mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-23 17:33:51 +02:00
eaacadeba3e27c5e3ec0e8b8d453c229e047eba9
1209
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
eaacadeba3 |
fix(recovery): let preservation owners reopen retained sources (#17053)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Recovery must save retained workspace files before ordinary execution can resume. > - The environment runtime blocks access to retained sources to prevent unsafe reuse or deletion. > - The recovery worker also used that ordinary resume path. > - The guard returned no lease, so recovery reported an invalid source binding before it could save files. > - This pull request gives the physical preservation owner a separate, source-bound resume path. > - Ordinary execution and destructive cleanup keep their existing guards. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16965. **What happened?** A retained workspace with a workspaceRestoreRecovery marker could not recover through the real environment runtime. The runtime returned null before calling the provider. Recovery classified this as source_binding_invalid. Earlier recovery fixtures replaced the runtime facade, so they did not exercise this guard. **Expected behavior** The verified preservation owner can reopen its exact stopped allocation to save files. Other callers remain blocked. Recovery preserves newer local files and does not start another agent or repeat a completed external action. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Seed a terminal source run with a retained sandbox, a recovery action, and the workspaceRestoreRecovery lease marker. 2. Give the source a verified stop receipt. 3. Call recoverRetainedWorkspace through environmentRuntimeService. 4. Before this change, the recovery action returns to blocked with source_binding_invalid. No files are copied. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on master at |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
30b753f614 |
perf(budgets): scope accounting and deliver enforcement asynchronously (#17046)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their paid work. > - Budgets must prevent new work and stop reported overruns. > - Cost settlement also ran serial lifecycle reconciliation for every eligible company agent. > - That made request latency grow with unrelated idle agents and delayed results on stop delivery. > - This change separates atomic admission and accounting from durable asynchronous enforcement. > - Scoped live usage detects overruns without writing provisional ledger charges. > - The result is constant query scope for ordinary settlement and recoverable stop delivery. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Settlement and budget checks entered company-wide lifecycle reconciliation. A company with 1,000 unrelated idle agents performed 1,001 accounting transactions for one ordinary cost evaluation. User requests could also wait for provider termination. Running usage checkpoints did not enforce reported monetary exposure. **Expected behavior** Keep the final reservation gate authoritative. Commit charges, scope blocks, and enforcement intent before returning. Deliver stop requests after commit. Read only applicable policies and execution scopes for ordinary charges. Stop long-running work when supported reported or priced usage establishes an overrun. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a disposable company with one company budget and idle agents. 2. Evaluate a charge below the budget with 0, 17, and 1,000 unrelated idle agents. 3. Compare query counts, company accounting transactions, and duration. 4. Use the controlled partial-usage and delayed-stop fixtures to check enforcement and request responsiveness. **Paperclip version or commit** The measured baseline is `6c9b87d0922f1ebfc43e8b0c36889ac5ba7b9837` from `master`. Related public work: Refs #16976, #2006, #3539, #13763, #14296, #16853, #13075. These cover the affected service charge, cancellation, and accounting paths. This change removes their shared reconciliation overhead. ## What Changed - Batch applicable policy exposure under the existing company accounting lock. Preserve exact fractional money and zero-reservation dispatch fences. - Commit a durable final budget dispatch claim before provider I/O. Retain a separate final issue/run ownership transaction through synchronous handoff, without holding the company accounting lock or awaiting provider work. Preserve native recovery lease checks and duplicate handoff fencing. Browser handoff rechecks current policy; it reuses a consumed rate slot only for the identical policy generation. - Separate ledger spend, live observed spend, and effective held capacity. Use the maximum of reservation and live observation for each unfinished operation. - Deliver budget cancellation through the existing coordinator. Revalidate generations and persist queued/running stop fences before external termination. Bound stop concurrency to four. - Apply agent holds only to the affected agent. Project budgets leave other projects running. Project real company transitions in bounded lifecycle batches. - Replace periodic broad reconciliation with durable pending work, startup repair, receipt replay, and concrete retry/window deadlines. Retain drain and idle-safety checks. - Enforce accepted cumulative usage checkpoints without provisional charges. Final accounting atomically replaces live exposure and settles reservations. - Add operator-gated budget spans, regression coverage, map updates, and a real-PostgreSQL comparison harness. No schema or first-party telemetry change. ## Verification - Full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` passes on the final ownership fix, rebased onto `bbcf5dfe98`. Production `pnpm build` passes on final head `4c5f4de8b1`. Map, module-boundary, token, and Storybook catalog checks pass. - Focused real-PostgreSQL coverage includes the 292-case rebased accounting/dispatch run, 63 browser cases, 52 run-control/cancellation cases, 42 policy-generation cases, 77 lifecycle/commentary cases, and the exact Muse confirmation regression. Native executor unit coverage passes all 768 cases. Final ownership coverage passes: 74 adapter/use-case cases, nine public regression cases, and the additional deleted-project race. These exercise competing ownership, budget changes and charges between phases, zero/nonzero duplicate claims, rollback, recovery contention, read-only capacity rechecks, and controlled HTTP startup after commit. Another 74 pure/startup/tracing cases pass. The complete CI matrix and both 5/5 reviews passed on `1ac9b58`; its external security scan identified a stale-owner handoff race. The final fix restores synchronous issue/run ownership fencing after the accounting transaction commits. Final head `8e84f55ce8` has fresh Greptile 5/5 with zero new comments, Paperclip review 5/5, and a passing security scan. The complete latest-head [CI matrix](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39535189808) passes, including budget, browser, Runner, build, and canary jobs. The unchanged Runner close fixture passed on its sole same-head job retry. - Broad local `pnpm test:run` invocations were stopped before required source updates (rebase and review fixes). They are not claimed as full passes. Final full-suite coverage comes from the complete latest-head CI matrix; local focused coverage and the incomplete broad invocations are reported separately. - Reproduce performance with `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsx ../scripts/benchmark-budget-enforcement.ts --baseline-ref=6c9b87d0922f1ebfc43e8b0c36889ac5ba7b9837`; repeat with `--reverse`. The harness uses disposable real PostgreSQL, 20 warm samples per variant/count, and records raw timings, SQL/lock counts, agent reads, unchanged agent state, and query plans. Final production-source measurement revision: `eff713a4f72c7f4b7a4002a701cb481d4bfccd95`; the extended harness is committed in `4c5f4de8b1`. | Unrelated idle agents | Baseline median / p95 | New median / p95 | Baseline SQL / locks | New SQL / locks | New agent reads | | --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | | 0 | 1.80 / 2.33 ms | 2.99 / 3.88 ms | 5 / 1 | 7 / 1 | 0 | | 17 | 15.53 / 19.55 ms | 2.24 / 2.60 ms | 90 / 18 | 7 / 1 | 0 | | 1,000 | 978.35 / 1,790.43 ms | 2.16 / 2.52 ms | 5,005 / 1,001 | 7 / 1 | 0 | - These measurements use local PostgreSQL 18.1 and Node 26.4.0 arm64. They isolate the cost-evaluation core and complete admission path, without hosted-region or provider latency. Prior-revision reversed-order controls also preserved the constant query counts; the final measurements above use the final production source. - Complete reserve → final ownership gate → immediate offline provider result is measured separately, with one responsible agent and one active operation at each unrelated-agent count. Admission p95 baseline/new: 0 agents **11.54 / 29.77 ms**; 17 agents **9.31 / 27.62 ms**; 1,000 agents **24.51 / 74.05 ms**. Baseline admission was already scoped; the stronger final fence adds bounded overhead. New counts stay constant at 53 Drizzle statements, three transactions, two company-accounting locks, and five agent-reading statements bound to the responsible agent. Zero unrelated-agent reads, exactly one provider callback per sample, and no leftover runs or holds. All admission scenarios stay below 250 ms. No external provider calls are included. - The partial-usage/delayed-termination fixture passed 20/20: receipt persistence p95 13 ms, receipt return to observed durable Stop fence p95 28 ms, complete receipt-start-to-fence p95 50 ms, unrelated database request p95 1 ms while termination was blocked. After releasing the controlled termination fixture, acknowledgement p95 was 14 ms. These are separately measured phases; fixture acknowledgement is not live-provider termination latency. - Models and provider deadlines are unchanged. No deployment, live inference, or staging acceptance is claimed. A quiet 30-minute follow-up waits for the merged revision on staging, then repeats classifier and controlled budget-stop acceptance in staging, recording hosted bookkeeping, queue delay, and actual provider acknowledgement separately. - Development failures retained: finalizer notification regressions (fixed; 27/27 affected cases passed), invalid browser admission fixture assumptions (fixed; browser coverage now passes 63/63), and first-head lifecycle/dispatch CI regressions (reproduced and repaired). A prior-head Cases E2E test hit its unchanged announcement-dismiss handler race while opening a filter; the same journey passed on `1ac9b58`. The external security review then found a stale-owner race between accounting commit and provider entry; final verification covers a competing run in that gap while retaining provider I/O outside the accounting lock. Early PostgreSQL startup attempts hit local semaphore pressure; serial reruns succeeded. The final-head Runner lane had one failure among 1,823 tests: the unchanged `timeout-attachment` fixture failed at its first process close after 6.28 seconds. The sole same-head job retry passed all 1,819 active tests (four skipped), including that fixture in 1.85 seconds. Three isolated local probes could not run correctly because the Rust fake-provider fixture binary was absent; cleanup masked the original startup failure. CI builds that fixture through its normal lane. These probes are inconclusive and are not counted as passes. ## Risks - This changes accounting, lifecycle, and cancellation ordering. Durable generations, source/sequence checks, ownership leases, and company locking remain required for correctness. - Provider stop acknowledgement can be slow or fail. Stop intent remains pending until existing termination proof succeeds; cancelled row status alone does not acknowledge delivery. - Mid-run limits depend on provider usage reports or supported price calculations. Providers that report only at completion cannot provide exact mid-call detection. - Signals are process-local wake hints for the supported single-active-writer model. Durable state and startup recovery remain authoritative. - There are no migrations, new queue tables, or cached balances. Repeat the classifier and controlled budget-stop acceptance after normal rollout. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, code execution, and parallel coding agents. The host does not expose the exact backend model revision or context-window size, so those values are not asserted. ## 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
|
dff63551fe |
fix: resume unfinished work after repository preparation (#17047)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip manages agents that perform work for a company.
> - Task repositories are prepared at normal run admission.
> - A running native task can stage a repository while its work remains
unfinished.
> - The controller did not offer that saved setup as a continuation.
> - The agent could add a timer or wait for a user restart.
> - This change uses the existing same-agent continuation and status
ledger.
> - The accepted explanation and proven conversation remain available
after setup.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #17045. That prerequisite has merged. This PR targets master.
**What happened?**
A projectless native task can request a repository for the next
admission. An unfinished task has no server-selected repository
continuation. An explicit same-agent continuation also loses chat
provenance.
**Expected behavior**
An unfinished standard task can yield and resume through the existing
admission queue. Its explanation and final result retain the authorized
conversation. A task that only stages a repository can complete without
another run.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start a native standard task in a task directory.
