Commit Graph
7 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
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wait in the in-review state and withdraws superseded completion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>
2026-10-23 07:14:40 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 3ec7309d91 feat(voice): add experimental Speko task connection runtime (#15727)
First PR: runtime. UI: #15728. Qualification: #15729.

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agent work through tasks and governed connections.
> - Chat connections already bind external conversations to those tasks.
> - Speko handles voice and telephony, while the selected Paperclip
agent does the work.
> - A call needs durable session authority, ordered follow-ups, and safe
result delivery.
> - This PR adds an explicit voice transport to the existing connection
runtime.
> - The UI and qualification suites follow in linked PRs. Speko stays
experimental.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Problem or motivation**

Phone and browser voice conversations cannot use the chat connection
task lifecycle. A separate voice runtime is needed to preserve task
authority, retries, and reply history.

**Proposed solution**

Add company-scoped voice sessions, signed callbacks, durable replies,
inbound intake, and an agent-facing outbound-call tool. Reuse existing
tasks, queues, secrets, and publications.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends the experimental chat connector entry points under Agent
Chat and Connected Apps. The project owner requested this feature.

Refs #11418 for the original provider catalog proposal. This
implementation uses the newer chat connection infrastructure rather than
an MCP catalog-only integration. Refs #15721 for remote OpenCode
startup.

## What Changed

- Add additive voice schema, shared contracts, session APIs, and
provider callbacks.
- Bind browser, inbound, and outbound sessions to an endpoint, task, and
selected agent.
- Add low-trust guest intake in an explicitly selected sandbox and keep
ordinary approval rules.
- Submit task work through session-scoped tools and push approved
replies through Speko POST /v1/calls/{id}/messages.
- Distinguish provider acceptance from confirmed spoken playback.
Reconcile reports without downloading recordings.
- Add protocol, migration, persistence, provider, and
delivery-diagnostic tests.

## Verification

- Master 3389bea708 is integrated. Database/shared builds, server
typecheck, migration upgrade/replay checks, and 46
communication-guidance/provider/protocol tests passed.
- The final persistence suite passed 85 real-database tests. Five
focused native continuation/authorization regressions passed. Five
callback ownership/rotation tests passed after the last runtime repair.
- Review repairs cover reconnect ownership, current caller authority,
duplicate delivery, multipart answers, task-page answers, guest question
handling, and saved sandbox recovery.
- A real OpenCode/OpenRouter DeepSeek task ran in Daytona and saved a
correct disk-space answer. This did not establish live-call playback.
- Full local typecheck/build passed before the final repairs; focused
typechecks passed after them. Latest-head CI runs the repository gates.
- The separate integrated browser qualification passed two journeys and
failed browser answer retrieval. The feature remains experimental. The
report in #15729 records this failure and outstanding real-provider
acceptance.
- No lockfiles are included. Speko migrations follow master as
0324–0330.

## Risks

- Voice sessions add migrations and provider-dependent lifecycle
behavior. Migrations preserve existing chat and AI transports.
- Callback origins must be reachable HTTPS. Provider keys and signing
secrets remain vaulted.
- Unverified callers receive task-scoped low-trust authority. Caller ID
does not grant private task access.
- Outbound telephony incurs provider charges. Provider acceptance is not
proof that the caller heard an answer.
- Keep the feature behind the existing experimental chat setting until
the real browser, inbound, outbound, and delayed-result acceptance
matrix passes.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with tool use and code execution. The exact serving
model ID 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
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-09 21:54:11 -05:00
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 d66acb7ac1 feat: automate Slack bot app setup and installation (#15413)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Chat connectors give each agent a customer-owned bot and task-backed
conversations.
> - Manual Slack setup requires app creation and copying durable
credentials.
> - Operators need a shorter setup that an assisting agent can use
safely.
> - This pull request creates the app through Slack's Manifest API and
installs it through OAuth.
> - Durable registration state supports recovery without creating
another app.
> - A four-screen wizard, automatic avatar upload, and OAuth account
linking reduce setup work.
> - Connector settings and per-turn tool guidance support daily use
after installation.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Native Slack bot setup, company secret storage, chat connector
management, and agent tool guidance.

