Commit Graph
25 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 6dc36700b1 fix(costs): mark unpriced usage in the agent, model and project cost reports (#20889)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Cost reports show what agents and projects spent
> - A run can have usage with no known price; Paperclip saves it with
costStatus "unpriced" and costCents 0
> - The summary and the provider, biller and user reports count those
events, but the agent, agent-model and project reports did not
> - An agent that read the by-agent-model report saw a native run at
costCents 0 and told the person it cost $0.00
> - This pull request adds unpricedEventCount to those three reports and
tells agents what it means
> - The benefit is that missing charges are reported as unpriced, not as
free

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**
In the chat eval budgets-costs.spend-breakdown, the person asked "How
much did Launch cost this week, broken down by agent?". The week
included a real native run whose usage had no known price (data-quality
reason missing_price). The agent read /costs/by-agent-model and
/costs/by-project. Both returned costCents 0 for that usage and no
unpriced count. The reply showed "1 native run ($0.00)" and gave the
total as complete.

**Expected behavior**
The reports say which rows include unpriced usage. The agent says that
usage is unpriced, marks the total incomplete, and links the record.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Record one priced and one unpriced metered cost event for an agent in
a project.
2. Call GET /api/companies/{companyId}/costs/by-agent, /by-agent-model
and /by-project.
3. See costCents counts only the priced event, and no field shows the
unpriced event.

## What Changed

- `costService.byAgent`, `byAgentModel` and `byProject` return
`unpricedEventCount` (same filter as the summary: unpriced and not
subscription_included).
- Shared types `CostByAgent`, `CostByAgentModel` and `CostByProject` add
`unpricedEventCount`.
- The OpenAPI catalog entries for the cost reports that count unpriced
usage now say that costCents counts priced usage only, that unpriced
usage must be reported as unpriced (never $0.00), and that
/costs/data-quality lists those runs.
- Tests: embedded-Postgres service test (red on master, green here) and
an OpenAPI description test. A UI test fixture adds the new field.

## Verification

- `npx vitest run src/__tests__/costs-service.test.ts` (19 passed). The
new test fails with the master service.
- `npx vitest run src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts
src/services/native-runtime/runner-api.test.ts` (2146 passed).
- `tsc --noEmit` for packages/shared and server.

## Risks

- Low risk. One added aggregate column per report and an added response
field. The UI does not read it yet.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), tool use and code
execution in 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 (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 13:36:03 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 c02de922af fix(chat): deliver the person's time zone to chat agents (#20898)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - People talk to agents in chat, and agents create routines and other
scheduled work from that chat
> - Paperclip does not record the person's time zone, so a chat agent
cannot read "every weekday at nine" or "today" in the person's zone
> - The agent then saves schedules in UTC, and the person gets the work
at the wrong hour
> - This pull request saves the browser time zone with the person's
personal preferences and gives it to chat agents in the task prompt
> - The benefit is that schedules and dates from chat match the person's
local time

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**
A person in America/Chicago wrote in chat: "Every weekday at nine in the
morning, summarize Launch for me." The agent saved the routine schedule
`0 9 * * 1-5` with the UTC time zone. It replied that it used UTC
because the person's time zone is not recorded.

**Expected behavior**
The agent knows the person's time zone. It saves one enabled `0 9 * *
1-5` schedule with the time zone America/Chicago. Its reply names the
zone.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open the board in a browser with the time zone America/Chicago.
2. Open a chat with an agent.
3. Send "Every weekday at nine in the morning, summarize Launch for me."
4. Look at the routine trigger that the agent creates. Its time zone is
UTC.

## What Changed

- Database: add the nullable `time_zone` column to
`user_workspace_preferences` (migration `0468`). This is an
instance-wide personal preference by user, as AGENTS.md section 5
permits.
- Shared: `WorkspacePreference` has `timeZone`.
`updateWorkspacePreferenceSchema` accepts an optional IANA `timeZone`
(max 64 characters, checked with `Intl.DateTimeFormat`).
`coordinatorWorkspaceEnabled` is now optional. The request must contain
at least one field.
- Server: the preference service returns `timeZone` and updates only the
fields in the request. The activity log entry stays the same. The
OpenAPI entry uses the shared schema.
- UI: a new `useBrowserTimeZoneSync` hook in `Layout` saves the browser
time zone one time when it is different from the saved zone. It is
silent and best-effort. It uses the selected company as the audit
context.
- Prompt: for a conversation (any adapter), the task context reads the
chat owner's saved zone. Recovery keeps the zone that the first turn
admitted. The chat block adds one line only when the zone is known:
`The person's time zone is America/Chicago (from their browser). Read
times and dates they give, such as "nine in the morning" or "today", in
that zone, and save schedules such as routine triggers with that
timezone; say the zone when you report a schedule.`

## Verification

- `cd server && npx vitest run
src/__tests__/workspace-preferences.test.ts
src/__tests__/workspace-preferences-routes.test.ts
src/services/heartbeat/task-markdown.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-task-context.test.ts
src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts
src/services/native-runtime/runner-api.test.ts`
- `cd ui && npx vitest run src/hooks/useBrowserTimeZoneSync.test.tsx
src/hooks/useCoordinatorWorkspaceEnabled.test.tsx
src/components/Layout.test.tsx`
- Red/green: without the task-context and task-markdown changes, the two
new prompt tests fail. With the changes, they pass.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` is clean. `tsc --noEmit` passes for
`packages/shared` and `packages/db`.
- Manual: open the board in a browser with a non-UTC zone. Then ask a
chat agent to create a weekday routine at nine in the morning. The
trigger uses the browser zone.

## Risks

- Low risk. The migration adds one nullable column.
- The PUT body is now more flexible: `coordinatorWorkspaceEnabled` is
optional. An empty body still gets a 400 response.
- The prompt grows by one line only for conversations with a known zone.
- The saved zone changes when the person uses a browser in a different
zone. The latest browser wins.

> 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

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), with tool use and code
execution in 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 (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 13:11:57 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 683fd1e9a5 test(restart-chaos): cells for staging's no-restart failures (re-wake, Nth recovery step, long turn, K15 without volume) (#20893)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The restart-chaos harness (`tests/restart-chaos/`) tests that agent
work survives control-plane faults
> - In one 8-hour staging window, 20 of 25 failed runs happened with no
restart at all, so the harness did not see them
> - The harness had blind spots: one short task per agent, no wake right
after a successful run, no fault in a later recovery step, short turns,
and a redeploy that always keeps its instance home
> - This pull request adds cells for those shapes, so the harness
reproduces these failure classes on master
> - The benefit is that fixes for these classes can be proven red and
green with the harness, without staging

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
On staging, an agent ran 10–13 tasks at once on reused sandboxes. 30–60
s after a long run succeeded, an ordinary wake (a comment or an issue
monitor) started the next run of the same task. That run or its recovery
failed before any provider work, with errors such as
`runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`, `Controller journal drain
timed out` and `journal_tool_input_unanswered`. Other failures happened
in a later recovery step (a held agent-directory lock, a missing runtime
asset after a deploy without a volume).

**Expected behavior**
The chaos harness can reproduce each of these shapes on demand, and
grades them: no failed attempt, every task `done`, and no task left
blocked without a working Retry.

**Steps to reproduce**
See the commands in the README sections "Re-wake after success", "Fail
the Nth recovery step", "Long turn" and "Redeploy without a volume, with
overlap".

Related: #20844 (session fault SR1). W2C is the configuration change
after a successful run; SR1 is the same change while a question is
parked. This PR does not add or change `session-faults.ts`.

## What Changed

- New workloads W2, W2Q, W2C (`rewake.ts`): phase 1 ends with the task
left open; the harness, as the board, wakes the same task the seeded
0–60 s after its run settled. W2 uses a comment or a board-scheduled
issue monitor (by nonce). W2Q parks on an unanswered
`request_human_input` question and is woken by a comment before the
answer. W2C changes the agent's `adapterConfig.idleTimeoutMs` before the
wake. Oracle: phase 1 succeeded, the wake was served by a run that
succeeded, `no_failed_attempt`, `done`, markers.
- `--faults K0`: cells with no fault, for workloads whose shape is the
fault.
- `--fail-recovery-step <step>[:<nth>]` (`recovery-step-faults.ts`):
when the wave's first restart fault starts its replacement, the harness
arms one crash point in a new fail mode; the nth hit throws the error of
the real step, once. Steps: `runnerd-start` (`spawn paperclip-runnerd
EAGAIN`), `teardown` (provider destroy did not finish), `directory-lock`
(`Agent directory operation is already active`). Crossed tasks get
`recovery_step_failed_once` and `no_failed_attempt`.
- Crash points (`packages/shared/src/crash-points.ts`): fail mode in the
control file (`<token> <name>:<nth> fail [pid=<n>]`), with an optional
call-site error; `pid=` binds the line to one server process. The
harness arms the step for the replacement only and disarms it once its
receipt lands. New point
`agent_directory.operation_lock.before_acquire`. The teardown point
moved into its `try`, so fail mode behaves like a failed provider
destroy; kill mode is unchanged. All points stay disarmed under
`NODE_ENV=production`. The runner package's own crash-point copy is not
changed (runner image content ID unchanged).
- `--long-turn-minutes <n>` (`long-turn.ts`, 15–60, opt-in): every
task's first turn runs rounds of real tool work for n minutes before its
workload. Checks `long_turn_rounds` and `long_turn_run_observed`.
- K15 `--k15-fresh-home` (Daytona) and `--k15-overlap-seconds
<min>-<max>` (`redeploy.ts`, `supervisor.ts`, `edge-proxy.ts`): each
deploy generation gets a new, empty instance home and no volume
variables; the next generation boots beside the old one behind an edge
proxy on the wave's port, takes traffic once ready, and the old one gets
SIGTERM after the overlap.
- `tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.json`: refreshed pins for
the changed shared crash-point files.
- README: one section per new cell, with what it covers.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/restart-chaos/vitest.config.ts`
(48 files, 581 tests after rebasing on master, includes the new
`shape-cells.test.ts`).
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/crash-points.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/crash-point-call-sites.test.ts` (fail mode, call
sites).
- `node scripts/typecheck-test-projects.mjs tests/restart-chaos`.
- Chaos waves on master `1d67e309e0` server code (Daytona image
`ghcr.io/paperclipai/paperclip-daytona-runner@sha256:99fc2671fc320816407f63cffd3acbd27471621febcd26494fe25bb5d7c5dd77`,
content ID `1836c515…`), all RED unless noted:

| Cell | Wave | Result on master | Staging class |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| W2/W2Q/W2C, 10 tasks on one Codex agent, `--daytona-warm`, K0 |
`w-20261111T163206-s5201` | 9/10 fail. 3 tasks (W2 t02, W2C t03, t06):
first fault `native_runner_process_exited`, same-run reattach,
`native.remote_runner_recovery_failed` with `stage:
process_verification`, `reason: process_not_running`, `runnerLifecycle:
ready`, `runnerSettled: false`, terminal
`runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`, "Workspace repair
required". 3 tasks (t04, t08, t10): `native_restart_recovery_blocked`
(`native_retry_source_superseded`) while its successor ran (R4
`concurrent_runs`). 3 W2Q tasks: the answer's continuation was cancelled
`issue_not_in_progress` (status `blocked`), and the task needed Retry. 2
W2C tasks then looped: 60+ succeeded runs in 20 minutes on an
`in_progress` task. | D′/T terminal step reproduced with no restart, no
governed wait and no PRP timeout (same error code and refusal fields).
C+ retry outcome (ownership ambiguous) reproduced as
`native_restart_recovery_blocked`. Not reproduced: `Controller journal
drain timed out`, `did not durably suspend`,
`journal_tool_input_unanswered`. |
| Same, local `--lifecycle warm` | `w-20261111T160103-s5101` | 4/10
fail. 3/3 W2Q: continuation cancelled `issue_not_in_progress`, Retry
needed. 1 W2C: the same `in_progress` run loop (39+ runs). | The
remote-runner classes need a remote runner; locally they do not show. |
| `--fail-recovery-step runnerd-start:1`, K1 at 10 s, local A1 |
`w-20261111T162432-s5303` | Fail. After K1 the first runnerd start of
recovery failed (`spawn paperclip-runnerd EAGAIN`); the run ended
`native_provider_terminal_failed` ("previous turn is no longer active",
"Automatic recovery stopped") and needed Retry. Control, same seed and
K1 without the step fault (`w-20261111T171114-s5303`): pass. | A later
recovery step that fails once ends the run instead of trying again (the
A-chain shape). |
| `runnerd-start:2`, local | `w-20261111T170909-s5304` | Step never
reached: recovery started the runner once and succeeded. Grade fails
`recovery_step_failed_once` (tested nothing). | — |
| `teardown:1`, K1, Daytona A1 | `w-20261111T172048-s5312` | Pass. The
teardown failed once and the sweep settled it. | Not reproduced. |
| `directory-lock:1`, K2, Daytona A1 | `w-20261111T171247-s5311` | Step
never reached by A1 after K2. | Not reproduced; A1 recovery does not
collect remote agent files. |
| K15 `--k15-fresh-home --k15-overlap-seconds 30-150`, `--storage s3`,
Codex and OpenCode, T1/C1 | `w-20261111T173618-s5322` | 1/4 fail
(OpenCode T1): `native_continuation_requires_reconciliation` with "Agent
directory belongs to a different execution environment"; the Retry runs
failed `adapter_failed` "Configured instruction entry is missing"; the
task rests `blocked` on a board recovery action, and two sandboxes were
left (R6). One Codex T1 task finished before its fault
(`fault_crossed_tool`). | A-deploy: a controller-local file missing
after a deploy without a volume. Here the missing file is the agent's
instruction bundle, not a runtime-context asset; whether staging keeps
instruction bundles outside the instance home is not verified. |
| `--long-turn-minutes 15`, K1 at 600 s, local A1 |
`w-20261111T175505-s5401` | Task pass (10/10 rounds, 992 s span, run
1019 s, K1 crossed mid-turn). The wave exited 2 only because I switched
branches in the worktree during the wave. | Shape check only. |


## Risks

- Product code changes are test instrumentation only: three `crashPoint`
call sites take a fail-mode error, and one new call site was added.
Disarmed (always in production) each call is one comparison. Moving the
teardown point into its `try` does not change kill mode: the process
dies at the same instant.
- The new cells are opt-in. Default waves plan the same tasks as before
for the same seed.
- The W2 cells depend on model behaviour (phase 1 leaves the task open).
The oracle records the task status at the wake.
- `--k15-fresh-home` drops everything under the instance home. Whether
staging keeps agent instruction bundles outside the instance home is not
verified (see the K15 result).

