mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-26 10:26:26 +01:00
c3be6085fa5b97c9706c184dea61ff8ac67305fe
1443
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
c3be6085fa |
test(server): ignore follow-up recovery in batching assertion
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d328f82bd0 |
test(server): align cancellation batching fixture
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
dd59e3898c |
test(server): acknowledge feedback in batching fixture
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
fbaf587214 |
fix(server): require explicit feedback disposition
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
53c075fbb3 |
fix(server): bind recovery to feedback batch
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
2ff8edb14b |
fix(server): require evidence for feedback recovery
Serialize issue-scoped idempotent wakes and add a partial uniqueness backstop so concurrent operator retries cannot enqueue duplicate delivery runs. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
279a3d7041 |
fix(openapi): register feedback delivery retry route
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8b3269dc3f |
test(server): tolerate partial service-index route mocks
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
93bff79e15 |
fix(feedback): resolve recovery after successful replay
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
c26ff70959 |
fix(feedback): handle paused delivery assignees
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
ea34e9b25b |
fix(server): revoke terminal run JWTs
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
276e24d210 |
fix(server): redact raw recovery failure evidence
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
b930ecf415 |
feat(ui): surface feedback delivery recovery states on the source comment
Implements the approved UX spec. Delivery state renders on the human comment it belongs to, never as a new task status: - retrying: one quiet footer line beside the comment's timestamp, revealed only after the ~400ms Doherty window, polite live region, no operator control while automatic recovery still owns the problem, static icon under reduced motion. - exhausted: a persistent compact warning InlineBanner directly under the comment with Retry delivery, an authorized View run (omitted, never disabled, when no safe route exists), a one-shot alert announcement, and a focusable anchor for the attention deep link. Retry pending/error state stays on that one button and reports failure inline, not only via toast. - recovered: the warning is replaced in place by the existing success SystemNotice so the operator can see why attention disappeared. Quiet transient recovery morphs to "Delivered after retry" for 5s and leaves nothing behind. State is shown once: the generic recovery card is suppressed for feedback_delivery in the thread, and the attention queue gets one plain-language operator row per feedback batch deep-linked at the banner. That row is new — an exhausted delivery is agent-owned but carries manual_repair_required, so it had no inbox surface at all. 44 focused tests (29 component, 3 thread integration, 1 live-Postgres attention, plus the 18 projection tests) and pnpm check:token-gates pass. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
f115a27942 |
feat(server): project feedback delivery state onto source comments
Adds the operator-facing response contract the feedback delivery recovery UI needs. Delivery is state on the human comment, not a new task status: the projection reads the durable signals the earlier server recovery work already persist (feedback_delivery recovery actions plus queued replay wakes/runs) and keys them to the comment ids the obligation covers. - ISSUE_FEEDBACK_DELIVERY_STATES + IssueCommentFeedbackDelivery in shared, surfaced as an optional field on IssueComment. - Pure, unit-tested projection with deliberate precedence: an open obligation outranks an in-flight replay so the actionable banner (and its attention item) cannot disappear before delivery actually succeeds. - Failure detail is mapped through an operator-safe whitelist; unmapped codes collapse to null rather than echoing adapter text, paths, or credentials. - POST /issues/:id/feedback-delivery/retry gives the operator one explicit replay, keyed off its own idempotency namespace so it is not swallowed by the spent automatic generation keys. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8c5db890e0 |
fix(server): add a stranded in-review feedback recovery backstop
Periodic reconciliation used to skip every `in_review` issue without a typed execution participant, so review feedback whose only remaining path was a pre-launch-failed comment run stayed silently stranded. Adds a narrow backstop for exactly that shape: agent-assigned `in_review`, no typed participant, interaction, approval, monitor, user owner, active run, or queued wake, and a failed latest run that carried user feedback context. It requeues one bounded normal-model replay for the original assignee, or opens one explicit recovery action naming the owner and next action once replay is exhausted or the assignee is no longer invokable. Dedupe against the immediate terminalization lane is structural: both lanes now derive the fingerprint, replay wake idempotency key, recovery-action kind/cause, and activity keys from one shared module, so a second parallel delivery lane cannot be opened even if the two lanes race. Legitimate waits stay untouched: pending Board confirmations, approvals, monitors and blockers, human-owned reviews, typed review participants, pause holds, paused/budget-gated assignees, system-originated wakes, and terminal issues. Exhausted delivery is still recorded for a held assignee because the recovery action carries a `manual_repair_required` wake policy and wakes nobody. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
afc4e6a81b |
fix(server): recover pre-launch feedback wakes
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
10d0555189 |
fix(interactions): authorize resolvers consistently (#11376)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Issue interactions give agents and people a structured decision record. > - Resolver routes used different authorization rules. > - Some routes blocked valid agents, including task watchdogs with normal issue access. > - The API did not show who could resolve a pending interaction. > - This pull request gives every interaction kind one resolver policy evaluator. > - The benefit is a clear decision path with consistent governance and company isolation. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Fixes: #8087 Refs: #7403 Related PR: #11082 proposes board-only confirmation rules. This change keeps human-only review as an explicit policy. **What happened?** Agents could create issue interactions. Some resolver routes still required board access. This left valid agent confirmations pending. Task watchdogs could see the same problem without board identity. **Expected behavior** Every interaction kind must use one resolver policy contract. The contract must support `anyone`, `not_creator`, and `human_only`. It must also apply all normal governance controls. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a `request_confirmation` interaction as an agent. 2. Resolve it with another authorized agent. 3. Observe the board-only denial. **Paperclip version or commit** The problem exists on `master` before this change. **Deployment mode** Local development with `pnpm dev`. ## What Changed - Add canonical policies for `anyone`, `not_creator`, and `human_only`. - Use one server evaluator for every interaction kind. - Apply named addressees, company limits, review rules, and task watchdog scope. - Charge cross-issue resolutions to the existing per-run action limit. - Return the effective resolver audience in attention and interaction data. - Show the audience, governance choices, and denial reasons in the board UI. - Add telemetry, API documents, product documents, and regression fixtures. - Add migration provenance for safe legacy behavior. - Make migration `0218` safe for complete replays and partial prior runs. ## Product Rules - An interaction records a response. It does not grant authority for the next action. - `anyone` lets any authorized issue participant respond. - `not_creator` requires a responder other than the interaction creator. - `human_only` requires an authorized person. - A named addressee, company policy, or governed action can narrow the audience. - These controls cannot widen the audience. - A task watchdog uses the same rules as an ordinary agent. - A task watchdog does not receive board authority. - An agent resolution on another issue uses the shared cross-issue action limit. - Legacy pending interactions keep their earlier restrictions. - The UI shows the effective audience and a permanent denial reason. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db check:migrations` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck` - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/db/src/issue-thread-interaction-resolver-policy-migration.test.ts` - The focused PostgreSQL test applies migration `0218` twice. - The test also completes a partial prior run and preserves existing provenance. - The latest GitHub head has 29 successful checks. - The opt-in Storybook visual check skipped as expected. - Greptile reports 5/5 with no open comments. ## Risks - New interaction writes use `anyone` by default. - Callers must select `not_creator` or `human_only` when they need stricter review. - Legacy pending interactions keep the old creator and human restrictions. - Migration `0218` fills only missing provenance fields during recovery. - Cross-issue resolutions can reach the existing action limit. - The shared evaluator affects every interaction kind. - Route, service, database, shared contract, and UI tests cover these rules. > This work matches the Agent Reviews and Approvals direction in `ROADMAP.md`. It does not duplicate a planned item. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The runtime does not expose the exact deployment ID or context window. The agent used reasoning, repository tools, shell commands, and test 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 linked public issues or described the issue with the required labels - [x] I have not referenced internal 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 - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation - [x] I have considered and documented the risks - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open comments - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9e9f744f58 |
Show blocker links in the task chat (#11456)
<!-- Write all pull request text in Simplified Technical English (ASD-STE100): short sentences, one instruction per sentence, simple approved vocabulary, and the active voice. --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps operators supervise agent work through tasks and task threads. > - The redesigned task thread shows the current work and its state. > - A blocked task did not show the dependency that prevented progress. > - Operators had to leave the thread to find the direct and final blockers. > - This pull request adds compact blocker links at the top and bottom of the task thread. > - The benefit is that operators can identify and open the relevant tasks without adding a large notice to the thread. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The redesigned task thread did not show which task directly blocked the current task or which task ultimately blocked its dependency chain. **Subsystem affected** `server/`, `packages/shared/`, and `ui/` task-blocker presentation. **Current behavior** A blocked task can open in the redesigned thread without a visible dependency link at the top or bottom of the conversation. **Proposed behavior** Show one compact amber row for the direct blocker. Show a second row for the selected final blocker when one exists. Render the rows at both ends of the thread. **Reason and benefit** Operators can see the reason for the blocked state and open the relevant task from the conversation. The compact rows preserve thread density. **Breaking changes** None. The new blocker-attention fields are optional. Existing clients remain compatible. ## What Changed - Added a compact task-chat component for direct and selected final blocker links. - Added the blocker rows to the top and bottom of populated and empty task threads. - Added link-ready blocker-attention details so an intermediate selected task stays on its correct direct chain. - Included blocker-link changes in the thread content key so pinned threads follow a newly added bottom row. - Added component, scrolling, server contract, and Storybook coverage for the new states. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/TaskChatThread.test.tsx server/src/__tests__/issue-blocker-attention.test.ts` (38 tests passed) - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `pnpm check:token-gates` ## Risks - Low risk. The rows only render while the task status is `blocked` and an unresolved blocker is available. - Long titles are truncated to keep each blocker on one line. The full task label remains available in the link title. - Older server payloads keep the original leaf-selection behavior because the new sampled details are optional. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex with GPT-5. The run used tool-enabled reasoning and code execution. The context-window size was not exposed to the 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> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
cd501499a2 |
test: add ACPX run lifecycle characterization baselines (#11461)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The adapter runtime starts, turns, settles, and composes ACPX runs > - Recent lifecycle corrections changed several order and cleanup rules > - Those rules need regression coverage before the planned engine refactor > - This pull request adds characterization suites for the corrected behavior > - The benefit is a clear test baseline for the next refactor ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The ACPX adapter runtime and server heartbeat lifecycle need stable regression coverage for their current corrected behavior. **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting (multiple of the above): `packages/adapter-utils` and `server` test suites. **Current behavior** The runtime has corrected rules for startup, turns, settlement, composed results, and heartbeat terminalization. The repository lacks a single characterization baseline for these rules. **Proposed behavior** Keep the current lifecycle rules pinned by five test suites. Let the later engine refactor change behavior only when it updates these tests with a clear reason. **Reason and benefit** The suites expose order, cleanup, transport, timeout, retry, result, and lease-release changes during the refactor. They also record one known latent defect as current behavior. **Breaking changes** None. This pull request adds tests only. ## What Changed - Add startup characterization coverage for commands, launch values, session fingerprints, sync order, bridge overlap, and cleanup paths. - Add turn characterization coverage for inputs, events, transports, timeout and cancel behavior, retry rules, errors, and usage. - Add settlement characterization coverage for teardown, adapter sync-back, workspace restore order, native sync, and error policy. - Add composed-run characterization coverage for result forms, finalization sets, and host-lane warm save and warm hit behavior. - Add server coverage that checks run terminalization before environment lease release. ## Verification - Run `npx vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/startup-characterization.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/turn-characterization.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/settlement-characterization.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/composed-run-characterization.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/execute.test.ts`. - Run `npx vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-run-terminalize-before-release.test.ts`. - The adapter-utils run passes 178 tests, and the server run passes 4 tests. - Check `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils typecheck`. - Check `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`. ## Risks Low risk. The change adds test files and does not change production code. One known cold ensure-session cleanup defect remains pinned as current behavior. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, 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> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
e52b8a343f |