2. Request an authorized repository through prepare_repository.
3. Yield with unfinished work and no explicit continuation.
4. Observe that the former driver rejects the yield, although the
pending repository is saved.
## What Changed
- Offer a saved same-agent continuation for the current task's pending
repository.
- Accept that current server continuation in the shared provider driver.
- Resolve chat provenance through applied status decisions, delivered
effects, and admitted wakes.
- Preserve accepted setup explanations without repeating an owned
question card.
- Document optional reproduction details and configured repository
discovery.
- Extend database regressions and workspace access maps.
- Preserve Copilot profile v52 and bind the shared continuation source
in v53. Include the active identity in the QA image fingerprint.
## Verification
- Five focused server suites: 100 checks pass.
- Shared continuation driver: 12 checks pass.
- Server typecheck passes.
- Map contract and whitespace checks pass.
- Existing API and driver assertions fail on the former implementation.
- Real dispatcher and queue cohort: 43 checks pass. The original
reply-loss regression fails before the dispatch receipt fix.
- Continuation driver and installation identity cohort: 62 checks pass.
- Regenerated capability inventory and contract checks pass.
- Final response precedence cohort: 109 checks pass. The stale-comment
case fails on the former implementation.
- All required CI checks, build, and both source reviews pass on
|
||
|
|
f3af9887ca |
fix(chat): keep each chat conversation in its own wake batch (#17054)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Chat channels let a linked user talk to an agent from Slack, GitHub and other platforms. Each external thread is a chat conversation that is bound to one issue. > - One issue can have many conversations. A GitHub pull request review makes one conversation for each inline finding thread. > - When replies arrive behind an active run, the wake queue merges them into one deferred wake. The merge did not look at the conversation. > - A reviewed chat run can attest only one conversation. A merged batch from two threads always failed attestation with `setup_failed` / `reviewed_chat_execution_binding_not_authorized`, so no reply got an answer. > - This pull request keeps each chat conversation in its own wake batch. The single-conversation attestation check stays the same. > - The benefit is that replies in different review threads each get their own attested run, one after the other. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16793 (related: chat origin during coalescing). No public issue exists, so the bug report follows. **What happened?** A linked user replied in three different inline review-finding threads of one pull request while the agent's review run was still active. The three wakes merged into one deferred wake. The promoted run failed in about 2 seconds with `setup_failed` / `reviewed_chat_execution_binding_not_authorized` and `providerWorkStarted=false`. None of the three replies got an answer. The failed-chat retry cannot recover this batch, because a retry source holds one conversation. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Bind two chat conversations (two GitHub finding threads) to one `in_review` issue. 2. Start a run for the assigned agent on that issue. 3. As the linked user, reply once in each thread. 4. Finish the active run. 5. See one promoted run that fails with `reviewed_chat_execution_binding_not_authorized`. **Expected behavior** Each thread gets its own run. Each run attests its one conversation and answers its reply. **Cause** `findExistingDeferredWake` matched on company, agent, issue and actor only. The active-run coalesce path had the same gap. `authorizeChatConversationForBoundRun` correctly denies a batch with more than one conversation. ## What Changed - `run-dispatch/domain/wake-context.ts`: add the `chatConversationId` wake-context key, a reader, and `wakeChatConversationsConflict`. A conflict means that both wakes have a conversation and the two conversations are different. - `issue-assignment-wakeup.ts` and `chat-channels/inbound/wakeups.ts`: stamp the conversation ID on each inbound chat wake. - `chat-channels/failed-run-retry.ts`: stamp the conversation ID on failed-chat retry wakes, so later replies do not merge into a retry from another conversation. - `wake-queue` admission: do not coalesce into an active run of another conversation. The deferred-wake lookup now matches only wakes of the same conversation or wakes without a conversation. - `heartbeat/queue.ts`: the same-scope queued or running coalesce target is skipped when the conversations conflict. - `doc/execution-semantics.md`: describe per-conversation chat wake batching. - Tests: an integration regression in the GitHub review block of `chat-channels.integration.test.ts`, and unit cases for the active-run branch in `wake-queue/application/use-cases.test.ts`. ## Verification - Red before the fix: `pnpm --dir server exec vitest run src/__tests__/chat-channels.integration.test.ts -t "replies in review finding threads"`. The main case fails with one run: `{ status: "failed", errorCode: "setup_failed", error: "reviewed_chat_execution_binding_not_authorized" }`. - Green after the fix, same command, 3 of 3 pass: - Replies in two finding threads give two successive runs. Each run succeeds, has `paperclipExternalChatExecutionBound: true`, and holds only its own comment and conversation. - Two replies in the same thread still give one run with both comments. - After the linked identity is revoked, each separated run is still denied (`setup_failed`) and the adapter does not execute. - `vitest run src/modules/wake-queue src/modules/run-dispatch`: all pass, with the new cases (different conversation, same conversation, run without a conversation, non-chat wake). - Related suites pass: `heartbeat-comment-wake-batching`, `durable-chat-wakeup`, `chat-failed-run-retry-boundary`, `issue-queued-comments-routes`, `heartbeat-stale-queue-invalidation`. - Full `chat-channels.integration.test.ts`: 823 passed, 1 timed out. The timed-out test (`GitHub terminal receipt composes pinned HTTP and durable source authority (held_token)`) passes alone with and without this change. The sandbox has a 4 GB memory cap. - Not run locally: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. The server `tsc` process was killed at the 4 GB sandbox memory cap. CI runs both. - Runtime dependency note: the deferred-wake lookup adds one JSONB predicate to the existing deferred-wake query. It reads the same rows. The query count does not change. The integration regression runs it against embedded Postgres. ## Risks - Low risk. No schema change and no migration. - Behavior change: chat replies from different conversations on one issue now run one after the other, not in one batch. Before this change, such a batch always failed, so no working flow becomes slower. - Wakes without a conversation (non-chat wakes, and wakes queued before this deploy) keep the old coalescing. A deferred wake from before the deploy has no conversation key, so one later reply can still merge into it. That window closes when the queue drains. - The check keeps the single-conversation attestation in `authorizeChatConversationForBoundRun`. Revoked identities are still denied. ## Model Used - Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), in Claude Code through the Paperclip agent harness. It used tool use (shell, file editing, test runs) and extended reasoning. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] 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: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
c2daf906d9 |
fix: preserve task continuation and question delivery (#17045)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip manages agent work and delivers its results.
> - One task can need several runs and a saved workspace.
> - A run can succeed while the task waits for its next run.
> - Chat fallback treated that success as completion and dropped useful
status.
> - Monitor runs also lost their conversation origin, and text-question
cards lost their prompt.
> - This change preserves the task outcome and exact delivery authority
across those boundaries.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
A Slack task requested a repository, yielded to a scheduled
continuation, and showed only a generic completion message. The next run
could not publish through the original conversation. A later text
question showed its title and Respond button without the question
context. Workspace recovery could commit the saved monitor result
without restoring its explanation.
**Expected behavior**
The original conversation shows the accepted continuation explanation,
receives the resumed result, and displays the full question when input
is needed. A successful provider run does not claim that unfinished work
is complete. Recovery delivers saved output once without another
provider result.
**Steps to reproduce**
Start an authorized chat task, prepare a repository for a later
admission, save a monitor wait, and let that monitor resume the task.
Repeat with workspace finalization interrupted and with a free-text
question. Inspect the originating conversation and the persisted output.
Related merged work: #16806 and #16975. The open monitor and recovery
changes found during duplicate search address different status and
liveness policies.
## What Changed
- Keep committed monitor summaries visible through the shared board and
chat response resolver. Preserve interaction ownership and comment
reuse.
- Recover a saved monitor explanation after finalization, with no
repeated provider result.
- Prove monitor publication origin from the admitted wake and matching
scheduling receipt. Match company, task, agent, requester, and schedule;
reject ambiguous sources.
- Include monitor continuations in the existing publication scan and use
the canonical task binding. Keep current transport authorization.
- Suppress completion fallback for yielded results. Explain missing
final output without claiming completion.
- Include question summaries, prompts, and help text in modal-backed
cards. Keep answered text private.
- Update execution semantics, capability maps, and the bounded
reliability plan.
## Verification
- Original source fails four composed PostgreSQL regressions: monitor
origin, yielded completion, question body, and saved-summary recovery.
The shared response resolver also fails before the repair.
- Repaired focused cohort: 148 tests pass across publication, question
privacy, scheduler, and native monitor suites. These use real disposable
PostgreSQL; they do not qualify live Slack.
- Full workspace typecheck and production build pass locally. Map checks
and whitespace checks pass.
