Commit Graph
18 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandPaperclip 5061ab7b35 perf(ui): speed up task and inbox cold opens (#17756)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Task lists and inboxes are the main entry points to that work.
> - Cold opens fetch overlapping task lists, task descriptions, and run
details before useful rows settle.
> - Independent responses can insert rows above content that a person
has started to read.
> - This pull request loads a small task index first and adds details
only for visible rows.
> - It keeps row order and geometry stable while those details arrive.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Cold opens of Tasks and Inbox, including the shared navigation badge.

**Subsystem affected**

Server list reads, shared response contracts, and the React UI.

**Current behavior**

The badge fetches full task bodies. Mine fetches several overlapping
lists. Historical diagnostics and row metadata add work before the first
useful list. A fast failed-run response can appear before task rows,
then move down when tasks arrive.

**Proposed behavior**

Load the selected inbox source and its required context together. Use an
index without task descriptions or recovery diagnostics. Fetch
diagnostic details for up to 50 visible rows. Keep skeletons, recovery
indicators, external status, and live metadata in fixed space.

**Reason and benefit**

Reduce work on a cold open and prevent loading-induced row movement. On
the same 100 local fixture tasks, the compact response was 262,441
decoded bytes and the index was 110,909 bytes. This comparison excludes
compression and is not a page latency benchmark.

**Breaking changes**

Existing full and compact responses remain available. New index/row
projections are opt-in and marked as partial data. Mine keeps its
existing most-recent-100 display limit, now selected on the server.
Existing filters and group preferences remain in the client. No database
migration.

**Additional context**

Refs: #17593. Related: #13095, #17428, #13803. This change addresses
collection overfetch and layout stability. It does not replace the
blocked-inbox query work or the database activity-index work.

## What Changed

- Add authorized index and row projections, with bounded task and parent
ID batches.
- Replace badge list downloads with unread IDs and aggregate counts.
Preserve actor privacy, dismissals, and local archive behavior.
- Load only the selected inbox source, plus bounded parent and
failed-run context. Return only relevant failures from the bounded run
window.
- Batch hierarchy reads, including at most one authorized child per
collapsed parent in one request. Collapsed markers do not consume the
expanded row budget, and partial descendant counts are not shown as
totals. Enrich visible rows without replacing membership, ordering,
titles, or read state.
- Reserve row geometry on desktop and mobile. Reveal the initial inbox
only after its sources settle. Preserve legacy task-list reads.
- Start collection module downloads during access checks. Keep partial
rows out of the task-detail cache.
- Keep ETags and concurrent request sharing for the new projections, but
skip the short server response TTL so archive undo sees fresh state.

## Verification

- On final head `ef6afb2a56`, the full CI workflow passed, including
build, typecheck, server/workspace/runner suites, and all eight browser
shards. A server shard reported **1,489 passing tests** before runner
shutdown canceled the job; its single infrastructure retry passed. Both
Greptile and Paperclip Review are **5/5**, with zero unresolved review
threads.
- The optional external **Entire Gates** check remains `unassessed`
because it has no active assessed Change for this comparison. Entire is
not set up in this checkout. The repository ruleset requires `ci /
verify` and `ci / e2e`; both passed. No gate configuration was changed.

- Passed workspace typecheck after the final API batching change. The
full production build also passed on the final commit; the exact-retry
E2E run built the shipped UI.
- Passed token gates and map validation. The final batch-preview pass
has 91 passing route/hierarchy/component tests, including privacy,
request bounds, 30 collapsed parents in one read, and a 120-child parent
alongside a sibling.
- Passed the 166-test focused UI/inbox/badge run, 47 additional UI
regression tests, and 34 issue-list route tests. The latest regressions
cover low-trust agent badge IDs, cold company selection, 30
description-only Mine matches with archive actions, retrying optional
row details, and collapsed/expanded siblings.
- The full local `pnpm test:run` spanned the rebase and reported
failures in five suites before it was stopped; it is not claimed as a
complete pass. A fresh serial rerun of all five suites passed
**452/452** tests (tool gateway, native resume, project repositories,
workspace recovery, and runner selection). Full current-commit coverage
is checked by CI.
- Real browser: delayed index and row-detail responses on Tasks and
Mine. The first placeholder and first row had the same origin and
44-pixel height. Twelve rows on each page had zero position, height, or
title-width change after recovery details arrived.
- Real browser: reviewed long titles and recovery status at a 390 by 844
viewport. Task text stays on one line and recovery uses a compact
indicator.
- Three fresh document loads per page on final commit `260893bf92`, with
HTTP cache retained on a warm local development server: Tasks
1.031–1.190 seconds; Mine 0.999–1.193 seconds. Browser-control overhead
is included. These values must not be compared directly with staging
latency or the earlier local samples taken during a full test run.
- The browser archive test exposed stale results after Undo. The new
projections now bypass the server TTL; immediate-mutation regression
tests pass. The final browser retry passed: Archive followed by Undo
restored exactly one row and the badge count.

- CI exposed a hook-order crash when company selection resolved after
the first inbox render. The hook now runs before the empty-company
return. All seven affected exact-retry and legacy-continuation browser
scenarios pass locally after the fix.
- Real browser review regressions: 97 description-only source matches
retained Archive actions; deliberately failed optional row reads
displayed a retry notice while all 12 observed row positions and heights
stayed unchanged. Retry restored the recovery indicator. Network fault
injection was removed.

- The final production build and workspace typecheck passed. Final
focused verification passed 153 UI/helper tests and 26 heartbeat privacy
route tests. Final review regressions cover newer diagnostics arriving
during the index read, reloading diagnostics when the same task ID
changes version, optional source failure/retry without hiding available
rows, and required external-status filter failure. The latest-failures
route test verifies bounded selection, agent filtering, success
suppressing an older failure, and private-run redaction.
- Real browser: deliberately failed the run source, then retried it.
Twelve available task rows kept the same position and 44-pixel height
before, during, and after retry. No loading skeleton replaced them.
Fault injection was removed.
- Hierarchy review decision: the cold-open barrier stays because
inserting ancestors or expanded children after revealing index rows
would cause layout shifts. Existing hierarchy context now survives
subsequent requests, with a regression proving a new ancestor read does
not blank the list. The bounded recursive tree read can still add
latency for unusually deep expanded trees.

- Tasks now handles a failed external-status filter with an explicit
error and Retry, suppressing a false empty state. All 52 Tasks component
tests pass, including failure-to-success retry. One existing large-tree
test timed out while workspace typechecking ran concurrently; the whole
component suite passed when rerun without that competing work. Workspace
typecheck, the full production build, and token gates passed for this
fix.

## Risks

- Saved filters and grouping still operate on the existing bounded
collection. This is not a new global server pagination model.
- Fixed row slots reduce available title width. Long titles remain
accessible through task navigation.
- Recovery and related diagnostics arrive after core rows. Their
responses cannot replace ordering fields, and stale versions are
rejected.
- Index/row requests now revalidate against current data instead of a
short server TTL. They still share concurrent reads and use ETags.
- This has not been deployed by this pull request. Staging latency must
be measured after deployment under comparable conditions.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact runtime model ID and
context-window size are not exposed in this session. Used code editing,
terminal execution, and real-browser 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 (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-26 14:29:20 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip a67a18c171 fix(tasks): hide empty message history disclosure (#17751)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work.
> - Each task page shows the instruction and saved conversation.
> - Cold opens show recent content before older history.
> - The page used any linked run as evidence of older messages.
> - A task's first run therefore showed an empty More messages control.
> - This PR shows the control only when the preview omits comments or
runs.
> - Fresh tasks stay clear, and older task history remains available.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #17593.

**What happened?**

A fresh task with only its first run displayed More messages, even
though there was no earlier history to load.

**Expected behavior**

Show More messages only when older comments or runs are omitted. Runs
observed while the page stays open must not create a false disclosure.
The output control also uses actual skipped bytes, so a growing run does
not gain an empty output control.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create a task and let its first run start or finish.
2. Open that task with a fresh application cache.
3. Observe the empty More messages control below its instruction.

## What Changed

- Keep omitted-run evidence with the cached recent run window.
- Use omitted comments or runs to decide whether to show More messages.
- Preserve run retention, reconnect reconciliation, and expansion of
real history.
- Offer More run output when a single legacy log exceeds the compact
byte window.
- Keep first-run native diagnostics accessible through More task actions
→ Show task activity.
- Add regression coverage and update the task feature map.

## Verification

- Passed the existing 9,168-test UI suite across 794 files, then all 504
focused task-detail, history-window, real thread, and log-transport
tests after adding the activity-menu regression.
- Passed workspace build, workspace typechecks, token gates, and map
checks.
- Reproduced the bug in the earlier UI using a disposable local task.
The corrected UI hides the control with zero runs or only the first run.
- In the local browser, expanded a long task to all 80 comments. The
latest answer appeared once and the disclosure disappeared. No console
warnings or errors occurred in that journey.
- Expanded a saved 111 KB legacy log through More run output and opened
its earlier activity in the local browser.
- On a single saved native run, verified no More messages control. Used
Show task activity to reveal its earlier tool output; the latest answer
remained visible exactly once, with no console warnings or errors.
- The first broad local run stopped because the fresh dependency install
lacked PostgreSQL library symlinks. The normal package setup repaired
that environment issue.
- The next broad run hit one workspace-runtime timeout. Its focused
rerun passed with unchanged server source; the original failure remains
recorded. Stopped the already-failed broad runner after the previous
revision passed full PR CI. All final-head build, typecheck, test, and
policy CI jobs passed. Both automated reviewers scored the final head
5/5, with no unresolved threads. The separate Entire Gates check is
pending because the PR has no active assessed Change for its current
comparison. The installed Entire CLI reports no linked project trail and
exposes no Change-assessment command; no gate or repository settings
were altered. Browser verification used this branch's UI with the
existing disposable test-drive API. No agent execution was started.

