Commit Graph
10 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
Nicky LeachandPaperclip 247de89eae fix(runner): preserve warm tasks during recovery (#18169)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agent work and the lifetime of its execution
resources.
> - A warm native task can keep one Runner alive between successful
turns.
> - Foreground completion selects whether that resource stays running or
stops.
> - Background recovery must use the same selected policy.
> - Recovery currently reads that policy only from workspace copy-back
records.
> - A task without such a record can be stopped immediately after
foreground retention.
> - This pull request saves the resource policy with the native runtime
and permits the retained task to refresh its control connection.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Background native finalization can stop a successful warm Runner when
its run has no Core workspace-sync record. Foreground completion retains
that same task. The stopped Runner cannot receive the later drain and
suspend commands. Cold resume then correctly rejects its unproven
checkpoint.

Hosted diagnostics confirmed the recovery reconciler attempted
environment release immediately after foreground retention. The provider
connection returned HTTP 404 within the same second. A database-backed
regression reproduced the stop without a workspace-sync record.

A separate authorization gap also prevents the current retained task
from refreshing its connection endpoint after the run succeeds.

**Expected behavior**

Foreground completion and recovery must use the selected resource
policy. A successful warm task stays running until its idle shutdown can
suspend it. Failed or cancelled work still stops. The current retained
task can refresh its existing control route, but cannot prepare or
submit new execution.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Select a warm native runtime on a reusable remote execution
environment.
2. Complete a turn without a Core workspace-sync record.
3. Let native finalization recovery settle the still-active run lease
before foreground retention finishes.
4. Before this change, recovery defaults to `stop_and_retain` and
invokes the provider stop path.
5. Separately, request the retained task's connection endpoint after
successful completion. Before this change, Core rejects that request.

**Paperclip version/commit**

The hosted failure used Core 31b927e301.
Regressions also reproduced on master at 6d59f5ef7.

**Deployment mode**

A remote native execution environment with reusable warm tasks. The
resource policy is generic and applies across harnesses and providers.

Related recovery coverage: Refs #18161. This change preserves the
suspended-checkpoint admission guard. Existing tasks without the newly
saved policy retain the previous conservative fallback; deployments must
drain or recover them explicitly.

## What Changed

- Save the selected native resource disposition in the existing
runtime-selection transaction. Add no startup database round trip or
network request.
- Read this small policy in background settlement and recovery when no
workspace-sync record exists. Preserve valid workspace-sync policies and
export-retry behavior.
- Keep failed and cancelled runs out of warm retention.
- Permit connection refresh for a successful, dispatched warm task on
its current retained reusable lease. Keep retirement, termination,
expiry, saved-run identity, and plugin capability checks.
- Add database-backed retention and selection regressions,
failure/cancellation coverage, and bounded projection checks. Document
the lifecycle and access contracts.

## Verification

- Before the source edits, the no-workspace-sync regression invoked the
driver with `stop_and_retain` instead of retaining the lease. Both
runtime-selection cases failed because the resource policy was absent.
- After the source edits, those regressions and both
run-state/runtime-selection files passed. The three-file run had 77
passes and two new fixture expectation failures. Those fixtures were
corrected. Final-head GitHub CI passed, including the server suites,
Runner checks, typecheck, build, and E2E gates. The local rerun was
deferred at the user's request.
- Commands: `node_modules/.bin/vitest run
server/src/__tests__/native-environment-settlement-work.test.ts
server/src/services/heartbeat/runtime-selection.test.ts
server/src/services/heartbeat/run-state.test.ts`.
- The connection authorization regression failed before its edit. All 34
tests in `server/src/__tests__/environment-task-runtime.test.ts` then
passed.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` passed.
- No comprehensive local suite was run. Further local tests and VM
reproductions were stopped at the user's request to conserve battery and
mobile data. GitHub CI verifies the final head.
- Hosted verification of this patch requires deployment after merge.
Passing pre-patch retries did not establish repair of the original
failure.

- Standard Greptile and the subsequent requested Apex review both
returned **5/5** on `360bcd7e789d65950c27484af237faec02553666`, with no
inline findings.