fix: ACP run lifecycle corrections — failure settlement, workspace sync-back, lease cleanup (#11454)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agent adapters run ACP sessions and manage runtime, workspace, and lease resources. > - Several failure paths left runtime bridges, staged workspaces, or environment leases active after an error. > - These leaks reduce run reliability and can leave later runs without clean resources. > - This pull request closes the failure paths, applies one teardown policy, and adds regression tests. > - The benefit is consistent failure settlement and safer reuse of agent workspaces and leases. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** ACP runs could leave runtime bridges, staged workspaces, or environment leases active after failures. Claude and Gemini ACP runs did not restore the sandbox workspace on teardown. Lease release stopped when one lease returned an error. **Expected behavior** Each ACP failure must return an error result and settle its resources. Teardown must run each step, release leases independently, and restore the host workspace when the sandbox ends. Pending cleanup leases must receive bounded retry attempts. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run an ACP session that fails after runtime creation or during turn preparation. 2. Run an ACP session that fails during a warm hit or staged runtime handoff. 3. Run lease cleanup with more than one lease when the first release returns an error. 4. Inspect the result phase, teardown calls, workspace state, and lease metadata. 5. Run the regression suites listed in the Verification section. ## What Changed - Settle every ACP failure after runtime creation with an error result and one sandbox.startup span closure. - Close the ACP runtime and remove warm entries after every pre-turn failure. - Run all teardown steps, record teardown errors, release staging leases in finally, and prevent duplicate teardown. - Dispose staged runtimes after seam failures and remove borrowed staged entries with identity guards. - Add fail-open workspace sync-back teardown for Claude and Gemini ACP adapters. - Isolate lease release errors and add bounded retry sweeps for stranded pending_cleanup leases. - Atomically claim pending_cleanup retries and clamp attempt readers to keep the five-attempt bound. - Default absent provider reusableLeases values to false and align the fake provider with its runtime declaration. - Add regression tests for engine, adapter, server, and shared environment behavior. ## Verification - [x] `npx vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/execute.test.ts` — 124 tests passed. - [x] `npx vitest run packages/adapters/codex-local/src/server/acp.test.ts packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/acp.test.ts packages/adapters/gemini-local/src/server/acp.test.ts` — 61 tests passed. - [x] `npx vitest run server/src/__tests__/environment-runtime.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-pending-cleanup-sweep.test.ts server/src/__tests__/reusable-leases-default.test.ts server/src/__tests__/environment-routes.test.ts packages/shared/src/environment-support.test.ts` — passed. - [x] All listed suites ran from the repository root. - [x] GitHub CI completed successfully for `cfc349c9f232711433897915112a1c52c0e462ca`. - [x] Greptile completed with a 5/5 confidence score and no blocking finding. ## Risks The engine changes affect failure settlement and teardown order across ACP runs. The server changes add retry state to existing lease metadata without a schema migration. The adapter changes restore workspaces after sandbox execution. Regression tests cover the changed paths. GitHub CI and Greptile passed for the current head. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. This change fixes runtime reliability and does not duplicate a roadmap feature. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-5 Codex. The model used tool-based repository inspection, GitHub operations, and code review support. The runtime does not expose a context-window value. ## 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 (for example, `docs/...` or `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
|
bc9f70f54c |
fix(plugin-daytona): bound the sandbox liveness calls with a per-call timeout (#11408)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Sandbox provider plugins run agent work in remote execution environments > - The Daytona sandbox liveness read can stay pending when the connection stops responding > - A pending read blocks the plugin until a broad host-to-worker limit expires > - This pull request adds bounded deadlines to Daytona liveness calls and clears stale handles > - The benefit is a fast and clear error when a Daytona connection stops responding ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #11341 **What happened?** The Daytona sandbox liveness read had no per-call timeout. A silent connection failure left the read pending until the broad host-to-worker RPC limit expired. **Expected behavior** The plugin should stop a liveness call within a defined limit and report a clear timeout error. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a Daytona sandbox handle. 2. Make the cached handle freshness read never resolve. 3. Run the next sandbox operation. 4. Observe that the operation waits for the outer RPC limit without a liveness timeout. **Paperclip version or commit** `master` before this change. **Deployment mode** Any deployment mode that uses the Daytona sandbox provider. ## What Changed - Add `withLivenessTimeout` with timer cleanup and `SandboxLivenessTimeoutError`. - Bound `refreshData` with configurable `livenessTimeoutMs`, which defaults to 30000 milliseconds. - Bound sandbox start and recovery calls with the SDK timeout plus a 5000 millisecond margin. - Reject `livenessTimeoutMs` values above 86400000 milliseconds and document the setting. - Evict a cached handle after a failed freshness refresh so the next operation fetches a new handle. - Add a test for a never-resolving freshness refresh and the cached-handle eviction. ## Verification - Run the Daytona plugin test suite with its package Vitest configuration. - Confirm that 150 of 150 tests pass. - Confirm that the new test reports a bounded timeout and a fresh handle on the next operation. - Confirm that GitHub Actions reports green status checks after the pull request starts. ## Risks This change adds an early timeout only to Daytona liveness calls. A value of 0 or less disables the extra bound. The default leaves normal SDK calls within their expected time limit. The main risk is a timeout value that is too short for a slow but healthy connection. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The model used tool calls and code execution. The model supplied the PR handoff and did not author the code in this pull request. ## 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
|
fdb9a4880d |
fix(security): route paperclipai CLI guidance through safe npx form (CWE-78) (#11400)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Paperclip provides CLI commands and guidance for operators and agents > - The `pnpm paperclipai` script can pass argument values through a shell > - Shell re-parsing can execute command substitutions inside quoted values > - This pull request routes guidance through inert-argv `npx paperclipai` commands and adds regression coverage > - The benefit is safer operator guidance across documentation and runtime hints ## Linked Issues or Issue Description This pull request fixes a command-injection-class defect in Paperclip CLI guidance. **What happened?** The `pnpm paperclipai <sub> --flag "$VALUE"` form can re-parse argument values through a shell. A command substitution inside a quoted value can execute on the host. **Expected behavior** Paperclip guidance must pass CLI values as inert argument values. Host-derived values must not appear in copyable commands. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run a Paperclip guidance command that uses the `pnpm paperclipai` script. 2. Provide a quoted value that contains a command substitution. 3. Observe that the shell can evaluate the substitution before the CLI starts. 4. Compare the result with the `npx paperclipai` form. **Paperclip version or commit** `5670984b75d109950c968542a0111ebb6967f4da` **Deployment mode** All deployment modes that show or use the affected CLI guidance. **Installation method** Built from source and installed CLI guidance. **Agent adapter(s) involved** Not adapter-specific (core bug). **Database mode** Not database-related. **Access context** Both. **Additional context** The earlier merged PR [#11343](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/11343) used the unsafe `pnpm exec paperclipai` form. This fresh PR replaces that guidance with the safe `npx paperclipai` form. ## What Changed - Standardize documentation and runtime hints on `npx paperclipai`. - Remove the broken `pnpm exec paperclipai` guidance. - Use a static `<host>` placeholder in private-hostname guidance. - Add regression tests for unsafe forms, continued lines, static hosts, and offline guidance. ## Verification - `git diff --check origin/master...origin/fix/paperclipai-cli-npx-safe-invocation` passes. - The branch adds `server/src/__tests__/cli-invocation-safety.test.ts` and updates private-hostname tests. - CI must run the new tests, typecheck, lint, and build checks. - Local Vitest execution was not available because this worktree has no installed Vitest binary. ## Risks - The change affects operator and agent documentation text. - The runtime hints now show `<host>` instead of a request-derived host value. - No database schema or migration changes exist. - CI will detect any missed unsafe invocation or type error. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-5, exact model ID `gpt-5`, with tool use and code-review assistance. The model used repository inspection, Git operations, and PR preparation. ## 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] CI ran the test suites and they pass; local test execution was unavailable in this worktree - [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 addressed all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Opaque
|
ea3a5ea7d2 |
fix(recovery): skip successful-run handoff for recovery-action-driven runs (#9010)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The recovery subsystem repairs issues stranded without a valid disposition: `decideSuccessfulRunHandoff` queues one corrective wake per successful-but-dispositionless run, and `source_scoped_recovery_action` wakes a recovery owner for stranded issues > - `decideSuccessfulRunHandoff` already refuses to treat corrective handoff runs, issue-monitor runs, and comment-driven wakes as handoff *sources* — but not runs woken by `source_scoped_recovery_action` > - Because the handoff idempotency key includes `sourceRunId`, every succeeding recovery run is a brand-new source: recovery run → handoff wake → corrective run → new recovery action → recovery run → … with `DEFAULT_MAX_SUCCESSFUL_RUN_HANDOFF_ATTEMPTS` never binding (it is per-source-run) and the source-scoped recovery action created with `maxAttempts: null` > - The cycle is unbounded, each leg is a ~15s no-op "succeeded" run, and the designed handoff-exhausted escalation (blocked + exhausted notice) never engages > - This PR adds recovery-action-driven runs to the existing skip list, so recovery runs own their own follow-up path and the stranded-issue escalation remains the exit when the disposition is still missing > - The benefit is that missing-disposition recovery converges (one handoff, then escalation) instead of ping-ponging wake volume unboundedly ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #6523 — same wake-loop family (repeated `source_scoped_recovery_action` wakes); this PR fixes the variant where the loop partner is the successful-run handoff. **Observed behavior:** in a 16-agent deployment, one agent produced 223 runs in 2 hours, every run `succeeded` with ~15s duration, with `contextSnapshot.wakeReason` alternating exactly between `source_scoped_recovery_action` (109) and `finish_successful_run_handoff` (108). The source issue never reached the exhausted escalation. ## What Changed - `server/src/services/recovery/successful-run-handoff.ts`: new `isRecoveryActionDrivenRun` predicate (matches `contextSnapshot.wakeReason === "source_scoped_recovery_action"` or a present `contextSnapshot.recoveryActionId`), consulted in `decideSuccessfulRunHandoff` alongside the existing corrective-handoff / issue-monitor / comment-driven skip guards. - `server/src/services/recovery/successful-run-handoff.test.ts`: cases asserting recovery-driven runs are skipped via both markers. ## Verification - `pnpm -F @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/services/recovery/successful-run-handoff.test.ts` → 17 passed (16 existing unchanged + 1 new). - Production validation (same logic deployed as a dist patch on 2026.626.0): the alternating recovery/handoff wake pattern stopped after restart; ordinary successful-run handoffs (first corrective wake per genuine source run) continue to queue. ## Risks Low-to-moderate, scoped to one decision function. The behavioral shift: a recovery-action run that succeeds without fixing the disposition no longer gets a corrective handoff wake — instead the stranded-issue detector escalates (blocked + recovery owner + exhausted notice), which per the existing `escalateStrandedAssignedIssue` code is the designed terminal path. Runs not woken by a recovery action are unaffected (covered by the existing 16 tests, all green). ## Model Used Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), extended thinking, agentic tool use via Claude Code. Human-reviewed before submission. ## 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 |
||
|
DottaandCodex
|
edb8083538 |
fix(server): serialize interaction review verdicts
Lock the issue before accepting or rejecting review confirmations, reauthorize against the current policy, and cover concurrent policy tightening. Co-Authored-By: Codex <noreply@openai.com> |
||
|
DottaandCodex
|
3526b82e2b |
test(server): expect transactional review transition
Align the watchdog in-review assertion with the atomic update contract. Co-Authored-By: Codex <noreply@openai.com> |
||
|
DottaandCodex
|
277c13529a |
fix(server): persist review requester atomically
Commit both bound and unbound in-review transition activity in the same transaction as the issue update. Co-Authored-By: Codex <noreply@openai.com> |
||
|
DottaandCodex
|
3a87b143a2 |
test(server): support locked review policy updates
Keep terminal-update route harnesses aligned with the transactional issue service contract. Co-Authored-By: Codex <noreply@openai.com> |
||
|
DottaandCodex
|
991f40bb2e |
fix(server): serialize review policy verdict authorization
Recheck terminal verdict and policy mutations under a row lock, and scope interaction verdict enforcement to the review confirmation itself. Co-Authored-By: Codex <noreply@openai.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
373b675f94 |
fix(server): prevent review policy verdict downgrade bypass
Authorize verdicts and policy changes against the stored restrictive review policy, remove downgrade guidance, and cover both restrictive policies with route regressions. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
37fde84abd |
fix(server): enforce review policy on interaction verdicts
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandClaude Opus 5
|
8ee1fb21a6 |