## Risks

Low risk. This changes the recent run cache shape and the disclosure
condition. The full run cache remains an array. Tests cover first-run
states, observed new runs, omitted older runs, expansion, and reconnect
reconciliation. No schema or API changes. A separate run-output control
preserves access to a single truncated legacy log. The task menu
preserves first-run native activity access without implying older
messages exist.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with code execution and browser tools. A
more specific model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this
session.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-26 11:58:30 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip a1f77821b9 perf(tasks): show recent conversation before historical activity (#17593)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - A task page must show the instruction and current conversation
quickly.
> - The current page waits for related task data and historical run
transcripts.
> - These reads grow with task history, even when the reader only needs
the latest answer.
> - This pull request gives cold opens a small initial view and loads
older history on demand.
> - Messages and runs observed while the page stays open remain visible.
> - The benefit is a readable task before historical diagnostics finish
loading.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Related: #14667 and #16229. The first changes the reveal gate and scroll
anchors. The second adds general history pagination. This PR adds a core
task read and a folded recent-conversation view. It preserves the
default full-read API contracts. The shared files will need coordination
if either related PR lands first.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Cold opening an ordinary task with a long conversation or large run
logs.

**Current behavior**

Task enrichment and historical transcripts delay the readable
conversation. A cold open can fetch several megabytes of tool activity
before revealing saved messages.

**Proposed behavior**

Show the task instruction, recent saved replies, latest human input, and
the latest run's conversation data first. Fetch older messages and full
run activity when the reader chooses **More messages**. Retain new
messages while the page stays open.

## What Changed

- Add an authorized core issue view that skips related enrichment. Keep
enrichment on the existing detail read. Share task mutation, rollback
and invalidation updates with the core cache.
- Add a bounded recent-comment read. Preserve the first human
instruction when no description exists, including legacy rows with a
NULL author type. Keep company and task access checks and comment
redaction.
- Add optional recent activity and run-summary views. Fetch original
input receipts for visible comments separately so delivered messages
stay out of the queue. Reconcile watched unfinished runs after a
reconnect beyond the preview window, removing deleted runs after
reconciliation.
- Filter the latest native run's initial events to assistant messages,
request lifecycles and terminal results. Full event reads remain
available on expansion. Legacy fallback reads use a small tail extended
to the first complete record. HTTP cancellation aborts the storage read.
- Retain observed messages across cursor catch-up and new runs. Apply
local cancellation and deletion to both caches and their task aliases.
Refetch locally seeded history pages on expansion. Preserve expansion
across identifier and UUID links. Keep deep links, classic tasks and
Agent Chat on their existing full-history path.
- Update API documentation, design guidance, capability maps and
regression coverage.

## Verification

- Final acceptance on `9ea0b15ae44d9f6d2c9a9f824b4835f299f92979`: all CI
gates passed, including server/UI tests, all eight browser shards,
runner checks, full typecheck and build. [Final CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40326990328).
GitHub reports 55 successful checks, two intentionally skipped checks,
and one neutral Paperclip Review check described below. No checks are
pending or failed; Greptile is 5/5 and no review threads remain open.
- October 26 merge update: merged current `master`. The only conflict
was in task-page imports; both the compact-history hook and the new
live-update hooks remain. All CI tests and build jobs passed on
`044fd6733d`. Fresh review found canceled-comment cache drift, legacy
human-comment filtering, send-then-expand truncation, and partial legacy
log records. These defects were fixed in `af3d66a5bd`.
- Review-fix verification: 470 tests pass across ten affected suites,
including all six PostgreSQL cold-open tests without a helper override.
Cancellation/delete and send-then-expand regression tests failed before
the fixes and pass afterward. Coverage includes task identifier/UUID
reopen, stale in-flight reads, legacy NULL author types, local-file and
object-storage tails cut inside UTF-8 text, route forwarding, and
request cancellation. Full workspace typecheck and production build,
token gates, map validation and diff checks pass.
- Follow-up review found that a failed expanded legacy read lost its
record-alignment state on retry. `9ea0b15ae4` commits the expanded
window only after a successful read. The new regression fails before the
fix and passes afterward; all 19 transcript tests, UI typecheck, UI
build and token gates pass. Greptile reviewed this commit at 5/5 with no
actionable findings, and all review threads are resolved.
- The final Paperclip Review check ended neutral because its execution
did not complete; no passing Paperclip assessment is claimed. Its
earlier four concrete findings were fixed and regression-tested.
Greptile and the security scans completed successfully on the final
commit.
- The preceding `af3d66a5bd` CI run was canceled when superseded by the
retry fix. Its server shard 11 check briefly reported failure, but the
job API records cancellation and its test step passed all 1,750 tests.
This superseded run is not used as final CI acceptance.
- 549 focused tests pass on the final implementation across nine task
UI, activity-route, OpenAPI and PostgreSQL suites. These cover pending
history, desktop/mobile visibility, expansion, retained runs, message
bursts, cancellation recovery and queued-comment removal in both views.
- Legacy expansion keeps the latest answer visible while fetching and
deduplicating older output.
- Five PostgreSQL tests pass for core access denial, recent comments,
missing-description instructions, event paging and bounded activity/run
reads. macOS could not start another PostgreSQL cluster because it
exhausted its semaphore limit. These tests used a separate disposable
database on an existing local server through a temporary test setup
override. The helper was restored afterward.
- Full workspace typecheck and build pass with the final state fixes, as
do token gates and capability-map validation.
- Token gates, capability-map validation and `git diff --check` pass.
- Browser proof used a disposable task with 80 comments and six large
run histories. The cold view showed the instruction and recent exchange.
**More messages** revealed older comments. Navigation away and back
preserved expansion.
- Local HTTP sample: core 50 ms, recent comments 24 ms, recent run
summaries 17 ms. The latest native conversation response was 839 JSON
characters / 8 ms; its full event response was 1,099,005 / 86 ms.
Browser content paint was 1.34 seconds with development assets cached.
These are local observations, not staging latency claims.
- The first CI run passed every job except four board-send browser cases
and the review threshold. Those browser fixtures only mocked the old
comments endpoint; they now serve both recent and full reads, retaining
all message and attachment assertions. Both initial review findings were
fixed with regression tests. The next CI run passed every job. The
deeper review identified core-cache mutation, older delivery receipt and
retained run-status gaps; those are now fixed with regression coverage.
Final review is 5/5 with zero unresolved findings. Final-head CI
initially failed one unchanged runner shutdown test
(`runnerd-codex-transport.test.ts`, timeout-attachment case) with
`NativeSessionCloseUnrecoverableError`; all other CI jobs passed. The
same runner code passed on 971a762f80. A targeted local reproduction
also failed during provider drain. The failure is outside the changed
task loading paths; its underlying cause remains unresolved. The single
failed-job retry passed on the same head; this demonstrates recovery,
not a root-cause fix. All CI gates passed on the previous implementation
head `9004f94f28`: [CI run and
retry](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40192334629).
- `pnpm test:run` was attempted and stopped after repeated embedded
PostgreSQL startup failures. The native session suite recorded 15
database-related failures; other database suites could not start. No
complete local suite pass is claimed.

## Risks

- The compact view intentionally omits older diagnostics until
expansion. Existing open questions and approvals still use the current
interaction and run paths.
- Previously observed comment and activity rows remain cached while
open. The newest preview and incoming cursor pages refresh; this does
not add a general historical-edit synchronization protocol.
- Recent views are optional. Existing full API callers retain their
response shape and behavior. No migration is required.
- A legacy tail can exceed the requested byte limit by the prefix of its
first log record. Backward reads stop at the preceding record boundary
and honor cancellation.
- Staging has not been deployed or qualified with this change. Instance
startup latency is separate from task history loading.
- The related open PRs touch the same task-history files.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository editing, shell
tools and browser testing. The exact serving model identifier and
context-window size are not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass — 549 affected task tests;
the full local suite and unrelated runner failure 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>
2026-10-26 08:11:39 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip f66d590899 fix(ui): open the new-task form immediately (#17041)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - People use New task to send work to an agent.
> - The board currently downloads the task dialog code after the first
click.
> - This shows a loading window before people can enter their request.
> - The form already loads agent and project choices after it opens.
> - This pull request loads the task dialog code with the board.
> - People can start writing immediately and keep their text as choices
arrive.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Related change: #16849. Commit
`fa50cab5685b9cdbb26ad9c610cc5b6c373d3ff4` added the deferred dialog and
its loading window on October 19, 2026.

