mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-06 10:48:12 +02:00
cf1e873ab24277d55ffd3ab06074f77014dc4015
4449
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
cf1e873ab2 |
fix(apps): temporarily hide Google connectors (#13551)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents for work. > - The Connectors catalog lists services that agents can use. > - We need to temporarily remove Google connectors from the UI. > - The catalog already separates visibility from retained definitions. > - This PR uses that setting so Google can return with a small change. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The Connectors catalog and its setup entry points. **Current behavior** The catalog shows Gmail and eight Google Workspace connectors. **Proposed behavior** Temporarily hide those nine entries. Keep their definitions and existing connections. **Reason and benefit** Make the temporary UI removal easy to reverse. **Breaking changes** Fresh catalog setup no longer offers Google. Saved connections keep the existing management and reconnect paths. ## What Changed - Add the nine Google connector slugs to the existing hidden list. - Match the branding manifest visibility flags. - Update existing catalog and service tests. Keep backend Google connection coverage and document how to restore visibility. ## Verification - Passed: 507 targeted tests covering catalog definitions, URL matching, setup routing, connector UI, branding, and the connection service. - Passed: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui... build` and `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui... typecheck`. - Passed: `pnpm check:token-gates` and `node scripts/check-app-brand-assets.mjs`. - Full local build and typecheck stop at the Rust runner because `cargo` is not installed. - Stopped the full local Vitest run after skill-cache permission failures. Three failures in `company-skills-service.test.ts` also reproduce on the unchanged base branch. The final connector service suite passes all 319 tests. - Greptile: 5/5 on the current commit, with no open review threads. CI is retrying one unrelated preview-server readiness timeout. That test file passes all seven tests locally. - Reviewer check: open Connectors in a company with no Google connections. Gmail and Google Workspace entries should be absent. Existing saved connections remain manageable. ## Risks Low risk. This uses the existing catalog visibility mechanism. No connector implementation, credential, or database schema is removed. Restoring visibility requires updating both the hidden list and branding manifest. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact deployment ID and context window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.916.1-canary.5 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
6fe8e30625 |
feat(apps): add Railway connection and governed deployment tools (#13415)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Apps gives agents governed access to external resources. > - Operators need to inspect Railway services, read logs, deploy code, and run container commands. > - Railway offers hosted MCP with OAuth, but broad remote actions hide their internal operations. > - This PR adds a branded connection and fixed direct operations through the existing gateway. > - Separate SSH keys enable container commands under the same grants and policies. > - Operators can require approval for an action and inspect the resulting audit record. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Apps catalog, connection setup, gateway execution, and connection documentation. **Problem or motivation** Agents need Railway access through Paperclip. Operators need to grant and revoke that access, inspect available actions, and govern deployment and container operations without giving agents provider credentials. **Proposed solution** Reuse hosted MCP OAuth, vault storage, catalog discovery, grants, and the gateway. Probe the actual credential before enabling fixed GraphQL operations. Use a dedicated grant-owned SSH key for bounded container commands. **Alternatives considered** A catalog entry alone cannot execute the missing operations. The hosted general agent has opaque internal effects. An unrestricted CLI runtime can bypass action policy and inherit ambient credentials. **Roadmap alignment** This extends the existing MCP Tool Gateway & Apps path and the Connected Apps direction in ROADMAP.md. It does not add a plugin or parallel connection service. Related PRs #311, #939, and #7861 concern hosting Paperclip on Railway. They do not add this outbound Apps connection. The separate shared agent-picker fix is #13414 and is not included here. ## What Changed - Add the generated Railway catalog entry, official marks, provenance, and OAuth setup guidance. - Add fixed service/deployment status, bounded logs, and redeploy/restart/rollback tools. Block source deployment until the provider can atomically bind the approved repository and commit. - Verify API access with an explicit workspace before exposing direct tools. - Add grant-owned SSH key setup and a bounded runner with host verification, target checks, isolated state, and cleanup. - Block the opaque hosted railway-agent and accept-deploy actions. Preserve normal Allowed defaults and Ask-first policies for other actions. - Quarantine new or changed Railway schemas after initial discovery, including reconnect. - Add provider, lifecycle, gateway, SSH, UI, and browser fixtures. Document setup, limitations, and the release checklist. ## Verification - Security follow-up: removed the unsafe source-deployment mutation. Direct calls and old active catalog entries are denied before any upstream request, including normalized aliases. Refresh marks retired entries disabled. All 386 focused Railway, catalog and gateway tests passed, and server TypeScript checking passed. Full [GitHub CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35139421144) passed oncanary/v2026.916.1-canary.4 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d0b67bfe71 |
feat: queue approvals and answers during active runs (#13539)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Users guide running agents through messages, questions, and approval cards. > - Messages already wait in a queue when an agent is running. > - Card responses did not appear in that queue. Some question answers also steered a later run without a user click. > - A fast approval could invalidate the agent's review handoff and cause it to stop its own run. > - This pull request gives card responses the same queue controls and preserves the exact response during delivery. > - Users can wait for completion or explicitly send the response with Interrupt or Steer. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13517, which is merged. This PR targets master and adds queued interaction responses on top of the onboarding changes. Related continuation work: #10519 and #12866. **What happened?** Accepting a proposal while its source run was active left a saved response outside the message queue. The agent could then lose its review path, reassign the task, and cancel itself. Answers to older questions could also steer another active turn without a click. **Expected behavior** Save the response immediately. Queue its continuation behind the active run. Deliver it after completion, or when the user explicitly chooses Interrupt or Steer. Preserve approval revisions and answer choices. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Let an agent publish a confirmation card while its run is still active. 2. Accept the card before the agent finishes its review handoff. 3. Inspect the message queue and the task's next run. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on da8a3876c with the onboarding changes from #13517. **Deployment mode** Local development from source. The fix covers legacy adapters and native Runner turns. ## What Changed - Project resolved cards into the existing queue as immutable responses. Keep answers and exact approval revisions. - Require an explicit click to steer a response into a compatible native turn. Use Interrupt when a fresh session is required. - Preserve typed response context through interruption, cleanup waits, and normal queue promotion. Keep the direct answer channel for a provider blocked on its original question request. - Accept the source run's review handoff after its card resolves. Reject stale agent reassignment that would orphan a queued response. - Add deterministic regression tests and an `accept-while-running` case to the first-task suite. Require recorded timestamp overlap before that case can pass. - Keep the first-task skill name out of user-facing messages. ## Verification - Red-green: the original route failed the queue regression; the changed route passes it. - Focused server/UI tests: 139 passed, including 64 queue-route tests. - Runner harness unit tests: 314 passed. - Server, UI, and Runner E2E typechecks passed. UI token gates passed. - Full repository typecheck and build passed. Server typecheck passed again after review fixes. - Review regressions: 165 queue/reopen route tests, 53 wake admission tests, and 18 run identity tests passed. Approval acknowledgement recovery and both message/approval arrival orders are covered. - Full local test run: 12,401 passed; three new admission regressions ran against a cached pre-fix module. A fresh run of that entire suite passed (53 tests). The complete CI suite passed on the final commit. - Previous-head CI at `c28e2ef12`: 32 checks passed and 2 optional Storybook checks skipped. Every server/workspace/browser shard, Runner verification, build, typecheck/release registry, canary, policy, and security check passed. Greptile: 5/5, no unresolved threads. Earlier interrupted CI workers were replaced by this fresh complete run. - After integrating the updated parent: 314 harness tests, 119 queue/admission tests, 44 onboarding/question-delivery tests, and 13 native recovery tests passed locally. Full repository typecheck and build passed. - Clarified the skill wording preference: routine replies describe the action without announcing the internal skill; direct questions and permission/security/execution disclosures remain truthful. - The paid `accept-while-running` scenario is registered for all four local first-task profiles. It has not been run against a model in this change. - Rebased onto the merged parent at `11921075a`; the resulting tree exactly matches the locally verified integration tree. Final-head CI on `b53054807` passed: 54 successful checks, 2 optional Storybook checks skipped, no failed checks. Every new server/browser shard, aggregate verify/e2e gate, Runner, typecheck, build, canary, and security check passed on the first attempt. Greptile reviewed this exact head at 5/5 with no unresolved threads. ## Risks - Responses now wait instead of implicitly steering another active turn. A provider blocked on the original question still receives its answer directly. - Approval receipts cannot be edited, discarded, or reordered as comments. This preserves the recorded decision. - Interruption must still prove that the prior execution stopped. The tests cover cleanup waits and duplicate delivery. - The new paid overlap case can be unexercised if the model finishes before the click lands. It cannot pass without evidence of overlap. - No database migration is required. This repairs the existing approvals and execution controls; it does not implement the roadmap's work-stream queues. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The exact deployed model ID and context-window size were not exposed in this session. Capabilities used: agentic reasoning, repository inspection, code editing, terminal commands, and test execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.916.1-canary.3 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
11921075a4 |
Add first-task onboarding skill and Runner E2E coverage (#13517)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The first task helps a new user define and approve useful work. > - That workflow needs reusable instructions and tests against the production experience. > - Native Codex and Claude must load the assigned skill, including after resume. > - Maintainers need recorded conversations and precise failed checks to judge regressions. > - This pull request adds the first-task skill and a suite in the shared Runner E2E harness. > - It keeps behavior results separate from informational quality scores and incomplete recordings. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The first onboarding task and the Runner E2E report used to review it. **Current behavior** Onboarding embeds its policy in a hidden brief. Native Codex drops the skill-instructions setting at the Rust boundary. The shared E2E harness has no onboarding suite or full conversation view. **Proposed behavior** Assign and invoke `/first-task` for the onboarding task. Send selected Codex skills as structured protocol inputs. Run twelve scenarios across legacy Codex, legacy Claude, native Codex, and native ACPX Claude. Include all 48 cells in full campaigns. Show recorded chat, question and approval cards, exact checks, instructions, and billing in the shared dashboard. **Reason and benefit** Measure the real onboarding experience before changing prompts. Distinguish infrastructure failures, behavior failures, and unexercised journey steps. **Breaking changes** No database migration or production API change. First-task instructions now live in an assigned skill. The user-edited persona is preserved; the skill includes the maintainer-approved proposal-mode mapping and saved-plan requirement. Related: #11043 is earlier onboarding work. #13422 already fixes native Claude model pinning, context delivery, and read permissions on master; this branch includes those fixes through its base. The new Claude recovery test supplements them. ## What Changed - Extract and assign the first-task skill while retaining the production greeting and opening question. - Carry the Codex skill-instructions flag through thread start and resume. Resolve explicit task skill references only against assigned skills and send native skill inputs. - Invoke an unambiguously selected assigned skill through Claude ACPX’s native slash-command parser on initial and resumed turns, retaining the entire task/wake envelope as its argument. Do not carry that invocation into ordinary tasks. - Restore the saved single-task proposal modes: confirmation card, or saved plan with revision-targeted checkbox approval. Explicit plan requests also require a saved plan. - Add first-response and complete-journey cases with fixed user facts, acceptance checkpoints, durable outcome checks, and accounting for child runs. - Fail the eval when choice questions have fewer than two real options. Recognize planning documents without treating them as completed work. - Add optional, bounded quality judging as explicit post-processing. - Render full conversations and static interaction cards in the shared report. Conversations start folded. Show original and regraded results and incomplete journeys distinctly. - Keep credential-persistence scanning outside the first-task behavioral suite; retain public evidence redaction. - Refresh generated capability references after the API-reference edits. - Correct shared native question guidance and tool schemas: choices need at least two meaningful options; open-ended questions use canonical text fields with the required compatibility payload. Verify both formats through real tool-authority persistence. - Disable announcements automatically for every isolated Runner E2E process and label the gallery environment/provider/target explicitly. - Remove CI races in the GitHub connection browser test and native session recovery test by waiting for the actual async work before asserting its results. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/services/onboarding-first-task-assets.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-onboarding-first-task-routes.test.ts`: 19 passed. - `pnpm --dir packages/paperclip-runner exec vitest run src/drivers/acpx/runtime-host.test.ts src/drivers/acpx/native-skill-prompt.test.ts src/cli/acpx-runtime-sidecar.test.ts`: 70 passed. Native command forwarding and the 1 MiB input boundary both failed before their fixes and passed afterward. Coverage includes changed skills on reopen, approval context, and an ordinary subsequent task. - Runner E2E unit suite: 306 passed. Harness typecheck passed. The 64 first-task fixture and grader tests also pass. - Full repository typecheck and build passed locally. Server typecheck and Runner build passed again after the native-command change. - Full GitHub Actions CI passed on `23e56447b`: all server/workspace/browser shards, Runner verification, typecheck/release registry, build, canary, policy, and Docker checks. Greptile reviewed this exact head at 5/5 with no unresolved threads. The earlier broad local run had database startup/timing failures that passed isolated retries; the complete remote suite is green. - Merge verification against current master: 312 harness tests and 13 native recovery tests passed. Regenerated semantic contracts and fixture hashes pass their consistency check. Full local typecheck and build also passed on the stacked queue branch. After merging the latest master and preserving the GitHub setup timing regression in the split browser suite, both focused GitHub browser tests passed. Three CI timing/startup flakes passed local verification and one remote retry; all latest-head checks are green. - Real pinned Claude SDK and Claude ACP JSON-RPC probes against a local mock API confirmed that `/skill-name` expands the assigned skill body before the model request and retains the task arguments. A prose mention does not. The probes made no paid model calls. The ACP probe used the current first-task skill body and retained the wake arguments. - [Full 48-case campaign and report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-e2e-first-task-35053063880/): 44 passed after three interrupted Codex cases completed in targeted reruns. Original results, regrades, and all 51 executions remain in the report provenance. - [Claude campaign after the shared-question fix](https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-e2e-first-task-claude-35099525201/): 10/12 passed with zero single-option failures. All 12 recorded the current assigned skill and corrected guidance. The failures exposed skipped skill invocation and a missing saved plan. This PR adds native command invocation and explicit saved-plan instructions; the subsequent report below still shows behavior failures. - [Fresh 12-case Claude report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-e2e-first-task-claude-35102737804/) at `78452129e`: 10/12 pass after correcting two false proposal-matcher failures. The recordings said “Here is the task I will create and run/complete” in approval cards; the old matcher missed that word order. Regression tests failed before the fix and pass after it. Original results and offline regrade provenance remain linked. No agent rerun was needed. Zero single-option-question failures; two behavior failures remain: direct work before acceptance on a plain first message, and an explicit plan request without a saved plan. Neither check was relaxed. The follow-up `82087ac7e` fixes command-prefix size accounting; `94aefb1f3` fixes only that proposal matcher. - Report browser checks confirm folded conversations, rendered cards, explicit Local/Daytona labels, and no page errors. The published-object audit scanned 1,306 text files across 2,154 objects with no credential-format findings or prohibited files. Image pixels and unknown token formats are outside that scan. ## Risks - Model behavior is nondeterministic. One campaign is evidence, not a guarantee. The two remaining Claude behavior failures are visible in the report and require further product work; this PR does not claim all onboarding scenarios pass. - The suite checks persisted Paperclip effects. It cannot prove the absence of arbitrary external effects. - Historical recordings can miss later journey steps. These remain incomplete, never passes. - Native profiles switch runtime after the production onboarding wizard because it does not yet expose a native option. - Quality scores are informational and cannot override behavioral failures. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools, and code execution. The exact deployed model identifier and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.916.1-canary.2 |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
dcb04a8062 |
fix(claude-local): read a macOS isolated login from its suffixed Keychain item (#13519)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Connecting a Claude subscription during onboarding uses an isolated
login: the wizard points `claude` at a per-connection
`CLAUDE_CONFIG_DIR` and then verifies the credential before saving the
connection
> - The verifier reads `.credentials.json` from that directory — but on
macOS, Claude Code does not write a credentials file at all: it stores
the OAuth credential for a custom config dir in a per-directory Keychain
item named `Claude Code-credentials-<first 8 hex chars of sha256(dir)>`
> - So on macOS the connect step can never verify a successful sign-in,
and onboarding dead-ends at "Could not verify the local subscription"
(Linux works because the CLI falls back to writing the file there, which
is why the Docker-based smokes pass)
> - This pull request teaches the credential readers to consult the
login home's own suffixed Keychain item when the file is missing
> - The benefit is that macOS self-hosted users can connect a Claude
subscription during onboarding, while the standing isolation invariant —
an isolated login must never fall through to the machine-level operator
login — is preserved, because only the per-directory suffixed item is
ever read
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No existing issue. Description follows the bug-report template:
**What happened?**
On macOS, connecting a Claude subscription during onboarding (or from
Connections) always fails with "Could not verify the local subscription.
Run the sign-in command shown for this connection, finish signing in,
then try Connect again" — even after `claude auth login` completes
successfully in the isolated `CLAUDE_CONFIG_DIR`.
**Expected behavior**
After finishing the browser sign-in for the printed command, clicking
Connect verifies the subscription and saves the connection.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. On macOS, run onboarding on a fresh instance and reach "Connect a
model" → Claude → Subscription.
2. Run the printed `export CLAUDE_CONFIG_DIR=… && claude auth login`
command in a terminal on the same machine and complete the browser
sign-in.
3. Return and click Connect. Verification fails every time. Inspecting
the isolated directory shows `.claude.json` with a fully populated
`oauthAccount` but no `.credentials.json`; `security
find-generic-password -s "Claude Code-credentials-<suffix>"` shows the
credential landed in the Keychain, where the verifier never looks.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduced on `2026.915.0-canary.11` (`dffc2b3ca`) with Claude Code
2.1.231.
**Deployment mode**
Self-hosted, authenticated instance on macOS.
**Installation method**
`npx paperclipai onboard` (also affects any macOS install; Linux is
unaffected).
## What Changed
- `packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/quota.ts`:
- New exported helper `readIsolatedClaudeKeychainToken(loginHome)` —
computes the suffixed service name (`Claude Code-credentials-` + first 8
hex chars of `sha256(loginHome)`) and reads only that item via
`/usr/bin/security`; returns null off macOS
- `readClaudeToken` with a custom `CLAUDE_CONFIG_DIR` now consults that
directory's suffixed item after the file reads miss (previously it
refused the Keychain entirely for custom homes). The unsuffixed operator
item is still gated behind the explicit `allowKeychain` opt-in with no
custom home, unchanged
- `server/src/services/local-ai-credentials.ts`: for anthropic isolated
logins, fall back to the suffixed Keychain item after the hardened
credentials-file reads miss. The file path is untouched and still
preferred; the hardened file reader (`readLocalAiCredentialFile` with
its uid/mode/symlink checks) is not bypassed
- Tests: adapter keychain suite extended (suffixed lookup for custom
homes, no unsuffixed fallback when the suffixed item is absent,
off-macOS null); server verifier suite extended (keychain fallback when
the file is missing, file preferred over keychain, absent-login failure
still never touches the ambient reader)
Security note: the suffix binds each Keychain item to exactly one auth
home, so reading it can only surface the login performed inside that
home. The account-isolation invariant the old code enforced by refusing
the Keychain outright ("never substitute the server operator's login for
a user's isolated login") is preserved — the unsuffixed item is never
consulted for an isolated login, and a new test pins that.
