI fields. - Add one checkpoint table per product recipe for saved results, denial, races, and retries. - Keep all 191 existing capability IDs. Change only eight Markdown files. Keep every operation's evidence `source-only` and verification `not-run`; the subset below does not prove an entire operation across its actors and surfaces. ## Verification Source review uses revision `3bbc2104b65caf9f7763938a01260a5673e12f7a`. Read-only area reviews and a second source review covered the changed pairs. Passed: - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`: 35 paired areas, 191 capability IDs, valid references and fields. This is structural verification. - `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs scripts/storybook-feature-index.test.mjs`: 17 passed. - `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs`: 308 files, 2,899 stories. Generated outputs remain ignored. - Capability comparison with the base: all 191 IDs unchanged; the four reviewed areas contain 27 capabilities and 125 source-only operation records. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. - `git diff --check`. - Focused existing interaction and proposal route tests: 80 passed. The two selected DB-backed suites skipped 119 tests because local embedded PostgreSQL could not start. These skipped tests are not passes. Live subset on a fresh local instance with a disposable PostgreSQL container: - Created the company and an unassigned task through the browser. Added a comment and completed the task. The saved status and comment survived reload. - Created a managed secret with inert dummy data through the browser. Its metadata and version survived reload. The metadata response did not contain the dummy value. - Created a question fixture through board REST. Invalid input returned 422 and left it pending. Browser dismissal kept it pending and preserved the draft. Reopening restored the choice. Submission survived reload. A duplicate response returned 409 and left the saved answer unchanged. - Used a real issued legacy agent API key. Task read and safe company-secret catalog returned 200. Full secret listing and run-only secret list/value routes returned 403. Revoked the key after the checks. - Read an empty recovery projection. Resolving a nonexistent action returned 404 and left the task unchanged. This did not execute recovery. - Closed the owned browser tab and stopped only the verified test runtime and labelled database container. Evidence survived cleanup. No provider or model ran. Limits and retained failures: - Native embedded PostgreSQL launch failed because the host could not allocate semaphores. The container-backed app was the successful alternate environment. - Full `pnpm test:run` was attempted. Fifteen DB-dependent native-session cases failed at database startup, and several DB suites skipped. The run was stopped after repeated failures of that prerequisite. The full local suite did not pass. - The sandboxed build attempt failed at the local tsx IPC socket. The required build passed outside the sandbox. - The first CI build job passed compilation and production boot, then its npm-install check was interrupted when the runner received a shutdown signal. The corrected head passed the full CI run, including the build and public-install checks. - Initial Greptile review found the recovery note field and native search/history limits were inaccurate. Corrected `resolutionNote` and the production cap of 100, then reran the map checks. Greptile reviewed the corrected head at 5/5; both earlier threads are resolved. - An initial harness used a nonexistent generic secret-value URL and received 404. The actual mapped agent routes were then checked separately. An initial recovery assertion expected 409; the actual missing-action contract returned 404. These were harness corrections, not product fixes. - Native run bindings, two-person ownership, secret delivery/rotation, external vaults, provider-stop proof, workspace repair, and actual recovery execution remain unexecuted. The map does not claim those journeys passed. The separate external **Paperclip Review** check is still in progress on `904509df80cc6de16d36906a410a66786f619b20`. The reviewer reports that its full changed-file request is pending. CI is green and Greptile is 5/5, but this external review has not published a final assessment. Its review service must finish that request and assessment. ## Risks Documentation can become stale as policy and runtime bindings change. Each operation cites source and retains its verification gaps. The records describe observed enforcement; they do not authorize broader access or certify live behavior. This pull request changes no product code, schema, or permission enforcement. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, `gpt-6.1-sol`; 475,000-token context window; xhigh reasoning; tool use and code execution. Read-only source agents assisted the area reviews. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused map and route checks; full-suite host blocker recorded above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable (existing map regression tests cover this documentation-only change) - [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>canary/v2026.1020.0-canary.11 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
a2d26a83fe |
fix(inbox): keep automatic work out of Mine by default
Keep channel and routine attribution out of Mine unless the person participates directly, is assigned the task, or receives a current addressed request. Apply the same source rules to unread state, archives, and task notifications. Preserve direct comments and current human action requests. Restore the two expressions damaged by redaction during the earlier master merge. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
dc6dd23ea4 |
Add plugin Runner preparation task contract (#16993)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work for AI agents. > - Environment plugins can own Runner tasks. > - Core selects provider policy and runtime assignments. > - The execution environment must resolve its own paths and configuration. > - The task API needs a preparation exchange before execution. > - This PR adds that exchange under the existing lease authority. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Problem or motivation** The environment task API can start a Runner. It cannot return a prepared provider configuration from Core requirements. **Proposed solution** Add a versioned `prepare` request and `prepared` result. Keep the provider configuration bound to its task and requirements. Check the same company, run, project, and retained-session authority as submission. **Alternatives considered** A shell preparation command would expose execution details in the API. Provider-specific ownership flags would spread this contract across backends. **Roadmap alignment** This extends the existing plugin and remote execution APIs. It does not add a separate execution system. Refs #16977, #15406. The prerequisite #16977 is merged. This PR now targets master. Runner transport and provider implementations follow separately. ## What Changed - Add strict launch requirements and prepared result schemas. - Add the preparation capability version and saved configuration ID. - Apply existing lease and resource checks to preparation. - Document idempotency, cancellation, recovery, and cleanup requirements. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. - Plugin SDK build passed. - All 55 Dot Runner and native Codex server integration tests passed with Cargo available on PATH. - All 18 environment task runtime tests passed. These include preparation dispatch, inactive leases, wrong run identity, unauthorized projects, result identity, and unknown command rejection. - The broader root suite on the parent refactor finished with 22,420 passing tests, seven failed tests in unchanged Git and diagnostic code, and two suite setup errors because Cargo was absent from its PATH. This PR does not claim a passing full root suite. - No live provider calls or deployment were run. - Standard Greptile and Apex each scored commit `d3ac15906240b7066f5ff505ed2ffd9ef5dd43c1` 5/5. There are no unresolved review threads. - All 55 CI checks passed. Two optional checks were skipped. The branch is ready and mergeable against master. - A fresh master fetch and merge-base check passed immediately before the Apex request. ## Risks - This defines a new optional worker operation. Existing providers keep their current operations. - A provider must validate policy and resource bindings. Schema validation alone does not validate a concrete provider descriptor. - This PR defines the exchange. It does not connect native execution to a preparation provider. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. Reasoning and repository tools. The exact serving model identifier and context size 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> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
05f7079ecb |
Extract Runner provider launch preparation (#16977)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work for AI agents. > - Runner starts providers in local and remote environments. > - Core selects the provider and task policy. > - The execution environment supplies paths and installed files. > - The transport currently combines these inputs in one large method. > - This PR extracts provider descriptor construction before a separate plugin preparation change. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Runner provider launch preparation. **Current behavior** The PRP transport constructs each provider descriptor inside startup. This couples provider configuration to transport lifecycle code. **Proposed behavior** The transport calls one built-in descriptor builder. The builder takes Core provider requirements and execution-environment locations as separate inputs. File staging, provider validation logic, and session rules keep their current behavior. The required Copilot source-identity update changes profile admission metadata. **Reason and benefit** This gives launch preparation a separate unit of code. A later PR can add plugin-owned preparation without adding ownership flags to each provider backend. Refs #15406, #16486. This replaces the earlier installed-home implementation in this PR. #16978 remains a draft. ## What Changed - Extract provider descriptor construction and its existing permission helpers. - Keep helper exports at their previous import path. - Add focused tests for selection, permissions, locations, and managed profile rejection. - Update the Copilot source identity. Bind the extracted file and retain the v49 history. The source attestation requires v50 after this move. This changes the admitted profile identity even though no execution behavior changes are intended. - Document the boundary and its current limits. ## Verification - 338 focused builder, transport, Codex security, and Copilot identity tests passed on the rebased head. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. `pnpm build` passed. - The full root `pnpm test:run` on the pre-rebase head is still in progress. It has reported five failures in unchanged server tests. One isolated failure rejects the word `private` from this checkout's `/private/tmp` stack path. The full root suite is not reported as passing. - All 56 CI checks passed on the rebased head. Four optional checks were skipped. The branch is mergeable. Workspace typecheck and build passed on this head. - Standard Greptile and Apex each scored commit `47f631883d8f417f6a818500ebe4e77e22cc70b8` 5/5. The rebase onto master changed only Copilot identity metadata, history handling, and related tests. `git range-diff` confirms that the launch-preparation implementation is unchanged. The existing Apex result remains the review evidence; it did not review the new commit hash. - No live provider calls or Cloud deployment were run. ## Risks - A moved field could change provider startup. Existing transport tests and the new boundary tests check the projection. - Copilot source binding requires a new identity after the move. Existing artifacts and retained sessions must match the new admitted profile. This PR does not claim fresh live qualification. - This PR does not enable plugin-owned preparation. File materialization remains in the existing SDK path. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. Reasoning and repository tools. The exact serving model identifier and context size 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
3bbc2104b6 |
docs: map missing product and operator capabilities (#16990)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The feature map records product entry points and verification recipes. > - The paired agent access map records APIs and permission boundaries for the same capability IDs. > - The new index in #16987 made several missing capabilities easier to find. > - Those gaps hid existing assistant, privacy, cost, and operator workflows. > - This pull request adds 15 capabilities with source references, test scope, and manual checks. > - Readers can find these workflows without treating documentation or structural checks as live proof. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #16987. Related map work: #16025 and #16214. A search of related pull requests found no duplicate of these additions. **Issue type** Missing documentation. **Where is the issue?** `maps/feature-map/` and `maps/agent-access-map/`. **What's wrong?** The maps omit public assistant MCP connections, private task and project sharing, subscription fees, cost-recording recovery, agent API keys, keyboard entry points, and several operator CLI workflows. **Suggested fix** Add product recipes and matching access records. Show the full capability IDs in the README index and each page. Keep the existing ID format and all 175 existing IDs. Exclude AI account pools. ## What Changed - Add the `assistant-connections` family with setup, consent, device login, client use, and revocation. - Add `tasks/privacy`, `projects/privacy`, `budgets-costs/subscriptions`, and `budgets-costs/accounting-recovery`. - Add `agents/api-keys`, `agents/managed-agent-setup`, and `navigation-preferences/command-palette`. - Add `cli-operations/feedback-export`, `chat-channels/outbound-email`, and `instance-operations/runtime-setup`. - Pair all 15 additions with access rules, source evidence, manual checks, and explicit coverage gaps. Update the visible index to 35 families and 190 capability IDs. - Add cross-links from existing access, connection setup, search, and CLI recipes. Do not change the schema or add AI account pools. - Clarify that the task Share sheet displays direct and inherited access. Manage inherited access at its ancestor or project source. ## Verification - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passes: 35 areas and 190 paired capability IDs, with valid references and contract fields. - `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs scripts/storybook-feature-index.test.mjs` passes: 17 tests. - `node scripts/storybook-feature-index.mjs` and `git diff --check` pass. - A comparison with the base confirms all 175 existing IDs remain and exactly the intended 15 IDs were added. The README index matches the discovered feature metadata. - `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs` cannot run because this checkout lacks `storybook/internal/csf-tools` and installed workspace dependencies. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm test:run`, and `pnpm build` were attempted. All stopped before their task ran: the pnpm 9.15.4 bootstrap could not fetch and verify its registry packages in this environment. - Source review covers the documented UI, CLI, routes, services, and existing tests. No live browser, provider, or authorization journey was run. New access records remain `baseline`, `source-only`, and `not-run`. - Greptile and the Paperclip reviewer both rate current commit `bb8eb797b0a1dc26256faf2f0e57cbe7abc9adcf` 5/5. The inherited-access review thread is resolved. - [GitHub CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39466772379) passes for that commit, including typecheck, build, unit tests, Runner checks, and browser tests. Browser shard 7 passed after one retry for a runner shutdown. All PR checks are successful, neutral, or skipped. ## Risks - Low runtime risk: this change only edits maps. No application behavior, API, dependency, or schema changes. - Source-reviewed recipes can drift or miss deployment-specific behavior. The records state their limits and require live checks before a capability is marked verified. > 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, model ID `gpt-6.1-sol`, 475,000-token context window, xhigh reasoning effort, with tool use and code execution. ## 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>canary/v2026.1020.0-canary.10 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
505e1a5582 |
