mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-24 10:13:11 +02:00
e48f1867b3b45f74edca4645d640846bcafeee4c
5558
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
e48f1867b3 |
fix(evals): correlate canceled gateway requests with their ledger (#17354)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Product E2E evaluations use a budget ledger and a local model gateway. > - The gateway writes each request reservation before it calls a provider. > - A client can cancel before the gateway returns response headers. > - Project-only logging context cannot then bind a late gateway log to its reservation. > - This change sends the reserved request identity in Braintrust log metadata before dispatch. > - Operators can use that identity to inspect late records without guessing from time or session order. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #17009 **What happened?** A hosted evaluation passed its product checks but retained two canceled requests with no response headers. Later gateway logs had partial usage. Their time and session matched, but they had no ledger request identity. **Expected behavior** A gateway log must carry the ledger request ID even when the client receives no headers. A log match must not imply final billing. **Steps to reproduce** Run the gateway regression with a transport that receives a request and then cancels before response headers. Before this change, both requests have the same project-only parent header. ## What Changed - Add a small Braintrust context encoder owned by the eval gateway integration. It uses the existing SpanComponentsV4 project-log format and an allowlist of request, campaign, execution, attempt and phase metadata. - Save the exact context in the private request receipt before dispatch. Send it as the gateway parent header. - Test both provider routes, repeated identical requests, cancellation holds and direct-provider isolation. - Document the lookup field and the limits of historical and partial evidence. ## Verification - The new cancellation regressions failed before the change: 2 failed, 37 passed. - Gateway, operations and tracing checks: 82 passed. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`: passed after rebuilding stale generated plugin-SDK types from current master. The initial stale-type failure remains recorded locally. - Official Braintrust SDK 3.38.0 decoded the actual generated context. Its `startSpan` implementation emitted the reserved identity in the initial LLM log. The check captured logs in memory and forbade all network calls. - `git diff --check`: passed. - Full repository CI passed on `529446a9295f2dc6fa6499a2f976480d74626097`, including typecheck, tests, build and both required gates. Greptile is 5/5 on that head; its sole finding is fixed and resolved. - The optional Paperclip review turn ended without a final response. Its check remains queued and provides no review assessment. No passing review is inferred from it. - Live hosted acceptance of this header change remains unqualified; no paid test was dispatched for this fix. ## Risks - The encoder follows Braintrust's versioned span format. A future vendor change can require an update. It adds no package dependency. - A late log can have partial usage. Existing reservations remain held until valid cost evidence resolves them. - Historical project-only requests cannot gain the new identity retroactively. - Only synthetic eval identifiers enter the new metadata. Credentials, prompts and responses are excluded. Direct provider routes keep their current headers. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact deployment ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, repository tools and code execution. No paid evaluation model calls were made for this 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> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
ef9e17304c |
perf: narrow runtime progress database reads (#17355)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Active runs publish workspace and provider progress. > - Each update must check the current run status before it publishes. > - This check fetched the full run, including prompts and runner configuration. > - This pull request reads only the four fields that progress publication uses. > - The benefit is less database transfer while each update still checks durable state. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #17348 narrows authorization reads. This PR applies a separate projection to runtime progress. GitHub searches for runtime progress and run-status read PRs found no duplicate. **What existing behavior does this improve?** The database read before a runtime progress update. **Current behavior** Each update calls `getRun`. This reads large run context and runner configuration even though progress publication only uses the run ID, company ID, agent ID, and status. **Proposed behavior** Use a fresh four-column read for each update. Keep the existing active-status check, event fields, error propagation, and late-progress suppression. **Reason and benefit** Transfer progress can emit many updates for one run. A small status check avoids repeatedly transferring payloads that it does not use. **Breaking changes** None. No API response, schema, scheduling, or cancellation policy changes. ## What Changed - Add `getRunStatus` to the run-state owner. The full reader remains available to consumers that need execution data. - Wire the narrow reader into the lifecycle progress check. Remove the unused context field from that check's input contract. - Cover the exact selected fields, missing runs, database errors, large stored payloads, terminal transitions, and the public heartbeat service wiring. Document the read boundary. ## Verification - Run-state and lifecycle suites: 44 tests passed before the additional public-service regression. - Lifecycle, public-service wiring, and native cancellation suites: 36 tests passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm build`: passed. - The [full PR workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40013092548) passed on `95bf496f689049812646b5ccddcdf2cca21efad0`. All 54 reported checks passed; two conditional checks were skipped. This includes test shards, browser checks, Runner verification, production bundle boot, and clean npm installation. - `GIT_CONFIG_COUNT=1 GIT_CONFIG_KEY_0=init.defaultBranch GIT_CONFIG_VALUE_0=master pnpm test:run`: an additional local all-in-one run is still in progress; no full-local-pass claim. The process-scoped Git default matches existing master-only fixtures and does not change user configuration. - The initial description check failed because the dedup-search checkbox was missing. Searches are complete and the template checkbox is now included. The rerun passed on the same source commit. - Greptile Apex: 5/5 on `95bf496f689049812646b5ccddcdf2cca21efad0`, no findings or review threads. - No hosted deployment or bill reduction is claimed. CI and Apex are complete; this PR is merge-ready. ## Risks - Low scope: the query selects fewer columns and preserves the existing status read on every progress callback. It adds no worker, cache, timer, or idle query. - A run can still finish after the status read and before publication, as it could before this change. This PR does not change that concurrency boundary. - No migration or operator configuration is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6 family). The runtime does not expose the exact model ID or 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 #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused suites above; full suite is still running) - [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> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
837add0caa |
fix(recovery): deliver review-path repair instructions to agent prompts (#17353)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip keeps agent tasks moving through owned execution and durable waiting paths. > - A consumed review path gets one repair wake before board escalation. > - That wake records an instruction to save a new monitor or another real review path. > - The canonical wake builder omitted that instruction from the agent prompt. > - This pull request delivers it through the existing disposition-repair section. > - The repair limit and execution authority stay unchanged. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** An agent opened a pull request and promised to watch CI and external review. It ended without scheduling a monitor. Its bounded review repair also ended without a maintained path, so the task became blocked for a board decision. The saved repair context contained the instruction, but the canonical wake payload and rendered prompt did not. **Expected behavior** The repair prompt tells the agent to save a one-shot monitor before promising another check. Both fresh and resumed sessions receive that instruction and the one-attempt limit. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a review-path recovery with `decideIssueReviewPathRecovery` for a task whose review path was consumed. 2. Pass its recorded context through `buildPaperclipWakePayload` and wake serialization. 3. Render a fresh or resumed prompt. Before this fix, it has the wake reason but no repair instruction. **Paperclip version or commit** Base: `9c442cf48e6`. Current head: `f38d65891c8d9f2b38eb76a8578e870debc2b1e6`. **Deployment mode** Observed on managed sandbox execution with the legacy Claude ACP adapter. The corrected canonical payload serves the shared adapter prompt path. Refs #15764 introduced the bounded exhausted-repair disposition. This change preserves that limit. Open monitor-retry work such as #17171 addresses an already scheduled check; this defect occurs before a check exists. Searches found no duplicate for this missing prompt field. ## What Changed - Build the review-path repair disposition in its owning recovery module, using the server instruction and fixed one-attempt bound. - Project it into the existing canonical `dispositionRepair` field. No new adapter field or execution protocol is added. - Ignore arbitrary replacement instructions and attempt-limit values. A pending repair keeps its instruction across a connection-pool retry that changes the wake reason. Ordinary wakes without the typed repair marker ignore raw instruction text. Existing legacy disposition repairs retain their values. - Add a regression across the real recovery decision, wake builder, serializer and fresh/resumed prompt selectors. Update execution guidance and the affected recovery maps. ## Verification - Verified red before the source fix: two regression cases failed because the instruction was absent; the sibling repair case passed. The same cases pass after the fix. - Passed 194 focused and safety tests across wake preparation, review recovery, adapter prompt handling, and database-backed liveness escalation. The connection-pool retry case also failed before its correction and passes after it. - Replayed the recorded incident wake through the fixed boundary. The old canonical prompt lacked its saved instruction. The corrected serialized prompt includes it with a 1/1 bound. This replay did not execute a provider turn or change the source task. Private evidence stays outside the repository. - Passed `pnpm -r typecheck` after the pool-retry correction. Passed `pnpm build` on final head `f38d65891c8d9f2b38eb76a8578e870debc2b1e6`. Map checks and `git diff --check` pass. - [Full CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40005890857) passed on that head: 54 checks passed and two optional checks were skipped. This includes the full test shards, typecheck, build, and browser suites. The local `pnpm test:run` attempt was stopped after the CI test shards passed. No complete local full-suite pass is claimed. - [Apex review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/17353#issuecomment-6372160694) is 5/5 on the final head, with no open findings. The first review found the pool-retry case. Its regression and correction are included. The branch has no merge conflicts. - Test setup first required the plugin SDK build, then an empty credential-history database boundary. Those setup errors are not the claimed red. The temporary recorded-wake probe was removed before final validation. - Hosted follow-up acceptance is not run. The source task remains blocked and needs a retry after rollout. This PR does not claim that prompt delivery itself schedules a monitor or that every model will follow the instruction. ## Risks - This fixes instruction delivery. The agent must still save a valid monitor or another waiting path. The existing bounded escalation remains if it does not. - The wake stays a normal-model repair. It does not become status-only recovery and can continue useful work. Existing ownership, approval, budget, pause, and monitor admission gates remain in place. - No schema, credential, telemetry, API, model, or retry-budget change. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, assisted with diagnosis, code editing, shell execution and verification. The exact serving model ID and context-window limit 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 (194 focused and safety cases; full coverage passed in CI) - [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>canary/v2026.1023.0-canary.14 |
||
|
|
73526559b5 |
fix(ui): reload once when a lazy chunk or its CSS fails to load (#17349)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The board UI loads each page as a lazy chunk. Vite adds a preload
step that also loads the CSS of the chunk.
> - Staging error monitoring reported `Unable to preload CSS for
…/assets/issue-detail-CIbQo9zW.css`. The same file name comes from the
current build, so the CSS did not change. One request for the file
failed for a short time.
> - Vite rejects only the first import that asks for a failed file.
Later imports skip that file. On a task page, the first import is the
task-page prefetch, which ignores errors. The page then shows without
its CSS. On other pages that share the CSS, such as Agents, the lazy
route rejects and the route error boundary shows the error.
> - Neither case recovers without a manual reload. This is a routine
retry that the app can do safely, so the app must do it.
> - This pull request reloads the page one time when a chunk or its CSS
fails to load. A loop guard limits this to one reload in five minutes.
> - The benefit is that a stale tab after a deploy, or one failed asset
request, recovers without an error page, without missing styles, and
without error-monitoring noise. An asset that stays broken still shows
the error and still sends a report.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
A board page showed "This page hit an error" with `Unable to preload CSS
for <origin>/assets/issue-detail-<hash>.css`. On a task page, the same
failure gave no error message, but the page showed without its
stylesheet.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Build the UI and start the server.
2. Make the first request for `/assets/issue-detail-*.css` fail. The new
Playwright spec does this with `page.route(...).abort("failed")`.
3. Open `/<prefix>/agents`. The route error boundary shows "Unable to
preload CSS".
4. Open `/<prefix>/issues/<id>`. The task shows, but the browser does
not request the task CSS again. The page has no task-page CSS.
**Expected behavior**
The app recovers from a chunk or CSS load failure without user action.
If the failure continues, the app shows the error one time, with no
reload loop.
**Environment**
Hosted staging browser. The local build of current `master` reproduces
it.
I searched open and closed PRs for `preload`, `preloadError`, and `stale
chunk`. I found no related PR.
## What Changed
- `ui/src/lib/chunk-load-recovery.ts` (new): `isChunkLoadError` matches
the Vite CSS preload error and the dynamic import errors from Chromium,
Firefox, and WebKit. `reloadForChunkLoadError` reloads one time. A
`sessionStorage` marker blocks a second reload for five minutes. After
the first reload, later chunk errors in the same document are part of
that reload, so they return "reloading" and do not show an error.
Without `sessionStorage`, the function does not reload, because it
cannot guard against a loop. `startChunkLoadRecovery` listens for
`vite:preloadError`. It does not cancel the event, so the import still
rejects as before.
- `ui/src/main.tsx`: Starts the listener before the first render. The
listener covers every import, including the task-page prefetch that
ignores errors.
- `RouteErrorBoundary` and `AppErrorBoundary`: While a recovery reload
runs, they show a loading state. They do not show the error page and do
not report to Sentry. Other errors work as before.
- Tests: Vitest unit tests for the helper and both boundaries. A new
Playwright spec, `tests/e2e/chunk-load-recovery.spec.ts`, runs against
the real server and the built UI.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/lib/chunk-load-recovery.test.ts
src/components/RouteErrorBoundary.test.tsx
src/components/AppErrorBoundary.test.tsx`: 21 tests pass.
- Full UI Vitest suite: 793 files, 9,075 tests pass.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` passes. `node
scripts/check-token-gates.mjs` is clean. `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`
passes.
- `npx playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts
chunk-load-recovery.spec.ts`: 3 tests pass.
- Task page with one failed CSS request: one reload, the CSS loads, and
the task shows.
- Agents page with one failed CSS request: one reload, the CSS loads,
and the page shows with no error page.
- CSS that always fails: one reload, then the error page shows. There is
no second reload.
- Red proof: I ran the same spec with the `ui/src` changes removed
(current `master` UI code). Both recovery tests fail. On Agents, the
route error boundary shows `Unable to preload CSS for
http://127.0.0.1:3199/assets/issue-detail-CIbQo9zW.css`. On the task
page, the CSS is never requested again.
- A failure I found and fixed during the work: my first version changed
only the error boundaries. The task-page e2e case failed with that
version, because the prefetch received the error and the boundary never
saw it. The `vite:preloadError` listener fixes that case. All results
above are from the final commit.
- The spec blocks service workers, because Playwright page routes cannot
see requests that a service worker sends. With a worker, a failed
network request for an asset that is not cached also gives
`Response.error()`. Thus the preload error is the same.
## Risks
- A page can reload while a user is on it. This occurs only after a
chunk or CSS load failure, and at most one time in five minutes per tab
session. Without this change, that page already shows an error or shows
without styles. Composer drafts use browser storage, so a reload keeps
them.
- A failure that recovers no longer sends a Sentry event. A failure that
continues after the reload still sends one, so a broken deploy stays
visible.
- The error patterns match browser and Vite message prefixes. If a
browser changes its message, that browser goes back to the current
behavior: the error page and a report.
- No API, schema, or server changes.
## Model Used
- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`) by Anthropic, run as a Paperclip
agent through Claude Code with tool use (shell, file edits, Playwright,
and Vitest).