feat(ui): badge the review policy when it constrains approval (#10938)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Agents move their work into review, and a reviewer must then give a verdict on it > - By default anyone with write access can give that verdict, including the agent that did the work > - The server can constrain that default per issue with a `reviewPolicy` column, but no screen showed the value > - A reviewer could therefore press Approve on a review that the server refuses, and get a 403 > - This pull request shows the policy as a badge on the two surfaces where a person gives a verdict > - It also makes an agent verdict read as a verdict in the activity timeline > - The benefit is that a reviewer sees who can approve before they try ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists for this change. The description below follows `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/enhancement.yml`. **What existing behavior does this improve?** The issue review flow. A reviewer cannot see the approval constraint on an issue before they give a verdict. **Subsystem affected** Web UI (`ui/`), with one supporting change in the server attention service. **Current behavior** The server stores an optional approval constraint for each issue in a `reviewPolicy` column. The column has three meaningful states: the default (`NULL` or `anyone`), `not_creator`, and `human_only`. The server enforces the constraint when it receives a verdict. No screen shows the value. Two problems follow: 1. A reviewer presses Approve on a review that the server refuses. The server answers 403, and the reason is not visible on the card. 2. An agent that accepts or rejects a review renders in the activity timeline as the raw action id, for example "issue thread interaction accepted". A person who reads the timeline cannot tell that a verdict was given. **Proposed behavior** Show the constraint as a read-only badge on the two surfaces where a person gives a verdict. Show no pixels for the default state, because the default is what every issue already does. Make an agent verdict read as a verdict in the timeline. Only agents set the column today, so this change adds no control to set it. **Reason and benefit** A reviewer sees the constraint before they act. This prevents the 403, and it removes the need to explain the 403 afterwards. The timeline also becomes complete, because it now shows agent verdicts and human verdicts in the same way. **Breaking changes** None. The change adds a badge and changes copy. It adds no column, no endpoint, and no request. **Additional context** The server-side column and the verdict enforcement landed earlier in #10931. This pull request is the user interface for that column. The default state stays unchanged on screen, so the badge appears on a small number of issues. ## What Changed - **A read-only "Approvals" row** in the issue Execution properties. The row renders *only* for a constrained policy: "Anyone else" (`not_creator`) or "Human only" (`human_only`). A `NULL` or `anyone` column adds no row, so the panel is untouched on the overwhelming majority of issues. - **The same badge on the stalled-review card** in `/decisions`, above the three review verbs. A reviewer now sees the constraint before they press Approve. The condition is the same, so the default card is unchanged. - **Agent verdicts read as verdicts in the activity timeline.** An agent that accepted or rejected a review request previously rendered the raw action id ("issue thread interaction accepted"). It now reads "approved the request". A stalled-review decision names the verb that the actor chose. - **A cleared policy reports as "anyone", not "none",** in the field-change receipt. The `reviewPolicy` column is nullable by default, so an absent value is a real setting rather than a missing one. - **All copy comes from `ui/src/lib/review-policy.ts`.** Its badge lookup returns `null` for the default. This makes "no pixels for the default" one enforced decision instead of a condition repeated at each call site. It also keeps the badge, the activity line, and the receipt reading alike. - **The server attention service carries the policy** on the review attention subject, so the stalled-review card can read it. ## Verification Automated tests: - `ui/src/lib/review-policy.test.ts` — the default returns no badge, however the column spells it (`null`, `undefined`, `"anyone"`). An unrecognised policy from the wire shows nothing rather than leaking an enum value. - `ui/src/components/AttentionQueueRow.test.tsx` — no badge on the default card, and the verbs still render. Suppression of the badge must not suppress the card. - `ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx` — no Approvals row on the default. The constrained row contains no `button`, so nothing there can PATCH. - `server/src/__tests__/attention-service.test.ts` — the review attention subject carries the policy, and subjects built from narrower selects do not claim one. Run them with: ```sh pnpm vitest run ui/src/lib/review-policy.test.ts \ ui/src/components/AttentionQueueRow.test.tsx \ ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx \ server/src/__tests__/attention-service.test.ts ``` Manual steps: 1. Open an issue that has no `reviewPolicy`. Confirm that the Execution properties panel shows no Approvals row. 2. Set the column to `not_creator`. Reload the issue. Confirm that the Approvals row reads "Anyone else", and that the row has no control. 3. Move that issue into review. Open `/decisions`. Confirm that the stalled review card shows the same badge above the review verbs. 4. Let an agent approve the review. Confirm that the activity timeline reads "approved the request" and not "issue thread interaction accepted". Screenshots were captured at 1440x900 and 390x844, in light mode and dark mode, with the three policy states side by side. The leftmost column in each capture is the default. It carries no badge and no extra row. ## Risks Low risk. - The change is additive on screen. Every new surface is behind a constrained policy, so the default path renders exactly as before. - The badge is read-only. It has no control and sends no request, and a test asserts that the row contains no `button`. - An unknown policy value from the wire renders nothing. It does not render the raw enum. - No migration, no schema change, and no endpoint change. ## Model Used Claude Opus 5 (Anthropic), model id `claude-opus-5[1m]`, 1M context window, with extended thinking and tool use enabled. Used through Claude Code for the implementation, the tests, and this description. ## 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: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
69027cbaae |
fix(workspaces): reopen archived git worktree for managed_checkout projects (#11395)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Execution workspaces give agent tasks isolated Git worktrees > - Archived isolated workspaces must reopen against a live project checkout > - A managed_checkout project has no project workspace directory in its row > - The reopen path used the removed archived worktree as the Git working directory > - This pull request resolves the live managed checkout and reports a clear error when it is unavailable > - The benefit is reliable workspace reopen behavior after archive cleanup ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related public pull request: [#6164](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/6164) clears archive state during un-archive. This pull request fixes the separate reopen failure that occurs after archive cleanup. **What happened?** An archived isolated `git_worktree` workspace under a `managed_checkout` project failed to reopen after cleanup. The route attempted to run Git in the removed archived worktree and returned a generic service error. **Expected behavior** The reopen path should use the live managed checkout as the Git base directory and should return a clear error when that directory is unavailable. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a project with `managed_checkout` source control. 2. Create and archive an isolated `git_worktree` execution workspace. 3. Let archive cleanup remove the worktree. 4. Reopen the workspace for an issue. **Paperclip version or commit** `cab0c31dc61310106caef42ca244e9f7b0f19460` **Deployment mode** Local dev with the default embedded database. **Agent adapter(s) involved** Not adapter-specific. This issue affects core workspace handling. ## What Changed - Resolve the live managed checkout when a managed project reopens an archived Git worktree. - Keep local-folder projects on their project workspace directory. - Validate the Git base directory before `git rev-parse` and return a scrubbed error. - Add nine regression tests for workspace reopen behavior. ## Verification - `server` TypeScript check passes with `tsc --noEmit`. - `server/src/__tests__/execution-workspace-reopen.test.ts` passes with 9 tests. - GitHub Actions must pass all required PR checks. ## Risks Low risk. The change affects only archived isolated workspace reopen behavior. It reuses the existing managed checkout and Git authentication helpers. It adds no new credential path, endpoint, or telemetry. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-5 assisted with review and GitHub operations. The implementation author supplied the code and test results. ## 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> |
||
|
LeeJandClaude Opus 5
|
a53cc8819b |
fix(claude-local): pipe print prompt via stdin (#9500)
Fixes #2444. Refs #4947. The `claude_local` adapter launched Claude Code as `claude --print - --output-format stream-json --verbose`. Paperclip writes the rendered task prompt to Claude's stdin, but current Claude Code releases can treat the stale `-` positional marker as the prompt itself, so Claude received the literal string `"-"` instead of the issue body. The customer's task ran against no content at all. The fix keeps `--print` mode and stdin delivery, and removes the stale `-`. Adds regression coverage on both sides of the delivery path: a `claude_local` assertion that `--print` is present, `"-"` is absent and the prompt still reaches stdin, and an adapter-utils case proving the sandbox run-log command wrapper preserves stdin while streaming logs. Authored by @elJayAdvisor, whose commit is included unchanged with their authorship. The branch had gone stale and was showing CONFLICTING; the conflict was in `execution-target-sandbox.test.ts`, where their new test was added at the same point as master's `creates the process session directories only in the launch exec` case and git interleaved the two into one hunk. Resolved by taking master's file and re-inserting their test whole, after checking every helper it needs still exists there. Verified: the bug was still live on master at `execute.ts:838`; the regression test genuinely catches it — restoring the stale `-` fails `expect(captured.argv).not.toContain("-")`; `@paperclipai/adapter-claude-local` and `@paperclipai/adapter-utils` typecheck clean; 67 pass across the two test files. All CI gates green; Greptile 5/5. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
5ca7b4c1fe |
fix(security): standardize paperclipai CLI guidance on safe npx path (#11343)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Paperclip provides CLI guidance to agents and operators through documentation and runtime messages. > - Content-bearing `pnpm paperclipai` examples send arguments through a shell. > - Shell evaluation can execute command substitutions in untrusted argument content. > - Runtime hostname guidance can also place request-derived content inside a shell command. > - This pull request uses `npx paperclipai` for content-bearing guidance and uses a static hostname placeholder. > - The benefit is safer copy-paste guidance for agents and operators. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Issue type** Incorrect information **Where is the issue?** CLI guidance in `doc/CLI.md`, `skills/paperclip/SKILL.md`, documentation, and runtime-generated hints. **What's wrong?** Content-bearing `pnpm paperclipai` commands can pass argument text through `/bin/sh`. Shell command substitution in an argument can execute before the CLI receives the value. **Suggested fix** Use `npx paperclipai` for content-bearing commands. Use a static `<host>` placeholder when runtime guidance displays the allowed-hostname command. ## What Changed - Replace content-bearing `pnpm paperclipai` examples with `npx paperclipai` across the documentation and agent-facing guidance. - Update runtime-generated CLI hints to use a static `<host>` placeholder. - Add safety notes to `doc/CLI.md` and `skills/paperclip/SKILL.md`. - Add scans and regression tests for unsafe invocation and hostile hostname headers. - Keep fixed lifecycle commands and `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/*` build commands unchanged. ## Verification - Run `tsc --noEmit` for the changed server files. - Run `cli-invocation-safety.test.ts`. - Run `private-hostname-guard.test.ts`. - Confirm that hostile hostname headers do not enter shown shell commands. - Confirm that the three commits contain the required Paperclip co-author trailer. ## Risks - This change updates documentation and diagnostic text across many surfaces. - Fixed lifecycle and setup commands remain unchanged. - The tests fail if content-bearing `pnpm paperclipai` guidance returns. - The change does not alter the CLI argument parser. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, tool use, code execution, and repository review assistance. ## 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
|
05d58cd884 |
fix(tool-gateway): keep unsigned ask-first requests out of the review queue without cancelling them (#11338)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The tool gateway creates approval requests and the review queue reads them > - The gateway creates a request row before it adds the signature > - A review-queue read can see the row during that short unsigned state > - The old read path cancels the unsigned row, so approval returns `409 action_not_pending` > - This pull request hides unsigned in-flight rows and keeps them pending until signing finishes > - The benefit is that approval succeeds while invalid signed requests remain cancelled ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A review-queue read cancelled a pending tool action request when the request had no signature yet. The next approval call returned `409 action_not_pending`. **Expected behavior** The review queue must hide an unsigned in-flight request and keep its state as `pending`. A request with an invalid signature must remain cancelled. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a require-approval tool action request. 2. Read the review queue while the request signature is still null. 3. Approve the request after the creator adds the signature. 4. Observe that the old code cancels the request and the approval call fails. **Paperclip version or commit** Commit `720aa0a494bbaa1711bc7a3d795f810765915bfe`. **Deployment mode** Local dev with the embedded PGlite database. **Installation method** Built from source with pnpm. **Agent adapter(s) involved** Not adapter-specific. This is a core tool access service bug. **Database mode** Embedded PGlite. **Access context** Board and agent tool approval flow. ## What Changed - Keep a pending request with a null signature out of `listActionRequests` results. - Cancel a request when its non-null signature fails verification. - Add a permanent regression test for the unsigned request transition. - Update the contract test for unsigned and invalid-signature requests. ## Verification - Run the tool access service, tool gateway service, tool gateway, and tool access policy service tests. - Confirm 227 tests pass. - Run the `@mcp-runnable` Playwright end-to-end suite in CI. - Run the US-9 loop 30 times in CI. ## Risks The change alters review-queue filtering for unsigned requests. A null signature now means that signing remains in progress. Invalid signed requests keep the existing cancellation behavior. The change has no database migration. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, with tool use and code execution. The model reviewed the handoff, repository rules, and pull request state. The implementation author supplied the code and tests. ## 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] 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> |
||
|
|
0819cac4c6 |
feat(secrets): add agent-readable /secrets/catalog endpoint (#9530)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents can be configured with env bindings that reference company
secrets — they specify which secret by UUID in `adapterConfig.env`
> - But there is no API endpoint agents can call to look up a secret
UUID by name — `GET /companies/:companyId/secrets` is board-only, and
the internal `secrets.resolve` handler only accepts UUIDs
> - So when an agent needs to wire a new secret (e.g. an API key for a
new skill), it has no way to discover the UUID from a known name like
`HOMEBOX_API_KEY` — the user must find it by inspecting browser network
traffic
> - The fix is a read-only catalog endpoint that agents can call to get
the `id`/`name`/`key`/`status` mapping — no values, no provider config —
just enough to resolve a name to a UUID
> - This PR adds `GET /companies/:companyId/secrets/catalog`, guarded by
`assertBoardOrAgent` + `assertCompanyAccess`, so agents can discover the
UUID they need without board-level access and without any secret value
being exposed
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No pre-existing public issue. Describing inline per the feature request
template:
**Subsystem affected:** `server/` — REST API & orchestration services
**Problem or motivation:**
Agents that configure env bindings must reference secrets by UUID
(`secretId`). There is no agent-accessible API to resolve a secret name
to its UUID. `GET /companies/:companyId/secrets` requires board access;
the internal `secrets.resolve` handler rejects anything that is not
already a UUID. Agents and their operators are forced to find UUIDs by
inspecting browser network requests, which is friction that should not
exist.