feat(cases): add persistent workflows with same-task agent handoffs (#16959)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - An agent workflow needs persistent facts and a safe way to transfer work. > - Creating a task for each phase splits the objective, discussion, workspace, and review policy. > - A case can retain the facts while one primary task moves between agents. > - Transfers must survive process failure and preserve private access, budgets, and completion gates. > - This pull request adds durable case handoffs, native case tools, and read-only case pages. > - Prompts describe the workflow. Existing task controls decide when work can run and finish. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Problem or motivation** Prompt-driven agent teams need a persistent record that can move through triage, implementation, verification, and correction. Ordinary reassignment does not provide a durable instruction, safe release barrier, or recoverable delivery receipt for an agent handing off its own running task. **Proposed solution** Extend standalone cases with one primary task, a descriptive phase, retained access sources, and a handoff ledger. Apply assignments after source execution and workspace settlement. Deliver each transfer through the existing durable wake queue. Provide `create_case`, `read_case`, `update_case`, and `handoff_case` in the native runner. Creation requires kickoff and explicit workflow text. An explicit handoff to `done` closes the case when normal task completion is accepted. **Alternatives considered** Do not add a workflow engine, filesystem queue, configured state graph, or one task per phase. The workflow document combines transition prose with an optional Mermaid `stateDiagram-v2` map. The server does not execute the diagram. The Pipelines experiment removed on master stays removed. **Roadmap alignment** This extends Agent Reviews and Approvals, Enforced Outcomes, Bounded Run Recovery, and Activity Log attribution. Existing approval, review, budget, privacy, workspace, and responsible-user rules remain authoritative. Related work: [ordinary handoff wake recovery](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15019). This feature adds a separate persisted case-handoff receipt and release barrier. ## What Changed - Add case routing fields, retained access sources, durable handoff history, delivery leases, and replay-safe migrations. - Keep the same primary task across agent phases. Preserve each returning agent's own session and the task's workspace. - Fence outgoing mutations, wait for provider and workspace release, and recover delivery without duplicate task comments or runs. Recheck current assignment permissions as the original caller before applying a delayed transfer. Scope a run Stop to that run’s own handoff intents, so repeated old Stop requests preserve newer work. Cancelling terminal intent without a source run also requires fenced current task ownership, including native retries and preparation with an old checkout. For Cloud callers, revalidate current stack membership with an uncached Cloud RPC and derive owner elevation from the current managed setting. - Keep case reads, documents, assets, Audit, and live events inside retained task/project permissions. - Add native case creation/read/update/handoff tools. Store required workflow text and initial documents on the first task. Page oversized case facts and referenced document bodies through the dedicated tool with bounded UTF-8 JSON, current routing versions, snapshot conflicts, and current source authorization on every page. - Add read-only case lists and detail pages, task-style list controls, compact dotted field tables, linked handoff tasks, and case filters in Audit. - Add native/legacy integration tests, migration/restart tests, browser coverage, and bounded live receipt fixtures. Extend the trusted sandbox condition to cover the new subscription fixture profile. - Hide obsolete paused-agent warnings on completed or cancelled task threads. - Synchronize the company-switch settings test with React effects after a CI failure. Preserve its security assertions and production remount behavior. ## Verification The branch directly includes master `9ef434fe79`. The required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e` gates pass on head `765fccd67c`. [Current-head CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39464348614) passes typecheck, build, tests, and all eight browser shards. Security checks pass. [Greptile gives this exact head 5/5](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16959#issuecomment-6291156549), with no unresolved review threads. The optional Paperclip Review check remains queued because its assigned agent is paused. It is not a required branch check. No check result was overridden. Local workspace typecheck and build pass after the master merge, along with database migration checks, token gates, map checks, Storybook catalog checks, and the Copilot profile identity check. Standard builds refresh Runner vendor output. Focused checks pass 2,008 API/paging/context tests and 7 strict case protocol tests. The final commit changes one test fixture only; its ten tests, UI typecheck, and token gates pass. No production source changed in that commit. On current head `765fccd67c`, all **194 critical workflow tests** executed and passed with no skipped tests in those files: - 38 Stop/ownership tests, including board completion intent, native retries, stale Stop, and preparation with an old checkout. - 2 actual legacy process/HTTP handoff tests, including scratch failure, a closed-stdio child that continues writing, and recovery through a fresh worker after the process group stops. - 5 migration tests, including SQL column metadata, preserved null authority context, and all six prior-numbering receipts. - 3 process-settlement and 5 scratch tests. - 88 handoff-service, 18 heartbeat handoff, and 21 native case-tool integration tests. - 7 bounded case/document-read projection tests and 7 strict protocol-contract tests. The current CI checkout was `fed65d49`, merging `765fccd67c` into master `9ef434fe79`. Its new document regressions reconstruct exact Unicode/escaped bodies and revisions through real native authority and authenticated HTTP with generic API tools disabled. They cover case-owned, primary-task, and linked-task documents; routing on every page; stale document snapshots; access loss and unlinking; unrelated/foreign/private sources; system documents; and quarantined content. Active-task document tools retain their existing behavior. These are current-head test results from the first CI attempt; the browser-only retry did not rerun these suites. The full `64fdd3403f` CI failed one separate settings test: after a company switch, it observed an unsettled API-key draft. The production component and test were unchanged from prior green source. Production switches remount both keyed settings layers; the test directly reused an unkeyed view and used a timer tick instead of waiting for React effects. The final commit replaces that fixture synchronization with React `act`. The exact secret-clearing assertions and all timeouts remain unchanged. The original assertion failure remains recorded; no unchanged retry was used. The narrow unchanged baseline and fixed fixture each pass 10 tests. The upstream result-paging merge preserves case capture namespaces and current asset privacy. Its API integration suite executed 39 of 41 tests successfully, with two skipped; the optional assigned-result PRP integration test was skipped. Neither skipped suite is counted in the 194 critical tests or as live provider proof. All 361 upstream migration entries and SQL bodies remain unchanged. Six case migrations follow master as 0363–0368 with identical SQL hashes. Official Drizzle generators produced the combined metadata and five retained snapshots. Generation reports no schema changes, and the snapshot drift test passes. The earlier `ce361ae5d0` CI passed on attempt 1, including its then-current 179 critical tests. Fresh review later identified unusable document references with generic API tools disabled; the bounded document reads and ten additional authenticated HTTP tests address that finding. The full local `pnpm test:run` attempt was cancelled after this Mac exhausted PostgreSQL semaphore capacity; it is **not** counted as a pass. Later database attempts also stopped before assertions or skipped, including one sandbox socket denial. Two original stale-Stop regressions did reproduce the bug against the old source. A REST serialization assertion passed after two preserved database-startup failures. No test timeout was increased. All 194 assertions listed above executed and passed in current-head CI. The complete 385-file, 3,963-test UI shard also passed after the fixture repair. A configured-provider receipt workflow passed 13 backend checks across triage → implementation → verification → correction → done, using one task and four work runs. The saved receipt is revision 2 with total 6 USD; case and task both closed. The original canonical attempt remains failed because its browser assertion confused the terminal destination with completed-task tooltips. The corrected full browser verifier passed on the same retained database and original runs, with no additional provider calls. The last clean-build browser readback is on `6a86c54a53`; later changes affect recovery, authorization, bounded reads, and settlement. Accounted work cost is a $1.010574 rate-card estimate; provider billing and setup-probe usage are unavailable. Copilot profile 49 passed the unchanged seven-fixture private protocol pack (46/46 checks, no retries) and the product file-edit canary after master's completion-replay change. All 60 bound implementation hashes remain unchanged on the current source. Historical profile-47/48 identities and results remain intact. See the [profile-49 compatibility record](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/codex/persistent-case-handoffs/doc/plans/2026-10-20-copilot-completion-recovery-compatibility-v49.json). This is bounded compatibility evidence, not a fresh full matrix, installed-package product test, or Daytona rollout. Preserved CI failures and retries: - On `20662930ac`, Slack managed setup failed a five-second success assertion after reload. Its test/application path was unchanged from a prior green head. One unchanged-source retry passed all 25 tests in that shard; no source or timeout changed. - On `9402b4f17a`, two CI workers received shutdown signals at 15:24:19 UTC. Neither log had an assertion failure before interruption. One unchanged-source retry of each passed all Runner static checks and all 32 tests in browser shard 6; both aggregates passed. The next head, `7b4374edaf`, passed all CI without retries. - On `295f289b5a`, serialized shard 9 timed out during its first device-login test, then the next test found an active login lease. Direct login/test paths were unchanged from a prior green head. Cold import plus a timed-out async body using the next test's mutable actor/store is the supported fixture-race explanation; no request trace proves that sequence. The original failure remains recorded. One unchanged-source retry passed all 294 tests in 19 files, including all 41 device-login tests. No login source or timeout changed. The subsequent `ce361ae5d0` CI passed without retries. - On `64fdd3403f`, one company-switch settings assertion observed an unsettled draft. The final test-only commit uses React `act` without changing assertions, timeouts, or production code. On `765fccd67c`, all ten settings tests and the complete 385-file, 3,963-test UI shard passed. - On `765fccd67c`, browser shard 3 completed the split-handoff assertions, then cleanup received HTTP 500 from run cancellation after a one-second PostgreSQL row-lock timeout. The extra chat run was reporting completed work while teardown began. Cleanup stopped before restoring a global experiment flag, causing a later assertion to fail. Relevant production and test paths are unchanged from an earlier green commit. Stop's lock order is consistent, and no nested self-lock was found; the exact PostgreSQL blocker was not recorded. One unchanged-shard retry passed. The original failure, trace, and downstream flag failure remain recorded. No Stop implementation, cleanup assertion, or timeout changed. The retry supports intermittent cleanup contention; it does not identify the original blocking transaction. ## Risks - Local process transfers require host-owned PID/group absence. Missing or uncertain termination evidence keeps delivery pending, independently of scratch setup. - Handoff admission and task cancellation share execution ownership. New regression tests cover temporary holds, late source writes, and uncertain provider termination. - Retained private sources use an intersection of existing permissions. This intentionally fails closed when a source is missing or an existing task cannot preserve that boundary. - Migrations add tables and indexes. They preserve master history and can replay over prior feature installs. Migration 0368 adds nullable internal authorization provenance with no default or authority backfill. Historical transfers still awaiting release without this context fail closed; an operator must cancel them and request a new handoff. - Delayed Cloud handoffs depend on the current Cloud membership RPC. An unavailable, ambiguous, expired, or mismatched response holds the handoff for retry; it does not reuse cached authority or grant access. - Bounded reads reload and reauthorize the selected projection per page. Underlying work grows with the data size and number of pages. Changed data or routing requires restarting from offset zero without the old snapshot. - Phase names and workflow diagrams remain advisory. They do not satisfy review or approval gates. - This is a large, cross-cutting PR. The maintainer requested one PR for the whole feature; the commits separate data, runtime, UI, and qualification work. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with tool use, code execution, and delegated code review. The exact deployment model ID and context-window size were not exposed in the session. Live fixture agents used the explicitly configured provider model recorded in their test evidence. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8ee851a0d8 |
fix(ui): keep runner turns stable through startup and completion (#16989)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task chat shows each agent turn from message submission through completion. > - Run admission can publish adapter metadata before native runtime metadata. > - The UI changed layouts during that gap and removed the agent identity. > - Completion reports can also arrive before the provider writes its final reply. > - The event reader treated those reports as final replies and then replaced them. > - This pull request keeps the runner layout stable and delays report fallbacks until the final history fetch completes. > - Readers see one provider reply, while report-only runs keep a useful answer. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Sending a task message briefly replaced the runner avatar, name, and Thinking row with a generic Working row. At completion, a full report summary appeared as the answer. A shorter provider reply then replaced it while streaming. **Expected behavior** Keep the runner identity and header spacing stable during admission. Stream the provider's final reply once. Use a report summary as a fallback only after the run ends and its final history fetch completes without a provider reply. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Send a message to a native Paperclip Runner agent. 2. Observe the initial run record before native runtime metadata arrives. 3. Let the agent call its completion tool before writing its final response. 4. Observe the report summary, final response stream, and saved reply handoff. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced from source at `6b804bfeba`. The event-reader behavior was also present in earlier revisions. **Deployment mode** Self-hosted server. Local component tests and browser fixtures reproduce the UI transitions. Related work: Refs #12617, which added native runner turns to task chat. The duplicate search found no open PR for this specific defect. ## What Changed - Keep Paperclip Runner turns in the runner layout while runtime metadata resolves. Use the same header spacing for queued and running states. - Keep structured reports as report entries. Do not create synthetic provider final messages from them. - Track successful event fetches for each run status. Permit a terminal report fallback after the final fetch, or when the transcript contains its terminal receipt. - Preserve report-only answers and saved reply deduplication. - Add desktop and mobile regressions for streamed replies, late final events, report-only runs, pagination, and fetch failures. Delay missing-answer notices until terminal history is ready. Document the presentation rules in `DESIGN.md`. ## Verification - Passed all 8,750 UI tests across 769 files. This includes 456 focused tests for the thread, runner turn, native projection, native transcript hook, transcript adapter, and boundary fixtures. - The six completion regressions fail against the old native event reader and pass with the fix. Three empty-history regressions fail before the review fix and pass afterward. The startup regressions also fail against the old layout condition. - Passed UI TypeScript checking with `node node_modules/typescript/bin/tsc -b ui/tsconfig.json`. - Passed the UI production build with `cd ui && node node_modules/vite/bin/vite.js build`. - Passed `pnpm check:token-gates`, `git diff --check`, and the Storybook catalog generator. - Browser check: mounted the production turn with native event snapshots at desktop and 390-pixel mobile widths. The report stayed hidden while running. The actual reply stayed unchanged at completion. The report-only fallback appeared after completion. The identity row kept the same position and size. No browser errors or horizontal overflow occurred. The temporary fixture was removed. - Passed `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. Initial attempts failed with `COPILOT_INSTALLATION_INVALID`. Reinstalling the generated Copilot assets resolved that local packaging failure without source changes. - The full repository test run was attempted locally and stopped after repeated embedded PostgreSQL bootstrap failures in server suites. The complete UI suite passes independently. In CI, serialized shard 5/9 had one 15-second timeout in the unchanged `agent-live-run-routes.test.ts` history-limit case; its other 387 tests passed. All five history-limit variants pass locally. The single CI job retry passed. The original timeout cause is not established. ## Risks - Report-only answers appear later because the UI waits for terminal history. Failed event fetches keep that fallback pending until a retry succeeds; provider replies remain visible. - Historical replies and accepted response-wake behavior retain their existing resolution rules. The focused tests cover these paths. - The change does not alter provider execution, completion authority, database schema, or run timing. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, code execution, and browser inspection. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9ef434fe79 |
docs: expose feature map IDs and add a recipe index (#16987)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Its feature map describes user journeys and their verification paths. > - The map already defines feature IDs and full capability IDs. > - The README and child pages did not show those IDs consistently. > - Readers need those IDs to connect issues, tests, stories, and evidence. > - This pull request adds a recipe index and displays the existing IDs. > - The benefit is clear references across the product and agent access maps. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Issue type** Missing documentation. **Where is the issue?** `maps/feature-map/README.md`, the child recipes, and their agent access companions. **What's wrong?** The README sends readers to Storybook to browse features. Child pages show local keys, such as `installation`, without the full `plugins/installation` ID. Readers must inspect the generator to find the full reference. **Suggested fix** List recipe links and existing IDs in the README. Show each feature ID and full capability ID in its child pages. Explain capability IDs and entry-point references. Keep the current keys and anchors. Related work: Refs #15288. Refs #16052. Refs #15983. No duplicate open PR or issue was found by title search. ## What Changed - Add an index grouped by feature area. It lists every recipe, feature ID, and full capability ID. - Explain how IDs are formed and used in issues, tests, Storybook, and evidence. - Add feature IDs to all product recipes and agent access companions. - Show full capability IDs beside recipe keys and below access and Storybook guidance headings. - Preserve existing keys, heading anchors, and generated ID values. Keep the latest upstream company capability in the index. ## Verification - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passes for 34 feature families and 175 capability IDs. - `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs scripts/storybook-feature-index.test.mjs` passes all 17 tests. - `node scripts/storybook-feature-index.mjs` passes on this checkout and generates the feature indexes and overview inputs. - `git diff --check` passes. - A source comparison confirms that the README matches the recipe index. After removal of the added ID labels, all 68 child pages match the upstream prose and headings. - Full workspace checks were attempted: `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm test:run`, and `pnpm build`. They could not start because the local pnpm wrapper could not fetch and verify the pinned pnpm 9.15.4 release. This checkout also has no workspace dependencies installed. - `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs` could not run because `storybook/internal/csf-tools` is not installed. The direct map and index checks above pass without that dependency. - Remote typecheck, release-registry, and full build checks passed. The first attempts of [server shard 3/12](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39460473910/job/118758430448) and [server shard 12/12](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39460473910/job/118758429932) stopped after their runners received a shutdown signal. The test steps were canceled. GitHub rejects the rerun request with HTTP 403: "The workflow run containing this job is already running". Five other CI jobs remain active. The next action is to rerun the two interrupted shards after workflow 39460473910 ends. No application changes were made to address these runner interruptions. - To inspect the result, open the feature-map README, follow a recipe link, and compare its full capability IDs with its access companion. ## Risks - Low risk. The change updates map documentation only. It changes no application code or ID schema. - The readable README index and child labels repeat source IDs. Keep them aligned when a capability changes. - Generated capability descriptions now include the visible ID prefix. Generated IDs, labels, navigation order, and verification fields remain the same. - Full local workspace checks and catalog generation remain unverified for the environment reasons above. > 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, model `gpt-6.1-sol`, with a 475,000-token context window and `xhigh` reasoning effort. The model used local file tools, shell commands, and GitHub CLI access. ## 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 - [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>canary/v2026.1020.0-canary.9 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9225796a4e |