- All CI gates pass at
|
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
e5351b240a |
Verify native Runner setup through plugin tasks (#17029)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work for AI agents. > - An environment plugin can own a Runner task. > - The merged launch-preparation contract lets the execution owner build the provider configuration. > - Core still needs a task process owner and a setup test that uses that configuration. > - This PR connects the task API to the Runner process-owner contract. > - Operators can test a plugin environment before Core sends it task work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Runner, plugin SDK, and agent environment tests. **Problem or motivation** A task-only environment cannot use the shell-based setup path. Core must verify the Runner hello exchange and process cleanup through dedicated task operations. **Proposed solution** Add a lease-bound task driver and use it for a bounded setup probe. Keep heartbeat admission and task execution in #16978. This PR follows the merged launch-preparation contract in #16997. **Alternatives considered** A provider declaration alone cannot prove that Runner and the provider connect. A shell bridge would give the plugin an unnecessary command interface. ## What Changed - Pass structured Runner launch data to process owners. Support an external connection and explicit detach. - Add typed launch authentication checks and checkpoint operations. Check lease, run, project, and retained-task authority. - Connect launch preparation, PRP, termination proof, and credential handoff to the task driver. Reject local environment overrides during installed-account setup. Pass saved-account identity and credential home directly from Core. - Run a short-lived setup probe through the existing agent environment test API. Require a verified provider hello and cleanup. Keep saved Copilot account checks metadata-only through a dedicated task operation. - Update the Copilot source identity because the shared transport source changed. Keep provider behavior and the earlier identity fixture. ## Verification - CI passes on `f987adec7`: 55 successful checks and 5 expected skips. Standard Greptile and Apex are both 5/5 with no open findings. The branch merges cleanly with current master. - Repository typecheck and build pass after the rebase onto the workspace-provider contract. Server typecheck and build also pass after the final setup fix. - The 110 focused lease, SDK, setup, Copilot, and route cases pass after the rebase. All 14 setup cases pass after the final change. These include a real local Runner with a test provider. The saved-agent model-discovery case also passes. - Apex found that Core's relative workspace marker failed the driver path check, and non-Codex sessions omitted the observed model. Both failures were reproduced and fixed. The probe leaves physical workspace selection to plugin preparation. The transport reads each provider's observed model and exposes it to the driver. All 14 setup cases, 6 transport peer cases, and both existing real Runner/OpenCode cases pass. Runner build and server typecheck pass. - The coverage audit removed two redundant cases, repeated fixture code, and two extra real Runner launches. It kept authorization, credential selection, cancellation, lost replies, termination proof, checkpoint identity, and provider setup checks. - The Copilot source-identity check passes. The added-line secret and PII scan passes. The unmerged v52 attestation was regenerated after the shared transport fix. - CI on `13faeff02` caught one stale Copilot digest assertion after attestation regeneration. The literal now matches the candidate attestation, and all 49 installation cases pass. That CI lane otherwise passed 1,818 cases. - An earlier CI run hit an unchanged UI toast timing test. The separate fix is tracked in #16952. Current CI passes that shard. CI also caught a stale model-discovery assertion in this change; the assertion is fixed. - The local full-suite run was stopped when master changed. The final CI run supplies exact-head full-suite validation. No live Cloud or provider test was run. ## Risks - Native hello tests require a saved Core account or the installed account. Local environment overrides are unsupported for installed-account probes and fail before the provider runs. - A native task provider must declare launch preparation and authentication-check version 1. It must keep the checked configuration fixed through submission. Core rejects providers that cannot make this guarantee. - A lost task reply does not prove process termination. Core retains grants until the provider proves termination and Core saves required state. - This PR does not enable native heartbeat dispatch through plugin environments. Cloud deployment and live provider validation remain separate. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. Tool use includes code editing, local tests, and the GitHub CLI. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal issue details - [x] I have run focused tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
79b2bf78dd |
Create agent records when onboarding names are submitted (#17005)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Core onboarding selects an agent and connects its provider account. > - The current flow creates the agent record after authentication. > - Setup needs a stable agent identity as soon as the user submits its name. > - This PR saves a paused setup record on name submission and finishes the hire on that same record. > - The existing sandbox authentication and approval paths continue to apply. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Core agent lifecycle, shared validators, and onboarding UI. **Current behavior** Onboarding creates the database record at the final hire step. Earlier authentication and saved setup have no agent record. **Proposed behavior** Create a paused agent with a setup hold when the user submits its name. Do this before adapter selection or authentication. Update that same record after adapter selection. Reuse its ID on retries and saved setup. Finish that record through the existing hire path. **Reason and benefit** Give setup a stable identity without coupling this refactor to computer provisioning or a new execution backend. **Breaking changes** Incomplete setup now leaves an inactive agent record. Existing clients can still create and hire agents without the new optional fields. The sandbox authentication flow and API key support remain in place. **Additional context** Requested Core-only refactor. Related work: #15422 changes runner defaults. This PR preserves those choices. No duplicate early-record refactor was found in the issue and PR search. ## What Changed - Save the agent when the user submits its name in both onboarding entry points. Use a provisional adapter until the user chooses one. Reopen name-only drafts at adapter selection. - Add retry-safe setup creation and same-record hire completion. Keep approval checks at final hire. - Save and restore setup configuration in both onboarding entry points. Show Finish setup for paused setup agents. - Restrict setup changes to authorized board users. Block generic resume until setup finishes. - Add lifecycle, authorization, connection, and UI coverage. Update the specification and feature maps. ## Verification - Latest focused server run: 126 lifecycle and AI-connection tests passed after the Apex fixes. An earlier broader run passed 301 lifecycle, instruction, adapter-validation, and AI-connection tests. Earlier authentication, retry, cross-company, and direct-create regressions also passed. - Name-save verification: 336 tests across the wizard, naming dialog, New agent, action-button, and wizard-step suites passed. Coverage includes retry identity, repeated submission, closing during a save, saved-model restoration, and a disabled process adapter. - Shared, server, and UI TypeScript checks passed. The latest UI package check and direct server TypeScript check passed. The server package preparation command could not finish locally because Cargo is unavailable; full build preparation runs in CI. Map checks, token gates, and `git diff --check` passed; each pushed diff was scanned for credentials and PII. - All six onboarding browser tests passed together with installed Chrome against a fresh throwaway instance after the Apex fixes. They include numbered duplicate names, first-time Copilot without a connected account, and Grok’s saved model. They verify early persistence in both entry points, closing and reopening a name-only draft, same-record adapter selection, sandbox sign-in, login reload, and failed-connection gating. Provider responses are simulated; Core persistence is real. - Regression coverage includes incomplete Copilot creation versus final validation, Kimi settings through redacted responses, stale local drafts, company switches during creation, saved environments, and provider changes with personal/shared old bindings. - Apex found five name-only setup gaps: numbered names, early Copilot account validation, the Grok model default, same-name draft ownership, and provisional runner restoration. The fixes preserve server names, defer implicit account binding until hire, set Grok’s model, avoid name-based reuse of unfinished records, and restore Auto for pending adapter choices. UI, database, and browser regressions cover these cases. - Standard Greptile found a Grok provider mismatch in the new adapter save. The save now uses ACPX with the Grok profile. Both the 129-test dialog/setup run and a real-API browser regression passed after the fix. The first browser attempt stopped on an ambiguous empty-roster button selector; it now scopes the click to the toolbar. - Moving the save point exposed a saved-model reset and timing assumptions in the same-name and portal fixtures. The source choice now preserves the restored model, and tests cover same-name recovery without a second hire. - Initial CI exposed direct-create compatibility, concurrent setup effects, fixture assumptions, and a missing-fields assumption in the provider-validation guard. These were fixed and verified locally. Review findings were addressed with authorization, recovery, credential-persistence, and restored-configuration regressions. - The final desktop capture passed after host resource cleanup. A repeat first failed before Core started because macOS had exhausted shared-memory IDs. Standalone PostgreSQL initialization reproduced the same error. Releasing only unattached control segments from this task’s stopped test databases allowed the unchanged revision to pass. No Core or system setting changed. - Local database tests required port access outside the sandbox. Missing declared development dependencies were supplied outside the branch. No live provider sign-in was tested locally. - [Full monorepo CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39522434236) is green on `82b82fec189a172a885d4dd565ae2f4a18c73efc`. Standard Greptile scored 5/5 with zero new comments (check `118969424903`). The subsequent Apex review also scored 5/5 with zero new comments (check `118972866331`) on that same commit. All review threads are resolved. - The separate Superagent Security scan returned neutral/inconclusive because its pinned merge-base checkout failed or timed out. GitHub returned 404 for check and suite rerun requests. This is not a successful security scan; the CI workflow and other security checks passed. ## Risks - Users can leave inactive setup records behind, including after name submission alone. These records cannot run until hire completes. - Setup completion touches hiring and approval boundaries. Tests cover retries, company isolation, creator permissions, and approval snapshots. - An uncertain credential-save result retains its new secret reference for retry. A confirmed client rejection removes only credentials staged by that attempt. - No schema migration or VM provisioning change is required. Agent-computer integration is out of scope. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository search, code editing, and tool execution. The exact deployment 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 - [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] Apex Greptile is also 5/5 on the same commit as standard review and green CI - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d33b40a5c3 |
fix: recover saved work and provide reliable task Retry (#16965)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The control plane must retain work when an execution or workspace export fails. > - Retained-workspace holds can leave saved input waiting with no usable Retry action. > - Users cannot verify process ownership or repair provider allocations. > - This pull request gives system recovery a durable budget and gives each deliberate Retry a durable intent. > - Safe recovery can preserve files, settle an accepted result, or prepare an independent workspace. > - One task state keeps infrastructure diagnostics out of the ordinary conversation while preserving real permission and approval gates. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A task with a retained workspace can show recovery, failed-run and saved-message warnings at the same time. Historical runs without native workspace descriptors cannot use the native restore path. Old recovery metadata can prevent a new attempt even when an independent workspace would be safe. **Expected behavior** Paperclip owns bounded infrastructure retries and file preservation. A user can request another attempt with ordinary Retry. Thinking appears immediately. The service preserves completed effects and current user controls. It does not claim that starting fresh recovered the old files. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Retain a failed run and its workspace after export or process-stop failure. 2. Save a follow-up while the recovery hold is active. 