**Proposed solution:**
Add a read-only catalog endpoint — `GET
/companies/:companyId/secrets/catalog` — that agents can call. It
returns only non-sensitive metadata (`id`, `name`, `key`, `status`) for
each active company secret, stripped of values, provider configuration,
and version history. Board callers get the same response. The existing
full-detail list endpoint (`GET /companies/:companyId/secrets`) remains
board-only and is unchanged.
**Alternatives considered:**
- Allow agents to call the existing `/secrets` list — rejected because
it returns full rows including provider metadata; narrowing the response
is safer.
- Add a name-to-UUID lookup by query param — simpler but less useful; a
full catalog means the agent can do the resolution locally without a
second round-trip.
**Roadmap alignment:** Does not duplicate anything in `ROADMAP.md`.
## What Changed
- `server/src/routes/secrets.ts` — new `GET
/companies/:companyId/secrets/catalog` route registered before the
board-only `GET /companies/:companyId/secrets` route. Uses
`assertBoardOrAgent` + `assertCompanyAccess`. Calls `svc.list()` then
projects each row to `{ id, name, key, status }` before responding.
- `server/src/__tests__/secrets-routes.test.ts` — adds `list` to the
shared mock service object (it was missing); adds a `describe` block
with four test cases: board caller receives stripped metadata, agent
caller in the same company receives stripped metadata, unauthenticated
request gets 401, agent from a different company gets 403.
## Verification
**Automated:**
```bash
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server test --run secrets-routes
```
All four new test cases (board access, agent access, unauthed rejection,
cross-company rejection) should pass.
**Manual:**
1. Start the Paperclip server locally.
2. Create a company and a secret via the UI.
3. Call the endpoint as a board user:
```bash
curl http://localhost:3100/api/companies/<companyId>/secrets/catalog \
-H "Authorization: Bearer <board-session-token>"
```
Expect a JSON array with `id`, `name`, `key`, `status` fields — no
`provider`, no `referenceCount`, no version data.
4. Call the same endpoint with an agent API key:
```bash
curl http://localhost:3100/api/companies/<companyId>/secrets/catalog \
-H "Authorization: Bearer <agent-api-key>"
```
Expect the same response.
5. Call with an agent API key scoped to a *different* company — expect
403.
## Risks
Low risk. This is a purely additive, read-only endpoint. No existing
behavior changes. The only new capability is that agents can discover
the UUIDs of secrets in their own company — metadata they already need
to do their job. Secret values are never returned. Authorization reuses
the existing `assertBoardOrAgent` and `assertCompanyAccess` guards
already used throughout the codebase.
## Model Used
Claude Sonnet 4.6 (`claude-sonnet-4-6`) — Anthropic, extended context,
tool use enabled. The entire change (route, tests, PR description) was
produced by the model operating as a Paperclip CEO agent assigned to the
task.
## 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
- [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Austin Pilz <austinpilz@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: root <root@paperclip.pilz.dev>
Co-authored-by: Internet Historian <agent@paperclip.internal>
Co-authored-by: Andrew Aymeloglu <aaymeloglu@gmail.com>
|
||
|
scotttongandPaperclip
|
eabecc6f77 |
feat(annotations): include issue document annotations in agent review context (#11332)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Reviewers annotate plans and issue documents with inline comments, and assigned agents act on that feedback > - The server already builds a bounded review context from open plan annotations and includes it in agent wake payloads > - Non-plan issue documents did not get the same treatment: their open annotation threads never reached the agent, and the properties pane did not surface their annotations > - This pull request extends the review-context path and the properties-pane UI to issue documents, at parity with plans > - The benefit is that agent feedback on any issue document reaches the assigned agent, not only feedback on the plan ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The review-context pipeline that delivers inline annotation feedback to assigned agents, and the properties pane that surfaces those annotations to reviewers. **Subsystem affected** The server review-context path (`server/src/services/plan-review-context.ts`, wake payload assembly in `server/src/services/heartbeat.ts`, `server/src/routes/issues.ts`), shared wake-payload types (`packages/shared`, `packages/adapter-utils`), and the issue properties pane (`ui/src/components/issue-properties/`). **Current behavior** A reviewer can annotate any issue document, not only the plan. The agent wake payload includes open annotation threads for the plan document only. Feedback left on other issue documents is invisible to the assigned agent. In the properties pane, the Artifacts tab also gives no way to see or open a document's annotations. **Proposed behavior** Add `buildDocumentReviewContext` beside the existing plan builder. It collects open annotation threads for all non-plan issue documents, applies the same thread, comment, and character budgets across documents, and reports truncation. Include the result as a new `documentReviewContext` field in agent wake payloads and in the issue wake-context route. Keep the plan context on its legacy builder and field so plan-only wakes stay byte-for-byte compatible. Render the new context in the adapter wake-payload text, and surface annotation counts and the annotation panel for documents in the properties pane's Plans and Artifacts tabs. **Reason and benefit** The floating annotation popover and persistent highlight UI landed earlier; this change completes the loop so agent feedback on any issue document reaches the assigned agent, not only feedback on the plan. **Breaking changes** None. The wake payload gains a new optional `documentReviewContext` field; the existing plan context field and its legacy builder are unchanged, so plan-only wakes stay byte-for-byte compatible. ## What Changed - Add `buildDocumentReviewContext` in `server/src/services/plan-review-context.ts`: bounded review context (shared thread/comment/character budgets, per-document legacy limits) over all non-plan issue documents - Include `documentReviewContext` in agent wake payloads (`server/src/services/heartbeat.ts`) and in the issue wake-context response (`server/src/routes/issues.ts`) - Add shared `DocumentReviewContext` / `DocumentReviewContextDocument` types in `packages/shared` - Normalize and render the new context in adapter wake-payload text (`packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.ts`), with tests - Show a `DocumentAnnotationsCountChip` and the annotation panel for documents in the properties pane Plans and Artifacts tabs, with tests - Extend server document-annotations service tests to cover the new context builder ## Verification - Run `npx vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts server/src/__tests__/document-annotations-service.test.ts` from the repo root — 104 tests pass - Run `TZ=UTC npx vitest run ui/src/components/issue-properties/IssuePropertiesDocumentAnnotations.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssueDocumentAnnotations.test.tsx ui/src/components/DocumentAnnotationPopover.test.tsx` from the repo root — 75 tests pass (one pre-existing monitor-row case asserts UTC timestamps, so use `TZ=UTC` locally; CI runs in UTC) - `pnpm run typecheck` in `server/` passes - Manual: annotate a non-plan issue document, then wake the assigned agent with a comment — the wake payload lists the open document annotation threads; the Artifacts tab shows the annotation count chip and opens the panel ## Risks - The wake payload gains a new optional `documentReviewContext` field; consumers that ignore unknown fields are unaffected, and the plan context field is unchanged - The context is new input to agent wakes; shared budgets (same limits as the plan context) bound token cost across all documents - Low UI risk: the properties-pane changes reuse the existing annotation components > 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 - Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-fable-5` (Claude Fable 5), with extended thinking and agentic tool use (Claude Code harness) ## 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
|
44694328a3 |
fix(issues): make DELETE /api/issues/:id succeed for issues with dependents (#11331)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The server provides issue APIs and the database stores issue child rows > - The issue delete endpoint removes the parent issue before dependent rows > - Several issue foreign keys had no delete policy, so PostgreSQL returned a foreign-key error > - This pull request adds safe cascade and set-null policies and a clear conflict response > - The benefit is reliable issue deletion with a useful error when a restricted audit row still blocks deletion ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Fixes #7728 Fixes #4660 Fixes #7991 Fixes #4627 Fixes #5086 **What happened?** `DELETE /api/issues/:id` returned HTTP 500 when dependent comments, thread interactions, read states, inbox archives, feedback votes, or ledger rows referenced the issue. The database raised SQLSTATE 23503 because several foreign keys had no delete policy. **Expected behavior** The endpoint must remove dependent rows that have no meaning without the issue. It must keep ledger rows with a null issue reference. It must return HTTP 409 when a restricted decision audit row still references the issue. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create an issue. 2. Add a comment or thread interaction that references the issue. 3. Send `DELETE /api/issues/:id`. 4. Observe the HTTP 500 response. **Paperclip version or commit** Commit `1f8f456f8340823fe2bd891ae8933d942f190b7b`. **Deployment mode** Local dev with embedded PGlite or external PostgreSQL. ## What Changed - Add `CASCADE` to five issue child foreign keys. - Add `SET NULL` to the finance and cost event issue foreign keys. - Keep decision audit references restricted. - Map SQLSTATE 23503 from the issue delete service to HTTP 409. - Add migration 0217 for the seven changed tables. - Add regression tests for cascade deletion and restricted decision references. ## Verification - Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`. - Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`. - Run `npx vitest run src/__tests__/issue-remove-cascade.test.ts` from `server/`. - The regression test applies migration 0217 to a fresh embedded PostgreSQL database. ## Risks - Migration 0217 changes only seven foreign keys that reference `issues.id`. - Cascade deletion removes child rows that cannot exist without the parent issue. - Set-null preserves finance and cost ledger rows. - Decision audit rows remain protected, so the endpoint can return HTTP 409. ## Model Used Codex, based on GPT-5, with tool use and code-review support. The implementation author used an AI coding agent. This PR handoff uses the same model family to validate the commit and manage the pull request. ## 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 - [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Apolinario RatioandApolinarioRatio
|
7787106e5c |
fix board key issue writes across assignees (#9025)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Board users and board API keys coordinate agents by commenting on
and updating issues.