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, agentic coding with
tool use (shell, file edits, test and chaos runs) in 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 (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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 12:58:41 -06:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip 5dfbb04b85 Poll asynchronous workspace provider preparation (#20865)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip starts agent runs through a workspace provider when a
project uses remote storage.
> - The provider must prepare the workspace before the agent starts.
> - One long worker call ties the checkout to its transport.
> - Some checkouts take longer than the transport allows.
> - This change lets an opted-in provider accept work and report its
deadline.
> - Core waits for completion through short status calls and stops at
the provider deadline.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A workspace provider can lose its reply when preparation takes longer
than a single transport request. This stops run bootstrap before agent
execution.

**Expected behavior**

Core should wait for a provider-confirmed workspace through short
requests. The provider's deadline must bound the wait.

**Steps to reproduce**

Use a workspace provider that takes longer to prepare a checkout than
its transport can remain open. Start a run that requires a new checkout.

## What Changed

- Add an optional workspace preparation method to the plugin SDK.
- Validate pending receipts and keep the original binding checks on
completed replies.
- Poll only during active preparation. Retry a lost status reply within
the advertised deadline.
- Preserve the original operation for providers that do not offer
asynchronous preparation.
- Reject deadline offers that exceed the existing lifecycle lock budget.
Honor accepted offers without shortening them.
- Checkout verification uses the existing synchronous RPC with a
10-second deadline and a 12-second transport timeout. [Core verification
PR #20876](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/20876)

## Verification

- All 63 workspace SDK and Core integration tests passed with temporary
local PostgreSQL. The tests cover lost status replies, deadline expiry,
oversized offers, and synchronous verification with an async-capable
worker.
- All 58 runner SDK input, evidence, and public type tests passed with
the regenerated source pins. The local server typecheck passed.

## Risks

- This change activates only when the provider advertises the method.
Existing providers keep their current behavior.
- Polling uses one-second intervals during active preparation. It stops
at completion, failure, or the provider deadline.
- No database migration is required.

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-6 Codex with local code execution 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] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-11-11 10:33:02 -08:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip b2edea5754 fix(workspaces): verify existing worktrees before fresh retries (#20876)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages work for AI agents.
> - Retry checks whether the task can keep its existing workspace.
> - A provider can complete checkout before Core receives the result.
> - Recreating a completed worktree costs time and can change its base
commit.
> - Core uses the same ownership and writer checks for local and
provider workspaces.
> - The provider verifies its checkout before Core creates a fresh
workspace.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A retry can allocate a new provider worktree even though the original
checkout completed.

**Steps to reproduce**

Complete workspace checkout through a storage provider. Fail Runner
startup or lose the prepare reply. Retry the task.

**Expected behavior**

Reuse the same worktree when the provider confirms checkout and the
prior run can no longer write to it.

Related: #20865 addresses timeouts while the original prepare is in
progress. This PR checks an earlier checkout when the user retries.

## What Changed

- Check the prior task binding and writer state before asking a storage
provider to verify a checkout.
- Extend the existing prepare operation with an optional verification
mode. Providers opt in through their manifest.
- Return through normal workspace reuse after verification. Keep the
fresh retry fallback when verification cannot establish checkout.

## Verification

- Core workspace preparation, plugin workspace ownership, retry
continuity, and SDK workspace-provider suites passed locally (213
tests).
- Focused cases pass for provider verification, retry through heartbeat
dispatch, and real local Git checkout verification with no plugin
worker. The heartbeat test confirms that ordinary preparation and
adapter dispatch keep the original workspace, branch, and base commit.
- Core server typecheck passed before the final audit and timing edits.
GitHub CI covers the final revision and broader regressions.

## Risks

Provider verification adds one bounded call before a fresh retry. Older
providers keep their current behavior. Verification must preserve the
workspace, branch, and recorded base commit. The normal execution
preparation checks still run before admission. No database migration is
needed.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 (Codex), with source inspection 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 linked existing issues or described the issue in-PR
following the relevant issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal issue
details
- [x] I have run targeted 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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-11-11 18:04:18 +00:00
Nicky LeachandClaude Opus 5.5 369e238295 fix(projects): make workspace storage the project's only placement choice (#20835)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A repository project gets its working files from core staging or
from a workspace storage plugin
> - #20459 reported that an installed storage plugin attached every new
repository project, so sandbox agents could not use those projects
> - #20587 fixed creation with an **Available in** choice that selects
storage
> - #20651 then saved an environment on every new project and used it
before the agent default to place runs. That solved a problem that did
not exist: the project needs storage, not a run environment
> - Creation saves the first environment of the chosen group, so a
project silently sends every agent's runs to that environment. Project
Configuration also shows two controls (Environment and Workspace
storage) for one decision
> - This pull request removes the project run environment and makes
storage the only placement choice a project owns. Storage is fixed at
creation
> - The benefit is that runs follow the agent again, and project
settings show one clear, read-only fact about storage

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20459. Follow-up to #20587 and #20651.

Refs #11644. That issue asks for a project-level run environment
override. This pull request removes the override that #20651 added for
it, because the override is not necessary to fix #20459. #11644 stays a
separate feature request.

Related: #18176 (open) repairs placement through the legacy
workspace-policy field. This pull request does not restore project
placement, so it conflicts with the direction of #18176.

## What Changed

- **Remove the project run environment.** Migration `0466` drops
`projects.environment_id`. Run placement no longer reads the project.
Runs use the agent default, then the instance default, then local
execution. The low-trust task sandbox and the enforced sandbox policies
keep their precedence.
- **Keep the #20651 recovery and binding guards.** A recovered run still
uses its admitted environment lease (source `run`). Company-binding
checks before admission and during lease creation stay.
- **Keep the creation choice.** **Available in** in New Project still
selects storage. It still shows only when the environments need more
than one storage owner. That can only occur when a storage plugin is
installed. `POST /projects` with `environmentId` selects the storage of
that environment and does not save the environment.
- **Fix storage at creation.** `PATCH /projects/:id` rejects any storage
change with `409 project_storage_locked`, from core to a plugin and from
a plugin to core. Before, a core project could move to a plugin.
- **Drop legacy writes.** Older clients can still send
`executionWorkspacePolicy.environmentId`. The service removes it on
create and update.
- **Simplify Project Configuration.** Remove the Environment and
Workspace storage selectors. Show an advisory **Available in** list of
the environments that can use the project's storage. Show it when a
storage plugin is installed or when the project uses one. When the
project's plugin is not installed, show **Storage plugin unavailable**.
Without a storage plugin, show nothing.
- **Issue workspace card.** Remove the "project default" environment
label.
- **Shared contract.** Remove `Project.environmentId`, the
`environmentId` project field, and `expectedStorageProviderPluginId`
from the update schema. The create schema keeps `environmentId` and
`expectedStorageProviderPluginId` from #20587.
- **Docs and maps.** Update `doc/project-environment-compatibility.md`,
`docs/api/goals-and-projects.md`, and the project feature and
agent-access maps.
- **SDK source pins.** Refresh
`tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.json` for the two shared
files. The shared file blobs return to their values before #20651. The
refresh also corrects the `pnpm-lock.yaml` pin and `lockSha256`:
`master` pins an older lockfile blob than the one it contains.

## Verification

- Targeted server suites pass (227 tests): `project-environments`,
`project-workspace-provider.integration`,
`heartbeat/environment-selection`, `execution-workspace-policy`,
`environment-selection-route-guards`, `environment-run-orchestrator`,
`openapi-routes`.
- Related server suites pass (349 tests): `environment-service`,
`environment-routes`, `plugin-workspaces.integration`, `issues-service`.
- Targeted UI suites pass: `ProjectProperties.concurrency`,
`IssueWorkspaceCard`, `NewProjectDialog`,
`NewProjectDialog.managed-sandbox`, `ProjectDetail`.
- New tests:
- Creation saves storage, not an environment. Core and plugin projects
both reject a storage change with `project_storage_locked`.
  - A legacy policy `environmentId` is dropped on create and update.
- A new run follows the agent default for any project. A recovered run
keeps its admitted lease after the agent default changes.
- Project Configuration has no storage or environment selector. The note
is hidden without a plugin. It lists the core or plugin environments for
the project's storage. It shows **Storage plugin unavailable** for a
removed plugin.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`, `pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/ui typecheck`, and `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared
typecheck` pass.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db check:migrations`, `pnpm
check:token-gates`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `node
tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs <HEAD> --check` pass.
- Not run locally: the full `pnpm test:run`, `pnpm build`, and browser
suites. CI supplies that coverage.
- Manual check: open Project Configuration on an instance with a storage
plugin. Confirm that there is no Environment or Workspace storage
selector, and that **Available in** lists the environments.

## Risks

- **Migration.** `0466` drops `projects.environment_id` and its foreign
key. The migration deletes the saved project environments. Apply it
before you serve the new revision. An old server revision that reads
`projects` fails until it stops. This is the same pattern as earlier
drop-column migrations (`0229`, `0289`).
- **Behavior change for existing projects.** Projects created after
#20651 shipped have a saved environment that overrides the agent. After
this change, their runs follow the agent default again. This is the
intended fix. Before #20651, a project environment selection was not
applied to runs (#11644), so no older behavior is lost.
- **No path from core to a plugin.** A core project, including one
created before a plugin was installed, cannot move to the plugin. To use
plugin storage, create a new project.
- **API.** A `PATCH` that sends `environmentId` or
`expectedStorageProviderPluginId` no longer has an effect. The schema
strips these fields.

> 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 Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`) by Anthropic, in Claude Code, with
tool use (shell, file edits, test runs). Extended thinking was
available.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 08:00:21 -08:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 0b8ba1ac92 fix(queue): show messages a booting run's first turn takes as sent (#20822)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Task chat lets a person send follow-up messages to a running agent,
and steer them into the live turn
> - A sandboxed run (for example on Daytona) can take minutes to boot
before its provider session exists
> - A message sent during that boot cannot be steered, so it waits in
the steering pane
> - The runner then puts the message into its first turn, and the server
removes it from the queue, but the view has no signal for this, so the
message stays in the steering pane as "queued"
> - That stale local entry also hides the queue id, so Steer and Discard
fail for every later message
> - This pull request tells the view which messages the first turn
takes, and drops local queue entries whose run has settled
> - The benefit is that a message sent while the sandbox boots shows as
sent at once, and later messages keep working Steer and Discard

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
A person sent a follow-up while the agent's sandbox was booting. The
message stayed in the steering pane with Steer unavailable. After the
agent started, the message stayed there. The agent had received it in
its first turn. Later, Discard on that message failed with "Couldn't
discard. Message is still queued.", and a new message also stayed in the
steering pane.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Assign a task to a Paperclip Runner agent that runs in a Daytona
sandbox.
2. While the sandbox boots, send a follow-up message.
3. Wait for the agent's first response. The message is still in the
steering pane.
4. After the run hands off to a successor run, send another message and
try to discard the first one.

**Expected behavior**
A message sent while the run is starting shows as a sent message. Later
messages keep working Steer and Discard.

**Actual behavior**
The first message stays in the steering pane. Discard fails, and the new
message cannot be steered until the page reloads.

## What Changed

- `firstTurnQueuedCommentIds` (server, `first-turn-queued-input.ts`)
returns the messages in a deferred queue that the target run's first
turn already sealed, or will take while it is still starting. It uses
the same eligibility rule as `claimFirstTurnQueuedInput`. It reads only
lean columns, so the queue poll does not transfer run snapshots or large
wake payloads.
- The queue read path and the queue mutation path both put these ids in
a new optional `firstTurnCommentIds` field on `IssueQueuedCommentQueue`.
- The task view puts each of those messages in the conversation as input
of that run, at its submission time, and not in the steering pane.
- The task view no longer treats a saved message as a pending local
queue entry after its target run is no longer live. A request that is
still in flight keeps its original target.