The suffix derivation was confirmed against a live login on macOS: a
real `claude auth login` into an isolated home left no credentials file,
wrote the full `oauthAccount` to `.claude.json`, and created a Keychain
item whose suffix equals the first 8 sha256 hex chars of the exact
`CLAUDE_CONFIG_DIR` string; reading it back with the same `security`
invocation returned the live token, which the new code path then
verifies via the existing quota probe.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/server/quota-keychain.test.ts`
(claude-local): 10 tests pass; full claude-local suite: 287 passed, 1
skipped
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/__tests__/local-ai-credentials.test.ts`
(server): 11 tests pass
- Reverting only the verifier change makes the two new server tests fail
— the suite reproduces the live bug
- End-to-end on macOS: a dev server built from this branch, fresh data
dir, full onboarding walk with a real `claude auth login` into the
printed isolated dir — the connect step verifies and saves the
connection
## Risks
- Low. The change is additive and fail-closed: when the suffixed item is
absent (Linux, older Claude Code versions, no login performed), behavior
is byte-identical to today — the file reads run first and the failure
message is unchanged
- The `security` call runs with the existing 10s timeout and swallowed
errors, matching the established unsuffixed-item code path
- No migrations, no API surface changes
## Model Used
Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), extended thinking with tool use
(Claude Code).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [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
canary/v2026.916.1-canary.1
|
||
|
Devin Foley
|
d08abcba15 |
ci: cut PR wall clock from ~16 to ~6 minutes (#13521)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Every pull request runs the Trusted PR CI workflow before merge > - The test suites roughly tripled in six weeks, and shard balance did not keep up, so PR runs crept from ~4 to ~17 minutes > - Slow CI delays every merge and every contributor > - This pull request rebalances the shards from fresh measurements, splits the largest test files, reuses the Rust build cache in three more jobs, and takes the policy job off the critical path > - The benefit is a PR wall clock near 6 minutes with the same coverage ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** PR CI wall clock. A typical green run took 16-17 minutes. Two months ago it took about 4 minutes. **Subsystem affected** The Trusted PR CI workflow (`.github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml`), the shard-duration manifests, the vitest shard runner scripts, the `paperclip-runner` package scripts, and the dry-run branch of `release.sh`. **Current behavior** The shard-duration manifests were stale. The general-server manifest had durations for ~400 of 649 suites. The e2e manifest was missing 14 of 29 specs. Stale median weights made shard steps range 417s-806s (server) and 277s-745s (e2e). Three jobs each paid a ~3m40s cold cargo release build. Every test lane waited ~60s for the policy job before it could start. **Proposed behavior** All lanes finish in a narrow ~200-290s band. The manifests carry fresh measured durations for every suite. The three largest test files are split so no single file caps a shard. The Rust cache restore runs in every job that builds the Runner binary. Test lanes start as soon as the gate resolves. **Reason and benefit** Merges stop waiting on CI. The projected wall clock is ~6 minutes for the same test coverage. ## What Changed - Rebuild `scripts/general-server-shard-durations.json` (646 suites) and `scripts/e2e-shard-durations.json` (all specs) from per-suite completion timestamps in runs 35036001734 and 35024948947. - Move the PR server lane to the release-verify shape: `general-server-without-chat` across twelve duration-balanced shards, plus the chat integration suite split by collected test location across three dedicated lanes. - Split `tests/e2e/chat-adapters-ui.spec.ts` into `-providers` and `-messaging` specs, and `tests/e2e/agent-chat.spec.ts` into `-sessions` and `-projects` specs. Each pair shares fixtures through a `.shared.ts` module. Playwright collects the same test sets (39 and 20 tests). - Raise e2e shards to eight and serialized shards to nine. - Run the runner package's `check:all` as four matrix lanes: `check:static`, `check:runner`, and two native vitest `--shard` halves. The union is exactly `check:all`. - Add the read-only Rust cache restore (toolchain pin, `save-if: false`) to the Canary Dry Run, Build, and Typecheck jobs. - Make release.sh preview publish payloads concurrently in batches of eight during `--dry-run`. The real publish path stays strictly serial. - Drop the policy-job lockfile artifact chain. Each lane installs with `--frozen-lockfile` and falls back to an inline `--resolution-only` regeneration. The policy job stays a required check through the `verify` and `e2e` aggregates. - Update the shard-count mirrors and workflow assertions in the partition and gate tests. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/run-vitest-stable-shard.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/e2e-shard.test.mjs` — 30 pass. - `node --test '.github/scripts/tests/'*.test.mjs` — 410 pass. - `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs scripts/cloud-source-verification.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/release-dry-run-notes.test.mjs` — 42 pass. - `playwright test --list` collects 39 tests across the chat-adapters split and 20 across the agent-chat split, equal to the original files. - A local vitest collection of the chat suite partitions 995 tests into 498/497 line shards. - Projected shard weights: server 230s x12, chat ~143s x3, e2e 207-242s x8, serialized ~216s x9. ## Risks - The split spec files reorder tests relative to the original files. Every describe seeds its own company, so the specs stay independent; a hidden cross-describe dependency would surface as a deterministic failure in one shard. - The inline lockfile fallback changes install behavior for manifest-changing and stacked PRs. The policy job still validates resolution as a required check. - `release.sh` changes are confined to the `--dry-run` preview branch. The publish loop is untouched. `bash -n` passes and the release dry-run tests pass. - One PR now schedules ~44 fleet runners. If the RunsOn fleet caps concurrency, queueing may absorb part of the gain; watch the first runs. ## Model Used - Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`, Anthropic), extended thinking, with tool use (shell, file edits) in Claude Code. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
Devin Foleyandgithub-actions[bot]
|
c49336acdf |
docs(release): canonicalize v2026.916.0 release notes (#13548)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Stable v2026.916.0 shipped today; its release notes were maintained during the beta window at `releases/beta/v2026.916.0-beta.0.md` > - The release workflow's canonicalize step renames the file to its canonical stable path once the promotion completes, pushing the rename to a branch for a human-opened pull request (bot-opened PRs trigger no CI) > - This pull request is that rename: `releases/beta/v2026.916.0-beta.0.md` → `releases/v2026.916.0.md` > - The benefit is that the published GitHub Release body and the in-repo notes file agree on the canonical path ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Routine post-release canonicalization for the `v2026.916.0` stable, generated by the release workflow's `canonicalize_stable_notes` job (run 35126040769). Content is byte-identical to the notes published on the GitHub Release. **What happened?** Stable promotion completed; the notes file needs its canonical name. **Expected behavior** `releases/v2026.916.0.md` exists on master matching the published release body. **Steps to reproduce** n/a — mechanical rename. ## What Changed - Rename `releases/beta/v2026.916.0-beta.0.md` to `releases/v2026.916.0.md` (no content change) ## Verification - Diff is a pure rename; content matches the published GitHub Release body for v2026.916.0 ## Risks - None — docs-only rename. ## Model Used None for the change itself (generated by the release workflow); PR opened via Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`, Claude Code). ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [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: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>canary/v2026.916.1-canary.0 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9fd2e50310 |
feat: create company skills from runner tasks (#13538)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The Runner gives agents tools to change company resources. > - Users need agents to save reusable skills during a task. > - A saved skill needs a visible result that users can inspect and edit. > - This pull request adds `create_skill` and a task feed card linked to Skill Studio. > - Users can open the saved skill from the task and edit the same resource. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Runner tools, company skill storage, task feed, and Skill Studio. **Problem or motivation** The Runner has no dedicated tool to create a company skill. A user cannot follow a creation result from the task feed to the saved skill. **Proposed solution** Add a company-scoped `create_skill` tool. Save the skill with the existing company policy. Add one creation card to the task. Open a named sidebar tab from that card. Let the user open the same skill in Skill Studio. **Alternatives considered** An agent can write a local file, but that file is not a company skill. A second document copy in the task would become stale after a Studio edit. The sidebar therefore reads the saved skill directly. **Roadmap alignment** This extends the shipped Skills Manager, Skill Studio, and Skills Store milestone. The maintainer requested and approved this scope. Search found no duplicate `create_skill` PR or issue. Related UI validation work: #8715. This PR does not change that validation display. ## What Changed - Add the real Runner tool, its contract, and its mock implementation. - Validate the complete SKILL.md and derive company, task, agent, and run identity from authentication. - Apply the existing company skill policy. Do not assign the skill to an agent. - Make keyed retries return one skill and one creation event. Reject conflicting retries. - Make concurrent file creation safe. Never replace an existing published skill during creation. - Add a creation card, a named sidebar tab, and an Open in Skill Studio action. - Show saved Studio edits when the user returns to the task. - Add storage, policy, mode, retry, UI, and Product E2E tests. Document the tool. - Fix deleted-name reuse, onboarding panel persistence, immediate feed refresh, and mock validation parity from review. - Serialize Studio file edits and renames with skill deletion and recreation. Reject stale editor requests before they can change a replacement skill. - Generate the standalone mock parser and validator from the production contract. Use portable UUIDs so the browser scenario bundle builds. ## Verification - All latest-head PR checks pass on `145dd76a5`, including all server shards, browser E2E, Runner verification, build, typecheck, and release dry run. Greptile: 5/5 with no open findings. An interrupted CI runner was retried successfully. - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm build`: passed. - `pnpm check:token-gates`: passed. - Review regressions: 73 storage tests, 6 real API tests, 63 UI tests, and 61 semantic runtime tests passed. Parser synchronization passed. - CI exposed existing fire-and-forget Sentry test races. Reproduced the resumption race locally, then synchronized the related sweep and finalizer assertions on the actual report; all 27 tests across the three affected files pass. - Runner scenario browser build and strict content-security-policy check: passed. - Runner suite: 2,012 tests passed; 10 skipped. - `pnpm test:run`: the general-server batch had 12,416 passes and two failures. The old tool-count assertion was fixed; all 16 authority tests then passed. The chat webhook test had a socket error; it passed four isolated reruns. - Both workspace test groups passed. The isolated route suites completed. Two socket failures in the initial route batches passed on individual reruns; all remaining 61 files passed. - Product E2E `create-skill-studio`: passed with local Codex and local ACPX Claude. - Manual browser test: submit a task, observe the real tool call and creation card, open the sidebar, edit in Studio, save, and return. The task reached Done. The saved second revision and sidebar tab survived a server restart. - The new companion headless Runner Eval passed. Companion coverage PR: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-evals/pull/23. Daytona was not run because no immutable runner image was configured. ## Risks - Database writes and local file writes cannot share one transaction. Recovery accepts only an exact file-for-file retry after a database rollback. Conflicting files remain untouched. - The sidebar displays the current skill. The feed card remains the historical creation receipt. - No database migration, dependency, or workflow change is included. - Remote Daytona behavior still needs a run with a configured immutable image. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 (`gpt-6-astra`) handled design, integration, review, and browser verification. OpenAI `gpt-5.6-luna` assisted with bounded implementation and eval work. Both used code execution and tool access. The host did not expose the context window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
5b6e54fba8 |
fix(cli): accept prompt defaults in onboarding wizard validators (#13520)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The CLI onboarding wizard's custom-setup path collects server,
database, storage, and secrets configuration through `@clack/prompts`
text prompts, most of which show a sensible default
> - `@clack/prompts` runs each prompt's `validate` callback on the raw
typed value, and only substitutes `defaultValue` after validation passes
— so pressing Enter to accept a shown default hands the validator an
empty string
> - Eleven of the wizard's validators reject the empty string, which
makes their own displayed defaults unacceptable: accepting "Embedded
PostgreSQL port: 54329" fails with "Port must be an integer between 1
and 65535", "Backup directory" fails with "Backup directory is
required", and so on through every prompt in the custom path
> - This pull request makes each affected validator accept empty input
when a default exists, while keeping all real validation for typed input
> - The benefit is that the custom-setup wizard is walkable by pressing
Enter through the defaults, as the UI clearly intends
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No existing issue. Description follows the bug-report template:
**What happened?**
In `paperclipai onboard` custom setup, pressing Enter to accept a
prompt's displayed default fails validation on eleven prompts. Confirmed
live on the "Embedded PostgreSQL port" prompt (default 54329 → "Port
must be an integer between 1 and 65535") and the "Backup directory"
prompt (populated default path → "Backup directory is required"). The
only way through is to retype every default by hand.
**Expected behavior**
Pressing Enter accepts the displayed default, as in every standard
`@clack/prompts` flow.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. `npx paperclipai onboard` → choose Custom setup.
2. At "Embedded PostgreSQL port", press Enter to accept the shown
default.
3. Validation rejects it. Same for the backup directory, backup
interval/retention, server port, bind host, storage directory, S3
bucket/region, and secrets key-file prompts.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduced on `2026.915.0-canary.11`; the same validators exist in the
latest stable (`v2026.831.1`) — long-standing, not a recent regression.
**Deployment mode**
Any (the bug is in the CLI wizard).
**Installation method**
`npx paperclipai onboard`.
## What Changed
- Audited all 15 `validate:` callbacks across
`cli/src/prompts/{database,server,storage,llm,secrets}.ts`. Eleven
rejected the empty string while displaying a default; two were already
fine (hostname CSV prompts, where empty parses to `[]`); one is an
intentionally required password with no default (left alone); one
(PostgreSQL connection string) and one (public base URL) are
conditionally required — empty now passes only when a saved default
exists, so fresh setups still enforce the field
- Fix pattern: allow empty/undefined input at the top of each affected
validator; every check for non-empty typed input is unchanged. One
deliberate exception: the bind-host validator validates `(val ||
defaultHost)` so accepting the default still runs the loopback safety
check rather than bypassing it
- New `cli/src/__tests__/prompt-default-accept.test.ts` (repo-convention
vitest + clack mock reproducing real submit semantics — validate raw
`""`, then substitute the default): drives the four prompt modules
end-to-end and unit-exercises each captured validator (empty accepted,
garbage still rejected, required-when-fresh still rejected)
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/__tests__/prompt-default-accept.test.ts` in
`cli/`: 13/13 pass; with the prompt fixes stashed: 12/13 fail — the
suite reproduces the bug
- Full cli suite: 483 passed; 15 failures are pre-existing/environmental
on the clean tree too (macOS `/var` realpath mismatch in
`worktree.test.ts`, one parallel-run flake that passes in isolation)
- `pnpm run typecheck` in `cli/`: zero errors in `cli/src` (the 228
pre-existing errors in `../server/src` from missing prebuilt workspace
dist are identical with and without the change)
## Risks
- Low. Typed input validates exactly as before; whitespace-only input is
still rejected (clack substitutes the default only for truly-empty
input). The two conditionally-required prompts still hard-require a
value on fresh setups
- No migrations, no API surface changes; CLI-only
## Model Used
Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), extended thinking with tool use
(Claude Code); implementation drafted by a subagent on the same model
and reviewed before commit.
## 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
canary/v2026.916.0-canary.4
|
||
|
Devin Foleyandgithub-actions[bot]
|
de9ac61fb5 |
docs(release): curate stable notes for v2026.916.0 (#13522)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The release system publishes canary, nightly, beta, and stable channels; a stable promotion publishes its release notes as the GitHub Release body > - At beta publish time the workflow auto-drafts a raw commit-log skeleton on this branch (`releases/beta/v2026.916.0-beta.0.md`) for humans to edit > - The skeleton is a 1,800-line commit dump; stable `v2026.916.0` cannot ship user-facing notes in that form > - This pull request replaces the skeleton with the curated changelog for the `v2026.916.0` promotion: overview, breaking changes, highlights, fixes, upgrade guide, and contributor credits for the 483-commit range since `v2026.831.1` > - The benefit is that the stable promotion reads finished, accurate notes from master and publishes them as the release body ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13403, #13247, #13248, #13268, #13256, #13038, #13299 — the headline features this changelog describes. The notes-drafting flow itself (skeleton branch at beta publish, stable promotion reading the file from master, post-ship canonicalization) is the standing release process; this PR is the curation step it expects. ## What Changed - Replaced the auto-drafted skeleton in `releases/beta/v2026.916.0-beta.0.md` with the curated release notes for stable `v2026.916.0` (promoted from beta `2026.916.0-beta.0`, source `dffc2b3ca`) - Also removes the orphaned `releases/beta/v2026.915.0-beta.0.md`: that beta's promotion was abandoned before publishing, and this changelog supersedes it - Sections: overview, Breaking Changes (5), Highlights (Connections train leads), Improvements, Fixes, Upgrade Guide (migrations `0231`–`0279`, new env vars, removed API surface), Contributors ## Verification - Every PR link and claim was checked against the actual commit range `dbf052577..667c79ded` (the same range the skeleton header names) - Migration list enumerated from `git log --diff-filter=A` over that range; only `0231` and `0236` discard data, called out as such - New environment variables verified in code (`server/src/config.ts`): announcement flags (default on), split Sentry DSNs with legacy fallback, token-broker allowed hosts, cwd `.env` opt-out - Contributor list built from commit authors plus co-author trailers; core maintainers excluded per release-notes convention - Docs-only change: no code paths, no tests to add ## Risks - Low risk: documentation only. The stable promotion reads this file from master at dispatch time; if wording needs a follow-up after merge, the promotion pins the master revision it resolved, so edits must land before the stable dispatch - The file is renamed to `releases/v2026.916.0.md` by the post-ship canonicalization step, as with previous promotions ## Model Used Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), extended thinking with tool use (Claude Code). The commit-range analysis and draft were produced by a subagent on the same model and human-review-style checked against the range before commit. ## 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: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>canary/v2026.916.0-canary.3 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
18989a9e73 |
docs: add eval guide, authoring skills, and public history hub (#13535)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Its evaluations test both the Runner and complete product workflows. > - The guides and run histories are in separate places. > - The shared Evalbook viewer can make the test boundary unclear. > - This pull request names the two families and adds a guide, authoring skills, and a public hub. > - Contributors can choose the correct test and inspect its history. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Issue type** Missing documentation. **Where is the issue?** Runner and Product E2E evaluation guides, case-authoring procedures, and public result navigation. **What's wrong?** There is no single entry point. A report format can be mistaken for an execution boundary. There are no dedicated case-authoring skills for these two families. **Suggested fix** Add a guide and three skills. Link both existing histories from a public hub. Keep existing campaign URLs and grading unchanged. ## What Changed - Add `doc/evals.md` and links from existing guides. - Add the `paperclip-evals`, `add-runner-eval`, and `add-product-e2e-eval` skills. Install copies in `~/paperclipai/.agents/skills`. - Add a static hub builder that reads the existing public history feeds. - Show a dated snapshot for each family. Label partial campaigns and preserve measurement dates across report refreshes. - Document publication and refresh commands for https://pages.paperclip.ing/evals/. ## Verification - Seven Python summary tests pass: `python3 -m unittest discover -s scripts/evals-hub -p 'test_*.py'`. Run these checks directly; this PR does not modify package scripts. - All three skills pass the skill-creator `quick_validate.py` check with `/usr/bin/python3`. - Build tested with saved history fixtures and the live public feeds. - Desktop and mobile browser checks pass. The mobile page has no horizontal overflow. - Published https://pages.paperclip.ing/evals/. Browser check: HTTP 200, no page errors, all eight links return HTTP 200, no mobile overflow. - Independent skill exercises found the existing Notion-decline case and a direct Runner permission-denial case. Roster validation with an explicit run ID passes. - Missing refresh measurement date: regression fails before the fix and passes after it. - `git diff --check` passes. - No paid evals were run for this documentation and reporting change. The preceding head passed typecheck, build, server/workspace tests, runner verification, browser E2E, and the canary dry run. Checks for the latest commit are pending. Local repository-wide typecheck, test, and build were not repeated because no product code changed. ## Risks The hub is a dated static snapshot. It can lag behind the linked histories until an operator refreshes it. A changed history schema stops the build. Existing archives and grades are not modified. The published guide link is pinned to the reviewed commit so branch deletion cannot break it. Later builds can use master. ## Model Used OpenAI gpt-6-astra for implementation and review. OpenAI gpt-5.6-luna for documentation and independent skill checks. Both used repository tools and code execution. Context window sizes 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 - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green (latest commit pending) - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups (preceding head was 5/5; latest commit pending) - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.916.0-canary.2 |