> - `issue:comment` and `issue:mutate` are intentionally null-mapped
authorization actions, so they need explicit same-company fallback
handling.
> - Same-company board-key writes worked for unassigned or same-actor
issues but failed for issues assigned to another agent.
> - That blocked cross-agent coordination because a board key could not
comment on or patch another agent's issue even inside the same company.
> - This pull request adds the missing board-member issue-write fallback
while keeping viewers denied and sparse service calls fail-closed.
> - The benefit is that non-viewer board members can coordinate agent
work across assignees without restoring broad instance-admin elevation.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists. Duplicate search performed:
- `gh search prs --repo paperclipai/paperclip "board key issue mutate"`
returned only this PR.
- `gh search issues --repo paperclipai/paperclip "board key
authorization boundary"` returned no issues.
Bug description:
### What happened
Same-company board-key actors received `403 "Issue is outside this
actor's authorization boundary"` when posting comments or patching
issues assigned to another agent.
### Expected behavior
Active same-company non-viewer board members can comment on and mutate
issues in their company, regardless of agent assignee; viewer members
remain denied.
### Steps to reproduce
Authenticate as a board API key for an active non-viewer company member,
then `POST /api/issues/{id}/comments` or `PATCH /api/issues/{id}`
against an issue assigned to a different agent in the same company.
### Paperclip version or commit
Observed against the current published 2026.626.0 package line and fixed
against current `master`.
### Deployment mode
Authenticated/tailnet board-key access.
## What Changed
- Added a board-actor fallback for `issue:comment` and `issue:mutate` in
`server/src/services/authorization.ts`.
- Restricted that fallback to fully contextualized issue resources with
issue id, status, and explicit assignee fields so sparse service calls
still fail closed.
- Allowed active same-company non-viewer board memberships and denied
viewer memberships for these issue-write actions.
- Added regression coverage for non-viewer board-key comment/mutate on
an issue assigned to another agent.
- Added regression coverage for viewer denial on both `issue:comment`
and `issue:mutate`.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/authorization-service.test.ts` passed: 35/35.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passed.
- `git diff --check` passed.
## Risks
Low-to-moderate authorization risk because this changes issue-write
access. The scope is constrained to active same-company board
memberships, excludes viewers, and requires route-shaped issue context
before granting access. Cross-company access and sparse/null-mapped
calls continue to fail closed.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex coding agent using GPT-5-class reasoning with local shell,
GitHub CLI, and test execution tools in an OpenClaw/Codex environment.
## 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
- [ ] 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: ApolinarioRatio <ApolinarioRatio@users.noreply.github.com>
|
||
|
RaviandPaperclip
|
b5bb236bc1 |
Fix stale closure-comment wakeups on done issue updates (#8656)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The issue update route is part of the workflow layer that records board state changes and emits follow-up wakes for agents. > - A single `PATCH /api/issues/:id` request can both close an issue and add the closure comment that explains the final disposition. > - The bug was that the comment-wakeup decision used the issue's pre-update status, so a request that changed `in_progress` to `done` could still enqueue an `issue_commented` wake as if the issue remained open. > - That stale wake could cause already-completed Sentry-family follow-up issues to drift back into active work even though the closure comment was the only new activity. > - This pull request makes the wake suppression decision use the post-update issue status and covers the closure-comment path with a focused regression test. > - The benefit is that terminal issue updates stay terminal unless a separate explicit reopen or resume path is used. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists for this instance-specific workflow bug, so the issue is described inline. Bug report: - What happened: when an issue was marked `done` with a closure comment in the same `PATCH /api/issues/:id` request, the route could still enqueue an `issue_commented` wake because it checked the pre-update status. - Expected behavior: a closure comment written as part of the terminal update should not wake the assignee again or clear the terminal disposition. - Steps to reproduce: start with an assigned issue in `in_progress`, patch it to `done` while including a comment, then inspect whether an `issue_commented` wake is emitted for the assignee. - Deployment mode: local Paperclip workflow/API behavior. - Related public PRs found during duplicate search: #6657 appears to address a broader stale closeout-comment reopen path; this PR is narrower and targets the same-request post-update status decision in `PATCH /api/issues/:id`. ## What Changed - Use the post-update issue status when deciding whether a PATCH comment should enqueue an `issue_commented` wake. - Add a regression test covering `in_progress` to `done` with a closure comment so the assignee is not woken again after the issue is already closed. ## Verification - `bin/ci`: absent in this repo, so I used the repo's targeted test-equivalent commands for the touched API route. - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts`: passed, with non-fatal warnings about missing `paperclip-plugin-dev-server` bins because `packages/plugins/sdk/dist/dev-cli.js` is not built under `--ignore-scripts`. - `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-update-comment-wakeup-routes.test.ts`: passed (`Test Files 1 passed`, `Tests 8 passed`). - GitHub PR workflow checks for build, typecheck, server tests, workspace tests, serialized suites, e2e, canary dry run, security scans, and policy are green on commit `5a8bd799edd606731fd5e215ea97417a655338ea`. - A normal `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` is blocked on this host before tests because `sharp` attempts a native build under Node `26.1.0` / Python `3.14.5` and fails on missing Python `distutils`; the route-level verification above used `--ignore-scripts` to avoid that local toolchain issue. ## Risks Low risk. The behavior change is limited to comment-wakeup suppression during issue update handling and only narrows wake emission when the post-update status is terminal. The main edge case is that a same-request terminal update with a comment will no longer wake the assignee; explicit reopen or resume flows should remain the correct way to restart completed work. > 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 via the managed local Codex adapter, model `gpt-5.5` with repository tool use and shell execution. The implementation and PR update were produced with AI assistance under the TechWright CTO Architect role. ## 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) - [ ] 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 Checklist notes: - The branch was already opened as `worker/TEC-1440-reopen-drift`; I am leaving the box unchecked rather than hiding that the live PR branch includes an internal coordination id. - The only non-green automated check before this body update was the automated review/template gate. Greptile was 4/5 because of this PR-description issue, with no code change requested. --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Eric BrookfieldandClaude Opus 4.8
|
166f381d3f |
fix(runtime): only rewrite base-URL port for loopback hosts (#10258)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The server derives each spawned agent's `PAPERCLIP_API_URL` from `authPublicBaseUrl` via `choosePrimaryRuntimeApiUrl` → `buildPaperclipEnv` > - At startup, `rewriteLocalUrlPort` rewrote the port of the configured `auth.publicBaseUrl` to the internal listen port > - The rewrite was applied to *any* explicit-port URL, not just loopback ones — so an external base URL on a non-default port (e.g. a Tailscale Serve listener on `:8443`) got clobbered to the internal HTTP port `:3101` > - `https://host:3101` (HTTPS scheme against the plaintext HTTP port) is unreachable, and that dead value propagated to every spawned agent's `PAPERCLIP_API_URL` > - This pull request preserves explicit external base URLs at startup while keeping the worktree path's intended per-worktree port rewrite > - The benefit is that agents following the documented `curl "$PAPERCLIP_API_URL/..."` pattern no longer hit a dead endpoint ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue; describing inline (bug report). **Summary:** at server startup, `rewriteLocalUrlPort` corrupts an explicit external `auth.publicBaseUrl`, leaking a dead `PAPERCLIP_API_URL` to spawned agents. **Steps to reproduce:** 1. Configure `auth.publicBaseUrl = https://<host>:8443` (an external listener on a non-default port, e.g. Tailscale Serve). 2. Start the server (internal listen port `3101`). 3. Inspect a spawned agent run's env: `PAPERCLIP_API_URL=https://<host>:3101`. **Expected:** the agent-facing URL points at a reachable origin. **Actual:** `curl "$PAPERCLIP_API_URL/..."` → `http_code=000` (HTTPS against the plaintext HTTP port; TLS handshake fails). The fleet stays healthy only because the runtime falls through its candidate list, but any agent following the documented curl pattern silently hits a dead endpoint first. Related open PRs in the same area (dedup — none merged; this is a smaller, targeted fix with regression tests): - Refs #9916 (PAPERCLIP_RUNTIME_API_URL precedence + authPublicBaseUrl port preservation) - Refs #7342 (preserve explicit authPublicBaseUrl during startup, GH#7341) - Refs #9228 (prefer reachable runtime API URLs for local adapters) ## What Changed - New `server/src/url-utils.ts` with two intent-revealing helpers (single source of truth): - `rewriteUrlPort` — rewrite any explicit-port URL to a new port. - `rewriteLoopbackUrlPort` — rewrite **only** loopback hosts; explicit external URLs survive untouched. - `isLoopbackHost` — bracket-tolerant so a URL hostname form `[::1]` matches. - `server/src/index.ts` (startup, the bug): `authPublicBaseUrl` now uses `rewriteLoopbackUrlPort`, so an external Serve URL keeps its port. Nested helper copies removed in favor of the shared module. - `server/src/worktree-config.ts` (worktree path): uses `rewriteUrlPort` — **behavior unchanged**; a worktree still advertises its own server port even on a non-loopback host (this is intended and asserted by the existing worktree suite). - `server/src/url-utils.test.ts`: regression coverage for both helpers. - Updated one stale assertion in `server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts` that had encoded the old (buggy) external-host rewrite at startup. ## Verification - `vitest run src/url-utils.test.ts src/__tests__/worktree-config.test.ts src/__tests__/server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts` → **33 passed**; the only local failure is a pre-existing, environment-coupled test (`derives trusted origins…`) that leaks the dev machine's real Tailscale identity into an origins list and passes in CI (it is unrelated to this change — its `authPublicBaseUrl` is loopback and rewrites identically before/after). - `npm run typecheck` (`tsc --noEmit`) → **clean, exit 0**. - PR CI: Build, Typecheck + Release Registry, serialized server suites, and `review` gate green. ## Risks Low risk. The only behavioral change is at startup: an explicit *external* base URL on a non-default port is no longer rewritten to the internal listen port (the bug). Loopback/worktree behavior is unchanged. No schema/migration changes. ## Model Used Claude Opus 4.8, 1M context (`claude-opus-4-8[1m]`), extended thinking, with tool use / code execution (Claude Code). ## 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) - [ ] 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 - [ ] 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: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
Frank Gonnello
|
0a1f9fda65 |
fix(adapters): wrap modulePath in pathToFileURL() before dynamic import (Windows) (#4287)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - One of its pluggability surfaces is external adapter packages,
loaded at startup by `server/src/adapters/plugin-loader.ts` and routed
through the adapter registry so third parties can override built-in
adapters like `claude_local`
> - `loadExternalAdapterPackage` calls `await import(modulePath)` where
`modulePath` is an absolute filesystem path
> - On Windows that path begins with a drive letter (`C:\…`), which
Node's ESM loader parses as a URL scheme and rejects with
`ERR_UNSUPPORTED_ESM_URL_SCHEME`; the defensive `try/catch` around the
call masks the failure and the builtin adapter silently keeps serving
traffic, so the override never activates
> - `reloadExternalAdapter` in the same file already tries to build a
`file://` URL, but does it via template-string concatenation
(`file://${modulePath}`) which produces a malformed URL on Windows
(`file://C:\…` instead of `file:///C:/…`) — so dev hot-reload of
adapters is broken on Windows even after initial load works on POSIX
> - This pull request swaps both paths to `pathToFileURL()` from
`node:url`, the idiomatic cross-platform conversion
> - The benefit is external adapter packages load reliably on Windows
with no changes required to existing adapters, and the two sibling paths
in the same file stop diverging in their URL-handling discipline
Closes #4286.
## What Changed
- `server/src/adapters/plugin-loader.ts`:
- Import `pathToFileURL` from `node:url`.
- `loadExternalAdapterPackage`: wrap `modulePath` in
`pathToFileURL(modulePath).href` before passing to `import()`.
- `reloadExternalAdapter`: replace `` `file://${modulePath}` `` string
concatenation with `pathToFileURL(modulePath).href` so the cache-bust
URL is well-formed on Windows too (drive letter, UNC, percent-encoding).