## Verification

- Red-green server test: `issue-queued-comments-routes.test.ts` "reports
the messages a preparing/native run's first turn takes, before and after
it seals them" and "reports no first-turn messages once the run's turn
already started". Before the fix, `firstTurnCommentIds` was `undefined`.
- Red-green UI tests: `IssueDetail.test.tsx` "shows a message the
booting run's first turn takes as sent, not queued" (still starting, and
sealed) and "keeps queue controls for a new message after the run that
took an earlier one hands off". Before the fix, the queue held
`['new-message', 'boot-message']` and the queue id was withheld.
- Reproduced on staging first: the run's context held a first-turn
receipt for the stuck message, and the server queue had no entries,
while the view still showed it as queued.
- `npx vitest run` for `issue-queued-comments-routes`,
`queued-comment-consumption`, `queued-comment-postgres`,
`queued-comment-use-cases`: 172 passed. The existing queue-poll byte
budget tests still pass.
- `npx vitest run src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx
src/components/task-chat src/lib/issue-queued-comment-queue
src/lib/optimistic-issue-comments`: 1288 passed.
- `tsc --noEmit` for shared, server, and ui: no new errors.
- `pnpm verify` exits 2 because the change touches `packages/shared`.
Required CI supplies the broad coverage.

## Risks

- Low risk. The new field is optional and only for display. Delivery
still belongs to the first-turn claim and the deferred wake.
- If a starting run fails before its first turn, the field goes away and
the message shows in the queue again for the next run. This is correct,
because the deferred wake still holds it.
- The queue read adds one lean run read and one comment read only while
a deferred queue targets a running run.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, in Claude Code with
tool use (shell, file edits, browser).

## Checklist

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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 15:52:14 +00:00
github-actions[bot]andlockfile-bot 1d67e309e0 chore(lockfile): refresh pnpm lockfiles (#20845)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip uses a dependency lock for reproducible builds.
> - Dependency changes on master need matching lock entries.
> - Paid eval reports also pin a reviewed offline correction.
> - Reports must install before paid model work starts.
> - This automated PR keeps the lock and report proof together.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Dependency manifests on master changed after the last committed lock
refresh.

**Expected behavior**

Frozen installs must match those manifests. Eval reports must retain
matching offline lock proof.

**Steps to reproduce**

Run a frozen install before and after this lock refresh.

## What Changed

- Refresh the dependency lock from the manifests on master.
- Refresh the sandbox provider lockfiles from their manifests on master.
- Include the matching offline report correction and hashes.
- Resync the SDK public source proof's lock pins from the refreshed
lock.

## Verification

- Pinned pnpm resolution completed with lifecycle scripts disabled.
- The report proof refresh accepted the reviewed committed baseline.
- The workflow rejected changes outside the lock and report proof files.

## Risks

The lockfile bot merges this PR without CI or review when every added
package version is at least 3 days old on npm. Otherwise the PR waits
for a maintainer, and the daily refresh tries again. The bot merges only
the exact commit this workflow generated from manifests already reviewed
on master. Unknown report lock baselines remain blocked. This update
changes no permissions or paid enable gates.

## Model Used

None — generated by pnpm and the deterministic report-lock updater.

## Checklist

- [x] Thinking path and problem description included
- [x] Generated lock and matching report proof included
- [x] Release-age gate decides between bot merge and maintainer review

Co-authored-by: lockfile-bot <lockfile-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-11-11 15:28:49 +00:00
Nicky LeachandClaude Opus 5.5 ff8ec41e6a feat(runner): upgrade ACPX to 0.22.0 and move patched behavior into Paperclip (#20770)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Paperclip Runner and the shared `adapter-utils` engine run ACP
agents through the embedded ACPX library
> - Paperclip pins ACPX 0.13.1 and keeps a large patch
(`patches/acpx@0.13.1.patch`) on it
> - ACPX 0.22.0 adds host hooks (`onAcpMessage`, `assertActive`,
`processLifecycle`, prompt-response `_meta`, `spawnAgent`-friendly
launch) that make much of that patch unnecessary
> - A large patch is expensive to port and hides behavior that belongs
to Paperclip
> - This pull request upgrades to ACPX 0.22.0 and moves most patched
behavior into Runner and `adapter-utils`
> - The benefit is a patch that is 484 lines instead of 1,334, with the
moved behavior covered by Paperclip tests

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20675, #14430, #15075, #17942, #9980

**Proposed enhancement**
Upgrade the embedded ACPX library from 0.13.1 to 0.22.0. Keep only the
patch behavior that stock 0.22 cannot express.

**Motivation**
The 0.13.1 patch held behavior that Paperclip owns, for example usage
receipts, Copilot policy, model checks and the agent environment. Each
ACPX upgrade had to port all of it. ACPX 0.22 gives hooks that let
Paperclip do this work itself.

**Current behavior**
Runner and `adapter-utils` depend on 1,334 lines of patched ACPX 0.13.1
code.

**Expected behavior**
Runner and `adapter-utils` use ACPX 0.22.0. The patch keeps only:
extension methods, Cursor subagent routing, event `_meta` and the
message boundary chunk, the protocol guard hook, `spawnAgent`, and
`requestExtension`.

## What Changed

- ACPX 0.13.1 → 0.22.0 in Runner, `adapter-utils`, the server, the
Daytona runner images and the qualified profiles (`acpxVersion`).
`@agentclientprotocol/sdk` moves to 1.9.0.
- New `patches/acpx@0.22.0.patch` (484 lines). The 0.12.0 and 0.13.1
patches are removed.
- Delivery receipts: Runner confirms a permission reply when
`onAcpMessage` sees the exact outbound reply. Question and extension
replies count as delivered when Runner hands them back to ACPX. New
`interaction-delivery.ts`.
- Copilot policy: the existing policy function runs from `onAcpMessage`.
A violation stops the agent, cancels later permission requests and fails
the next prompt through `assertActive`.
- Model selection: stock 0.22 validation, plus a sidecar gate
(`createAcpxEffectiveModelGate`) that refuses a prompt if the agent
reports another model. Grok binds its model when the session opens.
Antigravity adds its concrete model to the model list ACPX reads.
- Typed session failures: Runner and `adapter-utils` read them from the
turn result `_meta` and fail the turn. They advertise the capability
themselves.
- Pi and Cursor usage receipts: a collector (`prompt-receipts.ts`) binds
them to the turn's own `session/prompt` reply.
- Goal capability: Runner reads it from the `initialize` reply. It keeps
it under `paperclip.goalCapability` in the saved agent capabilities
`_meta` and restores it when a saved session loads.
- Agent environment: Runner and `adapter-utils` set the agent
environment in `spawnAgent`. ACP terminals keep their current
environment. `adapter-utils` blocks inheritance of `XAI_API_KEY` and
refuses to start if the server has an `ACPX_AUTH_*` variable.
- `adapter-utils` spawn hooks (`spawnCwd`, stderr, `onAgentSpawn`): a
new `stockAcpRuntimeOptions` maps them to stock `spawnAgent` and
`processLifecycle`.
- Windows: ACPX 0.22 rejects raw command strings on Windows.
`adapter-utils` now passes an argv array there.
- Grok rules: a Runner guard (`grok-session-rules.ts`) writes
`session/new` `_meta.rules`.
- Turn-dispatch journal (#20675): ACPX 0.22 ignores errors from
`onAcpMessage`. The adapter keeps a failed `dispatched` write and throws
it from the turn's `assertActive`. ACPX calls `assertActive` before the
prompt write, so the write still stops. The real-ACPX test now checks
this route. `docs/durable-recovery.md` is updated.
- Plan events: the sidecar reads 0.22 `status` events tagged `plan`.
- CI: the backup-checkpoint lane now installs through the shared
`setup-ci-dependencies` action, like PR CI, so it resolves a stale
`pnpm-lock.yaml` in place. It runs on any root `package.json` change,
and pull requests never commit the lockfile, so its own frozen install
failed on dependency changes.
- Tests that checked removed patch internals are removed or rewritten:
the response-delivery, Cursor-usage and Pi-receipt package contracts,
and the goal-persistence packaging test. New unit tests cover the moved
behavior.

## Verification

Local runs on macOS (darwin-arm64), Node 26, on the rebased head:

- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner exec vitest run
src/drivers/acpx src/cli`: 2,000 passed.
- `tsc -p packages/paperclip-runner/tsconfig.json` and
`tsconfig.test.json`: no errors, except the existing
`@paperclipai/paperclip-eval-kernel` build gap in `workflow-harness.ts`.
- Runner package contracts (`node --test
test/acpx-*-package-contract.test.mjs
test/acpx-sidecar-contract.test.mjs`), `scripts/build-inputs.test.mjs`,
`scripts/contracts/contract-fingerprints.test.mjs`,
`scripts/acpx-patch-packaging.test.mjs`: all pass. `node
scripts/generate-acpx-sidecar-contract.mjs --check` passes.
- `cargo test -p paperclip-runner-core --test acpx_park_preparation
--test acpx_park_readiness --test acpx_warm_attachment --test
native_provider_backend`: 86 passed. `cargo fmt --check` passes.
- `adapter-utils`: `tsc` clean. `vitest run src/acpx-engine
src/mcp-isolation.integration.test.ts`: 457 passed (one Gemini flag test
failed once under load and passes when run alone).
- Adapters: `claude-local` and `codex-local` `acp.quota.test.ts` (23 and
39 passed), `grok-local` (149 passed).
- Server: `scripts/prepare-runner-vendor.test.mjs`,
`native-session-executor.test.ts`, `quarantined-task-retry.test.ts`
(1,416 passed).
- `cargo test -p paperclip-runner-core --lib -- previous_acpx_release
acpx_upgrade unrestorable_saved_sessions`: 3 passed. `node --test
test/acpx-session-carry-forward-package-contract.test.mjs`: passes.
- `patch -p1 --forward` on a clean `acpx-0.22.0.tgz` gives output
identical to the port.
- Under full-suite load, some Runner live and recovery tests time out.
Each one passes when run alone. Full regression is left to CI.

Not run: live provider runs (they need provider credentials), the opt-in
Kimi live peer test, the Gemini filesystem smoke test, and Windows.

## Risks

- Previous-release story: sessions saved by the previous release (ACPX
0.13.1) carry forward. ACPX 0.22 loads the session records 0.13.1 wrote.
Runner moves a saved descriptor that names 0.13.1
(`CARRIED_ACPX_RELEASES`) to 0.22.0, and the sidecar keeps 0.13.1 as the
ACPX value in the session identity, so the saved session key and
identity record still match. The existing launch-profile rebind still
decides which sessions resume: a settled session, or the same run's
interrupted turn through lost-turn recovery. A session saved by any
other ACPX release is still refused as `provider_state_incompatible`.
`rules/acpx-profile-identity.mdc` and `docs/durable-recovery.md` now
describe this.
- Proof: `acpx-session-carry-forward-package-contract.test.mjs` resumes
a session record written by the real ACPX 0.13.1 with its Paperclip
patch. 0.22 loads the same provider session (no `session/new`), runs a
turn and keeps the earlier turn. Rust tests cover a settled 0.13.1
session that the next run attaches to, and a turn interrupted by the
upgrade. A recovery-identity test checks that the session key and
identity record match across the versions.
- `pnpm-lock.yaml` is not committed. CI resolves it for each run, and
the lockfile refresh workflow updates it after merge.
- Behavior change on the server: `adapter-utils` refuses to create an
ACPX runtime if the server environment has an `ACPX_AUTH_*` variable.
Before, ACPX ignored such variables. Stock 0.22 would use them to
authenticate agents with server credentials.
- Delivery confirmation is now Runner-owned. A permission reply is
confirmed by the exact outbound message. Question and extension replies
are confirmed when Runner hands them to ACPX, not when the pipe accepts
them.
- Users can select only models that the agent advertises. Stock 0.22
rejects other model IDs (Claude is exempt).
- ACP terminals keep the sidecar or server environment, as before. This
existing exposure is not changed by this pull request.
- The `adapter-utils` Gemini version probe now runs with the server
environment plus the run variables, not the run variables alone.
- The pack contract digest and profile `acpxVersion` change, so Daytona
needs a new runner image.
- Grok launch flags (`--model`, `--reasoning-effort`) were checked on
1.0.13 but session open needs a login, so Grok keeps the existing
`_meta` path.

> 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 Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, in Claude Code with tool
use (shell, file editing, subagents). Extended reasoning was used.

## Checklist

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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 07:28:00 -08:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 34f2bb78ee feat(connections): connect Sentry with a long-lived user auth token (#20823)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents use app connections to call provider tools, such as the
Sentry MCP server
> - The Sentry connection has only one method: browser sign-in through
the hosted MCP OAuth server
> - That grant expires. An unattended triage agent loses Sentry access
until a person signs in again
> - During that time, a scheduled triage routine completes each run but
reads no Sentry data
> - This pull request adds a second Sentry method that uses a user auth
token
> - The benefit is a Sentry connection that stays valid until a person
revokes the token

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**
App connections: the Sentry entry in the connection catalog.

**Problem or motivation**
A Sentry connection that was created with browser sign-in on 2026-10-11
changed to "OAuth authorization expired. Reconnect this app to
continue." at 04:01 UTC on 2026-11-10. The agent that used it had no
Sentry tools after that time. Each hourly triage run reported the
blocker but could not continue. Unattended agents need a Sentry
connection that does not need a person to sign in again each month.