||
|
|
4577d10029 |
fix: prepare everyday artifact and Codex sandbox prerequisites in CI (#13516)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The runner E2E workflow executes paid everyday workflow stories on disposable CI hosts > - The everyday artifact oracle requires a pinned Python image and fails closed when it is absent > - Fresh CI hosts did not prepare this image before the paid cell, so project stories failed during preflight > - This pull request prepares and verifies the pinned image before the affected everyday cells > - The benefit is reliable artifact isolation checks on fresh trusted CI hosts ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Fresh trusted CI runners did not have the pinned Python artifact oracle image. **Expected behavior:** The workflow prepares and verifies the pinned image before an everyday project story starts. **Steps to reproduce:** Run an everyday project story on a fresh CI host without the image cached. The `everyday-artifact.py --preflight` check fails before task creation. **Paperclip version or commit:** `master` at `bd51f157e`. **Deployment mode:** Other: GitHub Actions trusted paid workflow. ## What Changed - Add a matrix-gated CI step for everyday project and recovery cells. - Check Docker, pull the fixed digest with bounded timeouts, and verify the exact repo digest. - Apply the existing Codex sandbox preparation to both native Codex profiles, including the mini profile. - Add workflow security assertions for ordering, condition, digest, timeouts, and secret isolation. - Document that CI prepares the pinned oracle image. - Check provisioning eligibility against every catalog cell, and scope the Daytona registry inspection assertion to the Daytona image job. ## Verification - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit` — 24 files and 222 tests passed. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck` — passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts workflow-security.test.ts` — 10 tests passed. - Python artifact oracle calibration — 12/12 passed. - `git diff --check` — passed. ## Risks Low risk. The image step runs only for everyday cells that execute the artifact preflight. The Codex setup now covers both native Codex profiles. It uses a fixed public image digest and has no provider credentials. ## Model Used OpenAI gpt-5.6-luna (implementation subagent) and gpt-6-astra (review fixes and orchestration), using code execution and repository tools. Context window size is 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> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <paperclip@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Nicky Leach
|
ae06329971 | test(server): hoist the route module graph in the issue ownership authz suite (#13524) canary/v2026.916.0-canary.0 nightly/v2026.916.0-nightly.1 | ||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
e1f245a660 |
fix(server): recover sandbox leases stranded active after a restart (#13515)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The server starts and stops provider sandboxes through environment leases > - A restart can leave a terminal run with an `active` lease > - The normal orphan recovery path cannot find that lease after the run ends > - This pull request adds a bounded sweep that changes the stranded lease to `pending_cleanup` > - The existing cleanup sweep then stops the provider sandbox on the same heartbeat tick > - The benefit is that stranded sandboxes stop and do not continue to create provider cost ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A restart can occur after the server writes a terminal run status but before it releases the related environment lease. The lease then stays `active`, and later recovery does not select it. A second path skips the lease when its environment row does not exist. **Expected behavior** The heartbeat recovery path must find an `active` lease that no live run can release. It must move that lease to `pending_cleanup`, and the cleanup sweep must stop the provider sandbox. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a run that owns a provider sandbox lease. 2. End the run and stop the server between the run-status write and the lease-release write. 3. Restart the server and allow the heartbeat recovery sweep to run. 4. Confirm that the lease reaches `pending_cleanup` and the provider sandbox receives a stop request. **Paperclip version or commit** This pull request targets the current `master` branch at the base commit used for review. **Deployment mode** The change applies to local development and server deployments. **Installation method** Built from source with the repository test commands. **Agent adapter(s) involved** Not adapter-specific. The change applies to core heartbeat recovery. **Database mode** The change uses the existing database tables. It adds no migration. ## What Changed - Add `sweepOrphanedActiveLeases()` to heartbeat recovery. - Select only stale `active` leases that have no live run owner. - Skip leases with a different live lease for the same provider resource. - Preserve retained leases and write a failure reason for recovered leases. - Limit each sweep to 20 rows. - Run the recovery sweep before the pending-cleanup sweep. - Add focused tests for the recovery guards and same-tick cleanup. ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-orphaned-active-lease-sweep.test.ts` — 10 tests pass. - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-pending-cleanup-sweep.test.ts` — 22 tests pass. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — exits 0. - The complete CI suite remains the final check for the repository. ## Risks The sweep changes only stale `active` leases that no live run can release. The stale threshold, live-resource guard, retained-lease guard, and page limit reduce false recovery. The change adds no endpoint, schema change, or migration. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, tool-enabled coding agent with repository inspection, GitHub CLI, and test execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandClaude Opus 5
|
bd51f157e9 |
fix(ci): make the Runner Rust cache key independent of the image toolchain (#13500)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Every change goes through the pull request CI workflow, and its `Verify Paperclip Runner` lane builds and tests the native Rust runner > - https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13457 made that lane restore master's prebuilt Rust dependency cache instead of recompiling 313 crates > - Measured over 26 runs since it went live, the cache hits on the RunsOn fleet and misses on every GitHub-hosted runner > - The cause is the cache key: `rust-cache` hashes every installed toolchain, and each runner image ships a different stable Rust next to the pinned one > - This pull request removes the extra toolchains before the key is computed, in the reader and the writer > - The benefit is that the saving the cache already delivers, 4.8 minutes per run, reaches the 73% of runs that currently miss it ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists for this. The problem follows the enhancement issue template below. - Refs https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13457 — added the cache this pull request repairs - Refs https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13459 — activated it - Refs https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13194 — created the `release-runner-v1` entry on master I searched this repository for other pull requests touching this cache and found no duplicate and nothing in flight. **What existing behavior does this improve?** The Rust dependency cache added in #13457 misses on GitHub-hosted runners, so most pull requests still recompile the whole dependency tree. **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting (multiple of the above). The change touches CI workflow configuration only. It does not change product code. **Current behavior** The cache works, but only on one runner class. Across 26 successful `Verify Paperclip Runner` jobs since #13459 merged: | Runner | Runs | Before | After | Change | Cache | |---|---|---|---|---|---| | RunsOn fleet | 7 | 16.4m | 11.6m | −4.8m | 4 of 4 full hit | | ubuntu-latest | 19 | 14.9m | 14.7m | −0.2m | 0 of 6 hit | | All | 26 | 15.0m | 13.9m | −1.1m | | Only 27% of runs reach the fleet, so the fleet-wide saving is 1.1 minutes rather than the 4.8 minutes the cache delivers where it lands. The two runners compute different keys: ``` fleet: v0-rust-release-runner-v1-Linux-x64-4bb3b8ea-a95b0328 ubuntu-latest: v0-rust-release-runner-v1-Linux-x64-9fdc73e3-a95b0328 ``` The lockfile half agrees. The environment half does not. `rust-cache` logs why, under `Environment considered`: | Runner | Toolchains it found | |---|---| | fleet | 1.97.1 and **1.98.0** | | ubuntu-latest | 1.97.1 and **1.98.1** | `rust-cache` hashes every installed toolchain, not only the active one. Both images carry the pinned 1.97.1. Each also ships its own stable Rust, and those differ by a patch version. The post-merge writer runs on a RunsOn image, so the fleet agrees with it and GitHub-hosted runners cannot. Pinning `RUSTUP_TOOLCHAIN` in #13457 was necessary but not sufficient. It fixes which toolchain builds the code. It does not change which toolchains exist on the image. **Proposed behavior** Remove every toolchain except the pin, before the cache step, in both the reader and the `release-runner-v1` writer. The key then depends on the pinned compiler and the lockfile alone, not on what the image happens to carry. **Reason and benefit** The cache already proves its value where it lands: release compile drops from 5m07s to 1m30s, debug from 1m48s to 13s, and the job from 16.4m to 11.6m. This change extends that to the other 73% of runs. Expected fleet-wide mean: about 11.5m, against 13.9m today and 15.0m before #13457. It also removes a standing fragility. The fleet hits today only because two RunsOn images happen to agree. If either image updates its stable Rust on its own, the hit rate drops to zero with no code change. **Breaking changes** None. The change only affects cache key computation. A miss reproduces the current behavior. **Additional context** The typecheck writer in `release-verify.yml` keeps its current step on purpose. It restores and saves on the same post-merge image, so its key never disagrees with itself. ## What Changed - Added a toolchain normalization block to `Select the pinned Runner Rust toolchain` in `.github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml`, before the cache restore. It keeps the pinned toolchain and uninstalls the rest. - Added the identical block to the same step in the `verify_paperclip_runner` job of `.github/workflows/release-verify.yml`, which writes `release-runner-v1`. The reader and the writer must agree, or the key matches nothing. - Made the block tolerant. If a toolchain cannot be removed it prints a notice and continues, so a pull request loses the cache rather than the run. - Extended `.github/scripts/tests/pr-runner-rust-cache.test.mjs` with two tests: the block is byte-identical in both workflows, and it runs before the cache step in each. ## Verification Run the workflow shape tests: ```bash node --test '.github/scripts/tests/*.test.mjs' ./scripts/__tests__/e2e-shard.test.mjs ./scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs ./scripts/__tests__/run-vitest-stable-shard.test.mjs ./scripts/cloud-source-verification.test.mjs ``` Result: 471 pass, 0 fail. I ran the step body against a stub `rustup` to confirm the logic, rather than only checking syntax. Three paths, all exit 0: | Case | Result | |---|---| | Pin plus an extra stable toolchain | Uninstalls only the extra, exports `RUSTUP_TOOLCHAIN=1.97.1-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu` | | Pin only, already normalized | No uninstall calls, no error | | No `rustup` on `PATH` | Prints the notice and continues | I also mutation-tested the new parity assertion. Each mutation edits only the writer, then the reader and writer disagree: | Mutation to `release-verify.yml` | Result | |---|---| | One word changed in the shared comment | Caught | | `uninstall` changed to `remove` | Caught | | Trailing `rustup toolchain list` deleted | Caught | After this merges, confirm the repair in CI. Take a `Verify Paperclip Runner` job that ran on `ubuntu-latest` and check the restore step for `full match: true`. Under `Environment considered`, `Rust Versions` must list only 1.97.1. The job should finish near 11.5m rather than 14.7m. ## Risks - **Master must republish the cache once.** This changes the key, so the existing `release-runner-v1` entry no longer matches. `cloud-readiness.yml` runs `release-verify.yml` on every push to master, so the first push after this lands writes the new entry. Pull requests merged before that miss the cache, which is exactly what most of them do today. No run breaks. - **The reader and the writer must stay in step.** If they diverge, no run hits the cache. The new parity test fails on any difference in the block, including a comment. - **Uninstalling the image toolchain is deliberate.** Everything in this job builds through the pinned 1.97.1, resolved from `packages/paperclip-runner/rust-toolchain.toml` and `RUSTUP_TOOLCHAIN`. Nothing in the job uses the image default. - **Low blast radius.** The change only affects cache key inputs. A miss compiles from scratch, as today. - **Image drift is now handled.** The key no longer depends on the image's own Rust version, so a future image update cannot silently disable the cache. ## Model Used Claude Opus 5, provider Anthropic, exact model ID `claude-opus-5`, 1M context window. Adaptive thinking was on. I used tool use throughout: the `gh` CLI and the GitHub API to pull 26 post-merge job records and 10 full job logs, log parsing in Python to isolate the per-phase timings and the two cache keys, a stub `rustup` on `PATH` to exercise the new step, and local `node --test` runs to verify and mutation-test the guards. Run through Claude Code. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [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 Note on the unchecked boxes. The CI and Greptile boxes stay unchecked until those checks finish. On documentation: no document describes the Runner cache keys, so there is nothing to update. 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
|
a8d32e5e61 |
feat(sandbox-providers): add CreateOS sandbox provider (#13434)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Agent work runs in sandboxes that provider plugins supply > - Operators can choose a provider to run agent work > - CreateOS adds another provider with workspace-preserving pause and resume > - This pull request adds a CreateOS provider plugin > - The benefit is that operators can preserve a workspace between runs without keeping its compute active ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13203 and the earlier closed #13096. This continues the CreateOS contribution from @bhautikchudasama and @ashwaq06. The branch preserves the original implementation commit. Thank you to both contributors. When squash-merging, preserve the original author's credit in the squash commit body: ```text Co-Authored-By: bhautikchudasama <BhautikChudasama@users.noreply.github.com> ``` The original fork rejects maintainer pushes. This branch includes the merge-conflict resolution and review fixes. The request is described below using `adapter_request.yml`. **Agent or provider** CreateOS sandbox API (https://api.sb.createos.sh). **Why this adapter is useful** CreateOS can pause a sandbox and resume it by ID. The workspace survives the pause. This adds a reusable-lease option to the existing sandbox provider system. **How the agent is invoked** Build and install the local plugin as described in its README. Open Instance Settings, then Environments. Select the `createos` driver. Supply an API key and shape. The driver then supplies sandbox leases for agent runs. **Are you willing to implement it?** Yes. This pull request is the implementation. ## What Changed - Adds the `createos` sandbox provider under `packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/createos`. - Calls the CreateOS HTTP API directly. The package adds no vendor SDK. - Implements the environment lifecycle hooks, incremental process output, and binary workspace sync. - Registers the optional bundled provider and its trusted host credential fallback. The fallback is limited to the official API origin; custom endpoints require an explicit key. - Lists the package in the release manifest with `publishFromCi: false` until its first npm publish is bootstrapped. - Waits through delayed pause/resume state updates without duplicate action requests. - Cancels queued API requests promptly while preserving request spacing. - Uses direct CLI invocation in the setup guide so paths and IDs are passed without an extra shell expansion. - Includes current master and retains its existing Git-subfolder containment fix. ## Demo Fresh setup and a run against a CreateOS sandbox. https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/e71b9e06-c006-4fb9-b847-52dfd68f6110 https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/43b5ac75-66bd-4f76-8563-67e4c7759084 ## Verification All 25 jobs in [CI run 34884260542](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34884260542) passed at commit `f8d0997677024b784fdadf9d44a84c01cb4e813c`, including typecheck, build, native runner verification, server and workspace tests, browser tests, and the canary release dry run. Greptile reviewed the same commit at 5/5 with no unresolved review threads. GitHub reports no merge conflicts. The remaining merge gate is code-owner approval for the new `package.json`, as required by `.github/CODEOWNERS` and the `master` ruleset. Reviewers have been requested automatically. Local checks passed: - Provider: `pnpm typecheck`, `pnpm test` (52 passed, one live smoke skipped), and `pnpm build`. - Host: focused credential and bundled-plugin tests (17 passed), plus CLI invocation safety (39 passed). - Release: package manifest check and release policy tests (18 passed). The full local `pnpm test:run` attempt caught the README command issue; its focused rerun now passes. The full local run stopped after its general-server group: 7,804 tests passed, with unrelated embedded PostgreSQL startup failures and 10 failures in unchanged runtime-skill-cache tests (`EACCES` on directory rename on macOS). It did not reach the later test groups. Local `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` reach the runner package and stop because this machine has no Rust/Cargo installation. The corresponding CI checks passed on provisioned runners, as linked above. The live CreateOS smoke requires explicit provider credentials and was not run during this review. It is available with `CREATEOS_LIVE_TEST=1 pnpm test` in the provider directory. The author supplied the demo links above. ## Risks The provider is opt-in and is not installed by default. It is available through a local-path install or explicit image inclusion. npm publication remains disabled until a maintainer bootstraps the package and enables publishing. Sandbox creation has no idempotency key. An ambiguous create response can leave a resource that requires provider-account inspection. Process tracking is in memory; durable lease recovery belongs to the host. The provider does not advertise guaranteed expiry, interactive login, snapshots, duplex channels, or ingress. Live native-runner qualification remains outside this PR's tested claims. ## Model Used Original provider implementation: human-authored by @bhautikchudasama, as reported in #13203. The original description reports Claude Opus 5 assistance. Review and follow-up fixes: OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex, with code review, editing, and tool execution. The precise runtime model variant 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 (focused checks; full-suite environment limits documented above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: bhautikchudasama <bhautikrchudasama@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
scotttongandClaude Fable 5.1
|
dffc2b3ca1 |
fix(claude-local): skip expired credentials file when reading the Claude token (#13505)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents on the Claude Local adapter run on a local Claude Code
subscription. A user connects that subscription from Agent → Harness /
Runtime → "Connect account".
> - The server verifies the login with `readClaudeToken` in
`packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/quota.ts`. It reads
`~/.claude/.credentials.json` first and consults the macOS Keychain only
when no file is present.
> - On macOS the Claude CLI refreshes the Keychain item, not the file. A
leftover credentials file keeps an expired token forever, and the reader
ignores `claudeAiOauth.expiresAt`.
> - The stale file shadows the live Keychain login. The usage check
fails and the user sees "Could not verify the local subscription"
although `claude auth status` reports a valid login. Running `claude
auth login` again does not help.
> - This pull request skips a credentials file whose token has expired,
so the reader falls through to the Keychain or returns null.
> - The benefit is that a valid local Claude login connects on the first
try, and a dead token is never sent upstream.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public issue exists for this bug. Description follows
`bug_report.yml`.
### What happened?
Agent → Harness / Runtime → "Connect account" → Claude (Subscription) →
Connect failed with:
> Could not verify the local subscription. Run claude auth login in a
terminal on the machine running Paperclip, then try Connect again.
`claude auth status` on the same machine reported `loggedIn: true`,
`authMethod: claude.ai`, `subscriptionType: max`. The Keychain item
`Claude Code-credentials` held a fresh token. `POST
/api/companies/:id/ai-connections/local/check` returned
`{"status":"sign_in_required"}`.
A leftover `~/.claude/.credentials.json` (written weeks earlier) held an
access token that expired the same day it was written. `readClaudeToken`
returned that token. `fetchClaudeQuota` got a non-OK response from
`/api/oauth/usage`, and the route threw the generic 422.
### Expected behavior
An expired credentials file must not block a valid login. The reader
skips the dead token and falls through to the Keychain. Connect
succeeds.
### Steps to reproduce
1. On macOS, sign in with `claude auth login` (credentials land in the
Keychain).
2. Place a `~/.claude/.credentials.json` with
`claudeAiOauth.accessToken` set and `claudeAiOauth.expiresAt` in the
past.
3. Open an agent → Harness / Runtime → Connect account → Claude
(Subscription) → Connect.
4. Before this change: the "Could not verify the local subscription"
error appears. After: the connection is created.
### Agent adapter(s) involved
Claude Code (`@paperclipai/adapter-claude-local`)
### Operating system
macOS (Keychain-backed credentials). On Linux the file is the live
store; an expired file token now returns null instead of a failing
request, so the user-facing message is unchanged.
## What Changed
- `packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/quota.ts`:
`parseClaudeCredential` now returns the token plus `expiresAt` (epoch
ms) when the file records one. `readClaudeTokenFromFile` returns `null`
for a token whose `expiresAt` is in the past, so `readClaudeToken` moves
on to the next candidate (second file name, then Keychain when
`allowKeychain` is set). Files without an `expiresAt` keep the old
behavior. `parseClaudeCredentialToken` (used for the Keychain payload)
is unchanged in behavior.
- `packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/quota-keychain.test.ts`:
three new cases — expired file falls through to Keychain; expired file
with no Keychain access returns `null`; a file with no expiry is still
accepted.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-claude-local exec vitest run
src/server/quota-keychain.test.ts` → 7 passed (4 existing + 3 new).
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-claude-local exec tsc --noEmit` →
clean.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/local-ai-credentials.test.ts` → 9 passed.
- Manual, on the affected machine: with the stale file in place, `POST
/api/companies/:id/ai-connections/local/check` (provider `anthropic`,
method `subscription`) returned `sign_in_required`; with the stale file
removed it returned `ready`. This change makes the first case behave
like the second without touching the file.
## Risks
- Low risk. The only behavior change is for a credentials file that
carries a numeric `expiresAt` in the past. Such a token is already
rejected upstream, so the change removes a guaranteed failure rather
than a working path.
- Clock skew: a machine clock that runs ahead of real time could treat a
token as expired slightly early. The fall-through then reads the
Keychain (macOS) or returns null, which triggers the same "sign in"
message the user already sees for an expired token.
- Keychain payloads are not expiry-checked in this PR. The CLI refreshes
that item itself, and `getQuotaWindows` already falls back to the CLI
`/usage` probe when the OAuth call fails.