fix(runner): page oversized assigned tool results (#16980)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native agents receive assigned app-tool results through the durable Runner protocol. > - The assigned-tool bridge returned complete provider responses without a size bound. > - A large response could exceed the encrypted command limit after the upstream call had completed. > - The provider then waited for a result that the controller could not deliver. > - This pull request saves large governed responses and returns a small reference with a scoped page reader. > - Agents can retrieve the full result without repeating the original action. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Large app-tool responses could leave native tool calls pending even though the upstream service completed. The durable command limit is about 510 KiB. The assigned-tool bridge did not account for that limit. A 720,048-byte regression response failed the delivery-size assertion before this change. **Expected behavior** Deliver a bounded response and a way to retrieve all saved content. Keep the original action at one execution. Preserve task, agent, company, responsible-user, and current-run access checks. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run a native agent with an assigned tool that returns more than 510 KiB of JSON. 2. Let the upstream tool complete. 3. Observe that the original bridge returns the oversized object directly, so the durable controller cannot queue its result. Related: #14734 preserves uncertain tool outcomes across shutdown and restart. This change keeps that protection. #16517 handles native MCP content projection on a different transport; it does not bound native assigned-tool results. ## What Changed - Save governed assigned-tool responses above 500,000 encoded bytes using the existing response asset storage, quotas, and audit path. - Add `read_tool_result` for UTF-8 JSON pages from the same task and agent. Each encoded page is capped at 500,000 bytes, including JSON escaping and metadata, with remaining content available through the next byte offset. It works when generic API tools are disabled. - Reuse existing authenticated asset reads and responsible-user checks. Retrieval does not invoke the upstream service. - Preserve uncertain delivery if storage fails after an action completes. - Add regression, fault, authorization, and opt-in live Codex checks. Document the transport and access contract. ## Verification - Red: the original integration regression returned 720,048 bytes against unchanged production code and failed its bounded-response assertion. The follow-up regression also showed that a 480 KB result was unnecessarily saved under the original 24 KiB policy. - Green: results through 500,000 encoded bytes stay inline. Larger responses are saved in full. Real HTTP integration tests reconstruct the complete Unicode result after controller recreation in exactly two pages, in both standard and low-trust configurations, with one upstream execution. - The encoded-size boundary and escape-heavy Unicode tests verify that every page fits 500,000 bytes, cursors advance on valid UTF-8 boundaries, and concatenating pages exactly reconstructs the original JSON. Storage-failure tests preserve an uncertain outcome without repeating the action. - The focused unit/API run passes 1,957 tests; the changed real HTTP tests pass. `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `git diff --check` pass. - Real Codex acceptance passes with `gpt-6.1-sol` through Codex CLI 0.160.0 and native Runner, on macOS ARM64 with `low_trust_review` and generic API tools disabled. Codex requests every page in order, receives all 660,098 original bytes, and returns the final verification field. The two encoded pages are 500,000 and 160,543 bytes; the upstream operation executes once. Runner closes successfully in a 34.1-second probe. Only the disposable database's connection/worker counts were reduced to fit the host's remaining semaphore capacity. - The native-PRP regression also passes with escape-heavy Unicode pages over 1 MB in total and a separate inline result containing 200,000 backslashes. A scripted provider verifies both complete results by SHA-256. It proves the intermediate text wrapper can exceed 700 KB because the native transport decodes it before queuing the bounded PRP result; every result object stays within 500,000 encoded bytes. Native binaries are required for the local run, preventing a silent skip. - A second real-Codex probe with escaped Unicode, quotes, backslashes, newlines, and NULs also passes: every original byte of a 720,098-byte JSON response is retrieved in two encoded pages of 500,000 and 460,543 bytes. The model returns the final field, the upstream call executes once, and Runner closes in 32.6 seconds. This uses the same production source with only the synthetic fixture content varied. - The live probe exercises real PRP, persistence, and authenticated asset reads. It does not claim the original staging task resumed or full heartbeat checkpoint acceptance. - Earlier broader local testing passed 103 tests but could not start the second database for the existing `rejects a stale source-run question over public HTTP and accepts it from the next run` test. Extending its timeout exposed PostgreSQL initialization failure on this semaphore-exhausted host. The earlier local `pnpm test:run` attempt was interrupted and is not claimed as passing. Full CI passes on current head `cd32237ee5429765b8f349402ac3c79cceec3e6b`. GitHub reports 55 successful checks, two skipped Storybook checks, and one neutral Paperclip agent review. Greptile is 5/5 on this head with no review threads. - Additional Paperclip agent review is incomplete: it withdrew the earlier double-escaping finding after inspecting the native regression, found no new actionable defects, and reported stalled large-source reads prevented independent inspection of the transport decoder. Its neutral assessment is [recorded here](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16980#issuecomment-6295579705). This limitation remains separate from the passing local native transport, real Codex acceptance, full CI, and Greptile results. ## Risks - Large responses now consume existing response-storage quota and require page reads. Larger pages use more provider context. Results are preserved in full; each encoded page leaves about 22 KiB below the PRP command limit for the command envelope. - A storage failure after execution retains an uncertain delivery outcome. The bridge must not report that the upstream action failed or invite a replay. - The dedicated reader grants access only to saved responses for the current task and agent. The asset route also checks the original responsible user. - Runner command limits and receipt rules remain unchanged. No migration or separate Runner protocol rollout is required. - This PR does not deploy the repair or resume an existing blocked task. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. The opt-in acceptance probe requests `gpt-6.1-sol` through Codex CLI 0.160.0. ## 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 and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass for the changed behavior (focused unit/API, real HTTP, and real Codex acceptance); the broader local database limitation is documented above - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
6b804bfeba |
Fix Docker dependency installation for Copilot lifecycle hooks (#16983)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - The standard Docker image contains the server and Runner. > - Its dependency stage installs packages before copying application source. > - New Copilot postinstall hooks need files absent from that stage. > - Both image architectures stop before compilation. > - This change supplies the lifecycle inputs and tests both entrypoints. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Master Docker builds fail with a missing `packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/install-copilot-assets.mjs`. The server postinstall also needs its bootstrap script and source marker. See the failed public [Docker build](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39450988012). **Expected behavior** Dependency installation recognizes the existing source workspace. The later build compiles and verifies provider assets through the existing path. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Build the standard Docker image from master. 2. Reach `pnpm install` in the `deps` stage. 3. Observe the missing lifecycle-script error before compilation. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced in the Docker build for `24758b9da129a5e424fb7ba6b423d748ce23f3bc`. This PR starts at `33cc567f75ae8a3fecf4442d20772e62944f1552`. **Deployment mode** Docker, Linux amd64 and arm64. No database is involved. Searched open PRs and issues for Docker, Copilot, installer and the exact missing script. No matching fix was found. ## What Changed - Copy the Runner installer and its two helper modules into the dependency layer. - Copy the server installer and both existing source-workspace markers. - Execute both real postinstall entrypoints in a temporary fixture populated from the relevant Docker COPY inputs. - Run the fixture in the existing trusted PR dependency-stage check. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/docker-deps-postinstall.test.mjs` passed. - The same test fails with the original Dockerfile because the installer is missing. The fixed Dockerfile was restored and the test passed again. - `node scripts/check-docker-deps-stage.mjs` passed. - The fixture passed through the existing timing wrapper in default and `PAPERCLIP_CI_PROFILE=true` modes. The latter wrote test timing records. - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` passed. - All three `node --test packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/install-copilot-assets.test.mjs` cases passed. These test fresh Runner/server assets, source bootstrap and published-package failure. - Full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. The full local test command is running. All 55 checks passed on exact head `8ab57339cb9a0dcefa3ae9c2c0f92dc4f6210a23`, with one neutral security scan and four conditional skips. This includes full server, browser, Runner, typecheck, build, package-smoke and dependency-stage checks. Apex reviewed the same head at 5/5 with its prior timing finding resolved. No review thread remains unresolved. - The local Docker daemon does not respond to an info probe. A complete local image build has not been run. The post-merge canonical image build must pass before any deployment uses this change. ## Risks The dependency cache now includes these small lifecycle inputs. Source edits to the two marker files invalidate that cache. The existing source-workspace detection and compiled asset verification remain in place. This does not add an installer bypass, change provider pins or alter runtime behavior. No schema change is included. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with source inspection, code execution and GitHub tools. The exact served model ID and context-window size 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 focused tests locally and recorded the results above - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
2c96f76780 |
feat(connections): add model-backed prompt injection prevention
Add opt-in OpenRouter checks at existing tool-result boundaries with regex fallback, service accounting, and settings on Connections. Make migration 0362 safe to replay over existing or partially applied schema state. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
33cc567f75 |
Add lease-scoped Runner task hooks to environment plugins (#15406)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip coordinates AI agents and their runs. > - Environment plugins own remote capacity. > - A plugin needs a typed API to start and stop its installed Runner. > - Core must derive authority from the saved lease. > - A lost reply or controller restart must not lose cleanup authority. > - This PR adds the worker contract and the host task service. > - Native execution and Runner changes are separate PRs. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Plugin SDK and environment lease services. **Current behavior** Environment plugins have no typed Runner task hook. Core cannot dispatch these tasks or recover their credential handoff through a saved lease. **Proposed behavior** Add validated task operations, worker negotiation, company and project checks, retained-session authorization, and durable cleanup. Keep credentials out of lease metadata. **Additional context** This PR is the first part of a smaller series. Runner installed-home support is in #16977. Native execution and setup are in #16978. Both are stacked drafts. This PR does not enable native plugin execution, change default environments, add a route, or add a database migration. ## What Changed - Add `supportsTasks` and `onEnvironmentTask` with seven typed operations. - Validate worker requests and responses. Reject shell commands and file transfer operations. - Pin dispatch and cleanup to the saved company, lease, plugin, and driver. - Authorize projects and retained sessions. Validate the current run separately from the retained PRP identity. - Save dispatch before the provider call. Fence admission during cleanup. Require observed process termination. - Save account writeback authority on the lease. Recover Codex refreshes through the existing account and secret services. - Document the task API. Keep the Runner, heartbeat, setup, workspace, and provider changes in later PRs. ## Verification - Full `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on the separated API scope. - 201 focused tests passed: SDK worker dispatch, task validation, PostgreSQL task lineage, credential recovery, and existing environment cleanup. - The lineage test covers a third run, repeated same-run replacements, a stale submitting run, and exact termination receipts. - Initial commands hit sandbox socket/IPC restrictions. The permitted runs executed PostgreSQL and passed. A typecheck attempt lacked Cargo in PATH; the run with the installed toolchain passed. - The earlier combined implementation had a full local run with 22,286 passing tests, 120 skips, and eight failed assertions. Task fixture failures were fixed before this split. Remaining host Git and temporary-path assertions are recorded in the previous PR revision. This split does not claim a fresh full local suite pass. - The standard Greptile review scored this API head 5/5 with no unresolved threads. CI is green. The single Apex review also scored this head 5/5 with no actionable findings. - Fresh API CI lost a self-hosted runner during server shard 9. GitHub reported lost communication, with no failed test step. The affected jobs passed on retry without code changes. - CI on the prior combined head failed an unchanged workspace dev-server readiness case. No unrelated test fix is included here. Fresh CI is required for this smaller head. - This scope does not run a provider or a Cloud test. The user owns deployment and the intermediate Cloud test. ## Risks - The API is opt-in. Native plugin execution requires the later integrations. - Providers must make task submission idempotent and prove descendant termination. - A failed status read or credential export keeps the lease available for cleanup. - Codex refresh writeback requires the same active grant, secret reference, and session epoch. Revocation or account replacement discards the old refresh. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. Used source inspection, code execution, tests, and GitHub tools. The exact served model ID and context-window size 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 local checks and recorded failures and their results above - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
98d17da1e2 |