**Proposed solution**
The hosted Sentry MCP server accepts a Sentry user auth token in the
`Authorization: Sentry-Bearer <token>` header. It reserves `Bearer` for
its own OAuth tokens. Paperclip API-key methods already support a custom
header prefix. Add a Sentry API-key method that uses this header.

**Alternatives considered**
Reconnect with browser sign-in again. That restores access only until
the next grant expiry.

## What Changed

- Add the `mcp-user-token` method ("Use a user auth token") to Sentry in
`scripts/ingest-app-definitions.mjs`. It uses the same server URL and
sends the token as `Authorization: Sentry-Bearer <token>`.
- Regenerate `packages/shared/src/app-definitions/sentry.json`. I did
not include unrelated output that the content corpus drift caused for
other providers.
- Add a permission review entry for the new method in
`doc/connections/tool-method-permission-reviews.json`.
- Add a test for the new method and its header prefix.
- Document the token method, its required scopes, and its ownership risk
in `doc/connections/SENTRY.md`.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/app-definitions.test.ts`: 40
passed. The new assertion fails on `master` because Sentry has only one
method there.
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts -t
Sentry` (server): 2 passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/pages/apps/app-connect-policy.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/satisfied-connection-intents.test.ts`: 64 passed.
- `pnpm verify` returned exit 2 (a doc is a global CI input). Required
CI supplies the broad coverage.
- Live probe of `https://mcp.sentry.dev/mcp` with an `initialize`
request: `Authorization: Sentry-Bearer <invalid token>` starts an MCP
session (the token is checked on tool calls). `Authorization: Bearer
<same token>` returns `401 invalid_token`. This confirms the server
accepts the header scheme.
- Not done yet: a real agent tool call with a real token after
deployment.

## Risks

- Low risk. This adds a method. The existing OAuth method and saved
connections do not change.
- A user auth token acts as its creator and lasts until revoked. The
method guidance and docs say this. Rotate the token when that person
leaves.
- If Sentry changes the `Sentry-Bearer` scheme, connections that use
this method fail on tool calls. The OAuth method still works.

> 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 Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`) in Claude Code, with tool use
(shell, browser, web search).

## Checklist

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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 09:26:24 -06:00
Nicky LeachandClaude Opus 5.5 6ce953ca52 fix(runner-e2e): resync the SDK lockfile pins to master's current lock (#20834)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The Runner support suite proves the plugin SDK public types from
pins in `tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.json`
> - Two of those pins follow the root lockfile: the `pnpm-lock.yaml`
blob, and `lockSha256`, which must equal the `outputSha256` in
`tests/runner-e2e/report-lock.json`
> - The lockfile refresh #20824 changed the lockfile and
`report-lock.json`. The registry kept the old values
> - #20623 makes the refresh resync these pins, but its registry values
come from the refresh before #20824
> - The refresh resyncs only when it commits a lockfile change. The
lockfile is current, so the refresh after #20623 did nothing, and the
pins stay stale
> - This pull request regenerates the two pins with the existing
`--write` command
> - The benefit is that `ci / Runner support suite` passes again on
master and on new pull requests

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20824. Refs #20623.

**What happened?**

`ci / Runner support suite` fails on master at `e2cf9a670f` and on pull
requests that merge master. `source-sdk-public-type.test.ts` and
`source-sdk-evidence.test.ts` fail with "Reviewed SDK reference policy
does not match public proof". `source-sdk-public-inputs.test.mjs`
reports `pnpm-lock.yaml (changed)`. The refresh run after #20623 merged
(run 43043576648) logged "Lockfiles and reporting-lock proof unchanged,
nothing to do".

**Expected behavior**

The registry pins the committed lockfile, and `lockSha256` equals the
`outputSha256` in `report-lock.json`.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Check out master at `e2cf9a670f`.
2. Run `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts
tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-type.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-evidence.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.test.mjs`.
3. See the "Reviewed SDK reference policy does not match public proof"
failure.

## What Changed

- `tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.json`: regenerated with
`node tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs $(git rev-parse
HEAD) --write`. Only two values change:
- `inputs["pnpm-lock.yaml"]`: `6d825f97…` → `d24edac1…`, the committed
lockfile blob.
- `lockSha256`: `b3208306…` → `17625672…`, the `outputSha256` in
`report-lock.json`.
- No other pin changes. The lockfile and `report-lock.json` do not
change.

## Verification

- Before the change, the three SDK proof test files fail with the policy
mismatch. After the change, they pass.
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts
tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-type.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-evidence.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.test.mjs
tests/runner-e2e/prepare-report-lock.test.ts`: 4 files, 68 tests pass.
- `node tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs $(git rev-parse
HEAD) --check` reports `changed: false`.
- Local run on macOS (darwin-arm64). Full regression is left to CI.

## Risks

- Low risk. The change is test data only, and it uses the values that
the registry command derives from the committed lockfile and the
reviewed `report-lock.json`.
- The same two values are in #20770. Whichever pull request merges
first, the other one merges cleanly.
- The refresh still resyncs these pins only when it commits a lockfile
change. If the pins become stale with no lockfile change, the refresh
does not repair them, and the support suite shows the failure and the
fix command.

> 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 Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, in Claude Code with tool
use (shell, file editing). Extended reasoning was used.

## Checklist

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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 07:26:18 -08:00
Nicky Leach 4d141cdf64 Carry plugin task refusals and batch project reads (#20762) 2026-11-11 00:49:03 -08:00
DottaandClaude 9574065a28 fix(workspaces): hand on a proven-unchanged preparation epoch instead of abandoning it (#20736)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A native run on a remote sandbox first restores its workspace's
saved version, publishes that root as its dirty epoch, and only then
starts work
> - A restart that kills the run in that window leaves the epoch dirty.
The ownership settle (`settlePreparationOnlyRemoteWorkspaceEpoch`)
always abandons it: the root is forgotten and the retry restores the
saved version into a new directory
> - The saved provider session still names the old directory, which is
what #20712 and #20723 now have to handle
> - In the common case the killed preparation only restored the saved
version and changed nothing. A durable proof for exactly that already
exists (`proveRemoteWorkspaceUnchanged`, used when the next admission
finds an ended writer)
> - This pull request makes the settle use that proof first, and keeps
abandoning whenever the proof fails
> - The benefit is a stable workspace root across a restart during
preparation, with no change for anything unproven

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20712

**What happened?**
In restart-chaos waves, a server kill during a follow-up's preparation
(right after the workspace restore published) made the ownership settle
abandon the epoch. The retry restored into `<workspace>-<epoch>-<lease>`
instead of the published root, and the inherited session checkpoint
named a root that no longer existed.

**Expected behavior**
When durable records prove the killed preparation only restored the
saved version, the workspace is handed on at that saved version and
keeps its root. Anything unproven is abandoned exactly as before.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run a remote native task to a saved version, then start a follow-up
or continuation run.
2. Kill the server after the follow-up's restore publishes (crash point
`remote_workspace.prepare.after_publish_before_provision`).
3. Let ownership reconciliation settle the dirty epoch, then let the
retry prepare.

## What Changed

- `recovery/remote-workspace-unsaved-files-settlement.ts`: before it
abandons a preparation-only epoch, the settle calls the existing
`releaseUnchangedRemoteWorkspaceWriterById` (lock the workspace, check
the writer, then `releaseUnchangedRemoteWorkspaceWriter`). That releases
the writer at its saved version (dirty false, writer cleared, location
and root kept, baseline marked released, run reference set to `saved`)
only when `proveRemoteWorkspaceUnchanged` holds. The proof requires all
of these durable records:
- the unchanged-baseline marker for this exact epoch, run and saved
version. It is written in the same transaction that publishes the
restored root, so a kill mid-restore leaves no marker;
- no recorded process, process group, process start or provider session;
- no execution-start run event, no native result and no native runner
checkpoint (the controller writes one before every runner command);
- no workspace operation other than the file-neutral restore, finalize
and recovery receipts (provisioning and saves record theirs before they
touch files);
  - every workspace repository already in the saved version.
- If the proof fails for any reason, the settle abandons the epoch
exactly as before. The existing settle preconditions (run terminal,
still `preparing`, no finalization, no work-started event, no save in
flight) are unchanged and run first.
- `packages/shared/src/crash-point-registry.ts` and
`remote-workspaces.ts`: add the crash point
`remote_workspace.prepare.after_publish_before_provision`, so the chaos
harness can kill exactly at this boundary. It counts only a preparation
that published an unchanged baseline (a restore of a saved version), and
it is a no-op unless a test arms it.
`tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.json` is refreshed because
the registry file is a pinned SDK input.
- Test `ownership-reconciliation-report.test.ts`: a proven-clean epoch
is handed on with its root kept, with no abandonment receipt, and the
writer hold is free for the retry. These cases are still abandoned
exactly as before: no baseline (an epoch saved by the previous release),
a baseline for another epoch, an already-released baseline, a
provisioning operation. A run with a recorded process is still neither
handed on nor abandoned by this settle.

Previous-release story: an epoch saved by a release that did not write
the baseline marker has no proof, so it is abandoned as before. No
persisted shape changes; the marker already exists on master.

## Verification

- Red: with the release branch disabled, the new test fails on the clean
case (the epoch is abandoned). Green with the change.
- `cd server && npx vitest run
src/__tests__/ownership-reconciliation-report.test.ts
src/services/remote-workspace-snapshot-reuse.test.ts
src/__tests__/crash-point-call-sites.test.ts` passes. `packages/shared`
`crash-points.test.ts` passes. `tsc --noEmit -p server` passes.
- Live Daytona waves (claude, workload S1, the new crash point at the
continuation's preparation (`:2` before the point was gated to saved
restores; `:1` now), image built from master `e039be9202`, one task
each):

| | before (release disabled) | after |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Killed epoch 2 | abandoned (`workspace.remote_epoch_abandoned`) |
handed on (`workspace.snapshot_skipped_unchanged`, epoch 2) |
| Retry root | new root `…-4-ecf1c81e…` | same published root
`…-1-33e93b90…` |
| Retry `task.prepare` | 4598 ms | 4731 ms |
| Retry restore / environment acquire | 1141 / 1381 ms | 1106 / 1478 ms
|
| Task result | done, no Retry | done, no Retry |
| Stopped or orphan sandbox at rest | none | none |

Preparation time does not change in this setup. The Chaos Lab
environment uses ephemeral leases, so every run gets a fresh sandbox and
a full restore with or without this change, and the killed run's sandbox
is destroyed either way. The gain is the stable root, which keeps the
saved session's working directory valid.

## Risks

- Low. The release path is the same one admission already uses for an
ended writer, under the same proof. The settle now tries it first.
- A proof false positive would keep a root whose files changed. The
proof refuses on every record that precedes a write, and on any missing
or older-release evidence.

> 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 Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, used through Claude
Code with tool use (shell, file edit, 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)
- [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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 00:33:18 -06:00
Nicky Leach 0d4b1d8c89 Gate agent plugin tabs by execution environment (#20657) 2026-11-10 15:04:44 -08:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip f30ac226d6 Keep project environment mappings independent of shared defaults (#20651)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - A project supplies work context and repository storage to task runs.
> - Creation selected a storage owner but did not retain the selected
environment on the project.
> - Configuration stored an environment inside checkout policy, but
policy reads and run selection dropped it.
> - Projects therefore continued to follow shared agent and instance
defaults.
> - This pull request saves placement on each project and uses it for
new runs.
> - The benefit is an independent Project to Environment association
with the existing storage, trust, and recovery safeguards.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20459 and #11644. Follow-up to #20587.

The reported journey is Project > Configuration: changing one project's
environment must not change another project's mapping or shared
defaults.

Related open PR #18176 repairs placement through the legacy
workspace-policy field. This follow-up introduces a separate project
association, saves creation defaults, and migrates saved legacy
references. It overlaps that PR's placement, permission, and recovery
safeguards. The changes should be reviewed together. #9588 concerns
environment-variable response privacy and does not address placement.
ROADMAP.md has no separate project-association work planned.

## What Changed

- Add nullable `projects.environment_id` and expose
`Project.environmentId`. Save the effective creation default once on the
project. Keep environment placement separate from checkout/isolation
policy.
- Read and write Environment directly in Project Configuration. Keep the
control available with isolated workspaces disabled. Each form reads its
project's value, even when environment choices share a query cache.
- Offer environments compatible with the current storage owner. Change
the target and storage together when the existing storage selector
attaches a core project to a plugin. Preserve retained-data restrictions
and validate the observed storage owner again on save.
- Resolve new task runs from their organizational project's target
before agent and instance defaults. File sources from another project do
not change placement. Explicit low-trust sandbox choices and enforced
sandbox policies retain precedence. External provider placement remains
separate.
- Restore admitted native runs from their owned environment lease. Later
project edits apply to new admissions. Require workspace-write
permission for environment changes and clears. Check company bindings
before runtime admission and during lease creation.
- Migrate valid saved policy references into the project column.
Normalize legacy API writes. Count and clear matching project references
when an environment is deleted. Update API and behavior documentation.
- Refresh the maintained SDK source registry for the two changed shared
files. Runtime pins are unchanged.