## Risks

- This adds one server-owned field to the existing run profile JSON; no
migration is required. Invalid or absent policy keeps the previous
conservative fallback.
- Valid workspace-sync disposition remains authoritative. Pending export
and failed finalization still use stop-and-retain safety behavior.
- Retained connection access requires a successful run, matching saved
run identity, dispatched warm task, unexpired reusable lease, and no
retirement or termination. Superseded leases and new execution remain
denied.
- The cold-resume checkpoint proof is unchanged. This patch does not
make the already-stopped task's unsuspended checkpoint resumable.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The host does not expose a more specific serving model ID or
context-window size.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-29 09:19:49 -07:00
b06ea111a2 fix(server): schedule skill cache retention from changes and saved deadlines (#17923)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start -->
https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/83/changes/paperclip/83
<!-- entire-trail-link-end -->

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The server caches saved skill versions on disk so runs can restore
their exact instructions.
> - The old retention owner scans company rows every hour, even after
all caches are protected or removed.
> - Cache publication, version changes, and pin release already have
local or transaction-owned boundaries.
> - Grace windows and terminal controller leases already have saved
timestamps.
> - This pull request uses those changes and deadlines to drive the
existing bounded prune service.
> - Idle retention stops SQL and directory reads while pending cleanup
remains recoverable.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Stack slice 64. Parent: #17876 (`codex/sleep-63-agent-timer-deadlines`).
Related: #15625 establishes transaction-owned work signals. #17907
independently keeps an active cache-lock transaction alive; this PR
preserves that lock and does not duplicate that repair.

**What happened?**

At parent `31c12f1d68ff4a51e06fc2be2abf2c2aee9f9d3a`, skill-version
retention has an hourly company scan, a startup timeout, and separate
continuation timers. Empty or permanently protected caches still cause
recurring SQL.

**Expected behavior**

Reconstruct once, inspect changed companies, and schedule saved
access/staging grace or terminal controller deadlines. Stop recurring
work when no timed or uncertain obligation remains. Keep
current/newest/agent/run protection, restorable-byte validation, cache
locking, final pin revalidation, atomic rename, and trash recovery.

**Steps to reproduce**

Start an enabled server with no cached versions, or only current/pinned
versions. After the initial scan, advance an hour. The old interval
selects companies again. The new worker has no deadline and performs no
retention SQL or directory scan in that state.

## What Changed

- Signal the missing-local-source reconciliation deletion in its
transaction. Limit fresh scans of a successfully observed company to one
per thirty seconds. Keep one-second page continuations and actual saved
deadlines independent. Empty or uncertain passes do not delay first
publication.
- Restart a company scan if drain interrupts inspection or post-rename
trash cleanup. Restore bounded candidate/byte logging with dry-run mode.
Three controlled cases failed before repair and the complete 34-case
retention suite passes afterward.
- Register retention through the delivery coordinator and shared
scheduler. Remove the hourly, startup, and continuation timers from
`index.ts`. Track startup work without delaying readiness. Stop delivery
work before closing retained iterators.
- Keep one active company cursor and bounded 50-entry passes. Preserve
observed deadlines across pages and bound company discovery to 51 rows
per page. Retain concrete company failures and incomplete pins for
retry.
- Report saved grace and terminal controller deadlines from the existing
cache owner. PostgreSQL remains the controller-lease authority.
Current/newest/agent pins do not arm unrelated lease checks.
- Wake on cache publication, rejected materialization, and access
markers. Signal version creation/deletion and agent configuration/hire
changes in their owning transactions. Extend existing instruction,
finalization/environment, and retained-session fanouts with company
hints.
- Route reused provider-task prior-owner retirement through
`writeEnvironmentCleanup`, so that supported pin-release write also
settles a notification.
- Add an optional scope callback to `registerDeadlineWork`. Existing
consumers omit it and keep their behavior. The feature owns persistence
predicates; startup only registers it. Add no table or migration.

Full producer audit, shared-contract explanation, lifecycle evidence,
and limitations:
[`doc/plans/2026-10-27-skill-version-retention-sleep-audit.md`](doc/plans/2026-10-27-skill-version-retention-sleep-audit.md).