**What happened?**

The first New task click shows “Loading new task…” while the browser
downloads the dialog code.

**Expected behavior**

The form opens on click. Agent and project choices load in place. Text
entered during those requests stays in the form.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Open the board in a fresh browser session.
2. Select New task before its code is cached.
3. Observe the loading window before the form appears.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Source baseline: `8b4ab65b1c3d863d282752e83307943720a5c85c`.

**Deployment mode**

The browser code applies to local and hosted boards. Verification used a
source checkout.

## What Changed

- Import NewIssueDialog with the board. Keep the existing mount and
draft lifecycle.
- Add a first-open test that fails if the form waits for an asynchronous
render.
- Cover text entry during delayed agent and project requests and
defaults that arrive later.
- Document the behavior and its verification recipe.

## Verification

- Regression proof: the first-open test failed before the import change
and passed after it.
- All 125 tests in BoardDialogs, DeferredOverlay, NewIssueDialog and
Layout passed.
- The production UI build and UI TypeScript check passed. The typecheck
passed with `NODE_OPTIONS=--max-old-space-size=2400` after the competing
test process was stopped.
- Token gates, map validation and Git diff checks passed.
- The first UI typecheck could not resolve the unbuilt local plugin SDK.
The SDK was then built.
- Full typecheck and build attempts hit the sandbox's 4 GB memory limit
when run with the full test suite. Two later UI typecheck attempts also
hit that limit during other validation. The cgroup recorded four OOM
kills in total. The full repository test attempt and a broader UI test
attempt were stopped. No complete suite result is claimed. Serial
repository typecheck reached the missing Rust `cargo` executable. Full
CI passed on head `9dde4bc`; local limits remain recorded here.
- First CI run at `e5a99b8`: typecheck, build, all unit-test shards and
seven browser shards passed. Browser shard 2 failed at
`chat-adapters-ui-providers.spec.ts:185`, waiting for Slack setup
Success after reload. The saved page showed the working connection and
Continue button. The cause is not confirmed; this failure is retained
for follow-up. [Failed
job](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39522214527/job/118968542923).
- Removed the added import comment after Greptile review. Head `9dde4bc`
changes only that comment. The review thread is resolved. Fresh CI
passed on head `9dde4bc`. Greptile reviewed that exact head at 5/5 with
no open findings. All eight browser shards passed, including the earlier
Slack failure. The earlier failure remains unexplained; the only
intervening code change removed a source comment. A passing retry
establishes recovery, not its cause.
- Component tests use mocked directory requests. No deployed latency or
browser persistence claim is made.

Latest CI: [run
39523376437](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39523376437).
Reviewed head: `9dde4bc0caa3556e315a2fc197268b7c9879efa4`.

## Risks

- Task dialog code is part of board startup again. This adds its
dependencies to the initial code graph. No startup latency benchmark is
claimed.
- Other creation dialogs retain their existing lazy imports and loading
behavior.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools and code
execution. The runtime does not expose a more precise 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>
2026-10-24 08:15:35 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 5ef385f7e6 Run reusable Product E2E journeys across deployment targets (#17262)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agents and their work.
> - Product E2E tests check complete user journeys.
> - The current harness prepares self-hosted instances.
> - Hosted workspaces need separate authentication, setup, and cleanup.
> - The same in-app story should run on either deployment.
> - This pull request adds deployment targets and explicit
prerequisites.
> - The private Cloud adapter owns fleet access and lifecycle
operations.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Product E2E harness, fixture registry, and reports.

**Problem or motivation**

Self-hosted test setup cannot qualify a deployed Cloud workspace.
Copying each story into a second harness would make its assertions
diverge.

**Proposed solution**

Add explicit deployment targets, setup recipes, and ordered campaigns.
Reuse a no-model task-properties story on both deployments. Let fresh
Cloud onboarding provide verified context for that same story. Keep
Cloud lifecycle and credentials behind a private target provider.

**Roadmap alignment**

This supports Cloud deployment qualification and the existing agent eval
system. It adds no application endpoint or scheduler. Related work:
#17112. The separate onboarding gateway UI prerequisite is #17253.

## What Changed

- Add explicit target configuration and a credential-free preparation
preview. Keep historical selectors and the current `--all` matrix
unchanged.
- Resolve requested fixture prerequisites, including a run-owned backlog
task prepared before measurement. Reuse verified onboarding context
without counting recipe setup as onboarding coverage.
- Add task assignment persistence and the actual onboarding parent/child
first-task journey, with an independent artifact oracle and native trace
requirement.
- Preserve failed boundaries and blocked dependents, deployment
identity, costs, phase outcomes, and private evidence in the existing
dashboard.
- Validate success assertions and accounting before successful cleanup.
Bound collection by the campaign deadline and cleanup/evidence hooks by
a separate ten-minute grace, with cancellation and stop-only fallback.
- Stage dashboard rendering separately so a timed-out renderer cannot
overwrite retained failure results. Add evidence finalization hooks so
the private provider can save evidence before target deletion and lease
release.
- Reject private journey bundles in the public history publisher.
Browser-only results have no model or provider.

## Verification

- The unchanged task-properties story passed on managed self-hosted and
a registered testing Cloud workspace. Authentication, setup, journey,
collection, and cleanup passed. Model calls: zero. Earlier attempts
remain private and retained.
- Final journey and report tests: 96 passed in eight files. Catalog
compatibility: 39 passed. The wider focused run exposed three stale
master catalog expectations; these now match the already shipped
case-handoff v4 metadata and four-cell matrix. The default 385-cell
selection is unchanged.
- Review regressions reproduced premature success for a zero-request
receipt and a missing required assertion. Both now fail before success
cleanup while retaining cost receipts. The initial lifecycle fixes
passed 33 checks. A subsequent review exposed a late renderer write that
could erase saved failures; rendering now writes into isolated staging
and publishes HTML only after it settles. Combined campaign,
fixture-contract, and retained-report checks: 67 passed, including late
writes, delayed timer callbacks, stalled collection, release, stop,
evidence hooks, and browser close. Harness typecheck passed after the
fixes.
- A broader harness unit attempt completed 3,601 passing cases, two
failures, and two skips. The failures exposed a stale Pi count and an
omitted active Copilot fixture in the Daytona image input closure. The
focused compatibility fixes passed 83 tests. After all source fixes, the
full harness support suite passed: 160 files, 3,621 tests, two skips,
plus 128 native-source checks. The earlier failures remain recorded.
- Harness typecheck, repository typecheck, repository build, map checks,
and Storybook catalog checks passed on the rebased branch.
- The required full `pnpm test:run` attempt timed out after 35 minutes.
It had 1,195 completed passing cases and one chat integration failure
before its first suite completed. That case and nine adjacent cases pass
in isolation. The original failure remains unresolved and retained; this
is not a full-suite pass.
- Current-head remote checks
(`39b2a1ed8c49222fabd1ba8e225cac81bff5c6f7`): 53 passed, two skipped,
none pending or failing. Greptile completed successfully at 5/5 with no
unresolved review threads.
- Fresh paid Cloud onboarding, dependent reuse, and disposable cleanup
have not been qualified live. They require deployment of the separate UI
prerequisite and actual Cloud gateway budget admission. The trusted
Cloud workflow remains disabled.

- Final live verification at `39b2a1ed8c`: the unchanged shared story
passed on managed self-hosted and the registered testing Cloud stack
using the prepared backlog-task recipe. Both cleaned up successfully
with zero model calls. Independent private S3 checks confirmed final
evidence and released QA identity/stack leases. Cloud evidence remains
private.

## Risks

- A deployed UI or Cloud control-plane change can invalidate selectors
or provider contracts. Version drift fails the attempt.
- Cloud evidence and lifecycle recovery are private-provider
responsibilities. A pending cleanup or evidence upload must keep the
target unavailable for reuse.
- No release is deployed or pinned by this change. No automatic story
retry is added. The initial pilot retains its explicit $10, one
disposable workspace, and 30-minute bounds.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools, code
execution, and delegated agents. The runtime does not expose a more
specific deployment model identifier 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
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-23 06:27:49 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip b11010b0d4 Simplify failure banners and show only the latest error (#16982)
Remove dashed failure dividers and show only the latest adjacent run or recovery error. Preserve permitted retries, pending state and unrelated notice boundaries. Add production-component Storybook examples and browser regression coverage.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-20 14:29:39 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 4145b5048a docs: deepen task, approval, secret, and recovery maps (#16994)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Its feature map describes user journeys. Its access map describes
the matching agent paths.
> - The recent index and capability additions improved discovery and
breadth.
> - Broad baseline records still combined operations with different
actors, permissions, and retry behavior.
> - This pull request reviews the existing task, approval, secret, and
recovery capabilities at operation level.
> - Each operation now has its own access boundary, source evidence, and
verification recipe. Source review remains separate from live proof.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #16987, #16990, #16025. These related pull requests are merged.
The search found no open duplicate or matching issue.

**Issue type**

Missing documentation.

**Where is the issue?**

The paired task, questions-and-approvals, secrets, and recovery files
under `maps/feature-map/` and `maps/agent-access-map/`.

**What's wrong?**

Baseline records do not show enough detail to verify who can perform
each action, which state must persist, or what happens after a denial,
race, or retry. A declared scenario tool can also be mistaken for an
admitted production tool.

**Suggested fix**

Split the four areas into source-reviewed operation records. Add compact
checkpoints to their user recipes. Preserve existing capability IDs and
the map schema.

## What Changed

- Promote 27 existing capability records to `operation-reviewed`, with
125 operation records: tasks 32, questions and approvals 39, secrets 28,
recovery 26.
- Give each operation its own API, agent surface, policy, source
evidence, verification recipe, and remaining gap.
- Separate human, legacy agent, run JWT, native binding, mode, and
resource authority. Split operations where those rules differ.
- Correct production completion paths, plan acceptance and handoff,
question dismissal and withdrawal, secret proposal authority, runtime
recovery grants, and explicit duplicate-risk decisions.
- Preserve access gaps found in source, including the binding-proposal
dependency cascade and narrower native/CLI fields.
- Add one checkpoint table per product recipe for saved results, denial,
races, and retries.
- Keep all 191 existing capability IDs. Change only eight Markdown
files. Keep every operation's evidence `source-only` and verification
`not-run`; the subset below does not prove an entire operation across
its actors and surfaces.

## Verification

Source review uses revision `3bbc2104b65caf9f7763938a01260a5673e12f7a`.
Read-only area reviews and a second source review covered the changed
pairs.

Passed:

- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`: 35 paired areas, 191 capability IDs,
valid references and fields. This is structural verification.
- `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs
scripts/storybook-feature-index.test.mjs`: 17 passed.
- `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs`: 308 files, 2,899 stories.
Generated outputs remain ignored.
- Capability comparison with the base: all 191 IDs unchanged; the four
reviewed areas contain 27 capabilities and 125 source-only operation
records.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`.
- `git diff --check`.
- Focused existing interaction and proposal route tests: 80 passed. The
two selected DB-backed suites skipped 119 tests because local embedded
PostgreSQL could not start. These skipped tests are not passes.

Live subset on a fresh local instance with a disposable PostgreSQL
container:

- Created the company and an unassigned task through the browser. Added
a comment and completed the task. The saved status and comment survived
reload.
- Created a managed secret with inert dummy data through the browser.
Its metadata and version survived reload. The metadata response did not
contain the dummy value.
- Created a question fixture through board REST. Invalid input returned
422 and left it pending. Browser dismissal kept it pending and preserved
the draft. Reopening restored the choice. Submission survived reload. A
duplicate response returned 409 and left the saved answer unchanged.
- Used a real issued legacy agent API key. Task read and safe
company-secret catalog returned 200. Full secret listing and run-only
secret list/value routes returned 403. Revoked the key after the checks.
- Read an empty recovery projection. Resolving a nonexistent action
returned 404 and left the task unchanged. This did not execute recovery.
- Closed the owned browser tab and stopped only the verified test
runtime and labelled database container. Evidence survived cleanup. No
provider or model ran.

Limits and retained failures:

- Native embedded PostgreSQL launch failed because the host could not
allocate semaphores. The container-backed app was the successful
alternate environment.
- Full `pnpm test:run` was attempted. Fifteen DB-dependent
native-session cases failed at database startup, and several DB suites
skipped. The run was stopped after repeated failures of that
prerequisite. The full local suite did not pass.
- The sandboxed build attempt failed at the local tsx IPC socket. The
required build passed outside the sandbox.
- The first CI build job passed compilation and production boot, then
its npm-install check was interrupted when the runner received a
shutdown signal. The corrected head passed the full CI run, including
the build and public-install checks.
- Initial Greptile review found the recovery note field and native
search/history limits were inaccurate. Corrected `resolutionNote` and
the production cap of 100, then reran the map checks. Greptile reviewed
the corrected head at 5/5; both earlier threads are resolved.
- An initial harness used a nonexistent generic secret-value URL and
received 404. The actual mapped agent routes were then checked
separately. An initial recovery assertion expected 409; the actual
missing-action contract returned 404. These were harness corrections,
not product fixes.
- Native run bindings, two-person ownership, secret delivery/rotation,
external vaults, provider-stop proof, workspace repair, and actual
recovery execution remain unexecuted. The map does not claim those
journeys passed.

The separate external **Paperclip Review** check is still in progress on
`904509df80cc6de16d36906a410a66786f619b20`. The reviewer reports that
its full changed-file request is pending. CI is green and Greptile is
5/5, but this external review has not published a final assessment. Its
review service must finish that request and assessment.

## Risks

Documentation can become stale as policy and runtime bindings change.
Each operation cites source and retains its verification gaps. The
records describe observed enforcement; they do not authorize broader
access or certify live behavior. This pull request changes no product
code, schema, or permission enforcement.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, `gpt-6.1-sol`; 475,000-token context window; xhigh
reasoning; tool use and code execution. Read-only source agents assisted
the area reviews.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-20 13:59:25 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 3bbc2104b6 docs: map missing product and operator capabilities (#16990)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The feature map records product entry points and verification
recipes.
> - The paired agent access map records APIs and permission boundaries
for the same capability IDs.
> - The new index in #16987 made several missing capabilities easier to
find.
> - Those gaps hid existing assistant, privacy, cost, and operator
workflows.
> - This pull request adds 15 capabilities with source references, test
scope, and manual checks.
> - Readers can find these workflows without treating documentation or
structural checks as live proof.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #16987. Related map work: #16025 and #16214. A search of related
pull requests found no duplicate of these additions.

**Issue type**

Missing documentation.

**Where is the issue?**

`maps/feature-map/` and `maps/agent-access-map/`.

**What's wrong?**

The maps omit public assistant MCP connections, private task and project
sharing, subscription fees, cost-recording recovery, agent API keys,
keyboard entry points, and several operator CLI workflows.

**Suggested fix**

Add product recipes and matching access records. Show the full
capability IDs in the README index and each page. Keep the existing ID
format and all 175 existing IDs. Exclude AI account pools.

## What Changed

- Add the `assistant-connections` family with setup, consent, device
login, client use, and revocation.
- Add `tasks/privacy`, `projects/privacy`,
`budgets-costs/subscriptions`, and `budgets-costs/accounting-recovery`.
- Add `agents/api-keys`, `agents/managed-agent-setup`, and
`navigation-preferences/command-palette`.
- Add `cli-operations/feedback-export`, `chat-channels/outbound-email`,
and `instance-operations/runtime-setup`.
- Pair all 15 additions with access rules, source evidence, manual
checks, and explicit coverage gaps. Update the visible index to 35
families and 190 capability IDs.
- Add cross-links from existing access, connection setup, search, and
CLI recipes. Do not change the schema or add AI account pools.
- Clarify that the task Share sheet displays direct and inherited
access. Manage inherited access at its ancestor or project source.

## Verification

- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passes: 35 areas and 190 paired
capability IDs, with valid references and contract fields.
- `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs
scripts/storybook-feature-index.test.mjs` passes: 17 tests.
- `node scripts/storybook-feature-index.mjs` and `git diff --check`
pass.
- A comparison with the base confirms all 175 existing IDs remain and
exactly the intended 15 IDs were added. The README index matches the
discovered feature metadata.
- `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs` cannot run because this checkout
lacks `storybook/internal/csf-tools` and installed workspace
dependencies.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm test:run`, and `pnpm build` were attempted.
All stopped before their task ran: the pnpm 9.15.4 bootstrap could not
fetch and verify its registry packages in this environment.
- Source review covers the documented UI, CLI, routes, services, and
existing tests. No live browser, provider, or authorization journey was
run. New access records remain `baseline`, `source-only`, and `not-run`.
- Greptile and the Paperclip reviewer both rate current commit
`bb8eb797b0a1dc26256faf2f0e57cbe7abc9adcf` 5/5. The inherited-access
review thread is resolved.
- [GitHub
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39466772379)
passes for that commit, including typecheck, build, unit tests, Runner
checks, and browser tests. Browser shard 7 passed after one retry for a
runner shutdown. All PR checks are successful, neutral, or skipped.

## Risks

- Low runtime risk: this change only edits maps. No application
behavior, API, dependency, or schema changes.
- Source-reviewed recipes can drift or miss deployment-specific
behavior. The records state their limits and require live checks before
a capability is marked verified.

> 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, model ID `gpt-6.1-sol`, 475,000-token context window,
xhigh reasoning effort, with tool use and code execution.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-20 12:47:41 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 505e1a5582 feat(cases): add persistent workflows with same-task agent handoffs (#16959)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - An agent workflow needs persistent facts and a safe way to transfer
work.
> - Creating a task for each phase splits the objective, discussion,
workspace, and review policy.
> - A case can retain the facts while one primary task moves between
agents.
> - Transfers must survive process failure and preserve private access,
budgets, and completion gates.
> - This pull request adds durable case handoffs, native case tools, and
read-only case pages.
> - Prompts describe the workflow. Existing task controls decide when
work can run and finish.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Problem or motivation**

Prompt-driven agent teams need a persistent record that can move through
triage, implementation, verification, and correction. Ordinary
reassignment does not provide a durable instruction, safe release
barrier, or recoverable delivery receipt for an agent handing off its
own running task.

**Proposed solution**

Extend standalone cases with one primary task, a descriptive phase,
retained access sources, and a handoff ledger. Apply assignments after
source execution and workspace settlement. Deliver each transfer through
the existing durable wake queue. Provide `create_case`, `read_case`,
`update_case`, and `handoff_case` in the native runner. Creation
requires kickoff and explicit workflow text. An explicit handoff to
`done` closes the case when normal task completion is accepted.

**Alternatives considered**

Do not add a workflow engine, filesystem queue, configured state graph,
or one task per phase. The workflow document combines transition prose
with an optional Mermaid `stateDiagram-v2` map. The server does not
execute the diagram. The Pipelines experiment removed on master stays
removed.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends Agent Reviews and Approvals, Enforced Outcomes, Bounded Run
Recovery, and Activity Log attribution. Existing approval, review,
budget, privacy, workspace, and responsible-user rules remain
authoritative.

Related work: [ordinary handoff wake
recovery](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15019). This
feature adds a separate persisted case-handoff receipt and release
barrier.

## What Changed

- Add case routing fields, retained access sources, durable handoff
history, delivery leases, and replay-safe migrations.
- Keep the same primary task across agent phases. Preserve each
returning agent's own session and the task's workspace.
- Fence outgoing mutations, wait for provider and workspace release, and
recover delivery without duplicate task comments or runs. Recheck
current assignment permissions as the original caller before applying a
delayed transfer. Scope a run Stop to that run’s own handoff intents, so
repeated old Stop requests preserve newer work. Cancelling terminal
intent without a source run also requires fenced current task ownership,
including native retries and preparation with an old checkout. For Cloud
callers, revalidate current stack membership with an uncached Cloud RPC
and derive owner elevation from the current managed setting.
- Keep case reads, documents, assets, Audit, and live events inside
retained task/project permissions.
- Add native case creation/read/update/handoff tools. Store required
workflow text and initial documents on the first task. Page oversized
case facts and referenced document bodies through the dedicated tool
with bounded UTF-8 JSON, current routing versions, snapshot conflicts,
and current source authorization on every page.
- Add read-only case lists and detail pages, task-style list controls,
compact dotted field tables, linked handoff tasks, and case filters in
Audit.
- Add native/legacy integration tests, migration/restart tests, browser
coverage, and bounded live receipt fixtures. Extend the trusted sandbox
condition to cover the new subscription fixture profile.
- Hide obsolete paused-agent warnings on completed or cancelled task
threads.
- Synchronize the company-switch settings test with React effects after
a CI failure. Preserve its security assertions and production remount
behavior.

## Verification

The branch directly includes master `9ef434fe79`. The required `ci /
verify` and `ci / e2e` gates pass on head `765fccd67c`. [Current-head
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39464348614)
passes typecheck, build, tests, and all eight browser shards. Security
checks pass. [Greptile gives this exact head
5/5](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16959#issuecomment-6291156549),
with no unresolved review threads. The optional Paperclip Review check
remains queued because its assigned agent is paused. It is not a
required branch check. No check result was overridden.

Local workspace typecheck and build pass after the master merge, along
with database migration checks, token gates, map checks, Storybook
catalog checks, and the Copilot profile identity check. Standard builds
refresh Runner vendor output. Focused checks pass 2,008
API/paging/context tests and 7 strict case protocol tests. The final
commit changes one test fixture only; its ten tests, UI typecheck, and
token gates pass. No production source changed in that commit.

On current head `765fccd67c`, all **194 critical workflow tests**
executed and passed with no skipped tests in those files:

- 38 Stop/ownership tests, including board completion intent, native
retries, stale Stop, and preparation with an old checkout.
- 2 actual legacy process/HTTP handoff tests, including scratch failure,
a closed-stdio child that continues writing, and recovery through a
fresh worker after the process group stops.
- 5 migration tests, including SQL column metadata, preserved null
authority context, and all six prior-numbering receipts.
- 3 process-settlement and 5 scratch tests.
- 88 handoff-service, 18 heartbeat handoff, and 21 native case-tool
integration tests.
- 7 bounded case/document-read projection tests and 7 strict
protocol-contract tests.

The current CI checkout was `fed65d49`, merging `765fccd67c` into master
`9ef434fe79`. Its new document regressions reconstruct exact
Unicode/escaped bodies and revisions through real native authority and
authenticated HTTP with generic API tools disabled. They cover
case-owned, primary-task, and linked-task documents; routing on every
page; stale document snapshots; access loss and unlinking;
unrelated/foreign/private sources; system documents; and quarantined
content. Active-task document tools retain their existing behavior.
These are current-head test results from the first CI attempt; the
browser-only retry did not rerun these suites.

The full `64fdd3403f` CI failed one separate settings test: after a
company switch, it observed an unsettled API-key draft. The production
component and test were unchanged from prior green source. Production
switches remount both keyed settings layers; the test directly reused an
unkeyed view and used a timer tick instead of waiting for React effects.
The final commit replaces that fixture synchronization with React `act`.
The exact secret-clearing assertions and all timeouts remain unchanged.
The original assertion failure remains recorded; no unchanged retry was
used. The narrow unchanged baseline and fixed fixture each pass 10
tests.

The upstream result-paging merge preserves case capture namespaces and
current asset privacy. Its API integration suite executed 39 of 41 tests
successfully, with two skipped; the optional assigned-result PRP
integration test was skipped. Neither skipped suite is counted in the
194 critical tests or as live provider proof.

All 361 upstream migration entries and SQL bodies remain unchanged. Six
case migrations follow master as 0363–0368 with identical SQL hashes.
Official Drizzle generators produced the combined metadata and five
retained snapshots. Generation reports no schema changes, and the
snapshot drift test passes. The earlier `ce361ae5d0` CI passed on
attempt 1, including its then-current 179 critical tests. Fresh review
later identified unusable document references with generic API tools
disabled; the bounded document reads and ten additional authenticated
HTTP tests address that finding.

The full local `pnpm test:run` attempt was cancelled after this Mac
exhausted PostgreSQL semaphore capacity; it is **not** counted as a
pass. Later database attempts also stopped before assertions or skipped,
including one sandbox socket denial. Two original stale-Stop regressions
did reproduce the bug against the old source. A REST serialization
assertion passed after two preserved database-startup failures. No test
timeout was increased. All 194 assertions listed above executed and
passed in current-head CI. The complete 385-file, 3,963-test UI shard
also passed after the fixture repair.

A configured-provider receipt workflow passed 13 backend checks across
triage → implementation → verification → correction → done, using one
task and four work runs. The saved receipt is revision 2 with total 6
USD; case and task both closed. The original canonical attempt remains
failed because its browser assertion confused the terminal destination
with completed-task tooltips. The corrected full browser verifier passed
on the same retained database and original runs, with no additional
provider calls. The last clean-build browser readback is on
`6a86c54a53`; later changes affect recovery, authorization, bounded
reads, and settlement. Accounted work cost is a $1.010574 rate-card
estimate; provider billing and setup-probe usage are unavailable.

Copilot profile 49 passed the unchanged seven-fixture private protocol
pack (46/46 checks, no retries) and the product file-edit canary after
master's completion-replay change. All 60 bound implementation hashes
remain unchanged on the current source. Historical profile-47/48
identities and results remain intact. See the [profile-49 compatibility
record](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/codex/persistent-case-handoffs/doc/plans/2026-10-20-copilot-completion-recovery-compatibility-v49.json).
This is bounded compatibility evidence, not a fresh full matrix,
installed-package product test, or Daytona rollout.

Preserved CI failures and retries:

- On `20662930ac`, Slack managed setup failed a five-second success
assertion after reload. Its test/application path was unchanged from a
prior green head. One unchanged-source retry passed all 25 tests in that
shard; no source or timeout changed.
- On `9402b4f17a`, two CI workers received shutdown signals at 15:24:19
UTC. Neither log had an assertion failure before interruption. One
unchanged-source retry of each passed all Runner static checks and all
32 tests in browser shard 6; both aggregates passed. The next head,
`7b4374edaf`, passed all CI without retries.
- On `295f289b5a`, serialized shard 9 timed out during its first
device-login test, then the next test found an active login lease.
Direct login/test paths were unchanged from a prior green head. Cold
import plus a timed-out async body using the next test's mutable
actor/store is the supported fixture-race explanation; no request trace
proves that sequence. The original failure remains recorded. One
unchanged-source retry passed all 294 tests in 19 files, including all
41 device-login tests. No login source or timeout changed. The
subsequent `ce361ae5d0` CI passed without retries.
- On `64fdd3403f`, one company-switch settings assertion observed an
unsettled draft. The final test-only commit uses React `act` without
changing assertions, timeouts, or production code. On `765fccd67c`, all
ten settings tests and the complete 385-file, 3,963-test UI shard
passed.
- On `765fccd67c`, browser shard 3 completed the split-handoff
assertions, then cleanup received HTTP 500 from run cancellation after a
one-second PostgreSQL row-lock timeout. The extra chat run was reporting
completed work while teardown began. Cleanup stopped before restoring a
global experiment flag, causing a later assertion to fail. Relevant
production and test paths are unchanged from an earlier green commit.
Stop's lock order is consistent, and no nested self-lock was found; the
exact PostgreSQL blocker was not recorded. One unchanged-shard retry
passed. The original failure, trace, and downstream flag failure remain
recorded. No Stop implementation, cleanup assertion, or timeout changed.
The retry supports intermittent cleanup contention; it does not identify
the original blocking transaction.


## Risks

- Local process transfers require host-owned PID/group absence. Missing
or uncertain termination evidence keeps delivery pending, independently
of scratch setup.
- Handoff admission and task cancellation share execution ownership. New
regression tests cover temporary holds, late source writes, and
uncertain provider termination.
- Retained private sources use an intersection of existing permissions.
This intentionally fails closed when a source is missing or an existing
task cannot preserve that boundary.
- Migrations add tables and indexes. They preserve master history and
can replay over prior feature installs. Migration 0368 adds nullable
internal authorization provenance with no default or authority backfill.
Historical transfers still awaiting release without this context fail
closed; an operator must cancel them and request a new handoff.
- Delayed Cloud handoffs depend on the current Cloud membership RPC. An
unavailable, ambiguous, expired, or mismatched response holds the
handoff for retry; it does not reuse cached authority or grant access.
- Bounded reads reload and reauthorize the selected projection per page.
Underlying work grows with the data size and number of pages. Changed
data or routing requires restarting from offset zero without the old
snapshot.
- Phase names and workflow diagrams remain advisory. They do not satisfy
review or approval gates.
- This is a large, cross-cutting PR. The maintainer requested one PR for
the whole feature; the commits separate data, runtime, UI, and
qualification work.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with tool use, code execution, and delegated
code review. The exact deployment model ID and context-window size were
not exposed in the session. Live fixture agents used the explicitly
configured provider model recorded in their test evidence.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-20 12:46:14 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 9ef434fe79 docs: expose feature map IDs and add a recipe index (#16987)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Its feature map describes user journeys and their verification
paths.
> - The map already defines feature IDs and full capability IDs.
> - The README and child pages did not show those IDs consistently.
> - Readers need those IDs to connect issues, tests, stories, and
evidence.
> - This pull request adds a recipe index and displays the existing IDs.
> - The benefit is clear references across the product and agent access
maps.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Issue type**

Missing documentation.

**Where is the issue?**

`maps/feature-map/README.md`, the child recipes, and their agent access
companions.

**What's wrong?**

The README sends readers to Storybook to browse features. Child pages
show local keys, such as `installation`, without the full
`plugins/installation` ID. Readers must inspect the generator to find
the full reference.

**Suggested fix**

List recipe links and existing IDs in the README. Show each feature ID
and full capability ID in its child pages. Explain capability IDs and
entry-point references. Keep the current keys and anchors.

Related work: Refs #15288. Refs #16052. Refs #15983. No duplicate open
PR or issue was found by title search.

## What Changed

- Add an index grouped by feature area. It lists every recipe, feature
ID, and full capability ID.
- Explain how IDs are formed and used in issues, tests, Storybook, and
evidence.
- Add feature IDs to all product recipes and agent access companions.
- Show full capability IDs beside recipe keys and below access and
Storybook guidance headings.
- Preserve existing keys, heading anchors, and generated ID values. Keep
the latest upstream company capability in the index.

## Verification

- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passes for 34 feature families and 175
capability IDs.
- `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs
scripts/storybook-feature-index.test.mjs` passes all 17 tests.
- `node scripts/storybook-feature-index.mjs` passes on this checkout and
generates the feature indexes and overview inputs.
- `git diff --check` passes.
- A source comparison confirms that the README matches the recipe index.
After removal of the added ID labels, all 68 child pages match the
upstream prose and headings.
- Full workspace checks were attempted: `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm
test:run`, and `pnpm build`. They could not start because the local pnpm
wrapper could not fetch and verify the pinned pnpm 9.15.4 release. This
checkout also has no workspace dependencies installed.
- `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs` could not run because
`storybook/internal/csf-tools` is not installed. The direct map and
index checks above pass without that dependency.
- Remote typecheck, release-registry, and full build checks passed. The
first attempts of [server shard
3/12](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39460473910/job/118758430448)
and [server shard
12/12](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39460473910/job/118758429932)
stopped after their runners received a shutdown signal. The test steps
were canceled. GitHub rejects the rerun request with HTTP 403: "The
workflow run containing this job is already running". Five other CI jobs
remain active. The next action is to rerun the two interrupted shards
after workflow 39460473910 ends. No application changes were made to
address these runner interruptions.
- To inspect the result, open the feature-map README, follow a recipe
link, and compare its full capability IDs with its access companion.

## Risks

- Low risk. The change updates map documentation only. It changes no
application code or ID schema.
- The readable README index and child labels repeat source IDs. Keep
them aligned when a capability changes.
- Generated capability descriptions now include the visible ID prefix.
Generated IDs, labels, navigation order, and verification fields remain
the same.
- Full local workspace checks and catalog generation remain unverified
for the environment reasons above.

> 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, model `gpt-6.1-sol`, with a 475,000-token context window
and `xhigh` reasoning effort. The model used local file tools, shell
commands, and GitHub CLI access.

## Checklist

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

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-20 12:00:36 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 98d17da1e2 Fix native monitor dispatch and finalization recovery (#16975)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Native runs persist their results and workspace before they release
execution.
> - A task monitor must wait for that settlement before it starts the
next run.
> - The scheduler checked provider status but did not check unfinished
finalization.
> - A timer could dispatch too early, then its old finalizer could no
longer find the consumed schedule.
> - This pull request delays dispatch and reconciles prior delivery from
server records.
> - The task can continue without repeating the provider turn or
removing a newer run's ownership.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A native run saved a yielded monitor result while workspace finalization
needed recovery. Its timer dispatched after the provider stopped. The
follow-up failed because the earlier run still held workspace recovery.
The old finalizer then retried `monitor_wait_authority_lost`
indefinitely.

**Expected behavior**

Timer dispatch waits for native finalization. If an older timer already
dispatched, the finalizer uses its saved scheduling receipt and admitted
successor to settle the old result. It preserves current task state and
ownership.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Schedule a task monitor from a native run and save a yielded result.
2. Leave native finalization retryable after the provider reaches a
terminal state.
3. Let the monitor become due. Before this change, the scheduler
consumes it.
4. Restore workspace persistence and retry the old finalizer. Before
this change, the missing schedule leaves it retryable.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced against master `34be1b831bcaba070264ae8d214ceffe6a8f9eab`.

**Deployment mode**

Self-hosted server built from source, with PostgreSQL and the native
runner. Related recent recovery work: #16962 and #16963. No duplicate
repair found for this failure.

## What Changed

- Scheduled and manual monitor dispatch wait for unfinished native
finalization. If the monitor expires during workspace recovery, the
accepted result can settle into the persisted schedule, and the
scheduler then applies its existing expiry policy. New monitor-wait
results still require an unexpired, unexhausted schedule.
- A narrow reader joins the run's server-issued monitor receipt to its
durable wake and admitted successor.
- The finalizer and locked status commit verify that evidence and
preserve current task ownership. They do not create another wake.
- Monitor delivery participates in assessment identity, so recovery can
replace a prior error decision without violating the decision ledger's
uniqueness constraints.
- PostgreSQL regressions cover saved-result replay, active successors,
wrong task or agent, missing receipts, unadmitted wakes, ownership
races, and failed workspace persistence.
- The execution contract and verification maps describe the recovery
boundary.

## Verification

- Red: the saved monitor regression remained `retryable_failure` instead
of `committed` on unpatched code.
- Red: the scheduler admitted a wake while terminal-run finalization
remained retryable.
- Red/green: two PostgreSQL cases reproduce timeout during workspace
recovery for scheduled and manual checks. Before the review repair, both
remain `retryable_failure` with `monitor_wait_authority_lost`.
Afterward, both commit, apply board escalation once, preserve the saved
result, and enqueue zero provider wakes. New completion still rejects
the expired schedule.
- Typecheck: `pnpm -r typecheck` passed.
- Build: `pnpm build` passed.
- Maps: `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed.
- Review: Greptile 5/5 and Ponytail Paperclip Review 5/5 on the current
head, with no unresolved findings. Both reviews are static; execution
evidence is recorded separately above and below.
- Linux staging: the original repair passed 170 tests across monitor
integration, scheduling, status arbitration, and workspace finalization.
The expanded suite passes all 172 tests, including both new timeout
regressions.
- Live acceptance: deployed the original repair to the authorized Linux
ARM64 self-hosted instance. The stranded saved result finalized
automatically; the original task then completed through normal
admission, with its final answer persisted after browser reload. The
other original task was already complete and its external delivery was
verified without repeating it.
- The initial Mac regression run passed 68 tests, but three suites
failed during embedded PostgreSQL startup. A subsequent focused run
confirmed the host had exhausted its PostgreSQL semaphore allowance.
Linux verification uses isolated databases; the local failure logs
remain preserved.
- The local full test suite is not claimed as passed. It is blocked by
the same PostgreSQL startup limitation; full-suite CI passed on head
`8bc29d1b7783446f397b858e558083570a96bb66`
([run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39447913466)).

## Risks

- A delivery match must not grant new execution authority. The lookup
requires the original run's server receipt and a matching company,
agent, task, wake, and admitted successor. The locked commit rejects
old-run checkout ownership and permits no status effects.
- Workspace persistence must succeed before settlement. Its existing
failure path remains effective.
- The scheduler waits while a native finalizer is unfinished. Workspace
recovery must settle before dispatch; elapsed monitor limits transfer to
the existing scheduler recovery policy instead of stranding the result.
Neither settlement path renews a deadline or changes budget, approval,
pause, or provider authority.
- No schema, migration, credential, or provider configuration change.

## Model Used

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

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-20 10:58:41 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip b928c6698f fix(heartbeat): explain deferred monitor dispatch (#16891)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - One-shot task monitors request future work through the normal
heartbeat queue.
> - Queue admission can hold execution until recovery or ownership is
reconciled.
> - The scheduler retained those monitor schedules but recorded no
monitor diagnostic.
> - Agents could repeatedly reschedule the same blocked check without
seeing why it did not run.
> - This pull request records safe deferral and failure activity while
retaining all execution gates.
> - Agents and operators can inspect the actual blocker and use its
existing recovery path.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Related: #15556 handles transient monitor client errors. #14590 handles
parked monitor wakes. This change records the diagnosis when queue
admission defers or fails; it does not change their admission or monitor
consumption policies.

**What happened?**

A due monitor on a task with an unresolved execution-recovery hold was
claimed, passed to queue admission, and released without monitor
activity. The saved monitor continued to look scheduled. Unexpected
dispatch errors had the same audit gap. Repeated rearming could not
clear the recovery hold.

**Expected behavior**

Keep the monitor and the recovery hold. Record the reason that prevented
its wake. Do not execute uncertain work or consume an attempt. Limit
repeated identical diagnostics. If audit storage fails, release the
claim so a later tick can retry.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Schedule a due monitor on an agent-owned task in progress.
2. Add an active recovery action for an interrupted legacy execution.
3. Run the monitor scheduler twice. No provider may start while the hold
remains.
4. Before this fix, neither attempt writes monitor deferral activity.
5. Resolve the hold through its existing recovery path. The saved
monitor can then request one wake.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced on master 5739a53f5f with real PostgreSQL and the assembled
heartbeat service.

**Deployment mode**

Built from source. This affects the server monitor scheduler.

## What Changed

- Pass the existing execution blocker cause to the monitor scheduler
through a server-owned diagnostic callback.
- Record issue.monitor_deferred for held admission and
issue.monitor_dispatch_failed for unexpected admission failures.
- Keep activity to known reason codes and allowlisted blocker causes. Do
not copy raw provider messages.
- Fence claim release and activity against replacement, reassignment,
completion and competing scheduler instances.
- Limit identical activity for one schedule and cause to one record per
five minutes.
- Keep claim release functional when diagnostic storage fails.
- Update execution documentation and the task verification maps.

## Verification

- Red: explains held monitor dispatch without replaying uncertain
execution failed because it expected one deferral activity row and
received none. The fixture used the real queue, persisted source run and
recovery action.
- Red: records bounded dispatch failure diagnostics while retaining the
schedule failed because no failure activity was recorded.
- Green: both regressions pass after the fix. The held-source test
proves no successor while held, no monitor attempt consumed, and one
wake after explicit hold resolution.
- Passed: all 43 tests in heartbeat/scheduling.test.ts and
issue-monitor-scheduler.test.ts, with at most two workers.
- Additional coverage uses real PostgreSQL for diagnostic rate limits,
replacement races and an audit-insert trigger failure. Audit failure
must not retain the monitor claim. Private error and unknown blocker
text do not reach activity.
- Passed: node scripts/check-maps.mjs and git diff --check.
- Greptile: 5/5 with no actionable issues on
1d0aec738c.
- Latest-head checks: 55 successful, two skipped, and one neutral. No
check remains pending or failed. The branch has no merge conflict.
Paperclip Review ended neutral because its agent did not return a
complete assessment; it is not counted as a validated review pass.
- The dependency added on deferral is one bounded recent activity query
and at most one audit insert. Successful admission adds no new database
read. Existing queue authority checks still decide admission.
- The process fixtures validate queue admission and persisted state.
They log workspace setup errors after admission; this report does not
claim a live provider turn succeeded or that an existing deployment was
repaired.
- Passed: pnpm --dir server exec tsc --noEmit. The wrapper typecheck was
stopped because it started a redundant cold native Runner build. Full
repository checks run in PR CI; no local full-suite or full-build pass
is claimed.

## Risks

- Audit work must not strand a monitor. The storage-failure regression
verifies that rollback is followed by a claim-fenced release.
- Recovery holds still require their current reconciliation path. This
change makes their effect visible and does not bypass ownership, budget,
pause, Stop or company checks.
- Activity can be stale after a later repair, so each entry includes the
checked time and the exact saved deadline. A replacement cannot inherit
an old dispatch diagnostic.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, tool use and code execution.
The exact runtime model suffix and context window are not exposed to
this session.

## Checklist


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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-19 16:11:31 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 985d3b12b6 fix(runner): explain rejected task monitor arguments (#16868)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agents use task monitors to resume work after a future check.
> - The runner rejects monitor arguments that fail the tool schema.
> - It returned a generic error with no field or repair guidance.
> - An agent could treat a repairable call as a scheduling outage and
block its task.
> - This pull request adds safe repair guidance and shows the nested
request shape.
> - Agents can correct the call and confirm a saved schedule before they
yield.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #15446, #16686.

**What happened?**

A rejected native `set_task_monitor` call returned `invalid_tool_call`
with only “Paperclip rejected this semantic tool call.” The agent could
not identify the invalid field. A retry could fail again and leave
unfinished work without a scheduled wake.

**Expected behavior**

Reject invalid arguments before any mutation. Give the provider bounded
schema locations and clear repair guidance. A corrected call must save a
monitor and allow one wake without duplicate effects.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Call `set_task_monitor` with `idempotencyKey`, `nextCheckAt`, and
`notes` at the top level.
2. The schema rejects the call because scheduling fields belong inside
`monitor`.
3. Before this change, the provider received no guidance about the
required shape.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced against master `35c75b56d4` with a failing Rust regression.

**Deployment mode**

Source checkout. This affects the native runner tool bridge.

## What Changed

- Add monitor-specific repair guidance to the runner's existing safe
schema error path.
- Keep feedback within 512 bytes and omit submitted values and unknown
field names.
- Show the nested monitor request in the production tool description.
Refresh generated contracts and catalog identities.
- Test flat and nested invalid input, private value handling, and
unchanged authorization errors.
- Test rejection, correction with the same key, saved schedule and
audit, receipt replay, and one timer wake with real PostgreSQL and the
native tool authority.
- Update execution documentation and the task verification recipes.

## Verification

- Red/green: the Rust provider error regression failed on master because
monitor repair guidance was absent. It passed after the fix.
- Passed: 29 PostgreSQL monitor and scheduler integration tests. These
use the real tool authority and scheduler, with a no-op process agent
for wake delivery.
- Passed: the native Codex server vertical-slice test. It runs the
rebuilt Runner binary with a fake provider and checks durable results
and session resume.
- Passed: map structure checks, Rust formatting, and `git diff --check`.
- Passed locally: full repository `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and
all 392 Rust library unit tests.
- Passed on commit `3b667ad24763c1828edd48f56ef7a10766aeb946`: [CI run
39290889768](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39290889768),
including all server, Runner, serialized, browser, typecheck, build, and
canary gates. Across the PR, 56 checks passed and four conditional
checks were skipped. No check remains pending or failed.
- Greptile: 5/5 on that exact commit. The check concluded success, with
no review comments or unresolved threads.
- The duplicate local `pnpm test:run` attempt did not complete. It was
stopped after the full CI suite passed; it is not counted as a local
full-suite pass.
- The first PostgreSQL attempt could not bind localhost inside the shell
sandbox. It passed with normal localhost access. The first broader Rust
attempt had 37 socket-permission failures and 355 passes; all 392 passed
with localhost access and no code change.
- Live model recovery was not run. Local execution policy did not
authorize an extra acceptance run through the signed-in provider
account. This PR does not include a deployment or recovery of an
existing task.

## Risks

- Error feedback must not reveal submitted values. Tests cover private
values, unknown keys, nested constraints, length bounds, and unchanged
generic authorization errors.
- This changes guidance only. It does not relax the schema, retry calls
automatically, or change scheduling authority.
- A new runner binary and refreshed provider contract must reach the
target instance before agents receive this guidance.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The
exact runtime suffix and context window size are not exposed in this
session.

## Checklist

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

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-19 12:37:28 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip d20cb69ce5 fix(heartbeat): preserve active retries when comments arrive (#16855)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agents and their work.
> - Heartbeat retries preserve task ownership after a recoverable
failure.
> - The issue read model includes retries that are scheduled, queued, or
running.
> - The human comment route treated every retry in that model as parked
work.
> - A normal status comment could therefore cancel a running
continuation and return its task to Todo.
> - This pull request limits comment supersession to parked retries and
checks that state at the cancellation fence.
> - The agent can keep working when a person adds context. Explicit Stop
and Interrupt remain available.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A Board comment on an in-progress task cancelled its running recovery
continuation. The handler read a live retry from
`getCurrentScheduledRetry` but did not check its status. The
cancellation also forced workspace recovery when copy-back did not
complete.