Fix native monitor dispatch and finalization recovery (#16975)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native runs persist their results and workspace before they release execution. > - A task monitor must wait for that settlement before it starts the next run. > - The scheduler checked provider status but did not check unfinished finalization. > - A timer could dispatch too early, then its old finalizer could no longer find the consumed schedule. > - This pull request delays dispatch and reconciles prior delivery from server records. > - The task can continue without repeating the provider turn or removing a newer run's ownership. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A native run saved a yielded monitor result while workspace finalization needed recovery. Its timer dispatched after the provider stopped. The follow-up failed because the earlier run still held workspace recovery. The old finalizer then retried `monitor_wait_authority_lost` indefinitely. **Expected behavior** Timer dispatch waits for native finalization. If an older timer already dispatched, the finalizer uses its saved scheduling receipt and admitted successor to settle the old result. It preserves current task state and ownership. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Schedule a task monitor from a native run and save a yielded result. 2. Leave native finalization retryable after the provider reaches a terminal state. 3. Let the monitor become due. Before this change, the scheduler consumes it. 4. Restore workspace persistence and retry the old finalizer. Before this change, the missing schedule leaves it retryable. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced against master `34be1b831bcaba070264ae8d214ceffe6a8f9eab`. **Deployment mode** Self-hosted server built from source, with PostgreSQL and the native runner. Related recent recovery work: #16962 and #16963. No duplicate repair found for this failure. ## What Changed - Scheduled and manual monitor dispatch wait for unfinished native finalization. If the monitor expires during workspace recovery, the accepted result can settle into the persisted schedule, and the scheduler then applies its existing expiry policy. New monitor-wait results still require an unexpired, unexhausted schedule. - A narrow reader joins the run's server-issued monitor receipt to its durable wake and admitted successor. - The finalizer and locked status commit verify that evidence and preserve current task ownership. They do not create another wake. - Monitor delivery participates in assessment identity, so recovery can replace a prior error decision without violating the decision ledger's uniqueness constraints. - PostgreSQL regressions cover saved-result replay, active successors, wrong task or agent, missing receipts, unadmitted wakes, ownership races, and failed workspace persistence. - The execution contract and verification maps describe the recovery boundary. ## Verification - Red: the saved monitor regression remained `retryable_failure` instead of `committed` on unpatched code. - Red: the scheduler admitted a wake while terminal-run finalization remained retryable. - Red/green: two PostgreSQL cases reproduce timeout during workspace recovery for scheduled and manual checks. Before the review repair, both remain `retryable_failure` with `monitor_wait_authority_lost`. Afterward, both commit, apply board escalation once, preserve the saved result, and enqueue zero provider wakes. New completion still rejects the expired schedule. - Typecheck: `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. - Build: `pnpm build` passed. - Maps: `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed. - Review: Greptile 5/5 and Ponytail Paperclip Review 5/5 on the current head, with no unresolved findings. Both reviews are static; execution evidence is recorded separately above and below. - Linux staging: the original repair passed 170 tests across monitor integration, scheduling, status arbitration, and workspace finalization. The expanded suite passes all 172 tests, including both new timeout regressions. - Live acceptance: deployed the original repair to the authorized Linux ARM64 self-hosted instance. The stranded saved result finalized automatically; the original task then completed through normal admission, with its final answer persisted after browser reload. The other original task was already complete and its external delivery was verified without repeating it. - The initial Mac regression run passed 68 tests, but three suites failed during embedded PostgreSQL startup. A subsequent focused run confirmed the host had exhausted its PostgreSQL semaphore allowance. Linux verification uses isolated databases; the local failure logs remain preserved. - The local full test suite is not claimed as passed. It is blocked by the same PostgreSQL startup limitation; full-suite CI passed on head `8bc29d1b7783446f397b858e558083570a96bb66` ([run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39447913466)). ## Risks - A delivery match must not grant new execution authority. The lookup requires the original run's server receipt and a matching company, agent, task, wake, and admitted successor. The locked commit rejects old-run checkout ownership and permits no status effects. - Workspace persistence must succeed before settlement. Its existing failure path remains effective. - The scheduler waits while a native finalizer is unfinished. Workspace recovery must settle before dispatch; elapsed monitor limits transfer to the existing scheduler recovery policy instead of stranding the result. Neither settlement path renews a deadline or changes budget, approval, pause, or provider authority. - No schema, migration, credential, or provider configuration change. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with tool use and code execution. The exact backend model ID and context-window size 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> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
24758b9da1 |
Avoid loading tool schemas for effective assignments (#16969)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Tool profiles define which tools an agent can use. > - Run preparation and connection checks resolve these assignments from the database. > - These callers need tool IDs and names, but the existing lookup also reads complete schemas and provider metadata. > - Repeated lookups transfer data that these callers discard. > - This pull request adds a small assignment projection through the same permission resolver. > - The benefit is less database transfer and JSON work with current permission checks and the same public response. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Effective tool assignment reads during run preparation, native runtime setup, and connection policy checks. **Subsystem affected** server/ — tool access and orchestration services. **Current behavior** Internal callers use the public effective-profile lookup. Its catalog query reads complete tool rows, including input schemas, output schemas, annotations, and provider metadata. These callers only use catalog IDs and names. **Proposed behavior** Internal callers use an assignment lookup that selects catalog identity and selector fields. Both lookups share one resolver. The public effective-profile endpoint keeps its complete definitions. **Reason and benefit** Large catalogs increase database transfer and JSON work for every assignment lookup. The smaller query avoids that payload without caching permissions or changing query frequency. **Breaking changes** None. No route, schema, migration, permission rule, or public response changes. Related: Refs #16761, Refs #16723. The former narrows profile summary reads. The latter changes how the gateway presents tool definitions. Neither narrows this internal effective-assignment lookup. ## What Changed - Share effective-profile resolution between full definitions and assignment records. - Select the existing catalog identity and selector projection for internal assignments. - Use the assignment lookup in run preparation, native runtime setup, and connection policy checks. - Add real PostgreSQL tests for selectors, exclusions, current profile and binding state, company boundaries, and returned payload size. - Document the database read contract. ## Verification - Five focused test files passed: 521 tests. They cover tool access, connection intents, runtime preparation, native runtime context, and the new assignment lookup. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. - `pnpm check:module-boundaries` passed. - The PostgreSQL fixture compares the full authorization result with the assignment result. It checks all selector types, excludes removed tools, and observes catalog, profile, and binding changes on later calls. - The payload test measures rows returned by PostgreSQL before application mapping. With large schema and annotation fields, the assignment result is less than 1% of the full catalog payload. This is a synthetic fixture result, not a fleet savings estimate. - `pnpm build` passed. - The full local suite is in progress. It found two Git fixture failures that also reproduce on unchanged master with `init.defaultBranch=main`. Both pass with a process-only `init.defaultBranch=master` setting. The global Git configuration was not changed. This earlier failure remains recorded; it is not counted as a clean first pass. - Apex review: 5/5, no actionable comments. All 54 CI checks passed; two conditional jobs were skipped. - The broader local run also reached two UI test timeouts and one adapter test timeout. All three passed when rerun in isolation with unchanged source. The exact cause of these timeouts is not established. No UI or adapter implementation is changed by this PR. The CLI import/export journey passes its assertions but its local teardown fails with `ENOTEMPTY` while a runtime context asset is written. Its CI check passed. The complete local suite is not reported as a clean pass. ## Risks - Both lookups share permission resolution. Existing tool access tests and result parity checks cover that extraction. - Future assignment callers must use the fields in the smaller result. Typechecking rejects attempts to read full schemas from it. - The lookup still scans the active company catalog and resolves current connections on every call. This change reduces returned bytes; it does not reduce query count or introduce a cache. - No database migration or operational configuration change is required. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool-assisted source inspection, implementation, and test execution. The exact model variant 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> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
ba3bdd0675 |
Keep Muse maintenance idle on unclaimed warm instances (#16974)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Cloud keeps unclaimed applications warm so new users can enter quickly. > - Empty warm applications use an existing standby predicate to skip recurring database work. > - Muse maintenance starts without that predicate and scans its tables every five seconds. > - These scans keep an empty database active even when no Muse binding exists. > - This pull request applies the existing standby predicate to Muse startup and recurring maintenance. > - The benefit is idle database compute while the application stays warm, with normal maintenance after claim. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** `createApp` starts Muse maintenance without the warm standby guard used by other background services. The worker updates qualification evidence at startup and reads binding tables every five seconds, including on an empty unclaimed instance. **Expected behavior** An unclaimed warm application must not run recurring database work. Muse maintenance must resume after the signed claim, without a process restart. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start the maintenance service with background work disabled. 2. Advance the timer beyond several five-second sweeps. 3. Observe database calls from the original implementation despite the disabled state. The new regression test uses real PostgreSQL. The original source fails its zero-query assertion; the patched source passes. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on `813e808af46` before this fix. Related: Refs #16448. ## What Changed - Pass the Cloud standby predicate to Muse maintenance. - Admit both the startup evidence update and recurring sweeps only when background work is enabled. - Mark startup evidence once, before reconciliation. Retry that write after a database failure. - Add PostgreSQL tests for standby, claim, later ticks, default deadline enforcement, and startup-write failure. - Document the maintenance boundary. ## Verification - Five focused test files passed: 278 tests. They cover Muse maintenance, Muse control and qualification routes, and Cloud standby behavior. - Controlled regression: the new standby test fails against the original maintenance source. The patched source was restored after the comparison. - The new PostgreSQL test advances ten minutes while admission is closed and observes zero database operations. It opens admission and verifies the persisted qualification evidence update and reconciliation. Later sweeps retain a single successful startup update. - `pnpm check:module-boundaries` passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. - `pnpm build` passed. - All 54 CI checks passed; two conditional jobs were skipped. - Apex review: 5/5, no actionable comments or unresolved threads. - The full local test command is still running. The focused tests, workspace typecheck, build, and complete CI matrix above are the finished checks. ## Risks - Claimed workspaces retain existing Muse maintenance. The app gate depends only on warm standby. It does not suppress deadline enforcement or terminal cleanup during idle task drain. - Work resumes on the next five-second maintenance tick after claim. Request-driven work remains available through the existing claim path. - The receiver keeps its existing lifecycle. Its empty pending-contact map causes no database writes in standby. - No database migration, provider configuration, or authority rule changes. - Broker and receiver effects are mocked in the new maintenance tests. The database operations are real. Existing Muse control tests cover the broker boundary; no live Muse provider qualification is claimed. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool-assisted source inspection, implementation, and test execution. The exact model variant 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4b05795712 |
fix(github): reuse review instructions across native turns (#16971)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - GitHub events continue an ordinary task and can reuse its provider conversation. > - Each automatic event appended the full review policy and PR description. > - Native GitHub follow-ups also repeated task history because only Slack used the compact path. > - This pull request separates admitted review configuration from commit updates. > - A verified resume sends the current messages and changed configuration. A fresh session gets full context. > - This reduces repeated input while retaining review rules and current tool checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13959, #16645, #16901. **What happened?** Opening a PR and pushing twice stored three full review prompts. A later native turn repeated all three in a retained provider conversation. **Expected behavior** A new event supplies its commit and event data. The harness delivers stable review instructions once per retained conversation and configuration. Fresh sessions receive full instructions. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Enable automatic GitHub reviews for a repository. 2. Open a PR, let the review finish, and push two new commits. 3. Inspect task messages and the native submitted envelopes. Before this fix, the policy and old requests repeat. ## What Changed - Store compact automatic event messages. Fetch the PR description through the existing metadata tool when needed. - Load review instructions from processed deliveries bound to the company, task, agent, and source comments. Preserve each admitted policy snapshot. - Use the existing verified native continuation path for complete GitHub text batches. Deliver configuration changes using a key over endpoint, PR conversation, revision, and instructions. - Keep full bootstrap input for fresh sessions and failed resume, including board follow-ups with no new GitHub event. Retain existing framing for incomplete batches, attachments, interactions, and recovery. - Keep the same configuration identity across automatic review, discussion, and automatic review. Coalesced requests use the last accepted request's admitted policy. - Add regression and database coverage. Update the execution contract and verification recipe. ## Verification - Red: the new event-size regression failed because policy and PR body repeated. The GitHub continuation regression failed because it returned no compact prompt. - Green: focused policy, continuation, native input, and adapter prompt tests passed (231 tests). Native resume/fresh-bootstrap cases passed (9 tests). - The signed-webhook/database case passed at `6296168253`. It checks configuration edits, queued older snapshots, coalesced policy selection, discussion continuity, board follow-ups, and company/task/agent/comment boundaries. The private PostgreSQL template used 12 connections because the host reached its semaphore limit with the default settings. - The earlier broad channel/session integration run passed 1,432 tests. Later review fixes invalidated that run. The latest focused database case passed after those fixes. - Reviewer regressions failed against the previous lookup, then passed with the fix: a mixed-revision batch delivered multiple policies, and a discussion lost the configuration identity. The board wake-to-rendered-prompt regression also failed before repair. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `git diff --check` passed on the final source. - Full local `pnpm test:run` exposed follow-up/fixture failures during development. Those cases are fixed and pass separately. The stale run was stopped after source edits. Full-suite validation for the final commit passed in CI. - All required CI checks passed for `6296168253`, including tests, typechecks, build, and clean public npm install checks. The two unrelated Storybook checks were skipped. - A live two-turn Codex smoke could not start: the local macOS sandbox helper rejected execution of the installed Codex 0.153.4 binary. No live GitHub/provider acceptance or deployment is claimed. ## Risks Skipping instructions is safe only after a verified checkpoint resume with the correct previous run. The full bootstrap remains available if resume fails. Changed or previously unknown configuration is sent again. Tests cover these cases. Tool authorization and publication checks still run under the current server policy. No database migration is required. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool use and code execution. The exact deployment model identifier and context window are not exposed in this session. No delegated agents were used. ## 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>canary/v2026.1020.0-canary.8 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
1f3695ac67 |
fix: expire native session failover backups after their issues close (#16866)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Native agent sessions that run in a remote sandbox keep a host-side
failover copy of the sandbox's harness state, so a replacement sandbox
can resume the conversation
> - Each session keeps that copy forever, and one copy can reach several
gigabytes
> - On a busy instance these copies fill the volume, and no existing
cleanup touches them
> - Once a session's work is closed, its copy matters only if someone
reopens that work later
> - This pull request expires the copy after the session's issues have
been closed for a configurable window, and makes a reopened issue start
a fresh session
> - The benefit is bounded disk use without breaking active,
recoverable, or leased sessions
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Bug report described in-PR (bug report template).
**What happened?**
After every remote turn, `checkpointRemoteRunner` writes the sandbox's
runner state and provider session home (for example `codex-home`) to
`durable-sessions/<scope>/failover-backups/current`. Only the same
session's next checkpoint replaces it. No code path deletes a session's
copy when the session ends, its issue closes, or its agent goes away, so
the instance volume fills. On one instance:
- 246 sessions held 17 GB of copies, 84 of them older than a week;
- 24 new sessions added 5 GB in a single day, one copy alone 3.2 GB.
**Expected behavior**
Disk used by failover copies stays bounded. A copy is kept while its
session can still resume (open issue, live run, pending recovery, or
live lease), and expires once the session's issues have been closed for
a while. A reopened issue then starts a fresh native session, instead of
failing with `runner_harness_backup_unavailable` on a replacement
sandbox.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run agents with a native runtime in a remote sandbox environment.
2. Let them complete many issues.
3. Watch
`<instance>/runtime/paperclip-runner/durable-sessions/*/failover-backups/current`
grow without bound after the issues close.