## Verification

- [Hosted
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42908045146)
is green on `8b3b7d5b5aed51fc4c8e9c2e3506508bbaf9e00c`: **60 successful
checks**, three skipped gates, no failures, and `ci / verify` passed.
GitHub reports no merge conflicts. Standard Greptile scored the same
commit **5/5** with both review threads resolved.
- Source checkout on macOS arm64, Node 26.12.0, with fresh isolated
PostgreSQL. No production data or live provider calls.
- The two-project component test changes the first form with isolation
disabled and a shared query cache. The second form keeps its target.
Storage changes update only the selected project. A saved target remains
selected while the list loads, and an explicit clear remains possible.
- API integration creates two projects from the same default, patches
one, reads both, and checks that agent and instance defaults remain
unchanged. A later instance-default change does not rewrite either saved
project target. Tests cover unavailable/incompatible choices, anonymous
and cross-company denials, and storage preconditions.
- The migration test runs the actual SQL against an existing project row
and verifies its environment and disabled checkout policy survive.
Deletion accounting and clearing affect only matching project
references.
- The final guard set passes **53 tests across four files**:
`project-environments.test.ts`,
`environment-selection-route-guards.test.ts`,
`heartbeat/environment-selection.test.ts`, and
`ProjectProperties.environment.test.tsx`. All **64
environment-run-orchestrator tests** pass, including direct lease
acquisition without an extra caller argument. The broader affected set
passed **109 tests across eight files** before the additional admission
guards. These sets overlap.
- UI typecheck, migration numbering/safety, token gates, module
boundaries, query-error rendering, and diff checks pass. `pnpm verify
--explain` returns exit 2 and requires broad CI because shared
schema/runtime paths and behavior documentation changed. Broad coverage
is delegated to current-head CI.
- Early iterations failed due to a legacy parser that drops the
environment field, a fixture without real company membership, and
incorrect expectations for privacy-preserving 404 denials. The service
now reads legacy references before normalization, the API fixture has
real membership, and denial assertions match the existing privacy
contract. The orchestrator mock also needed the reused company-binding
guard in its service contract. The focused suites above pass after those
corrections.
- Local server typecheck remains blocked by installed ACPX, Slack, AI
SDK, and Runner type mismatches in unchanged dependency-facing code. It
reports no errors in the changed production paths. This is not a full
local typecheck or suite pass. Hosted CI supplies full current-head
coverage.
- SDK source-proof and privacy qualification passes **56 tests across
three files**, including the real built SDK. The maintained source
registry matches the committed revision; runtime pins are unchanged.
- Review reproduced two failures: an incoming policy without a storage
owner could be validated before the existing owner was restored, and
uppercase legacy UUIDs missed migration matching. Preserve the owner
before validation and compare normalized UUID text. Both regressions now
pass. The post-fix project/storage/orchestrator batch passes **107
tests**: `node node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run
server/src/__tests__/project-environments.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/project-workspace-provider.integration.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/environment-run-orchestrator.test.ts --silent`.
- The first hosted run failed build, typecheck, and canary at the same
`run-completion.test.ts` call because lease acquisition required a new
argument. The lease method now enforces binding internally. Its existing
caller compiles without a new field, and the orchestrator tests prove
the binding flag reaches the runtime. The full server check no longer
reports that error; the local dependency errors above remain.

## Risks

- Apply the normal database migration before serving the new revision.
The migration adds a nullable foreign key and copies valid legacy
project selections. It does not move repository data or resize provider
storage. The five newest schema snapshots are retained.
- New projects retain their creation target when shared defaults change.
Existing projects without a saved selection continue to inherit
defaults. A null target explicitly opts into inheritance.
- Existing saved project selections now affect placement. Missing,
archived, incompatible, and foreign-company targets fail validation;
they do not silently choose another storage owner. A running admitted
process keeps its original owned lease.
- Local dependency limitations are listed above. No live-provider,
deployed-browser, or production rollout qualification is claimed.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact serving snapshot and context-window size are not
exposed in this session.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-11-10 14:31:48 -08:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 353945c86d fix(tool-gateway): let agents create gateway tokens without receiving the value (#20613)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Tool gateways let external MCP clients use a company's tools with a
gateway client token
> - Since delegated connection management (#17737), an agent can create
and revoke gateway client tokens for its responsible person
> - #20581 stopped agents from getting the one-time token value, but it
did this by making token creation person-only
> - The product decision is that agents keep their delegated authority
to create and revoke tokens
> - This pull request restores agent token creation, but the agent never
receives the token value: the person reveals the value once on the
gateway's Tokens page
> - The benefit is that an agent can do the rotation work for the
person, and the secret still never enters chat, run events, logs or tool
output

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #17737
Refs #20581

**What happened**
After #20581, `POST /api/tool-gateway/gateways/{gatewayId}/tokens`
returns 403 `gateway_token_requires_person` to every agent caller.
Agents lost the delegated authority to create gateway client tokens that
#17737 gave them. Before #20581, an agent that created a token received
the plaintext value in its tool result and could repeat it in chat.

**Expected behavior**
An agent with delegated connection management can create and revoke
gateway client tokens. The agent never receives a token value. The
responsible person gets the value once, on the gateway's Tokens page.
Person callers keep today's behavior.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Give an agent delegated connection management for a responsible
person with `tools:admin`.
2. As the agent, call `POST
/api/tool-gateway/gateways/{gatewayId}/tokens` (for example through
`call_api`).
3. See 403 `gateway_token_requires_person`.

## What Changed

- Agent create: `POST /api/tool-gateway/gateways/:gatewayId/tokens` from
an agent with delegated authority returns 201 with token metadata only
(`id`, `tokenPrefix`, `expiresAt`, `pendingReveal: true`), plus
`tokensPath`, a `reveal_credential` `requiredUserAction` for the
responsible person, and a `nextStep` instruction. The saved row has no
usable value: its stored hash is of a value that is generated and then
discarded. Gateway authentication also rejects `pendingReveal` rows.
- Person reveal: new person-only `POST
/api/tool-gateway/gateway-tokens/:tokenId/reveal`. It generates the
value, stores its hash, clears `pendingReveal` and returns the value
once. A conditional update makes a second or concurrent reveal return
409. Only the token's responsible person can reveal it (403
`gateway_token_reveal_requires_responsible_person`). Agent callers get
403 `gateway_token_requires_person`. A token revoked before reveal
cannot be revealed.
- Why a reveal that generates the value: no stored plaintext existed to
reveal, and storing one (even encrypted) for later display adds a secret
at rest. Generating the value at reveal time keeps the existing one-time
display and stores only a hash.
- Schema: `tool_mcp_gateway_tokens.pending_reveal boolean not null
default false` (migration `0460_gateway_token_pending_reveal`). Shared
`ToolMcpGatewayToken.pendingReveal`, and `ConnectionRequiredUserAction`
gets `reveal_credential` / `gateway_token`.
- UI: the Tokens page shows a "Waiting for you to reveal" section for
pending tokens with a "Reveal token" button. The value appears in the
existing "New token — copy now" one-time block. Pending tokens show the
status "Not revealed".
- Agent gateway create: the 201 for agent callers also includes
`gatewayPath`, `tokensPath` and a `nextStep` that tells the agent to
link the saved gateway.
- The agent create-token `nextStep` and the catalog say not to revoke
the old token in the same turn: its client keeps working on it until the
person installs the new value.
- The reveal update and its `tool_gateway.token_revealed` activity entry
commit in one transaction. The Tokens page offers Reveal only for tokens
that act for the signed-in person.
- API reference: new `docs/api/tool-gateway-tokens.md` (create, reveal,
revoke) in the docs nav.
- Revoke stays allowed for agents with delegated authority (unchanged
route).
- API catalog: create-gateway, create-token, reveal and revoke
descriptions now say who acts, that agents never receive values, the
page paths, and that the old token is revoked only after the client
works with the new one.
- Agent access map: create-token policy note and a new reveal entry.
- Evals `gateways-profiles.create-gateway` and
`gateways-profiles.rotate-token`:
- Remove the keyword grader (`human|operator|admin|manage`) and the
handoff text checks. Grade saved state, rendered links and secret
absence. A plain reply or a question card is accepted.
- Remove the setup probes that called the create routes as the agent.
Under delegated authority, those probes created a real gateway
("Forbidden agent gateway"), which failed create-gateway before the
agent ran.
- create-gateway: exactly one gateway for the intended profile and
company, created by the agent (or by the person after a handoff); the
person opens it from a rendered link; attribution matches the creator;
any agent-created token is still pending reveal; no token value in chat,
cards or run events.
- rotate-token: after the agent's turn, both setup tokens still work and
any replacement the agent created is pending the person's reveal; the
person follows the rendered Tokens page link and reveals (or issues) the
value in a private browser; the new value works before the old token is
revoked; the unrelated client keeps access; no token value appears
anywhere, including a regex scan for any full `pcgw_<id>.<secret>`
value.
- The changed scenario context and outcomes are recorded in
`chat-full-catalog-testops-manifest.json` `changedFields` and pinned in
the manifest test. The inventory digest, descriptors (`oracleVersion`
v2, `sourceFiles`) and SDK public input pins are updated. The unused
`external-gateway-handoff.ts` module is removed.
- Fixture realism: the create-gateway profile now allows a real read
tool (an empty profile made the agent ask which apps to add instead of
finishing), and the rotation tokens get a neutral owner note instead of
"Disposable rotation fixture" (the agent read that note as an eval
hint).
- Shared private-browser helpers (`external-private-browser.ts`,
`external-private-browser-worker.ts`) get one optional `pendingTokenId`
input and one `revealedPending` receipt field.

## Verification

- Red: on `master` route code, the new integration tests `lets agents
create and revoke gateway client tokens without ever receiving a token
value` and `reveals an agent-created gateway token value only to its
responsible person` fail (403 `gateway_token_requires_person`).
- Green: `cd server && npx vitest run
src/__tests__/connection-management.integration.test.ts -t gateway` (25
passed). The test checks that the agent `call_api` result has no `token`
field and no token-shaped value, that the agent cannot reveal, that the
person reveals once (second reveal 409) and the value authenticates,
that agent revoke works and stops the value, that a token revoked before
reveal never gets a value, and that person create still returns the
value.
- `npx vitest run src/__tests__/tool-gateway.test.ts
src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts
src/services/native-runtime/runner-api.test.ts` (2247 passed).
- `cd ui && npx vitest run
src/pages/apps/gateways/panels/TokensPanel.test.tsx
src/pages/apps/gateways/gateway-helpers.test.ts` (16 passed); `pnpm
check:token-gates` clean.
- Eval graders and catalog: `pnpm exec vitest run --config
tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts` on the gateway oracle tests,
`external.test.ts`, catalog consistency/contract, TestOps
export/retained, phase/clock callers and SDK input/type tests (all
pass); `node --test` on the TestOps manifest, adapter, contract,
streaming and reconcile tests (all pass); `node
tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs <HEAD> --check`
(unchanged).
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passes. `tsc --noEmit` for `server`,
`ui` and `tests/runner-e2e`: no errors in changed files.
- Paid end-to-end run of both eval cases, run
[42872921890](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42872921890)
on 39f38a7f6c (before the last three commits): both FAILED, for
agent-behavior reasons the later commits address. Not rerun yet.
- rotate-token: the agent created the replacement (pending reveal, no
value), then revoked the old token in the same turn, despite the create
response saying to wait. Its reasoning cited the eval-looking fixture
note. The grader rejected the premature revocation. The reply linked the
Tokens page correctly.
- create-gateway: the agent created the gateway and one pending token,
then asked a question card about which apps to add to the empty profile,
with no link to the gateway. The grader rejected the missing link.
- Token values: a scan of all evidence files of both cells found no full
`pcgw_<id>.<secret>` value and no `pcgw_<uuid>` form. Agent `call_api`
payloads in run events are redacted; the integration test proves the
agent tool result has no value.

## Risks

- Behavior change for agents: token create returns metadata and a Tokens
page path, not a value. Agents that expect `token` in the response must
send the person to the Tokens page.
- Migration adds one boolean column with a default. Existing tokens get
`false` and keep working.
- A pending token that is never revealed stays as an unusable row until
someone revokes it. It cannot authenticate.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), tool use and code
execution in 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 (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-10 15:13:34 -06:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 8148fc0b1e fix(release): fetch draft-notes PR summaries in batches (#20602)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The release workflow drafts the next stable's release notes when a
beta publishes (`draft_stable_notes`)
> - The draft nests each referenced PR's summary under its commit
subject, and it fetches each summary with its own `gh pr view` call
> - A beta range now references more than 1,500 PRs, so these serial
calls do not finish inside the job's 10-minute timeout
> - This pull request fetches the summaries in batches of 50 per GraphQL
query
> - The benefit is that the job finishes in under a minute and pushes
the notes branch again

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

The `draft_stable_notes` job of [run
42763789753](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42763789753)
(beta `2026.1110.0-beta.0`) reached its 10-minute timeout. GitHub
cancelled it during "Draft stable notes from the published beta", while
a `gh` process was still running. The beta itself published and its
smoke tests passed. The `release-notes/v2026.1110.0-beta.0` branch was
not pushed.

**Expected behavior**

The job writes the notes draft and pushes the branch for every beta,
whatever the size of the commit range.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Publish a beta whose range from the last stable has many
PR-referencing commits. This range has 1,586 commits, and 1,583
different PRs.
2. `draft-stable-notes.sh` calls `gh pr view <n>` once for each commit,
one after another.
3. The job reaches `timeout-minutes: 10` before the loop ends.

