PaperClipAI

Jannik/PaperClipAI

0 Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git synced 2026-10-24 18:19:05 +02:00

Commit Graph

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	64b7dce0ad	refactor(adapter-utils): replace the process-wide byte ledger with route-local byte bounds (#12465 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The adapter layer carries sandbox requests to host processes. > - The HTTP/2 bridge used one process-wide byte ledger for all routes. > - One busy route could exhaust that shared budget and move another route to file transport. > - This pull request gives each host retention site a fixed byte bound and limits concurrent HTTP/2 streams. > - The benefit is local protection: one route cannot consume the byte budget of another route. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What happened? The HTTP/2 bridge used one aggregate byte ledger for retained bytes across all routes. A busy route could exhaust the shared budget and force an unrelated route to use file transport. Expected behavior Each route should protect its own retained bytes. A reset on one HTTP/2 stream should cancel only that stream's host forward. Steps to reproduce 1. Start the HTTP/2 bridge with multiple sandbox routes. 2. Send enough retained data through one route to reach the aggregate byte limit. 3. Send a request through a sibling route. 4. Observe that the sibling route can fall back to file transport because the first route used the shared ledger. Paperclip version or commit `47639e227e78e3c5e0dd1a3c0e2d792fe86895a3` Deployment mode Built from source with the adapter-utils and server test suites. ## What Changed - Bound each host retention site with a fixed local byte limit. - Limited concurrent live HTTP/2 streams with one built-in stream limit. - Bound each host forward and response-body read to its own HTTP/2 stream lifetime. - Removed the process-wide byte ledger, its environment override, its metrics, and its file-transport fallbacks. - Added tests for the stream limit, host body budget, and sibling-stream cancellation. ## Verification - Run `pnpm vitest run --project adapter-utils`. - Confirm that 996 adapter-utils tests pass. - Confirm that `test_live_forward_work_never_passes_the_stream_limit` passes. - Confirm that `test_the_host_body_budget_matches_the_stream_limit` passes. - Confirm that the sibling-stream cancellation test passes. - Run `pnpm tsc --noEmit`. - Confirm that all pull request checks pass. ## Risks The bridge no longer uses a process-wide byte ledger. A local bound or stream limit that is too low can reject or delay valid work. The tests cover the new limits and stream cancellation behavior. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-5 Codex. Runtime model ID: GPT-5. The model used code execution and repository tools. The runtime does not expose the context window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes: #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-08-28 14:36:18 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	445547c989	feat(duplex): run the Daytona sandbox callback bridge over Node HTTP/2 (#12120 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Sandbox providers carry agent work through controlled execution channels > - The Daytona callback bridge uses a bespoke line-framed protocol over its duplex channel > - The bespoke protocol adds framing work and does not use the Node transport that already supports multiplexed streams > - This pull request carries raw bytes across the channel, adds a Node HTTP/2 bridge, and selects it for Daytona > - The benefit is one authenticated, multiplexed callback session with queue_v1 as the bounded fallback ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Subsystem affected The packages/plugins Daytona provider and the shared duplex execution path. Problem or motivation The Daytona callback bridge uses a bespoke line-framed protocol over the provider duplex channel. This adds protocol work and limits stream handling. Proposed solution Carry raw bytes through the cross-layer channel. Add an authenticated Node HTTP/2 host server and sandbox client gateway. Select http2_v1 for Daytona and retain queue_v1 as the fallback. Alternatives considered Keep the current duplex_v1 protocol. This keeps the bespoke framing path and does not provide one HTTP/2 session for callback streams. Roadmap alignment ROADMAP.md lists Daytona under cloud and sandbox agents. This change improves the shipped Daytona provider path. Additional context The branch adds no dependency. Node 24 provides the http2 module. The host token check and canonical path parser remain the single dispatch path. ## What Changed - Carry raw Uint8Array chunks through the adapter, plugin, worker, runtime, and Daytona layers. - Encode bytes as base64 only across the JSON-RPC hop, because JSON has no binary type. - Add the bounded host HTTP/2 server and the in-sandbox HTTP/2 client gateway. - Authenticate every stream with the per-run bridge token before route work. - Parse the path once and reuse the canonical result for route and forwarding work. - Select http2_v1 for Daytona and fall back once to queue_v1 when the client preface is absent. - Add transport, session, stream, and fallback telemetry. - Mark HTTP/2 as the preferred transport and queue_v1 as the soft-deprecated fallback. ## Verification - `npx vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src` — 990 passed and 4 skipped. - `npx vitest run server/src/__tests__/plugin-worker-manager-duplex.test.ts` — 32 passed. - `npx vitest run --config packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/daytona/vitest.config.ts` — 220 passed and 6 skipped. - `npx tsc --noEmit` in `packages/adapter-utils`, `packages/shared`, `packages/plugins/sdk`, and `server` — clean. - No `package.json` or `pnpm-lock.yaml` file changed. - The live Daytona test skips when `DAYTONA_API_KEY` is absent. - The root `npx tsc --noEmit` command has a pre-existing missing `packages/adapters/droid-local` reference on this branch and on `master`. ## Risks - The transport change affects several duplex layers and could expose byte-boundary errors. - A missing HTTP/2 client preface falls back once to queue_v1 and records `preface_missing`. - The host token check and canonical path parser must remain on the shared dispatch path. - The live Daytona test needs `DAYTONA_API_KEY` and does not run in this agent sandbox. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-5, tool-enabled coding agent with repository inspection, GitHub CLI, and shell 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>	2026-08-25 07:35:39 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	d1573244b5	refactor: disambiguate the Telemetry and Observability data paths (#12128 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Paperclip records first-party events, OpenTelemetry data, and local run-log events > - The code and documents used one term for these three data paths > - This naming made the required review level unclear > - This pull request names each data path in the module names, documents, and code comments > - The benefit is a clear review rule without a runtime change ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Issue type Unclear or confusing. Where is the issue? `packages/shared/src/telemetry/README.md`, `doc/observability.md`, `doc/run-log-events.md`, and the duplex instrumentation modules. What's wrong? The repository used Telemetry for first-party events, OpenTelemetry data, and local run-log events. This usage made the data path and review level unclear. Suggested fix Use Telemetry only for Paperclip first-party events. Use Observability for OpenTelemetry data. Use the run log for rows in `heartbeat_run_events`. Related public pull requests: #8476 and #9672. ## What Changed - Rename the duplex instrumentation modules and identifiers from `Telemetry` to `Observability`. - Move the Observability and run-log contracts out of the Telemetry README. - Add `doc/observability.md` and `doc/run-log-events.md` as the canonical documents. - Add a file-path review rule to `AGENTS.md`. - Correct the remaining code comments that name the wrong data path. - Keep all event names, payloads, database records, spans, configuration keys, environment variables, and runtime paths unchanged. ## Verification - `npx vitest run packages/shared/src/telemetry/readme-contract.test.ts` passes. - `npx vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/published-exports.test.ts` passes. - `npx vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/startup-timing.test.ts` passes with 42 tests. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils typecheck` passes. - `pnpm --filter server typecheck` passes. - The old module name does not remain in TypeScript or JSON files, except for the intentional publication guard. - CI and Greptile checks remain pending after PR creation. ## Risks - The old duplex module subpath no longer has a compatibility shim. The board accepted this intentional hard break. - The new duplex module subpath stays blocked from package publication. - The change has no runtime effect. The main risk is an incorrect document or module reference. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-5 Codex, exact model ID `gpt-5`, with tool use and code review support. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have described the issue in-PR with the documentation issue fields - [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>	2026-08-24 16:42:33 -07:00

Author

SHA1

Message

Date

Nicky LeachandPaperclip

64b7dce0ad

refactor(adapter-utils): replace the process-wide byte ledger with route-local byte bounds (#12465 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The adapter layer carries sandbox requests to host processes.
> - The HTTP/2 bridge used one process-wide byte ledger for all routes.
> - One busy route could exhaust that shared budget and move another
route to file transport.
> - This pull request gives each host retention site a fixed byte bound
and limits concurrent HTTP/2 streams.
> - The benefit is local protection: one route cannot consume the byte
budget of another route.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

The HTTP/2 bridge used one aggregate byte ledger for retained bytes
across all routes. A busy route could exhaust the shared budget and
force an unrelated route to use file transport.

**Expected behavior**

Each route should protect its own retained bytes. A reset on one HTTP/2
stream should cancel only that stream's host forward.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Start the HTTP/2 bridge with multiple sandbox routes.
2. Send enough retained data through one route to reach the aggregate
byte limit.
3. Send a request through a sibling route.
4. Observe that the sibling route can fall back to file transport
because the first route used the shared ledger.

**Paperclip version or commit**

`47639e227e78e3c5e0dd1a3c0e2d792fe86895a3`

**Deployment mode**

Built from source with the adapter-utils and server test suites.

## What Changed

- Bound each host retention site with a fixed local byte limit.
- Limited concurrent live HTTP/2 streams with one built-in stream limit.
- Bound each host forward and response-body read to its own HTTP/2
stream lifetime.
- Removed the process-wide byte ledger, its environment override, its
metrics, and its file-transport fallbacks.
- Added tests for the stream limit, host body budget, and sibling-stream
cancellation.

## Verification

- Run `pnpm vitest run --project adapter-utils`.
- Confirm that 996 adapter-utils tests pass.
- Confirm that `test_live_forward_work_never_passes_the_stream_limit`
passes.
- Confirm that `test_the_host_body_budget_matches_the_stream_limit`
passes.
- Confirm that the sibling-stream cancellation test passes.
- Run `pnpm tsc --noEmit`.
- Confirm that all pull request checks pass.

## Risks

The bridge no longer uses a process-wide byte ledger. A local bound or
stream limit that is too low can reject or delay valid work. The tests
cover the new limits and stream cancellation behavior.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-5 Codex. Runtime model ID: GPT-5. The model used code
execution and repository tools. The runtime does not expose the context
window size.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>

2026-08-28 14:36:18 -07:00

Nicky LeachandPaperclip

445547c989

feat(duplex): run the Daytona sandbox callback bridge over Node HTTP/2 (#12120 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Sandbox providers carry agent work through controlled execution
channels
> - The Daytona callback bridge uses a bespoke line-framed protocol over
its duplex channel
> - The bespoke protocol adds framing work and does not use the Node
transport that already supports multiplexed streams
> - This pull request carries raw bytes across the channel, adds a Node
HTTP/2 bridge, and selects it for Daytona
> - The benefit is one authenticated, multiplexed callback session with
queue_v1 as the bounded fallback

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

The packages/plugins Daytona provider and the shared duplex execution
path.

**Problem or motivation**

The Daytona callback bridge uses a bespoke line-framed protocol over the
provider duplex channel. This adds protocol work and limits stream
handling.

**Proposed solution**

Carry raw bytes through the cross-layer channel. Add an authenticated
Node HTTP/2 host server and sandbox client gateway. Select http2_v1 for
Daytona and retain queue_v1 as the fallback.

**Alternatives considered**

Keep the current duplex_v1 protocol. This keeps the bespoke framing path
and does not provide one HTTP/2 session for callback streams.

**Roadmap alignment**

ROADMAP.md lists Daytona under cloud and sandbox agents. This change
improves the shipped Daytona provider path.

**Additional context**

The branch adds no dependency. Node 24 provides the http2 module. The
host token check and canonical path parser remain the single dispatch
path.

## What Changed

- Carry raw Uint8Array chunks through the adapter, plugin, worker,
runtime, and Daytona layers.
- Encode bytes as base64 only across the JSON-RPC hop, because JSON has
no binary type.
- Add the bounded host HTTP/2 server and the in-sandbox HTTP/2 client
gateway.
- Authenticate every stream with the per-run bridge token before route
work.
- Parse the path once and reuse the canonical result for route and
forwarding work.
- Select http2_v1 for Daytona and fall back once to queue_v1 when the
client preface is absent.
- Add transport, session, stream, and fallback telemetry.
- Mark HTTP/2 as the preferred transport and queue_v1 as the
soft-deprecated fallback.

## Verification

- `npx vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src` — 990 passed and 4
skipped.
- `npx vitest run
server/src/__tests__/plugin-worker-manager-duplex.test.ts` — 32 passed.
- `npx vitest run --config
packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/daytona/vitest.config.ts` — 220
passed and 6 skipped.
- `npx tsc --noEmit` in `packages/adapter-utils`, `packages/shared`,
`packages/plugins/sdk`, and `server` — clean.
- No `package.json` or `pnpm-lock.yaml` file changed.
- The live Daytona test skips when `DAYTONA_API_KEY` is absent.
- The root `npx tsc --noEmit` command has a pre-existing missing
`packages/adapters/droid-local` reference on this branch and on
`master`.

## Risks

- The transport change affects several duplex layers and could expose
byte-boundary errors.
- A missing HTTP/2 client preface falls back once to queue_v1 and
records `preface_missing`.
- The host token check and canonical path parser must remain on the
shared dispatch path.
- The live Daytona test needs `DAYTONA_API_KEY` and does not run in this
agent sandbox.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-5, tool-enabled coding agent with repository inspection,
GitHub CLI, and shell 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>

2026-08-25 07:35:39 -07:00

Nicky LeachandPaperclip

d1573244b5

refactor: disambiguate the Telemetry and Observability data paths (#12128 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Paperclip records first-party events, OpenTelemetry data, and local
run-log events
> - The code and documents used one term for these three data paths
> - This naming made the required review level unclear
> - This pull request names each data path in the module names,
documents, and code comments
> - The benefit is a clear review rule without a runtime change

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Issue type**

Unclear or confusing.

**Where is the issue?**

`packages/shared/src/telemetry/README.md`, `doc/observability.md`,
`doc/run-log-events.md`, and the duplex instrumentation modules.

**What's wrong?**

The repository used Telemetry for first-party events, OpenTelemetry
data, and local run-log events. This usage made the data path and review
level unclear.

**Suggested fix**

Use Telemetry only for Paperclip first-party events. Use Observability
for OpenTelemetry data. Use the run log for rows in
`heartbeat_run_events`.

Related public pull requests: #8476 and #9672.

## What Changed

- Rename the duplex instrumentation modules and identifiers from
`Telemetry` to `Observability`.
- Move the Observability and run-log contracts out of the Telemetry
README.
- Add `doc/observability.md` and `doc/run-log-events.md` as the
canonical documents.
- Add a file-path review rule to `AGENTS.md`.
- Correct the remaining code comments that name the wrong data path.
- Keep all event names, payloads, database records, spans, configuration
keys, environment variables, and runtime paths unchanged.

## Verification

- `npx vitest run packages/shared/src/telemetry/readme-contract.test.ts`
passes.
- `npx vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/published-exports.test.ts`
passes.
- `npx vitest run
packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/startup-timing.test.ts` passes
with 42 tests.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils typecheck` passes.
- `pnpm --filter server typecheck` passes.
- The old module name does not remain in TypeScript or JSON files,
except for the intentional publication guard.
- CI and Greptile checks remain pending after PR creation.

## Risks

- The old duplex module subpath no longer has a compatibility shim. The
board accepted this intentional hard break.
- The new duplex module subpath stays blocked from package publication.
- The change has no runtime effect. The main risk is an incorrect
document or module reference.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-5 Codex, exact model ID `gpt-5`, with tool use and code
review support.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have described the issue in-PR with the documentation issue
fields
- [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>

2026-08-24 16:42:33 -07:00