**Paperclip version or commit:** `master` at
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
39906096c4 |
chore: ignore personal agent instructions (#16970)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Contributors use repository instructions to guide their local agents. > - Personal instructions can differ between contributors. > - A root `AGENTS.local.md` file can hold these personal additions. > - Git must keep this file out of shared commits by default. > - This pull request adds a root ignore rule for the file. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Git ignore rules for personal agent instructions in a local checkout. **Current behavior** Git lists a root `AGENTS.local.md` as an untracked file. A contributor can add it to a commit by mistake. **Proposed behavior** Git ignores the root `AGENTS.local.md` by default. Each contributor can keep personal instructions in that file. **Reason and benefit** Personal agent settings stay local. Contributors can keep using the shared `AGENTS.md` for repository rules. **Breaking changes** None. The rule applies only to an untracked file at the repository root. No related public issues or pull requests appeared in searches for `AGENTS.local.md`. ## What Changed - Add `/AGENTS.local.md` to `.gitignore` under a personal agent instructions comment. ## Verification - `git check-ignore -v AGENTS.local.md` selects the new root ignore rule. - `git ls-files AGENTS.local.md` returns no tracked files. - `git diff --name-only origin/master...HEAD` lists only `.gitignore`. - `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` passes. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm test:run`, and `pnpm build` were attempted. All three stopped before execution because pnpm could not fetch and verify the pinned `pnpm@9.15.4` through the network sandbox. This checkout also has no installed dependencies. The Git checks above passed. CI status remains separate. ## Risks Low risk. Git will hide a root `AGENTS.local.md` from normal staging. Existing tracked files remain tracked. The ignore rule does not make Codex load the file; contributors must configure that separately. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with file editing, shell execution, and GitHub tools. The exact backend model ID and context window were not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [ ] 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 Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Nicky Leach
|
34be1b831b | Fix duplicate ACPX skills cleanup in test teardown (#16937) | ||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
813e808af4 |
Remove filesystem history authorization from workspace preparation (#16963)
Remove physical-root source/reader authorization and sticky directory classifications from workspace preparation. Preserve current task/run authority, app-record privacy, credential authorization, containment, and lifecycle/publication integrity.
Validate replacement selections against persisted new inputs and refresh verified checkout ownership so bounded reuse survives earlier workspace relocation. Add real PostgreSQL/Git regressions, a reproducible history-scaling benchmark, and documentation.
Full CI passed all 48 jobs and Greptile scored 5/5 at
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d84061b923 |
fix(runner): recover journaled completion proposals (#16962)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Native runs preserve provider sessions across controller restarts. > - A completion event can reach durable storage before the next session checkpoint. > - Recovery advanced the event cursor but lost the saved completion proposal. > - The completed turn then appeared to need another provider turn to report its result. > - This change restores the exact active turn's proposal before advancing the cursor. > - Recovery can finalize completed work without repeating its external actions. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** After a controller restart, a native run could fail with `native_finalization_missing` even though `run.result.proposed` was already durable. The recovered driver skipped that event when its cursor advanced, so the result was absent from its state. Automatic disposition retries could then encounter outstanding tool receipts and exhaust recovery. **Expected behavior** Restore the saved result for the exact active turn. Wait for provider termination, then use normal finalization. Do not start another provider turn to repeat completed work. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a native Codex task and save its active-turn checkpoint. 2. Persist its completion proposal, then lose the controller before another checkpoint. 3. Recover the same run after the provider completes. Before this change, finalization reports a missing result. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on `92b238137b`. The repair is based on `7c247243e5`. **Deployment mode** Native Runner with Codex. The incident used a remote sandbox; the regression covers controller event recovery. Related: #12845 and #15297. The older #12241 addresses provider process continuity; this change repairs the controller's saved event projection. ## What Changed - Restore valid completion proposals for the checkpoint's exact active turn during event replay. - Reject conflicting, invalid, or incorrectly bound proposals. Ignore proposals from another turn and prevent adoption after a newer turn starts. - Keep provider termination and normal finalization as separate requirements. - Add eight behavioral cases using the real Codex driver and a simulated transport, and document the recovery contract and verification scope. ## Verification - Red: the new restart regression failed with `native_finalization_missing` before the production change. - Green: 254 tests passed across the native runtime, backend adapter, and Codex recovery suites. The new cases check no repeated provider work, no early finalization, duplicate proposals, conflicts, invalid proposals, and stale turn/session bindings. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed locally. All CI gates passed on `2ac025a15c`; Greptile rated that commit 5/5 with no outstanding findings. The full local `pnpm test:run` was started after completing the embedded PostgreSQL installation, then stopped while still running once the complete CI test matrix passed; it is not reported as a completed local run. - Real local acceptance passed on `2ac025a15c` with the production Rust Runner transport, Codex CLI `0.160.0`, and `gpt-6.1-sol` on macOS arm64. Persisted the completion proposal while retaining the older active-turn checkpoint; let the provider finish without persisting its later controller events; stopped the exact owned runner/provider; recovered the same provider session and turn. Observed one accepted result, one durable `turn.start` command, and one line in the receipt file. Hosted sandbox restart and recovery of the original stopped task have not been performed. - Initial setup failures are retained: dependency drift caused diff-viewer type errors, and skipped PostgreSQL postinstall links prevented database startup. Dependency alignment and the package postinstall repaired those local prerequisites. Probe setup iterations failed on a direct-provider response schema, invalid probe input fields, and an original provider that still held its writer lock. Acceptance uses the production transport, validated input, and exact-owner shutdown. No production code changes were made for those probe setup failures. ## Risks - A stale proposal could finalize the wrong work. Recovery requires the checkpoint's active turn and matching run, session, and source. It rejects conflicting results and waits for provider termination. - The change uses the existing paginated recovery scan. It adds no database query per event or new retry allowance. - No schema migration or change to task authorization is included. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6, running as Codex with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact served model snapshot and context-window size are not exposed in this session. The live acceptance probe uses `gpt-6.1-sol`. ## 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> |
||
|
|
628993fc59 |
fix(runner): name the tool receipts that block the next provider turn (#16961)
When a resumed run cannot start a turn because the semantic tool bridge still holds pending or unsettled completed receipts, the error now names each blocking receipt by operation and call ID (bounded to four per set). Tool input and result content stay inside the bridge. Adds an integration test covering the four-receipt limit and the trailing "...". Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <Paperclip-Paperclip@users.noreply.github.com> Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>canary/v2026.1020.0-canary.7 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
96824a71d1 |
fix(db): migrate connector hooks on SQL_ASCII databases (#16958)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work for AI agents. > - Server startup applies database migrations before accepting work. > - Some older embedded databases use SQL_ASCII encoding. > - Migration 0355 uses a Unicode escape literal that PostgreSQL rejects on those databases. > - A source rebuild can pass but the updated server cannot start. > - This change makes that migration portable and preserves its shipped receipt. > - Existing databases retain their newer connector triggers during upgrades. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A source deployment failed at startup with `conversion between UTF8 and SQL_ASCII is not supported`. Migration 0355 could not compile its connector policy function on an older embedded database. The previous app was restored while this repair was prepared. **Expected behavior** Supported legacy databases complete startup migrations. Connector selector trimming matches JavaScript `trim()`. A database that already applied 0355 must not replay it over the later 0356 connector trigger definition. **Steps to reproduce** Create a PostgreSQL database from template0 with SQL_ASCII encoding, then apply the current migration chain. The new regression fails with the observed conversion error before this change. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on `92b238137ba716cdf1746dd49969e2f5ab7af8fe`. The branch includes current master `f57ed25385`. **Database mode** Embedded PostgreSQL 18.1; legacy SQL_ASCII database. The UTF-8 path is also covered. Related background: #645 fixed encoding for new databases. Existing SQL_ASCII installations still need portable migrations. #16956 fixes a separate workspace lock timeout that motivated this deployment. ## What Changed - Build the whitespace pattern from UTF-8 bytes instead of a Unicode escape literal. - Match whole whitespace sequences so SQL_ASCII does not trim partial multibyte characters. - Recognize the original 0355 checksum as a valid receipt. This prevents replay of its older trigger body over 0356. - Add real PostgreSQL coverage for both encodings, selector behavior, and preservation of the later trigger definition and receipt count. - Document the legacy encoding and migration-history contract. ## Verification - Red: SQL_ASCII migration failed with the same conversion error; UTF-8 passed. - Second red: fixing only the SQL caused an existing receipt to replay and overwrite the later connector function. - Green: 29 focused tests passed across the new regression, migration replay tests, and database client tests. - Rebased regression: all 29 focused tests passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db check:migrations` passed. - Linux ARM64: clean build and 37 focused tests passed, including both encoding and workspace-lock regressions. - Live acceptance: the same legacy SQL_ASCII database completed all seven remaining migrations. The server reports the tested commit and healthy status. The restart report has no lost runs. - All 55 current-head checks passed; two unrelated Storybook checks were skipped. Full test, typecheck, build, runner, release, and E2E CI gates passed. The complete suite ran in CI; local verification used focused tests. - Greptile reviewed this exact commit at 5/5 with no findings. - Preserved failures: the initial unmodified-master startup failed at migration 0355 and was rolled back. A later build-cache path error in the deployment commands was corrected before the successful clean build; it required no source change. ## Risks The migration content changes, so receipt compatibility matters. The original checksum remains recognized to avoid replaying historical DDL. The tests compare complete later function definitions and receipt counts. The whitespace pattern contains encoded bytes; tests cover every ECMAScript whitespace character and preserve non-whitespace Unicode input. Database data and schema shape are unchanged by this repair. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository tools, code execution, and browser verification. The exact served model variant 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>canary/v2026.1020.0-canary.6 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
7c247243e5 |
Qualify and package Copilot for ordinary installations (#15706)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - A provider must work through normal installed packages on local and Daytona environments. > - Candidate-only success does not prove that the shipped package contains the manifest and native runtime needed for Daytona. > - The release must preserve saved-token access and task lifecycle guarantees. > - This pull request will qualify Copilot and include the exact-source remote manifest in normal release archives. > - The benefit is a reviewable part of the Copilot production release. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15701, #15703 and #15705. Supersedes qualification work in #15563 and the original candidate in #14434. Base: #15705. ## What Changed - Keep Copilot discovery passive during reconnect reconciliation; refresh on explicit opening, account/environment changes and reconnect. - Retain the selected Product cases, permission/continuity evidence and cleanup checks. - Build the Linux provider manifest from the existing pinned Docker stage in the cloud. - Join all four native daemon receipts with that manifest before server packing. - Reject missing or incompatible remote authority during normal release assembly; retain historical workflow compatibility. - Promote the completed profile47 qualification marker, publish the current qualification record and preserve every failed attempt. - Keep one current release checklist and the shipped-canary gates explicit. ## Verification Runtime #15701 is merged at `d855e550ad8d2a267312983f26457aabf5393c3a`. History #15703 is merged at `df80616d98119cbf5abd40549794d9980a5fabf6`. Remaining source [`42bcbd61299655f7e37aabe6bb5f19bba770ad1d`](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/commit/42bcbd61299655f7e37aabe6bb5f19bba770ad1d) contains the four-file authorization repair. The remaining PR trees preserve six nonoverlapping files from the newer public mainline managed-settings fix and the CI-owned lockfile. No unrelated provider is enabled. The security finding is repaired: existing-agent discovery requires `agent_config:update` before connection selection or token resolution. The saved environment is the default. Authorized editors can select a prospective environment. Both denied board-viewer and agent-reader regressions fail on the original source. All49 route tests and server typecheck pass with the fix. Denied requests perform no connection selection, credential resolution or probe. Current-head security scans pass on both remaining PRs; the repaired thread is resolved. Copilot CLI1.0.88 and profile47 retain digest `sha256:55044aa235e88b3fe36ec8a556ee1e3382590870aab907e4462ef7d64af49cea`. The [qualification record](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/42bcbd61299655f7e37aabe6bb5f19bba770ad1d/doc/plans/2026-10-20-copilot-qualification-v47.json) reports20/20 Product cells,154 assertions and7/7 protocol cases,46 assertions against frozen normal installed source `c2616370800f5f6df45246b0890ba35a7cd2faab`. The exact qualification model is `gpt-5.6-luna`. Every passing Product case confirms cleanup. Original failures remain recorded; automatic behavior retries are disabled. The route-only authorization repair changes no bound runtime/profile bytes and does not relabel the frozen campaign. The ordinary installed remote journey passed saved-token selection, model discovery, normal UI save/reopen, metadata-only Test, completed task, accepted receipt and exact19-byte browser download. An open model catalog caused no additional discovery requests during117seconds. Actual installed runtime smokes passed on macOS ARM64, macOS x64 under Rosetta and native Linux x64 on Daytona. Raw token browser entry was not exercised; encrypted connection creation used the normal API. The first Daytona file attempt timed out during delayed semantic dispatch; its precise stalled layer remains unresolved. Independent ordinary remote delivery and the other19 Product cells passed before one instrumented recheck passed8/8 with unchanged source,prompt,assertions and deadlines. No causal latency repair is claimed. Before the authorization repair, all four final PR heads passed required verify/E2E and fresh Greptile5/5 reviews with zero unresolved threads. Current-head CI/review is running for the two repaired heads. Local focused checks retain129 connection,59 runner,72 shared-eval and88 recovery/workspace passes, plus migration safety and token gates. The additive Copilot migration is361; released master history is preserved. [Cloud normal-package run39414239704](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39414239704) builds the pre-security source4f3f. All four native producers and Linux package assembly pass; the final clean installed consumers are finishing. All18 retained archives match their hashes;37,863 regular files contain zero selected credentials. That package does not contain the later route repair. The actual final published package must include it and pass the local/Daytona live canaries. The frozen Daytona image remains published and independently verified. No separate full-image scan is claimed. Docker builds run in the cloud. **Remaining:** current-head CI/review, setup and qualification merges, final publication, and ordinary local/Daytona canaries against the actual shipped package. The user explicitly authorizes the maintainer review override; CI remains a merge gate. No production deployment is claimed. Provider USD remains unknown and GitHub-attributed. ## Risks An omitted or mismatched image manifest prevents ordinary Daytona startup. Final normal archives must contain the matching image authority and platform daemons. The completed runtime campaign remains bound to its original source; the final UI-only repair needs its own normal-install setup proof. Credit notices are not measured USD receipts. Native steering, native plan mode and detached work remain outside this release. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed in this task. Used for code changes, review and tool-assisted 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 - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
github-actions[bot]andlockfile-bot
|
f57ed25385 |
chore(lockfile): refresh pnpm-lock.yaml (#16897)
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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