## 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
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com>
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9c442cf48e |
feat(connections): deploy and configure Supabase and Vercel (#17217)
Add governed Supabase and Vercel deployment/configuration connectors with vaulted credentials, agent access policies, approvals, audit, and bounded provider operations. Deliver reviewed REST actions to native agents and guard Vercel preview intent on empty projects. Preserve secret-safe request identity and durable retry behavior. Verified by current-head CI, fresh Greptile 5/5 review, and real-agent deployment/configuration walkthroughs on disposable provider resources. Test resources and temporary provider tokens were removed after verification. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1023.0-canary.13 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
59d1b7b43d |
fix(evals): collect usage when GitHub skips jobs without a runner (#17352)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their operating budgets. > - Product E2E runs retain accounting for each campaign. > - The usage collector reads completed GitHub jobs without rerunning paid work. > - GitHub returns a null runner ID for jobs that it skips before assigning a runner. > - The collector rejected those jobs and could not retain the completed campaign inventory. > - This change accepts that skipped-job representation while preserving started-job checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17009. **What happened?** The usage collector rejected completed qualification run 39971835384. GitHub returned skipped jobs with null runner IDs. The collector accepted only zero for jobs without a runner. **Expected behavior** Retain completed run usage when skipped jobs have a null or zero runner ID. Do not count VM time for those jobs. Continue to reject missing runner identity for started jobs. **Steps to reproduce** Read the completed first-attempt Product E2E run with operating-receipts.ts github. Before this fix, a skipped job with runner_id set to null throws Invalid workflow job identity. **Paperclip version or commit** |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
f406b32d08 |
perf: narrow run authorization reads (#17348)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage and observe AI agents at work. > - Live events and run history must enforce current task permissions. > - Some permission checks load the complete run record for each event or request. > - Run context, runner configuration, results, and output can make those records large. > - This pull request reads only the persisted fields each access check needs. > - The checks still read current permissions and fail closed. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #17251, #9155, and #16229. Those changes cover other run projections, recovery polls, and task history. This change covers live-event delivery, workspace-operation run checks, and event-list access. **What happened?** Live-event delivery loaded every run column for each subscribed viewer, although the permission helper used only the company, run scope, and task binding. Workspace-operation checks did the same. The run-event endpoint also loaded complete run records before returning separate event rows. Large contexts and runner configurations therefore increased database transfer for ordinary access checks. **Expected behavior** Read only the stored access binding. Keep company checks, permission freshness, deleted-task tombstones, and response bodies unchanged. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create an issue-bound run with large context, runner configuration, and output fields. 2. Subscribe an authorized viewer to company live events and publish run updates. 3. Read the run events and a linked workspace operation. 4. Inspect the run SELECT projections. The previous queries load fields that the access checks do not use. **Paperclip version or commit** The defect is present on the current master base, `62c78e56e53`. **Deployment mode** Authenticated server with PostgreSQL. The defect is not adapter-specific. ## What Changed - Select only company, scope, and issue bindings for live-event and workspace-operation run authorization. - Add a four-field run-access read for event-list requests. Reuse those columns in the existing log-access projection. - Preserve per-delivery and per-request permission checks, company predicates, and event responses. - Add real PostgreSQL and WebSocket coverage with large run fixtures. Cover grant revocation, grant restoration, deleted tasks, missing and foreign-company runs, and failed reads. - Document the bounded access reads in the existing polling-load guide. ## Verification - Six focused suites pass: 40 tests. They cover the changed paths, run-state reads, run logs, disconnect retries, and native event replay. - The new WebSocket test uses the production delivery path and a real database. It verifies that the selected SQL omits large run fields while authorization changes take effect on the same open socket. - The event-route test preserves the returned event content and denies the next request after grant revocation. - Local recursive typecheck, full build, and module-boundary checks pass. [Exact-head CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39997370119) completed successfully, covering the full grouped unit suites, typecheck, build/runtime boot, and E2E shards. The separate serial local `pnpm test:run` is still running and is not claimed as completed. - A later CI shard failed an unchanged email test expecting exactly one task after permission grants. The unchanged-base test passes at normal speed; adding only a 2.2-second pause before granting access reproduces the extra tasks because previously denied deliveries become due for retry. No email code or assertions are changed in this PR. The original failure is retained. The single shard rerun passed: 92 suites and 1,489 tests passed, with one suite and two tests skipped by the existing gates. - CI initially found a route-test double missing the new access helper. The follow-up fixes that fixture and adds event reads to malformed-ID and missing/cross-company checks. All 122 tests across the four changed-path suites pass; a final rerun of the expanded route suite passes all 92 tests. - The first CI run also timed out in the signoff changes-requested handoff while waiting for a reviewer run after a cancelled execution blocker. The focused test passes locally on this source. The same focused test passes three times on unchanged master. Controller-lease cancellation messages appear on both versions. The original CI timeout is preserved as an intermittent, unreproduced failure; its exact cause remains unknown. The signoff shard passes in the final exact-head CI run. - Initial fresh-checkout tests could not start because workspace SDK output and native PostgreSQL library links were missing. Dependency builds and the package's native-link setup corrected those prerequisites. The subsequent focused run passed. Focused command: ```sh pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/live-events-run-read.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-run-privacy-routes.test.ts src/services/heartbeat/run-state.test.ts src/__tests__/native-observer-replay.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-run-log.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-run-privacy-disconnect-retry.test.ts ``` ## Risks - A missing access field could cause an incorrect allow or denial. Tests exercise current grants, revocation, company scope, and deleted-task bindings through the real consumers. - No successful permission decision is cached. Every delivery and request still checks current database state. - No schema, migration, polling interval, API response, or deployment configuration changes are included. - This reduces bytes for the affected reads. It does not establish a whole-account savings percentage. Hosted transfer measurements remain separate validation after staging deployment. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, a GPT-6 based coding agent, used repository tools, code execution, and database-backed tests. The session does not expose the exact backend model identifier or context-window size; those values are not guessed. ## 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>canary/v2026.1023.0-canary.12 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
62c78e56e5 |
fix: describe unexpected git expiration failures in the result (#17341)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Git cache expiration keeps a workspace and reports
`inspection_failed` when an unexpected error interrupts its checks
> - It dropped that error, so the log never said what went wrong
> - This pull request adds a sanitized description of the error to the
expiration result, which the workspace reaper already logs
> - The benefit is that unexpected expiration failures can be diagnosed
without exposing commands or credentials
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #17248. Bug report described in-PR (bug report template).
**What happened?**
On one instance, a closed workspace was kept with `inspection_failed`.
The log entry carried only that reason, so the cause could not be
determined from the logs.
**Expected behavior**
An unexpected failure is logged with enough detail to diagnose it,
without leaking the command line or credentials.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Break a closed issue's worktree so a git command fails, for example
by pointing its `.git` file at a missing directory.
2. Run expiration: the log says `inspection_failed` and nothing else.
**Paperclip version or commit:** `master` at
|
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
0001a4514e |
fix: keep stale pending restore points from blocking retries (#17344)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Git cache expiration saves restore points and tracks them in
`execution_workspace_restore_points`
> - A unique index allows one row per workspace, generation and checkout
unless the row is deleted
> - A pending row left by an interrupted attempt therefore blocked every
retry for an hour, and superseded rows blocked retries until retention
deleted their objects
> - This pull request narrows the index to live rows and supersedes
stale pending rows before inserting
> - The benefit is that an interrupted expiration no longer stalls a
workspace's cleanup
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #17257. Bug report described in-PR (bug report template).
**What happened?**
On one instance, a closed workspace with a nested checkout failed
expiration with `inspection_failed` on every sweep. An earlier attempt
had left a `pending` row for the nested checkout at the workspace's next
generation. Each retry stored the main worktree's restore point, then
failed to insert the nested row because the unique index on
`(execution_workspace_id, generation, checkout_name) WHERE status <>
'deleted'` still held the stale row. Running the expiration by hand
reproduced the failing insert.
**Expected behavior**
A retry after an interrupted attempt replaces the stale row and expires
the workspace.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Leave a `pending` restore point row for a workspace's next generation
and a nested checkout, as an interrupted attempt does.
2. Run expiration with restore points: it fails with `inspection_failed`
until retention supersedes the row after the one-hour pending grace
period.
**Paperclip version or commit:** `master` at
|
||
|
|
23bd238f05 |
fix(costs): stop OAuth refreshes from duplicating unverified subscriptions (#16512)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The Costs page shows one card for each AI subscription account. Each
card comes from an `ai_subscriptions` row.
> - Paperclip cannot verify an xAI/Grok account with the provider. So
each Grok row used a key made from a hash of the raw credential.
> - The Grok CLI refreshes its OAuth tokens during runs. Paperclip
writes the refreshed `auth.json` back to the vault and keeps the
secret's `aiSessionEpoch`.
> - The next run sees a new credential hash.
`subscriptionService.register()` finds no match and adds a new
subscription row. The old row stays on the Costs page. One Grok
connection becomes many duplicate cards.
> - Claude and OpenAI rows usually avoid this problem, because a
provider profile check merges them. Grok rows never get verified, so
nothing merges them.
> - This pull request keys unverified rows on the credential session
(secret id + `aiSessionEpoch`), not on the token bytes.
> - The benefit is one subscription card per Grok connection through
token refreshes. A real reconnect still gets its own card.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public issue exists. Bug description:
**What happened?**
On a hosted staging instance, the Costs → Subscriptions list showed many
duplicate Grok subscriptions for one Grok connection. Each Grok OAuth
token refresh added one more card.
**Expected behavior**
One Grok connection shows one subscription card. A token refresh does
not change it.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Connect an xAI/Grok subscription account.
2. Run an agent until the Grok CLI refreshes its OAuth token. Paperclip
writes the refreshed credential back to the vault.
3. Run the agent again.
4. Open Costs → Subscriptions. A second Grok card is there. Each refresh
adds another card.
**Agent adapter(s) involved**
Not adapter-specific (core bug). The trigger is the Grok OAuth refresh
write-back in `server/src/services/ai-connection-runtime.ts`.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`master` at
|
||
|
|
93d26eb84e |
feat(ui): link routine-created tasks back to their source routine (#16471)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Routines create tasks on a schedule. Each task records its source in `originKind = "routine_execution"` and `originId = <routine id>`. > - The issue Properties card shows Relationships such as Parent. It does not show the routine that created the task. > - An operator who reads a routine-created task cannot go to the routine from the task. They must find the routine by hand. > - This pull request adds a "Routine" row under Relationships, below Parent. The row links to the source routine. > - The benefit is a direct path from a routine-created task to the routine that made it. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #9727. That PR adds a general provenance model and an "Origin" chip. It also links routine executions to the routine. It is much larger (DB migration, server, plugin SDK). It has merge conflicts and no updates since August. This PR is a small UI-only change with no schema or API change. If #9727 merges later, the two rows can be merged into one. **Is your feature request related to a problem?** A task that a routine creates has no visible link back to that routine in the Properties card. **Describe the solution you'd like** Show a "Routine" row under Relationships for routine-created tasks. The row shows the routine title and links to `/routines/:id`. **Describe alternatives you've considered** A generic "Origin" row for all origin kinds (the #9727 approach). That needs new server data for most kinds. A routine link needs only data that the issue already has. ## What Changed - Add `ui/src/components/issue-properties/routine-origin-row.tsx` (`RoutineOriginRow`). It reads the routine with the same `queryKeys.routines.detail` query as the routine page, so the cache is shared. - Show the row in `IssueProperties.tsx` after Parent, only when `originKind === "routine_execution"` and `originId` is set (+5 lines). The new component is in its own file because `IssueProperties.tsx` already has more than 3,000 lines. - States: - Routine found: an outline chip with the repeat icon and the routine title. The chip links to the routine page. - Routine still loading, routine deleted (404), or any other lookup error: no row. The card never shows an empty Routine field. - Task not created by a routine: no row. No routine request is sent. - Add 4 tests in `IssueProperties.test.tsx`: routine found, routine loading, routine deleted, and task not created by a routine. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx`: 94/94 pass. - `vitest run src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx src/components/TaskSidePanel.test.tsx` (other surfaces that render the panel): 195/195 pass. - `node scripts/check-token-gates.mjs`: all gates clean. - `tsc --noEmit` in `ui`: no errors in the changed files. Other errors came from workspace packages that were not built locally (`@paperclipai/plugin-sdk/ui`, generated storybook catalog JSON). This change does not touch them. - Manual check: open a task that a routine created. Find the "Routine" row under Parent. Click it. The routine page opens. - Not run locally: full `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm test:run`, `pnpm build`, and a browser check. CI runs these. ## Risks - Low risk. The change is UI-only and additive. It has no schema, API, or contract change. - Each routine-created task view sends one extra `GET /routines/:id` request. The routine page uses the same cache key, so the response is often cached already. - The row appears only after the routine request finishes. On a cold cache, it shows up a moment after the rest of the card. - If the routine is deleted or the user cannot read it, the task shows no Routine row. The task still records `originKind`/`originId`. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`) in Claude Code, with tool use (shell, file edit, test execution). Standard 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 - [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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Devin Foley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>canary/v2026.1023.0-canary.11 |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
a708a13336 |
Separate plugin workspace completion from maintenance inspection (#17329)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Storage plugins own remote task workspaces. > - Run completion currently requests the same inspection used for storage cleanup. > - That inspection can fetch remote refs and scan files after the agent has finished. > - Completion needs retained workspace identity and durable writes, not permission to delete files. > - This change adds an optional completion operation and keeps maintenance inspection separate. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A successful plugin-backed run can fail during completion because the storage provider performs a slow remote-recoverability inspection. Dirty or unpublished output does not need a deletion-safety proof to remain valid task output. **Expected behavior** Completion verifies the assigned workspace and confirms durable writes through the provider. Cleanup still requires the existing full inspection. **Steps to reproduce** Run a task with plugin-owned storage whose inspection fetches remote refs. Let the agent finish, then observe completion waiting for the maintenance inspection. Related context: #16428 added finalization observability. The duplicate search found no existing PR for this provider contract. ## What Changed - Add optional `workspaceProvider.finalizationVersion: 1` and strict `finalize` / `finalized` schemas. - Pass original run and agent context through live completion and recovered completion. - Give the new operation a 30-second deadline and keep ownership checks and lifecycle serialization. - Retain the inspection fallback for providers without the capability. Keep maintenance inspection and removal unchanged. ## Verification - SDK build passed. - Targeted SDK and completion unit tests: 7 passed. - Added integration coverage for capability selection, legacy fallback, maintenance separation, and failure propagation. - Local integration setup timed out starting PostgreSQL; the integration suite passed in GitHub CI. - Full build/typecheck and broader tests passed in GitHub CI (55 successful checks, 2 skipped). Local checks remained targeted as requested. - Diff reviewed for secrets and operational identifiers. ## Risks The capability is opt-in. Providers must not advertise it until their completion implementation is available. An unavailable provider or failed durability barrier remains retryable. No schema or stored-binding migration is required. Test-file size exception: the provider integration suite grows from 973 to 1,002 lines. The 29-line case follows the same prepared binding through legacy completion, opted-in completion, and maintenance inspection using the existing single-connection database fixture. Keeping it there avoids a second embedded-Postgres lifecycle for one transition test. The completion helper unit tests are in a separate focused file. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 Codex, with reasoning and code/test tools. ## 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>canary/v2026.1023.0-canary.10 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
0fb152ee94 |
fix: save stale remote-tracking commits in nested restore points (#17289)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Git cache expiration removes closed issues' worktrees once their
remote, or a restore point, can reproduce them
> - A nested `.paperclip-repositories` checkout's remote-tracking refs
can point at commits the remote has since dropped, such as a branch
deleted after a squash merge
> - Strict expiration rightly keeps such a checkout, because it may hold
the only copy; but restore point mode also kept it forever, because
there was nothing else to save
> - This pull request saves those commits in the checkout's restore
point, so the workspace can be reclaimed without losing them
> - The benefit is that long-lived multi-repository workspaces are
reclaimed in restore point mode
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #17257. Bug report described in-PR (bug report template).
**What happened?**
With restore points enabled, four closed workspaces on one instance were
kept with `unpushed_managed_checkout`, after a dry run had counted them
as candidates. Each nested `paperclip` checkout was clean, on `main` at
a commit that is on GitHub `main`. But it held about 1,000
remote-tracking refs, and between 28 and 41 of them pointed at branches
the remote has since deleted or force-pushed (147 to 203 commits it no
longer has).
The relaxed check passed, so the checkout needed no restore point beyond
those commits. Capture saved only `HEAD` history, so it found nothing to
save and stored no restore point. The final check before deletion then
ran the strict check, which keeps stale remote-tracking commits, and
rolled back. The dry run never reaches that final check, so it
over-reported. Together these workspaces held about 2.4 GB.
**Expected behavior**
In restore point mode, commits that exist only in remote-tracking refs
are saved, and the workspace expires.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. In a nested checkout, fetch a remote branch, so
`refs/remotes/origin/<branch>` exists.
2. Delete that branch on the remote and garbage-collect it.
3. With restore points enabled, close the issue and run expiration: the
workspace is kept with `unpushed_managed_checkout`.
**Paperclip version or commit:** `master` at
canary/v2026.1023.0-canary.9
|
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
6877760904 |
feat: save ignored files in git restore points (#17290)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Git cache expiration removes closed issues' worktrees after saving a
restore point of anything the remote cannot reproduce
> - Restore points left ignored files out, so any worktree with an
ignored file that was not a known regenerable directory was kept
> - On one instance that was the most common reason a closed worktree
was still kept, mostly build caches and agent evidence files
> - This pull request saves those ignored files in the restore point too
> - The benefit is that more closed worktrees are reclaimed, and nothing
an agent left behind is lost
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #17248, #17257. Bug report described in-PR (bug report template).
**What happened?**
With restore points enabled, one instance kept 15 of 43 inspected closed
worktrees with `unique_ignored_files`. Among 19 such worktrees on disk:
- 9 held `ui/tsconfig.tsbuildinfo`;
- others held build output outside the regenerable directory names
(`server/ui-dist/`, `test-results/`);
- 2 held materialized skill copies under `.claude/skills/`;
- about 5 held small files agents kept out of git: patches, evidence
archives, recovery receipts.
**Expected behavior**
Ignored files that are not regenerable are saved with the restore point
and restored on reopen, so the worktree can be removed.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. In a closed issue's worktree, leave an ignored file outside
`node_modules`, `dist` and the other regenerable directories (for
example `ui/tsconfig.tsbuildinfo`).