Three lines changed + one import. No behavior change on POSIX:
`pathToFileURL("/foo/bar.js").href === "file:///foo/bar.js"`, which
Node's ESM loader accepts identically to the bare path.
## Verification
**Runtime, Windows 11, Node v24, `@paperclipai/server@2026.416.0`:**
Before (installed dist, vanilla):
```
INFO: Loading external adapter package {packageName: "@reforged/adapter-claude-local", modulePath: "C:\\Users\\…\\index.js"}
WARN: Failed to dynamically load external adapter; skipping
err: ERR_UNSUPPORTED_ESM_URL_SCHEME … Received protocol 'c:'
```
After (same dist with the equivalent two-line patch applied):
```
INFO: Loading external adapter package {packageName: "@reforged/adapter-claude-local"}
INFO: Loaded external adapters from plugin store {count: 1, adapters: ["claude_local"]}
```
End-to-end: the override actually services execute calls and its
telemetry fields (e.g. `errorCode: "rate_limited"` on 429) surface into
heartbeat-run records — I've been running this heartbeat through the
override on a vendor-patched copy while drafting this PR.
**Static / logic review:**
- `pathToFileURL` is part of Node's stdlib since v10.12.0, no new dep.
- On POSIX, `path.resolve("/a", "b") → "/a/b"` and
`pathToFileURL("/a/b").href → "file:///a/b"`. `await
import("file:///a/b")` and `await import("/a/b")` both resolve to the
same ESM module — no double-load risk.
- Reload path: the existing cache-bust query (`?t=${Date.now()}`) still
appends cleanly because `pathToFileURL(...).href` returns a normalized
`file:///…` URL with no pre-existing query string.
**Local test suite:** I did not run the full `pnpm test` suite in this
fork — the monorepo test infrastructure (embedded Postgres, pnpm
workspace install) is a significant local-setup cost and this change is
surgical enough that CI should be the source of truth. Happy to iterate
based on CI signal. No existing test directly exercises
`plugin-loader.ts`'s initial-load path.
## Risks
**Low.** This aligns the initial-load path with the already-existing
intent of the reload path (which tried, but imperfectly, to use a
`file://` URL). POSIX behavior is unchanged. The only runtime difference
is that Windows stops throwing and starts loading the adapter — which is
exactly the bug being fixed.
Edge cases worth naming:
- **UNC paths** (`\\server\share\…`): previously broken the same way on
the load path, still broken with `file://` string concat on the reload
path. `pathToFileURL` handles UNC correctly (→
`file:////server/share/…`), so this change also quietly fixes UNC-path
adapter installs on Windows.
- **Bun**: the reload path has a Bun cache-eviction block that keys off
`modulePath` and the old `fileUrl`. Bun accepts both `file://` URLs and
bare paths in its module cache keys, so changing the URL form is
consistent with the existing evict-both pattern (we still evict both
`fileUrl` and `modulePath` after the change).
## Model Used
Claude Opus 4.7 (`claude-opus-4-7`, provider: Anthropic) via Claude
Code, running as the CTO agent in a Paperclip-orchestrated company. 200k
context, tool use. No extended thinking mode. Model authored the patch,
the issue body, and this PR description; human review by the company's
principal (fronc) is pending.
## 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
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass — *deferred to CI, see
Verification note*
- [ ] I have added or updated tests where applicable — *no existing
tests for this file; adding one would require stubbing
`adapter-plugin-store` + filesystem, which seemed out of scope for a
3-line fix. Happy to add one on request.*
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots — *not UI, N/A*
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes — *no
user-facing docs affected; behavior unchanged on POSIX and now-working
on Windows*
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
|
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
d0d242e843 |
feat(server): reopen an archived isolated execution workspace in place (#11322)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Issue execution uses isolated workspaces that hold the issue
worktree
> - A terminal issue can leave its isolated workspace archived and
unable to resume
> - The existing closed-workspace guards returned a conflict and gave
the user no self-serve recovery
> - This pull request reopens the same isolated workspace row and
rebuilds its worktree
> - The benefit is that resume, checkout, and comment actions can
continue without a new workspace row
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Problem or motivation**
A terminal issue can point to an archived isolated execution workspace.
Resume, checkout, and comment actions then stop with a conflict.
**What happened?**
A terminal issue kept its issue-to-workspace link after the isolated
workspace reached a closed status. The guarded actions returned HTTP 409
instead of restoring access.
**Expected behavior**
The next authorized resume, checkout, or comment action reopens the same
isolated workspace row. The action rebuilds the worktree and then
continues.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Create an issue that uses an isolated execution workspace.
2. Move the issue to a terminal state and let the workspace archive.
3. Try to resume the issue or add a comment.
4. Observe the closed-workspace conflict.
**Paperclip version or commit**
|
||
|
|
f0e6c0f549 |
feat(server): receive and apply the Paperclip Cloud onboarding seed (#11098)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Paperclip Cloud provisions a dedicated tenant stack for each
customer. During signup it asks for a mission, a name and role for the
first agent, and a first task.
> - Cloud pushes those answers into the new stack at activation, as
`POST /api/companies/:companyId/onboarding-seed`.
> - No route served that path. The tenant answered 404, so Cloud
recorded the push as unacknowledged and retried on every portfolio
fetch.
> - The failure was soft. The answers stayed durable in Cloud and the
stack still activated. But the stack opened on the empty first-run
wizard, and it asked the customer again for what they had already given.
> - This pull request adds the receiving endpoint. It validates the
seed, applies it, and acknowledges it.
> - The benefit is that a seeded stack opens with the mission, the agent
and the first task already in place.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue covers this. The problem is described in-PR,
following the feature template.
**Subsystem affected**
server/ — Express REST API and orchestration services. Also
`packages/db` (one new table) and `packages/shared` (one new validator).
**Problem or motivation**
Paperclip Cloud collects onboarding answers at signup and pushes them to
the tenant stack at activation. The tenant had no route for that
request. It answered 404. Cloud treats a non-2xx as "not yet applied",
so it kept the answers and retried, but the stack itself stayed
unseeded. A customer who had already named their mission, their first
agent and their first task arrived at an empty first-run wizard that
asked for all three again.
**Proposed solution**
Serve `POST /api/companies/:companyId/onboarding-seed`. Validate the
body, apply it to the company, then acknowledge it.
The seed is customer free text, so it is bounded and validated in
`packages/shared` and read from the JSON body only. It is never read
from an `x-paperclip-cloud-*` header. That header set is the trusted
identity envelope: every member is derived server-side from the host
plus verified domain records, and that is exactly what makes it
trustworthy. Mixing user content into it would remove the property. A
test plants a mission on a cloud header and asserts that the body value
wins.
Application reuses the shapes the first-run wizard already produces, so
a seeded stack and a manually onboarded one look the same afterwards:
- The mission becomes the company-level goal. A multi-line mission
splits into a title and a description, as the wizard does.
- The agent becomes the company's first hire. Its free-text role ("Chief
of Staff") lands on `title`. The structural `role` stays `ceo`, which is
what the org chart and the default-instructions lookup read.
- The first task becomes an issue in the Onboarding project, assigned to
that agent.
Cloud retries until it gets a 2xx, and it reads any 2xx as "the tenant
holds this content". So the endpoint is idempotent per `revision`. A new
`company_onboarding_seeds` table records the applied revision together
with the goal, the agent and the issue it produced. A replay of a
revision that already matches is a successful no-op. A later revision —
the customer edited their answers — updates those three rows in place
instead of creating a second agent and a second task. The record is
written last, after every other write has landed, so a partial
application cannot present itself as acknowledged.
Everything is applied before the 200 is sent. This is an ordering
guarantee, not eventual consistency. The tests read the database
immediately after the response, with no waiting and no polling, so a
lazy receiver fails them on a fast machine as well as a slow one. That
matters because the redirect into the tenant dashboard is gated on this
acknowledgement.
**Alternatives considered**
Store the seed and let the tenant UI apply it on first load. Rejected:
the dashboard redirect is gated on the acknowledgement, so a background
apply would let the dashboard open before the agent and the task exist.
The whole point is that it must not.
Reuse `POST /companies/:companyId/agents` and `POST
/companies/:companyId/issues` over HTTP from Cloud. Rejected: it needs
three round trips with no shared idempotency key, and it moves the "did
all of it land?" decision to the caller.
**Roadmap alignment**
This completes an existing Cloud-to-tenant contract. It does not add a
new user-facing surface.
## What Changed
- Add `POST /api/companies/:companyId/onboarding-seed` in
`server/src/routes/onboarding-seed.ts`. It authenticates exactly as
`POST /api/companies/:companyId/logo` does, through
`assertCompanyAccess`.
- Add `server/src/services/onboarding-seed.ts`. It applies the mission,
the agent and the first task, and records the applied revision last.
- Add the `company_onboarding_seeds` table: schema, migration `0216`,
and journal entry. It holds the applied revision and the ids of the
goal, agent and issue the seed produced.
- Add `applyOnboardingSeedSchema` in `packages/shared`. It bounds
mission to 2000, agent name to 80, agent role to 120, task title to 200,
and task details to 2000 — the same limits Cloud enforces before it
sends.
- Mount the router in `server/src/app.ts` and register the path in the
OpenAPI document.
- Add `server/src/__tests__/onboarding-seed-route.test.ts` with 13
tests.
- The seeded agent is created on `claude_local`. This mirrors the
teams-catalog default for agents created server-side, where no human
runs an environment test first. `PAPERCLIP_ONBOARDING_SEED_ADAPTER_TYPE`
overrides it.
## Verification
```sh
pnpm typecheck # whole workspace, passes
npx vitest run \
server/src/__tests__/onboarding-seed-route.test.ts \
server/src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts # 15 passed
```
The suite runs against embedded Postgres with migrations applied, so
migration `0216` is exercised by every test.
The route tests cover:
- the happy path — mission, agent and task all applied, read immediately
after the 200
- replay of the same revision — no second agent, no second task, no
second goal, no second project
- a later revision — the goal, agent and task are updated in place
- a multi-line mission splitting into a goal title and description
- a revision-only seed
- the activity log entry written once, and not again on a replay
- a caller without access to the company — 403, and nothing written
- a body with no revision — 400
- each field bound past its limit — 400
- a mission planted on an `x-paperclip-cloud-*` header — ignored, body
wins
- an existing Onboarding project — reused, not duplicated
Not verified here: the full Cloud-to-tenant walk against a live stack.
That needs a deployed Cloud and a provisioned tenant together, which is
separate staging work.
## Risks
Migration `0216` creates one new table. It adds no column to an existing
table, rewrites nothing, and backfills nothing, so it is safe to apply
online. The migration safety check passes.
The endpoint writes to a company. Access is enforced by
`assertCompanyAccess`, the same gate the company logo write uses, and a
test covers the denial.
Behavioral note for stacks that already hold data. If a company already
has a non-built-in `ceo` agent, a first seed updates that agent's name
and title rather than creating a second lead. Likewise a seed adopts an
existing company-level goal rather than adding a parallel one. This is
deliberate: the seed is the customer's own stated answer from signup,
and two competing missions or two leads would be worse than one updated
in place. In the intended case — a stack that Cloud has just activated —
none of these exist yet.
The seeded agent is created on `claude_local` with an empty adapter
config. It is idle and needs the usual credential setup before it runs.
Seeding it does not start it.
## Update — rebased onto master + review hardening
Master moved on after this PR was cut, so it was **rebased onto
`master`** and
the seed migration was **renumbered from `0212` to `0216`** (the merged
#11101
took `0212_onboarding_first_task_unique`); the drizzle journal was
re-stitched
and `check:migrations` passes.
Two things landed on top of the original receiver:
- **Mission-only walk contract (PAP-67 r17.4).** The tenant now owns the
first
agent and the first task via #11101's server-owned onboarding path,
which
stamps `ONBOARDING_FIRST_TASK_ORIGIN_KIND` and races safely on the
partial
unique index `issues_onboarding_first_task_uq`. A comment in the apply
path
documents why this receiver leaves the first task to that path on the
cloud
walk, and a paperclip-cloud `node:test`
(`src/onboarding/walk-seed.test.ts`)
asserts the walk's seed carries no `agent`/`firstTask`. The receiver
retains
the agent/first-task code for its documented body contract, kept inert
on the
cloud path by the mission-only seed.