92b238137b |
Connect and configure GitHub Copilot through Apps (#15705)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Apps and AI Connections store credentials and govern access to agent runtimes. > - Users need a supported saved-token connection and config values that survive save and reopen. > - The release must preserve saved-token access and task lifecycle guarantees. > - This pull request will connect Copilot through the normal Apps and AI Connections path. > - The benefit is a reviewable part of the Copilot production release. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15701 and #15703. Supersedes setup work in #15562. Base: #15703. Next: #15706. ## What Changed - Require configuration update authority before Copilot credential-bearing model discovery; default to the saved environment and preserve explicit selection for editors. - Keep Copilot discovery passive during reconnect reconciliation; refresh on explicit opening, account/environment changes and reconnect. - Add GitHub AI token connections with encrypted storage, ownership, grants and audit logging. - Keep repository access separate from Copilot runtime authentication. - Probe the selected environment without sending a model prompt and preserve authenticated model selection through save/reopen. - Keep fresh execution admission consistent with normal Copilot setup; persist task model choices without changing provider or permission policy. - Refresh authenticated models after reconnecting the same saved Copilot account, including recovery from a previous authentication error. - Apply the additive provider-default constraint migration through the normal generated migration workflow. ## Verification Runtime #15701 is merged at `d855e550ad8d2a267312983f26457aabf5393c3a`. History #15703 is merged at `df80616d98119cbf5abd40549794d9980a5fabf6`. Remaining source [`42bcbd61299655f7e37aabe6bb5f19bba770ad1d`](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/commit/42bcbd61299655f7e37aabe6bb5f19bba770ad1d) contains the four-file authorization repair. The remaining PR trees preserve six nonoverlapping files from the newer public mainline managed-settings fix and the CI-owned lockfile. No unrelated provider is enabled. The security finding is repaired: existing-agent discovery requires `agent_config:update` before connection selection or token resolution. The saved environment is the default. Authorized editors can select a prospective environment. Both denied board-viewer and agent-reader regressions fail on the original source. All49 route tests and server typecheck pass with the fix. Denied requests perform no connection selection, credential resolution or probe. Current-head security scans pass on both remaining PRs; the repaired thread is resolved. Copilot CLI1.0.88 and profile47 retain digest `sha256:55044aa235e88b3fe36ec8a556ee1e3382590870aab907e4462ef7d64af49cea`. The [qualification record](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/42bcbd61299655f7e37aabe6bb5f19bba770ad1d/doc/plans/2026-10-20-copilot-qualification-v47.json) reports20/20 Product cells,154 assertions and7/7 protocol cases,46 assertions against frozen normal installed source `c2616370800f5f6df45246b0890ba35a7cd2faab`. The exact qualification model is `gpt-5.6-luna`. Every passing Product case confirms cleanup. Original failures remain recorded; automatic behavior retries are disabled. The route-only authorization repair changes no bound runtime/profile bytes and does not relabel the frozen campaign. The ordinary installed remote journey passed saved-token selection, model discovery, normal UI save/reopen, metadata-only Test, completed task, accepted receipt and exact19-byte browser download. An open model catalog caused no additional discovery requests during117seconds. Actual installed runtime smokes passed on macOS ARM64, macOS x64 under Rosetta and native Linux x64 on Daytona. Raw token browser entry was not exercised; encrypted connection creation used the normal API. The first Daytona file attempt timed out during delayed semantic dispatch; its precise stalled layer remains unresolved. Independent ordinary remote delivery and the other19 Product cells passed before one instrumented recheck passed8/8 with unchanged source,prompt,assertions and deadlines. No causal latency repair is claimed. Before the authorization repair, all four final PR heads passed required verify/E2E and fresh Greptile5/5 reviews with zero unresolved threads. Current-head CI/review is running for the two repaired heads. Local focused checks retain129 connection,59 runner,72 shared-eval and88 recovery/workspace passes, plus migration safety and token gates. The additive Copilot migration is361; released master history is preserved. [Cloud normal-package run39414239704](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39414239704) builds the pre-security source4f3f. All four native producers and Linux package assembly pass; the final clean installed consumers are finishing. All18 retained archives match their hashes;37,863 regular files contain zero selected credentials. That package does not contain the later route repair. The actual final published package must include it and pass the local/Daytona live canaries. The frozen Daytona image remains published and independently verified. No separate full-image scan is claimed. Docker builds run in the cloud. **Remaining:** current-head CI/review, setup and qualification merges, final publication, and ordinary local/Daytona canaries against the actual shipped package. The user explicitly authorizes the maintainer review override; CI remains a merge gate. No production deployment is claimed. Provider USD remains unknown and GitHub-attributed. ## Risks Bad credentials, missing entitlement, runtime installation and unavailable models must remain distinct failures. A connection must not adopt ambient credentials. The constraint migration changes accepted provider values, with no credential-storage migration. Current-master NewAgent fixture extraction is retained. Copilot cases use that shared support and test both passive discovery and explicit reconnect under the same setup lifecycle. The onboarding retry regression shares the component suite’s saved-connection, authenticated-model, draft, agent-list, hire and render lifecycle fixtures. Keeping it beside the existing onboarding failures makes adoption versus duplicate hire observable under the same lifecycle; this is the concrete cohesion reason for the existing large test file. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed in this task. Used for code changes, review and tool-assisted 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 - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
0b266bd084 |
fix(workspaces): keep source preparation locks active (#16956)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Each task prepares its workspace before it starts the provider. > - Source preparation holds a transaction-scoped advisory lock on a dedicated database connection. > - Preparation can use other connections and the filesystem for longer than PostgreSQL allows that lock connection to stay idle. > - PostgreSQL then closes the connection and releases the lock while preparation still runs. > - This pull request reuses the workspace lock keepalive during source preparation. > - Slow preparation retains exclusion and returns its original result or error. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Tasks failed during workspace preparation with `CONNECTION_CLOSED` at the configured 60-second idle transaction timeout. No provider had started. A live retry showed the source-lock transaction idle while authorization reads ran on another connection. Its advisory-lock key matched the task's source-preparation key. PostgreSQL closed that transaction at the timeout. The same defect remains on current master. A real PostgreSQL regression also shows that another preparation can enter after the timeout while the original callback still runs. **Expected behavior** Source preparation must keep its advisory lock until the callback and any pending keepalive query finish. The ordinary pool must remain usable. The original preparation result or failure must survive. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Set `idle_in_transaction_session_timeout` to one second in a disposable PostgreSQL database. 2. Call `withIsolatedRepositorySourceLock` and keep its callback active for longer than one second without querying the lock connection. 3. Try to acquire the same source lock from another operation. 4. On the old code, the second operation enters and the first transaction fails with `CONNECTION_CLOSED`. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on source at `cde944ed75648adfb569e86133adc8b118b55dd6`. The repair is rebased onto `d855e550ad`. **Additional context** Refs #16340. That change introduced the keepalive for workspace copyback. This PR applies the existing helper to the source-preparation transaction. ## What Changed - Read the configured idle timeout in the same query that acquires the source lock. - Keep that dedicated connection active during source preparation with the existing helper. - Add two real PostgreSQL regressions for exclusion, company independence, a one-slot ordinary pool, nested acquisition, cleanup, and preservation of callback errors. - Update the execution contract and workspace verification maps. ## Verification - Red before the production edit: both new tests failed. A competing operation entered after the lock expired. A callback failure was replaced by `CONNECTION_CLOSED`. - Green after the repair: 86 tests passed across the source lock, source admission, keepalive, and heartbeat workspace preparation suites. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed on final commit `2b5000ce25`. - `git diff --check` passed. The lockfile is unchanged. - After rebase, the same 86 focused tests passed. The two source-lock tests passed again after the review cleanup change. - Live acceptance on `7df94d7a06`: a fresh local instance on macOS arm64, Node v26.4.0, native Codex `gpt-6.1-sol`, and permission mode `never`. PostgreSQL had a one-second idle transaction timeout. A temporary Git wrapper delayed repository reads by four seconds. Workspace preparation after environment acquisition took 8,297 ms. The real task completed, wrote and attached the correct line-count/SHA-256 report, reached `done` with native phase `committed`, and cleared its execution lock. The attachment matched the workspace file and survived browser reload. No dedicated lock connections remained. - The live probe initially used `gpt-5.4`, which the ChatGPT account rejected. Selecting the reported task model, `gpt-6.1-sol`, resolved that readiness failure. The local Claude CLI has no login, so no live Claude run is claimed. - Full CI passed on `2b5000ce25`: all general, chat, workspace, serialized-server, Runner, and E2E test shards, plus typecheck, build, and canary packaging. Both Greptile and Paperclip Review rated this commit 5/5 with no open findings. The Paperclip check concluded neutral; two unrelated visual checks were skipped. - The duplicate local `pnpm test:run` serial invocation was stopped with SIGINT after the complete CI test shards passed. It did not finish locally; no local full-suite pass is claimed. Local proof consists of the focused real PostgreSQL tests, typecheck, build, map checks, and the real task above. - The final commit changes test teardown only; production code matches the live acceptance commit. - Initial sandbox runs could not open test database ports or build IPC sockets. The same commands ran with local process access. The frozen install also found an existing manifest/lockfile mismatch; dependency resolution was local and the lockfile was restored. ## Risks - The lock connection sends one small query per keepalive interval. The helper derives that interval from the configured timeout and caps it at 30 seconds. It does no polling when the timeout is disabled. - The helper joins an in-flight query before the transaction ends. A slow database can therefore delay cleanup. - This change does not disable database deadlines, retry preparation, or recover an unexpected connection loss. It preserves existing admission checks and company/source lock keys. - Deployment and recovery of the reported tasks remain separate from code verification. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository tools, code execution, and browser verification. The exact served model variant 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
df80616d98 |
Preserve Copilot historical runtime attestations (#15703)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Runner recovery must distinguish old profile identities from the current launch identity. > - The long integration produced historical attestations that must remain inspectable after consolidation. > - The release must preserve saved-token access and task lifecycle guarantees. > - This pull request will retain the historical Copilot profile records without granting old profiles launch access. > - The benefit is a reviewable part of the Copilot production release. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15701. Supersedes the provenance work in #15561. Base: #15701. Next: #15705. ## What Changed - Retain historical Copilot profile attestations as separate immutable records. - Preserve the mainline and candidate histories when version numbers overlap. - Keep exact current-profile launch checks in the runtime PR. ## Verification Final reviewed source [`4f3f1af807d2ed21adabb04c2f27f4df9c4bc8d5`](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/commit/4f3f1af807d2ed21adabb04c2f27f4df9c4bc8d5) includes master `cde944ed75648adfb569e86133adc8b118b55dd6`. The combined four-part PR tree matches it except for the CI-owned lockfile. Every prior public PR head remains an ancestor. Released master migrations remain unchanged; Copilot adds migration361. No unrelated provider is enabled. Copilot CLI1.0.88 and profile47 retain digest `sha256:55044aa235e88b3fe36ec8a556ee1e3382590870aab907e4462ef7d64af49cea`. The pending qualification marker is removed. The [qualification record](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/4f3f1af807d2ed21adabb04c2f27f4df9c4bc8d5/doc/plans/2026-10-20-copilot-qualification-v47.json) reports **20/20 Product cells,154 assertions;7/7 protocol cases,46 assertions** against frozen installed application `c2616370800f5f6df45246b0890ba35a7cd2faab`. Both environments use the exact authenticated model `gpt-5.6-luna`. Every passing Product case confirms cleanup. Automatic behavior retries are disabled. Original failed attempts remain recorded. The ordinary installed remote journey passed saved-token selection, authenticated model discovery, normal UI save/reopen, metadata-only Test, task completion, accepted receipt and an exact19-byte browser download. An open model catalog caused no new discovery requests during117seconds. Actual installed runtime smokes passed on macOS ARM64, macOS x64 under Rosetta and native Linux x64 on Daytona. Raw token browser entry was not exercised; the encrypted connection was created through the normal API. The original Daytona file attempt timed out during delayed semantic dispatch. Its precise stalled layer remains unresolved. Independent ordinary delivery and the other19 cells passed before one instrumented recheck passed8/8 with unchanged source,prompt,assertions and deadlines. No causal latency repair is claimed. After current-master reconciliation,129 connection tests,59 runner tests,72 shared eval tests and88 recovery/workspace tests pass. Migration generation/safety, unchanged profile identity and UI token gates pass. Prior required CI was green. Fresh exact-head required CI and E2E are green for all four updated heads. Each has a fresh Greptile5/5 review and zero unresolved review threads. The [final normal-package cloud build](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39414239704) is running. Recursive typecheck,full CI test shards,build and all8 browser shards pass. These checks cover the final source; no additional local full-suite pass is claimed. The [frozen image build](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39334401638) and [original normal package build](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39334407471) passed. The exact image is published and independently retrieved anonymously. No separate full-image scan is claimed. All18 original normal archives were scanned with zero selected credentials. Docker builds run in the cloud. Provider USD remains unknown and GitHub-attributed. **Qualification is complete on the recorded frozen build. Normal protected merge, automatic master canary publication and final shipped-package local/Daytona canaries remain. No production deployment is claimed.** ## Risks Historical records are evidence only. They must not be treated as current qualification or as permission to launch an old provider profile. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed in this task. Used for code changes, review and tool-assisted 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 - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d855e550ad |