## Model Used
- Claude — `claude-fable-5-1` (Claude Fable 5.1) via Claude Code, with
extended thinking and tool use (shell, file edit). Root cause found by
reproducing the server's read path against the local credential file and
Keychain.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
v2026.916.0
beta/v2026.916.0-beta.0
nightly/v2026.916.0-nightly.0
canary/v2026.915.0-canary.11
|
||
|
Devin Foley
|
bfb4ceabbb |
perf(release): wait for npm registry visibility of all packages concurrently (#13495)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The release system publishes ~33 public npm packages per release across the canary, nightly, beta, and stable channels > - `scripts/release.sh` publishes them strictly sequentially: publish one package, poll npm until that version is registry-visible, then start the next > - npm accepts a publish in seconds, but registry packument propagation can lag minutes per package (the CI budget was raised to 30 minutes per package after two aborted releases), so the total publish time is the sum of every package's lag — about two hours on a bad npm day, paid by every channel run including every canary on every master push > - This pull request keeps the publishes sequential but runs all the registry visibility polls concurrently once every publish is accepted > - The benefit is that the wall-clock cost of npm propagation drops from the sum of all packages' lag to the single slowest package's lag, with every existing safety property preserved ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No existing issue. Description follows the enhancement template: **What existing behavior does this improve?** The npm publish step of `scripts/release.sh` (Step 5), used by every release channel. **Subsystem affected** Release tooling (`scripts/release.sh`, `scripts/release-lib.sh`). **Current behavior** Packages publish one at a time, and after each publish the script polls npm until that package's version is visible in the registry packument before publishing the next. With per-package propagation lag of minutes (observed up to ~15 minutes; per-package CI budget is 30 minutes), the full 33-package set takes up to ~2 hours of mostly idle waiting. **Proposed behavior** Phase 1 publishes every package sequentially exactly as today (a rejected publish still aborts the batch immediately with exact attribution). Phase 2 then polls registry visibility for all packages concurrently. Each package keeps its own `NPM_PUBLISH_VERIFY_ATTEMPTS` × `NPM_PUBLISH_VERIFY_DELAY_SECONDS` budget, and any version that never becomes visible still hard-fails the release, now naming every straggler. **Reason and benefit** Total publish wait becomes the slowest single package's lag instead of the sum of all lags — typically minutes instead of hours. This shortens every canary, nightly, beta, and stable run and reduces exposure to job timeouts during npm slowdowns. **Breaking changes** None. Dry-run output is byte-identical in structure, dist-tags are still applied at publish time (`--tag`), the Sigstore TLOG duplicate-recovery path is untouched, and the later dist-tag integrity check (`wait_for_release_registry_state`) is unchanged. ## What Changed - `scripts/release-lib.sh`: replaced `publish_package_to_npm_and_wait` with `wait_for_npm_package_versions`, which takes the package tuple list and polls every package's visibility in background subshells, each reusing the existing `wait_for_npm_package_version` poll (same per-package budget), then reports per-package success or fails naming all stragglers - `scripts/release.sh` Step 5: the publish loop calls `publish_package_to_npm` only (sequential, fail-fast on a rejected publish), followed by one call to `wait_for_npm_package_versions` for the whole set; Step 6's recap line updated to match - `scripts/release-lib.test.mjs`: the registry-visibility and workflow-budget tests now drive the new function (same assertions on `npm view` counts, virtual sleeps, and the fail-closed message, which now names the straggler); a new cross-visibility test proves concurrency — two fake packages that each become visible only after the other has been polled can only converge when polled in parallel, so the test fails if the waits ever serialize again Safety analysis for the ordering change: nothing in the publish loop resolves sibling packages from the registry. `prepare-bundled-package.mjs` bundles and patches from the local workspace tree, and the TLOG duplicate-recovery path only queries the package it just published. The only consumer of the "visible before next publish" invariant was the release script's own final verification, which still runs against the full set. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/release-lib.test.mjs` — 15 tests pass, including the new concurrency proof and the existing 15-minute-20-second budget tolerance test against the new function - `npm run test:release-registry` — full lane, 140 tests pass - `bash -n` on both scripts; `shellcheck` reports no findings beyond the three pre-existing ones on master (verified by comparing counts against `origin/master` copies) - A real-release exercise happens on the next master push: every canary run executes this exact path ## Risks - Low. The failure mode most worth watching is a release where some packages become visible and others never do: previously the run stopped at the first invisible package with later packages unpublished; now all packages are accepted before visibility is enforced, and the run fails naming every straggler. Recovery is identical in both worlds (the next attempt derives a new version number), and the accepted-but-lagging packages carry the correct dist-tag either way. - Publish jobs run the source commit's copy of `release.sh`, so this change takes effect for a given channel only once its source commit includes this merge — promoted nightlies/betas cut from older commits keep the old sequential behavior until their trains catch up. ## Model Used Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), extended thinking with tool use (Claude Code). ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [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 mergecanary/v2026.915.0-canary.10 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
669bd0e7a9 |
fix(ui): show progress and verify subscriptions during onboarding (#13499)
Automatically verify detected Claude and Codex subscriptions during initial onboarding. Show connection progress, support retries, and ignore stale results after navigation. Prefer the personal default subscription while preserving the later create-agent chooser. Allow Enter to advance from the agent name field. Add regression tests and production-component Storybook coverage. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9adeabb590 |
fix(connections): unblock personal MCP auth discovery (#13497)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Connections let people give agents access to external tools. > - A personal connection needs the current user's authorization. > - A new MCP URL must be probed before Paperclip can discover its sign-in method. > - Requiring a personal grant before that probe prevents sign-in from starting. > - This pull request permits the initial probe for a creator-owned draft with no credentials. > - People can complete personal setup while later requests retain authorization checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Connecting an unknown MCP URL with "Just me" failed with HTTP 502 and "This connection needs the current user's authorization". Paperclip checked for a personal grant before contacting the provider. The health wrapper also changed the expected authorization error into a server error. **Expected behavior** Discover OAuth and start browser sign-in. Create a personal grant after consent. For a public endpoint, discover its tools and create the empty personal grant after a successful probe. Keep missing authorization on later health checks as HTTP 422. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Add an unknown remote MCP URL with no saved credentials. 2. Select "Just me". 3. Check the link. Before this fix, the request fails before sign-in or tool discovery. **Paperclip version or commit** The three original regressions fail against `6cfe4acff` with the service fix removed and pass with it restored. **Deployment mode** The defect was reported in production and reproduced in local server tests with isolated PostgreSQL. Related work: Refs #11831. Refs #11144. Searches found no duplicate fix. ## What Changed - Allow an initial credential-free probe only for the creating user's personal draft with unknown authentication and no supplied credentials. - Leave OAuth grant creation to the callback. Create an empty personal grant only after a public probe succeeds. - Preserve the personal grant for URLs that already contain a credential. - Make empty personal grant creation conflict-safe without overwriting a concurrent grant or duplicating its creation audit. - Commit the empty grant and audit atomically. Retain the established public draft identity after a later catalog failure, so a failed retry cannot remove a successful retry's grant. - Run the following catalog/default-profile step in its own transaction, so failures discard partial catalog, profile, binding, and audit changes without deleting the established identity. - Verify archived personal connections retain their owner: another user is rejected before probing, while the original owner can resume setup. - Preserve `user_authorization_required` and HTTP 422 in health failures. - Cover the connect and OAuth callback routes, real loopback HTTP, credential-bearing URLs, and later health checks. - Document personal setup and the test fixtures. ## Verification - Red/green: the original three tests failed with the exact reported error before the fix and passed after it. - The credential-bearing personal URL regression also failed before its guard was added. - Focused suite: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/generic-mcp-connection.test.ts src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts` passed all 385 tests across the two suites. An earlier run had a socket hang-up in an existing agent-permissions test; the unchanged suite passed on rerun. - The concurrent rollback regression failed before its fix because the successful retry's grant was deleted. It now verifies the grant and draft survive and a later normal health check succeeds. - Database fault injection during profile-entry insertion reproduced partial catalog writes before the transaction fix. The regression now verifies unchanged catalog rows, no partial profile/bindings, a retained grant, and successful retry. - CI's first serialized-server shard 3 attempt failed an existing peer-agent mutation test (the real run-context guard ran despite the test's mock). The test passed in isolation and all 108 tests in that suite passed unchanged locally. The single failed-shard rerun passed without code changes. - Final-commit CI: all 32 applicable checks passed on `639f037987352cab6084c4ebfa5dbf7b0aed6046`, including all 385 affected tests, the full test matrix, browser suite, build, typecheck, release checks, and security checks. The two Storybook-only checks were not applicable and skipped. Greptile is 5/5 with all review threads resolved. [Successful CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35027478353). - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. - `pnpm smoke:mcp-fixtures -- --require-paperclip` passed. - `pnpm build` passed. - Full local `pnpm test:run` was attempted: its general-server group finished with 12,372 passed, 4 failed, and 70 skipped tests. The run started before review edits; its two MCP failures used the old cached service (including an insert without the new conflict clause). All 385 focused tests pass on the final code. The other failures were existing workspace-cleanup and runtime-port tests; their unchanged suites passed on rerun (66 passed, and 25 passed/3 skipped). The local command stopped before later groups. The final-commit CI matrix is the full-suite merge gate; this local run is not claimed as green. ## Risks - The initial probe must not become a general authorization bypass. It is restricted to the creating user's draft. Normal health checks retain authorization enforcement. - Public endpoints get a personal grant with no secrets only after they answer successfully. Credential-bearing URLs keep their existing grant. - The concurrent-probe regression seeds the catalog and default profile to isolate grant creation. Existing first-time catalog/profile creation races are outside this change; this does not claim to make the entire setup flow concurrency-safe. - No database migration or UI change is required. OAuth tests use a simulated provider; the public endpoint test uses real loopback HTTP. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6-based assistant for regression tests and PR preparation; a GPT-5-based Codex assistant assisted with the initial implementation. Exact runtime model IDs and context-window sizes are not exposed in this session. Both used reasoning, repository tools, and code execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.915.0-canary.9 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
544c3476a8 |
feat(server): wrap a bare Cloud UI snippet body in a <script> element (#13496)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - A Cloud-managed instance injects an operator-owned HTML snippet before `</body>` through `injectCloudUiSnippet`. > - The Cloud control plane delivers that snippet to each instance as an environment variable through a provider API. > - The provider edge firewall now base64-decodes the request payload and blocks any value whose decoded form contains a `<script` marker. > - A working snippet needs a script tag, so every delivery is now blocked and the operator cannot ship the snippet at all. > - This pull request treats a resolved value that does not start with `<` as a bare script body and wraps it in a `<script>` element at injection time. > - The benefit is that the operator can deliver a tag-free body that the firewall passes, and the instance restores the script element on the page. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public issue exists. The problem is described below. Related PRs (searched the PR list; none duplicate this change): - Refs #13168 — added `injectCloudUiSnippet`, the mechanism this extends. - Refs #13245 — added the base64 `_B64` path on the assumption that base64 clears provider WAFs. That assumption no longer holds; this PR is the successor. - Refs #13441 — the in-product feedback approach that the Cloud-owned snippet replaced (closed). **What happened?** `injectCloudUiSnippet` injects `PAPERCLIP_CLOUD_UI_SNIPPET` (or the base64 `_B64` form) verbatim before `</body>`. A working value must therefore contain a `<script>` tag. The Cloud control plane delivers this value as an environment variable through a provider API that sits behind an edge firewall. The firewall now base64-decodes the payload and rejects any value whose decoded form contains `<script`. The delivery request fails, so the snippet cannot reach the instance. **Expected behavior** The operator can deliver the snippet through the provider API, and the instance runs it. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Build a snippet that contains a `<script>` element. 2. Deliver it to a Cloud instance through the provider variable API, in plain or base64 form. 3. The firewall rejects the request. The instance never receives the snippet. ## What Changed - `injectCloudUiSnippet` now wraps a resolved value that does not start with `<` in a `<script>...</script>` element. A value that already looks like markup is injected byte-for-byte, so existing full-`<script>` snippets are unchanged. - Added two unit tests: one for the wrap path (plain and base64), one that confirms `$&`-style replacement tokens in the body survive the wrap. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run src/__tests__/cloud-ui-snippet.test.ts` — 17 pass. - `pnpm exec vitest run src/__tests__/static-index-html.test.ts` — 2 pass. - Confirmed the changed file has no type errors. The full `pnpm run typecheck` needs the Rust runner toolchain (`cargo`), which is absent on this machine; CI runs it in full. - Verified out of band that a tag-free body clears the provider firewall and wraps into valid, executable standalone JavaScript with no premature `</script>` close. ## Risks Low risk. The change adds a branch that only affects values that do not start with `<` — previously injected as inert text, never as a running script. Values that start with `<` keep their exact bytes. The content is trusted operator HTML, consistent with the existing contract. Roll back by reverting this commit. ## Model Used Claude — `claude-fable-5` (Fable 5), extended thinking, with tool use and code execution in Claude Code. A human author reviewed and verified the change 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 - [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9cfa7fd2d1 |
fix(ui): share compact live and saved activity across runners (#13421)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and inspect their work. > - Task threads show live activity and saved transcripts from several runners. > - Legacy runs used a separate activity renderer that expanded tool cards as commands arrived. > - A compact live row makes ongoing work easier to follow. > - This PR shares the native runner activity group across live and saved legacy turns. > - Both paths now use the same labels, icon gutter, animation, and history controls. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: Refs #13255, which introduced rolling native-runner activity groups. **What happened?** During a legacy CLI run, each new command added an expanded tool card under an activity heading. The original legacy parity story rendered a completed turn, so it did not exercise this live path. **Expected behavior** Show one current activity line per commentary group. Roll that line forward when a new activity starts. Keep tool icons aligned on the left, use friendly labels, and show history only when expanded. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a task with the Codex local adapter using the CLI engine. 2. Ask it to read two files in separate tool calls and run a test command. 3. Watch the activity feed while the run is active, then expand its history. **Paperclip version or commit** The live behavior was reproduced on bdee5ebb21b2d09280e49c88bc329435da1b07c8. This update includes both live and saved rendering fixes. **Deployment mode** Built from source with the local test-drive command and a real Codex CLI agent. ## What Changed - Use `TaskChatRunnerActivityGroup` for both saved legacy phases and `TaskChatLiveTail`. - Align the legacy Working spinner with the shared activity icon gutter. - Cover streamed reasoning updates, successive commands, image labels, hidden details, and explicit history expansion in tests. - Feed raw legacy transcript events through the real adapter and live renderer in Storybook. Add live, expanded, narrow, light, and completed stories with the final reply preserved. ## Verification - Passed 195 targeted tests covering the live tail, status pill, shared activity group, native turn, and full task thread. - Passed UI typechecking, token gates, UI build, and Storybook build before submission. - Observed a real Codex CLI run while it read separate files and ran tests. The current activity stayed at one 32-pixel row without an accumulated tool list; the spinner and activity icon centers aligned. - Compared native and legacy Storybooks: identical rolling animation, fixed height, persistent expansion, truncated long labels, and correct light and completed states. - Full repository `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed after replaying the branch on current master, including the Rust runner. The full `pnpm test:run` suite is still running. ## Risks - Legacy activity now starts collapsed. Users can expand each group and each row to inspect the same transcript details. - Live runtime request cards must retain their timeline positions. Existing task-thread and native-runner regression tests cover this boundary. - No API, database, or transcript format changes. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex for the live-path fix, tests, and browser verification. Capabilities used: reasoning, tool use, local code execution, and image inspection. The exact deployment ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. - The original saved-turn change recorded OpenAI Codex with GPT-5.6; its exact variant and context size were not recorded. ## 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d49f168381 |
fix: publish sandbox files on legacy and native runners (#13493)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents must publish generated files so users can inspect their results after a sandbox stops. > - Legacy sandbox bridges blocked attachment listing and could not carry multipart binary uploads through the queue transport. > - The native runner has a separate verified file registration path that needs the same durable result. > - This pull request repairs legacy binary transport, makes native download receipts explicit, and reveals new outputs in the task Artifacts tab. > - Users can open generated files from either runner without a transport flag change. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13355 for the existing native file publication path. Related filename fixes: #2615 and #4788. Related sandbox persistence work: #13376. This change repairs attachment delivery through the existing API; it does not add workspace persistence. **What happened?** The upload helper first lists task attachments to avoid duplicates. Both legacy bridge allowlists rejected that GET request with 403. A direct multipart upload also failed: the queue bridge accepted only JSON, excluded attachment uploads, and converted bytes to UTF-8 text. Enabling HTTP/2 alone did not fix the missing listing route. These failures occurred before attachment storage. **Expected behavior** Both runners can publish a workspace file, register its work product, bind it to a response, and return a working download. The file stays accessible after sandbox deletion. A new output opens the task Artifacts tab. The agent receives accurate errors and decides how to retry or report a failure. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run a legacy agent in Daytona with the duplex bridge disabled. 2. Invoke the bundled upload helper with Bash on a PNG or PDF. 3. Repeat with the duplex bridge enabled. 4. Register the same file through the native runner with generic API tools disabled. 5. Retry registration, delete the sandbox, and compare the downloaded bytes with the original file. **Paperclip version or commit** The failing baseline was `f2c5e54dc`. This branch is rebased onto `6cfe4acff`. **Deployment mode** Source checkout with a local API and real isolated Daytona sandboxes. ## What Changed - Allow authenticated attachment listing, upload, and content download through both legacy bridge transports. - Add optional base64 body encoding to queue envelopes. Preserve the existing UTF-8 contract when the encoding field is absent. Decode binary bodies before forwarding them. - Preserve multipart headers. Bound raw bytes, encoded envelopes, and in-flight reservations. Retain timeout and uncertain-write behavior. - Preserve helper deduplication and return structured uncertain-write failures. Document explicit Bash invocation in live skills. - Add attachment IDs and content/download paths to native registration receipts. Reuse verified local and remote file reads, attachment storage, work-product registration, and response binding. - Preserve Unicode upload filenames and provide a valid Content-Disposition header. - Open the task Artifacts tab when new stored outputs arrive, including a closed desktop panel or mobile drawer. Deduplicate upload and registration events by object ID. Preserve manual selection on refetches, edits, and panel remounts. - Remove task artifact filters, the company Artifacts footer link, and the unassigned group heading and timestamp. ### Screenshot  This is the local display fixture. The image was generated separately and published through the attachment and work-product APIs. ## Verification - Post-rebase `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. - The post-rebase local `pnpm test:run` passed 12,369 tests before one existing conversation reset test timed out; all 33 tests in that suite pass when rerun with isolated test configuration. The aggregate command stopped before its remaining groups. GitHub runs the complete suite in separate shards. - All [GitHub verification checks](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35017893350) pass on `b66ac276dd3d5fc738a22ecea783400106a494d4`: 32 successful checks and two configured skips. The native-session recovery assertion initially raced its fire-and-forget Sentry report; all 13 tests pass locally, and the same-commit CI rerun passes all 170 suites (3,079 tests). - Live post-rebase Daytona: all three file-delivery tests pass. They cover the real Bash helper with the queue bridge, the helper with HTTP/2, and native `register_deliverable` with generic API tools disabled. - Daytona cases cover PNG/PDF bytes, spaced and Unicode names, duplicate registration, response binding, authorization controls, and byte-for-byte downloads after sandbox deletion. - Local focused coverage includes transfer bounds, malformed encoding, interrupted transfers, remote path containment, and native file verification. The attachment route suite passes all 32 tests, including an eight-case filename-header matrix for Unicode and special characters, inline and forced downloads, and full and partial responses. - Browser verification confirms image previews, persisted downloads, automatic Artifacts selection, and preserved manual selection after edits and reloads. Desktop/mobile component coverage passes. The latest UI cleanup passes its 10 affected tests and token gates. - Coverage limit: the Daytona tests call the real helper and native registration path directly. They do not replay a complete model-led image-generation task through the browser. Live command (requires a configured Daytona credential): ```sh PAPERCLIP_FILE_DELIVERY_DAYTONA=1 pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/file-delivery-bridges.test.ts ``` ## Risks - Binary queue bodies use more memory because base64 adds encoding overhead. Transfer and process limits must remain aligned. - An interrupted write can have an unknown result. The bridge reports this state and preserves stable retry identities. - New artifacts intentionally change the active task tab. Existing history and repeated updates must not take focus again. - Transport flag defaults, server authorization, frozen skill snapshots, and completion policies remain unchanged. No schema migration is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser testing. 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>canary/v2026.915.0-canary.8 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
6cfe4acff7 |
fix: preserve README images in npm package (#13488)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Its CLI is published as the paperclipai npm package, with the root README shown on the package page > - The root README uses repository-relative image paths so images render correctly on GitHub > - npm resolves those paths under the package repository directory, which is cli, so the image requests point to missing cli/doc/assets files > - This pull request prepares the generated npm README by converting only image src and srcset asset paths to stable raw GitHub URLs > - The benefit is that the same source README remains correct on GitHub and the published npm README displays its images ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Where is the issue?** The issue is in the root README image assets and the npm packaging step in scripts/build-npm.sh. The affected public page is https://www.npmjs.com/package/paperclipai. **What's wrong?** The npm build copies README.md into cli/ before publishing. npm resolves relative image paths beneath the package repository directory, so doc/assets/banner.jpg becomes cli/doc/assets/banner.jpg. Those files do not exist, and the images render as broken on npm. **Suggested fix** Keep the root README paths relative for GitHub. Rewrite repository-relative image paths only in the generated npm README copy to absolute raw.githubusercontent.com URLs. ## What Changed - Added a small npm README preparation script that rewrites relative image src and srcset asset paths. - Updated scripts/build-npm.sh to use the preparation step when generating the npm package README. - Added a regression test for src, srcset, immutable refs, absolute URLs, and non-image Markdown links. - Pinned release-build image URLs to the source commit, while preserving tarball builds by passing their known source refs. ## Verification - Passed: node --test scripts/prepare-npm-readme.test.mjs - Passed: bash -n scripts/build-npm.sh scripts/e2e-install-lifecycle.sh scripts/e2e-update-migrations.sh - Passed: focused README and E2E migration harness tests - Passed: git diff origin/master...HEAD --check - Generated README asset URLs were checked against raw GitHub and all seven returned HTTP 200. ## Risks Low risk. The change affects only the temporary README generated for npm packaging. It does not change the GitHub README or runtime code. The generated npm README depends on the public raw GitHub asset URLs remaining available. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. Tool-enabled repository inspection, code execution, browser verification, and git/GitHub operations were used. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with Fixes: # / Closes: # / Refs: # OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub #NNN / github.com/paperclipai/paperclip URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. docs/... or fix/...) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented 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> |
||
|
Devin Foleyandgithub-actions[bot]
|
081006bee4 |
docs(release): curate stable notes for v2026.915.0 (#13487)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The release system publishes canary, nightly, beta, and stable channels; a stable promotion publishes its release notes as the GitHub Release body > - At beta publish time the workflow auto-drafts a raw commit-log skeleton on this branch (`releases/beta/v2026.915.0-beta.0.md`) for humans to edit > - The skeleton is a 1,800-line commit dump; stable `v2026.915.0` cannot ship user-facing notes in that form > - This pull request replaces the skeleton with the curated changelog for the `v2026.915.0` promotion: overview, breaking changes, highlights, fixes, upgrade guide, and contributor credits for the 483-commit range since `v2026.831.1` > - The benefit is that the stable promotion reads finished, accurate notes from master and publishes them as the release body ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13403, #13247, #13248, #13268, #13256, #13038, #13299 — the headline features this changelog describes. The notes-drafting flow itself (skeleton branch at beta publish, stable promotion reading the file from master, post-ship canonicalization) is the standing release process; this PR is the curation step it expects. ## What Changed - Replaced the auto-drafted skeleton in `releases/beta/v2026.915.0-beta.0.md` with the curated release notes for stable `v2026.915.0` (promoted from beta `2026.915.0-beta.0`, source `667c79ded`) - Sections: overview, Breaking Changes (5), Highlights (Connections train leads), Improvements, Fixes, Upgrade Guide (migrations `0231`–`0279`, new env vars, removed API surface), Contributors ## Verification - Every PR link and claim was checked against the actual commit range `dbf052577..667c79ded` (the same range the skeleton header names) - Migration list enumerated from `git log --diff-filter=A` over that range; only `0231` and `0236` discard data, called out as such - New environment variables verified in code (`server/src/config.ts`): announcement flags (default on), split Sentry DSNs with legacy fallback, token-broker allowed hosts, cwd `.env` opt-out - Contributor list built from commit authors plus co-author trailers; core maintainers excluded per release-notes convention - Docs-only change: no code paths, no tests to add ## Risks - Low risk: documentation only. The stable promotion reads this file from master at dispatch time; if wording needs a follow-up after merge, the promotion pins the master revision it resolved, so edits must land before the stable dispatch - The file is renamed to `releases/v2026.915.0.md` by the post-ship canonicalization step, as with previous promotions ## Model Used Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), extended thinking with tool use (Claude Code). The commit-range analysis and draft were produced by a subagent on the same model and human-review-style checked against the range before commit. ## 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: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