## Verification

- Reconciled all existing sleep changes with actual master
`7e27bc5007c8f9cb8cdce06c24f9813e27f7120f` through normal merges. All 24
retention-owned and 95 unrelated upstream paths are preserved; package,
UI, E2E and map trees equal master.
- Combined-source qualification: **1,009 TypeScript cases across 42
complete files**, plus **28 Rust cases** in two targets. One intentional
Linux-inotify-only adapter case is skipped on this macOS host. Coverage
includes actual retention/cache/producer/runtime behavior, startup,
shared deadline consumers, changed OpenCode/observability and native
execution boundaries.
- After the subsequent task-index/task-read upstream merges, **85 cases
across six complete files** passed on final source
`d9277b1858a2230bdb726974c90a0c9bc5c5ebe6`: real retention/cache/work,
task reads/query behavior and concurrent migration repair. Counts
overlap earlier coverage. Fresh PostgreSQL 17 schemas apply all 413
journal entries through index 414.
- Database/adapter/Runner builds, production server and Runner
typechecking, module boundaries, target migration order and generated
TypeScript/Rust release-profile consistency pass. Selected source hashes
and temporary fixture imports restore exactly.
- Reproduced and repaired Greptile's own-company due-cleanup P2 with
identical old-worker-failing/new-worker-passing assertions. The
30-second ordinary scan floor remains; already-due cleanup receives its
owed scan and disarms afterward. Earlier 799-case and fresh-blank-plugin
acceptance remain in the audit.
- **Inherited validation exception:** the separate Copilot
source-identity check fails after upstream OpenCode reserved-environment
changes; all 72 identity inputs equal current master. No provider
release attestation is regenerated or new live qualification claimed
here. Required exact-head CI/security and Greptile 5/5 still must pass.
- Historical results, repair details and limitations remain in [the
retention
audit](doc/plans/2026-10-27-skill-version-retention-sleep-audit.md). No
full local repository-suite, live provider, production-load,
external-alarm, measured suspend/wake or fleet-savings claim.

- CI on the prior published head found four connection-review assertions
racing the concealed conversation after reload. Its fresh
Greptile/Ponytail reviews were both 5/5, but the failing browser gate
was not waived or retried unchanged. The fixture now foregrounds the
task tab and waits for visible history before retaining all existing
saved-result assertions. The full file passes four journeys locally; the
controlled-restart case is intentionally skipped by the default
configuration. Original local journeys also passed unchanged, so no
deterministic local red reproduction is claimed. See the audit for CI
failure artifacts and scope. Runtime and prior sleep-test sources remain
unchanged.

## Risks

- Supported live writers are the existing service/API owners in one
process. Independent SQL/FS writers need an ingress contract. Startup
reconstruction covers restarts.
- Notifications cause a bounded inspection; they do not authorize
deletion. Durable pin predicates and the cache lock remain
authoritative.
- A database clock behind application time can require another
one-second check of the concrete expired controller lease. Unknown pins,
lock contention, and failed inspection retain retries until resolved.
- The in-process scheduler cannot wake stopped compute. This PR
preserves Cloud sleep-safety gates and external-alarm coverage. It does
not prove deployed suspension or fleet savings. Cache reclamation can
wait until a supported wake when compute is stopped.
- Native-harness backup retention and the other remaining duties are
separate stack slices.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex (GPT-6-based coding agent), using repository inspection,
normal Git merges, composition proofs, a controlled red/green regression
and complete PostgreSQL/filesystem integration suites. No subagents were
used in this reconciliation.

## 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: Codex <noreply@openai.com>
2026-10-29 10:14:12 -05:00
Nicky Leach f7716ec65b Allow exact warm-state reads during retained task retirement (#17418) 2026-10-24 08:26:48 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip a3e8fa568a Reduce repeated work during plugin Runner admission (#17377)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agents and their execution authority.
> - A plugin can host Runner tasks on a persistent execution host.
> - Admission checks must observe current lifecycle state and
credentials.
> - The current runtime reader also resolves files, skills, and
connections for each check.
> - Some providers also repeat the same project authentication check
during submit.
> - This pull request adds a compact fresh reader and an explicit
submit-time validation contract.
> - Providers can remove repeated work while Core keeps lease and scope
checks.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Plugin Runner startup before task submission.

**Current behavior**

One measured startup made 30 full runtime reads during bootstrap. These
reads took 5.759 seconds. Each guard can resolve instructions, skills,
and connection assignments even when it only needs current identity and
lifecycle state. Providers that already enforce project authentication
in submit must also perform a separate Core preflight.

**Proposed behavior**

Use a lifecycle-owned runtime identity reader for guards. Keep the full
runtime reader for synchronization inputs. A trusted provider can
declare `projectAuthCheckAtSubmit: true` in its prepared result. Core
pins the exact configuration, provider, and project set on the lease.
The provider must reject authentication conflicts before credential
installation or task start. Providers that omit the flag retain the
existing preflight.

**Reason and benefit**

Estimated savings with a paired consumer: 4–5 seconds from compact
runtime checks, plus roughly 0.5–0.9 seconds from removing the duplicate
authentication operation. These estimates overlap and are not a measured
deployed result. Refs #17367 for the separate run-log HEAD optimization;
this PR does not duplicate it.

**Breaking changes**

No migration. The SDK adds a host method and an optional prepared-result
field. Consumers that use them require this Core host version. Older
providers retain their existing flow.

