Commit Graph
2172 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
Aashish Mahato 457d3209b1 fix: name the real reason a connection request expires on reassignment (#14067)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - When an agent's selected AI account is unavailable, the issue thread
shows a `connection_intent` card. A person must reconnect the account or
pick another connection.
> - If the issue assignment changes while that card is still pending,
the server expires it. This is the ownership-change path in
`expireConnectionIntentsForOwnershipChange`.
> - The expired card showed the reason "The task assignment changed".
That text is wrong in two ways. It does not say that the connection
request was never answered, and it does not say the connection is still
missing.
> - Worse, the reason never reached the screen at all: the expired
branch of the card hard-codes "This request is no longer active.", so
any guidance the server stores is discarded. My first round of this PR
claimed the opposite, which was incorrect — the UI change is required
for the fix to be visible.
> - Issue #14040 reported the symptom: users saw a run fail with
"assignment" blame and no hint that a connection needed attention. It
happened on both `claude_local` and `codex_local` agents, so the message
— not one adapter — is the defect.
> - This pull request therefore fixes both ends: the server stores a
sentence that names what happened and what to do next, per kind of
request, and the card prints the stored reason instead of a generic
string.
> - The issue asks for a larger behavior change (hold reassignment until
the card resolves). That needs a product discussion, so this PR keeps
the scope to the message and where it is displayed.
> - The benefit is that the card tells the truth: the blocker is the
connection, not the assignment, and it says so on screen.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

- Fixes: #14040

## What Changed

- `server/src/services/issue-thread-interactions.ts`:
`expireConnectionIntentsForOwnershipChange` now selects each pending
row's payload before expiring it and writes a per-request reason: "The
task was reassigned before the connection request was answered, so the
AI account is still not connected. Reconnect it or choose an available
connection." for AI-account intents, and the same sentence naming "the
`<serviceName>` connection" for tool intents. The subject is chosen from
`payload.purpose === "ai"`, falling back to "the requested connection"
for a payload that carries neither, because this one path expires both
kinds and the recovery step differs.
- `ui/src/features/connections/ConnectionIntentInteractionBody.tsx`: the
expired branch now renders `interaction.result?.reason` and keeps "This
request is no longer active." only as the fallback for results stored
before this change. The `superseded` outcome keeps its own wording. This
component is the shared body for both the compact task card and the full
thread card, so both views get the reason.
- `server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts`: the expiry test now
expires a tool (`Notion`) and an AI (`claude_local`) intent in the same
run and asserts both stored reasons, so neither wording can regress into
the other.
-
`ui/src/features/connections/ConnectionIntentInteractionBody.test.tsx`:
new test renders an expired card whose result carries a reason and
asserts the reason is on screen and the generic fallback string is not.

## Verification

- `npx vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts
ui/src/features/connections/ConnectionIntentInteractionBody.test.tsx` —
151/151 passed (127 server, 24 UI; 33.4s, Node 22.22.2, local). My first
revision of this body cited 168 for the same set; that count came from a
run on the wrong branch, and 151 is what this command prints on
`fix/connection-intent-expiry-reason`.
- The pinned server test drives the real path: it inserts pending
`connection_intent` rows plus a live `toolOauthStates` row, reassigns
the issue through `svc.update(...)`, then asserts both expired reasons
and the deleted OAuth state row.
- Mutation checks: forcing the AI subject for every row makes the expiry
test fail on the tool-row assertion (`1 failed | 126 skipped`, `expected
[ { …29 fields } ] to deeply equal [ ObjectContaining{…} ]`), and
deleting the `result.reason` branch in the card fails exactly `shows the
stored reason on an expired request` (`1 failed | 23 passed`). Both
revert clean. The reverse wording mutation (tool subject forced onto AI
rows) was not run, so that half of the test is pinned by its assertion
rather than by a demonstrated mutation.
- No schema, wire-format, or payload change. Only the free-text
`result.reason` value differs and the card now reads the field it was
already given.

## Risks

- Low risk. The value is display text on a terminal interaction outcome.
No code parses the old string, and no stored data is migrated; cards
that expired before this change keep their old text and now render it as
the stored reason they carry.
- The deeper request in #14040 (do not expire a pending
`connection_intent` on reassignment) is intentionally out of scope here
and needs a maintainer decision.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude (Opus 4.x, agentic CLI coding assistant with file
edit and shell tool use) assisted with the code change, the test
updates, and this PR text. A human reviewed the diff and the issue
context before submission.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` /
`Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the
relevant issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
2026-10-15 16:11:35 -07:00
Prompt-SurferandClaude Opus 5.5 fa062b202d fix(ui): ignore MDXEditor initial markdown normalization in MarkdownEditor (#13915)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Operators edit agent instructions, routine descriptions, and other
Markdown fields in the web UI
> - All of these fields use the shared `MarkdownEditor`, which wraps
MDXEditor
> - MDXEditor re-serializes the initial Markdown when it loads, and it
sends the result through `onChange`
> - MDXEditor marks that event with the second `onChange` argument,
`initialMarkdownNormalize`, but `MarkdownEditor` ignores the flag
> - Thus each parent with dirty tracking shows unsaved changes before
the user types, and each parent must add its own interaction gate
(#12502, #13485)
> - This pull request drops the flagged event inside `MarkdownEditor`
> - The benefit is that no consumer reports unchanged content as
modified on load, and new consumers do not need their own gate

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #13472

Related:
- #12502 (merged) adds an interaction gate for agent instructions in
`AgentDetail.tsx`.
- #13485 (open) adds the same gate to the two routine description
editors. Its description names "a shared fix inside `MarkdownEditor`" as
a follow-up. This PR is that follow-up. It does not conflict with
#13485. The two changes can merge in any order.

## What Changed

- `MarkdownEditor.tsx`: read the second `onChange` argument
(`initialMarkdownNormalize`). When it is `true`, do not call the parent
`onChange`.
- The check runs after the empty-document mount guard. That guard still
restores content when the first event is empty.
- `latestValueRef` keeps the parent value. Thus the prop-sync effect
does not push the original Markdown back into the editor.
- `MarkdownEditor.test.tsx`: the MDXEditor mock can now send a flagged
normalization event on mount. A new test makes sure that the parent
`onChange` does not run and that the editor keeps its content.

## Verification

- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx`: 48 tests pass.
- The new test fails without the change ("expected vi.fn() to not be
called at all, but actually been called 1 times"). It passes with the
change.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run` (full UI suite): 634
test files and 6653 tests pass.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`: passes with 0 errors.
- I read the MDXEditor 4.2.3 source (`dist/plugins/core/index.js`). The
flag is `true` only for the first export after the initial Markdown is
set. The editor sets it to `false` after that export. User edits and
`setMarkdown` echoes get `false`.
- Manual check: we tested the same guard in a real browser on an older
Paperclip base (MDXEditor 3.55), together with two changes that `master`
already has from #12502. We opened an agent Instructions tab with `-`
bullets. The Save bar and the unsaved-changes prompt did not show until
we typed. After an edit, one prompt showed for each navigation, and Save
still stored the edit.

Manual steps for a reviewer:
1. Put an instruction file with `-` bullets on an agent, for example `-
first` and `- second`.
2. Open the agent Instructions tab. Do not type.
3. Make sure that the Save bar does not show.
4. Go to another tab. Make sure that no unsaved-changes prompt shows.
5. Do the same steps with a routine description that has `-` bullets.

## Risks

- Low risk. The change affects only the first `onChange` event after the
editor loads.
- A consumer that uses the first event to learn the normalized Markdown
no longer gets it. We found no such consumer in the 24 files that render
`MarkdownEditor`, and the full UI suite passes.
- There are no API, database, migration, or visual changes.

> 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`), 1M-token context
window, run as a Claude Code agent with tool use (shell, file edits,
test runs). The model wrote the code, the test, and this description. A
human operator approved them before submission.

## Checklist

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

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-10-15 16:06:53 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip ec3eb1968b feat(runner): expose credential updates through PRP (#16463)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The Runner uses PRP to send harness events to the host.
> - A harness can replace its stored OAuth tokens during a run.
> - The host has no PRP signal that tells it to read the updated
credential.
> - This pull request adds a durable credential update event and
observers for supported stores.
> - The host can react before it acknowledges the event. Token values
stay outside PRP.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

`packages/paperclip-runner`: native provider execution, PRP schemas, and
host event delivery.

**Problem or motivation**

A Paperclip host that consumes PRP needs to react when a harness changes
its refresh-token credential. Existing credential copy-back paths do not
provide a common event during a warm session.

**Proposed solution**

Add `auth.credentials.updated` as a P0 runner event. Include only the
provider, binding ID, revision, and detection method. Observe native
Codex and Codex/Grok ACPX credential files. Retain each pending event
across runner restart until the durable outbox accepts it. Raw PRP
consumers opt in with `observeCredentials: true` before session open.
The bundled transport opts in for fresh sessions.

**Alternatives considered**

`harness.diagnostic` would mix a runner observation with harness
diagnostics. Sending token values through PRP would expose credentials
to event logs. Both approaches are unnecessary.

**Roadmap alignment**

I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This change extends the existing Runner protocol
and does not duplicate a planned core feature.

**Additional context**

Refs: #11094, #14056, #12696. These describe credential copy-back and
staging work. This PR adds the notification contract. It does not
replace those private credential channels or claim to fix their full
scope.

## What Changed

- Add strict credential update payload validation to PRP v1, v2, and v3.
Regenerate validators, the manifest, and the event catalog.
- Watch supported credential directories with `notify`. Add a periodic
read as a fallback and check at terminal and close boundaries.
- Persist a private baseline and pending event together. Notify on
account identity changes and retain the new baseline for later
refreshes. Ignore incomplete files, unsafe files, and metadata changes.
- Forward the event through the host transport. Test commit-before-ACK
delivery and replay.
- Commit pending runner observations before suspend and shutdown
commands complete. Preserve the provider event backlog.
- Create the private ACPX runtime directory before configuring
observation. Cover fresh session startup with observation enabled.
- Fence asynchronous PRP commits to the current authenticated connection
and run authority. Ignore replaced callbacks while preserving the
maintenance drain of admitted work.
- Deliver observations found during final provider cleanup before
clearing terminal recovery state. Retain the outbox and recovery state
when the host ACK is lost.
- Advance the pending Copilot candidate profile to v19 for the changed
shared PRP source hashes. Preserve its v18 history and pending
qualification status. Include the current fixture in the Docker build
context.
- Commit credential updates through an awaited host callback before PRP
ACK, including during idle and close. Persist them in a separate run-log
source namespace with company, agent, session, and runner checks.
- Preserve public event metadata through server redaction. Register the
event in task run details.
- Document opt-in behavior, supported stores, event semantics, and the
local run-log path.

## Verification

- All 45 durable runner control tests and 24 native executor integration
tests pass.
- Ten Rust credential observer tests pass. They cover atomic
replacement, polling, recovery, account-only changes and later refreshes
for Codex and Grok, unsafe files, fresh runtime creation, and the Grok
close handoff. Account identity stays private.
- The full Runner TypeScript suite passes: 3,565 tests in 221 files. An
additional 12 tests are skipped by the suite.
- All 214 focused tests pass for the contract, Codex event routing,
catalog, and durable host delivery.
- All 13 Node protocol contract tests pass.
- The exact Docker context integrity command passes: `docker buildx
build --file .github/docker-context-checks.Dockerfile .`.
- Rust formatting and generated protocol checks pass.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. The full local `pnpm
test:run` was attempted with CI-compatible `init.defaultBranch=master`,
then stopped after a reproducible failure outside this change:
`git-workspace-expiration.test.ts` expects one re-expired workspace but
gets zero. The same case fails in isolation on this macOS checkout. Full
repository validation is provided by CI; the focused Runner and host
tests pass locally.
- All 253 native transport and restart tests pass against the final
release binary.
- All 3 durable recovery tests and 139 candidate profile and native
admission tests pass.
- All 41 host redaction and task protocol surface tests pass. `pnpm
check:token-gates` passes.
- All 467 CI policy tests pass, including the 15 CI profiling tests. The
upstream secret-reference test fix is retained from master. No workflow
changes are included.

- The Apex host-delivery fix passes 381 targeted Runner tests, six host
database tests, repository typecheck, and the production build. The
Runner tests cover commit-before-ACK, retry after a rejected host
commit, warm attachment, and close after the turn queue ends.
- Prior head `2f125cfcb` passed CI, standard Greptile 5/5, and Apex 5/5.
One CI shard was interrupted by GitHub runner shutdown; its single rerun
passed. Both Apex findings are addressed: idle/cleanup host delivery and
late callback reconnect fencing. Current head `5db78f082` passes CI (56
successful statuses and four optional skips) and standard Greptile 5/5.
Apex review of the account-change update is 5/5 on this exact head, with
no actionable issues.
- All 121 durable control-plane and credential callback tests pass,
including account-only change delivery, subsequent refresh on the new
account during close, host commit retry, late success/failure races,
forward cursor delivery on a replacement connection, and the existing
maintenance retirement contract. All 27 native provider and durable
recovery integration tests pass after the account-change update.

## Risks

- File changes signal a stored credential update. They do not prove that
an OAuth refresh succeeded. Changes between reads can be combined.
- Unix Codex and Codex/Grok ACPX stores are supported. Other harnesses
and credentials held only in memory need their own integration.
- Hosts must update their event schemas before opting in. Older hosts
omit the flag and receive no new event. Older runners ignore the flag.
- The host must use its existing private credential channel and account
checks to read or copy the token. Account switches trigger notification
but do not authorize accepting the new account. The event grants no
credential access.
- Tests use synthetic credentials. No live OAuth refresh has been
forced.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, exact model ID `gpt-6.1-sol`, with high reasoning effort,
repository inspection, tool use, and code execution. The session does
not expose its context window size.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-15 14:49:00 -07:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 0b62c736a0 feat(connections): add generic Daytona API and Toolbox access (#16483)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Apps connections give agents controlled access to external services.
> - Daytona provides sandbox, file, command, Git, and account APIs.
> - Operators need to assign this access without exposing a server
credential.
> - A small task-specific tool list cannot serve general Daytona work.
> - This pull request adds the published HTTP actions through the
existing connection gateway.
> - Operators keep control of identity, agent access, and each action.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Problem or motivation**

Paperclip has a Daytona sandbox provider for its own execution
infrastructure. It lacks a normal Apps connection for agents to manage
an operator's Daytona account. Reusing the server's provider credential
would bypass normal connection ownership and action permissions.

**Proposed solution**

Add a Daytona connection with personal or shared vault credentials.
Generate its action catalog from the official platform and Toolbox API
specifications. Use the existing run-bound gateway, grants, action
policies, approvals, revocation, and audit paths. Sandbox IDs come from
Daytona; tools need no Paperclip task or lease ID.

**Alternatives considered**

A four-action diagnostic subset cannot support general provider work.
Launching the provider CLI would expose host filesystem behavior. Native
OAuth is not included because a supported third-party registration path
was not verified. The native method uses an organization API key.
Existing Composio setup is a separate possible OAuth route and is not
qualified by this change.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends the existing Apps and Connections provider coverage in
`ROADMAP.md`. It uses that system's credential and permission model.
GitHub searches found no existing Daytona Apps connector PR or issue.

## What Changed

- Add the Daytona catalog entry, provider source override, official
theme logos, permission review, and setup documentation.
- Generate 274 HTTP actions: 169 platform and 105 Toolbox operations.
Record two WebSocket upgrades separately; do not advertise them as HTTP
tools. Record source URLs and hashes.
- Add provider-focused execution for sandboxes, snapshots, volumes,
files, Git, commands, computer use, and account resources. Provider
authority still limits which endpoints accept an organization key.
- Validate action arguments. Resolve Toolbox targets through the fixed
platform API. Check sandbox identity and organization before using an
approved Daytona proxy. Keep normal guarded network requests and vault
resolution.
- Transfer file bytes without reading or writing host files. Share one
caller deadline across prerequisite reads, dispatch, and response
reading. Bound requests and responses. Do not automatically retry writes
with unknown outcomes. Redact the selected credential from results and
errors.
- Classify credential access, access changes, interactive input, command
execution, file permissions, and deletion (including TTL and
auto-delete) as destructive actions. Keep new and changed actions under
catalog review.
- Upgrade saved catalogs and retire the earlier diagnostic names. Hide
retired actions from the UI and agent discovery even when provider
refresh fails. Preserve existing action choices and historical records.
Reject stale same-name contracts during agent discovery and dispatch
before a board refresh.
- Add database-backed gateway and catalog-upgrade regressions, schema
generator tests, a browser setup check, and both capability map updates.

## Verification

- Passed on the review-fix head: 57 focused Vitest cases (18 Daytona
database/client cases, five HTTP boundary cases, and 34 shared catalog
cases), four generator tests, `pnpm -r typecheck`, and `pnpm build`. The
five HTTP cases use a real local server through the pinned production
transport. The normal browser setup check and 17 generator/artwork cases
passed on the initial PR head; those UI and artwork paths are unchanged.
- Passed on this branch: brand asset validation, token gates, map
structure checks, and `git diff --check`. All latest-head GitHub checks
pass on `ea979ccb3a64dc9508807823540f935c4316ea35`. Apex is 5/5, with
all five findings addressed and zero unresolved threads. The branch has
no merge conflicts.
- The initial catalog-generation command could not find the external
research corpus. The supported `--definitions-only` mode regenerated the
definitions successfully. Unrelated generated drift was excluded.
- An earlier full local Vitest attempt on the preview branch failed when
bundled PostgreSQL could not start on macOS. After replay onto current
master, all three unchanged event-sequencing cases pass with bundled
PostgreSQL; the earlier startup cause remains uncertain.
- The first full-suite command on this branch used my external test
database override. Chat fixtures require a current migrated schema and
failed because `agents.lifecycle_state` was absent in that disposable
database. A focused comparison reproduces failure with the override and
passes with normal setup. That attempt was stopped, and the full suite
restarted without the override. Focused Daytona cases use their own
migrated PostgreSQL 16 databases.
- The clean local full-suite attempt recorded embedded PostgreSQL
startup failures in two unchanged native-runtime cases and two failures
in unchanged Git fixtures. It was stopped after these failures were
isolated; no full local suite pass is claimed. The 15 matching
native-runtime cases pass separately. The Git cases fail with the local
`init.defaultBranch=main` setting and pass with `GIT_CONFIG_COUNT=1
GIT_CONFIG_KEY_0=init.defaultBranch GIT_CONFIG_VALUE_0=master` limited
to the test command. No global Git setting was changed. Full Linux CI is
green.
- Fixtures use real database persistence and run-bound gateway sessions
with provider responses replaced by fixtures. They cover personal/shared
vault ownership, reads and writes, file bytes, Off policies, revocation,
organization mismatch, untrusted proxy rejection, output bounds, saved
catalog upgrades, failed refresh, and permission preservation.
- The first Apex review found five valid issues: multipart transport
compatibility, destructive classification, caller deadlines, audit
filters, and stale saved contracts. All five were fixed with regressions
before the second review. A typecheck then found the nullable saved
schema hash; admission now accepts that stored type and rejects null as
stale.
- The browser check covers setup controls without submitting a provider
key. No real Daytona account, provider write, native OAuth flow, or
agent model run is qualified. Live provider read/write proof remains
pending a test account.

## Risks

- Daytona keys have broad Toolbox authority, including keys with no
selected resource scopes. Only assign this connection to trusted agents
and review its action permissions.
- Remote writes or commands can continue after a timeout. Calls do not
automatically retry an uncertain outcome.
- The bridge targets Daytona Cloud. Proxy hosts are restricted; an
unrecognized future regional host fails closed.
- Files and responses have an 8 MiB bound. Each action has one caller
deadline, capped at 30 seconds across all provider requests and response
reading. Interactive WebSocket sessions are not exposed as HTTP actions.
- The generated JSON snapshot exceeds 1,000 lines because it holds the
provider input contracts. Generator logic and execution code remain in
separate small modules. Updates require explicit regeneration and
catalog review.
- No database migration or lockfile change is required.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The runtime identifies the model family but does
not expose the exact backend model ID or context window. Used reasoning,
repository inspection, code editing, shell tools, database verification,
and browser 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>
2026-10-15 14:05:26 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip db11d899cf fix(native): recover remote sessions while preserving warm runs (#16451)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Native agents keep remote processes and conversation history across
warm turns.
> - A completed turn can leave handoff authority only in controller
memory.
> - Losing that controller can block a follow-up even while its sandbox
survives.
> - This pull request verifies durable ownership and reconnects the
exact prior process before handing it to the next run.
> - Healthy follow-ups stay warm. Recovery preserves saved work without
replaying a completed turn.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A remote warm turn can finish without suspended backup authority. A
replacement controller rejects that prior owner even when its exact
process and completed checkpoint remain. A single unavailable identity
probe can also stop an otherwise valid reattachment.

**Expected behavior**

Keep healthy follow-ups warm. Recover a completed session after proving
that its controller stopped and that the successor holds current
authority. Reuse compatible processes; otherwise save and resume the
conversation. Retry unavailable identity reads within one shared
deadline.

**Steps to reproduce**

Use `doc/testing-native-remote-continuity.md`. Its Linux cases execute
real turns through PostgreSQL, TLS ingress, and the Rust runner. They
kill a separate controller process, recover old checkpoint metadata, and
change process configuration. The provider is deterministic.

Related: #16432 and #16441 fix live warm-owner handoffs. #16341 adds
recovery diagnostics. #14695 covers provider process retention.

## What Changed

- Preserve warm process reuse between healthy remote turns.
- Verify a committed prior result, stopped controller, matching
checkpoint and sandbox, and current task/coordinator ownership before
recovering an orphaned warm session.
- Reconnect through the prior run route, then use the existing
authenticated run attachment to change authority.
- Persist a process-configuration digest. Close and save recovered
sessions when old or changed configuration cannot support reuse.
- Retry unavailable state, marker, and process reads within one
30-second deadline. Keep signals and definitive identity failures
single-attempt.
- Record closed recovery diagnostics, including unreadable or malformed
saved state.
- Retire the recovery-only ownership check after verified attachment, so
later warm turns use their current authority.
- Add real-process Linux regressions and refusal controls.
- Expose the existing source-only file-recovery form for retained native
holds, with the same board authority, evidence, and exact stop-receipt
requirements as legacy holds. Recording recovered files does not change
task status or replay a run.