- **Three Greptile P1 fixes** (`95622fa37`): concurrent application is
now
serialized under a per-company `pg_advisory_xact_lock` (no duplicate
goal/agent/project/task on overlapping pushes); a revised first task
carries
its resolved `assigneeAgentId`/`goalId`; and the
`company.onboarding_seed_applied`
audit write is best-effort so a logging failure can't leave the entry
permanently absent. Two new regression tests cover the first two.
## Model Used
Claude Opus 5 (`claude-opus-5`), 1M context window, extended thinking,
with tool use and code execution. Used for the original codebase
investigation, the implementation, and the tests. The rebase, migration
renumber, mission-only contract, and the three P1 fixes were done with
Claude Opus 4.8 (`claude-opus-4-8`), extended thinking, 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
- [ ] 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>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
||
|
|
a8d118a779 |
Prefer public base URL for generated invite links (#7619)
Fixes #7623 ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Company invites are part of the access subsystem and must produce URLs that recipients can open from outside the host machine. > - Paperclip already has public/auth base URL configuration for deployments behind a public hostname, Tailscale, or a reverse proxy. > - Invite URL composition was still deriving its origin from the incoming request host, so loopback-bound servers emitted `http://127.0.0.1:3100/invite/...`. > - A loopback invite URL is not shareable with a remote human or agent, even when the token itself is valid. > - This pull request makes invite URL builders prefer the configured public base URL and keep the existing request-host fallback when it is unset. > - The benefit is that copied invite links use the reachable deployment origin without changing local-only behavior. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Fixes #7623 No duplicate or related PRs/issues were found in a GitHub search for invite URL, loopback, public base URL, and `authPublicBaseUrl` terms. ## What Changed - Added base URL resolution in `server/src/routes/access.ts` that strips trailing slashes and prefers configured `authPublicBaseUrl` over the request-derived host. - Threaded `authPublicBaseUrl` through invite summary, invite onboarding manifest, onboarding text, access routes, `createApp`, and server startup wiring. - Added `server/src/__tests__/invite-url-public-base-url.test.ts` covering configured public-base precedence, unset fallback behavior, and trailing-slash normalization. - Registered the invite public-base URL test in the serialized Vitest server runner. ## Verification ```bash pnpm install --frozen-lockfile pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/invite-url-public-base-url.test.ts pnpm run test:run:serialized ``` Local results from the rebased PR branch: - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` exited 0. - Targeted invite URL test exited 0: 1 file, 3 tests passed. - Serialized server suite exited 0: 106 serialized suites completed; the new invite URL test passed inside that runner. Manual check after deployment: set `PAPERCLIP_AUTH_PUBLIC_BASE_URL` or equivalent public base URL config, create a company invite, and confirm the returned/copied invite URL uses that public origin instead of `127.0.0.1`. ## Risks Low risk. The new public base URL parameter is optional and falls back to existing request-derived behavior when unset. The main operational risk is misconfigured public base URL input; the implementation only trims trailing slashes and otherwise trusts the configured origin. ## Model Used - Original implementation: Anthropic `claude-sonnet-4-6`, 200k context, tool use and test execution. - Conflict repair and verification: OpenAI Codex GPT-5.5, coding agent with shell, git, GitHub CLI, and local test 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) - [ ] 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: Coder (Claude) <coder-claude@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Paperclip Coder (Claude) <lad-agent@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dylan RoyandPaperclip
|
6a546e8a9a |
fix(server): align agent run JWT default TTL with documented 48h default (#10176)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Local adapters (claude_local, codex_local) run agent heartbeats as
child processes, with a short-lived run JWT injected as
`PAPERCLIP_API_KEY` at spawn time
> - That JWT is minted exactly once, when the adapter spawns the process
— its TTL must therefore cover the entire wall-clock life of the run,
not just a prompt startup
> - On laptops the gap between spawn and first real execution can be
huge: a timer heartbeat scheduled while the lid is closed fires during a
~2s macOS dark wake, the machine re-sleeps immediately, and the frozen
child only executes during a later, longer wake — over an hour of
wall-clock delay in observed runs
> - The server's default TTL was 1h, so those sessions started with an
already-expired `PAPERCLIP_API_KEY` and every control-plane call 401'd;
the agent had to recover by manually minting a fresh key
> - The 1h default was also a spec drift: the CLI `env` command
(`DEFAULT_AGENT_JWT_TTL_SECONDS`) and the agent-authentication design
doc both document 172800s (48h)
> - This pull request realigns the server default to 48h and documents
the host-suspension constraint at the mint site and in the regression
test
> - The benefit is that lid-closed/suspended-host heartbeat runs come up
with a valid credential, and the three places that state the default now
agree
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this; per the bug-report template:
- **What happened:** A timer-driven heartbeat run on a MacBook (lid
closed, on battery) was invoked during a ~2s dark wake. The adapter
spawned the CLI and logged init within 2s, then the host re-slept and
the session sat frozen for ~64 minutes until a longer dark wake let it
execute. By then the injected run JWT (1h TTL, minted at spawn) had
expired, so every API call from the agent returned 401 and the run could
only recover via a manually minted key. A second agent's run the same
night showed the identical signature (output timestamps exactly matching
`pmset -g log` dark-wake windows).
- **Expected behavior:** A run that starts late because the host was
suspended should still have a valid `PAPERCLIP_API_KEY` when it finally
executes.
- **Steps to reproduce:** Run Paperclip on a laptop with a
`claude_local` agent on a timer heartbeat; close the lid on battery
overnight; observe a run invoked during a dark wake whose session
executes >1h later with an expired token (compare run-log timestamps to
`pmset -g log` sleep/wake entries).
- **Version/commit:** current `master` (
|
||
|
|
b7b8fbf688 |
fix(adapter-utils): let explicit PAPERCLIP_API_URL override the derived runtime URL in run env (#10339)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - Every agent run gets a run-scoped bridge into the Paperclip API
through the injected `PAPERCLIP_API_URL` / `PAPERCLIP_API_KEY` env vars,
built by `buildPaperclipEnv` in
`packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.ts`
> - `buildPaperclipEnv` resolves that URL as `PAPERCLIP_RUNTIME_API_URL
?? PAPERCLIP_API_URL ?? http://<listen-host>:<port>`, and the server
always exports `PAPERCLIP_RUNTIME_API_URL` derived from
`authPublicBaseUrl` at boot
> - When `authPublicBaseUrl` points at an address that is not reachable
from inside the runtime container (e.g. a VPN/tailnet-only address used
to keep the web UI off the public internet), every local run receives a
dead API URL (`curl` exit 7) and agents only survive by hand-rolling a
localhost fallback
> - An operator-set `PAPERCLIP_API_URL` is the documented escape hatch —
`docs/deploy/environment-variables.md` states the server "preserves the
value" when set externally and that the run-level var "inherits the
server-level value" — but the run env builder inverts the precedence, so
the override never actually reaches runs
> - This pull request swaps the precedence in `buildPaperclipEnv` so an
explicit `PAPERCLIP_API_URL` wins over the derived runtime URL, aligning
the behavior with the documented contract
> - The benefit is that operators with split-horizon topologies (public
auth URL != container-reachable URL) can point agent runs at a reachable
endpoint with one env var, with zero behavior change for deployments
that do not set it
## Underlying Issue
No pre-existing public issue covers this, so per CONTRIBUTING ("Link
Issues or Describe Them In-PR") here are the `bug_report.yml` fields
inline:
- **What happened:** with `PAPERCLIP_AUTH_PUBLIC_BASE_URL` on a
tailnet-only address and `PAPERCLIP_API_URL=http://localhost:3100`
explicitly set in the server environment, every agent run still received
`PAPERCLIP_API_URL=http://100.x.y.z:3100` (the derived,
container-unreachable URL); `curl` from inside the run exits 7 and
agents can only reach the API by hand-rolling a localhost fallback
- **Expected behavior:** the run env inherits the operator-configured
`PAPERCLIP_API_URL`, as documented in
`docs/deploy/environment-variables.md` ("preserves the value", run-level
var "inherits the server-level value")
- **Steps to reproduce:** (1) set `PAPERCLIP_AUTH_PUBLIC_BASE_URL` to an
address not reachable from inside the server container, (2) set
`PAPERCLIP_API_URL=http://localhost:3100` in the server env, (3) trigger
any agent run and inspect the spawned process env: it carries the
derived URL, not the override
- **Version/commit:** reproduced on the `91e58acb` image (2026-07-19);
the precedence is unchanged on current `master` (`a3b293e`)
- **Deployment mode:** single-host Docker Compose, local adapters
(`claude_local`/`codex_local`), web UI exposed via VPN/tailnet only
## Related PRs (dedup search)
Several in-flight PRs touch the same pain point (runs receiving an
unreachable injected API URL) — linked for reviewer context; none of
them honors the documented explicit override, and the older ones appear
stale:
- #9916 — reworks `PAPERCLIP_RUNTIME_API_URL` derivation and port
preservation (server side); complementary, does not change run-env
precedence
- #8130 — honors a pre-set `PAPERCLIP_RUNTIME_API_URL` (server side); a
complementary escape hatch via the runtime var instead of the documented
`PAPERCLIP_API_URL` override
- #8025 — heuristic: prefer loopback when the runtime bind is loopback
(no activity since Jun 12)
- #5692 — heuristic loopback-safe URL inside `buildPaperclipEnv` (no
activity since May 14)
- #4877 — broader same-host injection rework across 10 files (no
activity since May 2)
- #4794 — always forces loopback for spawned agents (no activity since
Apr 30; would break split-horizon setups where a reachable non-loopback
URL is intended)
This PR intentionally takes the Path-1 route from CONTRIBUTING: the
smallest possible change (swap two lines so the documented operator
override wins) plus regression tests, rather than a new heuristic.
## What Changed
- `packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.ts`: `buildPaperclipEnv` now
resolves the injected URL as `PAPERCLIP_API_URL ??
