mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-01 23:43:16 +01:00
d66e96646de7bdaa4c1e3409f7806387a97d6649
8
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
a3e8fa568a |
Reduce repeated work during plugin Runner admission (#17377)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and their execution authority. > - A plugin can host Runner tasks on a persistent execution host. > - Admission checks must observe current lifecycle state and credentials. > - The current runtime reader also resolves files, skills, and connections for each check. > - Some providers also repeat the same project authentication check during submit. > - This pull request adds a compact fresh reader and an explicit submit-time validation contract. > - Providers can remove repeated work while Core keeps lease and scope checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Plugin Runner startup before task submission. **Current behavior** One measured startup made 30 full runtime reads during bootstrap. These reads took 5.759 seconds. Each guard can resolve instructions, skills, and connection assignments even when it only needs current identity and lifecycle state. Providers that already enforce project authentication in submit must also perform a separate Core preflight. **Proposed behavior** Use a lifecycle-owned runtime identity reader for guards. Keep the full runtime reader for synchronization inputs. A trusted provider can declare `projectAuthCheckAtSubmit: true` in its prepared result. Core pins the exact configuration, provider, and project set on the lease. The provider must reject authentication conflicts before credential installation or task start. Providers that omit the flag retain the existing preflight. **Reason and benefit** Estimated savings with a paired consumer: 4–5 seconds from compact runtime checks, plus roughly 0.5–0.9 seconds from removing the duplicate authentication operation. These estimates overlap and are not a measured deployed result. Refs #17367 for the separate run-log HEAD optimization; this PR does not duplicate it. **Breaking changes** No migration. The SDK adds a host method and an optional prepared-result field. Consumers that use them require this Core host version. Older providers retain their existing flow. ## What Changed - Add `agents.getRuntimeIdentity` across SDK, RPC, host service, and test fixtures. - Reuse the existing company, plugin ownership, readiness, and capability checks. Read lifecycle state and protected instance secrets fresh on every call. - Skip instruction, organization, skill, and connection hydration in the compact reader. - Allow explicit submit-time authentication enforcement, with prepared scope pinned and checked again at dispatch. - Emit fixed preparation, project-auth, submit, and connection timing phases. ## Verification - 72 targeted SDK capability, plugin task-owner, and environment-task mediator tests passed. - 33 real embedded-Postgres lifecycle and secret tests passed, including pause, content revision, company isolation, plugin disablement, and secret rotation. - SDK and server TypeScript checks passed. Local Runner/eval TypeScript outputs were built to satisfy server type resolution. - Local Postgres required missing library aliases in ignored dependencies; no product source was changed for that repair. - Full repository suites are delegated to GitHub CI. No live rollout or speedup claim. ## Risks The submit-time flag delegates enforcement to a trusted provider. It is not proof that prepare already checked authentication. The provider must check before VM credential installation or task admission. Core still checks exact prepared scope, active lease, run identity, credential type, and dispatch fencing. Existing providers keep the separate check. Roll back a paired consumer before rolling back this host. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 (Codex), with code execution and repository tools. Exact deployment build and context-window size are not exposed. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket id - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [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 Leach
|
65f59e339a | Extend native instance secrets to project lifecycle plugins (#17034) | ||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
9f4a956b90 |
Add durable agent runtime synchronization hooks (#16499)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and their runtime configuration. > - Plugins can maintain external agent computers. > - Configuration and file saves currently miss durable plugin delivery. > - A transient activity notification cannot recover after interruption. > - This pull request adds an opt-in agent runtime resource stream. > - The existing dispatcher delivers and acknowledges its committed work. > - Plugins can prepare computers when configuration changes. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #15631 and #16203 establish agent lifecycle and native durable delivery. **Problem** Plugins cannot reliably react to agent configuration and instruction changes without polling or waiting for execution. **Proposed solution** Add an opt-in `agent_runtime` stream to the existing resource journal. Record changes at the database mutation and managed file audit boundaries. Wake the dispatcher with content-free commit notifications. Provide scoped runtime inputs to the selected lifecycle plugin. **Alternatives considered** Route-only activity events miss service and background writers. Scheduled scans delay changes and repeatedly query unchanged state. **Roadmap alignment** This extends the existing plugin and agent configuration work. ## What Changed - Add durable update/delete events for agent runtime state, including an existing-agent baseline. - Capture configuration changes, instruction edits, deletion, restore, and managed run writeback. - Add commit notifications and a reconnect scan. Register one listener for configured, enabled runtime subscribers. Release it when none remain. - Keep HTTP startup independent of queued plugin callbacks. - Add `ctx.agents.getRuntime`. Require lifecycle capability, invocation company, enabled plugin, and owning lifecycle selection. - Keep legacy agent/project subscriptions isolated. Manual inbox reads retain both legacy streams. - Resolve recovered instruction paths without reading or hashing bundle contents. Use the company reporting graph for runtime health. - Repair missed file events on identical save/deletion retries after a journal failure; preserve content tokens and conditional-write checks. - Correlate file audits with runtime revisions to deduplicate recorded retries without a new table. Bound the lookup with the existing company/timestamp index. - Document the contract, migration, access boundaries, and session-connection requirement. ## Verification - Rebased the full stack onto origin/master after #16507. - Final replayed stack: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. - All 132 affected runtime, skill, connector, publication, instruction, managed-agent, and delivery tests passed after the latest-master rebase. Workspace typecheck and build passed. - Journal failure injection verifies recovery on identical file writes, deletions, and instruction retries from an acknowledged inbox. - Deduplication follow-up: 80 runtime/instruction/delivery tests and server typecheck passed. Repeated retries create no audit/events; old hashes returning after an intervening commit still repair delivery. Built-in/native instruction writer regressions passed all 56 tests. - PR 1 follow-up tests cover valid/cyclic reporting chains, listener registration failure, multiple subscribers, global/company disable, re-enable, unload, and startup with blocked callbacks. - Database coverage includes rollback, journal failure, no-op suppression, file saves/deletion, ordering/replay, owner/company denial, independent-client commits, and real listener loss/reconnect. - SDK/shared suites passed 1,059 tests during implementation. CLI/delivery regressions also passed. - Migration safety, map checks, diff whitespace, and local secrets/PII scan passed. - Hosted CI and security checks are fully green at `b296405e2`. Standard Greptile and Apex both returned 5/5 with no unresolved findings. - The broad local suite encountered an unchanged diagnostic test that rejects the word "private" from an error stack. This worktree lives under /private/tmp. The same unchanged diagnostic suite passed all 108 tests in the original checkout. Hosted full-suite checks provide exact-head verification. ## Risks - Apply migration 0347 before enabling a runtime subscriber. Runtime notifications require session-level PostgreSQL LISTEN. Transaction-mode poolers are unsupported for this opt-in feature. - Database triggers share the mutation transaction. Journal failure prevents configuration commits. Trigger work adds a journal insert to relevant changes. - Filesystem publication and SQL commit are separate boundaries. Direct filesystem edits do not emit hooks. External clients must fence stale revisions and retain conditional-write checks. - The reader returns only that plugin's own instance secrets. Keep them out of UI data, logs, plugin state, and agent files. - No private transport integration or live remote computer qualification is included. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and testing. The exact deployment model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub references) - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused suites; broad local limitation 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> |
||
|
Michael NguyenandPaperclip
|
5a00040c4c |
feat(plugin-sdk): interactions/approvals respond + attachment read capabilities for the chat gateway (#10066)
Adds the remaining 5 plugin capabilities + 7 worker→host RPC methods (interactions read/respond, approvals read/respond, attachment read) needed by the Slack chat gateway plugin (v0.5.0) to pass manifest capability validation and load. - Security review: PASS (LOOA-642) after the viewer-role privilege-escalation blocker (LOOA-648) was fixed on this branch (requireActiveHumanMember now rejects viewer on impersonation write-paths, matching assertCompanyAccess). - CI: Build, Typecheck, all server suites (3/3 + serialized 4/4), workspaces, e2e shard 2/2, and all security scanners (Snyk/Socket/Superagent/Greptile/security-review) green. - One e2e flake (signoff-policy 'non-participant cannot advance stage') is unrelated: it exercises execution-policy stage advancement (routes/issues.ts, untouched by this PR) and failed on a heartbeat_run_events FK race + 409 checkout conflict. Unblocks LOOA-629 (Slack gateway go-live) and the interview-ask feature. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Michael NguyenandPaperclip