**Problem or motivation**

New Slack bots require manual app creation and copying a signing secret
and bot token. Interrupted setup can create duplicate apps. The setup
and management screens contain unnecessary controls. Agents also need
guidance for native questions, files, thread replies, and governed Slack
actions.

**Proposed solution**

Use a temporary app-configuration access token to create a
customer-owned app. Save durable secrets in the vault. Bind OAuth to the
initiating actor, company, endpoint, registration revision, scopes, and
configured origins. Preserve manual and existing-app recovery. Link the
installing user's account, send a welcome DM, and advance from saved
server evidence. Keep request-URL recovery instructions available if
automatic connection detection waits.

**Alternatives considered**

The Slack CLI adds installation requirements. Socket Mode changes
transport. A shared Paperclip-owned app changes app ownership. These
alternatives are outside this change.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends existing chat connectors and secrets capabilities. Related
public work: #14037 and #13954 cover Slack MCP prerequisites and user
OAuth. No duplicate bot-registration PR was found.

## What Changed

- Share one reviewed manifest builder between automatic registration and
manual setup.
- Add replay-safe migration 0318 and company-bound registration state
with vault references and uncertain-creation recovery.
- Add registration, installation, callback, and resume APIs with
short-lived, single-use OAuth state.
- Save installation credentials before downstream checks and preserve
bot identity constraints.
- Reduce automatic setup to four screens. Keep advanced app details,
manual recovery, and existing-app setup.
- Upload the agent avatar with the Paperclip dark background. Link the
OAuth installer's account and send setup DMs.
- Show agent and connector-owner avatars. Simplify settings, access, and
conversation screens.
- Discover joined Slack channels and enable them by default. Start a
task from a bare mention and admit same-thread follow-ups.
- Refresh Slack tool guidance each turn. Add native-form, file,
approval, and delivery regressions plus manual model probe definitions
and sanitized acceptance records.
- Update deployment/database docs, OpenAPI, redaction, removal cleanup,
production Storybook stories, and provider browser tests.
- Merge current master and move the registration migration after its
latest migration without rewriting published commits.

The completed Slack success view intentionally has a single centered
**Done** action and no **Save & exit**, as explicitly requested by the
product owner. `DESIGN.md` records this exception; unfinished setup
steps retain the aligned wizard footer.

## Verification

- Passed after the master merge: repository typecheck, full build,
Storybook build, design-token gates, module-boundary gates, and
migration generation.
- Passed: all 352 focused Slack deterministic tests and all 14 affected
provider browser tests. Browser tests use controlled provider fixtures
and a separate throwaway instance.
- Passed on current head `c5d01e0e2`: the complete GitHub test matrix
(general server, chat, all workspaces, serialized server, and Runner),
all eight browser shards, typecheck/release registry, build, canary dry
run, security checks, and policy gates. There are 52 passing checks and
no pending or failing checks.
- Greptile completed on the exact current head with 5/5 and no
actionable findings or open review threads.
- Local repair verification passed 93 focused tests, including same-app
reinstall after revocation and rejection of consent started before
revocation, the AgentMail browser journey, and repository typecheck.
Local build and Storybook build also passed. The redundant local
full-suite rerun was stopped after the complete current-head CI matrix
passed.
- Real Slack setup and agent replies were exercised in the authorized
isolated test drive during the setup iteration.
- The ten additional model probes were attempted with legacy
`codex_local`, `gpt-5.6-sol`: five passed, two failed, and three were
partly verified. Native runtime is not qualified. See
`server/src/services/connectors/slack/evals/2026-10-08-acceptance.md`
for evidence and limits.
- Passing model probes cover native forms, downloaded file bytes, bare
mentions with thread replies, explicit posts/reactions, and saved
approval denial.
- The controlled uncertain-write probe found wrong delivery-check IDs.
The canvas fallback attempt used an invented tool name. Search
pagination/native search, a private-source denied-tool receipt, and
distinct board/webhook origins remain unqualified.