f4cdc7b231 |
fix: recover transient workspace bootstrap scans (#13481)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The control plane prepares task workspaces before it starts an agent. > - Workspace preparation reads Git state so it can preserve edits and exclude private files. > - A failed scan was treated as a non-Git folder and lost its actual failure code. > - The resulting generic setup failure could not recover, even when the cause was temporary. > - This pull request keeps the cause and uses the existing bounded retry schedule before provider startup. > - Tasks can recover without human intervention, while permanent failures and exhausted retries stop with useful guidance. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A Git scan error during managed repository preparation became `Configured repository folder is not a Git checkout`, followed by generic `setup_failed`. The agent never started. Generic recovery could not distinguish a temporary timeout from a bad workspace configuration. **Expected behavior** Keep the closed scan error code. Retry temporary timeouts and queue saturation under the existing shared budget. Preserve edits, exclusions, ownership, and pause gates. Stop permanent failures and exhausted retries with a specific explanation. Do not replay historical generic setup failures. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Configure a task project with a local Git source that must be copied into its managed repositories. 2. Make the ignored-file scan exceed its timeout before the agent starts. 3. Before this fix, the snapshot returns null and the run ends as non-retryable `setup_failed`. 4. Use the disposable browser fixture in `tests/e2e/workspace-bootstrap/README.md` to inject real timeouts and test the full recovery path. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced against `4510bf7c9e2fcbeb043445850928b5dcb79908ca`. **Deployment mode** Built from source. The defect is in core workspace setup, not a specific model provider. Related work: Refs #13442 (managed repository preparation), Refs #11572 (bounded Git scheduler), Refs #12997 (separate adapter startup retry work), Refs #13469 (separate terminal-workspace scan performance work). ## What Changed - Return the non-Git fallback only for repository discovery. Propagate failed scans of a confirmed repository. - Replace full ignored status output with an ignored-only directory listing. Preserve NUL-delimited paths and exclusions. - Preserve typed, sanitized scan errors through workspace preparation and persist pre-provider failure details. - Retry only timeouts and queue saturation, using the existing durable two-retry budget and issue gates. Prevent generic recovery from adding another budget. - Show workspace-specific failure copy and actionable exhausted-recovery notices. - Add red-green unit tests, real-database restart and retry-boundary tests, and opt-in browser acceptance fixtures with real Git subprocess timeouts. - Document the recovery contract and browser verification procedure. ## Verification - Red: injected scan failures returned null instead of rejecting; setup lost the timeout code; task-thread and recovery notices had generic copy. - Green: 119 focused adapter/backend tests, 20 recovery-boundary tests, and 136 task-thread tests. - `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed. - `pnpm build` — passed on the final production code. - `pnpm check:token-gates` — passed. - The initial local `pnpm test:run` overlapped source edits and was interrupted after two late-added assertions saw pre-fix behavior; it is not counted as a green full run. A fresh final-head run passed all 229 tests across the six affected adapter/backend/UI suites. The clean latest-head CI full test matrix passed: all five general-server shards, all five serialized-server shards, and all three general-workspace shards. - Latest-head CI also passed all three browser shards and their aggregate gate, typecheck and release registry, build, runner verification, canary dry run, policy, Docker context integrity, and security gates. Greptile: 5/5, with the review thread resolved. - Browser: created a task in a disposable instance. A real Git timeout scheduled recovery, the next run completed through the run-scoped API without manual Retry, and Done survived reload. The deterministic process worker checked preserved source edits and excluded private files; no model calls were made. - `WORKSPACE_BOOTSTRAP_TEST_URL=<disposable-instance-url> pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/e2e/workspace-bootstrap/playwright.config.ts` — 2 passed (3.6 minutes). The persistent case made exactly three failed attempts, never started the worker, showed the cause-specific notice, stayed stopped for another scheduler tick, and retained Blocked after reload. - Extra red-green coverage: 50 recovery tests passed after fixing an exhausted-bootstrap classification that incorrectly implied unknown provider actions. Missing or uncertain evidence still retains the safety hold. - Verified the documented Git executable override during repository seeding. ## Risks - A confirmed repository scan failure now fails closed instead of falling back to directory sync. This prevents unfiltered copying but makes previously hidden errors visible. - Temporary host problems can create up to two additional setup attempts, 30 seconds apart. Permanent scan errors do not auto-retry. Generic recovery cannot reset this budget. - The durable retry path still enforces ownership, pause, and work eligibility. Integration tests cover restart, duplicate promotion, pause, exhaustion, and non-retryable categories. - No schema migration, new runtime setting, new retry budget, production deployment, or historical task replay. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent, with reasoning, repository tools, shell execution, and browser testing. The exact deployment model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.915.0-canary.6 |
||
|
|
cceeb0aa66 |
test(runner): add everyday workflow evaluation harness (#13474)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The native runner must support project work, delegation, hiring, and service access. > - Browser tests exposed lost connection access, rejected helper events, and stalled recovery. > - Some eval failures also came from incorrect fixtures and decision controls. > - This pull request fixes those paths and adds eight everyday workflow stories. > - The tests retain observed failures and verify delivered files independently. > - The benefit is repeatable evidence for common user tasks and their remaining gaps. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related work: #13404 contains earlier workflow fixes. #13300 and #13470 changed the CI contracts used by the harness security tests. Merged companion: [paperclip-evals#22](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-evals/pull/22). **What happened?** Native ACPX sessions did not receive the assigned connection gateway. Codex helper events could arrive before their spawn receipt and fail thread validation. A parent continuation could take a shared workspace before its child retried. A failed native continuation could leave the task status without a clear recovery blocker. The eval harness also confused tool approvals with new connection requests and could reject a valid delegated download. **Expected behavior** Keep assigned gateway access and its approval checks. Verify helper lineage before accepting helper progress. Let a waiting child proceed before automatic parent recovery. Preserve a failed task's recovery ownership. Grade the actual requested workflow and its delivered files. **Steps to reproduce** Run the everyday workflow suite with the native Codex and Claude profiles. Exercise service approval, connection refusal, delegated project work, and teammate reuse. The commands and case requirements are in `tests/runner-e2e/EVERYDAY-WORKFLOWS.md`. Use `pnpm test:runner-recovery` for controlled crash and replacement cases. ## What Changed - Pass the scoped connection gateway binding through the native ACPX host and sidecar. - Recognize Codex helper lineage from parent metadata and spawn receipts. Verify early helper events with `thread/read`. Keep helper events separate from root completion authority. - Guide agents to use persistent hiring, child tasks, dependency records, and a blocked handoff while waiting for a child. - Defer automatic parent recovery while a child has an active execution path in the same shared workspace. Allow parent recovery when the child needs review. - Record Blocked status and recovery evidence when a failed native continuation needs reconciliation, including existing active or escalated incidents. Preserve their owner and retry budget. - Add eight browser-driven workflow cases. Use real decision controls, explicit child feedback delivery, managed hiring credentials, and independent ZIP checks inside a bounded Docker sandbox. Verify sandbox availability before task creation. Record screenshot SHA-256 at capture. - Keep runner crash probes in controlled recovery tests. Preserve the original failure when cleanup also fails. - Display missing accounting and replay revisions as unavailable. Align harness security assertions with the approved CI changes. - Make the channel-rejection browser fixture bind its file after the send captures its payload. This prevents live refresh from removing the file before the simulated race. ## Verification - Full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` passed after merging current master. - Runner E2E typecheck passed. Harness unit tests passed: 216/216. - Wake-queue database tests passed: 55/55. The two added existing-incident tests failed before the fix and pass after it. - Docker artifact calibration passed: 12/12. Host-file and host-loopback isolation tests failed before the fix and pass after it. Read-only delivery and output limits are also verified. - Full `pnpm build` passed. Targeted recovery tests passed: 83/83. - The channel-rejection browser test passed five consecutive runs after fixing the fixture race found in CI. - Local general-server (12,351 tests), UI (6,250), CLI (485), and workspace package groups passed. The monolithic run stopped at an unchanged lock-heartbeat fixture race; the isolated workspace group passed on rerun (shared: 747/747). A separate local serialized run passed 97 files before two socket errors in the unchanged issue-list route suite; that suite passed 15/15 on isolated rerun. These local full commands did not finish uninterrupted; the complete CI matrix below covers the remaining suites. - Final head `0fb293733fe307be7e6667ae8f1364077d0c6455`: **34 successful checks, 2 expected skips**, including every server/workspace shard, browser shard, native runner verification, build, and typecheck. [Final CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34989136700). - Greptile reviewed this exact head at **5/5**; all review threads are resolved. Both Superagent security checks are successful. - ACPX credential-boundary tests passed: 118/118. Superagent accepted the runner/sidecar versus provider-environment trace and cleared its finding. - The latest paid local campaign on source `f6a2fdf7ac2af859826a2ae627ff4125a5478529` passed 22/24 cases: Sol 8/8, Claude 7/8, Mini 7/8. These results predate the merge with current master. - The two remaining failures are in `hire-reuse`: Claude exceeded the attempt deadline during final review; Mini made invalid deliverable tool calls and remained Blocked. - Six Daytona cases were not run because the matching immutable runner image was unavailable. This PR does not claim new remote model results. ## Risks The changes affect connection admission, helper identity, and recovery scheduling. Assigned gateway grants and user approval still govern service calls. The workspace admission gate still exists; the broader folder-sync design is separate work. Provider behavior can still cause the two recorded hiring failures. No database migration is required. Paid cases are opt-in and have bounded attempt deadlines. Project stories now require Docker and the documented pinned Python image on the harness host. ## Model Used OpenAI `gpt-6-astra` performed implementation, diagnosis, and substantive review. OpenAI `gpt-5.6-luna` assisted with verification, PR preparation, and review tracking. Both used repository tools and code execution. Context-window sizes were not recorded. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused checks and isolated reruns; full-run limitations are documented above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: OpenAI GPT-5.6 Luna <noreply@openai.com> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4510bf7c9e |
ci: use code-owner-reviewed master for trusted PR workflow (#13470)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Pull request CI uses a trusted workflow on the AWS runner fleet. > - The caller used a fixed SHA that also needed runner-group admission. > - A mainline pin update left CI queued because the group still allowed older SHAs. > - This pull request calls the trusted workflow on master, which requires code-owner review. > - New merged workflow versions can use the existing master runner-group entry. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #12968. That Dependabot PR proposes another SHA rotation. This change keeps this first-party workflow on master instead. **What happened?** CI run 34975562974 stayed queued because its trusted workflow SHA was absent from the runner-group allowlist. The fleet itself was healthy. **Expected behavior** New reviewed versions of the trusted workflow on master should receive runner access without a separate SHA allowlist update. **Steps to reproduce** Change the caller to a new trusted workflow SHA without adding that SHA to the restricted runner group. Its jobs remain queued. The master reference removes that recurring synchronization step. ## What Changed - Call `paperclipai/paperclip/.github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml@master`. - Exclude this exact first-party workflow from Dependabot updates. - Update the existing E2E shard workflow tests for the master caller contract. - Document the runner-group entry, required code-owner review, and old-reference retention. ## Verification - `actionlint .github/workflows/pr.yml` passed. - `node --test scripts/__tests__/e2e-shard.test.mjs .github/scripts/tests/cloud-runner-routing.test.mjs .github/scripts/tests/pr-runner-rust-cache.test.mjs .github/scripts/tests/pr-dependency-cache.test.mjs` passed: 35 tests. - Parsed Dependabot YAML and checked the exact workflow exclusion. - `git diff --check` passed. - Live GitHub checks confirmed `.github/**` has code owners, CODEOWNERS has no errors, and the active master ruleset requires code-owner review. This covers the trusted workflow, caller, and CODEOWNERS itself. - The approved organization setting now allows `paperclipai/paperclip/.github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml@refs/heads/master`. All previous references and other runner-group settings remain intact. - Full application typecheck, tests, and build were not repeated locally for this workflow-only change. This PR's CI and review are pending. ## Risks New versions of the trusted workflow take effect for new callers after merge to master. Keep code-owner review and master protection enabled. Existing administrator pull-request bypasses remain unchanged. Third-party action pins, runner routing, and infrastructure are unchanged. Older callers still use their SHA pins; their allowed refs remain in place. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex performed implementation and orchestration; its exact runtime variant and context-window size were not exposed. OpenAI `gpt-5.6-luna` with high reasoning inspected workflow assumptions and applied the approved runner-group setting. Both used code and tool access. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.915.0-canary.5 |
||
|
Nicky Leach
|
5b913e7943 |
ci: activate restore-only Rust dependency cache (#13459)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Every change to Paperclip goes through the pull request CI workflow before it merges > - That workflow is split in two on purpose: `pr.yml` is the caller, and it pins `pr-trusted.yml` at an immutable SHA > - The pin means a change to `pr-trusted.yml` on master does nothing until someone advances the pin > - https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13457 added a read-only Rust dependency cache to the `Verify Paperclip Runner` lane, and it is inert for that reason > - This pull request advances the pin, which is the second step of that rollout > - The benefit is that the saving measured in #13457 starts to apply, about 3.9 minutes per run and about 4.7 compute-hours each day ## Linked Issues or Issue Description This pull request is the activation half of a two-step rollout. #13457 merged on 2026-09-15, so this pull request now targets master directly. - Refs https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13457 — added the cache step this pull request activates. Merged as `f97a3f886`. - Refs https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13302 — the previous activation, and the change that introduced the `# Pin:` comment convention this pull request follows - Refs https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13300 — the change #13302 activated, and the current pin target I searched this repository for other pull requests that move this pin. One is open: - Refs https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12968 — an automated bump of the same pin. See Risks. **What existing behavior does this improve?** The pull request CI lane still recompiles the full Rust dependency tree on every run, because the cache step added in #13457 is not yet part of the active CI definition. **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting (multiple of the above). The change touches CI workflow configuration only. It does not change product code. **Current behavior** `.github/workflows/pr.yml` pins `pr-trusted.yml` at `44dde2de`, the squashed commit of #13300. GitHub reads `pr.yml` from the pull request and takes every job from `pr-trusted.yml` at that SHA. A change to `pr-trusted.yml` on master therefore has no effect on any pull request until the pin advances. #13457 is the only change to `pr-trusted.yml` since that pin, and it is currently inert. **Proposed behavior** Advance the pin to the commit that carries the cache step, and update the `# Pin:` comment to name the pull request it activates. **Reason and benefit** The saving measured in #13457 begins to apply. Master's own warm-cache lanes run the same checks in 3.4 minutes against 7.1 minutes cold. The net saving is about 3.9 minutes per run after the 20 second restore, across about 73 runs each day. **Breaking changes** None. The activated change only adds a cache restore. A cache miss reproduces today's behavior exactly. **Additional context** The last five activations all landed on the same day as the change they activated: #13302, #12860, #12810, #12509, and #12464. This pull request follows that convention. #13457 merged today. ## What Changed - Advanced the `uses:` pin in `.github/workflows/pr.yml` from `44dde2de` (#13300) to `f97a3f886`, the squashed merge of #13457. - Updated the `# Pin:` comment to name #13457 and the capability it activates, matching the convention #13302 introduced. The diff is the same two lines every previous activation changed. ## Verification Run the workflow and pin tests: ```bash node --test ./scripts/__tests__/e2e-shard.test.mjs ./scripts/__tests__/run-vitest-stable-shard.test.mjs ./scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs ./scripts/cloud-source-verification.test.mjs '.github/scripts/tests/*.test.mjs' ``` Result: 469 pass, 0 fail. This includes `pr.yml calls the trusted PR workflow at an immutable SHA`, which reads the pinned workflow out of git and asserts on its content. Confirm the pin resolves to a workflow that contains the cache step: ```bash git show $(grep -oE '[0-9a-f]{40}' .github/workflows/pr.yml):.github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml | grep -c "Restore Runner Rust dependencies (read only)" ``` This prints `1`. This pull request also verifies itself. GitHub uses the pull request's own `pr.yml` for `pull_request` events, so this run takes its jobs from the newly pinned workflow. The `Verify Paperclip Runner` job in this run is therefore the cached version, running the exact definition this pull request makes active. Check its log for `Cache restored from key: v0-rust-release-runner-v1-Linux-x64-...`, confirm cargo prints no `Compiling` lines for third-party crates, and compare the job duration against the 15.0 minute baseline recorded in #13457. ## Risks - **An automated pin bump is open and may race this.** #12968 moves the same pin. It is a no-op today, because `pr-trusted.yml` is identical between the two SHAs. If it rebases after #13457 lands, its target moves to a commit that contains the cache step, and merging it would activate the change with a stale `# Pin:` comment that still names #13300. Closing #12968 before merging this avoids the ambiguity. - **The activated change itself is low risk.** It only adds a read-only cache restore. A miss reproduces today's behavior. #13457 records the full risk list. - **The rollback is one commit.** Restoring the previous pin value returns CI to the current definition without touching `pr-trusted.yml`. ## Model Used Claude Opus 5, provider Anthropic, exact model ID `claude-opus-5`, 1M context window. Adaptive thinking was on. I used tool use throughout: `git` to confirm the merge strategy, the pin history, and the squashed merge SHA, the `gh` CLI and the GitHub API to read the repository merge settings and to find the open automated bump, and local `node --test` runs to verify the pin resolves and the guard tests pass. Run through Claude Code. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Note on the unchecked boxes. The CI and Greptile boxes stay unchecked until those checks finish on this pull request. On tests: the existing pin guard in `scripts/__tests__/e2e-shard.test.mjs` already covers this change, so this pull request adds no new test. On documentation: no document describes the pull request CI pin, so there is nothing to update. 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)canary/v2026.915.0-canary.4 |
||
|
Nicky Leach
|
f97a3f886e |
perf(ci): restore master's Rust dependency cache on the PR runner lane (#13457)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Every change to Paperclip goes through the pull request CI workflow before it merges > - One lane of that workflow, `Verify Paperclip Runner`, builds and tests the native Rust runner > - That lane compiles all 313 third-party crates from scratch on every pull request, in two profiles > - Master already builds and stores exactly those compiled crates, but the pull request lane never reads them > - This pull request restores that existing cache on the pull request lane, read-only > - The benefit is about 3.9 minutes less compute per run, or about 4.7 compute-hours each day, with no change to what CI checks ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists for this. The problem follows the enhancement issue template below. Related merged pull requests, found by searching this repository: - Refs https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13194 — created the `release-runner-v1` cache that this pull request reads - Refs https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13300 — established the restore-only dependency cache pattern that this pull request follows - Refs https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13326 — split the post-merge runner job into the `protocol` and `rust` lanes used as the warm-cache baseline below - Refs https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13259 — applied the same caching idea to the post-merge typecheck job I found no open pull request that duplicates this work. **What existing behavior does this improve?** The `Verify Paperclip Runner` job in `.github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml` recompiles the full Rust dependency tree on every pull request. **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting (multiple of the above). The change touches CI workflow configuration only. It does not change product code. **Current behavior** The job has no Rust cache. Its only cache step restores the pnpm store. Each run therefore downloads about 280 crates and compiles all 313 third-party crates twice, once in the `dev` profile and once in the `release` profile. Measured over 12 successful runs on 2026-09-15, the job takes 15.0 minutes on average. The range is 12.1 to 17.4 minutes. | Phase | Mean | Share | |---|---|---| | `check:eval-kernel` | 0.0m | — | | `typecheck:typescript` and protocol manifest | 0.1m | 1% | | `build:rust` — cargo `dev` profile | 1.8m | 12% | | TypeScript tests (`node --test` and vitest, 143 files) | 5.8m | 39% | | `check:replay-goldens` | 0.1m | 1% | | `typecheck:rust` — `cargo fmt` and `cargo check` | 0.9m | 6% | | `test:rust` compile — cargo `release` profile | 4.9m | 33% | | `test:rust` run | 0.8m | 5% | | Parity checks | 0.0m | — | | `check:api-authority` | 0.5m | 3% | Cargo reports the two compiles directly. The `dev` profile takes 1m24s to 1m53s. The `release` profile takes 3m54s to 5m36s. **Proposed behavior** The job restores master's existing Rust dependency cache before it runs the checks. Master already writes this cache. The post-merge `rust` lane in `.github/workflows/release-verify.yml` writes `release-runner-v1`. It also warms both profiles into that entry. The entry is 677MB and lives on `refs/heads/master`. Pull request branches are allowed to read caches from the default branch. The pull request lane restores that entry read-only. Master stays the only writer. A pull request never saves a branch-scoped copy. A pull request never evicts the shared entry. This matches the rule the pnpm store in the same file already follows. **Reason and benefit** Master runs these same checks with a warm cache. That gives a direct measurement of the saving. | Check set | Cold (pull request today) | Warm (master) | Change | |---|---|---|---| | `check:runner` and `check:api-authority` | 7.1m | 3.4m | −3.7m | | `check:eval-kernel` and `check:protocol` | 7.8m | 7.3m | −0.5m | | Cache restore step | — | 20–21s | +0.35m | The net saving is about 3.9 minutes per run, or about 26%. About 73 runs execute this job each day. The daily saving is therefore about 4.7 compute-hours. The protocol side changes very little. Vitest dominates that side, not compilation. The cache should almost always hit. `packages/paperclip-runner/runner/Cargo.lock` changed in 7 of the last 1697 commits on master. A miss costs nothing more than today's behavior. **Breaking changes** None. The change adds two steps to one CI job. It does not change any check, any test, or any product code. **Additional context** No documentation covers pull request CI caching, so this pull request updates no documents. ## What Changed - Added a `Select the pinned Runner Rust toolchain` step to the `verify_paperclip_runner` job in `.github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml`. The step exports `RUSTUP_TOOLCHAIN`. `rust-cache` hashes `rustc -vV` into the cache key, so the key needs the pinned compiler. This lane had no rustup step before, so `rustc` resolved to each runner image's default instead of the pinned 1.97.1. - Made that step tolerate a missing `rustup`. `release-verify.yml` runs on one post-merge fleet image. The gate in this workflow routes to either `ubuntu-latest` or the public pull request fleet. A missing `rustup` now costs the cache. It does not fail the pull request. - Added a `Restore Runner Rust dependencies (read only)` step that uses `Swatinem/rust-cache` with `save-if: false`. - Mirrored every cache key input from the master writer in `release-verify.yml`: the same action SHA, `workspaces`, `shared-key`, `cache-workspace-crates`, and `cache-bin`. Neither side sets `prefix-key`. Any drift causes a silent miss and a full recompile. - Added `.github/scripts/tests/pr-runner-rust-cache.test.mjs`. It asserts key-input parity across the two workflow files, the step order, and the restore-only contract. ## Verification Run the workflow shape tests: ```bash node --test '.github/scripts/tests/*.test.mjs' ``` Result: 413 pass, 0 fail. I also mutation-tested the new assertions. I applied each mutation to the workflow, ran the new test file, then restored the file. All 7 mutations fail the suite: | Mutation | Result | |---|---| | `shared-key` changed to `pr-runner-v1` | Caught | | `save-if` changed to `true` | Caught | | `cache-bin` changed to `true` | Caught | | `rustup show active-toolchain` line deleted | Caught | | `RUSTUP_TOOLCHAIN` export line deleted | Caught | | `working-directory` line deleted | Caught | | `command -v rustup` guard deleted | Caught | To confirm the cache key inputs match the master writer, parse both workflows and compare: ```bash ruby -ryaml -e 'pr=YAML.safe_load(File.read(".github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml"), aliases: true); rv=YAML.safe_load(File.read(".github/workflows/release-verify.yml"), aliases: true); a=pr["jobs"]["verify_paperclip_runner"]["steps"].find{|s| s["uses"].to_s.include?("rust-cache")}; b=rv["jobs"]["verify_paperclip_runner"]["steps"].find{|s| s["uses"].to_s.include?("rust-cache")}; puts a["uses"]==b["uses"]; %w[workspaces shared-key cache-workspace-crates cache-bin].each{|k| puts "#{k}: #{a["with"][k]==b["with"][k]}"}' ``` Every line prints `true`. After the pin advances (see Risks), confirm the cache works in CI. The restore step log must show `Cache restored from key: v0-rust-release-runner-v1-Linux-x64-...`. Cargo must stop printing `Compiling` lines for third-party crates. The job should drop from about 15.0 minutes to about 11.0 minutes. ## Risks Low risk overall. A cache miss produces exactly today's behavior, so the worst case is no improvement. - **This change does nothing until a second pull request lands.** `.github/workflows/pr.yml` pins this reusable workflow by SHA. The file header describes this two-step rollout. A follow-up pull request must bump that pin. That follow-up validates itself, because GitHub uses the pull request's own `pr.yml` for `pull_request` events. - **A key mismatch would silently remove the benefit.** The runner images here may ship a different default `rustc` than the post-merge fleet. The toolchain step pins the compiler to prevent this. The new test guards the remaining key inputs. If the first runs still miss, compare `rustup show` output against a master run. - **A missing `rustup` degrades quietly.** The step prints a GitHub notice and continues. CI stays green and the run is simply uncached. - **No cache poisoning path.** Pull requests only read. `save-if: false` stops any write. GitHub also isolates pull request cache writes from the default branch. - **The cache entry can expire.** GitHub evicts unused entries after 7 days and enforces a repository size limit. Master pushes are frequent, so the entry should stay warm. Eviction only causes a miss. ## Model Used Claude Opus 5, provider Anthropic, exact model ID `claude-opus-5`, 1M context window. Adaptive thinking was on. I used tool use throughout: the `gh` CLI to read 12 job logs and step timings from recent CI runs, the GitHub Actions cache API to read cache entry keys and sizes, `git log` to measure `Cargo.lock` churn, and local `node --test` runs to verify and mutation-test the change. Run through Claude Code. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [ ] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [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 Note on the unchecked boxes. The branch name `claude/paperclip-runner-conditional-81a300` carries a tool-generated suffix, so it does not meet the branch naming rule. I can rename it if you want. The CI and Greptile boxes stay unchecked until those checks finish on this pull request. 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
4cc387f907 |
fix(ci): remove npm propagation from cloud readiness (#13456)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Paperclip Cloud needs a verified image and matching database
migrator before it can deploy a merge.