**Paperclip version or commit**

`09e24dd12c36251dd12af2d73dbc715ce990f922` (beta `2026.1110.0-beta.0`).
This was the first beta to run the job after #12124 added the PR
summaries; earlier betas skipped it.

## What Changed

- `scripts/draft-stable-notes.sh`:
- Collects the unique PR numbers first. Fetches their bodies 50 per `gh
api graphql` query (aliased `pullRequest(number:)` fields), into a
temporary cache that `enrich_pr` reads.
- Parses the raw response with `jq`, not with `gh --jq`. When any number
in a batch is not a PR (for example, an issue reference), gh exits
non-zero and does not apply its `--jq` filter. The other PRs in the
batch still have usable data.
- The output format does not change. A missing `gh` or `jq`, a failed
batch, a cache directory that `mktemp` cannot create, or
`DRAFT_NOTES_SKIP_PR_ENRICHMENT=1` still gives bare subjects.
- No code comments are added (per `CONTRIBUTING.md`); this description
holds the explanation.
- `scripts/draft-stable-notes.test.mjs`:
- The enrichment tests now use a fake `gh` that answers GraphQL like
GitHub.
- New tests: batching (120 PRs make 3 queries, and a repeated PR is
fetched once); a batch with a non-PR number; a failed batch; a failed
`mktemp`; prose-only and empty bodies; the opt-out.
- Range tests now run with enrichment disabled, so an authenticated `gh`
on the test machine cannot reach GitHub.
- `package.json`: adds the test file to `test:release-registry`. These
tests did not run in CI before.

## Verification

- `node --test scripts/draft-stable-notes.test.mjs`: 17 pass. They also
pass with macOS bash 3.2 first on `PATH`.
- `node scripts/ci-profile/node-test.mjs
scripts/draft-stable-notes.test.mjs scripts/release-lib.test.mjs`: 31
pass.
- Red check: the new tests against the old script fail 5 cases (all
batching and enrichment cases). The `mktemp` test fails against an
unguarded `mktemp` call.
- Live run on the real range: `./scripts/draft-stable-notes.sh
2026.1110.0-beta.0` finished in 47 seconds. It wrote 4,596 excerpt lines
for 1,583 PRs.
- Parity: for 40 randomly sampled PRs from that range, the new excerpts
are byte-identical to the old per-PR `gh pr view` output.
- `shellcheck`: no new findings. The two remaining notices were there
before this change.

## Risks

- Low. The change touches only the post-publish draft job, and every
failure still gives the bare-subject draft.
- `jq` is now needed for the PR summaries. GitHub's Ubuntu runners
include it. Without `jq`, the draft has no summaries, the same as
without `gh`.
- I did not change `release.yml`. The job already checks out `master`,
so after this merges, re-running the failed job of run 42763789753
should push the missing notes branch with the fixed script.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`) via Claude Code, with tool use
(shell, file editing, test runs, read-only GitHub API calls).

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-11-10 11:48:55 -08:00
DottaandPaperclip 89ec4e7614 feat(links): add cached GitHub pull request previews (#20593)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Task conversations contain links to pull requests and other work.
> - A URL alone cannot tell the operator whether a PR is open, merged,
or blocked by conflicts.
> - Fetching every link at render time wastes API calls and can expose
private data through a shared cache.
> - This pull request adds a demand-driven links service and a GitHub PR
adapter.
> - Each viewer and company has a separate cache. Repeated links share
one request and result.
> - Operators get context when they hover or focus a link. Normal links
stay useful when a provider is unavailable.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Task Markdown links, shared link metadata, and the server GitHub API
boundary.

**Problem or motivation**

PR links have compact labels and neutral icons. They do not provide a
rich hover card or a common status source across repeated mentions. A
background resolver cannot borrow a person's GitHub connection because
it has no viewer identity.

**Proposed solution**

Recognize supported links locally. Request metadata after a delayed
hover or keyboard focus. Show a card at the first line of the link,
aligned with its icon. Share the result across all mentions in the
current viewer and company. Keep the exact original navigation URL.

The first adapter supports GitHub pull requests. Open is green, merged
is purple, and merge conflicts are orange. Draft, closed, unknown,
loading and unavailable states remain quiet.

**Alternatives considered**

Eager page scans would spend API quota on links the operator does not
inspect. Company-wide caching of personal GitHub results would cross the
credential boundary. This change uses neither approach.

**Roadmap alignment**

ROADMAP.md was checked. This extends existing task links and the GitHub
resolver. It adds no deployment adapter or new background worker.
Searches of open and closed PRs for link previews and PR hover cards
found no matching implementation.

## What Changed

- Add host-owned link recognition and a normalized preview contract. The
service selects an adapter by provider.
- Add a board-only company read endpoint. It checks company access
before cache reads and sends a private, no-store response.
- Use the current viewer's eligible GitHub connection. A configured
connection that cannot supply credentials fails closed. With no managed
connection, reuse existing company credentials or public access.
Instance credentials retain the public-repository check.
- Reuse the GitHub external-object resolver for API transport and
response parsing. Add title and mergeability to its normalized snapshot
without changing its existing state contract.
- Coalesce requests by company, viewer and canonical PR URL. Bound
cached entries and concurrent work. Cache success for one minute and
failures for a short period or the provider retry window.
- Add an abortable request deadline. Timed-out work stays in the
concurrency budget until it settles. No periodic worker or idle polling
is added.
- Add a shared browser query and anchored preview card. Repeated
Markdown links observe the same result. There are no automatic retries,
window-focus refreshes, toasts or connection prompts.
- Add ten production-component Storybook examples and real
pointer/keyboard browser checks. Document the API and verification
route.

## Verification

- Linux source checkout: 233 focused tests passed in nine suites. They
cover recognition, fixed API destinations, provider states, access
failures, credential selection, viewer/company isolation, request
coalescing, expiry, cache bounds, concurrency bounds and mounted OpenAPI
coverage.
- A live public GitHub smoke returned this PR's correct title and open
state. Two equivalent URLs shared one real network request. Personal
connection access was not part of that smoke.
- A controlled HTTP server stalls a real response body. The test proves
cancellation while another lookup completes.
- UI typecheck and the server layered typecheck passed. The UI
production build passed.
- Token gates and query policy gates passed. All 30 map/catalog support
checks passed. The three new server test files also passed a focused
TypeScript check.
- All 27 focused browser checks passed on the reviewed source tree. They
cover light/dark themes, narrow layouts,
open/merged/conflict/draft/closed/loading/unavailable/failed states,
fixed positioning during pointer movement, exact navigation and keyboard
access. A real browser HTTP interception counts one deferred lookup for
two equivalent PR links.
- The first browser attempt lacked Chromium. A later combined build/test
attempt exhausted the sandbox's 8 GiB memory limit and killed Storybook.
Those attempts supply no pass evidence. Chromium is installed, and the
final browser checks run with the build stopped. One initial Storybook
dependency reload interrupted a streaming check. All eight existing
inline-link cases passed on the warmed server, followed by a complete
27-case pass.
- Synthetic Storybook pointer events did not exercise the native hover
boundary. The assertions now run through real Playwright pointer and
keyboard actions. The fixture stories retain the production components.
- Review fixes preserve the Draft label when GitHub reports both draft
and conflicts. They also preserve neutral link colors in dark mode. The
25 affected service checks pass, including the added combined-state
regression. Browser checks compare unknown, draft and closed links with
the muted theme color.
- The first CI policy run rejected a literal retry opt-out. The code now
uses the existing explicit zero-retry helper. A new test-spy type error
was also corrected. These failures are fixed; their earlier runs remain
failed.
- `pnpm verify --explain` returned exit 2 because the browser test path
selects broad CI. No full local suite is claimed. The final CI run
supplies that coverage.
- The previous head `437913c797963aa113bb82e2ae8b836969317ef9` passed CI
and received a 5/5 Greptile score. All four review threads are resolved.
Master then advanced. The current head
`ae2a1c2adbd61a621cca9bdd160561952613df6e` resolves the source-manifest
conflict against master `9b21dcbdda01296349f3cfe0a3a6891e79df6130`.
Fresh CI and review are running.
- The previous CI run found a lost class on decorated PR links and a
stale SDK source manifest. Both are fixed. The existing CommentThread
integration test and 26 focused link service tests pass. All 45 SDK
source/privacy tests pass. All eight source-manifest helper tests pass.
The manifest helper changed only source identities and added the two new
shared files. Runtime, compiler, parser and library pins stay unchanged.
- A later review found that expired timeouts could reuse a settled
promise. The service now removes settled requests from its
shared-request map and counts unfinished provider work separately. The
new regression failed before the fix and passes after it. The
concurrency-bound and real stalled-HTTP tests also pass.
- UI typecheck and token gates pass after these fixes. The browser rerun
needed Chromium in the new session. That first attempt did not exercise
the UI. The complete 27-case browser rerun passed before the master
merge with retries disabled. All 27 browser cases also passed on the
merge revision with retries disabled.

- After the master merge, all 84 focused link, OpenAPI and integration
tests pass. All 55 SDK source/privacy/manifest tests pass. UI typecheck
and token gates pass again. The source manifest retains master's
reviewed runtime pins and includes both sets of source changes. GitHub
confirms the PR can merge cleanly. The preflight helper rebuilt the
shared package and plugin SDK; Cargo is unavailable locally. Final CI
supplies Rust coverage.

- The latest master update changed the reviewed report-lock policy but
left the SDK lock hash at its previous value. The SDK source/evidence
checks reproduced the mismatch. This change sets only the SDK lock hash
to the authenticated output of the existing master policy and patch.
Compiler, parser and Zod pins stay unchanged. All 56 SDK
source/evidence/manifest tests now pass. All 84 focused
link/API/integration tests, UI typecheck and token gates also pass on
the updated source.

## Risks

- This cache is process-local. Separate server replicas can make
separate GitHub requests.
- A cached result can remain visible for its short lifetime after GitHub
changes. A later hover refreshes expired data.
- GitHub can report unknown mergeability. The UI shows conflicts only
when GitHub explicitly reports them.
- Personal preview data stays in viewer/company caches. It is not
written to company external-object records or persisted browser query
storage.
- Stories simulate the API. They do not prove a live GitHub login or
private-repository access.
- No schema migration is required.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6. The runtime does not expose the exact
serving model ID or context-window limit. Used reasoning, repository
inspection, source editing, shell execution and browser tools. No
subagents were used.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] 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>
2026-11-10 19:32:51 +00:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 42d4499489 fix(daytona): force a stuck stop before starting a retained sandbox (#20609)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - On Daytona, a follow-up task resumes the agent's retained sandbox
before the agent starts
> - The host stops an idle sandbox gracefully. A process that ignores
SIGTERM can leave Daytona in `stopping` for many minutes
> - Resume waited for that state change until its 300 s start deadline.
It never escalated, so each attempt failed after five minutes, and the
bounded retries did the same
> - On staging, a user comment waited about 21 minutes before the agent
started. Two resume attempts each used 299.7 s in the plugin dispatch
> - This pull request forces a stuck stop once, then starts the sandbox
within the same deadline. It also traces the wait with the observed
state
> - The benefit is that a stuck stop costs about 30 s instead of failing
the run, and the next case is diagnosable from the trace

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
A user commented on a task that used a retained Daytona sandbox. The
first run and its first retry each failed after about 5 min 20 s with
`reusable_sandbox_resume_failed (cause=provider_error)`. The Honeycomb
trace shows `execution.plugin_dispatch` at 299.7 s in both. Inside it
there is only `lease.lookup` (44 ms) and `lease.channel_cleanup`, and no
`lease.start`. So the whole budget went to `waitOutSandboxTransition`,
which polled a sandbox that stayed in a transition state. The later
attempt, after a control-plane restart, found the sandbox `stopped`. Its
`lease.start` took 1.3 s. A transition that ends in `stopped` is a stop.

**Expected behavior**
A sandbox that stays `stopping` for longer than the host's own
graceful-stop budget is forced to stop, then starts. The run does not
fail on the start deadline.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Retain a Daytona sandbox whose graceful stop does not finish (Daytona
reports `stopping`).
2. Resume or realize the lease.
3. Before this change, the call polls until the 300 s deadline and fails
with "is still stopping at its start deadline".

## What Changed

- `packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/daytona/src/plugin.ts`:
`waitOutSandboxTransition` tracks how long the sandbox stays `stopping`.
After `STUCK_STOPPING_FORCE_AFTER_MS` (30 s) it calls
`sandbox.stop(seconds, true)` once, then keeps polling. A refused force
stop keeps the old wait within the same deadline.
- The wait is a `lease.wait_transition` span. The force stop is a
`lease.force_stop` child span.
- `lease-tracing.ts`: the closed `paperclip.sandbox.startup.state` label
also records `starting`, `stopping`, `restoring`, `archiving` and
`resizing`. Before, these were all `other`.
- `server/src/services/plugin-host-services.ts`: the host admits the two
new span names and the new closed state values.
- `doc/observability.md`: documents the new spans and states.