Reviewer path: enable Chat connectors, start Slack chat setup, select an
agent, enter an app-configuration access token, and approve Slack
installation. Send a message to the bot and confirm that setup advances
to success. Inspect settings and allowed channels. See
`doc/connections/SLACK-AUTOMATIC-SETUP.md` for deployment and recovery.

## Risks

- Slack app creation has no provider idempotency guarantee. A timeout
after dispatch stays uncertain until the operator checks Slack.
- OAuth needs a stable public HTTPS board origin. Webhook ingress may
use a separate configured HTTPS origin. Workspace policy can delay
installation.
- Migration 0318 can replay safely on instances that applied the earlier
development migration.
- OAuth installation now links the installer to the initiating Paperclip
user. Identity checks and company access rules still apply.
- Joined channels now enable bot responses by default. Linked-user
authorization and per-action approval rules still apply.
- Model behavior has the documented delivery-check and canvas fallback
failures. A passing CI run does not establish that every model probe
passed.
- Removing the connection does not delete the customer's Slack app. No
new first-party telemetry is added.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools, code
execution, and browser verification. The runtime does not expose a more
specific authoring model ID or context-window size. The live bot probes
used OpenAI `gpt-5.6-sol` through `codex_local` in legacy mode.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-08 06:33:31 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip b67db12d90 feat: add durable storage for private tasks (#14717)
Add private task and project ownership, downward access grants, and immutable run/workspace provenance. Apply migration 0313 with bounded batch commits and concurrent indexes. Keep the enforcement and sharing changes in their dependent PRs.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-07 06:53:20 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip c9021c6721 fix: require explicit native completion reviews (#13314)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Native runs report their outcome through paperclip_finish.
> - The server previously turned incomplete reports into human approval
requests.
> - Those requests could block a later successful run, even when no
person had requested review.
> - This pull request creates review cards only for explicit attention
requests and withdraws proven old fallback cards.
> - Agents receive useful completion feedback, while explicit approval
gates and task state protections remain in force.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Related: #13266 removed reviews caused by policy upgrades. This change
removes the separate completion fallback.

**What happened?**

An agent reported needs_review while waiting for checks without
requesting a human decision. Paperclip created a generic Native
completion review. A later successful report could not complete the task
because that old card remained pending.

**Expected behavior**

Ordinary low-risk work completes after a valid done report, a successful
run, and workspace finalization. Incomplete work stays with the agent.
Explicit approval requests remain visible and must be resolved.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Complete a native run with needs_review and no attention requests.
2. Continue the task and submit a successful done report.
3. Observe that the old implementation leaves the task in review behind
a generic confirmation card.

## What Changed

- Require explicit attention requests to create native review cards.
Route each request independently and preserve pending or declined
decisions.
- Withdraw only pending system cards with matching old decision,
assessment, effect, contract, and prompt provenance. Preserve history
and explicit or answered requests.
- Reassess an affected current result without overwriting later task
edits, runs, contracts, or workspace failures.
- Return pending approval links and required actions through the
completion tool. Reject contradictory done reports and empty review
requests before accepting a result.
- Allow one corrective continuation for incomplete results, then expose
a recovery action.
- Update status fixtures, database regressions, runner tests, and the
completion contract documentation.

## Verification

- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed after merging current master.
- `pnpm build` passed after merging current master.
- The combined branch passed 89 completion and Agent Chat tests. Other
targeted tests passed: 170 external-chat and reconciliation tests; 50
runner-resume and control-plane tests; 13 arbiter tests; 7 chat delivery
tests; 21 runner completion and runtime-context tests.
- The full local test attempt exposed old review fixtures and a missing
fake-provider binary. The fixtures are fixed and the helper is built.
All affected suites pass in fresh reruns. The timing-sensitive Discord
test also passed on rerun.
- All latest-head CI checks passed, including build, typecheck, general
and serialized tests, runner verification, browser tests, and canary dry
run. Greptile is 5/5 with zero unresolved comments.