|
e55d702916 |
feat(plugin-sdk): human-attributed issue comments for chat gateway plugins (#10050)
Adds the `issue.comments.create_human_attributed` capability and `ctx.issues.createComment` `actorUserId` option, with host-side active-human-member verification. LOOA-627. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
1de0a3bb1e |
feat(mcp) [split 2/8]: add governed access contracts (#9557)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Governed MCP access spans contracts, runtime enforcement, adapters, UI surfaces, and operator verification > - The parity reference PR #9534 is too large for effective automated or human review > - The feature therefore needs a linear stack whose individual diffs stay below the 100-file review limit > - This pull request is split 2/8 and focuses on database schema and shared governance contracts > - The benefit is a standalone, testable review boundary while preserving byte-for-byte parity at the top of the stack ## Linked Issues or Issue Description - Related parity reference: #9534 - Problem: The governed access model needs additive persistence and synchronized shared types before server enforcement can compile. - Proposed solution: Adds migrations 0148–0169, tool-access and Smoke Lab schema, shared types/validators/gallery helpers, and the minimal compile-required contract consumers identified by boundary testing. - Alternatives considered: keeping #9534 as one 403-file review, or rewriting the feature to manufacture seams; both were rejected in favor of path extraction plus compile-driven boundary moves. - Roadmap alignment: this advances the existing governed MCP/tool-access work already represented by #9534; it does not introduce a separate roadmap initiative. - Stack position: base branch is `pap10341-split/01-demo-servers`. - Merge policy: merge bottom-up, in order, only after the complete eight-PR stack has been reviewed and the top-of-stack parity gate remains empty. - Requested review: QA for migrations/validators; Greptile on every PR. ## What Changed - Adds migrations 0148–0169, tool-access and Smoke Lab schema, shared types/validators/gallery helpers, and the minimal compile-required contract consumers identified by boundary testing. - Keeps this PR below 100 changed files and independently typecheckable. - Preserves the final tree from #9534 when combined with the other seven stack levels. ## Verification - `pnpm typecheck` — passed, including migration numbering and safety checks - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db test` — passed - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared test` — passed ## Risks - Migration or contract mistakes could affect every upper layer; all migrations are additive/idempotent and compile consumers are included in this boundary. - Stack risk: merging out of order can expose incomplete layers; mitigate by following the documented bottom-up merge policy. - Parity risk: later edits to an intermediate branch can drift from #9534; mitigate by re-running the empty top-of-stack diff before merge. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, exact model ID `gpt-5.4`; runtime-managed context window; medium reasoning with repository, shell, Git, GitHub CLI, and code-execution tools enabled. ## 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] Internal references are omitted except the execution-plan link explicitly required for this coordinated split stack - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [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 ## Stack Coordination - Internal execution plan: [PAP-13874](/PAP/issues/PAP-13874#document-plan) - Parity reference: #9534 - Stack: #9556 → #9557 → #9558 → #9559 → #9560 → #9561 → #9562 → #9563 - Merge bottom-up only after full-stack review and an empty parity diff at #9563. --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
a1835cfa5e |
[codex] Harden plugin runtime invocation scope (#6547)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI-agent companies through a company-scoped control plane. > - Plugins extend that control plane, but plugin workers still call back into host APIs. > - Those worker-to-host calls need the same company boundary guarantees as normal API routes. > - Plugin action handlers also need authenticated actor context from the host instead of trusting caller-supplied params. > - This pull request hardens plugin bridge/action scope and keeps plugin operation issues out of normal issue surfaces. > - The benefit is safer plugin execution with clearer authorization boundaries and better test coverage. ## What Changed - Added host-owned invocation context plumbing for nested plugin worker calls. - Added actor context to plugin `performAction` calls and test harness helpers. - Enforced company invocation scope on worker-to-host calls and filtered company lists to the active invocation scope. - Extended plugin action route tests for board and agent actor context, spoofed company params, and cross-company rejection. - Extended plugin worker manager coverage for invocation-scope propagation. - Filtered typed and legacy plugin operation issue origins from default issue/inbox lists. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk build` - `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run packages/plugins/sdk/tests/host-client-factory.test.ts packages/plugins/sdk/tests/testing-actions.test.ts server/src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts server/src/__tests__/plugin-worker-manager.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` Note: embedded Postgres issue-service tests reported host-level Postgres init skip for 47 tests; the non-embedded targeted tests passed. ## Risks - Medium: plugin host authorization paths are sensitive, and external plugins may rely on previously loose company params. - Mitigation: the change only tightens calls when the host attached a company invocation scope and includes explicit tests for board, agent, and nested worker calls. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-5 Codex via `codex_local`, tool-enabled coding session; exact context window not exposed by this runtime. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
38c185fb8b |
[codex] Add agent permissions and controls plan (#6386)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies by keeping task ownership, approvals, and operator control inside one control plane. > - Agent permissions and plugin-hosted company settings sit on the boundary between autonomy and governance. > - V1 needs scoped task assignment rules, plugin extension points, and clearer company access surfaces without weakening company boundaries. > - The branch builds the core authorization service, plugin SDK/host APIs, and UI simplifications needed to support those controls. > - Paperclip EE plugin surfaces were intentionally moved out of this core PR per review direction, so this PR now carries only the public core/plugin infrastructure work. > - The latest updates preserve the PAP-9937 branch changes that belong in this PR, remove the `design/` artifacts, and exclude the experimental `plugin-briefs` package. > - Greptile feedback was applied through the authorization/audit paths and the final cleanup commit was re-reviewed at 5/5 with no unresolved Greptile threads. > - The benefit is safer assignment control with extension hooks for richer permission products while preserving simple defaults for normal operators. ## What Changed - Added scoped task-assignment authorization decisions and routed issue/agent assignment mutations through the authorization service. - Added plugin SDK and host APIs for company settings slots, authorization policy/grant management, assignment previews, and bridge invocation scope propagation. - Simplified core company access UI and moved advanced controls behind plugin-provided settings surfaces. - Added retry-now affordances for blocked issue next-step notices. - Added protected-assignment enforcement for persisted agent/project/issue policies, including explicit-grant fallback behavior. - Added incremental principal-access compatibility backfill for active agent memberships and role-default human permission grants. - Added the Markdown code block wrap action fix from the latest branch changes. - Removed `design/` artifacts from the PR and removed `packages/plugins/plugin-briefs` from the final diff. - Addressed Greptile feedback for plugin actor sanitization, legacy membership handling, audit pagination, unknown grant-scope metadata, and startup test mocks. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/access-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts` -> 2 files passed, 54 tests passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts server/src/__tests__/access-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts` -> 3 files passed, 62 tests passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/authorization-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/plugin-access-authorization-host-services.test.ts server/src/__tests__/server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts` -> 3 files passed, 28 tests passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` -> passed. - `git diff --check` -> passed. - `node ./scripts/check-docker-deps-stage.mjs` -> passed. - `CI=true pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts` -> passed with no lockfile update. - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.interaction.test.tsx` -> 1 test passed. - `git ls-files design packages/plugins/plugin-briefs | wc -l` -> 0. - GitHub CI on `40cd83b53` -> all checks passed, merge state `CLEAN`. - Greptile on `40cd83b53` -> 5/5, 102 files reviewed, 0 comments/annotations added, 0 unresolved review threads. - Confirmed the PR diff contains no `design/`, `packages/plugins/plugin-briefs`, `pnpm-lock.yaml`, or `.github/workflows` changes. ## Risks - Medium: task assignment authorization paths are behaviorally stricter for protected/private policy data, so existing plugin-authored policies may block assignment until explicit grants or approval flows are configured. - Medium: plugin-host authorization APIs expand the surface area available to trusted plugins and need careful review for company scoping. - Low: startup now performs a principal-access compatibility backfill, but the migration and runtime backfill use conflict-tolerant inserts. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent, tool-enabled workflow with shell, git, and GitHub CLI access. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |