Commit Graph
88 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandPaperclip 7c58ea07b2 fix(issues): guard prepared task promotion by status version (#16893)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Integrations can prepare a backlog task before its assigned agent
starts.
> - A person can change its status or assignment during preparation.
> - An unconditional promotion can replace that newer decision.
> - Safe promotion needs a saved revision that includes every assignment
path.
> - This pull request checks that revision under the task row lock and
derives policy cleanup from the locked row.
> - The benefit is safe initialization recovery with the existing
company, task, and run authority.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Prerequisite #16896 has merged. This PR now targets master and contains
only the conditional promotion API. The prerequisite fixed the confirmed
baseline first-upload browser regression.

**What happened?**

A client that saves a task's initial documents and then sends an
unconditional status update can override a concurrent status or
assignment decision. The update validator previously dropped an expected
version, so clients could not make this promotion conditional. Some
direct assignment and release paths also did not advance the revision.

**Expected behavior**

A prepared task moves from backlog to todo only if its original status
and assignment revision still matches. A stale request returns 409
before a task mutation, audit publication, or wake. Policy cleanup
preserves unrelated saved settings.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create a backlog task and save its statusVersion before preparing it.
2. Release its assignment, or change an assignee and then restore that
assignee.
3. Send `{ "status": "todo", "expectedStatusVersion": <original
revision> }` to its PATCH endpoint.
4. The stale promotion must return 409. A matching revision on an
unchanged backlog task must succeed.

Duplicate and related PR searches found no existing prepared-task
promotion fix.

## What Changed

- Accept an optional nonnegative expectedStatusVersion for exactly a
status-only backlog-to-todo promotion. Reject extra public fields before
parsing can discard them.
- Check the current revision and backlog state under the issue row lock.
Reject stale requests before checkout adoption or execution-control
effects.
- Add SQL migration 0358 to advance the revision for both assignee
fields at the database boundary. Release, administrative release, direct
writes, and assignment round trips now invalidate an old version.
- Derive guarded policy cleanup from the locked row. Preserve review
limits and protected authorization when removing a monitor. Reject
derived ownership changes or review decisions.
- Add schema, real HTTP/PostgreSQL, concurrency, migration replay, and
policy regression coverage. Update the response type, OpenAPI, developer
docs, and access map.

## Verification

- Red before the initial fix: stale requests returned 200 instead of
409, validation removed the expected version, and a stale active task
could adopt a checkout.
- Review found two further defects. Four new release/direct-assignment
tests showed unchanged revisions. The real HTTP/service test returned
422 for a valid two-field promotion after monitor cleanup. Helper tests
also proved that cleanup lost valid review limits and protected
authorization. All now pass after focused repairs.
- Green: 124 route and policy tests, including 7 real Express/PostgreSQL
cases, 37 existing route tests, and 80 policy/helper tests. The real
row-lock race preserves a policy edit committed while promotion waits.
- Green: all 23 database client tests, plus 9 focused assignment and
replay checks. Historical migration 0227 receipt recovery cannot remove
the new assignment trigger. Reapplying migration 0358 leaves existing
rows unchanged and installs one trigger. Combined status/assignment
writes increment once; unchanged assignees do not increment.
- Earlier verification passed all 218 schema/route/service cases and the
generated OpenAPI capability test. Rebased focused regressions passed
all 27 selected cases. Final server TypeScript passed after all repairs;
shared TypeScript passed. Migration safety/numbering, five-snapshot
retention, map validation, and diff checks pass.
- The baseline browser attachment case failed twice on the earlier head.
Separate #16896 proved the lost-composer cause, passed 335 component
tests and the real first-upload journey, and has green CI with a 5/5
review. No assertion or timeout was weakened.
- Some early local checks were blocked by missing or stale sibling
dependency artifacts. This worktree now has its own frozen offline
install and standard SDK prerequisites. The failures and successful
reruns remain in the task evidence.
- Before rebasing, head `3304bb00de6ad6a248b5e046c008072ad20ac8f5`
passed all CI (55 successful checks and one neutral), Greptile 5/5, and
a secondary source review at 5/5 with no unresolved findings. The
secondary reviewer did not execute project tests, inspect CI, or
exercise a live agent journey. Earlier incomplete and must-fix
assessments remain visible; both established findings are repaired
above.
- After #16896 merged, all five CAS commits were rebased onto master
`87d9386ae637c652d1fed09d2046be1bcaeb413b`. Migration 0358 was
regenerated because master added another 0357. Range comparison shows no
other change to the CAS patches; inherited UI commits are absent. The
original head is preserved locally.
- Rebased head `1c0264e51a280b1dbf597725a7e42e72d4be1b1b` passes all 124
route/policy tests, 9 selected assignment/promotion tests, and all 24
database client/snapshot-drift tests. Database build, migration checks,
generated snapshot linkage, five-snapshot retention (0354–0358), maps,
and diff checks pass. Fresh-head CI and review are pending. No
deployment or live agent journey was performed for this API.

## Risks

- The guard supports prepared backlog promotion only. Other statuses or
mixed public mutation fields return 422. A stale revision or non-backlog
row returns 409.
- Preserve the original version from a server that already advertises
this guard before initialization. Older versions did not track every
assignment path. Reconcile older or uncertain initialization instead of
fetching a new revision and blindly retrying.
- Migration 0358 is SQL-only and idempotent. It adds no table, column,
or task backfill. Its separate trigger survives historical
status-migration replay.
- Existing authorization and unguarded updates remain in place. Guarded
promotion does not provide a general lifecycle or review-stage control
API.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact serving model ID and context
window are not exposed by this session. Used tool calls, code execution,
and test-first regression 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
- [ ] 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 16:27:11 -05:00
Aashish Mahato 457d3209b1 fix: name the real reason a connection request expires on reassignment (#14067)
## Thinking Path

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

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

- Fixes: #14040

## What Changed

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

## Verification

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

## Risks

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

## Model Used

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

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` /
`Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the
relevant issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
2026-10-15 16:11:35 -07:00
23e7ee9a2d fix(issues): exclude terminal children from helper cap (#11542)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The issue service lets agents create bounded child work through a
helper.
> - The helper counted completed and cancelled children against its
safety limit.
> - A recurring coordinator could reach the limit even when almost all
historical children were terminal.
> - The safety limit must still bound current delegated work.
> - This pull request counts only non-terminal children when it applies
the limit.
> - The benefit is that recurring parents can keep their lineage without
losing the active-work guardrail.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

The child-creation helper rejected a new child after a parent had 25
historical children. It counted children with `done` and `cancelled`
status.

**Expected behavior**

The helper must apply its limit to non-terminal children. Terminal
children must remain attached to the parent for lineage and audit
history.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create one parent issue.
2. Create 25 child issues and move them to `done` or `cancelled`.
3. Use the issue-service child helper to create another child.
4. Observe that the current code rejects the new child.

**Paperclip version or commit**

`1a17cbf23`

## What Changed

- Exclude `done` and `cancelled` children from the helper cap query.
- Keep the limit at 25 non-terminal children.
- Add a regression test with terminal history and the active limit
boundary.
- Clarify the limit error so it says `active child issues`.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts -t
"counts only non-terminal children toward the helper child limit"`
passed: 1 test passed and 118 skipped.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm build` passed.
- `pnpm test:run` completed the general server and UI groups
successfully. The CLI group then reported one unrelated environment
failure because port 3199 was already in use. The failing test was
`doctor > re-runs repairable checks so repaired failures do not remain
blocking`.

```test-evidence:
sha: 071edbf019
command: pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts -t "counts only non-terminal children toward the helper child limit"
exit: 0
totals: 1 test passed; 118 skipped; 1 test file passed
worktree: clean before and after; local == remote == PR head
finished_at: 2026-08-17T14:03:53Z
```

## Risks

- Low risk. The change affects only the helper-specific count query.
- The helper still rejects creation when 25 non-terminal children exist.
- No schema or migration changes are present.

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

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-5 Codex with reasoning, repository tools, code execution,
and test execution.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] 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: Codex Engineer <agent+codex-engineer@agents.techwright.io>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: commitperclip-bot <305974387+commitperclip-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-10-15 14:36:48 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 982ff62949 test(shared): consolidate ZIP conversion observations (#16118)
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-15 00:06:50 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 1d5e2c89f0 test(server): retire duplicate guards and share issue seed fixtures (#16059)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Server tests protect task scheduling, session continuation,
transport decisions, and issue data.
> - Four cases repeat the same registered inputs and assertions as
existing owner cases.
> - Issue service tests also repeat 103 database seed statements.
> - Each distinct input, assertion, lifecycle, and security contract
must keep its proof.
> - This pull request removes the four exact duplicates and shares only
exact seed statements.
> - The benefit is 584 fewer test lines and four fewer registered
executions.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16047. This draft is stacked on
`codex/test-audit-round-six-delivery` at
`e868e6645ce0d598d756d3458f0b3d71afd6db4a`.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Maintenance of server owner tests. Production behavior does not change.

**Current behavior**

Four registered cases repeat identical executable bodies. The issue
service suite repeats 80 company rows, ten project rows, and thirteen
agent rows.

**Proposed behavior**

Keep each contract in its existing owner suite. Use three direct async
seed helpers for the exact repeated database rows. Preserve each
caller's database instance, IDs, awaited insert position, field order,
and fresh object allocations.

**Reason and benefit**

Remove 584 net test lines and four registered executions. No measured
wall-time improvement is claimed. No production, dependency, workflow,
telemetry, or skip change is included.

## What Changed

- Share exact company, Workspace project, and CodexCoder rows in
`issues-service.test.ts`. All 137 registered cases remain.
- Retire `heartbeat-scheduling-suppression.test.ts` → `suppresses
heartbeat scheduling while a task drain is active`. Keeper:
`heartbeat-task-drain.test.ts` →
`start_task_drain_suppresses_admission`.
- Retire `heartbeat-timer-wake-session-reset-pf4.test.ts` → `does not
reset for issue_commented (preserve continuation context)`. Keeper:
`heartbeat-workspace-session.test.ts` → `does not reset for comment
wakes`.
- Retire `setup-token-session.test.ts` → `denies a direct non-loopback
HTTP receive-token request, so it delivers no token (SR-6)`. Keeper in
the same describe: `denies a direct non-loopback HTTP request (SR-6)`.
- Retire `setup-token-session.test.ts` → `denies a spoofed forwarded
HTTPS receive-token request under a broad proxy setting (SR-7)`. Keeper
in the same describe: `denies a spoofed X-Forwarded-Proto when no
trusted proxy is configured (SR-6)`.

The retired receive-token cases only call
`evaluateConfidentialTransport`. They neither request a route nor
configure `TRUST_PROXY`. The keepers protect the exact guard inputs and
output. The route now uses the guard to select a transport advisory;
this PR makes no route-denial or token-delivery proof claim.

## Verification

- Complete matched six-file baseline: **414/414 pass**, no failures or
skips. Candidate: **410/410 pass**, no failures or skips.
- Run: `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-scheduling-suppression.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-task-drain.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-timer-wake-session-reset-pf4.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-session.test.ts
server/src/services/setup-token-session.test.ts`.
- Expand the actual three helper bodies at all 103 call sites. The
complete issue-service AST is identical to the original after expansion.
Independent review checked the exact inputs, lexical bindings, awaited
order, and fresh nested configs.
- Deliberate regressions disabled task-drain suppression, forced comment
wakes to reset, and allowed the final insecure transport branch. All
four retained keepers failed at their intended equality assertions. Each
production file was restored byte for byte against HEAD.
- An optional project-inheritance mutation was ineffective because
another workspace path still derives project identity. It passed and is
excluded from accepted preservation evidence.
- `git diff --check` passes. Independent cross-review approved the exact
source and proof before this draft.
- Broad typecheck, full test, and build gates passed in PR CI on
`a9713432b1e498e023b4828ffa283a351abe856f`. All 52 check-runs concluded
success. Greptile completed on that exact head with confidence 5/5 and
no findings.

## Risks

- Low risk: only test code changes. Four exact duplicate bodies are
removed.
- The fixture helpers preserve all original IDs and DB operations. They
do not cache data or generate assertions.
- Same-named explicit-project and derived-project inheritance cases
remain because their inputs differ. Separate login PTY and duplex
lifecycle cases also remain.
- No wall-time speed gain is claimed from fixture line reduction.

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-6.1-Sol, exact model ID `gpt-6.1-sol`, through Codex. Tool
use, code execution, and reasoning assisted the audit. The runtime does
not expose its context-window size.

## Checklist

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

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 22:38:16 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 6c198d616e fix(issues): preserve human handoffs from the active agent run (#16082)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Tasks have one owner, and the server records assignment changes.
> - An agent can finish its work by handing the task to a human for
review.
> - The assignment route stops the active run before it saves that
handoff.
> - When the caller is that run, a slow workspace restore can exceed the
stop timeout and prevent the assignment from saving.
> - Recovery can then mark the task Blocked while its comment says the
handoff succeeded.
> - This pull request lets the authenticated legacy run save a human
handoff and finish its turn normally.
> - Other actors and transfers to executable agents keep the verified
stop requirement.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #13730. Related: #13782, #14700, and #15094.

**What happened?**

An agent posted its review handoff, then sent `PATCH /api/issues/{id}`
to assign the task to its human creator with status `in_review`. The
route cancelled that same run before saving the assignment. Workspace
restore took 66 seconds. The stop limit is 60 seconds. The assignment
never committed. Recovery marked the task Blocked, and it stayed
assigned to the agent.

**Expected behavior**

The authenticated active legacy run can hand its own task to a human and
finish normally. The human assignment and requested review status must
save without waiting for workspace restore. Native runs, board
reassignment, agent API keys, and transfers to another agent still
require a verified stop.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Run a legacy agent on its assigned task with a signed run token.
2. Send a task PATCH from that run with a human `assigneeUserId`, a null
`assigneeAgentId`, and status `in_review`.
3. Make stopping the sandbox take more than 60 seconds. Before this fix,
the handoff fails before the task update. With this fix, the update
saves and the run finishes normally.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced in hosted execution. The patch is based on master at
`56a0bf0d492`.

**Deployment mode**

Hosted authenticated server with a legacy agent in a remote sandbox. The
same route serves local deployments.

PR #13782 proposes a broader exemption for all self-handoffs. This
focused change limits the exemption to human recipients and legacy runs.
It checks the exact active run, agent, company, and task, and it retains
the stop requirement before an executable successor can take ownership.
PRs #14700 and #15094 address later wake and recovery behavior after a
reassignment stop.

## What Changed

- Skip the reassignment cancellation only for an authenticated legacy
run handing its own task to a human.
- Reject later mutations from the outgoing run against its human-owned
task, both in route authorization and under the update transaction
locks.
- Keep assignment permission checks, goal control, and queued human
response protection.
- Add route regressions for slow stops, active-run lookup, actor and
runtime boundaries, recipient types, permission denials, and follow-up
edits, completion, and reassignment.
- Update the real HTTP low-trust handoff test to prove the run stays
alive, its late edit fails, and the human wake receipt remains
invalidated.
- Add Postgres tests for saved assignment, former-owner rejection, and
review state after the outgoing run succeeds or fails.
- Document the handoff rule and update the task feature and agent access
maps.

## Verification

- 328 relevant tests passed across the route, issue service, low-trust
HTTP, and legacy recovery suites. The route suite passed all 160 tests,
and all 13 low-trust HTTP tests passed after updating the obsolete
cancellation expectation.
- Removing the production guard makes both slow-shutdown handoff
regressions fail with HTTP 500.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm build` passed.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed.
- `git diff --check` passed.
- All 54 current-head checks passed; 2 optional Storybook checks were
skipped. The CI lanes cover the full Vitest suite, typecheck/build,
Runner checks, and product E2E checks.
- Apex reviewed `c68fbfb356c3d80eb7136babb49940709a3c3459` at 5/5 with
no findings; both earlier review threads are resolved.
- The complete test lanes passed in CI. The duplicate local full `pnpm
test:run` was stopped after CI completed; it did not finish locally. All
328 focused local tests and full local typecheck/build passed.

## Risks

- The outgoing legacy turn stays alive after the human takes ownership.
Route and transactional ownership checks reject its later mutations of
the human-owned task. Read and comment access follows normal policy.
Goal control still runs before the handoff.
- This exemption does not apply to native runs or another agent as
recipient. Those paths still stop the old execution before assignment.
- This fix prevents future failed handoffs. It does not infer or replay
old assignment requests.
- There is no schema change or API shape change.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools, and code
execution. The session does not expose a more specific runtime 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>
2026-10-12 20:34:28 -07:00
83e13db8fa fix(inbox): keep automatic recovery cleanup out of personal participation (#16063)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The personal inbox uses issue activity to identify a person's
participation.
> - Issue reads can cancel stale recovery actions and record that
cleanup as the reader's action.
> - This adds unrelated tasks to the inbox and refreshes their activity
timestamps.
> - A workspace owner hold can also alternate between creation and
cancellation after a task finishes.
> - This pull request corrects cleanup attribution, excludes historical
read cleanup, and retains one exact owner hold.
> - Agents can read authorized issue activity to diagnose the same
problem themselves.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15742 excludes logs by the execution-recovery actor from activity
timestamps. This PR covers reader-attributed stale recovery cleanup,
personal inbox participation, exact workspace owner holds, and sandbox
issue activity access. I searched open issues and PRs for recovery inbox
and activity bridge fixes. I found no duplicate for this defect.

**What happened?**

Loading issue lists cancels stale recovery actions under the reader's
identity. The personal inbox treats those rows as user participation.
One completed issue had hundreds of such rows and no edits or comments
by the affected reader. A retained native workspace owner repeatedly
creates a verification action that read projections then cancel. Sandbox
agents cannot inspect the issue activity because the reverse bridge
rejects the route.

**Expected behavior**

Automatic cleanup belongs to the system and does not add an issue to a
reader's inbox. Historical cleanup rows remain auditable but do not
count as participation or recent activity. An unresolved physical
workspace owner keeps one stable verification action. Agents can inspect
activity only for issues their identity may read.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Finish a task whose native run retains an unverifiable workspace
owner receipt.
2. Repeat workspace recovery checks and GET requests for issue detail,
compact lists, and recovery actions.
3. Observe new recovery action IDs and reader-attributed cancellations
in the activity history.
4. Query the personal inbox for that reader and observe the unrelated
task.
5. From a sandbox agent, request GET /api/issues/:id/activity and
observe Route not allowed.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Observed at f5346c05b9. Regression tests
use current master behavior.

**Deployment mode**

Authenticated hosted instance with native and legacy sandbox agents. The
inbox defect is independent of the adapter.

## What Changed

- Attribute automatic stale recovery cleanup to the recovery system
actor.
- Exclude exact historical read cleanup rows from personal inbox
membership, unread counts, and both activity timestamp queries. Keep all
audit rows and explicit user recovery decisions.
- Retain owner verification holds only while the exact company, run,
issue, and owner fingerprint still match. Apply the same rule to reads
and background recovery.
- Make repeated checks for the same owner hold leave its identity,
attempts, and timestamps unchanged. Keep physical takeover blocked.
- Allow GET issue activity through the sandbox bridge. Keep the existing
company and issue-read authorization and reject broader audit routes.
- Add regressions and update the runtime API and recovery documentation.
Refresh generated source references for the documentation edits. Update
the paired activity, inbox, and recovery maps.

## Verification

- Focused Vitest verification: 315 tests pass across five files. The
updated terminal owner hold regression also passes. The files cover
issue service, recovery routes, activity authorization, sandbox callback
bridge, and native workspace finalization.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass locally. The full general
and serialized unit test matrix passes in CI on the latest commit. The
duplicate local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after about 30 minutes once
that full CI coverage passed; it did not report a local full-suite pass.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passes for all paired areas and
capability IDs.
- Apex is 5/5 on commit 44c3787888. Its
access map finding is fixed and resolved. All CI checks are green on
this commit.
- The new regression repeats reads and background sweeps for done and
cancelled tasks. It checks one unchanged hold, zero physical copyback,
zero personal inbox participation, and system cleanup after the exact
receipt is cleared.
- Historical cleanup tests preserve explicit recovery decisions,
nullable metadata, unread counts, and the original audit rows.
- Authorization tests permit an authorized agent and reject
cross-company or issue-boundary reads. Bridge tests reject write
methods, extra path segments, and company-wide audit routes.

## Risks

Existing inbox items can disappear if their only participation evidence
was automatic read cleanup. No data migration or audit deletion is
needed. An unresolved workspace owner remains visible after task
completion; this preserves the physical writer fence. A stale or cleared
owner does not retain the hold. Issue activity access expands only the
sandbox transport allowlist and still uses existing controller
authorization.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code
editing, shell execution, and test tools. The session identifies the
model family as GPT-6. A more specific runtime model ID and context
window size are not exposed.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have 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: Amy (Opus) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-10-12 19:25:15 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip f329b24ee1 feat: give tasks durable project-optional workspaces (#15749)
Give tasks durable company-scoped workspace bindings independent of project assignment, channel defaults and authorized repository preparation. Reuse verified input seeds and sparse output recovery while preserving trust, privacy and controller provisioning boundaries.

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

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-12 20:45:18 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 1e0cfcb4fc test: retire redundant suites and consolidate owner coverage (#15978)
Retire duplicate ACPX and Codex proof after migrating unique assertions to their behavioral owners. Consolidate repeated fixtures and exact case matrices while preserving lifecycle, protocol, company, credential, approval, and ordering contracts. Remove the unused runtime-controls compatibility path and document test ownership and preservation evidence.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-12 10:44:02 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 5cf90417d6 fix(ui): confirm cancellation from monitor cards (#15735)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their tasks.
> - A task monitor schedules a later agent check.
> - The monitor card shows when that check will run.
> - The card has no direct control to cancel the monitor.
> - This change adds an X button and a confirmation dialog.
> - The operator can stop the scheduled check from the card.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The monitor card on the task page.

**Current behavior**
The operator must open task properties to clear a monitor.

**Proposed behavior**
Select the X in the top right of the card. Select Keep monitor to leave
the schedule in place. Select Cancel monitor to remove the scheduled
check.

**Reason and benefit**
The operator can cancel the monitor where its schedule is shown.
Confirmation helps prevent an accidental cancellation.

**Breaking changes**
None. The change uses the existing task update API.

## What Changed

- Add an accessible X button at the top right of the monitor card.
- Confirm cancellation before the task update.
- Keep the dialog open with an error if the update fails.
- Preserve the other execution policy settings and refresh the task
after success.
- Reject stale policy writes under the task row lock with an optional
expectedExecutionPolicy snapshot.
- Document the snapshot field and add a database test for stale
cancellation.
- Restrict snapshot requests to policy-only edits before
execution-control actions.
- Add seven route tests for rejected mixed requests and absent policy
updates.
- Keep automatic retry waits separate from monitor cancellation.
- Add component and task page tests.

## Verification

- `pnpm check:token-gates` passed.
- Monitor banner and task page tests passed: 199 tests. A targeted
database test and seven route tests also passed.
- UI typecheck and production build passed.
- Open a task with a scheduled monitor. Select X, then Keep monitor. The
schedule must remain.
- Select X, then Cancel monitor. The card must disappear after the
update.
- Local full build reached the Rust runner build but could not complete
because Cargo is absent. CI must verify the full build.
- Full repository typecheck, build, test suites, and E2E checks passed
in CI for the final commit. Local full checks were limited by missing
Cargo and workspace memory.

## Risks

- Low risk. Cancellation uses the existing company access checks and
activity log.
- A cancelled monitor no longer wakes the agent. The dialog explains
this effect.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The runtime does not expose a more specific model
ID or context window size. Used code editing, shell commands, and tests.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-09 16:38:04 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 3a726e676f feat: enforce private task permissions across execution and data (#10633)
Enforce private task and project access across direct reads, search, execution, files, plugins, live delivery, and sharing mutations. Preserve downward-only sharing, current responsible-user authorization, and audited emergency access. Bind historical draft assets with migration 0314.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-07 07:06:40 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip b67db12d90 feat: add durable storage for private tasks (#14717)
Add private task and project ownership, downward access grants, and immutable run/workspace provenance. Apply migration 0313 with bounded batch commits and concurrent indexes. Keep the enforcement and sharing changes in their dependent PRs.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-07 06:53:20 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 53aad90b9e fix: retry sandbox ACP input delivery after gateway failures (#14485)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip coordinates agent work through execution adapters.
> - Sandbox ACP sessions send ordered input through a remote file queue.
> - A temporary provider 502 currently closes the session during an
input upload.
> - A lost response can occur after the sandbox has consumed the
message, so a blind retry can duplicate input.
> - This pull request retries gateway failures with the same sequence
and drops consumed sequences at the receiver.
> - The session can continue through a brief provider failure without
repeating a tool call.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A sandbox ACP run can fail with `ACP agent disconnected during request
(connection_close, exit=null, signal=null)` when a provider input upload
returns HTTP 502. The bridge destroys its local socket on the first
failure and can discard the diagnostic before the proxy reads it.

**Expected behavior**

A temporary gateway failure should get a bounded retry. A lost response
after successful delivery must not duplicate input or reorder later
messages. Permanent failures must still close the session.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Run the real sandbox process bridge with an echo child and a local
test runner.
2. Inject a provider 502 before preparation, after a chunk upload, or
after final publication and consumption.
3. Send the next input message. Before this change, the connection
closes instead of delivering it.

Searched open and closed PRs for `ACP disconnect`, `bridge retry`, and
`502 sandbox`. Related work: #13287 covers shutdown after bridge loss;
#13793 covers large launch envelopes. This change covers ordered input
delivery within a running legacy ACP session.

## What Changed

- Retry input uploads up to three times for recognized Daytona and
Cloudflare HTTP 502, 503, and 504 diagnostics, with 250 ms and 500 ms
delays.
- Give each upload separate temporary paths and discard already-consumed
input sequences, including late publication from an earlier attempt.
Clean failed attempts in the background without removing a published
message or another attempt’s files. Cleanup cannot delay retries or
shutdown.
- Keep later input behind the retry. Stop queued input on permanent
failure and flush a fixed diagnostic before closing the socket. Neither
failure-diagnostic persistence nor shutdown-warning persistence can
block teardown.
- Add real-process regression tests for lost responses, late
publication, retry exhaustion, immediate permanent failure, and
diagnostic redaction.
- Give accepted run-log file appends up to three seconds to drain before
finalization computes the size, hash, and durable copy. Close the run
handle to later appends. This waits only for file writes, independently
of later DB progress or live-event persistence. If writes remain
stalled, return null size/hash metadata and skip the final durable copy
so the run can settle. Late writes cannot restart mirroring.
- Preserve legacy comment attribution when final log size is unknown by
reading existing entries within the unchanged 2 MB scan limit. Storage
errors or a three-second read deadline return the evidence already read
instead of failing the comment listing; pagination stops at the
deadline. The deadline requests cancellation of the underlying local
stream or S3 HEAD, GET, and response stream. A separate response timeout
returns partial evidence even when filesystem I/O delays cancellation;
late reads cannot append evidence or start another page. Each listing
retains its existing batches of eight reads, without a shared admission
cap that skips readable logs under contention.
- Document the retry and log-finalization boundaries in the development
guide.

## Verification

- Final commit `347daa564b`: [Linux
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36506995168/attempts/2)
passed. Greptile Apex review 13 scored this commit 5/5 with no new
findings; all 12 review threads are resolved.
- The final CI run initially hit a Cursor test timeout and four Discord
credential-lock contention failures. All five cases passed in isolation.
The two failed shards and their aggregate gate passed on retry without a
code change. Those intermittent failures are not claimed fixed by this
PR.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/adapter-utils/src/execution-target-stdin-race.test.ts
packages/adapter-utils/src/execution-target-sandbox.test.ts
packages/adapter-utils/src/sandbox-callback-bridge.test.ts`: 262 tests
passed on the final implementation, including 21 new regressions. The
original three fault-injection cases failed before the fix.
- The regressions cover failed and indefinitely stalled cleanup,
Cloudflare gateway responses and retry exhaustion, permanent errors that
must not retry, and teardown while failure logging remains indefinitely
stalled. Seven Apex regression cases failed before the review fixes.
Adapter-utils typecheck and build passed again after the final review
change.
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/services/run-log-store.test.ts
server/src/services/run-log-store-cancellation.test.ts`: all 25 tests
passed, including four new regressions that failed before the
finalization fix. They cover delayed and failed appends, late-write
admission, agreement between the local bytes/summary/durable copy, and a
stalled append that exhausts the three-second budget. The timeout case
verifies unknown metadata, no final upload, and no mirror restart after
late completion. New cancellation tests use the real AWS SDK against a
local HTTP server. They verify that stalled HEAD, GET, and response-body
connections close on abort and that a subsequent read succeeds. Local
range and already-aborted read cases also pass.
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts -t
'readIssueCommentRunLogText|deriveIssueCommentRunLogAttribution'`: 14
targeted tests passed. The null-size reader case, both storage-error
cases, the stalled-read case, and the cancellation/concurrent-listing
cases failed before their fixes. The new regressions verify that
timed-out reads are cancelled, subsequent listings recover, and two
concurrent listings both retain their attribution markers. A read that
ignores cancellation still returns partial evidence at three seconds and
cannot resume pagination when it finishes; this regression failed before
the response-timeout fix.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` and `pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/server build` passed after the response-timeout change.
- Full `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed earlier in this PR;
the affected packages were rechecked after review fixes.
- Full local `pnpm test:run` failed in the general-server group: 511
files passed, 40 failed, and 158 were skipped. Failures include embedded
PostgreSQL initialization, read-only cache directory renames, a macOS
long-path fixture, and a workspace exposure assertion. The PostgreSQL,
cache-permission, and long-path failures also reproduce with both
changed implementation files restored to baseline commit `24c58e479a`.
The exposure suite passes in isolation both on baseline and the fixed
branch (28 passed, 3 skipped). CI runs the full suite on Linux. Later
local test groups were not reached.
- An earlier CI run hit the Telegram retry-timing failure fixed upstream
in #14501. The branch includes that master fix. The selected recovery
test passed against a fresh, migrated PostgreSQL 16 database. The
embedded PostgreSQL runner is unavailable on this Mac; the isolated
database was stopped and removed afterward.
- No live agent turn was replayed. The tests use local child processes
and injected provider failures.

## Risks

Retries are restricted to recognized Daytona SDK and Cloudflare bridge
gateway-error messages, which survive plugin RPC serialization. Other
errors fail immediately. Temporary upload paths are now unique for all
command-managed queue writes. Receiver sequence checks prevent duplicate
input; retries do not restart an agent turn. Cleanup and failure logging
are nonblocking and best effort; session teardown remains the final
cleanup boundary. Log finalization now drains accepted local file writes
for at most three seconds and ignores later appends on the closed run
handle. A timeout leaves final size/hash unknown and skips the final
durable upload; an existing partial mirror may remain available, but it
is not claimed as a verified final snapshot. It does not wait for later
DB progress or live-event persistence. Optional attribution keeps
partial evidence when a read fails or times out. Cancellation closes S3
requests and response streams. Local filesystem I/O may finish after the
caller deadline, but a late read cannot change the returned evidence or
continue pagination. Later listings can retry after storage recovers.
There is no schema, authentication, or permission change. Revert this
commit to restore the previous behavior.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code
editing, and local test execution.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (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 and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally; targeted tests pass and full-suite
limitations are documented above
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-28 19:15:33 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 1652a5c7f2 fix: improve task search relevance with a PostgreSQL rubric (#13335)
Unify full and quick task search around PostgreSQL term coverage, explicit relevance bands, and conservative typo recovery. Preserve matching evidence and navigation, and add a judged corpus, regression tests, and documented performance measurements.

Validation: local typecheck, build, focused PostgreSQL tests, and task-list tests pass. All final-head CI gates pass and Greptile is 5/5.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-12 16:22:58 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 889947c238 feat: add experimental native chat connectors (#13038)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - People also ask agents for work in their existing chat tools.
> - Each external conversation needs one task and a current authorized
source.
> - Retries, Stop, and provider failures must not duplicate work or
expose private data.
> - The first chat PR establishes the opt-in provider and data
contracts.
> - This PR adds experimental channel integration and its durable
control plane.
> - Users can request work from connected channels and inspect delivery
in Paperclip.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #13100 and #13092. This is the second of exactly two chat PRs.
Foundation #13100 is merged and changed 143 files. Runner prerequisite
#13092 is also merged. This PR changes 400 files against master, below
the 500-file review limit. It contains no wireframe images or HTML
galleries.

## What Changed

- Add native Slack, GitHub, Microsoft Teams, Telegram, and Discord chat
connections. Keep chat disabled unless the operator enables experimental
chat connectors. Preserve the production GitHub tool connection and its
normal setup path.
- Bind each provider bot identity to one immutable Paperclip agent. Bind
each admitted external conversation to one task. Paperclip owns tasks,
runs, permissions, and audit records.
- Add durable admission, per-conversation queues, questions, task
controls, progress, final replies, images, files, and delivery receipts.
Board comments remain internal unless explicitly sent to the channel.
- Check current identity, provider reach, resource access, credentials,
runtime generation, and exact source before provider effects. Keep
private responses private. Never send raw reasoning, private logs,
credentials, or tool arguments.
- Hold uncertain sends for explicit audited resolution. Make Board
Send-to-channel atomic and idempotent. Keep reconnect and setup
credentials in Paperclip secret storage.
- Preserve current native-runner authority across retries, lost
acknowledgements, and recovery. Keep immutable input and completion
contracts separate from newer user input. Receipt reconciliation cannot
launch a provider.
- Reconcile chat close/new ordering and provider-effect lock order.
Audit resource access changes in the same transaction. Submit only the
selected resource from each UI toggle so stale pages cannot undo
unrelated access changes.
- Drain Codex stdout before certifying process exit. Bound the drain
with the existing shutdown grace. Preserve observed terminal authority
without treating an undrained process as successful or reusable.
- Incorporate master `018ca5da` with its ACP Stop, mobile task layout,
runner packaging, and official lock changes. Preserve dedicated
chat-answer continuations in both directions when ordinary queued
comments are adopted after Stop.
- Fence late adapter readiness behind an earlier Stop for the same run.
Preserve verified cleanup for registered adapters. Handle single Stop,
agent pause, duplicate Stops, and failure release without creating a
false cancellation receipt.
- Incorporate master's `6dd48cad4` wake-queue extraction. Preserve exact
failed-chat retry authorization and lineage, retired question-source
suppression, and the block on generic recovery that would discard the
admitted source. Fresh deferred input retains its separate promotion
path.
- Incorporate master `2a05b5ed3` and its queue-admission extraction,
simplified transaction ports, and separate runner CI job. Preserve exact
durable receipts, actor separation, and dedicated-answer isolation
through the new module. A failed receipt insert rolls back the
accompanying deferred-wake merge.

## Verification

Current head: `afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a`, incorporating
master `2a05b5ed3457ea33efd6895520447d1d97fe98d8`. The conflicts are
resolved. This successor fixes two test-harness boundaries exposed by
CI: per-case route-module preparation and actual durable-save completion
before intentional runner termination. Production code and all existing
test/turn deadlines are unchanged. [Exact-head Greptile
review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13038#issuecomment-5587250594)
is **5/5**, completed September 10 at 13:20:55 UTC, with no actionable
findings or open review threads. [Fresh exact-head
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34481724341)
passes **all 24 jobs**, including Build and both required aggregates.
Normal exact-head guarded merge was attempted and rejected by the
remaining branch approval policy: CODEOWNER review is required and no
human approval is present. Normal **squash auto-merge is enabled** as of
September 10 at 13:36:26 UTC. Requested CODEOWNERS have been notified;
no approval bypass or self-approval was used. Earlier-head results below
remain historical evidence, not qualification of this successor.

- Final exact-head Linux evidence: 995/995 chat integration cases; 36/36
agent-skills routes; 35/35 runner live-session cases, including real
process kill/resume; 1948 runner Vitest cases with three existing
benchmark/platform guards; 870/870 API-authority cases; and 104 browser
cases with four existing optional skips. Rust, conformance/replay, full
repository build, typecheck, canary, all server/workspace shards, and
both required aggregates pass with normal CI concurrency. Earlier failed
attempts remain recorded below.

- Latest test-only qualification: 141/141
route/permissions/authentication cases pass in separate cold forks, with
plain server types and independent review clear. The real-runner suite
passes 35/35, with plain runner types and independent review clear. A
controlled premature-save acknowledgement fails as expected; matching
ownership/effect/process evidence, rejected saves, real turn outcome,
test abort, and pre-kill liveness are covered. No local reproduction of
the original CI scheduling failure is claimed. The preceding [CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34479680858)
passes 21/24 jobs, including all 995 Linux chat cases and browser
aggregate (104 passed, four existing optional skips); only Build, the
skills serialized shard, and the required verification aggregate fail.
Its exact-head Greptile review was 5/5. Both failed job logs are
retained.

- Final fixture qualification: all eight focused Discord cases and all
995 chat integration cases pass. The exact modal statement/PID is
observed before taking the real connection lock; the test then proves
its actual blocking relationship before mutation. Original SQL
execution, provider behavior, negative assertions, and 1s/15s timeouts
remain unchanged. Independent review is clear and test/production hashes
remain frozen. The preceding [CI
attempt](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34477184777)
passed 22 jobs, including Build/runner, typecheck, canary, all other
test shards, and browser aggregate (104 passed, four existing optional
skips); the two fixture failures and failed verification aggregate
remain recorded, not relabeled as a pass.

- Current queue-module composition: 308/308 recovery/batching/queue/Stop
tests; 995/995 full chat integration; 89/89 module tests, including real
PostgreSQL receipt-insert rollback; 24/24 workflow/module-boundary
tests; plain server and UI types. All four actual local process/ACP
browser paths pass in 1.4 minutes. Fresh databases, no skips or retries,
stable reviewed source hashes. The initial boundary failure is retained;
its no-op service wrapper was removed without changing recovery context
or weakening the check. An exploratory standalone test-directory
typecheck fails because its new upstream transformation config is not a
standalone typechecking project; standard CI/build does not invoke it,
and no configuration was weakened to suppress those diagnostics.

- The preceding head `e02a63d462ce5d47433b0aeb632bb6fd20aab1ba` passed
[all 24 CI
jobs](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34436462958)
and exact-head Greptile review at 5/5. Required CODEOWNER review
prevented its normal merge before master advanced again.

- Final extracted-module composition: 307/307 recovery, batching, queue
and Stop-control tests; 995/995 full chat integration; 49/49 module
tests including eight PostgreSQL adapter cases; and 19/19 issue-update
tests. Plain server types pass. All four actual local process/ACP
browser paths pass in 1.3 minutes. Fresh databases, no skips or retries
in these cohorts, frozen source hashes, and independent review clear.

- The preceding head `3e4e1c1c` passes [all PR CI
jobs](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34415826820),
including Build and required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`. Both the
original Rust failure and the previously load-sensitive lineage fixture
pass with unchanged Linux concurrency. Master advanced afterward and
required this reconciliation.
- Final master composition: 448/448 focused UI tests, 186/186 adapter
tests, 24/24 queue/control tests, and 11/11 packaging tests. Plain UI,
server, shared, and adapter types pass. Token gates and diff checks
pass. Independent server and UI reviews are clear.
- Stop-registration regression: both real-service cases fail against
exact `a95` source and pass with the fix. The full corrected
recovery/control suite passes 265/265. Duplicate-owner and failed-Stop
controls also pass. Plain server types pass. The readiness barrier
prevents provider startup without adding an acknowledgment to an already
terminal run.
- Final qualification strengthens terminal-field equality and repeats
both affected cases successfully on a fresh database. All four actual
local process/ACP browser paths pass again in 1.3 minutes, without skips
or retries. The final screenshot shows Cancelled, a paused subtree,
retained input, and no error toast.
- Two new actual-service regressions fail before the merge fix. They
prove that queued-comment adoption could consume a dedicated chat answer
or add unrelated input to that answer. The fixed four-case cohort
passes, including ordinary upstream continuation and adapter Stop
controls. Full recovery passes 257/257. All four actual local
process/ACP Stop browser flows pass in 1.4 minutes, without skips or
retries, on a fresh database.
- The unchanged runner artifact was qualified with 171/171 transport
tests, 870/870 API-authority tests, conformance 1/1, and replay 11/11.
Six controlled reader tests prove the exit/drain repair. Its local
serial Rust workspace passed 546 top-level cases plus two invoked
helpers; the later passing Linux CI supplies default-concurrency
evidence.
- Prior exact-source full chat integration passes 995/995. Settings
regressions cover concurrent stale pages, 501 destinations, pending
state, rejected updates, and explicit retry. These deterministic tests
do not prove live provider behavior.
- Retained failed attempts and their causes are in the [qualification
log](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a/doc/plans/chat-adapters/2026-09-08-chat-queue-and-webhook-repair.md).
The first merge adapter run timed out while macOS slept for 290 seconds.
Its unchanged repeat passed with a temporary sleep guard. No assertion,
deadline, or CI gate was weakened.

Review commands include `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest
run src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-queued-comments-routes.test.ts` and `pnpm exec
playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts
tests/e2e/acp-stop-continuation.spec.ts`. Database suites require fresh
disposable databases. See the [browser
runbook](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a/doc/plans/chat-adapters/2026-09-04-chat-adapters-browser-e2e-runbook.md)
for provider setup and separate live acceptance steps.

## Risks

- This remains experimental. Deterministic tests and bounded live
evidence do not establish every provider feature, tenant, permission
layout, or media shape. Teams work-tenant qualification is still open.
- Failed and uncertain provider effects remain visible and can require
operator action. A transport receipt does not prove recipient
visibility.
- Native controller and runner artifacts must remain compatible.
Preserve lease ownership, terminal authority, source binding, and
quarantine during future changes.
- Access and audit rows commit together, but activity notifications
remain best-effort. This is not a new durable event outbox.
- The PR operation does not deploy a live server, replace its runner, or
change provider permissions. Remaining live qualification is documented
in the [temporary
handoff](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a/doc/plans/chat-adapters/2026-09-08-open-qualification-followups.md).

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex assisted with implementation, tool execution, testing, and
review. The work records `gpt-6-astra` assistance. The environment does
not report a context-window size. No private reasoning traces are
included.

## 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>
2026-09-10 10:06:45 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip e095b84dab feat(connections): connect services from native task feeds (#13058)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents use connections to reach external services.
> - A fresh native task can have no service tools installed.
> - The agent needs a way to discover services and ask the responsible
person for access.
> - This pull request brings the existing connection-intent flow into
native task execution.
> - The person can connect from the task, and the agent can continue
with updated tools.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Native runner tool authority, connection intents, task interactions, and
shared connection setup.

**Problem or motivation**

A task that needs an unconnected service cannot finish its work. Leaving
the task to configure access also loses context. A resolved request must
survive a restart and resume the correct agent once.

**Proposed solution**

Expose connection discovery and access requests as server-owned native
tools. Render a durable task card and use the shared setup dialog.
Persist outcome delivery and start a fresh provider session after access
is ready.

**Alternatives considered**

Sending the person to the Connections page adds navigation and does not
solve continuation. Polling for authorization consumes runs and can
create duplicate requests.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends the existing connection-intent runtime and setup
experience. It reuses the shared access model and the native runner.

Related: #12345, #12347. The service-slug fix in #12906 is related but
separate. Companion evaluation PR:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-evals/pull/21.

## What Changed

- Expose `connections_search` and `connection_request` with server-bound
company, task, agent, and responsible user. Preserve the legacy entry
points.
- Discover catalog services and authorized custom connections. Check
installation, identity, health, and executable permissions before
reporting ready.
- Keep pending cards through ordinary messages. Reuse requests and
retire stale ownership. Put Connect at the right of Not now.
- Reuse the shared setup flow in a task dialog. Keep access additive and
default to the requesting agent. Recover from cancelled or blocked OAuth
windows with a new-tab fallback.
- Persist outcome delivery with an idempotent wake key. Resume in a
fresh session and recheck ownership before dispatch.
- Add native browser fixtures, offline Storybook states, server
contracts, and evaluation fixtures. Update guidance and documentation.

## Verification

- `pnpm build`: passed after replaying the change on current master.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates`: passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build-storybook`: passed.
- New continuation-policy regression cases: 16 passed.
- Docker-backed PostgreSQL regressions passed for requester-only OAuth
access, assignment-only expiry, terminal expiry, and credential-free
setup metadata.
- Shared setup and task-card UI tests: 121 passed, including configured
MCP reconnect URL recovery and preserving user edits across refetch.
- Storybook browser checks: all 119 passed on the latest reconnect fix.
- `pnpm test:run`: 4,734 tests passed in the first server group, but
embedded PostgreSQL startup failures and resulting cleanup errors
prevented a complete local pass. All Linux CI lanes passed on the latest
reviewed commit. One external-object route test returned an unexplained
500 on the first run; it passed twice locally and the failed shard
passed on retry without code changes.
- Earlier feature-checkout evidence: three deterministic native browser
journeys passed, including restart delivery and an actual fixture tool
result. Legacy scripted coverage also passed. All 59 added stories were
inspected in light and dark themes.
- Live Notion testing recorded successful provider reads. The manual
test used a local-trusted instance. It does not prove
authenticated/cloud deployment or every provider journey.
- Native browser rerun reached the embedded PostgreSQL startup limit
before bootstrap, so the latest checkout’s full native browser journey
remains unverified. Both OAuth page/task regression cases passed against
isolated Docker-backed PostgreSQL 17. They verify no premature task
access, requester-only completion, additive retries, and reconnect
preservation.
- Applied both new migrations twice to isolated PostgreSQL 17. Foreign
keys remained intact, duplicate active delivery keys were rejected, and
failed delivery records did not block retries.

Reviewer path: start a fresh test drive, enable the native runner, use
an agent that can perform work directly, and ask it to summarize a
Notion page. Connect from the card, then verify the resumed provider
call and source-linked answer. The default test-drive CEO is instructed
to delegate, so it can introduce an unrelated hiring step.

## Risks

- Two additive migrations create durable deliveries and a partial unique
wake index. They are idempotent. The wake index can require a
maintenance window on large tables because migrations run in a
transaction.
- OAuth and continuation cross asynchronous boundaries. Tests cover
ownership changes, retries, additive access, and restart delivery; live
provider behavior still varies.
- The latest requester-scope fix has not yet been exercised through live
OAuth. GitHub, API-key, authenticated-user, and all recovery journeys
are not claimed as verified.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6-based Codex assisted with implementation, tests, and review
using tools and code execution. The runtime does not expose the exact
model version, context window, or reasoning setting. Live evaluation
used `gpt-5.6-luna`; manual native testing used `gpt-5.6-sol`.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used and disclosed unavailable runtime
details
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this extends existing
connection 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 feature 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
- [ ] I have run all required 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
- [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>
2026-09-08 15:55:26 -05:00
Dotta 0c1e7504c0 fix(runner): persist warm Daytona workspaces across turns (#12904)
## Thinking Path

> - Daytona preserves a stopped sandbox filesystem, but deleting or
replacing a sandbox removes its only remote copy.
> - Warm reuse therefore improves latency but cannot be Paperclip's
durability boundary.
> - The host execution workspace must remain authoritative after every
successful turn, while same-run recovery must avoid overwriting
unexported remote work.
> - Result proposal, workspace export/merge, and terminal completion
need a durable, replayable ordering so a crash never starts a duplicate
provider turn.
> - A paid browser acceptance suite must exercise both legacy Codex and
Runner Codex for three real turns on one continuously warm Daytona
sandbox.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #12901.

Runner Codex did not previously export successful Daytona workspace
changes back to the authoritative host workspace. That made warm reuse
depend on Daytona's remote filesystem and left deleted/replacement
sandboxes without a reliable reconstruction path. The existing paid
fixture also lacked a focused three-turn continuity case for both Codex
adapters.

## What Changed

- Persist versioned, atomic native workspace-sync descriptors and
durable seeds in `PAPERCLIP_HOME`, without credentials or a database
migration.
- Classify fresh, warm, replacement, and same-run-recovery workspace
preparation explicitly; ambiguous lease/root/digest evidence fails
closed.
- Finalize native workspace export/merge after semantic result proposal
and before run completion, with idempotent replay that never submits a
second provider turn.
- Surface legacy Codex workspace restoration failures instead of masking
them, while preserving an earlier provider error when both fail.
- Keep healthy reusable Daytona leases warm for legacy and native
adapters, stamp finalized workspace generations, and retain existing
cleanup behavior for per-turn or unhealthy leases.
- Preserve Runner Codex's provider process/session across warm turns,
including bounded post-terminal tail draining and exact authority
rotation.
- Add the exact paid `daytona-warm-continuity` matrix:
  - `legacy-codex × daytona × warm-three-turn`
  - `runner-codex × daytona × warm-three-turn`
- Drive all three turns through the browser, verify ordered file
continuity and stable lease/workspace/runtime identities, capture
per-turn timings, and delete the sandbox immediately after assertions.
- Document `pnpm test:e2e:runner -- --suite daytona-warm-continuity`; no
package script was added.

## Verification

- `pnpm typecheck` — passed, including migration safety (no migration
added)
- Focused server/runner Vitest coverage — 144 passed
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit` — 114 passed
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck` — passed
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:codex` — 66 passed,
1 helper ignored
- `native-session-executor.test.ts` — 139 passed, including safe
fail-closed cleanup after remote runner identity capture failure
- Paid local browser acceptance, exact post-rebase Linux/amd64 runner
binary:
- Runner Codex — passed in 1.7m; 3 runs; lease outcomes `created,
resumed, resumed`; 10/10 matchers; cleanup passed
- Legacy Codex — passed in 2.7m; 3 runs; lease outcomes `created,
resumed, resumed`; 10/10 matchers; cleanup passed
- [Protected paid GitHub Actions
campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34026735033)
against `7da42a91b95fa7fb2df126668ef7e37afb3b2b9d` — passed 2/2:
- Runner Codex — 3 runs; lease outcomes `created, resumed, resumed`;
evidence and cleanup passed
- Legacy Codex — 3 runs; lease outcomes `created, resumed, resumed`;
evidence and cleanup passed
  - Merge/enforcement, S3 history, and Pages publication jobs passed
- Paid result artifacts were scanned for both provider credentials;
neither secret was present.
- Current PR checks — 31 passed, 1 expected Storybook skip; Greptile
5/5; Superagent security scan passed
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` — passed
- Confirmed no `package.json`, lockfile, migration, or SQL changes.

## Risks

- Workspace synchronization now sits on the terminal-success path, so a
remote export failure deliberately prevents false success. Retryable
state retains its lease/seed; loss of the only unexported remote copy
fails closed.
- Warm provider reuse has strict identity and quiescence checks.
Mismatched or ambiguous evidence blocks reuse rather than risking
concurrent provider work.
- The paid suite incurs Daytona and Codex cost only in the existing
protected scheduled/manual workflow and explicitly destroys its sandbox
after each cell.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex with GPT-5 agentic reasoning, repository inspection, real
browser E2E execution, Rust/TypeScript test execution, and GitHub
Actions diagnostics.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either linked an existing issue or described the issue
in-PR
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [x] My branch name contains no internal ticket id
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have documented the dedicated suite invocation without adding a
package script
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green on the current revision
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
on the current revision
- [x] I will address all reviewer comments before requesting merge
2026-09-06 08:16:12 -05:00
505e7b40fc fix: guard listComments against non-UUID afterCommentId to prevent 500 errors (#8695)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is an open-source app for managing AI agents
> - The issue history subsystem stores comments per issue, with
cursor-based pagination via the `after` query parameter
> - `GET /issues/:id/comments?after=<commentId>` looks up the anchor
comment by UUID to get its created_at timestamp
> - When agents store an incorrect or truncated comment ID (e.g.
`670427ab` instead of `670427ab-e0ae-4a54-959e-2b13a2e33d14`), Postgres
throws `invalid input syntax for type uuid` before the anchor-not-found
guard can execute
> - This surfaces as an unhandled 500 and causes agents to fail when
doing incremental comment reads on any issue
> - This pull request adds a UUID validation guard in `listComments`
using the already-imported `isUuidLike` helper
> - The benefit is that invalid cursors get a clean empty-array response
instead of a 500, matching what already happens when a valid UUID simply
isn't found

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #2612 (a different 500 on the same `after=` cursor path, fixed
earlier; this PR covers the malformed-cursor case that remains).

**What happened?**

`GET /issues/:id/comments?after=<value>` returns a 500 when `after` is
not a UUID. The route trims the query value and passes it straight to
the anchor lookup, so Postgres raises `invalid input syntax for type
uuid: "670427ab"` before the anchor-not-found guard can run. Any agent
that stored a truncated or malformed comment ID as its pagination cursor
gets stuck in a 500 loop on that issue.

**Expected behavior**

A cursor that cannot name a comment behaves like a cursor that names a
missing comment: the endpoint returns `[]`.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Pick any issue id on a running instance.
2. Call `GET /api/issues/<issue-id>/comments?after=670427ab` (8 hex
characters instead of a full UUID).
3. Observe a 500 with `PostgresError: invalid input syntax for type
uuid: "670427ab"`, where a full-but-unknown UUID such as
`00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000` returns `[]`.

**Paperclip version or commit**

`master` at the time this PR was opened (June 2026). The `listComments`
anchor lookup in `server/src/services/issues.ts` is unchanged on current
`master`, so the failure still reproduces there.

**Deployment mode**

Local dev (`pnpm dev`). Not deployment-specific: the failure is in the
server's comment-listing service, so it reproduces in every mode.

## What Changed

- `server/src/services/issues.ts` — added `if
(!isUuidLike(afterCommentId)) return [];` guard in `listComments` before
the DB anchor lookup, using the already-imported `isUuidLike` helper

## Verification

```bash
# Start the dev server
pnpm dev

# Pass a truncated UUID — should return [] instead of 500
curl -s "http://localhost:3100/api/issues/<any-valid-issue-id>/comments?after=670427ab"
# Expected: []

# Pass a valid full UUID that doesn't exist — should also return []
curl -s "http://localhost:3100/api/issues/<any-valid-issue-id>/comments?after=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000"
# Expected: []

# Pass a valid full UUID that exists — should return comments after that cursor
curl -s "http://localhost:3100/api/issues/<any-valid-issue-id>/comments?after=<real-comment-uuid>"
# Expected: array of comments
```

## Risks

Low risk. The change only adds an early-return guard for values that are
provably invalid UUIDs. The code path for valid UUIDs is unchanged. The
existing behavior for anchor-not-found (returning `[]`) is preserved for
invalid UUIDs, which is the correct semantic (cursor not found → no
comments after it).

## Model Used

Claude Sonnet 4.6 (`claude-sonnet-4-6`) via Paperclip CTO agent, tool
use + code execution mode, 200K context window.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip CTO <cto@paperclip.ai>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Andrew Aymeloglu <aaymeloglu@gmail.com>
2026-09-03 20:47:19 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 87d05e194b feat(work-products): add rich cards and run artifact inventory (#12717)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the control plane for AI-agent companies.
> - Agent outputs must remain visible after a run and easy to inspect
from a task.
> - The thread and artifact inventory need one consistent rich-card
vocabulary.
> - Run uploads also need durable artifact registration and
producing-run context.
> - Reviewers need deterministic examples for each rich-card kind and
state.
> - This pull request adds the shared presentation, registration,
inventory, and Storybook review coverage.
> - The benefit is a complete output path that reviewers can inspect
without seeded data.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

This change improves work-product presentation in task threads and the
task Artifacts tab.

**Subsystem affected**

The change affects shared work-product contracts, the runner diff path,
server attachment and work-product services, GitHub metadata refresh,
the React board UI, and Storybook.

**Current behavior**

The thread used generic cards. Some files uploaded by a run existed only
as message attachments. The Artifacts tab showed a flat list without run
context or filters. Storybook showed only one resting card per kind.

**Proposed behavior**

The thread uses rich cards for supported work-product types. Each
run-produced file registers one attachment-backed artifact work product.
The Artifacts tab groups outputs by run and supports filters. Storybook
shows every kind and requested state, PR lifecycle states, stats
variants, truncation, mobile layout, and message-tail media.

**Reason and benefit**

Users can identify outputs quickly. Reviewers can inspect all card
permutations without creating task data.

**Breaking changes**

None. The metadata fields and automatic artifact registration are
additive. Existing attachments and work products keep their current
behavior.

## What Changed

- Added a shared rich work-product card with kind-specific content and a
compact inventory variant.
- Added pull-request and commit diff metadata plus bounded GitHub state
refresh.
- Added media strips and typed file chips to message-tail attachments.
- Registered each run-produced attachment as an artifact work product in
the same server transaction.
- Grouped task artifacts by run with agent and timestamp headings.
- Added type and run filters, image thumbnails, compact cards, and a
company Artifacts link.
- Added a Storybook kind-by-state matrix with stats variants for all
eight visual kinds.
- Added PR open, draft, merged, and closed examples, long-title
truncation, an exact 375-pixel viewport, and message-tail overflow
coverage.
- Closed reconciled runtime work products when the linked runtime stops
or disappears, so the card shows `Stopped` instead of `Unhealthy`.

### Screenshots

Before: one resting card per kind.

![Previous rich-card
inventory](https://pages.paperclip.ing/rich-work-product-storybook-20260902/before-inventory.png)

After: the kind and state matrix.

![Rich-card kind and state
matrix](https://pages.paperclip.ing/rich-work-product-storybook-20260902/after-kind-state-matrix.png)

After: message-tail media at 375 pixels.

![Message-tail thumbnails and typed
chips](https://pages.paperclip.ing/rich-work-product-storybook-20260902/after-message-tail.png)

[Open the Storybook evidence
viewer](https://pages.paperclip.ing/rich-work-product-storybook-20260902/).

The earlier artifact inventory comparison remains available in the
[artifact inventory
viewer](https://pages.paperclip.ing/rich-artifacts-inventory-proof-20260902/).

## Verification

- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passed.
- `pnpm build-storybook` passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/work-product-runtime-reconciliation.test.ts` passed
with 5 tests.
- Chromium visual checks passed at desktop and 375-pixel widths.
- All 30 latest-head GitHub checks passed. One unrelated annotation test
was flaky and passed on its single retry.
- Greptile passed at 5/5 with zero unresolved threads.

## Risks

- Low risk. The Storybook change adds review fixtures only. The runtime
fix changes read-time reconciliation without database writes.
- The matrix is intentionally large so every permutation stays visible
in one review surface.

> I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This work does not duplicate planned core
work.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex with GPT-5 and GPT-5.6-sol across this pull request.
Reasoning, tool use, and code execution were enabled. The 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 public branch name describes the change and contains no
internal task id
- [x] I have run tests locally and the changed-path tests 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: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-02 15:27:54 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 6244e4cf32 feat(apps): add Composio and Gmail connectors (#12342)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - App connections need both direct providers and managed provider
hubs.
> - The grant layer now defines safe credential ownership.
> - Composio needs parent and child connection lifecycle rules, and
Gmail needs governed setup.
> - This pull request adds both connector families on the grant
foundation.
> - The benefit is broader app access without weakening credential
isolation.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #11965

This is stack 4 of 11. It depends on stack 3 and replaces another
reviewable part of #11965.

## What Changed

- Add Composio parent and child connection support.
- Add Gmail connection setup and governance.
- Preserve credential paths and remove duplicate binding declarations.
- Cascade Composio pause and restore actions to child connections.

## Verification

- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts`
- Result: 164 tests passed.
- `pnpm build`

## Risks

- Parent lifecycle changes can affect every Composio child.
- The service restores only children whose provider accounts remain
active.
- Credential binding paths are normalized before secret resolution.

> I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This stack continues the existing app
connection work from #11965 and does not duplicate another planned item.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The runtime model ID and context window were not
exposed. The model used reasoning, tool use, and code execution.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [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>
2026-08-29 12:08:33 -05:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip 3e28d64a72 fix(plugin-worker-manager): queue and replay pre-bind login pseudo-terminal frames (#12173)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip routes plugin worker messages to agent sessions.
> - The login pseudo-terminal route opens after the host receives the
open reply.
> - `readline` can deliver later frames from the same pipe read before
that reply continuation runs.
> - The host dropped early output and exit frames.
> - The fix queues valid early frames, preserves arrival order, and
replays them after the route opens.
> - The route uses bounded memory and closes fail-closed when a bound
breaks.
> - The final tests also pin child issue ordering so the serialized
suite remains deterministic.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Fixes #12122

## What Changed

- Add a bounded queue for login pseudo-terminal output and exit frames
during route opening.
- Validate session ids, chunk types, and per-chunk limits before queue
insertion.
- Bound the queue by 10,000 frames and 8 MiB of characters.
- Charge retained worker session identifiers against the character
bound.
- Preserve arrival order and stop replay after the first valid exit.
- Drop repeated exits without changing the first exit position or code.
- Bound the repeat-exit lookup and clear queued state on all terminal
paths.
- Add regression tests and fixture support for coalesced frames,
ordering, limits, cleanup, and log safety.
- Pin issue numbers in the child-wake test so its expected child order
remains deterministic.

## Verification

- Build the plugin SDK with `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk
build`.
- Run `npx vitest run
server/src/__tests__/plugin-worker-manager.test.ts` from the repository
root.
- Run `npx vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` from
the repository root.
- The focused plugin worker suite passes 66 of 66 tests at the prior
reviewed head.
- The issue service file passes 120 of 120 tests in two isolated runs at
the current head.
- Confirm that GitHub Actions passes all required checks.
- Confirm that Greptile reports 5/5 with no unresolved review threads.
- Storybook visual regression remains skipped because the PR has no
`storybook-visual` label.

## Risks

- The queue adds bounded memory use while the login pseudo-terminal
route opens.
- A queue limit breach closes the route and prevents unbounded
buffering.
- A hostile worker can fail only its own login route when it breaches a
bound.
- The first valid exit closes the route, so later records do not reach
the session.
- The child-wake test now uses distinct issue numbers to match the
service sort contract.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, extended reasoning, tool use, and code review
support. The runtime does not expose a separate context-window value.

## 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 that 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 the existing public issue with `Fixes: #12122`
- [x] I have not referenced internal Paperclip issues or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
ticket id
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation where needed
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [x] All required Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved review threads
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-08-25 13:42:13 -07:00
SamandSami Rusani 14fd8aee36 fix(server): flag truncated issue descriptions (#4771)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - The issue list API is one of the surfaces API consumers use to
synchronize issue metadata.
> - The list endpoint intentionally returns a bounded `description`
preview so large descriptions do not bloat list responses.
> - Before this change, that preview looked like a complete field value
because the response did not say whether it had been shortened.
> - That made round-trip clients vulnerable to accidentally PATCHing a
preview back over the full description.
> - This pull request keeps the existing preview behavior but adds an
explicit `descriptionTruncated` flag.
> - The benefit is backwards-compatible visibility into truncated issue
descriptions, so clients can avoid data-loss workflows.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Fixes #4758.