2. With restore points enabled, run expiration: the worktree is kept
with `unique_ignored_files`.
**Paperclip version or commit:** `master` at
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
ed3f067dbd |
fix(evals): select operating allowance by cadence (#17326)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their operating budgets. > - Product E2E runs exercise real agents through a bounded gateway. > - The daily and weekly selections share one repository configuration variable. > - Their different request limits need different operating allowances. > - The existing parser accepts only one allowance, which cannot represent both reviewed limits. > - This change selects the allowance for the actual cadence and retains all existing validation. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17009. **What happened?** The daily selection needs an $11 operating reservation; the weekly selection needs $21. A shared $21 allowance cannot fit the $20 daily cap. A shared $11 allowance does not cover the reviewed weekly resource bound. A configuration containing both allowances was rejected before paid admission. **Expected behavior** Each cadence uses its own reviewed allowance. Missing or malformed selected allowances stop admission before paid work. **Steps to reproduce** Set the operating allowance JSON to an object with daily and weekly allowances. Prepare either campaign through prepareScheduledCampaign. Before this change, both calls reject the outer object. **Paperclip version or commit** |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
3f1ad6b25b |
fix(chat): resume task Retry after retained-source containment (#17317)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agent work through task and execution ownership. > - A task Retry must retain the user's request while the system verifies an old executor. > - Connected conversations also retain their external principal and accepted source batch. > - Chat Retry admission required containment before it could save a wait for that recovery. > - A saved chat receipt could also remain deferred after containment became available. > - This pull request lets the exact recovery-bound request wait and resume through its chat owner. > - Normal admission still checks containment, current access and policy before one successor starts. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** An ordinary task Retry on a connected conversation failed with `failed_chat_retry_not_authorized` while its retained remote executor still needed verification. The new recovery generation existed, but the chat action failed before it could save a dispatch wait. This occurred after the repairs in #17267 were confirmed live. The local regression found a second gap. A processed chat action with a deferred wake was not reconsidered after containment. Re-entering normal admission also tried to insert its existing durable receipt again. A historical hold for the same failed run could also hide the current Retry's workspace strategy, so the request still waited after the old executor was contained. Preparation could then read that sibling instead of the recovery record that owned the fresh successor, losing the fresh-workspace decision. **Expected behavior** Save the exact authorized Retry while its matching recovery generation verifies the executor. Once containment is recorded, reconsider the same chat receipt through normal admission. Start one successor with the original source batch. Keep publication, principal, pause and budget checks. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Admit a GitHub or Telegram request and record a failed native run with a retained remote lease. 2. Leave the executor's termination unconfirmed and exhaust its prior recovery generation. 3. Use ordinary task Retry to create a new recovery generation. 4. Process the connected Retry. The old admission code fails instead of retaining a wait. 5. With a deferred receipt, record exact containment and reconcile again. The old dispatch path leaves it stranded. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced from `412914cfa78d5abefcc34d3eb8d4bb86e461caac`. The branch is rebased onto current master. **Deployment mode** Hosted tenant for the reported failure. Isolated local PostgreSQL and the assembled heartbeat/chat services for the regression. Refs #17267 and #16965. This change does not add a Cloud dependency or change the absence protocol. ## What Changed - Permit a saved admission wait only for the exact current task Retry and active source recovery generation. - Keep promotion and execution dependent on independent containment proof. - Bind a Retry to active automatic recovery without replacing its generation, attempt count or deadline. - Share the current exact Retry strategy across historical holds for the same run. Retain each hold's stop and effect checks. - Select the canonical recovery record that proves the committed fresh successor during workspace preparation. - Let task receipt reconciliation return the same deferred action to its chat owner. - Recheck current board and external authority, then update the existing wake atomically with its successor. - Preserve the exact chat source batch. Keep generic board-comment filtering unchanged. - Add GitHub and Telegram cases for waiting, containment, one successor, stale generations, source edits, endpoint pause and supersession. - Update recovery documentation and capability maps. ## Verification - Red: real PostgreSQL tests reproduced the admission rejection for GitHub and Telegram. Six active-recovery cases then failed on the generation-ID assumption. Two same-run historical-hold cases remained deferred after containment on the old strategy lookup. A preparation regression then returned no readiness when the historical hold was stored first. - Green: 73 selected chat integration tests and 394 continuation, task Retry, workspace recovery, recovery-state and workspace-preparation tests passed. The chat tests use the real chat admission and heartbeat queue. Unrelated capacity stays occupied so no real provider starts. They assert no executor before containment, one successor afterward, unchanged source leases while waiting, preserved recovery budgets, and denial after authority changes. A separate source hold still blocks work. Both sibling insertion orders pass through the committed-readiness lookup and real workspace preparation: the new directory has independent Git storage and files, and unpublished old work remains intact. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` passed after the review fixes. The source build passed on `f6660efa48e37a80cd9857217a537606de85b5c8`. - The local host reached its PostgreSQL semaphore limit. Successful runs used a test-only loader to reduce disposable cluster connection and worker limits. No repository database helper or application setting changed. - The full local `pnpm test:run` began before the final review edits, failed in its first server phase and was stopped after those failures. Later phases did not run. This is not a full local pass. The transient Retry-notice case passes after fixture isolation; the four Discord close-owned publication cases also pass in isolation. Other broad-run failure causes are not established. - Exact-head CI and security checks pass on `f6660efa48e37a80cd9857217a537606de85b5c8`; Greptile is 5/5 with zero unresolved review threads. Optional Paperclip Review completed neutral with a 5/5 static assessment of all 11 changed files and no findings; it did not run tests or hosted acceptance. All 57 current-head checks are terminal: 54 success, two skipped and the optional neutral review, with no failures or pending checks. - The real hosted workflow confirmed that the deployed absence repair recorded containment. A later ordinary UI Retry was accepted and saved a durable request, but it remains behind the historical source hold. The useful existing review remains unchanged. This follow-up is not deployed; a live successful successor and final task disposition remain unverified. No missing files are claimed recovered. ## Risks - The existing task reconciliation sweep can restage a deferred chat action. This reuses its receipt and generation; it does not grant new execution or publication authority. - Dispatch must keep the board Retry identity separate from the connected request's principal. The regression checks these bindings and preserves current chat authorization at each phase. - Historical holds reuse a strategy only from the locked same-run recovery that names the current Retry intent. A different run, malformed recovery record or independent source hold remains fenced. - Unknown executors without a matching active recovery still fail admission. Promotion and execution require containment even when admission saved a wait. - No schema or API shape changes. No credential changes, manual deployment or service restart. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository tools, code execution and browser verification. The exact served model variant and context window 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
3bd709df8b |
Operationalize Product E2E accounting, tracing, and scheduling (#17009)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and the work they perform. > - Product E2E tests exercise real agents, tools, setup and cleanup. > - Repeated runs need retained costs and traces, including failed attempts. > - A passing retry must not hide earlier spending or feedback. > - Recurring work also needs admission limits, private reports and failure detection. > - This change supplies those controls while keeping paid activation behind existing gates. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16996 and #17158. This is the consolidated landing of the reviewed eval operations stack: #17019, #17024, #17025, #17027, #17030, #17033, #17035, #17038, #17043, #17044, #17048, #17050, #17051, #17092, #17096, #17100, #17107, #17109, #17112, #17115, #17117, #17121, #17123, #17127, #17130, #17133, #17134, #17137, #17140, #17143, #17154. The repository permits squash merges only. A local rehearsal showed that squashing each slice into master causes repeated conflicts in dependent slices. This PR preserves their commits and lands their combined implementation in one reviewed integration. Superseded slices will close after this merge. ## What Changed - Retain every attempt's cost receipt, including setup, failures, interruptions and retries. Separate reported amounts, estimates, missing costs and reserved capacity in reports and dashboards. - Add bounded request admission, exact model pricecards, gateway error accounting, cache policy and reconciliation evidence. Refuse unsupported routes and requests that cannot fit the allowance. - Integrate Braintrust gateway traces and OTLP correlation, with secret filtering and experiment imports. Record phase timing, including setup, feedback capture and cleanup. - Collect complaint and suggestion evidence after each attempt, including recovery after failures. Retain explicit review dispositions independently from the product grade. - Add gated daily and weekly selections, measured forecasts, setup/readiness checks, wall-time limits and retained monitor notifications. Include declared non-model overhead in admission while reporting the existing subscription separately. - Keep recurring history private, bound uploads and retention, and use isolated archive environments. Keep public publication an explicit operation. Report and publication jobs install only the committed lockfile, with scripts disabled and isolated stores; stale pins fail closed. - Integrate current master, preserve its Product E2E journey billing and privacy checks, and test that shared setup receipts do not double-count estimated agent usage. Preserve upstream fixture repairs. ## Verification - Complete integration baseline `0649a5ce7544ab20825c2183d2f421157db49f24` includes master `a3e1d915a7110a4e115b46396a3f79e6dfb4d05e` and every original stack head as ancestors. - On that integration baseline, `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit`: 4,012 Vitest tests passed, two skipped, across 193 files; all 137 Node source-contract tests passed. - Focused billing and Product E2E journey contract checks: 24 tests passed. They cover estimates, unknown receipts, single-owner setup costs, browser-only execution and private publication guards. - Monitor and workflow wiring: all 96 Node tests passed. `node scripts/check-token-gates.mjs`: all gates clean. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck` passes after the standard Runner TypeScript build refreshed local declarations. The first attempt rejected the new master `runner_prepared_launch` union member because this checkout retained an older generated declaration; the source union already contained that member. - Current head `492b0708a1c531a023d9ac10f0f3dc6383cc1754` removes dependency re-resolution from archive-authorized reporting jobs after the security scan flagged it. All 15 workflow-security tests pass after updating the old two-install assertion. - Hosted [CI run 39965460180](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39965460180) passes on the current repaired head, including typecheck, build, general tests, Runner checks, browser shards and canary dry run. Greptile is 5/5 on this exact head with no unresolved threads. The security scan passes after the fixed lockfile-resolution thread was resolved. - Paperclip Review returned a terminal neutral check but an incomplete 0-file assessment on the repaired head: its platform blocked both diff responses as prompt-injection content. This is not a successful code review. No bypass or fabricated pass was attempted; current-head Greptile, security and hosted CI are independent gates. - No paid test, reservation release or recurring-run activation accompanies this landing. Live route qualification and invoice reconciliation remain separate evidence. <details> <summary>Retained earlier validation failures</summary> Earlier broad local runs had two 15-second test timeouts (CLI poll cadence and Retry validation), one embedded-database setup timeout, and later PostgreSQL semaphore exhaustion. The exact timed-out tests passed separately without larger timeouts; the broad-run causes were not established. Those local failures remain distinct from subsequent hosted CI results. The independent #17158 fix records its Muse fixture collision, its UUID correction and hosted verification. Local Muse execution was also blocked by macOS embedded-PostgreSQL startup. No historical failure is treated as a successful paid qualification. </details> ## Risks - Admission is a local control, not a provider invoice cap. Missing provider receipts or resource charges retain unknown amounts and holds; estimates do not become billed dollars. - The bounded path admits only documented local suites and provider routes. Ordinary legacy or separate Runner protocol campaigns have different controls. Merging this code does not qualify additional routes. - Recurrence still needs the existing enable gates and current qualification/allowance evidence. Archive permissions and resources must match the documented private-environment contract. - Legacy reports may lack complete attempt or phase evidence. Reports preserve that limitation and do not infer zero usage from missing data. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools and code execution. The exact deployment variant and context-window size are not exposed by 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 (targeted checks; full-suite host limitation disclosed 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>canary/v2026.1023.0-canary.8 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4173059081 |
fix(inbox): keep advisory GitHub review waits quiet (#17318)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Mine shows a person's participation and requests that need their response. > - Automatic GitHub reviews should remain quiet until the assigned work needs human input. > - Review bots used completion requests to keep tasks in review while CI or a PR was still open. > - Those requests correctly entered Mine, despite the automatic-work filter from #16356. > - This pull request gives published reviews an existing provider-event wait in the in-review state and withdraws superseded completion requests. > - Real input requests and separate approval gates keep their current behavior. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16356 Refs #13314 An advisory score below 5/5, pending or failed CI, or an unmerged PR does not by itself require a person's approval in Paperclip. The bot can track those conditions without adding a completion card to Mine. ## What Changed - Explain the quiet review lifecycle in the GitHub review instructions. Use a yielded provider-event wait, or an existing saved monitor, after publication. Report done when the configured completion conditions are met. - Keep a confirmed, published review in `in_review` during that wait. Reuse existing authorization and monitor delivery. Add no schema, timer, or polling loop. - Recognize the committed external wait in review attention and recovery. Shared execution receives a verified publication flag; GitHub receipt lookup stays with the GitHub module. Other chat waits keep their current status. - Withdraw an older system-created completion request only when the same bot has published both reviews and its new report has no attention request. Keep explicit cards, separate approval gates, and requests without the prior review evidence. Finish validation stays read-only; withdrawal commits atomically with the new status after checking current governance, the admitted result, and both low-risk contracts. - Update the product rule, capability maps, and regression coverage. ## Verification - Final commit `7c502118eec36028d1b4537bb8797ef893940bf0`: 54 GitHub checks passed, two intentionally skipped, none pending or failed. Greptile is 5/5, the security scan passed, and all review threads are resolved. - Passed: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. Rechecked server typecheck and build after the final authorization guard. - Passed: 195 tests across `external-chat-wait.integration.test.ts`, `status-arbiter.test.ts`, `review-instructions.test.ts`, and `issue-liveness.test.ts`. The database suite used an isolated PostgreSQL 18 container through `PAPERCLIP_TEST_DATABASE_URL`. - Acceptance coverage: 3/5 stays in review outside Mine; 5/5 with pending completion conditions stays in review; 5/5 with satisfied conditions finishes quietly; a real repository-access request enters Mine until resolved. Also covers obsolete-card withdrawal, transaction rollback, rejected reports, separate approval gates, multiple reviewed heads, saved monitors, and revoked endpoints, repositories, or membership. - Passed: `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, `node scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs`, and `git diff --check`. - The initial acceptance run exposed a missing authenticated user in the test fixture. Added the user required by the existing addressee authorization check. All 154 tests in that database suite then passed, including the final rerun. - Review found premature withdrawal during validation, stale repository access, and a missed receipt when a run reviewed multiple heads. The revision fixes all three and includes acceptance regressions. The saved-monitor commit guard now accepts the verified published-review state. - `pnpm test:run` was attempted but could not complete on this Mac. Embedded PostgreSQL failed to allocate semaphores (`semget: No space left on device`); a direct initialization probe confirmed the host resource limit. The isolated database run proves the affected suite, not the full repository suite. - These tests exercise persisted review receipts, finalization, and Mine queries. They do not prove a live model followed the new instructions or submit a live GitHub review. ## Risks - The bot must follow the new lifecycle instructions. A real explicit attention request still enters Mine. - Existing obsolete cards are withdrawn when the same bot publishes a later review and reports no human dependency. This change does not run a bulk cleanup of historical inbox entries. - Review attention now recognizes an external response path. It requires an applied current status decision, a successful bound run, and current conversation, repository, and principal authorization. - No migration or UI change. The full local test suite is unverified because of the host database limit; CI passes on the final commit. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository inspection, code editing, and test execution. The exact deployment model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (195 focused tests; full-suite limitation 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
a3e1d915a7 |
fix(evals): preserve unknown Codex provider cost (#17158)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Direct Runner evals report usage and costs for each attempt. > - Codex App Server supplies token counts without a provider USD receipt. > - The legacy Runner ledger fills an absent cost with zero. > - The eval result exposed that ledger value as provider-reported cost. > - This fix keeps provider cost unknown and preserves the estimate and budget stop. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17009 and #17154. This is a separate direct Runner accounting fix based on master. ## What Changed - Codex direct eval usage now reports null provider USD cost with unavailable provenance. Token counts and the pinned price estimate remain available. - Preserve the original ledger amount as optional `legacyLedgerCostNanodollars`. Keep the original snapshot receipts unchanged. - Apply the existing budget ceiling to the retained ledger amount as well as the token estimate. Correcting a label does not relax admission or settlement checks. - Use the unique operator UUID for Muse test company prefixes, eliminating collisions from the previous 24-bit random suffix. - Document the cost distinction in the Runner/Evals integration contract. Other provider behavior and historical artifacts remain unchanged. ## Verification - Reproduced both zero and nonzero legacy amounts being labelled as provider USD cost before the fix. - The current eval-session contract and entrypoint tests pass (39 tests). The new regression uses the bounded usage consumer and actual campaign cost projection. It checks unknown provider cost, the separate estimate, unchanged raw evidence and the legacy ledger budget stop. - All 15 Runner report, campaign and metrics Node tests pass. Four adjacent CLI entrypoint/runtime tests also pass. - Runner TypeScript validation passes with its standard dependency-build prerequisite; `git diff --check` passes. Both Runner TypeScript configurations also passed during the original accounting verification. - Hosted CI run [39960367674](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39960367674) passes on `7d84f138044bac58cdced6baa2d0ec3d63767bb8`, including typecheck, build, server tests and browser checks. Greptile and Paperclip Review both report 5/5 on that commit with no actionable findings. - The previous CI failure was a PostgreSQL unique-index collision on `companies_issue_prefix_idx` during Muse fixture setup. Local Muse verification could not reach test execution because embedded PostgreSQL timed out during macOS startup (initially reporting a missing zstd library). The corrected fixture passed in hosted Linux CI. - Verification used no model calls. Full repository checks were performed by hosted CI; local verification was scoped to the changed contracts and fixture. ## Risks Consumers that assumed Codex always had a numeric provider cost must handle null. The contract already permits null for other profiles, and the report consumer retains missing-cost coverage. The legacy amount remains available as unverified evidence and still triggers the existing budget stop. Neither the estimate nor that ledger amount proves an invoice charge. This change does not rewrite old artifacts or qualify other provider routes. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository tools and code execution. The exact deployment variant and context-window size are not exposed by 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