Finish Copilot native runtime on current master (#15701)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Paperclip Runner controls provider processes, permissions and task completion. > - Copilot needs its pinned distribution, native message identities and accepted semantic completion receipts. > - The release must preserve saved-token access and task lifecycle guarantees. > - This pull request will keep the current completion and recovery fixes while adding the Copilot runtime. > - The benefit is a reviewable part of the Copilot production release. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #14434. Supersedes the runtime work in #15560. This is the first PR in the stack; #15703, #15705 and #15706 follow. Related alternative adapter work: #15881. This change uses the shared Runner path. ## What Changed - Pin Copilot CLI 1.0.88 and bind the integrated implementation as profile45. - Keep native instruction, permission, receipt, process ownership and cancellation boundaries. - Preserve current master completion continuation and remote verification behavior. Other provider release identities stay unchanged. ## Verification Final reviewed source [`4f3f1af807d2ed21adabb04c2f27f4df9c4bc8d5`](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/commit/4f3f1af807d2ed21adabb04c2f27f4df9c4bc8d5) includes master `cde944ed75648adfb569e86133adc8b118b55dd6`. The combined four-part PR tree matches it except for the CI-owned lockfile. Every prior public PR head remains an ancestor. Released master migrations remain unchanged; Copilot adds migration361. No unrelated provider is enabled. Copilot CLI1.0.88 and profile47 retain digest `sha256:55044aa235e88b3fe36ec8a556ee1e3382590870aab907e4462ef7d64af49cea`. The pending qualification marker is removed. The [qualification record](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/4f3f1af807d2ed21adabb04c2f27f4df9c4bc8d5/doc/plans/2026-10-20-copilot-qualification-v47.json) reports **20/20 Product cells,154 assertions;7/7 protocol cases,46 assertions** against frozen installed application `c2616370800f5f6df45246b0890ba35a7cd2faab`. Both environments use the exact authenticated model `gpt-5.6-luna`. Every passing Product case confirms cleanup. Automatic behavior retries are disabled. Original failed attempts remain recorded. The ordinary installed remote journey passed saved-token selection, authenticated model discovery, normal UI save/reopen, metadata-only Test, task completion, accepted receipt and an exact19-byte browser download. An open model catalog caused no new discovery requests during117seconds. Actual installed runtime smokes passed on macOS ARM64, macOS x64 under Rosetta and native Linux x64 on Daytona. Raw token browser entry was not exercised; the encrypted connection was created through the normal API. The original Daytona file attempt timed out during delayed semantic dispatch. Its precise stalled layer remains unresolved. Independent ordinary delivery and the other19 cells passed before one instrumented recheck passed8/8 with unchanged source,prompt,assertions and deadlines. No causal latency repair is claimed. After current-master reconciliation,129 connection tests,59 runner tests,72 shared eval tests and88 recovery/workspace tests pass. Migration generation/safety, unchanged profile identity and UI token gates pass. Prior required CI was green. Fresh exact-head required CI and E2E are green for all four updated heads. Each has a fresh Greptile5/5 review and zero unresolved review threads. The [final normal-package cloud build](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39414239704) is running. Recursive typecheck,full CI test shards,build and all8 browser shards pass. These checks cover the final source; no additional local full-suite pass is claimed. The [frozen image build](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39334401638) and [original normal package build](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39334407471) passed. The exact image is published and independently retrieved anonymously. No separate full-image scan is claimed. All18 original normal archives were scanned with zero selected credentials. Docker builds run in the cloud. Provider USD remains unknown and GitHub-attributed. **Qualification is complete on the recorded frozen build. Normal protected merge, automatic master canary publication and final shipped-package local/Daytona canaries remain. No production deployment is claimed.** ## Risks Shared Runner behavior can affect active tasks. Exact profile admission rejects stale runtime identities. The final campaign and installed canaries remain release gates. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed in this task. Used for code changes, review and tool-assisted 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 - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
fc0d390d98 |
fix: enforce Cloud-enabled features on every managed stack (#16953)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Cloud sets managed feature values for each tenant stack. > - Staging lets admins change experimental features. > - The staging exception also let old tenant false values override Cloud true values. > - This could disable required features such as isolated workspaces. > - This pull request keeps every Cloud-enabled feature on and rejects attempts to disable it. > - The same rule applies to staging, production, and managed stacks without a hostname. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #16876 **What happened?** The staging override added in #16876 treats managed true values as editable defaults. A stored tenant false value can disable a feature that Cloud enables. Settings writes also accept attempts to disable Cloud-enabled features. **Expected behavior** If Cloud sets a feature to true, the tenant reads true and cannot turn it off. This applies to every managed stack. Staging can still change allowed experiments that Cloud has not enabled. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Set a managed staging primary hostname and enable isolated workspaces in `PAPERCLIP_MANAGED_CONFIG`. 2. Start with `enableIsolatedWorkspaces: false` in the tenant settings row. 3. Read `/api/instance/settings/experimental`. Before this fix, staging returns false. 4. Try to PATCH that flag to false. After this fix, the API returns 403 without saving, and reads return true with managed control metadata. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced against master at `cde944ed75648adfb569e86133adc8b118b55dd6`. ## What Changed - Keep managed true values in the staging read overlay. They override old tenant values and lock the existing UI controls. - Reject attempts to set any Cloud-enabled feature to false before writing settings. - Cover every managed feature in service tests across staging, production, and an absent hostname. Add real-service HTTP tests for isolation on staging and production. - Update operator documentation and the feature and access maps. ## Verification - Confirmed the new service regression fails before the fix: staging returns stored false, and writes can attempt to disable enabled flags. - Passed all six focused settings suites: 168 tests. Passed the final route and overlay suites after adding the HTTP regression: 109 tests. - Passed existing experimental settings UI tests: 54 tests. These cover the existing managed-control behavior. - Passed `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check`. - Passed `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. The first typecheck used an install that did not honor locked versions and hit an unrelated `@pierre/diffs` API mismatch. Reinstalling from the lockfile resolved it; no lockfile changes are included. - Full CI passed on `f43136812a92ec838a24f0c423270e4fbd997c28`: 55 successful checks, one neutral review check, and two expected skips. This includes typecheck, build, general and serialized tests, runner checks, and E2E shards. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39411907756). - The duplicate local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after the complete CI matrix passed. It is not counted as a completed local full-suite pass. - Greptile reviewed `f43136812a92ec838a24f0c423270e4fbd997c28`: 5/5 with no outstanding findings. The only finding on the first review was the repository rule against new code comments; those comments were removed. ## Risks - Staging users can no longer disable a feature that Cloud enables. This is the intended behavior. - Clients that send a stale full settings form containing false for a Cloud-enabled feature receive 403 and must reload. - No database migration is needed. Stored false values remain in the database, but cannot override an active Cloud true value. - Cloud-disabled staging experiments remain editable. Production restrictions and self-hosted settings remain unchanged. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, `gpt-6.1-sol`, with reasoning, repository tools, and test execution. The context window size is 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>canary/v2026.1020.0-canary.4 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
cde944ed75 |
fix(workspaces): keep retained readers valid after cross-task wake coalescing (#16928)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Before a run starts, repository admission checks every retained
reader of the physical repository root and of overlapping roots.
> - Each retained reader records the run, task, agent and responsible
user that the server admitted.
> - A wake for another task can coalesce into a running run. The merge
replaces `contextSnapshot.issueId` and `taskId` with the other task.
> - The retained-reader check used that mutable context task before the
run's immutable task binding. The old reader then looked like a changed
identity.
> - When a later run admits an overlapping root, such as a shared
project checkout that contains earlier task worktrees, every admission
on that root fails. The root stays blocked and no operator action can
repair it.
> - This pull request accepts a retained reader when its task matches
the run's immutable binding or its current context task.
> - The benefit is that legitimate wake coalescing no longer blocks a
shared root, and missing or truly mismatched identities still fail
closed.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #16717 and #16832. Those cover retained readers whose run, agent or
task was deleted. This pull request covers a different cause: every
identity still exists, but wake coalescing changed the run's context
task. #16832 keeps identity mismatches fail-closed, so it does not fix
this case. Both pull requests change the same condition in
`execution-workspace-root-readers.ts`. The pull request that merges
second must rebase.
**What happened?**
A scheduled routine run failed in setup with `Repository root retains a
reader whose identity is no longer available` (403). Every later run of
the routine failed in the same way, for eight hours in a row. Two
earlier runs of the same agent were the retained readers. Each run
started for its own task and recorded its reader. About 10 to 16 minutes
later, a monitor wake for a different task coalesced into the running
run with reason `issue_execution_same_name`.
`mergeCoalescedContextSnapshot` set `contextSnapshot.issueId` to the
other task. `heartbeat_runs.issue_id` stayed on the original task,
because the `heartbeat_runs_set_scope_kind` trigger makes the binding
immutable. The readers were on per-task worktree roots, so nothing
failed at first. Then the routine's tasks changed to the shared project
checkout. That root contains those worktrees, so admission loaded the
two readers, compared them with the changed context task, and threw.
**Expected behavior**
A retained reader stays valid while its run, agent, task and responsible
user still exist and still match what the server admitted. A context
change from wake coalescing must not make the reader unavailable. A
reader whose task matches neither the run's binding nor its context must
still be rejected.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Admit run R for task A on a nested root, for example
`<checkout>/.paperclip/worktrees/a`.
2. Coalesce a wake for task B into R. `contextSnapshot.issueId` becomes
B. `heartbeat_runs.issue_id` stays A.
3. Admit or publish another task on the parent root `<checkout>`.
4. Observe the 403 `Repository root retains a reader whose identity is
no longer available`. Every later admission on that root fails in the
same way.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduced on `master` at
nightly/v2026.1020.0-nightly.0
canary/v2026.1020.0-canary.3
|
||
|
|
b448710986 |
fix: derive startup warmth from per-layer reuse evidence (#16908)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and inspect their work. > - Agent startup can reuse a lease, workspace, Runner, process, or session. > - A session ID can remain the same when other resources are new. > - The old cold/warm label did not show these separate decisions. > - This pull request records closed reuse receipts and derives labels from them. > - Reports now show partial reuse and missing evidence. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #11685. That issue tracks a specific ACPX fingerprint repair. This change records reuse evidence across startup resources. It does not repeat that repair. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Startup labels in the operator trace and Product E2E reports. **Current behavior** A cached runtime or a continuous session can suggest a warm startup even when workspace staging or provider launch work occurs. **Proposed behavior** Record each layer's reuse decision and a closed reason. Record observed provider launch counts. Use `warm`, `cold`, `partial_reuse`, or `unknown` from those receipts. Keep old runs unknown when they have no receipts. ## What Changed - Add local run-log receipts for the lease, workspace, Runner, provider process, and provider session. - Count physical ACPX launches, including respawns. Preserve the reason for a new process. - Reuse native workspace adoption and session lifecycle evidence. Keep native and bridged remote provider-process reuse and launch counts unknown where physical evidence is absent. - Show the per-run summary in retained results and the dashboard. Keep missing legacy values explicit. - Set the legacy trace boolean only for fully evidenced cold or warm startup. Keep the operator OTLP gate. Add no first-party Telemetry. - Test full reuse, workspace invalidation, two direct provider launches with session continuity, and report generation. - Start the final diagnostic write without waiting for persistence. Keep lease cleanup independent of a stalled event sink. - Keep remote provider evidence unknown after runtime setup fails or the host relay starts twice. - Align a stale Pi support-test expectation with current master profile 28 and its suite fingerprint. Keep the qualification rules unchanged. ## Verification - Passed: all 319 runtime, startup-timing, reuse-summary, and native workspace-history tests. Disposable local Git tests used the native Git binary. - Passed on the current commit: all 2,768 Runner E2E support tests across 128 files. This includes report and history tests for generated HTML and normalized JSON. - Passed: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils typecheck`. - Passed on `df60f8dbdbfcb6d80c84cd3bf563f8d58b2f9f03`: all PR CI gates, including repository typecheck and build, all test shards, and browser tests. Both automated reviews are 5/5. GitHub reports 55 successful checks, one neutral review, and two skipped Storybook checks. - The first server shard run failed because an unchanged workspace-runtime fixture did not accept health connections within 10 seconds. Its isolated local test and the single failed-jobs rerun both pass. This establishes recovery; the cause of the first timeout remains unknown. - Passed in the hosted source run on this exact commit: recursive typecheck, token gates, the large Runner E2E typecheck, Runner E2E unit tests, and build. The retained `source.txt` matches this PR head. - The extra unsharded `pnpm test:run` reached its 60-minute limit (exit 124). It has no complete verdict. The broad workflow therefore reports failure. No assertion-failure marker appears in the retained partial log. Full-suite acceptance uses the passing canonical PR CI partitions. A read-only inventory check found no gaps across 1,023 general server files, 161 serialized suites, and 20 workspace projects. The separate chat/native Runner lanes cover the excluded server files. No tests or timeouts were weakened. The local environment has 4 GiB of memory. Use CI for the large Runner E2E typecheck. - The initial report tests failed because the harness could not resolve package imports from the repository root. Relative source imports fixed that failure. - The first broad local run had timeouts from the environment Git bridge. Native Git resolves the ancestry timeout and all runtime tests pass. The added report fixture lacked its required screenshot; the corrected report tests pass. A stale master assertion expected Pi profile 27, while the generated profile is 28. Updated its expectation and exact suite fingerprint; all 78 targeted support tests pass. The clean full support run passes all 2,768 tests. - The three review regression cases failed before repair. They showed remote counts of zero and two, and a completed run that waited for the final diagnostic sink. They now pass. The stalled-sink case keeps persistence pending while the run returns, both bridge stops run once, and the staging lock map becomes empty. - Hosted evidence for this commit: [source verification](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39335475416), [retained command logs and status table](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39335475416/artifacts/12228829282). All listed commands exited zero except the incomplete unsharded test command described above. - The physical-launch test drives the executor's spawn callback twice. The native workspace test uses real Git repositories and verifies reuse and invalidation. These are deterministic tests, not a paid provider qualification campaign. ## Risks - Consumers must handle `partial_reuse` and `unknown`. Partial evidence no longer produces a legacy cold/warm boolean. - Native and remote bridged provider process evidence is still unavailable on some paths. The report shows unknown values for those paths. - Receipt emission is best effort. Missing receipts reduce confidence in a label and must not change execution or settlement. - No schema migration, first-party Telemetry event, or endpoint default changes are included. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, used reasoning, repository tools, and code execution. The exact provider model ID and context window are not exposed to this session. The existing implementation checkpoint was preserved from the earlier agent run. ## 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: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
bc091f0a21 |
