320 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Clément	df5a78cf91	fix(ui): keep iPhone task chat stable while typing and streaming (#17232) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip keeps human-agent conversations attached to tasks. > - People need to read and reply comfortably from a phone. > - The mobile task page scrolled the document and positioned its composer with a sticky navigation offset. > - Safari's keyboard resize and later focus pan could move that document again, causing overlap, gaps, and jumps while editing. > - This change gives mobile and desktop the same message scroller and a normal flex footer. > - CSS owns the layout. A small VisualViewport adapter handles the visible height and Safari's stale document focus scroll. > - Streaming no longer measures every historical row while following the bottom. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Fixes https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/issues/16497 Related: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15245 also addresses keyboard positioning. This change additionally removes mobile document auto-follow and reduces historical-row measurement work. ## What Changed ### One scroll owner and a natural-flow composer Before: ```text Document scroll + mobile auto-follow └─ Conversation + sticky composer + animated navigation offset ``` After: ```text Height-constrained conversation shell ├─ Header ├─ Message scroller — owns follow/reading position └─ Composer — normal flex footer Navigation stays at the layout viewport bottom, behind the keyboard ``` - Reuse TaskMessageScroller on mobile. Delete the separate 136-line useWindowAutoFollow implementation and its superseded tests. - Keep the composer in normal flex flow. Remove its sticky bottom positioning and navigation-offset animation. - Constrain the mobile conversation with CSS. Classic tasks and other pages retain their existing layout. - Add a 47-line useMobileVisualViewport hook. It changes shell height on resize, not on typing or incoming messages. It never translates the shell or hides navigation. - Reject Safari's stale document focus pan only for an unzoomed, keyboard-open conversation. Inner message and editor scrolling stay native. - Keep a saved reading anchor when reading older messages. Skip historical-row measurements while following the bottom. - Update tests and the existing mobile streaming fixture. Keep only two layout-contract sentences in DESIGN.md. **Scope:** 19 files, +367 / -482 lines: 115 fewer lines overall. Production UI/CSS alone is +158 / -190 lines. No API, database, or dependency changes. ## Verification Bottom-follow is also saved explicitly for Back navigation. A new regression covers returning after rotation changes message wrapping, without restoring historical-row scans. ### Physical iPhone acceptance Tested on an iPhone 15 Pro running iOS 26.7.1. The reporter confirmed: - Opening the keyboard positions the composer correctly immediately, before any typing. - The installed web app works. - Long drafts, insertion, deletion, and sending are acceptable. The reporter described long drafts as not perfect but good enough. - Reading older messages during incoming output preserves position; returning to the bottom resumes following. - Rotation, keyboard close/reopen, and attachment/picker transitions work. Remote inspection corroborated the corrected open-keyboard state: visible height 358px, composer bottom 358px, document scrollY 0. Navigation remained display:block at y=631px, behind the keyboard. Earlier candidates failed device testing. The decisive trace showed a correct viewport resize followed about one frame later by a stale 337px native document focus pan. Typing caused Safari to correct it. Tests now cover that event ordering, the reverse ordering, and zoom panning. ### Performance evidence The existing TaskChatPerfHarness supplied 200 historical responses, 4,000 collapsed tools, and 30 updates at 100ms intervals. | Measurement | Before | After | | --- | ---: | ---: | | Historical row geometry reads | 6,000 | 0 | | Renderer main-thread work | 331.2ms | 273.5ms | | Largest task | 27.1ms | 12.3ms | This is one instrumented Chromium development run on the Mac, not a phone benchmark or a statistical speedup claim. The zero-row-measurement result also has a regression test that failed with 6,000 reads before the change. To reproduce, serve ui/tests/task-chat-perf.html with the UI Vite server. Record 30 streaming updates at the bottom. Inspect TaskMessageScroller and row getBoundingClientRect calls. Existing historical-render tests also confirm that unchanged Markdown does not reparse on live-tail updates. ### Automated and full-app checks - [Current-head CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39862524031) is green: 54 successful checks and 2 skipped checks. Greptile rates the current head 5/5, confirms the Back-navigation fix, and has no unresolved findings. - **601 focused tests pass** across the task page, layout, composer, scroller, viewport adapter, and historical-render coverage. - UI typecheck and production build pass. - Token gates, Storybook catalog checks, and catalog/map structural tests pass. - Independent review of the final source tree passed with no findings. - The full source app ran on macOS with an isolated database and saved conversation history. A reply sent through the real UI persisted after reload. Provider execution was not part of this layout test. - **Full local repository checks did not pass.** Build/typecheck stop at missing Rust cargo. The full test run reported 142 failed server tests and 3 failed suites; missing cargo is confirmed in those three suites. The other server failures were not diagnosed in this UI task. Current-head CI now supplies the repository-wide evidence; these local failures remain disclosed. ## Risks - Mobile conversations now share the desktop scroll owner. Navigation, loading, history restoration, and reading-position tests cover that change. - The keyboard-state threshold is a 120px viewport reduction. Accessory-only keyboards retain the normal navigation spacing. - The document-scroll fallback is scoped to rendered conversations with an open keyboard at scale 1. It does not handle inner scrolling or prevent zoom panning. - Long-draft behavior is accepted, with minor polish still possible. - The UI change is reversible and requires no data migration. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 Astra, exact model ID gpt-6-astra, through OpenCode. Capabilities used: reasoning, code editing, tests, Chromium performance tracing, and Safari remote inspection. The harness does not expose the context-window size. An independent general-purpose subagent reviewed the final tree; its serving model ID was 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 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 - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run focused tests locally and they pass; repository-wide failures are disclosed 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	2026-10-26 08:44:39 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	d64cb7be52	fix(ui): identify accounts in AI connection choices (#17738) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agent settings select an authorized AI account independently of the harness and model. > - Multiple accounts can have the same provider name. > - The account picker and legacy adoption dialog showed only that name. > - Operators could not distinguish a personal API key from a shared subscription during credential repair. > - This pull request shows the existing sign-in method, sharing scope, and available account identity before selection and adoption. > - Operators can select the intended account while the existing access and validation checks remain effective. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #14970 for the shared account selection control. No duplicate account-identity repair was found. **What happened?** Two authorized OpenAI accounts appeared as identical `OpenAI` choices. The adoption dialog repeated that ambiguous name. The list response already contained the account method, scope, and identity, but the UI omitted them. **Expected behavior** An operator can distinguish a personal API key from a company-shared subscription and confirm the selected account before saving. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Make a personal OpenAI API-key account and a shared OpenAI subscription available to an agent. Give both the name `OpenAI`. 2. Open Harness / Runtime and choose a managed connection for a legacy agent. 3. Inspect the two choices and the adoption confirmation. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on master `a1f77821b9cd5c9c846fdf7a0fa5cc620ad2b6bb`. **Deployment mode** Hosted staging and the source UI regression. ## What Changed - Show the sign-in method, personal/shared scope, and available account or owner identity in connection labels. - Use the same label in the selected value and legacy adoption confirmation. Match the confirmation to both the connection and grant. Wrap dropdown choices so narrow screens retain the account identity, and expose the full selected label in the trigger title. - Add a behavioral regression with duplicate provider names, exact grant selection, and disabled unavailable accounts. - Update affected Storybook interaction selectors, the account guide, and the agent verification recipe. ## Verification - Before the fix, the new regression fails because duplicate accounts have no distinguishing metadata. The other 13 field tests pass. - After the fix, all 67 tests in `ui/src/components/ai-connections` pass. The regression selects the exact personal grant and keeps the unavailable option disabled. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass locally. The full `pnpm test:run` command was stopped after embedded PostgreSQL failed to initialize after five attempts in an unrelated native-runtime suite. Its log is retained. Current-head CI partitions must establish full test coverage. - Token gates, map checks, Storybook catalog checks, and all 30 map/catalog contract tests pass. - In local Chrome, the existing production-component Storybook dropdown shows method and scope. Its nine interaction steps pass, as do all 19 steps in the new-agent connection-modes story. At a 320-pixel preview width, two shared OpenAI subscriptions show their distinct account identities in full, including during keyboard selection. These fixtures do not establish provider authentication. - Separately, the staging credential-repair workflow validated an existing authorized shared OpenAI connection, persisted the agent binding across reload, and resumed the original task into real provider/tool execution. This configuration recovery does not deploy this UI patch or establish task completion. - All CI completes on final head `a283bda2ad2f026f4f3c0fee03bf2962b0ad6e02`: 55 successful checks, the neutral Paperclip review, and two intentionally skipped Storybook checks; no pending or failed checks. This includes the partitioned tests, typecheck, build, runner suites, canary, and eight browser shards. Greptile and Paperclip review both rate this exact head 5/5 with no unresolved findings. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40338613167). - The review's selected-trigger truncation finding is fixed in the final head. Its title assertion failed before the fix, and all 67 account-selection tests, UI typecheck, and token gates pass afterward. ## Risks - Labels are longer and can truncate in narrow selected-value controls; the trigger title exposes the complete label. Dropdown choices wrap, and the adoption dialog uses the complete label. - The UI uses existing authorized account metadata. It adds no credential reads, access grants, provider fallback, or account selection policy. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6). The exact serving model identifier and context window are not exposed in this session. The agent used code editing, terminal tests, and browser tools. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-26 10:28:59 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	d0c8f0b090	fix: explain project access denials and add an authorized repair path (#17509) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Low-trust agents may read only the projects in their allowed scope. > - Workspace setup correctly stops a task outside that scope. > - The task previously showed a generic failure, and agent settings did not offer an additive repair. > - This pull request explains the denial and lets authorized operators add projects while preserving other restrictions. > - The saved task then offers an explicit retry. Saving access does not start work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A project access denial appeared as an ordinary failed attempt. Operators could not add a second allowed project from agent settings. **Expected behavior** The task should explain the denied access and link to a working permission editor. The editor should preserve existing scope and restrictions, enforce operator authority, and retain drafts after a failed save. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Assign a low-trust agent to a task whose project is outside its allowed projects. 2. Let workspace setup deny project access. 3. Open the task, follow Manage project access, add the project, save, reload, and return to the task. 4. Confirm that the saved message remains and Retry task is a separate action. ## What Changed - Record a typed, non-retryable project denial before provider dispatch. Project denials do not enter automatic continuation or provider comment policy. - Project current and historical setup denials into a safe task notice. Keep unrelated failures, prior assignees, and approval/pause/budget gates separate. Recheck current project authority, including standard trust and root-issue grants. Accepted retries keep their working state. - Add board-only project-access reads and additive saves under the agent row lock. Enforce company scope, agent-management authority, pending-approval restrictions, and an audit record for new additions. - Add the production notice and searchable multi-project editor, including read-only, saving, cancellation, and failed-save states. Preserve the return-to-task query through canonical agent redirects. - Register board-only project-access routes in OpenAPI with a strict request schema. - Add production Storybook examples and API/persistence/concurrency regressions. Retain the approved design snapshot and update the behavior maps and implementation contract. ## Verification - Passed: `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `pnpm build-storybook`, `pnpm check:token-gates`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs`. - Passed: 11 permission/projection tests and 30 run-completion tests against an isolated PostgreSQL database. These cover historical failures, concurrent additions, idempotent audit, preserved restrictions, foreign projects, read-only users, agent self-grants, and no automatic wakeup. - Passed: all 27 OpenAPI route tests, including route coverage and the new board-only request/response contract. - Browser: the real app displayed a historical denial; Manage project access opened the editor; saving retained the original project and survived reload; Return to task showed the ready notice. Saving created one audit event and zero runs. Explicit Retry returned 202 and reached the separate sandbox requirement, which remained enforced. No external provider was used. - All five production Storybook interaction checks pass: blocked task, save, cancellation, failed-save recovery, and read-only settings. These use fixture callbacks; durable authorization is covered separately above. - `pnpm test:run` was attempted locally but stopped after repeated embedded PostgreSQL startup failures caused by macOS semaphore exhaustion. Full-suite CI is required before merge. The separate UI suite passed all 9,095 tests. The 41 focused server regressions also passed after rebasing onto the latest master. A further 26 recovery-classification tests pass, including a red-to-green regression for automatic continuation after a project denial. ## Risks - No schema migration. The new endpoint only adds same-company project IDs and preserves the rest of the stored policy. - The historical notice recognizes one exact setup denial message. It does not display arbitrary run errors or disclose a different source project's identity. - The retry still passes all current admission and isolation checks. The notice does not promise that other execution requirements are satisfied. - Related open work: #13309 covers inherited secret restrictions; #11234 covers the broader repository catalog. This change does not replace either policy surface. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with code execution and browser tools. The precise runtime model ID and context-window size were not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` 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 server and full UI suites; full-suite infrastructure limit 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>	2026-10-24 16:16:29 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	87bf89756e	fix: support Daytona runner upgrades and ignore obsolete Claude options (#17361) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Existing Claude and Codex agents can upgrade to Paperclip Runner. > - A Daytona computer needs platform qualification before Runner becomes its default. > - The upgrade notice required that default, so it hid the action that could start qualification. > - Saved Claude turn limits also caused conversion to fail even though Runner can run without them. > - This pull request verifies the computer on click and ignores obsolete Claude options with a warning. > - Agents retain their model, account, environment, instructions, and permission policy. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #17122. **What happened?** A legacy Claude agent on a Daytona snapshot had no upgrade button until its environment had platform qualification. A saved `maxTurnsPerRun: 1000` then caused conversion to return HTTP 422. **Expected behavior** The upgrade action verifies a supported Daytona computer and converts the agent. Unsupported tuning options produce a visible warning and do not block execution. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a legacy Claude agent with `maxTurnsPerRun: 1000` on an active Daytona snapshot. 2. Open Runtime before the environment has platform qualification. 3. Try to upgrade to Paperclip Runner. **Paperclip version or commit** After #17122, reproduced against `9c442cf48e`. ## What Changed - Offer upgrade on probe-capable Daytona snapshots and immutable sandbox images. Perform the public environment probe only after a click. Save after fresh adapter discovery confirms support. - Resolve the actual computer for explicit, instance-default, and hidden managed environments. Preserve pending edits and reject stale probe results. - Ignore Claude `maxTurnsPerRun`, `chrome`, `warmHandleIdleMs`, and `acpWarmHandleIdleMs`. Return structured warnings from create, hire, and update. Show warnings in Runtime and after a save. - Keep validation for commands, credentials, filesystem, network, and permission settings. - Retain the legacy turn limit in the existing live conversion fixture. Update regression tests, upgrade stories, and capability maps. ## Verification - Red: the old route returns HTTP 422 for the saved turn limit; the old form hides the Daytona upgrade notice. - Green: 417 focused server and form tests pass. A further 188 tests pass after the review fixes. Qualification coverage includes failed probes, unsupported targets, changed settings, managed defaults, unsaved environment variables, and forced Kubernetes targets. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. Token gates, map checks, map tests, and Storybook catalog checks pass. - Real local Claude Opus 5.5 conversion and task pass, with the downloaded artifact checked against seeded source bytes, SHA-256, and Git commit. - Real browser upgrade and full Claude Opus 5.5 task on a disposable named Daytona snapshot pass at `b81cec7d8c`. The saved agent retains its model, high effort, credentials, timeout, and grace settings while dropping the turn limit with a visible warning. Exactly one successful run completed the task. The downloaded artifact matched independently seeded source bytes, SHA-256, and Git commit; the source was unchanged, no interactions remained pending, and the delivery link survived a browser reload. The snapshot used current runtime assets built from public source. The supplied Daytona account could not access the original staging snapshot, so this verifies an equivalent local fixture rather than that exact snapshot. Disposable test resources were cleaned up. - Earlier live attempts remain recorded: an image-based sandbox creation failed, and the first named-snapshot probe returned failure with unresolved provisional cleanup identity. Later named-snapshot probing and the task succeeded; the initial creation failures are not attributed to this PR or declared resolved. A separate attempt using the Oct 18 cached runtime failed the current provider-pack compatibility check; rebuilding the runtime from matching public source removed that mismatch. Owned resources were identified and cleaned up, with diagnostic databases retained. - 54 checks passed at `b81cec7d8c`, with no failed checks; Greptile and Paperclip Review both scored 5/5, with both review threads resolved. Master advanced during the live proof, so the branch was rebased with both sides of additive import/test conflicts retained. On the rebased head `2b74222b94`, 472 focused tests, UI typecheck, and UI build pass. All required CI gates pass; Greptile and Paperclip Review both score 5/5 on this head, with no unresolved review threads. The PR is mergeable. The serial local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after the CI test lanes passed; that local run is not claimed as a pass. ## Risks - An explicit upgrade can allocate a temporary probe sandbox and take several minutes. Probe failures leave the agent on its existing runner. - Ignored options no longer enforce a turn cap, Chrome integration, or legacy idle-time tuning. The UI warns about each active ignored option. - Unsafe or ambiguous execution settings still fail validation. This change does not weaken environment qualification or runtime artifact checks. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, code execution, and browser tools. 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>	2026-10-24 07:59:18 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	4d90634f74	feat(connections): add 1Password service-account connector (#17249) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and govern their access to outside services. > - Apps connections keep provider credentials in the instance vault and mediate every action through grants, policies, and audit. > - Agents currently have no Apps connection for reading or managing 1Password items with an operator-supplied service-account token. > - 1Password supports this through its official SDK; its documentation MCP server does not expose vault operations. > - This pull request adds a one-field service-account connection and registers eight reviewed SDK actions through the existing native-provider catalog. > - Operators can select vault permissions in 1Password and agent/action access in Paperclip without installing a CLI or handing durable credentials to agents. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #16144 adds 1Password as Paperclip's secret-storage backend. This PR adds the separate Apps/tool-access flow with a per-connection credential; it does not change secret providers or use a server-wide ambient token. **Subsystem affected** Apps catalog, native tool-provider registry, and shared connection setup. **Problem or motivation** People need to paste their own `OP_SERVICE_ACCOUNT_TOKEN`, find official service-account setup instructions, and authorize agents to use the selected vaults through ordinary Paperclip governance. **Proposed solution** Add `1password/service-account`, with a password field labeled **Paste your 1Password Service Account token** and a link to [1Password's creation instructions](https://www.1password.dev/service-accounts/get-started#create-a-service-account). Use the pinned official `@1password/sdk` 0.5.0 for vault/item listing, item and secret-reference reads, and item create/update/archive/delete. **Alternatives considered** A remote MCP card would not provide vault access. A local CLI or a third-party MCP package adds installation and credential surfaces that the official SDK avoids. ## What Changed - Added the source and generated catalog definition, permission review, official light/dark artwork, documentation, and capability-map references. - Added a provider-owned SDK bridge with strict schemas, account-domain validation, contract hashes, fixed errors, bounded output, and disposable workers with cancellation/deadlines. - Registered the provider through master's native-provider catalog; existing setup, health, discovery, gateway, policy, and audit owners remain in place. - Labeled the single password field **Paste your 1Password Service Account token**. The shared formatter preserves explicit credential prompts; ordinary key labels retain their existing presentation. - Added credential-ownership, gateway read/write, policy/revocation, worker, setup UI, and interactive Storybook coverage. ## Verification - Final review follow-up: added two deterministic worker-entry tests for nested exact-token redaction and oversized-output rejection. Removing each guard caused exactly its regression test to fail. The focused provider suite passed **15 tests**, and the official server typecheck passed after rebuilding stale workspace SDK artifacts. Current head `569cb7f9bd57db791fb13a6034ce69bf50878cb1` passed the full [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40016166260), including typecheck, build, unit/integration tests, and all eight browser shards. The required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e` gates passed. [Greptile](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/17249#issuecomment-6353731805) and [Paperclip Review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/17249#issuecomment-6372165895) each rated this exact head **5/5**, with no open findings. Paperclip Review completed with a neutral check because its scoped reviewer could not inspect CI; the full CI result was verified separately. Other neutral checks and intentionally skipped Storybook jobs contain no actionable findings. - CI recovery on the same commit: the first attempt lost six jobs. Five logged simultaneous runner shutdowns at 18:49 UTC on 2026-10-23; the sixth stopped logging before a test result and its root cause was not established. No assertion failure appeared in the retrieved logs. All six jobs and the aggregate gates passed one failed-job retry. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40005754936). - Copy follow-up: the catalog, provider, and setup UI suites passed **275 tests**. The governed gateway lifecycle passed **3 tests** (one live-only test skipped), including create, update, archive, and delete. UI token gates and map checks passed. The branch was rebased onto `9c442cf48e` to resolve additive catalog conflicts while retaining the Vercel and Supabase entries. The existing live write proof below remains applicable; this follow-up changes presentation only. - Five affected suites, including the existing Daytona consumer, passed **290 tests** (one opt-in live test skipped in fixture mode). Full `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. The local broad-suite attempt could not complete because PostgreSQL semaphore exhaustion prevented a competing integration suite from starting; the complete affected-file retry passed after disposable-process cleanup. The prior commit `f208a8aff6dc28859cc3f343497e18d85f124579` passed the complete CI matrix. All CI build, typecheck, test, and browser gates also passed on the earlier commit `9e2f3d3140368a08da43b004b2e8d3a0f4c0fa4d`. The separate Paperclip Review reported a worker-result regression-test gap on that head; the follow-up above addresses it. Its review thread is resolved, and both fresh current-head reviews are clean as recorded above. - Token gates, module boundaries, brand validation, map checks, and Storybook catalog checks passed. - Direct SDK create/archive/delete and rejected-call coverage passed (13 provider tests); the Storybook Permissions/Test play completed successfully in Chromium. Server and UI typechecks passed after those fixes. Greptile passed prior commit `9e2f3d3140368a08da43b004b2e8d3a0f4c0fa4d` at **5/5**. Both reviewers also passed the worker-test follow-up at **5/5** as recorded above. - Live 1Password proof on 2026-10-22: connect, eight-action discovery, vault listing through an actual run-scoped gateway, refresh, reconnect preserving identity, another read, removal, and denial through the retained session passed. Credential absence was asserted in responses/audit; an exact-token scan of inspected logs and changed files passed. - Real browser: Connectors → 1Password → token entry → personal access limited to one disposable agent → completion → Permissions → Test `onepassword_list_vaults` succeeded. The disposable connection was removed afterward. - Compiled-worker smoke initially exposed inherited Node launch flags. Workers now use explicit empty `execArgv`; the compiled worker then authenticated successfully and listed one vault. - Live write proof on **2026-10-23**: the replacement Keychain token passed all eight actions through the actual run-scoped gateway for both personal and shared credentials. The test created, listed, read, updated, resolved a secret from, archived, and deleted two synthetic items. Both were absent from subsequent item lists. Refresh/reconnect, identity preservation, removal, retained-session denial, and credential absence passed. The live suite passed **3 tests** (one fixture-only test skipped) in 116.65 seconds. The expanded fixture suite passed **3 tests** (one live-only test skipped); the 13 provider tests and server typecheck passed. An exact-token scan passed over 64 source/log files. - Failure history: the original token denied creation on 2026-10-22 and created no item. The first 2026-10-23 attempt stopped before provider calls because host PostgreSQL semaphore limits prevented test-database startup. A temporary ten-connection test profile allowed the complete retry to pass without changing shared services or host limits. A new delete-result assertion also exposed an outdated fixture response (`success` instead of `deleted`); the fixture was corrected and the complete fixture suite passed. Official contract sources: [service accounts](https://www.1password.dev/service-accounts/get-started), [SDKs](https://www.1password.dev/sdks), [item management](https://www.1password.dev/sdks/manage-items), [official JavaScript SDK](https://github.com/1Password/onepassword-sdk-js). ## Risks - Authorized item/secret reads intentionally return secret values to the agent and ordinary tool-result history. Select trusted agents and use restricted service-account vaults; the connection token itself is redacted. - New connections retain existing Paperclip action defaults, including Allowed writes/destructive actions for selected agents. 1Password still enforces the token's permissions. - Service-account access cannot be changed in place. Create a replacement account and reconnect to change vault permissions; read-only keys can connect but cannot write. - SDK authentication happens per action in a disposable worker. Calls have a 30-second maximum; cancellation stops local work, while a mutation already accepted by 1Password can still finish. Writes are never automatically retried. - Additive dependency and catalog change; no database migration. Disable/remove the connection to withdraw access, or remove the provider from catalog visibility for rollback. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with code editing, shell/browser tools, and live provider verification. A more specific runtime model ID and context-window limit were not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-23 13:27:33 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	9bf7dc0c8f	feat(agents): bulk edit connections and default models (#17215) ... Add harness-scoped bulk connection and default-model edits to the agent roster, with compatible choices, change previews, per-agent save results, and retries. Use an icon-based harness filter, keep agent rows readable, remove the status selector and selection hint, and redirect legacy status URLs to the full roster. Preserve authorization, audit history, unrelated settings, and optimistic concurrency checks through the existing agent update route. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-22 18:47:06 -05:00