PAPERCLIP_RUNTIME_API_URL ?? http://<listen-host>:<port>` (explicit
override first), with a short comment explaining why
- `packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts`: three new tests
covering the override precedence, the derived-URL fallback, and the
listen-host default (including the `0.0.0.0` to `localhost` mapping)
- `server/src/__tests__/paperclip-env.test.ts`: updated the expectation
that encoded the old runtime-URL-first precedence and added the
symmetric fallback case (runtime URL used when no explicit override is
set)
- No docs changes needed: `docs/deploy/environment-variables.md` already
describes the fixed behavior
## Verification
- `vitest run` on the new `buildPaperclipEnv` tests in
`packages/adapter-utils`: 3/3 pass
- `vitest run` on `server/src/__tests__/paperclip-env.test.ts` after the
expectation update: 5/5 pass (the first CI run correctly flagged the one
test that encoded the old precedence)
- Reproduced and verified on a production deployment (single-host
Docker, `PAPERCLIP_AUTH_PUBLIC_BASE_URL` on a tailnet-only address):
- Before: freshly spawned runs received
`PAPERCLIP_API_URL=http://100.x.y.z:3100` (verified in the spawned
process `/proc/<pid>/environ`); `curl` to it from inside the container
exits 7
- After (with `PAPERCLIP_API_URL=http://localhost:3100` in the compose
environment): a fresh run received `http://localhost:3100`, and `curl
$PAPERCLIP_API_URL/api/agents/me` with the run-scoped key returned HTTP
200; the run finished `succeeded` with usage telemetry recorded
## Risks
- Low. Behavior changes only for deployments that explicitly set
`PAPERCLIP_API_URL`; when unset (the default),
`PAPERCLIP_RUNTIME_API_URL` is used exactly as before
- The sandbox callback bridge (`execution-target.ts`) is intentionally
untouched: remote sandboxes genuinely need the publicly reachable URL,
and its `input.hostApiUrl || PAPERCLIP_RUNTIME_API_URL || ...` chain
still provides it
## Model Used
- Claude Fable 5 (Anthropic, model ID `claude-fable-5`), extended
thinking + agentic tool use via Claude Code, operating over SSH against
the affected deployment
## Checklist
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
---------
Co-authored-by: Sergio-LPA <204395363+Sergio-LPA@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
||
|
Eric BrookfieldandClaude Fable 5
|
c6727e7b20 |
fix(server): don't implicitly reopen a blocked issue when the same PATCH wires blockers (#10269)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Issues coordinate that work, and first-class blockers
(`blockedByIssueIds`) are how dependent work auto-resumes when its
prerequisites finish
> - A human commenting on a blocked issue implicitly reopens it to
`todo` — a deliberate heuristic so "please continue" comments revive
parked work
> - But that heuristic evaluates the issue's *pre-update* blocker set,
ignoring blockers being wired in by the very same PATCH
> - So the natural repair action for a bare-blocked issue — one PATCH
adding `blockedByIssueIds` plus an explanatory comment — silently flips
the issue to `todo`, contradicting the dependency edit it just made
> - This pull request suppresses the implicit reopen when the request
itself declares a non-empty blocker list
> - The benefit is that structured dependency edits always win over the
conversational-comment heuristic, so blocked issues keep their intended
waiting posture and auto-resume via `issue_blockers_resolved` as
designed
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No existing issue describes this exact behavior; per the bug-report
template:
- **What happened:** On a `blocked` issue with an empty blocker set, a
board user sent one `PATCH /api/issues/:id` containing
`blockedByIssueIds: ["<unresolved-issue-id>"]` and a `comment`. The
response showed `status: "todo"` — the implicit comment-reopen fired
even though the same request wired an unresolved blocker. A follow-up
`PATCH { status: "blocked" }` was then needed to restore the waiting
posture (and because the blocker array replaces on every update, the two
fields had to be re-sent together).
- **Expected behavior:** A request that explicitly declares dependencies
is stating that the issue is waiting on other work. The implicit reopen
exists for plain conversational comments; it should not override a
structured dependency edit made in the same request.
- **Steps to reproduce:** (1) Create issue A with `status: "blocked"`
and no blockers; (2) as a board user, `PATCH /api/issues/A` with `{
"blockedByIssueIds": ["<id of an open issue>"], "comment": "wiring the
dependency" }`; (3) observe the response/issue status is `todo` instead
of remaining `blocked`.
- **Version/commit:** reproduced on `master` @ `d1b9448b5`.
- **Deployment mode:** `authenticated`, single-host (macOS launchd),
embedded Postgres.
Related (not fixed here): the family of "blocked with empty
`blockedByIssueIds` zombie" reports — Refs #9201, Refs #6523 — this bug
is one way an issue's status and blocker list end up contradicting each
other; and Refs #8062, which proposes a different auto-transition at the
status/blocker boundary.
## What Changed
- `shouldImplicitlyMoveCommentedIssueToTodo`
(server/src/routes/issues.ts) accepts an optional
`requestAddsExplicitBlockers` input and returns `false` when set,
alongside the existing suppression guards, with a comment documenting
the rationale.
- The `PATCH /api/issues/:id` call site passes
`requestAddsExplicitBlockers: Array.isArray(req.body.blockedByIssueIds)
&& req.body.blockedByIssueIds.length > 0`.
- Two route tests in `issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts`: a regression
test (comment + non-empty blocker list on a blocked issue must not flip
status) and a boundary test (comment + `blockedByIssueIds: []` still
implicitly reopens, preserving the existing clear-blockers behavior).
Deliberately unchanged: explicit `reopen`/`resume` flags still behave as
before, and the `POST /comments` route is untouched (its body cannot
carry `blockedByIssueIds`).
## Verification
- `cd server && pnpm vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts` → 74/74 pass.
- Reverting the `issues.ts` change makes the new regression test fail
with `expected 'todo' to be undefined` — it bites.
- `cd server && pnpm tsc --noEmit` → clean.
## Risks
- Low. The change is a single additional suppression guard on the
*implicit* reopen path, scoped to requests that carry a non-empty
`blockedByIssueIds` array; all other reopen behavior is untouched.
- Edge case considered: a request wiring only already-resolved blockers
plus a comment now stays `blocked` instead of implicitly reopening. This
is the conservative reading of caller intent (an explicit dependency
edit), and an explicit `status`/`reopen` in the same request still wins.
## Model Used
- Anthropic Claude — Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), extended thinking
enabled, agentic tool use via Claude Code (CLI). Production repro,
diagnosis, fix, and tests all model-authored under human direction.
## 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 (none
applicable — behavior comment added inline)
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green (pending first CI run on this PR)
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
(pending first review pass)
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
||
|
Jannes Stubbemann
|
6d2eab742f |
fix(server): retry runs that hit a sandbox provider worker restart window instead of failing setup (#10212)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agent runs execute in sandbox environments acquired through provider
plugins (e.g. the Kubernetes sandbox provider)
> - Lease acquisition happens during run setup, before the adapter
executes
> - When a provider plugin's worker is momentarily unavailable (a server
or plugin restart window), lease acquisition throws "Sandbox provider
... is installed via plugin ..., but its worker is not running."
> - The heartbeat setup path records that as a terminal `setup_failed`:
no retry classifier matches the message, so the run dies instantly even
though the worker returns seconds later
> - This PR classifies that transient condition as retryable
infrastructure so the run is retried instead of being lost to a restart
blip
> - The benefit is that routine restarts no longer produce spurious
instant run failures
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists; describing inline following the bug
report template.
**What happened**
During a brief sandbox-provider-worker restart window, several runs
failed instantly with `setup_failed` ("... but its worker is not
running."), while runs on the same agent moments earlier and later
succeeded.
**Expected behavior**
A transient, self-healing worker-unavailable condition should schedule a
bounded retry, not terminally fail the run.
**Steps to reproduce**
Trigger a run while the sandbox provider plugin worker is momentarily
unavailable (a server or plugin restart). Lease acquisition throws the
worker-not-running error and the run is finalized as `setup_failed` with
no retry. The recovery test added here reproduces the classification
path.
**Deployment mode**
Cloud multi-tenant execution (Kubernetes sandbox provider plugin).
## What Changed
- Added a dedicated, readable predicate that recognizes the transient
sandbox-provider-worker-unavailable lease failure and treats it as
retryable infrastructure, so the heartbeat schedules a bounded
continuation retry instead of finalizing terminally
- The predicate is anchored to the full lease-failure phrasing (`is
installed via plugin ... but its worker is not running`) so it cannot
match the permanent "provider not installed" message emitted by config
validation
- Added tests proving the readiness poll already waits the full deadline
while the worker handle is absent or `starting` (registered-late
coverage); no poll behavior change was needed
## Verification
- `cd server && npx vitest run
src/__tests__/environment-runtime.test.ts` — poll exhaustion +
registered-late cases
- `npx vitest run src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` —
worker-unavailable message schedules a retry; a non-matching permanent
provider failure still escalates terminally (negative case)
## Risks
Low risk. The retry is bounded by the existing
infrastructure-continuation attempt cap (max 3), the message match is
narrow enough to exclude the permanent provider-not-installed failure
(covered by a negative test), and no readiness-poll or lease-acquisition
behavior changed.
## Model Used
Claude (Anthropic) via Claude Code. Implementation and tests authored by
a Claude Sonnet-class model (`claude-sonnet-5`) dispatched as isolated
per-task implementer agents under a multi-agent orchestration workflow;
root-cause investigation, planning, and two-stage adversarial code
review performed by additional Claude agents. Extended thinking and tool
use enabled throughout.
## 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
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] 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
|
||
|
Jannes StubbemannandClaude Opus 5
|
a0bdf388af |
fix(agents): refuse to hire onto an adapter this instance cannot run (#10256)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Hiring an agent means choosing a harness (adapter) for it, and an
instance can declare which harnesses it actually runs through
`PAPERCLIP_ADAPTERS`, which `reconcileAdapterAvailability` turns into a
disabled set at boot
> - The hire and create routes validate the adapter type with
`assertKnownAdapterType`, which only asks whether the adapter is
REGISTERED — a disabled adapter passes
> - So an agent can be created on a harness the instance cannot run, and
the failure only appears later, per run, at lease time: `Adapter "..."
is not in the configured adapter registry`
> - By then the error is in a run log, minutes after the choice, with
nothing tying it back to the harness the user picked; the agent also
keeps accepting work it can never do
> - This pull request validates the hire and create paths against the
ENABLED set and refuses with a message that names the adapters that are
available
> - The benefit is that an impossible choice fails at the moment it is
made, in the words of the choice itself, instead of as a run failure the
user cannot act on
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No existing issue; describing it here per the bug report template.
**What happened**
On an instance with a curated registry, a company's Chief of Staff was
hired on `cursor_cloud`, which that instance had disabled. The API
accepted the hire. Its first assignment run then failed:
```
Failed to acquire lease for environment "Kubernetes Sandbox" (sandbox): Adapter "cursor_cloud" is not in the configured adapter registry
```
and its automation run sat in `queued` for hours afterwards. Nothing in
the hire response, the agent detail view, or the agent's status
explained that this harness could never run.
**Expected behavior**
hiring on an adapter the instance has disabled is refused at hire time,
with a message naming the adapters that can be chosen.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start the server with a registry that omits an otherwise-registered
adapter, e.g. `PAPERCLIP_ADAPTERS` listing `claude_local` but not
`cursor_cloud`.
2. `POST /api/companies/:companyId/agents` with
`{"name":"CoS","adapterType":"cursor_cloud"}`.
3. The agent is created (201). Every run it attempts fails at lease time
with the message above.
**Paperclip version or commit**
master (`4c55f0d8d`).
## What Changed
- `server/src/routes/agents.ts`: adds `assertSelectableAdapterType`,
which extends `assertKnownAdapterType` with an enabled-set check and
throws `422 Adapter "<type>" is not available on this instance.
Available adapters: <list>`. The hire (`POST .../agent-hires`) and
create (`POST .../agents`) paths now use it.
- Routes that operate on an EXISTING agent keep
`assertKnownAdapterType`, so an agent already running on a
since-disabled adapter is unaffected — the same rule
`listEnabledServerAdapters` already documents ("hidden from selection,
still functional for agents that already use them").
- `server/src/__tests__/agent-adapter-validation-routes.test.ts`: mocks
the adapter-plugin store's disabled set (so the test never writes to a
real `~/.paperclip/adapter-settings.json`), and covers
refuse-when-disabled (including that the message names the alternatives
and that no agent is created) plus create-still-works-when-enabled.
## Verification
```
pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/agent-adapter-validation-routes.test.ts
```
13 tests pass, including the two new cases and the existing
unknown-adapter-type test.
Manual: disable an adapter (`PATCH /api/adapters/:type {"disabled":
true}` as an instance admin, or omit it from `PAPERCLIP_ADAPTERS` and
restart), then POST an agent with that `adapterType` — 422 naming the
available adapters, and no agent row is created.
## Risks
Low, and scoped to new selections:
- Automation that creates agents on a disabled adapter now gets a 422
where it previously got a 201 followed by runs that always failed. That
is the intended behavior change, and the message names the valid
choices.
- Existing agents, and every route that acts on an existing agent, are
untouched.
- The enabled set comes from the same store `GET /api/adapters` already
reports, so the API and the picker cannot disagree.
## Model Used
Claude Opus 5 (Anthropic), model id `claude-opus-5`, 1M context window,
extended thinking, with tool use and code execution via Claude Code.
## 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
(`upstream/adapter-selection-guard`) and contains no internal ticket id
- [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 (the
new helper documents the selection-vs-existing-agent rule)
- [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
Related: #10254 makes the adapter inventory readable during onboarding,
which is what lets the picker hide these adapters in the first place.
This PR is the server-side backstop for the same failure.
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
|