5ef385f7e6 |
Run reusable Product E2E journeys across deployment targets (#17262)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and their work. > - Product E2E tests check complete user journeys. > - The current harness prepares self-hosted instances. > - Hosted workspaces need separate authentication, setup, and cleanup. > - The same in-app story should run on either deployment. > - This pull request adds deployment targets and explicit prerequisites. > - The private Cloud adapter owns fleet access and lifecycle operations. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Product E2E harness, fixture registry, and reports. **Problem or motivation** Self-hosted test setup cannot qualify a deployed Cloud workspace. Copying each story into a second harness would make its assertions diverge. **Proposed solution** Add explicit deployment targets, setup recipes, and ordered campaigns. Reuse a no-model task-properties story on both deployments. Let fresh Cloud onboarding provide verified context for that same story. Keep Cloud lifecycle and credentials behind a private target provider. **Roadmap alignment** This supports Cloud deployment qualification and the existing agent eval system. It adds no application endpoint or scheduler. Related work: #17112. The separate onboarding gateway UI prerequisite is #17253. ## What Changed - Add explicit target configuration and a credential-free preparation preview. Keep historical selectors and the current `--all` matrix unchanged. - Resolve requested fixture prerequisites, including a run-owned backlog task prepared before measurement. Reuse verified onboarding context without counting recipe setup as onboarding coverage. - Add task assignment persistence and the actual onboarding parent/child first-task journey, with an independent artifact oracle and native trace requirement. - Preserve failed boundaries and blocked dependents, deployment identity, costs, phase outcomes, and private evidence in the existing dashboard. - Validate success assertions and accounting before successful cleanup. Bound collection by the campaign deadline and cleanup/evidence hooks by a separate ten-minute grace, with cancellation and stop-only fallback. - Stage dashboard rendering separately so a timed-out renderer cannot overwrite retained failure results. Add evidence finalization hooks so the private provider can save evidence before target deletion and lease release. - Reject private journey bundles in the public history publisher. Browser-only results have no model or provider. ## Verification - The unchanged task-properties story passed on managed self-hosted and a registered testing Cloud workspace. Authentication, setup, journey, collection, and cleanup passed. Model calls: zero. Earlier attempts remain private and retained. - Final journey and report tests: 96 passed in eight files. Catalog compatibility: 39 passed. The wider focused run exposed three stale master catalog expectations; these now match the already shipped case-handoff v4 metadata and four-cell matrix. The default 385-cell selection is unchanged. - Review regressions reproduced premature success for a zero-request receipt and a missing required assertion. Both now fail before success cleanup while retaining cost receipts. The initial lifecycle fixes passed 33 checks. A subsequent review exposed a late renderer write that could erase saved failures; rendering now writes into isolated staging and publishes HTML only after it settles. Combined campaign, fixture-contract, and retained-report checks: 67 passed, including late writes, delayed timer callbacks, stalled collection, release, stop, evidence hooks, and browser close. Harness typecheck passed after the fixes. - A broader harness unit attempt completed 3,601 passing cases, two failures, and two skips. The failures exposed a stale Pi count and an omitted active Copilot fixture in the Daytona image input closure. The focused compatibility fixes passed 83 tests. After all source fixes, the full harness support suite passed: 160 files, 3,621 tests, two skips, plus 128 native-source checks. The earlier failures remain recorded. - Harness typecheck, repository typecheck, repository build, map checks, and Storybook catalog checks passed on the rebased branch. - The required full `pnpm test:run` attempt timed out after 35 minutes. It had 1,195 completed passing cases and one chat integration failure before its first suite completed. That case and nine adjacent cases pass in isolation. The original failure remains unresolved and retained; this is not a full-suite pass. - Current-head remote checks (`39b2a1ed8c49222fabd1ba8e225cac81bff5c6f7`): 53 passed, two skipped, none pending or failing. Greptile completed successfully at 5/5 with no unresolved review threads. - Fresh paid Cloud onboarding, dependent reuse, and disposable cleanup have not been qualified live. They require deployment of the separate UI prerequisite and actual Cloud gateway budget admission. The trusted Cloud workflow remains disabled. - Final live verification at `39b2a1ed8c`: the unchanged shared story passed on managed self-hosted and the registered testing Cloud stack using the prepared backlog-task recipe. Both cleaned up successfully with zero model calls. Independent private S3 checks confirmed final evidence and released QA identity/stack leases. Cloud evidence remains private. ## Risks - A deployed UI or Cloud control-plane change can invalidate selectors or provider contracts. Version drift fails the attempt. - Cloud evidence and lifecycle recovery are private-provider responsibilities. A pending cleanup or evidence upload must keep the target unavailable for reuse. - No release is deployed or pinned by this change. No automatic story retry is added. The initial pilot retains its explicit $10, one disposable workspace, and 30-minute bounds. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and delegated agents. The runtime does not expose a more specific deployment model identifier or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
fbaf3c6ed2 |
feat(onboarding): connect a custom AI gateway (#17253)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - A person must connect an AI account when they set up the first agent. > - The existing connection form supports custom Responses and Messages gateways. > - First-agent onboarding does not expose that form or its saved model list. > - A person who uses a custom gateway cannot complete this setup through the normal controls. > - This pull request adds the existing gateway form to onboarding and requires a model before Connect. > - The person can save the account first, then choose Connect to test the environment and hire the agent. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #14104. This addresses the missing custom endpoint option during first-agent onboarding. Refs #15103. That issue also covers other adapters and the separate New Agent wizard. Related source review: - Refs #15884. That proposal adds a Local LLM source, changes private-network HTTP validation, and uses OpenCode. This change uses existing gateway routing and preserves the explicit environment test before hire. - Refs #14006. That proposal adds new providers and connection methods. This change uses the existing OpenAI and Anthropic managed connection contracts. **What existing behavior does this improve?** The API-key step of first-agent onboarding for Codex and Claude. **Current behavior** The wizard accepts a direct provider key but does not expose custom gateway setup or the saved gateway model list. **Proposed behavior** Choose Use a custom gateway. Save its URL, key, and models through the existing connection form. Select a saved model. Choose Connect to run the normal environment test and hire the agent with the managed connection binding. **Reason and benefit** People can complete onboarding with an existing custom gateway. They can save the connection before any agent test starts. **Breaking changes** No API, database, or routing schema changes. The new path applies to Codex and Claude API-key setup. Existing direct-key setup remains available. ## What Changed - Add a small onboarding dialog that reuses `AiProviderSetup` for Responses or Messages gateway connections. - Let the shared setup form use Save connection as its submit label in this dialog. - Bind the saved account to the current company and adapter. Clear its selection when the person changes companies or chooses another API key. - Load the saved connection's models. Require a model before Connect can test the environment and hire the agent. - Show a loading state, a visible error, and Retry loading connection when the saved connection lookup fails. Reuse the shared lookup cache and preserve the model hook contract for existing consumers. - Cover saving, model selection, delegated account use, secret exclusion from drafts and hire payloads, and Cmd+Enter in the gateway dialog. ## Verification - Focused UI verification: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/components/OnboardingWizard.test.tsx src/components/ai-connections/AiProviderSetup.test.tsx` — 187 tests passed across two files. - The first focused attempt had one test-only failure because its fixture lacked `TooltipProvider`. The fixture now supplies that provider. The complete focused run then passed all 187 tests. - The new test confirms that saving the connection and pressing Cmd+Enter in its dialog do not call the adapter test or hire API. Connect remains disabled until model selection. Connect then uses the selected model and managed connection for both test and hire. - Rebased onto `origin/master` at `042051904d368f5514e287e5ca8e404dc8f78a0d`. The two focused UI files passed all 187 tests again on the rebased tree. - UI typecheck passed on the rebased tree. The first attempt found missing generated Plugin SDK declarations in the fresh worktree. `node scripts/ensure-plugin-build-deps.mjs` built the local shared and SDK artifacts. The Storybook catalog check and `tsc -b` then passed. - Reused installed third-party packages from the unchanged lockfile. Worktree-local workspace links pointed at the rebased source. No older workspace source was substituted. - The full token gate checks and `git diff --check` passed in this isolated worktree. - An earlier wider local repository run failed in a chat-channel test. That failure was not investigated in this isolated UI follow-up and remains part of the verification history. The complete CI suite for this PR later passed on the reviewed commit. Deployed gateway acceptance has not been run. - Review follow-up: reproduced the failed saved-connection refresh before the fix. The new test failed because the page did not show the lookup error. The page now shows the error and Retry loading connection. Connect stays disabled until lookup and model selection succeed. - The new failure-and-retry test uses separate response objects so cache mutation cannot hide a failed refresh. It also proves that save and retry do not probe or hire an agent. - The expanded regression initially needed a corrected mock return type. After that correction, all 199 tests passed across OnboardingWizard, AiProviderSetup, and useConnectionModels. UI typecheck, all token gate commands, and `git diff --check` passed. - The review fix is pushed at `12b4e9cb8528ba44af377315ba39fe3fbccae7bd`. All 53 active CI and security checks passed on that exact head. Two Storybook checks were skipped. Greptile completed with 5/5, and there are no unresolved review threads. The earlier local chat-channel failure remains recorded above. - No live Cloud gateway campaign or candidate deployment has been completed for this product change. ## Risks - Gateway setup adds a nested dialog inside onboarding. Its key events must not submit the parent wizard. The Cmd+Enter regression test covers this boundary. - A saved connection can offer no model list. That state permits an explicit model ID and still requires selection before Connect. - Saving a connection proves that it was stored. The normal Connect action remains responsible for runtime validation. A successful mocked UI test does not prove gateway reachability from a deployed runtime. - `ROADMAP.md` already includes personal and shared AI accounts and multi-model teams. This is a scoped extension of those capabilities. It does not add a provider, a protocol, or wider URL access. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact deployment model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. The agent used reasoning, tool use, code editing, and local test execution. No unverified model ID or context size is claimed. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] 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> |
||
|
Nicky Leach
|
f5b6721ae0 | Use the admitted session directory in native task prompts (#17310) | ||
|
Nicky Leach
|
583ec2443a | Read deliverable files before locking mutation rows (#17309) canary/v2026.1023.0-canary.7 | ||
|
Nicky Leach
|
412914cfa7 | Read native plugin task output files on the execution host (#17285) | ||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
d69631b01b |
feat: reopen a fresh workspace with a warning when its restore point expired (#17269)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - #17248 and #17257 let git cache expiration remove closed issues'
worktrees after saving encrypted restore points
> - Restore points are kept for 90 days after an issue tree closes, then
deleted
> - Reopening a workspace whose restore point had expired failed, so the
issue could not get a workspace back
> - This pull request starts a fresh workspace on the same branch
instead, and warns that the saved work is gone
> - The benefit is that old issues can always be resumed, with a clear
record of what was lost
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #17248, #17257. Bug report described in-PR (bug report template).
**What happened?**
After `PAPERCLIP_GIT_RESTORE_POINT_RETENTION_DAYS` passes, the retention
worker marks the restore point expired and deletes it. Reopening that
workspace then fails with the git cache restoration error, every time.
**Expected behavior**
Reopening succeeds with a fresh workspace on the issue's branch, and the
issue says that unsaved work from before the cleanup is no longer
available.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Enable restore points and let a closed issue's worktree expire with
unsaved work.
2. Let its restore point expire.
3. Reopen the issue: the workspace rebuild fails.
**Paperclip version or commit:** `master` at
beta/v2026.1023.0-beta.0
canary/v2026.1023.0-canary.6
nightly/v2026.1023.0-nightly.0
|
||
|
Nicky Leach
|
2cd6eb27c7 | fix(runner): record the plugin-prepared working directory (#17243) canary/v2026.1023.0-canary.5 | ||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4c57da3708 |
fix(recovery): continue Retry after verified sandbox absence (#17267)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Task Retry must reconcile a stopped native execution before starting another one. > - A retained sandbox can disappear while workspace preservation is pending. > - A tenant-key error does not prove absence, especially after credential rotation. > - This pull request accepts only a short-lived Cloud observation bound to the exact source and current preservation owner. > - Normal Retry admission can then continue in a fresh workspace without claiming that missing files were recovered. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A native run stops with workspace preservation pending. Its Daytona allocation no longer exists. Recovery tries to reopen it, then cannot confirm a stop. The ordinary Retry remains deferred behind cleanup and repeats a transient failure. **Expected behavior** Cloud must independently confirm absence in the recorded provider organization. Core must verify that proof and settle executor containment under the current physical owner. Normal Retry admission must enforce all existing gates and create at most one successor. The old run must remain failed and missing files must remain unavailable. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Persist a failed native run with a retained Daytona lease and an exhausted workspace-recovery generation. 2. Remove the exact provider allocation so reopen and stop cannot confirm it. 3. Request ordinary task Retry. 4. Observe that recovery reports `provider_unavailable` and leaves the Retry deferred. **Paperclip version/commit** Reproduced on source based on `6d44b80a5edbcc9f69bfc3d520994e70aa9fab6d` with the prior preservation and Retry repairs present. **Deployment mode** Cloud tenant with native Runner and a retained Daytona source. The local acceptance uses real Core, Cloud, PostgreSQL, signatures, native Runner and UI, with deterministic model and provider HTTP boundaries. Refs #16962, #16965, #17053. These repairs cover completion proposals, durable Retry and retained-source reopening. They do not establish absence of a missing provider allocation. Related #16809 preserves orphan sandbox leases; this change requires independent proof before settling an absent allocation. ## What Changed - Add an HTTPS client for a purpose-separated, host-bound Cloud sandbox-absence capability. - Verify signature, audience, stack, expiry, source identities and current physical-owner token. - Settle only executor absence with a metadata and owner compare-and-set. Preserve source protection and record that workspace contents are unavailable. - Leave successor creation, approval, pause, budget and uncertain-effect checks to normal Retry admission. - Document the protocol and update the recovery maps. ## Verification - Red: the new persisted-state regression returned `provider_unavailable` and scheduled recovery on the unfixed code. Expected: `source_unavailable` with a contained old execution. - Green: 384 focused tests pass across workspace recovery, signed absence, explicit continuation, ordinary Retry, workspace preparation and provider-owned fresh workspaces. - Signature tests reject forged, expired and mismatched proofs. HTTP failures or missing configuration grant no authority. - Two missing allocations are both reconciled before Retry. A simulated interruption reuses the first durable absence receipt. - Concurrent Retry admission produces one queued fresh successor. It records no successful old result and no recovered-file claim. - Browser acceptance at this change: one ordinary Retry, two provider absence reads for two retained sources, one fresh native execution, useful confirmation and Done after reload. The old run remains failed. Existing saved review and newer local file bytes remain unchanged. The deterministic model does not perform external publication; this is local protocol acceptance, not live provider recovery. - `pnpm typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` pass. - A complete local `pnpm test:run` pass was not obtained. The first run hit a 15-second timeout in an unchanged status-card test. It was stopped to apply review fixes before the remaining phases ran. The unchanged status-card suite then passed 25/25 in isolation with the repository short temporary-path convention. - CI exposed a chat nonduplication assertion that compared unordered database rows. The assertion now sorts both complete row sets by run ID. Its focused test passes. - All 58 current-head checks are terminal on `1e2e881f6b6b1ae1fbfe1f2b2922657ce46e1470`: 55 success, two unaffected Storybook skips, and one neutral advisory review. Required CI, build, E2E and security checks pass. Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved threads. The optional Paperclip review is neutral advisory 5/5 with nine-file source coverage and no findings; it did not independently run tests. - One unchanged native-runtime test timed out at five seconds on its first CI attempt. Its suite passed 33/33 in isolation; a single retry of that lane passed without code changes. ## Risks - The companion Cloud endpoint must ship before this consumer. Older or unavailable Cloud versions return no proof and retain the current hold. - A valid absence receipt permits a fresh workspace attempt. It cannot restore missing remote files, establish task success or authorize repeating an uncertain external effect. - This PR has not been deployed. The original task remains unrecovered pending rollout and reconciliation of its existing Retry. - No schema, credential, provider-resource or fleet changes are included. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, source inspection, code execution and browser tools. The exact backend variant and context-window size are not exposed by 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 and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused scope above; full local run limitation recorded) - [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> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
5ef783d971 |
feat: expire idle open issues' worktrees with restore points (#17271)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - #17248 and #17257 let git cache expiration remove a closed issue
tree's worktree after saving an encrypted restore point
> - Issues that stay open but go untouched for weeks still keep their
worktrees forever, so disks keep filling
> - This pull request expires those idle worktrees the same way, and has
the next run restore its workspace automatically
> - The benefit is bounded disk use for stalled open work, with nothing
lost when work resumes
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #17248, #17257. Bug report described in-PR (bug report template).