Dotta	46760cc588	fix(chat): honor dismissal for all composer requests (#17218) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task conversations show requests in the feed and above the message composer. > - Earlier fixes kept dismissed questions in history, but excluded completion reviews and other request kinds. > - Closing those forms left a pending badge, and the server could still demand a response. > - This pull request saves human dismissal and removes the request from composer reminders and ordinary completion gates. > - People can continue the conversation and reopen the request from history. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related work: #15229 and #15392. **What happened?** Dismissing a completion review closed its form but left it counted as pending. It could return after reload, block a retry, or cause the agent to demand another response. Raw runtime requests could also lose their only usable control when dismissed. **Expected behavior** Dismissal leaves an accessible request in the feed and clears the composer form and pending count. It persists after reload. It does not submit an answer, approve an action, or wake the agent. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open a task with a pending completion review or another composer request. 2. Dismiss the request, then reload the task. 3. Check that the composer stays clear and the feed entry can reopen the request. ## What Changed - Add nullable dismissal fields and a human-only dismissal endpoint with company, private-task access, resolver, and locked review-policy checks. - Persist saved-request dismissal on the server. Keep browser persistence for raw runtime requests and existing question dismissals. - Keep confirmations, choices, item verdicts, suggested tasks, and runtime requests accessible in the feed. - Exclude dismissed ordinary requests from completion and retry gates. Tell agents not to repeat deferred requests. - Preserve tool, secret, connection, plan, company-policy, and configured review authorization gates. Expire deferred non-question requests when their task completes. - Preserve the selected form when another dismissal finishes saving. Keep reopened reviews visible through delayed comment refreshes. - Add a completion-review Storybook test drive and update design, API, database, and capability documentation. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. The final UI changes also passed the UI typecheck. - `pnpm build`: passed. The final UI changes also passed the UI production build. - Focused UI and transcript tests: 550 passed across nine files after merging the current base branch. - Focused database, completion, and prompt tests: 105 passed across three files, including two review-policy regressions that failed before the fix. The tests reject a review requester excluded by current policy, preserve the pending gate on denial, and permit an independent reviewer to defer the request. - Route regression suite: 81 passed, including denial before reading or mutating a private-task request. - `pnpm check:token-gates`: passed. - Map and Storybook structural checks: passed; 30 map/catalog script tests passed. - Browser: used the production task-thread components in the completion-review fixture. Dismissed, reloaded, reopened from the feed, and dismissed again. No pending badge or composer takeover remained. Story callbacks simulate API saves; separate server tests cover persistence and permissions. - `pnpm test:run`: stopped after the general-server group reported one failure in `workspace-runtime.test.ts`: "returns a bounded structured conflict and exposes only same-company workspace references". The same test passed in isolation (1 passed, 178 skipped). The cause of the full-suite failure is not established. The full PR CI suite subsequently passed on e243cbb001; its two authorization review findings are fixed in 9e1b4478b3. Fresh [full CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39871944846) passes on 9e1b4478b3, including the previously failing server and browser shards. All 54 executed checks passed; two optional Storybook deployment/visual jobs were skipped. The legacy security status also passed. Fresh Greptile review is 5/5, the security scan passes, and no review threads remain open. This full CI run settles the merge gate; the earlier local workspace-suite failure remains recorded above because its cause was not established. - Additional verification: the original failing browser journey passed locally after the delayed-refresh fix. The expanded page-reload case also passes on 9e1b4478b3 (52.7s): dismiss, reload, reopen, approve, and receive the actual tool failure in the continuing task. It exposed a fixture reading an accepted request before tool execution finished; the fixture now waits for a stored execution result. The first reload attempt stopped on a still-loading page at the default five-second assertion; the reload now uses the suite’s navigation allowance. A controlled server-restart run timed out waiting for server health before the UI assertions. Local route-suite runs timed out during concurrent module loading; sequential imports passed all 81 tests, including the privacy regression. - Initial verification failures: a missing SDK build and a story fixture type error were fixed. PostgreSQL bootstrap then failed because the host had exhausted its semaphore allowance. After explicit operator approval, 64 verified abandoned PostgreSQL semaphore sets were reclaimed; no live process was stopped. The database regressions then passed. The raw-runtime regression exposed a missing feed control; the implementation now preserves that entry and the regression passes. ## Risks - Apply the additive database migration before the new server code. It adds two nullable columns and does not change existing decisions. - A dismissal is shared task attention state. Only a human with task read access and current resolver/review authority can persist it. Review policy is checked under the task lock. The operation is idempotent and records the dismissing user. - Raw runtime dismissal remains specific to a browser. Saved interaction dismissal persists across browsers. - A deferred review is not an approval. Tests retain protected-action and configured review gates. - The browser walkthrough uses a fixture. This branch has not been deployed to a live instance. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with code execution and browser tools. The exact backend 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	2026-10-22 18:37:36 -05:00
TonioandClaude Fable 5.1	341b622604	feat(ui): Artifacts V1 behind an experimental setting — Artifacts page, panel tab and task thread (#17228) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Agents produce artifacts: documents, files, pictures, video and links. The app shows them on the Artifacts page, in the right panel's Artifacts tab and in the task thread > - The artifact directions lab (#17213) settled a presentation for those surfaces, MVP V1, drawn from the PCLP-Core mocks. It is a reference, not product code > - Shipping it means product components on product data, token-only, behind a switch, one surface at a time, so the current presentation stays the default until the new one has been used > - This pull request adds the switch (Settings > Experimental > Artifacts V1), the `--artifact-*` tokens, the V1 primitives as product components, and the V1 presentation on all three surfaces behind the switch: the Artifacts page, the panel's Artifacts tab and the task thread > - The benefit is the redesign in the product, reversible by one setting, with every existing behaviour of those surfaces kept ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public issue exists. This section follows the feature request template; the plan is `doc/plans/2026-10-22-artifacts-mvp-v1.md`. **Subsystem affected** The web UI (`ui/`): the Artifacts page, the right panel's Artifacts tab and the task thread. The experimental settings contract in `packages/shared` and `server` gains one boolean. **Problem or motivation** The three artifact surfaces grew separately and their artifact presentation is dated and inconsistent. The lab produced a measured direction; nothing in the product uses it yet. **Proposed solution** An experimental setting, `enableArtifactsV1`, default off, with the same plumbing as the other experimental settings. Product primitives under `ui/src/components/artifacts/v1` (kind helpers and adapters, the sheet and print artwork, the stack, the page tiles with the Paper Mono pill, the row the panel and thread will share), driven by `--artifact-*` tokens in `index.css` with light and dark values. With the setting on: the Artifacts page shows one row of views (Tasks, All files, Images, Videos, Documents, Text, Files) and the V1 tiles, a task with several artifacts as a stack whose newest artifact is the first page, everything else as single tiles; the panel's Artifacts tab is one flat list of V1 rows, newest first, with the expandable rows (Markdown review surface, document annotations, deep links) keeping their behaviour behind the row as their face; the thread shows a message's files as rows under its footer and registered deliverables and documents as one row each. The hover movement respects reduced motion. **Alternatives considered** Replacing the current cards outright: no fallback and three surfaces to land at once. Mounting the lab's components: they are typed on lab fixtures and keep lab-local tokens, which the token gates reject. The primitives were ported instead and the lab stays a reference. **Roadmap alignment** Supports the "Artifacts & Work Products" theme in `ROADMAP.md`. Presentation only; no data model change. **Additional context** No new API fields: the tiles show title, identifier, count and "Updated …"; rows take sizes from the work-product and attachment payloads; a picture's aspect ratio comes from the loaded image, 4:3 until it loads. The plan records what each surface keeps and what it drops (run sections in the panel; the "Images · N / Files · N" labels and the four-up grid in the thread). ## What Changed - Add the `enableArtifactsV1` experimental setting: shared type, validator and feature catalog, server defaults and managed keys, the `useArtifactsV1Enabled` hook, and the Settings > Experimental toggle (in its alphabetical place). - Add the `--artifact-*` tokens and the Artifacts V1 component rules to `ui/src/index.css`: light values on `:root`, dark overrides, and the hover movement under `prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference`. - Add `ui/src/components/artifacts/v1/`: `kinds.ts` (kind treatment, labels, glyphs, the server's media-kind rule, adapters from `CompanyArtifact`), `geometry.ts` (the measured constants), `when.ts`, `ArtifactSheet`, `ArtifactPrint`, `ArtifactStack`, `ArtifactFront`, `ArtifactTile` (stack and single tiles, caption, grid), `ArtifactRow` (the row and its inline group), `ArtifactsV1Filters`, with the mock's SVG assets. - Wire the Artifacts page: with the setting on, the toolbar's filter row becomes the V1 views and the grid renders V1 tiles; the toolbar takes an optional `filters` row for this. The old cards and kind filters stay the default. - Wire the panel's Artifacts tab (`IssuePropertiesArtifactsTab`): with the setting on, one flat list of V1 rows, newest first; `DocumentRow` and `MarkdownWorkProductRow` take a `face` render prop so the V1 row fronts their unchanged expansion, review and deep-link behaviour; `PanelFileRow` opens attachments and attachment-backed work products the way the shipped card does (gallery, text tab, new tab) with open and download beside the name; other work products are a link row with their status. - Wire the task thread: `TaskChatBubble` hangs a message's files under its footer as V1 rows inline (pictures and video to the gallery, text to a text tab, files to a new tab) in place of the media grid and file chips; `TaskChatProtocolCard`'s resource rows render deliverables, documents and attachments as one V1 row each, opening where the card did. - `ArtifactRow` keeps trailing controls beside its own control (no nested interactive elements) and can be a link, an in-app anchor, a new-tab anchor or a button; adapters read work products, documents, attachments and message references. - Add a catalogued Storybook story, `Components/Artifact V1 primitives`, under `documents-artifacts`, on fixtures. - Add tests: the primitives (kinds, dates, print fitting, tiles, rows), the hook, the Artifacts page, the panel's Artifacts tab, the task-chat bubble and the protocol card, each with the setting on and off; the settings page and server tests list the new key. - Add `doc/plans/2026-10-22-artifacts-mvp-v1.md`. ## Verification - Run `cd ui && pnpm typecheck`: the Storybook catalog accepts the new story, and `tsc -b` is clean apart from the five pre-existing `PluginOrganizationSwitcher` errors. - Run `pnpm check:token-gates` and `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`: clean. - Run `cd ui && npx vitest run src/components/artifacts src/components/issue-properties src/components/task-chat/TaskChatBubble.test.tsx src/components/task-chat/TaskChatBubble.artifactsV1.test.tsx src/components/task-chat/TaskChatProtocolCard.test.tsx src/components/task-chat/TaskChatProtocolCard.artifactsV1.test.tsx src/pages/Artifacts.test.tsx src/hooks/useArtifactsV1Enabled.test.ts src/pages/InstanceExperimentalSettings.test.tsx`: the suites pass (151 tests in the last run). - Run `cd packages/shared && npx vitest run src/feature-catalog.test.ts` and `cd server && npx vitest run src/__tests__/instance-settings-service.test.ts`: pass. - Manual: open Settings > Experimental, turn on Artifacts V1. On the Artifacts page the view row reads Tasks, All files, Images, Videos, Documents, Text, Files; tasks with several artifacts show as stacks, hovering fans the pages and lifts the artwork (not under reduced motion); Images shows single tiles with bordered prints. Open a task's Artifacts tab: one list of rows, newest first; a Markdown work product still expands into its review surface, a document still opens in its tab. In the thread, a message's files sit under its footer as rows. Turn the setting off: everything returns to the current presentation. - Storybook: `Tasks and conversations / Documents, attachments, and work products / Components / Artifact V1 primitives`. - Not run: the full `pnpm test:run` and `pnpm build` (CI runs them), and a browser pass against a dev instance with real artifacts on the three surfaces; that pass is the remaining step before this leaves draft. ## Risks - Off by default; with the setting off, the only changes on a product path are an optional `filters` prop on the toolbar, an optional `face` prop on two panel rows, a read of the setting in the bubble and the protocol card, and the new token declarations. - With the setting on, the Artifacts page's view tabs set two URL parameters (`groupBy`, `kind`) at once; the group-by menu and search are unchanged. - A picture with unknown dimensions renders at 4:3 until it loads, then the print refits once; the frame's height is fixed so nothing below it moves. - About thirty new `--artifact-*` tokens, namespaced and documented in place. ## Model Used - Claude Fable 5.1 by Anthropic, model ID `claude-fable-5-1`, used through Claude Code in the desktop app. Extended reasoning was on. Capabilities used: tool use (shell, file edits, a headless Playwright browser for the lab's measurements, the Figma MCP server for the mocks during the lab work) and image input. The context window is the Claude Code session's; its exact size is not surfaced to the 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 (#17213 is the lab this builds on) - [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 (the suites listed above; CI runs the full set) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (the plan document; no command or product behaviour changes outside the setting) - [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>	2026-10-22 15:14:58 -07:00
TonioandClaude Fable 5.1	def4726bea	feat(ui): add the artifact directions lab with the MVP V1 kit (#17213) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Agents produce artifacts: documents, files, pictures, video and links. The app shows them in the task thread, in the right panel's Artifacts tab and on the Artifacts page > - The three surfaces grew one at a time. Their artifact presentation is dated and does not match > - A redesign needs a side-by-side comparison of several directions on the real chrome, in both themes, with hover states, before any product code changes > - This pull request adds a backend-free design lab under `ui/src/artifact-directions`: the shipped presentation as the baseline, four exploratory directions, and the MVP V1 kit drawn from the PCLP-Core mocks > - The benefit is a shareable, capturable reference for the artifact redesign that touches no product code path ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public issue exists. This section follows the feature request template. **Subsystem affected** The web UI (`ui/`): the task thread, the right panel's Artifacts tab and the Artifacts page. The change is a design lab beside the app, not a change to those surfaces. **Problem or motivation** The three artifact surfaces are being redesigned. Designers must compare candidate directions on the real chrome, in dark and light, with hover states, and share a link. No harness for that exists. Figma mocks do not show the real chrome or the themes. **Proposed solution** A separate Vite entry (`ui/artifact-directions.html`) renders static mocks of the three surfaces. A "kit" supplies the artifact components for each surface. Kits: Today (the shipped components fed with fixtures), four directions (1.Solid, 2.Tint, 3.Tactile, 4.Hybrid) and 5.MVP V1 built from the Figma mocks. A toolbar switches kit, surface, theme and hover animation. The state lives in the URL, so any view can be linked and captured. **Alternatives considered** Figma mocks only: no real chrome, no themes, no hover. Storybook stories only: no page-level composition and no shareable static build. The lab keeps two Storybook stories as a secondary view. **Roadmap alignment** The lab supports the "Artifacts & Work Products" theme in `ROADMAP.md`. It is a design reference. It is not a product feature and it does not ship in the app bundle. **Additional context** The lab builds with its own config (`ui/vite.artifact-directions.config.mjs`). The app's `vite build` does not include it. A build of this branch is live at https://paperclip-artifact-directions.vercel.app. That preview also carries two surfaces that are not in this pull request (a media preview overlay and a panel closeup); they are parked on a separate branch. ## What Changed - Add the lab entry, its Vite config and the shell: `ui/artifact-directions.html`, `ui/vite.artifact-directions.config.mjs`, `ui/src/artifact-directions/` (static frames for the thread, the panel and the Artifacts page, a `fetch` stub for the lab's own page, fixtures, the kit contract, URL state, a sticky two-row toolbar). - Add the Today kit: the shipped artifact components, fed with the lab's fixtures. - Add four directions, each with its own `tokens.css` scoped to `[data-direction]`: 1.Solid, 2.Tint, 3.Tactile, 4.Hybrid. - Add the 5.MVP V1 kit from the PCLP-Core mocks: Artifacts page stacks and single tiles, the right panel's row list, thread rows grouped inline when one message produced several, a hover animation (the backing pages turn 5°, the artwork rises 6px), light-mode values, Paper Mono for the task pill. - Set Paper Mono for every monospace run in the lab (`lab.css`), from the face and `--font-paper-mono` that `index.css` declares. - Add two Storybook stories under `design-proposals` (`artifact-directions-compare`, `artifact-directions-hybrid`), annotated for the Storybook catalog as proposed prototypes on fixtures, and a capture script (`shot.cjs`). - Add two `.claude/launch.json` entries: the lab's dev server and its static preview. - Add Vitest coverage for the lab's logic: URL state, the API stub, the kit's kind treatment, type labels and media kinds, its date labels, print fitting and the thread's inline grouping (six files). ## Verification - Run `cd ui && npx vitest run src/artifact-directions`. The six lab test files pass (31 tests). - Run `cd ui && npx tsc -p tsconfig.json --noEmit`. The output is clean apart from the five pre-existing `PluginOrganizationSwitcher` errors. - Run `node scripts/check-token-gates.mjs`, `node scripts/sync-agent-palette-tokens.mjs --check` and `node scripts/sync-cliplab-character.mjs --check`. All gates are clean. The lab directory is outside the token-gated paths; its tokens are lab-local. - Start the lab: `cd ui && npx vite --config vite.artifact-directions.config.mjs --port 5180`. Open `http://localhost:5180/`. The page lands on 5.MVP V1's Overview in dark mode with animation on. Switch kit, surface and theme in the toolbar; the URL follows. - Open `http://localhost:5180/?d=d5-v1-mvp&s=gallery` and hover a stack: the two backing pages turn and the first page rises. Open `?s=thread` and `?s=panel` for the rows. - Build the lab: `cd ui && ARTIFACT_DIRECTIONS_OUT_DIR=/tmp/artifact-lab npx vite build --config vite.artifact-directions.config.mjs`. - Headless checks ran against the dev server during the work: toolbar labels, defaults and keys; thread and panel row geometry (58px rows, 8px and 12px gaps); the hover animation (5° turn, 6px rise, one easing curve); pill fills per theme; Paper Mono resolution on every monospace run. The measured values are in the kit's doc comments. - Run `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --check` (the check `ui typecheck` runs first): the catalog accepts both stories. - Not run: the repo-wide `pnpm -r typecheck` (it needs the Rust toolchain for `paperclip-runner`) and `pnpm build`. The change adds files under `ui/src/artifact-directions` and `ui/storybook/stories/design-proposals` and edits `.claude/launch.json`; it changes no shipped module. CI runs the full Vitest suite. ## Risks - Low risk for the product. The app bundle does not include the lab. The lab's `fetch` stub installs only on the lab's own page. - Storybook gains two stories; the Storybook build includes them. ## Model Used - Claude Fable 5.1 by Anthropic, model ID `claude-fable-5-1`, used through Claude Code in the desktop app. Extended reasoning was on. Capabilities used: tool use (shell, file edits, a headless Playwright browser for measurements and captures, the Figma MCP server to read the mocks) and image input for mock screenshots. The context window is the Claude Code session's; its exact size is not surfaced to the 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 (none found for "artifact directions lab", "artifacts redesign", "artifacts tab design") - [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 (the lab's Vitest files, the UI typecheck and the token gates; CI runs the full suite) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (no product behaviour or command changed; the lab documents itself in `kit.ts` and the frames) - [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>	2026-10-22 10:38:12 -07:00
TonioandPaperclip	043f2514e6	fix(ui): keep task tabs steady when switching views (#17068) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work. > - A task side panel contains properties, artifacts, and document views. > - These views share one row of tabs. > - Selecting Artifacts adds an upload control beside the row. > - That control reduces the space available to the tabs and changes their widths. > - This pull request reserves the upload control space while the Artifacts tab is open. > - Switching views now keeps the tab widths and positions stable. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #14949. This fixes a layout shift observed after that PR merged. **What happened?** In a narrow task panel, tabs shrink when Artifacts is selected. They expand when another tab is selected. The upload control enters and leaves the header during selection. **Expected behavior** Tab selection must not change the space available to the tab row. Tabs must keep equal widths while the panel width and open tabs remain unchanged. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open Properties, Artifacts, and a document or attachment in a task side panel. 2. Make the side panel narrow enough for tabs to compress. 3. Switch between Artifacts and the other tabs. 4. Observe the tab widths and positions as the upload control appears and disappears. ## What Changed - Keep an upload control slot in the header while an upload-capable Artifacts tab is open. - Hide the control and make it inert when another tab is active. Remove the slot when Artifacts is closed. Agent conversations do not reserve upload space. - Add a component regression test for selection, focus exclusion, and closing the Artifacts tab. - Add a constrained production-panel Storybook case with assertions for equal widths, stable widths across selections, and upload-control visibility. ## Verification - The focused TaskSidePanel and SidePanelTabs suites passed: 52 tests. - UI typecheck, UI build, and token gates passed after replaying the fix onto current master. - The Storybook catalog check and all 28 map/catalog tests passed. - The browser ran `html-artifacts-03-task-journey--stable-tab-widths` successfully. All three tabs measured 71.328125px before and after selecting Properties, the report, and Artifacts. - Review the Stable Tab Widths story under HTML artifacts / 03 Task journey. The fixture mounts the production task panel. Upload requests are outside its scope. - Full repository typecheck, tests, and build were not rerun locally. This machine has no Cargo, and an earlier broad test run hit unrelated server workspace/runtime failures. Full PR CI passed on commit `019e324c0eca815f90d9797194e768fb48cb46b6`. - All 55 successful PR checks are green on the latest head, with no pending or failing checks. The failed end-to-end shard passed on one rerun after a transient database lock timeout during test cleanup; no code changes were needed for the rerun. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39557963507). ## Risks - A blank upload-control space remains when Artifacts is open but inactive. This keeps the tab row stable. - Hidden controls use both visibility and inert state to exclude them from keyboard navigation and accessibility exposure. - No API, database, upload permission, or saved-tab format changes. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The runtime did not expose a more specific model ID or context window. Used reasoning, code execution, and browser inspection. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-21 22:21:42 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	0f15f82b19	feat: offer existing Claude and Codex agents a runner upgrade (#17122) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Each agent stores its harness, model, account and runtime configuration. > - New Claude and Codex agents now use Paperclip Runner on qualified targets. > - Existing agents keep their legacy runner and need a clear upgrade action. > - The existing configuration API already translates settings and records revisions. > - This pull request adds an explicit upgrade action that uses that API. > - Operators can retain supported settings and correct rejected settings in place. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Existing Claude and Codex agent configuration. Related defaults: #15683 and #15993. **Current behavior** Existing agents retain their legacy runner. The operator must find the runner selector in Advanced to change it. **Proposed behavior** Show Upgrade runner when Paperclip Runner is the qualified default for the saved environment. One click saves pending edits and requests the existing server conversion. Show any rejected settings without changing saved configuration. **Reason and benefit** Operators can adopt the current runner while retaining their harness, model, account bindings, instructions and history. Unsupported settings remain visible and editable. **Breaking changes** None. Visiting configuration and saving unrelated changes do not upgrade an agent. The server API, authorization and conversion rules are unchanged. ## What Changed - Add an upgrade notice, pending state, saved result and retry feedback to the production configuration form. - Include pending profile, runtime and environment-variable edits in the upgrade request. - Bind asynchronous upgrade feedback and save receipts to their original agent. Navigating away cannot show success on another agent or redirect back. - Keep the notice absent for native agents, other harnesses, unavailable targets and failed discovery. - Add configuration/API regressions and database session-reset checks for Claude and Codex. - Add 13 production-page Storybook states with browser checks in both themes and on mobile. - Update the product contract and feature/access maps. ## Verification - Configuration form and original-agent save receipts: 135 tests passed. Existing agent route/rename helpers also pass. - Runner selection, configuration API and database migration regressions: 220 tests passed. - Storybook browser checks: 26 passed. Interactive cases wait for Storybook's visible Pass report. Static cases check the rendered production form. These use simulated HTTP boundaries. - Full typecheck, build, map checks and token gates passed on the current head. Storybook build and public preview verification passed. - Published fixture preview: https://storybook.paperclip.page/storybook/branches/codex~2Fagent-runner-upgrade/?path=/story/agents-runner-upgrade--legacy-codex - All 58 current-head PR checks passed, including the full test shards, browser suites, build and aggregate gates. The duplicate local pnpm test:run was stopped after 34 minutes once the same-head full CI suite passed; it had not finished its general-server phase. No local full-suite pass is claimed. - Real disposable local test drive: Codex used gpt-5.4 and Claude used claude-sonnet-4-6. Both completed one task on Legacy, upgraded through the browser button, and completed another task on Paperclip Runner with the same model and API credentials. Independent file checks confirmed saved instructions and environment bindings before and after conversion. - Reopened both configurations and compared identity, model, credential references, instruction hashes, working directories, run policies and configuration revisions. - A Claude Chrome setting produced a field-specific rejection. The saved agent stayed Legacy. Clearing Chrome in the form and clicking Upgrade runner saved the pending correction and completed conversion. ## Risks - The existing translator rejects settings that the new runner cannot honor. The notice shows that error and leaves the form available for correction. - Converted agents start fresh sessions. Prior runs remain available. - Real task execution was checked on local macOS with API credentials. SSH, sandbox targets and subscription credentials were not exercised in this change. - Storybook responses simulate persistence. The real test drive and database tests provide separate persistence evidence. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The exact serving variant and context-window size were not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, code editing, shell tools and browser interaction. No subagents. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-21 15:13:42 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	0a5f1546ee	feat(cases): add reusable prompt workflows (#17114) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Cases keep facts, documents, and one primary task across agent handoffs. > - Each case currently needs its own procedure text. > - Agents need to reuse procedures and move cases between them without replacing the task. > - This change adds company workflow definitions with a name and Markdown prompt. > - Existing handoff and document transactions preserve authority, revisions, and recovery. > - Cases remain behind `experimental.enableCases`. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16959. Related proposal: #3951 uses task graphs and a visual editor. This change extends existing Cases with prompt definitions and keeps its current handoff model. **Problem or motivation** Agents cannot share a reusable procedure across cases or inspect a case's movement between procedures. **Proposed solution** Add name-and-prompt workflow definitions. Adopt a prompt into the primary task's revisioned workflow document through a handoff. Keep phases as free text. **Alternatives considered** Defer graphs, workflow versions, run entities, role schemas, authoring screens, and Spec Kit integration. **Roadmap alignment** This extends the existing Cases experiment and same-task review flow. It adds no work queue or new execution engine. The maintainer approved this scope in the implementation plan. ## What Changed - Add company-scoped definition storage, shared request schemas, REST routes, and four optional Cases tools. - Accept a workflow ID at kickoff. Agent handoffs can adopt, refresh, preserve, or detach a workflow. - Capture prompt text and the document base revision at acceptance. Apply workflow, phase, and document revision together after outgoing execution settles. - Hold conflicting document edits for recovery. Preserve cancellation, replay, and restart behavior. - Show current workflow names and captured transition names/phases in Work, history, and Audit. - Update instructions, API/tool contracts, capability maps, and the isolated workflow journey. - Pin bounded workflow prompt reads to a content fingerprint; continuation conflicts on edits and can restart safely. - Remove experimental Cases/workflow/Mermaid guidance from the always-on native prompt. Extract runtime-context prompt strings into a CODEOWNERS-protected constants file while preserving the public imports. - Refresh Copilot’s pinned source identity to v57, including the extracted prompt file and retaining historical identities. ## Verification Local checks: repository `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass on the prompt-extraction tree (`88222d45d8`). Full repository coverage previously completed through the supported isolated shard groups (1,082 general server suites, 161 serialized suites, and all three workspace groups). The earlier default serial run was interrupted and remains incomplete. The first sharded run retained the failures described below; targeted corrections and separate limited-concurrency reruns pass. All CI jobs, security checks, and the 5/5 Greptile review passed on `fc1bd79c28`. Fresh CI and review are pending for the prompt extraction in `88222d45d8`. Focused verification passes: real-database handoff recovery and reuse; 2,002 native-tool/API contract checks; 144 Runner catalog/discovery checks; 27 Runner context/coverage checks; 37 case/Audit UI checks; and Product E2E oracle calibration. Token gates, migration safety/numbering, module boundaries, capability maps, and generated tool/Storybook catalogs pass. The final route/context corrections pass 49 API/native-tool tests, 90 real-database handoff tests, and server typecheck; 142 Copilot installation/sidecar tests pass with the refreshed identity. Greptile’s first review found that successive prompt pages could mix definitions after an edit. The fix returns a content fingerprint, requires it for continuation, and rejects edits with 409. Strict live/catalog schemas pass (171 Runner checks). The 2,005 API/OpenAPI tests pass; the initial native regression caught compression’s weak ETag prefix, and all 23 native integration tests pass after handling it. The regression covers same-length edits and a four-byte restart window. No stored version fields or entities were added. The prompt extraction passes all 462 checks across six focused suites, including persisted-context recovery and provider transport. The first local transport attempt lacked the required debug Runner binaries (102 failures, retained); after building the normal prerequisites, all 283 tests in that suite pass without source or assertion changes. Existing saved snapshots retain their recorded prompt text, and new executions use core-only prompt v7. The extracted prompt source is now covered by both CODEOWNERS and Copilot’s source fingerprint. Live-provider evidence is separate from those simulated checks: the isolated API-key campaign `reusable-workflows-api-final-2026-10-21` passed with local code matching `a1d73b4652`. Four actual Codex API runs read the adopted task documents, moved one case A → B → A on the same task, completed normally, and passed all nine durable checks. Browser assertions verified the current workflow/phase, historical names/phases, five handoff records including terminal completion, and the completed original task. Cleanup passed. The local report remains under `tests/runner-e2e/results/reusable-workflows-api-final-2026-10-21/`; no credentials or screenshots are committed. CI initially caught an omitted route-inventory entry and a stale pinned instruction-source hash; both are corrected and separately verified. Local serialized coverage also recorded an unrelated environment-route socket disconnect and activity-route timeout; their separate 11-test and 17-test suites passed without code or timeout changes. An unchanged chunked-webhook check also passed its separate four-test rerun. The initial adapter/database workspace groups hit time and resource limits under default worker counts; complete reruns with `VITEST_MAX_WORKERS=2` pass, including all 55 database files and 211 tests. The UI/CLI groups passed 837 files and 9,442 tests in the original run. Original failures remain retained and are not regraded. Earlier failed live campaigns remain unchanged: subscription HTTP 429 before agent execution; an obsolete exact-four-row oracle that rejected the valid terminal fifth row; and a chat-marker expectation that did not account for the existing explicit-comment presentation policy. The final fixture requires terminal completion and places the marker in its authoritative comment. Positive/negative oracle tests and the fresh live campaign pass. ## Risks - The additive migration adds a table and nullable case/handoff fields. Existing rows keep null workflow metadata; no assignments are inferred. - Adoption can wait on an intervening task-document edit. Recovery must cancel the old intent and accept a new one after readback. - Shared definition edits affect future adoptions. Existing case copies keep their revisions. - The feature remains experimental. This PR does not merge or deploy the change. - Live acceptance covers native Codex before the prompt extraction; this cleanup has contract/transport verification rather than a new live-provider campaign. The refreshed Copilot identity has static compatibility evidence, not new live-provider qualification. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, configured model ID `gpt-6-astra`, xhigh reasoning. Used terminal execution, file editing, and tool calls. The active context-window size is 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 either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-21 15:00:12 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	d33b40a5c3	fix: recover saved work and provide reliable task Retry (#16965) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The control plane must retain work when an execution or workspace export fails. > - Retained-workspace holds can leave saved input waiting with no usable Retry action. > - Users cannot verify process ownership or repair provider allocations. > - This pull request gives system recovery a durable budget and gives each deliberate Retry a durable intent. > - Safe recovery can preserve files, settle an accepted result, or prepare an independent workspace. > - One task state keeps infrastructure diagnostics out of the ordinary conversation while preserving real permission and approval gates. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A task with a retained workspace can show recovery, failed-run and saved-message warnings at the same time. Historical runs without native workspace descriptors cannot use the native restore path. Old recovery metadata can prevent a new attempt even when an independent workspace would be safe. **Expected behavior** Paperclip owns bounded infrastructure retries and file preservation. A user can request another attempt with ordinary Retry. Thinking appears immediately. The service preserves completed effects and current user controls. It does not claim that starting fresh recovered the old files. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Retain a failed run and its workspace after export or process-stop failure. 2. Save a follow-up while the recovery hold is active. 3. Open the task and try to continue without infrastructure credentials or operator certification. Refs #16906, #16835, #16883. This extends their recovery and receipt contracts. Related work: #16962 and #16963. ## What Changed - Add task-level Retry with company-scoped authorization, all-status idempotency and durable admission before physical work. Keep exact-run Retry compatible. - Add typed recovery phases, finite persisted backoff, historical adoption and durable local failure diagnostics. - Preserve native workspaces or verified historical snapshots. Admit an independent fresh workspace only after execution containment. Keep old-source preservation and cleanup obligations separate. - Carry completed publication and API receipts forward. Fence uncertain mutation retries across replacement runs. Preserve connected-chat identity and authorization. - Re-enter normal dispatch for saved input. Reuse accepted results through the existing finalizer. - Use one task interruption projection across the thread, composer and task list. Show optimistic Thinking, ordinary Retry and genuine user gates. - Add PostgreSQL, filesystem, API, browser-fixture and controlled provider coverage. Document the behavior and update the feature/access maps. ## Verification - All GitHub Actions CI jobs pass on `6d8c6d27d50586d8548b31d03b47f6d73a0ee11d`: typecheck, all server/chat/workspace and serialized suites, Runner checks, eight browser shards, canary and build. The required merge gate passes. - Greptile reviewed the final commit at 5/5, with no actionable findings or unresolved review threads. Its two earlier P1 findings are fixed. - Full recursive typecheck and build pass locally on the final commit. All 16 task Retry cases pass against isolated real PostgreSQL. The unrelated-success case and both stale Retry cases fail on the previous code and pass after the fix. - The corrected gateway fixture passes its uncertain-mutation and independent-read case. Four real HTTP API cases pass for definite 403/422 rejection, completed-effect reuse, and uncertain-effect fences across deliberate and automatic retries. These focused gateway/API checks used a temporary database lifecycle harness on an existing healthy local PostgreSQL process. The standard repository helper is unchanged. - Earlier qualification covers 291 task UI cases, saved-file copyback and ancestry, current Agent Chat ownership races, nine chat Retry API browser cases, and six assembled browser recovery fixtures. A real API/PostgreSQL/native-runner journey showed Thinking in 25 ms despite a delayed response, admitted one successor in a separate workspace, retained original files, and survived reload. - The controlled Daytona test interrupts export, joins the controller, restarts it in a separate process, and verifies one agent start, one external sentinel operation, retained file contents and no premature cleanup. It does not establish abrupt-kill or live LLM/GitHub acceptance. - The full local `pnpm test:run` was attempted and was not green: an OAuth row-lock timing assertion failed, and a later suite exhausted macOS PostgreSQL semaphores. The ten OAuth timing cases passed on rerun against a separate database. Later embedded database initialization failures remain recorded; the final CI matrix passes. - Security scanning passed on production-code commit `63953edf069b111c6becc3144dffa6deb52f68b5`. Its only successor changes one test-fixture identity line. The final scan is neutral/inconclusive because its pinned merge-base checkout failed or timed out. Both rerun API requests returned 404, so no fresh successful scan is claimed. Socket and Snyk checks pass on the final head. - The optional Paperclip Review remains queued behind an earlier run in workspace finalization. Its prior completed assessment was incomplete because a comparison tool was blocked by the platform filter. It is not counted as a completed code review. GitHub does not require this check for merge. - Hosted acceptance remains pending deployment. Local and CI results do not establish recovery of a hosted task or its retained files. ## Risks - Recovery changes span admission, physical ownership and dispatch. Incorrect evidence could permit overlapping work. Existing physical locks and authoritative stop requirements remain in place. - The migration adds concurrent indexes. It requires the existing top-level migration runner and retries incomplete index creation safely. - A fresh attempt can complete while old-source preservation remains unresolved. The service retains that obligation and does not report those files as recovered. - Unknown tool mutations remain blocked until their authoritative receipt owner resolves them. Generic upstream tools have no universal result-query protocol. - Recovery and diagnostics stay inside the stack. No Cloud incident endpoint, notification worker or new outbound reporting channel is included. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The runtime does not expose a more specific model version or context-window size. The model used reasoning, shell execution, source editing and browser tools. No model subagents were used for this implementation. ## 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 suites; the full local run limitation is 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>	2026-10-20 19:58:53 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	b11010b0d4	Simplify failure banners and show only the latest error (#16982) ... Remove dashed failure dividers and show only the latest adjacent run or recovery error. Preserve permitted retries, pending state and unrelated notice boundaries. Add production-component Storybook examples and browser regression coverage. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-20 14:29:39 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	505e1a5582	feat(cases): add persistent workflows with same-task agent handoffs (#16959) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - An agent workflow needs persistent facts and a safe way to transfer work. > - Creating a task for each phase splits the objective, discussion, workspace, and review policy. > - A case can retain the facts while one primary task moves between agents. > - Transfers must survive process failure and preserve private access, budgets, and completion gates. > - This pull request adds durable case handoffs, native case tools, and read-only case pages. > - Prompts describe the workflow. Existing task controls decide when work can run and finish. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Problem or motivation** Prompt-driven agent teams need a persistent record that can move through triage, implementation, verification, and correction. Ordinary reassignment does not provide a durable instruction, safe release barrier, or recoverable delivery receipt for an agent handing off its own running task. **Proposed solution** Extend standalone cases with one primary task, a descriptive phase, retained access sources, and a handoff ledger. Apply assignments after source execution and workspace settlement. Deliver each transfer through the existing durable wake queue. Provide `create_case`, `read_case`, `update_case`, and `handoff_case` in the native runner. Creation requires kickoff and explicit workflow text. An explicit handoff to `done` closes the case when normal task completion is accepted. **Alternatives considered** Do not add a workflow engine, filesystem queue, configured state graph, or one task per phase. The workflow document combines transition prose with an optional Mermaid `stateDiagram-v2` map. The server does not execute the diagram. The Pipelines experiment removed on master stays removed. **Roadmap alignment** This extends Agent Reviews and Approvals, Enforced Outcomes, Bounded Run Recovery, and Activity Log attribution. Existing approval, review, budget, privacy, workspace, and responsible-user rules remain authoritative. Related work: [ordinary handoff wake recovery](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15019). This feature adds a separate persisted case-handoff receipt and release barrier. ## What Changed - Add case routing fields, retained access sources, durable handoff history, delivery leases, and replay-safe migrations. - Keep the same primary task across agent phases. Preserve each returning agent's own session and the task's workspace. - Fence outgoing mutations, wait for provider and workspace release, and recover delivery without duplicate task comments or runs. Recheck current assignment permissions as the original caller before applying a delayed transfer. Scope a run Stop to that run’s own handoff intents, so repeated old Stop requests preserve newer work. Cancelling terminal intent without a source run also requires fenced current task ownership, including native retries and preparation with an old checkout. For Cloud callers, revalidate current stack membership with an uncached Cloud RPC and derive owner elevation from the current managed setting. - Keep case reads, documents, assets, Audit, and live events inside retained task/project permissions. - Add native case creation/read/update/handoff tools. Store required workflow text and initial documents on the first task. Page oversized case facts and referenced document bodies through the dedicated tool with bounded UTF-8 JSON, current routing versions, snapshot conflicts, and current source authorization on every page. - Add read-only case lists and detail pages, task-style list controls, compact dotted field tables, linked handoff tasks, and case filters in Audit. - Add native/legacy integration tests, migration/restart tests, browser coverage, and bounded live receipt fixtures. Extend the trusted sandbox condition to cover the new subscription fixture profile. - Hide obsolete paused-agent warnings on completed or cancelled task threads. - Synchronize the company-switch settings test with React effects after a CI failure. Preserve its security assertions and production remount behavior. ## Verification The branch directly includes master `9ef434fe79`. The required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e` gates pass on head `765fccd67c`. [Current-head CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39464348614) passes typecheck, build, tests, and all eight browser shards. Security checks pass. [Greptile gives this exact head 5/5](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16959#issuecomment-6291156549), with no unresolved review threads. The optional Paperclip Review check remains queued because its assigned agent is paused. It is not a required branch check. No check result was overridden. Local workspace typecheck and build pass after the master merge, along with database migration checks, token gates, map checks, Storybook catalog checks, and the Copilot profile identity check. Standard builds refresh Runner vendor output. Focused checks pass 2,008 API/paging/context tests and 7 strict case protocol tests. The final commit changes one test fixture only; its ten tests, UI typecheck, and token gates pass. No production source changed in that commit. On current head `765fccd67c`, all **194 critical workflow tests** executed and passed with no skipped tests in those files: - 38 Stop/ownership tests, including board completion intent, native retries, stale Stop, and preparation with an old checkout. - 2 actual legacy process/HTTP handoff tests, including scratch failure, a closed-stdio child that continues writing, and recovery through a fresh worker after the process group stops. - 5 migration tests, including SQL column metadata, preserved null authority context, and all six prior-numbering receipts. - 3 process-settlement and 5 scratch tests. - 88 handoff-service, 18 heartbeat handoff, and 21 native case-tool integration tests. - 7 bounded case/document-read projection tests and 7 strict protocol-contract tests. The current CI checkout was `fed65d49`, merging `765fccd67c` into master `9ef434fe79`. Its new document regressions reconstruct exact Unicode/escaped bodies and revisions through real native authority and authenticated HTTP with generic API tools disabled. They cover case-owned, primary-task, and linked-task documents; routing on every page; stale document snapshots; access loss and unlinking; unrelated/foreign/private sources; system documents; and quarantined content. Active-task document tools retain their existing behavior. These are current-head test results from the first CI attempt; the browser-only retry did not rerun these suites. The full `64fdd3403f` CI failed one separate settings test: after a company switch, it observed an unsettled API-key draft. The production component and test were unchanged from prior green source. Production switches remount both keyed settings layers; the test directly reused an unkeyed view and used a timer tick instead of waiting for React effects. The final commit replaces that fixture synchronization with React `act`. The exact secret-clearing assertions and all timeouts remain unchanged. The original assertion failure remains recorded; no unchanged retry was used. The narrow unchanged baseline and fixed fixture each pass 10 tests. The upstream result-paging merge preserves case capture namespaces and current asset privacy. Its API integration suite executed 39 of 41 tests successfully, with two skipped; the optional assigned-result PRP integration test was skipped. Neither skipped suite is counted in the 194 critical tests or as live provider proof. All 361 upstream migration entries and SQL bodies remain unchanged. Six case migrations follow master as 0363–0368 with identical SQL hashes. Official Drizzle generators produced the combined metadata and five retained snapshots. Generation reports no schema changes, and the snapshot drift test passes. The earlier `ce361ae5d0` CI passed on attempt 1, including its then-current 179 critical tests. Fresh review later identified unusable document references with generic API tools disabled; the bounded document reads and ten additional authenticated HTTP tests address that finding. The full local `pnpm test:run` attempt was cancelled after this Mac exhausted PostgreSQL semaphore capacity; it is **not** counted as a pass. Later database attempts also stopped before assertions or skipped, including one sandbox socket denial. Two original stale-Stop regressions did reproduce the bug against the old source. A REST serialization assertion passed after two preserved database-startup failures. No test timeout was increased. All 194 assertions listed above executed and passed in current-head CI. The complete 385-file, 3,963-test UI shard also passed after the fixture repair. A configured-provider receipt workflow passed 13 backend checks across triage → implementation → verification → correction → done, using one task and four work runs. The saved receipt is revision 2 with total 6 USD; case and task both closed. The original canonical attempt remains failed because its browser assertion confused the terminal destination with completed-task tooltips. The corrected full browser verifier passed on the same retained database and original runs, with no additional provider calls. The last clean-build browser readback is on `6a86c54a53`; later changes affect recovery, authorization, bounded reads, and settlement. Accounted work cost is a $1.010574 rate-card estimate; provider billing and setup-probe usage are unavailable. Copilot profile 49 passed the unchanged seven-fixture private protocol pack (46/46 checks, no retries) and the product file-edit canary after master's completion-replay change. All 60 bound implementation hashes remain unchanged on the current source. Historical profile-47/48 identities and results remain intact. See the [profile-49 compatibility record](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/codex/persistent-case-handoffs/doc/plans/2026-10-20-copilot-completion-recovery-compatibility-v49.json). This is bounded compatibility evidence, not a fresh full matrix, installed-package product test, or Daytona rollout. Preserved CI failures and retries: - On `20662930ac`, Slack managed setup failed a five-second success assertion after reload. Its test/application path was unchanged from a prior green head. One unchanged-source retry passed all 25 tests in that shard; no source or timeout changed. - On `9402b4f17a`, two CI workers received shutdown signals at 15:24:19 UTC. Neither log had an assertion failure before interruption. One unchanged-source retry of each passed all Runner static checks and all 32 tests in browser shard 6; both aggregates passed. The next head, `7b4374edaf`, passed all CI without retries. - On `295f289b5a`, serialized shard 9 timed out during its first device-login test, then the next test found an active login lease. Direct login/test paths were unchanged from a prior green head. Cold import plus a timed-out async body using the next test's mutable actor/store is the supported fixture-race explanation; no request trace proves that sequence. The original failure remains recorded. One unchanged-source retry passed all 294 tests in 19 files, including all 41 device-login tests. No login source or timeout changed. The subsequent `ce361ae5d0` CI passed without retries. - On `64fdd3403f`, one company-switch settings assertion observed an unsettled draft. The final test-only commit uses React `act` without changing assertions, timeouts, or production code. On `765fccd67c`, all ten settings tests and the complete 385-file, 3,963-test UI shard passed. - On `765fccd67c`, browser shard 3 completed the split-handoff assertions, then cleanup received HTTP 500 from run cancellation after a one-second PostgreSQL row-lock timeout. The extra chat run was reporting completed work while teardown began. Cleanup stopped before restoring a global experiment flag, causing a later assertion to fail. Relevant production and test paths are unchanged from an earlier green commit. Stop's lock order is consistent, and no nested self-lock was found; the exact PostgreSQL blocker was not recorded. One unchanged-shard retry passed. The original failure, trace, and downstream flag failure remain recorded. No Stop implementation, cleanup assertion, or timeout changed. The retry supports intermittent cleanup contention; it does not identify the original blocking transaction. ## Risks - Local process transfers require host-owned PID/group absence. Missing or uncertain termination evidence keeps delivery pending, independently of scratch setup. - Handoff admission and task cancellation share execution ownership. New regression tests cover temporary holds, late source writes, and uncertain provider termination. - Retained private sources use an intersection of existing permissions. This intentionally fails closed when a source is missing or an existing task cannot preserve that boundary. - Migrations add tables and indexes. They preserve master history and can replay over prior feature installs. Migration 0368 adds nullable internal authorization provenance with no default or authority backfill. Historical transfers still awaiting release without this context fail closed; an operator must cancel them and request a new handoff. - Delayed Cloud handoffs depend on the current Cloud membership RPC. An unavailable, ambiguous, expired, or mismatched response holds the handoff for retry; it does not reuse cached authority or grant access. - Bounded reads reload and reauthorize the selected projection per page. Underlying work grows with the data size and number of pages. Changed data or routing requires restarting from offset zero without the old snapshot. - Phase names and workflow diagrams remain advisory. They do not satisfy review or approval gates. - This is a large, cross-cutting PR. The maintainer requested one PR for the whole feature; the commits separate data, runtime, UI, and qualification work. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with tool use, code execution, and delegated code review. The exact deployment model ID and context-window size were not exposed in the session. Live fixture agents used the explicitly configured provider model recorded in their test evidence. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-20 12:46:14 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	2c96f76780	feat(connections): add model-backed prompt injection prevention ... Add opt-in OpenRouter checks at existing tool-result boundaries with regex fallback, service accounting, and settings on Connections. Make migration 0362 safe to replay over existing or partially applied schema state. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-20 11:32:25 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	bc091f0a21	fix(recovery): recover retained workspaces before saved messages (#16906) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - A stopped run can leave useful files in its original sandbox. > - The server keeps that sandbox when it cannot confirm file copyback. > - The task can then save new user input but offers no safe way to recover the files. > - A retry of the old agent turn can repeat work that already finished. > - This pull request recovers files through the existing workspace owner and delivers only saved human input. > - The user can recover a task without certifying infrastructure facts or losing completed work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16883 and #16835 for publication receipts and verified process termination. Related: #16478 clears stale holds after copyback already succeeded. This change performs the missing export and records its proof. #16901 manages the main GitHub response comment and does not perform workspace repair. **What happened?