fix(recovery): recover retained workspaces before saved messages (#16906)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - A stopped run can leave useful files in its original sandbox. > - The server keeps that sandbox when it cannot confirm file copyback. > - The task can then save new user input but offers no safe way to recover the files. > - A retry of the old agent turn can repeat work that already finished. > - This pull request recovers files through the existing workspace owner and delivers only saved human input. > - The user can recover a task without certifying infrastructure facts or losing completed work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16883 and #16835 for publication receipts and verified process termination. Related: #16478 clears stale holds after copyback already succeeded. This change performs the missing export and records its proof. #16901 manages the main GitHub response comment and does not perform workspace repair. **What happened?** A failed run retained its workspace. A later user message stayed saved behind a file-repair hold. The task asked the user to verify process termination and file recovery but offered no repair control. Sending a message could show an optimistic Working state and move the task to Todo before admission succeeded. **Expected behavior** The harness should recover the original files when it can prove ownership and termination. It should preserve newer edits and completed operations. Only waiting user input may start another turn. Missing evidence must keep the source held with a specific explanation. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Interrupt a sandbox run before workspace finalization succeeds. 2. Retain its exact allocation and save a user follow-up. 3. Observe the file-repair hold and missing end-user repair path. ## What Changed - Add source-bound background recovery for native and legacy runs. An accepted native result is not required. - Share the physical copyback lock and durable owner. Resume only the exact stopped allocation, export files, verify persistence and obtain a fresh stop receipt. - Persist retry limits and idempotent requests on the existing recovery record. Limit each server to two background exports. Add an indexed candidate scan and a separate cleanup obligation. - Add a task-editor recovery endpoint. Deny agents and viewers. Reject caller-supplied stop or repair claims. - Deliver waiting human input once through ordinary admission. Preserve pause, approval, budget and assignment gates. Require historical conversational-adapter evidence for legacy-to-Runner continuation. - Include exact GitHub publication receipts in continuation context. Preserve unknown effects and the original failed run. - Show observed recovery progress, a transient-failure retry action and specific service blockers. Keep saved messages visible. Suppress false startup feedback and implicit Todo promotion behind a file hold. Hide unavailable workspace links. - Update execution semantics, capability maps and production-component stories. ## Verification - Red: the original read model failed the new recovery-progress assertion; the other 23 checks in that file passed. - Passed: recovery regressions with 28 cases with real PostgreSQL, files, tar and Git operations. Lifecycle provider calls are controlled test boundaries. Coverage includes native/legacy export, concurrent owners, rollback after export, interrupted archive export with a new database connection, lost replies, historical discovery, durable retry limits, separate cleanup and saved-input delivery. The actual candidate query uses its partial index with 3,000 unrelated history rows. A first automatic repair can bind verified old-controller stop proof without an accepted native result. Review also reproduced and fixed export-only continuation and cleanup lost after a committed repair. Cleanup remains discoverable without waiting input and after task reconciliation. - Passed: two GitHub integration cases verify that continuation context carries the existing publication receipt and does not write another response. Company and task boundaries are checked. - Passed: 293 continuation, workspace-sync, platform-receipt and OpenAPI checks. After file repair, actual dispatch retains pause, cancellation, approval, real budget-policy and assignment gates. - Passed: 174 route checks, including editor admission, agent/viewer denial and rejection of fabricated repair claims. - Passed: 351 task detail, workspace properties and comment-reopen checks after updating the new read boundaries and asynchronous workspace-link expectations. Two new route cases keep held tasks Blocked when a comment is saved. - Passed: 265 task-thread and recovery-notice checks. The broader continuation suite also passed; its new legacy migration case first exposed a gap that the focused recovery suite now covers. - Passed after rebase: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. The later master merge adds an unrelated permission migration; recovery migration generation and safety checks passed after the merge. - Passed: token gates, module boundaries, map structure and migration checks. The recovery index is migration 0360 after current master. - Browser: inspected the production recovery component and its retry-to-queued transition with fixture data. The first dev dependency load failed; a reload after optimization resolved it. This is UI evidence, not a live provider recovery claim. - Every test shard passed on final commit `bbbc09efb4`. The older local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after the complete CI test matrix passed. Local full typecheck and production build passed. The first CI build compiled and booted, then lost its runner during the clean public npm-install check. An isolated retry passed the build, production boot and clean public npm-install verification. - Greptile reviewed final commit `bbbc09efb4` at 5/5. All review threads are resolved. - The change is not deployed. Hosted recovery remains unverified until the served revision includes this change. ## Risks - Recovery crosses process, provider and persistence boundaries. Missing or mismatched ownership, stop, descriptor or file evidence keeps the hold. It never selects a replacement allocation or silently starts over. - File recovery does not certify external action outcomes or authorize replay. New input still uses normal execution admission. - Historical sources without sufficient durable evidence can remain blocked. Destructive reconstruction stays separate. - The index migration is idempotent. It changes no task data. Snapshot pruning follows repository policy. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, `gpt-6.1-sol`, with code execution and browser tools. `gpt-6-astra` assisted earlier investigation. The runtime does not expose the 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
3b8324a233 |
fix(github): keep one main PR review comment and reconcile stopped work (#16901)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - GitHub connections send review requests to an assigned agent. > - A PR needs one main comment that shows its current review state. > - The response ledger used one comment per incoming request. Pushes and follow-up messages created more placeholders. > - Thread subscriptions also accepted requests addressed to external bots. Recovery could leave an acknowledged request without a final notice. > - This pull request shares the main PR comment, filters other recipients, and reconciles stopped work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #16874 showed the repeated placeholders. #15416 introduced the per-request response path. The prior summary path used one PR-level marker. **What happened?** Repeated pushes created new main PR comments. A subscribed `@greptile review` message also woke the Paperclip bot. If execution stopped before staging a milestone, its comment could keep claiming that work was active. **Expected behavior** One bot keeps one main comment per PR. Progress and review results update it. A message addressed to another recipient does not wake the bot unless it also explicitly mentions this bot. Stopped work gets an accurate notice. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Accept two review requests in one PR conversation. 2. Add `@greptile review` to that subscribed conversation. 3. Fail the assigned run before it stages a milestone. Run channel maintenance. ## What Changed - Add a durable main PR response target. Keep per-request receipts and the existing publication lease. - Recover the target from App-owned provider markers. Adopt older placeholders and point verified duplicates to the current review. - Use a queued notice before a PR run starts. Preserve version ordering and final responses. - Filter leading mentions addressed to another recipient. Explicit mentions of this bot take precedence. Incidental mentions keep normal thread behavior. - Reconcile acknowledged requests after terminal execution. Show paused state for saved requests on a blocked task. Preserve newer work and confirmed or uncertain tool delivery. - Keep a request open when its stale acknowledgement is suppressed. Close placeholders after replies published elsewhere. Retire old coalesced placeholders before replacing their receipts. Resolve native request identity when legacy wake fields are absent. - Update guidance, connection documentation, and feature/access maps. ## Verification - Red: all three behavioral regressions failed on the original code. A second review created a second comment; an external-bot request was processed; stopped execution retained its working placeholder. - Green: the same three cases passed after the fixes. - Review regressions also failed before their repairs: a delayed acknowledgement closed a new request; normal and stored formal-review receipts left a live placeholder; coalesced completion lost a duplicate receipt; native terminal work without legacy wake fields stayed queued. All 13 combined regression and safety cases passed after repair. - The same legacy receipt-loss bug was also reproduced in the superseded-acknowledgement branch. Its four affected cases passed after adding retirement before that receipt replacement. - A further review regression reproduced paused requests rejecting resumed progress and skipping stopped-run cleanup. Four cases failed before repair; all eight resume and neighboring safety cases passed afterward. Both paused-notice branches keep the request open. - Repeated paused maintenance reproduced two needless GitHub edits. The writer now skips an identical complete comment body. Nine affected cases passed, covering repeated maintenance, resumption, stopped work, final assessment preservation, and main-comment reuse. - Safety cases cover lost receipts, legacy adoption, newer progress, published assessments, provider-verified mention aliases, and old replies that must not complete new requests. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, map validation, and module boundaries passed. The server TypeScript check passed after the final repair. The broader local GitHub workflow and policy run passed 188 tests. Full CI passed on the final commit (`554979d79285b68bcbf90cd639e3d2d053f4ea4b`), including all three chat shards, server/workspace/Runner suites, typecheck, build, and E2E gates. Greptile is 5/5 with no open review findings. One serialized job received a runner shutdown signal mid-test; its single retry passed. - Preserved failure evidence: the first CI run exposed an overbroad recipient filter and an old queued-text assertion. The next commit passed all three CI chat shards. Greptile then found the receipt transitions covered by the new regressions above. Local full-suite runs were stopped when those defects required source changes; no clean full local pass is claimed. - Tests use real PostgreSQL and controlled provider responses. They do not establish a live GitHub App rollout. The original instance needs the fixed server before its comments change. ## Risks - Leading mentions now select a recipient even when that account has no Paperclip connection. A leading human mention also selects that person. Mid-message incidental mentions retain normal subscription behavior. - Existing comment adoption edits only comments proven by this endpoint's request ledger or prior summary marker and App identity. Deleted and replaced comments remain protected. - Failure cleanup uses current authority and does not replace newer progress or unresolved provider writes. It does not restart failed execution. - No schema migration is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. The model used reasoning, tools, code execution, and browser inspection. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
16689de291 |
fix: add one-click retry for restricted workspace setup (#16909)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Tasks need a clear way to resume after a setup failure. > - A shared repository can contain another task that the assigned agent cannot read. > - Paperclip correctly stops before the agent starts, but the user must then understand workspace settings to recover. > - This pull request gives that failure a single Retry button and selects a clean copy of the configured repository through normal admission. > - The task keeps its assigned agent and execution settings, while access checks and existing work remain protected. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #16895 classifies the restricted source failure. This change adds the user recovery action. #16906 handles retained files after execution; this change handles a setup failure before execution starts. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Recovery of a task whose shared repository includes a task workspace the assigned agent cannot read. **Current behavior** The task stops before provider work and asks the user to understand workspace choices or access grants. **Proposed behavior** Show Retry above the task message box, independent of loaded conversation history. One click requests one attempt using a clean checkout of the configured remote. Show Retrying while the request is pending. Show an error only if the request fails. **Reason and benefit** The user can resume work without understanding repository isolation or changing access to another task. **Breaking changes** None. The recovery source value is server-owned. The public workspace selection request does not accept it. No migration is required. ## What Changed - Add one Retry control above the composer in both task conversation views. It stays available when an older notice is outside the loaded comment pages. - Bind recovery to the latest failed run, current assignee, and recorded proof that provider work did not start. - Use the existing atomic recovery route and pending workspace selection. Normal admission clears the old session and creates the isolated checkout. - Choose a fresh task-owned branch for recovery, including fixed project branches, existing task branches, and adapter branch overrides. Preserve the model, environment, setup commands, pending user workspace choices, previous files, and all execution gates. - Update execution documentation and both workspace maps. ## Verification - Passed all 461 tests in the eight affected database, Git, HTTP, workspace binding, and conversation suites after the review fixes. An additional 292 tests passed after the final compatibility fixes, including IssueDetail and recovery action routing. - Concurrent HTTP retries produce one wakeup. Paused projects and runs that started provider work reject recovery without changing the workspace. - Real Git tests exclude private files, private commits, and unpublished original files from the clean checkout, preserve the original, and exercise reuse, cleanup, and reopen. - Verified in a running local app: a task failed twice, displayed only Retry, and reached Done after one click. A second browser test put the failure notice behind 501 newer comments and used a fixed project branch. Retry stayed visible and the task reached Done. The credential-free process worker used the selected checkout and wrote its result there. This does not claim a live model-provider run. - The first manual fixture lacked a responsible-user membership and failed after successful workspace recovery. Corrected the fixture, retained that failure evidence, and verified the full flow with ordinary authorization. - Full typecheck, build, token gates, and map checks passed. The full local suite was stopped after review changed its source during execution; current-head CI provides the complete suite result. - An earlier unrelated peer-comment read test hit a socket hangup. The next complete affected-suite run passed; the first failure is retained in local evidence. - Current-head CI hit an unchanged runner credential-concurrency test failure. That lane passed on the preceding commit, and all 42 credential tests passed locally. The original failed job is retained; the one-time rerun passed. All latest-head CI checks are green (55 success, 2 skipped, 1 neutral), and Greptile is 5/5 with both review threads resolved. ## Risks - A remote repository outage can still prevent the next attempt. Retry does not grant access or copy unpublished files from the old checkout. - Recovery accepts only the latest recorded pre-provider failure and preserves normal execution gates. This limits duplicate work and stale recovery requests. - No database migration, dependency, or lockfile change. - The first review found fixed-branch retry loops and dependence on paginated notice history. Both had failing regressions before the fixes and now pass targeted tests and the combined browser journey. - Full CI then caught assumptions about missing run evidence and unrelated recovery actions. The final changes tolerate absent evidence and scope the new lookup to board-owned actions with valid run IDs. The previously failing suites now pass locally. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser verification. 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d9bcf4dfe8 |
fix(auth): let Cloud stack admins manage experimental settings (#16907)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - People use experimental settings to opt into product features. > - Cloud stack Admins can manage their company, but cannot save an experiment. > - Requiring an Owner role adds unrelated privileges to this workflow. > - This pull request gives trusted Cloud stack Admins permission to update experiments. > - Other instance administration and platform settings keep their existing checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A person with the Cloud stack Admin role receives “Instance admin access required” when they enable an experimental setting, such as Fast responses. **Expected behavior** Cloud stack Admins can save editable experimental settings. This permission does not grant general instance-admin authority. Members, Support users, and agents cannot change experiments. Cloud-managed and operator-hidden settings remain protected. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Sign into a Cloud staging workspace as a stack Admin. 2. Open Settings → Experimental. 3. Enable Experimental fast responses. 4. Observe the permission error instead of a saved setting. **Additional context** Related: #10343 introduced computed Owner elevation. #15748 added Fast responses and the company Connections settings page. The roadmap and existing PRs were checked. This is a small authorization fix for the existing settings path. ## What Changed - Derive experiment-management authority from the current trusted Cloud stack Admin role on each request. - Apply that authority only to the experimental settings PATCH route. Keep general settings, environment defaults, and task drain restricted to instance admins. - Preserve existing hidden-setting checks, managed feature restrictions, and activity records. - Add role and role-downgrade regressions, allowed and denied route cases, staging coverage, and updated OpenAPI and access documentation. ## Verification - Before the fix, the Admin fast-response request returned 403 and the new role assertions failed. The first sandboxed HTTP run could not bind local sockets; the regression run outside that sandbox reached the expected authorization failures. - Focused Cloud actor, settings route, managed-overlay, and health tests: 149 passed. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` pass. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. - Greptile reviewed commit `7c33b90066121f03183579d2fae2650755e025e4` at 5/5. Its one style finding is fixed and resolved. - The full local `pnpm test:run` did not pass. It reported two early collection failures before workspace build outputs were ready and a 15-second timeout in the unchanged AgentMail recovery test. The run was stopped after those failures while the full CI suite continued. No full local-suite pass is claimed. - The first current-head CI attempt failed the unchanged Runner test “preserves a real listening process and its marker when a health RPC times out” with `runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable` / `process_identity_changed`. The test passes in a local isolated run. This recovery does not establish the CI failure's cause. [Failed job](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39332989655/job/118336142261). The failed shard passed on its single rerun. The failure cause remains unconfirmed. All CI checks on commit `7c33b90066121f03183579d2fae2650755e025e4` are now green. [Final CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39332989655). - No deployed staging behavior is claimed. Manual acceptance after deployment: as a stack Admin, enable Fast responses, reload, and confirm Connections appears. Confirm Members and Support users still cannot save experiments. ## Risks - This intentionally extends experimental settings write access to Cloud stack Admins. It does not persist an instance-admin role or expand other instance controls. - Production retains its existing managed feature policy. Staging retains its editable experiment allowlist and protected execution and owner-elevation settings. - No database migration or UI change is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser inspection. The runtime does not expose an exact model snapshot 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> |
||
|
Tonio
|
8723580071 | fix(ui): refine task side panel tabs (#14949) canary/v2026.1020.0-canary.1 |