**Expected behavior**

A comment must preserve queued and running execution. Only a retry that
is still `scheduled_retry` may be superseded. If promotion wins the
race, the comment must keep the task in progress and follow the normal
wake path.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Let a task retry advance from `scheduled_retry` to `running`.
2. Keep its retry reason and source run identity in the stored row.
3. Post a normal human comment, without an Interrupt request.
4. Observe the old handler cancel the run and move the task to Todo.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced on master base `9966f31bee`. The staging incident served
`f3cd3f4ea89539b68410841d39ec15a5c626007f`.

**Deployment mode**

Staging server with a remote runner. The defect is in the core comment
and cancellation path.

Refs #16835 and #16843. Those repairs cover runner health and workspace
preservation. This change prevents a normal comment from requesting the
wrong cancellation. Related #9732 promotes human wakes on parked
retries; it does not protect a retry that is already running.

## What Changed

- Check the live retry status in both comment routes: POST comments and
PATCH issue with a comment.
- Add an optional expected-status fence to cancellation. A concurrent
promotion or terminal outcome returns a no-op result.
- Make due-retry promotion honor a cancellation claim under its issue
and run row locks. A scheduler cannot promote work after cancellation
has won.
- Finish persisted cancellations of parked retries through the existing
startup and periodic recovery sweep. Preserve their original request and
retry a failed settlement without starting provider work.
- Keep the task active when guarded cancellation does not win. Do not
record a cancellation that did not occur.
- Add route regressions, real PostgreSQL race tests, and pending-retry
and explicit Stop safety coverage.
- Exercise both normal HTTP comment routes with real services, stored
Board membership, PostgreSQL, and a live child process. Assert that the
process can still perform work, the task keeps its original execution,
and no second executor starts.
- Document the comment supersession contract and update the task
feature/access maps with the local regression coverage and deployed
acceptance recipe.

## Verification

- Before the fix, all four POST/PATCH regressions cancelled queued or
running work.
- Before the fix, the real PostgreSQL race test cancelled a retry that
became running after lookup.
- The comment-route suite passes **103 tests**. The final dispatch,
cancellation, restart recovery and HTTP/live-process suites pass **119
tests**, for **222 affected tests** across these runs. They cover
comment delivery, both sides of the promotion race, concurrent terminal
outcomes, pending retries, explicit Stop, and a live process that can
continue work.
- Command: `node node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run
server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts
server/src/services/heartbeat/run-control.test.ts`.
- The normal HTTP/live-process acceptance suite passes all **14 tests**,
including both comment endpoints with stored Board membership and
deterministic wakeup teardown.
- Review exposed a second race after the cancellation claim. Its new
PostgreSQL test failed before the dispatch guard with `promoted` and
passes afterward with `not_promoted`, followed by completed
cancellation.
- A real PostgreSQL constraint interrupts the terminal cancellation
write after its intent commits. The assembled recovery service failed to
settle that row before the repair. Afterward a fresh service settles it,
clears its task lock, cancels its saved wake, preserves the original
request and leaves unrelated parked retries alone. A repeated database
failure preserves the intent for a later successful sweep; a second
successful sweep adds no duplicate event.
- Full `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. Server typecheck and
build pass again after the final server-only review fix. A local
full-suite attempt started on `f8773bf` did not return an overall
result; its log is preserved and no local full-suite pass is claimed.
The new recovery change passes the focused suites and fresh server
typecheck/build. Latest-head CI on
`8f928adee67c089e1ac405d2ad3b169eedb8da27` is green: the full PR
workflow and commitperclip review passed; only the two optional
Storybook jobs skipped.
- Greptile reviewed final head
`8f928adee67c089e1ac405d2ad3b169eedb8da27` at **5/5**, with no
unresolved findings. All actual latest-head CI checks passed; the two
optional Storybook jobs skipped.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passes after the map updates (34 areas,
172 capability IDs); it checks structure only.
- Fixed-revision staging acceptance is pending deployment. The original
workspace remains held and its latest source checkpoint is backed up and
verified.

## Risks

- A promoted retry must keep its execution and ownership when a comment
arrives. The database status predicate and route no-op handling enforce
this at the race boundary.
- A cancellation intent must prevent promotion without leaving work
parked forever after a restart. The recovery sweep consumes at most 20
such intents per pass through guarded cancellation, and a failed
settlement keeps its intent for retry.
- A parked retry must still accept fresh instructions. Its existing
cancellation and wake behavior remains covered.
- Ordinary Stop and Interrupt calls omit the expected-status option.
Their cancellation authority is unchanged and remains covered by the
run-control suite.
- No schema migration or API request contract changes are required.

## Model Used

OpenAI `gpt-6.1-sol` in Codex, with extra-high reasoning, tool use, and
code execution. The session does not expose its context-window limit.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-19 11:34:27 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 433d94ee0b refactor(maps): generate indexes from local story and feature metadata (#16214)
## Thinking Path

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

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

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

**Current behavior**

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

**Proposed behavior**

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

**Reason and benefit**

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

**Breaking changes**

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

## What Changed

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

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

## Verification

Passed:

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

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

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

To repeat the browser check against an owned Storybook server:

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

## Risks

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

## Model Used

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

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 15:27:23 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip be380ba155 fix(ui): hide agent-created tasks by default (#16157)
Hide agent-created, system-created, and chat-channel tasks from independent collections by default. Preserve task hierarchy context and existing inbox participation. Add a saved opt-in checkbox without helper text.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 09:26:37 -05:00
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
DottaandPaperclip 7d9b93aee2 docs: establish paired feature and agent access maps (#16025)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Contributors use the feature map to understand and verify product
capabilities.
> - Agents need APIs and usable entry points within their permission
boundaries.
> - Product recipes and agent access need separate records with shared
capability IDs.
> - This pull request establishes that contract and gives maintenance
ownership of both maps.
> - The benefit is repeatable access review without changing product
behavior or permissions.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #15983, which added the portable verification skills and updated
the feature map. This is its contract-only follow-up. Related: #15288
added the original feature map.

**Issue type**

Missing documentation and maintenance contract.

**Where is the issue?**

The product map, its missing agent access companions, and the
verification skills.

**What's wrong?**

There is no shared convention for API presence, agent entry points,
permission boundaries, access gaps, or evidence. An API declaration does
not prove that a permitted native or remote agent can use it.

**Suggested fix**

Keep the product and agent access maps as siblings under `maps/`. Reuse
capability IDs. Record representative source inventory separately from
operation review and live proof. Keep both maps aligned through the
maintenance skill.

## What Changed

- Move the existing product map to `maps/feature-map/`. Preserve its
recipes and Poteto format. Update relative links and add companion
links.
- Add `maps/agent-access-map/` with 35 area files and 171 matching
capability IDs. Seed representative API operations, agent paths,
policies and known gaps from the reviewed source inventory. Mark entries
as `baseline`, `source-only`, and live verification `not-run`.
- Define the shared contract in `maps/README.md`. Track API presence,
agent availability, policy, evidence and review depth separately.
Require operation enumeration before marking a broad capability
operation-reviewed.
- Extend `maintain-verification-skill` to reconcile both maps and
inspect actual route policy and production tool admission. Update
creation, verification, notices and contributor references to use the
shared contract.
- Add `scripts/check-maps.mjs` and ten regression tests. Check matching
areas/IDs, indexes, references, contract fields, API method/path
examples, justified exceptions and evidence-state consistency.
- Keep the coverage inventory unchanged. Preserve skill invocation
policies and both MIT license blocks. No product API, permission, UI,
runtime helper, migration, dependency or workflow changes.

## Verification

- Passed: `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` reports 35 paired areas and 171
matching capability IDs. All local map references resolve.
- Passed: `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs` runs ten tests.
Fixtures cover missing companions, renamed/orphan/duplicate IDs, broken
references, missing operation fields, empty exceptions, missing API
examples, empty policy fields, and verified evidence without passed
verification.
- Passed: metadata validation for all three verification skills. Skill
and contributor links resolve. Invocation policies and both license
blocks are unchanged.
- Compared relocated recipes with current master. Contents differ only
in relative links and companion links. `coverage.json` is byte-for-byte
unchanged. Master's updated read-only interaction test reference is
retained.
- Passed: `git diff --check`. The branch starts from current master and
contains only this contract change.
- Repository-wide typecheck, tests and build were not run locally for
this documentation and Node structural-check scope. Live agent access
was not exercised. Those gaps are explicit in the baseline entries; the
structural check does not certify behavior. CI and automated review are
pending.

## Risks

- The companions are representative source baselines. They are not
complete operation inventories or passed agent journeys.
- The checker cannot establish actual permissions, native tool
admission, operation completeness or truthful live evidence. Maintenance
must inspect source and verify with the actual permitted agent context.
- External links to the old product-map directory may need updates.
Repository references have been updated.
- Existing access gaps and board/user restrictions remain recorded. This
contract does not change authority or implement missing paths.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex assisted with this change. The session does
not expose the exact serving model ID, configured context-window size,
or reasoning setting. Capabilities used: source analysis, file edits,
shell commands, and structural 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 not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-12 14:52:28 -05:00