Related PR: #4792 also targets #4758, but it includes unrelated logger
changes and currently has separate review/security concerns. This PR
keeps the fix scoped to the issue-list description truncation API
behavior.

## What Changed

- Added `descriptionTruncated` to the issue list projection when
`description` exceeds the existing 1200-character preview limit.
- Exposed `descriptionTruncated?: boolean` on the shared `Issue` type.
- Added service tests for truncated descriptions, exact-limit
descriptions, null descriptions, and multibyte-safe preview truncation.

## Verification

June 18, 2026 refresh after rebasing onto current `origin/master`:

- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm typecheck`
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD`
- GitHub PR checks are green on head `12e828e6`.

Earlier pre-review verification also included `pnpm test`.

## Risks

- Low risk. This is an additive API response field; existing clients can
ignore it.
- The list endpoint still returns the same bounded `description`
preview. Clients that need full text should continue fetching the issue
detail, but can now detect when that is necessary.
- No database migration or UI behavior change.

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

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex based on GPT-5, via Codex desktop on April 29, June 15,
and June 18, 2026. Used tool-assisted repository inspection, code
editing, local test execution, GitHub CLI workflows, and PR review
follow-up. Exact context window size is not surfaced by the tool.

## 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots (N/A: no UI change)
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (N/A:
additive API field covered by tests)
- [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: Sami Rusani <sr@samirusani>
2026-08-17 14:02:01 -07:00
b847e8b6f6 perf(server): reduce issue detail request overhead (#10414)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source control plane people use to coordinate
AI-agent work
> - Opening an issue fans out into several authenticated issue-detail
reads, so repeated work on that path directly affects perceived latency
> - Those reads repeated issue and authorization lookups, returned full
private JSON even when unchanged, and performed non-critical bookkeeping
writes on the request path
> - Interaction reads also performed lifecycle writes even though `GET`
must be read-only
> - This pull request adds request-scoped reuse, private conditional
responses, read-only interaction access, and bounded write debouncing
without crossing actor, request, or company boundaries
> - The result is less database, serialization, logging, and
response-body work while preserving authorization and interaction
lifecycle invariants

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

This is the server-only latency phase. Related work is tracked
separately in #10415 (aggregate view), #10416 (warm navigation, merged
into the base), and #10463 (bundle split). This pull request
intentionally excludes those scopes.

**What happened?**

Opening an issue detail view caused avoidable server costs: repeated
issue and authorization reads within one request, full private JSON
responses when a representation was unchanged, writes during
interaction-list reads, production debug transport setup, and immediate
bookkeeping writes for cloud tenant activity and board-key usage.

**Expected behavior**

All successful JSON `GET /api/issues/:id/*` responses should support
strong private ETags and `304 Not Modified`. Repeated work may be reused
only within the current request. `GET /interactions` must not modify
stored interactions. Non-critical activity timestamps may be debounced
without weakening authentication or stale instance-admin cleanup.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Start Paperclip in local development or self-hosted server mode.
2. Open one issue and request its detail subresources with the same
authenticated actor.
3. Repeat a successful JSON request with its `ETag` in `If-None-Match`.
4. Observe `304 Not Modified`, no interaction writes from `GET
/interactions`, and unchanged authorization boundaries.

**Deployment mode / installation**

- Local development or self-hosted server
- Built from source
- Core server behavior; not adapter-specific

## What Changed

- Added strong ETags and `Cache-Control: private, must-revalidate` to
successful JSON reads under `/api/issues/:id/*`, including
standards-compliant `If-None-Match` handling.
- Added request-scoped promise memoization for issue and authorization
lookups; no authorization result survives the request.
- Made `GET /interactions` read-only, moved supersession and
terminal-state handling to mutation paths, and prevented plugin callers
from accepting or rejecting interactions after an issue closes.
- Removed the production debug-file logger transport while preserving
development formatting.
- Debounced cloud-tenant activity and board-key `lastUsedAt`
persistence, while keeping stale instance-admin deletion unconditional
and authentication checks per request.
- Added focused tests for ETags, request isolation, authorization
lifecycle behavior, interaction invariants, logger configuration, and
retry-safe debounce behavior.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/private-json-etag.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts` — 2 files,
23 tests passed.
- Focused Vitest run covering request memoization, authorization,
interactions, plugin orchestration, logger, cloud tenant, board auth,
and issue services — 9 files, 264 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed.
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` — passed.
- Scope guardrails: 21 changed files under `server/src`; no lockfile,
workflow, migration, UI, aggregate-view, or bundle-split changes.

## Risks

- Strong ETags hash each successful serialized JSON response. This adds
a small CPU cost but avoids transferring unchanged bodies.
- Debounced bookkeeping timestamps can lag by the bounded debounce
interval. They are non-critical usage metadata; authentication still
runs per request, and stale instance-admin deletion remains
unconditional.
- Legacy pending interactions on terminal issues are projected as
expired by reads and are finalized only by mutation paths. The stored
record remains unchanged on `GET` by design.
- No database schema or migration changes are included.

> This is a focused performance correction and does not duplicate a
planned core feature in `ROADMAP.md`.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex using `gpt-5.3-codex` for the initial implementation and
`gpt-5.6-sol` for isolation, verification, and PR preparation, with
reasoning, repository tool use, code execution, and GitHub CLI access.
The runtimes did not expose authoritative context-window sizes.

## 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: Dev Agent <dev@paperclip.ing>
2026-08-11 14:39:23 -04:00
dcac49a4fd feat(workspaces): defer isolated setup until runtime start (#10653)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Isolated workspaces give each task a safe and reproducible checkout.
> - The existing setup cloned the development database before an agent
needed to run the app.
> - This made worktree creation slower and heavier for tasks that never
start a service.
> - Runtime services already use one server start path for heartbeat,
operator, and startup recovery flows.
> - This pull request moves heavy setup to that start path and keeps
worktree creation lean.
> - The benefit is faster isolated workspace creation with the same
reliable runtime setup when a service starts.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Related pull request: #10652 covers the initial deferred
database-seeding slice. This pull request supersedes it with end-to-end
runtime provisioning and safe cleanup.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

This improves isolated worktree creation, runtime service startup, and
isolated instance cleanup.

**Subsystem affected**

Cross-cutting: CLI worktree setup, server runtime orchestration, shared
workspace contracts, and development scripts.

**Current behavior**

Paperclip seeds an isolated development database during worktree
creation. It can also leave an isolated instance directory after
workspace teardown. This work happens even when no runtime service
starts.

**Proposed behavior**

Paperclip creates the worktree with a lean eager setup. It runs an
idempotent runtime provision command before the first managed service
spawn. Concurrent starts share one provision attempt. Teardown removes
the isolated instance safely.

**Reason and benefit**

Many agent tasks only edit and test code. They do not need a running
Paperclip instance. Deferring the database seed reduces workspace
startup cost while preserving automatic setup for tasks that start the
app.

**Breaking changes**

None. The new runtime provision command is optional. Existing workspace
behavior is unchanged when it is absent.

## What Changed

- Split Paperclip worktree setup into a lean eager script and an
idempotent runtime provision script.
- Added `runtimeProvisionCommand` to project, issue, realized workspace,
and persisted workspace contracts.
- Added a per-workspace provision mutex before local service spawn for
heartbeat, operator, and startup recovery flows.
- Added a persisted `provisioning` service state and the
`workspace_runtime_provision` operation phase.
- Kept provision time outside the service readiness timeout and made
failed attempts visible and retryable.
- Reclaimed isolated instance data during safe workspace teardown.
- Serialized deferred database seeding across processes and bound
teardown to the instance root captured in persisted workspace metadata.
- Added tests for config flow, concurrency, retry, no-op behavior,
readiness timing, scripts, CLI commands, and cleanup.
- Documented the eager and runtime provisioning contracts.

## Verification

- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- `pnpm test:run` (server: 3,201 passed; UI: 3,345 passed; the CLI phase
exposed one environment-sensitive AWS doctor assertion because the agent
runtime injects static AWS credentials)
- `env -u AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID -u AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY pnpm exec vitest
run cli/src/__tests__/secrets.test.ts -t 'passes AWS doctor checks when
non-secret provider config is present'`
- Focused runtime tests cover serialized provisioning, retry after
stderr failure, absent-command no-op behavior, operation logging,
persisted state order, and readiness timeout exclusion.
- Focused CLI and cleanup tests cover concurrent seed serialization,
stale-lock fail-closed behavior, persisted instance ownership, and
rewritten sibling pointers.

## Risks

- A faulty runtime provision script blocks service startup. Paperclip
records stderr, marks the service failed, and retries on the next start.
- Concurrent service requests share an in-process provision attempt,
while the seed command uses an atomic filesystem lock across processes.
A stale lock fails closed and requires an operator to verify no seed is
running before removing it.
- Isolated instance cleanup is destructive. The cleanup service
validates ownership and path containment before removal.

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

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex, `gpt-5.6-sol`, with agentic reasoning, tool use, and
code execution. The service 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>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-02 10:37:10 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 14d4db6330 fix(inbox): keep passive issue views out of Mine (#10581)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The inbox shows work that a board user owns or has joined
> - Issue detail views update a per-user read receipt
> - The Mine query treated that read receipt as user participation
> - A passive view therefore added the issue to Mine
> - This pull request separates passive reads from audited user
mutations
> - The benefit is a Mine inbox that reflects ownership and real
participation

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Opening an issue detail marks the issue as read. The Mine query treated
the read receipt as participation. The viewed issue then appeared in
Mine even when the user did not change it.

**Expected behavior**

Viewing an issue can update unread state. A view alone must not add the
issue to Mine. Issue creation, assignment, comments, and audited user
mutations must add it.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Open an issue that you did not create and that is not assigned to
you.
2. Do not comment or change the issue.
3. Open the Mine inbox.
4. Observe that the issue appears in Mine on the previous
implementation.

**Paperclip version or commit**

`90ead239a8`

**Deployment mode**

Local dev from source.

**Additional context**

Related approach: #3421 changes Mine to an assignee-only filter. This
change keeps participation-based Mine behavior and corrects the
participation signal.

## What Changed

- Use an explicit audited user-mutation allowlist for Mine
participation, including comment cancellation.
- Keep passive reads, previews, denied resource requests, and archive
bookkeeping out of Mine participation.
- Record manual routine reuse as an explicit audited inbox touch instead
of a read receipt.
- Keep that inbox bookkeeping from satisfying routine activity gates.
- Add focused regression coverage for passive views, real mutations,
comment cancellation, and manual routine runs.
- Document the Mine participation contract.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts -t
"does not treat passive issue activity"`
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts -t
"touches a (coalesced|skipped active) routine issue|ignores inbox
bookkeeping activity"`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- GitHub latest-head CI: all required checks passed, including build,
typecheck, server suites, and e2e shards.

## Risks

- Low risk. The change affects only the server query that defines user
participation in Mine and the manual routine touch signal.
- Historical audited user mutations can now qualify an issue for Mine.
Passive read and archive actions remain excluded.

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

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 family. The runtime did not expose the exact
deployment ID or context window. Agentic reasoning, tool use, and code
execution were enabled.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] 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>
2026-08-01 20:20:34 -05:00
Devin Foley ddbcf53e31 fix(server): refuse agent delegation cycles back to an open ancestor's creator (#10658)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents decompose work by creating child issues assigned to other
agents
> - When two agents each lack a capability the other assumed (e.g.
neither can push to GitHub), each can "resolve" its blocker by
delegating the same step to the other: A creates a child for B, B
creates a grandchild back for A
> - Nothing detects the cycle; the chain of blocked issues grows and no
signal reaches the human who could actually fix the capability gap
> - This pull request refuses agent-initiated child creation when the
child's assignee is the creator of a still-open ancestor in the same
chain — a mechanical, semantics-free cycle signal
> - The benefit is that the hot-potato dies at creation time with an
actionable error instead of growing a dead chain

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Fixes #10642 (write-time counterpart: #10648 refuses assignment to
paused agents; the credential-gap *preflight* side is tracked separately
in #10644)

## What Changed

- `issueService.findOpenAncestorCreatedByAgent(parentIssueId, agentId,
{maxDepth})`: bounded walk up the parent chain looking for a still-open
(not done/cancelled) ancestor created by the given agent.
- Agent-initiated issue creation with a parent (both the
create-with-`parentId` route and `POST /issues/:id/children`) now
refuses with a structured 409 (`code: delegation_cycle`, naming the
ancestor) when the new child would be assigned to the agent that created
a still-open ancestor: that agent delegated the work into this chain, so
assigning it back is a cycle. The message states the alternatives —
complete the work, leave the child unassigned, or escalate to a board
operator.
- Deliberately unaffected: human actors (deliberate re-routing is their
call), closed ancestors (re-engaging the creator of finished work is
normal), and accepted-plan decomposition (its children come from a
human-approved plan).

## Verification

- `pnpm vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issue-assignee-invokability-routes.test.ts` — cycle
refused with 409 and no create call; the same child allowed when no open
ancestor matches; board actors never consult the guard.
- `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` — new
embedded-Postgres coverage: ancestor found through the chain, closed
ancestors ignored, depth bound honored (114 total).
- `pnpm vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issue-create-deduplication-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts` —
unchanged (79).
- `cd server && pnpm run typecheck`.

## Risks

- Low-to-moderate: a new 409 for a creation shape that previously
succeeded. The blocked shape (agent assigns new work to the creator of
an open ancestor) is the cycle signature; the legitimate "hand a subtask
to the parent's assignee" pattern is unaffected because it keys on
assignee, not creator. Watchdog and plan-decomposition flows are exempt
or unaffected as described.
- The walk adds at most `maxDepth` (10) single-row lookups per agent
child creation with an assignee.

## Model Used

Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`, Anthropic) via Claude Code — extended
thinking, agentic tool use. No other models involved.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
2026-08-01 17:43:09 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 627728bdde feat: add authoritative issue PATCH receipts (#10478)
<!-- Write all pull request text in Simplified Technical English
(ASD-STE100): short sentences, one instruction per sentence, simple
approved vocabulary, and the active voice. -->

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agents update tasks through the issue API.
> - The update response did not state which values changed.
> - Blocker updates also did not echo the scalar blocker IDs.
> - Agents therefore used an extra GET request to confirm a successful
write.
> - This pull request adds an authoritative change receipt and an
optional small response.
> - The benefit is fewer API calls with a clear and compatible write
contract.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No public GitHub issue exists for this change.

### Subsystem affected

Cross-cutting: `server/`, `packages/shared`, and the UI issue cache.

### Problem or motivation

A successful issue PATCH returned the updated issue, but it did not
identify the effective changes. Blocker writes returned relation
summaries without the scalar IDs. Agents could not distinguish a
confirmed clear operation from missing data. The response must confirm
committed field and blocker changes while existing UI clients continue
to receive the full issue by default.

### Proposed solution

Add a `changes` receipt. Add a conditional `blockedByIssueIds` echo.
Support `Prefer: return=minimal`. Keep the full response as the default.

### Alternatives considered

Make the small response the default for agent tokens. This would create
different response contracts by actor type, so this pull request does
not use that design.

### Roadmap alignment

This is a focused control-plane reliability improvement. It does not
duplicate an open roadmap milestone.

## What Changed

- Compute committed issue row and relation changes in the issue service.
- Omit no-op fields and truncate changed long text values to 200
characters.
- Echo blocker ID arrays for blocker set and clear requests.
- Add the opt-in `Prefer: return=minimal` response and
`Preference-Applied` header.
- Keep receipt metadata out of React Query issue caches.
- Add route and embedded Postgres tests for the new contract.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issue-activity-events-routes.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts -t
"returns authoritative update receipts for row fields and blocker
relations"`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `git diff --check`

## Risks

- Low compatibility risk. The default response only adds receipt fields.
- Minimal mode is opt-in. Existing clients do not receive a smaller
body.
- The receipt excludes `updatedAt` because the response already returns
it as the freshness anchor.
- Prose API and agent workflow guidance will follow after the server
contract is available.

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

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex based on GPT-5. The exact deployment ID, context window
size, and reasoning mode are not exposed to the agent. The agent used
repository tools, code execution, and test execution.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-07-31 18:52:59 -07:00
fc5a30805e feat(cli): add managed install, update, and service lifecycle (#10045)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source control plane people use to manage
AI-agent companies
> - Operators need a predictable installation path that survives beyond
an ephemeral `npx` process
> - A durable installation needs an owned per-user payload store, stable
command shim, safe shell integration, and supported service lifecycle
> - Updates must preserve recoverability by backing up data, installing
side-by-side, verifying the new payload, and retaining rollback state
> - Bootstrap scripts and privileged service operations must fail closed
across download, filesystem, ownership, and consent boundaries
> - This pull request integrates managed install, update, rollback,
service, uninstall, doctor, bootstrap-installer, and runtime-serving
support into one workflow
> - The benefit is a recoverable, inspectable, and documented
installation lifecycle with explicit safety boundaries across Linux,
macOS, containers, WSL, npm, npx, and source checkouts

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

### Problem

Paperclip lacks a first-class durable installation and lifecycle
workflow. Operators currently have to assemble npm/npx installation,
PATH setup, background-service management, updates, rollback,
diagnostics, and uninstall behavior themselves. That makes upgrades
harder to recover, creates inconsistent behavior across platforms, and
leaves shell/download/service trust boundaries without one documented
implementation.

### Proposed Solution

Add a managed per-user install store and stable shim, a verified shell
bootstrap installer, service lifecycle commands, install-mode-aware
update/rollback behavior, doctor checks, and documentation. Managed
updates back up the database, install and smoke-test a side-by-side
payload, atomically switch `current`, and retain prior payloads. The
shell installer pins registry/download trust boundaries and requires
explicit consent for non-interactive privileged actions.

### Alternatives Considered

- Keep recommending `npx`: simple for evaluation, but ephemeral and
unsuitable for stable services, atomic updates, or rollback.
- Require global npm installation only: familiar, but cannot provide the
owned side-by-side payload store and retained rollback semantics.
- Split the capability across multiple PRs: rejected because install,
update, service, uninstall, bootstrap, and serving behavior share
contracts and security boundaries that need review together.

### Related Pull Requests

- Supersedes #10042 and #10044 with one integrated final diff.
- Incorporates and replaces the closed preparatory work in #10032 and
#10034.

## What Changed

- Added `paperclipai install`, `update`/`upgrade`, rollback, uninstall,
service lifecycle, onboarding integration, and managed-install doctor
checks.
- Added a private managed payload store, verified manifest/marker
ownership, exclusive mutation locks, atomic manifest/current/shim
writes, retained previous payloads, and provenance validation.
- Added npm and GitHub-ref install sources with exact target resolution,
registry isolation, database backup, side-by-side verification, atomic
activation, service restart coordination, and failure rollback.
- Made managed-update backups report actionable service-start and
`--no-backup` recovery guidance for unreachable databases, while clean
never-onboarded instances skip an empty backup.
- Added systemd user and launchd service definitions, status/health/log
commands, single-instance coordination, stale-port recovery, and
explicit sudo/lingering consent handling.
- Added the `scripts/install.sh` bootstrap path with checked two-stage
downloads, pinned public npm registry usage, platform checks,
dry-run/non-interactive controls, and Docker fixtures.
- Added embedded Postgres/native bootstrap integration,
hot-restart/systemd-notify serving support, passive update notices,
configuration contracts, README/CLI/install documentation, and focused
regression tests.
- Security re-review should explicitly re-verify: (1)
`addManagedPathBlock`/`removeManagedPathBlock` reject symlinked or
non-regular rc files, assert current-user ownership, preserve
restrictive modes, and replace atomically; (2) managed shim replacement
rejects unsafe parents, foreign-owned or multiply linked files, and uses
checked atomic replacement; (3) the shell installer and sudo path
preserve explicit consent and checked downloads; and (4) installed
service/runtime serving remains bound to the validated managed shim and
instance configuration.

## Verification

- `bash -n scripts/install.sh scripts/clean-install-git.sh
scripts/clean-install-npm.sh scripts/test-install-sh-docker.sh`
- `pnpm exec vitest run cli/src/__tests__/install-store.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/install-command.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/managed-install-check.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/onboard-service.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/service-health-check.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/service-manager.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/update-command.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/update-notice.test.ts
packages/db/src/embedded-postgres-native.test.ts` — 9 files, 66 tests
passed
- `pnpm --dir cli typecheck`
- `pnpm --dir cli build`
- Follow-up verification: `pnpm exec vitest run
cli/src/__tests__/update-command.test.ts` (14/14), `pnpm --dir cli
typecheck`, `pnpm --dir cli build`, and `pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/server typecheck`.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- Full `pnpm test:run` exercised all suites; an injected static AWS
credential changed one unrelated doctor expectation, which passed when
those credentials were removed. A second run cleared that case and
exposed stale pre-existing adapter-utils `dist` output; rebuilding
`@paperclipai/adapter-utils` made the isolated test pass. The updated PR
CI is the authoritative clean-workspace full-suite run.