## Verification

- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed; the server check was repeated for the
third-turn fix.
- `pnpm build` passed after the final UI change. The UI typecheck, token
gates, and map checks also pass.
- Four Linux continuity cases passed: warm reuse, controller loss,
legacy checkpoint metadata, and changed configuration. Each creates one
conversation and starts exactly three turns, including a healthy
follow-up after recovery. The fixture uses expired prior leases; the
third turn keeps the runner and provider processes.
- Greptile caught the retained recovery gate; the third-turn regression
now covers it. An initial test omitted the heartbeat’s saved input and
left a test process after failure; the fixture was corrected and its
disposable container reset before the passing run.
- The current focused executor/restart group passes all 749 tests,
including the original failure classifications.
- Native file-recovery and UI tests pass (52 tests), including blocked
tasks and both native and legacy holds.
- After merging current master and retaining its equivalent CI
expression check, the CI policy tests pass (15 tests) and all four
three-turn Linux continuity cases pass again on
`dec418ae55ff21b4fb067132613658cce445f181`.
- `pnpm test:run` completed its general server group with 20,572 passes,
103 skips, and three failures: the skill-audit child process and two
HTTP test timeouts. The same three suites then passed in isolation (89
tests) without code changes. That local command stopped before later
groups; the complete final-head CI, including general, serialized,
Runner, build, and browser gates, is green.
- Greptile reviewed the combined head
`dec418ae55ff21b4fb067132613658cce445f181` at 5/5 with no actionable
findings; both earlier findings are resolved. All final-head CI gates
and the security scan passed. Staging deployment and retained-incident
disposition remain deployment acceptance work.

## Risks

- Recovery requires exact durable evidence. Live conflicting
controllers, replacement sandboxes, Stop/pause, and uncertain effects
must remain blocked.
- After controller loss, tool-contract or process-configuration changes
can restart the provider. Normal healthy follow-ups retain their
processes.
- The new idle-recovery path has Linux fake-provider evidence. Live
Codex/OpenCode and retained quarantined-state recovery still need
staging qualification.
- No database schema, telemetry, or runner protocol changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code
execution, and browser tools. The session does not expose a more
specific model version or context-window size.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (targeted checks and
isolated reruns; full-run limitation recorded above)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green on
`dec418ae55ff21b4fb067132613658cce445f181`
- [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>
2026-10-15 13:26:09 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip cccde7122b Trace execution preparation and durable response persistence (#16419)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The server prepares an execution environment before it starts an
agent.
> - Operators need to distinguish preparation, provider wait, and
response persistence.
> - Existing preparation phases start separate traces, and the native
session trace ends before the final response is saved.
> - This pull request adds an execution-attempt trace and detailed spans
at the existing work boundaries.
> - The benefit is a measurable startup and settlement path without
changing execution policy.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Operator-configured OpenTelemetry tracing for agent preparation,
startup, and durable response storage.

**Subsystem affected**

Server orchestration, native Runner startup, and the Honeycomb run link.

**Current behavior**

Preparation phases start independent roots. Workspace lock waits,
authorization groups, runtime asset work, provider-pack fallback, and
the gap after provider completion are hard to attribute.

**Proposed behavior**

Use a server-owned async context for each execution attempt. Parent
nested work to that attempt. Link the separately sampled native session
because its ingress and queue history can begin earlier. Record
transaction entry, lock waits, grouped authorization, asset preparation,
artifact fallback, copyback, and response commit.

**Reason and benefit**

Operators can identify expensive work from recorded boundaries instead
of inferring the cause from elapsed time. Nested and concurrent
durations remain visible and must not be added together.

**Breaking changes**

No API or execution-policy change. New Observability span names and
closed count attributes are documented. The existing local
run-performance schema also records the additional provider-pack and
harness measurements.

Refs: #16178, #16205, #16330.

## What Changed

- Add `task.execution_attempt` with same-run async ownership,
independent root sampling, and native-session links.
- Measure workspace transaction entry and settlement, advisory and row
waits, source scans, reader groups, notifications, and writes.
- Measure runtime selection and each concurrent instructions, skills,
and MCP branch. Separate manifest, cache, materialization, and
verification work.
- Measure provider-pack discovery, verified reuse or upload, final
verification, and remote harness state checks.
- Measure workspace settlement, accounting, liveness, response
authorization, comment commit, and publication enqueue.
- Preserve the silent endpoint-off path, including when another library
has registered a tracer. Bound repeated detail spans to 16 per name per
attempt.
- Extend the Honeycomb run link and document the actual coverage and
remaining gaps.

## Verification

- After resolving the conflict with retained-reader batching on
`b98cdaea531c8447637cd4dcc19c61b3f5f41844`, all 61 targeted query,
authorization, workspace-preparation and trace-boundary tests passed.
The server typecheck passed. Reader tests still bound query count, avoid
loading retained run payloads and enforce fresh project grants on every
publication attempt.
- Before that base integration, the tracing/exporter group passed 855
tests with 2 optional-SDK skips across 10 files and no inherited OTLP
endpoint. It covers real PostgreSQL waits/rollback, durable response
commit, assembled heartbeat preparation, concurrent parentage, sampling
and tracer failure isolation. Native workspace/history tests passed 23
cases. These results remain supporting evidence for the unchanged
tracing paths.
- Full workspace typecheck and build passed during implementation. Full
sharded CI, release validation, E2E and Apex 5/5 passed on prior head
`8cebad80f3856dbcff6f3a6d5d34880ff77a20f2`. Fresh CI, security and Apex
review are required on the current head before merge.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passed. No styles changed.
- Earlier CI runs exposed exact-source-expression assertions changed by
wrappers, missing run hashes on transaction-boundary spans, and sampling
fixtures without an enabled endpoint. The fixes preserve the calls, add
the declared hash and span cap, and enable tracing explicitly in the
sampling fixtures. Focused repairs passed; the full prior-head CI passed
after those repairs. Earlier failed run:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38729131366.
- The full local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after the base advanced
during that process. Its mixed-version results are not final-head
evidence. A full local-suite pass is not claimed.
- The old-head Superagent scan stalled at 35%. The current head has a
fresh scan; no security pass is inferred from the old pending result.
- No deployed Honeycomb acceptance is claimed by this code change.

## Risks

- Enabled tracing creates more spans. Repeated detail spans are bounded,
and inventories use group spans.
- The attempt and native session remain linked traces. Historical queue
time can precede the attempt, and nested intervals overlap.
- A committed comment proves durable server storage. Publication enqueue
and realtime dispatch do not prove external delivery or browser paint.
- New custom attributes use only the existing run hash and validated
file/byte counts. No SQL, paths, permissions, content, or exception text
is added.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The serving model ID and context window size
are not exposed in this session. The agent used reasoning, tools, code
editing, and code execution.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-15 08:13:53 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 250429942e fix(agents): report actionable lifecycle failure steps (#16418)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents for work.
> - New agents must pass setup and execution checks before they can run.
> - The lifecycle worker saved the same retry message for every failure.
> - Users could not identify the failed step or correct its
configuration.
> - The UI also described failed work as work still in progress.
> - This pull request names the failed step and gives a safe corrective
action.
> - Users can identify configuration problems and understand automatic
retries.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A new hire showed a paused status and “The lifecycle step failed. Retry
the operation.” Repeated retries did not explain the failure. A
successful retry cleared the original error. This change cannot recover
an error that an older server already cleared.

**Expected behavior**

Name the failed setup step. Give a useful action for known execution
test failures. Explain automatic retry. Keep provider output and
credentials out of lifecycle errors.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create a disposable agent with an unavailable model or invalid
execution command.
2. Open its profile while verification fails.
3. Inspect the error, correct the configuration, and select Retry now.
4. Confirm that the failure disappears after the agent becomes ready.

Related change: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16155
shows pending setup progress in creation and assignment. This change
improves the cause and action shown when setup fails.

## What Changed

- Save the failed lifecycle phase and step in the existing lifecycle
error field.
- Classify authentication, model, command, directory, timeout, and
response failures from execution test check codes.
- Use fixed error messages. Do not retain raw provider messages, check
details, or credentials.
- Share the allowed failure codes with the lifecycle log.
- Show failed-state labels and automatic retry guidance. Rename Retry to
Retry now.
- Extend worker, database, and UI regression coverage. Update the agent
verification maps.

## Verification

- Passed 105 focused tests across lifecycle diagnostics, database
lifecycle commands, saved harness verification, and
AgentLifecycleStatus.
- Passed server TypeScript compilation with `pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/server exec tsc --noEmit`.
- Passed UI typecheck and production build.
- Passed module boundary checks, token gates, character sync, map
validation, and `git diff --check`.
- Used Playwright to inspect the production component with a simulated
model failure. Confirmed the failure text, retry guidance, retry
callback, and recovered state. Captured a screenshot. This component
check does not prove a live provider run.
- Attempted `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. Both require Rust
cargo, which is not installed in the local execution environment.
- Started `pnpm test:run` locally. No final local suite result was
recorded before handoff. The complete PR CI workflow passed.
- Passed all latest-commit CI gates, including typecheck, build, general
and serialized tests, Rust checks, and all eight browser test shards:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38726198774
- Greptile scored the latest commit 5/5 with no findings. There are no
review threads to resolve.

## Risks

- Failure classification depends on existing adapter check codes.
Unknown codes use a safe fallback message.
- A known code can describe only the checks reported by the adapter.
- No database migration is required. The error field remains a string.
- Retry schedules, leases, readiness, approvals, and budget controls
keep their current behavior.
- Full build verification requires a runner with Rust cargo.

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. Used reasoning, code editing, browser
checks, and tool execution. The runtime does not expose the exact
deployment ID or 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
- [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>
2026-10-15 06:46:29 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 074c67fea8 fix(grok): avoid routine wakes for accepted work (#16394)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and their work.
> - Grok Bot receives assignments through routine webhooks and uses
agent MCP tools.
> - Each accepted assignment belongs to the current external
interaction.
> - A pending tool result or comment could start another routine while
that work was still active.
> - Quiet MCP traffic cannot prove that Grok has stopped working.
> - This pull request keeps receipts and feedback durable for the
current interaction to read.
> - New task routines start only for offers that the Bot has not
accepted.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16219 and #16305. The duplicate search also found #12991, which
covers instruction files for local Grok runs.

**What happened?**

The dispatcher could start another routine for an unread result after a
period without a routine reply. It could also wake accepted work for a
task comment. A queued delivery could still start after the Bot had
claimed the offer.

**Expected behavior**

Accepted work stays in its current interaction. The Bot polls the
original operation receipt and reads queued feedback at a safe boundary.
Acknowledgements of a sent wake remain valid after acceptance.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Accept a Grok assignment and leave it active.
2. Add an unread comment, or complete a tool operation whose call
returned pending.
3. Run the dispatcher after its quiet period.
4. Observe another webhook call. Also queue an offer wake, accept the
offer before sending, and observe that delivery still starts.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Observed during real-client qualification on Core
ff0f976de1. The three new regression cases
also failed on current master before the correction.

## What Changed

- Stop automatic result and feedback wakes for accepted work. Keep both
available through their existing read paths.
- Require an unaccepted offer before dispatch or an explicit delivery
retry. Serialize the final HTTP handoff with acceptance receipts. Cancel
obsolete unsent wakes. Preserve late acknowledgements and immediate Stop
authority.
- Return current Grok polling instructions on assignment reads. Clarify
pending and unknown outcomes in setup guidance.
- Add protocol, receipt-polling, queued-delivery and
late-acknowledgement regressions. Update the operation guide and
readiness plan.

## Verification

- Three new regression cases fail before the fix because a webhook
starts.
- The latest 31 Grok protocol checks and 47 existing Dot Runner checks
pass. New tests force acceptance during secret lookup and the final send
check. They also prove that acknowledgements and Stop remain free during
pending delivery.
- The final-head Grok, Dot, MCP and question-delivery suite passes all
212 checks across six files. Dedicated onboarding UI checks passed six.
- Dedicated Runner driver checks use the real local Rust daemon. Built
the debug daemon required by that package; all 17 checks then passed.
- Repository typecheck and build pass. Token gates, the 2,731-story
structural catalog and the Storybook build pass.
- Public synthetic marker for the post-deployment native source-read
check: `grok-native-read-b45be4eff22cb15a31d0af512f437b8d`.
- Final-head CI passes all 55 checks, with two optional Storybook skips.
Greptile is 5/5 with no open threads. The first chat-shard attempt
failed one Telegram SQL-quiet timing assertion; all five related cases
pass locally and the single targeted CI rerun passes.
- After deployment, repeat actual Grok work through an answered
question, receipt polling, a saved report and file, canonical completion
and cleanup. This correction is not production qualification by itself.

## Risks

A Bot that does not poll a pending receipt can wait without another
routine wake. Current assignment reads now supply polling instructions
to existing connections. Task comments stay queued until the Bot reads
them or Runner admits the next continuation. The real client must verify
that behavior before production enablement. The observed second file
version does not prove which provider interaction created it. Acceptance
can wait for the bounded webhook response. Stop and authenticated
acknowledgements use independent row locks and remain available.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 in Codex, with reasoning, repository editing, shell tools
and browser tools. The exact serving model ID, snapshot and context
window are not exposed by 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>
2026-10-15 00:54:15 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 1315aa22c2 test(ui): retire duplicate company settings checks (#16113)
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-15 00:10:50 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 982ff62949 test(shared): consolidate ZIP conversion observations (#16118)
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-15 00:06:50 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 67e45e869e test(ui): retire duplicate CompanyExport render checks (#16108)
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 23:59:17 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 522619744b test(ui): retire duplicate IssueChatThread render cases (#16092)
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 23:51:37 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip ae6e701821 test(ui): share repeated IssueDetail render proofs (#16091)
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 23:47:38 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip ccbfefef5f test(ui): retire 33 duplicate executions and share render setup (#16072)
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 23:12:34 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 32ede08918 fix(grok): copy pairing codes during agent reconnect (#16373)
Grok Bot reconnect showed a masked one-use code without a copy action. Add the shared Copy code control, preserve masking and copy-error feedback, and keep the code out of Bot instructions. Cover the reconnect flow and readiness wait in tests and Storybook, and update the user guide.

Verified head 1346f7a909: 55 checks passed, two optional skips, full tests/build/typecheck/E2E, and Greptile 5/5 with no unresolved threads. Local typecheck, build, token gates, Storybook build and focused regressions pass. Scoped Chrome copying and a fresh built story were verified with synthetic data. Actual Grok runtime qualification remains a release gate.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 22:22:54 -05:00
dependabot[bot] 5a9c74d1c8 build(deps): bump mermaid from 11.17.2 to 12.1.0 (#16018)
Bumps [mermaid](https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid) from 11.17.2 to
12.1.0.
<details>
<summary>Release notes</summary>
<p><em>Sourced from <a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/releases">mermaid's
releases</a>.</em></p>
<blockquote>
<h2>mermaid@12.1.0</h2>
<h3>Minor Changes</h3>
<ul>
<li>
<p><a
href="https://redirect.github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/pull/8303">#8303</a>
<a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/9140716e72d1c1a3eb82bd5b25786e44f0cb6163"><code>9140716</code></a>
Thanks <a
href="https://github.com/filipsajdak"><code>@​filipsajdak</code></a>! -
feat: add the <code>elk.orientFeedbackEdges</code> option, enabled by
default. With the ELK layout, an edge from a node that a subgraph feeds
back into that subgraph is now routed downstream instead of around the
subgraph. This changes the layout of existing ELK diagrams that contain
such edges; set <code>elk.orientFeedbackEdges: false</code> to keep the
previous routing.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><a
href="https://redirect.github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/pull/8250">#8250</a>
<a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/fd4f5f26546110b4da281b44d60f94644f9a146c"><code>fd4f5f2</code></a>
Thanks <a href="https://github.com/kartben"><code>@​kartben</code></a>!
- feat: add a <code>bitOrder</code> option to packet diagrams. It
defaults to <code>ascending</code>, which is the current
behaviour, and <code>descending</code> mirrors every row so it reads
from that row's highest bit down to its
lowest. Fields are still declared lowest bit first and keep their width,
so switching a diagram
between the two conventions only means changing
<code>bitOrder</code>.</p>
</li>
</ul>
<h3>Patch Changes</h3>
<ul>
<li>
<p><a
href="https://redirect.github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/pull/8330">#8330</a>
<a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/50c9e555a17725e50a9cf92f4a0876710e44a53a"><code>50c9e55</code></a>
Thanks <a
href="https://github.com/ashishjain0512"><code>@​ashishjain0512</code></a>!
- fix: upgrade chevrotain to 13 so mermaid no longer pulls in vulnerable
<code>lodash-es@4.17.23</code></p>
</li>
<li>
<p><a
href="https://redirect.github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/pull/8259">#8259</a>
<a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/4c90f5c4487c5c5628e28073454e88708af26bfb"><code>4c90f5c</code></a>
Thanks <a
href="https://github.com/afonsojanu"><code>@​afonsojanu</code></a>! -
fix(sequence): allow whitespace between an actor name and its <code>@{
... }</code> config object</p>
<p><code>participant Bob@{ &quot;type&quot; : &quot;database&quot;
}</code> parsed fine, but adding a single space before the
config object (<code>participant Bob @{ &quot;type&quot; :
&quot;database&quot; }</code>) failed with a confusing parse error,
even though the plain form without a config object tolerates trailing
whitespace just fine.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><a
href="https://redirect.github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/pull/8339">#8339</a>
<a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/c7fa1a550cf024ce1c74faece36ecf18a5935c5e"><code>c7fa1a5</code></a>
Thanks <a
href="https://github.com/ashishjain0512"><code>@​ashishjain0512</code></a>!
- fix: keep ELK class-diagram cardinalities off namespace frames</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><a
href="https://redirect.github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/pull/8334">#8334</a>
<a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/d67331d927d90e53ed0cd6da7e031f3513866d41"><code>d67331d</code></a>
Thanks <a
href="https://github.com/ashishjain0512"><code>@​ashishjain0512</code></a>!
- fix(class): place cardinality labels beside their relation ends on
dagre's sides with ELK, centre dagre's end labels, and stop clipping
their text</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><a
href="https://redirect.github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/pull/8344">#8344</a>
<a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/99a050ba56c834569df4d9891c70fd23ffe92203"><code>99a050b</code></a>
Thanks <a
href="https://github.com/pbrolin47"><code>@​pbrolin47</code></a>! - fix:
with the ELK layout, an edge label could sit up to 16px beside its edge
instead of centred on it, when the edge's terminal jog was straightened
after the label's position was computed. The label is now re-projected
onto the straightened route</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><a
href="https://redirect.github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/pull/8276">#8276</a>
<a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/3101c7da2add126d0e1f3e256f408620efdd987e"><code>3101c7d</code></a>
Thanks <a
href="https://github.com/mir-ashiq"><code>@​mir-ashiq</code></a>! -
fix(error): show the actual error message in the error diagram</p>
<p>When a diagram fails to parse, the error diagram now draws the real
error message below the
&quot;Syntax error in text&quot; headline, wrapped to at most four
lines. Hosts that only show the SVG
(GitHub, GitLab, Obsidian, exported images) no longer hide what actually
went wrong, e.g. that the
flowchart edge limit was exceeded and <code>maxEdges</code> needs
raising via <code>mermaid.initialize</code>.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><a
href="https://redirect.github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/pull/8296">#8296</a>
<a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/aa29345b9a5c58346fb457396614cfd349a94e68"><code>aa29345</code></a>
Thanks <a href="https://github.com/pentaoa"><code>@​pentaoa</code></a>!
- fix: preserve explicit source relations on event modeling reset
frames</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><a
href="https://redirect.github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/pull/8297">#8297</a>
<a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/967bbdeb1b47a46f9f73c65d009d1dd19381cc05"><code>967bbde</code></a>
Thanks <a href="https://github.com/pentaoa"><code>@​pentaoa</code></a>!
- fix: reject duplicate event modeling frame IDs before rendering</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><a
href="https://redirect.github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/pull/8337">#8337</a>
<a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/147f343c863f537e1acd4d1df527eccfc88574c8"><code>147f343</code></a>
Thanks <a
href="https://github.com/knsv-bot"><code>@​knsv-bot</code></a>! - fix: a
flowchart that declares the same subgraph id more than once now renders
as one merged subgraph with the ELK layout instead of producing NaN
geometry. Classes and <code>view: collapsed</code> set on a repeated
subgraph now apply to it, whichever declaration they follow.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><a
href="https://redirect.github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/pull/8203">#8203</a>
<a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/40ef7b47259cb9dd335583298917c69d1174e2cb"><code>40ef7b4</code></a>
Thanks <a href="https://github.com/MFA-G"><code>@​MFA-G</code></a>! -
perf(frontmatter): replace the quadratic front matter regex on hot
paths</p>
<p><code>frontMatterRegex</code> backtracks polynomially on
whitespace-heavy input, so a
diagram well inside the default <code>maxTextSize</code> could stall
parsing for over a
second. <code>detectType</code> and <code>extractFrontMatter</code> now
use a linear scanner that
matches the regex result exactly, leaving no document stripped
differently.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><a
href="https://redirect.github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/pull/8254">#8254</a>
<a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/351d7d21af7f8e1dba6e021bef7e0c30f3deb92f"><code>351d7d2</code></a>
Thanks <a href="https://github.com/galshir"><code>@​galshir</code></a>!
- fix: warn when a gantt task references an unknown
<code>after</code>/<code>until</code> task id, or when its end value is
neither a valid date nor a valid duration</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><a
href="https://redirect.github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/pull/8249">#8249</a>
<a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/b657a2c0735e60d9049d5078a550e0625cf42b2e"><code>b657a2c</code></a>
Thanks <a
href="https://github.com/mir-ashiq"><code>@​mir-ashiq</code></a>! -
fix(sequence): allow hyphenated actor and participant names when a
config object is attached</p>
</li>
</ul>
<!-- raw HTML omitted -->
</blockquote>
<p>... (truncated)</p>
</details>
<details>
<summary>Commits</summary>
<ul>
<li><a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/21f72f07ea22c0af48a3149c550654e80d8e40cb"><code>21f72f0</code></a>
Merge pull request <a
href="https://redirect.github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/issues/8360">#8360</a>
from mermaid-js/changeset-release/master</li>
<li><a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/3f89f7b130eb0bc3424344d01b57197f329053d3"><code>3f89f7b</code></a>
Version Packages</li>
<li><a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/4ef021859a94353ca35ea9cc0652b518cd142539"><code>4ef0218</code></a>
Merge pull request <a
href="https://redirect.github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/issues/8358">#8358</a>
from mermaid-js/release/12.0.1</li>
<li><a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/f45c6913ab771a72d22bb5b89b8d5d72cc3dbc1d"><code>f45c691</code></a>
Fix error from build docs</li>
<li><a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/d9cb282b6faf2ee33005cf0f5724bd3e848ff7d4"><code>d9cb282</code></a>
Fix label overlap bug</li>
<li><a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/47fffa05c044f460f8b9645c7a24429ed200a084"><code>47fffa0</code></a>
Merge pull request <a
href="https://redirect.github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/issues/8297">#8297</a>
from pentaoa/fix/eventmodeling-duplicate-frame-ids</li>
<li><a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/12c280e7cb7ff3effa7285b54390761d5eb0a583"><code>12c280e</code></a>
Merge develop and preserve eventmodeling regression tests</li>
<li><a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/c0f7052343a8015aabf5dd28a62cee6facc6956c"><code>c0f7052</code></a>
Merge pull request <a
href="https://redirect.github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/issues/8296">#8296</a>
from pentaoa/fix/eventmodeling-reset-explicit-relations</li>
<li><a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/4f6ac96ac95fd0ee0f66c986985680eb98dce1ec"><code>4f6ac96</code></a>
Merge pull request <a
href="https://redirect.github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/issues/8345">#8345</a>
from mermaid-js/bug/8283_xychart-legend-clip-title-h...</li>
<li><a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/commit/679093a791bfd2b3e851b41db2742640391aa58a"><code>679093a</code></a>
Merge pull request <a
href="https://redirect.github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/issues/8344">#8344</a>
from mermaid-js/pebr/issue-8292-elk-label</li>
<li>Additional commits viewable in <a
href="https://github.com/mermaid-js/mermaid/compare/mermaid@11.17.2...mermaid@12.1.0">compare
view</a></li>
</ul>
</details>
<br />


[![Dependabot compatibility
score](https://dependabot-badges.githubapp.com/badges/compatibility_score?dependency-name=mermaid&package-manager=npm_and_yarn&previous-version=11.17.2&new-version=12.1.0)](https://docs.github.com/en/github/managing-security-vulnerabilities/about-dependabot-security-updates#about-compatibility-scores)

Dependabot will resolve any conflicts with this PR as long as you don't
alter it yourself. You can also trigger a rebase manually by commenting
`@dependabot rebase`.