## Verification

- Red/green: with the plugin change stashed, the three new
stuck-`stopping` tests (realize, refused force stop, resume) fail by
hanging to the deadline. With the change they pass. The "settles on its
own" test confirms that no force stop happens for a normal stop.
- `vitest run` in `packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/daytona`: 14
files, 618 tests passed (8 skipped). `tsc --noEmit` passed.
- `server/src/__tests__/plugin-host-services-span.test.ts`: red before
the allowlist change, 25/25 after.
- `pnpm verify` exited 2 (the doc is a global CI input), so CI supplies
the broad coverage.
- Not verified on a live Daytona sandbox. Hosted acceptance needs the
change deployed to staging.

## Risks

- The force stop sends SIGKILL to processes in a sandbox that is already
stopping and is about to start. The disk persists across a stop, so the
retained workspace is kept. A graceful stop that is still running past
30 s is killed. The host's own graceful stop budget is 30 s, so the host
had already given up on it.
- Daytona can refuse a stop while a state change is in progress. Then
the code waits as before, so the result is no worse than today.
- The root cause is inferred from the trace (a transition that ends in
`stopped`). The new state label confirms or refutes it the next time it
happens.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), via Claude Code with tool use
(shell, file edits, browser, 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)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-10 19:20:30 +00:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 9b21dcbdda refactor: remove SPEC docs and repoint spec citations (#20565)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Contributors and agents read the docs under `doc/` before they
change code
> - `doc/SPEC.md` and `doc/SPEC-implementation.md` were out of date.
`doc/SPEC-implementation.md` became an append-only log: in 60 days it
got about 1,645 new lines and lost 181, across 140 commits
> - #20557 changed `AGENTS.md` so the code and its tests are the source
of truth, and the specs are only background
> - This pull request removes the two spec docs. It moves only the
sections that live code comments cite into focused docs, and it repoints
all other references
> - The benefit is one less stale document that agents read and append
to

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20557 (merged). This PR is the follow-up that removes the docs. It
is based on `master`, which already contains #20557.

**Issue type**
Outdated content. The docs are out of date and conflict with the code.

**Where is the issue?**
`doc/SPEC.md`, `doc/SPEC-implementation.md`, and the code comments and
docs that cite them.

**What's wrong?**
`doc/SPEC.md` and `doc/SPEC-implementation.md` are out of date, but
agents still read them and append a paragraph with each fix.

**Suggested fix**
Delete both files. Move the sections that code cites into focused docs.
Repoint the references.

## What Changed

- Deleted `doc/SPEC.md` and `doc/SPEC-implementation.md`.
- Moved these spec sections, because live code comments cite them:
- §9.3.1 "Shared default-open issue writes" → new section in
`doc/agent-permission-defaults.md`.
- §9.8.1 "Issue-thread interaction resolver contract" →
`doc/execution-semantics.md`, "Issue-thread interaction resolution".
That section already had most of the contract. I added only the missing
parts: the `supersedeOnUserComment` default, the canonical policy list,
the addressee and cap rules, the rule that surfaces show the server's
effective audience, and the cross-issue budget charge. The short policy
summary at the top of the section now points to the list, so the
definitions occur one time only.
- §9.9 "Task Watchdog Authority Contract" → new "Authority contract"
section in `doc/TASK-WATCHDOG.md`. It holds the allowed and disallowed
mutation lists and the deferred capabilities. The atomic recovery batch,
restoration verification, and interaction rules were already in
`doc/execution-semantics.md` §11, so the new section links there and
does not repeat them. I did not move the "Downstream acceptance
criteria" checklist or the sentence about the CTO and Security sign-off.
These were implementation-time notes; the tests now hold that coverage.
- §9.10 "Company Skill Policy Contract" → new
`doc/company-skill-policy.md`. No focused doc had this contract. I did
not move the "Required regression tests" phase checklist.
- Did not move any other part of the specs.
- Repointed code comments that cited spec sections:
- `packages/shared/src/issue-write-denial.ts` (§9.3) →
`doc/agent-permission-defaults.md`
- `server/src/routes/issues.ts` (§9.9) → `doc/TASK-WATCHDOG.md`,
"Authority contract"
- `server/src/routes/issues.ts` (§9.3, §9.8.1 cross-issue budget) →
`doc/agent-permission-defaults.md`
- `ui/src/lib/interaction-audience.ts` and
`ui/src/components/InteractionGovernancePanel.tsx` (§9.8.1) →
`doc/execution-semantics.md`
- `ui/src/lib/skill-policy-denial.ts`, `ui/src/pages/CompanySkills.tsx`,
`ui/src/pages/CompanySkills.production.tsx`,
`ui/src/pages/SkillStudio.tsx` (§9.10) → `doc/company-skill-policy.md`
- `server/src/services/recovery/ownership-invariant-report.ts` (monitor
deadline wait path) → `doc/execution-semantics.md` §8. That section
already lists the one-shot monitor as a valid wait path.
- Resynced the git blob pin for
`packages/shared/src/issue-write-denial.ts` in
`tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.json`. The comment edit
changed the file's hash, and the Runner support suite checks that pin. I
used `node tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs <HEAD>
--write`; only that one pin changed.
- Updated `AGENTS.md` §1 so it does not name the deleted files.
- Removed the links to the deleted files from
`doc/plugins/PLUGIN_SPEC.md`.
- Updated the `doc-maintenance` agent skill
(`.agents/skills/doc-maintenance/`) so it no longer audits or stages
`doc/SPEC.md`.
- Removed or replaced references in `maps/README.md`,
`maps/feature-map/README.md`, `maps/storybook-map/README.md`,
`doc/PRODUCT.md`, `doc/CLIPHUB.md`, `doc/DEPLOYMENT-MODES.md`,
`doc/DEVELOPING.md`, `doc/evals.md`, `doc/spec/agent-runs.md`,
`doc/AGENTCOMPANIES_SPEC_INVENTORY.md`,
`doc/connections/CONNECTOR-PLAYBOOK.md`,
`doc/plugins/ideas-from-opencode.md`, `doc/execution-semantics.md`,
`doc/TASK-WATCHDOG.md`, and `.devin/wiki.json`.
- In `doc/execution-semantics.md`, the "admission is independent of
cleanup and accounting" reference now states the rule inline: only a
hard stop, an explicit pause, or an inactive company refuses admission.
- Kept these references as they are: dated plans in `doc/plans/` and
`docs/plans/`, the dated log
`doc/logs/2026-05-24-cli-api-parity-e2e-log.md`, `releases/`, the
transcript fixture `ui/src/fixtures/runTranscriptFixtures.ts` (it uses
the filename only as sample text), and
`docs/specs/external-task-protocol.md` (it refers to the Symphony
project's own `SPEC.md`).

## Verification

- `git grep -n "SPEC-implementation\|SPEC\.md"` (without `releases/`,
and ignoring `PLUGIN_SPEC.md` citations) finds only the kept references
listed above.
- `grep -rn "§9\.\(3\|8\|9\|10\)" ui/src server/src packages/shared/src`
finds no results.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`: "Maps aligned: 35 areas, 192 capability
IDs".
- `pnpm check:token-gates`: "All gates clean".
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts
tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-type.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-evidence.test.ts`: 45 passed. These failed
in CI before the pin resync.
- `pnpm verify`: exit 2 ("Broader verification required") because
`AGENTS.md` is a global CI input. Required CI supplies the broad
coverage for this revision.
- All code changes are comments only. No runtime behavior changes. The
title uses `refactor:` because comments in source files changed.

## Risks

- Low risk. The change removes docs and edits comments only.
- A reader can lose context from spec sections that I did not move. The
text stays in git history. The code and its tests are the source of
truth.
- External links to the two deleted files will return 404.

> 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

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), in Claude Code with
tool use (shell, file edits). Standard context window.

## Checklist

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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-10 13:07:59 -06:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip 98ce93dd4e Choose project storage from compatible environments (#20587)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Projects supply repository files to agent runs through core staging
or a storage plugin.
> - A storage plugin's default claim silently attached new projects even
when their agents used a different environment.
> - An environment name or driver type does not establish shared storage
access. The existing binding and task-driver contracts do.
> - This pull request groups creation choices by that contract and
selects storage from the creator's effective environment.
> - The benefit is a visible, validated choice and a clear error before
an incompatible managed workspace operation.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Fixes #20459.

Related: #20156 covers a separate provider-failure diagnostic. The PR
search found no other fix for #20459. ROADMAP.md has no duplicate
project-creation change.

## What Changed

- Show **Available in** when configured environments require different
project storage. Each option names the environments that can use the
same storage owner. Hide the selector when all choices are compatible.
- Derive compatibility from repository staging and managed binding
ownership. Local, SSH, and sandbox environments use core staging.
Managed storage requires a registered task driver from the same
installed storage plugin. Separate storage plugins remain incompatible.
Unknown plugin contracts and the fake sandbox are excluded.
- Follow the creating agent's environment, or the person's primary
agent, then the instance default and local fallback. Apply managed-only
and forced Kubernetes policy. The product has no separate user or
company environment-default field today.
- Add a company-authorized discovery endpoint and an optional creation
`environmentId`. Validate the choice again on save. Store the storage
owner without overriding agent run environments. Preserve explicit API
storage choices and existing project ownership.
- Keep the hidden repository-free private-task project independent of
environment availability. Submit the observed storage owner as
`expectedStorageProviderPluginId` so a changed contract fails at save
without setting a workspace policy. Instance task-isolation defaults
stay inherited.
- Reject an incompatible managed workspace before a provider operation.
Name the storage and selected environment in the error. Add regression
tests, API documentation, creation-story fixtures, and minimal
corrections to obsolete map text.

## Verification

- **102 tests passed across 7 files:** project environment integration,
installed storage policy, repository persistence, project environment
routes, project creation telemetry routes, OpenAPI, and
NewProjectDialog. Run with `node node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run
server/src/__tests__/project-environments.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/project-workspace-provider.integration.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/project-repositories-persistence.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/project-routes-env.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/project-goal-telemetry-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts
ui/src/components/NewProjectDialog.test.tsx --silent`.
- The review fixes cover both archived-default private-task cases and
changed-storage rejection. With both instance isolation flags enabled, a
new core repository project keeps a null policy and resolves to an
isolated Git worktree. The complete affected set passes all 102 tests.
- The CI query-error policy failure was fixed by using the shared query
view. The form and shared query-view suites pass **24 tests**, including
cached choices during a transient refetch failure. `node
scripts/check-query-error-rendering.mjs --enforce --summary` reports
zero findings.
- CI exposed stale SDK source hashes and heartbeat fixtures that paired
plugin storage with Local. Refreshed exactly four shared-source hashes
with the maintained generator (runtime pins unchanged). All **53 SDK
privacy/source-proof tests**, including real built SDK output, pass. All
**7 corrected managed-storage heartbeat scenarios** pass; the fixtures
declare the owning plugin's task environment and substitute transport at
the existing execution seam.
- Shared and UI TypeScript checks pass. The UI production build passes.
`pnpm check:token-gates`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, `node
scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs`, and diff checks pass.
- Tested UI states: compatible choices, incompatible groups, default
within a group, manual override, create failure, loading, discovery
failure and retry, and an unavailable default. Tests use the production
form and existing design tokens.
- The integration tests use real isolated PostgreSQL on macOS arm64 with
Node 26.12.0. They cover user/agent defaults, storage persistence,
policy restrictions, company and authentication denials, and rejection
before a provider call. Discovery uses saved configuration and makes no
worker or provider requests.
- Local verification limits: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` stop
in unchanged adapter-utils code because the installed ACPX types lack
`inheritProcessEnv`. A direct server check also finds an unchanged AI
SDK type-version mismatch. The existing heartbeat test `inherits the
instance default environment across companies while preserving explicit
agent overrides` times out at line 518 on both this change and
unmodified master with the same dependencies. The full `pnpm test:run`
attempt passed all six chat shards (1,948 tests), then the Git workspace
expiration suite reported 14 failures. I stopped that broad run. Two
sampled failures reproduce on unchanged master with the same
`unknown_worktree_git_files` refusal; the other expiration failures were
not independently compared. A later broad workspace-preparation run also
hit workspace validation failures and was stopped; the seven corrected
fixture scenarios pass independently. These limits do not establish a
full local suite pass. Hosted CI remains required.
- Initial missing-package and loopback-denial failures were resolved by
repairing isolated dependency links, building the SDK, and running
database tests with loopback access. No deployed or live-provider
execution is claimed.

## Risks

- Creation defaults now follow the effective environment. A plugin's
`defaultForProjects` claim alone no longer selects storage. This is the
intended behavior change.
- Compatibility covers repository project storage. It does not guarantee
arbitrary host paths, retained-workspace moves, adapter/image support,
credentials, or worker readiness. Matching provider configs cannot prove
a cross-plugin storage contract.
- A person's primary agent supplies the personal default because there
is no separate personal environment setting. An unavailable configured
default requires a valid explicit choice or a configuration repair.
- No migration runs. Existing projects keep their storage owner. This
change does not detach existing managed data or provide a storage
migration.
- Full local verification has the limits listed above. CI and standard
Greptile review are pending.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact serving snapshot and context-window size were not
exposed in this session.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-11-10 17:38:31 +00:00
DottaandClaude 84007892e9 refactor: move AGENTS.md section detail to docs and rules, add a bug-fixing section (#20585)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - `AGENTS.md` is the instruction file that each human and AI
contributor reads before a change
> - Pull request #20557 shortened the file, but several sections still
held detail that applies to only some changes
> - The scoped-rules section told agents to read each matching rule in
full, and most changes match five rules
> - The core engineering rules mixed three product invariants with
process conventions
> - This pull request moves that detail to the docs and to scoped rules,
and adds a section on how to fix a bug
> - The benefit is a 211-line file that states what applies to every
change and points to the rest

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20557

**Issue type**

Outdated or unclear contributor documentation.