## What Changed

- Add `agents.getRuntimeIdentity` across SDK, RPC, host service, and
test fixtures.
- Reuse the existing company, plugin ownership, readiness, and
capability checks. Read lifecycle state and protected instance secrets
fresh on every call.
- Skip instruction, organization, skill, and connection hydration in the
compact reader.
- Allow explicit submit-time authentication enforcement, with prepared
scope pinned and checked again at dispatch.
- Emit fixed preparation, project-auth, submit, and connection timing
phases.

## Verification

- 72 targeted SDK capability, plugin task-owner, and environment-task
mediator tests passed.
- 33 real embedded-Postgres lifecycle and secret tests passed, including
pause, content revision, company isolation, plugin disablement, and
secret rotation.
- SDK and server TypeScript checks passed. Local Runner/eval TypeScript
outputs were built to satisfy server type resolution.
- Local Postgres required missing library aliases in ignored
dependencies; no product source was changed for that repair.
- Full repository suites are delegated to GitHub CI. No live rollout or
speedup claim.

## Risks

The submit-time flag delegates enforcement to a trusted provider. It is
not proof that prepare already checked authentication. The provider must
check before VM credential installation or task admission. Core still
checks exact prepared scope, active lease, run identity, credential
type, and dispatch fencing. Existing providers keep the separate check.
Roll back a paired consumer before rolling back this host.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 (Codex), with code execution and repository tools. Exact
deployment build and context-window size are not exposed.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have 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
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-23 14:54:25 -07:00
Nicky Leach 412914cfa7 Read native plugin task output files on the execution host (#17285) 2026-10-22 23:38:09 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip 989ee668e0 Support provider-owned fresh retry workspaces (#17252)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip coordinates AI agents and retains their work across
failures.
> - A retry can require a new workspace while preserving the failed
attempt.
> - Core rejects this recovery strategy for provider-owned storage.
> - Providers should implement the required outcome using their own
storage design.
> - This pull request adds a semantic fresh-preparation contract and
delegates recovery preparation.
> - The benefit is that a supported provider can run a fresh retry
without losing prior work.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
A retry that selects `fresh_isolated_workspace` fails with
`fresh_workspace_storage_unsupported` for provider-owned storage.

**Expected behavior**
Core asks a capable provider to prepare new storage and attach verified
recovery files. The failed workspace remains intact.

**Steps to reproduce**
Run a task in a task-capable plugin environment. Let the task fail
without a verified workspace preservation receipt. Retry the task so
Core selects a fresh attempt.

**Paperclip version or commit**
6204239cf (rebased on current master).

**Deployment mode**
Self-hosted server with a plugin task environment and managed workspace
provider.

Search found no duplicate implementation. This branch includes the
default-provider changes from #17247 and preserves their source
selection behavior.

## What Changed

- Define an opt-in fresh-preparation contract with a stable attempt
identity and verified recovery file descriptors.
- Describe retained-storage and recovery-attachment guarantees without
requiring a Git storage layout.
- Reserve replacement task bindings with revision checks and keep the
failed workspace intact. Projectless and project-backed task
environments both replay their stable attempt reservation.
- Reconcile an interrupted preparation against its reserved workspace
and stable operation identity.
- Stage verified recovery archives at stable transfer paths. Delegate
attachment materialization to the provider.
- Preserve projectless attempt directory identities through later turns
and pin the intent into each execution lease.
- Protect fresh intent and projectless ownership from caller metadata
replacement or injection.

## Verification

- SDK workspace-provider tests: 4 passed.
- Targeted reservation and task-dispatch tests: 31 passed.
- Recovery transfer staging and lifecycle focus: 7 passed. The separate
cache-cleanup failure reconciliation case also passed.
- After rebasing on current master, 7 focused preparation and ownership
cases passed. These cover inherited provider defaults, fresh
preparation, stable projectless identity, and authorization denial.
- The focused metadata authority regression passed, including forged
intent, replacement, and null metadata patches.
- Three assembled interrupted task-reservation cases passed:
projectless, project with a saved source, and project with a newly
selected default source.
- Targeted tests use worktree SDK sources. No full local build or
typecheck ran.
- Local checks remain targeted as requested. Latest-head GitHub CI
passed: 54 successful checks, including typecheck, build, server suites,
Runner validation, and E2E shards; 2 unrelated Storybook checks were
skipped.
- Greptile reviewed commit 73595b0c61 at
5/5 with zero unresolved threads.
- Live VM E2E has not run.

## Risks

- Existing providers retain their existing behavior. Fresh attempts
require explicit version support.
- The companion provider implementation must materialize recovery
snapshots safely and preserve the old workspace.
- Fresh retries require the companion provider implementation. Providers
without the version marker fail closed.

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-6.1 (`gpt-6.1-sol`), reasoning and coding tools. The
runtime does not expose the context-window limit.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-22 17:46:27 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip e5351b240a Verify native Runner setup through plugin tasks (#17029)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages work for AI agents.
> - An environment plugin can own a Runner task.
> - The merged launch-preparation contract lets the execution owner
build the provider configuration.
> - Core still needs a task process owner and a setup test that uses
that configuration.
> - This PR connects the task API to the Runner process-owner contract.
> - Operators can test a plugin environment before Core sends it task
work.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Runner, plugin SDK, and agent environment tests.

**Problem or motivation**

A task-only environment cannot use the shell-based setup path. Core must
verify the Runner hello exchange and process cleanup through dedicated
task operations.

**Proposed solution**

Add a lease-bound task driver and use it for a bounded setup probe. Keep
heartbeat admission and task execution in #16978. This PR follows the
merged launch-preparation contract in #16997.

**Alternatives considered**

A provider declaration alone cannot prove that Runner and the provider
connect. A shell bridge would give the plugin an unnecessary command
interface.

## What Changed

- Pass structured Runner launch data to process owners. Support an
external connection and explicit detach.
- Add typed launch authentication checks and checkpoint operations.
Check lease, run, project, and retained-task authority.
- Connect launch preparation, PRP, termination proof, and credential
handoff to the task driver. Reject local environment overrides during
installed-account setup. Pass saved-account identity and credential home
directly from Core.
- Run a short-lived setup probe through the existing agent environment
test API. Require a verified provider hello and cleanup. Keep saved
Copilot account checks metadata-only through a dedicated task operation.
- Update the Copilot source identity because the shared transport source
changed. Keep provider behavior and the earlier identity fixture.

## Verification

- CI passes on `f987adec7`: 55 successful checks and 5 expected skips.
Standard Greptile and Apex are both 5/5 with no open findings. The
branch merges cleanly with current master.
- Repository typecheck and build pass after the rebase onto the
workspace-provider contract. Server typecheck and build also pass after
the final setup fix.
- The 110 focused lease, SDK, setup, Copilot, and route cases pass after
the rebase. All 14 setup cases pass after the final change. These
include a real local Runner with a test provider. The saved-agent
model-discovery case also passes.
- Apex found that Core's relative workspace marker failed the driver
path check, and non-Codex sessions omitted the observed model. Both
failures were reproduced and fixed. The probe leaves physical workspace
selection to plugin preparation. The transport reads each provider's
observed model and exposes it to the driver. All 14 setup cases, 6
transport peer cases, and both existing real Runner/OpenCode cases pass.
Runner build and server typecheck pass.
- The coverage audit removed two redundant cases, repeated fixture code,
and two extra real Runner launches. It kept authorization, credential
selection, cancellation, lost replies, termination proof, checkpoint
identity, and provider setup checks.
- The Copilot source-identity check passes. The added-line secret and
PII scan passes. The unmerged v52 attestation was regenerated after the
shared transport fix.
- CI on `13faeff02` caught one stale Copilot digest assertion after
attestation regeneration. The literal now matches the candidate
attestation, and all 49 installation cases pass. That CI lane otherwise
passed 1,818 cases.
- An earlier CI run hit an unchanged UI toast timing test. The separate
fix is tracked in #16952. Current CI passes that shard. CI also caught a
stale model-discovery assertion in this change; the assertion is fixed.
- The local full-suite run was stopped when master changed. The final CI
run supplies exact-head full-suite validation. No live Cloud or provider
test was run.

## Risks

- Native hello tests require a saved Core account or the installed
account. Local environment overrides are unsupported for
installed-account probes and fail before the provider runs.
- A native task provider must declare launch preparation and
authentication-check version 1. It must keep the checked configuration
fixed through submission. Core rejects providers that cannot make this
guarantee.
- A lost task reply does not prove process termination. Core retains
grants until the provider proves termination and Core saves required
state.
- This PR does not enable native heartbeat dispatch through plugin
environments. Cloud deployment and live provider validation remain
separate.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact model ID and context window are not
exposed in this session. Tool use includes code editing, local tests,
and the GitHub CLI.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-20 18:13:09 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip 8b4ab65b1c Add plugin-owned project storage and task workspaces (#17001)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Tasks can use isolated repository workspaces.
> - Core currently prepares those repositories on its own filesystem.
> - A storage provider may only expose repositories inside remote agent
computers.
> - Project storage and task workspace preparation must have one
provider owner.
> - This pull request adds that contract and keeps execution as a
separate plugin interface.
> - Core keeps authorization, durable task bindings, and lifecycle
fences.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Plugin SDK, project workspace policy, heartbeat preparation, execution
leases, and workspace lifecycle.