**What happened?**
With restore points enabled, expiration only considers worktrees whose
whole issue tree has been `done` or `cancelled` for a while. A worktree
whose issue stays `todo`, `in_progress`, `blocked` or `in_review` with
no activity for weeks is never removed.
**Expected behavior**
An open issue's worktree that has been idle long enough is saved to a
restore point and removed, and the next run on that issue gets it back
exactly.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Enable git cache expiration and restore points.
2. Leave an issue open with an isolated worktree and no activity for
weeks.
3. The worktree is never removed.
**Paperclip version or commit:** `master` at
canary/v2026.1023.0-canary.4
|
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
c5ca29dbef |
fix(claude): prepare compatible sandbox runtimes during onboarding (#17259)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip connects agent accounts and prepares their execution environments. > - A managed sandbox image can outlive the model defaults shipped by the app. > - Claude setup skipped installation whenever a CLI was already on PATH. > - The selected model then failed its minimum-version check after sign-in succeeded. > - This pull request prepares a compatible private CLI before testing or running it. > - Cloud onboarding also stops asking customers to run inaccessible shell commands. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A new managed Cloud stack completed Claude subscription sign-in. Its environment test then failed because the snapshot contained Claude Code 2.1.263, while the selected `claude-opus-5-5` model requires 2.1.280. The screen displayed Manual debug commands that a hosted customer cannot run. **Expected behavior** Paperclip prepares its managed runtime before testing the selected account. A stale image CLI does not require the customer to upgrade a server package. Failed preparation still blocks hiring. Cloud does not display manual shell debugging. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a managed sandbox with Claude Code 2.1.263 on PATH. 2. Connect a Claude subscription and select `claude-opus-5-5` on the CLI lane. 3. Connect the agent. Installation is skipped because the command exists, then the version gate blocks the hello test. **Paperclip version or commit** Source baseline: `6204239cfc8c3be79fc185cf3f468ebaa0ab1e3e`. **Deployment mode** Authenticated managed Cloud with a Daytona named snapshot. The correction also applies to the default CLI in other managed sandbox transports. Related work: Refs #14993 sets model/runtime requirements; Refs #15993 changes native defaults on qualified targets. Neither prepares an outdated default sandbox CLI on this path. Searches found no open duplicate. ## What Changed - Check the actual default CLI against the selected model's existing minimum version. - When a sandbox's default command is outdated, install the exact required npm package into a private versioned workspace prefix. Reuse a compatible private installation. Keep the image's global CLI intact. - Verify the private executable and use that same command for the account hello test and normal CLI runs, with matching command metadata. Probe effort support after preparing that executable so the chosen effort is retained. Keep the model, account, engine and permissions unchanged. - Return safe preparation checks to environment tests and normal run logs, distinguishing installation failure causes without returning raw installer output or credential-bearing URLs. - Exclude provider and Paperclip credentials from the installer environment. Preserve the existing failing version gate if installation or verification cannot succeed. Local, SSH and explicit custom commands remain operator-managed. - Hide Manual debug and legacy operator check hints on Cloud and while deployment metadata is unknown; preserve check messages and details. Retain self-hosted help and the detailed failed checks. Cloud copy asks for a retry instead of asking the customer to repair the environment. - Add subprocess-backed runtime controls, an account-probe regression and mounted Cloud/self-hosted wizard controls. Update development guidance and the affected capability maps. ## Verification - Passed all Claude source suites and the server Claude execution suite on head `c941ae44c22d8dafec0df033a129e39ce4ebd966`: **412 passed**, one existing opt-in test skipped. These include the new command/effort ordering, safe installer diagnostics, environment forwarding and run-log regressions. - On final head `0ecae0e9304f495a57524158b3700b8e9bc21cb8`, passed **208 tests** across all 174 mounted onboarding wizard tests and 34 Claude execution tests. The failure fixture includes the real command-bearing hint, and execution asserts both metadata command fields agree. - Passed `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `pnpm check:token-gates`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check`. Full typecheck and build were repeated successfully on final head `0ecae0e9304f495a57524158b3700b8e9bc21cb8`. [Latest-head CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39879208694) is green: 54 checks passed and two skipped, including browser E2E and serialized database suites. - The new runtime controls execute real subprocesses with a controlled installer. They cover an old CLI, an already compatible CLI, failed or ineffective installation, local/custom commands, and an unknown version. The probe regression asserts that the hello call uses the private executable. - A separate non-root local subprocess check installed the real npm `@anthropic-ai/claude-code@2.1.280` package. Its private command reported 2.1.280, the simulated image CLI remained 2.1.263, and a second preparation reused the private copy. This ran on macOS ARM64. It did not use a provider account, send a model prompt, or prove live Daytona behavior. - Attempted `pnpm test:run`. Embedded PostgreSQL initialization failed after five attempts on this Mac with `Postgres init script exited with code null`. The unchanged native-session database cases then failed. Stopped only that full-suite process tree after recording the repeated startup failure. No full local-suite pass is claimed; Linux CI must cover those tests. - The first new subprocess fixture had a quoting syntax error. It was corrected before the passing focused runs. The one-off real-package script first required an ESM extension correction, then passed. Logs retain both attempts. A new execution assertion initially inspected the final sandbox cleanup shell instead of the launched command; it now checks execution metadata. A broader directory selection also picked up generated `dist` tests whose Markdown fixtures are not copied by the build (two ENOENT failures). The explicit source-suite run above passes; no generated-test pass is claimed. - Apex review: **5/5**, reviewed final head `0ecae0e9304f495a57524158b3700b8e9bc21cb8`, all five earlier findings addressed and resolved, no new findings. - Merge, deployment and a fresh live Cloud subscription test are still required. No customer account or production runtime was changed by this branch. ## Risks - An outdated sandbox needs npm registry access and up to 120 seconds for one bounded installation attempt. A failed or unverified install continues to block execution. - The versioned package uses sandbox workspace storage. Compatible cached copies avoid repeat installation within that workspace. Existing runtime cleanup and sandbox lifecycle still apply. - The compatible version comes from the adapter's existing model-version contract. This does not add a model fallback or change the selected execution engine. - No schema, credential, permission, workflow or lockfile change. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, assisted with implementation and verification. The exact serving model ID and context-window limit are not exposed in this session. Capabilities used: code editing, shell execution, API inspection and test execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1023.0-canary.3 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
650581b2f0 |
feat: give nested managed checkouts their own restore points (#17257)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - #17248 lets git cache expiration remove a closed issue's worktree
with unsaved work after saving an encrypted restore point
> - Workspaces with nested `.paperclip-repositories` checkouts were
still kept whenever a checkout had unpushed or uncommitted work
> - On one instance that was the second most common reason expiration
skipped a workspace
> - This pull request gives each nested checkout its own restore point
and restores it when the workspace comes back
> - The benefit is that multi-repository workspaces can be cleaned up as
safely as single-repository ones
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #17238, #17241, #17248. Bug report described in-PR (bug report
template).
**What happened?**
With restore points enabled, a workspace whose nested managed checkout
has unpushed commits or uncommitted files is still skipped with
`unpushed_managed_checkout` or `dirty_or_untracked_files`. On one
instance, `unpushed_managed_checkout` accounted for 32 of the last 111
expiration checks.
**Expected behavior**
A nested checkout's unsaved work is saved like the main worktree's, and
the workspace can expire and later be restored exactly.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Use a project with an extra repository, so the task worktree contains
`.paperclip-repositories/<name>`.
2. Commit in that checkout without pushing, then close the issue.
3. With restore points enabled, the workspace is never expired.
**Paperclip version or commit:** `master` at
|
||
|
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**canary/v2026.1023.0-canary.2 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
35bd7f6059 |
Reduce encrypted event retries and GitHub run-query transfer (#17251)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Its Cloud connector delivers encrypted GitHub events to an instance. > - One failed inner event currently rejects the whole authenticated batch. > - Healthy events then remain unacknowledged and are downloaded again. > - GitHub response and check reconciliation also reads full run records when it needs only ownership and status. > - This pull request isolates inner failures and narrows those run projections. > - Valid events can finish while failed events remain available for recovery. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** An inner App event encrypted with an unavailable key causes `leaseEvents` to reject the complete batch. No sibling can finish or acknowledge. Repeated retries download the same encrypted payloads. Separately, GitHub response and check reads load prompts, runtime profiles, results, and log excerpts that their callers do not use. **Expected behavior** Authenticate the outer batch and lease before handling individual events. Process valid siblings independently. Retain failed events without acknowledging them. Read only the current run fields needed for response ownership and status checks. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Seal one event for an old instance key and another for the current key. 2. Put both events in a correctly authenticated outer lease. 3. Observe that the old client rejects the whole lease. 4. With this change, the valid event processes, the failed ID is reported locally, and only completed events acknowledge. No public issue exists. The change does not add a provider integration or duplicate a roadmap feature. ## What Changed - Keep outer authentication, environment checks, and lease binding strict. - Isolate inner decryption and route-binding failures. Return their authenticated IDs only to the local poller and count them as failures. - Leave failed events unacknowledged in the broker. Continue processing and acknowledging healthy and duplicate siblings. - Read only run identity, status, and required request context for GitHub responses. Read only run ID and status for check reconciliation. - Cover stale keys, swapped routes, invalid outer bindings, all-failed batches, large unused run payloads, and cross-company/task refusals. ## Verification - Connector cryptography suite: 47 tests passed. - Final connector suite: 50 tests passed, including cryptography and three real PostgreSQL connection-event tests. These cover acknowledgment isolation, all-failed batches, and the exact safe warning fields. - GitHub workflow regression suite after the master refresh: 307 tests passed, including the large-payload/company/task test (1,084 unrelated tests skipped by the selection). - Server typecheck passed after the final source changes. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed after the latest conflict-free master refresh. - The broad local `pnpm test:run` was stopped when the branch was refreshed; it has no complete passing result. All CI gates passed on the final commit, including general and serialized server suites, runner verification, build, typecheck, and end-to-end tests. Apex is 5/5 with all review comments resolved. The last change removes source comments and expands docs; both edited TypeScript files emit identical JavaScript before and after that change. - A read-only sample compared full run records with the new field sets: response data decreased by about 96%, and check data by over 99%. This is serialized query output, not a claim of realized billing savings or CPU reduction. - An initial database test setup failed because the local dependency install omitted native-library symlinks. The package's standard setup script repaired them. The unchanged test timeout then passed. - Added lines checked for credentials, customer data, private links, and internal issue references. ## Risks Failed inner events remain pending and retry under the broker's existing lease and retention policy. This change does not recover a lost original private key or introduce a dead-letter deletion path. Outer authentication failures still reject the complete batch. Run projections must retain request provenance and task binding fields. Existing predicates, ordering, identity validation, and publication authority remain unchanged. The change has no schema migration and adds no background timer or new provider call. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning and shell/GitHub CLI tools. ## 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 - [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the bug report template - [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket ID - [x] Focused local regressions and all CI gates pass - [x] I have added and updated tests - [x] I have updated relevant documentation - [x] I have documented risks - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1023.0-canary.1 |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
6204239cfc |
Support installed default project workspace providers (#17247)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Storage plugins already own project storage and task checkout preparation. > - Core only selected these plugins through an explicit project policy. > - Installation could therefore leave new and existing projects on incompatible Core preparation. > - This pull request adds one generic manifest declaration and one shared effective-policy resolver. > - Project configuration shows inheritance while durable workspace bindings retain their owners. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Plugin contracts, project configuration, and execution workspace preparation. **Problem or motivation** An installed storage provider cannot become the company default. Projects without an explicit provider keep Core preparation, even when their execution environment cannot use a Core Git checkout. **Proposed solution** A provider declares supported `workspaceProvider.defaultForProjects` mode and strategy. Company-enabled installations supply inherited defaults. Explicit plugin selections and explicit Core/local (`storageProviderPluginId: null`) win. Conflicting defaults require an operator choice. The declaration and implementation contain no provider-specific identifiers. **Alternatives considered** Rewriting every project would lose the distinction between inheritance and overrides. Selecting by worker health would silently change storage on an outage. **Roadmap alignment** Extends the existing workspace and sandbox provider contracts. The roadmap has no duplicate default-provider implementation. Related public work includes #17243, which covers prepared execution directories rather than provider selection. ## What Changed - Add a validated generic default-provider declaration and document it in the SDK. - Resolve provider selection and Git defaults consistently in project responses, source selection, heartbeat source resolution, reservation, and preparation. - Keep stored policy separate from effective configuration. Add the normal project configuration selector for inheritance, explicit plugins, and Core/local. - Preserve existing local and plugin workspace ownership. Pin selection through preparation and keep provider failures visible. - Add database, API, manifest, heartbeat, and UI regressions. Update the verification maps. ## Verification - Targeted Vitest runs cover manifest validation, project defaults and API access, explicit overrides, existing ownership, new/imported task inheritance, heartbeat routing, source-free tasks, selection pinning during setup, and UI configuration. - Combined policy, provider integration, and heartbeat run: 58 tests pass; 60 unrelated cases excluded. After the final shared-provider fallback fix, all 47 policy tests pass, including shared and operator-mode regressions. - Server and UI TypeScript checks, SDK build, verification-map validation, credential-pattern scan, added-comment scan, and `git diff --check` pass. - A downstream integration uses this Core resolver and preparation service with a real storage hook and mocked remote infrastructure. A new Git project reaches the hook without a stored provider ID. - Standard Greptile and Apex both scored 5/5 on |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
6d44b80a5e |
feat: expire closed git worktrees with unsaved work behind restore points (#17248)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Git cache expiration removes a closed issue's worktree only when the
remote can reproduce it exactly
> - Most closed worktrees hold unpushed commits or uncommitted files, so
they are kept forever and disks fill up
> - #17238 added restore points (an encrypted save of exactly what the
remote cannot reproduce) and #17241 added their lifecycle
> - This pull request lets expiration remove those worktrees after
saving a restore point, and restores them exactly when the work resumes
> - The benefit is bounded disk use for closed work without losing
anything a user could need, behind a setting that is off by default
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #17238, #17241. Bug report described in-PR (bug report template).
**What happened?**
With `PAPERCLIP_GIT_CACHE_EXPIRATION_ENABLED=true` and dry run off, one
instance's last 111 expiration checks removed nothing:
| Skip reason | Checks |
|---|---|
| `dirty_or_untracked_files` | 39 |
| `unpushed_managed_checkout` | 32 |
| `live_or_unresolved_consumer` | 21 |
| `unique_ignored_files` | 9 |
| commit not on the remote | 10 |
Without expiration, the terminal workspace reaper archives only merged,
clean worktrees. Closed issues' worktrees therefore accumulate without
bound.
**Expected behavior**
A closed worktree whose only obstacle is unsaved work can be removed
after that work is saved, and restored exactly if the issue is reopened
or work resumes.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Close an issue whose worktree has an unpushed commit or an
uncommitted file.