> - New npm package versions can take minutes to become downloadable
after the package build finishes.
> - The direct producer now publishes signed archives and a complete
dependency lockfile for each master commit.
> - This pull request makes readiness verify those artifacts and removes
the duplicate automatic npm migrator run.
> - Deployment still requires all source checks, exact image identity,
migration compatibility, and pinned dependencies.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs: #13455, #13454, #13192
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The time from a master merge to the `Cloud deployable v1` signal.
**Current behavior**
Readiness polls npm metadata for the new DB and shared versions. An
automatic dispatcher also starts a separate npm-only migrator workflow.
A measured source built its packages at 06:22:41 UTC on 2026-09-15, but
both npm archives were not downloadable until 06:31:56 UTC.
**Proposed behavior**
Wait for the successful exact-source direct producer, verify its signed
manifest and all pinned downloads, and publish readiness only after the
existing source and image jobs pass. Keep manual npm migrators and
branch previews available.
**Reason and benefit**
Remove new-version npm propagation from merge-to-deployable time. The
gain depends on whether image building or source verification finishes
later; it is not a fixed subtraction from every run.
## What Changed
- Require a successful producer from the canonical repository, exact
commit, master ref, expected workflow, and approved event.
- Verify the manifest's GitHub attestation with the hosted GitHub CLI.
Enforce the exact source SHA, master workflow identity, and hosted
runner.
- Download and validate both archives and the complete dependency
lockfile after publication succeeds. Reject invalid signatures,
inaccessible objects, corrupt bytes, and source mismatches.
- Remove automatic npm-only migrator dispatch. Retain manual release and
branch-preview publication.
- Document the cloud feature-switch prerequisite and coordinated
rollback.
## Verification
- `node --test .github/scripts/tests/*.test.mjs`: 405 pass.
- Focused readiness, routing, preview, and artifact tests: 249 pass.
- Workflow lint and `git diff --check`: pass.
- `pnpm test:release-registry`: 139 pass after installing this
worktree's dependencies.
- All latest-head GitHub CI checks passed. Greptile is 5/5 with no
unresolved comments.
- Application source is unchanged. Common-source local typecheck and
build passed. The full local application suite has the documented macOS
read-only-directory rename limitation from #13454 (13 failures in two
unchanged suites); Linux CI is the final application gate.
- Live readiness verification of master
|
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
9ed55f6931 |
fix: allow concurrent agent runs on one OpenAI or xAI subscription connection (#13452)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Paperclip starts local command-line sessions and stores provider credentials through managed connections > - One OpenAI Codex or xAI Grok subscription connection held a credential lease for the full agent run > - A second run then waited for the first run, and concurrent runs could overwrite a newer credential > - The write-back must compare fresh credentials while it holds the row lock > - This pull request removes the run lease, keeps the revocation guard, and bounds Codex timestamps against the host clock > - The benefit is safe concurrent use of one subscription connection with newest-credential selection ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A managed OpenAI Codex or xAI Grok subscription connection held a credential lease for the full agent run. A second run waited for the first run to finish. The write-back gate also rejected any row change before it compared credential freshness. **Expected behavior** Concurrent runs should start on one subscription connection. The server should keep the newest valid credential and reject a credential write after a person revokes the connection. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start two runs that use one OpenAI or xAI subscription connection. 2. Let both provider tools refresh the credential. 3. Finish the runs in either order. 4. Confirm that the newest valid credential remains in the connection. **Paperclip version or commit** `ec25bf1e4a81d1729a6d7276e6a486587cff4a0b` **Deployment mode** Local dev (`pnpm dev`), built from source. **Agent adapter(s) involved** Codex. The server path also covers xAI Grok subscription connections. **Database mode** Embedded PGlite for local development, and external Postgres for deployments. **Access context** Both board and agent runs can use managed connections. **Additional context** The provider command-line tool refreshes credentials inside the sandbox. The server copies the result back after the run. Two long runs can still refresh one token hours apart, so the provider can reject the second refresh. The server cannot observe that provider call. ## What Changed - Remove the full-run credential lease for OpenAI Codex and xAI Grok subscription connections. - Lock and re-read the connection row before credential write-back. - Accept only a strictly newer credential, while keeping the connection revocation guard. - Reject Codex freshness timestamps more than five minutes ahead of the host clock. - Add tests for both completion orders, xAI cleanup, revocation, the Codex time bound, and agent hiring. - Update the connection and run-log documentation. ## Verification - `server/src/__tests__/ai-connections.test.ts` passes with 42 tests. - `packages/adapters/codex-local/src/server/codex-auth-merge-decision.test.ts` covers the five-minute boundary and the one-millisecond overflow. - `packages/adapters/codex-local/src/server/codex-auth-merge.test.ts` passes. - `server/src/__tests__/agent-hire-ai-connections.test.ts` covers OpenAI and Anthropic. - The project type check reports no new error in changed files. - GitHub Actions must pass on this pull request. ## Risks The write-back now permits concurrent runs, so the provider may reject a later refresh when both long runs use one token. The server keeps the revocation guard and rejects future-dated Codex timestamps. No schema change occurs. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. Context window and exact deployment build are not exposed in this run. The model used tool calls, code inspection, and test 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> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
da77a0c28c |
feat(ci): publish immutable cloud migrator artifacts (#13455)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Paperclip Cloud deploys images and a matching database migrator.
> - New migrator versions must currently become available on npm before
cloud can use them.
> - npm can serve package metadata while the named archive still returns
404.
> - This pull request publishes immutable migrator archives and a
complete dependency lockfile through the existing artifact store.
> - Cloud can install these exact packages without waiting for their new
npm versions.
> - This producer change prepares a separate cloud consumer and
readiness cutover.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs: #13454
**What happened?**
A recent master run built both packages by 06:22:41 UTC on 2026-09-15.
Both archives became downloadable from npm at 06:31:56 UTC. Fresh
metadata requests did not remove the delay.
**What did you expect to happen?**
Cloud should be able to install the verified migrator as soon as its
package build and artifact upload finish.
**Steps to reproduce**
Compare package build completion, npm publication, version metadata
availability, and tarball download availability for a fresh full commit
SHA.
**Version**
Master commit `08adcc70d5ec45b7ced9619a3dc10c1d1bec397d`.
## What Changed
- Add a master-only workflow that builds the DB and shared archives
without publication credentials.
- Resolve the dependency lockfile from local archives, then pin those
archives to content-addressed URLs.
- Publish the complete bundle to a separate prefix in the existing
S3/CloudFront artifact store. Write the commit manifest last and verify
public downloads.
- Add a dedicated OIDC role policy. Only canonical master can assume it.
Writes require `If-None-Match: *`; the role cannot overwrite or delete
objects.
- Add source, integrity, lockfile, publication, and real npm install
tests. Document the format and staged rollout.
- Attest the validated manifest with GitHub/Sigstore before S3
publication. The signature binds every package and lockfile hash to the
exact master workflow and source commit.
## Verification
- `node --test scripts/cloud-migrator-artifacts.test.mjs`: 7 tests pass,
including real `npm ci` with an empty cache and no new-version metadata
lookup.
- `pnpm test:release-registry`: 136 tests pass.
- `actionlint .github/workflows/cloud-migrator-artifacts.yml` and `git
diff --check`: pass.
- Ran the workflow's filtered install and package build against the
exact master source. Built and validated the dependency lockfile from
those real archives.
- Latest-head application tests passed, including reruns of two failures
in unchanged application tests. The final CI aggregate passed. The
application source is unchanged. Common-source local typecheck and build
passed; the full local suite has the same documented macOS
read-only-directory rename limitation as #13454 (13 failures in two
unchanged suites).
- The dedicated role and additive bucket read permission are configured.
IAM simulation allows only conditional writes in the intended prefix;
overwrite without the condition, other prefixes, and deletion are
denied.
- Published the verified master
|
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
058c55bf8f |
fix(ci): overlap preview migrator publication waits (#13454)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - Cloud deploys an application image with a migrator from the same
source commit.
> - The migrator consists of the DB package and its matching shared
package.
> - npm can accept a package several minutes before readers can see it.
> - The publisher waits for shared visibility before it submits the DB
package.
> - This change submits both validated packages before polling their
visibility.
> - Their availability delays can then overlap while the final gate
still requires both packages.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Related: #13334. No duplicate open migrator-publication fix was found.
**What happened?**
The cloud migrator publisher waits up to ten minutes for the shared
package before submitting the DB package. The two registry delays
therefore accumulate. A shared visibility timeout can prevent the DB
package from being submitted at all.
**Expected behavior**
Submit both valid packages, then wait for both to pass the existing
exact-source metadata checks. Report which package remains unavailable.
**Steps to reproduce**
Return 404 for shared metadata after npm accepts the shared archive.
Observe that the old publisher never submits the DB archive until shared
becomes visible. The new regression test requires both submissions
before the first visibility sleep.
**Paperclip version**
Base commit
canary/v2026.915.0-canary.3
nightly/v2026.915.0-nightly.3
|
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
c276d3fdc3 |
feat(observability): report terminal run failures to Sentry (#13446)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The server records the state of each agent run. > - Terminal run failures need clear error tracking for operators. > - The server did not report terminal `failed` or `timed_out` transitions to Sentry. > - This pull request reports each genuine terminal failure transition with safe diagnostic data. > - The benefit is faster diagnosis without changing run control flow or exposing credentials. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** The server wrote terminal run failures but did not report them to Sentry. Operators could not see these failures in error tracking. **Expected behavior** The server should report each genuine transition to `failed` or `timed_out` to Sentry. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run an agent task that reaches a terminal failure state. 2. Inspect the Sentry events for the server. 3. Observe that the terminal run failure has no matching Sentry event. **Paperclip version or commit** The change targets the current `master` branch. No public GitHub issue or pull request covers this change. ## What Changed - Add `captureRunFailure()` as a fail-open Sentry entry point. - Add `reportRunFailure()` to filter status, resolve the adapter, redact text, and report the failure. - Call `reportRunFailure()` beside each of the eight terminal status writers. - Report six diagnostic values: the instance host, task identifier, run identifier, error message, error code, and agent adapter. - Group events by error code and agent adapter while keeping the redacted message in the event. - Report only genuine transitions and avoid duplicate finalization events. - Keep Sentry failures outside run control flow. ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run server/src/services/__tests__/run-failure-report.test.ts server/src/__tests__/run-failure-sentry.test.ts server/src/__tests__/native-session-resumption.test.ts` - `pnpm vitest run server/src/services/execution-control-reconciliation.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - The full continuous-integration suite must run on this pull request. ## Risks - The report path can add diagnostic events when Sentry is configured. - The report path returns without action when Sentry is not configured. - Redaction runs before length limits and before the event leaves the process. - The change has no migration and no schema change. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, tool use and code review support. The exact context window and reasoning configuration are not exposed by the 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> |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
08adcc70d5 |
fix(ci): retry transient GitHub reads while waiting for source verification (#13429)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Every commit on master is published as an npm canary, and a canary
is the only thing a nightly, a beta and then a stable can be promoted
from
> - A canary only publishes after the release run confirms that Cloud
readiness passed for that exact commit, which it does by polling the
GitHub Actions API for up to 45 minutes
> - That poll used a read that threw on any non-OK response, so one
gateway error ended the wait immediately
> - The release run then failed and the commit published no canary,
although readiness itself had passed
> - A commit with no canary can never be promoted, so this silently
removes commits from the release path
> - This pull request retries the reads that mean "ask again" and leaves
every real failure fast
> - The benefit is that a transient API error costs a few seconds
instead of a release
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No existing issue. The problem, in the bug report format:
**What happened**
The `Reuse exact-source verification` job failed 12 seconds into a
45-minute wait:
```
Waiting for Cloud source verified v1 for
|
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
667c79ded2 |
fix: prevent retry-exhaustion events from exhausting attention-feed memory (#13451)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Its attention feed shows failed runs whose retry budget is exhausted. > - Startup retention builds this feed before startup completes. > - The feed joins every exhaustion event to the full run context, then removes duplicate runs in JavaScript. > - Recovery can revisit an exhausted run and append the same event again. This multiplies the data loaded into memory. > - This pull request selects one small row per run in PostgreSQL and makes exhaustion writes idempotent. > - Existing duplicate events can stay in the database without multiplying run contexts in server memory. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13367. This fixes the repeated-event allocation path in the retention feed. Other full-feed sources and sweep cadence remain separate concerns. **What happened?** The attention query loaded one full run context for every matching exhaustion event. Deduplication ran only after the driver had loaded those rows. A run with thousands of exhaustion events therefore produced thousands of context copies. The startup retention sweep can exhaust the server heap while reading this result. **Expected behavior** The query should return one row per exhausted run and only the context fields that the feed needs. Repeated checks of the same exhausted retry budget should reuse the original event. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a failed run with a 32 KB context and 2,500 matching exhaustion events. 2. Build the attention feed, including dismissed items, as startup retention does. 3. Inspect the database result before JavaScript feed processing. The old join returns 2,500 copies of the run context. 4. Call bounded retry scheduling repeatedly for a run at its retry limit. The old writer appends another exhaustion event on every call. **Paperclip version or commit** The attention query was introduced by #9380 and is present in stable `v2026.831.1`. The retention caller is also present in that stable release. The later recovery callback added by #13075 provides a repeated path into the exhausted-budget writer. This change is based on `c0fda8fac` after rebasing onto current master. Related PR: [#12162](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12162) changes retention cadence and newer-run suppression queries. This change addresses the exhaustion-event join and duplicate event writes. ## What Changed - Select the newest company-scoped exhaustion event per run with a PostgreSQL `DISTINCT ON` subquery before joining run data. - Project only `issueId` and `taskId` from run context. Preserve JSON types, fallback behavior, run ordering, company filters, and run/agent status filters. - Reuse an exhaustion event for the same run, reason, attempt, and retry limit under the existing run-row lock. Recognize historical events without a migration. - Skip sequence allocation and live publication when a receipt already exists. - Document the run-log behavior and add PostgreSQL regression tests. ## Verification - Focused attention, retry-scheduling, and event-sequencing suites: 72 tests pass on the rebased head `39ce77158`. - The large-history fixture verifies two database result rows under 4 KB, newest-message selection, task-ID fallback, and company/status filtering. This assertion runs before feed deduplication. - Concurrent event tests verify one receipt across two database clients, reuse of historical receipts, distinct reason/attempt/budget keys, and stable event sequences. - Repeated scheduling through a new service instance produces no extra run-log or live events. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsc --noEmit`: passes. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`: pass on the rebased head, including native runner checks. - Greptile: 5/5 on `39ce77158`, with no review threads. - [GitHub CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34929002304): all 25 workflow jobs pass, including all server/workspace test shards, serialized server suites, browser tests, typecheck, build, native-runner verification, and the release dry run. Security checks also pass. The branch has no merge conflicts. - `pnpm test:run`: stopped with unrelated failures. Two chat integration cases passed when rerun separately (2 passed, 993 unselected). Three skill-cache cases failed on both this branch and the unmodified parent commit, with `EACCES` during directory rename. The full suite is not reported as green. ## Risks - No schema migration or data cleanup is required. The query still scans matching event history in PostgreSQL; its result size now scales with exhausted runs. - This does not bound every source in the attention feed or change retention scheduling. - An exhaustion receipt is emitted once per retry decision. Consumers that observed repeated copies will now receive one event. - Native source-event replay handling stays on its existing path. - A deployed application boot has not been verified. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6, used through Codex with reasoning, repository inspection, code editing, and test execution. The runtime does not expose a more specific model snapshot or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run the focused tests locally and they pass (full-suite limitations are documented above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>beta/v2026.915.0-beta.0 nightly/v2026.915.0-nightly.2 canary/v2026.915.0-canary.2 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
c0fda8fac5 |
fix(apps): restore action test picker scrolling and agent eligibility (#13414)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Apps action tests let operators use an agent's permissions. > - The agent picker must scroll inside the test dialog. > - Its body portal sits outside the dialog's scroll boundary and blocks wheel input. > - Admin permission bypasses also skip agent lifecycle checks. > - This PR fixes scrolling and rejects agents that cannot receive assignments. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** The Act as picker does not scroll with the mouse wheel inside an action test dialog. Admins can also see terminated agents. **Expected behavior** The list scrolls normally. Terminated and pending-approval agents are absent. Direct requests cannot test an action as one of those agents. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create enough agents to overflow the list. Terminate one agent. 2. Open a connected app's Permissions tab. Click Test on an action. 3. Open Act as and use the mouse wheel over the list. 4. Check whether the terminated agent appears as an admin. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on master at |
||
|
Nicky LeachandClaude Opus 5
|
b64469e403 |
feat(workspaces): add an operator default for isolated execution workspaces (#13444)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The execution workspace subsystem decides if a task run uses the
shared project checkout or an isolated per-task git worktree
> - The mode comes from the project policy, then the task settings. A
project that stores no policy always falls back to the shared checkout
> - An operator who wants every project to use isolated workspaces must
therefore edit each project one at a time, and must repeat this for each
new project
> - There is no instance-level control, so a fleet operator cannot set
this default at all
> - This pull request adds a managed experimental flag that moves the
default for projects that store no policy of their own
> - The benefit is that an operator sets the workspace default one time,
and every current and future project follows it
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public issue exists. The description follows the feature request
template.