**Problem or motivation**

Core cannot prepare a task workspace when its repository storage is
unavailable on the Core host. An execution lease must not be required
just to prepare persistent storage.

**Proposed solution**

Let one plugin provide project resource lifecycle and workspace prepare,
inspect, restore, and remove behavior. Core reserves a task workspace
before it calls the plugin. The plugin returns an opaque durable
reference. The matching execution plugin receives that reference on its
task RPC.

**Alternatives considered**

Preparing repositories on Core would require a provider mount on Core.
Preparing them only during task launch would tie persistent workspace
lifecycle to execution leases and agent availability.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends the remote provider model in ROADMAP.md. Related execution
work is in #16978. This PR does not replace that task bridge. Native
execution of managed storage requires the bridge; this change fails
closed when it is absent.

## What Changed

- Add one storage provider declaration with supported modes/strategies,
a capability, a validated RPC contract, and a test harness.
- Persist provider ownership, repository revision, and
execution-workspace identity before external effects. Reconcile retries
with a stable operation ID.
- Prepare provider storage before environment acquisition. Keep Core
filesystem preparation out of this path.
- Pin the durable reference to the matching execution plugin and
validate the lease binding before task dispatch.
- Route inspection, reopen, and removal through the existing lifecycle
process. Keep local data when remote recovery is uncertain.
- Keep the application database pool free during lifecycle locks.
Preserve pending workspace selections, validate source edits before
retirement, and retry unfinished closed storage cleanup.
- Protect provider metadata and live repository sources from caller
edits. Storage edits retire only closed records with confirmed removal;
retired records cannot reopen.

