Commit Graph
2 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandPaperclip ed2c22ea8c feat(connections): simplify dedicated GitHub App setup (#15416)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agent work and the tools each agent can use.
> - GitHub bots need their own App identity and restricted repository
access.
> - Manual App configuration and repeated setup gates make that
connection hard to finish.
> - GitHub can create an App from a manifest, but people must approve
creation and repository access.
> - Each Paperclip stack should own configuration, credentials,
signature verification, and task admission.
> - This change uses Cloud as an encrypted callback and event gateway,
then completes setup in the stack.
> - GitHub review bots have their own experimental setting. Chat
connector opt-in does not control them.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Dedicated GitHub App setup, bot settings, and task-scoped GitHub
replies.

**Current behavior**

Users must configure an App, copy credentials, repeat repository
selection, and complete manual verification gates. Review settings are
hard to scan. Mentions in descriptions can be missed, and automatic
completion text can produce an extra GitHub comment.

**Proposed behavior**

Choose an agent and connect GitHub under a personal account or
organization. GitHub asks for creation and installation consent.
Paperclip resumes the same draft, stores secrets locally, imports
access, verifies delivery, and opens Settings. Each accepted request has
one editable App-owned comment for progress and results. Review
assessments produce deterministic checks for the reviewed commit.

**Breaking changes**

GitHub bots require their own default-off experimental opt-in. The
setup-method and delegated-agent screens are removed. Per-person
automatic-run flags remain readable but are replaced by author filters.
Existing connections, direct webhooks, saved restrictions, and manual
existing-App recovery remain supported.

Companion gateway:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-cloud/pull/688 (merged). The
roadmap and related PRs were checked; no duplicate dedicated-App wizard
was found.

## What Changed

- Add an independent **GitHub review bots** setting across the catalog,
routes, identity admission, and task controls. Existing bots continue
running when the UI setting is off.
- Replace setup with Choose agent and Connect GitHub. Support personal
and organization owners, inline low-trust conversion, saved drafts,
known organization suggestions, automatic completion, and same-App
recovery.
- Keep manifests, OAuth PKCE, credential exchange, vault storage,
installation verification, and original webhook-signature validation in
the stack. Use the Cloud sealed gateway for public callbacks and
outbound local delivery.
- Add resumable owner metadata in migration 0323. Retry a failed
registration renewal through the same durable replacement rather than
creating another App route.
- Support authorized mentions in issue and PR bodies, comments, inline
comments, and review summaries. Preserve attachments, edited-source
identity, duplicate protection, and lifecycle invalidation. Filter
requests explicitly addressed to another connected bot.
- Give agents task-scoped review, comment, and update tools. Update one
working comment through progress and final output. Close coalesced
requests and recover delayed acknowledgements, including deleted earlier
working comments. Preserve automatic replies for legacy connections
without saved review configuration. Preserve partial publication
evidence and quarantine uncertain automatic fallbacks without blocking
Board messages or questions.
- Reorganize Settings and Access with rich slash-skill instructions,
numeric passing scores, clear automation controls, formal-review
tooltips, member and contributor sections, and verified App branding
links. Preserve invalid score drafts and automation choices across tabs.
- Paginate repositories in 20-row batches with search and a true
connection-wide toggle. Batch verification at GitHub's 500-ID token
limit. Keep saved repository overrides while hiding their editor.
- Give each review a detail URL that remains usable beyond the newest
100 records. Synchronize the manager OpenAPI contracts and add recovery,
authorization, UI, and browser regressions.
- Reconcile the current master branch and retain its agent avatar,
feature catalog, and extracted heartbeat preparation code. Preserve a
saved test-drive port and recover from an occupied high port.

## Verification

- Focused UI, independent experimental-setting, and CLI tests: 199
passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `pnpm check:token-gates`
passed. The broad local Vitest attempt was interrupted after resource
timeouts and stale expectations; the affected regressions passed focused
reruns. The latest-head full CI matrix passed, including all browser
shards, server/chat suites, builds, typechecking, canary packaging, and
Docker context integrity. A Docker Hub 429 required a CI retry; it
passed without changing the code.
- Final review repairs: 127 attachment/event tests and server typecheck
passed. All 13 final integration regressions passed under the normal CI
timeout, covering legacy reply compatibility, deleted coalesced
comments, inline-only review completion, progress edits, and native
final recovery. Restart-safe description/review attachments passed the
attachment suite.
- Final regressions: four reply/lifecycle tests, both native GitHub wait
tests, 171 feature-gate/reply-contract tests, the routed review preview,
and five scheduler/reply regressions passed. The final fixture repair
also passed all six setup-continuation cases and all three complete
chat-test shards in CI, covering terminal receipts and retries under the
normal CI timeout. One loaded-host receipt run exceeded its local
timeout; the exact case passed in an isolated rerun and the complete CI
shard.
- GitHub integration tests cover personal and organization setup, retry
recovery, edited mentions, attachment provenance, coalesced requests,
delayed acknowledgements, partial review writes, old review URLs, and
company boundaries.
- Browser qualification: both GitHub journeys, all five provider
setup/management journeys, and the GitHub uncertain-send recovery
journey passed. GitHub setup, reconnect, and task replies run with chat
disabled; chat enabled alone cannot expose GitHub bots. The disposable
qualification database was removed after testing.
- Earlier live qualification verified App-owned issue replies, native
slash-skill invocation, progress comment edits, and a 5/5 PR review with
a passing current-head check in the dedicated permissions-smoke
repository. These live checks did not use personal credentials as bot
execution authority.

## Risks

- Deploy the merged Cloud gateway protocol before the stack update. Each
callback and encrypted event must retain the original instance and
tenant binding.
- Migration 0323 uses idempotent column additions for test installations
that already applied the earlier draft migration number.
- A verified connection does not prove runtime isolation or a completed
review. Runtime checks remain separate.
- Required merge checks must be configured in GitHub. A passing numeric
score does not formally approve a PR; approval and request-changes tools
remain opt-in.
- Existing-App credentials cannot silently renew an uncertain manifest
exchange. Recovery preserves the existing App, draft, connection, and
agent.
- Repository changes save immediately. Global toggles affect all
currently available repositories, including unloaded rows, without
granting new installation access.
- A failed or uncertain tool write suppresses automatic fallback text;
the governed outbox retains its evidence. Deleted or replaced response
comments are not recreated through a personal credential fallback.
- GitHub logo upload remains an optional human action in GitHub App
settings. Runtime provisioning, delegated setup, screenshot publication,
and production push delivery remain deferred.

## Model Used

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

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub references)
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused suites; complete
test matrix is checked 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>
2026-10-09 17:01:20 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 33f2b3a159 fix: separate GitHub tools and code review bot connections (#14750)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The Connectors catalog lets people give agents tools or connect
agents to conversations.
> - GitHub put these two uses behind one card and an extra choice.
> - People should choose the connection they need from the catalog.
> - This pull request keeps GitHub for tools and adds GitHub Code Review
Bot as a separate card.
> - Each card opens its setup directly. Both use the existing connection
code.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

GitHub connector discovery and setup.

**Current behavior**

With chat connectors enabled, GitHub opens a menu that asks whether to
use tools or create a bot. Saved tools and bots share the same catalog
entry.

**Proposed behavior**

GitHub opens tool account access. GitHub Code Review Bot opens agent
selection. Saved bots and drafts appear under the bot card.
Chat-disabled instances show only GitHub tools.

**Reason and benefit**

The catalog names the two uses and removes an extra setup choice. The
bot keeps the existing GitHub provider, credentials, endpoint IDs, setup
steps, and runtime.

**Additional context**

Related work: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12843 and
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/14594 established GitHub
account identity. This change preserves that tool flow. No duplicate
catalog split was found.

## What Changed

- Split the generated app definitions into GitHub tools and GitHub Code
Review Bot. Reuse the existing GitHub logo and channel method.
- Open bot setup directly, including old resume and reconnect links.
- Put existing bot endpoints and drafts under the bot card. Hide
duplicate internal chat applications.
- Keep pasted GitHub URLs mapped to the tool connection.
- Add seven Storybook states for the catalog, saved connections,
disabled chat, both setup paths, mobile, and light mode.
- Fix narrow-screen bot rows so the label cannot overlap status and
setup actions.
- Update catalog, route, browser, and API tests, plus the GitHub
connector guide.

## Verification

- [Hosted
Storybook](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/storybook/branches/codex~2Fgithub-review-connection/?path=/story/connections-github-and-code-review-bot--catalog):
seven states built from this branch. The deployment passed its
public-file verification.
- All GitHub checks pass on `d13a2cd53561645bb2a15c6f8e75a61a936d6459`.
Two optional Storybook jobs skip under their normal trigger rules; the
manual Storybook deployment passes. The branch has no merge conflicts.
- Greptile: 5/5 on the current head, with no review comments or
unresolved threads.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `pnpm check:token-gates`, and `pnpm
build-storybook` passed. The final Storybook fixture also passed UI
typecheck and the hosted build.
- Targeted catalog, URL matching, routing, grouping, brand, and chat UI
contract tests passed.
- GitHub provider browser tests: 2 passed. These cover direct tool setup
and the bot setup and management lifecycle with provider responses
mocked.
- Embedded-browser test on an isolated local instance: opened both
cards, selected an agent, saved a bot draft, and resumed the same
endpoint under the bot card after a reload.
- Storybook Tool Setup and Bot Setup assertions pass in the published
preview. Chat Disabled assertions pass locally. Inspected mobile and
light mode, including the draft-row layout and official GitHub marks.
- Local full-suite limitation: `pnpm test:run` was not clean. A
cross-company route assertion failed in the aggregate run and passed in
isolation; a workspace-runtime test reached its 30-second hook timeout.
Some isolated database reruns skipped when the embedded-PostgreSQL
availability probe failed. The local aggregate was stopped after CI
completed. The corresponding full CI suites pass all 360 tool-access
tests and all 162 workspace-runtime tests.
- No live GitHub authorization or installation was performed. The
isolated instance correctly stopped at the cloud enrollment or public
HTTPS prerequisites.

## Risks

- Low scope: catalog presentation and routing change. There is no
database migration or provider credential change.
- Existing GitHub bot URLs now open bot setup directly. The tool route
remains `/apps/connect?source=github`.
- The bot remains behind the existing chat-connectors feature flag.
Existing endpoints retain `provider: github`.
- Channel applications are represented by endpoint rows. Regression
tests cover legacy bot applications, tools, active bots, and drafts
together.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, code execution, and
embedded-browser tools. The exact deployed model ID, context window
size, and reasoning setting are not exposed to this session.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-30 17:15:02 -05:00