**Subsystem affected**
Execution workspaces. The files are
`server/src/services/execution-workspace-policy.ts` and the run dispatch
path in `server/src/services/heartbeat.ts`.
**Problem or motivation**
`resolveExecutionWorkspaceMode` reads only the project policy, the task
settings, and a legacy field. Its last statement returns
`shared_workspace`. A project that stores no policy always gets the
shared project checkout.
An operator has no way to change this default for many projects at the
same time. The operator must edit each project, and must edit each new
project again later. Tasks in one project therefore share one checkout,
and they run one at a time when the environment driver makes the
scheduler serialize them.
**Proposed solution**
Add the managed experimental flag `enableIsolatedWorkspacesByDefault`.
When the flag is on, a project that stores no policy of its own resolves
as if it selected isolated workspaces. A project that stores a policy
keeps that policy.
The new helper substitutes a project policy. It does not move the last
statement of `resolveExecutionWorkspaceMode`. Two behaviors make this
necessary:
- A task that has no project must keep its current behavior. An isolated
workspace needs a repository to cut a worktree from.
`isUnrunnableWorktreeCombo` blocks an isolated task that has no
`projectId` and no `projectWorkspaceId`. A moved fallback would resolve
isolated for project-less tasks, such as agent chat, and stop them
before dispatch.
- The mode and the strategy must agree.
`buildExecutionWorkspaceAdapterConfig` supplies the default
`git_worktree` strategy only when one layer asserts workspace control. A
moved fallback would leave isolated mode with a `project_primary`
strategy.
**Alternatives considered**
- Change the last statement of `resolveExecutionWorkspaceMode` to
`isolated_workspace`. This is one line, but it changes the default for
every deployment. It is also not gated, so it would apply where isolated
workspaces are off.
- Write the policy to each project row with a script. This does not
cover new projects, and it does not cover new instances.
- Add an instance defaults section to the managed-config document. This
needs a new document key, new validation, and new delivery code. A
boolean flag reuses the delivery machinery that exists today.
**Roadmap alignment**
`ROADMAP.md` does not list execution workspace defaults. This change
adds an operator control to an existing capability. It does not add a
new capability.
**Additional context**
The flag is `tier: "managed"`. A cloud operator can therefore deliver it
with the managed-config machinery that exists today. No new delivery
code is needed.
## What Changed
- Add `enableIsolatedWorkspacesByDefault` to the feature catalog with
`tier: "managed"`. Both defaults are off.
- Add the flag to the experimental settings schema, the type, and both
branches of `normalizeExperimentalSettings`.
- Add `applyDefaultIsolatedExecutionWorkspacePolicy` to
`execution-workspace-policy.ts`. It substitutes `{ enabled: true,
defaultMode: "isolated_workspace" }` only when the flag is on, the task
has a project, and the project stores no policy.
- Apply the helper in the run dispatch path in `heartbeat.ts`, after the
existing `gateProjectExecutionWorkspacePolicy` call. The `hasProject`
argument reads the resolved project row, not the raw `projectId` of the
task.
- Gate the new flag behind `enableIsolatedWorkspaces` at the call site.
The new flag does nothing on its own.
- Add a toggle card to the instance experimental settings page. The card
shows only when isolated workspaces are on.
- Add eight tests for the new helper.
## Verification
Commands:
```
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck
cd server && ../node_modules/.bin/tsc --noEmit
```
The server typecheck script also builds a Rust binary. I ran `tsc`
directly because this machine has no `cargo`. The server package reports
no type errors.
Tests:
```
./node_modules/.bin/vitest run \
server/src/__tests__/execution-workspace-policy.test.ts \
server/src/__tests__/instance-settings-service.test.ts \
server/src/__tests__/instance-settings-cloud-defaults.test.ts \
server/src/__tests__/instance-settings-managed-overlay.test.ts \
server/src/__tests__/instance-settings-routes.test.ts \
server/src/__tests__/managed-config.test.ts \
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-busy.test.ts \
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-session.test.ts \
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-ready-comment.test.ts \
server/src/__tests__/execution-workspaces-service.test.ts \
server/src/__tests__/issue-runtime-workspace-binding.test.ts \
server/src/__tests__/run-trust-preset.test.ts \
packages/shared/src/feature-catalog.test.ts \
packages/shared/src/settings-visibility.test.ts \
packages/shared/src/validators/instance.test.ts \
ui/src/pages/InstanceExperimentalSettings.test.tsx \
ui/src/components/Sidebar.test.tsx
```
All of these files pass. The new tests cover each of these cases:
- The helper substitutes an isolated policy for a project that stores
none.
- The helper changes nothing while the flag is off.
- The helper changes nothing for a task that has no project.
- The helper keeps a stored policy, including a policy with `enabled:
false`.
- The resolver returns `isolated_workspace` for an unpolicied project.
- An explicit task setting still wins over the operator default.
- The substituted policy produces the `git_worktree` strategy.
- A project-less task does not become an unrunnable worktree.
To confirm the behavior by hand:
1. Turn on Isolated Workspaces, then turn on Use Isolated Workspaces By
Default.
2. Open a project that has no execution workspace policy.
3. Start a task in that project.
4. The run gets its own worktree. Tasks in that project no longer wait
for each other.
## Risks
Low to medium. The details:
- The flag defaults to off, and it is inert unless
`enableIsolatedWorkspaces` is also on. An instance that does not turn on
both flags sees no change.
- A project that stores a policy keeps it. This includes a policy with
`enabled: false`, which the helper reads as a decision to stay on the
shared checkout.
- When an operator turns the flag on, the workspace configuration
fingerprint changes for projects that store no policy. Their next run
creates a new workspace. This is correct, because the mode did change,
but the first run after the change does more setup work.
- A task that is in flight when the flag changes resumes with a
different workspace path than the path its session remembers. An
operator should let current runs finish before turning the flag on.
- Isolated workspaces use more disk, because each task gets its own
worktree.
## Model Used
Claude Opus 5 (`claude-opus-5`) in Claude Code, with extended thinking
and tool use. The model read the repository, made the change, and ran
the typechecks and tests above.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
canary/v2026.915.0-canary.1
|
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
ee81cee76d |
fix: allow concurrent agent runs on one Anthropic subscription connection (#13445)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Agent runs use provider connections and subscription credentials. > - File-backed subscriptions need a lease while a run writes new credentials. > - Anthropic subscriptions pass a token and do not write a credential file. > - The current lease blocks concurrent Anthropic runs without protecting shared state. > - This pull request limits the lease to file-backed subscriptions and tests both paths. > - The result lets Anthropic runs share one connection safely while file-backed credentials remain serialized. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** This change improves concurrent use of one subscription connection. Anthropic runs no longer wait for a lease that protects no shared file. **Subsystem affected** server/ — REST API and orchestration services, with related server tests and connection documentation. **Current behavior** The server takes a connection lease for every subscription invocation. The lease blocks a second Anthropic run while the first runtime remains open. **Proposed behavior** The server takes the lease only when the subscription writes a provider authentication file back to the grant. Anthropic runs can proceed at the same time. **Reason and benefit** Anthropic passes its token through an environment variable and writes no file. Removing this unnecessary wait improves concurrency and preserves credential safety for OpenAI and xAI. **Breaking changes** None. OpenAI and xAI keep the existing lease and retry behavior. ## What Changed - Limit the AI credential lease to subscriptions that write a provider authentication file. - Add coverage for concurrent Anthropic runs and hired-agent runs. - Keep the existing OpenAI contention assertions as a sensitivity control. - Update the AI connection documentation to describe the lease boundary. ## Verification - Run `server/src/__tests__/ai-connections.test.ts`. - Run `server/src/__tests__/agent-hire-ai-connections.test.ts`. - Run `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-ai-subscription-contention.test.ts`. - Run the server type check. - Review the pull request checks after GitHub starts continuous integration. ## Risks The main risk is an incorrect provider classification. The write-back condition remains unchanged, and OpenAI contention tests keep the file-backed lease behavior under test. No schema or API contract changes occur. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-5. Exact runtime model ID and context window are not exposed in this execution. The model used tool calls, shell commands, and GitHub operations. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
52d120f68d |
fix(release): wait 30 minutes for npm to expose a published version (#13436)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Every release publishes a batch of npm packages and then waits for each one to become visible before continuing > - npm accepts a publish immediately but exposes it later, so that wait exists to keep a release from continuing past a package nobody can install yet > - Today that wait was too short twice in a row, and each timeout aborted the release with the batch half-published > - Version numbers are derived from what is already on npm, so every retry moves to a new number and meets the same lag > - Two canary attempts burned two versions this way and shipped nothing > - This pull request raises the per-package budget from ten minutes to thirty > - The benefit is that ordinary registry lag costs waiting instead of a failed, half-published release ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No existing issue. The problem, in the bug report format: **What happened** `publish_canary` failed twice in a row with the batch half-published: ``` Warning: npm accepted @paperclipai/server@2026.914.0-canary.2, but the version did not become registry-visible. Error: stopping release: npm did not publish and expose @paperclipai/server@2026.914.0-canary.2 ``` The version was accepted at 17:49:09 and became visible at 18:04:29 — about five minutes after the poll gave up. `shared`, `db` and `adapter-utils` published at that version; `server`, `paperclip-runner` and the root package did not. **Expected behavior** Ordinary registry propagation delay costs the release some waiting, not a failure. A package that becomes visible after 15 minutes must not abort the batch because of the old 10-minute wait. Longer registry outages can still leave a partial batch. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Publish any channel while npm is propagating slowly. 2. A package takes longer than `NPM_PUBLISH_VERIFY_ATTEMPTS * NPM_PUBLISH_VERIFY_DELAY_SECONDS` to become visible. 3. The release aborts, that version is half-published, and the retry picks a new version number and meets the same lag. **Paperclip version or commit** Present on master. Observed on 2026-09-14 across canary runs in workflow run 34869494325. ## What Changed - Increase npm visibility checks from 60 to 180, retaining the 10-second delay: about 30 minutes per package. - Increase canary, nightly, beta, and stable publish job timeouts from 90 to 150 minutes. - Add offline regression tests using the workflow's actual settings. They cover the observed 15-minute 20-second delay, immediate visibility, exhausted retries, and job timeout sizing. - Load the access router in test setup so its cold transform does not consume the first permission test's 10-second timeout. The permission assertions are unchanged. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/release-lib.test.mjs`: 14 passed. - `pnpm run test:release-registry`: 129 passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/access-routes-permissions-upgrade.test.ts`: 3 passed. - Regression proof in temporary fixtures: restoring 60 attempts fails the observed-delay test; restoring 90-minute jobs fails the timeout-budget test. - [CI run 34916632804](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34916632804): all jobs passed, including typecheck/release registry, build, all general and serialized server shards, browser tests, runner verification, and canary dry run. The PR has 31 successful checks and two expected Storybook skips at `a27f5e896`. - [Previously failing serialized shard](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34916632804/job/104215809616): all three access-route permission tests passed in CI after preloading the router. - Greptile's final review is 5/5 with no outstanding findings. Both review threads are resolved. - Local limits: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` stop at the runner package because this machine has no Rust `cargo` executable. The duplicate full local `pnpm test:run` was interrupted while the complete CI matrix ran. Targeted local results are listed above; full validation is from CI. The previous CI failures were unrelated to npm propagation: - [PR review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34891770396) required a test file for this fix. - [Serialized server shard 3](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34891773736/job/104136392196) timed out in the first access-route permission test at 10 seconds. The other two tests in that file passed. - The canary dry run passed in that same CI run. ## Risks Low risk. Production behavior changes only in release waiting budgets. - Polling exits as soon as npm exposes the version, so healthy publishes do not wait longer. - An unavailable version now takes about 30 minutes to report. Polls remain bounded and still fail the release on exhaustion. - The 150-minute jobs leave roughly 30 minutes for setup/build plus four full polling windows. npm command runtime and later release steps also consume that budget; a broader outage can still interrupt a batch. - The permission-test change moves module loading into a bounded setup hook; it does not relax authorization assertions. - No schema changes or operational migrations. ## Model Used - Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), 1M context, extended thinking, run through Claude Code with tool use and code execution. - OpenAI GPT-6 (Codex), with reasoning, tool use, and code execution, for the CI follow-up. Context-window size is not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass — targeted checks listed above; full validation passed in CI - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes — workflow comments and verification details - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
a2e7ffdc34 |
fix(runtime): validate sandbox paths and preserve live controller leases (#13432)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents can run in remote sandboxes. > - Connection checks must use the selected execution target. > - Recovery must respect the controller that owns an active run. > - A host path or PID does not describe a remote sandbox. > - This pull request checks sandbox paths on the target and preserves live controller leases. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Selecting an AI account for a sandbox agent could fail because the Claude ACP environment check tried to create the sandbox directory on the Paperclip host. The recovery sweep could also interrupt a sandbox run while its controller lease was still valid. It treated a PID absent from the local host as proof that the run had stopped. **Expected behavior** ACP checks directories on the selected execution target. Recovery leaves a run with a live controller lease alone. Its final database write rejects a stale snapshot after renewal, a claim, a controller change, or a runtime change. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Test a Claude ACP sandbox agent with a directory that cannot be created on the host. The check fails before this fix. 2. Give a running sandbox task a valid controller lease and a PID absent from the host. Run the stale-lock sweep without an in-memory handle. The sweep interrupts the run before this fix. 3. Renew or replace the controller between the sweep's read and write. The old snapshot must not end that controller's run. **Paperclip version or commit** Rebased onto `origin/master` at `0e9b24c8216171c26c8358ba387d77858e02c7a9`. All seven regression cases still fail against this base. Refs #13438, which supplies the managed hiring and task-connection behavior, and #13433, which preserves non-assignee subscription comment wakes. This PR preserves both upstream changes and addresses the two remaining sandbox failures. ## What Changed - Resolve and create Claude ACP test directories through the execution-target helpers. - Preserve active legacy controller leases during stale-lock recovery, including finalization after a task becomes terminal. - Recheck the controller, lease, runtime mode, and native ownership in the terminal database write. - Add two sandbox-directory cases and five database-backed controller-lease cases. - Document the target used for ACP directory checks. ## Verification - Red: all seven new cases fail against `0e9b24c82` without these two implementation changes. - Before the final upstream sync, 192 focused tests passed. Full `pnpm test:run` coverage completed using the repository's group/shard runner: all general server and workspace groups passed, and all 147 serialized server suites passed across the initial run and isolated continuations. Five cold-import timeout suites passed with `--experimental.fsModuleCache`; their assertions and deadlines were unchanged. - The hiring routes, default-selection service, and upstream hiring tests match `origin/master` exactly. The two remaining fixes are unchanged by the final rebase. - On final head `bd28d5cefbdf7084acc3759199cd9661907e7a26`, all 372 focused tests pass across 16 suites covering both upstream changes and these fixes. Two timeouts in the combined run (database setup and an existing ACP case) pass in isolated reruns with fresh test homes and temporary directories. `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` also pass on this head. - All 32 active checks pass on final head `bd28d5cef`, including the full test matrix and browser shards, in [CI run 34904204849](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34904204849). Two Storybook checks are skipped by path filters. - Greptile reviewed final head `bd28d5cef` at 5/5 with no findings or unresolved review threads. ## Risks - A failed remote directory check still blocks connection adoption. - A live controller retains finalization authority after its task becomes terminal. Cleanup waits for ownership to expire and must pass the final ownership check. - No schema or credential-storage changes. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 in Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and API tools. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8f1905d34d |
fix: provision all project repositories for local and sandbox tasks (#13442)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Projects can now attach several source repositories. > - Task preparation still treated these sources as alternative workspaces. > - Sandbox sync preserved Git history only for the selected repository. > - A task needs every attached repository to complete work across the project. > - This pull request prepares all distinct project repositories and preserves their separate Git histories through sandbox restore. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A user reported that a project with two repositories received only the first repository in Daytona. Repository-only project rows also reached the agent with null local paths. Managed checkouts with matching repository names could resolve to the same directory. **Expected behavior** Local and sandbox tasks receive every distinct repository attached to their project. Repository-only sources work without preconfigured local folders. Each repository keeps its own Git history and working files. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a project with two repository sources and no local folder paths. 2. Assign a task to the project and run it in Daytona. 3. Inspect the task workspace and the repository paths exposed to the agent. 4. Observe that the original implementation supplies only the selected checkout. Related change: #13010 added multiple repository selection. The open repository-catalog proposals #11234 and #11228 cover a different data model. This fix uses the existing project workspaces. ## What Changed - Materialize each additional distinct repository as an editable checkout inside the task root. Seed configured local sources with their current working files and retain task edits across runs. - Pass materialized repository paths to local agents and native sandbox task prompts. Apply existing run-scoped Git credentials to each remote clone. - Preserve each repository's Git history, dirty files, and restore baseline during sandbox staging and durable recovery. Apply each repository's ignore rules and the operator's workspace exclusions. - Keep same-name managed repositories in separate directories. Report additional clone failures before the task starts. - Add task-level, checkout, sandbox round-trip, environment-hint, and recovery-descriptor regression coverage. Document checkout and restore behavior. ## Verification - Red: the original implementation fails the sandbox test because the second repository has no Git directory. It also fails the same-name checkout test and both real-database task tests because repository hints have no local path. - Green: focused tests pass for one and two repository-only sources, local source edits, clone failures, per-repository credentials, separate Git histories, ignored files, and recovery from remote or durable seed state. - Live Daytona smoke passed with two disposable repositories through the production provider sync functions. Both repositories arrived with Git history. Commits from both restored locally. Ignored files stayed excluded. The disposable sandbox was deleted. - Passed on final commit `93ab76763`: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. - Final focused coverage: 254 assertions across the six changed test areas passed across the serial run and an isolated rerun of the existing process-kill timing test. The live Daytona smoke also passed. - The local `pnpm test:run` overlapped source edits and retained stale transformed code. Its first phase reported 12,240 passed assertions, nine failed assertions, three hook failures, and one worker error; later phases did not run locally. This run is not claimed as green. Fresh focused tests verify the changes, and every general/workspace and serialized-server CI shard passes on the final commit. - Final CI is green on `93ab76763`: all test shards, all three browser shards, typecheck, build, runner verification, canary dry run, and security checks. The initial unrelated chat-delivery browser timing failure passed in the final CI run. Optional Storybook visual checks were skipped. - Greptile is 5/5 on the final commit with no unresolved review threads. Its checkout-race finding was reproduced with a failing test, fixed, and rechecked. ## Risks - Additional repositories need disk space and clone time. Access failure for an attached repository stops preparation. - Additional checkouts live under `.paperclip-repositories/` and keep independent histories. Changes stay in those task copies; they do not overwrite configured source folders. - Detached or reconfigured repository copies are retained under `.paperclip-runtime/detached-repositories/`. Sandbox recovery retains per-repository merge baselines. - No database migration, UI contract change, or new credential delegation is required. Referenced projects retain their separate read-only behavior. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository inspection, code execution, and tool use. The runtime does not expose a more specific model deployment 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>nightly/v2026.915.0-nightly.1 canary/v2026.914.0-canary.7 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
0e9b24c821 |
fix: resume subscription comment wakes and preserve retry status (#13433)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Concurrent task runs can share a managed AI subscription with one credential lease. > - #13438 added durable retries for busy subscriptions and task-lock checks. > - A comment wake can run for an agent who is not the task assignee. Such a run never owns the task lock, so the new checks suppress its retry. > - This pull request preserves those comment wakes while keeping the lock checks for assignee runs. > - It also shows the subscription wait in task status and preserves the failure count through the database projection. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13438. **What happened?** When a subscription is busy, a non-assignee comment wake is cancelled without a successor. Repeated subscription waits also display an inflated attempt count because the execution query omits the preserved failure count. **Expected behavior** An eligible comment wake waits and resumes without claiming the assignee's task lock. The task shows “Waiting for AI subscription”. Waiting does not consume provider-failure retries. Assignee retries still stop when the task lock is cleared or transferred. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Configure an agent with a managed subscription and concurrent runs. 2. Hold its credential lease in one run. 3. Mention the agent on a task assigned to another actor. 4. Release the lease and inspect whether the comment wake has a scheduled retry. The test uses a real embedded Postgres database and a real credential lease. Provider execution uses a fixture. The reassignment test applies a database mutation after the real checkout. No live provider account is needed. **Paperclip version or commit** Based on `f912ecaac` from #13438. Before the reconciliation fix, the rebased regression at `2063cfd13` failed because the comment wake had no scheduled retry. The original configuration failure was reproduced on `5282cabde` before #13438 merged. **Deployment mode** Built from source with embedded Postgres for local verification. ## What Changed - Record non-assignee comment-wake authority at admission while holding the task and run locks. A later reassignment cannot grant this exception. Preserve it through repeated subscription waits. - Keep master’s lock checks for assignee retries, including the check inside the scheduling transaction. - Show the subscription wait and preserve its failure count in the execution projection query. - Limit pre-provider wait receipts to fresh executions. A persisted native execution input must retain its recovery path. - Add lease, retry, projection, cancellation, reassignment, pause, revocation, service-recreation, and ownership regression coverage. - Use master’s 60–120 second retry interval and document the resulting behavior. ## Verification - Red: after rebase, the comment-wake test failed with no scheduled retry; the other 50 contention and retry-scheduling tests passed. - Red/green: reassigning the task immediately after real checkout reproduced an unwanted successor for both assignment and comment wakes. Both tests pass after recording authority at admission. - Green: all 285 targeted tests pass across 12 suites, including #13438’s four cancellation-race phases, its hiring/connection suite, run-dispatch integration tests, and both reassignment regressions. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passes after rebase. - `pnpm build` passes on the final revision. - The full general and serialized test suites pass in [CI run 34899514681](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34899514681) on `99f1e4c1d`. Full-suite verification ran in CI; local verification used the 285 targeted tests. - All 32 active PR checks pass, including build, typecheck, native runner verification, canary dry run, and all browser shards. Two Storybook checks are skipped by path filters. - Greptile reviewed `99f1e4c1d` at 5/5 with no outstanding findings. All review threads are resolved. - `git diff --check` and `node scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs` pass. ## Risks - The non-assignee exception requires authority recorded under admission locks or its server-created subscription retry. Tests cover caller-supplied flags, assignment and comment reassignment races, repeated comment waits, and assignee lock protections. - A wait uses master’s 60–120 second interval. A long-held lease can produce multiple wait records. - Existing native sessions can have provider effects. They must not receive a fresh-execution receipt that permits replay. - No schema migration or credential permission change is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, model `gpt-6-astra`, with repository search, code editing, shell execution, and test tools. 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