## Risks

- Installer/update code writes executable shims, symlinks, shell rc
blocks, service definitions, and managed payloads; ownership,
regular-file, symlink, hard-link, marker, and path-containment checks
fail closed before destructive changes.
- The bootstrap installer executes downloaded tooling; downloads are
staged and checked before execution, npm traffic is pinned to the public
registry, and non-interactive privileged behavior requires explicit
consent.
- Linux lingering may invoke `sudo`; the command is surfaced and
confirmed before execution, and unsupported service managers fall back
to foreground-run guidance.
- Database migrations remain forward-only; payload rollback does not
reverse migrations, so managed updates create a backup before activation
unless explicitly disabled.
- Service restart and runtime serving touch process/port ownership;
lifecycle locks, health/version checks, and stable-shim service
definitions reduce split-brain and stale-process risk.

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

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex coding agents using GPT-5.5 and GPT-5.6-sol, with
reasoning, repository/API access, shell execution, and test tooling. The
runtime did not expose a reliable 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>
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-31 18:52:23 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip 0edb742f8d test(server): relocate referenced-project run-prep tests to a dedicated file (#10446)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip keeps server tests that protect run-prep and issue service
behavior
> - The issue service test file now mixes issue service tests with
heartbeat run-prep tests
> - That mix makes the file harder to scan and harder to keep focused
> - The run-prep suites belong with the other heartbeat tests
> - This pull request moves those suites into
`heartbeat-referenced-projects.test.ts`
> - The benefit is a smaller issue service test file and a clearer home
for heartbeat tests

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

This PR has no public GitHub issue. It moves the referenced-project
run-prep suites into a dedicated heartbeat test file. The issue service
test file keeps only issue service tests.

## What Changed

- Moved the `resolveRunReferencedProjects` suite into
`server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-referenced-projects.test.ts`
- Moved the multi-project workspace sync kill-switch test into the same
file
- Left `server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` with issue service
coverage only

## Verification

- `pnpm exec tsc --noEmit`
- `pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-referenced-projects.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts`
- `git log --oneline origin/master..HEAD` shows one commit
- `git diff --stat origin/master...HEAD` shows only the two test files

## Risks

- Low risk. This change moves tests only and does not change product
code.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, tool use enabled, local shell execution enabled.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] 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
- [ ] 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>
2026-07-29 10:22:01 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip 11273c18d6 feat(server): resolve per-project-authorized referenced-project set for run prep (#10380)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the control plane for autonomous AI companies
> - Run prep needs to know which referenced projects belong in a run
without breaking company boundaries
> - The anchor project must keep its existing authorization path, while
additional mentioned projects must be checked independently and fail
closed if access is denied or unknown
> - This pull request adds a helper that computes the deduped,
company-scoped referenced-project set for run prep and warns when a
project is rejected
> - It also introduces an off-by-default kill-switch so downstream
consumers can adopt the set safely
> - The benefit is safer multi-project run preparation without widening
access beyond what the run actor is already allowed to read

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

This PR does not rely on a public GitHub issue. The change is
self-contained and follows the feature-request style description below
so reviewers can evaluate it without leaving the PR.

**Problem / motivation**
- Run prep needs to assemble a referenced-project set that includes the
anchor project plus additional @-mentioned projects.
- Additional projects must be authorized independently and rejected
projects must not widen access.
- The result should be safe to merge inertly behind a default-off
kill-switch until downstream consumers opt in.

**Proposed solution**
- Add `resolveRunReferencedProjects(issueId, anchorProjectId, opts)` in
`server/src/services/heartbeat.ts`.
- Compute a deduped company-scoped set with the anchor project first and
additional mentions admitted only after a fail-closed `project:read`
authorization check.
- Drop missing, foreign-company, denied, or errored projects and append
run warnings when they are rejected.
- Keep the feature inert behind a default-off kill-switch until
downstream workspace resolution is wired to consume it.

**Alternatives considered**
- Reusing company membership alone was rejected because it would
over-admit projects and widen access.
- Including all mentioned projects without per-project authorization was
rejected because it would bypass the existing access model.

**Roadmap alignment**
- This is Phase 1 only: the helper is computed but not yet consumed
downstream, so the merge is inert until a later phase turns the flag on.

## What Changed

- Added `resolveRunReferencedProjects(issueId, anchorProjectId, opts)`
in `server/src/services/heartbeat.ts`.
- Enforced company scoping, deduplication, fail-closed authorization,
and warning emission for additional referenced projects.
- Added a configurable cap for the additional referenced-project set.
- Added tests covering allowed, denied, foreign-company, thrown-auth,
dedupe, and overflow cases.
- Added a default-off kill-switch for downstream consumption of the
computed set.

## Verification

- `tsc --noEmit`
- `server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` now passes 117/117
- `git log --oneline origin/master..HEAD` shows only the expected single
commit on this branch

## Risks

- The new helper is computed but not yet consumed by workspace
resolution, so behavior only changes once downstream code is wired to
it.
- The authorization path for additional referenced projects is stricter
than before, so any unexpected access gap will surface as a dropped
project plus warning.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, tool-use enabled, 128k context.

## 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>
2026-07-29 09:48:54 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip f6ab82d490 feat(interactions): add interaction withdrawal and terminal-issue expiry (#10251)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents and boards coordinate through issue-thread interactions
(request_confirmation, ask_user_questions, suggest_tasks, …) that wait
as `pending` cards until someone resolves them
> - Two lifecycle gaps existed: an interaction's creator could not take
back a card it no longer stands behind, and interactions left `pending`
on issues that reached a terminal status lingered forever as
live-looking approval requests
> - Stale pending cards mislead humans (they look actionable), distort
attention/liveness signals, and in the worst case invite acting on a
proposal whose issue is already closed or cancelled
> - This pull request adds an explicit withdraw route for pending
interactions and automatically expires pending interactions when their
issue reaches a terminal status (including a catch-up sweep for issues
closed before this change)
> - The benefit is that interaction cards now faithfully reflect
reality: only genuinely actionable requests stay pending, and creators
can retract requests that events have overtaken

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Fixes #5787
Refs #7403

Related prior PRs found while searching for duplicates (all overlap
partially; none combine both lifecycle paths or the route-level
authorization used here): #6709 and #7312 (creator-withdraw attempts),
#8169 (terminal expiry), #8081 and #5137 (generalized cancel/expire
endpoints), #6094 (stale confirmation auto-resolve). Related merged
context: #9568 (agent cancel for ask_user_questions), #10119 (tolerating
legacy `withdrawn_by_creator` result outcomes — the reader side of the
outcome this PR writes).

## What Changed

- New route `POST /issues/:id/interactions/:interactionId/withdraw` that
resolves a `pending` interaction to status `withdrawn` with a structured
result (`outcome: "withdrawn"`, optional trimmed `reason`), stamps
`resolvedBy*`/`resolvedAt`, touches the issue, logs activity, and emits
resolved-interaction telemetry
- Withdrawal authorization: board users, the interaction's creator
agent, or the issue's current assignee agent (assignees additionally
pass the standard issue-mutation gate); task-watchdog runs are
explicitly rejected, and authorization-boundary plus low-trust
control-plane checks apply
- Withdrawing an already-resolved interaction returns `409`;
unknown/cross-issue/cross-company interaction ids return `404`
- New service method `expirePendingInteractionsForTerminalIssue`: when
an issue transitions to a terminal status, all of its `pending`
interactions are resolved to `expired` with `outcome: "issue_closed"`,
guarded by a `status = 'pending'` predicate so concurrent resolutions
are not overwritten
- The same expiry runs as a catch-up when interactions are listed on an
already-terminal issue, so cards stranded by issues closed before this
change also get cleaned up; expired request_confirmations are logged
with a distinguishing source
- Shared package: new `withdrawIssueThreadInteractionSchema` validator,
`WithdrawIssueThreadInteraction` type, and `withdrawn` / `issue_closed`
result-outcome support for all interaction kinds (kind-aware result
shapes for `ask_user_questions` and `request_item_verdicts`)
- UI helper `ui/src/lib/issue-thread-interactions.ts` recognizes the new
outcomes for card rendering
- Docs: bundled skill API reference updated with the withdraw endpoint
- Review follow-up: terminal expiry moved from the HTTP route hooks into
`issueService.update`'s status-transition block, so direct service
callers (tree control, recovery, pipelines, status cards) expire pending
cards too; the list-endpoint catch-up remains for issues closed before
this change
- Review follow-up: withdrawing or issue-close-expiring a
`request_confirmation` also settles its linked `tool_action_requests`
row (withdraw -> `cancelled`, issue closed -> `expired`), so a parked
tool call cannot stay approvable after its card is gone
- Review follow-up: interaction cards render dedicated copy for the new
outcomes ("Withdrawn" with the reason, "Expired when issue closed")
instead of falling through to superseded-by-comment / stale-target
variants; withdrawn plan reviews badge as "Withdrawn" rather than
"Changes requested"

## Screenshots

Card states rendered from a local ux-lab harness with mocked data ([full
gallery](https://pages.paperclip.ing/pr-10251-interaction-withdrawal-cards/)):

| Light | Dark |
| --- | --- |
| ![All card states,
light](https://pages.paperclip.ing/pr-10251-interaction-withdrawal-cards/all-light.png)
| ![All card states,
dark](https://pages.paperclip.ing/pr-10251-interaction-withdrawal-cards/all-dark.png)
|

## Verification

- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared build` — clean tsc
- `cd server && npx vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts` — 22 tests pass,
including new coverage for: creator-agent withdraw success,
non-creator/non-assignee agent 403, watchdog-run 403, double-withdraw
409, and board-user withdraw
- `cd server && npx vitest run
src/services/issue-thread-interactions.test.ts` — 4 tests pass,
including terminal-issue expiry writing `issue_closed` results and
leaving already-resolved interactions untouched
- `cd ui && pnpm typecheck` — clean
- `cd server && npx vitest run src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` —
includes a new embedded-Postgres test proving a direct
`issueService.update` terminal transition expires pending interactions
and writes the activity-log entry
- `cd ui && npx vitest run
src/components/IssueThreadInteractionCard.test.tsx` — 32 tests,
including new coverage for withdrawn / issue-closed confirmation and
question cards
- `cd server && npx tsc --noEmit` — matches the pre-existing repo error
baseline exactly (no new errors)
- Manual: `POST /issues/:id/interactions/:interactionId/withdraw` with
`{"reason":"superseded"}` as the creator agent resolves the card to
`withdrawn`; closing an issue with a pending confirmation flips it to
`expired` with `outcome: "issue_closed"`

## Risks

- Interactions on terminal issues now auto-expire (including
retroactively via the list-time catch-up), so consumers that expected to
resolve a pending interaction on a closed issue will get `409`; this is
the intended semantics and matches how the attention feed already wants
to treat dead cards
- New result outcomes (`withdrawn`, `issue_closed`) are written to
stored results; readers were already made tolerant of these outcome
strings in #10119, so mixed-version reads are safe
- No schema/migration changes; per-row conditional updates (`status =
'pending'`) avoid clobbering concurrent resolutions
- Withdrawal is a new mutation surface, but it is strictly narrower than
existing resolve paths (board, creator, or assignee only; watchdog runs
blocked)

## Model Used

Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`, Anthropic Mythos-class tier) with
extended thinking and agentic tool use (Claude Code harness); commit
authored in a Paperclip-managed engineering 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>
2026-07-27 19:04:46 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 59eee4829c fix(inbox): stop archived items from resurfacing (#9931)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the control plane operators use to coordinate AI-agent
companies and review work needing attention.
> - The Inbox is the operator-facing surface that aggregates tasks
requiring attention across server state and shared client polling.
> - Archiving a task optimistically removed it, but ordinary background
activity and stale polling responses could make it reappear seconds
later.
> - The server therefore needs to distinguish genuine user-attention
events from routine agent/system activity.
> - The client also needs a bounded local archive guard across every
Inbox query path while the server mutation and in-flight polls settle.
> - This pull request fixes both resurrection paths and adds
race-focused regression coverage.
> - The benefit is stable archive behavior without hiding a genuine
archive failure after reconciliation or reload.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

### Pre-submission checklist

- [x] Searched existing open and closed issues and pull requests; no
duplicate implementation was found.
- [x] Reproduced on `master` before this branch.
- [x] Confirmed this is a Paperclip core bug, not adapter or provider
behavior.

### What happened?

Archiving an Inbox task hid it optimistically, then background refresh
activity could insert it back into the list seconds later.

### Expected behavior

A successfully archived task remains hidden during normal polling. A
genuine failed archive may become visible again after reconciliation or
reload.

### Steps to reproduce

1. Open Inbox with a visible task.
2. Archive the task.
3. Wait for shared polling or routine agent activity to refresh task
data.
4. Observe the archived task reappear without a hard page refresh.

### Paperclip version or commit

`master` before this branch.

### Deployment mode

Built from source using the local development application.

### Installation method

Built from source (`pnpm`).

### Agent adapter(s) involved

Not adapter-specific; this is a core Inbox bug.

### Database mode

Not database-mode-specific.

### Access context

Board (human operator).

### Additional context

The failure had independent server and client causes: routine activity
could resurface archived rows server-side, while stale shared-poll
responses could bypass optimistic client removal.

## What Changed

- Restrict server-side Inbox resurfacing to explicit user-attention
events rather than any issue activity write.
- Add a bounded client-side archive guard with confirmation, failure
restoration, and cache reconciliation behavior.
- Apply the guard to Inbox rendering, badge counts, optimistic cache
updates, and shared-poll result application.
- Classify the generic compact Inbox query so stale shared-poll data
cannot bypass the guard.
- Add server visibility-matrix tests and UI race-condition regression
tests.

## Verification

- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/hooks/useSharedPolling.test.ts src/lib/inboxArchiveCache.test.ts
src/pages/Inbox.test.tsx` — 25 passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` — 107 passed.
- Branch rebased cleanly onto current `origin/master` before push.

## Risks

- Low-to-moderate behavioral risk: resurfacing is intentionally
narrower, so the server tests cover human comments, mentions,
interactions, and status transitions that must still regain attention.
- The client guard is bounded and cleared on mutation failure, limiting
the risk of hiding a task whose archive did not persist.
- No schema, migration, public API, workflow, dependency-lock, or
visual-token changes.

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

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude via Claude Code (`claude_local`; prior
implementation/review run, exact underlying model ID and context window
were not retained in the handoff metadata), with repository tool use and
test execution.
- OpenAI `gpt-5.5` via Codex CLI for final review repair and PR
preparation, with reasoning, repository editing, GitHub tooling, and
code execution.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and
linked/described the result 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 task identifier
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation where needed; no
documentation change is required for this bug fix
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [x] All Paperclip-authored commits include the required co-author
trailer

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-07-21 08:13:14 -05:00
a59aa128a3 fix(api): sanitize createdByRunId on comment insert to prevent 500s (#9489)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The issue-comments API (`POST /api/issues/:id/comments`) attributes
each comment to the run that created it via `created_by_run_id`, a
foreign key into `heartbeat_runs`
> - In multi-agent local control-plane usage, board/session clients
sometimes forward an `X-Paperclip-Run-Id` that is not a real run row — a
non-UUID client request id, a synthetic string, or a since-deleted run
> - That value was written straight to the FK column, so the insert died
with a Postgres FK violation and the endpoint returned HTTP 500,
breaking agent coordination
> - This PR resolves the run id defensively before insert: reject
non-UUID shapes, verify the row exists for the company, and null out
anything unresolvable while logging a warning
> - The benefit is that a bad run-id header degrades gracefully to an
unattributed comment (201) instead of a 500, so comment creation stays
up

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No public issue exists; describing inline (bug):

**What happened:** `POST /api/issues/:id/comments` returns HTTP 500 when
the request carries an `X-Paperclip-Run-Id` that does not correspond to
a row in `heartbeat_runs` (non-UUID value, synthetic client id, or
deleted run). The value is written to the `created_by_run_id` FK, and
Postgres rejects the insert with a foreign-key violation (SQLSTATE
23503).

**Expected:** the comment is created (HTTP 201); an unresolvable run id
is dropped to `null` rather than failing the request.

**Impact:** in multi-agent usage, comment creation — and the agent
coordination that depends on it — fails whenever a client forwards a run
id that isn't a live run.

## What Changed

- Add `resolveCommentCreatedByRunId(dbOrTx, companyId, runId)` — trims
and validates UUID shape, then checks existence in `heartbeat_runs`
scoped to the company; returns `null` for missing/invalid ids.
- `addComment` now resolves the run id through that helper before insert
and logs a warning when a supplied run id is dropped.
- Add embedded-Postgres regression tests for the three cases (non-UUID
header, unknown UUID, valid run id).

## Verification

- `pnpm --filter server test issues-service` — the new
`issueService.addComment createdByRunId` block passes.
- Cases covered: non-UUID header → 201, `createdByRunId: null`; UUID
absent from `heartbeat_runs` → 201, `null`; valid run id present for the
company → preserved.

## Risks

Low. Purely defensive — valid run ids are still preserved, only
unresolvable ones are nulled. Adds one indexed, tenant-scoped `SELECT`
per comment insert.

## Model Used

Claude Opus 4.8 (extended thinking), via the Paperclip PR-triage
cockpit, produced the added regression tests and this description. The
original implementation is by @digitalflanker-ux; the author's model is
unspecified.

## 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)
- [ ] 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 (related: #4795 same fix; #8065 sibling FK-guard on the
activity-log path)
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues OR (b) described the
issue in-PR following the relevant issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [ ] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Haiku 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Andrew Aymeloglu <aaymeloglu@gmail.com>
2026-07-20 17:31:42 -05:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip 38cca22b09 fix(server): avoid accepted-plan workspace branch freeze before child realization (#9233)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents tackle complex tasks via *plan* flows: a planner decomposes
work into child issues, which are accepted by the board and then
executed
> - When a plan is accepted, `createChild` in `issues.ts` inserts child
issues pre-bound to the parent's already-realized execution workspace —
carrying over its concrete branch ref
> - If the repository's base ref advances between plan acceptance and a
child's first heartbeat, the child inherits a stale branch that no
longer matches the current base
> - At first heartbeat the workspace validator detects the mismatch and
freezes the child ("branch freeze"), blocking it from starting any work
> - The real fix is to strip the concrete workspace binding when
creating accepted-plan children: they should receive only the unresolved
*intent* (mode, baseRef, branchTemplate) and realize a fresh workspace
from the current base on their own first heartbeat
> - This PR implements that strip, adds a regression test that proves a
post-base-advance child realizes cleanly, and also fixes
`parseIssueExecutionWorkspaceSettings` so `environmentId` is not
silently dropped on update round-trips (a latent bug that was masking
the original fix)

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No public GitHub issue exists for this bug. Bug description follows the
bug-report template:

**What happened:** Accepted-plan decomposition pre-binds child issues to
the parent's realized execution workspace branch (`executionWorkspaceId`
+ `executionWorkspaceBranch`). When `origin/master` advances between
plan acceptance and the child's first heartbeat, the workspace branch
interlock fires and the child is permanently frozen before it can start.

**Expected behavior:** Accepted-plan children should receive only
unresolved workspace intent (mode, git strategy fields) and realize a
fresh isolated worktree from the current base on first heartbeat. A
base-ref advance between acceptance and first-run should be transparent.

**Steps to reproduce:**
1. Accept a plan that decomposes into one or more child issues
(isolated_workspace + git_worktree mode).
2. Allow `origin/master` to advance (new merge).
3. Observe the first child heartbeat: workspace validation fails with a
branch-freeze error.

**Paperclip version:** current `master` (pre-fix).

**Deployment mode:** any (affects all modes that use isolated workspace
+ git worktree strategy).

Supersedes #9227 (earlier attempt, now closed — the fix was incomplete
because `environmentId` was silently dropped during
`parseIssueExecutionWorkspaceSettings` update round-trips, causing the
child workspace to lose its environment binding; this PR includes that
fix).

## What Changed

- **`server/src/issues.ts` — `createChild` / accepted-plan decomposition
path:** strip resolved workspace fields (`executionWorkspaceId`,
concrete branch) when creating accepted-plan children; preserve only
unresolved intent fields (`mode`, `baseRef`, `branchTemplate`,
`environmentId`, runtime/provisioning settings).
- **`server/src/execution-workspace-policy.ts` —
`parseIssueExecutionWorkspaceSettings`:** preserve `environmentId`
through update round-trips (was silently dropped, causing environment to
detach on any workspace settings update).
-
**`server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-accepted-plan-workspace-refresh.test.ts`:**
new regression test — accepted-plan child created after `origin/master`
moves realizes a fresh isolated worktree from the moved base and passes
workspace execution.
- **`server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts`:** extended
workspace-linkage and `createChild` tests covering the accepted-plan
strip and the unchanged direct-child path.