[//]: # (dependabot-automerge-start)
[//]: # (dependabot-automerge-end)

---

<details>
<summary>Dependabot commands and options</summary>
<br />

You can trigger Dependabot actions by commenting on this PR:
- `@dependabot rebase` will rebase this PR
- `@dependabot recreate` will recreate this PR, overwriting any edits
that have been made to it
- `@dependabot show <dependency name> ignore conditions` will show all
of the ignore conditions of the specified dependency
- `@dependabot ignore this major version` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this major version (unless you reopen
the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
- `@dependabot ignore this minor version` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this minor version (unless you reopen
the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
- `@dependabot ignore this dependency` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this dependency (unless you reopen the
PR or upgrade to it yourself)


</details>

Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>
Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-10-14 19:45:58 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 3dffd2197d test: consolidate owner fixtures and retain real regression proof (#16047)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Tests protect sandbox execution, run recovery, credentials and the
board UI.
> - Several owner suites repeat the same setup and prove the same result
more than once.
> - These copies add maintenance work and can hide weak assertions.
> - Each cut needs a retained test that proves every distinct contract.
> - This pull request consolidates repeated setup and removes twelve
redundant executions.
> - It also replaces two weak assertions with checks of real outputs.
> - The benefit is 2,831 fewer test lines with clearer regression proof.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The maintenance and regression strength of the existing Vitest owner
suites.

**Subsystem affected**

Sandbox adapter utilities, server heartbeat recovery and environment
capabilities, and the board UI.

**Current behavior**

Tests copy database rows, query builders, render calls and runtime
inputs. Some cases repeat an existing contract. One token test omits a
real bridge credential. A PostHog host comparison can compare absent
controls.

**Proposed behavior**

Use small local helpers with fresh values and the same action order.
Keep each distinct contract in an owner test. Check real bridge
credentials and fixed PostHog method states. Carry the exact persisted
first-run success assertion into the stronger cancellation keeper.

**Reason and benefit**

The ten test files shrink by 2,831 net lines. Twelve redundant
executions retire. All other case tables, inputs, security boundaries,
timeouts and cleanup rules remain.

**Breaking changes**

None. This round changes tests and audit evidence only.

**Additional context**

Refs: #15978, the merged first cleanup. Refs: #16022, the merged prior
cleanup. Its squash merge is `dabb8c5daf430a1987af611e2e7ca4c7b23ef7d4`.

Related open work: #14634 repairs feedback fixture completion; #14477
supplies explicit sandbox fixture tools; #14198 changes cleanup retry
behavior in another heartbeat file. This audit preserves those separate
action and cleanup contracts. It does not apply their changes.

This PR was first stacked on `codex/test-audit-followup`. After #16022
was squash merged, only the two Round 6 commits were replayed onto
merged master `dabb8c5daf430a1987af611e2e7ca4c7b23ef7d4`. The original
stack head is preserved in a local snapshot branch. The current diff
contains only ten test files and two evidence files. No merge is
requested.

## What Changed

- Consolidate repeated setup in three sandbox adapter suites. Remove
seven redundant executions and retain the real protocol, cleanup and
scratch-file checks. Save 875 lines.
- Consolidate heartbeat database fixtures and read queries. Retain exact
wake cancellation, total run count and the actual first-run success
receipt. Remove one duplicate execution. Save 1,372 lines.
- Remove two repeated rejected-capability cases. Carry the absent
snapshot assertion into the retained runner case. Save 22 lines.
- Consolidate UI fixtures and render calls. Remove two repeated
connection cases. Replace the weak PostHog comparison with fixed method
and required-key checks in both real hosts. Save 562 lines.
- Record audit scope, decision and expansion counts, all twelve keeper
mappings and deliberate mutation results in the [audit
report](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/codex/test-audit-round-six-delivery/doc/plans/2026-10-12-test-audit-round6.md)
and [controls
evidence](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/codex/test-audit-round-six-delivery/doc/plans/2026-10-12-test-audit-round6-controls.json).

## Verification

Source baseline: `a090035cafb29c06f6fca2dbe43561ad866b7c1b`. All ten
original test programs are byte-identical at the stacked base
`58c5c4aa241c85f4665a3159c192888bbb2a5cfa`.

- Baseline: 1,841/1,841 cases passed in the main thirty-file
owner/sibling run. Another 219/219 cases passed in nine extra files.
- Preservation: all four proposal packages passed independent review.
Whole-program helper expansion retains ordered inputs, callbacks,
awaits, queries, fresh allocations and hooks outside the declared
assertion migrations and repairs.
- Candidate: all 2,048 cases passed across 39 complete owner/sibling
files. The main run passed 1,831 cases. The extra run passed 217 cases.
Both runs had zero failures and zero skips.
- PostHog control: the repaired positive case passed. The original weak
case passed with authentication choices removed. The repaired case
failed at its fixed OAuth aria-checked assertion under the same
mutation.
- Eight accepted mutations failed at their intended assertions. They
cover bridge-token exclusion, fallback cleanup, READY bytes, real
scratch-file preservation, exact wake cancellation, the persisted
first-run success receipt, rejected capability snapshots and reachable
PostHog method controls. Two original weak cases passed with the same
defects. All production source bytes were restored.
- Rejected control: changing run status before legacy release timed out
before wake cancellation. This result is not counted as assertion proof.
Its replacement changed only the persisted receipt after real drain in
the existing transaction. It failed at the direct fixed succeeded-row
assertion.
- No new code comments or 1,000-line threshold crossings were
introduced. No production, schema, lockfile or workflow changes are
included.

On the exact final test sources, later committed as
`d8de9422f0703d4508a9dc880b67a07f13e0f110`, `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm
check:token-gates` and `pnpm build` passed. The required full `pnpm
test:run` completed with **exit 1** after **52.14 minutes** on clean,
immutable `d8de9422f0703d4508a9dc880b67a07f13e0f110`. HEAD and tracked
sources remained unchanged.

The first general-server group ran 889 files: **882 passed, one failed
and six skipped**. Its 18,032 cases were **17,925 passed, two failed and
105 skipped**. The only failing file was
`server/src/__tests__/remove-test-home.test.ts`. On macOS, the read-only
runtime bundle and symlink cleanup cases returned `ENOTEMPTY`. The
permission-error case expects `EACCES` or `EPERM`. Four reported failure
entries cover these two cases, including their cleanup errors. The test
and helper are byte-identical to previous master
`4b766b872993045a2e787404f0475503683e5ded` and audit master
`e364b92c82`.

The default wrapper stopped after that group failed. **Later local
groups did not run.** The earlier public-MCP, HTTP log redaction and
workspace snapshot failures did not recur. The 39 focused owner/sibling
files and all 48 remote CI jobs completed independently. This result is
an unresolved macOS cleanup limitation, not full local success. No test,
skip, retry, timeout or cleanup rule was changed to hide it.

The three adapter files received a whitespace tidy after focused
execution. Full runtime AST and string/template/regex byte equality link
those tested sources to the final sources. All 134 adapter helper calls
were checked again. Replayed code commit
`3d3defd2a60595a623045d9e2c6c586f4acb3452` has the exact final test
bytes. Evidence commit `e868e6645ce0d598d756d3458f0b3d71afd6db4a` adds
the report and controls JSON, with one historical ancestry
clarification. All ten accepted test hashes and all seven
production-owner source guards match. No package, lockfile, workspace,
TypeScript, Rust or Vitest dependency manifest changed since the audit
snapshot.

The [original stack CI
workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38312876910)
passed all 48 jobs on head `c171d6c0d603d22bb997c1f9a9bdcd5bcc5d22aa`.
Those results are historical stack proof.

The [fresh master-context CI
workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38318223856)
completed successfully with **all 48 jobs passed** on current head
`e868e6645ce0d598d756d3458f0b3d71afd6db4a`. Its tested merge commit was
`41292af60c6eb60d477637d23822bb17b08dc07e`, combining workflow base
`88bf4c6c1d222f818faa56257efe79207c892a6c` with that head. The delivery
commits remain based on pinned master
`dabb8c5daf430a1987af611e2e7ca4c7b23ef7d4`. Both required master checks,
`ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`, passed. Two separate optional Storybook
checks were skipped by their scope gate.

[Fresh Greptile
review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16047#issuecomment-6133323165)
gives the current head **5/5**, with no findings, inline comments or
unresolved review threads. The [current-head commitperclip
review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38318223666)
also completed successfully. This PR remains open and draft; no merge is
requested. The local macOS failure above remains unresolved.

## Risks

- A helper could share a value or capture the wrong binding. Independent
expansion and lexical binding checks guard the actual helper calls.
- A retired case could contain a distinct assertion. Each cut has an
exact keeper map and carried observations.
- A mutation could fail before the intended assertion. Controls reject
timeouts and earlier failures. The rejected receipt mutation remains in
the evidence.
- The delivery ancestry changed after the parent squash merge. Exact
source hashes preserve the audited tests and producer receipts. Fresh CI
and review passed in the current master context; the broad local run
remains evidence from its immutable audit snapshot.
- The complete local default failed in two unchanged macOS cleanup
cases. Later local groups were not run. This limitation remains visible
even though focused checks and remote CI passed.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, assisted with this work. The exact served
model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. It used
repository tools, code execution, AST analysis and parallel audit
agents.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 21:43:12 -05:00
976cdc77ed fix(recovery): expose settled holds and their preserved decisions (#16169)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Task recovery preserves work when execution or tool outcomes are
uncertain.
> - Automatic recovery can settle its record while keeping replay
blocked.
> - The recovery-actions API omitted those records unless they held
workspace files.
> - Operators and agent tools could therefore see an empty recovery
history for a task that still had an execution hold.
> - This pull request lists those holds and shows their matching
decision in the existing stopped-run notice.
> - Existing stop verification, continuation, and file repair gates
remain in force.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A cancelled or failed task can retain a settled recovery record with
`automaticRecovery.replay: blocked`. The task remains held, but the
recovery-actions API returns no action. The board notice also lacks that
record's decision.

**Expected behavior**

List settled execution holds that still block replay. Let an authorized
board user inspect the current action and run in Recovery details.
Preserve the existing guarded continuation and required-file repair
paths.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Stop a run whose outcome requires inspection.
2. Let automatic recovery settle its record with replay blocked.
3. Read the task's recovery actions and open its stopped-run notice.
4. Before this change, the action list is empty unless workspace
recovery is required.

**Paperclip version or commit**

This PR includes current master through `66424362a85`.

**Deployment mode**

Authenticated and local deployments with persisted execution recovery
holds.

The original API correction and route regression are by Tao Xie
(@TaoXieSZ). This update preserves those commits and adds the board
inspection path, current documentation, and regression coverage.

Related: #14840 describes controller lease loss. This change exposes
recovery records; it does not change controller lease renewal.

## What Changed

- Include settled execution reconciliation holds with replay blocked in
the company-scoped recovery-actions response.
- Read the matching action from the existing stopped-run notice. Show
its decision under Recovery details, including when active recovery is
empty.
- Reject mismatched historical records in the notice. Bind history to
the current action/run and refresh visible decisions every five seconds.
Keep history read errors visible beside the current guidance.
- Preserve existing run inspection, new-message continuation, and
required-file repair controls. No new reconciliation form is added.
- Update the execution documentation and both recovery capability maps.

## Verification

- Recovery route suite with real embedded PostgreSQL: 80 passed, none
skipped.
- Notice and retry-client suites: 36 passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed.
- `pnpm build`: passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates`: passed.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`: passed. This checks structure only.
- `git diff --check`: passed.
- Full `pnpm test:run` was started. It is not yet a full local pass.
Initial database tests were affected by missing packaged macOS library
aliases; the aliases were restored in this worktree's dependencies, and
the complete recovery route suite then passed.
- All CI checks passed on `09e4461e4d3a0960a4dc8bc270a2a10c628bf524`,
including the full test matrix, typecheck, build and browser checks.
Optional Storybook jobs were skipped.
- Apex: 5/5 on the same head. Both review threads are resolved; the
reviewer confirmed the existing guarded continuation design.

## Risks

- The API response now includes settled records that still block replay.
Consumers must distinguish a settled record from permission to continue.
- Recovery history is supplemental. A failed history read keeps the
current blocker and guidance visible.
- The UI binds the decision to both the current action and run. It does
not certify tool outcomes or grant execution authority.
- No schema, dependency, telemetry, or runtime admission changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution, assisted with the board inspection and verification
follow-up. The exact serving snapshot ID and context window size are not
exposed in this session. The original API work is retained from Tao
Xie's contribution.

## 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 (targeted suites;
full-suite limits above)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Devin Foley <devin@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 17:32:35 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 538bbd5478 fix(ui): configure Grok Bot through its external connection (#16338)
## Thinking Path

Paperclip coordinates an external Grok Bot through its authenticated
agent connection and routine. The shared configuration form only
excluded OpenAI Dot from local runtime controls, so Grok Bot inherited a
model picker, local paths, an AI account picker, and a generic runtime
test. These controls cannot configure the external Bot and the generic
test is not evidence of its webhook-to-MCP connection. Extend the
existing external-provider presentation gates and retain the dedicated
connection verification workflow.

Related implementation: #16219 and #16305. Searched open Grok PRs and
issues; the remaining matches concern the separate coding runtime or
unrelated coverage.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
An existing Grok Bot agent's Runtime page shows local model and runtime
configuration alongside its actual external connection controls.

**Expected behavior**
Identify the harness as Grok Bot, show its connection and routine
controls, and use Verify connection for authenticated two-way readiness.
Omit inapplicable local-runtime controls and model catalog queries.

**Steps to reproduce**
Create a Grok Bot through Invite external agent, then open its Runtime
settings. Before this correction, the shared form renders a model
selector and Test your agent despite the Bot owning its runtime.

**Paperclip version/commit**
Master after #16219; reproduced against the shared form at
8ffc5748a2.

## What Changed

- Treat Grok Bot and Dot as external providers when resolving local
configuration and model catalog queries.
- Identify Grok Bot directly in the harness field and keep its dedicated
connection, routine, and verification controls.
- Hide the generic runtime test for Grok Bot, including compact feedback
and externally registered test actions.
- Add regressions for compact and inline configuration and production
ConfigurationTab stories for connected, disconnected, and mobile states.
- Isolate generated documentation previews in separate iframes; verified
connected and disconnected states remain distinct across polling.
- Document the Runtime management path.

## Verification

- New regression failed in both variants before the correction; the four
focused UI suites pass: 131 tests, including existing native-provider
configuration coverage.
- Repository typecheck, production build, and token gates pass.
Storybook builds successfully.
- Used the built production ConfigurationTab in the browser: connected
health, credential replacement fields, disconnected reconnect, and a
375-pixel mobile layout with no horizontal overflow. These are synthetic
connection fixtures, not live-provider qualification.
- A full local database-backed suite is unavailable because this Mac has
reached its SysV shared-memory limit. The earlier diagnostic fixture
confirmed that limitation; no unrelated databases were stopped. Full
repository CI passes on 60119f1ce1: 55
checks successful and two intentional skips.

- Fresh Greptile review is 5/5 on the final head, with the
preview-isolation finding addressed and its thread resolved.

## Risks

Low risk: shared form presentation and unnecessary model queries change;
no authorization, secret storage, Runner execution, schema, or transport
behavior changes. Existing stored configuration remains intact.
Native-provider form regressions run in the focused suite; full
repository CI passes on the final head.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository inspection, code editing,
shell tests, and browser verification. The host does not expose a more
specific serving-model ID or context-window size.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 17:23:18 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 5c7a025032 fix(ui): clear consumed messages from the pending queue (#16317)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Task conversations keep follow-up messages pending while an agent
works.
> - The screen combines optimistic sends, queue snapshots, and run input
records.
> - A late send response can restore a local queue flag after a run
takes the message.
> - A stale queue snapshot can then keep the same message in pending.
> - This pull request matches the input record to its source queue and
clears stale pending flags.
> - The benefit is that consumed messages leave pending while unsent
messages stay visible.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A follow-up can remain in the task composer's pending row after a run
takes it as input. Local queue state can outlive the send request. The
old projection cleared that state for steering, but not for ordinary
run-start input. A stale queue read can also retain the consumed entry.

**Expected behavior**

A message that a started run takes as input appears once in history and
leaves pending. Other pending messages remain available. A message
assigned to a run that has not started remains pending.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Send a follow-up while a task has a live run.
2. Let a started run record that message as input before or after the
send response arrives.
3. Let a queue read still include the consumed message.
4. Observe the message remain pending on the base revision.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced against master at `33d24e48ad` with controlled request
ordering.

**Deployment mode**

Source checkout. Browser verification used the production task screen
with a simulated native runner and delayed API responses. It did not run
a live model or change a deployed instance.

Related: [PR
#15030](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15030) addresses
acknowledgement matching in the runner console. This change addresses
the task-detail composer and does not modify that console.

## What Changed

- Clear local pending flags when a started run records the comment as
input.
- Use live-run input IDs while the run-history query catches up.
- Match stale queue entries by their primary or coalesced source wake
ID, even when the snapshot targets the previous run or has no target.
- Retain coalesced source queue IDs in run context and include receipt
IDs in compact task run reads.
- Keep unstarted run inputs and authoritative retries pending. Cover
send ordering, same-run and successor delivery, queued snapshots,
coalesced inputs, and retry consumption.
- Add the delivery-race checks to the steering feature map.

## Verification

- Before the fix, the first four request-order regressions failed with
the consumed message still in pending. Coverage now includes 16
combinations of receipt source, send-response order, and stale snapshot
kind.
- Focused UI checks: 5 files and 233 tests passed. These cover task
detail, queue projection, optimistic comments, queued-message controls,
and the task-chat adapter.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed.
- Server receipt checks: 5 files and 139 tests passed with
`PAPERCLIP_TEST_POSTGRES_TEMPLATE=0`. These exercise real database
reads, coalesced heartbeat input, and polling routes. The default
cached-template path timed out during setup on this host; the
fresh-cluster path passed without longer timeouts.
- Token gates and `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed.
- Browser: sent a follow-up with a delayed response in the production
task screen. The consumed message moved into history. A second unsent
follow-up stayed queued. Reload preserved both states. The API and
runner were simulated.
- `pnpm build` passed.
- The full local repository test run was started, then stopped to
isolate database setup timeouts. All 55 GitHub CI checks passed on
`4ec6820cf1f89880b801fd5f938d72f54591c5e2`, including the full test
matrix. One serialized server shard passed on its single rerun after a
15-second route-test timeout; the same 97-test route suite also passed
locally.
- Greptile reviewed the final head at 5/5. All review threads are
resolved.

## Risks

- Queue display depends on matching comment IDs, source queue IDs, and a
recorded start time. Rows without start evidence stay pending. Newer
queues remain visible until their own input receipt arrives.
- Run context gains additive receipt metadata. No schema migration is
required. Dispatch order, stored queue state, company access, and
steering authority stay unchanged.
- Browser evidence covers controlled response ordering. It does not
establish deployment or live-provider behavior.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The
exact serving model ID and context-window limit 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
#` 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>
2026-10-14 16:11:29 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 33d24e48ad fix(skills): simplify source rows, errors, and actions (#16310)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agent skills from GitHub repositories.
> - Skills → Sources shows saved repositories and their sync status.
> - A saved source gained a second repository row when other projects
used the same repository and branch.
> - That row repeated the GitHub icon and branch, and it exposed project
names that did not help with source management.
> - The page also repeated the Installed navigation link and showed
refresh errors as separate lines of text.
> - Connection management also appeared under each source, where it
competed with source-specific actions.
> - This pull request shows each saved source once, groups error
details, and moves connection management into the menu beside Import
from GitHub.
> - The result is a clearer source list that keeps import and recovery
actions available.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

When a saved source shared its repository and branch with other
projects, Skills → Sources displayed a second GitHub header and the
names of those projects. The page also displayed an extra Installed
skills link and repeated Manage GitHub connection under source rows. A
failed refresh placed its timestamp and error on separate lines.