2. Enable git cache expiration with dry run off.
3. The worktree is never removed.
**Paperclip version or commit:** `master` at
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9bf7dc0c8f |
feat(agents): bulk edit connections and default models (#17215)
Add harness-scoped bulk connection and default-model edits to the agent roster, with compatible choices, change previews, per-agent save results, and retries. Use an icon-based harness filter, keep agent rows readable, remove the status selector and selection hint, and redirect legacy status URLs to the full roster. Preserve authorization, audit history, unrelated settings, and optimistic concurrency checks through the existing agent update route. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
46760cc588 |
fix(chat): honor dismissal for all composer requests (#17218)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task conversations show requests in the feed and above the message composer. > - Earlier fixes kept dismissed questions in history, but excluded completion reviews and other request kinds. > - Closing those forms left a pending badge, and the server could still demand a response. > - This pull request saves human dismissal and removes the request from composer reminders and ordinary completion gates. > - People can continue the conversation and reopen the request from history. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related work: #15229 and #15392. **What happened?** Dismissing a completion review closed its form but left it counted as pending. It could return after reload, block a retry, or cause the agent to demand another response. Raw runtime requests could also lose their only usable control when dismissed. **Expected behavior** Dismissal leaves an accessible request in the feed and clears the composer form and pending count. It persists after reload. It does not submit an answer, approve an action, or wake the agent. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open a task with a pending completion review or another composer request. 2. Dismiss the request, then reload the task. 3. Check that the composer stays clear and the feed entry can reopen the request. ## What Changed - Add nullable dismissal fields and a human-only dismissal endpoint with company, private-task access, resolver, and locked review-policy checks. - Persist saved-request dismissal on the server. Keep browser persistence for raw runtime requests and existing question dismissals. - Keep confirmations, choices, item verdicts, suggested tasks, and runtime requests accessible in the feed. - Exclude dismissed ordinary requests from completion and retry gates. Tell agents not to repeat deferred requests. - Preserve tool, secret, connection, plan, company-policy, and configured review authorization gates. Expire deferred non-question requests when their task completes. - Preserve the selected form when another dismissal finishes saving. Keep reopened reviews visible through delayed comment refreshes. - Add a completion-review Storybook test drive and update design, API, database, and capability documentation. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. The final UI changes also passed the UI typecheck. - `pnpm build`: passed. The final UI changes also passed the UI production build. - Focused UI and transcript tests: 550 passed across nine files after merging the current base branch. - Focused database, completion, and prompt tests: 105 passed across three files, including two review-policy regressions that failed before the fix. The tests reject a review requester excluded by current policy, preserve the pending gate on denial, and permit an independent reviewer to defer the request. - Route regression suite: 81 passed, including denial before reading or mutating a private-task request. - `pnpm check:token-gates`: passed. - Map and Storybook structural checks: passed; 30 map/catalog script tests passed. - Browser: used the production task-thread components in the completion-review fixture. Dismissed, reloaded, reopened from the feed, and dismissed again. No pending badge or composer takeover remained. Story callbacks simulate API saves; separate server tests cover persistence and permissions. - `pnpm test:run`: stopped after the general-server group reported one failure in `workspace-runtime.test.ts`: "returns a bounded structured conflict and exposes only same-company workspace references". The same test passed in isolation (1 passed, 178 skipped). The cause of the full-suite failure is not established. The full PR CI suite subsequently passed on e243cbb001; its two authorization review findings are fixed in |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
042051904d |
fix(codex): deliver configured service secrets to shell tools (#17216)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets operators assign tools and credentials to agents. > - Legacy Codex starts provider processes and builds a separate shell environment policy. > - Both ACP and CLI removed every variable whose name contained KEY, SECRET, or TOKEN. > - This also removed service credentials that the operator explicitly assigned, such as SLACK_BOT_TOKEN. > - This pull request uses the resolved configuration to admit assigned service secrets by name. > - Every Codex launch keeps a bounded shell allowlist, including launches without an agent identity. > - Assigned scripts can use their credentials without adding unassigned host secrets to shell tools. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #16255. That PR fixes project-level exclude patterns. This PR fixes the removal of explicitly assigned service secrets and the fallback to an inherited policy when no agent identity is present. **What happened?** A Codex task could not run a Slack posting script. SLACK_BOT_TOKEN was present in its resolved launch environment, but Paperclip removed its name from shell_environment_policy.include_only. A live removal check also showed that an identity-free launch without an explicit policy could inherit an unassigned host token. **Expected behavior** An explicitly assigned service credential reaches shell commands. Removing that binding removes its shell access on the next launch. Unassigned host credentials stay outside the allowlist. Codex login credentials and observability headers keep their separate provider paths. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Configure a Legacy Codex agent with a synthetic SLACK_BOT_TOKEN value. 2. Run a shell command that checks whether the variable exists without printing its value. 3. Before this fix, the variable is absent. Repeat through ACP and CLI. 4. Remove the binding and run a second turn. Check that neither the removed token nor an unassigned host token reaches the command. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced in the executor regressions before the fix on master atcanary/v2026.1023.0-canary.0 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
12bb7e1976 |
feat: track git workspace restore points and apply their retention (#17241)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Closed issues' git worktrees pile up on disk because they can only
be removed once the remote reproduces them exactly
> - #17238 adds restore points: encrypted saves of the unpushed and
uncommitted parts of a worktree, so the worktree itself can be removed
> - Those saves live in file storage and must be deleted on a schedule,
and promptly when their issue or company is deleted
> - This pull request adds the table that tracks restore points and a
deadline-driven retention worker, with nothing creating restore points
yet
> - The benefit is a reviewable lifecycle foundation before capture is
wired into expiration
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #17238 (restore point library). Bug report described in-PR (bug
report template).
**What happened?**
Closed issues' worktrees accumulate without bound. For example, one
instance's last 111 git cache expiration checks removed nothing, because
each worktree held unpushed commits or uncommitted files. Restore points
(#17238) will let those worktrees be removed safely. That needs a
durable record of every stored restore point and a retention policy for
deleting them.
**Expected behavior**
- A restore point is kept while its work can still resume.
- It is deleted a fixed time after its issue tree closes.
- It is deleted promptly when its issue or company is deleted.
**Steps to reproduce**
Not applicable on its own: this adds the lifecycle that the capture
integration will use.
**Paperclip version or commit:** `master` at
canary/v2026.1022.0-canary.5
|
||
|
TonioandClaude Fable 5.1
|
341b622604 |
feat(ui): Artifacts V1 behind an experimental setting — Artifacts page, panel tab and task thread (#17228)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Agents produce artifacts: documents, files, pictures, video and links. The app shows them on the Artifacts page, in the right panel's Artifacts tab and in the task thread > - The artifact directions lab (#17213) settled a presentation for those surfaces, MVP V1, drawn from the PCLP-Core mocks. It is a reference, not product code > - Shipping it means product components on product data, token-only, behind a switch, one surface at a time, so the current presentation stays the default until the new one has been used > - This pull request adds the switch (Settings > Experimental > Artifacts V1), the `--artifact-*` tokens, the V1 primitives as product components, and the V1 presentation on all three surfaces behind the switch: the Artifacts page, the panel's Artifacts tab and the task thread > - The benefit is the redesign in the product, reversible by one setting, with every existing behaviour of those surfaces kept ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public issue exists. This section follows the feature request template; the plan is `doc/plans/2026-10-22-artifacts-mvp-v1.md`. **Subsystem affected** The web UI (`ui/`): the Artifacts page, the right panel's Artifacts tab and the task thread. The experimental settings contract in `packages/shared` and `server` gains one boolean. **Problem or motivation** The three artifact surfaces grew separately and their artifact presentation is dated and inconsistent. The lab produced a measured direction; nothing in the product uses it yet. **Proposed solution** An experimental setting, `enableArtifactsV1`, default off, with the same plumbing as the other experimental settings. Product primitives under `ui/src/components/artifacts/v1` (kind helpers and adapters, the sheet and print artwork, the stack, the page tiles with the Paper Mono pill, the row the panel and thread will share), driven by `--artifact-*` tokens in `index.css` with light and dark values. With the setting on: the Artifacts page shows one row of views (Tasks, All files, Images, Videos, Documents, Text, Files) and the V1 tiles, a task with several artifacts as a stack whose newest artifact is the first page, everything else as single tiles; the panel's Artifacts tab is one flat list of V1 rows, newest first, with the expandable rows (Markdown review surface, document annotations, deep links) keeping their behaviour behind the row as their face; the thread shows a message's files as rows under its footer and registered deliverables and documents as one row each. The hover movement respects reduced motion. **Alternatives considered** Replacing the current cards outright: no fallback and three surfaces to land at once. Mounting the lab's components: they are typed on lab fixtures and keep lab-local tokens, which the token gates reject. The primitives were ported instead and the lab stays a reference. **Roadmap alignment** Supports the "Artifacts & Work Products" theme in `ROADMAP.md`. Presentation only; no data model change. **Additional context** No new API fields: the tiles show title, identifier, count and "Updated …"; rows take sizes from the work-product and attachment payloads; a picture's aspect ratio comes from the loaded image, 4:3 until it loads. The plan records what each surface keeps and what it drops (run sections in the panel; the "Images · N / Files · N" labels and the four-up grid in the thread). ## What Changed - Add the `enableArtifactsV1` experimental setting: shared type, validator and feature catalog, server defaults and managed keys, the `useArtifactsV1Enabled` hook, and the Settings > Experimental toggle (in its alphabetical place). - Add the `--artifact-*` tokens and the Artifacts V1 component rules to `ui/src/index.css`: light values on `:root`, dark overrides, and the hover movement under `prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference`. - Add `ui/src/components/artifacts/v1/`: `kinds.ts` (kind treatment, labels, glyphs, the server's media-kind rule, adapters from `CompanyArtifact`), `geometry.ts` (the measured constants), `when.ts`, `ArtifactSheet`, `ArtifactPrint`, `ArtifactStack`, `ArtifactFront`, `ArtifactTile` (stack and single tiles, caption, grid), `ArtifactRow` (the row and its inline group), `ArtifactsV1Filters`, with the mock's SVG assets. - Wire the Artifacts page: with the setting on, the toolbar's filter row becomes the V1 views and the grid renders V1 tiles; the toolbar takes an optional `filters` row for this. The old cards and kind filters stay the default. - Wire the panel's Artifacts tab (`IssuePropertiesArtifactsTab`): with the setting on, one flat list of V1 rows, newest first; `DocumentRow` and `MarkdownWorkProductRow` take a `face` render prop so the V1 row fronts their unchanged expansion, review and deep-link behaviour; `PanelFileRow` opens attachments and attachment-backed work products the way the shipped card does (gallery, text tab, new tab) with open and download beside the name; other work products are a link row with their status. - Wire the task thread: `TaskChatBubble` hangs a message's files under its footer as V1 rows inline (pictures and video to the gallery, text to a text tab, files to a new tab) in place of the media grid and file chips; `TaskChatProtocolCard`'s resource rows render deliverables, documents and attachments as one V1 row each, opening where the card did. - `ArtifactRow` keeps trailing controls beside its own control (no nested interactive elements) and can be a link, an in-app anchor, a new-tab anchor or a button; adapters read work products, documents, attachments and message references. - Add a catalogued Storybook story, `Components/Artifact V1 primitives`, under `documents-artifacts`, on fixtures. - Add tests: the primitives (kinds, dates, print fitting, tiles, rows), the hook, the Artifacts page, the panel's Artifacts tab, the task-chat bubble and the protocol card, each with the setting on and off; the settings page and server tests list the new key. - Add `doc/plans/2026-10-22-artifacts-mvp-v1.md`. ## Verification - Run `cd ui && pnpm typecheck`: the Storybook catalog accepts the new story, and `tsc -b` is clean apart from the five pre-existing `PluginOrganizationSwitcher` errors. - Run `pnpm check:token-gates` and `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`: clean. - Run `cd ui && npx vitest run src/components/artifacts src/components/issue-properties src/components/task-chat/TaskChatBubble.test.tsx src/components/task-chat/TaskChatBubble.artifactsV1.test.tsx src/components/task-chat/TaskChatProtocolCard.test.tsx src/components/task-chat/TaskChatProtocolCard.artifactsV1.test.tsx src/pages/Artifacts.test.tsx src/hooks/useArtifactsV1Enabled.test.ts src/pages/InstanceExperimentalSettings.test.tsx`: the suites pass (151 tests in the last run). - Run `cd packages/shared && npx vitest run src/feature-catalog.test.ts` and `cd server && npx vitest run src/__tests__/instance-settings-service.test.ts`: pass. - Manual: open Settings > Experimental, turn on Artifacts V1. On the Artifacts page the view row reads Tasks, All files, Images, Videos, Documents, Text, Files; tasks with several artifacts show as stacks, hovering fans the pages and lifts the artwork (not under reduced motion); Images shows single tiles with bordered prints. Open a task's Artifacts tab: one list of rows, newest first; a Markdown work product still expands into its review surface, a document still opens in its tab. In the thread, a message's files sit under its footer as rows. Turn the setting off: everything returns to the current presentation. - Storybook: `Tasks and conversations / Documents, attachments, and work products / Components / Artifact V1 primitives`. - Not run: the full `pnpm test:run` and `pnpm build` (CI runs them), and a browser pass against a dev instance with real artifacts on the three surfaces; that pass is the remaining step before this leaves draft. ## Risks - Off by default; with the setting off, the only changes on a product path are an optional `filters` prop on the toolbar, an optional `face` prop on two panel rows, a read of the setting in the bubble and the protocol card, and the new token declarations. - With the setting on, the Artifacts page's view tabs set two URL parameters (`groupBy`, `kind`) at once; the group-by menu and search are unchanged. - A picture with unknown dimensions renders at 4:3 until it loads, then the print refits once; the frame's height is fixed so nothing below it moves. - About thirty new `--artifact-*` tokens, namespaced and documented in place. ## Model Used - Claude Fable 5.1 by Anthropic, model ID `claude-fable-5-1`, used through Claude Code in the desktop app. Extended reasoning was on. Capabilities used: tool use (shell, file edits, a headless Playwright browser for the lab's measurements, the Figma MCP server for the mocks during the lab work) and image input. The context window is the Claude Code session's; its exact size is not surfaced to the 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 (#17213 is the lab this builds on) - [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 (the suites listed above; CI runs the full set) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (the plan document; no command or product behaviour changes outside the setting) - [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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
30f402f5fe |
feat: add a library to capture and restore git workspace restore points (#17238)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Each issue's agent works in a git worktree that Paperclip keeps on
the instance's disk
> - Git cache expiration removes a closed issue's worktree only when the
remote can reproduce it exactly: every commit pushed, nothing
uncommitted
> - Most closed worktrees fail that test, so they are kept forever and
disks fill up
> - A restore point that saves only the part the remote cannot reproduce
would let those worktrees be removed without losing work
> - This pull request adds the library to capture, verify, encrypt and
restore such restore points, with no callers yet
> - The benefit is a small, reviewable foundation for removing unpushed
and uncommitted worktrees safely in follow-up changes
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Bug report described in-PR (bug report template).
**What happened?**
Closed issues' worktrees accumulate without bound. With
`PAPERCLIP_GIT_CACHE_EXPIRATION_ENABLED=true` and dry run off, one
instance's last 111 expiration checks expired nothing. The skip reasons
were:
| Skip reason | Checks |
|---|---|
| `dirty_or_untracked_files` | 39 |
| `unpushed_managed_checkout` | 32 |
| `live_or_unresolved_consumer` | 21 |
| `unique_ignored_files` | 9 |
| commit not on the remote | 10 |
Without expiration, the terminal workspace reaper only archives merged,
clean worktrees. One local instance archived 37 workspaces across about
6,200 sweeps.
**Expected behavior**
A closed worktree can be removed once anything the remote cannot
reproduce is saved, and restored exactly if the work resumes.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Close an issue whose worktree has an unpushed commit or an untracked
file.
2. Enable git cache expiration with dry run off.
3. The worktree is never removed; expiration reports
`dirty_or_untracked_files` or `upstream_commit_unverified`.
**Paperclip version or commit:** `master` at
|
||
|
Devin Foley
|
059ae49cab |
feat(connections): add Unikraft Cloud connection (#17139)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Apps connections give agents governed access to external services through vault credentials, grants, action policies, the tool gateway, and audit. > - Unikraft Cloud runs unikernel micro-VMs, services, and volumes across regional metros, and it offers a sandbox plugin for commands and files. > - Unikraft is not in the catalog. It has no hosted MCP server, so the generic "Connect your own MCP server" flow cannot reach it. > - Daytona (#16483) added a native REST pattern for this case: a catalog generated from the provider's published OpenAPI specifications and executed through the gateway. > - This pull request adds Unikraft on that pattern and moves the shared native-provider code into one registry, so the shared connection code does not name each provider. > - The benefit is governed agent access to all published Unikraft actions, with the token kept in the vault and sent only to published Unikraft hosts. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16483 **Problem or motivation** Teams that run workloads on Unikraft Cloud want their agents to list instances, read logs, deploy and scale services, and run commands in sandboxes. Unikraft is not in the Apps catalog. Unikraft has no hosted MCP server, so operators cannot connect it through the remote MCP flow. **Proposed solution** Add a native Unikraft connection. Generate its actions from Unikraft's official OpenAPI specifications for the platform API and the sandbox plugin. Pin the specifications to a reviewed commit. The operator connects an API token. The token stays in the vault and goes only to the five published metro hosts. Every action takes an optional metro. Actions without a metro use the connection's default metro, which the operator can change under Advanced. **Alternatives considered** A catalog-only AppDefinition was not possible because no hosted MCP endpoint exists. Wrapping the `unikraft` CLI was rejected because it would expose host filesystem behavior and CLI login state. A second copy of the Daytona bridge was rejected; the shared transport and catalog contract are now one module with a provider registry. **Roadmap alignment** This extends the existing Apps and Connections provider coverage. It uses the existing credential, grant, policy, gateway, and audit model. It does not overlap planned core work. ## What Changed - Added `scripts/generate-unikraft-tools.mjs` and its tests. The generator reads the platform and sandbox plugin specifications at commit `5dd107ea1cd8716b83cb86a83ed2a6ee46f99b5b`, resolves shared parameters, records source SHA-256 hashes, and writes `server/src/services/unikraft/operations.generated.json`. - The catalog has 105 actions: 89 platform operations and 16 sandbox plugin operations. The server-sent audit event stream is recorded in the inventory and is not advertised as an action. - Classification: GET operations and sandbox reads and waits are reads. Delete, stop, suspend, detach, unpin, and sandbox command execution, signals, and stdin are destructive. All other operations are writes. - Added `server/src/services/connectors/unikraft/client.ts` and its generated catalog. It validates arguments against the generated schemas, accepts only published metros, rejects path traversal, sends JSON bodies on GET and DELETE as the specification requires, and verifies the token with `GET /v1/users/quotas`. A sandbox wait that times out (documented HTTP 408) returns a still-running result instead of a failure. - Moved the bounded, credential-redacting HTTP sender and the catalog contract helpers from `daytona.ts` to `native-rest-client.ts`. Added `native-provider-catalogs.ts`. `tool-access.ts`, the `tool-access/catalog` and `token-broker` modules, `connectors/tool-policy.ts`, and `tool-gateway.ts` now use this registry instead of Daytona-specific checks. Daytona behavior does not change. - Added the Unikraft definition source, the generated definition, the brand mark and manifest entry, and the permission review (`liveProof: not-run`). - Added `doc/connections/UNIKRAFT.md` with a sequence diagram, endpoints, setup, actions, and limits. Updated the connections README, the permission audit, and both capability maps. - Tests: definition shape, database-backed gateway reads, writes, deletes, and sandbox commands for personal and shared grants, default and per-call metros, rejection of unpublished metros and traversal, Off policies, revocation, stale-contract blocking, credential export denial, schema validation for all actions, pinned-transport tests for GET and DELETE bodies, and a browser setup check. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src server/src/__tests__/unikraft-connection.test.ts server/src/__tests__/unikraft-http-boundary.test.ts server/src/__tests__/daytona-connection.test.ts server/src/__tests__/daytona-http-boundary.test.ts server/src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/tool-gateway-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/tool-gateway.test.ts ui/src/pages/apps/AppsConnect.test.tsx ui/src/pages/apps/Browse.test.tsx ui/src/lib/app-brand-assets.test.ts` plus `connector-tool-policy` and `tool-catalog-publication`: all passed after the rebase onto the split tool-access modules. - `node --test scripts/generate-unikraft-tools.test.mjs scripts/generate-daytona-tools.test.mjs scripts/app-brand-validation.test.mjs`: 20 passed. - `node scripts/check-app-brand-assets.mjs`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `git diff --check`: passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`, `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`, and `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`: clean. - `npx playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts tests/e2e/unikraft-connector.spec.ts tests/e2e/daytona-connector.spec.ts`: 2 passed. - `node scripts/generate-unikraft-tools.mjs` regenerates the committed catalog with the recorded hashes. - Manual: on a local instance, open Connectors, search for Unikraft, and select **Add key**. Confirm the icon, the password field, the key guidance, and the default metro select under **Change**. - Not verified: a real Unikraft account. Live provider read and write proof is pending. ## Risks - A Unikraft token acts for the whole organization in every metro. Unikraft offers no narrower token permissions. Assign only trusted agents and review action permissions. - Sandbox actions run arbitrary commands inside the selected instance. They are classified as destructive. - A timed-out write can still complete at the provider. The bridge does not retry writes automatically. - New metros fail closed until the specification is regenerated and reviewed. Legacy `*.kraft.cloud` hosts are not reachable. - The Daytona refactor moves code without behavior changes. All Daytona tests pass without edits. - The generated JSON snapshot is large because it holds the provider input contracts. No migration or lockfile change is required. ## Model Used - Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic), model ID `claude-opus-5-5`, 1M context window, used through Claude Code with tool use (shell, file editing, web research, browser 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 mergecanary/v2026.1022.0-canary.4 |
||
|
TonioandClaude Fable 5.1
|
def4726bea |
feat(ui): add the artifact directions lab with the MVP V1 kit (#17213)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Agents produce artifacts: documents, files, pictures, video and links. The app shows them in the task thread, in the right panel's Artifacts tab and on the Artifacts page > - The three surfaces grew one at a time. Their artifact presentation is dated and does not match > - A redesign needs a side-by-side comparison of several directions on the real chrome, in both themes, with hover states, before any product code changes > - This pull request adds a backend-free design lab under `ui/src/artifact-directions`: the shipped presentation as the baseline, four exploratory directions, and the MVP V1 kit drawn from the PCLP-Core mocks > - The benefit is a shareable, capturable reference for the artifact redesign that touches no product code path ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public issue exists. This section follows the feature request template. **Subsystem affected** The web UI (`ui/`): the task thread, the right panel's Artifacts tab and the Artifacts page. The change is a design lab beside the app, not a change to those surfaces. **Problem or motivation** The three artifact surfaces are being redesigned. Designers must compare candidate directions on the real chrome, in dark and light, with hover states, and share a link. No harness for that exists. Figma mocks do not show the real chrome or the themes. **Proposed solution** A separate Vite entry (`ui/artifact-directions.html`) renders static mocks of the three surfaces. A "kit" supplies the artifact components for each surface. Kits: Today (the shipped components fed with fixtures), four directions (1.Solid, 2.Tint, 3.Tactile, 4.Hybrid) and 5.MVP V1 built from the Figma mocks. A toolbar switches kit, surface, theme and hover animation. The state lives in the URL, so any view can be linked and captured. **Alternatives considered** Figma mocks only: no real chrome, no themes, no hover. Storybook stories only: no page-level composition and no shareable static build. The lab keeps two Storybook stories as a secondary view. **Roadmap alignment** The lab supports the "Artifacts & Work Products" theme in `ROADMAP.md`. It is a design reference. It is not a product feature and it does not ship in the app bundle. **Additional context** The lab builds with its own config (`ui/vite.artifact-directions.config.mjs`). The app's `vite build` does not include it. A build of this branch is live at https://paperclip-artifact-directions.vercel.app. That preview also carries two surfaces that are not in this pull request (a media preview overlay and a panel closeup); they are parked on a separate branch. ## What Changed - Add the lab entry, its Vite config and the shell: `ui/artifact-directions.html`, `ui/vite.artifact-directions.config.mjs`, `ui/src/artifact-directions/` (static frames for the thread, the panel and the Artifacts page, a `fetch` stub for the lab's own page, fixtures, the kit contract, URL state, a sticky two-row toolbar). - Add the Today kit: the shipped artifact components, fed with the lab's fixtures. - Add four directions, each with its own `tokens.css` scoped to `[data-direction]`: 1.Solid, 2.Tint, 3.Tactile, 4.Hybrid. - Add the 5.MVP V1 kit from the PCLP-Core mocks: Artifacts page stacks and single tiles, the right panel's row list, thread rows grouped inline when one message produced several, a hover animation (the backing pages turn 5°, the artwork rises 6px), light-mode values, Paper Mono for the task pill. - Set Paper Mono for every monospace run in the lab (`lab.css`), from the face and `--font-paper-mono` that `index.css` declares. - Add two Storybook stories under `design-proposals` (`artifact-directions-compare`, `artifact-directions-hybrid`), annotated for the Storybook catalog as proposed prototypes on fixtures, and a capture script (`shot.cjs`). - Add two `.claude/launch.json` entries: the lab's dev server and its static preview. - Add Vitest coverage for the lab's logic: URL state, the API stub, the kit's kind treatment, type labels and media kinds, its date labels, print fitting and the thread's inline grouping (six files). ## Verification - Run `cd ui && npx vitest run src/artifact-directions`. The six lab test files pass (31 tests). - Run `cd ui && npx tsc -p tsconfig.json --noEmit`. The output is clean apart from the five pre-existing `PluginOrganizationSwitcher` errors. - Run `node scripts/check-token-gates.mjs`, `node scripts/sync-agent-palette-tokens.mjs --check` and `node scripts/sync-cliplab-character.mjs --check`. All gates are clean. The lab directory is outside the token-gated paths; its tokens are lab-local. - Start the lab: `cd ui && npx vite --config vite.artifact-directions.config.mjs --port 5180`. Open `http://localhost:5180/`. The page lands on 5.MVP V1's Overview in dark mode with animation on. Switch kit, surface and theme in the toolbar; the URL follows. - Open `http://localhost:5180/?d=d5-v1-mvp&s=gallery` and hover a stack: the two backing pages turn and the first page rises. Open `?s=thread` and `?s=panel` for the rows. - Build the lab: `cd ui && ARTIFACT_DIRECTIONS_OUT_DIR=/tmp/artifact-lab npx vite build --config vite.artifact-directions.config.mjs`. - Headless checks ran against the dev server during the work: toolbar labels, defaults and keys; thread and panel row geometry (58px rows, 8px and 12px gaps); the hover animation (5° turn, 6px rise, one easing curve); pill fills per theme; Paper Mono resolution on every monospace run. The measured values are in the kit's doc comments. - Run `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --check` (the check `ui typecheck` runs first): the catalog accepts both stories. - Not run: the repo-wide `pnpm -r typecheck` (it needs the Rust toolchain for `paperclip-runner`) and `pnpm build`. The change adds files under `ui/src/artifact-directions` and `ui/storybook/stories/design-proposals` and edits `.claude/launch.json`; it changes no shipped module. CI runs the full Vitest suite. ## Risks - Low risk for the product. The app bundle does not include the lab. The lab's `fetch` stub installs only on the lab's own page. - Storybook gains two stories; the Storybook build includes them. ## Model Used - Claude Fable 5.1 by Anthropic, model ID `claude-fable-5-1`, used through Claude Code in the desktop app. Extended reasoning was on. Capabilities used: tool use (shell, file edits, a headless Playwright browser for measurements and captures, the Figma MCP server to read the mocks) and image input for mock screenshots. The context window is the Claude Code session's; its exact size is not surfaced to the 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 (none found for "artifact directions lab", "artifacts redesign", "artifacts tab design") - [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 (the lab's Vitest files, the UI typecheck and the token gates; CI runs the full suite) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (no product behaviour or command changed; the lab documents itself in `kit.ts` and the frames) - [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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>canary/v2026.1022.0-canary.3 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
25f2d05282 |
fix(ui): remove the provider trace run button (#17211)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The agent header provides actions to assign work and start runs. > - A second run button starts a run with raw provider tracing. > - Agent configuration already has a switch for raw tracing on future runs. > - This pull request removes the extra run button and its unused code. > - The header keeps one normal run action and the saved tracing status. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The action buttons in the agent detail header. **Current behavior** Administrators see Run now and Run with provider trace next to each other. **Proposed behavior** Remove Run with provider trace from the header. Use Capture raw provider traces in the configuration Debugging section to enable tracing for future runs. **Reason and benefit** Keep the normal run action clear. Put the tracing setting with the other agent settings. **Breaking changes** The separate trace button is removed. The tracing configuration, trace API, and run inspector actions stay available. ## What Changed - Remove the trace button, its property, and its mutation. - Remove the property from the agent detail page. - Update tests for normal runs with saved tracing on and off. - Check normal actions for Codex, Dot, and Muse. - Document the tracing setting in the feature map. ## Verification - Passed: 178 focused UI tests across AgentActionButtons, AgentDetail.accounting, RunnerInspector, AgentConfigForm, and AgentConfigForm.render. - Passed: pnpm check:token-gates. - Passed: node scripts/check-maps.mjs. - Passed: git diff --check. - Passed: [PR CI workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39796866659), including the required verify and e2e gates. - Passed: Greptile 5/5 with no open review threads. - Two optional job badges still say running. Their test, cleanup, and final job steps passed. The parent workflow completed with success. - The broad local checks could not complete with the installed dependencies. The full typecheck and build require smol-toml. The UI checks also require @spekoai/client and the plugin SDK UI build. The full test run was stopped after many suites could not load. The PR workflow and both required gates passed for the current head. - To inspect the UI, open an agent. Confirm there is one Run now action. Enable Capture raw provider traces under configuration, Debugging. Save the change. Confirm the header shows Raw tracing on and still has one run action. ## Risks - Low risk. This removes one UI action and its unused code. - Administrators use the saved Debugging setting for tracing future runs. - No API, database, or permission changes. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed in this 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> |
||
|
TonioandPaperclip
|
043f2514e6 |
fix(ui): keep task tabs steady when switching views (#17068)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work. > - A task side panel contains properties, artifacts, and document views. > - These views share one row of tabs. > - Selecting Artifacts adds an upload control beside the row. > - That control reduces the space available to the tabs and changes their widths. > - This pull request reserves the upload control space while the Artifacts tab is open. > - Switching views now keeps the tab widths and positions stable. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #14949. This fixes a layout shift observed after that PR merged. **What happened?** In a narrow task panel, tabs shrink when Artifacts is selected. They expand when another tab is selected. The upload control enters and leaves the header during selection. **Expected behavior** Tab selection must not change the space available to the tab row. Tabs must keep equal widths while the panel width and open tabs remain unchanged. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open Properties, Artifacts, and a document or attachment in a task side panel. 2. Make the side panel narrow enough for tabs to compress. 3. Switch between Artifacts and the other tabs. 4. Observe the tab widths and positions as the upload control appears and disappears. ## What Changed - Keep an upload control slot in the header while an upload-capable Artifacts tab is open. - Hide the control and make it inert when another tab is active. Remove the slot when Artifacts is closed. Agent conversations do not reserve upload space. - Add a component regression test for selection, focus exclusion, and closing the Artifacts tab. - Add a constrained production-panel Storybook case with assertions for equal widths, stable widths across selections, and upload-control visibility. ## Verification - The focused TaskSidePanel and SidePanelTabs suites passed: 52 tests. - UI typecheck, UI build, and token gates passed after replaying the fix onto current master. - The Storybook catalog check and all 28 map/catalog tests passed. - The browser ran `html-artifacts-03-task-journey--stable-tab-widths` successfully. All three tabs measured 71.328125px before and after selecting Properties, the report, and Artifacts. - Review the Stable Tab Widths story under HTML artifacts / 03 Task journey. The fixture mounts the production task panel. Upload requests are outside its scope. - Full repository typecheck, tests, and build were not rerun locally. This machine has no Cargo, and an earlier broad test run hit unrelated server workspace/runtime failures. Full PR CI passed on commit `019e324c0eca815f90d9797194e768fb48cb46b6`. - All 55 successful PR checks are green on the latest head, with no pending or failing checks. The failed end-to-end shard passed on one rerun after a transient database lock timeout during test cleanup; no code changes were needed for the rerun. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39557963507). ## Risks - A blank upload-control space remains when Artifacts is open but inactive. This keeps the tab row stable. - Hidden controls use both visibility and inert state to exclude them from keyboard navigation and accessibility exposure. - No API, database, upload permission, or saved-tab format changes. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The runtime did not expose a more specific model ID or context window. Used reasoning, code execution, and browser inspection. ## 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>canary/v2026.1022.0-canary.2 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4dfcb4c9b8 |