** A failed run retained its workspace. A later user message stayed saved behind a file-repair hold. The task asked the user to verify process termination and file recovery but offered no repair control. Sending a message could show an optimistic Working state and move the task to Todo before admission succeeded. **Expected behavior** The harness should recover the original files when it can prove ownership and termination. It should preserve newer edits and completed operations. Only waiting user input may start another turn. Missing evidence must keep the source held with a specific explanation. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Interrupt a sandbox run before workspace finalization succeeds. 2. Retain its exact allocation and save a user follow-up. 3. Observe the file-repair hold and missing end-user repair path. ## What Changed - Add source-bound background recovery for native and legacy runs. An accepted native result is not required. - Share the physical copyback lock and durable owner. Resume only the exact stopped allocation, export files, verify persistence and obtain a fresh stop receipt. - Persist retry limits and idempotent requests on the existing recovery record. Limit each server to two background exports. Add an indexed candidate scan and a separate cleanup obligation. - Add a task-editor recovery endpoint. Deny agents and viewers. Reject caller-supplied stop or repair claims. - Deliver waiting human input once through ordinary admission. Preserve pause, approval, budget and assignment gates. Require historical conversational-adapter evidence for legacy-to-Runner continuation. - Include exact GitHub publication receipts in continuation context. Preserve unknown effects and the original failed run. - Show observed recovery progress, a transient-failure retry action and specific service blockers. Keep saved messages visible. Suppress false startup feedback and implicit Todo promotion behind a file hold. Hide unavailable workspace links. - Update execution semantics, capability maps and production-component stories. ## Verification - Red: the original read model failed the new recovery-progress assertion; the other 23 checks in that file passed. - Passed: recovery regressions with 28 cases with real PostgreSQL, files, tar and Git operations. Lifecycle provider calls are controlled test boundaries. Coverage includes native/legacy export, concurrent owners, rollback after export, interrupted archive export with a new database connection, lost replies, historical discovery, durable retry limits, separate cleanup and saved-input delivery. The actual candidate query uses its partial index with 3,000 unrelated history rows. A first automatic repair can bind verified old-controller stop proof without an accepted native result. Review also reproduced and fixed export-only continuation and cleanup lost after a committed repair. Cleanup remains discoverable without waiting input and after task reconciliation. - Passed: two GitHub integration cases verify that continuation context carries the existing publication receipt and does not write another response. Company and task boundaries are checked. - Passed: 293 continuation, workspace-sync, platform-receipt and OpenAPI checks. After file repair, actual dispatch retains pause, cancellation, approval, real budget-policy and assignment gates. - Passed: 174 route checks, including editor admission, agent/viewer denial and rejection of fabricated repair claims. - Passed: 351 task detail, workspace properties and comment-reopen checks after updating the new read boundaries and asynchronous workspace-link expectations. Two new route cases keep held tasks Blocked when a comment is saved. - Passed: 265 task-thread and recovery-notice checks. The broader continuation suite also passed; its new legacy migration case first exposed a gap that the focused recovery suite now covers. - Passed after rebase: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. The later master merge adds an unrelated permission migration; recovery migration generation and safety checks passed after the merge. - Passed: token gates, module boundaries, map structure and migration checks. The recovery index is migration 0360 after current master. - Browser: inspected the production recovery component and its retry-to-queued transition with fixture data. The first dev dependency load failed; a reload after optimization resolved it. This is UI evidence, not a live provider recovery claim. - Every test shard passed on final commit `bbbc09efb4`. The older local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after the complete CI test matrix passed. Local full typecheck and production build passed. The first CI build compiled and booted, then lost its runner during the clean public npm-install check. An isolated retry passed the build, production boot and clean public npm-install verification. - Greptile reviewed final commit `bbbc09efb4` at 5/5. All review threads are resolved. - The change is not deployed. Hosted recovery remains unverified until the served revision includes this change. ## Risks - Recovery crosses process, provider and persistence boundaries. Missing or mismatched ownership, stop, descriptor or file evidence keeps the hold. It never selects a replacement allocation or silently starts over. - File recovery does not certify external action outcomes or authorize replay. New input still uses normal execution admission. - Historical sources without sufficient durable evidence can remain blocked. Destructive reconstruction stays separate. - The index migration is idempotent. It changes no task data. Snapshot pruning follows repository policy. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, `gpt-6.1-sol`, with code execution and browser tools. `gpt-6-astra` assisted earlier investigation. The runtime does 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>	2026-10-19 21:51:46 -05:00
Tonio	8723580071	fix(ui): refine task side panel tabs (#14949)	2026-10-19 19:26:23 -07:00
3 people	7b9334cd10	Draft: Build agent-ready design proposal system (#16875) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work. > - People need consistent UI patterns to review and control that work. > - The current board uses related layouts and controls with different spacing, type, and behavior. > - That drift makes it hard for a designer or an agent to build a new page from a reliable reference. > - Storybook can show the shared patterns and the states they need to support. > - This pull request adds design proposals, a local sandbox, and reusable UI controls so people can compare the patterns in context. > - The benefit is a clearer design system that agents can use to build consistent UI. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** `ui/` — React board UI and Storybook. **Problem or motivation** Board pages repeat visual and interaction decisions. Storybook did not provide a complete reference for task views, conversation states, typography, toolbars, tabs, and light/dark colors. People could not compare a proposed pattern with the running board in one place. **Proposed solution** Add a staged Design Proposals catalog with foundations, components, layouts, and page specimens. Add an opt-in sandbox. Reuse production components where possible. Include synthetic conversation states and shared controls so reviewers can compare and refine them. **Alternatives considered** Separate static mockups would not show keyboard behavior, responsive layout, or real component states. Rebuilding each page only in Storybook would allow the reference to drift from the board. **Roadmap alignment** This improves existing board UI and Skills Manager surfaces. It does not add a new control-plane capability. ## What Changed - Added dark and light color references, typography and conversation specimens, and component stories for buttons, tabs, toolbars, sidebar, popovers, activity, and task lists. - Added a local design sandbox with synthetic task conversation playback and representative states. - Shared collection toolbars and navigation patterns across task, agent, project, routine, skill, connector, and artifact pages. - Added the streamlined Skills tabs and a My Skills collection that uses the shared skill cards. - Restored saved-thread access during synthetic playback, kept connector searchbox semantics, and updated reproduction checks after moving trial stories. - Documented the proposed patterns and added focused UI, catalog, and browser checks. ## Verification - `pnpm check:token-gates`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --check` passed. - Full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed after merging master. After the review fixes, focused UI typecheck, `pnpm build-storybook`, 23 Skills Sources tests, and all 15 Storybook typography browser tests passed. - Focused task-thread and system-notice suites passed: 251 tests. Connector Browse passed 84 tests; the connector, attachment, recovery, and Storybook flyout browser journeys passed locally. - A local full Vitest run hit one intermittent chat-channels integration failure; that test passed in isolation. GitHub CI [39347996059](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39347996059) passed on the exact latest commit: 55 successful checks and two skipped draft-only Storybook jobs. - Greptile reviewed the exact latest commit at 5/5 with no new comments or open review threads. GitHub reports the branch as cleanly mergeable. ## Risks - This PR changes 206 files and exceeds the repository's 100-file review target. Review by commit and consider a scoped split before merge. - Design Proposals are staged references. Fixture interactions do not prove API behavior, permissions, or provider execution. - UI changes to shared controls may affect pages outside the proposal sandbox. Focused browser checks and the full CI matrix passed. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact runtime model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. The model used reasoning, code execution, browser inspection, and local tests. Earlier branch commits were also AI-assisted in this Codex conversation. ## 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 available in this session) - [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 where applicable - [x] I have either linked existing issues or described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket id - [x] I have run focused 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 - [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: Scott Tong <scott@scotts-mbp-m5-max.local> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 17:45:26 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	ac9459bae3	feat: configure company agent observability (#16874) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Companies use several agent harnesses and execution environments. > - Operators need one place to select where native agent logs and traces go. > - An inference proxy would add a dependency to the agent request path. > - This pull request supplies native OpenTelemetry settings to managed Codex and Claude Code processes. > - Company secrets protect destination credentials. Export failure does not change the task result. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Company settings, shared contracts, database, server, adapters, and runner. **Problem or motivation** An operator cannot configure a company destination for native agent logs and traces. Manual harness configuration is hard to apply across local and remote execution. **Proposed solution** Add one company destination: Braintrust or a custom OTLP HTTP/protobuf endpoint. Apply a transient snapshot when execution preparation starts. Keep credentials out of API reads, task environment manifests, recovery files, and command arguments. Replace a warm process when its export settings change and preserve its conversation. **Alternatives considered** Multiple destinations can use a user-operated collector for fan-out. This change does not add a collector, an inference proxy, or transcript scraping. **Roadmap alignment** This extends company settings, secret management, and support for multiple harnesses. The maintainer requested this implementation. Searches for observability and Braintrust found no duplicate company destination feature. Related infrastructure tracing work in #16236 has a separate content-free contract. ## What Changed - Add strict schemas, revision checks, encrypted secret storage, activity records, and board-only settings routes. - Add explicit synthetic logs and traces tests with a bounded HTTP request and sanitized results. - Supply native Codex configuration and Claude Code environment values through local and remote launch paths. - Preserve Codex login refresh through the existing managed credential link. Retain unsaved drafts across background reads. Require complete custom header re-entry when the endpoint origin changes. - Separate process export compatibility from conversation identity. Isolate generated Codex configuration and preserve resumable sessions, including remote home refresh after export changes. - Advance the immutable Pi/Copilot source attestations for shared environment and sidecar code changes. Keep their provider payloads unchanged and retain prior identities for decoding. - Redact destination credentials throughout launch diagnostics and HTTP logs. - Add the production settings form, Storybook states and journey, documentation, and feature/access map entries. ## Verification - Real managed local Codex 0.160.0 and Claude Code 2.1.286 tasks exported to Braintrust. API readback and the Braintrust UI showed the test records. A real remote Daytona Codex task exported through the legacy `exec` path. - Live tests exercised content capture off, export disabled, warm conversation reuse, and a destination that accepted connections but never replied. Agent work succeeded and export requests stopped at the configured three-second timeout. The UI connection test returned “Test payload accepted”; the saved API key stayed masked after reload. - All current-head CI test lanes, typechecks, packaging/build checks, and required aggregates passed on `71e994b2be9c8fb6d6e938a4ad7cf4c95fdafe31` ([CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39319194318)). Greptile completed on that exact commit at 5/5, with zero unresolved review threads. The additional optional Paperclip Review check remains queued waiting for its assigned agent. - Local workspace typecheck and build passed. Focused verification included 239 combined runner tests, 789 API/native-session tests, 107 Codex home/ACP/sandbox-site tests, 204 feature/privacy tests, and the affected Rust suites. Migration, token, map, Storybook catalog, and Storybook build checks passed during acceptance. These checks ran at the relevant implementation or merge boundary; the current-head CI is the complete final gate. - Managed AI credential projections now receive enabled and disabled company export settings; genuine caller-owned Codex homes remain untouched. Two regressions reproduced the skip before the repair. All 276 engine/lifecycle tests and adapter-utils typecheck pass afterward. The launched TOML retains provider/MCP settings, credential continuity, and redaction. - Settings saves, removal, and the real company-deletion owner acquire secret mutation ownership before database locks. PostgreSQL NOWAIT probes cover all three paths; concurrent save/rotation/removal/deletion requests settle correctly. The affected suites passed 137 tests, followed by all 32 service/connection cases after expanded deletion coverage. Server and Codex adapter typechecks pass. - Codex source profiles use the effective CLI argument list. A spawned fixture CLI reproduced both ignored-argument failures; all three precedence/fallback cases now pass. - Real tar staging reproduced remote conversation loss in both API-key and subscription modes before the repair. Both now pass: changing managed settings preserves sessions, archives, native indexes, and refreshed subscription credentials. A corrupt upload preserves the prior config and conversation. - Preserved failure evidence: initial CI caught stale Pi/Copilot source attestations, a missing test-harness helper, and packaging fixture/probe mismatches; those were corrected and covered by focused checks. Superseded heads had intermittent attachment-composer timeouts despite successful uploads; [the original trace and screenshot remain available](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39309701089/artifacts/12215109203). The same attachment case passed on the final head: [25/25 tests in shard 3](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39319194318/job/118288637051). - A connection-fault fixture also exposed a stale pooled socket after its hang case; closing fixture responses isolated scenarios and the full affected suite passed. - The broad local test run was not clean: database resource failures, timeouts, an older cached module graph, and a stale optional-resource manifest assumption were recorded. Focused checks passed after the documented fixes. This does not establish a clean full local pass. - Native remote Codex, remote Claude, and the full ACPX Codex bridge remain unqualified. The direct Codex resume test does not establish full bridge acceptance. ## Risks - Native exporters perform network requests from each execution environment. A server connection test does not prove remote reachability. - Prompts, assistant responses, and tool content are enabled by default when supported. Native caps and harness-specific controls still apply. - Caller-owned Codex homes are unsupported for automatic configuration and remain untouched. - Native harnesses and their tool processes can inspect export credentials. The settings form and documentation advise using ingestion-scoped credentials. Retained headers remain bound to their saved scheme, host, and port; changing origin requires fresh values or removal. - Migration 0357 adds a company-scoped row and secret reference. It is safe to reapply. Secret removal and company deletion use the existing secret lifecycle. - Slow or unavailable destinations must not block task settlement. Export settings take effect at the next execution preparation boundary. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, code execution, and browser verification. 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>	2026-10-19 15:36:04 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	e6dcd1e8e9	feat: add Commentary to Audit with filters and shareable messages (#16884) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents can submit suggestions and complaints while they work. > - Operators currently need database access to read those messages. > - That makes it hard to find feedback from one agent or share a specific message. > - This pull request adds a standard Commentary tab in Audit. > - Operators can filter messages, browse 50 at a time, and share links to full message dialogs. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15367, which added feedback storage and agent submission. The duplicate search found no open PR for a commentary reader. **Subsystem affected** Server, shared API contracts, and the board UI. **Problem or motivation** Agent suggestions and complaints are stored but have no board reader. Operators must query the database to inspect feedback. **Proposed solution** Add Commentary to Audit without an experimental toggle. Show previews, agent and message-type filters, text search, and 50-message pages. Opening a row updates the URL. A copied URL opens the full message with its agent, task, and run context. **Alternatives considered** Direct database queries remain useful for operators, but do not provide a normal product workflow. An experimental setting would add setup to a read-only audit page. **Roadmap alignment** This completes the operator view for the existing feedback feature. It supports human oversight and does not change agent execution or task ownership. ## What Changed - Add company-scoped, board-only list and detail endpoints with audit permission and source-task privacy checks. - Return bounded previews and counts. Fetch full bodies only when a message opens. - Add the Commentary tab, search, filters, 50-row pagination, and URL-based selection. Audit tab destinations work in both layouts, with a classic sidebar entry for Commentary. - Add production Storybook examples for populated, filtered, linked, long, paginated, empty, loading, failed, denied, mobile, and light states. - Update API documentation and the feature and agent access maps. ## Verification - Final head `abc4a251c14cfbfec007542214beec528f2b18bf`: 55 checks pass; two conditional Storybook checks are skipped. The PR workflow is successful. Greptile is 5/5 with all findings resolved. - Focused database, HTTP, submission, OpenAPI, and UI regression tests cover company isolation, task privacy, filter bounds, 50-row pagination, and copied message links. - Browser Storybook journeys cover row opening, direct links, combined filters, search, and pagination. Storybook uses synthetic API fixtures; database authorization is tested separately. - Token gates, feature maps, and Storybook catalog validation pass. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `pnpm build-storybook` pass on the rebased branch. All 80 focused tests and all 37 Audit tests pass, including the real App route table in both layouts, task grant/revocation through HTTP, deleted-task privacy, and URL UI regressions. The full suite passes in the parallel PR CI matrix. The local serial full-suite run was stopped before completion after checking the recorded 94-minute serial duration. Local focused tests, workspace typecheck, production build, and final server/UI checks pass. - The linked-message Storybook test initially asserted against the loading dialog. It now waits for the message body; both direct-link and row-open journeys pass. - Native and legacy deleted-task privacy regressions failed before the fix and pass afterward. The reader checks the run task binding after the task foreign key clears. - A rapid search-then-agent-filter browser regression reproduced the search overwriting the selected agent. The pending search now restarts when URL filters change. The same browser test passes with both filters applied. - CI found two existing AuditHub assertions that still expected five tabs. They now assert the six-tab model and selected-company Commentary rendering. All 37 Audit tests pass. All other test and build jobs passed before this test-only correction. - The [agent-chat attachment browser test](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39307881171/job/118250189664) timed out waiting for an attachment preview. The [same shard passed on the prior head](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39306658703/job/118245498343) with identical application code; the intervening change only updates AuditHub unit tests. The single retry passed on the same head. The precise cause of the earlier failure remains unconfirmed. ## Risks - Commentary may contain sensitive task context. The reader requires board access and audit permission, and filters source-task visibility before returning previews, counts, or full bodies. - Text search scans stored message bodies. Pages are bounded and full bodies are fetched on demand. - Offset pagination can shift if new messages arrive while paging. Ordering uses timestamp and ID for stable ties. - No database migration or agent submission behavior changes are required. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, tool use, browser interaction, and code execution. The exact backend 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>	2026-10-19 14:21:13 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	45b67f1d93	feat: default new Apple Silicon Claude agents to Paperclip Runner (#15993) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets users choose an agent harness and account. > - The server resolves the runner for new agents. > - Claude still needs the same ordinary native-default journey as Codex. > - Existing agents must retain their runner, model and account. > - This PR defaults new Apple Silicon Claude agents to Paperclip Runner with Opus 5.5. > - Users can connect and work without a runner override. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15683. This PR depends on #15994 and precedes #15997. Related scope: #15422, #13978 and #15224. ## What Changed - Resolve new Apple Silicon Claude agents to `paperclip_runner`, `provider: acpx`, `acpxAgent: claude`. Keep explicit Legacy, models, provider routing and saved execution. - Use `claude-opus-5-5` for ordinary Claude defaults and retain explicit overrides. - Reuse existing API-key/subscription connections, credential storage and checks. Generalize the shared Advanced runner control with Claude branding. - Carry configured effort into the shared v9 contract. Preserve compatible permissions, instructions, skills, timeouts and session behavior. Require Legacy for unsupported settings. - Qualify a new immutable managed Claude target at explicit Connect through the existing permission-gated probe. Use fresh scoped discovery for test and hire. Discard stale results and require an explicit Connect after settings change. - Retain merged Codex onboarding recovery, auth preparation, import/effort corrections and Grok Bot gates. - Check the Claude first-task wizard's saved default directly. Update configuration/runtime documentation and exact Opus 5.5 accounting. - Align hire fixtures with the merged host-environment restriction. Native agent-authenticated hires cannot inject host env settings; both creation endpoints verify that no extra agent is saved. ## Verification - Updated onto master `9179d8dcc3e908c217fde4f63c9d08ccf8132eeb` through #15994. Native input v9 carries effort while preserving v7 home modes and v8 Muse. Codex defaults remain unchanged. - Focused local verification passed 285 server tests, 323 UI tests, 124 setup/registry tests, and two v9 permission-pin transport cases. Direct server/UI TypeScript checks passed. An initial 30-second hook timeout was resolved by serial verification with a longer hook budget: all 122 credential/permission cases and 232 snapshot/environment cases pass. Direct server TypeScript checking also passes. - Ordinary web creation with the experiment disabled saved native Claude, Opus 5.5 and High effort without runner/model overrides. The actual product task and follow-up both succeeded on integrated source `b2c9fe43f9cd3bc5dd9d22552da0148845ba71a4` with the cloud-built daemon from `04e0202ca81387b17cbe7fd094a8338648356fe9`. The final master reconciliation also changes shared runtime source. Historical proof retains its source identity; a final-source cloud qualification is running before refreshing the preview daemon. - Both actual browser downloads were checked: v1 has three sections/six checkboxes (451 bytes); v2 preserves the original body and adds two Rollback checks (612 bytes). The original attachment stayed byte-identical. The follow-up records session resume and the same provider session. Total estimated API usage: $0.518432800, with no pending/unpriced usage in the successful fixture. - Fixed the live-discovered setup incompatibility: native API-key validation no longer depends on the global Legacy Claude CLI. The existing provider endpoint verifies the key without a paid prompt; subscription/custom routing probes remain intact. - Fixed security review's native-hire credential redirection: agent-supplied URLs, proxy/launch settings and other host environment controls are rejected before inheritance. Native credential references remain supported and partial edits use the saved harness. Added create/hire/update regression coverage. - Current-head cloud CI is green. All three stack PRs have fresh Greptile 5/5 reviews and zero unresolved review threads. Required typecheck, test and build gates ran in cloud CI; Docker work stayed remote. Earlier failed checks remain in their original runs. - Docker and native release builds ran in cloud infrastructure. An inadvertent local Rust prerequisite was stopped; no local Docker build was run. - The final master merge preserves task-loading, permission, skill-retention and OpenRouter changes. Pi uses a fresh combined profile 27, preserving both historical profile-24 declarations; Copilot remains profile 22. Focused protocol checks passed 155 cases (one skipped), the updated Pi attestation check passed 18 (one skipped), and 91 evaluation/catalog checks passed. - Latest-application manual continuation passed in 37.942 seconds on `695e5c005a85bddc8711d3fcddcaf6b7e1fb64d0`, with High effort, native Opus 5.5, Anthropic API attribution, the same resumed Claude session, an independently checked 635-byte file and persisted Done status. It uses the earlier verified Mac daemon; the preceding-source package qualification passed at `dca62c7aeb4b45f0dd91a8e18d386a16a2658ef8`. That package run predates the small TypeScript startup fix and is not relabeled as qualification for it. - Upgrade limitation: changed compiled sidecar identity rejected old durable launch state and recovery hit session-open bounds before eventually resuming. That attempt was operator-cancelled and retained; the successful manual continuation does not qualify seamless upgrades. - Local latency profile, Opus 5.5/High unchanged: three alternating real-ACP loopback samples per variant reduce median provider-ready time from 5.081s to 4.034s. The matched real API task startup improves from 5.533s to 4.348s, but total reply time changes from 17.933s to 20.221s because agent work varies. This establishes a startup saving of about one second, not a consistent total-reply speedup. A real candidate follow-up passed in 20.146s and resumed the same saved session. The loopback fixture makes no external model requests; failed initial probes remain retained. - The startup change passes 107 focused runtime/effort/lease tests, 53 profile checks (one skipped), TypeScript checking and the TypeScript-only runtime build. Native hire fixture checks pass 70 tests; their first local run retained a socket-hangup failure and stale OpenCode expectation, both accounted for before the passing rerun. Broader required checks run in cloud CI. ## Risks - Missing packages, authentication rejection, unsupported settings and unavailable models must fail explicitly. Existing agents retain saved execution; explicit runner changes use existing revision/session invalidation. - Subscription follow-up remains unverified; remaining live acceptance uses API keys per human steering. Historical accounting holds and the separate $50 ceiling remain intact. - The subscription acceptance limit remains explicit for review. No Claude database migration is introduced. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution and browser testing. 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 - [ ] Focused local tests and final cloud verification pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 13:58:52 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	23b2ceb0d1	feat(connections): add unified Google Workspace connector (#15545) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Connected Apps supply governed tools to those agents. > - Google services currently require separate connections or one broad request. > - Users need one account and control over which services it can access. > - A picker must change the OAuth request, not just the screen. > - This pull request binds selected services to consent and tool access. > - The benefit is simpler setup without enabling unselected tools. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Connections catalog, OAuth grants, and the MCP tool gateway. **Current behavior** Google setup uses separate service profiles. A combined request alone cannot express the user's choice before Google consent. Accumulated Google grants can be broader than a new request. **Proposed behavior** Offer one Workspace connection. Let users choose Gmail, Drive (including Docs, Sheets, and Slides), and Calendar. Start all three with read and write access. Let users disable groups or choose read-only access. Do not offer Chat, Contacts/directory, or cross-service Search in new setup. Bind selected scopes to durable OAuth state. Cap effective tool access to both the saved request and provider-reported consent. **Reason and benefit** Users can choose services without managing several accounts. Existing company, identity, agent, and action-policy controls remain in force. **Breaking changes** No database migration. Existing service connections and grants remain supported. New Workspace requests require the companion broker change in https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-cloud/pull/823. Old brokers reject narrowed requests safely. Related work: #14740 reduced Google scopes; #14774 introduced the earlier catalog hold. #15412 proposes a separate Gmail REST implementation. This maintainer-requested change extends the existing Connections and governed tool gateway paths. It does not replace them. ## What Changed - Add one Workspace catalog entry and a namespaced action catalog. Retain legacy definitions and saved accounts. - Use the approved production service picker in Apps and task-hosted setup. Keep dropdowns between names and toggles. Block empty selection. - Derive exact scopes from a closed registry. Default selection requests nine scopes. New requests exclude Chat, Contacts/directory, and Search scopes. - Bind selected scopes through managed and customer-owned OAuth state, callback, claim redemption, and refresh. - Cap accumulated Google grants to the saved selection. Recheck grant-specific permission at discovery, listing, and dispatch, including cached actions. - Restore the current subject's saved request on reconnect. Block on grant-load failure. Preserve draft selection on cancel and retry. Do not create an account on picker cancellation. - Preserve healthy services during partial outages, without combining grants across identities. Keep writes from being automatically replayed. - Preserve the original 21-scope legacy Workspace envelope contract as individual profiles evolve. - Add production-component Storybook stories, request validators, consent regression tests, and rollout guidance. Integrate the stories with the current feature catalog while preserving their IDs. ## Verification - Integrated branch merges current master and has no merge conflicts. - Full workspace build passed on the integrated checkout. - Token gates passed. Storybook catalog structure check passed: 283 files and 2,750 stories. - Final affected app suites: 914 passed. This includes 502 database-backed service/gateway tests and 412 UI/shared/validator/broker-handoff/governance tests. The production picker tests cover defaults, identity-specific reconnect, and failed-load recovery. - Full workspace typecheck passed after adding required current-master Storybook annotations. The final UI build also passed. - The full repository suite is still running and includes the two pre-fix retry assertions. Both were updated for the current gateway's explicit-retry contract and pass in the clean 502-test database run. No complete final-head full-suite pass is claimed. - The initial local database startup failure came from missing native-library symlinks in the fresh dependency install. The package's postinstall repair fixed it; the clean database-backed run has no skipped tests. - Broker focused suite: 47 passed, including real signed session → callback → claim redemption and wrong-scope rejection. Full broker suite before the final test-only follow-up: 3,562 passed, 103 skipped. - Real integrated-app walkthrough: Connectors → Workspace → customer-owned app → service picker. Verified all three defaults, empty-selection blocking, cancel/reopen with the selected read-only access preserved, preserved form values, and zero saved connections after cancel. Credentials were synthetic; no Google grant was made. - Current-head CI and Greptile review remain pending. Previous-head results are not treated as current. ## Risks Ship the companion broker before app instances send narrowed requests. Enable the intended Workspace client/profile separately on the target broker. This pull request does not deploy a tenant app, start a fleet rollout, alter Google Console, or upgrade the pinned reviewer stack. The three-group picker is not proof of live provider access. Before production, verify a real selected-service grant, reconnect, refresh, allowed reads/writes, and denied unselected actions on the isolated staging reviewer app. Google verification and preview enrollment remain separate requirements. Legacy service profiles stay compatible. New grant metadata keeps provider scope evidence separate from requested scope evidence. Missing or unsupported evidence fails closed. No scope union across user or organization grants is allowed. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent, with repository editing, code execution, and browser tools. The exact serving model ID and context-window size were 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 issue ID - [ ] I have run all final-head 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 - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 12:07:30 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	5245959023	fix(github): simplify App reconnection and credential recovery (#16856) ... Show clear GitHub connection recovery guidance and reconnect the saved App before requesting replacement credentials. Preserve PEM bytes through paste, upload, and retry, with production-page Storybook and browser regression coverage. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 11:47:06 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	9077748894	Remove the Pipelines experiment and preserve its data (#16834) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Pipelines was an unused experiment with its own UI, API, CLI, and automation. > - Keeping it leaves unsupported product surfaces and extra task-detail queries. > - Removing the experiment must preserve data that users already saved. > - This pull request removes the feature and keeps its database schema and migration history. > - Cases and Routines remain available as separate features. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Remove the unused Pipelines experiment across the application. **Current behavior** The experiment includes pipeline boards, stage settings, case automation, review queues, learnings, permissions, and CLI commands. Task detail also queries pipeline links. **Proposed behavior** Remove all these product surfaces and their implementation. Preserve existing tables, records, and documents. Ignore the retired boolean in older managed configurations so upgrades still start. **Breaking changes** Pipeline URLs, API endpoints, CLI commands, and `pipelines:write` are removed. Task detail no longer includes the old `linkedCases` field. The independent Cases API remains available. No database migration or cleanup is included. Related feature work: #7907, #9110, #10905, #11375, #13004, #14671, #16133. Related issues: #9663, #10310, #10312. This removal supersedes the feature; it does not implement those pending enhancements or delete their saved data. ## What Changed - Remove Pipeline UI pages, navigation, gates, clients, query keys, helpers, and unused design tokens. - Remove Pipeline REST routes, services, automation dispatch, task-detail queries, and OpenAPI discovery. - Remove the CLI commands, shared contracts, experimental flag, catalog entry, and permission defaults. - Remove feature-specific tests, tutorials, smoke scripts, maps, and Storybook examples. - Preserve database schema, migration history, and the reserved document key used by old records. - Keep Cases routes independent and cover obsolete stored and managed settings. ## Verification - Passed: `pnpm build` and `pnpm -r typecheck`. - Passed: targeted settings, managed configuration, sidebar, settings UI, routing, and feature-catalog tests. A first sidebar run caught a shared Workspaces icon import; the import was restored and the sidebar rerun passed. - Passed: 40 tests covering Cases routes, OpenAPI discovery, retained Pipeline table constraints, and schema snapshot drift. - Passed: token gates, map validation, generated API metadata check, Storybook catalog validation, and 28 map/catalog tests. - Passed: isolated local browser verification of navigation and Experimental settings with Pipelines absent; Cases and Routines still open normally. Live GET/POST requests to retired Pipeline endpoints return 404, and the retired setting is absent. CLI help has no Pipeline commands. - Passed: 22 access-service and agent-default-grant tests after restoring unrelated permission assertions flagged in review. - Local full run: `pnpm test:run` reported one failure in the unchanged workspace-runtime port-allocation test. That test passed in an isolated rerun. The long local run was stopped after full CI passed; it is not reported as a complete local pass. - Passed: all 56 checks on `def9181f3a4491d95fca1d38e9739f5b821aae3e` (2 conditional checks skipped), including build, typecheck, test shards, and browser suites. Eleven interrupted CI jobs reported “The operation was canceled”; their one-time retry passed. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39255211006). - Greptile: 5/5 on the final commit, with the only review finding fixed and resolved. - Sandbox socket restrictions affected the first build/API test attempts. The same commands ran with local sockets available. ## Risks - Existing Pipeline clients must stop using the removed endpoints and commands. - Existing data remains in the database and backups, but the removed UI no longer displays it. - Historical boolean `enablePipelines` values are ignored. They cannot restore the feature. - Cases and Routines must retain their separate behavior. Targeted route tests cover this boundary. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with repository inspection, editing, shell execution, and browser verification. The exact deployed 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>	2026-10-19 08:09:46 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	6e89919631	refactor(storybook): check recovery disclosure visibility (#16828) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work. > - Recovery previews show when work can continue and when an operator must inspect it. > - Saved-source reconstruction keeps its inputs inside a closed disclosure. > - The browser query can find those mounted inputs while the disclosure is closed. > - The old assertion required the inputs to be absent and failed before testing the disclosure. > - This pull request checks that each input is hidden, then keeps the existing open-and-inspect assertions. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16686. The `SourceReconstruction` story fails with “Found multiple elements with the role textbox” while its disclosure is closed. The inputs are mounted but hidden. Their visibility is the intended contract. ## What Changed - Assert that all reconstruction text fields are hidden before opening the disclosure. - Keep the checks for the saved attachment and the disabled continuation button after opening it. ## Verification - Baseline: the browser play function failed at `queryByRole("textbox")` because it found two hidden fields. - Treatment: the same story passes all six browser interaction steps. Both hidden-field checks execute before the disclosure opens. - All ten play-enabled recovery notice stories pass in the browser, including automatic recovery, operator and reader blockers, missed recovery, read failure, mobile, reconstruction, and queued continuation. Revisiting automatic recovery after the error and reconstruction fixtures also passes. - Catalog validation passes. All 28 map and catalog tests pass. - UI typecheck and token gates pass. All 57 current-head checks pass or have their expected skipped state, including workspace typecheck, tests, and build. - Greptile scored this head 5/5 with no unresolved threads. The initial description gate did not recognize Storybook play files as tests; the assertion-only change is classified as a refactor and its rerun passed. - These stories use production components with fixture data. They do not prove provider recovery or a production deployment. ## Risks Low risk. This changes one Storybook assertion. A regression that exposes a reconstruction field before opening the disclosure still fails the visibility check. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, `gpt-6.1-sol`, xhigh reasoning, with tool use and code execution. The host does not expose the context-window limit. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 06:57:56 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	3858d2341d	fix(recovery): default saved-monitor waits and keep task recovery quiet (#16686) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - A task must keep a durable path to its next action. > - A provider can save a task monitor, then fail to yield because it omits internal continuation fields. > - An interrupted provider-pack check can then be reported as permanent artifact incompatibility. > - The task asks its user to certify recovered workspace files, even though this is an operator responsibility. > - This pull request derives the saved monitor continuation, bounds verification retries, and removes that task form. > - Normal recovery stays quiet. Unresolved holds retain inspection and the existing safety checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A yielded completion without `continuation` is rejected even after the provider saves an eligible monitor on the task. Repeated attempts cannot finish. Remote verification also treats timeouts and missing exit status as artifact incompatibility. The task recovery notice exposes raw diagnostics and asks the task user to certify infrastructure files. **Expected behavior** Use current persisted task state to fill routine continuation fields. Retry interrupted verification reads within a fixed bound. Keep normal recovery in the working state. Show a compact notice only when work cannot safely continue. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Save an eligible monitor on the active task. 2. Call `paperclip_finish` with `reportedWorkDisposition: "yielded"` and omit `continuation`. 3. Return a timed-out remote provider-pack command with empty stderr during recovery. Inspect the resulting task notice. **Paperclip version or commit** Source baseline: `aaeff418cf` (master integrated with its current task visibility and saved-source reconstruction rules). Related changes: #15824, #16104, #16451, #16493, #16690. This fix complements saved-result recovery and verified pack reuse. It does not replace their workspace ownership checks. ## What Changed - Allow omitted or null continuation at the provider input boundary. Read current authorized task context and fill a monitor continuation only for the bound run and an eligible saved monitor. Keep accepted results strict. Apply this to Codex, OpenCode, both direct and production-sidecar ACPX paths, and external drivers. Reserve the semantic call identity during the saved-context read and reject cancellation or a changed run/turn. - Bind the shared completion change and continuation helper in a new Copilot v21 source declaration. Preserve v20 history and its decoder support. Qualification stays pending. - Expose the eligible continuation in task context. Completion admission still checks persisted monitor state. No schedule is created or renewed by the default. - Retry read-only provider verification at most twice per command. Hold exhausted reads with a distinct verification-unavailable cause. Reattachment cannot renew the read budget through an unchanged provider-attempt counter. Keep completed verification failures and wrong versions incompatible. - Remove the task file-certification form. Hide the notice only for a matching durable recovery path without an unknown-action replay hold. Keep missed retries, unsafe outcomes, and unresolved file holds visible. - Add production-component stories for automatic recovery, blocked and expired holds, reader access, persisted repair decisions, source reconstruction, queued continuation, and mobile. Preserve master’s guarded saved-source reconstruction choice after confirmed source destruction. Update the execution contract and access maps. ## Verification - Completion, helper, Codex, OpenCode, ACPX, and profile regressions pass. After the sidecar review fix, 271 tests across the production sidecar and three provider suites pass, plus 72 helper/profile tests. The real sidecar MCP bridge tests cover saved-monitor acceptance, no-monitor refusal, cancellation, duplicate call identity, and raw-versus-forwarded semantic receipt hashes. The OpenCode tests also cover eligible-monitor acceptance and refusal without one. - The fresh full native executor suite passes all 743 tests. Four profile, installation-integrity, and ACPX driver suites pass all 168 tests. The earlier CI fingerprint failure required a new immutable source declaration; its follow-up Docker failure required the matching context allowlist entry. Both fixes are verified locally. Targeted server monitor, tool authority, and provider verification suites pass. The probe tests include a real timed-out subprocess, an unrelated responsive timer, transport errors, and completed integrity rejections. - All 90 tests in the merged task notice, reconstruction choice, recovery display, and lineage suites pass. They cover reader access, live/missed/mismatched recovery, unknown outcomes, saved messages, retry refusal, and removal of the file form. Both review findings have failing-baseline/passing-treatment regressions: identical polling across retry expiry, and a failed refresh after cached running activity. - Browser walkthrough passed for automatic recovery, unresolved details, a 390px mobile story, and the merged saved-source reconstruction and queued states. The reconstruction control starts disabled and normal automatic recovery shows only Working. The stories use production components and fixture API data. They do not prove live cloud recovery. - Token gates, map checks, and Storybook catalog generation pass. The exact Docker context integrity command passes locally after adding the new build declaration to its allowlist. - Workspace typecheck and build pass on the final source, including the versioned identity update. The final server and UI guards pass their focused tests, typechecks, builds, and token gates. The final standalone Storybook builds. The saved-monitor default retains master’s stricter child-task visibility filter. Re-review caught an additional production-sidecar validator before forwarding; the fix now defaults at that boundary and has passing regression controls. After preserving master’s new reconstruction capability, 68 targeted reconstruction, tool-authority, and provider-verification server tests pass. The current-master integration at `2a80050a0d` has a fresh 5/5 review with zero unresolved threads. Its complete CI matrix, including Runner tests, is the merge acceptance record. - On the final master integration, local typecheck, build, and all 90 recovery UI tests pass. A concurrent runner run hit five 5-second sidecar startup timeouts; an isolated sidecar run passed 86 tests and timed out in the unrelated unsupported-bootstrap case. Those local deadline failures remain recorded; the canonical CI Runner lanes use their normal deadlines and pass. The unsharded local full-suite attempt did not complete. It spanned source edits; the fresh native executor run above passes. An unrelated workspace fixture timed out once and then failed to reserve 32 contiguous ports on this host. Its unchanged-base control and CI server suite pass. Full-suite acceptance uses the fresh latest-head CI matrix; this PR does not claim a passing unsharded local run. ## Risks The default applies only to an eligible persisted monitor. An explicit invalid continuation still fails validation. The added read occurs only when a yielded report omits its continuation. Admission rechecks current state after that read. An interrupted verification command can add one extra 30-second probe. Completed rejections stay closed. These probes do not change the pack, launch provider work, or replay external tools. Two inconclusive reads hold the original run. They do not schedule another reattachment with an unchanged provider-attempt counter. This PR’s pending Copilot v21 declaration binds the changed shared contract, resolver, direct driver, and production sidecar sources. The previous v20 declaration is immutable and remains decodable, but launch requires the new exact identity. Qualification remains pending. Task users lose the file-certification form. Board-authorized source-only repair remains available through the resolution API with the original evidence and stop-receipt requirements. This branch does not deploy or recover historical held runs. > This is a bug fix and UI polish within existing recovery behavior. ROADMAP.md was checked. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, `gpt-6.1-sol`, xhigh reasoning, with tool use and code execution. The host does not expose the context-window limit. ## 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 (changed-area suites; the full local run limitation is recorded above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-18 21:43:15 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	896f3c7f3b	Add personal Muse operator setup and composer controls (#16450) ... Add Muse invitation, connection readiness and scoped operator controls. Keep connection state tied to the current company, person, agent and binding. Surface failed reads and invalidate stale cleanup observations; require current authority and exact readback. Preserve Dot/Grok setup, source-trust limits and existing design tokens. Carry actual merged backend e6dcc6b095 through a normal forward merge. Preserve its project-write authority fix, existing migration bytes and upstream idle-serving behavior; no new UI behavior is authored by this source carry. Current-head CI and substantive review remain merge gates; final canonical and deployed-provider qualification remain separate. Refs #16450. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-17 23:01:42 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	32ede08918	fix(grok): copy pairing codes during agent reconnect (#16373) ... Grok Bot reconnect showed a masked one-use code without a copy action. Add the shared Copy code control, preserve masking and copy-error feedback, and keep the code out of Bot instructions. Cover the reconnect flow and readiness wait in tests and Storybook, and update the user guide. Verified head 1346f7a909: 55 checks passed, two optional skips, full tests/build/typecheck/E2E, and Greptile 5/5 with no unresolved threads. Local typecheck, build, token gates, Storybook build and focused regressions pass. Scoped Chrome copying and a fresh built story were verified with synthetic data. Actual Grok runtime qualification remains a release gate. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-14 22:22:54 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	538bbd5478	fix(ui): configure Grok Bot through its external connection (#16338) ... ## Thinking Path Paperclip coordinates an external Grok Bot through its authenticated agent connection and routine. The shared configuration form only excluded OpenAI Dot from local runtime controls, so Grok Bot inherited a model picker, local paths, an AI account picker, and a generic runtime test. These controls cannot configure the external Bot and the generic test is not evidence of its webhook-to-MCP connection. Extend the existing external-provider presentation gates and retain the dedicated connection verification workflow. Related implementation: #16219 and #16305. Searched open Grok PRs and issues; the remaining matches concern the separate coding runtime or unrelated coverage. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** An existing Grok Bot agent's Runtime page shows local model and runtime configuration alongside its actual external connection controls. **Expected behavior** Identify the harness as Grok Bot, show its connection and routine controls, and use Verify connection for authenticated two-way readiness. Omit inapplicable local-runtime controls and model catalog queries. **Steps to reproduce** Create a Grok Bot through Invite external agent, then open its Runtime settings. Before this correction, the shared form renders a model selector and Test your agent despite the Bot owning its runtime. **Paperclip version/commit** Master after #16219; reproduced against the shared form at 8ffc5748a2. ## What Changed - Treat Grok Bot and Dot as external providers when resolving local configuration and model catalog queries. - Identify Grok Bot directly in the harness field and keep its dedicated connection, routine, and verification controls. - Hide the generic runtime test for Grok Bot, including compact feedback and externally registered test actions. - Add regressions for compact and inline configuration and production ConfigurationTab stories for connected, disconnected, and mobile states. - Isolate generated documentation previews in separate iframes; verified connected and disconnected states remain distinct across polling. - Document the Runtime management path. ## Verification - New regression failed in both variants before the correction; the four focused UI suites pass: 131 tests, including existing native-provider configuration coverage. - Repository typecheck, production build, and token gates pass. Storybook builds successfully. - Used the built production ConfigurationTab in the browser: connected health, credential replacement fields, disconnected reconnect, and a 375-pixel mobile layout with no horizontal overflow. These are synthetic connection fixtures, not live-provider qualification. - A full local database-backed suite is unavailable because this Mac has reached its SysV shared-memory limit. The earlier diagnostic fixture confirmed that limitation; no unrelated databases were stopped. Full repository CI passes on 60119f1ce1: 55 checks successful and two intentional skips. - Fresh Greptile review is 5/5 on the final head, with the preview-isolation finding addressed and its thread resolved. ## Risks Low risk: shared form presentation and unnecessary model queries change; no authorization, secret storage, Runner execution, schema, or transport behavior changes. Existing stored configuration remains intact. Native-provider form regressions run in the focused suite; full repository CI passes on the final head. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository inspection, code editing, shell tests, and browser verification. The host does not expose a more specific serving-model ID or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-14 17:23:18 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	33d24e48ad	fix(skills): simplify source rows, errors, and actions (#16310) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agent skills from GitHub repositories. > - Skills → Sources shows saved repositories and their sync status. > - A saved source gained a second repository row when other projects used the same repository and branch. > - That row repeated the GitHub icon and branch, and it exposed project names that did not help with source management. > - The page also repeated the Installed navigation link and showed refresh errors as separate lines of text. > - Connection management also appeared under each source, where it competed with source-specific actions. > - This pull request shows each saved source once, groups error details, and moves connection management into the menu beside Import from GitHub. > - The result is a clearer source list that keeps import and recovery actions available. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** When a saved source shared its repository and branch with other projects, Skills → Sources displayed a second GitHub header and the names of those projects. The page also displayed an extra Installed skills link and repeated Manage GitHub connection under source rows. A failed refresh placed its timestamp and error on separate lines. **Expected behavior** Show one row for each saved source. Keep project names out of that row. Keep the additional import action available in More. Put connection management in the page actions menu beside Import from GitHub. Present refresh errors as one readable notice with the time and review action. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open Skills → Sources in a company with one saved GitHub source and another project that uses the same repository and branch. 2. Observe the repeated repository row and project names. 3. Open the Storybook journey `Existing source, more projects` to inspect the same state. Open `Retained skills and retry` to inspect a failed refresh. **Paperclip version or commit** The issue is present on base commit `739f9e40a4`. **Deployment mode** Built from source. The issue was also observed in a staging workspace. ## What Changed - Remove project names, the duplicate repository row, and the redundant Installed skills link from saved source rows. - Put imports for additional projects in the source More menu. Show brief import progress in the source metadata. - Group source errors, attempt time, and the review link in a compact notice. Add a Storybook journey and browser coverage for the shared-repository state. - Add a page actions menu beside Import from GitHub. Put Manage GitHub connection there and remove the repeated inline links. Cover the menu and keyboard focus in the Storybook browser suite. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `pnpm check:token-gates`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --check` passed locally. The Skills sources unit suite passed 22 tests. - All 18 repository-skills Storybook browser tests passed, including the shared-source import, connection menu, mobile, and failed-refresh journeys. - A local full `pnpm test:run` was stopped after a server runner-API test timed out. An isolated diagnostic identified macOS embedded PostgreSQL shared-memory exhaustion. The PR passed all 55 CI checks, including server test shards and end-to-end tests. - Open the Storybook journeys `Existing source, more projects`, `Automatically imported skills`, and `Retained skills and retry` to inspect the compact source row, page actions menu, and grouped error notice. ## Risks Low risk. The visible import action for projects that share a saved source moves to More. Connection management moves to a page menu and opens the Apps catalog. People must open those menus to find the actions. The import API and access checks do not change. > I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This source-list correction does not duplicate planned core work. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The task runtime did not expose an exact serving model ID or context-window size. The model used tool calls, code edits, and browser verification. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-14 12:52:18 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	adb69e8f09	feat: default new Codex agents to Paperclip Runner on Linux and macOS (#15683) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source control plane for agent companies. > - People choose a harness when creating an agent. > - The server should resolve that harness to a qualified runner. > - Codex is the first harness in the staged default rollout. > - Saved agents must retain their execution choices. > - New Codex agents therefore use Paperclip Runner on qualified macOS/Linux targets, with an explicit Legacy override. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16028, #15555, #15673, #15422, #15631, #15926, #15932, #16149. The runtime/install prerequisite and release repair are merged. This slice owns Codex creation, setup, configuration and preservation. Other harness defaults remain unchanged. It adds no database migration; incoming master migrations, required maps and regression coverage are retained. ## What Changed - Resolve `runner: auto | paperclip | legacy` at the common creation boundary across onboarding, API/CLI, hires, built-ins, plugins and imports. Freeze pending hires and export resolved execution choices. - Preserve existing runners on upgrades, unrelated edits and import updates, including compatible accounts, workspace settings, Codex effort and intentional clears. - Use the underlying harness picker and branding; put the runner override in Advanced. Use the shared dropdown and update production-component stories and creation contracts. - Support qualified Apple Silicon, Intel Mac, Linux x64 and Linux ARM64. Linux requires GNU libc 2.39+. Disabled, external, unsupported and unqualified combinations retain their applicable Legacy execution. - Test the selected runtime/account/model/environment. Ordinary Connect probes eligible immutable managed targets and refreshes scoped discovery. Creation/discovery do not provision. Auth, dependency, incompatible-setting and cleanup failures remain actionable without changing runners. - Keep setup probes read-only, preserve local/SSH isolation and resolve packaged assets before staging credentials. Bound cleanup reads by the remaining absolute deadline; physically close every owned ingress socket before endpoint release. Unconfirmed cleanup retains recovery state. - Preserve validated completed-onboarding callbacks through startup recovery. First file-producing work belongs to the child task and uses the existing dependency/block handoff and task-scoped registration. - Reuse existing E2E fixtures, artifact checks, reporting and controls. Keep Docker/Cargo/native compilation remote. Paperclip tarballs contain no Codex payloads; official optional npm platform dependencies remain. ## Verification Current tested head: `1c03a8815672d82c264a9b08d4ea1984e8fae107`. **Merge-ready: required CI, fresh review, package qualification, Mac core acceptance and Test task/follow-up acceptance pass.** The existing attachment and native-continuity oracles independently verify both Test downloads, run attribution and unchanged native/provider/workspace identities. The maintainer authorized a code-owner-review exception for this PR only. The first Test setup failure and normal Board completion-review friction are retained below. Actual post-merge packages and private Cloud distribution remain separate qualification gates. - [Current CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38564241625): all 48 ordinary jobs and required verify/E2E pass. Attempt 1 retained six simultaneous host-shutdown cancellations. One failed-only retry passes those six lanes and two aggregates, preserving 40 successes. Actual integration checkout `53104c1` combines this head with master `c80`; it is not relabeled as the branch tree. Fresh exact-head Greptile 5/5, 30 resolved threads, no actionable findings. - [Exact-source package qualification](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38565287239): nine applicable jobs pass, nine conditional jobs skip. Four remote native producers; Linux x64 clean install; Intel Mac, Apple Silicon and Linux ARM64 native startup/physical cleanup controls. All 18 tarballs/four daemon source/hash/manifest bindings and 343 migrations through 0344 verify. No Codex payload is packed. These hosted tarballs are not a published npm canary. - Normal Apple Silicon installation and credential-free native startup/cleanup pass using the packaged daemon, with no source build or provider turn. Fresh installed DB initialization passes. Upgrade 651a→1c03 preserves all three complete execution configs, accounts, ten recorded run profiles, paused budgets, active incidents, cost summaries and two historical unpriced events. Historical recovery state is retained. - Cleanup regressions: four delayed-read baseline failures become 15 passing deadline/authority controls. No-acknowledgement and prior-error socket ownership regressions become 12 passing controls. Direct runtime/server types, maps: 35 areas / 176 IDs, diff checks and independent reviews pass. Permission/auth/reconnect policy and the 10-second setup budget remain intact. - Existing source coverage includes creation/selection/imports, pending approvals, recovery, account/lifecycle handling, mounted forms, dropdowns and E2E support. Full typechecks/tests/build/token and applicable Storybook checks pass in the recorded current CI; no duplicate suite or weakened grader. - Literal 9546 live Mac proof: ordinary Auto Codex onboarding, useful document, real completed-child callback/reply, seven successful native runs, manual follow-up and independently downloaded1,101-byte child file. Existing Legacy title edit/reload preserves execution; two real Legacy runs produce independently checked15/34-byte files. These remain historical source records. - Current literal 1c03 Mac core acceptance passes independent checks: ordinary Auto native Codex onboarding without runner override; only timeout 180 seconds/concurrency 1 saved; six successful native runs and six serialized turns (maximum overlap 1); both same-task continuity checks and five mechanical callback checks; actual rendered parent reply and exact child downloads. The useful handoff advances from revision 1 to 2. Both files are 48 bytes, SHA-256 `8b742bd4e8123a7c078f0a8d9f3449fbfa8a320d7d90be641a2818db3c53d92c` and `f42db9774fa06e804ab7d596fc8b922a2b638921c418b87d0111151d290a6afe`; exactly one byte changes and old history remains. The agent is paused with zero active runs/errors. Both artifact work products have `isPrimary=false`, and descriptive titles fail a stricter title-helper assumption; these retained results are scoped editorial follow-up, not new merge gates. Six source-bound screenshots are uploaded and verified in the private primary QA report. - [Literal 9546 managed proof](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-38485488621-1/index.html): original 19 assertions and completed judge pass, four native turns, child-bound240-byte file and session/workspace continuity. Checkout reports a verified generated target-lock mutation; full final porcelain was not retained. Signed execution-image identity remains separate from Core source. - Actual 651a Test deployment succeeds on one owned/pinned target. One ordinary Auto API-key Connect then fails native cleanup before hire. Controller turn/drain/suspend completion and service-recorded environment cleanup are observed; they do not certify physical deletion or native authority retirement. Failure/recovery/unknown holds are retained. No Legacy switch or unchanged paid retry. The two source repairs above require actual treatment. - [Current immutable Core preview](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38570365725) and matching DB/shared artifacts pass. One owned, pinned Test target serves exact `1c03`; identical migration history correctly skips the migrator. Ordinary Auto Codex Connect succeeds and hires native; saved native selection and QA bounds survive reload. The initial child preparation attempt fails before provider work, with actual stdout identifying `renewal_deadline`; its trigger remains unknown and the failure is retained. Normal Board **Try again** and **Resume** recover the child to Done, producing a browser-verified 44-byte file, SHA-256 `0a8458b1efcc2d7a0d815689458c4caab039a46c7c7a3e5805de6bc8b1a96ecc`. The actual parent callback reports the completed child document/file. The existing validator requires a parent-owned attachment, so recovery enters normal Review; after byte checking, normal **Approve completion** reaches parent Done. No forced status or duplicate parent file is used. The validator is unchanged from integrated and current master. Autonomous initial callback-to-Done is not proven. The same-child follow-up completes document revision 2 and publishes a second independently downloaded 44-byte file, SHA-256 `22022257300fae762784632d08d3bbe0bab61e2ce81f91864a14dcd7aa464591`; only the revision digit changes. The unchanged existing native-continuity and attachment oracles pass. All ten recorded runs are terminal: nine native successes and the retained pre-provider setup failure. The QA agent is paused with zero active runs. The pre-existing parent evidence scope mismatch is a separate follow-up, with ordinary completion review exercised rather than a forced status or relaxed validation. This unsigned Core preview remains distinct from post-merge private Cloud composition. ## Risks - Saved agents are not migrated. Explicit runner changes use normal configuration/session rules; historical runs retain their recorded execution. - Native readiness depends on verified assets and server-owned target qualification. A Legacy probe, HTTP200 or successful account save cannot prove native readiness. - Recovery exceptions remain restricted to validated completed-onboarding reports; process-loss, ownership and terminal-state safeguards remain active. Unexecuted live journeys stay open. - Linux ARM paid tasks, Windows, Alpine and 32-bit ARM remain deferred. Cold Cargo cache misses are recorded; no warm-cache speedup is claimed. - Historical invoices/physical cleanup remain unconfirmed and held. After merge, exact published npm canary, signed standard image/migrator, private composition and serving/live acceptance still require qualification. Production deployment/default promotion is not authorized. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, tools, code execution and parallel agents. Exact serving snapshot and context-window size are not exposed. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used with available version and capability details - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have linked public issues or PRs above - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket id - [x] I have run the stated focused tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation - [x] I have considered and documented risks - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green on the current candidate - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open findings on the current candidate - [x] I will address all reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-14 11:33:02 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	df4ee06e2f	feat(skills): select and validate tracked GitHub branches (#16288) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Skills can track a branch in an authorized GitHub repository. > - Sources previously offered only a default-branch repair action. > - People need to select a listed branch or enter a branch that GitHub has not listed. > - The server must validate the selected ref with the caller's authorized connection. > - This pull request connects the approved branch picker to production APIs. > - Installed skills remain usable while the source changes its tracked ref. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Skills UI, shared API contracts, GitHub source services, and agent API discovery. **Problem or motivation** The default-branch repair action does not let people choose another branch. The settings service also validates the old ref when a caller supplies a new ref other than HEAD. A missing tracked branch can prevent connection repair even when the selected account has repository access. **Proposed solution** Load a bounded branch list with the authorized connection. Mark the default branch. Search listed branches or accept a typed ref. Validate the selected ref before saving. Keep the chosen value after a load error, invalid ref, or concurrent update. Save the selected connection and branch together during connection repair. **Alternatives considered** A default-branch button does not support a named branch. A text field alone does not help people find the repository default or available branches. **Roadmap alignment** This improves the existing Skills source manager. It does not add a new skill import system. **Additional context** Refs #16066 and #16256. This is the production implementation of the approved branch-selection Storybook journeys. ## What Changed - Add an authorized branch-list endpoint and shared response/query types. Register it in agent API discovery. - Validate the requested ref, including the returned commit SHA. Preserve source leases, revision checks, project ownership, skill identities, selections, and installed versions. - Add the searchable branch picker to Sources and connection repair. Allow typed refs during branch discovery and after discovery fails. - Keep save errors in the dialog. Retain the selected branch through a concurrent source update. - Use the production components and API client in Storybook. Add keyboard, touch, loading, retry, invalid-ref, connection-repair, and concurrent-update browser journeys. - Update product documentation and the feature/access maps. ## Verification - Red/green: two new database regressions fail against the previous service and pass against the implementation. - Linux database/service suite: 85 tests passed. This includes source visibility, human/agent authorization, selected connections, immutable versions, and invalid refs. - Rebased branch and review fixes: 94 focused UI, route, branch-validation, and fixture tests passed. Two conflict-message regressions and the stale-retry fixture regression fail before the fix and pass after it. - Storybook build passed. All 26 focused browser journeys passed. - Repository typecheck and build passed. Final UI typecheck passed after the review fixes. - The full local Vitest run was interrupted when the checkout and its dependencies disappeared. It reported missing working-directory/Postgres files and worker startup errors. Its two timed-out tests pass after the checkout was restored. The complete CI suite passed on the final head, `cf5d4c8f0a`: [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38571068332). One unchanged workspace timestamp test required a single rerun. Its release-minus-one-millisecond value can equal the original confirmation time. The rerun passed. - Live acceptance passed on implementation head `5dd935bf14` in an isolated macOS arm64 instance with Node 24.21.0 and an authorized private GitHub repository. The UI loaded the actual default branch, saved branch and selected connection together, and preserved the installed skill/version IDs after reload. An invalid typed ref retained the draft and showed the provider error. A valid typed HEAD ref then saved successfully. The owned runtime and database were stopped after the test. Focused unit, Linux database, and browser suites passed again after the error-handling review fixes. - Greptile reviewed final head `cf5d4c8f0a` at 5/5. Both review threads are resolved; the fresh review has no remaining findings. - Token gates and map/catalog checks passed. - Review entry points: `Skills / Project repository skills / 03 Branch selection components` and `04 Branch selection journeys`. Run `pnpm storybook` to inspect them. - Browser command: `pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/storybook-visual/playwright.config.ts tests/storybook-visual/skill-source-branch-selection.spec.ts tests/storybook-visual/project-repository-skills.spec.ts`. - Manual check: open an independent GitHub source, choose a new branch, select the default or type a ref, save, and reload. Try an invalid ref and confirm the selection remains in the dialog. For a project-bound source, change its ref in project settings. ## Risks - GitHub discovery is bounded to 100 listed branches. The default branch is always included. Typed refs remain available. - A source can change while the dialog is open. The API rejects a stale revision and the UI keeps the draft for retry. - A ref change schedules the existing refresh pipeline. Installed versions remain available until a successful refresh imports new content. - No database migration or credential storage change is required. Existing HEAD requests remain supported. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The serving model's exact identifier and context-window size are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser tools. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-14 09:55:43 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	f8af817f8d	fix(ui): make external agent pairing codes copyable (#16274) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - External agents connect through the shared MCP agent gateway. > - Grok setup gives the operator a one-use code for the authorization page. > - The password field hides the code but does not provide a working copy action. > - The pending approval button names Dot before the agent preview loads. > - This pull request adds explicit code copying and a neutral approval label. > - The operator can review the fixed agent without sending credentials to chat. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #16219, #15581, #15414. **What happened?** The Grok setup code is in a read-only password field. Ordinary browser copying does not copy that field. The shared authorization page says “Connect Dot with pairing code” before it knows the invited provider. These defects blocked a watched Grok desktop setup before approval. **Expected behavior** An operator can copy the one-use code with a visible control. The code stays hidden and outside the Bot prompt. The authorization page shows the registered client and the fixed company, agent, permissions, and authorizing person before approval. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Choose New agent, Invite an external agent, and Grok Bot. 2. Save the Bot identity and open Connect access. 3. Try to copy the masked code into the Bot's browser authorization page. 4. Inspect the pending approval action before a valid preview loads. **Paperclip version or commit** The fix starts from master commit 2c17d3ca52. **Deployment mode** Cloud. The same UI serves self-hosted instances. ## What Changed - Add Copy code beside the masked Grok pairing field. Reuse CopyText and the shared clipboard fallback, failure feedback, and retry. - Associate the pairing label with its input for keyboard and screen-reader access. - Use Allow agent connection before and after the fixed-agent preview. Keep approval disabled until that preview loads. Align Dot's generated setup prompt and guide with that action. - Add tests for copy failure and retry, a Grok invitation using the Cursor client identity, and unchanged person and Dot connection paths. - Add a waiting-for-authorization Storybook state and record the live qualification blocker in the existing plan. ## Verification - Focused Grok, Dot, and person-connection UI tests: 33 passed. - Repository build: passed. - Token gates: passed. - Storybook catalog: passed; structure only. - Watched Storybook preview: native browser input copied the full synthetic code while the field stayed masked and Continue stayed disabled. This is fixture evidence, not live OAuth or Runner qualification. - Repository typecheck and Storybook build: passed. UI typecheck and production build passed again after the review fix. - Current-head CI: 55 successes, two intentional skips, one neutral result, no unfinished or failed gates. Greptile: 5/5, with the review finding fixed and resolved. Head: 1b95218c91. - The additional local aggregate test run is still running. No local aggregate pass is claimed. The required full server, workspace, Runner, browser, and release checks passed in CI for the current head. - After deployment, resume the saved Grok setup, use Copy code, check the fixed agent preview, and finish the real authenticated round trip. ## Risks Copying temporarily places the one-use code on the clipboard. Its existing expiry and one-use checks remain. The authorization endpoint, grant scopes, fixed identity, and disabled-state checks do not change. No persistent secret enters the prompt. Live provider and managed Runner qualification remain incomplete. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. Used tool calls, code execution, and browser inspection. The exact serving model suffix and context limit are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-14 06:36:47 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	c36281d639	fix(skills): repair missing branches and show grouped import progress (#16256) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and their reusable skills. > - GitHub skill sources must keep their installed content usable during updates. > - A source can track a branch that no longer exists. > - The UI treats that GitHub error as a connection problem, so saving a valid account does not resolve it. > - Project workspaces also show the same repository several times, and long imports give little feedback. > - This pull request adds explicit branch repair, groups repository imports, and shows import progress. > - People can repair the actual problem and see when their import is working. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16066 and #14713. This fixes the Sources experience introduced by those changes. Related adapter-source PRs #14340 and #14341 cover runtime mounting, not this source-management flow. No overlapping source-management fix was found. **What happened?** An installed source tracked `main` while its GitHub repository used `master`. GitHub returned HTTP 422. The UI showed a general read error and asked for a new connection after a valid account was saved. The project repository list repeated the same repository/ref for each project. Import had no spinner or explanation of queued work. **Expected behavior** Identify an unavailable branch and offer an explicit repair. Retain the selected connection and installed versions. Show one repository/ref row with its projects. Give immediate feedback and show the queued and active import states. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Install a source with an immutable commit and a saved tracked branch that does not exist. 2. Refresh it, or try to save a valid GitHub connection. 3. Add the same repository/ref to two legacy project workspaces and open Sources. 4. Import that repository and observe the row until installation completes. ## What Changed - Distinguish a missing GitHub revision from access denial and temporary read errors. - Validate both repository identity and the tracked revision when saving a connection. - Offer Use default branch on independent sources and in connection repair. Keep `HEAD` as the default-branch alias after refresh. Preserve skill IDs, versions and selections. - Keep active project refs under project configuration. Reject source-level changes that would alter their tracking. Recheck the ref under the source lock when project attachment races with branch repair. - Group matching repository/ref workspaces. Adopt eligible workspaces and skip pending workspaces. Keep remaining project links inside the existing source card. Allow remaining imports while another workspace is pending. - Show a spinner, busy state and queued/importing text. Keep the saved authorized account selected in connection repair. - Update shared contracts, feature/access maps, database notes and production-component Storybook journeys. ## Verification - Red/green: three local regressions failed on the original code: missing-ref classification, duplicate repository rows, and branch repair instead of another connection prompt. The changed UI/reader tests pass after the fixes. - Live local app with a real authorized GitHub credential: reproduced HTTP 422 for the unavailable branch; used the UI to restore default-branch tracking; confirmed the same connection, skill ID and single immutable version remained. - Live local grouped Paperclip import: one source, two project associations and 52 installed skills. Sources survived reload. No staging data was changed. - All 16 project repository Storybook browser journeys pass on the final head, including keyboard focus recovery after branch repair. These include branch repair, grouped imports, connection selection, recovery, removal and responsive layouts. - Repository typecheck, production build, Storybook build, token gates and 28 map/catalog tests passed. Final UI typecheck and build also passed after grouping remaining project links. - Linux qualification: all 94 focused source, project import, GitHub reader and UI tests pass with supported Node 24. No database tests were skipped. Both review findings failed before their fixes and pass after them. - The full local `pnpm test:run` attempt was stopped after macOS database suites exhausted the host shared-memory limit. The complete Linux CI matrix is the full-suite gate. The complete Linux CI matrix passes for head `f886e3ac073ec1c6f051fd6429496234f5143694`. - Greptile rates head `f886e3ac073ec1c6f051fd6429496234f5143694` 5/5. Both findings are fixed and all review threads are resolved. - Storybook: `skills-project-repository-skills-02-journeys--missing-branch` and `--duplicate-projects`. ## Risks - Default-branch repair changes the tracked branch only after an explicit user action. Existing execution version pins stay intact. - A selected connection now needs access to the tracked revision, not only repository metadata. - Grouping is by repository and ref. Project access and provenance remain separate and are checked by the existing services. - Legacy source errors contain safe text. The repair-action classifier maps known errors and treats other failures as retryable. No credentials or provider response bodies are returned. - No schema migration, workflow change, lockfile change or staging deployment. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact serving model identifier and context-window size are not exposed in this session. Tool-assisted implementation, code execution and browser verification. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-13 22:27:11 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	b8ffeb973a	feat(runner): add experimental Grok Bot agent participation (#16219) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents that perform work for a company. > - The shared Runner owns task admission, authority, receipts and finalization. > - An existing Grok Bot needs to receive assignments and return results through that Runner. > - The Bot also needs governed access when it starts work from its own conversation. > - This PR adds agent-purpose MCP access and routine webhook dispatch. > - It reuses the external-agent Rust Runner and keeps Grok capabilities explicit. > - The provider stays experimental until the real-client managed journeys pass. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Agent or provider** Grok Bot, distinct from the Grok Build coding runtime in #13882. **Why this adapter is useful** Users can assign work to an existing Bot, receive progress, questions, documents and files in Paperclip, and let the Bot initiate work under its agent permissions. **How the agent is invoked** A webhook-only routine delivers bounded references. Dedicated named-agent OAuth and MCP provide inbound calls. Setup follows [Grok routines](https://cursor.com/help/grok-bot/routines) and [custom plugins](https://cursor.com/help/grok-bot/connect-plugins). The current desktop app needs its Bot-generated Webhook URL navigation link when routine-row clicks fail. The GitHub search found related Grok Build runtime work, but no existing Grok Bot agent provider. This extends the roadmap’s existing agent, Runner, governance and artifact foundations. ## What Changed - Add default-off Grok Bot participation through the shared real Rust external backend, preserving native provider identity guarantees and distinguishing session closure from remote termination. - Bind agent OAuth to company, agent, client, gateway and authorizer; recheck permissions and task-bound execution authority without manufacturing a native identity. - Persist routine configuration, dispatch intents, authenticated acknowledgement and recovery holds. Store URL/key together in encrypted secret storage, use guarded public egress, and never automatically replay ambiguous HTTP delivery. - Reuse native tools, durable waiting, completion assessment and review. Add task-bound file grants through existing artifact storage; suppress proactive echo dispatch and synchronous result wake loops. - Enforce the current native deliverable work-mode policy at file-ticket issuance and use. Add operator retries for confirmed rejected wakes, with retained receipts, stable retry intent and current-authority checks. Recovery locks bindings before routine rows. Thread Stop resolves the selected run and its agent. - Cancel queued and preparing Stop targets before assignment creation, restore saved setup after a failed request and successful retry, and publish the Grok provider descriptor schema. Advance the versioned Copilot source declaration for the shared schema change; its qualification remains pending. - Filter task summaries with the shared privacy policy, preserve feedback admission when wake delivery is blocked, reconcile settled delivery receipts without restoring work authority, and bind every Stop control to its displayed run. Recovery records distinguish dispatch uncertainty from a revoked session. - Add resumable guided setup, credential replacement, consent, management, observed work status and stop/recovery controls, plus an interactive Storybook journey using the production task thread, question form and report card. Grok’s own apps remain available; Paperclip workspace and third-party tools are deferred. ## Verification - Five focused protocol, authorization, person MCP and Runner files: 192 tests pass. The Grok assigned-work case executes the actual Rust Runner, saves a document, uploads/deduplicates a file and reaches ordinary finalization. - Proactive intake/deduplication and renewed-session recovery pass. These use scripted clients and synthetic storage; they are not real-provider acceptance. - Repository typecheck, production build, token gates, map checks and Storybook build/catalog checks pass. The local full-suite campaign was stopped after macOS shared-memory exhaustion repeatedly prevented embedded PostgreSQL startup. No local aggregate pass is claimed. The first clean-worker CI run identified avatar fixture/configuration, flag defaults, feature-card ordering and OpenAPI route-coverage gaps; all four focused regressions pass after correction. Those regressions pass. The latest clean-worker CI run also found a Copilot source-hash declaration mismatch after the shared descriptor update; the corrected declaration passes all 28 integrity tests. The next review corrections pass 144 rendered UI tests, 21 OpenAPI tests and 82 Runner contract/integrity/history tests. The latest database fixtures were blocked at startup by host shared-memory exhaustion; clean-worker CI must execute their new regressions. Full current-head CI now passes: 54 successful checks and four intentional skips. The database regression uses the PostgreSQL driver result shape; file-policy, rejected-feedback and lock-order cases pass on clean workers. Current-head Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved findings. - Rendered setup steps and outbound-only verification were walked through in Storybook. Simulation cannot enable Done without an authenticated-reply state. - Actual client OAuth, continued access, reconnect and one routine wake with an exact chat acknowledgement were observed separately. This candidate’s live authenticated challenge, assigned/proactive workflows, Linux managed artifact, restart and cleanup are not yet qualified. The provider stays disabled by default. - The separate Cloud ingress change forwards only exact task-bound upload/download paths and preserves host identity and header stripping. - Current Cloud policy reserves Test for pre-merge app/harness experiments; Staging accepts only master-derived revisions. Real-client qualification needs a supported, authorized deployment target and remains outstanding. ## Risks One append-only migration adds routine/dispatch state and extends shared bindings and file tickets. The unshipped migrations were regenerated after upstream consumed their original numbers. Rolling back code retains the durable rows; revoke grants and inspect unknown remote activity before resuming dispatch. Grok cannot confirm remote termination, stream its complete transcript or report spending. Plugins are account-wide and do not isolate credentials between Bots. Real-client managed acceptance remains required before enabling the experimental provider. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex based on GPT-6, with reasoning, code execution and browser/native UI tools. The exact deployment model ID and context-window size are not exposed by this runtime. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-13 20:57:42 -05:00
3 people	e0f30a4c71	feat(apps): collapse provider connections behind an "N connections" toggle (#16097) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The Apps page shows one card for each provider. Each card lists the connections for that provider. > - Some providers have many connections. For example, a team can have five OpenAI accounts. > - Each connection uses a full row. Thus, the page becomes long and cluttered. > - This pull request puts the connection list behind a "N connections" row with a chevron. The user clicks the row to show or hide the list. > - The benefit is a shorter Apps page. Connections that need action stay visible. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** UI: the Apps page (`ui/src/pages/apps/Browse.tsx`), the `ConnectorCard` component. **Problem or motivation** A provider card shows every connection as a full row. When a provider has many accounts, the card is very tall. The page is hard to scan. **Proposed solution** When a card has two or more connections, show a "N connections" row with a chevron below the card header. A click on the row opens or closes the list. The list is closed when all connections are healthy. The list is open when a connection needs attention or setup. The row also shows the count, for example "· 1 needs attention". The list is open while a search is active. A card with one connection does not show the row. **Alternatives considered** - Always show the list. This is the current behavior, and it causes the clutter. - Show the toggle for one connection too. This adds a click and gives no benefit. - Always close the list. This can hide an account that needs reconnection, so we did not use it. ## What Changed - `ConnectorCard` counts native connections, gateway-managed accounts (Composio, Arcade, Executor), and chat or bot endpoints. - When the count is two or more, the card wraps the list in the existing `Collapsible` component. The trigger row shows the count and a chevron that turns when the list opens. - The list opens by default when one or more connections need attention or setup. The trigger row shows how many need attention. - The `Browse` page sends `defaultExpanded` and the current trimmed search query while a search is active. A new search opens the list again, even after the user closed it. - The upstream account state logic moved into the `upstreamAccountState` helper. The list render and the attention count use the same helper. The behavior did not change. - The attention count and Finish setup action share one predicate. A verifying endpoint stays visible until setup is complete. Four regression cases cover provider setup, identity linking, missing setup metadata, and completed setup. - New tests in `Browse.test.tsx` cover: open and close with the toggle, search opens the list, one connection stays inline, and the list opens when an account needs attention. - New review story: `ui/storybook/stories/connection-setup/apps-connection-count-toggle.stories.tsx` ("Apps, channels, and extensions / Connection setup / Connection count toggle"). It includes production component fixtures for collapsed, expanded, needs-attention, search-match, single-connection, page-overview, and unfinished-chat-setup states. The original six story IDs are retained; the unfinished chat setup fixture adds one ID. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/pages/apps/Browse.test.tsx`: all 84 tests pass. The new test closes an active search result, changes the query, then returns to the first query. It fails before the search-reset fix and passes after it. - `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --check`: passes (265 story files, 2,520 stories). Story annotations describe the production components, fixture boundary, and covered capabilities. - `pnpm check:token-gates`: passes. - Full repository typecheck and build passed after the master merge. The final UI typecheck passes after the setup fix. Final full build and Storybook build pass on `d4c923d3ce0`. The built index retains all six prior story IDs and adds the unfinished-chat-setup ID. Chromium checks pass for all seven states, including the setup action and toggle behavior. All 54 successful CI checks pass on this head, with two intentional skips, including all general and serialized test shards, E2E, typecheck, and build. The fresh Apex review is 5/5 on this head with no unresolved findings. The separate, unsharded local `pnpm test:run` invocation has not completed; complete suite verification comes from CI. - The stories use local account fixtures and stub navigation. They do not prove a live provider connection or persistence. ## Risks - Low risk. The change is UI only, with no API or data change. - Behavior change: users must click to see the connections on a healthy card with two or more connections. Cards with a problem stay open, so a broken connection is not hidden. ## Model Used - Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), used in Claude Code with tool use (shell, file edit, test runs). OpenAI GPT-6 (`gpt-6`) through Codex assisted conflict resolution, regression tests, and repository verification. This session does not expose an exact context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Devin Foley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-13 14:57:48 -07:00
4 people	ba4fac585d	feat(agents): show who created an agent in shared companies (#16055) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - A company in Paperclip can have more than one human member, and each member can create agents > - The app does not record which person created an agent > - When two or more people share a company, members cannot see who added an agent or who to ask about it > - This pull request records the creator of each agent and shows the creator on the agent Overview tab > - The benefit is clear ownership of agents in shared companies, with no change for single-user companies ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public issue exists. This description follows `feature_request.yml`. **Subsystem affected** Agents: the agent data model, the agent create path on the server, and the agent Overview tab in the board UI. **Problem or motivation** Paperclip does not record which human user created an agent. When more than one human user works in a company, the agent page does not tell members who created the agent. **Proposed solution** Record the user ID of the creator when a human creates an agent. Show "Created by <name>" on the Identity card of the agent Overview tab. Show this row only when the company has two or more human members. Do not count the synthetic local Board principal as a human member. Do not show the local Board as a creator. **Alternatives considered** Count human users across the full instance. We did not do this. An instance-wide count tells a member of one company that other companies have users. The creator is always a member of the agent's company, so the company count is sufficient. **Roadmap alignment** `ROADMAP.md` has no item for agent ownership. This change is small and additive. ## What Changed - Add the nullable column `agents.created_by_user_id` (`packages/db/src/schema/agents.ts`, migration `0343_new_mentor.sql`). - Set the column in the single agent insert path (`server/src/modules/agent-lifecycle/adapters/records.ts`). The value comes from the authenticated user actor. The server ignores a creator value in the request body. Agents that agents or the system create keep `null`. - Backfill existing agents in the migration. The backfill uses the earliest `agent.created` or `agent.hire_created` activity row that a user actor wrote in the same company. - Add `createdByUserId` to the shared `Agent` type (`packages/shared/src/types/agent.ts`). - Add `ui/src/lib/agent-creator.ts`. It decides if the UI shows the creator row and it resolves the creator name. If the creator left the company, the row shows "Former member". - Add the "Created by" row to the Identity card in `ui/src/pages/AgentDetail.tsx`. If the company user directory request fails, the row shows "Could not load creator". The row does not disappear silently. - Add the Storybook story `Pages/Agent Detail → Shared Company Shows Creator`. - Document the column in `doc/SPEC-implementation.md` §7.2. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck` passes. This includes the migration numbering and migration safety checks. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` passes. - `ui`: `tsc --noEmit` passes. - `server`: `vitest run src/modules/agent-lifecycle/__tests__/lifecycle.test.ts` passes (49/49). Two new tests: - The server records the creator from the actor and ignores a creator value in the request body. - The backfill takes the earliest user activity row. It skips agent actors and rows from other companies. - `server`: `vitest run src/__tests__/built-in-agents.test.ts` passes (40/40). A new test checks that a built-in agent enabled by a human records that human, and that automatic provisioning stays unattributed. The gated (pending-approval) provisioning test also asserts the creator. `src/__tests__/built-in-agent-routes.test.ts` also passes. - `ui`: `vitest run src/lib/agent-creator.test.ts src/pages/AgentOverview.test.tsx` passes (10/10). The tests cover these cases: the row shows with two or more humans, the row stays hidden with one human plus the Board, the UI never shows the Board as the creator, the row shows an error when the directory request fails, and the row stays hidden (no error) for agents with no creator or the Board as creator. The last case fails without the fix. - The current Storybook catalog uses source annotations and generated indexes. `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --check` passes (264 story files, 2,514 stories). The merge keeps the authored catalog deletion from master. - `pnpm check:token-gates` is clean. - Screenshots from the Storybook story (fake data: two human members, Alice Admin and Bob Builder, plus the local Board). The red "Could not load public key" text is a Storybook artifact: the story has no fixture for the public key request. The existing `Dashboard` story shows the same text. **Two or more human members: the Identity card shows "Created by".**  **One human member plus the local Board: the row stays hidden.**  Full Overview tab: [overview-created-by.png](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/9b62bd2ea6cf984ce6745f08cc45f44ddf00fb51/pr-16055/overview-created-by.png). The images are on the separate branch `pr-assets/agent-created-by`. They are not in this PR and do not go to `master`. - Manual check: open Storybook at `Pages/Agent Detail → Shared Company Shows Creator`. The Identity card shows "Created by Alice Admin". The `Dashboard` story has one human, so it does not show the row. - Final focused verification on `5a02350cf16050a3cf3cb3f8dc061fe61758c60d`: all 99 tests pass across the two UI suites, built-in-agent suite, and lifecycle suite. The backfill test applies the complete migration twice. The migration uses `ADD COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS` and preserves the company-scoped backfill. Migration numbering and token checks pass. - Full repository typecheck, build, and Storybook build pass. The generated creator story ID is present. A Chromium check renders the production agent page fixture and verifies the creator row and Alice Admin name. Map checks and their 21 tests pass. A fresh Apex review is 5/5 on the current head with no unresolved findings. All 54 successful CI checks pass on this head, with two intentional skips, including all general and serialized test shards, E2E, typecheck, and build. The workspaces-b job passed after rerunning a runner shutdown; no source change was needed. The separate, unsharded local `pnpm test:run` invocation has not completed; complete suite verification comes from CI. ## Risks - Migration: the migration adds one nullable column and runs one `UPDATE` on `agents` with a correlated subquery on `activity_log`. On an instance with a very large activity log, the backfill can take some time. The migration does not lock other tables and does not delete data. - Backfill accuracy: agents with no user-authored create activity row keep `null`. The UI then does not show a creator. This is the same as the current behavior. - Privacy: the row shows only names from the company user directory, and only to users who can already see that directory. - Low risk for single-user companies: the UI does not change for them. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - Provider: Anthropic, Claude Opus 5.5 (model ID `claude-opus-5-5`), run as a coding agent through Claude Code with tool use (shell, file edit, and test execution), standard context window. OpenAI GPT-6 (`gpt-6`) through Codex assisted conflict resolution, regression tests, and repository verification. This session does not expose an exact context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Amy (Opus) <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com>	2026-10-13 14:57:41 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	22d05644f4	feat(ui): add Speko voice setup, task calls, and Storybook coverage (#15728) ... Runtime #15727 is merged. This PR adds the UI. Qualification follows in #15729. ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agent work through tasks and governed connections. > - Chat connections already bind external conversations to those tasks. > - Speko handles voice and telephony, while the selected Paperclip agent does the work. > - A call needs durable session authority, ordered follow-ups, and safe result delivery. > - This PR adds the Speko setup and call controls to the existing Apps and task UI. > - This PR depends on #15727. The qualification suite follows separately. Speko stays experimental. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Problem or motivation** Phone and browser voice conversations cannot use the chat connection task lifecycle. A separate voice runtime is needed to preserve task authority, retries, and reply history. **Proposed solution** Add company-scoped voice sessions, signed callbacks, durable replies, inbound intake, and an agent-facing outbound-call tool. Reuse existing tasks, queues, secrets, and publications. **Roadmap alignment** This extends the experimental chat connector entry points under Agent Chat and Connected Apps. The project owner requested this feature. Refs #11418 for the original provider catalog proposal. This implementation uses the newer chat connection infrastructure rather than an MCP catalog-only integration. Refs #15721 for remote OpenCode startup. ## What Changed - Add the Speko Apps catalog entry, provider artwork, and browser SDK. - Reuse existing agents in setup. Keep the optional Company Phone Agent in the catalog, with connection instructions available to any assigned agent. - Add task voice controls, transcripts, phone callbacks, inbound-line settings, and call Activity entries. - Surface retryable connection and incoming-task inventory failures, preserve active call controls and cached tasks, restore keyboard focus after recovery, and bound notification polling so a stuck request cannot hide later results. - Put Save & exit and Connect Speko in the credential step’s shared footer. - Add deterministic production-component Storybook fixtures for setup, lifecycle, failures, permissions, and phone surfaces. - Include voice components in the design guide. Stories never request a real microphone or place calls. ## Verification - All 27 focused UI/controller regressions, UI typecheck, token gates, and 28 map/catalog structural tests pass. The shared connection cache test covers pause/resume invalidation during the 30-second fresh period. - Storybook builds 157 Speko production-component stories. The complete prior 156-story set passed all 624 checks on UI source 249cbc616a. After the final cache repair, all 152 affected page/launcher checks passed across both themes, 390/1200 widths and reduced motion. Real microphone access and external provider requests are blocked. - Source annotations follow the current generated-catalog contract. No generated catalog or lockfile is included. Three inherited GitHub-heading tests passed after master reconciliation. - Latest-head CI and Greptile review must pass before merge. Local fixture success does not establish provider or spoken-playback acceptance. - The separate integrated browser run passed two journeys and failed browser answer retrieval. Real browser/telephone playback and timing acceptance remain outstanding. See the dated qualification report and E01–E16 runbook. Speko stays experimental. ## Risks - Voice sessions add migrations and provider-dependent lifecycle behavior. Migrations preserve existing chat and AI transports. - Callback origins must be reachable HTTPS. Provider keys and signing secrets remain vaulted. - Unverified callers receive task-scoped low-trust authority. Caller ID does not grant private task access. - Outbound telephony incurs provider charges. Provider acceptance is not proof that the caller heard an answer. - Keep the feature behind the existing experimental chat setting until the real browser, inbound, outbound, and delayed-result acceptance matrix passes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with tool use and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-13 16:26:38 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	473c80d13f	Automatically import and update project repository skills (#16066) ... Automatically import skills from new GitHub project repositories and update enabled sources in the background. Preserve project-derived access, saved selections, immutable execution versions and explicit pins; add legacy adoption, refresh and connection repair in Sources. Include durable scheduling and bounded work credits, production Storybook journeys, real GitHub-to-routine acceptance receipts and final-head CI/security/Greptile qualification. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-13 16:11:43 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	433d94ee0b	refactor(maps): generate indexes from local story and feature metadata (#16214) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Feature recipes and Storybook help contributors find behavior, examples, and verification steps. > - Independent feature changes currently update shared catalogs, indexes, and review hashes. > - Those shared files cause merge conflicts and repeated bookkeeping during parallel work. > - This pull request stores metadata in each feature recipe and story, then generates the combined views. > - Contributors can merge independent work without editing a common index. Git and PR evidence retain change and review history. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Maintaining the product, agent-access, and Storybook maps while multiple agents change different features. **Current behavior** A story or recipe change can update `catalog.json`, `INDEX.md`, review hashes, verification tables, and tracked generated navigation. Two unrelated changes then conflict in the same files. **Proposed behavior** Each story declares capability links and classification in `parameters.paperclip`. Each feature recipe declares its navigation and optional verification guidance. Startup, build, and UI typechecking discover these sources and generate ignored indexes and Storybook pages. **Reason and benefit** A routine change edits its own source files. Aggregate metadata is rebuilt from the merged checkout. There is no sidecar registry, shared review journal, or hash acknowledgment to maintain. **Breaking changes** The tracked Storybook catalog and index paths are retired. Consumers use `ui/storybook/generated/` or `maps/generated/` after generation. Contributor instructions and the existing feature-gap browser suite use the new paths. Story and overview IDs remain stable. ## What Changed - Move the existing annotations into 262 story files. Preserve classifications, capability associations, exports, and explicit IDs. - Discover all 35 feature recipes. Store section/order beside each recipe and move durable verification routes out of the shared table. - Remove tracked catalogs, inventories, overview pages, and inline preview ordering. Keep authored preview behavior in `preview-base.tsx`. - Generate the Storybook guide, feature/access Markdown indexes, gap report, page-reference inventory, and preview wrapper automatically. - Update the map contracts and maintenance skills to use Git history and revision-specific PR/CI evidence. - Add schema, identity, regeneration, and actual Git merge tests. Run these through the existing UI Vitest suite. Add focused browser navigation checks. This is one coordinated migration. Most of the 367 changed files contain only moved metadata or deleted generated content. Review the generator scripts, map contracts, Storybook configuration, and tests first. No product API or authorization behavior changes. ## Verification Passed: - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`: 35 paired areas and 175 capabilities. - `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --check`: 262 suites and 2,485 authored stories after incorporating current master. - `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs scripts/storybook-catalog.test.mjs scripts/storybook-feature-index.test.mjs`: 28 tests, including independent branches merged in both orders with identical generated output and no tracked changes. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run storybook/map-tooling.test.ts`: the CI entrypoint runs those map tests. - `pnpm check:token-gates`. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` before the final master rebase. - `pnpm build-storybook`: all 2,517 original story/docs URLs retained. Current master contributes exactly four additional recovery stories. - Focused Playwright navigation checks: search and open a feature without examples; expand verification guidance and check source links; retain capability order and follow a related Foundations suite. The final clean Storybook build passed after deleting every ignored map output. Post-rebase UI typechecking and both browser tests passed. The working tree stays clean after generation. The concurrent-cleanup regression fails with `ENOENT` without the fix and passes with it. All GitHub CI gates passed on `00fc7ec18e`, which also received Greptile 5/5 with no unresolved findings. The final merge commit `1c3c5143a6` incorporates master and resolves only the two modify/delete conflicts by retaining removal of the aggregate index and catalog. Master’s new workspace feature and access guidance is preserved. Map validation, catalog generation, overview generation, all 28 map tests, and diff checks pass after conflict resolution. The maintainer explicitly requested merging without another Greptile review. CI has not been rerun to completion on this merge commit. The local repository-wide `pnpm test:run` was stopped before completion after the earlier CI matrix passed; it is not reported as a local pass. No screenshot baselines or production acceptance are claimed. To repeat the browser check against an owned Storybook server: ```sh PAPERCLIP_GAP_STORYBOOK_URL=http://127.0.0.1:6136 pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/storybook-visual/feature-gap-stories.config.ts map-navigation.spec.ts ``` ## Risks - Existing branches need a one-time rebase to move their catalog changes into local annotations. The PR incorporates the recovery changes from current master. - Changing the same story or capability can still produce a meaningful conflict. This removes the shared aggregate bottleneck. - The generator uses Storybook's existing CSF parser. Literal-only annotations and parser regression tests protect the current contract. - Generated Markdown is available after running the generator; the published Storybook provides a browsable guide. - Shared source changes still require review. Removing hashes removes mechanical acknowledgments; it does not establish runtime parity. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository inspection, code execution, and browser-test tools. The exact deployment model ID and context window were not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green on the previously reviewed head `00fc7ec18e`; final conflict-resolution checks are documented above - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups on `00fc7ec18e`; another review was waived by the maintainer - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-13 15:27:23 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip	5a6d0d08a7	fix: record verified workspace file recovery from tasks (#16104) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Recovery must preserve files and show the next operator action. > - A stopped run can leave a file repair hold after its recovery action is resolved. > - The task notice shows that hold but has no form to record verified file recovery. > - A chat connection can also replace the file repair instruction with a chat retry instruction. > - This pull request adds a file recovery form and preserves the file repair instruction. > - The form records evidence for the original run and keeps the current task status. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A retained workspace file hold can block a task after its recovery action is resolved. The task page offers no file recovery form. A chat binding can hide the required file repair instruction. **Expected behavior** An authorized board member can record verified recovery of the original files. The server checks the original stop proof. The task keeps its current status and does not start another run. Chat instructions must not replace file repair instructions. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a stopped legacy run with a retained workspace recovery marker and a resolved recovery action. 2. Open its task page, including a task with a chat connection. 3. Observe that the file hold has no supported form to record verified recovery. Refs: #15857, #15824, #16095. Those PRs address shutdown export, native finalization and workspace source isolation. This PR uses the existing file repair API. ## What Changed - Add a board-only file recovery form with evidence and an explicit file verification confirmation. - Preserve the current task status when recording file recovery. - Project whether the original recovery marker supports file recording. - Keep file repair instructions when a task has a chat binding. - Add UI, route and Storybook examples for success, denial and chat-connected file holds. - Document the recovery flow and update the affected Storybook catalog entries. ## Verification - Merged master `c8efdbfba43` and resolved both rounds of catalog/index conflicts. Upstream review notes and classifications are preserved, together with all four retained-file recovery examples and their stable story IDs. Both fix branches also combine without merge conflicts or catalog fingerprint drift. - Passed locally after conflict resolution: 47 tests covering the file recovery UI, execution blocker notice and retained workspace repair route. The earlier ownership-route pass also covered 196 tests. - Passed: UI token gates, the complete Storybook catalog check with no drift errors, feature and agent map structure checks, and all 17 catalog/index script tests. Verification inventory counts match all 262 authored suites and 2,485 story IDs. The upstream production verification obligations remain intact. - Passed: full workspace typecheck, build and Storybook build on latest head `10ac22b35d0a4fe469cf620914845c509046da48`. The built index retains all four file-recovery story IDs. - Latest head `10ac22b35d0a4fe469cf620914845c509046da48` has 54 successful checks and two intentionally skipped Storybook checks. Apex is 5/5 on that exact commit, with no unresolved findings. The full general/serialized suites and all eight browser shards passed in CI. Local tests use the focused suites above. Storybook browser interactions have not been executed locally. - Manual check: open a task with a retained file hold. Verify that evidence and confirmation are required. Record verified file recovery. Confirm that its status stays unchanged and no run starts. Repeat without board runtime access and with an unverified stop receipt. ## Risks - The form records an operator attestation. It does not recover files itself or prove external action outcomes. - A stale source or missing stop proof must remain rejected by the existing server route. - No database migration or automatic task retry is added. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 (`gpt-6`), used through Codex with reasoning, repository tools, code editing and test execution. The exact context window size is not exposed by this environment. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-13 13:47:10 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	c8efdbfba4	test(storybook): add production examples for feature map UI gaps (#16196) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - The feature map records the user-facing capabilities. > - Storybook uses the same feature index. > - Step 2 found 49 UI capabilities with no authored examples. > - This pull request adds shipped-component examples with isolated fixtures. > - The catalog records each example's states and remaining production checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #16167. The verification inventory is merged; this follow-up now targets master. ## What Changed - Add 37 suites and 257 scenarios for all 49 UI capabilities from the step-2 inventory. Keep existing stories and IDs. - Use shipped pages and components. Simulate API replies, sockets, props, and callbacks at their boundaries. - Activate story API fixtures before the application providers read data. Block unregistered API mutations and restore owned storage/fetch state. - Add browser checks for rendering, declared play assertions, fixture reset, and selected mobile/theme states. Update the catalog and verification inventory. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm build`: passed. - UI Vitest suite: 730 files and 8,208 tests passed. Fixture boundary tests: 4 passed. - Map/catalog checks, 27 generator/map tests, and token gates: passed. - `pnpm build-storybook`: passed. All 2,248 previous built entry IDs remain present. - Pre-reconciliation static browser suite: 260 checks passed (257 scenarios, token fixture reset, and two mobile/theme cases). All non-play stories assert an explicit subject state; 129 play functions passed. - `pnpm test:run` could not complete on this Mac. Embedded PostgreSQL exhausted host shared-memory allocation. The run also reported native-runner test timeouts. Only this task's verified runner was stopped; other jobs and host settings were preserved. - Reconciled onto merged master `252d9b5077`. The six draft stories and new same-browser reset regression passed (7 checks); 16 draft-persistence tests and UI typecheck passed. Static merge verification: 32 affected-subject/draft checks passed, including same-browser reset. Rebuilt Storybook retains all 2,248 original IDs in its 2,517-entry index. Four additional play-result checks passed: visible onboarding reset, pending probe, filtered-empty runs, and optimistic queued-response removal. UI typecheck and 27 catalog/map tests also passed. Final static browser suite on `3fab35df8d912935fa86ce0de7d32d07e2b5f4c3`: all 261 checks passed (257 scenarios plus fixture-reset and mobile checks). Latest head `3fab35df8d912935fa86ce0de7d32d07e2b5f4c3`: all 55 CI/status checks passed; the two optional Storybook workflow jobs were skipped. Greptile 5/5 with no unresolved threads. - No pinned Linux visual-baseline comparison or real provider journey is claimed. ## Risks Fixtures can drift from production contracts. The catalog records inspected sources and their fingerprints. Capability links provide initial isolated UI coverage; they do not certify every recipe variant, real permissions, persistence, or provider behavior. The new examples expose existing UI limits. Plugin discovery failure stays on Loading. Document and environment-list reads lack dedicated failure feedback; Cases and Inbox fall back to empty views after errors. Goal alignment has display views but no assignment control. These findings remain visible in the inventory. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex. The exact runtime deployment ID and context window are not exposed in this session. Used code generation, shell execution, and browser verification. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-13 13:24:09 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	252d9b5077	docs(storybook): record verification routes for missing examples (#16167) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The feature map describes product capabilities and verification journeys. > - The Storybook catalog links existing examples to those capabilities. > - A capability without a story can need UI examples, CLI checks, or browser checks. > - This pull request records the required verification surface for all 60 current gaps. > - The next Storybook pass can add useful examples without claiming backend proof from mocks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16154. Reconciles the new task-notification capability from #16153. The related PR search found no duplicate of this classification pass. This change follows the merged association corrections. It does not add product behavior or duplicate a roadmap feature. ## What Changed - Add `maps/storybook-map/VERIFICATION.md` with all 60 unassociated capabilities: 49 UI example gaps, eight CLI/operator operations, and three browser verification boundaries. - Record required UI states, separate production checks, source links, and existing test starting points. Keep execution marked not run. - Link the record from the catalog contract. Tell the maintenance skill to keep its rows, counts, and source revision current. - Regenerate the feature index for personal task notifications. Refresh only the inspected recipe/index-dependent review fingerprints. Retain all 223 suites, 2,212 authored IDs, associations, and classifications. - Record the targeted association revisit. It found no additional justified links. ## Verification - `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs` and `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed. - All 27 catalog, feature-index, and map structural tests passed. - The maintenance skill validator passed. - A source check confirmed that the 60 unique rows match all non-guide association gaps. All report, contract, and skill file links exist. - `git diff --check` passed. - Inspect the eight CLI/operator rows and three browser rows. UI/API capabilities retain both obligations. - Full repository typecheck, tests, build, Storybook build, and live product journeys were not run locally for this documentation and generated-data change. No live proof is claimed. - Final head `a9ef9e8ebc1f41bb7047142704655d08b3e47be7`: all 57 checks/statuses are green (55 successful, two Storybook jobs skipped). Greptile approved this head at 5/5. The review finding is resolved and the PR is mergeable. ## Risks - This source inventory can become stale as capabilities or associations change. The maintenance skill requires refreshing its rows and source revision. - Existing test links identify starting points. They do not certify complete or passing production coverage. - There is no migration, permission change, product behavior change, story removal, or new visual baseline. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex with GPT-6 assisted with source review, documentation, and checks. It used shell tools and read-only area agents. The runtime did not expose an exact backend model revision or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-13 12:39:04 -05:00
4 people	0b0e53029f	fix: recover saved workspace results automatically (#15824) ... ## Thinking Path - Paperclip preserves accepted agent results before workspace copyback and result commitment. - A replaced controller can leave a physical copyback owner receipt behind. A lost database lock or expired lease cannot prove that its tar/Git children stopped. - Infrastructure recovery should belong to the runtime and deployment harness; task users should not investigate processes or attest shutdown. - New receipts record the exact deployment. The harness independently verifies that deployment fully stopped and signs a short-lived proof bound to the stack, run, owner and deployment. - The existing guarded reconciler then finishes the same accepted result without a new agent turn. Legacy receipts retain the documented administrator API after independent platform verification. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** An accepted native result can remain at `workspace_finalizing` with an abandoned physical copyback owner. Repeated recovery sweeps could replace specific instructions with advice to start new agent work. The first version of this PR exposed a shutdown-evidence form in the task; that asks end users to resolve infrastructure details. **Expected behavior** Automatically verify and recover the exact stopped deployment, preserve the original accepted result and existing approval/monitor waits, and show only a quiet task status. Unknown or live workers must remain fenced. Older receipts without platform identity need independently verified operator assistance through the administrator API. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Persist an accepted native result and a copyback receipt from a prior controller. 2. Replace that deployment before workspace finalization commits. 3. Let the normal finalization reconciler revisit the saved result. 4. With a platform-bound receipt and a fully stopped deployment, recovery should finish automatically. With missing, live, unverifiable or changed ownership, it must not write files or create another provider turn. Related public work: #14402 introduced copyback ownership; #9687 handles dead-run finalize barriers; #15795 handles terminal stale-run cleanup. This change addresses an accepted result whose physical copyback owner prevents commitment. ## What Changed - Record Railway project, environment, service and deployment identity on new physical copyback owners. - Request read-only platform verification from the managed cloud harness. Require an Ed25519 stop receipt with a disjoint purpose, configured signing key, exact stack/run/owner/deployment binding and valid expiry. - Keep live, unknown, malformed, unavailable and legacy owners fenced. Compare the whole prior receipt during ownership takeover, under the existing dedicated advisory lock. - Persist platform proof and audit automatic takeover. Resume normal finalization of the same saved result, preserving task ownership, approved boundaries, monitors and pending confirmations. - Remove process metadata, shutdown evidence, confirmation checkboxes and infrastructure-repair forms from task views. Suppress the duplicate technical owner-recovery card. Show “Restoring saved work…” only from server-confirmed recovery or queued operator recovery; platform identity alone shows the operator-assistance fallback. Remove the status when recovery resolves. - Share current-task, current-running-execution, accepted-result, authoritative-reviewer and newer-execution checks between automatic and operator recovery. Validate after the provider lookup, atomically with the owner claim, and again before file publication; closed or superseded tasks cannot start copyback. - Keep the separately authorized exact-owner API for operator recovery of legacy receipts, with active-lock, live-controller, stale-result and newer-execution rejection. Generic dismissal cannot bypass the copyback fence. - Replace obsolete form stories with production-backed automatic, queued, legacy, completed and mobile examples; retain stable suite IDs. Update the operator runbook and scoped Storybook catalog. ## Verification - Red/green: new platform-proof tests failed before implementation; the database takeover regression failed against the original ownership guard; reduced-UI assertions failed against the original form. All pass after the changes. - Passed: 59 physical-owner/finalization database tests using isolated PostgreSQL, including real reconciler commitment from all three saved-result phases through both automatic and operator recovery. They preserve result identity, exact saved file bytes, pending approval and overdue monitor waits, and create no new run or wake request. Unknown evidence and changed ownership remain fenced. - Passed: 162 focused proof, cloud identity, recovery route, recovery-card and reduced-UI tests. - Passed: full workspace typecheck and build, final server/UI typechecks, token gates, and Storybook build. - Browser inspection: desktop task composition shows only the quiet status; completed example removes it and retains the approval-wait message. Mobile shows the existing bottom navigation with no horizontal overflow. These are fixture UI observations, not live provider acceptance. - A companion harness change implements the actual provider check, signed receipts, server-token authentication and bounded/coalesced provider reads. Its full typecheck and test suite passed: 3,240 passed, 92 skipped, zero failures. This application alone cannot enable platform verification. - The updated full application `pnpm test:run` was stopped after repeated local embedded-Postgres startup failures; it is not claimed green. The same affected recovery suites pass against isolated PostgreSQL. CI passed on final head `9ad5c3529e`: 54 successful checks, two intentional skips, and successful legacy Snyk status. Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved findings. - Global Storybook catalog validation is green: 225 files, 2,224 stories. Its 17 catalog/index tests pass. Master was merged and the inherited index metadata was reconciled after source review. - Review correction red/green: two UI and two database assertions reproduced misleading progress / missing server recovery state; all pass after server-confirmed state was added. All 153 focused server tests and 68 UI tests pass on the final recovery code, including repeated-sweep idempotence. Full workspace typecheck/build, token gates and Storybook build also pass. - Safety regression red/green: stale-task copyback and publication tests failed against the previous guard. The final suite covers changes during proof lookup, closed/cancelled tasks, replaced execution/checkout, newer and queued legacy runs, reassignment and rejected/unbound results, plus the real reconciler selecting closed or superseded tasks. Files remain untouched and no workspace operation starts. - No staging mutations, deployment, live provider probes or live production recovery were performed. The three historical receipts lack deployment identity and still require independent operator proof. ## Risks Automatic takeover requires the companion harness release and configured runtime-identity keys. Deploying only this application leaves unavailable evidence fenced. Legacy receipts are not retrospectively assigned a deployment identity. An authorized operator can still make an incorrect attestation through the fallback API; its administrator gate and exact-owner safeguards remain. Provider history that is missing or deeper than the bounded lookup defers automatic recovery. Copyback can still fail under its existing retained-workspace policy. No migration, telemetry change or cloud provider credential delivery is required. The companion harness PR also has passing CI and a 5/5 review; neither branch is deployed. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with repository inspection, browser verification, tool use and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context-window size were not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run the relevant tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <paperclip@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Devin Foley <devin@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-13 10:14:45 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	be380ba155	fix(ui): hide agent-created tasks by default (#16157) ... Hide agent-created, system-created, and chat-channel tasks from independent collections by default. Preserve task hierarchy context and existing inbox participation. Add a saved opt-in checkbox without helper text. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-13 09:26:37 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	5e8e992df2	fix(storybook): reconcile capability associations and map omissions (#16154) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work. > - The feature map describes user capabilities and verification recipes. > - Storybook holds isolated examples of those capabilities. > - Missing catalog links can hide existing examples. > - Some stories also expose shipped capabilities absent from the map. > - This pull request adds verified source associations and three paired map entries. > - Readers can find existing examples without changing their homes or URLs. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16052, #16049 and #16046. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Storybook capability lookup and the feature/agent access maps. **Current behavior** Seventy capabilities have no example link. Some matching stories already exist. Primary-agent preferences and company decision/fast-response services appear only under broad neighboring capabilities. **Proposed behavior** Add source-supported links across 34 suites. Keep shared foundations in place while cross-listing them. Add primary-agent, decision-model and fast-response capabilities to both upstream maps. Retain explicit simulation and partial-example limits. **Reason and benefit** The catalog distinguishes missing associations from missing examples. The upstream map describes three existing product capabilities more precisely. **Breaking changes** None to product behavior, story exports, folders, sidebar titles or URLs. A shared foundation can declare a reasoned `home: "foundations"` override while referencing related capabilities. ## What Changed - Add 55 references across 34 suites. Replace primary-agent suites' reporting-line association with their own capability. - Add three source-reviewed capabilities and their API/actor boundaries to paired maps. - Preserve the shared Foundations home when cross-listing developer design examples. Add a validation regression test. - Record which exports demonstrate each association and what remains simulated or unverified. - Regenerate the catalog and capability data. Preserve all original 223 authored suites and 2,210 story IDs. Retain the two skill-removal stories added by current master, for 2,212 authored stories in total. - Reduce empty example lookups from 70 of 171 capabilities to 59 of 174. Links do not establish complete capability coverage. ## Verification - Passed: 27 catalog/generator/map tests, catalog validation, map structural checks, token gates and skill validation. - Passed: source inventory comparison preserves all authored files, titles, meta IDs and story IDs. - Passed: repository typecheck/build and Storybook build. Final built index has 2,248 entries and preserves all previous entries, including the two skills stories added by current master. - The broad local repository test run was interrupted before completion to resolve a new master conflict. A complete local suite pass is not claimed; fresh CI passed on the reconciled branch. - Browser: Design links to preserved Foundations stories; company-service sections link settings/history/journey suites; decision SetupToHistory passed 12 interaction steps; primary-agent ReplacePrimary passed four steps. No console errors in selected checks. - Greptile: 5/5 on final commit `805a8af62abe589907e7cc6ca1b415ce1e0cc3c0`, with no findings or unresolved threads. - Final-revision CI passed all 57 checks/statuses, including all eight browser shards, server and Runner tests, typecheck and build. The unchanged Cloud-auth mocked-response race seen on a superseded revision did not recur on the final commit. No test expectations were changed. - New agent-access evidence is source-only. Live provider and agent-credential verification is not established. ## Risks - Suite-level associations can represent only selected states. Notes retain those limits and existing review classifications. - In-memory connection drafts do not prove reload persistence. Resume-failure UI does not prove successful continuation. No-op budget controls do not prove relief or resumption. - Three map capabilities document existing behavior. No permission, API, provider or production component changes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, code execution and source inspection. The exact runtime model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-13 08:11:15 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	2ad36f4ff2	Fix skill source removal with a keep-or-delete choice (#16150) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - GitHub sources import skills and keep their updates together. > - Disconnect only disabled a source and kept its read-only imports. > - A disabled source could not be removed or imported again. > - Removing a source needs an explicit decision about its imported skills. > - This pull request removes the source after the user keeps editable copies or deletes the imports. > - Existing disabled sources use the same removal flow. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15731, #14713. **What happened?** Disconnect left the repository on Sources. Its Disconnect action was then disabled. The saved repository still blocked a new import. **Expected behavior** Remove the repository from Sources. Require a choice to keep editable copies or delete its imports. Allow removal of sources that are already disconnected. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Import a repository in Skills → Sources. 2. Choose Disconnect source. 3. Observe the disconnected row and disabled removal action. 4. Try to import the repository again. **Paperclip version or commit** d67e3507b2. ## What Changed - Add one confirmation with a required keep-or-delete choice. - Remove the source and entries, including legacy disabled sources. - Keep complete editable copies in My Skills, including shared repository files and executable modes. Preserve skill IDs, keys, versions, and agent assignments. - Delete imported skills and source in one transaction with its activity record. Check policy for every linked skill, including deselected entries. Reject deletion of skills still used by agents. - Fence removal with the source revision. Reload stale confirmations and require a new choice. Prevent an in-flight refresh from restoring removed imports. - Reject incomplete legacy copies with a recovery message. Lock copied skill rows against concurrent deletion and check publication succeeded. - Add regression tests and production-page Storybook examples. Make an initially unselected radio-card group keyboard accessible. ## Verification - Workspace typecheck and build passed. Final affected server/UI typechecks passed. - Focused server, UI, and API suites passed: 114 tests initially. After review fixes, all 21 source persistence and 58 route authorization tests passed, including the complete repository copy regression; affected server/UI typechecks and token gates passed again. - Design token gates passed. - Real isolated app: imported a public repository, assigned bro to the CEO, verified that deletion reports the assignment, kept an editable copy, observed the source disappear, opened the copy in My Skills, saved an edit, and refreshed. The assignment remained. Re-imported the same repository, deleted its new unused import, and verified the original editable copy and assignment remained. No model tasks ran. - Full local Vitest was attempted but terminated with exit 137 before completion; it is not counted as a pass. Current-head sharded CI is pending. Greptile reviewed the current head at 5/5 with no new actionable comments. The final workspace build passed again. - Storybook catalog aligned. The legacy removal example was inspected in the browser; the Delete choice enables removal. - Storybook: Skills / GitHub-synced skills / Sources · Disconnect source and Sources · Remove disconnected source. ## Risks - DELETE of a skill source now requires the saved revision and an explicit copy/delete choice. Old callers must update their request body. - Deletion removes imported skills and their records. Assigned skills must be detached first. - Incomplete legacy versions must be refreshed before keeping copies; removal does not silently discard supporting files. - Copies intentionally stop receiving upstream updates. Their IDs and keys remain stable for assigned agents. - No database migration. Copy writes use new managed directories and clean up on failure. Delete restores quarantined files before releasing publication locks on failure. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, configured model `gpt-6-astra`. The runtime does not expose the context-window size. Used shell tools, code editing, tests, and browser interaction. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-13 07:53:13 -05:00
3 people	9bd820e687	feat(storybook): mirror the complete feature-map index (#16052) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The feature map describes its user-facing capabilities and verification recipes. > - Storybook provides isolated UI examples for those capabilities. > - The previous organization showed only features with primary story suites. > - This pull request derives the complete Storybook index from the upstream map. > - Readers can find the same features in both places and see related examples or explicit gaps. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16046 and #16049. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Storybook navigation and the downstream feature catalog. **Current behavior** The sidebar has 28 primary feature homes. The feature map lists 35. The main guide groups suites alphabetically by area slug. Related examples can live under a different feature. **Proposed behavior** Use the feature map's eight sections and 35 features in the same order. Give each feature an Overview page with all its capabilities, related example links, and missing-example messages. Keep shared foundations outside the product index. Preserve all existing stories and URLs. **Reason and benefit** Readers can move between the feature map and Storybook without learning a second index. A feature without cataloged examples remains visible. **Breaking changes** None to existing story IDs or product behavior. Storybook start and build now reject stale generated feature pages and ordering. Run the catalog generator after upstream changes, inspect the output, and review affected source fingerprints. ## What Changed - Generate 35 feature Overview stories and capability data from the upstream map. Generate the inline sidebar order required by Storybook. - Replace the main guide with the full ordered feature index and search. Link all related suites from feature pages, even across primary homes. - Preserve all 223 authored files, 2,210 story IDs, and the existing docs ID. Keep status, implementation, and fixture classifications visible. - Put the generated Markdown catalog in feature-map order. Keep generated guides outside example counts. - Update maintenance and review skills, documentation, and generator tests. Keep the feature map independent of Storybook. ## Verification - Passed: 16 catalog and generator tests; map checks; token gates; both skill validators. - Passed: `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and the Storybook build. - Built-index comparison preserved all 2,211 previous entries and added only 35 feature overviews. Feature order matches the map. - Browser: inspected the complete index and sidebar, searched for Goals, opened its overview, and followed a related suite under Projects. The original suite renders. - Passed: all 8,170 UI tests in 728 files. Browser checks also covered empty search, capability-ID search, missing-example pages, the original editable-text bookmark, the CLI sidebar label, and searching/opening shared foundations. - The broad local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after a failure in the unchanged GitHub chat test `authorizes description edits as the editor, never inheriting the original author's access`. That exact test passed alone without code or expectation changes. A complete local repository suite pass is not established. - Original revision CI passed after one runner retry. The merged revision `5ca01c70716f23974680a8019ddc613035d11bc4` passed fresh CI. Local UI typecheck, catalog checks, 16 generator tests, map checks and token gates pass. - Greptile: 5/5 on final commit `5ca01c70716f23974680a8019ddc613035d11bc4`, with all findings resolved. - Master merge: inspected source drift in 61 catalog entries and regenerated INDEX, preserving upstream notes. Marked the sidebar suite that mounts IssueDetail unreviewed for the new activity query; recorded limits for composer and channel-default changes. No stories removed. - Final Storybook build passed. Browser filename searches for `new-task-composer` and `forms-editors` return the expected feature and shared example. - No visual-baseline or full production acceptance claim. The deeper authored scenario groups remain intact. ## Risks - The parser depends on the feature-map Markdown contract. It rejects unknown index rows, omitted feature recipes, and unexpected generated files. - A suite can reference several capabilities. A link proves catalog association, not complete behavior coverage or production parity. - Storybook treats `/` as a folder separator. Sidebar labels use a comma for that character; the guide and page headings retain the upstream name. - No database, API, authorization, or production component changes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, code execution, and browser inspection. The exact runtime model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: copilot-swe-agent[bot] <198982749+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>	2026-10-13 07:01:29 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	7d7f55e4be	fix(apps): show user avatars and center access rows (#15577) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their access to apps. > - The app access page shows people with linked chat accounts. > - The identity response omitted the user's saved image. > - The row placed the avatar beside only the first name line. > - This change returns the image and centers the avatar beside both name lines. > - People can recognize linked accounts and still see initials when no image is available. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** The app access page showed initials even when the linked Paperclip user had a profile image. The avatar was above the vertical center of the Disconnect button. **Expected behavior** Show the linked user's saved image. Center it beside the Paperclip and chat names. Keep initials when no image is available. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Link a Slack account to a Paperclip user with a profile image. 2. Open the app's Access tab. 3. Inspect the person's avatar and the two name lines. Searched public issues and pull requests. No duplicate fix was found. Related avatar work in #15095 concerns agent uploads, not linked user profiles. ## What Changed - Return `paperclipUserImage` from the chat principal service and declare it in the API and client types. - Use the shared avatar primitives and center the avatar beside the full name block. Keep full names available in hover text. - Add image and initials examples to the existing Storybook access story, with image and alignment checks. - Extend the service test to check saved images and missing images. ## Verification - Token gates and `git diff --check` pass. - The 33 existing chat setup and identity-link UI tests pass. - The OAuth installer service regression test passes. - Chromium rendered the Storybook Access story at desktop and mobile sizes. The avatar, name block, and Disconnect button centers all measured 307 CSS pixels on desktop. - UI typecheck passes. Full repository typecheck and build stop at the Rust runner because this workspace has no `cargo`. The initial parallel typecheck also exceeded the 4 GiB workspace limit. The full local test attempt was stopped as memory approached the 4 GiB limit; it has no complete verdict. CI passed the full build, typecheck, test, and E2E lanes on the initial commit. The previously reviewed commit passed 54 checks with two intentionally skipped Storybook checks. Master was merged on October 10 to resolve an import conflict; fresh CI is running for `24badb742d331c1b6ee3e90cbd06defefe5cd634`. Token gates and whitespace checks pass after conflict resolution. The single retry after CI runner shutdowns passed. Greptile gives this commit 5/5, with both review threads resolved. ### Screenshots The Storybook fixture shows an image, fallback initials, and a pending account.   ## Risks Low risk. The API field is additive and needs no migration. The image uses the same avatar primitive as other user identities. Missing or failed images retain the initials fallback. Other chat providers share this access row. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. Tool use and code execution. The runtime does not expose a more specific model ID or context window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-12 23:54:01 -05:00