## Risks

- Cleanup changes existing pending cards. It requires exact system
provenance and only applies to low-risk agent-claim contracts. It does
not delete history or dismiss explicit requests.
- Status still commits after the turn and workspace finalization.
Completion feedback reports current constraints and does not claim an
early status commit.
- Incomplete reports now request a bounded corrective run instead of an
automatic approval. Repeated failures expose recovery.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with repository inspection, code execution, and
test tools. The exact deployment identifier 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>
2026-09-12 13:00:04 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 889947c238 feat: add experimental native chat connectors (#13038)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - People also ask agents for work in their existing chat tools.
> - Each external conversation needs one task and a current authorized
source.
> - Retries, Stop, and provider failures must not duplicate work or
expose private data.
> - The first chat PR establishes the opt-in provider and data
contracts.
> - This PR adds experimental channel integration and its durable
control plane.
> - Users can request work from connected channels and inspect delivery
in Paperclip.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #13100 and #13092. This is the second of exactly two chat PRs.
Foundation #13100 is merged and changed 143 files. Runner prerequisite
#13092 is also merged. This PR changes 400 files against master, below
the 500-file review limit. It contains no wireframe images or HTML
galleries.

## What Changed

- Add native Slack, GitHub, Microsoft Teams, Telegram, and Discord chat
connections. Keep chat disabled unless the operator enables experimental
chat connectors. Preserve the production GitHub tool connection and its
normal setup path.
- Bind each provider bot identity to one immutable Paperclip agent. Bind
each admitted external conversation to one task. Paperclip owns tasks,
runs, permissions, and audit records.
- Add durable admission, per-conversation queues, questions, task
controls, progress, final replies, images, files, and delivery receipts.
Board comments remain internal unless explicitly sent to the channel.
- Check current identity, provider reach, resource access, credentials,
runtime generation, and exact source before provider effects. Keep
private responses private. Never send raw reasoning, private logs,
credentials, or tool arguments.
- Hold uncertain sends for explicit audited resolution. Make Board
Send-to-channel atomic and idempotent. Keep reconnect and setup
credentials in Paperclip secret storage.
- Preserve current native-runner authority across retries, lost
acknowledgements, and recovery. Keep immutable input and completion
contracts separate from newer user input. Receipt reconciliation cannot
launch a provider.
- Reconcile chat close/new ordering and provider-effect lock order.
Audit resource access changes in the same transaction. Submit only the
selected resource from each UI toggle so stale pages cannot undo
unrelated access changes.
- Drain Codex stdout before certifying process exit. Bound the drain
with the existing shutdown grace. Preserve observed terminal authority
without treating an undrained process as successful or reusable.
- Incorporate master `018ca5da` with its ACP Stop, mobile task layout,
runner packaging, and official lock changes. Preserve dedicated
chat-answer continuations in both directions when ordinary queued
comments are adopted after Stop.
- Fence late adapter readiness behind an earlier Stop for the same run.
Preserve verified cleanup for registered adapters. Handle single Stop,
agent pause, duplicate Stops, and failure release without creating a
false cancellation receipt.
- Incorporate master's `6dd48cad4` wake-queue extraction. Preserve exact
failed-chat retry authorization and lineage, retired question-source
suppression, and the block on generic recovery that would discard the
admitted source. Fresh deferred input retains its separate promotion
path.
- Incorporate master `2a05b5ed3` and its queue-admission extraction,
simplified transaction ports, and separate runner CI job. Preserve exact
durable receipts, actor separation, and dedicated-answer isolation
through the new module. A failed receipt insert rolls back the
accompanying deferred-wake merge.

## Verification

Current head: `afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a`, incorporating
master `2a05b5ed3457ea33efd6895520447d1d97fe98d8`. The conflicts are
resolved. This successor fixes two test-harness boundaries exposed by
CI: per-case route-module preparation and actual durable-save completion
before intentional runner termination. Production code and all existing
test/turn deadlines are unchanged. [Exact-head Greptile
review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13038#issuecomment-5587250594)
is **5/5**, completed September 10 at 13:20:55 UTC, with no actionable
findings or open review threads. [Fresh exact-head
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34481724341)
passes **all 24 jobs**, including Build and both required aggregates.
Normal exact-head guarded merge was attempted and rejected by the
remaining branch approval policy: CODEOWNER review is required and no
human approval is present. Normal **squash auto-merge is enabled** as of
September 10 at 13:36:26 UTC. Requested CODEOWNERS have been notified;
no approval bypass or self-approval was used. Earlier-head results below
remain historical evidence, not qualification of this successor.

- Final exact-head Linux evidence: 995/995 chat integration cases; 36/36
agent-skills routes; 35/35 runner live-session cases, including real
process kill/resume; 1948 runner Vitest cases with three existing
benchmark/platform guards; 870/870 API-authority cases; and 104 browser
cases with four existing optional skips. Rust, conformance/replay, full
repository build, typecheck, canary, all server/workspace shards, and
both required aggregates pass with normal CI concurrency. Earlier failed
attempts remain recorded below.

- Latest test-only qualification: 141/141
route/permissions/authentication cases pass in separate cold forks, with
plain server types and independent review clear. The real-runner suite
passes 35/35, with plain runner types and independent review clear. A
controlled premature-save acknowledgement fails as expected; matching
ownership/effect/process evidence, rejected saves, real turn outcome,
test abort, and pre-kill liveness are covered. No local reproduction of
the original CI scheduling failure is claimed. The preceding [CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34479680858)
passes 21/24 jobs, including all 995 Linux chat cases and browser
aggregate (104 passed, four existing optional skips); only Build, the
skills serialized shard, and the required verification aggregate fail.
Its exact-head Greptile review was 5/5. Both failed job logs are
retained.

- Final fixture qualification: all eight focused Discord cases and all
995 chat integration cases pass. The exact modal statement/PID is
observed before taking the real connection lock; the test then proves
its actual blocking relationship before mutation. Original SQL
execution, provider behavior, negative assertions, and 1s/15s timeouts
remain unchanged. Independent review is clear and test/production hashes
remain frozen. The preceding [CI
attempt](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34477184777)
passed 22 jobs, including Build/runner, typecheck, canary, all other
test shards, and browser aggregate (104 passed, four existing optional
skips); the two fixture failures and failed verification aggregate
remain recorded, not relabeled as a pass.

- Current queue-module composition: 308/308 recovery/batching/queue/Stop
tests; 995/995 full chat integration; 89/89 module tests, including real
PostgreSQL receipt-insert rollback; 24/24 workflow/module-boundary
tests; plain server and UI types. All four actual local process/ACP
browser paths pass in 1.4 minutes. Fresh databases, no skips or retries,
stable reviewed source hashes. The initial boundary failure is retained;
its no-op service wrapper was removed without changing recovery context
or weakening the check. An exploratory standalone test-directory
typecheck fails because its new upstream transformation config is not a
standalone typechecking project; standard CI/build does not invoke it,
and no configuration was weakened to suppress those diagnostics.

- The preceding head `e02a63d462ce5d47433b0aeb632bb6fd20aab1ba` passed
[all 24 CI
jobs](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34436462958)
and exact-head Greptile review at 5/5. Required CODEOWNER review
prevented its normal merge before master advanced again.

- Final extracted-module composition: 307/307 recovery, batching, queue
and Stop-control tests; 995/995 full chat integration; 49/49 module
tests including eight PostgreSQL adapter cases; and 19/19 issue-update
tests. Plain server types pass. All four actual local process/ACP
browser paths pass in 1.3 minutes. Fresh databases, no skips or retries
in these cohorts, frozen source hashes, and independent review clear.

- The preceding head `3e4e1c1c` passes [all PR CI
jobs](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34415826820),
including Build and required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`. Both the
original Rust failure and the previously load-sensitive lineage fixture
pass with unchanged Linux concurrency. Master advanced afterward and
required this reconciliation.
- Final master composition: 448/448 focused UI tests, 186/186 adapter
tests, 24/24 queue/control tests, and 11/11 packaging tests. Plain UI,
server, shared, and adapter types pass. Token gates and diff checks
pass. Independent server and UI reviews are clear.
- Stop-registration regression: both real-service cases fail against
exact `a95` source and pass with the fix. The full corrected
recovery/control suite passes 265/265. Duplicate-owner and failed-Stop
controls also pass. Plain server types pass. The readiness barrier
prevents provider startup without adding an acknowledgment to an already
terminal run.
- Final qualification strengthens terminal-field equality and repeats
both affected cases successfully on a fresh database. All four actual
local process/ACP browser paths pass again in 1.3 minutes, without skips
or retries. The final screenshot shows Cancelled, a paused subtree,
retained input, and no error toast.
- Two new actual-service regressions fail before the merge fix. They
prove that queued-comment adoption could consume a dedicated chat answer
or add unrelated input to that answer. The fixed four-case cohort
passes, including ordinary upstream continuation and adapter Stop
controls. Full recovery passes 257/257. All four actual local
process/ACP Stop browser flows pass in 1.4 minutes, without skips or
retries, on a fresh database.
- The unchanged runner artifact was qualified with 171/171 transport
tests, 870/870 API-authority tests, conformance 1/1, and replay 11/11.
Six controlled reader tests prove the exit/drain repair. Its local
serial Rust workspace passed 546 top-level cases plus two invoked
helpers; the later passing Linux CI supplies default-concurrency
evidence.
- Prior exact-source full chat integration passes 995/995. Settings
regressions cover concurrent stale pages, 501 destinations, pending
state, rejected updates, and explicit retry. These deterministic tests
do not prove live provider behavior.
- Retained failed attempts and their causes are in the [qualification
log](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a/doc/plans/chat-adapters/2026-09-08-chat-queue-and-webhook-repair.md).
The first merge adapter run timed out while macOS slept for 290 seconds.
Its unchanged repeat passed with a temporary sleep guard. No assertion,
deadline, or CI gate was weakened.

Review commands include `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest
run src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-queued-comments-routes.test.ts` and `pnpm exec
playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts
tests/e2e/acp-stop-continuation.spec.ts`. Database suites require fresh
disposable databases. See the [browser
runbook](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a/doc/plans/chat-adapters/2026-09-04-chat-adapters-browser-e2e-runbook.md)
for provider setup and separate live acceptance steps.

## Risks

- This remains experimental. Deterministic tests and bounded live
evidence do not establish every provider feature, tenant, permission
layout, or media shape. Teams work-tenant qualification is still open.
- Failed and uncertain provider effects remain visible and can require
operator action. A transport receipt does not prove recipient
visibility.
- Native controller and runner artifacts must remain compatible.
Preserve lease ownership, terminal authority, source binding, and
quarantine during future changes.
- Access and audit rows commit together, but activity notifications
remain best-effort. This is not a new durable event outbox.
- The PR operation does not deploy a live server, replace its runner, or
change provider permissions. Remaining live qualification is documented
in the [temporary
handoff](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a/doc/plans/chat-adapters/2026-09-08-open-qualification-followups.md).

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex assisted with implementation, tool execution, testing, and
review. The work records `gpt-6-astra` assistance. The environment does
not report a context-window size. No private reasoning traces are
included.

## 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>
2026-09-10 10:06:45 -05:00