3. Open the task and try to continue without infrastructure credentials or operator certification. Refs #16906, #16835, #16883. This extends their recovery and receipt contracts. Related work: #16962 and #16963. ## What Changed - Add task-level Retry with company-scoped authorization, all-status idempotency and durable admission before physical work. Keep exact-run Retry compatible. - Add typed recovery phases, finite persisted backoff, historical adoption and durable local failure diagnostics. - Preserve native workspaces or verified historical snapshots. Admit an independent fresh workspace only after execution containment. Keep old-source preservation and cleanup obligations separate. - Carry completed publication and API receipts forward. Fence uncertain mutation retries across replacement runs. Preserve connected-chat identity and authorization. - Re-enter normal dispatch for saved input. Reuse accepted results through the existing finalizer. - Use one task interruption projection across the thread, composer and task list. Show optimistic Thinking, ordinary Retry and genuine user gates. - Add PostgreSQL, filesystem, API, browser-fixture and controlled provider coverage. Document the behavior and update the feature/access maps. ## Verification - All GitHub Actions CI jobs pass on `6d8c6d27d50586d8548b31d03b47f6d73a0ee11d`: typecheck, all server/chat/workspace and serialized suites, Runner checks, eight browser shards, canary and build. The required merge gate passes. - Greptile reviewed the final commit at 5/5, with no actionable findings or unresolved review threads. Its two earlier P1 findings are fixed. - Full recursive typecheck and build pass locally on the final commit. All 16 task Retry cases pass against isolated real PostgreSQL. The unrelated-success case and both stale Retry cases fail on the previous code and pass after the fix. - The corrected gateway fixture passes its uncertain-mutation and independent-read case. Four real HTTP API cases pass for definite 403/422 rejection, completed-effect reuse, and uncertain-effect fences across deliberate and automatic retries. These focused gateway/API checks used a temporary database lifecycle harness on an existing healthy local PostgreSQL process. The standard repository helper is unchanged. - Earlier qualification covers 291 task UI cases, saved-file copyback and ancestry, current Agent Chat ownership races, nine chat Retry API browser cases, and six assembled browser recovery fixtures. A real API/PostgreSQL/native-runner journey showed Thinking in 25 ms despite a delayed response, admitted one successor in a separate workspace, retained original files, and survived reload. - The controlled Daytona test interrupts export, joins the controller, restarts it in a separate process, and verifies one agent start, one external sentinel operation, retained file contents and no premature cleanup. It does not establish abrupt-kill or live LLM/GitHub acceptance. - The full local `pnpm test:run` was attempted and was not green: an OAuth row-lock timing assertion failed, and a later suite exhausted macOS PostgreSQL semaphores. The ten OAuth timing cases passed on rerun against a separate database. Later embedded database initialization failures remain recorded; the final CI matrix passes. - Security scanning passed on production-code commit `63953edf069b111c6becc3144dffa6deb52f68b5`. Its only successor changes one test-fixture identity line. The final scan is neutral/inconclusive because its pinned merge-base checkout failed or timed out. Both rerun API requests returned 404, so no fresh successful scan is claimed. Socket and Snyk checks pass on the final head. - The optional Paperclip Review remains queued behind an earlier run in workspace finalization. Its prior completed assessment was incomplete because a comparison tool was blocked by the platform filter. It is not counted as a completed code review. GitHub does not require this check for merge. - Hosted acceptance remains pending deployment. Local and CI results do not establish recovery of a hosted task or its retained files. ## Risks - Recovery changes span admission, physical ownership and dispatch. Incorrect evidence could permit overlapping work. Existing physical locks and authoritative stop requirements remain in place. - The migration adds concurrent indexes. It requires the existing top-level migration runner and retries incomplete index creation safely. - A fresh attempt can complete while old-source preservation remains unresolved. The service retains that obligation and does not report those files as recovered. - Unknown tool mutations remain blocked until their authoritative receipt owner resolves them. Generic upstream tools have no universal result-query protocol. - Recovery and diagnostics stay inside the stack. No Cloud incident endpoint, notification worker or new outbound reporting channel is included. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The runtime does not expose a more specific model version or context-window size. The model used reasoning, shell execution, source editing and browser tools. No model subagents were used for this implementation. ## 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 (focused suites; the full local run limitation is documented above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
6c9b87d092 |
trace(server): expose repository admission waits (#17040)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work performed by AI agents. > - The controller prepares a task workspace before it starts a provider turn. > - Repository admission also runs when a checkout already exists. > - One observed reuse took 16.877 seconds. Its child spans explained only 3.556 seconds. > - The missing detail covered repeated authority checks, catalog work, and publication waits. > - This change exposes those operations under the existing execution attempt. > - Operators can expand the slow phase before choosing a performance fix. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16963, #16330, and #16515. The provider-routing work in #17019 has a different scope. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Repository-admission traces for new and reused checkouts. **Subsystem affected** server/ orchestration and operator-configured OpenTelemetry tracing. **Current behavior** The admission span can contain a long interval without child spans. Existing project checks, HTTP requests, and checkout lookup do not explain current-task checks, database awaits, credential refresh, or publication locks. **Proposed behavior** Expose nested spans for current binding and task access, individual identity reads, catalog construction, credentials, grant transactions, filesystem validation, Git inspection, and directory-lock acquisition, work, and release. **Reason and benefit** The trace can distinguish repeated checks, remote calls, database awaits, and directory contention. A database-await span includes driver, network, pool, and server time. It is not isolated SQL execution time. **Breaking changes** None. No API, schema, permission, retry, lock, or repository behavior changes. ## What Changed - Add fixed admission phases beneath the existing execution attempt. Keep the existing project, checkout, and HTTP detail. - Trace current-task authorization stages only under workspace access. Unrelated decisions cannot consume that detail budget before admission. - Trace GitHub catalog reads, credentials, provider metadata, grant row locking and writes, transaction settlement, and webhook work. - Separate directory-lock acquisition, the protected operation, and release without changing the adapter lock contract. - Document the hierarchy and timing limits. Keep endpoint gating, span caps, and hashed run correlation. Add no span attributes or exception text. ## Verification - Nine new tests passed with real PostgreSQL, real Git, and SDK-exported spans. They cover directory contention, grant-row blocking, all three binding checks, reuse without cloning, dirty files, private-task denial, receipt repair, conflict retry, endpoint-off behavior, and parent IDs. - Twenty earlier unrelated authorization decisions do not exhaust the admission detail budget. - Existing authorization and trust suites: 105 tests passed. Existing timing/context suites: 26 tests passed. Existing repository-access tests: 6 tests passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on commit `5a986d8c86644dfb7ee39b3b832e2d7c86532598`. - `pnpm test:run` could not complete locally. The temporary five-connection cluster returned `sorry, too many clients already` in chat fixtures, and the run was interrupted. It is not a pass. The complete standard CI workflow passed on the same commit, including all 12 server shards and all three chat shards. - Final current-head checks: 54 success, two neutral, two skipped, zero pending or failing. The [CI aggregate](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39522187940/job/118971261973) passed. [Greptile](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/17040#issuecomment-6305066520) and [Paperclip Review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/17040#issuecomment-6305017182) both assessed this exact commit at 5/5 with no actionable findings or unresolved threads. - `node scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs` and `git diff --check` passed. - This macOS host exhausted its SysV semaphore quota. Database tests used a temporary command-scoped initdb preload with five connections, fewer workers, and a larger lock table. No repository test infrastructure or shared host settings changed. Initial skipped tests, focused-fixture failures, and clock-order assertion failures were corrected and rerun; they are not counted as passes. The complete local run remained connection-limited and was interrupted. - Local SDK export proves parentage and privacy. Hosted Honeycomb ingestion remains unverified until deployment. No deployment occurred. ## Risks Span recording requires an operator-configured OTLP endpoint. Each fixed detail name remains capped at 16 occurrences per attempt. Later operations still execute under their enclosing phase. Timing wrappers preserve the existing operations and their errors. No migration is required. The change does not itself reduce admission latency. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with tool use, code execution, and delegated agents. The exact hosted model 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> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
572bef4ba7 |
fix: omit re-downloadable Codex remote plugins from failover backups (#17026)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Native Codex sessions in remote sandboxes copy the sandbox's Codex
home into a host-side failover backup after every turn
> - Ephemeral sandboxes restore that backup at the start of every turn,
so its size affects both disk use and turn latency
> - Most of each backup is remote plugin data that Codex itself treats
as a cache and re-downloads on startup
> - This pull request leaves that data out of Codex checkpoints, keeping
everything a resumed session needs
> - The benefit is backups roughly 80–90% smaller, less data moved per
turn, and much slower disk growth
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Bug report described in-PR (bug report template). Related: #16866
(expires failover backups after their issues close).
**What happened?**
Failover backups grow quickly because each Codex checkpoint includes
`$CODEX_HOME` remote plugin data. On one instance, 204 backups held 22.1
GB:
- `codex-home/plugins/cache/openai-curated-remote`: 8.3 GB (about 29 MB
per backup);
- `codex-home/cache/remote_plugin_catalog`: 6.1 GB (one 38 MB catalog
file per backup);
- `codex-home/sessions` (the conversation history): 0.31 GB.
About 80 new backups (9.8 GB) were written per day. Ephemeral sandboxes
also copy all of this into a fresh sandbox before each turn.
**Expected behavior**
Checkpoints keep what a resumed session needs and omit data that Codex
re-downloads itself.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run a Codex agent with ChatGPT auth in a remote sandbox environment.
2. Inspect
`<instance>/runtime/paperclip-runner/durable-sessions/*/failover-backups/current/codex-home`.
3. Most bytes are under `plugins/cache/openai-curated-remote` and
`cache/remote_plugin_catalog`.
**Paperclip version or commit:** `master` at
|
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
2a5a323e57 |
Add execution-owned Runner launch preparation (#16997)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work for AI agents. > - Runner can execute in a different environment from Core. > - Core owns provider selection, policy, and resource assignments. > - The execution environment must prepare its own files and paths. > - A shared contract must keep these responsibilities separate. > - This PR adds that contract to the Runner execution driver. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Problem or motivation** Runner transport prepares provider files on the controller before launch. An execution owner cannot prepare those files in its own environment through the existing driver. **Proposed solution** Add `prepareLaunch` to the execution driver. Supply versioned Core requirements. Accept a configuration ID, requirements digest, and ordinary provider descriptor. Validate Core policy and assignments before launch. Keep existing provider session checks. **Alternatives considered** Provider-specific ownership flags would spread the boundary across backends. Shell preparation would expose process details in the plugin API. Refs #16993, #16977. Both prerequisites are merged. This PR now targets master. Native plugin integration and execution-host preparation follow separately. PR #16978 contains an earlier, unmerged prototype. Its `persistentAgentHome` mode and skill path-map call will be replaced by this preparation contract before activation. This PR preserves current master callers of the skill helper. ## What Changed - Add the optional preparation callback and an explicit Runner artifact identity. - Keep the built-in preparation path as the default. - Validate provider policy and resource assignment identity. Preserve instruction text when resource locations change. - Persist the attachment seed after an authority epoch rotation, so a later controller restart can recover the same run. - Preserve explicit context removal on a new run. Only an omitted context can reuse the saved context. Remove its registered instruction framing when context is removed. - Save exact requirements and configurations in a private file outside Runner commands. Retain the active record across failed attachments. Use current grants for new runs. Keep incompatible session changes rejected. - Join delayed preparation during startup and warm attachment cleanup. Retain an unsettled checkpoint after a timeout. Prevent work after cancellation. - Use the supplied Runner artifact for interrupted handoff recovery. Restore the exact target configuration at each handoff crash boundary. Check the Runner state when the final ACK may be lost. - Bind the changed shared sources to Copilot profile v51. Preserve the v50 receipt and current integrity checks. ## Verification - Workspace typecheck passed. - All 487 affected Runner transport, control-plane, preparation store, builder, policy, and profile tests passed on commit `eaf8ae8d1`. - Workspace build and typecheck passed again on commit `eaf8ae8d12c7ef2d22d226e4b3f05fdbf79ef4cb`. - Both warm attachment cleanup regressions fail before the fix. They pass after the fix. The tests cover delayed preparation, timeout retention, and concurrent attachment rejection. - The routed handoff regression fails with a missing controller binary before the fix. It passes after the fix. The execution owner launches the real fixture Runner. - The 200,000-byte instruction regression fails before the fix and passes after it. Four prepared handoff crash cases verify exact request and configuration recovery. The store tests verify private file mode, conflicting records, corrupt data, and active-run retention. - A real Runner with a controlled fake provider verifies execution-host paths, exact recovery, warm reuse, incompatible profile rejection, and cancellation. It does not contact an external provider. - The regression found undefined settings in strict PRP command hashing. Requirements now contain only JSON values. The warm transition test passes without changing PRP validation. - The broader root suite on the prerequisite finished with 22,420 passing tests, seven failed tests in unchanged Git and diagnostic code, and two suite setup errors because Cargo was absent from its PATH. This PR does not claim a passing full root suite. - The CI Build job passed compilation and production runtime boot, then its runner received a shutdown signal during the clean public install check. Other jobs reported lost communication with their self-hosted runners. The failed jobs passed on retry on the same commit; successful jobs kept their results. - The current Superagent security scan is inconclusive because its pinned merge-base checkout failed or timed out. GitHub rejected the check rerun request through the available API. This is not a passing security scan. - Standard Greptile and Greptile Apex each returned 5/5 on `eaf8ae8d1`. All review threads are resolved. CI passed on attempt 2. Current checks have 55 successes, four optional skips, and the inconclusive security scan described above. The branch is ready, mergeable, and current with master. - No live provider qualification or deployment was run. ## Risks - A preparation owner must store configurations and keep retries bound to the same task and requirements. - Copilot source binding requires a new profile identity. This PR does not claim fresh live qualification. - The callback is an SDK extension. This PR does not connect it to a plugin task process owner or add a Launcher endpoint. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. Reasoning and repository tools. The exact serving model identifier and context size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
15176963b1 |
fix: stop idle skill-source polling (#17008)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agent work and the skills that agents use. > - Project repositories create durable import jobs, and installed sources can refresh automatically. > - The server queried these records every five seconds, even when no work existed. > - Idle tenant databases need to stop receiving those discovery queries. > - This change uses the existing transaction notifications and delivery coordinator. > - Saved refresh, retry, and lease deadlines determine when the worker runs next. > - Cloud does not yet wake these deadlines, so outstanding skill work retains the instance. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Skill-source background synchronization. This continues the idle-work migrations in #15625 and #17000. A search found no overlapping open polling-removal PR. **Current behavior** On master `b11010b0d4`, startup installs a five-second skill-source interval and also calls it from the external-object scheduler. Each sweep queries active companies, import capacity, pending imports, and automatic refreshes. **Proposed behavior** Run at startup, after a relevant transaction settles, or at a saved deadline. Stay SQL-quiet when no eligible work remains. Preserve import admission, authorization, atomic claims, retry backoff, and the existing five-minute upstream check. **Reason and benefit** Remove recurring database activity from inactive tenant instances without requiring new tables or a new scheduler. ## What Changed - Replace both recurring skill-sync calls with one delivery-coordinator registration. - Notify from attachment/detachment, source creation/settings/manual refresh/disconnection, project/company deletion, and company status changes, including budget resume. - Restore the earliest eligible `nextSyncAt` or lease-expiry deadline. Due backlogs and conflicts retry after five seconds; no idle recovery cadence remains. - Admit deferred imports again after a batch frees capacity. Preserve requests through drain, standby, restart, and commits during a sweep. - Add sleep-safety predicates for imports and eligible automatic sources until Cloud supports these deadlines. - Document the lifecycle and process-local writer contract. No schema or API changes. - Guard external test database URLs before migrations or cleanup: require a `_test` database name and reject database/options overrides. ## Verification - 147 targeted tests pass: 39 server-startup tests, 14 new real-PostgreSQL lifecycle tests, 20 shared coordinator/scheduler tests, 63 existing import/refresh/retry regression tests, and 11 test-database guard cases. - CI exposed a stale startup mock without the new `start` method. The fixture is updated and all 39 startup tests pass locally. - Tests exercise real enqueue/settings/company-reactivation producers, nested commit, rollback, saved retry/lease restart, manual refresh failure, capacity admission, concurrent commit, shutdown cancellation, and SQL quiet after startup or pause. - Sleep-safety tests reject sleep for future imports and automatic refreshes, and accept inactive retained state. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. - `pnpm test:run` was attempted and stopped after repeated embedded-PostgreSQL startup failures in unrelated suites. The two existing import/refresh suites initially skipped for the same host limitation; after adding explicit disposable-database options, all 63 regression tests passed against PostgreSQL 17. Full CI passed on `ddb3ee51369baa8c7153bae9fd88efb8b903f2bc`: 55 successful checks, one neutral review check, and two intentional skips. ## Risks - Notifications are process-local. Independent SQL writers and separate live replicas do not wake this worker; startup reconstructs persisted work. - Enabled automatic sources still contact GitHub every five minutes. Their upstream changes have no event ingress here. - Cloud scheduled wakes currently cover routines and issue monitors, not skill sync. This change retains instances with outstanding skill obligations. It does not claim measured host/database suspension or fleet savings. - No change to source authorization, installed content on failure, or existing claim semantics. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools, and code execution. The host does not expose an exact model revision or context-window size 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
b11010b0d4 |
Simplify failure banners and show only the latest error (#16982)
Remove dashed failure dividers and show only the latest adjacent run or recovery error. Preserve permitted retries, pending state and unrelated notice boundaries. Add production-component Storybook examples and browser regression coverage. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
cb2d6e80d3 |
perf: stop polling idle Muse maintenance (#17000)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Muse connects an external worker to a Paperclip agent. > - Its maintenance loop scans the database every five seconds, even without bindings. > - These empty scans prevent an otherwise idle database from sleeping. > - The shared delivery coordinator can react to committed writes and saved deadlines. > - This change uses that coordinator and retains recovery for unfinished assignments. > - Idle Muse maintenance can now stop querying the database. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Muse qualification, OAuth authority, and terminal assignment maintenance. **Current behavior** A claimed instance runs two empty scans every five seconds even when Muse has no bindings. This produces about 34,560 unnecessary queries per day. Warm standby suppression from #16974 does not cover claimed instances. **Proposed behavior** Recover once at startup. Wake after relevant transactions settle. Schedule qualification expiry at its saved deadline. Retain five-second recovery only for failures and unfinished assignments. **Reason and benefit** Remove recurring database traffic from idle Muse maintenance while preserving authority checks and recovery. Reuse the database work signal foundation from #15625 without adding tables. ## What Changed - Register Muse maintenance with the shared delivery coordinator and its idle admission rules. - Signal pairing, OAuth attachment and revocation, qualification changes, and new assignments before transaction writes. The existing transaction layer waits for outer commit. - Restore qualification deadlines from persisted bindings. Retry failed sweeps and unfinished assignments. - Add PostgreSQL tests for idle quiet, nested commit, rollback, deadlines, standby, drain, and failure recovery. Verify signals from actual Muse producers. Preserve startup, newly committed work, and failed sweep retries across idle drain without SQL polling. - Document the remaining recovery cadence and sleep limitations. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed before rebase. Server typechecking also passed after rebase and the drain fix. - `pnpm build`: passed before rebase. - Final change: 33 maintenance, delivery coordinator, and scheduler tests passed. Maintenance used a fresh disposable PostgreSQL 17 database. - Muse control-plane tests: 254 passed against the same disposable database. - `pnpm test:run`: attempted, then stopped after repeated embedded PostgreSQL startup failures from this host's semaphore limit. Native-session, Muse, and AI-connection suites could not create local clusters. The complete suite runs in CI. - `git diff --check`: passed. - Final commit `e106cbf20d`: all CI gates passed, including complete test suites, E2E, build, production bundle boot, public-install smoke test, and canary dry run. Greptile and Paperclip source reviews both rated 5/5, with no unresolved findings. The focused suites accept `PAPERCLIP_MUSE_MAINTENANCE_TEST_DATABASE_URL` and `PAPERCLIP_MUSE_CONTROL_TEST_DATABASE_URL`. Use a disposable test database; fixtures remove test data. ## Risks - Unfinished assignments retain five-second recovery. This change removes idle polling, not all Muse polling. - Signals are process-local. Independent database writers need explicit integration. Startup recovers persisted state. - Qualification deadlines depend on the running process. Existing durable Muse sleep blockers remain unchanged. - The receiver keeps its batching timer. An empty buffer already makes no database calls. - No schema migration or API change. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with code execution and repository tools. The exact model version is 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 (focused suites; full local run has the environment 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> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
a2d26a83fe |
fix(inbox): keep automatic work out of Mine by default
Keep channel and routine attribution out of Mine unless the person participates directly, is assigned the task, or receives a current addressed request. Apply the same source rules to unread state, archives, and task notifications. Preserve direct comments and current human action requests. Restore the two expressions damaged by redaction during the earlier master merge. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
dc6dd23ea4 |
Add plugin Runner preparation task contract (#16993)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work for AI agents. > - Environment plugins can own Runner tasks. > - Core selects provider policy and runtime assignments. > - The execution environment must resolve its own paths and configuration. > - The task API needs a preparation exchange before execution. > - This PR adds that exchange under the existing lease authority. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Problem or motivation** The environment task API can start a Runner. It cannot return a prepared provider configuration from Core requirements. **Proposed solution** Add a versioned `prepare` request and `prepared` result. Keep the provider configuration bound to its task and requirements. Check the same company, run, project, and retained-session authority as submission. **Alternatives considered** A shell preparation command would expose execution details in the API. Provider-specific ownership flags would spread this contract across backends. **Roadmap alignment** This extends the existing plugin and remote execution APIs. It does not add a separate execution system. Refs #16977, #15406. The prerequisite #16977 is merged. This PR now targets master. Runner transport and provider implementations follow separately. ## What Changed - Add strict launch requirements and prepared result schemas. - Add the preparation capability version and saved configuration ID. - Apply existing lease and resource checks to preparation. - Document idempotency, cancellation, recovery, and cleanup requirements. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. - Plugin SDK build passed. - All 55 Dot Runner and native Codex server integration tests passed with Cargo available on PATH. - All 18 environment task runtime tests passed. These include preparation dispatch, inactive leases, wrong run identity, unauthorized projects, result identity, and unknown command rejection. - The broader root suite on the parent refactor finished with 22,420 passing tests, seven failed tests in unchanged Git and diagnostic code, and two suite setup errors because Cargo was absent from its PATH. This PR does not claim a passing full root suite. - No live provider calls or deployment were run. - Standard Greptile and Apex each scored commit `d3ac15906240b7066f5ff505ed2ffd9ef5dd43c1` 5/5. There are no unresolved review threads. - All 55 CI checks passed. Two optional checks were skipped. The branch is ready and mergeable against master. - A fresh master fetch and merge-base check passed immediately before the Apex request. ## Risks - This defines a new optional worker operation. Existing providers keep their current operations. - A provider must validate policy and resource bindings. Schema validation alone does not validate a concrete provider descriptor. - This PR defines the exchange. It does not connect native execution to a preparation provider. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. Reasoning and repository tools. The exact serving model identifier and context size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
05f7079ecb |
Extract Runner provider launch preparation (#16977)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work for AI agents. > - Runner starts providers in local and remote environments. > - Core selects the provider and task policy. > - The execution environment supplies paths and installed files. > - The transport currently combines these inputs in one large method. > - This PR extracts provider descriptor construction before a separate plugin preparation change. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Runner provider launch preparation. **Current behavior** The PRP transport constructs each provider descriptor inside startup. This couples provider configuration to transport lifecycle code. **Proposed behavior** The transport calls one built-in descriptor builder. The builder takes Core provider requirements and execution-environment locations as separate inputs. File staging, provider validation logic, and session rules keep their current behavior. The required Copilot source-identity update changes profile admission metadata. **Reason and benefit** This gives launch preparation a separate unit of code. A later PR can add plugin-owned preparation without adding ownership flags to each provider backend. Refs #15406, #16486. This replaces the earlier installed-home implementation in this PR. #16978 remains a draft. ## What Changed - Extract provider descriptor construction and its existing permission helpers. - Keep helper exports at their previous import path. - Add focused tests for selection, permissions, locations, and managed profile rejection. - Update the Copilot source identity. Bind the extracted file and retain the v49 history. The source attestation requires v50 after this move. This changes the admitted profile identity even though no execution behavior changes are intended. - Document the boundary and its current limits. ## Verification - 338 focused builder, transport, Codex security, and Copilot identity tests passed on the rebased head. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. `pnpm build` passed. - The full root `pnpm test:run` on the pre-rebase head is still in progress. It has reported five failures in unchanged server tests. One isolated failure rejects the word `private` from this checkout's `/private/tmp` stack path. The full root suite is not reported as passing. - All 56 CI checks passed on the rebased head. Four optional checks were skipped. The branch is mergeable. Workspace typecheck and build passed on this head. - Standard Greptile and Apex each scored commit `47f631883d8f417f6a818500ebe4e77e22cc70b8` 5/5. The rebase onto master changed only Copilot identity metadata, history handling, and related tests. `git range-diff` confirms that the launch-preparation implementation is unchanged. The existing Apex result remains the review evidence; it did not review the new commit hash. - No live provider calls or Cloud deployment were run. ## Risks - A moved field could change provider startup. Existing transport tests and the new boundary tests check the projection. - Copilot source binding requires a new identity after the move. Existing artifacts and retained sessions must match the new admitted profile. This PR does not claim fresh live qualification. - This PR does not enable plugin-owned preparation. File materialization remains in the existing SDK path. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. Reasoning and repository tools. The exact serving model identifier and context size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
505e1a5582 |
feat(cases): add persistent workflows with same-task agent handoffs (#16959)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - An agent workflow needs persistent facts and a safe way to transfer work. > - Creating a task for each phase splits the objective, discussion, workspace, and review policy. > - A case can retain the facts while one primary task moves between agents. > - Transfers must survive process failure and preserve private access, budgets, and completion gates. > - This pull request adds durable case handoffs, native case tools, and read-only case pages. > - Prompts describe the workflow. Existing task controls decide when work can run and finish. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Problem or motivation** Prompt-driven agent teams need a persistent record that can move through triage, implementation, verification, and correction. Ordinary reassignment does not provide a durable instruction, safe release barrier, or recoverable delivery receipt for an agent handing off its own running task. **Proposed solution** Extend standalone cases with one primary task, a descriptive phase, retained access sources, and a handoff ledger. Apply assignments after source execution and workspace settlement. Deliver each transfer through the existing durable wake queue. Provide `create_case`, `read_case`, `update_case`, and `handoff_case` in the native runner. Creation requires kickoff and explicit workflow text. An explicit handoff to `done` closes the case when normal task completion is accepted. **Alternatives considered** Do not add a workflow engine, filesystem queue, configured state graph, or one task per phase. The workflow document combines transition prose with an optional Mermaid `stateDiagram-v2` map. The server does not execute the diagram. The Pipelines experiment removed on master stays removed. **Roadmap alignment** This extends Agent Reviews and Approvals, Enforced Outcomes, Bounded Run Recovery, and Activity Log attribution. Existing approval, review, budget, privacy, workspace, and responsible-user rules remain authoritative. Related work: [ordinary handoff wake recovery](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15019). This feature adds a separate persisted case-handoff receipt and release barrier. ## What Changed - Add case routing fields, retained access sources, durable handoff history, delivery leases, and replay-safe migrations. - Keep the same primary task across agent phases. Preserve each returning agent's own session and the task's workspace. - Fence outgoing mutations, wait for provider and workspace release, and recover delivery without duplicate task comments or runs. Recheck current assignment permissions as the original caller before applying a delayed transfer. Scope a run Stop to that run’s own handoff intents, so repeated old Stop requests preserve newer work. Cancelling terminal intent without a source run also requires fenced current task ownership, including native retries and preparation with an old checkout. For Cloud callers, revalidate current stack membership with an uncached Cloud RPC and derive owner elevation from the current managed setting. - Keep case reads, documents, assets, Audit, and live events inside retained task/project permissions. - Add native case creation/read/update/handoff tools. Store required workflow text and initial documents on the first task. Page oversized case facts and referenced document bodies through the dedicated tool with bounded UTF-8 JSON, current routing versions, snapshot conflicts, and current source authorization on every page. - Add read-only case lists and detail pages, task-style list controls, compact dotted field tables, linked handoff tasks, and case filters in Audit. - Add native/legacy integration tests, migration/restart tests, browser coverage, and bounded live receipt fixtures. Extend the trusted sandbox condition to cover the new subscription fixture profile. - Hide obsolete paused-agent warnings on completed or cancelled task threads. - Synchronize the company-switch settings test with React effects after a CI failure. Preserve its security assertions and production remount behavior. ## Verification The branch directly includes master `9ef434fe79`. The required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e` gates pass on head `765fccd67c`. [Current-head CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39464348614) passes typecheck, build, tests, and all eight browser shards. Security checks pass. [Greptile gives this exact head 5/5](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16959#issuecomment-6291156549), with no unresolved review threads. The optional Paperclip Review check remains queued because its assigned agent is paused. It is not a required branch check. No check result was overridden. Local workspace typecheck and build pass after the master merge, along with database migration checks, token gates, map checks, Storybook catalog checks, and the Copilot profile identity check. Standard builds refresh Runner vendor output. Focused checks pass 2,008 API/paging/context tests and 7 strict case protocol tests. The final commit changes one test fixture only; its ten tests, UI typecheck, and token gates pass. No production source changed in that commit. On current head `765fccd67c`, all **194 critical workflow tests** executed and passed with no skipped tests in those files: - 38 Stop/ownership tests, including board completion intent, native retries, stale Stop, and preparation with an old checkout. - 2 actual legacy process/HTTP handoff tests, including scratch failure, a closed-stdio child that continues writing, and recovery through a fresh worker after the process group stops. - 5 migration tests, including SQL column metadata, preserved null authority context, and all six prior-numbering receipts. - 3 process-settlement and 5 scratch tests. - 88 handoff-service, 18 heartbeat handoff, and 21 native case-tool integration tests. - 7 bounded case/document-read projection tests and 7 strict protocol-contract tests. The current CI checkout was `fed65d49`, merging `765fccd67c` into master `9ef434fe79`. Its new document regressions reconstruct exact Unicode/escaped bodies and revisions through real native authority and authenticated HTTP with generic API tools disabled. They cover case-owned, primary-task, and linked-task documents; routing on every page; stale document snapshots; access loss and unlinking; unrelated/foreign/private sources; system documents; and quarantined content. Active-task document tools retain their existing behavior. These are current-head test results from the first CI attempt; the browser-only retry did not rerun these suites. The full `64fdd3403f` CI failed one separate settings test: after a company switch, it observed an unsettled API-key draft. The production component and test were unchanged from prior green source. Production switches remount both keyed settings layers; the test directly reused an unkeyed view and used a timer tick instead of waiting for React effects. The final commit replaces that fixture synchronization with React `act`. The exact secret-clearing assertions and all timeouts remain unchanged. The original assertion failure remains recorded; no unchanged retry was used. The narrow unchanged baseline and fixed fixture each pass 10 tests. The upstream result-paging merge preserves case capture namespaces and current asset privacy. Its API integration suite executed 39 of 41 tests successfully, with two skipped; the optional assigned-result PRP integration test was skipped. Neither skipped suite is counted in the 194 critical tests or as live provider proof. All 361 upstream migration entries and SQL bodies remain unchanged. Six case migrations follow master as 0363–0368 with identical SQL hashes. Official Drizzle generators produced the combined metadata and five retained snapshots. Generation reports no schema changes, and the snapshot drift test passes. The earlier `ce361ae5d0` CI passed on attempt 1, including its then-current 179 critical tests. Fresh review later identified unusable document references with generic API tools disabled; the bounded document reads and ten additional authenticated HTTP tests address that finding. The full local `pnpm test:run` attempt was cancelled after this Mac exhausted PostgreSQL semaphore capacity; it is **not** counted as a pass. Later database attempts also stopped before assertions or skipped, including one sandbox socket denial. Two original stale-Stop regressions did reproduce the bug against the old source. A REST serialization assertion passed after two preserved database-startup failures. No test timeout was increased. All 194 assertions listed above executed and passed in current-head CI. The complete 385-file, 3,963-test UI shard also passed after the fixture repair. A configured-provider receipt workflow passed 13 backend checks across triage → implementation → verification → correction → done, using one task and four work runs. The saved receipt is revision 2 with total 6 USD; case and task both closed. The original canonical attempt remains failed because its browser assertion confused the terminal destination with completed-task tooltips. The corrected full browser verifier passed on the same retained database and original runs, with no additional provider calls. The last clean-build browser readback is on `6a86c54a53`; later changes affect recovery, authorization, bounded reads, and settlement. Accounted work cost is a $1.010574 rate-card estimate; provider billing and setup-probe usage are unavailable. Copilot profile 49 passed the unchanged seven-fixture private protocol pack (46/46 checks, no retries) and the product file-edit canary after master's completion-replay change. All 60 bound implementation hashes remain unchanged on the current source. Historical profile-47/48 identities and results remain intact. See the [profile-49 compatibility record](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/codex/persistent-case-handoffs/doc/plans/2026-10-20-copilot-completion-recovery-compatibility-v49.json). This is bounded compatibility evidence, not a fresh full matrix, installed-package product test, or Daytona rollout. Preserved CI failures and retries: - On `20662930ac`, Slack managed setup failed a five-second success assertion after reload. Its test/application path was unchanged from a prior green head. One unchanged-source retry passed all 25 tests in that shard; no source or timeout changed. - On `9402b4f17a`, two CI workers received shutdown signals at 15:24:19 UTC. Neither log had an assertion failure before interruption. One unchanged-source retry of each passed all Runner static checks and all 32 tests in browser shard 6; both aggregates passed. The next head, `7b4374edaf`, passed all CI without retries. - On `295f289b5a`, serialized shard 9 timed out during its first device-login test, then the next test found an active login lease. Direct login/test paths were unchanged from a prior green head. Cold import plus a timed-out async body using the next test's mutable actor/store is the supported fixture-race explanation; no request trace proves that sequence. The original failure remains recorded. One unchanged-source retry passed all 294 tests in 19 files, including all 41 device-login tests. No login source or timeout changed. The subsequent `ce361ae5d0` CI passed without retries. - On `64fdd3403f`, one company-switch settings assertion observed an unsettled draft. The final test-only commit uses React `act` without changing assertions, timeouts, or production code. On `765fccd67c`, all ten settings tests and the complete 385-file, 3,963-test UI shard passed. - On `765fccd67c`, browser shard 3 completed the split-handoff assertions, then cleanup received HTTP 500 from run cancellation after a one-second PostgreSQL row-lock timeout. The extra chat run was reporting completed work while teardown began. Cleanup stopped before restoring a global experiment flag, causing a later assertion to fail. Relevant production and test paths are unchanged from an earlier green commit. Stop's lock order is consistent, and no nested self-lock was found; the exact PostgreSQL blocker was not recorded. One unchanged-shard retry passed. The original failure, trace, and downstream flag failure remain recorded. No Stop implementation, cleanup assertion, or timeout changed. The retry supports intermittent cleanup contention; it does not identify the original blocking transaction. ## Risks - Local process transfers require host-owned PID/group absence. Missing or uncertain termination evidence keeps delivery pending, independently of scratch setup. - Handoff admission and task cancellation share execution ownership. New regression tests cover temporary holds, late source writes, and uncertain provider termination. - Retained private sources use an intersection of existing permissions. This intentionally fails closed when a source is missing or an existing task cannot preserve that boundary. - Migrations add tables and indexes. They preserve master history and can replay over prior feature installs. Migration 0368 adds nullable internal authorization provenance with no default or authority backfill. Historical transfers still awaiting release without this context fail closed; an operator must cancel them and request a new handoff. - Delayed Cloud handoffs depend on the current Cloud membership RPC. An unavailable, ambiguous, expired, or mismatched response holds the handoff for retry; it does not reuse cached authority or grant access. - Bounded reads reload and reauthorize the selected projection per page. Underlying work grows with the data size and number of pages. Changed data or routing requires restarting from offset zero without the old snapshot. - Phase names and workflow diagrams remain advisory. They do not satisfy review or approval gates. - This is a large, cross-cutting PR. The maintainer requested one PR for the whole feature; the commits separate data, runtime, UI, and qualification work. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with tool use, code execution, and delegated code review. The exact deployment model ID and context-window size were not exposed in the session. Live fixture agents used the explicitly configured provider model recorded in their test evidence. ## 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
|
9225796a4e |
fix(runner): page oversized assigned tool results (#16980)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native agents receive assigned app-tool results through the durable Runner protocol. > - The assigned-tool bridge returned complete provider responses without a size bound. > - A large response could exceed the encrypted command limit after the upstream call had completed. > - The provider then waited for a result that the controller could not deliver. > - This pull request saves large governed responses and returns a small reference with a scoped page reader. > - Agents can retrieve the full result without repeating the original action. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Large app-tool responses could leave native tool calls pending even though the upstream service completed. The durable command limit is about 510 KiB. The assigned-tool bridge did not account for that limit. A 720,048-byte regression response failed the delivery-size assertion before this change. **Expected behavior** Deliver a bounded response and a way to retrieve all saved content. Keep the original action at one execution. Preserve task, agent, company, responsible-user, and current-run access checks. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run a native agent with an assigned tool that returns more than 510 KiB of JSON. 2. Let the upstream tool complete. 3. Observe that the original bridge returns the oversized object directly, so the durable controller cannot queue its result. Related: #14734 preserves uncertain tool outcomes across shutdown and restart. This change keeps that protection. #16517 handles native MCP content projection on a different transport; it does not bound native assigned-tool results. ## What Changed - Save governed assigned-tool responses above 500,000 encoded bytes using the existing response asset storage, quotas, and audit path. - Add `read_tool_result` for UTF-8 JSON pages from the same task and agent. Each encoded page is capped at 500,000 bytes, including JSON escaping and metadata, with remaining content available through the next byte offset. It works when generic API tools are disabled. - Reuse existing authenticated asset reads and responsible-user checks. Retrieval does not invoke the upstream service. - Preserve uncertain delivery if storage fails after an action completes. - Add regression, fault, authorization, and opt-in live Codex checks. Document the transport and access contract. ## Verification - Red: the original integration regression returned 720,048 bytes against unchanged production code and failed its bounded-response assertion. The follow-up regression also showed that a 480 KB result was unnecessarily saved under the original 24 KiB policy. - Green: results through 500,000 encoded bytes stay inline. Larger responses are saved in full. Real HTTP integration tests reconstruct the complete Unicode result after controller recreation in exactly two pages, in both standard and low-trust configurations, with one upstream execution. - The encoded-size boundary and escape-heavy Unicode tests verify that every page fits 500,000 bytes, cursors advance on valid UTF-8 boundaries, and concatenating pages exactly reconstructs the original JSON. Storage-failure tests preserve an uncertain outcome without repeating the action. - The focused unit/API run passes 1,957 tests; the changed real HTTP tests pass. `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `git diff --check` pass. - Real Codex acceptance passes with `gpt-6.1-sol` through Codex CLI 0.160.0 and native Runner, on macOS ARM64 with `low_trust_review` and generic API tools disabled. Codex requests every page in order, receives all 660,098 original bytes, and returns the final verification field. The two encoded pages are 500,000 and 160,543 bytes; the upstream operation executes once. Runner closes successfully in a 34.1-second probe. Only the disposable database's connection/worker counts were reduced to fit the host's remaining semaphore capacity. - The native-PRP regression also passes with escape-heavy Unicode pages over 1 MB in total and a separate inline result containing 200,000 backslashes. A scripted provider verifies both complete results by SHA-256. It proves the intermediate text wrapper can exceed 700 KB because the native transport decodes it before queuing the bounded PRP result; every result object stays within 500,000 encoded bytes. Native binaries are required for the local run, preventing a silent skip. - A second real-Codex probe with escaped Unicode, quotes, backslashes, newlines, and NULs also passes: every original byte of a 720,098-byte JSON response is retrieved in two encoded pages of 500,000 and 460,543 bytes. The model returns the final field, the upstream call executes once, and Runner closes in 32.6 seconds. This uses the same production source with only the synthetic fixture content varied. - The live probe exercises real PRP, persistence, and authenticated asset reads. It does not claim the original staging task resumed or full heartbeat checkpoint acceptance. - Earlier broader local testing passed 103 tests but could not start the second database for the existing `rejects a stale source-run question over public HTTP and accepts it from the next run` test. Extending its timeout exposed PostgreSQL initialization failure on this semaphore-exhausted host. The earlier local `pnpm test:run` attempt was interrupted and is not claimed as passing. Full CI passes on current head `cd32237ee5429765b8f349402ac3c79cceec3e6b`. GitHub reports 55 successful checks, two skipped Storybook checks, and one neutral Paperclip agent review. Greptile is 5/5 on this head with no review threads. - Additional Paperclip agent review is incomplete: it withdrew the earlier double-escaping finding after inspecting the native regression, found no new actionable defects, and reported stalled large-source reads prevented independent inspection of the transport decoder. Its neutral assessment is [recorded here](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16980#issuecomment-6295579705). This limitation remains separate from the passing local native transport, real Codex acceptance, full CI, and Greptile results. ## Risks - Large responses now consume existing response-storage quota and require page reads. Larger pages use more provider context. Results are preserved in full; each encoded page leaves about 22 KiB below the PRP command limit for the command envelope. - A storage failure after execution retains an uncertain delivery outcome. The bridge must not report that the upstream action failed or invite a replay. - The dedicated reader grants access only to saved responses for the current task and agent. The asset route also checks the original responsible user. - Runner command limits and receipt rules remain unchanged. No migration or separate Runner protocol rollout is required. - This PR does not deploy the repair or resume an existing blocked task. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. The opt-in acceptance probe requests `gpt-6.1-sol` through Codex CLI 0.160.0. ## 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 for the changed behavior (focused unit/API, real HTTP, and real Codex acceptance); the broader local database limitation is documented above - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
2c96f76780 |
feat(connections): add model-backed prompt injection prevention
Add opt-in OpenRouter checks at existing tool-result boundaries with regex fallback, service accounting, and settings on Connections. Make migration 0362 safe to replay over existing or partially applied schema state. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
33cc567f75 |
Add lease-scoped Runner task hooks to environment plugins (#15406)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip coordinates AI agents and their runs. > - Environment plugins own remote capacity. > - A plugin needs a typed API to start and stop its installed Runner. > - Core must derive authority from the saved lease. > - A lost reply or controller restart must not lose cleanup authority. > - This PR adds the worker contract and the host task service. > - Native execution and Runner changes are separate PRs. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Plugin SDK and environment lease services. **Current behavior** Environment plugins have no typed Runner task hook. Core cannot dispatch these tasks or recover their credential handoff through a saved lease. **Proposed behavior** Add validated task operations, worker negotiation, company and project checks, retained-session authorization, and durable cleanup. Keep credentials out of lease metadata. **Additional context** This PR is the first part of a smaller series. Runner installed-home support is in #16977. Native execution and setup are in #16978. Both are stacked drafts. This PR does not enable native plugin execution, change default environments, add a route, or add a database migration. ## What Changed - Add `supportsTasks` and `onEnvironmentTask` with seven typed operations. - Validate worker requests and responses. Reject shell commands and file transfer operations. - Pin dispatch and cleanup to the saved company, lease, plugin, and driver. - Authorize projects and retained sessions. Validate the current run separately from the retained PRP identity. - Save dispatch before the provider call. Fence admission during cleanup. Require observed process termination. - Save account writeback authority on the lease. Recover Codex refreshes through the existing account and secret services. - Document the task API. Keep the Runner, heartbeat, setup, workspace, and provider changes in later PRs. ## Verification - Full `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on the separated API scope. - 201 focused tests passed: SDK worker dispatch, task validation, PostgreSQL task lineage, credential recovery, and existing environment cleanup. - The lineage test covers a third run, repeated same-run replacements, a stale submitting run, and exact termination receipts. - Initial commands hit sandbox socket/IPC restrictions. The permitted runs executed PostgreSQL and passed. A typecheck attempt lacked Cargo in PATH; the run with the installed toolchain passed. - The earlier combined implementation had a full local run with 22,286 passing tests, 120 skips, and eight failed assertions. Task fixture failures were fixed before this split. Remaining host Git and temporary-path assertions are recorded in the previous PR revision. This split does not claim a fresh full local suite pass. - The standard Greptile review scored this API head 5/5 with no unresolved threads. CI is green. The single Apex review also scored this head 5/5 with no actionable findings. - Fresh API CI lost a self-hosted runner during server shard 9. GitHub reported lost communication, with no failed test step. The affected jobs passed on retry without code changes. - CI on the prior combined head failed an unchanged workspace dev-server readiness case. No unrelated test fix is included here. Fresh CI is required for this smaller head. - This scope does not run a provider or a Cloud test. The user owns deployment and the intermediate Cloud test. ## Risks - The API is opt-in. Native plugin execution requires the later integrations. - Providers must make task submission idempotent and prove descendant termination. - A failed status read or credential export keeps the lease available for cleanup. - Codex refresh writeback requires the same active grant, secret reference, and session epoch. Revocation or account replacement discards the old refresh. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. Used source inspection, code execution, tests, and GitHub tools. The exact served model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run local checks and recorded failures and their results above - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
98d17da1e2 |