## Verification

```sh
pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-accepted-plan-workspace-refresh.test.ts
pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts -t "workspace linkage|accepted plan decomposition|createChild applies"
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck
```

All three pass on this branch.

## Risks

**Low.** The change is scoped to the accepted-plan `createChild` code
path. The direct child / follow-up issue creation path (normal non-plan
decomposition) is unchanged and covered by existing tests. The
`parseIssueExecutionWorkspaceSettings` fix is additive — it now
preserves a field that was previously silently dropped, so no consumer
loses data.

## Model Used

Claude Sonnet 4.6 (`claude-sonnet-4-6`), Anthropic, 200K context window,
extended tool use + code generation.

## 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 (supersedes #9227)
- [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>
2026-07-08 11:07:36 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip 88bf71b84e Reject projectless isolated git worktree tasks (#9231)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is an open-source platform for orchestrating AI agents;
agents run inside execution workspaces that range from a shared
container to full git worktrees cloned from a project repository.
> - Isolated git-worktree workspaces require a project to determine
which repository to clone — without a project the worktree base path
cannot be computed.
> - A task pinned to `isolated_workspace` + `git_worktree` with no
project was previously accepted at creation time but failed late at
dispatch with the opaque `workspace_validation_failed` /
`git_worktree_base_agent_home` error — only after the heartbeat
attempted to provision the workspace.
> - Fail-closed validation should happen in two places: (1) explicit
create/update pins that contradict the requirement are rejected at the
HTTP layer with a structured 422; (2) rows that reach the heartbeat
dispatcher with this invalid combination (e.g. through inheritance or a
retroactively-removed project) are blocked before any heartbeat run or
adapter spawn.
> - This PR adds the shared detection policy, the create/update guard in
the issues service, and the heartbeat pre-dispatch guard, together with
focused unit tests for all three layers.
> - The benefit is deterministic early failure with a clear remediation
message instead of a late, cryptic runtime error.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No upstream public GitHub issue — describing the problem inline
(bug-report format).

**What happened?**
Creating an issue with `executionWorkspaceSettings: { mode:
"isolated_workspace", type: "git_worktree" }` and no `projectId` was
accepted without error. The issue then became blocked at dispatch time
with the opaque message `git_worktree_base_agent_home` /
`workspace_validation_failed` — surfaced only after the heartbeat
attempted to provision the workspace.

**Expected behavior**
The platform should reject the invalid combination at create/update time
with a structured 422 that includes a clear remediation message, before
any heartbeat resource is consumed.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Call `POST /api/issues` (or `PATCH /api/issues/:id`) with
`executionWorkspaceSettings: { mode: "isolated_workspace", type:
"git_worktree" }` and omit `projectId` (or set it to `null`).
2. Observe: request succeeds (200/201).
3. Assign the issue to an agent and watch it enter `blocked` with a
cryptic `workspace_validation_failed` error at dispatch.

**Related prior fix** — Refs #4844 (`fix(validator): reject static cwd
combined with git_worktree strategy`) — same validation area, different
dimension (static cwd vs. missing project).

**Paperclip version / commit**
Latest `master` (pre-this-PR).

**Deployment mode**
Standard (app-global server).

## What Changed

- **`execution-workspace-policy.ts`** — new shared
`detectWorkspaceWorktreeRequiresProject` function returning a stable
`workspace_worktree_requires_project` policy violation when an isolated
git-worktree task has no project, project workspace, or reusable
execution workspace; exports canonical remediation text used by both the
HTTP guard and the heartbeat guard.
- **`issues.ts`** — create and update paths check the new policy before
persisting; explicit pins to `isolated_workspace` / `operator_branch` +
`git_worktree` with no project are rejected with a 422 including the
policy code and remediation text.
- **`heartbeat.ts`** — pre-dispatch preflight checks the same policy for
rows that reach the heartbeat with the invalid combination (e.g. through
inheritance); such rows are marked `blocked` with a skipped wakeup
request, durable issue comment, and activity log before any heartbeat
run or adapter spawn.
- **`execution-workspace-policy.test.ts`** — focused policy-layer unit
tests for detection logic and remediation text.
- **`issues-service.test.ts`** — create/update 422 guard tests for the
new policy.
- **`heartbeat-workspace-branch-containment.test.ts`** — pre-dispatch
blocking test for inherited/ambiguous invalid rows; also fixes a cleanup
race in the existing test suite.

## Verification

```sh
pnpm exec vitest run \
  server/src/__tests__/execution-workspace-policy.test.ts \
  server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts \
  server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-branch-containment.test.ts

pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck

# Targeted regression
pnpm exec vitest run \
  server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-branch-containment.test.ts \
  -t "blocks projectless isolated git-worktree issues before dispatch"
```

All three test files and typecheck passed locally before this PR was
opened.

## Risks

**Low risk.** The policy detection function is pure with no side
effects. The create/update guard only triggers on explicit
`isolated_workspace` or `operator_branch` + `git_worktree` pins combined
with a missing project — it does not fire on inherited settings (handled
by the heartbeat preflight), so there is no false-positive rejection
risk for valid tasks. The heartbeat guard fires before any resource is
provisioned; the only behavioral change for already-invalid rows is that
they receive a clear `blocked` status and durable comment instead of a
late cryptic error.

## Model Used

Claude Sonnet 4.6 (`claude-sonnet-4-6`), 200k context window, tool use
enabled (agentic coding). Used to implement all server-side changes and
tests in this PR.

## 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
- [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-07-08 10:31:37 -07:00
ad961227f5 feat(secrets): add user-specific runtime secrets (#8825)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agent runs often need provider credentials, API tokens, and other
environment-bound secrets.
> - Company-level secrets work for shared credentials, but they do not
model values that should differ by human operator.
> - Without a user-scoped model, a run can dispatch without knowing
whether the responsible human has supplied the needed value.
> - Paperclip also needs run attribution to make those user-scoped
runtime checks deterministic and auditable.
> - This pull request adds user-specific secret definitions, per-user
values, environment bindings, responsible-user attribution, and runtime
resolution gates.
> - The benefit is that teams can define the secret once, let each user
provide their own value, and block runs before dispatch when required
user secrets or active definitions are unavailable.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #224
Refs #6057

This PR implements user-specific secret support as a core
secret-management capability rather than a one-off adapter setting. It
is related to existing public work on company secrets UI and runtime
secret refs, but is distinct because the value is owned by the
responsible user and resolved at run dispatch time.

Related PR search before opening found existing secrets work such as
#1550, #8256, #8614, #8634, and #8647; none of those add the full
user-secret definition/value/runtime gate covered here.

## What Changed

- Added user-secret definitions and per-user "My secrets" values,
keeping stored values out of access metadata.
- Added `user_secret_ref` environment bindings and UI affordances to
pick them alongside existing secret refs.
- Added responsible-user runtime resolution so user-secret refs resolve
against the human responsible for the run.
- Added pre-dispatch missing-secret gates so runs fail before adapter
dispatch when required user values are absent or definitions are
inactive.
- Added low-trust allowlist hardening for user-secret runtime access.
- Added issue, routine, run, and agent API key responsible-user
attribution and fail-closed dispatch behavior when attribution cannot be
resolved.
- Added denial-copy mapping so responsible-user authorization failures
surface as actionable run outcomes instead of opaque setup failures.
- Added OpenAPI documentation for the user-secret routes.
- Rebases cleanly on current `master`; migrations were renumbered
incrementally as `0128_user_specific_secrets`,
`0129_agent_api_key_responsible_user`, and
`0130_run_responsible_user_invariant` after upstream `0126`/`0127`
migrations.
- Removed previously committed local design screenshots so the PR
contains code/docs/tests only.

## Verification

- PASS: PR head `2527febd106bcf3ca264ca0da7fca491084192d6` is based on
`paperclipai/paperclip:master`.
- PASS: `git diff --check`
- PASS: `git diff --name-only public/master...HEAD | rg
'^(pnpm-lock\\.yaml|\\.github/workflows/|screenshots/)' || true`
produced no files.
- PASS: migration journal audit confirmed unique indexes through `130`
with tail entries `0126_issue_comment_derived_attribution`,
`0127_environment_custom_images_instance_scoped`,
`0128_user_specific_secrets`, `0129_agent_api_key_responsible_user`, and
`0130_run_responsible_user_invariant`.
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-responsible-user-invariant.test.ts`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-active-run-output-watchdog.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-stale-queue-invalidation.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-finalize-branch.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-monitor-scheduler.test.ts`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-accepted-plan-workspace-refresh.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-plugin-environment.test.ts`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/low-trust-red-team-routes.test.ts`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` (55 tests)
- PASS: `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/secrets-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` (89 tests after final
Greptile cleanup fixes)
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-issue-liveness-escalation.test.ts` (17 tests
after the final rebase CI fix)
- PASS: focused server Vitest batches covering heartbeat recovery,
project env, plugin env, routines, low-trust, pipelines, monitors,
watchdog, and stale queue paths.
- PASS: GitHub checks are green on
`2527febd106bcf3ca264ca0da7fca491084192d6`, including Typecheck +
Release Registry, Build, General tests, serialized server suites, e2e,
Canary Dry Run, verify, security checks, and Greptile Review.
- PASS: Greptile Review completed successfully on
`2527febd106bcf3ca264ca0da7fca491084192d6` with Confidence Score 5/5,
and GraphQL review-thread audit returned zero unresolved non-outdated
threads.

## Risks

- Runtime behavior now depends on a run having a correct responsible
user; missing or incorrect responsibility assignment can block runs
before adapter dispatch.
- `user_secret_ref` bindings intentionally expose metadata without
values, but UI/API callers may need to handle the new binding kind
explicitly.
- External secret providers and IAM policies are not automatically
provisioned by this PR; operators still need to configure provider-side
access for non-local vaults.
- The PR is broad across db/shared/server/UI/runtime paths, so release
validation should include both API and UI secret workflows before merge.
- The migration renumbering is intentionally incremental after upstream
migrations; the branch migrations use guarded
column/table/index/constraint creation so users who tested the older
draft numbering should not hit duplicate DDL for the existing objects.

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

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent (`gpt-5`), Codex local adapter
with shell/tool use and code execution. Context window and internal
reasoning mode are not exposed by the runtime.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-05 05:58:20 -05:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip 2c4c110e90 Fix issue create response relation summaries (#8901)
Return blockedBy and blocks relation summaries from issue create paths after blocker relations are synced. Refresh child relation summaries after blockParentUntilDone adds a parent blocker relation.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-07-02 15:49:18 -07:00
scotttongandClaude Opus 4.8 fb2b760915 fix(issues): attribute agent-authored comments instead of rendering them as "Board" (#8833)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Task/issue threads render each comment as a chat bubble; the author
determines whether it shows as a left-aligned agent bubble (name + icon)
or a right-aligned "Board" bubble
> - Comments posted by an agent from a local execution environment are
written with a non-human author id (`local-board`/system), so they were
mis-rendered as blue "Board" bubbles instead of being attributed to the
authoring agent
> - This misattribution is confusing (it looks like the human board said
something an agent actually said) and it can drive false
wake/reconciliation behavior on the affected threads
> - This pull request adds server-side attribution derivation (lossless
run-id join first, then an explicit run-log post marker), persists the
derived agent so the read path stops re-scanning run logs, and stops the
client from labeling agent-derived comments "Board"
> - The benefit is agent comments render as the correct agent, genuine
human board comments are never reattributed, and reads get cheaper after
a one-time persistence

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

<!-- No public GitHub issue — describing the problem in-PR (bug report
shape). -->

**What happened?**

In a task/issue comment thread, comments authored by an agent from a
local execution environment are stored with a non-human author id
(`local-board`/system). The UI renders these as right-aligned blue
"Board" bubbles, implying a human board member authored them. The
mislabeling is also a wake/reconciliation hazard: an agent comment that
reads as "Board" can look like human board input.

**Expected behavior**

Such comments should render as the authoring agent (left-aligned bubble
with agent name + icon). Genuine human/board comments must continue to
render as "Board" and must never be reattributed to an agent.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Have an agent post a comment on an issue from a local execution
environment (author id `local-board`).
2. Open the issue comment thread in the UI.
3. Observe the agent's comment rendered as a right-aligned blue "Board"
bubble instead of the authoring agent.

**Root cause**

The read path did not resolve the authoring agent for these comments,
and the client fell back to a "Board" label for the `local-board`
author.

## What Changed

- **Server derivation (`server/src/services/issues.ts`):**
- Resolve the authoring agent from the comment's run id first
(`createdByRunId`/`derivedCreatedByRunId` → `heartbeatRuns.agentId`) —
lossless when present.
- Second tier `run_log_comment_post`: read the run log lazily (only for
still-unresolved comments) to match the explicit `comment id:` post
marker.
- **Guard:** never reattribute a comment whose author maps to a genuine
user profile. Only the non-human sentinel (`local-board`, which is
itself a `user` row) and authors absent from the `user` table are
eligible.
- Pure timing-overlap tiers are intentionally **not** used (Option A) —
an agent comment and a human board comment posted during the same run
are indistinguishable rows, so any timing guess risks mislabeling a real
human comment.
- **Persistence
(`packages/db/src/migrations/0126_issue_comment_derived_attribution.sql`,
`packages/db/src/schema/issue_comments.ts`):** add stored `derived_*`
attribution columns and write the resolved agent back with a single bulk
`UPDATE ... FROM (VALUES ...)`, so reads stop recomputing from run logs.
Migration is additive (new nullable columns) with a batched, idempotent
backfill of the lossless run-id tier over historical rows.
- **Types (`packages/shared/src/types/issue.ts`):** expose the persisted
attribution fields and the `IssueCommentDerivedAuthorSource` union.
- **Client (`ui/src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts`):** the message
builder already prefers a resolved agent id (`authorAgentId ??
runAgentId ?? derivedAuthorAgentId`), so once the server persists the
derived agent the bubble renders as the agent automatically — no client
code change needed. Adds a regression guard confirming a genuine board
comment with no derived agent is still rendered as "Board".
- **Tests:** derivation + message-building tests, including assertions
that genuine board/user comments are **not** reattributed.

## Verification

- `cd server && npx vitest run issues-service` — 94 tests pass: run-id
resolution, no-attribution on timing overlap alone (Option A), multi-run
ambiguity, same-agent multi-run, and the genuine-user guard. Exercises
the real persistence path (bulk UPDATE) against the test DB.
- `cd ui && npx vitest run issue-chat-messages` — 27 tests pass; client
no longer labels agent-derived comments "Board", and a genuine board
comment with no derived agent is not re-labeled.
- `cd server && npm run typecheck` — passes (exit 0).
- Manual: on a thread containing old agent-authored comments, the blue
"Board" bubbles render as the authoring agent; a genuine board comment
on the same thread still renders as "Board".

## Risks

- **Mis-reattributing a genuine board comment made during an agent run**
→ mitigated by the human-profile guard (only `local-board`/system
authors are eligible) and by dropping pure timing tiers (Option A): only
the lossless run-id join and the explicit run-log post marker attribute
history.
- **Backfill volume / run-log reads** → the migration backfill is
batched (5000 rows/loop) and results are persisted so reads stop
recomputing; the read-path persistence is a single bulk UPDATE rather
than per-comment round-trips. Migration adds only nullable columns (no
destructive change).
- The persistence/backfill has **not** been run against any production
database as part of opening this PR.

## Model Used

Claude Opus 4.8 (`claude-opus-4-8`), extended thinking, via Claude Code
with tool use.

## 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 — related open
PRs (#6006 narrow attribution run scan, #4729 attribution roll-up, #7014
reaped-run attribution) address different attribution paths; none fix
the `local-board` "Board" bubble rendering this PR targets. Supersedes
#8832 (same change; branch renamed to drop an internal ticket id per
CONTRIBUTING → Branch Naming)
- [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 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: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-01 17:45:30 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 746e287e33 feat(control-plane): add annotation and workspace controls (#8229)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI-agent
companies.
> - The control plane coordinates issues, workspaces, documents,
routines, and board review flows across company-scoped data.
> - The local source branch contained related schema, service, and UI
changes for workspace issue scoping and document/routine annotations.
> - These changes need to move together because db schema, shared types,
server services, and UI consumers form one contract.
> - This pull request extracts the migration-bearing control-plane work
from the source branch onto `origin/master`.
> - The benefit is a standalone branch with deterministic migration
order and focused review for the highest-risk part of the split.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No GitHub issue exists for this branch split. Internal source task:
[PAP-11234](/PAP/issues/PAP-11234).

Problem/motivation:
- Workspace operations need explicit issue scoping so readiness and
blocker handling can be derived correctly.
- Document annotations need reliable live updates, save failure
surfacing, normalized activity keys, and better comment panel behavior.
- Routine descriptions need the same annotation contract as issue
documents so operators can discuss and edit routine text without
special-case infrastructure.

Proposed solution:
- Add the workspace-operation `issueId` migration and readiness scoping.
- Add routine document/annotation schema, shared types, services,
routes, and UI editing support.
- Keep the related migrations in one PR so the renumbered `0106` and
`0107` migrations land in a deterministic order after current `master`.

Alternatives considered:
- Split migrations into separate PRs, rejected because that would create
migration-numbering conflicts and make each branch less standalone.
- Merge this with UI polish, rejected because this branch needs deeper
server/db review.

Roadmap alignment:
- Checked `ROADMAP.md`; the roadmap mentions future recurring routine
capabilities generally, but no duplicate implementation PR for these
annotation/workspace changes was found.

## What Changed

- Added `0106_workspace_operations_issue_id.sql` and
`0107_routine_description_annotations.sql`, plus schema exports.
- Scoped workspace readiness to blocker issues and attached workspace
operation issue ids.
- Scoped issue-thread interaction accept finalization to the source run.
- Added routine document annotation contracts across
db/shared/server/UI.
- Improved document annotation live updates, activity-key normalization,
save failure surfacing, and comment panel behavior.
- Added issue workspace property controls and compact
blocked-by/quick-control UI updates.
- Added focused server and UI regression tests for the new contracts.

## Verification

- `CI=true NODE_ENV=development pnpm install --frozen-lockfile
--prefer-offline`
- `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest
server/src/__tests__/document-annotation-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interactions-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routine-document-annotation-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routines-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueDocumentAnnotations.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx
ui/src/components/WorkspaceRuntimeControls.test.tsx
ui/src/context/LiveUpdatesProvider.test.ts --run` — 10 files, 273 tests
passed.
- `NODE_ENV=test pnpm -r --filter @paperclipai/db --filter
@paperclipai/shared --filter @paperclipai/server --filter
@paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed, including db migration numbering
check.

## Risks

- Migration-bearing PR; merge this branch before any later PR that adds
migrations with higher numbers.
- Cross-layer contract risk across db/shared/server/ui, mitigated with
targeted tests and affected-package typecheck.
- Review should pay special attention to company scoping in new
routine/document annotation paths.

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

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-5 Codex via Paperclip `codex_local` / CodexCoder, GPT-5-class
coding model with tool use and shell execution. Exact runtime snapshot
and context-window setting were not exposed by the Paperclip run
context.

## 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 from the run context)
- [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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots (N/A per source task: do not add screenshots/images unless
specifically part of the work)
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (N/A;
no public docs changed)
- [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>
2026-06-23 12:00:03 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip e68188c438 fix: upstream deployed document-comment, routine-annotation, workspace & board-polling fixes (#8536)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - This change touches several already-shipped subsystems —
document-comment annotations, the selected-agent Conference Room chat
surface, routine description annotations, workspace-operation tracking,
and the board polling/inbox UI
> - A batch of incremental fixes and two small backend additions had
accumulated on a local mainline and were deployed to a live instance,
but never landed upstream — so each `origin/master` sync kept
re-diverging
> - Leaving them un-upstreamed means the same delta has to be re-merged
on every sync and risks being lost or silently reverted
> - This pull request rebases that delta cleanly on top of current
`origin/master` (preserving recent upstream work such as reusable
sandbox leases and the relation-list collapse controls) and brings it up
for review
> - The benefit is that mainline and the deployed instance converge, and
these fixes/additions get normal review + CI + Greptile coverage

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No single GitHub issue tracks this; it is a bundle of bug fixes and two
small feature additions. Following the issue-template fields:

**Bug fixes (what was wrong → what this does):**
- Document comments rendered out of document order, didn't live-update
across clients, swallowed save failures, and lost the markdown text
selection on re-render. Now: doc-order sort, live updates, surfaced
save-failure state, stable selection across re-renders.
- The board polling hot path returned oversized payloads on every poll.
Now: an opt-in `summary` projection trims the heartbeat-run list
payload.
- Assorted UI fixes: sidebar nav peek/streamlining edge cases, markdown
file-viewer re-mount/line-height issues on iOS Safari, inbox badge/skill
deep-link tab selection, and `⌘.` work-mode cycling on iOS.

**Feature additions:**
- `workspace_operations.issue_id` — associate a workspace operation with
the issue that triggered it (new migration `0106`, schema, service,
shared type).
- Routine **description annotations** — comment threads on a routine's
description document, mirroring issue document annotations (new
migration `0107`, `routine_documents` schema, routes/service,
editable-sections UI).
- Selected-agent **Conference Room chat** surface wiring and live
issue-thread updates.

**Related PR:** #8229 (`feat(control-plane): add annotation and
workspace controls`, draft) covers overlapping
annotation/workspace-control territory — flagging it so a reviewer can
reconcile the two rather than double-merging.

## What Changed

- `feat(workspace)`: `workspace_operations.issue_id` migration +
schema/service/type; issue workspace property controls reconciled with
upstream's evolved "Service" row.
- `feat(routines)`: routine description annotations —
`routine_documents` schema, migration `0107`, routes/service,
`editable-sections` UI.
- `fix(document-comments)`: doc-order sort, live updates, save-failure
surfacing, stable markdown selection (+ storybook story, rerender test).
- `feat(chat)`: selected-agent Conference Room chat surface and live
issue-thread updates (`LiveUpdatesProvider`, `issue-chat-messages`,
interactions service).
- `perf(board)`: opt-in `summary` projection for the board
polling/heartbeat-run list payload, plus assorted sidebar / file-viewer
/ inbox / IssueProperties UI fixes.

Organized into 5 logical commits. Migrations are numbered incrementally
after upstream's latest (`0105`) — `0106` then `0107`, no journal
collision.

## Verification

- Built by 3-way merging the deployed delta onto current
`origin/master`; the only merge conflict (`IssueProperties.test.tsx`,
two adjacent test blocks) was resolved in favor of upstream's evolved
"green service link above the workspace row" layout, which matches the
merged component's rendered output.
- Confirmed recent upstream work is preserved post-merge: reusable
sandbox lease teardown (`#8513`), the IssueProperties relation-list
collapse controls, and the sidebar streamlined-nav default.
- Confirmed the net diff vs `origin/master` is exactly the intended
feature delta (65 files) and that overlapping server files (`issues.ts`,
`agents.ts`, `heartbeat.ts`) only add feature code without disturbing
upstream logic.
- This delta is already running on a live deployed instance.
- Full typecheck/test suite + Greptile to run in CI (see checklist).

## Risks

- Two new migrations (`0106`, `0107`). Both are additive (new table /
new nullable column) and ordered after upstream's `0105`; no data
backfill, low risk. If another migration-bearing PR merges first,
renumber before merge.
- Largest blast radius is in the merged overlapping UI/service files;
covered by the existing test suites for those files plus CI.
- Overlaps thematically with draft PR #8229 — reviewers should reconcile
rather than merge both blindly.

## Model Used

Claude Opus 4.8 (`claude-opus-4-8`), extended thinking, with tool use
(git, shell). Agentic coding workflow.

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-06-23 09:00:14 -05:00
Devin Foley 547463d3a2 refactor(environments): make execution environments instance-scoped (#8375)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the control plane for AI-agent companies, so execution
environment selection has to stay inspectable and predictable across
companies, agents, and runs.
> - The environment subsystem decides where an agent heartbeat actually
runs and how remote sandbox state is realized and restored.
> - That subsystem previously mixed company-scoped environment catalogs
with issue-level environment stamping, so a reassigned issue could keep
executing in the previous assignee's sandbox.
> - That behavior breaks the control-plane contract: changing the
assignee should change the executing agent/environment path unless there
is an explicit current override.
> - Fixing it cleanly required more than a narrow patch; the environment
model had to move to instance scope with a single inherited default and
per-agent override semantics.
> - This pull request rewires the schema, server/API surface, runtime
resolution, and UI around that model, then adds regression coverage for
cross-company inheritance and per-agent isolation.
> - The benefit is that environment choice now follows the approved
instance/agent configuration path instead of stale issue state, while
shared environments only need to be configured once per instance.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

- No directly matching public GitHub issue or PR was found while
searching for this refactor.

### What happened?

Reassigning work between agents with different execution environments
could keep running in the previous sandbox because environment choice
was stamped onto the issue and outranked the current assignee. The same
subsystem also forced environment catalogs to be duplicated per company
even though the underlying execution environments were instance-wide
resources.

### Expected behavior

Execution should resolve through the current instance and agent
configuration path, with one instance-scoped environment catalog, one
instance default, optional per-agent override, and no stale issue-level
environment authority surviving reassignment.

### Steps to reproduce

1. Configure two agents to use different execution environments.
2. Assign an issue to the first agent so the issue records execution
state in that environment.
3. Reassign the same issue to the second agent and run another
heartbeat.
4. Observe that the pre-fix runtime can still sync or execute in the
original sandbox instead of the second agent's environment.

### Paperclip version or commit

Current `master` before this PR.

### Deployment mode

Self-hosted server.

### Installation method

Built from source (`pnpm dev` / `pnpm build`).

### Agent adapter(s) involved

- Claude Code
- Not adapter-specific (core bug in environment authority / resolution)

### Database mode

External Postgres.

### Access context

Both board reassignment and agent heartbeats were involved.

## What Changed

- Moved environments and their default selection contract to instance
scope in DB/shared types, including the migration that dedupes legacy
per-company environments and seeds the instance local default.
- Reworked environment CRUD/auth flows to use instance-scoped APIs and
added route/service coverage for instance-level environment management.
- Changed runtime resolution to prefer `agent default -> instance
default -> built-in local`, removed issue-level environment stamping
from the active execution path, and isolated sandbox/plugin leases by
`(executionWorkspaceId, agentId)`.
- Added environment env-var runtime precedence so environment-provided
values act as the baseline for agent execution.
- Moved the environment UI into instance settings and updated agent
configuration surfaces to reflect inherit/override behavior.
- Added regression coverage for instance-default inheritance across
companies and for the new runtime resolution behavior.
- Fixed a rebase-only duplicate `enableTaskWatchdogs` flag regression in
instance settings types/validators/services so the branch typechecks
cleanly on current `master`.
- Updated stale server tests so CI matches the shipped instance-scoped
environment contract.

## Verification

- `git diff --check`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/environment-runtime-driver-contract.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/agent-permissions-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/environment-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/environment-instance-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/execution-workspace-policy.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-plugin-environment.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/instance-settings-routes.test.ts`

## Risks

- The migration changes environment scope and dedupes existing rows, so
installs with unusual legacy environment combinations should be reviewed
carefully during upgrade.
- Remote execution behavior now depends on instance-default inheritance
semantics instead of issue-level stamping, so any remaining code paths
that still assume issue-scoped environment authority would surface as
follow-up bugs.
- This PR includes both server/runtime behavior and UI relocation, so
reviewers should watch for authorization edge cases around instance
settings and environment management.

> I checked [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md). This work fits the existing
Cloud / Sandbox agents direction as a bug-fix/refactor to current
behavior, not a new parallel product surface.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex coding agent in this Paperclip/Codex session; GPT-5-class
tool-using model with code execution and shell access. The exact backend
model ID is not exposed to the session 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
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
2026-06-20 09:42:53 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 7069053a1f [codex] Add ask issue work mode (#8334)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Issue work mode controls how a task starts and how the conversation
composer frames the operator's intent.
> - Paperclip already supports standard agent execution and planning
mode, but there is no lightweight mode for asking a question without
immediately implying execution or plan drafting.
> - That gap makes low-commitment clarification workflows look like
normal task execution.
> - This pull request adds an explicit Ask mode and threads it through
shared contracts, server heartbeat context, and the issue composer UI.
> - The benefit is that operators can create or switch a task into a
question-oriented mode while preserving existing agent and planning
flows.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No public GitHub issue exists for this change. Inline feature request
follows the repository feature request template.

### Subsystem affected

Cross-cutting: `packages/shared`, `server/`, and `ui/`.

### Problem or motivation

Issue conversations currently distinguish standard agent work from
planning work, but question-first conversations do not have a clear
public mode in the shared contract or UI. Operators who want to ask an
agent a focused question have to use standard mode, which can imply
normal task execution, or planning mode, which asks for a plan rather
than an answer.

### Proposed solution

Add Ask as a first-class issue work mode. It should be selectable from
issue creation and issue chat, cycle alongside Standard and Planning
from the keyboard shortcut/menu, appear distinctly in composer styling,
and be included in heartbeat context so agents know to answer directly
instead of executing or drafting a plan.

### Alternatives considered

- Keep using standard mode for questions: rejected because it does not
communicate answer-only intent to the agent or the UI.
- Reuse planning mode for questions: rejected because planning mode asks
for a plan and is semantically different from asking a question.
- Add only local UI copy: rejected because the mode needs to be
represented in the shared contract and server heartbeat context to be
reliable.

### Roadmap alignment

This is a focused issue-workflow improvement. `ROADMAP.md` was checked
and no duplicate planned core work was found.

### Additional context

Related public searches performed before opening this PR:

- GitHub PR search for `"ask mode" repo:paperclipai/paperclip`
- GitHub issue search for `"ask mode" repo:paperclipai/paperclip`
- GitHub PR search for `"work mode" "ask" repo:paperclipai/paperclip`

No duplicate PR was found.

## What Changed

- Added `ask` to the shared issue work-mode contract and validation
coverage.
- Included issue work mode in heartbeat context summaries so agents can
see standard, planning, and ask state.
- Added Ask mode metadata, styling, composer tone handling, and
selection/cycling behavior in the issue chat/new issue UI.
- Updated focused tests for shared validators, heartbeat context, and
affected UI work-mode flows.

## Verification

- `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run
ui/src/components/ChatComposer.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/work-mode-meta.test.ts`
- `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run
packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-context-summary.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts
ui/src/components/ChatComposer.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/work-mode-meta.test.ts ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`

The broader targeted command passed 8 test files / 245 tests.

Visual reference for Standard/Planning/Ask composer states:
https://gist.github.com/cryppadotta/714d8590bac55500a65e7e16de5bb4b8

It emitted an expected warning from an existing server test fixture
about a missing run-log fixture while verifying derived issue comment
metadata.

## Risks

Low to moderate risk. This adds a new enum value that crosses shared,
server, and UI contracts. Existing standard and planning modes are
preserved, but any downstream code assuming only two non-terminal work
modes may need to handle `ask`.

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

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-5 Codex coding agent in Paperclip CodexCoder mode, with
shell, git, GitHub connector, and local test execution tools. Context
window and exact hosted model snapshot are not exposed in 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)
- [ ] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`,
`feat/...`) 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] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] 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>
2026-06-19 13:06:04 -05:00
3fbab2e6db fix: resolve orphan-sweep null-assignee filter regression (#8018)
> Resubmits #5925 by @digitalflanker-ux (rebased onto current `master`;
original commit authorship preserved).

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The issues list API powers orphan-sweep and board inbox views that
filter by assignee
> - `assigneeAgentId=null` is a valid query-string sentinel for
"unassigned issues"
> - A regression caused that sentinel to throw 500 instead of filtering
correctly
> - This pull request restores null-sentinel parsing in the route and
service layers
> - The benefit is reliable orphan-sweep and unassigned-issue queries
without server errors

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #5891 (paired fix — land together)

**Bug:** `GET /api/companies/:id/issues?assigneeAgentId=null` returned
HTTP 500. Expected: HTTP 200 with only unassigned issues. Malformed
UUIDs should return 4xx, not 500.

## What Changed

- Parse `assigneeAgentId=null` in the issues list route and pass a JS
`null` filter to the service
- Handle malformed assignee IDs with HTTP 422 in the route layer
- Extend `issueService.list` to treat `assigneeAgentId: null` as `IS
NULL` SQL filter
- Add route-level and service-level regression tests

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issue-list-assignee-filter-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts`
- result: 2 files passed, 79 tests passed

## Risks

Low risk — scoped to query-parameter parsing and list filtering; no
schema or API contract changes beyond fixing the regression.

## Model Used

None — human-authored original fix by @digitalflanker-ux; rebased and
test-harness adjustments by Paperclip cluster cleanup.

## 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [ ] 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

## Cross-references and status (maintainer)

- Pairs with #5891 — both fix the `assigneeAgentId=null` issues-list
regression and should land together.
- Supersedes #5925 (fork branch could not be force-pushed; this is the
operator-mergeable resubmission).

---------

Co-authored-by: openclaw <digitalflanker@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-06-12 09:20:00 -07:00
Vasu YadavandDevin Foley d7049e0cae fix(server): adopt stale checkout run ownership (#5413)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is a control plane for autonomous AI-agent companies.
> - Issue checkout ownership is part of the execution-control layer that
prevents two runs from mutating the same task at the same time.
> - The current lock model should preserve `409` conflicts for live
competing owners, but it should not strand the rightful assignee behind
a stale terminal run.
> - A same-agent follow-up run can encounter an existing `checkoutRunId`
from a failed, timed-out, succeeded, or missing heartbeat run.
> - In that case, the new run should safely adopt ownership instead of
failing with an ownership conflict.
> - This pull request makes stale checkout adoption transactional and
keeps live checkout owners protected.
> - The benefit is safer run recovery without weakening single-owner
checkout semantics.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

- Fixes #5350
- Closes #1508
- Closes #1970
- Closes #2083
- Closes #3158
- Closes #3190
- Related stale-lock PRs reviewed during dedup search: #7536, #6658,
#5660, #5442, #6223, #7048, #6824, #6799

## What Changed

- Updated issue checkout ownership recovery so the current assignee can
adopt a stale terminal or missing checkout run.
- Added row locking around stale checkout adoption to avoid races while
replacing `checkoutRunId` / `executionRunId`.
- Preserved `409` behavior when a different live checkout owner is still
active.
- Prevented terminal actor runs from reclaiming an unowned checkout lock
after the newer eager stale-checkout clear path.
- Fixed the stale checkout test fixture so same-assignee cases do not
insert duplicate agent rows.
- Added/kept focused coverage for stale checkout adoption and live-owner
conflict behavior.
- Fixes #5350.

## Verification

- Focused tests:

```sh
pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-stale-execution-lock-routes.test.ts
```

Result:

```text
2 passed, 84 tests passed
```

- Server typecheck:

```sh
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck
```

Result:

```text
passed
```

- Live curl smoke confirmed same-agent stale checkout adoption returns
`200` instead of `409`.

```text
old_run_status=succeeded
checkout_http=200
patch_http=200
```

The PATCH response showed `checkoutRunId` and `executionRunId` updated
to the new run id.

### Live curl smoke result

<img width="1498" height="570" alt="Live curl smoke showing stale
checkout adoption returned 200"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/4bf834de-e3cd-4495-ac5a-74767b439eeb"
/>

### Server request log

<img width="631" height="131" alt="Server logs showing heartbeat,
checkout, and patch requests succeeded"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/ceaaa403-110e-44e8-bac8-5d8506e79cc3"
/>

## Risks

- Low to medium risk: this touches issue execution lock ownership.
- The behavioral shift is intentionally narrow: only the current
assignee can adopt stale terminal or missing checkout ownership.
- Live checkout owners remain protected with `409`.
- No database migration or API contract change.

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

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-5.5 Codex coding agent with repository tool use, shell
execution, code review, and local 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] 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

## Cross-references and status (maintainer)

- Closes #1508
- Closes #1970
- Closes #2083
- Closes #3158
- Closes #3190
- Status: rebased onto current master; focused tests and server
typecheck pass locally; all required CI is green; Greptile is 5/5;
master drift verified.

---------

Co-authored-by: Devin Foley <devin@paperclip.ing>
2026-06-11 22:03:07 -07:00
9e81067678 fix: clear stale executionRunId on release, reassignment, and checkout (#2482)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Issues are the unit of agent assignment; each assignment queues a
heartbeat run, and the agent claims ownership via a `checkout()` that
sets `checkoutRunId` and `executionRunId` on the issue row.
> - When a queued run never starts (crash, deploy, lost heartbeat) or a
different run picks up the work, the issue is left with a stale
`executionRunId` pointing at a terminal/missing run.
> - The next checkout attempt fails with "Issue checkout conflict"
because the fast-path `UPDATE` requires `executionRunId` to be null or
equal to the requester's run id, so the row is permanently locked until
an admin clears the column by hand.
> - This pull request closes that lifecycle gap in three places —
`release()` and `update()` clear the execution lock fields alongside the
existing `checkoutRunId` clear, and `checkout()` gains a guarded
stale-`executionRunId` adoption path that mirrors the existing
`adoptStaleCheckoutRun` pattern.
> - The benefit is that assignment-triggered issues self-heal after a
lost run instead of paging an admin to unlock them, while the adoption
path keeps the caller's `expectedStatuses` guard, preserves any pending
`assigneeUserId`, and preserves the original `startedAt` for issues
already `in_progress`.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

- Closes #759
- Closes #1015
- Closes #1276
- Closes #1298
- Closes #2265
- Closes #2661
- Closes #2964
- Closes #3559
- Closes #4033
- Closes #4131

## What Changed

- `server/src/services/issues.ts` — `release()` now clears
`executionRunId`, `executionAgentNameKey`, and `executionLockedAt`
alongside `checkoutRunId`.
- `server/src/services/issues.ts` — `update()` clears the same
execution-lock fields on status change (away from `in_progress`) and on
assignee change.
- `server/src/services/issues.ts` — `checkout()` gains a stale
`executionRunId` adoption block that runs only when the row's
`executionRunId` points at a terminal/missing heartbeat run, the
caller's `expectedStatuses` still hold, and the requester is either the
existing assignee or the assignee is null. The `SET` clause preserves
`assigneeUserId` and only resets `startedAt` when the issue was not
already `in_progress` (matches `adoptStaleCheckoutRun` semantics).
- `server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` — two regression tests
covering the new adoption guards: (1) checkout refuses to promote a
`done` issue when `done` is not in `expectedStatuses`, even with a
lingering `executionRunId` pointer; (2) checkout adoption of a stale
`checkoutRunId` preserves the issue's `assigneeUserId`.

## Verification

- `vitest run src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` — 75/75 tests pass,
including the two new regression tests.
- `tsc --noEmit` clean.
- Manual repro of the original stuck-lock case: queue a run, mark the
heartbeat run terminal without releasing the issue, attempt a new
checkout — the adoption path now succeeds with the caller's
`expectedStatuses` guard intact instead of returning a checkout
conflict.

## Risks

- Low risk. The `release()` and `update()` changes are additive field
clears alongside the existing `checkoutRunId` clear and follow the same
conditions. The `checkout()` adoption block is gated by the same status
/ assignee / expected-statuses constraints as the fast-path `UPDATE` and
only fires when the prior run is verifiably terminal via
`isTerminalOrMissingHeartbeatRun()`. No migration. No public API change.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 4.7 (`claude-opus-4-7`), extended-thinking mode, tool-use
enabled (file reads, edits, shell, gh CLI). Used to address review
feedback on the original commit by Allen Lu (`alcylu`); follow-up fix
commit preserves the `expectedStatuses` guard, `assigneeUserId`, and
`startedAt` and adds regression tests.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots (N/A — server-only)
- [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

## Cross-references and status (maintainer)

- Closes #759
- Closes #1015
- Closes #1276
- Closes #1298
- Closes #2265
- Closes #2661
- Closes #2964
- Closes #3559
- Closes #4033
- Closes #4131

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Devin Foley <devin@paperclip.ing>
2026-06-11 21:58:04 -07:00
LempkeyandDevin Foley e1e2cef928 fix(issues): accept array-form ?status= filter and stop crashing on repeated keys (#4628) (#4890)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - Boards, agents, and the public REST API all read issue lists via
`GET /api/companies/:cid/issues`, with `?status=` as the most-common
filter
> - Express's default `qs` parser binds repeated keys to a `string[]` —
the conventional URL form `?status=todo&status=in_progress` is therefore
valid input
> - The service layer treated `filters.status` as a string and called
`.split(",")` unconditionally, returning HTTP 500 with `TypeError:
filters.status.split is not a function`. The same buggy pattern lived at
a second call site in the same file
> - This PR adds a small `parseStatusFilter` helper that normalizes all
four shapes the route can receive, routes both service-layer call sites
through it, and widens the `IssueFilters.status` type so the contract
stops lying about runtime reality
> - The benefit is a passive 500 disappears for any client (curl, board,
agent code) that builds `?status=` with array-style binding, and the
type system now forces every future caller to handle both shapes
correctly

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

- Refs #4628
- Closes #4084
- Related earlier attempt: #1964

## What Changed

- **`server/src/services/issues.ts`** — Added exported helper
`parseStatusFilter(input: string | readonly string[] | undefined):
string[]` that normalizes single strings, CSV
(`?status=todo,in_progress`), array (`?status=todo&status=in_progress`),
and mixed array+CSV; trims and filters empties. Widened
`IssueFilters.status` from `string` to `string | readonly string[]`.
Replaced inline `.split` call sites in `list()`, blocked-count
filtering, `count()`, and `countUnreadTouchedByUser()` with
helper-driven branching.
- **`server/src/routes/issues.ts`** — Replaced dishonest
`req.query.status` casts with `string | string[] | undefined` at both
issue-list and blocked-count entry points so the route contract matches
Express `qs` runtime behavior.
- **`server/src/__tests__/parse-status-filter.test.ts`** (new) — 10 unit
cases: undefined, empty string, single, CSV, array, mixed array+CSV,
whitespace trim, trailing/extra commas, no-mutation guarantee, hostile
non-string entry guard.
- **`server/src/__tests__/issues-list-query-parsing.test.ts`** (new) — 5
supertest cases against a minimal Express app whose handler mirrors the
route cast/forwarding pattern: single, CSV, repeated-key array, mixed
array+CSV, and no `?status` param.
- **`server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts`** — Added
embedded-Postgres service coverage for array-form status filters through
`list`, `count`, and `countUnreadTouchedByUser` on current master.