## Verification

- Current head `8214b3ca5`: all 25 provider lifecycle tests pass with
`maxConnections=1`. They cover preparation, inspection, reopening,
removal, a paused provider with responsive ordinary SQL and a competing
source edit, pending selection preservation, rejected source edits,
cleanup retry scheduling, and providers that cache operation results,
and committed cleanup notifications for storage intent and recovered
state.
- Final frozen-tree lifecycle run on `8214b3ca5`: all 318 tests passed
in 10 files, covering workspace services, reopen, compaction, task
binding, project sources, heartbeat preparation, display caching, and
source locks.
- Direct server `tsc --noEmit` passes. The SDK build and all 128 SDK
tests passed during initial verification; later SDK changes are
documentation only.
- Full CI on the previous head `ec5c7209a` passed all 55 applicable
checks; 2 conditional checks skipped. Standard Greptile reviewed current
head `342e6d9c3` at 5/5 with no unresolved threads. All 55 applicable CI
checks passed on `342e6d9c3`; 2 conditional checks skipped. The Slack
browser and CLI startup jobs passed on their single unchanged-head
rerun. Its Apex review returned 4/5 with one pending-restoration issue.
Commit `1b58943b1` reconciles that durable intent before cleanup,
advances the generation without reopening the Core row, and blocks
direct removal or retirement while intent remains unresolved. Standard
Greptile reviewed `1b58943b1` at 5/5 with no new findings. All 54
applicable CI checks passed on `1b58943b1`; 3 conditional checks
skipped. The chat job passed on its single unchanged-head rerun. Apex
then returned 4/5 for a missing cleanup wake after recovery. Commit
`8214b3ca5` atomically registers cleanup intent before storage intent
and recovery-result writes. Its provider test observes real committed
notification hints and the visible advanced generation. Standard
Greptile reviewed `8214b3ca5` at 5/5 with no new findings. All 55
applicable current-head CI checks passed on the first run; 2 conditional
checks skipped. Final Apex verification completed at 5/5 on this exact
head: 38 files reviewed, no new comments, and no unresolved threads. The
PR is ready for review and mergeable.
- The first Apex review found five issues after a standard 5/5:
application-pool starvation, stale pending selections, retirement during
rejected source edits, lost cleanup retries, and reused inspection
identities. Commits `6d72e7fd4` and `342e6d9c3` fix each with regression
coverage. Archive lock waits use dedicated connections, and source edits
fail promptly if the lifecycle is busy. Retirement compares normalized
values. The normalized-source regression initially failed with the
raw-value comparison; after moving the check after normalization, a
clean provider-suite rerun passed all 24 tests at that stage. Those
threads are resolved; the earlier Apex 0/5 is not a passing acceptance
result.
- Earlier local integration attempts could not bind localhost inside the
sandbox. The same suites passed with permission to start local
PostgreSQL.
- The earlier broad local `pnpm test:run` overlapped edits and reported
stale-revision and checkout-path/Git-fixture failures. It was not a
final-tree result. Full CI subsequently passed; the original local
failure remains part of verification history.
- Local repository-wide typecheck/build cannot complete because `cargo`
is unavailable. Direct server TypeScript checks and affected tests pass;
full Rust and build validation comes from CI.
- An earlier browser run on `ff918c5a8` failed in the unchanged
case-filter journey: expected “Done,” received “All statuses,” with an
announcement handler recorded during the assertion. The cause is not
confirmed. [The failed
job](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39500611857/job/118896954508)
remains verification history. The unchanged shard passed in the next
full CI run on `ec5c7209a`; no UI or fixture change was made.
- Current-head browser shard 2 failed waiting five seconds for the
mocked Slack setup Success heading. This PR changes neither that UI nor
its fixture. [The failed
job](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39506070513/job/118916021232)
remains verification evidence. The cause is not confirmed; the single
unchanged-shard rerun passed; no UI or fixture change was made, and the
original cause remains unconfirmed.
- The workspace test shard passed its 3,978 general tests, then its CLI
company-import/export fixture timed out after 30 seconds waiting for
startup health before creating any company or workspace. [The failed
job](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39506070513/job/118916021855)
remains verification history. The child reached external-PostgreSQL
startup without exiting or reporting an exception. Its cause is not
confirmed; the single unchanged-job rerun passed, including the CLI
fixture. No startup or fixture change was made, and the original cause
remains unconfirmed.
- The new cached-removal regression initially failed because its fake
worker advertised availability for unrelated fixture plugins, so another
workspace changed its fake checkout state. Worker availability now
matches the fixture plugin; the complete 25-test provider suite passes.
- On `1b58943b1`, the chat shard timed out polling for one conversation
after an authorized GitHub description edit. [The failed
job](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39510521657/job/118930193418)
remains evidence. The exact case passes locally against PostgreSQL (1
passed, 1,380 unrelated cases skipped), and this PR changes neither that
test nor its handler. The original cause is unconfirmed; the single
unchanged-job CI rerun passed without a code or fixture change. The
original cause remains unconfirmed.
- The diff was checked for credentials, private references, and
generated artifacts.

## Risks

This is an additive provider contract with no database migration.
Existing projects keep their local behavior unless their policy selects
a storage plugin. A selected provider must be ready and enabled. Unknown
or unsafe cleanup fails closed.

Managed native execution depends on #16978. Core refuses a host Runner
fallback. Providers must fence lifecycle generations, preserve ambiguous
retries, and report remote recovery honestly. Provider-specific live
storage and guest mount qualification remain separate from these Core
contract tests.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with repository inspection, code execution, and
tests. The exact model variant 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 linked existing issues or 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 (affected suites; broad-run
limits are documented above)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-20 16:35:33 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip dc6dd23ea4 Add plugin Runner preparation task contract (#16993)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages work for AI agents.
> - Environment plugins can own Runner tasks.
> - Core selects provider policy and runtime assignments.
> - The execution environment must resolve its own paths and
configuration.
> - The task API needs a preparation exchange before execution.
> - This PR adds that exchange under the existing lease authority.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Problem or motivation**
The environment task API can start a Runner. It cannot return a prepared
provider configuration from Core requirements.

**Proposed solution**
Add a versioned `prepare` request and `prepared` result. Keep the
provider configuration bound to its task and requirements. Check the
same company, run, project, and retained-session authority as
submission.

**Alternatives considered**
A shell preparation command would expose execution details in the API.
Provider-specific ownership flags would spread this contract across
backends.

**Roadmap alignment**
This extends the existing plugin and remote execution APIs. It does not
add a separate execution system.

Refs #16977, #15406. The prerequisite #16977 is merged. This PR now
targets master. Runner transport and provider implementations follow
separately.

## What Changed

- Add strict launch requirements and prepared result schemas.
- Add the preparation capability version and saved configuration ID.
- Apply existing lease and resource checks to preparation.
- Document idempotency, cancellation, recovery, and cleanup
requirements.