**Expected behavior**

Show one row for each saved source. Keep project names out of that row.
Keep the additional import action available in More. Put connection
management in the page actions menu beside Import from GitHub. Present
refresh errors as one readable notice with the time and review action.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Open Skills → Sources in a company with one saved GitHub source and
another project that uses the same repository and branch.
2. Observe the repeated repository row and project names.
3. Open the Storybook journey `Existing source, more projects` to
inspect the same state. Open `Retained skills and retry` to inspect a
failed refresh.

**Paperclip version or commit**

The issue is present on base commit `739f9e40a4`.

**Deployment mode**

Built from source. The issue was also observed in a staging workspace.

## What Changed

- Remove project names, the duplicate repository row, and the redundant
Installed skills link from saved source rows.
- Put imports for additional projects in the source More menu. Show
brief import progress in the source metadata.
- Group source errors, attempt time, and the review link in a compact
notice. Add a Storybook journey and browser coverage for the
shared-repository state.
- Add a page actions menu beside Import from GitHub. Put Manage GitHub
connection there and remove the repeated inline links. Cover the menu
and keyboard focus in the Storybook browser suite.

## Verification

- `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `pnpm check:token-gates`, `node
scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs
--check` passed locally. The Skills sources unit suite passed 22 tests.
- All 18 repository-skills Storybook browser tests passed, including the
shared-source import, connection menu, mobile, and failed-refresh
journeys.
- A local full `pnpm test:run` was stopped after a server runner-API
test timed out. An isolated diagnostic identified macOS embedded
PostgreSQL shared-memory exhaustion. The PR passed all 55 CI checks,
including server test shards and end-to-end tests.
- Open the Storybook journeys `Existing source, more projects`,
`Automatically imported skills`, and `Retained skills and retry` to
inspect the compact source row, page actions menu, and grouped error
notice.

## Risks

Low risk. The visible import action for projects that share a saved
source moves to More. Connection management moves to a page menu and
opens the Apps catalog. People must open those menus to find the
actions. The import API and access checks do not change.

> I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This source-list correction does not duplicate
planned core work.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The task runtime did not expose an exact
serving model ID or context-window size. The model used tool calls, code
edits, and browser verification.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [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>
2026-10-14 12:52:18 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip adb69e8f09 feat: default new Codex agents to Paperclip Runner on Linux and macOS (#15683)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source control plane for agent companies.
> - People choose a harness when creating an agent.
> - The server should resolve that harness to a qualified runner.
> - Codex is the first harness in the staged default rollout.
> - Saved agents must retain their execution choices.
> - New Codex agents therefore use Paperclip Runner on qualified
macOS/Linux targets, with an explicit Legacy override.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16028, #15555, #15673, #15422, #15631, #15926, #15932, #16149.

The runtime/install prerequisite and release repair are merged. This
slice owns Codex creation, setup, configuration and preservation. Other
harness defaults remain unchanged. It adds no database migration;
incoming master migrations, required maps and regression coverage are
retained.

## What Changed

- Resolve `runner: auto | paperclip | legacy` at the common creation
boundary across onboarding, API/CLI, hires, built-ins, plugins and
imports. Freeze pending hires and export resolved execution choices.
- Preserve existing runners on upgrades, unrelated edits and import
updates, including compatible accounts, workspace settings, Codex effort
and intentional clears.
- Use the underlying harness picker and branding; put the runner
override in Advanced. Use the shared dropdown and update
production-component stories and creation contracts.
- Support qualified Apple Silicon, Intel Mac, Linux x64 and Linux ARM64.
Linux requires GNU libc 2.39+. Disabled, external, unsupported and
unqualified combinations retain their applicable Legacy execution.
- Test the selected runtime/account/model/environment. Ordinary Connect
probes eligible immutable managed targets and refreshes scoped
discovery. Creation/discovery do not provision. Auth, dependency,
incompatible-setting and cleanup failures remain actionable without
changing runners.
- Keep setup probes read-only, preserve local/SSH isolation and resolve
packaged assets before staging credentials. Bound cleanup reads by the
remaining absolute deadline; physically close every owned ingress socket
before endpoint release. Unconfirmed cleanup retains recovery state.
- Preserve validated completed-onboarding callbacks through startup
recovery. First file-producing work belongs to the child task and uses
the existing dependency/block handoff and task-scoped registration.
- Reuse existing E2E fixtures, artifact checks, reporting and controls.
Keep Docker/Cargo/native compilation remote. Paperclip tarballs contain
no Codex payloads; official optional npm platform dependencies remain.

## Verification

Current tested head: `1c03a8815672d82c264a9b08d4ea1984e8fae107`.
**Merge-ready: required CI, fresh review, package qualification, Mac
core acceptance and Test task/follow-up acceptance pass.** The existing
attachment and native-continuity oracles independently verify both Test
downloads, run attribution and unchanged native/provider/workspace
identities. The maintainer authorized a code-owner-review exception for
this PR only. The first Test setup failure and normal Board
completion-review friction are retained below. Actual post-merge
packages and private Cloud distribution remain separate qualification
gates.

- [Current
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38564241625):
all 48 ordinary jobs and required verify/E2E pass. Attempt 1 retained
six simultaneous host-shutdown cancellations. One failed-only retry
passes those six lanes and two aggregates, preserving 40 successes.
Actual integration checkout `53104c1` combines this head with master
`c80`; it is not relabeled as the branch tree. Fresh exact-head Greptile
5/5, 30 resolved threads, no actionable findings.
- [Exact-source package
qualification](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38565287239):
nine applicable jobs pass, nine conditional jobs skip. Four remote
native producers; Linux x64 clean install; Intel Mac, Apple Silicon and
Linux ARM64 native startup/physical cleanup controls. All 18
tarballs/four daemon source/hash/manifest bindings and 343 migrations
through 0344 verify. No Codex payload is packed. These hosted tarballs
are not a published npm canary.
- Normal Apple Silicon installation and credential-free native
startup/cleanup pass using the packaged daemon, with no source build or
provider turn. Fresh installed DB initialization passes. Upgrade
651a→1c03 preserves all three complete execution configs, accounts, ten
recorded run profiles, paused budgets, active incidents, cost summaries
and two historical unpriced events. Historical recovery state is
retained.
- Cleanup regressions: four delayed-read baseline failures become 15
passing deadline/authority controls. No-acknowledgement and prior-error
socket ownership regressions become 12 passing controls. Direct
runtime/server types, maps: 35 areas / 176 IDs, diff checks and
independent reviews pass. Permission/auth/reconnect policy and the
10-second setup budget remain intact.
- Existing source coverage includes creation/selection/imports, pending
approvals, recovery, account/lifecycle handling, mounted forms,
dropdowns and E2E support. Full typechecks/tests/build/token and
applicable Storybook checks pass in the recorded current CI; no
duplicate suite or weakened grader.
- Literal 9546 live Mac proof: ordinary Auto Codex onboarding, useful
document, real completed-child callback/reply, seven successful native
runs, manual follow-up and independently downloaded1,101-byte child
file. Existing Legacy title edit/reload preserves execution; two real
Legacy runs produce independently checked15/34-byte files. These remain
historical source records.
- Current literal 1c03 Mac core acceptance passes independent checks:
ordinary Auto native Codex onboarding without runner override; only
timeout 180 seconds/concurrency 1 saved; six successful native runs and
six serialized turns (maximum overlap 1); both same-task continuity
checks and five mechanical callback checks; actual rendered parent reply
and exact child downloads. The useful handoff advances from revision 1
to 2. Both files are 48 bytes, SHA-256
`8b742bd4e8123a7c078f0a8d9f3449fbfa8a320d7d90be641a2818db3c53d92c` and
`f42db9774fa06e804ab7d596fc8b922a2b638921c418b87d0111151d290a6afe`;
exactly one byte changes and old history remains. The agent is paused
with zero active runs/errors. Both artifact work products have
`isPrimary=false`, and descriptive titles fail a stricter title-helper
assumption; these retained results are scoped editorial follow-up, not
new merge gates. Six source-bound screenshots are uploaded and verified
in the private primary QA report.
- [Literal 9546 managed
proof](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-38485488621-1/index.html):
original 19 assertions and completed judge pass, four native turns,
child-bound240-byte file and session/workspace continuity. Checkout
reports a verified generated target-lock mutation; full final porcelain
was not retained. Signed execution-image identity remains separate from
Core source.
- Actual 651a Test deployment succeeds on one owned/pinned target. One
ordinary Auto API-key Connect then fails native cleanup before hire.
Controller turn/drain/suspend completion and service-recorded
environment cleanup are observed; they do not certify physical deletion
or native authority retirement. Failure/recovery/unknown holds are
retained. No Legacy switch or unchanged paid retry. The two source
repairs above require actual treatment.
- [Current immutable Core
preview](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38570365725)
and matching DB/shared artifacts pass. One owned, pinned Test target
serves exact `1c03`; identical migration history correctly skips the
migrator. Ordinary Auto Codex Connect succeeds and hires native; saved
native selection and QA bounds survive reload. The initial child
preparation attempt fails before provider work, with actual stdout
identifying `renewal_deadline`; its trigger remains unknown and the
failure is retained. Normal Board **Try again** and **Resume** recover
the child to Done, producing a browser-verified 44-byte file, SHA-256
`0a8458b1efcc2d7a0d815689458c4caab039a46c7c7a3e5805de6bc8b1a96ecc`. The
actual parent callback reports the completed child document/file. The
existing validator requires a parent-owned attachment, so recovery
enters normal Review; after byte checking, normal **Approve completion**
reaches parent Done. No forced status or duplicate parent file is used.
The validator is unchanged from integrated and current master.
Autonomous initial callback-to-Done is not proven. The same-child
follow-up completes document revision 2 and publishes a second
independently downloaded 44-byte file, SHA-256
`22022257300fae762784632d08d3bbe0bab61e2ce81f91864a14dcd7aa464591`; only
the revision digit changes. The unchanged existing native-continuity and
attachment oracles pass. All ten recorded runs are terminal: nine native
successes and the retained pre-provider setup failure. The QA agent is
paused with zero active runs. The pre-existing parent evidence scope
mismatch is a separate follow-up, with ordinary completion review
exercised rather than a forced status or relaxed validation. This
unsigned Core preview remains distinct from post-merge private Cloud
composition.

## Risks

- Saved agents are not migrated. Explicit runner changes use normal
configuration/session rules; historical runs retain their recorded
execution.
- Native readiness depends on verified assets and server-owned target
qualification. A Legacy probe, HTTP200 or successful account save cannot
prove native readiness.
- Recovery exceptions remain restricted to validated
completed-onboarding reports; process-loss, ownership and terminal-state
safeguards remain active. Unexecuted live journeys stay open.
- Linux ARM paid tasks, Windows, Alpine and 32-bit ARM remain deferred.
Cold Cargo cache misses are recorded; no warm-cache speedup is claimed.
- Historical invoices/physical cleanup remain unconfirmed and held.
After merge, exact published npm canary, signed standard image/migrator,
private composition and serving/live acceptance still require
qualification. Production deployment/default promotion is not
authorized.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, tools, code execution and
parallel agents. Exact serving snapshot and context-window size are not
exposed.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used with available 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 linked public issues or PRs above
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
ticket id
- [x] I have run the stated focused tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation
- [x] I have considered and documented risks
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green on the current candidate
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open findings on the current candidate
- [x] I will address all reviewer comments before requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 11:33:02 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip ebeac833a6 perf(runs): bound history and reduce repeated context reads (#16286)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps operators manage AI agents and inspect their work.
> - Run history supplies recent execution records to the board and API
clients.
> - The list repeats eight reads of a large stored JSON context.
> - A caller can also omit the limit and read the complete history.
> - This pull request expands context fields once and bounds every list
read.
> - The benefit is lower database cost and bounded redaction work.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #958. Related community reports: #13962 and #10631. This is an
independent implementation. It does not use their commits or code. It
covers the history bounds reported in both. Process memory monitoring
from #10631 is outside this change.

**What happened?**

The run-history query repeatedly extracts fields from large context
JSON. Requests without a limit also load every historical run before
authorization and redaction. Accumulated staging query statistics showed
271 ms for summary history and another 58 ms for its redaction lookup.

**What did you expect to happen?**

Normal reads must use a bounded recent history. Context projection must
preserve the existing values and privacy behavior with less repeated
database work.

**Steps to reproduce**

Run the disposable benchmark below against the baseline revision. It
creates 1,400 synthetic runs with 192 KiB contexts. It compares the
exact service SQL and every returned column for both summary and full
history.

## What Changed

- Expand context fields with one lateral record projection. Preserve
non-object legacy contexts and the first-class issue binding.
- Enforce a 200-row default and a 1,000-row maximum in the route and
service.
- Apply the default in the shared UI client, including both agent detail
implementations.
- Preserve response arrays, authorization, result projection and secret
redaction.
- Fetch older linked runs by ID in both agent pages. Check company and
agent scope, navigation races and visible retry errors.
- Update OpenAPI, data-path documentation and capability maps.
- Add real PostgreSQL and HTTP regressions plus a reproducible
benchmark.

## Verification

- Local benchmark: summary history 37.72 ms to 19.34 ms; full history
37.84 ms to 19.01 ms. All 200 complete positional rows match in each
comparison. These are synthetic local SQL timings, excluding HTTP and
redaction.
- History, route, privacy and redaction suites: 160 server tests passed
across six files. Twenty-two UI API, selection, run-panel and
log-visibility tests passed. Both agent-page variants render an older
linked run with an empty history page on desktop and mobile.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed.
- Map validation and `git diff --check` passed.
- All current-head CI and security checks passed, including the full
general and serialized suites, browser shards, Runner verification and
build. Greptile reviewed the exact commit at 5/5 with no remaining
findings.
- The full local sweep began before the final compatibility fixes. It
was stopped after the final commits passed complete CI. The focused
local suites listed above passed on the final code. Before interruption,
the broader local sweep passed 31,743 tests across the general server,
UI and several package groups, with no reported failures. The full local
command is not claimed as a completed pass.

```sh
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/services/heartbeat/run-state.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-list.test.ts src/__tests__/agent-live-run-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/run-secret-redaction.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-run-privacy-routes.test.ts
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/api/heartbeats.test.ts
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsx ../scripts/benchmark-run-history.ts --baseline-ref=1e731520bb
```

## Risks

- Clients that relied on an unbounded array now receive 200 rows by
default. Explicit limits allow up to 1,000. This change does not add
pagination.
- Legacy context conversion must stay identical. Real database
regressions cover null, array, scalar, nested values and native issue
precedence.
- No schema migration or persistent cache is introduced. Redaction and
access checks remain active.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, shell
tools and local code execution. The runtime does not expose a more
specific backend model ID or context-window size.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 10:14:41 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip df4ee06e2f feat(skills): select and validate tracked GitHub branches (#16288)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Skills can track a branch in an authorized GitHub repository.
> - Sources previously offered only a default-branch repair action.
> - People need to select a listed branch or enter a branch that GitHub
has not listed.
> - The server must validate the selected ref with the caller's
authorized connection.
> - This pull request connects the approved branch picker to production
APIs.
> - Installed skills remain usable while the source changes its tracked
ref.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Skills UI, shared API contracts, GitHub source services, and agent API
discovery.

**Problem or motivation**

The default-branch repair action does not let people choose another
branch. The settings service also validates the old ref when a caller
supplies a new ref other than HEAD. A missing tracked branch can prevent
connection repair even when the selected account has repository access.

**Proposed solution**

Load a bounded branch list with the authorized connection. Mark the
default branch. Search listed branches or accept a typed ref. Validate
the selected ref before saving. Keep the chosen value after a load
error, invalid ref, or concurrent update. Save the selected connection
and branch together during connection repair.

**Alternatives considered**

A default-branch button does not support a named branch. A text field
alone does not help people find the repository default or available
branches.

**Roadmap alignment**

This improves the existing Skills source manager. It does not add a new
skill import system.

**Additional context**

Refs #16066 and #16256. This is the production implementation of the
approved branch-selection Storybook journeys.

## What Changed

- Add an authorized branch-list endpoint and shared response/query
types. Register it in agent API discovery.
- Validate the requested ref, including the returned commit SHA.
Preserve source leases, revision checks, project ownership, skill
identities, selections, and installed versions.
- Add the searchable branch picker to Sources and connection repair.
Allow typed refs during branch discovery and after discovery fails.
- Keep save errors in the dialog. Retain the selected branch through a
concurrent source update.
- Use the production components and API client in Storybook. Add
keyboard, touch, loading, retry, invalid-ref, connection-repair, and
concurrent-update browser journeys.
- Update product documentation and the feature/access maps.

## Verification

- Red/green: two new database regressions fail against the previous
service and pass against the implementation.
- Linux database/service suite: 85 tests passed. This includes source
visibility, human/agent authorization, selected connections, immutable
versions, and invalid refs.
- Rebased branch and review fixes: 94 focused UI, route,
branch-validation, and fixture tests passed. Two conflict-message
regressions and the stale-retry fixture regression fail before the fix
and pass after it.
- Storybook build passed. All 26 focused browser journeys passed.
- Repository typecheck and build passed. Final UI typecheck passed after
the review fixes.
- The full local Vitest run was interrupted when the checkout and its
dependencies disappeared. It reported missing working-directory/Postgres
files and worker startup errors. Its two timed-out tests pass after the
checkout was restored. The complete CI suite passed on the final head,
`cf5d4c8f0a`: [CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38571068332).
One unchanged workspace timestamp test required a single rerun. Its
release-minus-one-millisecond value can equal the original confirmation
time. The rerun passed.
- Live acceptance passed on implementation head `5dd935bf14` in an
isolated macOS arm64 instance with Node 24.21.0 and an authorized
private GitHub repository. The UI loaded the actual default branch,
saved branch and selected connection together, and preserved the
installed skill/version IDs after reload. An invalid typed ref retained
the draft and showed the provider error. A valid typed HEAD ref then
saved successfully. The owned runtime and database were stopped after
the test. Focused unit, Linux database, and browser suites passed again
after the error-handling review fixes.
- Greptile reviewed final head `cf5d4c8f0a` at 5/5. Both review threads
are resolved; the fresh review has no remaining findings.
- Token gates and map/catalog checks passed.
- Review entry points: `Skills / Project repository skills / 03 Branch
selection components` and `04 Branch selection journeys`. Run `pnpm
storybook` to inspect them.
- Browser command: `pnpm exec playwright test --config
tests/storybook-visual/playwright.config.ts
tests/storybook-visual/skill-source-branch-selection.spec.ts
tests/storybook-visual/project-repository-skills.spec.ts`.
- Manual check: open an independent GitHub source, choose a new branch,
select the default or type a ref, save, and reload. Try an invalid ref
and confirm the selection remains in the dialog. For a project-bound
source, change its ref in project settings.

## Risks

- GitHub discovery is bounded to 100 listed branches. The default branch
is always included. Typed refs remain available.
- A source can change while the dialog is open. The API rejects a stale
revision and the UI keeps the draft for retry.
- A ref change schedules the existing refresh pipeline. Installed
versions remain available until a successful refresh imports new
content.
- No database migration or credential storage change is required.
Existing HEAD requests remain supported.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The serving model's exact identifier and
context-window size are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning,
repository tools, code execution, and browser tools.

## 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>
2026-10-14 09:55:43 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip f8af817f8d fix(ui): make external agent pairing codes copyable (#16274)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - External agents connect through the shared MCP agent gateway.
> - Grok setup gives the operator a one-use code for the authorization
page.
> - The password field hides the code but does not provide a working
copy action.
> - The pending approval button names Dot before the agent preview
loads.
> - This pull request adds explicit code copying and a neutral approval
label.
> - The operator can review the fixed agent without sending credentials
to chat.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #16219, #15581, #15414.

**What happened?**

The Grok setup code is in a read-only password field. Ordinary browser
copying does not copy that field. The shared authorization page says
“Connect Dot with pairing code” before it knows the invited provider.
These defects blocked a watched Grok desktop setup before approval.

**Expected behavior**

An operator can copy the one-use code with a visible control. The code
stays hidden and outside the Bot prompt. The authorization page shows
the registered client and the fixed company, agent, permissions, and
authorizing person before approval.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Choose New agent, Invite an external agent, and Grok Bot.
2. Save the Bot identity and open Connect access.
3. Try to copy the masked code into the Bot's browser authorization
page.
4. Inspect the pending approval action before a valid preview loads.

**Paperclip version or commit**

The fix starts from master commit
2c17d3ca52.

**Deployment mode**

Cloud. The same UI serves self-hosted instances.

## What Changed

- Add Copy code beside the masked Grok pairing field. Reuse CopyText and
the shared clipboard fallback, failure feedback, and retry.
- Associate the pairing label with its input for keyboard and
screen-reader access.
- Use Allow agent connection before and after the fixed-agent preview.
Keep approval disabled until that preview loads. Align Dot's generated
setup prompt and guide with that action.
- Add tests for copy failure and retry, a Grok invitation using the
Cursor client identity, and unchanged person and Dot connection paths.
- Add a waiting-for-authorization Storybook state and record the live
qualification blocker in the existing plan.

## Verification

- Focused Grok, Dot, and person-connection UI tests: 33 passed.
- Repository build: passed.
- Token gates: passed.
- Storybook catalog: passed; structure only.
- Watched Storybook preview: native browser input copied the full
synthetic code while the field stayed masked and Continue stayed
disabled. This is fixture evidence, not live OAuth or Runner
qualification.
- Repository typecheck and Storybook build: passed. UI typecheck and
production build passed again after the review fix.
- Current-head CI: 55 successes, two intentional skips, one neutral
result, no unfinished or failed gates. Greptile: 5/5, with the review
finding fixed and resolved. Head:
1b95218c91.
- The additional local aggregate test run is still running. No local
aggregate pass is claimed. The required full server, workspace, Runner,
browser, and release checks passed in CI for the current head.
- After deployment, resume the saved Grok setup, use Copy code, check
the fixed agent preview, and finish the real authenticated round trip.

## Risks

Copying temporarily places the one-use code on the clipboard. Its
existing expiry and one-use checks remain. The authorization endpoint,
grant scopes, fixed identity, and disabled-state checks do not change.
No persistent secret enters the prompt. Live provider and managed Runner
qualification remain incomplete.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. Used tool calls, code execution, and browser
inspection. The exact serving model suffix and context limit 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>
2026-10-14 06:36:47 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip c36281d639 fix(skills): repair missing branches and show grouped import progress (#16256)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and their reusable skills.
> - GitHub skill sources must keep their installed content usable during updates.
> - A source can track a branch that no longer exists.
> - The UI treats that GitHub error as a connection problem, so saving a valid account does not resolve it.
> - Project workspaces also show the same repository several times, and long imports give little feedback.
> - This pull request adds explicit branch repair, groups repository imports, and shows import progress.
> - People can repair the actual problem and see when their import is working.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16066 and #14713. This fixes the Sources experience introduced by those changes. Related adapter-source PRs #14340 and #14341 cover runtime mounting, not this source-management flow. No overlapping source-management fix was found.

**What happened?**

An installed source tracked `main` while its GitHub repository used `master`. GitHub returned HTTP 422. The UI showed a general read error and asked for a new connection after a valid account was saved. The project repository list repeated the same repository/ref for each project. Import had no spinner or explanation of queued work.

**Expected behavior**

Identify an unavailable branch and offer an explicit repair. Retain the selected connection and installed versions. Show one repository/ref row with its projects. Give immediate feedback and show the queued and active import states.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Install a source with an immutable commit and a saved tracked branch that does not exist.
2. Refresh it, or try to save a valid GitHub connection.
3. Add the same repository/ref to two legacy project workspaces and open Sources.
4. Import that repository and observe the row until installation completes.

## What Changed

- Distinguish a missing GitHub revision from access denial and temporary read errors.
- Validate both repository identity and the tracked revision when saving a connection.
- Offer Use default branch on independent sources and in connection repair. Keep `HEAD` as the default-branch alias after refresh. Preserve skill IDs, versions and selections.
- Keep active project refs under project configuration. Reject source-level changes that would alter their tracking. Recheck the ref under the source lock when project attachment races with branch repair.
- Group matching repository/ref workspaces. Adopt eligible workspaces and skip pending workspaces. Keep remaining project links inside the existing source card. Allow remaining imports while another workspace is pending.
- Show a spinner, busy state and queued/importing text. Keep the saved authorized account selected in connection repair.
- Update shared contracts, feature/access maps, database notes and production-component Storybook journeys.

## Verification

- Red/green: three local regressions failed on the original code: missing-ref classification, duplicate repository rows, and branch repair instead of another connection prompt. The changed UI/reader tests pass after the fixes.
- Live local app with a real authorized GitHub credential: reproduced HTTP 422 for the unavailable branch; used the UI to restore default-branch tracking; confirmed the same connection, skill ID and single immutable version remained.
- Live local grouped Paperclip import: one source, two project associations and 52 installed skills. Sources survived reload. No staging data was changed.
- All 16 project repository Storybook browser journeys pass on the final head, including keyboard focus recovery after branch repair. These include branch repair, grouped imports, connection selection, recovery, removal and responsive layouts.
- Repository typecheck, production build, Storybook build, token gates and 28 map/catalog tests passed. Final UI typecheck and build also passed after grouping remaining project links.
- Linux qualification: all 94 focused source, project import, GitHub reader and UI tests pass with supported Node 24. No database tests were skipped. Both review findings failed before their fixes and pass after them.
- The full local `pnpm test:run` attempt was stopped after macOS database suites exhausted the host shared-memory limit. The complete Linux CI matrix is the full-suite gate. The complete Linux CI matrix passes for head `f886e3ac073ec1c6f051fd6429496234f5143694`.
- Greptile rates head `f886e3ac073ec1c6f051fd6429496234f5143694` 5/5. Both findings are fixed and all review threads are resolved.
- Storybook: `skills-project-repository-skills-02-journeys--missing-branch` and `--duplicate-projects`.

## Risks

- Default-branch repair changes the tracked branch only after an explicit user action. Existing execution version pins stay intact.
- A selected connection now needs access to the tracked revision, not only repository metadata.
- Grouping is by repository and ref. Project access and provenance remain separate and are checked by the existing services.
- Legacy source errors contain safe text. The repair-action classifier maps known errors and treats other failures as retryable. No credentials or provider response bodies are returned.
- No schema migration, workflow change, lockfile change or staging deployment.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact serving model identifier and context-window size are not exposed in this session. Tool-assisted implementation, code execution and browser verification.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [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>
2026-10-13 22:27:11 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip b8ffeb973a feat(runner): add experimental Grok Bot agent participation (#16219)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents that perform work for a company.
> - The shared Runner owns task admission, authority, receipts and
finalization.
> - An existing Grok Bot needs to receive assignments and return results
through that Runner.
> - The Bot also needs governed access when it starts work from its own
conversation.
> - This PR adds agent-purpose MCP access and routine webhook dispatch.
> - It reuses the external-agent Rust Runner and keeps Grok capabilities
explicit.
> - The provider stays experimental until the real-client managed
journeys pass.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Agent or provider**
Grok Bot, distinct from the Grok Build coding runtime in #13882.

**Why this adapter is useful**
Users can assign work to an existing Bot, receive progress, questions,
documents and files in Paperclip, and let the Bot initiate work under
its agent permissions.

**How the agent is invoked**
A webhook-only routine delivers bounded references. Dedicated
named-agent OAuth and MCP provide inbound calls. Setup follows [Grok
routines](https://cursor.com/help/grok-bot/routines) and [custom
plugins](https://cursor.com/help/grok-bot/connect-plugins). The current
desktop app needs its Bot-generated Webhook URL navigation link when
routine-row clicks fail.

The GitHub search found related Grok Build runtime work, but no existing
Grok Bot agent provider. This extends the roadmap’s existing agent,
Runner, governance and artifact foundations.

## What Changed

- Add default-off Grok Bot participation through the shared real Rust
external backend, preserving native provider identity guarantees and
distinguishing session closure from remote termination.
- Bind agent OAuth to company, agent, client, gateway and authorizer;
recheck permissions and task-bound execution authority without
manufacturing a native identity.
- Persist routine configuration, dispatch intents, authenticated
acknowledgement and recovery holds. Store URL/key together in encrypted
secret storage, use guarded public egress, and never automatically
replay ambiguous HTTP delivery.
- Reuse native tools, durable waiting, completion assessment and review.
Add task-bound file grants through existing artifact storage; suppress
proactive echo dispatch and synchronous result wake loops.
- Enforce the current native deliverable work-mode policy at file-ticket
issuance and use. Add operator retries for confirmed rejected wakes,
with retained receipts, stable retry intent and current-authority
checks. Recovery locks bindings before routine rows. Thread Stop
resolves the selected run and its agent.
- Cancel queued and preparing Stop targets before assignment creation,
restore saved setup after a failed request and successful retry, and
publish the Grok provider descriptor schema. Advance the versioned
Copilot source declaration for the shared schema change; its
qualification remains pending.
- Filter task summaries with the shared privacy policy, preserve
feedback admission when wake delivery is blocked, reconcile settled
delivery receipts without restoring work authority, and bind every Stop
control to its displayed run. Recovery records distinguish dispatch
uncertainty from a revoked session.
- Add resumable guided setup, credential replacement, consent,
management, observed work status and stop/recovery controls, plus an
interactive Storybook journey using the production task thread, question
form and report card. Grok’s own apps remain available; Paperclip
workspace and third-party tools are deferred.

## Verification

- Five focused protocol, authorization, person MCP and Runner files: 192
tests pass. The Grok assigned-work case executes the actual Rust Runner,
saves a document, uploads/deduplicates a file and reaches ordinary
finalization.
- Proactive intake/deduplication and renewed-session recovery pass.
These use scripted clients and synthetic storage; they are not
real-provider acceptance.
- Repository typecheck, production build, token gates, map checks and
Storybook build/catalog checks pass. The local full-suite campaign was
stopped after macOS shared-memory exhaustion repeatedly prevented
embedded PostgreSQL startup. No local aggregate pass is claimed. The
first clean-worker CI run identified avatar fixture/configuration, flag
defaults, feature-card ordering and OpenAPI route-coverage gaps; all
four focused regressions pass after correction. Those regressions pass.
The latest clean-worker CI run also found a Copilot source-hash
declaration mismatch after the shared descriptor update; the corrected
declaration passes all 28 integrity tests. The next review corrections
pass 144 rendered UI tests, 21 OpenAPI tests and 82 Runner
contract/integrity/history tests. The latest database fixtures were
blocked at startup by host shared-memory exhaustion; clean-worker CI
must execute their new regressions. Full current-head CI now passes: 54
successful checks and four intentional skips. The database regression
uses the PostgreSQL driver result shape; file-policy, rejected-feedback
and lock-order cases pass on clean workers. Current-head Greptile is 5/5
with no unresolved findings.
- Rendered setup steps and outbound-only verification were walked
through in Storybook. Simulation cannot enable Done without an
authenticated-reply state.
- Actual client OAuth, continued access, reconnect and one routine wake
with an exact chat acknowledgement were observed separately. This
candidate’s live authenticated challenge, assigned/proactive workflows,
Linux managed artifact, restart and cleanup are not yet qualified. The
provider stays disabled by default.
- The separate Cloud ingress change forwards only exact task-bound
upload/download paths and preserves host identity and header stripping.
- Current Cloud policy reserves Test for pre-merge app/harness
experiments; Staging accepts only master-derived revisions. Real-client
qualification needs a supported, authorized deployment target and
remains outstanding.

## Risks

One append-only migration adds routine/dispatch state and extends shared
bindings and file tickets. The unshipped migrations were regenerated
after upstream consumed their original numbers. Rolling back code
retains the durable rows; revoke grants and inspect unknown remote
activity before resuming dispatch. Grok cannot confirm remote
termination, stream its complete transcript or report spending. Plugins
are account-wide and do not isolate credentials between Bots.
Real-client managed acceptance remains required before enabling the
experimental provider.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex based on GPT-6, with reasoning, code execution and
browser/native UI tools. The exact deployment model ID and
context-window size are not exposed by this runtime.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 20:57:42 -05:00
e0f30a4c71 feat(apps): collapse provider connections behind an "N connections" toggle (#16097)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The Apps page shows one card for each provider. Each card lists the
connections for that provider.
> - Some providers have many connections. For example, a team can have
five OpenAI accounts.
> - Each connection uses a full row. Thus, the page becomes long and
cluttered.
> - This pull request puts the connection list behind a "N connections"
row with a chevron. The user clicks the row to show or hide the list.
> - The benefit is a shorter Apps page. Connections that need action
stay visible.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**
UI: the Apps page (`ui/src/pages/apps/Browse.tsx`), the `ConnectorCard`
component.

**Problem or motivation**
A provider card shows every connection as a full row. When a provider
has many accounts, the card is very tall. The page is hard to scan.

**Proposed solution**
When a card has two or more connections, show a "N connections" row with
a chevron below the card header. A click on the row opens or closes the
list. The list is closed when all connections are healthy. The list is
open when a connection needs attention or setup. The row also shows the
count, for example "· 1 needs attention". The list is open while a
search is active. A card with one connection does not show the row.

**Alternatives considered**
- Always show the list. This is the current behavior, and it causes the
clutter.
- Show the toggle for one connection too. This adds a click and gives no
benefit.
- Always close the list. This can hide an account that needs
reconnection, so we did not use it.

## What Changed

- `ConnectorCard` counts native connections, gateway-managed accounts
(Composio, Arcade, Executor), and chat or bot endpoints.
- When the count is two or more, the card wraps the list in the existing
`Collapsible` component. The trigger row shows the count and a chevron
that turns when the list opens.
- The list opens by default when one or more connections need attention
or setup. The trigger row shows how many need attention.
- The `Browse` page sends `defaultExpanded` and the current trimmed
search query while a search is active. A new search opens the list
again, even after the user closed it.
- The upstream account state logic moved into the `upstreamAccountState`
helper. The list render and the attention count use the same helper. The
behavior did not change.
- The attention count and Finish setup action share one predicate. A
verifying endpoint stays visible until setup is complete. Four
regression cases cover provider setup, identity linking, missing setup
metadata, and completed setup.
- New tests in `Browse.test.tsx` cover: open and close with the toggle,
search opens the list, one connection stays inline, and the list opens
when an account needs attention.
- New review story:
`ui/storybook/stories/connection-setup/apps-connection-count-toggle.stories.tsx`
("Apps, channels, and extensions / Connection setup / Connection count
toggle"). It includes production component fixtures for collapsed,
expanded, needs-attention, search-match, single-connection,
page-overview, and unfinished-chat-setup states. The original six story
IDs are retained; the unfinished chat setup fixture adds one ID.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/pages/apps/Browse.test.tsx`: all 84 tests
pass. The new test closes an active search result, changes the query,
then returns to the first query. It fails before the search-reset fix
and passes after it.
- `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --check`: passes (265 story files,
2,520 stories). Story annotations describe the production components,
fixture boundary, and covered capabilities.
- `pnpm check:token-gates`: passes.
- Full repository typecheck and build passed after the master merge. The
final UI typecheck passes after the setup fix. Final full build and
Storybook build pass on `d4c923d3ce0`. The built index retains all six
prior story IDs and adds the unfinished-chat-setup ID. Chromium checks
pass for all seven states, including the setup action and toggle
behavior. All 54 successful CI checks pass on this head, with two
intentional skips, including all general and serialized test shards,
E2E, typecheck, and build. The fresh Apex review is 5/5 on this head
with no unresolved findings. The separate, unsharded local `pnpm
test:run` invocation has not completed; complete suite verification
comes from CI.
- The stories use local account fixtures and stub navigation. They do
not prove a live provider connection or persistence.

## Risks

- Low risk. The change is UI only, with no API or data change.
- Behavior change: users must click to see the connections on a healthy
card with two or more connections. Cards with a problem stay open, so a
broken connection is not hidden.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), used in Claude Code
with tool use (shell, file edit, test runs).

OpenAI GPT-6 (`gpt-6`) through Codex assisted conflict resolution,
regression tests, and repository verification. This session does not
expose an exact context-window size.

## Checklist

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

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Devin Foley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 14:57:48 -07:00
ba4fac585d feat(agents): show who created an agent in shared companies (#16055)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A company in Paperclip can have more than one human member, and each
member can create agents
> - The app does not record which person created an agent
> - When two or more people share a company, members cannot see who
added an agent or who to ask about it
> - This pull request records the creator of each agent and shows the
creator on the agent Overview tab
> - The benefit is clear ownership of agents in shared companies, with
no change for single-user companies

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No public issue exists. This description follows `feature_request.yml`.

**Subsystem affected**

Agents: the agent data model, the agent create path on the server, and
the agent Overview tab in the board UI.

**Problem or motivation**

Paperclip does not record which human user created an agent. When more
than one human user works in a company, the agent page does not tell
members who created the agent.

**Proposed solution**

Record the user ID of the creator when a human creates an agent. Show
"Created by <name>" on the Identity card of the agent Overview tab. Show
this row only when the company has two or more human members. Do not
count the synthetic local Board principal as a human member. Do not show
the local Board as a creator.

**Alternatives considered**

Count human users across the full instance. We did not do this. An
instance-wide count tells a member of one company that other companies
have users. The creator is always a member of the agent's company, so
the company count is sufficient.

**Roadmap alignment**

`ROADMAP.md` has no item for agent ownership. This change is small and
additive.

## What Changed

- Add the nullable column `agents.created_by_user_id`
(`packages/db/src/schema/agents.ts`, migration `0343_new_mentor.sql`).
- Set the column in the single agent insert path
(`server/src/modules/agent-lifecycle/adapters/records.ts`). The value
comes from the authenticated user actor. The server ignores a creator
value in the request body. Agents that agents or the system create keep
`null`.
- Backfill existing agents in the migration. The backfill uses the
earliest `agent.created` or `agent.hire_created` activity row that a
user actor wrote in the same company.
- Add `createdByUserId` to the shared `Agent` type
(`packages/shared/src/types/agent.ts`).
- Add `ui/src/lib/agent-creator.ts`. It decides if the UI shows the
creator row and it resolves the creator name. If the creator left the
company, the row shows "Former member".
- Add the "Created by" row to the Identity card in
`ui/src/pages/AgentDetail.tsx`. If the company user directory request
fails, the row shows "Could not load creator". The row does not
disappear silently.
- Add the Storybook story `Pages/Agent Detail → Shared Company Shows
Creator`.
- Document the column in `doc/SPEC-implementation.md` §7.2.

## Verification

- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck` passes. This includes the
migration numbering and migration safety checks.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` passes.
- `ui`: `tsc --noEmit` passes.
- `server`: `vitest run
src/modules/agent-lifecycle/__tests__/lifecycle.test.ts` passes (49/49).
Two new tests:
- The server records the creator from the actor and ignores a creator
value in the request body.
- The backfill takes the earliest user activity row. It skips agent
actors and rows from other companies.
- `server`: `vitest run src/__tests__/built-in-agents.test.ts` passes
(40/40). A new test checks that a built-in agent enabled by a human
records that human, and that automatic provisioning stays unattributed.
The gated (pending-approval) provisioning test also asserts the creator.
`src/__tests__/built-in-agent-routes.test.ts` also passes.
- `ui`: `vitest run src/lib/agent-creator.test.ts
src/pages/AgentOverview.test.tsx` passes (10/10). The tests cover these
cases: the row shows with two or more humans, the row stays hidden with
one human plus the Board, the UI never shows the Board as the creator,
the row shows an error when the directory request fails, and the row
stays hidden (no error) for agents with no creator or the Board as
creator. The last case fails without the fix.
- The current Storybook catalog uses source annotations and generated
indexes. `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --check` passes (264 story
files, 2,514 stories). The merge keeps the authored catalog deletion
from master.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` is clean.
- Screenshots from the Storybook story (fake data: two human members,
Alice Admin and Bob Builder, plus the local Board). The red "Could not
load public key" text is a Storybook artifact: the story has no fixture
for the public key request. The existing `Dashboard` story shows the
same text.

  **Two or more human members: the Identity card shows "Created by".**

![Identity card with the Created by
row](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/9b62bd2ea6cf984ce6745f08cc45f44ddf00fb51/pr-16055/identity-created-by.png)

  **One human member plus the local Board: the row stays hidden.**

![Identity card without the Created by
row](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/9b62bd2ea6cf984ce6745f08cc45f44ddf00fb51/pr-16055/identity-single-human.png)

Full Overview tab:
[overview-created-by.png](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/9b62bd2ea6cf984ce6745f08cc45f44ddf00fb51/pr-16055/overview-created-by.png).
The images are on the separate branch `pr-assets/agent-created-by`. They
are not in this PR and do not go to `master`.
- Manual check: open Storybook at `Pages/Agent Detail → Shared Company
Shows Creator`. The Identity card shows "Created by Alice Admin". The
`Dashboard` story has one human, so it does not show the row.
- Final focused verification on
`5a02350cf16050a3cf3cb3f8dc061fe61758c60d`: all 99 tests pass across the
two UI suites, built-in-agent suite, and lifecycle suite. The backfill
test applies the complete migration twice. The migration uses `ADD
COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS` and preserves the company-scoped backfill.
Migration numbering and token checks pass.
- Full repository typecheck, build, and Storybook build pass. The
generated creator story ID is present. A Chromium check renders the
production agent page fixture and verifies the creator row and Alice
Admin name. Map checks and their 21 tests pass. A fresh Apex review is
5/5 on the current head with no unresolved findings. All 54 successful
CI checks pass on this head, with two intentional skips, including all
general and serialized test shards, E2E, typecheck, and build. The
workspaces-b job passed after rerunning a runner shutdown; no source
change was needed. The separate, unsharded local `pnpm test:run`
invocation has not completed; complete suite verification comes from CI.

## Risks

- Migration: the migration adds one nullable column and runs one
`UPDATE` on `agents` with a correlated subquery on `activity_log`. On an
instance with a very large activity log, the backfill can take some
time. The migration does not lock other tables and does not delete data.
- Backfill accuracy: agents with no user-authored create activity row
keep `null`. The UI then does not show a creator. This is the same as
the current behavior.
- Privacy: the row shows only names from the company user directory, and
only to users who can already see that directory.
- Low risk for single-user companies: the UI does not change for them.

> 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

- Provider: Anthropic, Claude Opus 5.5 (model ID `claude-opus-5-5`), run
as a coding agent through Claude Code with tool use (shell, file edit,
and test execution), standard context window.

OpenAI GPT-6 (`gpt-6`) through Codex assisted conflict resolution,
regression tests, and repository verification. This session does not
expose an exact context-window size.

## Checklist

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

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Amy (Opus) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-10-13 14:57:41 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip edcfcaf3f6 fix(ui): leave hidden task source defaults to the server (#16220)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The task dialog sends project and workspace choices to the control
plane.
> - Hidden workspace controls must leave automatic source choices to the
server.
> - The dialog still sent its computed source pointer while those
controls were hidden.
> - This bypassed the implicit default branch added in #16095 and saved
an untyped source choice.
> - This pull request omits that automatic pointer and preserves
explicit launch context.
> - The benefit is that fresh tasks can use the server's safe isolated
default source path.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16095. A search found no open duplicate for the hidden-selector
payload bug.

**What happened?**

A fresh task created through the board with a project and hidden
isolation controls failed setup with “Task workspace access is no longer
available.” The dialog sent `projectWorkspaceId` even though the user
had not selected a source. The saved task had no workspace-selection
provenance. No provider turn started.

**Expected behavior**

Omit automatic or restored draft source pointers when the selector is
hidden. Let the server select and record the project default. Preserve
explicit source and execution-workspace context supplied by a launch
action.

**Steps to reproduce**

Hide `workspaces.isolation` through the existing operator setting. Use a
project with a default Git source and isolated workspace policy. Create
a fresh task from the board. Inspect the creation payload: the hidden
automatic source must be omitted. The server must then apply its
existing default source contract. A restricted shared source must remain
protected.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Observed on Core `c7f4b74111d16f0b57112fa6d0b6a59c2d63bfe8`, which
includes #16095.

**Deployment mode**

Authenticated staging Cloud instance with a configured remote runner
provider and operator-hidden workspace controls.

## What Changed

- Omit the automatic `projectWorkspaceId` while isolation controls are
hidden.
- Keep explicit same-project launch source context, including reused
workspaces and subtasks.
- Add a fresh-default payload regression and strengthen stale-draft and
explicit-context controls.
- Keep server authorization, trust checks, source fallback rules,
visible selectors, and stored old tasks unchanged.

## Verification

- Before the repair, the hidden fresh/default and restored-source
regressions failed: 2 failed, 3 passed, 79 other cases filtered.
- Final rebased source: `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui
ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/project-workspace-defaults.test.ts` passed all 87 cases.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build` passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passed.
- Initial UI typecheck failed because this new checkout had not built
the plugin SDK. Building that dependency and repeating the unchanged
check passed. The failed attempt remains separate from the source
regression.
- Full repository typecheck, full repository tests, and full repository
build have not been run locally for this two-file UI patch. Complete
latest-head CI passed with 55 successful checks and two intentional
skips. This includes the full repository typecheck, build,
general/serialized tests and all eight browser shards. Fresh Apex is 5/5
on `f992823480311691469c6797d5cdff26d76899a2`, with no unresolved
findings or recommendations.
- No live recovery pass is claimed. The deployed baseline failed before
provider startup. A fresh same-project task must pass after this patch
is deployed. Existing tasks with untyped source pointers need a separate
authorized recovery path.
- The old Storybook maps were reviewed at the baseline, then master
removed them. The rebase preserves that removal. The final Storybook
structural check covers 262 files and 2,485 story IDs. No new Storybook
browser, play, render, or visual proof is claimed.

## Risks

- Hidden restored draft source choices are intentionally ignored.
Explicit same-project launch defaults remain in the request and have
controls for normal tasks and subtasks.
- Visible workspace choices retain their existing behavior.
- This patch fixes one creation path. It does not recover old tasks,
relax private source restrictions, or establish a performance fix for
slow historical runs.
- No data model, endpoint, permission, runner, or Observability changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with code and browser tools. The exact
served model identifier and context-window size are not exposed in this
session.

## Checklist

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

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 14:26:56 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 22d05644f4 feat(ui): add Speko voice setup, task calls, and Storybook coverage (#15728)
Runtime #15727 is merged. This PR adds the UI. Qualification follows in
#15729.

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agent work through tasks and governed connections.
> - Chat connections already bind external conversations to those tasks.
> - Speko handles voice and telephony, while the selected Paperclip
agent does the work.
> - A call needs durable session authority, ordered follow-ups, and safe
result delivery.
> - This PR adds the Speko setup and call controls to the existing Apps
and task UI.
> - This PR depends on #15727. The qualification suite follows
separately. Speko stays experimental.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Problem or motivation**

Phone and browser voice conversations cannot use the chat connection
task lifecycle. A separate voice runtime is needed to preserve task
authority, retries, and reply history.

**Proposed solution**

Add company-scoped voice sessions, signed callbacks, durable replies,
inbound intake, and an agent-facing outbound-call tool. Reuse existing
tasks, queues, secrets, and publications.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends the experimental chat connector entry points under Agent
Chat and Connected Apps. The project owner requested this feature.

Refs #11418 for the original provider catalog proposal. This
implementation uses the newer chat connection infrastructure rather than
an MCP catalog-only integration. Refs #15721 for remote OpenCode
startup.

## What Changed

- Add the Speko Apps catalog entry, provider artwork, and browser SDK.
- Reuse existing agents in setup. Keep the optional Company Phone Agent
in the catalog, with connection instructions available to any assigned
agent.
- Add task voice controls, transcripts, phone callbacks, inbound-line
settings, and call Activity entries.
- Surface retryable connection and incoming-task inventory failures,
preserve active call controls and cached tasks, restore keyboard focus
after recovery, and bound notification polling so a stuck request cannot
hide later results.
- Put Save & exit and Connect Speko in the credential step’s shared
footer.
- Add deterministic production-component Storybook fixtures for setup,
lifecycle, failures, permissions, and phone surfaces.
- Include voice components in the design guide. Stories never request a
real microphone or place calls.

## Verification

- All 27 focused UI/controller regressions, UI typecheck, token gates,
and 28 map/catalog structural tests pass. The shared connection cache
test covers pause/resume invalidation during the 30-second fresh period.
- Storybook builds 157 Speko production-component stories. The complete
prior 156-story set passed all 624 checks on UI source 249cbc616a. After
the final cache repair, all 152 affected page/launcher checks passed
across both themes, 390/1200 widths and reduced motion. Real microphone
access and external provider requests are blocked.
- Source annotations follow the current generated-catalog contract. No
generated catalog or lockfile is included. Three inherited
GitHub-heading tests passed after master reconciliation.
- Latest-head CI and Greptile review must pass before merge. Local
fixture success does not establish provider or spoken-playback
acceptance.
- The separate integrated browser run passed two journeys and failed
browser answer retrieval. Real browser/telephone playback and timing
acceptance remain outstanding. See the dated qualification report and
E01–E16 runbook. Speko stays experimental.

## Risks

- Voice sessions add migrations and provider-dependent lifecycle
behavior. Migrations preserve existing chat and AI transports.
- Callback origins must be reachable HTTPS. Provider keys and signing
secrets remain vaulted.
- Unverified callers receive task-scoped low-trust authority. Caller ID
does not grant private task access.
- Outbound telephony incurs provider charges. Provider acceptance is not
proof that the caller heard an answer.
- Keep the feature behind the existing experimental chat setting until
the real browser, inbound, outbound, and delayed-result acceptance
matrix passes.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with tool use and code execution. The exact serving
model ID and context window are not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] 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>
2026-10-13 16:26:38 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 473c80d13f Automatically import and update project repository skills (#16066)
Automatically import skills from new GitHub project repositories and update enabled sources in the background. Preserve project-derived access, saved selections, immutable execution versions and explicit pins; add legacy adoption, refresh and connection repair in Sources.

Include durable scheduling and bounded work credits, production Storybook journeys, real GitHub-to-routine acceptance receipts and final-head CI/security/Greptile qualification.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 16:11:43 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 433d94ee0b refactor(maps): generate indexes from local story and feature metadata (#16214)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Feature recipes and Storybook help contributors find behavior,
examples, and verification steps.
> - Independent feature changes currently update shared catalogs,
indexes, and review hashes.
> - Those shared files cause merge conflicts and repeated bookkeeping
during parallel work.
> - This pull request stores metadata in each feature recipe and story,
then generates the combined views.
> - Contributors can merge independent work without editing a common
index. Git and PR evidence retain change and review history.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Maintaining the product, agent-access, and Storybook maps while multiple
agents change different features.

**Current behavior**

A story or recipe change can update `catalog.json`, `INDEX.md`, review
hashes, verification tables, and tracked generated navigation. Two
unrelated changes then conflict in the same files.

**Proposed behavior**

Each story declares capability links and classification in
`parameters.paperclip`. Each feature recipe declares its navigation and
optional verification guidance. Startup, build, and UI typechecking
discover these sources and generate ignored indexes and Storybook pages.

**Reason and benefit**

A routine change edits its own source files. Aggregate metadata is
rebuilt from the merged checkout. There is no sidecar registry, shared
review journal, or hash acknowledgment to maintain.

**Breaking changes**

The tracked Storybook catalog and index paths are retired. Consumers use
`ui/storybook/generated/` or `maps/generated/` after generation.
Contributor instructions and the existing feature-gap browser suite use
the new paths. Story and overview IDs remain stable.

## What Changed

- Move the existing annotations into 262 story files. Preserve
classifications, capability associations, exports, and explicit IDs.
- Discover all 35 feature recipes. Store section/order beside each
recipe and move durable verification routes out of the shared table.
- Remove tracked catalogs, inventories, overview pages, and inline
preview ordering. Keep authored preview behavior in `preview-base.tsx`.
- Generate the Storybook guide, feature/access Markdown indexes, gap
report, page-reference inventory, and preview wrapper automatically.
- Update the map contracts and maintenance skills to use Git history and
revision-specific PR/CI evidence.
- Add schema, identity, regeneration, and actual Git merge tests. Run
these through the existing UI Vitest suite. Add focused browser
navigation checks.

This is one coordinated migration. Most of the 367 changed files contain
only moved metadata or deleted generated content. Review the generator
scripts, map contracts, Storybook configuration, and tests first. No
product API or authorization behavior changes.

## Verification

Passed:

- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`: 35 paired areas and 175 capabilities.
- `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --check`: 262 suites and 2,485
authored stories after incorporating current master.
- `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs
scripts/storybook-catalog.test.mjs
scripts/storybook-feature-index.test.mjs`: 28 tests, including
independent branches merged in both orders with identical generated
output and no tracked changes.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
storybook/map-tooling.test.ts`: the CI entrypoint runs those map tests.
- `pnpm check:token-gates`.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` before the final master rebase.
- `pnpm build-storybook`: all 2,517 original story/docs URLs retained.
Current master contributes exactly four additional recovery stories.
- Focused Playwright navigation checks: search and open a feature
without examples; expand verification guidance and check source links;
retain capability order and follow a related Foundations suite.

The final clean Storybook build passed after deleting every ignored map
output. Post-rebase UI typechecking and both browser tests passed. The
working tree stays clean after generation. The concurrent-cleanup
regression fails with `ENOENT` without the fix and passes with it.

All GitHub CI gates passed on `00fc7ec18e`, which also received Greptile
5/5 with no unresolved findings. The final merge commit `1c3c5143a6`
incorporates master and resolves only the two modify/delete conflicts by
retaining removal of the aggregate index and catalog. Master’s new
workspace feature and access guidance is preserved. Map validation,
catalog generation, overview generation, all 28 map tests, and diff
checks pass after conflict resolution. The maintainer explicitly
requested merging without another Greptile review. CI has not been rerun
to completion on this merge commit. The local repository-wide `pnpm
test:run` was stopped before completion after the earlier CI matrix
passed; it is not reported as a local pass. No screenshot baselines or
production acceptance are claimed.

To repeat the browser check against an owned Storybook server:

```sh
PAPERCLIP_GAP_STORYBOOK_URL=http://127.0.0.1:6136 pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/storybook-visual/feature-gap-stories.config.ts map-navigation.spec.ts
```

## Risks

- Existing branches need a one-time rebase to move their catalog changes
into local annotations. The PR incorporates the recovery changes from
current master.
- Changing the same story or capability can still produce a meaningful
conflict. This removes the shared aggregate bottleneck.
- The generator uses Storybook's existing CSF parser. Literal-only
annotations and parser regression tests protect the current contract.
- Generated Markdown is available after running the generator; the
published Storybook provides a browsable guide.
- Shared source changes still require review. Removing hashes removes
mechanical acknowledgments; it does not establish runtime parity.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository inspection, code
execution, and browser-test tools. The exact deployment model ID and
context window were not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [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 on the previously reviewed head
`00fc7ec18e`; final conflict-resolution checks are documented above
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
on `00fc7ec18e`; another review was waived by the maintainer
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 15:27:23 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 5a6d0d08a7 fix: record verified workspace file recovery from tasks (#16104)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Recovery must preserve files and show the next operator action.
> - A stopped run can leave a file repair hold after its recovery action
is resolved.
> - The task notice shows that hold but has no form to record verified
file recovery.
> - A chat connection can also replace the file repair instruction with
a chat retry instruction.
> - This pull request adds a file recovery form and preserves the file
repair instruction.
> - The form records evidence for the original run and keeps the current
task status.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A retained workspace file hold can block a task after its recovery
action is resolved. The task page offers no file recovery form. A chat
binding can hide the required file repair instruction.

**Expected behavior**

An authorized board member can record verified recovery of the original
files. The server checks the original stop proof. The task keeps its
current status and does not start another run. Chat instructions must
not replace file repair instructions.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create a stopped legacy run with a retained workspace recovery marker
and a resolved recovery action.
2. Open its task page, including a task with a chat connection.
3. Observe that the file hold has no supported form to record verified
recovery.

Refs: #15857, #15824, #16095. Those PRs address shutdown export, native
finalization and workspace source isolation. This PR uses the existing
file repair API.

## What Changed

- Add a board-only file recovery form with evidence and an explicit file
verification confirmation.
- Preserve the current task status when recording file recovery.
- Project whether the original recovery marker supports file recording.
- Keep file repair instructions when a task has a chat binding.
- Add UI, route and Storybook examples for success, denial and
chat-connected file holds.
- Document the recovery flow and update the affected Storybook catalog
entries.

## Verification

- Merged master `c8efdbfba43` and resolved both rounds of catalog/index
conflicts. Upstream review notes and classifications are preserved,
together with all four retained-file recovery examples and their stable
story IDs. Both fix branches also combine without merge conflicts or
catalog fingerprint drift.
- Passed locally after conflict resolution: 47 tests covering the file
recovery UI, execution blocker notice and retained workspace repair
route. The earlier ownership-route pass also covered 196 tests.
- Passed: UI token gates, the complete Storybook catalog check with no
drift errors, feature and agent map structure checks, and all 17
catalog/index script tests. Verification inventory counts match all 262
authored suites and 2,485 story IDs. The upstream production
verification obligations remain intact.
- Passed: full workspace typecheck, build and Storybook build on latest
head `10ac22b35d0a4fe469cf620914845c509046da48`. The built index retains
all four file-recovery story IDs.
- Latest head `10ac22b35d0a4fe469cf620914845c509046da48` has 54
successful checks and two intentionally skipped Storybook checks. Apex
is 5/5 on that exact commit, with no unresolved findings. The full
general/serialized suites and all eight browser shards passed in CI.
Local tests use the focused suites above. Storybook browser interactions
have not been executed locally.
- Manual check: open a task with a retained file hold. Verify that
evidence and confirmation are required. Record verified file recovery.
Confirm that its status stays unchanged and no run starts. Repeat
without board runtime access and with an unverified stop receipt.

## Risks

- The form records an operator attestation. It does not recover files
itself or prove external action outcomes.
- A stale source or missing stop proof must remain rejected by the
existing server route.
- No database migration or automatic task retry is added.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 (`gpt-6`), used through Codex with reasoning, repository
tools, code editing and test execution. The exact context window size is
not exposed by this environment.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [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>
2026-10-13 13:47:10 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip c8efdbfba4 test(storybook): add production examples for feature map UI gaps (#16196)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - The feature map records the user-facing capabilities.
> - Storybook uses the same feature index.
> - Step 2 found 49 UI capabilities with no authored examples.
> - This pull request adds shipped-component examples with isolated
fixtures.
> - The catalog records each example's states and remaining production
checks.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #16167. The verification inventory is merged; this follow-up now
targets master.

## What Changed

- Add 37 suites and 257 scenarios for all 49 UI capabilities from the
step-2 inventory. Keep existing stories and IDs.
- Use shipped pages and components. Simulate API replies, sockets,
props, and callbacks at their boundaries.
- Activate story API fixtures before the application providers read
data. Block unregistered API mutations and restore owned storage/fetch
state.
- Add browser checks for rendering, declared play assertions, fixture
reset, and selected mobile/theme states. Update the catalog and
verification inventory.

## Verification

- `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed.
- `pnpm build`: passed.
- UI Vitest suite: 730 files and 8,208 tests passed. Fixture boundary
tests: 4 passed.
- Map/catalog checks, 27 generator/map tests, and token gates: passed.
- `pnpm build-storybook`: passed. All 2,248 previous built entry IDs
remain present.
- Pre-reconciliation static browser suite: 260 checks passed (257
scenarios, token fixture reset, and two mobile/theme cases). All
non-play stories assert an explicit subject state; 129 play functions
passed.
- `pnpm test:run` could not complete on this Mac. Embedded PostgreSQL
exhausted host shared-memory allocation. The run also reported
native-runner test timeouts. Only this task's verified runner was
stopped; other jobs and host settings were preserved.
- Reconciled onto merged master `252d9b5077`. The six draft stories and
new same-browser reset regression passed (7 checks); 16
draft-persistence tests and UI typecheck passed. Static merge
verification: 32 affected-subject/draft checks passed, including
same-browser reset. Rebuilt Storybook retains all 2,248 original IDs in
its 2,517-entry index. Four additional play-result checks passed:
visible onboarding reset, pending probe, filtered-empty runs, and
optimistic queued-response removal. UI typecheck and 27 catalog/map
tests also passed. Final static browser suite on
`3fab35df8d912935fa86ce0de7d32d07e2b5f4c3`: all 261 checks passed (257
scenarios plus fixture-reset and mobile checks). Latest head
`3fab35df8d912935fa86ce0de7d32d07e2b5f4c3`: all 55 CI/status checks
passed; the two optional Storybook workflow jobs were skipped. Greptile
5/5 with no unresolved threads.
- No pinned Linux visual-baseline comparison or real provider journey is
claimed.

## Risks

Fixtures can drift from production contracts. The catalog records
inspected sources and their fingerprints. Capability links provide
initial isolated UI coverage; they do not certify every recipe variant,
real permissions, persistence, or provider behavior.

The new examples expose existing UI limits. Plugin discovery failure
stays on Loading. Document and environment-list reads lack dedicated
failure feedback; Cases and Inbox fall back to empty views after errors.
Goal alignment has display views but no assignment control. These
findings remain visible in the inventory.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex. The exact runtime deployment ID and context
window are not exposed in this session. Used code generation, shell
execution, and browser verification.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [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>
2026-10-13 13:24:09 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 252d9b5077 docs(storybook): record verification routes for missing examples (#16167)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The feature map describes product capabilities and verification
journeys.
> - The Storybook catalog links existing examples to those capabilities.
> - A capability without a story can need UI examples, CLI checks, or
browser checks.
> - This pull request records the required verification surface for all
60 current gaps.
> - The next Storybook pass can add useful examples without claiming
backend proof from mocks.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16154. Reconciles the new task-notification capability from
#16153.

The related PR search found no duplicate of this classification pass.
This change follows the merged association corrections. It does not add
product behavior or duplicate a roadmap feature.

## What Changed

- Add `maps/storybook-map/VERIFICATION.md` with all 60 unassociated
capabilities: 49 UI example gaps, eight CLI/operator operations, and
three browser verification boundaries.
- Record required UI states, separate production checks, source links,
and existing test starting points. Keep execution marked not run.
- Link the record from the catalog contract. Tell the maintenance skill
to keep its rows, counts, and source revision current.
- Regenerate the feature index for personal task notifications. Refresh
only the inspected recipe/index-dependent review fingerprints. Retain
all 223 suites, 2,212 authored IDs, associations, and classifications.
- Record the targeted association revisit. It found no additional
justified links.

## Verification

- `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs` and `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`
passed.
- All 27 catalog, feature-index, and map structural tests passed.
- The maintenance skill validator passed.
- A source check confirmed that the 60 unique rows match all non-guide
association gaps. All report, contract, and skill file links exist.
- `git diff --check` passed.
- Inspect the eight CLI/operator rows and three browser rows. UI/API
capabilities retain both obligations.
- Full repository typecheck, tests, build, Storybook build, and live
product journeys were not run locally for this documentation and
generated-data change. No live proof is claimed.

- Final head `a9ef9e8ebc1f41bb7047142704655d08b3e47be7`: all 57
checks/statuses are green (55 successful, two Storybook jobs skipped).
Greptile approved this head at 5/5. The review finding is resolved and
the PR is mergeable.

## Risks

- This source inventory can become stale as capabilities or associations
change. The maintenance skill requires refreshing its rows and source
revision.
- Existing test links identify starting points. They do not certify
complete or passing production coverage.
- There is no migration, permission change, product behavior change,
story removal, or new visual baseline.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex with GPT-6 assisted with source review, documentation, and
checks. It used shell tools and read-only area agents. The runtime did
not expose an exact backend model revision or context-window size.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 12:39:04 -05:00
2a56e5c734 fix(ui): show soft budget incidents as warnings, not hard stops (#16201)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Budget policies limit what an agent, a project, or the organization
can spend.
> - At the warning threshold (80% by default), the server opens a soft
incident. It does not pause the scope. At 100%, it opens a hard incident
and pauses the scope.
> - The budget incident card always shows the hard-stop design. A soft
incident shows "agent hard stop", "This scope is paused", and a "Keep
paused" button.
> - Operators read this as a paused agent. The policy card and the
"Paused agents" counter for the same agent say something different.
> - This pull request shows soft incidents as warnings. Hard stops do
not change.
> - The benefit is that the Costs and Budgets pages give one consistent
and correct state.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

I searched open and closed issues and pull requests for "budget
incident", "hard stop", "soft incident", and "BudgetIncidentCard". I
found no issue for this bug. Refs #14306: that open PR also changes
`BudgetIncidentCard`, for failed-action feedback. It does not change the
soft and hard labels. The two PRs can conflict in this file.

**What happened?**

An agent budget policy reached its warning threshold. The Audit →
Budgets page and the Audit → Costs overview showed the soft incident as
"AGENT HARD STOP" with the banner "This scope is paused. New heartbeats
will not start until you resolve the budget incident." The card showed
"Raise budget & resume" and "Keep paused". The agent was not paused. Its
policy card showed "Warning", and the "Paused agents" counter did not
count it.

**Expected behavior**

A soft incident looks like a warning. It says that work continues. Its
actions are "Raise budget" and "Dismiss warning". A hard incident keeps
the current design and actions.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create an agent budget policy with a $1,000 monthly limit and the
default 80% warning threshold.
2. Record $800 of cost for that agent.
3. Open Audit → Budgets.
4. Look at the active incident for that agent. It says "agent hard stop"
and "This scope is paused".

**Paperclip version or commit**

Seen on v2026.1012.0 (`bba6a45`). The same code is on `master` at
`721e87ac0`.

**Deployment mode**

local_trusted (not deployment-specific).

## What Changed

- `BudgetIncidentCard` reads `incident.thresholdType`. A `soft` incident
shows:
- The heading "<scope> budget warning", with amber styling and a warning
icon.
- The banner "Spending crossed the warning threshold. This warning does
not pause work."
- The actions "Raise budget" and "Dismiss warning". They call the same
handlers as before (`raise_budget_and_resume` and `keep_paused`). For a
soft incident, the server dismisses the incident for `keep_paused`, and
the resume step has no effect because the scope is not paused.
- A new-budget prefill of the current limit plus $10. Before, the
prefill was equal to the current limit, so "Raise budget" did not change
the limit.
- A `hard` incident does not change: the same heading, banner, styling,
prefill, and actions.
- The "Active incidents" description on the Costs page now covers
warnings and hard stops.
- New tests in `BudgetIncidentCard.test.tsx` cover a hard stop, a soft
warning, and a project hard stop.

## Verification

- `cd ui && npx vitest run src/components/BudgetIncidentCard.test.tsx`:
3 tests pass. Before the fix, the soft-warning test failed with
`expected 'agent hard stopOpen…' to contain 'agent budget warning'`.
- `cd ui && npx vitest run src/pages/Costs src/components/Budget`: 31
tests pass.
- Manual check in a running instance (v2026.1012.0 with this patch,
seeded with an agent at 100% and an agent at 80% of a $1,000 budget), in
light and dark themes:
- The 100% agent shows the red "Agent hard stop", "This scope is
paused", "Raise budget & resume", and "Keep paused".
- The 80% agent shows the amber "Agent budget warning", the warning
banner, a $1,010.00 prefill, "Raise budget", and "Dismiss warning".
  - "Paused agents: 1" agrees with the cards.
- `ui` typecheck: no errors in the changed files. The local run had
unrelated errors in `PluginOrganizationSwitcher` because the plugin SDK
was not built.

## Risks

- Low risk. The change is UI-only. Hard-stop rendering and behavior do
not change. No API, server, or data changes.
- The soft card now prefills a value above the current limit. Before, it
prefilled the current limit.
- PR #14306 changes the same component. One of the two PRs can need a
small rebase.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, through Claude Code
with tool use (shell, file edits, test runs, Playwright screenshot
capture). A human requested and reviewed the change.

## 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 (no
`doc/` page describes this card, so no change was needed)
- [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: Aron Prins <aronprins@icloud.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-10-13 10:12:49 -07:00
0b0e53029f fix: recover saved workspace results automatically (#15824)
## Thinking Path

- Paperclip preserves accepted agent results before workspace copyback
and result commitment.
- A replaced controller can leave a physical copyback owner receipt
behind. A lost database lock or expired lease cannot prove that its
tar/Git children stopped.
- Infrastructure recovery should belong to the runtime and deployment
harness; task users should not investigate processes or attest shutdown.
- New receipts record the exact deployment. The harness independently
verifies that deployment fully stopped and signs a short-lived proof
bound to the stack, run, owner and deployment.
- The existing guarded reconciler then finishes the same accepted result
without a new agent turn. Legacy receipts retain the documented
administrator API after independent platform verification.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

An accepted native result can remain at `workspace_finalizing` with an
abandoned physical copyback owner. Repeated recovery sweeps could
replace specific instructions with advice to start new agent work. The
first version of this PR exposed a shutdown-evidence form in the task;
that asks end users to resolve infrastructure details.

**Expected behavior**

Automatically verify and recover the exact stopped deployment, preserve
the original accepted result and existing approval/monitor waits, and
show only a quiet task status. Unknown or live workers must remain
fenced. Older receipts without platform identity need independently
verified operator assistance through the administrator API.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Persist an accepted native result and a copyback receipt from a prior
controller.
2. Replace that deployment before workspace finalization commits.
3. Let the normal finalization reconciler revisit the saved result.
4. With a platform-bound receipt and a fully stopped deployment,
recovery should finish automatically. With missing, live, unverifiable
or changed ownership, it must not write files or create another provider
turn.

Related public work: #14402 introduced copyback ownership; #9687 handles
dead-run finalize barriers; #15795 handles terminal stale-run cleanup.
This change addresses an accepted result whose physical copyback owner
prevents commitment.

## What Changed

- Record Railway project, environment, service and deployment identity
on new physical copyback owners.
- Request read-only platform verification from the managed cloud
harness. Require an Ed25519 stop receipt with a disjoint purpose,
configured signing key, exact stack/run/owner/deployment binding and
valid expiry.
- Keep live, unknown, malformed, unavailable and legacy owners fenced.
Compare the whole prior receipt during ownership takeover, under the
existing dedicated advisory lock.
- Persist platform proof and audit automatic takeover. Resume normal
finalization of the same saved result, preserving task ownership,
approved boundaries, monitors and pending confirmations.
- Remove process metadata, shutdown evidence, confirmation checkboxes
and infrastructure-repair forms from task views. Suppress the duplicate
technical owner-recovery card. Show “Restoring saved work…” only from
server-confirmed recovery or queued operator recovery; platform identity
alone shows the operator-assistance fallback. Remove the status when
recovery resolves.
- Share current-task, current-running-execution, accepted-result,
authoritative-reviewer and newer-execution checks between automatic and
operator recovery. Validate after the provider lookup, atomically with
the owner claim, and again before file publication; closed or superseded
tasks cannot start copyback.
- Keep the separately authorized exact-owner API for operator recovery
of legacy receipts, with active-lock, live-controller, stale-result and
newer-execution rejection. Generic dismissal cannot bypass the copyback
fence.
- Replace obsolete form stories with production-backed automatic,
queued, legacy, completed and mobile examples; retain stable suite IDs.
Update the operator runbook and scoped Storybook catalog.

## Verification

- Red/green: new platform-proof tests failed before implementation; the
database takeover regression failed against the original ownership
guard; reduced-UI assertions failed against the original form. All pass
after the changes.
- Passed: 59 physical-owner/finalization database tests using isolated
PostgreSQL, including real reconciler commitment from all three
saved-result phases through both automatic and operator recovery. They
preserve result identity, exact saved file bytes, pending approval and
overdue monitor waits, and create no new run or wake request. Unknown
evidence and changed ownership remain fenced.
- Passed: 162 focused proof, cloud identity, recovery route,
recovery-card and reduced-UI tests.
- Passed: full workspace typecheck and build, final server/UI
typechecks, token gates, and Storybook build.
- Browser inspection: desktop task composition shows only the quiet
status; completed example removes it and retains the approval-wait
message. Mobile shows the existing bottom navigation with no horizontal
overflow. These are fixture UI observations, not live provider
acceptance.
- A companion harness change implements the actual provider check,
signed receipts, server-token authentication and bounded/coalesced
provider reads. Its full typecheck and test suite passed: 3,240 passed,
92 skipped, zero failures. This application alone cannot enable platform
verification.
- The updated full application `pnpm test:run` was stopped after
repeated local embedded-Postgres startup failures; it is not claimed
green. The same affected recovery suites pass against isolated
PostgreSQL. CI passed on final head `9ad5c3529e`: 54 successful checks,
two intentional skips, and successful legacy Snyk status. Greptile is
5/5 with no unresolved findings.
- Global Storybook catalog validation is green: 225 files, 2,224
stories. Its 17 catalog/index tests pass. Master was merged and the
inherited index metadata was reconciled after source review.
- Review correction red/green: two UI and two database assertions
reproduced misleading progress / missing server recovery state; all pass
after server-confirmed state was added. All 153 focused server tests and
68 UI tests pass on the final recovery code, including repeated-sweep
idempotence. Full workspace typecheck/build, token gates and Storybook
build also pass.
- Safety regression red/green: stale-task copyback and publication tests
failed against the previous guard. The final suite covers changes during
proof lookup, closed/cancelled tasks, replaced execution/checkout, newer
and queued legacy runs, reassignment and rejected/unbound results, plus
the real reconciler selecting closed or superseded tasks. Files remain
untouched and no workspace operation starts.
- No staging mutations, deployment, live provider probes or live
production recovery were performed. The three historical receipts lack
deployment identity and still require independent operator proof.

## Risks

Automatic takeover requires the companion harness release and configured
runtime-identity keys. Deploying only this application leaves
unavailable evidence fenced. Legacy receipts are not retrospectively
assigned a deployment identity. An authorized operator can still make an
incorrect attestation through the fallback API; its administrator gate
and exact-owner safeguards remain. Provider history that is missing or
deeper than the bounded lookup defers automatic recovery. Copyback can
still fail under its existing retained-workspace policy.

No migration, telemetry change or cloud provider credential delivery is
required. The companion harness PR also has passing CI and a 5/5 review;
neither branch is deployed.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with repository inspection, browser verification,
tool use and code execution. The exact serving 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 and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run the relevant tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <paperclip@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Devin Foley <devin@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 10:14:45 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip be380ba155 fix(ui): hide agent-created tasks by default (#16157)
Hide agent-created, system-created, and chat-channel tasks from independent collections by default. Preserve task hierarchy context and existing inbox participation. Add a saved opt-in checkbox without helper text.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 09:26:37 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 5e8e992df2 fix(storybook): reconcile capability associations and map omissions (#16154)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work.
> - The feature map describes user capabilities and verification
recipes.
> - Storybook holds isolated examples of those capabilities.
> - Missing catalog links can hide existing examples.
> - Some stories also expose shipped capabilities absent from the map.
> - This pull request adds verified source associations and three paired
map entries.
> - Readers can find existing examples without changing their homes or
URLs.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16052, #16049 and #16046.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Storybook capability lookup and the feature/agent access maps.

**Current behavior**

Seventy capabilities have no example link. Some matching stories already
exist. Primary-agent preferences and company decision/fast-response
services appear only under broad neighboring capabilities.

**Proposed behavior**

Add source-supported links across 34 suites. Keep shared foundations in
place while cross-listing them. Add primary-agent, decision-model and
fast-response capabilities to both upstream maps. Retain explicit
simulation and partial-example limits.

**Reason and benefit**

The catalog distinguishes missing associations from missing examples.
The upstream map describes three existing product capabilities more
precisely.

**Breaking changes**

None to product behavior, story exports, folders, sidebar titles or
URLs. A shared foundation can declare a reasoned `home: "foundations"`
override while referencing related capabilities.

## What Changed

- Add 55 references across 34 suites. Replace primary-agent suites'
reporting-line association with their own capability.
- Add three source-reviewed capabilities and their API/actor boundaries
to paired maps.
- Preserve the shared Foundations home when cross-listing developer
design examples. Add a validation regression test.
- Record which exports demonstrate each association and what remains
simulated or unverified.
- Regenerate the catalog and capability data. Preserve all original 223
authored suites and 2,210 story IDs. Retain the two skill-removal
stories added by current master, for 2,212 authored stories in total.
- Reduce empty example lookups from 70 of 171 capabilities to 59 of 174.
Links do not establish complete capability coverage.

## Verification

- Passed: 27 catalog/generator/map tests, catalog validation, map
structural checks, token gates and skill validation.
- Passed: source inventory comparison preserves all authored files,
titles, meta IDs and story IDs.
- Passed: repository typecheck/build and Storybook build. Final built
index has 2,248 entries and preserves all previous entries, including
the two skills stories added by current master.
- The broad local repository test run was interrupted before completion
to resolve a new master conflict. A complete local suite pass is not
claimed; fresh CI passed on the reconciled branch.
- Browser: Design links to preserved Foundations stories;
company-service sections link settings/history/journey suites; decision
SetupToHistory passed 12 interaction steps; primary-agent ReplacePrimary
passed four steps. No console errors in selected checks.
- Greptile: 5/5 on final commit
`805a8af62abe589907e7cc6ca1b415ce1e0cc3c0`, with no findings or
unresolved threads.
- Final-revision CI passed all 57 checks/statuses, including all eight
browser shards, server and Runner tests, typecheck and build. The
unchanged Cloud-auth mocked-response race seen on a superseded revision
did not recur on the final commit. No test expectations were changed.
- New agent-access evidence is source-only. Live provider and
agent-credential verification is not established.

## Risks

- Suite-level associations can represent only selected states. Notes
retain those limits and existing review classifications.
- In-memory connection drafts do not prove reload persistence.
Resume-failure UI does not prove successful continuation. No-op budget
controls do not prove relief or resumption.
- Three map capabilities document existing behavior. No permission, API,
provider or production component changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, code execution and source
inspection. The exact runtime model ID and context window are not
exposed in this session.

## Checklist

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

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 08:11:15 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip aded4197e5 fix: make multiplayer task toasts personal (#16153)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work.
> - A company can have several human users and shared agents.
> - Live task events currently produce toasts for any user who can read the task.
> - This makes unrelated work interrupt other users.
> - This pull request checks each user's task participation before it permits a toast.
> - Users receive relevant task notifications while company views continue to refresh.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Company task activity and agent failures produce noisy toasts for users who have no involvement in the task.

**Expected behavior**

A task qualifies when the viewer created it, commented on it, is its assigned user, deliberately acted on it under the Mine rules, or has an explicit user mention in its description or a non-deleted comment. Viewing, agent ownership, responsible-user attribution, and parent participation alone do not qualify.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Sign in as two users in the same company.
2. Have the second user create and update a task that does not involve the first user.
3. Observe a task toast in the first user's company view before this fix.

The duplicate PR search found no existing change for personal task-toast eligibility.

## What Changed

- Extract the existing Mine participation predicate without changing Mine behavior.
- Compute task eligibility from stored tasks, comments, and run associations after WebSocket access checks. Use an exact indexed comment-mention lookup with `LIMIT 1`.
- Add optional `toastEligible` metadata to each viewer's event copy. Keep it off the shared event bus.
- Require eligibility for live task activity and task-linked run errors. Suppress generic agent errors.
- Continue cache updates for quiet events. Refetch visible comments when authenticated events omit hydration details. Ignore stale socket callbacks after account or company changes.
- Document toast semantics and add feature-map and agent-access-map coverage.
- Add persisted-data, socket, UI, and authenticated browser regression coverage.

## Verification

- Final commit: `1dc4f9402c5883744738cfe236ad00fa0bb5ca4c`.
- All 55 current-head checks passed. Two Storybook checks were skipped because this change does not affect that coverage.
- Greptile approved this exact commit with 5/5. The security scan passed. Both review threads are resolved.
- Local `pnpm build`, `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm check:token-gates`, and `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed.
- The focused socket/UI suite passed 123 tests. The persisted eligibility suite passed 9 tests, including long history, exact viewer matching, and regex escaping. The existing Mine service suite previously passed 140 tests.
- The named browser case `task toasts follow personal involvement in multiplayer` passed against the final commit in an isolated authenticated instance. It used two real sessions, real WebSocket delivery, and persisted tasks, edits, comments, and mentions. It verified quiet unrelated activity, viewing alone, first and historical mentions, own-action suppression, visible-task suppression, and live cache refresh.
- A prior-head server shard passed its single rerun after a fixture-cleanup deadlock. The final-head CI run passed without a rerun.
- The broad local run remained in progress when CI completed the full test suite. Local focused checks and CI provide the completed test evidence.

## Risks

- This intentionally reduces live notifications. A new client stays quiet against an older server that omits eligibility.
- Eligibility queries add work to live event delivery. A lookup failure suppresses the toast and still delivers the authorized event.
- Deleted mentions cease to qualify unless another participation rule applies. Historical comment authorship retains the existing Mine behavior.
- No database migration or notification-settings change is required.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex with GPT-6 assisted with implementation, tests, documentation, and PR preparation. It used repository tools, shell commands, and browser automation. The runtime did not expose an exact backend revision or context-window size.

## Checklist

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


Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 08:09:19 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 2ad36f4ff2 Fix skill source removal with a keep-or-delete choice (#16150)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - GitHub sources import skills and keep their updates together.
> - Disconnect only disabled a source and kept its read-only imports.
> - A disabled source could not be removed or imported again.
> - Removing a source needs an explicit decision about its imported
skills.
> - This pull request removes the source after the user keeps editable
copies or deletes the imports.
> - Existing disabled sources use the same removal flow.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15731, #14713.

**What happened?**

Disconnect left the repository on Sources. Its Disconnect action was
then disabled. The saved repository still blocked a new import.

**Expected behavior**

Remove the repository from Sources. Require a choice to keep editable
copies or delete its imports. Allow removal of sources that are already
disconnected.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Import a repository in Skills → Sources.
2. Choose Disconnect source.
3. Observe the disconnected row and disabled removal action.
4. Try to import the repository again.

**Paperclip version or commit**

d67e3507b2.

## What Changed

- Add one confirmation with a required keep-or-delete choice.
- Remove the source and entries, including legacy disabled sources.
- Keep complete editable copies in My Skills, including shared
repository files and executable modes. Preserve skill IDs, keys,
versions, and agent assignments.
- Delete imported skills and source in one transaction with its activity
record. Check policy for every linked skill, including deselected
entries. Reject deletion of skills still used by agents.
- Fence removal with the source revision. Reload stale confirmations and
require a new choice. Prevent an in-flight refresh from restoring
removed imports.
- Reject incomplete legacy copies with a recovery message. Lock copied
skill rows against concurrent deletion and check publication succeeded.
- Add regression tests and production-page Storybook examples. Make an
initially unselected radio-card group keyboard accessible.

## Verification

- Workspace typecheck and build passed. Final affected server/UI
typechecks passed.
- Focused server, UI, and API suites passed: 114 tests initially. After
review fixes, all 21 source persistence and 58 route authorization tests
passed, including the complete repository copy regression; affected
server/UI typechecks and token gates passed again.
- Design token gates passed.
- Real isolated app: imported a public repository, assigned bro to the
CEO, verified that deletion reports the assignment, kept an editable
copy, observed the source disappear, opened the copy in My Skills, saved
an edit, and refreshed. The assignment remained. Re-imported the same
repository, deleted its new unused import, and verified the original
editable copy and assignment remained. No model tasks ran.
- Full local Vitest was attempted but terminated with exit 137 before
completion; it is not counted as a pass. Current-head sharded CI is
pending. Greptile reviewed the current head at 5/5 with no new
actionable comments. The final workspace build passed again.
- Storybook catalog aligned. The legacy removal example was inspected in
the browser; the Delete choice enables removal.
- Storybook: Skills / GitHub-synced skills / Sources · Disconnect source
and Sources · Remove disconnected source.

## Risks

- DELETE of a skill source now requires the saved revision and an
explicit copy/delete choice. Old callers must update their request body.
- Deletion removes imported skills and their records. Assigned skills
must be detached first.
- Incomplete legacy versions must be refreshed before keeping copies;
removal does not silently discard supporting files.
- Copies intentionally stop receiving upstream updates. Their IDs and
keys remain stable for assigned agents.
- No database migration. Copy writes use new managed directories and
clean up on failure. Delete restores quarantined files before releasing
publication locks on failure.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, configured model `gpt-6-astra`. The runtime
does not expose the context-window size. Used shell tools, code editing,
tests, and browser interaction.

## 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>
2026-10-13 07:53:13 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip df06df2306 fix(slack): allow direct messages without at-mentions (#16151)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Slack connections let people start and continue agent tasks.
> - The Require at-mention setting currently applies to channels and
direct messages.
> - A person who sends a direct message has already selected the agent.
> - This pull request exempts direct messages from mention checks,
including queued work.
> - People can talk normally in DMs while channel messages keep the
configured mention rule.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15612, which introduced the Require at-mention setting. Searches
found no duplicate PR for the DM exemption.

**What happened?**

With Require at-mention enabled, a plain Slack DM does not start or
continue agent work. New Slack connections enable the setting by
default.

**Expected behavior**

Direct messages do not need an at-mention. Top-level DM replies remain
top-level. Channel messages and channel thread replies still follow the
saved mention setting.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Enable Allow direct messages and Require at-mention on a Slack
connection.
2. Send a plain DM from an authorized sender.
3. Confirm the agent responds without an at-mention. Send a plain
follow-up and confirm it also works.
4. Confirm unmentioned channel messages remain filtered when Require
at-mention is enabled.
5. Disable Allow direct messages and confirm new DMs remain blocked.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Source baseline: `eb06c9fedd`.

**Deployment mode**

Built from source. Automated tests use disposable local Postgres and
provider fixtures. This change has not been deployed or retested in live
Slack.

## What Changed

- Exempt DMs at inbound admission, task mutation, work authorization,
and heartbeat queue claim.
- Keep channel mention checks and all existing sender, endpoint, and
destination checks.
- Update regressions for new connections, follow-ups, deferred delivery,
and coalesced queued messages.
- Clarify the Slack settings copy, connection documentation, and
verification maps.
- Refresh the affected Storybook review references after source
inspection.

## Verification

- Passed 55 Slack and durable scheduler tests with Vitest on the current
rebased commit, including admission through the extracted inbound
module.
- Passed `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` on the rebased PR commit.
- Passed token gates and map checks.
- Passed Storybook catalog validation after rebase: 223 files and 2,210
stories.
- Full local `pnpm test:run` was stopped before completion after three
failures in the unchanged tool-access suite. All 418 tests in that suite
passed in a standalone rerun. The focused regressions passed; full
GitHub CI remains the merge gate.
- Greptile reviewed commit `b0293fa6571403c5e01c30bb7b5fcc5e91b88c97`:
5/5, with no findings or unresolved review threads. All 55 GitHub checks
passed on this commit; two optional Storybook jobs were skipped.
- No live Slack messages were sent during implementation verification.

## Risks

Existing Slack connections now accept authorized plain DMs even when
Require at-mention is enabled. Allow direct messages and sender
authorization still apply. Queued DM work follows the same exemption.
Channel behavior and DM reply routing are unchanged. No schema or
migration change is required.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6, running as Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The runtime does not expose a more specific model ID or
context-window size.

## Checklist

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

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 07:40:46 -05:00
9bd820e687 feat(storybook): mirror the complete feature-map index (#16052)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The feature map describes its user-facing capabilities and
verification recipes.
> - Storybook provides isolated UI examples for those capabilities.
> - The previous organization showed only features with primary story
suites.
> - This pull request derives the complete Storybook index from the
upstream map.
> - Readers can find the same features in both places and see related
examples or explicit gaps.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16046 and #16049.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Storybook navigation and the downstream feature catalog.

**Current behavior**

The sidebar has 28 primary feature homes. The feature map lists 35. The
main guide groups suites alphabetically by area slug. Related examples
can live under a different feature.

**Proposed behavior**

Use the feature map's eight sections and 35 features in the same order.
Give each feature an Overview page with all its capabilities, related
example links, and missing-example messages. Keep shared foundations
outside the product index. Preserve all existing stories and URLs.

**Reason and benefit**

Readers can move between the feature map and Storybook without learning
a second index. A feature without cataloged examples remains visible.

**Breaking changes**

None to existing story IDs or product behavior. Storybook start and
build now reject stale generated feature pages and ordering. Run the
catalog generator after upstream changes, inspect the output, and review
affected source fingerprints.

## What Changed

- Generate 35 feature Overview stories and capability data from the
upstream map. Generate the inline sidebar order required by Storybook.
- Replace the main guide with the full ordered feature index and search.
Link all related suites from feature pages, even across primary homes.
- Preserve all 223 authored files, 2,210 story IDs, and the existing
docs ID. Keep status, implementation, and fixture classifications
visible.
- Put the generated Markdown catalog in feature-map order. Keep
generated guides outside example counts.
- Update maintenance and review skills, documentation, and generator
tests. Keep the feature map independent of Storybook.

## Verification

- Passed: 16 catalog and generator tests; map checks; token gates; both
skill validators.
- Passed: `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and the Storybook build.
- Built-index comparison preserved all 2,211 previous entries and added
only 35 feature overviews. Feature order matches the map.
- Browser: inspected the complete index and sidebar, searched for Goals,
opened its overview, and followed a related suite under Projects. The
original suite renders.
- Passed: all 8,170 UI tests in 728 files. Browser checks also covered
empty search, capability-ID search, missing-example pages, the original
editable-text bookmark, the CLI sidebar label, and searching/opening
shared foundations.
- The broad local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after a failure in the
unchanged GitHub chat test `authorizes description edits as the editor,
never inheriting the original author's access`. That exact test passed
alone without code or expectation changes. A complete local repository
suite pass is not established.
- Original revision CI passed after one runner retry. The merged
revision `5ca01c70716f23974680a8019ddc613035d11bc4` passed fresh CI.
Local UI typecheck, catalog checks, 16 generator tests, map checks and
token gates pass.
- Greptile: 5/5 on final commit
`5ca01c70716f23974680a8019ddc613035d11bc4`, with all findings resolved.
- Master merge: inspected source drift in 61 catalog entries and
regenerated INDEX, preserving upstream notes. Marked the sidebar suite
that mounts IssueDetail unreviewed for the new activity query; recorded
limits for composer and channel-default changes. No stories removed.
- Final Storybook build passed. Browser filename searches for
`new-task-composer` and `forms-editors` return the expected feature and
shared example.
- No visual-baseline or full production acceptance claim. The deeper
authored scenario groups remain intact.

## Risks

- The parser depends on the feature-map Markdown contract. It rejects
unknown index rows, omitted feature recipes, and unexpected generated
files.
- A suite can reference several capabilities. A link proves catalog
association, not complete behavior coverage or production parity.
- Storybook treats `/` as a folder separator. Sidebar labels use a comma
for that character; the guide and page headings retain the upstream
name.
- No database, API, authorization, or production component changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, code execution, and browser
inspection. The exact runtime model ID and context window are not
exposed in this session.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: copilot-swe-agent[bot] <198982749+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-10-13 07:01:29 -05:00
Dotta 4a641d0980 fix(ui): default human task replies to the latest assigning agent (#15594)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Tasks let agents ask a person for input.
> - The reply composer needs a useful default recipient.
> - A recent comment does not identify the agent that assigned the task.
> - The old fallback can select the person who is writing the reply.
> - This change uses the latest agent assignment and keeps manual
choices.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
When an agent assigns a task to a person, the reply composer can select
that person or a different commenter. A data refresh can also replace a
manual selection.

**Expected behavior**
For a task assigned to the current person, select the latest agent that
assigned it to them. If no such assignment exists, use the latest other
commenter. If neither exists, leave the recipient empty. Keep explicit
choices during refreshes.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Have agent Alpha assign a task to a person.
2. Assign it to agent Beta, then have Beta assign it to the same person.
3. Open the task as that person.
4. Check that the reply composer selects Beta.
5. Select another recipient. Refresh task data. Check that the selection
stays.

Related work: #15091 shares task composer controls. This change fixes
recipient defaults.

## What Changed

- Read real assignment changes from REST and native runner task
activity, in time order.
- Record human assignee fields in native create and reassign activity.
- Ignore unchanged assignment fields and assignments to other people.
- Use the assigning agent before comment hints for human-owned tasks.
- Connect the suggestion to current and classic task composers and
pipeline replies.
- Keep manual selections when suggestions change.
- Add regression tests and document the fallback.
- Use tasks with no assignee in the attachment receipt tests. This keeps
the tests on the comment route. Dismiss announcements through the real
UI.
- Record human and agent assignees in REST creation receipts. Include
child creation in the assignment history resolver.

## Verification

- Focused tests cover assignment order, creation, other recipients,
unchanged fields, fallback, and manual selections.
- Browser fixture uses the real composer and assignment resolver. It
selects Beta and keeps a manual human selection after history refresh.
- Passed: 223 focused tests across four suites.
- Passed: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`.
- Passed: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build`.
- Passed: `pnpm check:token-gates`.
- The initial CI run passed full build, typecheck, Rust, unit tests and
seven E2E shards. The attachment shard exposed tests that relied on the
old self-selection default. The tests now select the recipient
explicitly.
- Native assignment regression tests and resolver tests pass: 40 tests.
- Attachment E2E suite: 10 passed; one page-load timing failure passed
on an isolated rerun. All 11 cases passed across the suite and rerun.
- Previous full CI passed at cc7ed05. New CI must pass on the current
head.
- Latest local checks: 16 resolver tests and 7 workspace policy tests
pass. REST creation audit tests cover both creation routes.
- The latest browser check could not start. The UI build exceeded the
local memory limit (exit 137). Full typecheck, tests, build, and browser
checks will run in CI.

## Risks

- Old activity rows without previous assignment values cannot prove a
reassignment. They use the comment fallback.
- An empty fallback requires the person to choose a recipient or use the
existing no-assignee flow.
- No database or API schema changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The session does not expose an exact model build or
context window. Used code editing, shell tools, tests, and browser
verification.

## Checklist

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


Final validation at f83f2f6: 55 checks passed. Two optional Storybook
checks were skipped. All browser shards passed. Both review threads are
resolved. Classic attachment tests use the real no-assignee
confirmation.
2026-10-13 00:56:15 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 7d7f55e4be fix(apps): show user avatars and center access rows (#15577)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their access to apps.
> - The app access page shows people with linked chat accounts.
> - The identity response omitted the user's saved image.
> - The row placed the avatar beside only the first name line.
> - This change returns the image and centers the avatar beside both
name lines.
> - People can recognize linked accounts and still see initials when no
image is available.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

The app access page showed initials even when the linked Paperclip user
had a profile image. The avatar was above the vertical center of the
Disconnect button.

**Expected behavior**

Show the linked user's saved image. Center it beside the Paperclip and
chat names. Keep initials when no image is available.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Link a Slack account to a Paperclip user with a profile image.
2. Open the app's Access tab.
3. Inspect the person's avatar and the two name lines.

Searched public issues and pull requests. No duplicate fix was found.
Related avatar work in #15095 concerns agent uploads, not linked user
profiles.

## What Changed

- Return `paperclipUserImage` from the chat principal service and
declare it in the API and client types.
- Use the shared avatar primitives and center the avatar beside the full
name block. Keep full names available in hover text.
- Add image and initials examples to the existing Storybook access
story, with image and alignment checks.
- Extend the service test to check saved images and missing images.

## Verification

- Token gates and `git diff --check` pass.
- The 33 existing chat setup and identity-link UI tests pass.
- The OAuth installer service regression test passes.
- Chromium rendered the Storybook Access story at desktop and mobile
sizes. The avatar, name block, and Disconnect button centers all
measured 307 CSS pixels on desktop.
- UI typecheck passes. Full repository typecheck and build stop at the
Rust runner because this workspace has no `cargo`. The initial parallel
typecheck also exceeded the 4 GiB workspace limit. The full local test
attempt was stopped as memory approached the 4 GiB limit; it has no
complete verdict. CI passed the full build, typecheck, test, and E2E
lanes on the initial commit. The previously reviewed commit passed 54
checks with two intentionally skipped Storybook checks. Master was
merged on October 10 to resolve an import conflict; fresh CI is running
for `24badb742d331c1b6ee3e90cbd06defefe5cd634`. Token gates and
whitespace checks pass after conflict resolution. The single retry after
CI runner shutdowns passed. Greptile gives this commit 5/5, with both
review threads resolved.

### Screenshots

The Storybook fixture shows an image, fallback initials, and a pending
account.

![Desktop access
rows](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/fix/app-access-user-avatar/doc/screenshots/app-access-avatar/desktop.png)

![Mobile access
rows](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/fix/app-access-user-avatar/doc/screenshots/app-access-avatar/mobile.png)

## Risks

Low risk. The API field is additive and needs no migration. The image
uses the same avatar primitive as other user identities. Missing or
failed images retain the initials fallback. Other chat providers share
this access row.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. Tool use and code execution. The runtime does not
expose a more specific model ID or context window size.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] 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>
2026-10-12 23:54:01 -05:00
56a0bf0d49 Support test Cloud connector identities (#16033)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Its Cloud connector uses an environment-bound identity to call a
hosted broker.
> - The identity parser and enrollment flow accept development, staging,
and production.
> - A separate test broker needs its own environment identity.
> - This pull request accepts test identities and maps the test broker
to that environment.
> - Known hosted brokers still reject identities from other
environments.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Cloud connector configuration and self-host enrollment.

**Current behavior**

The app rejects an identity with environment `test`. Self-host
enrollment infers development for the test broker.

**Proposed behavior**

Accept `test` identities at `https://test.paperclip.app`. Infer test
during self-host enrollment. Reject development, staging, and production
identities at that broker. Continue to reject test identities at the
production and staging brokers.

**Reason and benefit**

Branch testing needs a separate broker so test identities and requests
stay in their selected environment. The existing identity, enrollment,
and signature flow can provide that isolation with a new allowed
environment value.

**Breaking changes**

Existing environment values and broker checks keep their current
behavior. Older app versions cannot use test connector identities.

## What Changed

- Add `test` to managed and self-hosted connector environment types and
validation, and to the board API enrollment status type.
- Infer test from its hosted broker and enforce the matching
environment.
- Test enrollment persistence, signed request environment/audience
claims, and broker mismatch rejection.
- Document test broker configuration in the development guide.

## Verification

- Connector, enrollment, and board API-client suites passed: 63 tests
across three files. Board UI typecheck and token gates passed after
synchronizing its enrollment response type.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed, including after rebasing
onto current master.
- `pnpm test:run` completed its general server stage: 17,867 passed, 105
skipped, and 9 failed across 5 files. The runner stops at that failing
stage, so it did not run subsequent workspace/serialized stages locally.
All nine failures also reproduce on the unchanged base commit in a
separate checkout. Five skill-related cases resolve an unrelated
ancestor skills directory; two workspace cases accept a remote main
branch that their fixture expects to be absent; two permission-cleanup
cases return macOS `ENOTEMPTY` instead of the expected permission error.
- Current-head GitHub CI passed, including full general and serialized
test suites, typecheck, build, runner checks, and browser e2e. Greptile
is 5/5 with no unresolved comments.
- `git diff --check` and Gitleaks passed.

## Risks

The new environment value is additive. The test broker must support test
identities before use. This change preserves existing signature
handling, managed identity overrides, and rejection of mismatched
identities at known hosted brokers. A local full-suite pass is not
claimed; the nine failures above also occur without this change.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning and tool execution. The exact
serving model ID and context window are not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Dotta <34892728+cryppadotta@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-10-12 19:32:33 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip f329b24ee1 feat: give tasks durable project-optional workspaces (#15749)
Give tasks durable company-scoped workspace bindings independent of project assignment, channel defaults and authorized repository preparation. Reuse verified input seeds and sparse output recovery while preserving trust, privacy and controller provisioning boundaries.

Full CI and E2E, Superagent, legacy checks and Greptile Apex 5/5 passed on reviewed head 753680b61c. All review findings are resolved; the PR records focused verification and historical acceptance limits.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-12 20:45:18 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 88bf4c6c1d refactor(storybook): organize folders and navigation by feature map (#16049)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The feature map describes product areas and verification entry
points.
> - Storybook has 223 story suites that show production components,
proposals, and retained history.
> - The parent PR maps those suites to features, but their folders and
sidebar still use unrelated groups.
> - This pull request puts the existing suites under feature folders and
uses the feature map's names and order in the sidebar.
> - Explicit meta IDs preserve existing story links while the titles
change.
> - Contributors can find stories through the same product structure
without losing examples.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16046. This is the requested follow-up. Parent #16046 is merged.
This PR now targets master, with its single follow-up commit rebased
onto the parent squash merge. The Storybook implementation is unchanged
by that rebase. Related open Storybook PRs were checked; this change
organizes existing suites and adds no product capability.

## What Changed

- Move all 223 story files into folders named for their primary feature
area. Keep useful scenario groups below the feature's sidebar label.
- Order the sidebar by the eight feature-map sections. Put Overview
first and shared Foundations last. Leave areas with no stories out of
the sidebar.
- Move 19 support files into `ui/storybook/support/` and update relative
imports and active documentation.
- Preserve all 2,210 story IDs and the single docs ID through explicit
CSF meta IDs. Keep all entry names and story exports.
- Record stable IDs and sidebar titles in the downstream catalog.
Validate feature folders, title prefixes, and IDs. Update the
maintenance skill and review evidence.

## Verification

- Storybook build passed. Built index comparison against parent
`75bd3c977cd828d5222823850339e8204f40eb47` found the same 2,211 entries,
IDs, and names.
- UI typecheck passed (`ui/node_modules/.bin/tsc -b` from `ui`, invoked
as `./node_modules/.bin/tsc -b`).
- UI Vitest project: 728 files and 8,176 tests passed.
- Catalog checker and its nine tests passed. Feature-map checks, token
gates, and the maintenance-skill validator passed.
- Chromium: nine existing play cases and one render case reached
`storyFinished: success` with no page exceptions. The guide rendered,
sidebar sections followed map order, and a search for `steering/queue`
opened its preserved story link.
- Source comparison found only meta title/ID changes, rebased relative
references, and updated fixture path text in story files.
- To inspect: build Storybook, start `node
scripts/serve-storybook-static.mjs --port 6136`, and open the Overview
guide. Expand feature folders and use existing story links.
- The complete repository suite was not repeated for this organization
change. The parent records a backend timeout that passed in isolation,
without a complete broad-suite pass. Visual comparisons remain blocked
by the unpublished empty baseline. The separate fixture-server story was
not run.

## Risks

- Open branches that add stories under old paths will need to choose a
feature folder and update the catalog. Cross-feature suites have one
primary home and retain related capability references.
- Sidebar paths change; story and docs IDs remain stable. Automated
references to source paths may need the new location.
- This is one requested follow-up with 258 changed files, mostly moves.
It exceeds the usual review-size guideline because splitting it would
leave the sidebar and folder convention partly migrated.
- Browser verification samples ten stories, not all 2,210. Existing
production/prototype classifications and review gaps remain unchanged.
- Required CI gates and a 5/5 review passed on the original head. Fresh
checks and review are running for the rebased head. Catalog validation
and all nine checker tests passed after rebase; UI, map, skill, and
checker contents are identical to the original reviewed head.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact runtime model ID and context-window
size are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, repository
inspection, code execution, and local browser automation.

## 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>
2026-10-12 22:29:22 +00:00
DottaandPaperclip dabb8c5daf test: remove repeated setup and strengthen regression proof (#16022)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Its tests protect company boundaries, approvals, durable tasks,
credentials and the board UI.
> - Several owner suites repeat large database fixtures and render
frames.
> - Some tests repeat stronger proof or pass when the behavior they
describe is broken.
> - This pull request shares exact setup, removes proven duplicate cases
and repairs weak observations.
> - It preserves distinct security, lifecycle, concurrency and
user-facing contracts.
> - The benefit is 5,027 fewer test lines and stronger regression
checks.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15978. This continues the merged test-audit cleanup in [PR
#15978](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15978), which
removed 11,976 test/support lines. The savings in this pull request are
additional.

Related open work: [PR
#13460](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13460) changes
legacy OAuth parent/version lock ordering. This pull request retains
those production paths and the existing lock-order test. Its secrets
changes compact fixtures and repair the two AWS wrapper exclusion
observations.

Scoped title searches found no open duplicate audit or
fixture-consolidation PR and no matching audit issue. The problem is
described here using the enhancement template.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The maintenance and regression value of the existing server, UI, CLI,
shared and wiki-plugin test suites.

**Subsystem affected**

Cross-cutting test code. Two UI modules also lose unused test inspection
exports.

**Current behavior**

Owner tests repeat database rows, service inputs, HTTP setup and render
frames. Some cases repeat stronger assertions. Two AWS lock tests record
only cleanup events, so an AWS provider write can happen inside the held
lock without failing those observations. Several other negative tests
accept or do not observe the wrong result. Worktree fixtures also use a
temporary path alias that conflicts with the existing canonical-path
checks on macOS.

**Proposed behavior**

Use small local helpers that preserve exact inputs, fresh allocations,
callbacks, query order and await positions. Remove only cases with named
stronger keepers. Tighten negative assertions and observe actual AWS
provider entry while a confirmed lock holder remains parked. Resolve
temporary fixture roots to their canonical paths.

**Reason and benefit**

Remove 5,027 net test lines and 15 redundant registered executions.
Remove 11 lines of unused UI inspection exports. Keep every distinct
company, actor, approval, credential, persistence, stale-write and
concurrency contract. No wall-time speedup is claimed for setup
compaction.

**Breaking changes**

None for application behavior, APIs or stored data. The removed exports
expose private UI test state and have no remaining callers.

## What Changed

- Consolidate repeated runtime, workspace, portability, route,
tool-access, policy, gateway and state-service fixtures.
- Share repeated UI render frames and CLI/wiki-plugin setup while
retaining the original actions and expected results.
- Remove 15 repeated case executions only where the audit records an
exact stronger keeper.
- Repair weak HTTP/UI negative assertions and two AWS account-home lock
observations. Keep the existing durable results and cleanup behavior.
- Remove the unused `__inflightGetCount` and `__secondTickInternals`
inspection exports. Keep observable request coalescing and ticker
lifecycle checks.
- Canonicalize temporary worktree fixture paths without weakening
production path checks.
- Record the owner decisions, savings, independent preservation reviews
and validation in [the dated audit
report](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/58c5c4aa241c85f4665a3159c192888bbb2a5cfa/doc/plans/2026-10-12-test-audit-rounds.md)
and [the compact control
evidence](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/58c5c4aa241c85f4665a3159c192888bbb2a5cfa/doc/plans/2026-10-12-test-audit-controls.json).

## Verification

- Complete owner and retained-sibling baselines passed before each audit
cutover. Independent reviewers checked the full original tests, actual
helper bodies, exact inputs, receipt provenance, async order, fresh
allocations and case registrations.
- All 14 UI/route/wiki mutations failed at their intended assertions:
ten UI/API/ticker controls, one route control and three wiki
persistence/receipt controls. Each mutated production source was
restored to its exact original bytes.
- Both old AWS lock tests passed with their respective AWS-only lock
bypass. Both repaired tests failed at the intended assertions with the
same bypasses. These give 16 intended failures and two passing weak
controls across 18 executions. Each source was restored exactly.
- Final complete state-owner/sibling run: 329/329 passed at code
revision `64370831ebe191e5ce092f85f79b6fb661df7e16`.
- Final `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm check:token-gates` and `pnpm build`:
passed at the same code revision.
- Delivery head `58c5c4aa241c85f4665a3159c192888bbb2a5cfa` includes the
evidence commit and master `4b766b872993045a2e787404f0475503683e5ded`.
All 27 audited test files and both application files match the locally
verified code revision byte-for-byte. Current-head CI validates the
integrated branch, including the incoming master changes.
- All eight production-owner SHA guards for the 16 deliberate failing
mutation controls still match the integrated delivery checkout. The
mutation receipts therefore apply to those current owners.
- Full default `pnpm test:run`: **failed** with exit 1 at frozen code
revision `64370831ebe191e5ce092f85f79b6fb661df7e16`; HEAD and tracked
source bytes remained unchanged. The first general-server group reported
878 passing files, four failing files and six skipped files; 17,846
passing cases, 24 failing cases and 105 skipped cases. Later groups did
not run. Failures were `http-log-redaction` (socket hangup),
`public-mcp` (initial 15-second timeout followed by hosted token
“Refresh before subscribing” failures), `remove-test-home` (macOS
`ENOTEMPTY` where permission errors were expected, plus cleanup
failure), and `workspace-git-snapshot-streaming` (300-second timeout).
All four failing test files and the relevant cleanup/MCP production
owners are unchanged by this audit. Full local success is not claimed.
- Focused complete-owner diagnosis at the same frozen revision: 149/152
passed, three failed, zero skipped. `public-mcp` passed 82/82 and
`http-log-redaction` passed 66/66 unchanged. The two `remove-test-home`
cases reproduced macOS `ENOTEMPTY` against an expected `EACCES`/`EPERM`
contract; the 32 MiB workspace snapshot case reproduced its existing
300,000 ms timeout. HEAD and tracked files stayed clean. Exact blob
comparison confirmed all four test files and the relevant cleanup/MCP
owners match both inspected master
`4b766b872993045a2e787404f0475503683e5ded` and the frozen local
revision. The three remaining local failures are unresolved; no timeout,
retry or assertion was weakened.
- Current-head CI: [workflow
38299262149](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38299262149)
has passed runner selection and created all downstream
test/typecheck/build gates; those gates are queued, with no failures
reported. Greptile completed successfully at
`58c5c4aa241c85f4665a3159c192888bbb2a5cfa` with [5/5 and zero
comments](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16022#issuecomment-6131457592).
All review threads are resolved or absent. This pull request will remain
open after verification.

Reviewers can reproduce the required workspace checks:

```sh
pnpm -r typecheck
pnpm check:token-gates
pnpm test:run
pnpm build
```

Browser suites were not run. Their sources and user journeys are
unchanged by this audit.

## Risks

- A fixture helper can hide a specialized input or change object
freshness. Full-program expansion checks and independent reviews
preserve the exact old inputs and execution order.
- Removing duplicate proof can remove a distinct contract by mistake.
The audit records the keeper for each deletion; all distinct security
and lifecycle cases remain.
- Concurrency checks can miss progress during a fixed delay. The AWS
repairs record actual provider entry, confirm holder entry, use measured
entry windows, require exact final event order and drain both operations
in `finally`.
- The full local default run failed. Focused diagnosis reproduced two
macOS cleanup failures and one existing snapshot timeout in unchanged
owners; these remain unresolved. Current-head CI is pending. No test
deadline, retry policy, skip or CI shard was weakened to obtain a pass.

> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex with GPT-6, reasoning, repository inspection, code
execution and delegated audit/review. The runtime does not expose the
exact served model identifier or context-window size; those values are
unavailable and are not inferred from the model catalog.

## 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
- [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>
2026-10-12 22:23:11 +00:00