**Why service-layer, not route-layer:** the bug is the service contract.
Fixing only at the route would leave other service-layer call sites
latent, keep `IssueFilters.status` inaccurate, and let future internal
callers reintroduce the same crash. Widening the type is the forcing
function that prevents recurrence.

**Why `parseStatusFilter` is exported, not file-local:** the helper has
direct unit coverage and keeps the normalization logic colocated with
its only current call sites.

## Coordination with prior work

- Supersedes **#4084** (thanks to @adlai88 for the original
report-and-fix). This PR additionally fixes the extra current-master
service call sites, widens `IssueFilters.status` so the type contract is
honest, replaces the incorrect route casts, and ships direct regression
coverage.
- **#1964** bundles unrelated route/service changes; this PR keeps scope
tight per CONTRIBUTING.md's one-PR-one-change guidance.

## Out-of-scope finding

While verifying all query-string status parsing sites, I found a sibling
bug in `server/src/services/execution-workspaces.ts:409` reachable from
`routes/execution-workspaces.ts:48`, where repeated `?status=` keys can
still hit the same `.split(",")` assumption. I left that out of this PR
to keep the review surface small.

## Verification

```bash
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run \
  src/__tests__/parse-status-filter.test.ts \
  src/__tests__/issues-list-query-parsing.test.ts \
  src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts \
  --testNamePattern='parseStatusFilter|issue list status query parsing|accepts array-form status filters in list and count|excludes plugin operation issues from unread inbox counts'
```

Result on the rebased head: `3` files passed, `17` tests passed, `72`
skipped.

GitHub CI on PR `#4890` is green on the rebased head
`805731d3270783d0b80b33ee1dccdc6771febef6`, including `verify`,
`Typecheck + Release Registry`, `Build`, `e2e`, general tests,
serialized suites, Socket checks, Snyk, and `Greptile Review`.

Local workspace typecheck commands still encounter unrelated
current-master baseline errors under `packages/plugins/sdk` and
`server/src/services/company-skills.ts`; no failures were produced from
the `issues` files changed in this PR.

## Risks

- **Type widening blast radius:** `IssueFilters.status` widens from
`string` to `string | readonly string[]`. Any direct caller that still
assumes `.split()` on the input now gets a useful typecheck failure
instead of a latent runtime crash.
- **Behavior change:** `?status=todo,in_progress&status=done` previously
returned HTTP 500; it now returns HTTP 200 with the union of matching
statuses. Single-string and CSV behavior remain unchanged.
- **No migration. No breaking API changes. No new deps. No UI changes.**

> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. — Confirmed: this is a bug
fix, not a feature. ROADMAP.md grep showed no overlap.

## Model Used

- **Claude Opus 4.7** (Anthropic), `claude-opus-4-7`, 1M context,
extended thinking. Used for problem scoping, implementation, and test
authoring; the final rebasing, PR prep, and verification updates were
handled in the maintainer workflow.

## 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] 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

## Cross-references and status (maintainer)

- Closes #4084

---------

Co-authored-by: Devin Foley <devin@paperclip.ing>
2026-06-11 21:52:43 -07:00
f3db7b88ea Clear stale checkoutRunId on run finalization and add backstop sweeper (#6008)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The issue subsystem holds per-row lock columns (`checkoutRunId`,
`executionRunId`, `executionAgentNameKey`, `executionLockedAt`) that
gate checkout, ownership, and release
> - When a heartbeat run terminates, `releaseIssueExecutionAndPromote`
clears the execution-lock columns but stale checkout locks could remain
attached to dead runs in edge paths
> - The original fix closed the finalization, checkout, release, and
sweeper paths, but PR CI exposed one more process-loss retry path where
a queued retry advanced `executionRunId` while leaving `checkoutRunId`
pinned to the failed run
> - This pull request closes the asymmetry: terminal-run cleanup and
process-loss retry recovery release dead checkout locks while preserving
live execution ownership
> - The benefit is permanent, automatic self-heal of stale lock columns
and fewer false checkout 409s requiring board intervention
> - Related upstream issue: #6007

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #6007.

Duplicate/related PR search performed on 2026-06-10 with query
`checkoutRunId process loss retry stale checkout lock
repo:paperclipai/paperclip`.

Related PRs found and reviewed for overlap:

- #7727 `fix(heartbeat): atomically advance checkoutRunId on
process-loss retry`
- #7707 `test: cover same-agent stale checkout adoption`
- #3068 `fix: clear checkoutRunId when releasing issue execution lock`

## What Changed

- `server/src/services/heartbeat.ts` `releaseIssueExecutionAndPromote`:
extend the per-issue update to also null `checkoutRunId` when it matches
the terminating run id. WHERE clause scoped to `executionRunId = run.id
OR checkoutRunId = run.id` for idempotence.
- `server/src/services/heartbeat.ts` process-loss retry: when queuing
the retry run, move `executionRunId` to the retry and clear the failed
run's `checkoutRunId` so the dead run no longer owns checkout.
- `server/src/services/issues.ts`: add `clearCheckoutRunIfTerminal`
helper, symmetric to `clearExecutionRunIfTerminal`. No assignee/status
precondition. Wired into `checkout`, `assertCheckoutOwner`, and
`release`. Exported on the issue service.
- `server/src/services/recovery/service.ts`: add `sweepStaleIssueLocks`.
Scans `issues` where `checkoutRunId IS NOT NULL OR executionRunId IS NOT
NULL`, joins each referenced run, and clears all lock columns on issues
whose referenced runs are all terminal or missing. Emits one
`issue.stale_lock_cleared` activity log row per cleared issue.
- `server/src/services/heartbeat.ts`: re-export the sweeper on the
heartbeat facade.
- `server/src/index.ts`: invoke `sweepStaleIssueLocks` in both the
startup recovery sequence and the periodic heartbeat timer chain.
- Tests: route-level coverage of the new self-heal path on the next
checkout attempt, service-level sweeper coverage, and heartbeat recovery
assertions that terminal process-loss cleanup releases `checkoutRunId`.

## Verification

```bash
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run \
  src/__tests__/recovery-stale-issue-lock-sweep.test.ts \
  src/__tests__/issue-stale-execution-lock-routes.test.ts
NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts -t "queues exactly one retry when the recorded local pid is dead|does not block paused-tree work when immediate continuation recovery is suppressed by the hold"
NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
```

All listed local checks pass. The new and updated tests cover:

- Run termination clears `checkoutRunId` when it points at the
terminating run.
- Process-loss retry clears the failed run's `checkoutRunId` while
assigning `executionRunId` to the queued retry.
- A different agent calling `POST /api/issues/:id/checkout` on an issue
whose prior owner died self-heals via `clearCheckoutRunIfTerminal` and
succeeds.
- Sweeper clears stale lock columns for issues whose run row is
terminal.
- Sweeper leaves issues alone while the referenced run is still running.
- Sweeper leaves issues alone when `executionRunId` is still running
even if `checkoutRunId` is terminal.
- Sweeper is idempotent; second pass clears nothing.

Manual reproduction of the original bug shape:

1. Create an issue assigned to agent A, set `status='in_progress'`,
`checkoutRunId=R1`, `executionRunId=null`, where `heartbeat_runs.status
= 'failed'` for `R1`.
2. Reassign to agent B and move to `status='todo'`.
3. Before this PR: agent B `POST /checkout` returns `409 Issue checkout
conflict` indefinitely. After this PR: succeeds, lock columns rewritten
to agent B's current run id.

## Risks

- Low. All clears are scoped by run id, so they only fire when the lock
column unambiguously points at the terminating or terminal run. No
schema change. No migration. No API surface change.
- Behavioral shift: an issue that previously stayed `in_progress` with a
dead `checkoutRunId` after run termination now self-heals. Downstream
code that reads stale `checkoutRunId` as a proxy for recent run history
should already be reading `executionRunId` or the `heartbeat_runs`
table.
- Sweeper cost: one indexed scan per recovery tick over rows where
`checkoutRunId IS NOT NULL OR executionRunId IS NOT NULL` plus a single
batched `heartbeatRuns` lookup per candidate. Negligible at expected
cardinality; further bounded by the existing recovery cadence.

> 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`.

This is a bug fix, not a feature. No roadmap overlap.

## Model Used

- Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-opus-4-7`, extended-thinking off,
tool use enabled.
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent, tool use enabled, used for the
follow-up process-loss retry fix and PR body update.

## 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Dotta <bippadotta@protonmail.com>
2026-06-10 09:33:21 -05:00
67b22d872f [codex] Clarify interrupt handoffs and scoped wake semantics (#7855)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The issue thread is the operator surface where comments, assignee
changes, pauses, resumes, and wakeups turn human intent into agent
execution.
> - Interrupting a live run and handing work to another assignee needs
clear semantics so the product does not accidentally keep work alive,
wake the wrong participant, or hide why an agent stopped.
> - Comment-driven wakes also need strict boundaries so closed, blocked,
and dependency-driven work only resumes when there is real actionable
input.
> - This pull request codifies the interrupt handoff contract,
implements backend scheduling behavior, and gives the UI clearer
handoff/pause language.
> - The benefit is a more inspectable and predictable task lifecycle for
both operators and agents.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Paperclip issue: `PAP-10664` / `PAP-10751`.

Problem: interrupting or reassigning live agent work could be ambiguous
in the UI and backend. Operators needed clearer feedback about whether a
handoff wakes an agent, what pause/cancel affects, and when comments
should revive execution. The backend also needed stronger tests around
comment wake boundaries, retry supersession, and structured agent
mention dispatch.

Related GitHub PR search found broad workflow-adjacent PRs #5082, #6359,
and #4083, but no exact duplicate for this head branch or
interrupt-handoff scope.

## What Changed

- Added an interrupt handoff semantics document covering destination
behavior, wake expectations, and live-run interruption states.
- Implemented backend interrupt handoff behavior and comment wake/reopen
handling in issue routes/services and heartbeat scheduling.
- Hardened structured agent mention dispatch so mentions resolve through
the intended dispatch path.
- Added UI helpers and components for handoff chips, wake rows,
interrupt banners, pause-affects summaries, and composer guidance.
- Updated the issue properties assignee picker and issue chat/composer
surfaces to make interrupt/reassign behavior clearer.
- Added backend, UI utility, component, and Storybook coverage for the
new behavior.
- Stabilized the new UI component tests with a local `flushSync`-backed
act helper matching existing repo practice in this dependency set.
- Addressed Greptile feedback by threading historical run `errorCode`
through issue-run data and operator-interrupted chat labels.
- Addressed Greptile's cancel ordering concern by terminating/deleting
in-memory heartbeat processes before cancellation status persistence,
with regression coverage for DB update failure.

## Verification

- `git diff --check $(git merge-base HEAD origin/master)..HEAD`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/lib/interrupt-handoff.test.ts src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts
src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx
src/components/interrupt-handoff/InterruptHandoffViews.test.tsx
--no-file-parallelism --maxWorkers=1` — 4 files / 91 tests passed before
the Greptile follow-ups.
- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-update-comment-wakeup-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts --no-file-parallelism
--maxWorkers=1` — 6 files / 191 tests passed before the Greptile
follow-ups.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts --no-file-parallelism
--maxWorkers=1` — 1 file / 24 tests passed after the historical
`errorCode` follow-up.
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/activity-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/activity-routes.test.ts --no-file-parallelism
--maxWorkers=1` — 2 files / 11 tests passed after the historical
`errorCode` follow-up.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
--no-file-parallelism --maxWorkers=1` — 1 file / 52 tests passed after
the cancel ordering follow-up.
- Greptile is green for head `272647636287d034bab8d981eaf5305865aa0f96`;
the old inline P2 is resolved/outdated.
- GitHub Actions, Socket, security-review, and Greptile checks are green
for head `272647636287d034bab8d981eaf5305865aa0f96`. The external
`security/snyk (cryppadotta)` status was still pending at
`https://app.snyk.io/org/cryppadotta/pr-checks/85b3e8f4-04e1-4f8e-9362-899c8148c23c`
after a bounded wait.

## Risks

- Medium: changes touch issue comments, wake scheduling, and live-run
interruption semantics, so regressions could affect when agents resume
or stay stopped.
- Medium: UI copy and state grouping for assignee changes may need
reviewer tuning after product review.
- Low migration risk: no database schema migration is included.
- The branch was created before the latest `origin/master` commits;
reviewers should confirm CI merge-base behavior and resolve any merge
conflicts if GitHub reports 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

OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent, tool use and local command
execution enabled. Exact hosted model build and context window were not
exposed by the runtime.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] 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

Screenshot note: this PR includes Storybook coverage for the new
interrupt handoff UI states rather than captured before/after browser
screenshots in this PR-creation heartbeat.

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-06-09 21:57:21 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 71a8464fee [codex] prevent invalid agents from receiving assignments and runs (#7663)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The control plane owns agent lifecycle, issue assignment, routine
dispatch, heartbeat wakeups, and recovery paths
> - Terminated, paused, pending-approval, or otherwise invalid agents
should not receive new work or new execution attempts
> - The old behavior left eligibility checks spread across routes and
services, so assignment and run paths could drift apart
> - This pull request centralizes agent lifecycle eligibility and
applies it consistently to assignment, invocation, routines, recovery,
and UI affordances
> - The benefit is safer autonomy: terminated agents stay paused,
invalid org-chain agents are surfaced, and active agents keep receiving
valid work

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #5103
Related: #1864

Bug fix context:
- What happened: agent assignment and heartbeat/run paths did not share
one eligibility contract, so invalid lifecycle states could still be
considered in some paths.
- Expected behavior: terminated agents must never receive new
assignments or heartbeat runs, and paused or otherwise invalid agents
should be treated as non-invokable consistently.
- Steps to reproduce: create or select an agent in an invalid lifecycle
state, then attempt assignment, routine dispatch, or heartbeat/recovery
wake paths.
- Paperclip version/commit: fixed on top of `paperclipai/paperclip`
`master` at the PR base.
- Deployment mode: applies to the server control plane in local and
authenticated deployments.

## What Changed

- Added shared agent lifecycle eligibility helpers and exported the
related shared types.
- Centralized server-side assignability and invokability checks for
issue assignment, agent routes, heartbeat dispatch, routines, recovery,
and liveness logic.
- Hardened issue assignment so invalid assignees are rejected instead of
queued for work.
- Hardened heartbeat/routine/recovery paths so terminated and otherwise
invalid agents are not woken for new runs.
- Updated board UI affordances to disable invalid agent actions and
surface org-chain warnings where relevant.
- Added targeted shared, server, and UI tests for the new eligibility
behavior.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/agent-eligibility.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/agent-invokability.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-archived-company-guard.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-liveness.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts
ui/src/lib/company-members.test.ts ui/src/pages/Agents.test.tsx` — 8
files, 144 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/server typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui
typecheck` — passed.
- Checked the PR diff does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml` or
`.github/workflows` changes.
- Checked `ROADMAP.md`; this is a targeted control-plane safety fix and
does not duplicate a planned core feature.
- Searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs/issues; closest related
items are linked above.
- CI and Greptile verification are pending on the opened PR and will be
followed up before requesting merge.

## Risks

Low to moderate risk. The intended behavioral shift is that invalid
agents are refused earlier and more consistently, which could expose
existing data with paused, pending, terminated, or broken org-chain
assignees. The added tests cover the critical assignment, heartbeat,
routine, recovery, shared helper, and UI paths. No database migrations
are included.

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

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-5 Codex via the Paperclip `codex_local` adapter, with
shell/git/GitHub CLI tool use. Reasoning mode and context window are
managed by the adapter runtime and not exposed in 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots (not applicable: no design screenshots requested; UI
behavior is covered by tests)
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (not
applicable: no user-facing command or schema docs changed)
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green (pending CI)
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
(pending Greptile)
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-06-06 12:45:57 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 7428fb956f [codex] Guard git-sensitive adapter workspaces (#7644)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The affected subsystem is the heartbeat execution path that turns
issue assignment into adapter-backed work in a selected workspace.
> - PAP-10409 and sibling follow-ups failed before useful adapter output
because project/workspace identity became incoherent.
> - A project-workspace-linked child issue could keep
`projectWorkspaceId` / execution workspace state while losing
`projectId`, then a git-sensitive local adapter could fall through
toward an invalid fallback cwd.
> - Paperclip needs to treat coherent workspace identity as part of the
live-path contract, not only as post-failure cleanup.
> - This pull request documents that rule, repairs issue inheritance,
and blocks git-sensitive adapter launch before it can run from the wrong
cwd.
> - The benefit is a bounded recovery path: affected issues are repaired
explicitly, future malformed workspaces fail fast with a clear recovery
action, and the UI surfaces that reason.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #7646

Bug report fields:

- Summary: adapter-backed follow-up issues can fail before doing work
when issue creation/inheritance preserves workspace ids but drops
project identity.
- Affected issues: internal Paperclip issues PAP-10408 through
PAP-10412, especially PAP-10409.
- Steps to reproduce: create a project-scoped parent/follow-up tree
where a child issue keeps `projectWorkspaceId` or an inherited execution
workspace but has `projectId: null`, then launch a git-sensitive local
adapter such as `codex_local`.
- Expected behavior: Paperclip derives or preserves coherent project
identity during issue creation, and heartbeat refuses malformed
git-sensitive workspace launches with one clear recovery action.
- Actual behavior before this PR: the run could reach adapter bootstrap
with an incoherent workspace context and fail with git errors such as
`fatal: not a git repository (or any parent up to mount point /srv)`.
- Root cause: child/follow-up issue inheritance preserved workspace
execution context without coherent project context. That let heartbeat
workspace resolution/adapter launch reach a fallback cwd instead of
refusing the malformed workspace state up front.

## What Changed

- Documented the adapter workspace-coherence live-path precondition in
`doc/execution-semantics.md`.
- Updated issue creation/inheritance so workspace-inheriting issues
preserve or derive project identity, while existing mismatch validation
still rejects incoherent project/workspace combinations.
- Added a heartbeat preflight guard for git-sensitive local adapters
that validates effective cwd, persisted workspace identity, project
workspace identity, and required git metadata before launch.
- Added `workspace_validation` recovery actions for this failure class
and ensured the source issue gets a visible, idempotent recovery
comment.
- Surfaced workspace-validation recovery state in issue rows, blocked
notices, and recovery action cards, including the manual-repair wake
policy label.
- Added focused regression coverage for issue inheritance, all heartbeat
workspace-validation guard branches, recovery display helpers, and UI
recovery components.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-session.test.ts`
  - Result: 1 test file passed, 68 tests passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
ui/src/components/IssueRecoveryActionCard.test.tsx`
  - Result: 1 test file passed, 12 tests passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/IssueBlockedNotice.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssueRecoveryActionCard.test.tsx`
  - Result: 2 test files passed, 18 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
  - Result: passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-plugin-environment.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-session.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueBlockedNotice.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssueRecoveryActionCard.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/recovery-display.test.ts`
- Result: 7 test files passed, 200 tests passed before the final
guard-branch additions; the changed server file was re-run above.
- UI coverage: `ui/storybook/stories/source-issue-recovery.stories.tsx`
contains rendered scenarios for the generic recovery chip,
workspace-validation recovery chip, blocked notice indicator, recovery
action card, and issue-row chip.
- Screenshot capture attempt: Storybook started successfully on
`http://127.0.0.1:6016/`, but screenshots could not be captured in this
runner because `agent-browser` launched an unusable Chrome binary and
Playwright Chromium failed on missing system library `libatk-1.0.so.0`;
the runner is non-root and lacks passwordless sudo for installing
browser dependencies.
- Hosted CI on final commit `969594e7` is green, including `verify`,
`Build`, `Typecheck + Release Registry`, `General tests (server)`,
workspace suites, serialized server suites, `Canary Dry Run`, and `e2e`.
- Roadmap checked: no duplicate roadmap item; this is a tightly scoped
reliability fix for existing heartbeat/workspace behavior.
- Duplicate PR search checked: no open PR matched `workspace coherence
adapter cwd`.

## Risks

- Medium risk: heartbeat launch is stricter for git-sensitive local
adapters and can now block malformed workspace states before adapter
execution.
- Mitigation: the guard is limited to local git-sensitive adapters and
records a source-scoped recovery action with structured evidence instead
of retrying indefinitely.
- Compatibility: valid project/workspace execution paths continue
normally; explicit project/workspace mismatches remain rejected.

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

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based `codex_local` coding agent with terminal/tool
use. Work was produced through Paperclip issue execution with focused
local test runs.

## 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] 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>
2026-06-06 09:39:26 -05:00