refactor(tools): isolate connection access and removal (#17167)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Connection grants and installations control which identities and agents can reach tools. > - Removal must close those access paths and stop runtimes before cleaning up owned secrets. > - These responsibilities still shared the setup coordinator after earlier extractions. > - This pull request gives grants, installations, credential validation and removal explicit owners. > - The benefit is a smaller coordinator and focused access-lifecycle modules with existing security ordering intact. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Depends on #17165. Earlier stack: #17144 → #17146 → #17147 → #17155 → #17157 → #17159 → #17161 → #17162 → #17165 → this PR. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Maintenance of connection audiences, delegation, installation and removal. **Current behavior** The 6,419-line service still owns grant mutation, installation reach and resumable credential cleanup alongside app setup. **Proposed behavior** A grant owner manages audiences and delegation. An installation owner manages reach and its profile bindings. A removal owner keeps access revocation, runtime shutdown, secret classification and cleanup together. The coordinator delegates through typed APIs. **Reason and benefit** The entry point falls to 4,821 lines / 198,065 bytes, meeting the requested under-5,000-line target. Across the full stack it falls from 21,525 lines / 829,519 bytes. App setup remains together in the coordinator. ## What Changed - Extract credential validation (75 lines), grants (603), installations (350) and removal (658). - Preserve company boundaries, audience advisory locks, membership locks, assignment locks and audit order. - Keep the existing runtime supervisor and secret client. Retain live HTTP options for provider shutdown. - Keep Slack credential-mutation leasing and resumable owned-secret cleanup with removal. ## Verification - Removal, grant-resolution and the stronger real HTTP OAuth fixture pass before extraction (13 cases); the existing service and publication baselines also pass. - The original combined targeted run passed 525 cases across seven suites. After replaying onto master, 601 cases pass across nine suites, including Braintrust lifecycle and connector-policy coverage, with one database worker. - Full repository typecheck and build passed before merge integration. After integration, server typecheck, module-boundary and whitespace gates pass; fresh CI covers the full repository gates. - All 94 pre-existing function/method bodies match by normalized syntax comparison. A full-stack TypeScript symbol audit preserves all 18 exports and 89 service methods. - The earlier local full-suite run was interrupted after 79 minutes and remains unverified. All current-head CI gates pass on `d5307fcea2365e51a75d49db82deeed236d19951`, including the full sharded test matrix, browser suites, typecheck, build and canary dry run. Greptile is 5/5 with no open review threads after merge integration. - GitHub canceled duplicate CI run [39716841632](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39716841632) during the atomic stack update. Replacement run [39716843243](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39716843243) passed on the same head; no failing test was retried. ## Risks - Audience replacement must not erase an inactive member marker and widen authority. Its advisory and membership locks remain in the grant owner. - Uninstall must remove only its own profile bindings. Existing operator-authored bindings keep their current behavior. - Removal must remain fail-closed and retryable after provider failures. Its order, shared-secret retention, supervisor and cleanup references are unchanged and covered by removal tests. - No schema, public API, policy or scheduling change is intended. The first eight PRs have landed; this PR follows the updated catalog extraction. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with repository tools and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1022.0-canary.1 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
f7210cd31f |
refactor(tools): isolate catalog ownership (#17165)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents receive reviewed actions discovered from their connections. > - Transport, discovery, risk classification, publication and account inventory lived in the same service. > - Their ownership differs: transport guards requests, discovery reads providers, and publication changes the catalog under locks. > - This pull request gives those phases separate modules with explicit capabilities. > - The benefit is a visible discovery-to-publication path that preserves permission and quarantine behavior. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Builds on merged #17162 and preserves the connector policy from #17141. Earlier stack: #17144 → #17146 → #17147 → #17155 → #17157 → #17159 → #17161 → #17162 → this PR. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Maintenance of tool discovery, catalog publication, health and upstream account inventory. **Current behavior** The 8,988-line service handles HTTP guards, MCP sessions, provider probes, risk classification, quarantine, cached reads and account sync. **Proposed behavior** Discovery returns descriptors through the existing credential and transport owners. Publication owns catalog writes and default access. A reader owns refresh deduplication. Health and aggregator inventory have separate owners. **Reason and benefit** The entry point falls to 6,419 lines, a reduction of 2,569. Provider discovery no longer shares a closure with connection setup and teardown. ## What Changed - Extract guarded remote HTTP, descriptor policy, discovery, publication, default access, cached reads, health, attention and aggregator account sync. - Keep the public descriptor/risk exports and existing service methods. - Preserve database locks, transaction-scoped default-access writes, quarantine decisions, current grant checks and failure classification. - Preserve per-service catalog flights and aggregator jobs, lease ownership and live remote-request options. - New modules range from 39 to 492 lines. ## Verification - Before and after the move, 470 public service/HTTP integration cases and 44 publication, HTTP rebinding and aggregator sync cases pass. - Server typecheck, module-boundary gate and whitespace checks pass. - All 157 pre-existing function/method bodies match by normalized syntax comparison. - Before merge integration, the completed stack passed 525 targeted cases, repository-wide typecheck and build. Its stronger rotating-token fixture is included. - After replaying onto master, the integrated stack passes 601 cases across nine suites, including Braintrust lifecycle and connector-policy coverage. Server typecheck and module-boundary checks pass. All 157 moved bodies still match the current master versions. - The earlier local full-suite run was interrupted after 79 minutes and remains unverified. All current-head CI gates pass on `a21595f20809a514b7619d8a8748c56f8e546e2f`, including the full sharded test matrix, browser suites, typecheck, build and canary dry run. Greptile is 5/5 with no open review threads after merge integration. ## Risks - Discovery must keep its current grant and session behavior; publication must retain its locks and quarantine rules. Existing authority, schema-drift and publication-race tests exercise these paths. - Aggregator account observations must not become authorization. Lease, freshness, failure and credential-fingerprint behavior stay unchanged. - Live transport options must not be snapshotted. The HTTP owner retains the same options object. - No schema, public API, access-policy or scheduling change is intended. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with repository tools and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
ba9e6e4bc5 |
refactor(tools): isolate authorization lifecycle (#17162)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Browser authorization binds a consenting identity to a company connection. > - Direct OAuth, managed-cloud claims and Vercel authorization have different state and persistence rules. > - Keeping all of them in the general tool service obscures those rules and their cleanup owners. > - This pull request separates state, initiation, provider completion and explicit identity promotion. > - The benefit is reviewable authorization flows with their existing authority checks and ordering preserved. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Depends on #17161. Earlier stack: #17144 → #17146 → #17147 → #17155 → #17157 → #17159 → #17161 → this PR. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Maintenance of browser authorization and credential-sharing lifecycle. **Current behavior** The 12,019-line service combines provider callbacks, actor-bound states, authorization URLs and personal-to-company credential promotion. **Proposed behavior** Separate owners handle authorization state, start, direct/cloud/Vercel callbacks, catalog completion and explicit access finalization. Shared setup policy and identity checks have typed APIs used by the coordinator and authorization owners. **Reason and benefit** The entry point falls to 8,997 lines, a reduction of 3,022. Provider-specific state consumption and durable-write rules are visible in their own modules. ## What Changed - Extract authorization flows and their constraints; the largest new module is 700 lines. - Preserve direct/Vercel terminal state consumption and managed-cloud retryability until claim persistence commits. - Keep membership and grant locks, secret transaction clients, interaction resolution and catalog ordering unchanged. - Keep partial secret acquisition and cleanup together in access finalization. - Give shared organization-grant persistence, personal identity checks, setup policy and response projections named owners. ## Verification - All 470 public service and real local HTTP/PostgreSQL OAuth cases pass before and after extraction. - Coverage includes same-actor state binding, replay/denial, scope selection, membership revocation, provider failures, refresh concurrency and persisted usable credentials. - Server typecheck, module-boundary gate and whitespace checks pass. - All 182 pre-existing function/method bodies match by normalized syntax comparison. - The completed stack passes 525 targeted cases, full repository typecheck and build. The earlier interrupted local full suite remains unverified; all current-head CI gates pass; Greptile is 5/5 with no open review threads. - Original CI failure retained: [server shard 1/12](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39710536789/job/119600621627), `workspace-runtime.test.ts` case “replaces a reused Paperclip dev runtime whose 2xx health payload is unhealthy”. The fixture failed its initial health readiness with `ECONNREFUSED` after 97 probes / 10 seconds. The fixture and runtime implementation are unchanged and do not import this service. The isolated case passes without changing its timeout or assertions. One retry of only that shard passed at the same commit. All CI gates are now green; the original failure remains recorded here. ## Risks - Provider flows intentionally consume authorization state at different points. This extraction preserves each flow rather than sharing its completion algorithm. - Promotion must remove partially created secrets on failure and retire source secrets only after persistence. Both phases remain in the same owner with unchanged ordering. - Local HTTP fixtures prove assembled application behavior, not live third-party qualification. - No schema, public API or authorization policy change is intended. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with repository tools and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1022.0-canary.0 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4fdef9457f |
refactor(tools): isolate credential ownership (#17161)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Connections need durable credentials that survive authorization and token rotation. > - Storage, registration, refresh coordination and credential selection lived in the general tool service. > - Each has a different ownership boundary: secrets, process-wide registration, database leases and per-service refresh work. > - This pull request gives those responsibilities named modules and passes their narrow capabilities to consumers. > - The benefit is visible credential ownership while retaining current concurrency and failure behavior. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Depends on #17159. Earlier stack: #17144 → #17146 → #17147 → #17155 → #17157 → #17159 → this PR. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Maintenance of OAuth credential persistence, refresh and provider credential access. **Current behavior** The 14,877-line service owns registration flights, refresh leases, secret writes and provider selection alongside app setup. **Proposed behavior** Dedicated owners handle credential storage, client registration, refresh leases, connection/grant refresh, GitHub continuity and Vercel credential access. Credential selection composes those owners. Authorization callbacks remain in the coordinator for the next extraction. **Reason and benefit** The entry point falls to 12,019 lines, a reduction of 2,858. Lease acquisition and cleanup can be reviewed together, independently of callback completion. ## What Changed - Extract credential owners and shared single-flight/connection-link primitives. The largest new module is 650 lines. - Preserve process-wide client-registration flights, per-service refresh maps and GitHub sweep state. - Preserve live cloud-connector lookup, options and environment reads; use the existing secret client and transaction-scoped clients. - Extend the real local HTTP/PostgreSQL OAuth fixture with concurrent refresh across two service instances and authenticated use of rotated credentials. ## Verification - The two extended HTTP integration cases pass before extraction for public and client-secret-basic clients. - After extraction, all 470 public service and HTTP integration cases pass, including refresh failure, abandoned leases, secret redaction and membership revocation cases. The fixture was then strengthened after review: a second expiry must use the persisted rotated refresh token, and the provider rejects the old token. Both cases pass before and after extraction; server typecheck also passes. - Server typecheck, module-boundary gate and diff whitespace checks pass. - All 233 pre-existing function/method bodies match by normalized syntax comparison. - Full typecheck/build will run at the stack handoff. The earlier interrupted local full suite remains unverified; all current-head CI gates pass, with Greptile 5/5 and no open review findings. - Prior-head CI failure retained: run 39708550066, general server shard 2/12, `native-session-executor.test.ts` case “preserves a real listening process and its marker when a health RPC times out” raised `runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable` / `process_identity_changed`. Both the fixture and runner implementation are unchanged. The isolated case passes without changing assertions or timeouts. The fresh full CI run passes for the test-only review fix; the prior failure remains recorded here. ## Risks - Changing state lifetime could permit duplicate refreshes or registrations. Existing concurrency cases and the real HTTP fixture exercise these paths. - A transaction-scoped secret write must stay inside its authority lock. Function bodies, await ordering and client arguments are preserved. - The fixture proves assembled local HTTP/database behavior, not live third-party qualification. - No schema, public API, policy or scheduling change is intended. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with repository tools and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
ffcd113761 |
refactor(tools): isolate runtime and activity ownership (#17159)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Operators inspect tool execution, review pending actions and control local runtimes. > - These paths shared a large service with token exchange and app authorization. > - Runtime state and execution history need explicit owners and stable public responses. > - This pull request separates runtime controls, health summaries, activity reads and the review queue. > - The benefit is focused modules that preserve the current supervisor and approval behavior. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Depends on #17157. Earlier stack: #17144 → #17146 → #17147 → #17155 → #17157 → this PR. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Maintenance of tool runtime administration and execution activity views. **Current behavior** The 16,100-line service contains runtime slot controls, health calculations, usage history, invocation decisions and action review queries. **Proposed behavior** Runtime modules own slot persistence, operator controls and health summaries. Activity modules own history, response projections and the review queue. The public service delegates to these owners. **Reason and benefit** The entry point falls to 14,877 lines, a reduction of 1,223 lines. The coordinator no longer needs execution-history joins or runtime alert calculations. ## What Changed - Extract five modules totaling 1,282 lines. The largest is 426 lines. - Pass the existing supervisor to slot controls. Pass the same live deployment options, clock and host getter to runtime health. - Keep activity reads scoped as before. Keep unsigned-request grace and invalid-signature cancellation in the review-queue owner. - Preserve public methods, response projections, query order and audit writes. ## Verification - The public service and unsigned review-queue tests pass before and after the move. The combined post-move run passes 469 cases with one database worker. - Existing cases exercise actual local stdio stop/restart, route permissions, stale-slot and audit-failure health, activity attribution, run decisions and unsigned pending requests. - Server TypeScript check, module-boundary gate and `git diff --check` pass. - Normalized syntax comparison finds all 256 pre-existing function/method bodies unchanged. - Full typecheck/build will run at the stack handoff. The earlier interrupted local full suite remains unverified; all current-head CI gates pass, with Greptile 5/5 and no open review threads. ## Risks - Creating another supervisor would split process ownership. The new module receives the same instance; it does not construct one. - Copying deployment settings could freeze live values. The health reader holds the existing options object and getter. - Review-queue reads can cancel invalid requests. Those writes and the unsigned-request grace period are preserved and covered by the existing regression test. - No schema, public API, authorization policy or background scheduling change is intended. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with repository tools and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
a42f213244 |
refactor(tools): isolate connection token broker (#17157)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents can request short-lived tokens for connections that allow token exchange. > - Admission, scope checks, exchange protocols and issuance records lived inside the general tool service. > - The security flow needs one visible owner while provider payloads need a separate boundary. > - This pull request extracts the broker into admission, configuration, endpoint, exchange and issuance modules. > - The benefit is a focused issuance flow with its locks, authority checks and audit order intact. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Depends on #17155. Earlier stack: #17144 → #17146 → #17147 → #17155 → this PR. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Maintenance and verification of connection token issuance for agent runs. **Current behavior** A 17,752-line service contains broker configuration, endpoint policy, credential exchange, admission and issuance. **Proposed behavior** A dedicated broker coordinates the same admission and transaction flow. The exchange owner returns normalized token material. It receives the existing secret client, including the transaction-scoped client at issuance time. **Reason and benefit** The entry point falls to 16,100 lines, a reduction of 1,652 lines. Reviewers can see the responsible-user lock and hash-only issuance write without navigating app setup or OAuth callbacks. ## What Changed - Extract six broker modules. The largest is 755 lines; together they contain 1,721 lines. - Give tool-access audit persistence a named owner shared by the broker and coordinator. - Keep current-state checks, policy decisions, rate limits, secret resolution and transaction order unchanged. Private-host configuration is still read live. - Add two public-route integration cases with a real local HTTP server and disposable PostgreSQL. Cover Pages and RFC 8693 success and upstream failure. ## Verification - Baseline: all 466 existing public service tests passed before this move. The two new real HTTP cases passed on the original implementation before extraction. - After extraction: 495 tests pass across the public service and HTTP rebinding suites, with one database worker. This includes the two new cases, membership revocation ordering, scope denials, disabled broker behavior and hash-only persistence. - Server TypeScript checking, the module-boundary gate and `git diff --check` pass. - Normalized syntax comparison finds all 294 pre-existing function/method bodies unchanged. - Full typecheck and build passed for the preceding batch. Its interrupted local full-suite result remains unverified. All current-head CI gates pass; Greptile is 5/5 with no open review threads. ## Risks - A new closure could use the wrong secret client or move exchange outside the membership lock. The existing transaction still passes `secretService(tx)` to the exchange owner after taking that lock. - Endpoint validation must preserve live configuration and fail before credential disclosure. Existing rebinding and private-host tests cover this path. - The local fixture proves real HTTP and persisted application behavior. It does not qualify a live third-party broker. - No schema, API or access policy change is intended. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with repository tools and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |