PaperClipAI

0 Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git synced 2026-10-11 05:31:46 +02:00

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	e1df4c6068	fix(workspaces): keep deferred seed databases reliable (#11706 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agent work in isolated execution workspaces. > - A workspace depends on a valid database seed before it can run. > - Deferred seed failures were hidden behind a successful provision status. > - The seed restore also had two possible owners for the embedded PostgreSQL process. > - That allowed the target database to stop while the restore was still running. > - This pull request makes seed failures visible and gives the seed process sole lifecycle ownership. > - The benefit is that workspace provisioning reports the real result and does not stop its own target database. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #11684 What happened? Initial worktree provisioning could report success before its deferred database seed completed. The seed restore could also reuse a target embedded PostgreSQL process with another shutdown owner. This could stop the target database during the restore. Expected behavior Workspace status must show a failed deferred seed as a failure. The seed restore must own the target embedded PostgreSQL process until restore, migration, and validation finish. Steps to reproduce 1. Provision a worktree with deferred database seeding. 2. Make the seed manifest end in a failed state while the command exits with code 0. 3. Observe that the provision status remains successful on `master`. 4. Start a seed restore against an already-running target embedded PostgreSQL process. 5. Observe that another lifecycle owner can stop the target during restore. Paperclip version or commit `51a843e135` Deployment mode Local dev with execution workspaces and embedded PostgreSQL. ## What Changed - Add a first-class `workspace_seed` operation for deferred database seeds. - Require terminal, verified seed evidence before the seed operation succeeds. - Surface the seed phase and failure metadata in workspace status and UI state. - Give the seed process exclusive lifecycle ownership of the target embedded PostgreSQL process. - Suppress imported embedded-Postgres exit hooks without removing existing host listeners. - Record a credential-safe shutdown diagnostic in failed seed manifests. ## Verification - The original deferred-seed commit passed 4 server tests, 24 workspace-status UI tests, shared/server/UI typechecks, and the UI token gate. - The original PostgreSQL-lifecycle commit passed 3 lifecycle tests, 3 ownership/diagnostic tests, 1 real embedded-Postgres seed integration, and the affected package typechecks. - No local tests were rerun after the clean cherry-pick because the operator requested the shortest landing path. - Review the automatic PR checks for the clean `origin/master` replay. ## Risks - A live target database now causes an early error instead of being reused. The error includes recovery guidance. - Workspace consumers must handle the new `workspace_seed` operation type. Shared types and UI state handling are updated in this pull request. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, high-reasoning mode, with repository, shell, and GitHub tool use. The runtime does not expose a more specific deployment suffix or context-window value. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed 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>	2026-08-19 10:41:29 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	a2bf936f9a	feat(workspaces): sign the workspace login handoff and gate readiness (#11671 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Managed worktree services run isolated Paperclip instances with cloned databases. > - A reachable service was reported as ready even when its database, runtime identity, or login path was not usable. > - The first candidate added verified database seeding and managed repair in #11665. > - This pull request consolidates that candidate with signed login handoff and a complete readiness contract. > - Post-QA fixes close five defects in repair identity, repair responses, UI retry, seed journal handling, and seed-source trust. > - The benefit is a workspace that either opens safely or reports one accurate recovery action. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists for this work, so the problem is described here. What happened Managed workspace URLs could return HTTP 200 and report ready while login failed. QA also found cases where repair used the wrong instance identity, returned a generic error, left the UI stuck, rejected a safe journal lag, or trusted a mutable workspace manifest. Expected behavior Opening a ready workspace signs the board user in to the correct isolated instance. Provisioning and repair use a registered source and report a structured recovery state. Actual behavior Entry depended on a password copied into the clone. Several failure paths could publish stale readiness, hide the repair precondition, or trust state that the workspace could modify. Additional context This pull request includes the commits first published in #11665. That pull request keeps the original base head for review history. This consolidated pull request is the merge candidate. Related open readiness work includes #11575 and #11621. ## What Changed - Adds a short-lived, signed, single-use login ticket. It binds the user, workspace, instance, and runtime origin. - Exchanges the ticket through Better Auth. It creates the session and cookie through the supported adapter path. - Adds protected workspace readiness fields for the database, clone data, login handoff, seed phase, and runtime identity. - Fails readiness closed when the guest has no company or execution-workspace binding. - Binds ticket issuance to the exact cloned user and active company membership selected for the handoff. - Verifies every current active board identity through the exact-user handoff before publication or reuse. - Gates managed runtime publication on the readiness contract and the recorded worktree instance identity. - Refreshes runtime work products from the live runtime row after a port change. - Adds one workspace access card with ready, degraded, repairing, and failed states. - Uses the runtime response identity for repair. It returns structured repair precondition errors. - Lets a valid source journal lag converge during provisioning. - Binds seed and repair manifests to a source registered outside the agent-writable worktree. - Clears recovered UI errors so a successful retry can open the workspace. - Makes runtime tests register canonical sources and avoid ports owned by live host listeners. - Keeps Vitest on source suites when compiled `dist` trees exist. - Isolates CLI and adapter tests from ambient AWS and runtime API environment variables. - Preserves a 404 response for cross-company workspace ID lookups before runtime authorization. - Makes concurrent single-flight coverage independent of path-canonicalization scheduling order. ## Verification The following checks passed on the integrated head: ```sh pnpm -r typecheck pnpm build pnpm check:token-gates pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db check:migrations ``` - The server source lane passed 420 files and 4,953 tests. Five tests were skipped. - The CLI lane passed 57 files and 385 tests. - The database lane passed 26 files and 97 tests. - The shared package passed 58 files and 506 tests. - The adapter utility lane passed 640 tests. Four tests were skipped. - The Claude adapter passed 220 tests. One test was skipped. - The Codex adapter passed 323 tests. - The OpenClaw adapter passed 13 tests. - The OpenCode adapter passed 42 tests. - The plugin SDK passed 45 tests. - The workspace runtime suite passed 124 tests. - The caller-scoped readiness and handoff suite passed 52 tests. - The workspace provisioning shell suite passed 7 tests. - The runtime exposure suite passed 17 tests while live host mappings occupied fixed test ports. - `git diff --check` passed and the worktree is clean. The serialized route lane will run in GitHub CI with its normal shards. No deployment or active-workspace migration was performed. ## Risks - This is a medium-risk authentication and runtime-readiness change. - The login ticket uses exact origin, workspace, instance, and user binding. It has a short expiry and a one-time nonce. - Runtime publication is stricter. A real readiness, identity, per-user handoff, or control-plane database disagreement now blocks publication. - This pull request supersedes #11665 as the merge candidate. Close #11665 after this pull request merges. - No new database migration is included. The lockfile and workflow files are unchanged. - Deployment and active-workspace migration are intentionally outside this pull request. > 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 Claude Opus 5 (`claude-opus-5[1m]`), 1M context, extended thinking, tool use, and code execution produced the main candidate. OpenAI GPT-5 (`gpt-5`) through Codex, with agentic reasoning, tool use, and code execution, integrated the post-QA fixes and hardened the test gates. The Codex context-window size was not exposed. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (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>	2026-08-19 02:37:02 -05:00
dependabot[bot]Priya Raman Paperclip	3dd2d21e4d	build(deps-dev): bump @storybook/react-vite from 10.5.0 to 10.5.8 (#11514 ) Bumps [@storybook/react-vite](https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/tree/HEAD/code/frameworks/react-vite) from 10.5.0 to 10.5.8. <details> <summary>Release notes</summary> <p><em>Sourced from <a href="https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/releases">@storybook/react-vite's releases</a>.</em></p> <blockquote> <h2>v10.5.8</h2> <h2>10.5.8</h2> <ul> <li>React: Fix RDT tsconfig selection for Vite project references - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35743">#35743</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/ndelangen"><code>@ndelangen</code></a>!</li> <li>Tanstack React: Remove <code>@cloudflare/vite-plugin</code> from the inherited Vite config - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35706">#35706</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/FrancoKaddour"><code>@FrancoKaddour</code></a>!</li> <li>Tanstack: Wait for router to load before rendering - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35784">#35784</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/huang-julien"><code>@huang-julien</code></a>!</li> <li>Test: Fix Illegal invocation when reading prototype.focus - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35528">#35528</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/FrancoKaddour"><code>@FrancoKaddour</code></a>!</li> </ul> <h2>v10.5.7</h2> <h2>10.5.7</h2> <ul> <li>Angular: Serve ancestor node_modules for addon-vitest in browser mode - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35600">#35600</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/brandonroberts"><code>@brandonroberts</code></a>!</li> <li>Refactor: Update getVersionedPackages method to handle non-Storybook packages correctly - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35769">#35769</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/valentinpalkovic"><code>@valentinpalkovic</code></a>!</li> </ul> <h2>v10.5.6</h2> <h2>10.5.6</h2> <ul> <li>Dependencies: Pin `@testing-library/jest-dom` to `6.9.1` - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35614">#35614</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/ndelangen"><code>@ndelangen</code></a>!</li> <li>ESLint Plugin: Add plugin meta and document oxlint usage - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35655">#35655</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/yannbf"><code>@yannbf</code></a>!</li> <li>Vue: Skip docgen for module ids carrying a query - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35598">#35598</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/seanogdev"><code>@seanogdev</code></a>!</li> </ul> <h2>v10.5.5</h2> <h2>10.5.5</h2> <ul> <li>CLI: Update AI setup instructions to msw-storybook-addon v3 - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35512">#35512</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/yannbf"><code>@yannbf</code></a>!</li> <li>Core: Upgrade `ws` to fix security advisories - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35584">#35584</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/ndelangen"><code>@ndelangen</code></a>!</li> <li>ReactNative: Telemetry framework detection fix - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35560">#35560</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/ndelangen"><code>@ndelangen</code></a>!</li> <li>SyntaxHighlighter: Fix PrismJS dark mode mismatch - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35541">#35541</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/hxy-asdw"><code>@hxy-asdw</code></a>!</li> <li>TanStack: Preserve explicit route ids on pathful clones - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35499">#35499</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/unpunnyfuns"><code>@unpunnyfuns</code></a>!</li> <li>TanStack: Resolve mock redirects through Vite's resolver - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35501">#35501</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/unpunnyfuns"><code>@unpunnyfuns</code></a>!</li> <li>TanStack: Respect routeOverrides component overrides in stories - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35497">#35497</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/unpunnyfuns"><code>@unpunnyfuns</code></a>!</li> </ul> <h2>v10.5.4</h2> <h2>10.5.4</h2> <ul> <li>ReactNative: Telemetry framework detection fix - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35560">#35560</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/ndelangen"><code>@ndelangen</code></a>!</li> <li>SyntaxHighlighter: Fix PrismJS dark mode mismatch - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35541">#35541</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/hxy-asdw"><code>@hxy-asdw</code></a>!</li> </ul> <h2>v10.5.3</h2> <h2>10.5.3</h2> <ul> <li>Dependencies: Upgrade TypeScript to 6.0.3 - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/34971">#34971</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/valentinpalkovic"><code>@valentinpalkovic</code></a>!</li> </ul> <h2>v10.5.2</h2> <h2>10.5.2</h2> <ul> <li>Angular-Vite: Drop <code>@angular/platform-browser-dynamic</code> peer dependency - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35457">#35457</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/valentinpalkovic"><code>@valentinpalkovic</code></a>!</li> <li>Angular-Vite: Widen TypeScript peer dependency range to support TypeScript 6 - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35455">#35455</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/valentinpalkovic"><code>@valentinpalkovic</code></a>!</li> <li>Core: Include chromatic packages in ecosystem identifier - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35170">#35170</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/yannbf"><code>@yannbf</code></a>!</li> <li>TanStack: Fix createServerFn validator mock - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35185">#35185</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/sjh9714"><code>@sjh9714</code></a>!</li> </ul> <!-- raw HTML omitted --> </blockquote> <p>... (truncated)</p> </details> <details> <summary>Changelog</summary> <p><em>Sourced from <a href="https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/blob/next/CHANGELOG.md">@storybook/react-vite's changelog</a>.</em></p> <blockquote> <h2>10.5.8</h2> <ul> <li>React: Fix RDT tsconfig selection for Vite project references - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35743">#35743</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/ndelangen"><code>@ndelangen</code></a>!</li> <li>Tanstack React: Remove <code>@cloudflare/vite-plugin</code> from the inherited Vite config - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35706">#35706</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/FrancoKaddour"><code>@FrancoKaddour</code></a>!</li> <li>Tanstack: Wait for router to load before rendering - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35784">#35784</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/huang-julien"><code>@huang-julien</code></a>!</li> <li>Test: Fix Illegal invocation when reading prototype.focus - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35528">#35528</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/FrancoKaddour"><code>@FrancoKaddour</code></a>!</li> </ul> <h2>10.5.7</h2> <ul> <li>Angular: Serve ancestor node_modules for addon-vitest in browser mode - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35600">#35600</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/brandonroberts"><code>@brandonroberts</code></a>!</li> <li>Refactor: Update getVersionedPackages method to handle non-Storybook packages correctly - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35769">#35769</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/valentinpalkovic"><code>@valentinpalkovic</code></a>!</li> </ul> <h2>10.5.6</h2> <ul> <li>Dependencies: Pin <code>@testing-library/jest-dom</code> to <code>6.9.1</code> - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35614">#35614</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/ndelangen"><code>@ndelangen</code></a>!</li> <li>ESLint Plugin: Add plugin meta and document oxlint usage - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35655">#35655</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/yannbf"><code>@yannbf</code></a>!</li> <li>Vue: Skip docgen for module ids carrying a query - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35598">#35598</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/seanogdev"><code>@seanogdev</code></a>!</li> </ul> <h2>10.5.5</h2> <ul> <li>CLI: Update AI setup instructions to msw-storybook-addon v3 - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35512">#35512</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/yannbf"><code>@yannbf</code></a>!</li> <li>Core: Upgrade <code>ws</code> to fix security advisories - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35584">#35584</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/ndelangen"><code>@ndelangen</code></a>!</li> <li>ReactNative: Telemetry framework detection fix - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35560">#35560</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/ndelangen"><code>@ndelangen</code></a>!</li> <li>SyntaxHighlighter: Fix PrismJS dark mode mismatch - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35541">#35541</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/hxy-asdw"><code>@hxy-asdw</code></a>!</li> <li>TanStack: Preserve explicit route ids on pathful clones - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35499">#35499</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/unpunnyfuns"><code>@unpunnyfuns</code></a>!</li> <li>TanStack: Resolve mock redirects through Vite's resolver - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35501">#35501</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/unpunnyfuns"><code>@unpunnyfuns</code></a>!</li> <li>TanStack: Respect routeOverrides component overrides in stories - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35497">#35497</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/unpunnyfuns"><code>@unpunnyfuns</code></a>!</li> </ul> <h2>10.5.4</h2> <ul> <li>ReactNative: Telemetry framework detection fix - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35560">#35560</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/ndelangen"><code>@ndelangen</code></a>!</li> <li>SyntaxHighlighter: Fix PrismJS dark mode mismatch - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35541">#35541</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/hxy-asdw"><code>@hxy-asdw</code></a>!</li> </ul> <h2>10.5.3</h2> <ul> <li>Dependencies: Upgrade TypeScript to 6.0.3 - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/34971">#34971</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/valentinpalkovic"><code>@valentinpalkovic</code></a>!</li> </ul> <h2>10.5.2</h2> <ul> <li>TanStack: Fix createServerFn validator mock - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35185">#35185</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/sjh9714"><code>@sjh9714</code></a>!</li> <li>TanStack: Support pathless layout routes (id-only) in story routing - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35465">#35465</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/unpunnyfuns"><code>@unpunnyfuns</code></a>!</li> <li>Tanstack-react: Add missing Hydrate export - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35111">#35111</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/arun-357"><code>@arun-357</code></a>!</li> <li>Tanstack-react: Keep JSX-only component references during dead-code elimination - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35206">#35206</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/yatishgoel"><code>@yatishgoel</code></a>!</li> <li>Vitest: Fix coverage toggle crash on Vite 6 by clearing closed Vitest instance on restart - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35461">#35461</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/yannbf"><code>@yannbf</code></a>!</li> </ul> <h2>10.5.1</h2> <ul> <li>Angular-Vite: Drop <code>@angular/platform-browser-dynamic</code> peer dependency - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35457">#35457</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/valentinpalkovic"><code>@valentinpalkovic</code></a>!</li> <li>Angular-Vite: Widen TypeScript peer dependency range to support TypeScript 6 - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35455">#35455</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/valentinpalkovic"><code>@valentinpalkovic</code></a>!</li> <li>Core: Include chromatic packages in ecosystem identifier - <a href="https://redirect.github.com/storybookjs/storybook/pull/35170">#35170</a>, thanks <a href="https://github.com/yannbf"><code>@yannbf</code></a>!</li> </ul> </blockquote> </details> <details> <summary>Commits</summary> <ul> <li><a href="https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/commit/6ef7d1ae816ebd5fb8bf84b8dec7d4a92410d73c"><code>6ef7d1a</code></a> Bump version from "10.5.7" to "10.5.8" [skip ci]</li> <li><a href="https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/commit/647e982151f1bb4e15163b0d2a31c5a1022efda3"><code>647e982</code></a> Merge pull request <a href="https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/tree/HEAD/code/frameworks/react-vite/issues/35743">#35743</a> from storybookjs/norbert/revive-34415-file-aware-ts...</li> <li><a href="https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/commit/7c6fb3a5ecf4495d73de6d70f802251934e079bd"><code>7c6fb3a</code></a> Bump version from "10.5.6" to "10.5.7" [skip ci]</li> <li><a href="https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/commit/43f2316559b30948d9ef724e5cb3140ddeca8867"><code>43f2316</code></a> Merge pull request <a href="https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/tree/HEAD/code/frameworks/react-vite/issues/35490">#35490</a> from storybookjs/valentin/remove-tsconfig-baseurl</li> <li><a href="https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/commit/3126f0a14a351e971679f61cd0bd5609d086ed57"><code>3126f0a</code></a> Bump version from "10.5.5" to "10.5.6" [skip ci]</li> <li><a href="https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/commit/05a52b7a888c6b85c3f8aa6765ed9a0a69a79e4c"><code>05a52b7</code></a> Bump version from "10.5.4" to "10.5.5" [skip ci]</li> <li><a href="https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/commit/3327dc44697304275e28ceaa2cd34d9bede4e333"><code>3327dc4</code></a> Bump version from "10.5.3" to "10.5.4" [skip ci]</li> <li><a href="https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/commit/9ac273930a49ad33b6a331f1f36dc472f5c36054"><code>9ac2739</code></a> Bump version from "10.5.2" to "10.5.3" [skip ci]</li> <li><a href="https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/commit/b4b00f27662caf7328330b5ab47e9b903218f43a"><code>b4b00f2</code></a> Merge pull request <a href="https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/tree/HEAD/code/frameworks/react-vite/issues/34971">#34971</a> from storybookjs/valentin/upgrade-typescript-6</li> <li><a href="https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/commit/518f711cb367d8df184be22f1fab9a218b2743df"><code>518f711</code></a> Bump version from "10.5.1" to "10.5.2" [skip ci]</li> <li>Additional commits viewable in <a href="https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/commits/v10.5.8/code/frameworks/react-vite">compare view</a></li> </ul> </details> <br /> --------- Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com> Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Priya Raman <priya@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-08-19 00:27:37 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	1b4de0b65c	fix(workspaces): recover degraded runtime databases (#11651 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Managed workspaces run local web services and embedded PostgreSQL databases > - A listening process could return an unhealthy response and still be reused > - Embedded PostgreSQL failures had no bounded restart owner > - Cleanup inferred ownership from a branch slug instead of exact persisted instance data > - This pull request validates runtime health, supervises database recovery, and uses exact cleanup ownership > - The benefit is reliable replacement of degraded services without deleting active instances ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What happened? Workspace reconciliation could reuse a degraded Paperclip process after any successful HTTP response. Embedded PostgreSQL could stop without bounded recovery. Cleanup could infer database ownership from a branch slug and select the wrong instance. Expected behavior Paperclip must require a semantic healthy response from the assigned loopback listener. It must replace degraded processes. It must supervise embedded PostgreSQL with bounded restarts. Cleanup must use exact persisted worktree and instance-root ownership. Steps to reproduce 1. Start a managed workspace runtime. 2. Make its health endpoint return HTTP 200 with an unhealthy status, or stop its embedded PostgreSQL process. 3. Reconcile the workspace or run instance cleanup. 4. Observe that the old implementation can reuse the degraded runtime or infer ownership from its branch slug. Paperclip version or commit Current `master` before this pull request. Deployment mode Local dev with managed workspace services. ## What Changed - Require `{ "status": "ok" }` from the assigned loopback health endpoint before runtime reuse or adoption. - Refresh persisted runtime health and replace degraded managed processes. - Add bounded embedded PostgreSQL restart supervision with coordinated shutdown and hot-restart support. - Stop the unhealthy web process when PostgreSQL recovery is exhausted so reconciliation can replace it. - Require exact persisted instance-root ownership before cleanup can reclaim an embedded database. - Add focused regression tests for degraded HTTP responses, ownership mismatches, bounded recovery, active instance preservation, and confirmed orphan reclamation. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server test -- src/embedded-postgres-supervisor.test.ts src/services/workspace-instance-cleanup.test.ts src/services/workspace-runtime.test.ts src/services/execution-workspaces-service.test.ts` - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm build` - `git diff --check` - The full local stable test runner also found host-owned listeners on ports 42000 and 52000. Those listeners conflict with the exposure test fixture. The focused changed suites pass, and CI runs on a clean host. ## Risks - A custom process that returns HTTP 2xx without the Paperclip health contract is now degraded by design. - Restart exhaustion terminates the managed web process. The runtime reconciler then starts a clean process. - Cleanup now fails closed when persisted ownership is missing. This can retain an ambiguous orphan for manual review. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-5 Codex. The exact serving revision and context-window size are not exposed. The model used agentic reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and test execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [ ] 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>	2026-08-18 17:40:54 -05:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	120ae5428f	feat(server): add a one-click relink action for detached custom-image templates (#11641 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Paperclip environments can use captured custom images for agent runs > - A configuration fingerprint change can detach a valid custom-image template > - Operators need a safe way to confirm that the image still matches the boot source > - This pull request adds a guarded relink action with drift classification and audit logging > - The benefit is a deliberate relink without a new sandbox boot or provider snapshot ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Subsystem affected Cross-cutting environment, server, and UI behavior. Problem or motivation A custom-image template detaches when the environment configuration fingerprint changes. The runtime then uses the base image, even when the boot source did not change. The only prior remedy required a full re-capture. Proposed solution Add an operator-triggered relink action. Classify configuration drift from a server-owned boot-relevant snapshot. Relink knob-only drift without confirmation. Require explicit confirmation for boot-source or unclassified drift. Guard the route for instance administrators and record a safe activity event. Alternatives considered Keep requiring a full re-capture. This adds a sandbox boot and provider snapshot for cases where the image remains correct. Roadmap alignment The roadmap has no matching custom-image relink item. This change addresses an environment operation gap. Additional context The relink response exposes raw drift values only in the transient 409 response to the instance administrator. The service never persists or logs fingerprints or configuration values. Reserved identity-path segments fail closed. ## What Changed - Add `relinkActiveTemplate` with drift classification and conditional fingerprint update. - Persist a server-owned boot-relevant configuration snapshot during capture. - Add the guarded relink route with strict request validation and activity logging. - Add the relink action and confirmation flow to the environment page. - Add service, route, UI, and OpenAPI coverage. ## Verification - Run the focused service suite: `pnpm vitest run server/src/services/environment-custom-images-service.test.ts`. - Run the focused route suite: `pnpm vitest run server/src/routes/environment-custom-image-routes.test.ts`. - Run the focused UI suite: `pnpm vitest run ui/src/pages/CompanyEnvironments.test.tsx`. - Run server and UI TypeScript checks. - Confirm the OpenAPI snapshot matches the new route. - Confirm all required GitHub checks pass on commit `e46fdcfe94a719be854adf8849d30714e5b70b93`. - Confirm Greptile reports 5/5 with no unresolved review threads. ## Risks The relink action can keep an image after configuration drift. The service requires explicit confirmation for boot-source or unclassified drift. Reserved path segments produce a safe unresolved marker and never enter stored values. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-5 Codex. The model used repository inspection, GitHub operations, and PR preparation with tool use and code execution. The runtime did not expose a context-window value or a separate reasoning-mode value. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed 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>	2026-08-18 11:43:39 -07:00
Nicky Leach Paperclip greptile-apps[bot]	fe803bedf1	feat(server): add a configurable cooldown to the terminal workspace reaper (#11642 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is an open source app that manages AI agents for work. > - The server manages execution workspaces and their worktrees. > - The terminal workspace reaper removes a workspace when its issue tree reaches a terminal state. > - Immediate removal prevents a person from reopening recently completed work. > - This pull request adds a configurable cooldown before the reaper archives the workspace. > - The cooldown keeps recent work available and keeps immediate cleanup available with value `0`. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #7790 Problem The reaper archives an execution workspace and deletes its worktree as soon as the issue tree becomes terminal. A person cannot reopen recent work without extra effort. Expected behavior The reaper should keep a recently completed workspace during a configurable cooldown window. It should archive older work and support immediate cleanup when the value is `0`. Proposed solution Read the cooldown from `PAPERCLIP_WORKSPACE_REAPER_COOLDOWN_DAYS`. Use a seven-day default. Use the latest terminal timestamp in the source issue tree as the cooldown anchor. ## What Changed - Add `PAPERCLIP_WORKSPACE_REAPER_COOLDOWN_DAYS` with a seven-day default. - Treat `0` as no cooldown and use the default for negative or non-numeric values. - Use the latest `completedAt` or `cancelledAt` value in the source issue tree. - Use `updatedAt` when a terminal timestamp is null. - Skip candidates inside the cooldown and report them in `skippedCooldown`. - Recheck the cutoff during the guarded archive operation. - Document the environment variable and add focused tests. ## Verification - Run `npx vitest run server/src/__tests__/execution-workspaces-service.test.ts`. - Confirm that the test run passes 66 tests. - Confirm that the tests cover a recent tree, an old tree, value `0`, and a null terminal timestamp. - Confirm that the changed files pass `tsc --noEmit`. ## Risks The default changes terminal workspace cleanup from immediate removal to a seven-day delay. A value of `0` preserves immediate cleanup. The guarded archive check limits race risk during concurrent lifecycle changes. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, tool use and code execution. This model assisted with the implementation review and PR preparation. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: greptile-apps[bot] <165735046+greptile-apps[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>	2026-08-18 11:23:27 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	0e9b03832d	fix(server): skip host provisionCommand for sandbox-driver environments (#11626 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The run orchestrator prepares an execution environment before an agent starts > - A sandbox driver creates a remote folder before the adapter uploads repository content > - The orchestrator ran the host `provisionCommand` in that empty folder > - The command failed with exit 127 before the adapter could run its `stage.sync` step > - This pull request skips host provisioning for sandbox drivers and keeps the existing local and SSH behavior > - The benefit is that sandbox runs reach the adapter sync step without an empty-folder setup failure ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What happened? A sandbox environment ran the host `provisionCommand` before the adapter uploaded repository content. The command ran in an empty remote folder and failed with exit 127. Expected behavior The orchestrator should skip host provisioning for a sandbox driver. The adapter should upload the provisioned tree during its `stage.sync` step. Steps to reproduce 1. Configure an environment with the `sandbox` driver and a host `provisionCommand`. 2. Start a run that uses this environment. 3. Observe that the command runs in the empty sandbox folder and the run fails with `setup_failed`. Paperclip version or commit Reproduced on the current `master` commit before this change. Deployment mode Built from source with a sandbox environment. Installation method Built from source with pnpm. Agent adapter(s) involved Not adapter-specific (core bug). The sandbox adapter syncs the tree after environment setup. Database mode Not database-related. Additional context Related context: [#11091](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/11091) changes provision behavior for reused workspaces. This pull request covers the separate sandbox ordering failure. ## What Changed - Skip the orchestrator provision step when `environment.driver` is `sandbox`. - Keep the existing skip for `local` and the provision step for `ssh`. - Log one info message when a sandbox skip drops a present command. - Keep the existing `plugin` path because it has no `stage.sync` step and runs against the host filesystem. - Add tests for sandbox, local, SSH, plugin, logging, and provision failures. ## Verification - Run `./node_modules/.bin/vitest run server/src/__tests__/environment-run-orchestrator.test.ts`. - Confirm that the test run passes all 10 tests. - Confirm that CI checks pass on this pull request. ## Risks - Low risk. The change affects only the provision gate for sandbox drivers. - SSH and local behavior stays unchanged. - The plugin driver stays on its current path. - The new log line makes a sandbox skip visible to operators. ## Model Used OpenAI, GPT-5, exact runtime model `gpt-5`, with tool use and code review support. The implementation author used this model to inspect code, edit source and tests, and run the targeted test suite. ## 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 (no exact duplicate found; related PR #11091 reviewed) - [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 (no documentation change applies to this internal gate correction) - [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>	2026-08-18 09:29:31 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	6b8e42168e	Add governed secret alias confirmation cards (#11486 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents need scoped secret bindings to use external services safely. > - Agents could not request an existing secret under a new config name without an internal secret identifier. > - Existing binding proposals were only visible in Settings and did not create an issue-thread approval path. > - A confirmation card could record acceptance without proving that the binding was created. > - This pull request extends the existing secret proposal system with safe source references and governed issue-thread confirmation cards. > - The benefit is a one-click flow that creates the binding or shows a clear failure without exposing secret material. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related prerequisite: #11482. Subsystem affected Cross-cutting: server REST APIs, shared interaction contracts, database proposal schema, and issue-thread UI. Problem or motivation An agent can need an existing bound secret under a second config name. The agent cannot safely discover the internal secret identifier. The existing proposal is also easy for the operator to miss because it only appears in Settings. A generic confirmation can record acceptance without executing the binding. Proposed solution Let an agent create a binding proposal from one of its existing config paths. Mint a server-owned, human-only confirmation card on the checked-out issue. Recheck the operator's target-agent permission under the proposal row lock. Execute the existing proposal transaction after card acceptance. Store an `executed` or `failed` result on the card. Render the complete lifecycle in the issue thread and attention resolver. Alternatives considered A new alias subsystem would duplicate proposal quotas, expiry, authorization, and binding synchronization. A text-only issue comment would not provide a governed action or an execution result. An agent-supplied card payload would permit metadata smuggling. This change uses the existing proposal transaction and a server-owned payload instead. Roadmap alignment This change extends the completed "Secrets Manager with per-agent access" roadmap item. It preserves scoped bindings and audited resolution. The required GitHub search found no other open duplicate issue or pull request. ## What Changed - Added safe source-config-path binding proposals and preserved user-secret ownership checks. - Added a proposal-to-interaction link and an idempotent database migration. - Minted human-only `request_confirmation` cards with server-owned `secretProposal` metadata. - Rejected agent-supplied governed metadata and agent addressees. - Rechecked `agent_config:update` authority under the proposal lock before execution. - Recorded `executed` or `failed` results and posted a failure comment when no binding was created. - Settled failed accepted proposals atomically and mirrored rejection, withdrawal, and expiry in both directions. - Emitted `secret.binding.created` for new agent binding writes. - Added a dedicated issue-thread card for pending, executed, failed, rejected, withdrawn, and expired states. - Showed only the source label, target agent, config path, skeptical justification, expiry, and safe failure code. - Replaced resolved attention-query entries immediately with the stitched server result. - Added focused server, database, UI, and state-transition tests. - Added Storybook fixtures for every review state and documented the API and agent behavior. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/IssueThreadInteractionCard.test.tsx ui/src/components/AttentionInteractionResolver.test.ts` — 58 passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `pnpm check:token-gates` - `pnpm build-storybook` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db check:migrations` - `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/secret-proposals-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/secrets-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/agents-service-secret-bindings.test.ts` — 142 passed. - `NODE_ENV=test pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db exec vitest run src/company-secret-proposals-migration.test.ts --silent` — 1 passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm test:run` — server 4,175 passed, UI 4,109 passed; the CLI AWS-doctor case passes 8/8 with runtime-injected static AWS credential variables unset. - `pnpm build` - `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` ## Risks - Migration `0221` adds one nullable foreign key and one index. It uses idempotent guards. - The accept route performs a governed write after it records card acceptance. A failed write is visible and settles the proposal as rejected. - Concurrent proposal and card resolution must use proposal-before-interaction lock order. A race test covers direct approval against card rejection. - The new audit event increases activity rows for newly added agent bindings. It does not include secret values or fingerprints. - The card includes only safe proposal metadata. It does not include secret value, fingerprint, version, or internal secret identifiers. - The UI uses the stitched resolution result. Focused tests cover immediate cache replacement and every terminal state. > This work extends an existing completed roadmap capability. The GitHub duplicate search returned no other open related work. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex with model ID `gpt-5`. The runtime did not expose its context-window size. Reasoning, repository tools, code execution, database integration tests, UI rendering, and GitHub tools were enabled. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-08-18 09:44:24 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	8087661bb8	fix: bound workspace Git scans (#11572 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Workspaces let users and agents inspect files that belong to an issue > - Changed-file views use full-tree Git status scans > - Many issue views could start those scans at the same time and make the server unresponsive > - Route-level limits did not protect the process or coalesce work for one repository > - This pull request adds one bounded scheduler for every expensive workspace Git scan > - It also starts browser scans only when the file panel is open and visible > - The benefit is bounded child-process use and responsive health checks during request storms ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What happened? Many changed-file requests could start full `git status --porcelain=v1 -z --untracked-files=all` scans at the same time. One production incident produced about 270 direct Git child processes. The Node process stayed alive but stopped answering health requests in time. Expected behavior Paperclip must bound expensive Git work across all companies, actors, issues, repositories, and browser tabs. Duplicate requests for one worktree must share work. Excess requests must fail fast with a retryable response. Hidden or closed file panels must not start scans. Steps to reproduce 1. Open changed-file views for many issue and actor keys. 2. Send requests for two large workspace roots at the same time. 3. Observe that route-level limiter keys allow many full Git scans to run together. 4. Observe delayed health responses and accumulated Git children. Paperclip version or commit Reproduced on master before commit `43ab441f0f`. Deployment mode Self-hosted server with local workspace repositories. ## What Changed - Add a process-wide scheduler with configurable concurrency, queue capacity, timeout, and cache TTL. - Add fair admission, a bounded queue, canonical worktree keys, single-flight joins, and bounded result caching. - Add subprocess timeouts, TERM-to-KILL escalation, bounded output, waiter cancellation, and slot cleanup. - Route full-tree status work from file resources, workspace runtime, execution workspaces, and adapter overlay sync through the scheduler. - Return stable retryable `503` and `504` error codes for saturation and timeout. - Add structured logs with safe workspace hashes, durations, queue state, cache use, joins, and terminal outcomes. - Gate UI queries on panel and document visibility. Cancel queries on close, hide, unmount, and workspace change. - Disable focus and reconnect bursts. Keep one explicit refresh action and a retryable unavailable state. - Document the 10-second default freshness tradeoff and all configuration variables. - Add unit, route, UI, adapter, and deterministic 500-request load coverage. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm build` - `pnpm check:token-gates` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/services/workspace-git-operation-scheduler.test.ts src/__tests__/file-resources-git-scan-load.test.ts --reporter=dot` — 16 tests passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/components/WorkspaceFileBrowser.test.tsx src/lib/page-visibility.test.ts --reporter=dot` — 38 tests passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils exec vitest run src/git-workspace-sync.test.ts --reporter=dot` — 16 tests passed. - Existing file-resource, workspace-runtime, and execution-workspace regression selections passed. - Two cleanup safety regressions prove failed scans preserve the worktree before archive and at the final deletion fence. - Before: the incident produced about 270 Git children and health requests timed out. - After: 500 concurrent requests across 500 issue keys, 73 actors, and two roots started two underlying scans. Peak scan concurrency was 2. All 500 requests succeeded. Health p99 was 4.94 ms. The harness found zero unreaped children. - The full local Vitest run passed 4,267 tests. Ten existing fixed-port HTTPS exposure tests could not run because this host already owns Tailnet listeners on ports 42000 and 52000. Clean GitHub CI is the final full-suite result. - Latest-head GitHub CI passed all required test, typecheck, build, canary, e2e, policy, and security gates. - Greptile completed at 5/5 with zero unresolved comments, recommendations, or follow-ups. ## Risks - Changed-file results can be up to 10 seconds old by default. Explicit refresh remains available. - A full queue returns a retryable `503` instead of waiting without a bound. - A scan that exceeds the default 8-second deadline returns a retryable `504` and terminates its process group. - Operators can tune all limits with documented environment variables. Safe defaults protect local and shared servers. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 family. The runtime does not expose the exact deployment ID or context-window size. High reasoning, tool use, and code execution were enabled. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-08-17 22:11:30 -05:00
Devin Foley	962e98b1be	feat(server): operator declaration for platform edge TLS termination on the Claude login guard (#11579 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The Claude local adapter supports a setup-token subscription login, and its confidential routes pass a fail-closed transport guard > - The guard accepts direct socket TLS, a local_trusted loopback peer, or an allowlisted proxy peer that forwards https — and deliberately never reads the global `TRUST_PROXY` > - On a managed platform the edge terminates TLS, the app socket is always plain HTTP, and the edge-proxy peer addresses are not stable or documented, so none of the three cases can hold > - Every login on such a deployment shows the clear-text transport warning although the user's connection is HTTPS, and the agent-scoped confidential routes fail closed entirely > - This pull request adds a dedicated operator declaration that the platform edge terminates TLS, as a fourth guard case > - The benefit is a correct transport decision on managed platforms with the default posture unchanged everywhere else ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue covers this. The problem is described in-PR following the enhancement template. Related public PRs: [#11347](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/11347) added the new-agent login flow and the non-blocking transport advisory, and [#11286](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/11286) added the setup-token login and the guard with its `CLAUDE_LOGIN_TRUSTED_PROXIES` allowlist. Subsystem affected server/ — the confidential transport guard for the Claude setup-token login (`services/setup-token-session.ts`, `routes/agents.ts`, `app.ts`). Current behavior The guard allows a confidential response on direct socket TLS, on a `local_trusted` loopback peer, or when the immediate peer is on the dedicated `CLAUDE_LOGIN_TRUSTED_PROXIES` allowlist and forwards `https`. Behind a managed platform's TLS-terminating edge (Railway, Render, Fly, and similar), the app socket is plain HTTP and the edge-proxy peer addresses are not operator-visible or stable, so the allowlist cannot express them — IPv6 entries match by exact string only. The result: the login panel shows "This connection is not encrypted" for a connection that is HTTPS to the user, and the agent-scoped confidential routes return the fixed no-secret error. Proposed behavior `CLAUDE_LOGIN_EDGE_TLS_TERMINATED=true` is an explicit, single-purpose operator declaration that every client request reaches the server through the platform's TLS-terminating edge. Under the declaration the guard treats a request as confidential unless the edge itself labels the client hop as plain `http` in `X-Forwarded-Proto`. The declaration is never derived from the global `TRUST_PROXY` setting, which the guard still never reads. Without the declaration, nothing changes. Reason and benefit The guard's spoofing concern does not apply to this deployment shape: a client cannot pick its transport, because the platform admits HTTPS only, and the header the guard consults is set by the platform edge, not the client. A blanket warning that is always wrong teaches users to ignore it. The declaration keeps the strict default for every deployment that does not opt in, and it keeps the allowlist as the precise tool for operators who do know their proxy addresses. ## What Changed - `ConfidentialTransportConfig` gains optional `edgeTlsTerminated` (default false), documented as the operator declaration for platform edge TLS termination. - `evaluateConfidentialTransport` adds the declaration as a guard case: allowed unless the forwarded protocol's first hop is explicitly `http` (reason `edge_labeled_plain_http` then; `operator_edge_tls_termination` when allowed). - `assessConfidentialStartup` reports `edge_tls_termination_declared`, so the startup log shows why forwarded requests pass. - `app.ts` parses `CLAUDE_LOGIN_EDGE_TLS_TERMINATED` (truthy: `1/true/yes/on`) and passes it to the agent routes; the routes build the guard config from it. - The SR-7 operator-requirement comment on the setup-token routes documents the new variable next to the allowlist. - Tests: five new guard unit cases and a route case asserting the prompt and code responses carry no `transportAdvisory` under the declaration. ## Verification ```sh cd server npx tsc --noEmit # clean npx vitest run src/services/setup-token-session.test.ts \ src/routes/setup-token-route.test.ts \ src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts # 3 files, 89 passed ``` The new "keeps failing closed when the declaration is absent" case pins the unchanged default posture. ## Risks The declaration is an operator statement the server cannot verify; an operator who sets it on a deployment whose edge does not terminate TLS re-labels plain-HTTP requests as confidential. This is the same trust class as `CLAUDE_LOGIN_TRUSTED_PROXIES` (a wrong allowlist entry has the same effect) and is opt-in, off by default, and scoped to the login routes only. The guard still fails closed when the edge explicitly labels a request `http`. No schema change, no API shape change — `transportAdvisory` was already nullable. ## Model Used Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), extended thinking, with tool use and code execution — investigation, implementation, and tests. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-08-17 17:46:45 -07:00
Adam TealeandClaude Sonnet 5	43ab441f0f	Exempt plugin-managed issues from successful-run-handoff recovery (#9047 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Plugins can extend Paperclip with their own multi-step workflow/graph engines that own an issue's lifecycle across many agent handoffs > - When such a plugin-managed issue legitimately stays `in_progress` for a while (e.g. an anchor issue parked at a fan-out step, waiting on child issues it spawned), Paperclip's generic recovery mechanisms have no way to know that's intentional > - The first commit on this branch fixed one such mechanism (`decideSuccessfulRunHandoff`) to skip plugin-owned issues, and was deployed to a real instance to verify the fix > - Watching that same instance afterward, the identical symptom (repeated "give a disposition" nags, the agent repeating "completed", the plugin's own enforcement correctly reverting the status) recurred on the same class of issue — meaning a second, independent code path had the exact same gap > - Traced it to `reconcileStrandedAssignedIssues` in `service.ts`: it detects a stale successful-run-handoff corrective run via `isExhaustedSuccessfulRunHandoff` and, once "exhausted" (default max attempts is 1, so effectively immediate), escalates via `escalateStrandedAssignedIssue` — with no check on who owns the issue's lifecycle at all > - Rather than duplicate the `originKind` check inline a second time (which is exactly how it got missed the first time), extracted it into a shared, exported, unit-tested helper (`isPluginManagedIssueLifecycle`) that both recovery paths now call > - The benefit is the same as the first commit, but closing the second loop this pull request's earlier version left open: generic plugin-owned issues (any workflow/graph-engine plugin, not just one specific plugin) stop burning real agent-run cost in a loop that can never actually resolve, across both recovery mechanisms that can trigger it ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No existing public issue covers this — describing it directly, following the bug report fields: What happened? An issue owned by a workflow-engine-style plugin (`originKind` starting with `"plugin:"`) was correctly held at `in_progress` by the plugin while it waited on spawned child issues to finish. The assigned agent's heartbeat succeeded and posted a well-formed completion comment, but `issue.status` stayed `in_progress` (the plugin's own enforcement reverted it, correctly, since the underlying work wasn't done). - Path 1 (fixed in the first commit): `decideSuccessfulRunHandoff()` saw `status === "in_progress"` after a successful run and enqueued a "missing disposition" corrective wake. The agent responded again, the plugin reverted the status again, and the recovery re-triggered again. - Path 2 (fixed in the second commit, found after deploying and verifying the first fix on a live instance): separately, `reconcileStrandedAssignedIssues` periodically re-scans `in_progress` issues, sees the corrective run from Path 1 (or any prior successful-run-handoff wake) as "exhausted" evidence, and escalates the issue via `escalateStrandedAssignedIssue` regardless of plugin ownership — producing the same nag-revert-nag cycle through a completely different call path that the first commit's fix did not touch. Expected behavior Neither recovery mechanism should nag an agent for a disposition, or escalate for one, on an issue whose lifecycle is already owned and managed by a plugin — that plugin's own enforcement/recovery path is the correct owner of "what happens next," not these generic core mechanisms. Steps to reproduce 1. Install a plugin that creates/owns issues via the plugin host bridge (`ctx.issues.create`/`ctx.issues.update`) with an `originKind` of `"plugin:<pluginKey>"`. 2. Have the plugin's own graph/workflow logic hold an issue at `in_progress` while some multi-step process it owns is still pending (e.g. spawned child issues not yet complete). 3. Let an agent run a successful heartbeat on that issue that produces visible progress (a comment) but does not change `issue.status` away from `in_progress` in a way that sticks (the plugin's own logic reverts any change back to `in_progress` on the next event). 4. Observe `decideSuccessfulRunHandoff` enqueue a corrective handoff wake (Path 1), and/or `reconcileStrandedAssignedIssues` treat that wake's run as exhausted and escalate (Path 2). Either one repeats indefinitely on its own. Paperclip version or commit `eb2cb916be3271e3e7ab5f643ad3ca3eb7c34d01` (current `master` at time of the first commit; rebased onto `ad961227f` for the second) Deployment mode Self-hosted server ## What Changed - First commit: Added `originKind: issues.originKind` to the issue query in `heartbeat.ts` that feeds `decideSuccessfulRunHandoff`, and a skip condition there for `originKind` starting with `"plugin:"`. - Second commit: - Extracted the plugin-ownership check out of `decideSuccessfulRunHandoff` into a new exported helper, `isPluginManagedIssueLifecycle(issue)`, in `successful-run-handoff.ts`. - Added the same check to `reconcileStrandedAssignedIssues` in `service.ts`, immediately before it would otherwise escalate an issue based on `isExhaustedSuccessfulRunHandoff` evidence — skipping plugin-managed issues there too. - Added unit tests for the new helper directly (plugin-prefixed origin kinds → `true`; non-plugin/missing origin kinds → `false`), alongside the existing `decideSuccessfulRunHandoff` tests (updated to import and rely on the shared helper, behavior unchanged). ## Verification - `npx vitest run server/src/services/recovery/successful-run-handoff.test.ts` — 20/20 passed (18 pre-existing/from the first commit + 2 new for the extracted helper). - `npx vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts server/src/services/recovery/successful-run-handoff.test.ts` — full suite still passes with the refactor. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsc --noEmit` — no new errors introduced by either commit (confirmed against a pre-existing baseline of unrelated `@paperclipai/plugin-sdk` module-resolution errors from the workspace, present identically with the changes stashed out). - Manually verified Path 1 against a real plugin-managed issue stuck in that loop: after deploying the first commit and restarting the server, the same agent posted the same completion comment again, and the corrective-handoff recovery did not re-trigger. - Path 2 was found live on the same instance after that first deploy (the loop recurred through the second, independent mechanism) — root-caused via direct inspection of `heartbeat_runs`/`agent_wakeup_requests`/issue comment history, then fixed in the second commit. Not yet re-verified live on the instance (pending redeploy of this updated branch). ## Risks - Low risk. Both changes are additive skip conditions — they only cause a recovery decision to return early for a specific, narrow case (`originKind` starting with `"plugin:"`) that previously fell through to escalation/enqueue. No existing skip conditions are changed or reordered in a way that affects non-plugin issues. - Behavioral shift: plugin-managed issues that are genuinely stuck (not just correctly mid-flight) will no longer get either of these corrective nags. This is intentional — the plugin owning the issue is expected to have its own recovery path — but it does mean these mechanisms are no longer a safety net for buggy plugins that leave issues stranded. Plugin authors should ensure their own enforcement handles stranded states. - The refactor (extracting `isPluginManagedIssueLifecycle`) is a pure code-motion change for the first commit's check — no behavior change there, only a new call site added in `service.ts`. - No migration required (query-shape and control-flow changes only, no schema change). ## Model Used Claude (Anthropic), model `claude-sonnet-5`, used within a coding-agent harness (Claude Code) with tool use (file edit, test execution, git operations, live production-instance debugging via SSH/SQL) and extended reasoning across two sessions: the first implemented and deployed the initial fix, the second discovered the second recovery path was still looping on a live instance, root-caused it, and implemented/tested this follow-up commit. ## 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 - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-08-17 14:30:58 -07:00
santastabberandsantastabber	8774909361	fix(heartbeat): reuse sessions across execution handoffs (#9917 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip uses durable task sessions so local adapters can resume work across sequential heartbeat runs. > - `execution_review_requested` and `execution_changes_requested` are issue-local execution-policy handoffs, not new task assignments. > - The existing `agent_task_sessions` lookup, adapter session codec, workspace resolution, and effective config freshness checks already decide whether reuse is safe. > - Treating those two handoff wake reasons as unconditional fresh-session boundaries discards a valid saved task session before adapter resume can be attempted. > - This makes Dev → CodeReview → Dev loops repeatedly cold-start even when task, issue, agent, adapter, workspace, and config identity are unchanged. > - The fix is to let normal review/change-request handoffs reach the durable task-session path while preserving explicit fresh-session and unsafe-boundary resets. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Fixes #8246. cc @cryppadotta — this is the narrow handoff-session policy change discussed there: normal `execution_review_requested` / `execution_changes_requested` wakes no longer force a fresh task session by wake reason alone, while assignment, approval, review-participant recovery, timer wakes, explicit `forceFreshSession`, and config/workspace/model/session freshness still keep their safety boundaries. ## What Changed - Removed normal `execution_review_requested` and `execution_changes_requested` from the unconditional task-session reset policy. - Kept fresh-session boundaries for: - `issue_assigned` - `execution_approval_requested` - `execution_review_participant_recovery` - `heartbeat_timer` - explicit `forceFreshSession` - existing config/model/workspace/session freshness reset paths - Updated heartbeat session-policy tests so execution handoffs are resume-eligible by wake reason alone. - Preserved PF-4 timer-wake behavior and its explicit reset reason. ## Verification - `npx pnpm@9.15.4 exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-session.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-timer-wake-session-reset-pf4.test.ts server/src/__tests__/codex-local-execute.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts --reporter=verbose` — 220 tests passed. - `npx pnpm@9.15.4 --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed. - `git diff --check` — passed. - `coderabbit review --agent -t committed --base origin/master` — 0 findings. ## Risks - Moderate behavior change in session-boundary policy: normal review/change-request handoffs may now reuse a saved per-task session when the existing identity/freshness checks pass. - Safety boundaries remain in place for new assignments, approval gates, review-participant recovery, timer/discovery wakes, explicit fresh-session requests, and config/model/workspace/session drift. - If a saved session is stale or incompatible, existing freshness/resume fallback behavior still handles reset/fresh execution. > For core feature work, check ROADMAP.md first and discuss it in #dev before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See CONTRIBUTING.md. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-5.5. Tool use and local verification were enabled. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket ID - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes — N/A, server policy/test-only change - [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: santastabber <184111696+santastabber@users.noreply.github.com>	2026-08-17 14:30:47 -07:00
ulisavoandUliana Savostenko	b90da4d115	fix: keep task sessions across issue comments (#10111 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Local session adapters persist task sessions so later wakes can resume the same conversation > - Session reuse correctly resets when effective execution configuration changes > - The workspace fingerprint currently includes the issue row's `updatedAt` timestamp > - Adding a comment advances that timestamp even though workspace configuration is unchanged > - The next same-issue wake therefore discards a valid task session and starts cold > - This pull request excludes that volatile timestamp while retaining actual workspace settings in the fingerprint > - The benefit is reliable same-task continuation without weakening configuration-freshness safety ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public issue exists. The inline report below follows the bug report template. ### Pre-submission checklist - [x] I searched existing open and closed issues and found no duplicate. - [x] I reproduced the bug on the latest release and current `master`. - [x] I confirmed the error originates in Paperclip core fingerprinting, not an adapter, provider, or local configuration. ### What happened? On Paperclip 2026.720.0 and current `master`, a comment on an issue changes `issues.updated_at`. Heartbeat session fingerprinting includes that value under `workspaceConfig.issueConfigRevisionAt`, so the next wake for the same issue reports a workspace-config change and refuses the saved task session. ### Expected behavior Comment-only and other non-configuration issue updates should be delivered as wake deltas without invalidating the task session. Changes to the execution mode, issue workspace settings, project policy, environment, instructions, model, secrets, or other effective run configuration must still reset it. ### Steps to reproduce 1. Complete a local session-adapter run for an issue and retain its task session. 2. Add a comment to the issue without changing execution configuration. 3. Wake the same agent for the same issue. 4. Observe `changedCategories: ["workspaceConfig"]` and a fresh session. ### Paperclip version or commit Reproduced on Paperclip 2026.720.0 and current `master`. ### Deployment mode Self-hosted server. ### Installation method npm global install; also reproduced from the current source tree. ### Agent adapter(s) involved Codex exposed the symptom. The bug is in core fingerprint construction and is not adapter-specific. ### Database mode External Postgres. The bug is not database-specific. ### Access context Board comments trigger the timestamp change; the subsequent agent wake exposes the reset. ### Node.js version Node.js 22. ### Operating system Ubuntu 24.04. ### Relevant logs or output The next run records `changedCategories: ["workspaceConfig"]` and starts a fresh session after a comment-only mutation. ### Relevant config No unusual configuration is required. ### Additional context The regression test exercises the fingerprint directly on current `master`. ### Privacy checklist - [x] I reviewed the report for PII, credentials, private paths, company names, and instance-local identifiers. ## What Changed - Copy and sanitize the session workspace-fingerprint input before hashing. - Exclude only `issueConfigRevisionAt`, which reflects general issue mutation rather than workspace configuration. - Add regression coverage proving comment timestamps preserve the session while real workspace mode/settings changes still reset it. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-session.test.ts` - 120 tests passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - passed. - `git diff --check` - passed. ## Risks Low risk. A general issue update no longer rotates the adapter session solely because its row timestamp changed. The fingerprint still includes issue workspace settings, issue adapter overrides, project workspace policy, environment, instructions, runtime skills, secrets, model profile, adapter configuration, and agent runtime configuration, so actual execution-config drift continues to reset. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected - check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, `gpt-5`, context-window size not exposed, reasoning and tool use enabled. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] 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: Uliana Savostenko <ulia@MacBook-Air.local>	2026-08-17 14:21:00 -07:00
Michael Nguyen anicca Claude Sonnet 5	7a4767017e	fix(issues): base comment-wake decisions on post-insert issue state (#10068 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work; issues get commented on by both humans and agents, and the assignee is woken to act on new comments. > - #10050 added human-attributed issue comments for chat gateway plugins, with the host waking the issue's assignee the same way a board user's comment does. > - Greptile's review on #10050 flagged that the wakeup guard in `plugin-host-services.ts` decides whether to wake the assignee using the issue snapshot fetched before the comment was inserted. > - If another request closes, cancels, unassigns, or reassigns the issue in the window between that fetch and the wakeup call, the guard still acts on the stale snapshot — it can wake an agent for a now-terminal issue, or wake the old assignee instead of the new one. > - The PR discussion noted the HTTP add-comment route (`routes/issues.ts`) has the identical pattern outside its reopen/auto-approval branches, and deferred a fix to a follow-up covering both call sites — this PR is that follow-up. > - The fix re-fetches the issue immediately before the wake decision in both places, so the decision reflects the latest committed state instead of a pre-insert snapshot. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #10050 Problem or motivation Both the plugin-comment wakeup guard (`plugin-host-services.ts`) and the HTTP add-comment route's wakeup guard (`routes/issues.ts`, outside its reopen/auto-approval branches) decide whether to wake the issue's assignee using the issue state fetched before the comment was inserted. A concurrent close/unassign/reassign landing in that window is invisible to the guard, so it can enqueue a wakeup for a stale assignee or an issue that is no longer open. Proposed solution Re-fetch the issue immediately before the wake decision in both call sites, and base the assignee/status checks on that fresh read instead of the earlier snapshot. This shrinks the race window to essentially nothing (the fetch happens right before the fire-and-forget wakeup call), and any residual window is already covered by the heartbeat/checkout machinery re-validating issue status and assignee ownership when a woken run actually starts. Alternatives considered Wrap the whole comment-insert + wake-decision sequence in a single serializable transaction with row locking (rejected for this change — much larger blast radius across two already-complex handlers for a wakeup that is explicitly best-effort; the woken run's own re-validation already makes a stale wake degrade to a no-op rather than incorrect work). Leaving the plugin path fixed but not the HTTP route (rejected — that was the exact gap the original PR discussion flagged as needing a follow-up covering both call sites). Roadmap alignment Bug fix / hardening follow-up to #10050; no change to planned core roadmap items. ## What Changed - `server/src/services/plugin-host-services.ts`: `issues.createComment`'s assignee-wakeup guard now re-fetches the issue after the comment is inserted and bases the assignee/status checks on that fresh read, instead of the snapshot fetched before the insert. - `server/src/routes/issues.ts`: the `POST /issues/:id/comments` route's wakeup guard (outside the reopen/auto-approval branches, which already use post-mutation state) now does the same re-fetch before deciding whether — and whom — to wake. - Adds regression coverage for both: - `server/src/__tests__/plugin-orchestration-apis.test.ts`: a new embedded-Postgres test holds a row lock on the issue to deterministically force the race (comment-insert's internal update blocks until a concurrent transaction commits a cancellation), then asserts no wakeup is enqueued. - `server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts`: two new mocked-service tests assert the route skips the wakeup when the fresh re-fetch shows the issue cancelled, and wakes the freshly reassigned agent (not the pre-insert snapshot's assignee) when the fresh re-fetch shows a different assignee. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — clean. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/plugin-orchestration-apis.test.ts` — 13/13 (1 new). - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts` — 74/74 (2 new). - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk exec vitest run tests/host-client-factory.test.ts` — 14/14. - Broader sweep of 38 `routes/issues.ts`-adjacent test files (447 tests) — all passing, confirming the added re-fetch doesn't change behavior for any existing reopen/auto-approval/interrupt/scheduled-retry/dependency-wake scenario. ## Risks Low risk. Both changes are additive guards around an existing best-effort, fire-and-forget wakeup (failures already logged, not thrown) — no change to the comment-write path itself, response shape, or status codes. The HTTP route's fix only touches the plain (non-reopen, non-auto-approval) wake-decision path; the reopen and auto-approval branches already used post-mutation state for the reasons documented inline and are unchanged. Adds one extra `SELECT` per comment on each call site, negligible relative to the existing query volume in both handlers. ## Model Used Claude Sonnet 5 (`claude-sonnet-5`), extended thinking, tool use enabled, via Claude Code. ## 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 searched the GitHub PR list (open and recently closed) for similar PRs; found no duplicate — this is a direct follow-up to the review discussion on #10050 - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket id - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] 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: anicca <annica@Michaels-Mac-Studio.local> Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-08-17 14:18:15 -07:00
SamandSami Rusani	14fd8aee36	fix(server): flag truncated issue descriptions (#4771 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - The issue list API is one of the surfaces API consumers use to synchronize issue metadata. > - The list endpoint intentionally returns a bounded `description` preview so large descriptions do not bloat list responses. > - Before this change, that preview looked like a complete field value because the response did not say whether it had been shortened. > - That made round-trip clients vulnerable to accidentally PATCHing a preview back over the full description. > - This pull request keeps the existing preview behavior but adds an explicit `descriptionTruncated` flag. > - The benefit is backwards-compatible visibility into truncated issue descriptions, so clients can avoid data-loss workflows. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Fixes #4758. Related PR: #4792 also targets #4758, but it includes unrelated logger changes and currently has separate review/security concerns. This PR keeps the fix scoped to the issue-list description truncation API behavior. ## What Changed - Added `descriptionTruncated` to the issue list projection when `description` exceeds the existing 1200-character preview limit. - Exposed `descriptionTruncated?: boolean` on the shared `Issue` type. - Added service tests for truncated descriptions, exact-limit descriptions, null descriptions, and multibyte-safe preview truncation. ## Verification June 18, 2026 refresh after rebasing onto current `origin/master`: - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm typecheck` - `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` - GitHub PR checks are green on head `12e828e6`. Earlier pre-review verification also included `pnpm test`. ## Risks - Low risk. This is an additive API response field; existing clients can ignore it. - The list endpoint still returns the same bounded `description` preview. Clients that need full text should continue fetching the issue detail, but can now detect when that is necessary. - No database migration or UI behavior change. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex based on GPT-5, via Codex desktop on April 29, June 15, and June 18, 2026. Used tool-assisted repository inspection, code editing, local test execution, GitHub CLI workflows, and PR review follow-up. Exact context window size is not surfaced by the tool. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots (N/A: no UI change) - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (N/A: additive API field covered by tests) - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Sami Rusani <sr@samirusani>	2026-08-17 14:02:01 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	c1c46f1e4e	feat: Claude login on the new-agent page before agent creation (#11347 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The Claude local adapter supports subscription login through a sandbox > - The new-agent page must show login before the user creates an agent > - Test results must not expose raw sandbox diagnostics or secret values > - This pull request adds the login UI to both Test lanes and closes the diagnostic boundary > - The branch also adds durable cleanup recovery for failed sandbox teardown > - Reusable sandboxes must retain both their recorded teardown configuration and a valid lifecycle path until destruction succeeds > - The benefit is a usable login flow with fixed public checks, redacted server logs, and recoverable sandbox cleanup ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related public work: [#9488](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/9488) adds first-class recognition for `CLAUDE_CODE_OAUTH_TOKEN` in headless and remote runs. Related public issue: [#2681](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/issues/2681) requests Claude Code subscription support. This pull request adds the login transport and new-agent UI flow that those changes do not provide. Subsystem affected: Claude local adapter, server login probes, sandbox provider setup, cleanup recovery, and the new-agent UI. Problem or motivation: The Test lanes did not show the sandbox login panel in all supported cases. Test results also exposed raw probe diagnostics, and JSON escapes could end secret redaction early. Proposed solution: Surface the login capability through the bundled provider manifest. Prepare the same probe runtime in the ACP lane. Send diagnostics only to redacted server logs. Keep Test checks on fixed public messages. Normalize login URL hints to allowlisted HTTPS Claude and Anthropic hosts. Consume JSON escapes during redaction. Preserve failed sandbox cleanup state across retries and restarts, and prevent deletion from severing the lifecycle context of a live reusable sandbox. Alternatives considered: Keep raw diagnostics in Test checks or trust login URL text from the sandbox. Both choices increase information exposure. Keep separate probe behavior in the ACP lane. That choice would leave the two Test lanes inconsistent. ## What Changed - Surface the sandbox login panel on both Test lanes. - Reconcile the bundled Daytona plugin manifest so `supportsSetupTokenLogin` reaches the UI capability gate. - Prepare the ACP Test lane with the same probe runtime as the CLI Test lane. - Add the `claude_acp_login_probe_unavailable` warning when the ACP probe cannot run. - Send raw sandbox diagnostics only to redacted server logs. - Keep Test checks on fixed public messages in the ACP, managed-config, and CLI paths. - Normalize login URL hints to allowlisted HTTPS Claude and Anthropic hosts. - Redact JSON and escaped-JSON secret values, including escaped quotes and backslashes. - Preserve orphan cleanup records across provider failures, restarts, and unavailable plugins. - Atomically block environment deletion while a live reusable sandbox lease still depends on it. - Verify pending cleanup destroys plugin sandboxes with the provider configuration recorded on the lease, even after the current environment configuration changes. ## Verification - Head under review: `506b7fa2d83c36bfa5fd722ee9d95b0c7431c241`. - Focused environment route/service/runtime coverage passes: 196 tests across 3 files. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passes. - `pnpm build` passes. - The full Vitest run completed with 4,754 passing and 28 failing tests. All 23 source-test failures reproduce unchanged on parent head `58cfe61a33191ce03d965d65085d26064b4888ba`; the other 5 are duplicate executions from stale `server/dist` output. The failures are unrelated macOS path/listener and scheduler-fixture failures, so there is no new bad commit for bisect to localize. - All required CI checks pass for the current head, including build, typecheck/release registry, all server and workspace shards, serialized server suites, canary, and e2e. - A fresh Greptile review for `506b7fa2d83c36bfa5fd722ee9d95b0c7431c241` reports 5/5, “safe to merge,” with no blocking failure remaining. ## Risks - A probe or redaction change could hide useful server diagnostics. - An allowlist change could reject a valid Claude login URL. - Cleanup recovery changes could affect provider teardown ordering. - An environment with a live reusable sandbox can no longer be deleted until the owning issue or execution workspace completes teardown. - The implementation keeps public Test messages fixed and sends detail to redacted server logs. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-5 via Codex — exact model ID: GPT-5; tool use and code execution enabled; extended reasoning enabled. The implementation author used AI-assisted development. ## 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 documented the result - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation or confirmed no separate documentation change is needed - [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>	2026-08-17 13:42:51 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	3061ce6901	feat(sandbox): stream session output by capability, drop three operator flags (#11557 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Sandboxed agents use provider capabilities to select safe execution paths > - Session output still depends on three operator flags that duplicate capability data > - Duplicate flags can drift from the verified sandbox capability snapshot > - This pull request makes the capability snapshot the only streaming decision and removes the obsolete flags > - The benefit is default streaming with a poll fallback when a capability or stream fails ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What existing behavior does this improve? ACP sandbox session-output streaming and sandbox execution configuration. Subsystem affected Cross-cutting (multiple of the above): server/, packages/shared/, packages/adapter-utils/, and packages/plugins/. Current behavior Session-output streaming requires operator flags in the server and Daytona plugin configuration. Saved configurations can retain a removed key. Proposed behavior The verified capability snapshot selects streaming. The Daytona plugin uses persistent sessions by default, keeps bypass commands one-shot, and falls back from the log stream to polling. Removed configuration keys become inert. Reason and benefit One capability source prevents configuration drift. The fallback keeps output available when capability resolution or log streaming fails. Breaking changes The three operator flags no longer control session-output streaming. Existing saved keys load but have no effect. ## What Changed - Remove `useSessions` and `useLogStream` from the Daytona plugin configuration and manifest. - Remove `streamAgentSessionOutput` from server configuration, shared types, and execution-target plumbing. - Select streaming from `persistentProcessSessions` and `independentControlCommands`. - Keep poll fallback on capability resolution failure and stream failure. - Strip removed keys from strict fake-sandbox and catchall plugin configuration. - Update the sandbox capability documentation and focused tests. ## Verification - `tsc --noEmit` passed in `packages/shared`, `packages/adapter-utils`, `server`, and the Daytona plugin. - Daytona `plugin.test.ts` passed 139 tests. - Server capability, configuration, route, and runtime suites passed 160 tests. - `packages/adapter-utils` `execution-target-sandbox.test.ts` passed 44 tests. - The capability matrix covers stream, poll, and resolution-failure paths. - Removed-key tests cover strict fake-sandbox and catchall plugin schemas. ## Risks - A capability snapshot that lacks either required session capability uses polling. - A log stream failure uses polling and can increase request count. - Existing removed configuration keys no longer change behavior. - The isolated-worktree Daytona Vitest run has a pre-existing missing `packages/adapters/droid-local` reference. CI and standard checkouts use the committed configuration. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, tool use and code review assistance. The exact runtime context window is managed by the Codex platform. ## 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>	2026-08-17 13:25:30 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	e71ce9a9d3	feat: sandbox provider capability contract with fail-closed effective resolution (#11463 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Paperclip runs work through adapters and sandbox providers > - Providers need a clear contract so the server can use only verified capabilities > - A declared capability must not grant a method that the live worker did not verify > - This pull request adds manifest declarations and fail-closed effective capability resolution > - The benefit is safe provider reuse across execution targets and run lifecycles ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Subsystem affected Cross-cutting (multiple of the above) Problem or motivation Sandbox providers expose different runtime methods. The server needs one safe capability contract that accounts for provider declarations, worker verification, and narrowing configuration. Proposed solution Add strict manifest validation for five sandbox capabilities. Resolve effective capabilities as the subset of verified, declared, and narrowed values. Store the result as a frozen execution-target snapshot. Alternatives considered Trusting the manifest alone could grant methods that the worker does not support. Trusting only a fixed built-in list would reject valid third-party providers. The intersection rule keeps the verified runtime ceiling and supports both provider types. Roadmap alignment This change supports the ACP run lifecycle track and the sandbox provider contract work in the current roadmap. Additional context The legacy `supportsReusableLeases` field remains supported. The nested capability validator rejects unknown keys. Missing or unavailable verification resolves all capabilities to `false`. ## What Changed - Add strict `sandboxCapabilities` manifest validation with legacy reusable-lease compatibility. - Carry declarations through the ready-driver projection. - Add fail-closed effective resolution from verified, declared, and narrowed capabilities. - Add narrowing for provider configuration, Kubernetes Job leases, and Daytona sessions. - Add a frozen read-only capability snapshot to execution targets. - Add focused tests and keep existing characterization baselines covered. - Add and update sandbox provider capability documentation. ## Verification - `npx vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/plugin.test.ts` - `npx vitest run server/src/__tests__/plugin-environment-driver-sandbox-capabilities.test.ts` - `npx vitest run server/src/__tests__/sandbox-capability-contract.test.ts` - `npx vitest run server/src/__tests__/environment-execution-target-capabilities.test.ts` - `npx vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/startup-characterization.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/turn-characterization.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/settlement-characterization.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/composed-run-characterization.test.ts` - Package typechecks for shared, server, and adapter-utils pass. - Stage-2 security review suites pass with 28 tests. ## Risks The resolver fails closed when verification is absent or unavailable. Providers that rely on undeclared capabilities may see narrower behavior until they expose verified worker methods. The change does not alter the existing native-sync guard. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, exact runtime model ID `gpt-5`, tool use and code execution. The implementation author used this model to assist with the change. ## 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>	2026-08-17 10:55:40 -07:00
Dotta	1a17cbf232	fix(runtime-exposure): mediate leased app/HMR port pairs centrally (#11526 ) <!-- Simplified Technical English (ASD-STE100). --> > Stacked pull request. This targets #11525, which targets #11524. Merge those first. Review only the last commit, `fix(runtime-exposure): mediate leased app/HMR port pairs centrally`. ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Paperclip starts managed runtime services for execution workspaces, and #11524 and #11525 make those services reachable over Tailscale HTTPS on a loopback port pair > - An HTTPS lane is only safe if one execution workspace holds its port pair exclusively for the whole life of the lane > - A managed start reused a pair that a stopped but still leased workspace owned. Paperclip reported that workspace stopped and its exposure removed, while the host listeners and the Serve mappings for those ports were live and belonged to an unrelated workspace > - The cause is that ownership was decided in more than one place, and no single place saw persisted reservations, live listeners, and Serve mappings together > - This pull request adds one mediator that owns the decision, and makes every mismatch fail closed while naming the conflicting workspace > - The benefit is that a later start cannot collide with, adopt, or interfere with another issue's service, and cannot produce security evidence attributed to the wrong workspace ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists. The change follows the bug report template. What happened A managed HTTPS start reused the loopback port pair of a stopped but still exclusively leased execution workspace. The ports were then held by an unrelated workspace. Paperclip continued to report the first workspace's runtime as stopped and its exposure as removed, while the host listeners and the `tailscale serve` mappings for those exact ports were live and owned by the other workspace. Expected behavior An active execution-workspace lease reserves its app and HMR pair until the lease is explicitly released or torn down. A start that finds the pair held by a different workspace fails closed and names the conflict. Paperclip never adopts a process or a Serve mapping across execution-workspace ids. Root cause Three separate readers each had an incomplete view: - `deprovisionExposure` replaces the exposure status with a fresh `removed` status whose `listeners` array is empty. A later reader asking "which ports did this row own?" gets no answer, so a stopped row's pair looked free even while the row was leased. - Startup reconciliation adopted a persisted service by `row.port` alone, then terminated the local service when its health check failed. Under the `project_primary` strategy, where workspaces share a working directory, the containment check cannot separate two workspaces, so the sweep could adopt and then kill an unrelated workspace's live service. - Allocation checked live port availability but never checked which pairs active leases still reserve. Impact Two workspaces can collide on one lane. A start can adopt or interfere with another issue's service, and evidence about an exposure can be attributed to the wrong workspace. ## What Changed - Add `server/src/services/runtime-exposure/port-reservation.ts`, one mediator that decides allocation and ownership from persisted reservations plus live listener and Serve ownership together. - Reserve a pair for as long as its execution workspace holds an active lease, until the lease is explicitly released or torn down. - Re-derive a row's pair from the `port` column and `deriveViteHmrPort` instead of the status `listeners` array, so a `removed` status no longer hides which ports a leased row still reserves. - Refuse to adopt a process or a Serve mapping across execution-workspace ids. A mismatch fails closed and names the conflicting workspace and issue. - Treat an unattributable holder as a conflict. A Serve mapping that is present but cannot be attributed means the host has something there that could not be named, so it fails closed instead of falling through to "allowed". - Make reconciliation surface a stopped or removed row whose reserved ports are live or mapped by another workspace, instead of reporting success. - Leave manual and unknown Serve mappings alone on release and teardown. ## Verification - `npx vitest run --root server src/services/runtime-exposure/ src/__tests__/workspace-runtime-exposure-reservation.test.ts src/services/workspace-runtime-exposure-backfill.test.ts` — 8 files, 112 tests pass. - `npx tsc --noEmit -p server/tsconfig.json` — 0 errors with `@paperclipai/plugin-sdk` built. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck` — migration numbering and safety checks pass. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/tailscale-https-broker test` — 87 tests pass. The five required regressions are covered by `workspace-runtime-exposure-reservation.test.ts` and `port-reservation.test.ts`: 1. Reuse of a stopped-but-leased pair is denied. 2. Cross-execution-workspace process adoption is denied. 3. A Serve mapping ownership mismatch is visible and fails closed. 4. Concurrent allocators return unique pairs. 5. Release and teardown make the pair reusable without harming manual or unknown mappings. Note for reviewers: `server/src/services/workspace-runtime-exposure.test.ts` fails on a development host that already runs an HTTPS canary holding ports 42000, 42001, 52000, and 52001, because that fixture stubs port availability and then allocates into the occupied range. It is unaffected by this change and is expected to pass in CI, where no such listener exists. Please read the CI result rather than a local run on an exposing host. ## Risks - The mediator is now the single decision point for allocation and adoption, so a defect in it affects every managed start. This is deliberate: the incident happened because the decision was spread across three readers, and concentrating it is the fix. - Behavior becomes stricter. A start that previously reused a pair now fails closed with a named conflict. This is the intended change, and it can surface pre-existing collisions that used to pass silently. - The remediation path does not stop an unrelated service that already holds a pair. It reports the conflict instead, so it cannot disturb another issue's running lane. - No migration runs in this pull request. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. ## Model Used Claude Opus 5 (`claude-opus-5`), 1M context window, extended thinking, 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 - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-08-17 06:47:55 -04:00
Dotta	4c349fe6b7	feat(runtime): managed Tailscale HTTPS lifecycle, durable runtime leases, and bounded control recovery (#11525 ) <!-- Simplified Technical English (ASD-STE100). --> > Stacked pull request. This targets #11524. Merge #11524 first. Review only the second commit, `feat(runtime): managed Tailscale HTTPS lifecycle...`. ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Paperclip starts and supervises managed runtime services, so an agent's branch can be previewed while the agent works > - The previous pull request added the host broker, the shared contract, and the database columns, but no code used them > - A managed runtime can only be exposed over HTTPS if it holds a stable loopback port pair for the whole life of the service. The current control path cannot promise this: two controls can race the same execution workspace, a stranded control can stay `running` forever, and a start can adopt a port it does not own > - This pull request adds the HTTPS lifecycle and the control-path hardening that the lifecycle depends on > - The benefit is that a managed preview becomes reachable from another device, and a managed control now always reaches a terminal state ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists. The change follows the feature request template. Subsystem affected Managed workspace runtime services, workspace operations, the execution workspace routes, and the workspace runtime UI. Problem or motivation A managed runtime service is reachable only on loopback, so a preview cannot be opened from a phone or a second computer. Exposing it safely needs an exclusively held port pair. Three existing gaps block that. Overlapping controls can race the same workspace. A control whose owner dies stays `running` and blocks the lane forever. Port allocation does not confirm that the process holding a port is the process Paperclip spawned. Proposed solution Add the exposure lifecycle on top of the broker from #11524: reserve before spawn, expose after readiness, validate the public URL, and remove on stop. In the same change, make managed controls mutually exclusive per workspace, give each control a durable issue-owned lease and a terminal state, and verify port ownership before use. Alternatives considered - Add HTTPS exposure without the control hardening. This was rejected because a raced or stranded control makes exposure point at the wrong process. - Guard the lane with an in-memory lock only. This was rejected because the lock does not survive a server restart, so the lane can be lost or double-claimed. - Trust the requested bind address. This was rejected because a checkout that predates managed HTTPS overwrites `PAPERCLIP_BIND` from its own `--bind` argument, and then binds the wildcard address. Roadmap alignment This completes the managed workspace runtime capability that already exists. It adds no new product surface beyond the HTTPS link. Additional context This is the second of three pull requests. The third adds central mediation of leased port pairs. ## What Changed Exposure lifecycle: - Add the server-side broker client and the exposure lifecycle manager. The manager reserves the mapping before spawn, exposes after backend readiness, validates the public URL, and removes the mapping on stop. - Default managed worktree runtimes to `tailscale_https`, read exposure intent from legacy `expose` blocks, and backfill runtimes that are still HTTP-only. - Verify listener ownership for the app port and its Vite HMR companion before the broker is asked to expose anything. An unrelated listener on either port fails the start closed. - Force the loopback bind through argv instead of environment hints. Leave a non-Paperclip service's `--bind` argument alone. - Probe loopback for readiness instead of the public URL, and give Vite HMR its own loopback-bound server in middleware mode. - Preserve operator-declared Serve mappings across the managed lifecycle, so cleanup never removes a mapping that Paperclip did not create. - Name which listener predicate denied an expose, so an operator can act on the message. Control-path hardening: - Make `start`, `stop`, `restart`, and job `run` mutually exclusive per execution workspace. An overlap gets `409 workspace_runtime_control_in_progress`, and authorization is still checked first. - Take a durable exclusivity lease on the execution workspace, owned by the controlling issue. A different issue gets `409 workspace_runtime_lease_conflict` before any operation is recorded. Board and operator actions bypass the lease. - Give every control a terminal state. Each control stamps its owning process and pid, heartbeats while it runs, and has a wall-clock ceiling. Recovery of a stranded control uses a compare-and-swap on `updated_at`, so a live owner is never stolen. - Bound readiness probes, verify allocated port ownership on POSIX and Windows, harden sibling port allocation, and reconcile desired runtimes on server startup. - Surface exposure state and bounded runtime errors in the workspace runtime UI. - Record the new behavior in `doc/DEVELOPING.md`. ## Verification Focused checks, all run on this branch: - `npx tsc --noEmit -p server/tsconfig.json` — 139 errors, exactly the count on `master`. All 139 come from the unbuilt `@paperclipai/plugin-sdk` package. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — clean. - Server suites, 177 tests pass across 9 files: `workspace-runtime.test.ts`, `workspace-runtime-leases.test.ts`, `workspace-runtime-control-recovery.test.ts`, `execution-workspace-runtime-control-conflict.test.ts`, `execution-workspace-runtime-lease-route.test.ts`, `workspace-operations-reconciliation.test.ts`, `workspace-runtime-start-terminality.test.ts`, `app-hmr-port.test.ts`, and `workspace-runtime-ready-comment.test.ts`. - Exposure unit suites, 77 tests pass: `src/services/runtime-exposure/` and `workspace-runtime-exposure-backfill.test.ts`. - UI: `WorkspaceRuntimeControls.test.tsx` and `WorkspaceServiceControlBar.test.tsx` — 34 tests pass. One suite is red on the development host and is expected to be green in CI. `server/src/services/workspace-runtime-exposure.test.ts` has 10 failures on the machine used to write this branch. The cause is host contamination, not the code. That machine already runs an HTTPS canary that holds ports 42000, 42001, 52000, and 52001 on a tailnet address. The suite allocates from the same range, so the new listener-ownership check correctly reports: ``` listener_ownership_mismatch — port 42000 is bound to 100.123.243.20, 127.0.0.1, fd7a:115c:a1e0:0:0:0:dd3a:f314 ... instead of loopback only ``` A CI runner has no listener on those ports, so the check sees loopback only and the suite passes. Please confirm this from the CI result on this pull request rather than from a local run on a host that already exposes a managed runtime. This is a real weakness of the current test fixture, and the third pull request in the series removes it by allocating the pair through a central mediator instead of a stubbed availability check. `workspace-runtime-https-live-exercise.test.ts` needs a live `tailscale` host and was not run locally. ## Risks - This is the behavior-bearing pull request of the three, so it carries the most risk. - Two new `409` responses appear on managed control routes. A caller that assumed a control always starts must handle a conflict. Board and operator actions are deliberately exempt, so an agent lease cannot lock an operator out. - Managed worktree runtimes now default to `tailscale_https`. If the host has no working broker, the start fails closed and reports the exposure failure instead of silently serving plain HTTP. This is intended, and it is the reason the failure message names the denying predicate. - Startup reconciliation touches persisted runtime rows. It is scoped to desired state and does not resurrect a service that never came up. - The lease has a 30-minute time to live and explicit release paths, so a crashed owner cannot hold a lane forever. - No migration runs in this pull request. The tables and columns land in #11524. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. ## Model Used Claude Opus 5 (`claude-opus-5`), 1M context window, extended thinking, 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, with the one host-contaminated suite explained 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 - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-08-17 06:23:33 -04:00
Dotta	f4802b1bbc	feat(runtime-exposure): least-privilege Tailscale HTTPS broker, shared contract, and persisted exposure state (#11524 ) <!-- Simplified Technical English (ASD-STE100). --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Paperclip starts and supervises managed runtime services for a project's execution workspaces, so an agent's branch can be previewed while it works > - Those services only listen on plain loopback HTTP. A person on another device, or on a phone, cannot open the preview > - A Tailscale HTTPS mapping solves this, but `tailscale serve` needs host privileges that the Paperclip server process must not hold > - This pull request adds the foundation only: a separate least-privilege host broker, the shared exposure contract, and the database columns that hold exposure state > - Nothing calls the broker yet, so there is no behavior change. The benefit is that the privileged surface is small, reviewable, and isolated before any lifecycle code depends on it ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists. The change follows the feature request template. Subsystem affected Managed workspace runtime services, the shared type and validator package, and the database schema. Problem or motivation A managed runtime service binds to loopback only. There is no supported way to reach that preview from another device. Adding HTTPS directly to the server would mean the server process runs `tailscale serve`, which needs privileges far wider than the task requires. A compromised or buggy server could then map any port to the tailnet. Proposed solution Split the privileged work into a separate broker process with a narrow protocol, and define one shared contract that the server, the UI, the runtime, and the broker all read. Land this foundation first, with no caller, so the privileged code can be reviewed on its own. Alternatives considered - Call `tailscale serve` from the server process. This was rejected because it gives the server unrestricted mapping authority. - Use `sudo` for single `tailscale` commands. This was rejected because the argument list is the only guard, and it is easy to widen by accident. - Use a generic reverse proxy. This was rejected because it does not remove the need for a privileged Tailscale mapping step. Roadmap alignment This supports the existing managed workspace runtime capability. It adds no new product surface on its own. Additional context The broker is the security boundary of the feature, so it is deliberately the first slice. Three later pull requests build on it: the server exposure lifecycle, the runtime lease and recovery integration, and the leased-port mediator. ## What Changed - Add the `@paperclipai/tailscale-https-broker` workspace package. The broker listens on a unix socket, authorizes each peer with `SO_PEERCRED`, and answers a small request protocol. - Restrict what the broker will map. It accepts only same-number HTTPS-to-loopback pairs inside the Paperclip port range, refuses protected ports, and confirms that the loopback port belongs to a Paperclip-owned listener. - Parse every request with a strict JSON reader that rejects duplicate keys, prototype keys, and unknown fields. - Write an append-only audit record for each broker decision. - Add the shared exposure contract in `@paperclipai/shared`: the `RuntimeExposureConfig`, `RuntimeExposureState`, and `RuntimeExposureStatus` types, their zod validators, the app and HMR port rules, and the loopback-bind helpers. - Persist exposure state on `workspace_runtime_services` with the new `exposure` column, plus the server-private `exposure_handle` and `backend_url` columns that are never serialized to API clients. - Add the `execution_workspace_runtime_leases` table that the later lease slice uses. - Extend the runtime read-model test fixture for the three new columns. ## Verification Focused checks, all run on this branch: - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/tailscale-https-broker test` — 12 files, 82 tests pass. This covers peer credentials, port policy, protected ports, the serve config writer, the strict JSON reader, argv parsing, and the socket server. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/tailscale-https-broker typecheck` — clean. - `npx vitest run --root packages/shared src/runtime-exposure src/validators/runtime-exposure.test.ts` — 3 files, 40 tests pass. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck` — runs `check:migrations` first. Migration numbering and migration safety both pass. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` — clean. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — clean. - `npx vitest run --root server src/services/workspace-runtime-read-model.test.ts` — 3 tests pass. - `npx tsc --noEmit -p server/tsconfig.json` — 139 errors, which is exactly the count on `master` before this branch. All 139 come from the unbuilt `@paperclipai/plugin-sdk` package. To confirm the exposure state is inert, start a managed runtime service as usual. The new columns stay null and the service behaves as it does today. ## Risks - Migration risk is low. Both migrations only add a table and three nullable columns. No column is backfilled and no existing column changes. The migration safety check passes. - Behavior risk is low. No code path calls the broker in this pull request, and the shared exposure fields are optional. - The broker is privileged, so it is the real risk surface. It is mitigated by peer-credential authorization, a fixed port range, a protected-port deny list, same-number pair enforcement, listener-ownership checks, strict JSON parsing, and an audit trail. Reviewers should read `packages/tailscale-https-broker/src/authorization.ts` and `src/port-policy.ts` closely. - The broker requires a `tailscale` version floor, which its README records. An older host CLI makes the broker refuse to start rather than map incorrectly. - `pnpm-lock.yaml` changes because a new workspace package is added. The diff is the new importer block, plus one duplicate `tinyexec` entry that pnpm removed. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. ## Model Used Claude Opus 5 (`claude-opus-5`), 1M context window, extended thinking, 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 - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-08-17 05:54:12 -04:00
DottaandPaperclip	10d0555189	fix(interactions): authorize resolvers consistently (#11376 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Issue interactions give agents and people a structured decision record. > - Resolver routes used different authorization rules. > - Some routes blocked valid agents, including task watchdogs with normal issue access. > - The API did not show who could resolve a pending interaction. > - This pull request gives every interaction kind one resolver policy evaluator. > - The benefit is a clear decision path with consistent governance and company isolation. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Fixes: #8087 Refs: #7403 Related PR: #11082 proposes board-only confirmation rules. This change keeps human-only review as an explicit policy. What happened? Agents could create issue interactions. Some resolver routes still required board access. This left valid agent confirmations pending. Task watchdogs could see the same problem without board identity. Expected behavior Every interaction kind must use one resolver policy contract. The contract must support `anyone`, `not_creator`, and `human_only`. It must also apply all normal governance controls. Steps to reproduce 1. Create a `request_confirmation` interaction as an agent. 2. Resolve it with another authorized agent. 3. Observe the board-only denial. Paperclip version or commit The problem exists on `master` before this change. Deployment mode Local development with `pnpm dev`. ## What Changed - Add canonical policies for `anyone`, `not_creator`, and `human_only`. - Use one server evaluator for every interaction kind. - Apply named addressees, company limits, review rules, and task watchdog scope. - Charge cross-issue resolutions to the existing per-run action limit. - Return the effective resolver audience in attention and interaction data. - Show the audience, governance choices, and denial reasons in the board UI. - Add telemetry, API documents, product documents, and regression fixtures. - Add migration provenance for safe legacy behavior. - Make migration `0218` safe for complete replays and partial prior runs. ## Product Rules - An interaction records a response. It does not grant authority for the next action. - `anyone` lets any authorized issue participant respond. - `not_creator` requires a responder other than the interaction creator. - `human_only` requires an authorized person. - A named addressee, company policy, or governed action can narrow the audience. - These controls cannot widen the audience. - A task watchdog uses the same rules as an ordinary agent. - A task watchdog does not receive board authority. - An agent resolution on another issue uses the shared cross-issue action limit. - Legacy pending interactions keep their earlier restrictions. - The UI shows the effective audience and a permanent denial reason. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db check:migrations` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck` - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/db/src/issue-thread-interaction-resolver-policy-migration.test.ts` - The focused PostgreSQL test applies migration `0218` twice. - The test also completes a partial prior run and preserves existing provenance. - The latest GitHub head has 29 successful checks. - The opt-in Storybook visual check skipped as expected. - Greptile reports 5/5 with no open comments. ## Risks - New interaction writes use `anyone` by default. - Callers must select `not_creator` or `human_only` when they need stricter review. - Legacy pending interactions keep the old creator and human restrictions. - Migration `0218` fills only missing provenance fields during recovery. - Cross-issue resolutions can reach the existing action limit. - The shared evaluator affects every interaction kind. - Route, service, database, shared contract, and UI tests cover these rules. > This work matches the Agent Reviews and Approvals direction in `ROADMAP.md`. It does not duplicate a planned item. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The runtime does not expose the exact deployment ID or context window. The agent used reasoning, repository tools, shell commands, and test execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either linked public issues or described the issue with the required labels - [x] I have not referenced internal Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket id - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation - [x] I have considered and documented the risks - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open comments - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-08-16 13:46:50 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	9e9f744f58	Show blocker links in the task chat (#11456 ) <!-- Write all pull request text in Simplified Technical English (ASD-STE100): short sentences, one instruction per sentence, simple approved vocabulary, and the active voice. --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps operators supervise agent work through tasks and task threads. > - The redesigned task thread shows the current work and its state. > - A blocked task did not show the dependency that prevented progress. > - Operators had to leave the thread to find the direct and final blockers. > - This pull request adds compact blocker links at the top and bottom of the task thread. > - The benefit is that operators can identify and open the relevant tasks without adding a large notice to the thread. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What existing behavior does this improve? The redesigned task thread did not show which task directly blocked the current task or which task ultimately blocked its dependency chain. Subsystem affected `server/`, `packages/shared/`, and `ui/` task-blocker presentation. Current behavior A blocked task can open in the redesigned thread without a visible dependency link at the top or bottom of the conversation. Proposed behavior Show one compact amber row for the direct blocker. Show a second row for the selected final blocker when one exists. Render the rows at both ends of the thread. Reason and benefit Operators can see the reason for the blocked state and open the relevant task from the conversation. The compact rows preserve thread density. Breaking changes None. The new blocker-attention fields are optional. Existing clients remain compatible. ## What Changed - Added a compact task-chat component for direct and selected final blocker links. - Added the blocker rows to the top and bottom of populated and empty task threads. - Added link-ready blocker-attention details so an intermediate selected task stays on its correct direct chain. - Included blocker-link changes in the thread content key so pinned threads follow a newly added bottom row. - Added component, scrolling, server contract, and Storybook coverage for the new states. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/TaskChatThread.test.tsx server/src/__tests__/issue-blocker-attention.test.ts` (38 tests passed) - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `pnpm check:token-gates` ## Risks - Low risk. The rows only render while the task status is `blocked` and an unresolved blocker is available. - Long titles are truncated to keep each blocker on one line. The full task label remains available in the link title. - Older server payloads keep the original leaf-selection behavior because the new sampled details are optional. > 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 with GPT-5. The run used tool-enabled reasoning and code execution. The context-window size was not exposed to the run. ## 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>	2026-08-16 13:09:17 -04:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	cd501499a2	test: add ACPX run lifecycle characterization baselines (#11461 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The adapter runtime starts, turns, settles, and composes ACPX runs > - Recent lifecycle corrections changed several order and cleanup rules > - Those rules need regression coverage before the planned engine refactor > - This pull request adds characterization suites for the corrected behavior > - The benefit is a clear test baseline for the next refactor ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What existing behavior does this improve? The ACPX adapter runtime and server heartbeat lifecycle need stable regression coverage for their current corrected behavior. Subsystem affected Cross-cutting (multiple of the above): `packages/adapter-utils` and `server` test suites. Current behavior The runtime has corrected rules for startup, turns, settlement, composed results, and heartbeat terminalization. The repository lacks a single characterization baseline for these rules. Proposed behavior Keep the current lifecycle rules pinned by five test suites. Let the later engine refactor change behavior only when it updates these tests with a clear reason. Reason and benefit The suites expose order, cleanup, transport, timeout, retry, result, and lease-release changes during the refactor. They also record one known latent defect as current behavior. Breaking changes None. This pull request adds tests only. ## What Changed - Add startup characterization coverage for commands, launch values, session fingerprints, sync order, bridge overlap, and cleanup paths. - Add turn characterization coverage for inputs, events, transports, timeout and cancel behavior, retry rules, errors, and usage. - Add settlement characterization coverage for teardown, adapter sync-back, workspace restore order, native sync, and error policy. - Add composed-run characterization coverage for result forms, finalization sets, and host-lane warm save and warm hit behavior. - Add server coverage that checks run terminalization before environment lease release. ## Verification - Run `npx vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/startup-characterization.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/turn-characterization.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/settlement-characterization.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/composed-run-characterization.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/execute.test.ts`. - Run `npx vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-run-terminalize-before-release.test.ts`. - The adapter-utils run passes 178 tests, and the server run passes 4 tests. - Check `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils typecheck`. - Check `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`. ## Risks Low risk. The change adds test files and does not change production code. One known cold ensure-session cleanup defect remains pinned as current behavior. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, 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>	2026-08-15 21:36:59 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	e52b8a343f	fix: ACP run lifecycle corrections — failure settlement, workspace sync-back, lease cleanup (#11454 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agent adapters run ACP sessions and manage runtime, workspace, and lease resources. > - Several failure paths left runtime bridges, staged workspaces, or environment leases active after an error. > - These leaks reduce run reliability and can leave later runs without clean resources. > - This pull request closes the failure paths, applies one teardown policy, and adds regression tests. > - The benefit is consistent failure settlement and safer reuse of agent workspaces and leases. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What happened? ACP runs could leave runtime bridges, staged workspaces, or environment leases active after failures. Claude and Gemini ACP runs did not restore the sandbox workspace on teardown. Lease release stopped when one lease returned an error. Expected behavior Each ACP failure must return an error result and settle its resources. Teardown must run each step, release leases independently, and restore the host workspace when the sandbox ends. Pending cleanup leases must receive bounded retry attempts. Steps to reproduce 1. Run an ACP session that fails after runtime creation or during turn preparation. 2. Run an ACP session that fails during a warm hit or staged runtime handoff. 3. Run lease cleanup with more than one lease when the first release returns an error. 4. Inspect the result phase, teardown calls, workspace state, and lease metadata. 5. Run the regression suites listed in the Verification section. ## What Changed - Settle every ACP failure after runtime creation with an error result and one sandbox.startup span closure. - Close the ACP runtime and remove warm entries after every pre-turn failure. - Run all teardown steps, record teardown errors, release staging leases in finally, and prevent duplicate teardown. - Dispose staged runtimes after seam failures and remove borrowed staged entries with identity guards. - Add fail-open workspace sync-back teardown for Claude and Gemini ACP adapters. - Isolate lease release errors and add bounded retry sweeps for stranded pending_cleanup leases. - Atomically claim pending_cleanup retries and clamp attempt readers to keep the five-attempt bound. - Default absent provider reusableLeases values to false and align the fake provider with its runtime declaration. - Add regression tests for engine, adapter, server, and shared environment behavior. ## Verification - [x] `npx vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/execute.test.ts` — 124 tests passed. - [x] `npx vitest run packages/adapters/codex-local/src/server/acp.test.ts packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/acp.test.ts packages/adapters/gemini-local/src/server/acp.test.ts` — 61 tests passed. - [x] `npx vitest run server/src/__tests__/environment-runtime.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-pending-cleanup-sweep.test.ts server/src/__tests__/reusable-leases-default.test.ts server/src/__tests__/environment-routes.test.ts packages/shared/src/environment-support.test.ts` — passed. - [x] All listed suites ran from the repository root. - [x] GitHub CI completed successfully for `cfc349c9f232711433897915112a1c52c0e462ca`. - [x] Greptile completed with a 5/5 confidence score and no blocking finding. ## Risks The engine changes affect failure settlement and teardown order across ACP runs. The server changes add retry state to existing lease metadata without a schema migration. The adapter changes restore workspaces after sandbox execution. Regression tests cover the changed paths. GitHub CI and Greptile passed for the current head. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. This change fixes runtime reliability and does not duplicate a roadmap feature. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-5 Codex. The model used tool-based repository inspection, GitHub operations, and code review support. The runtime does not expose a context-window value. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed 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 (for example, `docs/...` or `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>	2026-08-15 18:52:08 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	fdb9a4880d	fix(security): route paperclipai CLI guidance through safe npx form (CWE-78) (#11400 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Paperclip provides CLI commands and guidance for operators and agents > - The `pnpm paperclipai` script can pass argument values through a shell > - Shell re-parsing can execute command substitutions inside quoted values > - This pull request routes guidance through inert-argv `npx paperclipai` commands and adds regression coverage > - The benefit is safer operator guidance across documentation and runtime hints ## Linked Issues or Issue Description This pull request fixes a command-injection-class defect in Paperclip CLI guidance. What happened? The `pnpm paperclipai <sub> --flag "$VALUE"` form can re-parse argument values through a shell. A command substitution inside a quoted value can execute on the host. Expected behavior Paperclip guidance must pass CLI values as inert argument values. Host-derived values must not appear in copyable commands. Steps to reproduce 1. Run a Paperclip guidance command that uses the `pnpm paperclipai` script. 2. Provide a quoted value that contains a command substitution. 3. Observe that the shell can evaluate the substitution before the CLI starts. 4. Compare the result with the `npx paperclipai` form. Paperclip version or commit `5670984b75d109950c968542a0111ebb6967f4da` Deployment mode All deployment modes that show or use the affected CLI guidance. Installation method Built from source and installed CLI guidance. Agent adapter(s) involved Not adapter-specific (core bug). Database mode Not database-related. Access context Both. Additional context The earlier merged PR [#11343](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/11343) used the unsafe `pnpm exec paperclipai` form. This fresh PR replaces that guidance with the safe `npx paperclipai` form. ## What Changed - Standardize documentation and runtime hints on `npx paperclipai`. - Remove the broken `pnpm exec paperclipai` guidance. - Use a static `<host>` placeholder in private-hostname guidance. - Add regression tests for unsafe forms, continued lines, static hosts, and offline guidance. ## Verification - `git diff --check origin/master...origin/fix/paperclipai-cli-npx-safe-invocation` passes. - The branch adds `server/src/__tests__/cli-invocation-safety.test.ts` and updates private-hostname tests. - CI must run the new tests, typecheck, lint, and build checks. - Local Vitest execution was not available because this worktree has no installed Vitest binary. ## Risks - The change affects operator and agent documentation text. - The runtime hints now show `<host>` instead of a request-derived host value. - No database schema or migration changes exist. - CI will detect any missed unsafe invocation or type error. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-5, exact model ID `gpt-5`, with tool use and code-review assistance. The model used repository inspection, Git operations, and PR preparation. ## 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] CI ran the test suites and they pass; local test execution was unavailable in this worktree - [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 addressed all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-08-14 22:11:16 -07:00
Opaque	ea3a5ea7d2	fix(recovery): skip successful-run handoff for recovery-action-driven runs (#9010 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The recovery subsystem repairs issues stranded without a valid disposition: `decideSuccessfulRunHandoff` queues one corrective wake per successful-but-dispositionless run, and `source_scoped_recovery_action` wakes a recovery owner for stranded issues > - `decideSuccessfulRunHandoff` already refuses to treat corrective handoff runs, issue-monitor runs, and comment-driven wakes as handoff sources — but not runs woken by `source_scoped_recovery_action` > - Because the handoff idempotency key includes `sourceRunId`, every succeeding recovery run is a brand-new source: recovery run → handoff wake → corrective run → new recovery action → recovery run → … with `DEFAULT_MAX_SUCCESSFUL_RUN_HANDOFF_ATTEMPTS` never binding (it is per-source-run) and the source-scoped recovery action created with `maxAttempts: null` > - The cycle is unbounded, each leg is a ~15s no-op "succeeded" run, and the designed handoff-exhausted escalation (blocked + exhausted notice) never engages > - This PR adds recovery-action-driven runs to the existing skip list, so recovery runs own their own follow-up path and the stranded-issue escalation remains the exit when the disposition is still missing > - The benefit is that missing-disposition recovery converges (one handoff, then escalation) instead of ping-ponging wake volume unboundedly ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #6523 — same wake-loop family (repeated `source_scoped_recovery_action` wakes); this PR fixes the variant where the loop partner is the successful-run handoff. Observed behavior: in a 16-agent deployment, one agent produced 223 runs in 2 hours, every run `succeeded` with ~15s duration, with `contextSnapshot.wakeReason` alternating exactly between `source_scoped_recovery_action` (109) and `finish_successful_run_handoff` (108). The source issue never reached the exhausted escalation. ## What Changed - `server/src/services/recovery/successful-run-handoff.ts`: new `isRecoveryActionDrivenRun` predicate (matches `contextSnapshot.wakeReason === "source_scoped_recovery_action"` or a present `contextSnapshot.recoveryActionId`), consulted in `decideSuccessfulRunHandoff` alongside the existing corrective-handoff / issue-monitor / comment-driven skip guards. - `server/src/services/recovery/successful-run-handoff.test.ts`: cases asserting recovery-driven runs are skipped via both markers. ## Verification - `pnpm -F @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/services/recovery/successful-run-handoff.test.ts` → 17 passed (16 existing unchanged + 1 new). - Production validation (same logic deployed as a dist patch on 2026.626.0): the alternating recovery/handoff wake pattern stopped after restart; ordinary successful-run handoffs (first corrective wake per genuine source run) continue to queue. ## Risks Low-to-moderate, scoped to one decision function. The behavioral shift: a recovery-action run that succeeds without fixing the disposition no longer gets a corrective handoff wake — instead the stranded-issue detector escalates (blocked + recovery owner + exhausted notice), which per the existing `escalateStrandedAssignedIssue` code is the designed terminal path. Runs not woken by a recovery action are unaffected (covered by the existing 16 tests, all green). ## Model Used Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), extended thinking, agentic tool use via Claude Code. Human-reviewed before submission. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-08-14 23:21:34 -05:00
DottaandCodex	edb8083538	fix(server): serialize interaction review verdicts Lock the issue before accepting or rejecting review confirmations, reauthorize against the current policy, and cover concurrent policy tightening. Co-Authored-By: Codex <noreply@openai.com>	2026-08-15 01:53:26 +00:00
DottaandCodex	991f40bb2e	fix(server): serialize review policy verdict authorization Recheck terminal verdict and policy mutations under a row lock, and scope interaction verdict enforcement to the review confirmation itself. Co-Authored-By: Codex <noreply@openai.com>	2026-08-15 01:25:17 +00:00
DottaandPaperclip	373b675f94	fix(server): prevent review policy verdict downgrade bypass Authorize verdicts and policy changes against the stored restrictive review policy, remove downgrade guidance, and cover both restrictive policies with route regressions. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-08-15 01:12:34 +00:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5	8ee1fb21a6	feat(ui): badge the review policy when it constrains approval (#10938 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Agents move their work into review, and a reviewer must then give a verdict on it > - By default anyone with write access can give that verdict, including the agent that did the work > - The server can constrain that default per issue with a `reviewPolicy` column, but no screen showed the value > - A reviewer could therefore press Approve on a review that the server refuses, and get a 403 > - This pull request shows the policy as a badge on the two surfaces where a person gives a verdict > - It also makes an agent verdict read as a verdict in the activity timeline > - The benefit is that a reviewer sees who can approve before they try ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists for this change. The description below follows `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/enhancement.yml`. What existing behavior does this improve? The issue review flow. A reviewer cannot see the approval constraint on an issue before they give a verdict. Subsystem affected Web UI (`ui/`), with one supporting change in the server attention service. Current behavior The server stores an optional approval constraint for each issue in a `reviewPolicy` column. The column has three meaningful states: the default (`NULL` or `anyone`), `not_creator`, and `human_only`. The server enforces the constraint when it receives a verdict. No screen shows the value. Two problems follow: 1. A reviewer presses Approve on a review that the server refuses. The server answers 403, and the reason is not visible on the card. 2. An agent that accepts or rejects a review renders in the activity timeline as the raw action id, for example "issue thread interaction accepted". A person who reads the timeline cannot tell that a verdict was given. Proposed behavior Show the constraint as a read-only badge on the two surfaces where a person gives a verdict. Show no pixels for the default state, because the default is what every issue already does. Make an agent verdict read as a verdict in the timeline. Only agents set the column today, so this change adds no control to set it. Reason and benefit A reviewer sees the constraint before they act. This prevents the 403, and it removes the need to explain the 403 afterwards. The timeline also becomes complete, because it now shows agent verdicts and human verdicts in the same way. Breaking changes None. The change adds a badge and changes copy. It adds no column, no endpoint, and no request. Additional context The server-side column and the verdict enforcement landed earlier in #10931. This pull request is the user interface for that column. The default state stays unchanged on screen, so the badge appears on a small number of issues. ## What Changed - A read-only "Approvals" row in the issue Execution properties. The row renders only for a constrained policy: "Anyone else" (`not_creator`) or "Human only" (`human_only`). A `NULL` or `anyone` column adds no row, so the panel is untouched on the overwhelming majority of issues. - The same badge on the stalled-review card in `/decisions`, above the three review verbs. A reviewer now sees the constraint before they press Approve. The condition is the same, so the default card is unchanged. - Agent verdicts read as verdicts in the activity timeline. An agent that accepted or rejected a review request previously rendered the raw action id ("issue thread interaction accepted"). It now reads "approved the request". A stalled-review decision names the verb that the actor chose. - A cleared policy reports as "anyone", not "none", in the field-change receipt. The `reviewPolicy` column is nullable by default, so an absent value is a real setting rather than a missing one. - All copy comes from `ui/src/lib/review-policy.ts`. Its badge lookup returns `null` for the default. This makes "no pixels for the default" one enforced decision instead of a condition repeated at each call site. It also keeps the badge, the activity line, and the receipt reading alike. - The server attention service carries the policy on the review attention subject, so the stalled-review card can read it. ## Verification Automated tests: - `ui/src/lib/review-policy.test.ts` — the default returns no badge, however the column spells it (`null`, `undefined`, `"anyone"`). An unrecognised policy from the wire shows nothing rather than leaking an enum value. - `ui/src/components/AttentionQueueRow.test.tsx` — no badge on the default card, and the verbs still render. Suppression of the badge must not suppress the card. - `ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx` — no Approvals row on the default. The constrained row contains no `button`, so nothing there can PATCH. - `server/src/__tests__/attention-service.test.ts` — the review attention subject carries the policy, and subjects built from narrower selects do not claim one. Run them with: ```sh pnpm vitest run ui/src/lib/review-policy.test.ts \ ui/src/components/AttentionQueueRow.test.tsx \ ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx \ server/src/__tests__/attention-service.test.ts ``` Manual steps: 1. Open an issue that has no `reviewPolicy`. Confirm that the Execution properties panel shows no Approvals row. 2. Set the column to `not_creator`. Reload the issue. Confirm that the Approvals row reads "Anyone else", and that the row has no control. 3. Move that issue into review. Open `/decisions`. Confirm that the stalled review card shows the same badge above the review verbs. 4. Let an agent approve the review. Confirm that the activity timeline reads "approved the request" and not "issue thread interaction accepted". Screenshots were captured at 1440x900 and 390x844, in light mode and dark mode, with the three policy states side by side. The leftmost column in each capture is the default. It carries no badge and no extra row. ## Risks Low risk. - The change is additive on screen. Every new surface is behind a constrained policy, so the default path renders exactly as before. - The badge is read-only. It has no control and sends no request, and a test asserts that the row contains no `button`. - An unknown policy value from the wire renders nothing. It does not render the raw enum. - No migration, no schema change, and no endpoint change. ## Model Used Claude Opus 5 (Anthropic), model id `claude-opus-5[1m]`, 1M context window, with extended thinking and tool use enabled. Used through Claude Code for the implementation, the tests, and this description. ## 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: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-08-14 20:29:36 -04:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	69027cbaae	fix(workspaces): reopen archived git worktree for managed_checkout projects (#11395 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Execution workspaces give agent tasks isolated Git worktrees > - Archived isolated workspaces must reopen against a live project checkout > - A managed_checkout project has no project workspace directory in its row > - The reopen path used the removed archived worktree as the Git working directory > - This pull request resolves the live managed checkout and reports a clear error when it is unavailable > - The benefit is reliable workspace reopen behavior after archive cleanup ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related public pull request: [#6164](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/6164) clears archive state during un-archive. This pull request fixes the separate reopen failure that occurs after archive cleanup. What happened? An archived isolated `git_worktree` workspace under a `managed_checkout` project failed to reopen after cleanup. The route attempted to run Git in the removed archived worktree and returned a generic service error. Expected behavior The reopen path should use the live managed checkout as the Git base directory and should return a clear error when that directory is unavailable. Steps to reproduce 1. Create a project with `managed_checkout` source control. 2. Create and archive an isolated `git_worktree` execution workspace. 3. Let archive cleanup remove the worktree. 4. Reopen the workspace for an issue. Paperclip version or commit `cab0c31dc61310106caef42ca244e9f7b0f19460` Deployment mode Local dev with the default embedded database. Agent adapter(s) involved Not adapter-specific. This issue affects core workspace handling. ## What Changed - Resolve the live managed checkout when a managed project reopens an archived Git worktree. - Keep local-folder projects on their project workspace directory. - Validate the Git base directory before `git rev-parse` and return a scrubbed error. - Add nine regression tests for workspace reopen behavior. ## Verification - `server` TypeScript check passes with `tsc --noEmit`. - `server/src/__tests__/execution-workspace-reopen.test.ts` passes with 9 tests. - GitHub Actions must pass all required PR checks. ## Risks Low risk. The change affects only archived isolated workspace reopen behavior. It reuses the existing managed checkout and Git authentication helpers. It adds no new credential path, endpoint, or telemetry. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-5 assisted with review and GitHub operations. The implementation author supplied the code and test results. ## 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>	2026-08-14 16:44:31 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	5ca7b4c1fe	fix(security): standardize paperclipai CLI guidance on safe npx path (#11343 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Paperclip provides CLI guidance to agents and operators through documentation and runtime messages. > - Content-bearing `pnpm paperclipai` examples send arguments through a shell. > - Shell evaluation can execute command substitutions in untrusted argument content. > - Runtime hostname guidance can also place request-derived content inside a shell command. > - This pull request uses `npx paperclipai` for content-bearing guidance and uses a static hostname placeholder. > - The benefit is safer copy-paste guidance for agents and operators. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Issue type Incorrect information Where is the issue? CLI guidance in `doc/CLI.md`, `skills/paperclip/SKILL.md`, documentation, and runtime-generated hints. What's wrong? Content-bearing `pnpm paperclipai` commands can pass argument text through `/bin/sh`. Shell command substitution in an argument can execute before the CLI receives the value. Suggested fix Use `npx paperclipai` for content-bearing commands. Use a static `<host>` placeholder when runtime guidance displays the allowed-hostname command. ## What Changed - Replace content-bearing `pnpm paperclipai` examples with `npx paperclipai` across the documentation and agent-facing guidance. - Update runtime-generated CLI hints to use a static `<host>` placeholder. - Add safety notes to `doc/CLI.md` and `skills/paperclip/SKILL.md`. - Add scans and regression tests for unsafe invocation and hostile hostname headers. - Keep fixed lifecycle commands and `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/*` build commands unchanged. ## Verification - Run `tsc --noEmit` for the changed server files. - Run `cli-invocation-safety.test.ts`. - Run `private-hostname-guard.test.ts`. - Confirm that hostile hostname headers do not enter shown shell commands. - Confirm that the three commits contain the required Paperclip co-author trailer. ## Risks - This change updates documentation and diagnostic text across many surfaces. - Fixed lifecycle and setup commands remain unchanged. - The tests fail if content-bearing `pnpm paperclipai` guidance returns. - The change does not alter the CLI argument parser. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, tool use, code execution, and repository review assistance. ## 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>	2026-08-13 16:43:21 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	05d58cd884	fix(tool-gateway): keep unsigned ask-first requests out of the review queue without cancelling them (#11338 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The tool gateway creates approval requests and the review queue reads them > - The gateway creates a request row before it adds the signature > - A review-queue read can see the row during that short unsigned state > - The old read path cancels the unsigned row, so approval returns `409 action_not_pending` > - This pull request hides unsigned in-flight rows and keeps them pending until signing finishes > - The benefit is that approval succeeds while invalid signed requests remain cancelled ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What happened? A review-queue read cancelled a pending tool action request when the request had no signature yet. The next approval call returned `409 action_not_pending`. Expected behavior The review queue must hide an unsigned in-flight request and keep its state as `pending`. A request with an invalid signature must remain cancelled. Steps to reproduce 1. Create a require-approval tool action request. 2. Read the review queue while the request signature is still null. 3. Approve the request after the creator adds the signature. 4. Observe that the old code cancels the request and the approval call fails. Paperclip version or commit Commit `720aa0a494bbaa1711bc7a3d795f810765915bfe`. Deployment mode Local dev with the embedded PGlite database. Installation method Built from source with pnpm. Agent adapter(s) involved Not adapter-specific. This is a core tool access service bug. Database mode Embedded PGlite. Access context Board and agent tool approval flow. ## What Changed - Keep a pending request with a null signature out of `listActionRequests` results. - Cancel a request when its non-null signature fails verification. - Add a permanent regression test for the unsigned request transition. - Update the contract test for unsigned and invalid-signature requests. ## Verification - Run the tool access service, tool gateway service, tool gateway, and tool access policy service tests. - Confirm 227 tests pass. - Run the `@mcp-runnable` Playwright end-to-end suite in CI. - Run the US-9 loop 30 times in CI. ## Risks The change alters review-queue filtering for unsigned requests. A null signature now means that signing remains in progress. Invalid signed requests keep the existing cancellation behavior. The change has no database migration. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, with tool use and code execution. The model reviewed the handoff, repository rules, and pull request state. The implementation author supplied the code and tests. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] 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>	2026-08-13 16:15:12 -07:00
scotttongandPaperclip	eabecc6f77	feat(annotations): include issue document annotations in agent review context (#11332 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Reviewers annotate plans and issue documents with inline comments, and assigned agents act on that feedback > - The server already builds a bounded review context from open plan annotations and includes it in agent wake payloads > - Non-plan issue documents did not get the same treatment: their open annotation threads never reached the agent, and the properties pane did not surface their annotations > - This pull request extends the review-context path and the properties-pane UI to issue documents, at parity with plans > - The benefit is that agent feedback on any issue document reaches the assigned agent, not only feedback on the plan ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What existing behavior does this improve? The review-context pipeline that delivers inline annotation feedback to assigned agents, and the properties pane that surfaces those annotations to reviewers. Subsystem affected The server review-context path (`server/src/services/plan-review-context.ts`, wake payload assembly in `server/src/services/heartbeat.ts`, `server/src/routes/issues.ts`), shared wake-payload types (`packages/shared`, `packages/adapter-utils`), and the issue properties pane (`ui/src/components/issue-properties/`). Current behavior A reviewer can annotate any issue document, not only the plan. The agent wake payload includes open annotation threads for the plan document only. Feedback left on other issue documents is invisible to the assigned agent. In the properties pane, the Artifacts tab also gives no way to see or open a document's annotations. Proposed behavior Add `buildDocumentReviewContext` beside the existing plan builder. It collects open annotation threads for all non-plan issue documents, applies the same thread, comment, and character budgets across documents, and reports truncation. Include the result as a new `documentReviewContext` field in agent wake payloads and in the issue wake-context route. Keep the plan context on its legacy builder and field so plan-only wakes stay byte-for-byte compatible. Render the new context in the adapter wake-payload text, and surface annotation counts and the annotation panel for documents in the properties pane's Plans and Artifacts tabs. Reason and benefit The floating annotation popover and persistent highlight UI landed earlier; this change completes the loop so agent feedback on any issue document reaches the assigned agent, not only feedback on the plan. Breaking changes None. The wake payload gains a new optional `documentReviewContext` field; the existing plan context field and its legacy builder are unchanged, so plan-only wakes stay byte-for-byte compatible. ## What Changed - Add `buildDocumentReviewContext` in `server/src/services/plan-review-context.ts`: bounded review context (shared thread/comment/character budgets, per-document legacy limits) over all non-plan issue documents - Include `documentReviewContext` in agent wake payloads (`server/src/services/heartbeat.ts`) and in the issue wake-context response (`server/src/routes/issues.ts`) - Add shared `DocumentReviewContext` / `DocumentReviewContextDocument` types in `packages/shared` - Normalize and render the new context in adapter wake-payload text (`packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.ts`), with tests - Show a `DocumentAnnotationsCountChip` and the annotation panel for documents in the properties pane Plans and Artifacts tabs, with tests - Extend server document-annotations service tests to cover the new context builder ## Verification - Run `npx vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts server/src/__tests__/document-annotations-service.test.ts` from the repo root — 104 tests pass - Run `TZ=UTC npx vitest run ui/src/components/issue-properties/IssuePropertiesDocumentAnnotations.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssueDocumentAnnotations.test.tsx ui/src/components/DocumentAnnotationPopover.test.tsx` from the repo root — 75 tests pass (one pre-existing monitor-row case asserts UTC timestamps, so use `TZ=UTC` locally; CI runs in UTC) - `pnpm run typecheck` in `server/` passes - Manual: annotate a non-plan issue document, then wake the assigned agent with a comment — the wake payload lists the open document annotation threads; the Artifacts tab shows the annotation count chip and opens the panel ## Risks - The wake payload gains a new optional `documentReviewContext` field; consumers that ignore unknown fields are unaffected, and the plan context field is unchanged - The context is new input to agent wakes; shared budgets (same limits as the plan context) bound token cost across all documents - Low UI risk: the properties-pane changes reuse the existing annotation components > 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 - Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-fable-5` (Claude Fable 5), with extended thinking and agentic tool use (Claude Code harness) ## 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>	2026-08-13 14:23:09 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	44694328a3	fix(issues): make DELETE /api/issues/:id succeed for issues with dependents (#11331 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The server provides issue APIs and the database stores issue child rows > - The issue delete endpoint removes the parent issue before dependent rows > - Several issue foreign keys had no delete policy, so PostgreSQL returned a foreign-key error > - This pull request adds safe cascade and set-null policies and a clear conflict response > - The benefit is reliable issue deletion with a useful error when a restricted audit row still blocks deletion ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Fixes #7728 Fixes #4660 Fixes #7991 Fixes #4627 Fixes #5086 What happened? `DELETE /api/issues/:id` returned HTTP 500 when dependent comments, thread interactions, read states, inbox archives, feedback votes, or ledger rows referenced the issue. The database raised SQLSTATE 23503 because several foreign keys had no delete policy. Expected behavior The endpoint must remove dependent rows that have no meaning without the issue. It must keep ledger rows with a null issue reference. It must return HTTP 409 when a restricted decision audit row still references the issue. Steps to reproduce 1. Create an issue. 2. Add a comment or thread interaction that references the issue. 3. Send `DELETE /api/issues/:id`. 4. Observe the HTTP 500 response. Paperclip version or commit Commit `1f8f456f8340823fe2bd891ae8933d942f190b7b`. Deployment mode Local dev with embedded PGlite or external PostgreSQL. ## What Changed - Add `CASCADE` to five issue child foreign keys. - Add `SET NULL` to the finance and cost event issue foreign keys. - Keep decision audit references restricted. - Map SQLSTATE 23503 from the issue delete service to HTTP 409. - Add migration 0217 for the seven changed tables. - Add regression tests for cascade deletion and restricted decision references. ## Verification - Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`. - Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`. - Run `npx vitest run src/__tests__/issue-remove-cascade.test.ts` from `server/`. - The regression test applies migration 0217 to a fresh embedded PostgreSQL database. ## Risks - Migration 0217 changes only seven foreign keys that reference `issues.id`. - Cascade deletion removes child rows that cannot exist without the parent issue. - Set-null preserves finance and cost ledger rows. - Decision audit rows remain protected, so the endpoint can return HTTP 409. ## Model Used Codex, based on GPT-5, with tool use and code-review support. The implementation author used an AI coding agent. This PR handoff uses the same model family to validate the commit and manage the pull request. ## 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 - [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-08-13 12:02:15 -07:00
Apolinario RatioandApolinarioRatio	7787106e5c	fix board key issue writes across assignees (#9025 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Board users and board API keys coordinate agents by commenting on and updating issues. > - `issue:comment` and `issue:mutate` are intentionally null-mapped authorization actions, so they need explicit same-company fallback handling. > - Same-company board-key writes worked for unassigned or same-actor issues but failed for issues assigned to another agent. > - That blocked cross-agent coordination because a board key could not comment on or patch another agent's issue even inside the same company. > - This pull request adds the missing board-member issue-write fallback while keeping viewers denied and sparse service calls fail-closed. > - The benefit is that non-viewer board members can coordinate agent work across assignees without restoring broad instance-admin elevation. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists. Duplicate search performed: - `gh search prs --repo paperclipai/paperclip "board key issue mutate"` returned only this PR. - `gh search issues --repo paperclipai/paperclip "board key authorization boundary"` returned no issues. Bug description: ### What happened Same-company board-key actors received `403 "Issue is outside this actor's authorization boundary"` when posting comments or patching issues assigned to another agent. ### Expected behavior Active same-company non-viewer board members can comment on and mutate issues in their company, regardless of agent assignee; viewer members remain denied. ### Steps to reproduce Authenticate as a board API key for an active non-viewer company member, then `POST /api/issues/{id}/comments` or `PATCH /api/issues/{id}` against an issue assigned to a different agent in the same company. ### Paperclip version or commit Observed against the current published 2026.626.0 package line and fixed against current `master`. ### Deployment mode Authenticated/tailnet board-key access. ## What Changed - Added a board-actor fallback for `issue:comment` and `issue:mutate` in `server/src/services/authorization.ts`. - Restricted that fallback to fully contextualized issue resources with issue id, status, and explicit assignee fields so sparse service calls still fail closed. - Allowed active same-company non-viewer board memberships and denied viewer memberships for these issue-write actions. - Added regression coverage for non-viewer board-key comment/mutate on an issue assigned to another agent. - Added regression coverage for viewer denial on both `issue:comment` and `issue:mutate`. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/authorization-service.test.ts` passed: 35/35. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passed. - `git diff --check` passed. ## Risks Low-to-moderate authorization risk because this changes issue-write access. The scope is constrained to active same-company board memberships, excludes viewers, and requires route-shaped issue context before granting access. Cross-company access and sparse/null-mapped calls continue to fail closed. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex coding agent using GPT-5-class reasoning with local shell, GitHub CLI, and test execution tools in an OpenClaw/Codex environment. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] 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: ApolinarioRatio <ApolinarioRatio@users.noreply.github.com>	2026-08-13 10:14:05 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	d0d242e843	feat(server): reopen an archived isolated execution workspace in place (#11322 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Issue execution uses isolated workspaces that hold the issue worktree > - A terminal issue can leave its isolated workspace archived and unable to resume > - The existing closed-workspace guards returned a conflict and gave the user no self-serve recovery > - This pull request reopens the same isolated workspace row and rebuilds its worktree > - The benefit is that resume, checkout, and comment actions can continue without a new workspace row ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Problem or motivation A terminal issue can point to an archived isolated execution workspace. Resume, checkout, and comment actions then stop with a conflict. What happened? A terminal issue kept its issue-to-workspace link after the isolated workspace reached a closed status. The guarded actions returned HTTP 409 instead of restoring access. Expected behavior The next authorized resume, checkout, or comment action reopens the same isolated workspace row. The action rebuilds the worktree and then continues. Steps to reproduce 1. Create an issue that uses an isolated execution workspace. 2. Move the issue to a terminal state and let the workspace archive. 3. Try to resume the issue or add a comment. 4. Observe the closed-workspace conflict. Paperclip version or commit `e6e79f458e` Deployment mode Built from source with pnpm. Proposed solution Reopen the closed isolated workspace in place. Rebuild the worktree before the route reports success. Alternatives considered Create a new workspace row. This would require repointing the issue link and would not preserve access for issues that share the original row. Roadmap alignment ROADMAP.md has no matching reopen item. ## What Changed - Reopen closed isolated workspace rows in place and rebuild their worktrees. - Use the reopen path from resume, checkout, and comment guards. - Return a clear error when the rebuild fails and keep the workspace closed. - Fence terminal reaping and archive cleanup while a reopen is in flight. - Update the comment composer to allow the next action to reopen the workspace. - Add service and route tests for reopen, scope, failure, and lifecycle races. ## Verification - Server TypeScript check passes with the tsc --noEmit command. - UI TypeScript check passes with the tsc --noEmit command. - Seventy-two server tests pass across the affected test files. - The isolated worktree UI test suite has a dependency mismatch and fails before tests run with the error TypeError: act is not a function. - CI confirms the UI test job after a clean dependency install. ## Risks The reopen path changes behavior for closed isolated workspaces. A rebuild failure returns an error and keeps the row closed. Lifecycle locks and generation checks protect the worktree from stale cleanup. The UI test mismatch needs CI confirmation. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, with tool use and code review assistance. The runtime did not provide 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 references) - [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>	2026-08-13 07:44:19 -07:00
Tonio Paperclip Claude Opus 5	f0e6c0f549	feat(server): receive and apply the Paperclip Cloud onboarding seed (#11098 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Paperclip Cloud provisions a dedicated tenant stack for each customer. During signup it asks for a mission, a name and role for the first agent, and a first task. > - Cloud pushes those answers into the new stack at activation, as `POST /api/companies/:companyId/onboarding-seed`. > - No route served that path. The tenant answered 404, so Cloud recorded the push as unacknowledged and retried on every portfolio fetch. > - The failure was soft. The answers stayed durable in Cloud and the stack still activated. But the stack opened on the empty first-run wizard, and it asked the customer again for what they had already given. > - This pull request adds the receiving endpoint. It validates the seed, applies it, and acknowledges it. > - The benefit is that a seeded stack opens with the mission, the agent and the first task already in place. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue covers this. The problem is described in-PR, following the feature template. Subsystem affected server/ — Express REST API and orchestration services. Also `packages/db` (one new table) and `packages/shared` (one new validator). Problem or motivation Paperclip Cloud collects onboarding answers at signup and pushes them to the tenant stack at activation. The tenant had no route for that request. It answered 404. Cloud treats a non-2xx as "not yet applied", so it kept the answers and retried, but the stack itself stayed unseeded. A customer who had already named their mission, their first agent and their first task arrived at an empty first-run wizard that asked for all three again. Proposed solution Serve `POST /api/companies/:companyId/onboarding-seed`. Validate the body, apply it to the company, then acknowledge it. The seed is customer free text, so it is bounded and validated in `packages/shared` and read from the JSON body only. It is never read from an `x-paperclip-cloud-` header. That header set is the trusted identity envelope: every member is derived server-side from the host plus verified domain records, and that is exactly what makes it trustworthy. Mixing user content into it would remove the property. A test plants a mission on a cloud header and asserts that the body value wins. Application reuses the shapes the first-run wizard already produces, so a seeded stack and a manually onboarded one look the same afterwards: - The mission becomes the company-level goal. A multi-line mission splits into a title and a description, as the wizard does. - The agent becomes the company's first hire. Its free-text role ("Chief of Staff") lands on `title`. The structural `role` stays `ceo`, which is what the org chart and the default-instructions lookup read. - The first task becomes an issue in the Onboarding project, assigned to that agent. Cloud retries until it gets a 2xx, and it reads any 2xx as "the tenant holds this content". So the endpoint is idempotent per `revision`. A new `company_onboarding_seeds` table records the applied revision together with the goal, the agent and the issue it produced. A replay of a revision that already matches is a successful no-op. A later revision — the customer edited their answers — updates those three rows in place instead of creating a second agent and a second task. The record is written last, after every other write has landed, so a partial application cannot present itself as acknowledged. Everything is applied before the 200 is sent. This is an ordering guarantee, not eventual consistency. The tests read the database immediately after the response, with no waiting and no polling, so a lazy receiver fails them on a fast machine as well as a slow one. That matters because the redirect into the tenant dashboard is gated on this acknowledgement. Alternatives considered* Store the seed and let the tenant UI apply it on first load. Rejected: the dashboard redirect is gated on the acknowledgement, so a background apply would let the dashboard open before the agent and the task exist. The whole point is that it must not. Reuse `POST /companies/:companyId/agents` and `POST /companies/:companyId/issues` over HTTP from Cloud. Rejected: it needs three round trips with no shared idempotency key, and it moves the "did all of it land?" decision to the caller. Roadmap alignment This completes an existing Cloud-to-tenant contract. It does not add a new user-facing surface. ## What Changed - Add `POST /api/companies/:companyId/onboarding-seed` in `server/src/routes/onboarding-seed.ts`. It authenticates exactly as `POST /api/companies/:companyId/logo` does, through `assertCompanyAccess`. - Add `server/src/services/onboarding-seed.ts`. It applies the mission, the agent and the first task, and records the applied revision last. - Add the `company_onboarding_seeds` table: schema, migration `0216`, and journal entry. It holds the applied revision and the ids of the goal, agent and issue the seed produced. - Add `applyOnboardingSeedSchema` in `packages/shared`. It bounds mission to 2000, agent name to 80, agent role to 120, task title to 200, and task details to 2000 — the same limits Cloud enforces before it sends. - Mount the router in `server/src/app.ts` and register the path in the OpenAPI document. - Add `server/src/__tests__/onboarding-seed-route.test.ts` with 13 tests. - The seeded agent is created on `claude_local`. This mirrors the teams-catalog default for agents created server-side, where no human runs an environment test first. `PAPERCLIP_ONBOARDING_SEED_ADAPTER_TYPE` overrides it. ## Verification ```sh pnpm typecheck # whole workspace, passes npx vitest run \ server/src/__tests__/onboarding-seed-route.test.ts \ server/src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts # 15 passed ``` The suite runs against embedded Postgres with migrations applied, so migration `0216` is exercised by every test. The route tests cover: - the happy path — mission, agent and task all applied, read immediately after the 200 - replay of the same revision — no second agent, no second task, no second goal, no second project - a later revision — the goal, agent and task are updated in place - a multi-line mission splitting into a goal title and description - a revision-only seed - the activity log entry written once, and not again on a replay - a caller without access to the company — 403, and nothing written - a body with no revision — 400 - each field bound past its limit — 400 - a mission planted on an `x-paperclip-cloud-` header — ignored, body wins - an existing Onboarding project — reused, not duplicated Not verified here: the full Cloud-to-tenant walk against a live stack. That needs a deployed Cloud and a provisioned tenant together, which is separate staging work. ## Risks Migration `0216` creates one new table. It adds no column to an existing table, rewrites nothing, and backfills nothing, so it is safe to apply online. The migration safety check passes. The endpoint writes to a company. Access is enforced by `assertCompanyAccess`, the same gate the company logo write uses, and a test covers the denial. Behavioral note for stacks that already hold data. If a company already has a non-built-in `ceo` agent, a first seed updates that agent's name and title rather than creating a second lead. Likewise a seed adopts an existing company-level goal rather than adding a parallel one. This is deliberate: the seed is the customer's own stated answer from signup, and two competing missions or two leads would be worse than one updated in place. In the intended case — a stack that Cloud has just activated — none of these exist yet. The seeded agent is created on `claude_local` with an empty adapter config. It is idle and needs the usual credential setup before it runs. Seeding it does not start it. ## Update — rebased onto master + review hardening Master moved on after this PR was cut, so it was rebased onto `master`* and the seed migration was renumbered from `0212` to `0216` (the merged #11101 took `0212_onboarding_first_task_unique`); the drizzle journal was re-stitched and `check:migrations` passes. Two things landed on top of the original receiver: - Mission-only walk contract (PAP-67 r17.4). The tenant now owns the first agent and the first task via #11101's server-owned onboarding path, which stamps `ONBOARDING_FIRST_TASK_ORIGIN_KIND` and races safely on the partial unique index `issues_onboarding_first_task_uq`. A comment in the apply path documents why this receiver leaves the first task to that path on the cloud walk, and a paperclip-cloud `node:test` (`src/onboarding/walk-seed.test.ts`) asserts the walk's seed carries no `agent`/`firstTask`. The receiver retains the agent/first-task code for its documented body contract, kept inert on the cloud path by the mission-only seed. - Three Greptile P1 fixes (`95622fa37`): concurrent application is now serialized under a per-company `pg_advisory_xact_lock` (no duplicate goal/agent/project/task on overlapping pushes); a revised first task carries its resolved `assigneeAgentId`/`goalId`; and the `company.onboarding_seed_applied` audit write is best-effort so a logging failure can't leave the entry permanently absent. Two new regression tests cover the first two. ## Model Used Claude Opus 5 (`claude-opus-5`), 1M context window, extended thinking, with tool use and code execution. Used for the original codebase investigation, the implementation, and the tests. The rebase, migration renumber, mission-only contract, and the three P1 fixes were done with Claude Opus 4.8 (`claude-opus-4-8`), extended thinking, 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 - [ ] 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> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-08-12 22:54:07 -07:00
Jannes Stubbemann	6d2eab742f	fix(server): retry runs that hit a sandbox provider worker restart window instead of failing setup (#10212 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Agent runs execute in sandbox environments acquired through provider plugins (e.g. the Kubernetes sandbox provider) > - Lease acquisition happens during run setup, before the adapter executes > - When a provider plugin's worker is momentarily unavailable (a server or plugin restart window), lease acquisition throws "Sandbox provider ... is installed via plugin ..., but its worker is not running." > - The heartbeat setup path records that as a terminal `setup_failed`: no retry classifier matches the message, so the run dies instantly even though the worker returns seconds later > - This PR classifies that transient condition as retryable infrastructure so the run is retried instead of being lost to a restart blip > - The benefit is that routine restarts no longer produce spurious instant run failures ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists; describing inline following the bug report template. What happened During a brief sandbox-provider-worker restart window, several runs failed instantly with `setup_failed` ("... but its worker is not running."), while runs on the same agent moments earlier and later succeeded. Expected behavior A transient, self-healing worker-unavailable condition should schedule a bounded retry, not terminally fail the run. Steps to reproduce Trigger a run while the sandbox provider plugin worker is momentarily unavailable (a server or plugin restart). Lease acquisition throws the worker-not-running error and the run is finalized as `setup_failed` with no retry. The recovery test added here reproduces the classification path. Deployment mode Cloud multi-tenant execution (Kubernetes sandbox provider plugin). ## What Changed - Added a dedicated, readable predicate that recognizes the transient sandbox-provider-worker-unavailable lease failure and treats it as retryable infrastructure, so the heartbeat schedules a bounded continuation retry instead of finalizing terminally - The predicate is anchored to the full lease-failure phrasing (`is installed via plugin ... but its worker is not running`) so it cannot match the permanent "provider not installed" message emitted by config validation - Added tests proving the readiness poll already waits the full deadline while the worker handle is absent or `starting` (registered-late coverage); no poll behavior change was needed ## Verification - `cd server && npx vitest run src/__tests__/environment-runtime.test.ts` — poll exhaustion + registered-late cases - `npx vitest run src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` — worker-unavailable message schedules a retry; a non-matching permanent provider failure still escalates terminally (negative case) ## Risks Low risk. The retry is bounded by the existing infrastructure-continuation attempt cap (max 3), the message match is narrow enough to exclude the permanent provider-not-installed failure (covered by a negative test), and no readiness-poll or lease-acquisition behavior changed. ## Model Used Claude (Anthropic) via Claude Code. Implementation and tests authored by a Claude Sonnet-class model (`claude-sonnet-5`) dispatched as isolated per-task implementer agents under a multi-agent orchestration workflow; root-cause investigation, planning, and two-stage adversarial code review performed by additional Claude agents. Extended thinking and tool use enabled throughout. ## 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 - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-08-12 16:43:48 -07:00
Eric BrookfieldandClaude Opus 4.8	20482a4cb6	fix(server): gate heartbeat-fallback comment to never publish raw transcript (#10143 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents run on a heartbeat; when an issue-scoped run ends, the server records the outcome on the issue's board thread. > - Normally the agent posts its own summary comment via `POST /comments`. When it doesn't, the server has a fallback that auto-publishes a run summary so the board isn't left silent. > - That fallback (`buildHeartbeatRunIssueComment` in `server/src/services/heartbeat-run-summary.ts`) returns `resultJson.summary` verbatim, with no length cap or shape check. > - For runs that never produce a final `result`, `summary` is concatenated inter-tool narration ("Let me check…", "I'll fetch…", joined by the claude-local adapter's parser). The fallback then dumps that raw transcript onto the public board thread. > - In practice this produces long, confusing transcript comments that mislead reviewers and other agents about what actually happened. > - This PR gates the fallback so it publishes a clean summary or a short stub, never raw transcript. > - The benefit is that the board thread stays trustworthy: a missing agent summary degrades to a one-line "no summary this run" note instead of leaking internal narration. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists for this; describing it here as a bug report. What happened: When an issue-scoped heartbeat run finishes without the agent posting its own comment, the server's fallback publishes `resultJson.summary` verbatim as the board comment. When the run produced no final result, that value is concatenated inter-tool narration, so raw transcript is posted to the issue thread. Expected behavior: The fallback should post a concise summary when one is available, and otherwise a short stub — never multi-hundred-line raw narration. Steps to reproduce: 1. Run an issue-scoped agent turn that ends without calling `POST /comments` and without emitting a final `result` (only inter-tool narration). 2. Observe the auto-published board comment: it is the full narration transcript. Deployment mode: self-hosted server (`server/src/services/heartbeat.ts` fallback path). Prior attempt: an earlier PR for this change was auto-closed when its head branch was renamed to strip an internal ticket id from the branch name; this PR supersedes it. Related PR: #7505 (`fix(heartbeat): skip auto-mirror run-summary comment on cross-owner wakes`) touches the same fallback area but addresses a different case (cross-owner wakes); this PR is complementary, gating the content of the fallback rather than when it fires. ## What Changed - `server/src/services/heartbeat-run-summary.ts`: `buildHeartbeatRunIssueComment` now gates the fallback text. After resolving `summary` → `result` → `message`, if the text opens with a narration phrase (`let me`, `i'll`, `i need to`, `i can see`, `looking at`, `fetching`, `checking`, `first,`) or exceeds `MAX_FALLBACK_COMMENT_CHARS` (1200), it returns a fixed stub: "Run completed. Agent did not post a summary comment this run (transcript withheld — see run log)." Otherwise it returns the text unchanged. - `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-run-summary.test.ts`: added cases for each narration opener, the length cap, the exact 1200-char boundary (posts), and clean-summary passthrough. Runs where the agent posts via the API are unaffected — the fallback only fires when no agent comment is found for the run, and that call site is unchanged. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclip/server test heartbeat-run-summary` — 13/13 pass (new + existing cases). - Manual reasoning: the gate is a pure function of the resolved text; API-posted runs never reach it. - CI note: at the time of opening, `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` fails on this branch's base commit with `ERR_PNPM_LOCKFILE_CONFIG_MISMATCH` (patchedDependencies drift). This reproduces on every PR based on the current `master` tip (e.g. #10137) and is unrelated to this two-file change; PRs cut from the prior master (e.g. #10135) install cleanly. This should clear once the `Refresh Lockfile` job lands a corrected lockfile on `master` and this branch is rebased. Happy to rebase or fold in the lockfile fix if a maintainer prefers. ## Risks Low risk. The change is confined to one pure function and its tests, touches no schema or migration, and only alters the fallback comment path (never the normal API-posted path). Worst case is a legitimate clean summary that happens to open with a gated phrase gets replaced by the stub — the run log still holds the full detail. ## Model Used Claude Opus 4.8 (`claude-opus-4-8`), 1M-token context window, extended thinking, with tool use. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs 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 (`fix/gate-heartbeat-fallback-comment`) 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 - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (no user-facing docs affected) - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green (blocked on a master-side lockfile drift, see CI note) - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups (pending re-review on this PR) - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-08-12 16:43:13 -07:00
Constantineandcucurigoo	2f1c0e011e	fix(hermes): surface silent nonzero exit failures (#10107 ) ## Thinking Path - Followed a silent nonzero Hermes exit from child-process result parsing through heartbeat run, runtime, task-session, and agent finalization. - Found two gaps: the adapter could return `errorMessage: null` for a numeric nonzero exit, and heartbeat later reused the nullable adapter field instead of its normalized fallback. - Kept timeout, signal-cancellation, and specific parsed diagnostics authoritative. ## Linked Issue(s) / Bug Report Related to #9751 (stderr classification) and #9519 (exit-zero finalization), but this is a separate failure mode. Reproduction: run Hermes with a child result equivalent to `exitCode: 1`, `timedOut: false`, and no parsed diagnostic. The heartbeat row derives `Adapter failed`, while runtime/task-session/agent finalization can persist null diagnostics. ## What Changed - Give silent numeric nonzero Hermes exits a stable fallback such as `Hermes exited with code 1`. - Preserve specific parsed errors and timeout/signal semantics. - Reuse the normalized persisted run error for recovered runtime state, task-session `lastError`, and agent `errorReason`. - Add adapter-level and embedded-Postgres regressions. ## Verification - Hermes adapter `execute.onspawn.test.ts` — 7 passed. - Focused heartbeat normalized-error regression — 1 passed (91 skipped). - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/hermes-paperclip-adapter typecheck` — passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed. - `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` — passed. Independent review also ran the full recovery file: the changed regression passed; one unrelated pre-existing timing-sensitive test timed out. ## Risks / Rollout Notes Low risk. Fallback text is used only when a numeric nonzero exit has no better diagnostic. Existing timeout, signal, and parsed-error precedence remains unchanged. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex `gpt-5.6-sol` with repository inspection, test execution, and independent read-only review. ## 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 (not applicable: internal diagnostics only) - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: cucurigoo <cucurigoo@users.noreply.github.com>	2026-08-12 16:09:35 -07:00
Jonathan Reyes	676e20a894	fix(routines): reject HMAC webhook replays (#9994 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Routines allow external systems to start recurring work through authenticated public webhooks > - Timestamped HMAC authentication currently verifies authenticity and age but does not remember an accepted delivery > - An exact signed request can therefore be reused within its replay window, including through simultaneous duplicate delivery > - Replay rejection must be atomic with run creation so concurrent copies cannot both succeed > - This pull request derives a non-secret replay identity from each valid timestamped HMAC delivery and claims it under the existing routine transaction lock > - The benefit is at-most-once acceptance of an exact HMAC delivery without changing ordinary caller-supplied idempotency semantics ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Fixes: #9993 ## What Changed - Derive a stable, non-secret idempotency key after a timestamped HMAC signature has been validated. - Reject a previously claimed HMAC delivery with a conflict while preserving coalescing for existing non-HMAC idempotency keys. - Apply the same atomic replay claim when automatic worktree execution is suppressed. - Add regression coverage for sequential, concurrent, and suppressed-run replays. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts` — 59 tests passed. - `pnpm typecheck` — all workspace packages passed. - The sequential test was observed failing on unmodified `master`: the second identical request resolved and a second run was created. - The concurrent regression test verifies exactly one request succeeds and only one routine run exists. ## Risks - Low migration risk: no schema change is required; the existing nullable routine-run idempotency field is reused. - The routine row lock serializes replay claims, adding a small amount of contention only while a routine run is being created. - Replay rejection applies only to `hmac_sha256`, which carries the timestamp needed for a bounded replay policy. Existing `github_hmac`, bearer, and unauthenticated trigger semantics are unchanged. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-5 family) with reasoning, repository inspection, shell execution, and test tooling. ## 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] Documentation does not require an update because this restores the documented replay-window security behavior without changing configuration or APIs - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-08-12 16:09:00 -07:00
Christian Lappin	fc5c6ffed2	fix(server): return 404 instead of 500 for non-UUID company refs (#9959 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The board REST API is how operators and integrations read company state; `GET /api/companies/:companyId` is one of its most basic reads > - The route passes the raw path param into `companyService.getById`, which queries the uuid-typed `companies.id` column directly > - Any non-UUID ref — a slug, a typo, a stale bookmark — makes Postgres throw `invalid input syntax for type uuid`, which surfaces as an HTTP 500 with a stack trace in the server log instead of a clean client error > - A 500 for malformed client input is miscategorized: it pages operators, pollutes error budgets, and hides the actual problem ("that ref doesn't exist") from the caller > - This pull request guards `getById` with a UUID check so non-UUID refs resolve to `null` and the route returns its existing 404 path > - The benefit is correct HTTP semantics for bad input, quieter logs, and one less misleading 500 for self-hosters to chase ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Fixes #9962 — `GET /api/companies/:companyId` returns 500 (`invalid input syntax for type uuid`) for non-UUID refs instead of 404. Full repro and log excerpt in the issue. ## What Changed - `server/src/services/companies.ts`: `getById` returns `null` early for non-UUID refs instead of passing them to the uuid-typed query. - `server/src/__tests__/companies-service.test.ts`: regression test — non-UUID refs (`"tumbly-haus-creative"`, `"not-a-uuid"`, `""`) resolve to `null` without a query error. ## Verification - `npx vitest run src/__tests__/companies-service.test.ts` — 12/12 pass (new test included, embedded-postgres suite). - Manual: `curl -i /api/companies/not-a-uuid` → 404 (was 500); `curl -i /api/companies/<real-uuid>` → 200 unchanged. ## Risks - Low. Pure input-validation guard on one read path; UUID lookups are byte-for-byte unchanged. Only behavioral shift is 500→404 for refs that could never have matched a row. ## Model Used Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`, Anthropic) via Claude Code — diagnosis from server logs, patch, and test authored with extended thinking and tool use; human-reviewed and submitted by @christianlappin. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket id - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (n/a — no doc references this error path) - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green (pending first CI run) - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups (pending) - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-08-12 16:08:49 -07:00
dmndbrp-ossandCoder	0db8480b19	fix(SAG-2595): land updatedSince issues-list filter on master (#9050 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The issues-list REST endpoint (`GET /api/companies/:companyId/issues`) backs the digester and other pollers that ask "what changed since last time". > - The service layer supports rich filters, but there was no `updatedSince` filter — so every routine fire re-read the full backlog instead of just the delta. > - A prior commit added this filter, but it was never merged to `master`; it only ran in production because a feature branch happened to be the live checkout, and the behavior vanished when that directory was repurposed. > - This pull request re-lands just the `updatedSince` filter (route param parse + validation, service `IssueFilters` field, and the `updatedAt` predicate) as a single-purpose change. > - The benefit is that pollers can request only issues updated after a timestamp, and the fix now lives durably on `master` instead of a transient checkout. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists; describing inline per the bug report template. What happened `GET /api/companies/:companyId/issues` ignores an `updatedSince` query parameter, so consumers (e.g. the digester and other pollers) cannot request only the delta since a prior poll and must re-read the whole backlog on every fire. Expected behavior Passing `updatedSince=<ISO 8601 timestamp>` returns only issues whose `updatedAt` is strictly after that timestamp; a malformed value returns `400`. Steps to reproduce 1. Call `GET /api/companies/:companyId/issues?updatedSince=<a future ISO 8601 timestamp>`. 2. Observe the endpoint returns the full backlog instead of an empty list (the parameter is silently ignored). ## What Changed - `server/src/routes/issues.ts`: parse the `updatedSince` query param, return `400` for a non-parseable timestamp, and pass it into `svc.list()`. - `server/src/services/issues.ts`: add `updatedSince?: string` to `IssueFilters` and, when present and valid, add a `gt(issues.updatedAt, since)` condition to the list query. - `server/src/__tests__/issue-list-updatedsince-filter-routes.test.ts`: new route+service coverage — future timestamp returns 0 issues, a past timestamp returns only the delta, and a malformed timestamp returns 400. ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run src/__tests__/issue-list-updatedsince-filter-routes.test.ts` — 3/3 pass. - `pnpm vitest run src/__tests__/issue-list-assignee-filter-routes.test.ts` — 5/5 pass (regression check on the sibling filter path). - `tsc --noEmit` on `server/` — no new errors introduced (pre-existing unrelated `plugin-sdk` build errors on `master` are untouched). ## Risks Low risk. Purely additive: the new filter only takes effect when `updatedSince` is supplied, so existing callers that omit it are unaffected. Invalid timestamps fail fast with `400` rather than silently returning all rows. ## Model Used Claude — `claude-sonnet-4-6` (implementation) with `claude-opus-4-8` review/merge-gate; tool use + code execution enabled. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots (N/A — no UI change) - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green (in progress) - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups (in progress) - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Coder (Claude) <coder-claude@paperclip.ing>	2026-08-12 16:08:40 -07:00
edgardfrz ClawdeBot Paperclip	c5574599b1	fix(routines): exclude assignee configuration from detail responses (#9818 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open-source control plane people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Routines are the subsystem that schedules recurring work and returns routine detail to authorized company actors. > - Routine detail embedded the complete assignee database row even though its shared contract requires only assignee identity. > - That full row can contain protected adapter and runtime configuration, including environment bindings. > - The service boundary should project only the fields the routine contract actually needs. > - This pull request replaces the full-row query with a company-scoped identity projection and adds sentinel-based regression coverage. > - The benefit is useful routine detail without exposing protected assignee configuration. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public issue exactly tracks this service-level exposure. - Related prior PR: Refs #4967, an older route-level redaction approach with broader changes and no focused routine serialization test. - Related closed PR: Refs #5144, an unmerged prior implementation of the same identity-projection approach. - Related agent-route hardening: Refs #8779; that work covers direct agent responses, while this PR removes protected fields from the routine embed itself. Bug details: - Actual behavior: `GET /api/routines/{routineId}` could serialize the complete assignee row, including protected adapter/runtime configuration. - Expected behavior: routine detail exposes only the assignee identity required by `RoutineDetail`, including its derived `urlKey`. - Reproduction: assign an agent with sentinel-only protected configuration to a routine, retrieve routine detail, and inspect key presence or serialize the response; no production value is needed or recorded. - Version/commit reproduced: upstream `master` immediately before this PR. - Deployment mode: service-level embedded Postgres test; the vulnerable serializer is shared by supported deployments. ## What Changed - Added a company-scoped assignee summary query in `server/src/services/routines.ts` that selects only `id`, `name`, `role`, and `title`, then derives the non-sensitive `urlKey` from the name. - Updated `getDetail()` to use that projection instead of selecting the complete agent row. - Added focused negative and positive identity assertions, including the derived `urlKey`, in `server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts`. - Audited routine list/detail serialization and broader embedded-agent query sites; routine list exposes only `assigneeAgentId`, while other agent embeds use explicit projections or authorized agent endpoints. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts` — 57/57 passed. - Focused sentinel regression test — passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed. - Server, UI, and CLI builds — passed; UI gzip-size completion used a 4096 MB Node heap. - `git diff --check` — passed. - Full `pnpm test:run` — 2,699 passed, 1 skipped, 9 failed in untouched tests. The failures reproduce outside this change and are limited to local-adapter `nohup`/PTY behavior, macOS `/tmp` versus `/private/tmp` normalization, and one workspace-runtime auto-port fixture. ## Risks - Low compatibility risk: the returned shape now matches the existing shared `RoutineDetail` contract. - A consumer relying on undocumented protected agent fields inside routine detail will stop receiving them. - No schema, migration, deployment, credential, or production-secret changes are included. - Rollback is a single commit revert, but reverting would restore the exposure. > This is security hardening for the already-shipped routines subsystem; `ROADMAP.md` marks Scheduled Routines complete, and this PR does not add or duplicate roadmap feature work. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-5 via Codex, with repository search, local code execution, tests, TypeScript typechecking, builds, Git, and GitHub API use. The runtime does not expose a more granular snapshot 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 relevant tests pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (no documentation change is required for this contract-preserving security fix) - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green 5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups/- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: ClawdeBot <clawdebot@Mac-mini-de-ClawdeBot.local> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-08-12 16:08:31 -07:00
Nicky Leach Paperclip Claude Opus 4.8	e31951a17d	feat: Claude agent setup-token login in a sandbox (#11286 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Claude agents that run in a remote sandbox need a safe in-product login path > - The existing host login route cannot open a pseudo-terminal inside that sandbox > - The login flow must protect the browser code, the login URL, and the OAuth token at every step > - This pull request adds the parser, the runner, a Daytona pseudo-terminal transport, and a guarded, owner-bound session route behind an injectable transport > - The route stays inert in the default build and fails closed until a sandbox provider binds the live transport > - The benefit is a company-scoped setup-token flow with one-time secret delivery, redaction, and fail-closed transport checks, ready for a later staged production rollout ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Agent or provider Claude Code setup-token login for sandbox agents. Why this adapter is useful Sandbox agents need a supported way to sign in without host credentials. An authorized owner completes the browser step and receives the token one time. How the agent is invoked When a sandbox provider binds the injectable transport, the server starts `claude setup-token` through a sandbox pseudo-terminal, sends the browser code to the matched prompt, and returns the token through the guarded session route. The default build does not bind the transport. In that state the start route fails closed with a fixed no-secret `503`. It does not start a process and it does not hold a sandbox lease. Additional context The transport is injectable, so each sandbox provider binds its own pseudo-terminal. This pull request adds the Daytona transport but does not bind it in the production server. A production wiring needs a lease manager, a live pseudo-terminal factory, a durable token store, and its own security review. The route keeps secrets out of logs, activity details, errors, telemetry, and non-owner responses. ## What Changed - Add strict parsers for the setup-token URL, the prompt, and the success token. - Add a login runner that drives the `claude setup-token` command through a pseudo-terminal. - Add the Daytona pseudo-terminal transport and the sandbox plugin wiring. - Add a company-scoped, owner-bound login session service with rate limits, a reaper, cleanup, and one-time token delivery. - Add the guarded session routes at `/agents/:id/setup-token-login-sessions/*` behind an injectable transport. The routes become the live login path only when a provider binds the transport. - Keep the start route fail-closed in the default build. It returns a fixed no-secret `503` and it does not bind `setupTokenLogin`. - Keep the existing host route `POST /agents/:id/claude-login` in place. This pull request does not replace it. - Keep confidential responses behind a fail-closed TLS transport guard with `Cache-Control: no-store`, and extend redaction for the new fields. - Export the parser and the runner from the Claude local server entry, and document the new session routes in the OpenAPI spec. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run setup-token-route setup-token-session` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-claude-local exec vitest run` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server run typecheck` - Confirm that the pull request checks pass on GitHub. ## Risks - Low user-facing risk on merge. The default build does not bind the transport, so the production start route stays fail-closed with a `503`. The merge does not change the production login behavior. - When a provider later binds the transport, the flow starts a live sandbox process and holds a short-lived in-memory secret. Cleanup must stop the child before it releases the sandbox lease. - The transport guard fails closed when the deployment does not provide a trusted TLS path. A wrong proxy allowlist can block a valid request. - The production wiring is out of scope. It needs a lease manager, a live pseudo-terminal factory, a durable token store, and its own security review before the server binds `setupTokenLogin`. ## Model Used Anthropic Claude Opus 4.8 assisted the implementation. It used extended reasoning, code execution, repository tool use, and a 200,000-token context window. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [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 (the OpenAPI spec covers the new session routes; no user-facing documentation needs changes) - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-08-12 13:02:49 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	f9bd0438e1	fix(server): stop terminal workspace reaper starving on oldest candidates (#11238 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The server runs a scheduled reaper that archives terminal workspaces after it checks their state. > - The reaper reads candidates in `updatedAt` order and skips candidates that do not qualify for archive. > - The fixed page kept the same skipped candidates at the front, so the reaper did not inspect later eligible workspaces. > - This pull request adds a keyset cursor and a throttled log for sweeps that archive no workspace. > - The benefit is that the reaper inspects all candidates over time and reports an inert sweep. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What happened? The terminal workspace reaper inspected a fixed page of old candidates. Ineligible candidates stayed in that page, so the reaper skipped later eligible workspaces on every sweep. Expected behavior The reaper must inspect each candidate over time and archive every eligible terminal workspace. Steps to reproduce 1. Create more than 50 terminal workspace candidates. 2. Keep the oldest page ineligible for archive. 3. Place an eligible workspace after that page. 4. Run repeated reaper sweeps. 5. Observe that the later eligible workspace remains unarchived. Paperclip version or commit Commit `3efdf555e6e14a46747c796c3c554438bfc03261`. Deployment mode Built from source with the server test suite. Installation method Built from source. Agent adapter(s) involved Not adapter-specific (core bug). Database mode Not database-related. ## What Changed - Add a keyset cursor that uses `(updatedAt, id)` order across reaper pages. - Reset the cursor at the end of the candidate set so the next sweep starts at the beginning. - Add a throttled log when a sweep inspects candidates but archives none. - Add regression tests for archive delivery and starvation. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/execution-workspaces-service.test.ts` — 45 tests pass. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts` — 16 tests pass. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — clean. ## Risks Low risk. The change affects only candidate paging and the related reaper log. The cursor resets after the candidate set, so the sweep remains periodic. ## Model Used Codex, OpenAI GPT-5, extended reasoning, tool use, and code execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above (no exact duplicate found; related scheduler PR #10911 is distinct) - [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 (no documentation applies; this is an internal reaper behavior change) - [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>	2026-08-12 10:21:00 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	e5a7fd7038	Add sandbox device-login for the Codex adapter (#11237 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents for work. > - Agent adapters connect Paperclip to tools such as the Codex command line tool. > - A sandboxed Codex agent may start without a credential. > - The operator needs a safe sign-in flow that does not expose credentials to the shared package or the sandbox. > - This pull request adds a company-scoped device-login flow with a temporary Daytona sandbox. > - The flow promotes the credential only after readiness checks pass and removes the temporary sandbox after use. > - The result lets an operator sign in to a sandboxed Codex agent from the agent form. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Subsystem affected Cross-cutting (multiple of the above) Problem or motivation A Codex adapter that runs in a sandbox cannot authenticate when the company has no pre-provisioned Codex credential. Proposed solution Add a company-scoped device-login session. Start a temporary sandbox, run `codex login --device-auth`, stream the code and URL, verify readiness, promote the credential, and delete the sandbox. Alternatives considered Pre-provisioning a credential does not support first-time sandbox login. Keeping the credential in the login sandbox does not provide a durable company credential. Roadmap alignment This supports the roadmap item for cloud and sandbox agents. Additional context The flow uses a five-minute cleanup reaper, compare-and-set status changes, and a PostgreSQL advisory lock to protect promotion and cleanup. ## What Changed - Add the adapter login-session contract, database table, and migration. - Add company-scoped server routes and a service for sandbox device login. - Add credential promotion, readiness checks, and cleanup after login. - Add restart-safe cleanup for abandoned login sandboxes. - Add sandbox login controls to the agent creation and edit forms. - Keep device-login and vendor identifiers out of public shared and adapter UI symbols. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-codex-local exec vitest run` passed with 310 tests at the submitted commit. - The server login route, service, and reaper tests passed with 45 tests at the submitted commit. - The agent form render tests passed with 26 tests at the submitted commit. - The public-symbol leak check passed at the submitted commit. - A live Daytona sign-in flow still requires confirmation by a user with a live sandbox. ## Risks The migration adds a new company-scoped table. A promotion or cleanup race could remove a credential or leave a sandbox active, so the service uses claims, compare-and-set transitions, and an advisory lock. The live Daytona flow needs operator confirmation because local tests do not provide a real browser sign-in. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, tool use and code execution, extended reasoning. ## 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>	2026-08-12 08:58:25 -07:00
Devin Foley	d5bb396518	fix: pass sandbox provider credential env vars to plugin workers; hide Local default under managed-sandbox-only (#11244 ) <!-- Write all pull request text in Simplified Technical English (ASD-STE100): short sentences, one instruction per sentence, simple approved vocabulary, and the active voice. --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Environments give each agent run an execution target, and sandbox providers (Daytona, E2B, Novita, exe.dev) run as plugin workers > - A managed deployment provisions one platform-managed sandbox row with no credential in config; the provider is documented to fall back to its process env var (for example `DAYTONA_API_KEY`) > - Plugin workers spawn with a scrubbed environment, so that fallback never sees the host env var — probe and lease acquisition fail with "require an API key in config or DAYTONA_API_KEY" even when the deployment sets the var > - Separately, the managed-sandbox-only mode hides local rows from every list, but the instance Default picker renders a hardcoded synthetic "Local" option that no filter touches > - This pull request forwards each bundled provider's documented credential env var to its own plugin worker, and gates the synthetic Local option on the flag > - The benefit is that the documented host-env credential fallback works for plugin-backed providers, and managed-sandbox-only instances no longer offer Local anywhere ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Subsystem affected Plugin worker environment construction (`server/src/services/plugin-loader.ts`) and the environments UI (instance Default picker, agent form inherited-environment label). Problem or motivation Two follow-ups to the managed-sandbox-only mode (#11200), both found on a live managed deployment: 1. The deployment sets `DAYTONA_API_KEY` as a server env var and the managed sandbox row omits `config.apiKey` by contract. "Test Connection" fails with `Sandbox environment probe failed for provider "daytona". Daytona sandbox environments require an API key in config or DAYTONA_API_KEY.` A real agent run fails the same way at lease acquisition. The cause: sandbox providers run as plugin workers, and `buildPluginWorkerEnv` passes only model-provider keys and in-cluster Kubernetes vars. The provider's own documented credential env var never reaches the worker, so the in-plugin `process.env` fallback reads nothing. The self-hosted path has the same gap: the Daytona plugin README documents `DAYTONA_API_KEY` as a host-level fallback, and it does not work today. 2. With `enableManagedSandboxOnly` on, the instance Default environment picker still shows "Local". The server filters local rows out of the list, and the client filter mirrors that for cached lists, but this option is a hardcoded `<option value="">Local</option>` — not a list row — so no filter removes it. Selecting it writes a null default, which run selection then rejects fail-closed. Proposed solution Forward each bundled sandbox provider's documented credential env var into its plugin worker, keyed by the manifest's declared `environmentDrivers[].driverKey` so a worker only receives its own provider's credential (daytona → `DAYTONA_API_KEY`, e2b → `E2B_API_KEY`, exe-dev → `EXE_API_KEY`, novita → `NOVITA_API_KEY`). Keep the existing gate: only plugins that declare `environment.drivers.register` receive any passthrough. In the UI, render the synthetic Local option only when managed-sandbox-only is off; under the flag show a disabled "Select environment" placeholder only while no default is stamped yet, and stop the agent form's inherited label from reading "Local". Alternatives considered Adding `DAYTONA_API_KEY` to the existing `ADAPTER_ENV_PASSTHROUGH` list was rejected: that list goes to every environment-driver plugin, so each provider would receive every other provider's credential. A manifest schema field for declared credential env vars was rejected as heavier than needed: the bundled providers are known, and the mapping lives next to the two existing passthrough lists. ## What Changed - `server/src/services/plugin-loader.ts`: new `SANDBOX_PROVIDER_CREDENTIAL_ENV_PASSTHROUGH` map (driverKey → documented credential env vars). `buildPluginWorkerEnv` reads the manifest's `environmentDrivers` and forwards only the matching vars, after the existing `environment.drivers.register` gate. Blank values stay excluded. - `server/src/__tests__/plugin-database.test.ts`: the daytona worker receives `DAYTONA_API_KEY` and not another provider's key; a plugin whose drivers have no mapping (kubernetes) receives no credential var. - `ui/src/pages/CompanyEnvironments.tsx`: the Default picker's synthetic Local option renders only when managed-sandbox-only is off. Under the flag, a disabled "Select environment" placeholder renders only while the default is unset. - `ui/src/pages/CompanyEnvironments.test.tsx`: the Local option is present by default and absent under the flag; saved non-local environments stay selectable. - `ui/src/components/AgentConfigForm.tsx`: the inherited-environment label falls back to "Managed sandbox" instead of "Local" under the flag. ## Verification - `server`: `npx vitest run src/__tests__/plugin-database.test.ts -t buildPluginWorkerEnv` — 5 passed (3 existing, 2 new). - `ui`: `npx vitest run src/pages/CompanyEnvironments.test.tsx` — 22 passed (2 new); `npx vitest run src/components/AgentConfigForm.render.test.tsx` — 10 passed. - `tsc --noEmit` clean in `server` and `ui`. - Live managed deployment: confirmed the tenant service env carries `DAYTONA_API_KEY` while the probe fails with the exact message above, which pins the root cause to the worker env, not delivery. ## Risks - The worker env grows by exactly one var per matching bundled provider, only when the deployment sets it and only for plugins that declare a matching environment driver. Plugins without a mapping see no change. - Self-hosted behavioral shift is the fix itself: a host-level `DAYTONA_API_KEY` (or E2B/EXE/NOVITA equivalent) now reaches the provider as its README documents. Deployments that set the var but expected it to stay inert had no working configuration to preserve — the provider errored on every keyless probe and run. - UI change is inert unless `enableManagedSandboxOnly` is on (default false everywhere). ## Model Used Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`) via Claude Code — extended thinking, tool use, parallel read-only subagents for the two root-cause traces. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-08-11 19:10:45 -07:00

1 2 3 4 5 ...