**Where is the issue?**

`AGENTS.md` at the repository root, and `rules/`.

**What's wrong?**

- The scoped-rules section made agents read the full body of each
matching rule before a change. The rule bodies total about 47 KB.
- Sections 4, 6, 8, 9 and 10 repeated detail that belongs in
`doc/DEVELOPING.md`, `doc/DATABASE.md`, a route rule, `DESIGN.md` and
`CONTRIBUTING.md`.
- Section 4 had a database reset command for `data/pglite`. That
directory does not exist.
- Section 5 had seven rules. Four of them were process conventions or
path-specific detail.
- The file did not say how to fix a bug.

**Suggested fix**

Make the rule headers the index. Move section detail to the document or
rule that owns it. Keep only the three invariants in section 5. Add a
bug-fixing section.

## What Changed

- The scoped-rules section now tells agents to list the rule headers
with one `grep` command. Agents read a rule body only for a design
decision in its area, when the description is not sufficient, or when a
reviewer cites it.
- `rules/README.md` says that each `description` must state the required
behavior in one sentence.
- `rules/pull-request-review.mdc` has a description that states its
requirements.
- Section 4 (dev setup) and section 11 (pull requests) now point to
`doc/DEVELOPING.md` and `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
- The schema change workflow moved from section 6 to `doc/DATABASE.md`.
- The API and auth expectations moved from section 8 to the new
`rules/api-route-expectations.mdc`.
- Section 9 links to `DESIGN.md` for design rules. `AGENTS.md` no longer
tells contributors to run `pnpm check:token-gates`.
- Added section 10, "Fixing a Bug": reproduce the error, write a failing
test, write the fix, see the test pass, and verify the fix.
- Section 5 now has three rules: company scope, contract
synchronization, and the control-plane invariants.
- The company-scope exceptions moved to the new
`rules/company-scope-exceptions.mdc`.
- Removed the strategic-docs rule. The plan-doc convention moved to the
repo map. The artifact rule moved to section 7.
- Removed rule 7. Five code comments that cited `AGENTS.md §5.7` now
cite `rules/data-paths.mdc`.
- Regenerated the SDK public source pin, because one of those comments
is in `packages/shared/src/crash-points.ts`.
- Added both new rules to `.greptile/files.json`.
- The API route rule applies only to routes that read or write company
data. Its status code list is a list of common codes.
- The company-scope rule lists the sidebar company order as an
instance-wide exception.
- The `honeycomb-tracing` skill now points to `rules/data-paths.mdc` for
the Telemetry workflow.

## Verification

- Open `AGENTS.md` and confirm that each link resolves. A local script
checked this.
- Run `grep -E '^(description|globs|alwaysApply):' rules/*.mdc` and
confirm that each rule prints a description.
- Run `node tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs <HEAD>
--check`. It passes locally.
- `packages/shared/src/crash-points.test.ts` passed locally before the
rebase onto `master`.
- Five source files changed in comments only. No other test suite ran
locally.

## Risks

- An agent that reads only rule descriptions can miss a detail in a rule
body. Reviewers still apply the full rules.
- Pull requests and the definition of done are now sections 11 and 12.
Sections 1 to 9 keep their numbers.
- Dated plan documents under `doc/plans/` still cite `AGENTS.md §5.7`.
They are historical records.
- Pull request #20565 also changes `AGENTS.md`. The second one to merge
needs a conflict fix in section 1 and section 2.

## Model Used

- Claude (Anthropic), in Claude Code with tool use.
- `claude-fable-5-2`.

## Checklist

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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-10 11:00:31 -06:00
DottaandPaperclip ce1ee9e89f fix: stop prompts from encouraging subtasks (#20362)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agents read runtime prompts, tool help, skills, and role
instructions.
> - Several of these texts tell agents to create child tasks as a normal
next step.
> - One accepted-plan prompt even forbids work on the current task.
> - Task parentage is useful, but it does not need a prompt that
encourages task creation.
> - This pull request removes those prompts and keeps the task APIs
available.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #10642. This change adjusts prompt wording; it does not add
delegation-cycle guards.

**Current behavior**
Prompts tell agents to create children after plan approval, use children
for long work, and create a task just to pass context. Onboarding
requires a child even for a single request.

**Proposed behavior**
Continue work on the current task. Keep explicit assignments, optional
task creation, parentage, dependencies, and approval gates. Use the
separate-task recipes when the user requests that structure or when
continuing existing work.

**Reason and benefit**
Reduce needless task trees without removing subtask support. Keep the
patch limited to wording, existing test expectations, and generated
catalog data.

## What Changed

- Align accepted-plan prompts and remove direct child-creation advice
from runtime and error text.
- Make task tool descriptions neutral. Keep their fields, defaults, and
handlers.
- Update the main skill, onboarding, CEO instructions, company
templates, specialist workflows, and matching guides.
- Keep historical release snapshots intact. Refresh the explicitly
seeded schema fixture's catalog digest; the server still verifies
historical release snapshot hashes.
- Refresh the affected generated catalogs, capability inventory,
semantic contracts, and fixture manifest.

## Verification

- Final tested head: `c6e304d0c105cdbfbe0b2ab0a233307fcd91a04b`.
- All 66 check runs are complete: 60 pass, one is neutral, and five are
skipped by CI conditions. Snyk also passes. No checks fail or remain
pending.
- [PR
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42846226554)
passes typecheck, build, server/general tests, all eight E2E shards,
Runner support, Runner Rust, and the aggregate verify gate.
[Windows](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42846226546)
and [Docker
Runner](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42846226108)
also pass.
-
[Greptile](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/20362#issuecomment-6751419835)
and [Paperclip
review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/20362#issuecomment-6751454010)
give this exact head 5/5. All six inline threads are resolved. Neither
current summary has findings.
- Merged master `bf0220d34a156c81853755c3d1365ddc527037de`. Resolved
three generated-file conflicts with the canonical generators.
- Local verification passes: 473 focused prompt, continuation, UI,
catalog, runtime and native-execution tests; Runner TypeScript build;
generated metadata; UI token gates; and diff checks.
- The prior head `c22018cb0f` failed three SDK evidence tests because
two source hashes were stale. Reproduced all three failures locally. The
existing generator refreshed only the hashes for the denial-copy file
and its test. All 53 affected evidence/source-pin tests then passed,
including private-value rejection. No scanner logic, assertions, or
runtime dependency pins changed. Current CI confirms the support suite
passes.
- A prior commit failed the Rust process reaping test. Its cause remains
unproven. No Rust code or assertions changed. Later Rust runs pass; this
does not establish the cause of the earlier failure.
- Local preflight built shared/plugin SDK packages, then stopped because
`cargo` is absent. Current-head CI supplies Rust and full build
coverage. `pnpm verify --explain` selects broad required CI; full local
suites were not repeated.

## Risks

- Wording changes guide the model; they do not enforce a ban on
subtasks.
- Existing installed skill versions and saved custom instructions need
their normal refresh process. This PR does not migrate company
configuration.
- Existing approved task assignments and approval gates remain in
effect.

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-6, through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact routed model ID and context-window size were not
exposed in this session.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-11-10 09:58:54 -06:00
DottaandClaude 8d2bf78323 test(runner-e2e): resync the SDK public source pins with master (#20550)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The Runner support suite checks that the plugin SDK's public types
come only from reviewed source inputs, pinned by git blob hash in
`tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.json`
> - #19614 landed those pins, generated against an older master; since
then `package.json` and ten files under `packages/shared/src` changed
> - So `source-sdk-public-type.test.ts` (2 tests) and
`source-sdk-evidence.test.ts` (1 test) fail the `ci / Runner support
suite` check on every PR merge ref
> - This pull request regenerates the source pins with the script made
for that job
> - The benefit is a green Runner support suite for every open PR again

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?** Since #19614 merged, `ci / Runner support suite`
fails on every PR (for example #20047 and #20538) with `SDK public
source proof unavailable` and `Source SDK evidence privacy check
failed`.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. On master at 902f376796, run `pnpm exec vitest run --config
tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts source-sdk`.
2. Two tests in `source-sdk-public-type.test.ts` fail.

**Expected behavior** The source pins match the committed tree, and the
suite passes.

## What Changed

- `tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.json`: source pins
regenerated with `node tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs
902f376796 --write` (11 changed blobs,
plus new source files). The script reports `runtimePinsChanged: false`:
the lock, compiler, parser and zod pins are unchanged.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts
source-sdk`: 5 files, 68 passed, 1 skipped (before: 2 failed).

## Risks

- Test registry only, no product code. The next change to a pinned input
under `packages/shared/src` or `packages/plugins/sdk/src` will need the
same resync, as before.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, via Claude Code with
tool use (shell, file editing, 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)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-10 08:33:32 -06:00
f4337bb5fb test(evals): land the chat catalog eval harness on master (#19614)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The chat-feature evals measure whether agents complete real chat
requests through the product
> - The chat catalog eval harness and its repairs live on the
`chat-eval/master-candidate` branch, not on master
> - Today's work made 139 of 242 chat evals pass in verified single-case
live runs. Each product fix landed on master as its own pull request
> - The eval-side changes (setups, graders, fault seams, evidence
capture) still exist only on the candidate
> - This pull request lands the harness on master. Master stays the
source of truth for product behavior
> - The benefit is one tree: evals run against master commits, and
product fixes reach the evals as soon as they merge

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #19441, Refs #19599, Refs #20270, Refs #20334, Refs #20342, Refs
#20344, Refs #20354, Refs #20360, Refs #20373, Refs #20382, Refs #20409

**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The chat catalog eval harness and the product it evaluates live on a
long-running branch outside master. Eval fixes do not reach master, so
master-based eval runs use old setups and graders.

**Subsystem affected**
`tests/runner-e2e` chat catalog harness, plus a small set of product
changes that exist only on the candidate.

**Proposed change**
Land the harness on master. Every product fix from this eval work
already merged to master as its own pull request. Conflicts keep
master's product behavior.

## What Changed

- Most of the diff (808 of 851 files) is under `tests/runner-e2e/`:
chat-catalog domains, scenarios, descriptors, the TestOps manifest,
private evidence tooling, and their tests.
- Graders now check saved state, setup literals and rendered or clicked
links. Many keyword and regex checks on free-form replies are removed.
Each changed grader has a bumped `oracleVersion` and calibration tests
(a valid reply, a reworded valid reply, and broken variants that must
fail).
- The shared link helper `hasLink` no longer treats a list link (for
example `/COM/issues?view=mine`) as a link to every task without a URL
key.
- Setup fixes build real state through supported product routes: routine
history, agent grants through the board grant route, budget holds with a
real cap, and a storage-layer archive fault for
`inbox-search.archive-partial-failure`.
- Browser boundary journeys (sign-in, chat-disabled, onboarding) now
write the standard pass evidence files.
- Retargeted cases, approved by the maintainer:
`agent-chat.chat-disabled` (Conference Room gate),
`agents.restore-instructions` (no saved instruction history),
`access.manage-membership` (member permission edits stay board-only).
- The private evidence trusted files (`manual-private-handoff.ts`,
`manual-private-retention.ts`, `manual-private-report-assets.ts`) are
byte-identical to master.
- Product files outside `tests/` (43 files, +1,328 −49) carry
candidate-only changes that master does not yet have. Most are tests.
The main code changes are in `request-human-input.ts`,
`heartbeat-run-summary.ts`, `native-completion-feedback.ts`,
`native-run-finalizer.ts`, `openapi.ts`, `secrets.ts` and
`IssueChatLongThreadPerf.tsx`.

## Verification

- `pnpm vitest run chat-catalog-domains chat-catalog-contract.test.ts
chat-catalog-consistency.test.ts unit-launcher.test.mjs
--testTimeout=180000` in `tests/runner-e2e`: 269 files pass, 3,550 tests
pass.
- `node --test chat-full-catalog-testops-manifest.test.mjs`: 10 pass.
- `node tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs <HEAD> --check`:
no change.
- `tsc` for `server` and `tests/runner-e2e`: clean.
- Live single-case verification: 139 of 242 cases passed on paid runs,
and a person read the saved evidence for each. These are single-case
runs, not one full-cohort run.

## Risks

- Large diff. Most of it is test-only, but the 43 non-test files change
product code paths. Review those files first.
- Some graders are now less strict on reply wording. A person must read
replies for meaning on those cases.
- 42 cases need disposable outside accounts (Notion, Slack, GitHub,
Daytona and others) and stay blocked. `access.invite-teammate` stays
failing until local agent isolation lands, because the runner's durable
state keeps a live invite token.
- The paid workflow compares the trusted private-evidence files with
master. They are unchanged, so this risk is low.

## Model Used

Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), with tool use and code
execution, in Claude Code. Subagents used the same model.

## Checklist

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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-11-10 08:02:11 -06:00