## Verification

- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed.
- Plugin SDK build passed.
- All 55 Dot Runner and native Codex server integration tests passed
with Cargo available on PATH.
- All 18 environment task runtime tests passed. These include
preparation dispatch, inactive leases, wrong run identity, unauthorized
projects, result identity, and unknown command rejection.
- The broader root suite on the parent refactor finished with 22,420
passing tests, seven failed tests in unchanged Git and diagnostic code,
and two suite setup errors because Cargo was absent from its PATH. This
PR does not claim a passing full root suite.
- No live provider calls or deployment were run. 
- Standard Greptile and Apex each scored commit
`d3ac15906240b7066f5ff505ed2ffd9ef5dd43c1` 5/5. There are no unresolved
review threads.
- All 55 CI checks passed. Two optional checks were skipped. The branch
is ready and mergeable against master.
- A fresh master fetch and merge-base check passed immediately before
the Apex request.

## Risks

- This defines a new optional worker operation. Existing providers keep
their current operations.
- A provider must validate policy and resource bindings. Schema
validation alone does not validate a concrete provider descriptor.
- This PR defines the exchange. It does not connect native execution to
a preparation provider.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. Reasoning and repository tools. The exact serving
model identifier and context size are not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

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

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-20 11:41:49 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip 33cc567f75 Add lease-scoped Runner task hooks to environment plugins (#15406)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip coordinates AI agents and their runs.
> - Environment plugins own remote capacity.
> - A plugin needs a typed API to start and stop its installed Runner.
> - Core must derive authority from the saved lease.
> - A lost reply or controller restart must not lose cleanup authority.
> - This PR adds the worker contract and the host task service.
> - Native execution and Runner changes are separate PRs.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Plugin SDK and environment lease services.

**Current behavior**

Environment plugins have no typed Runner task hook. Core cannot dispatch
these tasks or recover their credential handoff through a saved lease.

**Proposed behavior**

Add validated task operations, worker negotiation, company and project
checks, retained-session authorization, and durable cleanup. Keep
credentials out of lease metadata.

**Additional context**

This PR is the first part of a smaller series. Runner installed-home
support is in #16977. Native execution and setup are in #16978. Both are
stacked drafts. This PR does not enable native plugin execution, change
default environments, add a route, or add a database migration.

## What Changed

- Add `supportsTasks` and `onEnvironmentTask` with seven typed
operations.
- Validate worker requests and responses. Reject shell commands and file
transfer operations.
- Pin dispatch and cleanup to the saved company, lease, plugin, and
driver.
- Authorize projects and retained sessions. Validate the current run
separately from the retained PRP identity.
- Save dispatch before the provider call. Fence admission during
cleanup. Require observed process termination.
- Save account writeback authority on the lease. Recover Codex refreshes
through the existing account and secret services.
- Document the task API. Keep the Runner, heartbeat, setup, workspace,
and provider changes in later PRs.

## Verification

- Full `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on the separated API
scope.
- 201 focused tests passed: SDK worker dispatch, task validation,
PostgreSQL task lineage, credential recovery, and existing environment
cleanup.
- The lineage test covers a third run, repeated same-run replacements, a
stale submitting run, and exact termination receipts.
- Initial commands hit sandbox socket/IPC restrictions. The permitted
runs executed PostgreSQL and passed. A typecheck attempt lacked Cargo in
PATH; the run with the installed toolchain passed.
- The earlier combined implementation had a full local run with 22,286
passing tests, 120 skips, and eight failed assertions. Task fixture
failures were fixed before this split. Remaining host Git and
temporary-path assertions are recorded in the previous PR revision. This
split does not claim a fresh full local suite pass.
- The standard Greptile review scored this API head 5/5 with no
unresolved threads. CI is green. The single Apex review also scored this
head 5/5 with no actionable findings.
- Fresh API CI lost a self-hosted runner during server shard 9. GitHub
reported lost communication, with no failed test step. The affected jobs
passed on retry without code changes.
- CI on the prior combined head failed an unchanged workspace dev-server
readiness case. No unrelated test fix is included here. Fresh CI is
required for this smaller head.
- This scope does not run a provider or a Cloud test. The user owns
deployment and the intermediate Cloud test.

## Risks

- The API is opt-in. Native plugin execution requires the later
integrations.
- Providers must make task submission idempotent and prove descendant
termination.
- A failed status read or credential export keeps the lease available
for cleanup.
- Codex refresh writeback requires the same active grant, secret
reference, and session epoch. Revocation or account replacement discards
the old refresh.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. Used source inspection, code execution,
tests, and GitHub tools. The exact served model ID and context-window
size are not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

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

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-20 09:14:23 -07:00