f912ecaacf |
fix: carry AI connections through hiring and unblock task execution (#13438)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents hire other agents and assign tasks to them. > - Managed AI connections must follow those hires across legacy and native runners. > - Missing accounts should pause task execution and let the user connect from the task. > - Subscription contention must wait without asking for new credentials. > - This pull request fixes these paths and the native tool and Daytona staging failures found during live tests. > - The result is a working hire, subtask, and connection setup flow on local and remote runners. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A managed Claude or Codex agent could hire a teammate without a usable AI binding. Cross-provider hiring could fail before the user had a chance to connect the new provider. First-time task setup did not show the existing AI credential form inline. A busy subscription could request a new connection. Native API replies could stop the parent after a hire had already committed. Fresh Daytona sandboxes could fail to extract read-only skill directories created on macOS. **Expected behavior** Compatible hires inherit the managed connection choice. A hire for another provider uses the responsible user's default. If that account is missing, the hire succeeds and the task asks for a connection. Completing setup in the task resumes work automatically. Explicit child auth settings and existing unmanaged login paths keep precedence. Shared-account access checks remain in force. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Connect a Claude or Codex parent with a managed AI account. 2. Ask it to hire one agent of each provider and create a self-assigned subtask. 3. Assign work to both hires without connecting the second provider first. 4. Connect the missing provider from its task card. 5. Check that all tasks finish and same-provider work uses the original account. 6. Repeat with native runners and fresh Daytona sandboxes. The opt-in browser suite in `tests/hiring-ai-connections/README.md` performs these steps. **Paperclip version or commit** The live failures were reproduced from `f2c5e54dc`. The branch is rebased onto `5282cabde`. **Deployment mode** Isolated local development instance. Legacy CLI and native runners. Local execution and ephemeral Daytona sandboxes. Related work: Refs #13247 for managed AI connections. Refs #13268 for legacy credential-reference inheritance, which this branch preserves. Refs #13432 for a concurrent managed-inheritance fix. This PR also covers cross-provider task setup, subscription waits, native API replies, and Daytona extraction. It permits missing responsible-user defaults at hire time; restricted shared selections still fail. ## What Changed - Apply managed connection defaults to both agent creation routes. Preserve explicit auth choices and legacy credential-reference inheritance. - Allow hires before their responsible user connects the provider. Keep approval gates, company boundaries, and shared-account access checks. - Reuse the production AI credential form inside the pending task card. Resume the task after setup. - Retry subscription lease contention without consuming the provider-failure allowance or creating a connection request. - Require task execution-lock ownership when scheduling, promoting, and dispatching subscription retries. Recheck ownership under the issue row lock. - Rename the HTTP operation identity at the native tool boundary so it cannot override the runner's operation identity. - Delay directory permission restoration during Daytona extraction. Preserve the final read-only modes. - Add database-backed regressions, real browser acceptance tests, and Storybook states. Document setup and run-log behavior. ## Verification - Six real browser scenarios passed: both parent providers on legacy local and legacy Daytona; native Codex locally; native Claude on Daytona. Each scenario hires both providers, completes a self-subtask and assigned work, and connects the missing provider inline with automatic continuation. - Successful runs verify the account, responsible user, runner mode, and Daytona lease. All 18 test sandboxes were deleted. - Live authentication used API keys. Subscription inheritance, lease contention, and retry have integration coverage. Fresh subscription OAuth sign-in was not automated. - Red/green tests reproduced missing bindings, missing inline forms, subscription contention, native API reply failure, and GNU tar permission failure. - Seven Storybook browser checks passed. They cover both providers, method selection, narrow layout, completion, cancellation, and invalid credentials. - Full local suite coverage completed before rebase. Initial timing and fixture startup failures passed unchanged on isolated reruns. The first full command did not exit cleanly; the remaining workspace and serialized groups were completed separately. - After rebase, 107 hiring/auth/retry tests and 59 native API, task-card, and Daytona tests passed. The full workspace typecheck, production build, and token gates passed again. Storybook build passed before rebase. - Review fixes: 169 hiring/retry/dispatch tests, 37 adjacent tests, and four explicit cancellation-race cases passed. Eight cross-provider cases cover stale auth keys on both creation routes and both runner types. Server typecheck and build passed. - Final CI on `ee4890837a8a4913e07453392b9a75969580dae1`: 32 checks passed. Two optional Storybook jobs were skipped. The full server, workspace, browser, native runner, build, typecheck, and release checks passed. - Three unchanged tests initially failed on a busy port, a chat row-lock race, and preview-server readiness. Each affected job passed after one CI rerun. Isolated local checks also passed: 41 credential tests, the chat-concurrency case, and 25 preview-runtime tests. - Greptile reviewed the final commit at 5/5. Both review threads are resolved. GitHub reports no merge conflicts. ## Risks - A missing personal account now defers authentication to the first task. Explicit incompatible bindings and restricted shared accounts still fail at hire time. - An inherited personal default uses the responsible user's existing authorization to install access for the new agent. It never copies credentials or another user's identity. - Subscription contention retries after a delay and rechecks task eligibility. It does not consume the provider-failure budget. - Native hiring uses the existing managed API-tools opt-in. Remote native runners require a matching Linux binary and provider pack, as documented in the acceptance README. - No schema changes. Live tests make paid provider calls and remain opt-in. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 (`gpt-6-astra`) in Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, browser automation, and API tools. The context-window size is not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
5282cabde8 |
fix(ui): make every agent reachable from Chats (#13420)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Experimental Agent Chat gives each person a persistent conversation
with each agent.
> - The sidebar only showed starred or previously visited agents.
> - A person could not start a conversation with an agent absent from
that list.
> - This pull request adds a searchable agent picker and a default
sidebar entry.
> - People can now reach every company agent while keeping their
frequent conversations close.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #13283, which introduced the existing task-backed agent chat
surface. This change adds discovery to that surface after maintainer
review of the Storybook design.
**What happened?**
With Agent Chat enabled, a person with no starred or recent agents had
no agent shortcut. The sidebar also lacked a direct way to start a chat
with another agent.
**Expected behavior**
Show the first-created company agent by default. Let the person search
all company agents and open a persistent conversation.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Enable Agent Chat in a company with agents.
2. Use an account with no starred agents or recent chats.
3. Look for a chat entry in the sidebar, or try to chat with an agent
absent from its shortcuts.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The existing behavior is present on master at
|
||
|
Devin Foley
|
5054c9ef9b |
fix(grok): stage the environment test from a host directory, and survive an absent workspace (#13416)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - An agent runs through an adapter. Before you use an environment, the
adapter's environment test probes it and reports structured checks
> - The grok adapter's environment test stages the managed account into
a remote environment first. It gave the runtime its resolved `cwd` as
the host workspace directory
> - For a remote target that `cwd` is a path inside the sandbox. It does
not exist on the host that runs the test
> - A new workspace ignore scan reads that host directory. The scan
failed on the missing directory, and the error escaped the environment
test
> - The user got a server error instead of a result with checks
> - This pull request stages from a host temporary directory, sends the
remote path separately, and reports a staging failure as a check
> - The benefit is that the grok environment test always answers with
checks, and a workspace directory that does not exist no longer stops a
runtime preparation
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No existing issue. The problem, in the bug report format:
**What happened**
The grok environment test failed with `Error: Workspace ignore scan
failed: git-ignore-scan-failed`. The route returned a server error, so
the user saw no checks at all.
**Expected behavior**
The environment test always returns `{status, checks}`. Every other
problem it finds (an invalid working directory, a command it cannot
resolve, a probe that times out) becomes a check with a level. A
credential staging problem must do the same.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Configure a grok agent with a managed AI connection.
2. Point the agent at a remote (sandbox) environment.
3. Run the environment test for that environment.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Present on master. Both halves landed on 2026-09-12: the call site in
#13247, and the scan that it trips in #13353.
## What Changed
- `packages/adapters/grok-local/src/server/test.ts` stages the managed
account through a fresh host temporary directory and passes the remote
path as `workspaceRemoteDir`. This is the split `codex-local` and
`opencode-local` already use.
- A failure while staging becomes a `grok_environment_unprepared` check
with level `error`, instead of an exception that escapes the function.
The probe does not run after it, because there is no prepared
environment to probe.
- The temporary directory is removed in the existing `finally` block.
- `packages/adapter-utils/src/sandbox-managed-runtime.ts` treats a
`workspaceLocalDir` that does not exist as "nothing to sync". A
directory that is not there has no files for ignore rules to govern,
nothing to stage, and nothing to restore.
- Tests: the grok environment test now covers the managed-connection
remote branch, which had no coverage. `sandbox-file-sync.test.ts` covers
a preparation whose workspace directory does not exist.
## Verification
```
npx vitest run packages/adapters/grok-local/src/server/test.test.ts # 9 passed
npx vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/sandbox-file-sync.test.ts \
packages/adapter-utils/src/sandbox-managed-runtime.test.ts # 90 passed
cd packages/adapter-utils && npx tsc --noEmit # clean
cd packages/adapters/grok-local && npx tsc --noEmit # clean
```
The two new grok tests fail against the old call site: the first asserts
the runtime never receives the remote path as its host workspace
directory, and the second asserts a staging failure becomes a check
instead of an exception.
## Risks
Low risk, and limited to environment preparation.
- The adapter change only affects the managed-connection remote branch
of one adapter's environment test.
- The `adapter-utils` change makes a preparation that used to throw now
continue with no workspace sync. A real workspace is unaffected, because
the directory exists in that case and the scan runs exactly as before.
- No migration. No API change.
## Model Used
- Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), 1M context, extended thinking, run
through Claude Code with tool use and code execution.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes — no
documented behavior changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green — pending first run
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups —
pending first review
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
|
||
|
Devin Foley
|
46bcc0863c |
test(runner): stop two CI-contention flakes that starve the canary lane (#13418)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Each master commit is published as an npm canary, and the nightly release gate installs the newest canary and runs the onboarding smoke against it > - A canary only publishes after the Cloud readiness workflow passes for that exact commit > - Cloud readiness fails often, and almost every failure stops that commit from ever becoming a canary > - The nightly gate then keeps testing an old canary, so a fix that landed after it cannot reach the gate, and the gate stays red for reasons no longer in the code > - Most of these failures are short timeouts that only expire because the runner is loaded > - This pull request gives two such timeouts the budget the surrounding tests already use > - The benefit is that more master commits publish a canary, so the nightly gate tests current code ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No existing issue. The problem, in the bug report format: **What happened** Cloud readiness failed on 25 of 85 runs over three days (29%). 24 of those failures stopped the commit from publishing a canary. Two timeout clusters account for 10 of the 25: - `packages/paperclip-runner/src/control-plane/durable-prp-control-plane.test.ts` — `Error: Test timed out in 5000ms.` in "promptly fails the real transport request and notification paths on authenticated bad semantic input". Seen in runs 34652752663, 34654215468, 34656885170, 34657111560, 34661910120. - `packages/paperclip-runner/src/live/live-session.test.ts` — `Turn settled before the intentional SIGKILL: Error: Capability Codex turn timed out after 2000ms`. Seen in runs 34632264036, 34658026290, 34658106386, 34727991195, 34760283177. **Expected behavior** A commit that is good publishes its canary. A test fails because the behavior is wrong, not because the runner was busy. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run the Cloud readiness workflow on master repeatedly. 2. Watch the Runner protocol and chaos jobs. 3. The two tests above fail intermittently, and the commit then publishes no canary. **Paperclip version or commit** Present on master. Measured over runs from 2026-09-11 to 2026-09-14, which is the workflow's whole history. ## What Changed - `durable-prp-control-plane.test.ts`: the "promptly fails the real transport request..." `it.each` now takes the same 15s budget as the test directly above it. It ran on the 5s default, although it builds a real control plane over a socket. The neighbouring test already asks for 15s, so this reads as an omission. - `live-session.test.ts`: the real-runner SIGKILL test gives the turn a 60s timeout instead of 2s. The test kills the runner process and then asserts the turn was still running at that moment, so the timeout is only a backstop. At 2s a loaded machine settles the turn first and the assertion fails. Neither change weakens an assertion. No test in this PR asserts that a timeout happens, and the tests that do assert one (`turnTimeoutMs: 500` and `turnTimeoutMs: 20`) are untouched. ## Verification ``` cd packages/paperclip-runner npx vitest run src/control-plane/durable-prp-control-plane.test.ts # 87 passed npx vitest run src/control-plane/durable-prp-control-plane.test.ts \ -t "promptly fails the real transport" # 2 passed (both it.each cases) ``` The live-session change is verified by the readiness lane itself, because that suite needs a real runner and a provider. ## Risks Low risk, and limited to test budgets. - A genuine hang in either test now takes longer to report: 15s instead of 5s, and 60s instead of 2s. - A real regression still fails, because the assertions are unchanged. - Timeouts are not a complete fix for this lane. Port races (`EADDRINUSE`), lease races, and lost runner VMs cause about another 40% of its failures. A retry on the `verify` matrix would cover all of those classes, and none of them reproduce on a second attempt. That is a larger policy change, so it is not in this PR. ## Model Used - Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), 1M context, extended thinking, run through Claude Code with tool use and code execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes — no documented behavior changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green — pending first run - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups — pending first review - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
e1d2e279a3 |
fix(db): replay a query whose socket write failed on a recycled pooled connection (#13417)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A hosted instance keeps its data in Postgres, and it reaches that
database through a connection pooler
> - A pooler recycles the server side of a connection that sat idle. The
client still holds the socket and believes it is open
> - The next query fails while the driver writes it to that dead socket,
with `write CONNECTION_CLOSED host:5432`
> - The request that happened to draw the recycled connection fails,
although nothing is wrong with the query or the database
> - Only one code path guards against this today, so the same error
keeps reaching users and error reporting from every other path
> - This pull request replays a query when the write itself failed,
because those bytes never reached the server
> - The benefit is that a recycled connection costs one retry instead of
one failed request
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No existing issue. The problem, in the bug report format:
**What happened**
Requests fail with `write CONNECTION_CLOSED <host>:5432` (driver code
`CONNECTION_CLOSED`). It is most visible on the first queries after an
idle period, when the pool holds connections the pooler already
recycled.
**Expected behavior**
A connection that the pooler recycled while it was idle is not a
user-visible failure. The client notices the dead socket and uses a live
connection.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run the server against a pooled Postgres endpoint (for example a Neon
`-pooler` host).
2. Leave the instance idle until the pooler recycles the server side of
the pooled connections.
3. Issue any request that queries the database.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Present on master.
## What Changed
- `packages/db/src/transient-write-retry.ts` (new) wraps the root
`postgres.js` client. When a query fails while the driver writes it to
the socket, the wrapper runs it again on a fresh connection. Three
attempts, 50 ms then 100 ms backoff.
- `packages/db/src/client.ts` gives Drizzle the wrapped client. The
teardown registry keeps the real client, because shutdown must end the
actual pool.
- The wrapper is deliberately narrow:
- It matches only the write phase (`code === "CONNECTION_CLOSED"` and a
message that starts with `write CONNECTION_CLOSED`). The write failed,
so the server never saw the query, and a replay cannot run anything
twice. That makes it safe for reads and writes alike.
- An error after the write propagates untouched, because the server may
have acted on the query.
- `CONNECTION_ENDED` and `CONNECTION_DESTROYED` propagate untouched,
because they mean a deliberate shutdown.
- Queries inside `db.transaction()` run on the scoped client that
`sql.begin()` returns, which the wrapper does not touch. A transaction
that loses its connection must abort, not replay.
- A query runs once however many handlers attach to it, and it still
executes lazily, like `postgres.js` itself.
## Verification
```
npx vitest run packages/db/src/transient-write-retry.test.ts # 7 passed
npx vitest run packages/db/src/client-teardown-registry.test.ts \
packages/db/src/client-options.test.ts # existing db suites pass
npx vitest run server/src/__tests__/cloud-tenant-transient-db-retry.test.ts # 6 passed
cd packages/db && npx tsc --noEmit # clean
```
New tests cover the replay, the `.values()` form Drizzle uses, the
attempt budget, an error that must not replay, and one execution per
pending query. A Drizzle round trip runs through a fake wire-protocol
server, which shows the wrapper is transparent to ordinary queries.
## Risks
Low risk.
- The retry only fires for a failure during the socket write, where the
server never received the query. A replay therefore cannot duplicate an
effect.
- A permanently unreachable database costs two extra attempts and 150 ms
before the same error surfaces.
- Transactions keep exactly their current behavior.
- Existing `retryOnTransientDbConnectionError` in the auth middleware
stays. It wraps a broader set of codes for one path, and it is
unaffected.
- No migration. No configuration change. No API change.
## Model Used
- Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), 1M context, extended thinking, run
through Claude Code with tool use and code execution.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes — no
documented behavior or configuration changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green — pending first run
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups —
pending first review
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
|
||
|
|
02c7175e72 |
feat(agents): hired agents inherit provider credential references (#13268)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Agent adapters need provider credentials to start work > - A hired agent can lack the credential reference that its hiring agent already uses > - The child agent then cannot authenticate, even when the company has a valid credential > - This pull request copies matching credential references from the hiring agent to the hired agent > - The benefit is that hired agents can start with the provider access that the hiring agent already uses ## Linked Issues or Issue Description This change relates to [PR #9920](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/9920), which covers credential inheritance for other agent creation paths. This pull request covers hiring-specific inheritance and fixed Claude OAuth binding checks. ### What existing behavior does this improve? The agent hire route builds the child adapter configuration from the hire request only. ### Current behavior A hired agent does not receive matching provider credential references from its hiring agent. The child agent cannot run when the request omits the credential. ### Proposed behavior The hire route inherits matching credential references from the hiring agent. The request keeps priority. A Claude hire that supplies any Claude credential inherits none. ### Reason and benefit The child agent can use the provider access that the hiring agent already uses. The change copies references only and never copies raw token values. ### Breaking changes None. The change affects only hires that need an inherited reference. ## What Changed - Copy matching credential references from the hiring agent into the hired agent adapter configuration. - Preserve pinned versions, `required`, and `allowMissingOverride` fields on each copied reference. - Keep hire-request credentials ahead of inherited credentials. - Reject inherited fixed Claude OAuth bindings unless the parent agent passes company, adapter, and exact-binding checks inside the same transaction. - Add route and service tests for inheritance, precedence, and binding validation. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server src/__tests__/agent-hire-auth-inheritance-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/agents-claude-oauth-binding.test.ts` — 60 passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server src/__tests__/agent-hire-idempotency-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/agents-service-secret-bindings.test.ts src/__tests__/secrets-service-user-secret-owner-scoped.test.ts` — 28 passed. - `tsc --noEmit` in `server/` — the error count matches the merge base, with no error in either changed source file. - `git diff --check` — clean. ## Risks Low risk. The route copies references, not raw tokens. The request keeps precedence. Company, adapter, and exact-binding checks protect the inherited Claude OAuth path. ## Model Used Codex, OpenAI GPT-5, with code execution and review support. The implementation commit predates this pull request handoff. ## 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: nickyleach <331803+nickyleach@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