Fix native monitor dispatch and finalization recovery (#16975)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native runs persist their results and workspace before they release execution. > - A task monitor must wait for that settlement before it starts the next run. > - The scheduler checked provider status but did not check unfinished finalization. > - A timer could dispatch too early, then its old finalizer could no longer find the consumed schedule. > - This pull request delays dispatch and reconciles prior delivery from server records. > - The task can continue without repeating the provider turn or removing a newer run's ownership. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A native run saved a yielded monitor result while workspace finalization needed recovery. Its timer dispatched after the provider stopped. The follow-up failed because the earlier run still held workspace recovery. The old finalizer then retried `monitor_wait_authority_lost` indefinitely. **Expected behavior** Timer dispatch waits for native finalization. If an older timer already dispatched, the finalizer uses its saved scheduling receipt and admitted successor to settle the old result. It preserves current task state and ownership. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Schedule a task monitor from a native run and save a yielded result. 2. Leave native finalization retryable after the provider reaches a terminal state. 3. Let the monitor become due. Before this change, the scheduler consumes it. 4. Restore workspace persistence and retry the old finalizer. Before this change, the missing schedule leaves it retryable. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced against master `34be1b831bcaba070264ae8d214ceffe6a8f9eab`. **Deployment mode** Self-hosted server built from source, with PostgreSQL and the native runner. Related recent recovery work: #16962 and #16963. No duplicate repair found for this failure. ## What Changed - Scheduled and manual monitor dispatch wait for unfinished native finalization. If the monitor expires during workspace recovery, the accepted result can settle into the persisted schedule, and the scheduler then applies its existing expiry policy. New monitor-wait results still require an unexpired, unexhausted schedule. - A narrow reader joins the run's server-issued monitor receipt to its durable wake and admitted successor. - The finalizer and locked status commit verify that evidence and preserve current task ownership. They do not create another wake. - Monitor delivery participates in assessment identity, so recovery can replace a prior error decision without violating the decision ledger's uniqueness constraints. - PostgreSQL regressions cover saved-result replay, active successors, wrong task or agent, missing receipts, unadmitted wakes, ownership races, and failed workspace persistence. - The execution contract and verification maps describe the recovery boundary. ## Verification - Red: the saved monitor regression remained `retryable_failure` instead of `committed` on unpatched code. - Red: the scheduler admitted a wake while terminal-run finalization remained retryable. - Red/green: two PostgreSQL cases reproduce timeout during workspace recovery for scheduled and manual checks. Before the review repair, both remain `retryable_failure` with `monitor_wait_authority_lost`. Afterward, both commit, apply board escalation once, preserve the saved result, and enqueue zero provider wakes. New completion still rejects the expired schedule. - Typecheck: `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. - Build: `pnpm build` passed. - Maps: `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed. - Review: Greptile 5/5 and Ponytail Paperclip Review 5/5 on the current head, with no unresolved findings. Both reviews are static; execution evidence is recorded separately above and below. - Linux staging: the original repair passed 170 tests across monitor integration, scheduling, status arbitration, and workspace finalization. The expanded suite passes all 172 tests, including both new timeout regressions. - Live acceptance: deployed the original repair to the authorized Linux ARM64 self-hosted instance. The stranded saved result finalized automatically; the original task then completed through normal admission, with its final answer persisted after browser reload. The other original task was already complete and its external delivery was verified without repeating it. - The initial Mac regression run passed 68 tests, but three suites failed during embedded PostgreSQL startup. A subsequent focused run confirmed the host had exhausted its PostgreSQL semaphore allowance. Linux verification uses isolated databases; the local failure logs remain preserved. - The local full test suite is not claimed as passed. It is blocked by the same PostgreSQL startup limitation; full-suite CI passed on head `8bc29d1b7783446f397b858e558083570a96bb66` ([run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39447913466)). ## Risks - A delivery match must not grant new execution authority. The lookup requires the original run's server receipt and a matching company, agent, task, wake, and admitted successor. The locked commit rejects old-run checkout ownership and permits no status effects. - Workspace persistence must succeed before settlement. Its existing failure path remains effective. - The scheduler waits while a native finalizer is unfinished. Workspace recovery must settle before dispatch; elapsed monitor limits transfer to the existing scheduler recovery policy instead of stranding the result. Neither settlement path renews a deadline or changes budget, approval, pause, or provider authority. - No schema, migration, credential, or provider configuration change. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with tool use and code execution. The exact backend 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> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
24758b9da1 |
Avoid loading tool schemas for effective assignments (#16969)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Tool profiles define which tools an agent can use. > - Run preparation and connection checks resolve these assignments from the database. > - These callers need tool IDs and names, but the existing lookup also reads complete schemas and provider metadata. > - Repeated lookups transfer data that these callers discard. > - This pull request adds a small assignment projection through the same permission resolver. > - The benefit is less database transfer and JSON work with current permission checks and the same public response. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Effective tool assignment reads during run preparation, native runtime setup, and connection policy checks. **Subsystem affected** server/ — tool access and orchestration services. **Current behavior** Internal callers use the public effective-profile lookup. Its catalog query reads complete tool rows, including input schemas, output schemas, annotations, and provider metadata. These callers only use catalog IDs and names. **Proposed behavior** Internal callers use an assignment lookup that selects catalog identity and selector fields. Both lookups share one resolver. The public effective-profile endpoint keeps its complete definitions. **Reason and benefit** Large catalogs increase database transfer and JSON work for every assignment lookup. The smaller query avoids that payload without caching permissions or changing query frequency. **Breaking changes** None. No route, schema, migration, permission rule, or public response changes. Related: Refs #16761, Refs #16723. The former narrows profile summary reads. The latter changes how the gateway presents tool definitions. Neither narrows this internal effective-assignment lookup. ## What Changed - Share effective-profile resolution between full definitions and assignment records. - Select the existing catalog identity and selector projection for internal assignments. - Use the assignment lookup in run preparation, native runtime setup, and connection policy checks. - Add real PostgreSQL tests for selectors, exclusions, current profile and binding state, company boundaries, and returned payload size. - Document the database read contract. ## Verification - Five focused test files passed: 521 tests. They cover tool access, connection intents, runtime preparation, native runtime context, and the new assignment lookup. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. - `pnpm check:module-boundaries` passed. - The PostgreSQL fixture compares the full authorization result with the assignment result. It checks all selector types, excludes removed tools, and observes catalog, profile, and binding changes on later calls. - The payload test measures rows returned by PostgreSQL before application mapping. With large schema and annotation fields, the assignment result is less than 1% of the full catalog payload. This is a synthetic fixture result, not a fleet savings estimate. - `pnpm build` passed. - The full local suite is in progress. It found two Git fixture failures that also reproduce on unchanged master with `init.defaultBranch=main`. Both pass with a process-only `init.defaultBranch=master` setting. The global Git configuration was not changed. This earlier failure remains recorded; it is not counted as a clean first pass. - Apex review: 5/5, no actionable comments. All 54 CI checks passed; two conditional jobs were skipped. - The broader local run also reached two UI test timeouts and one adapter test timeout. All three passed when rerun in isolation with unchanged source. The exact cause of these timeouts is not established. No UI or adapter implementation is changed by this PR. The CLI import/export journey passes its assertions but its local teardown fails with `ENOTEMPTY` while a runtime context asset is written. Its CI check passed. The complete local suite is not reported as a clean pass. ## Risks - Both lookups share permission resolution. Existing tool access tests and result parity checks cover that extraction. - Future assignment callers must use the fields in the smaller result. Typechecking rejects attempts to read full schemas from it. - The lookup still scans the active company catalog and resolves current connections on every call. This change reduces returned bytes; it does not reduce query count or introduce a cache. - No database migration or operational configuration change is required. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool-assisted source inspection, implementation, and test execution. The exact 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> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
ba3bdd0675 |
Keep Muse maintenance idle on unclaimed warm instances (#16974)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Cloud keeps unclaimed applications warm so new users can enter quickly. > - Empty warm applications use an existing standby predicate to skip recurring database work. > - Muse maintenance starts without that predicate and scans its tables every five seconds. > - These scans keep an empty database active even when no Muse binding exists. > - This pull request applies the existing standby predicate to Muse startup and recurring maintenance. > - The benefit is idle database compute while the application stays warm, with normal maintenance after claim. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** `createApp` starts Muse maintenance without the warm standby guard used by other background services. The worker updates qualification evidence at startup and reads binding tables every five seconds, including on an empty unclaimed instance. **Expected behavior** An unclaimed warm application must not run recurring database work. Muse maintenance must resume after the signed claim, without a process restart. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start the maintenance service with background work disabled. 2. Advance the timer beyond several five-second sweeps. 3. Observe database calls from the original implementation despite the disabled state. The new regression test uses real PostgreSQL. The original source fails its zero-query assertion; the patched source passes. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on `813e808af46` before this fix. Related: Refs #16448. ## What Changed - Pass the Cloud standby predicate to Muse maintenance. - Admit both the startup evidence update and recurring sweeps only when background work is enabled. - Mark startup evidence once, before reconciliation. Retry that write after a database failure. - Add PostgreSQL tests for standby, claim, later ticks, default deadline enforcement, and startup-write failure. - Document the maintenance boundary. ## Verification - Five focused test files passed: 278 tests. They cover Muse maintenance, Muse control and qualification routes, and Cloud standby behavior. - Controlled regression: the new standby test fails against the original maintenance source. The patched source was restored after the comparison. - The new PostgreSQL test advances ten minutes while admission is closed and observes zero database operations. It opens admission and verifies the persisted qualification evidence update and reconciliation. Later sweeps retain a single successful startup update. - `pnpm check:module-boundaries` passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. - `pnpm build` passed. - All 54 CI checks passed; two conditional jobs were skipped. - Apex review: 5/5, no actionable comments or unresolved threads. - The full local test command is still running. The focused tests, workspace typecheck, build, and complete CI matrix above are the finished checks. ## Risks - Claimed workspaces retain existing Muse maintenance. The app gate depends only on warm standby. It does not suppress deadline enforcement or terminal cleanup during idle task drain. - Work resumes on the next five-second maintenance tick after claim. Request-driven work remains available through the existing claim path. - The receiver keeps its existing lifecycle. Its empty pending-contact map causes no database writes in standby. - No database migration, provider configuration, or authority rule changes. - Broker and receiver effects are mocked in the new maintenance tests. The database operations are real. Existing Muse control tests cover the broker boundary; no live Muse provider qualification is claimed. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool-assisted source inspection, implementation, and test execution. The exact 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
|
4b05795712 |
fix(github): reuse review instructions across native turns (#16971)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - GitHub events continue an ordinary task and can reuse its provider conversation. > - Each automatic event appended the full review policy and PR description. > - Native GitHub follow-ups also repeated task history because only Slack used the compact path. > - This pull request separates admitted review configuration from commit updates. > - A verified resume sends the current messages and changed configuration. A fresh session gets full context. > - This reduces repeated input while retaining review rules and current tool checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13959, #16645, #16901. **What happened?** Opening a PR and pushing twice stored three full review prompts. A later native turn repeated all three in a retained provider conversation. **Expected behavior** A new event supplies its commit and event data. The harness delivers stable review instructions once per retained conversation and configuration. Fresh sessions receive full instructions. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Enable automatic GitHub reviews for a repository. 2. Open a PR, let the review finish, and push two new commits. 3. Inspect task messages and the native submitted envelopes. Before this fix, the policy and old requests repeat. ## What Changed - Store compact automatic event messages. Fetch the PR description through the existing metadata tool when needed. - Load review instructions from processed deliveries bound to the company, task, agent, and source comments. Preserve each admitted policy snapshot. - Use the existing verified native continuation path for complete GitHub text batches. Deliver configuration changes using a key over endpoint, PR conversation, revision, and instructions. - Keep full bootstrap input for fresh sessions and failed resume, including board follow-ups with no new GitHub event. Retain existing framing for incomplete batches, attachments, interactions, and recovery. - Keep the same configuration identity across automatic review, discussion, and automatic review. Coalesced requests use the last accepted request's admitted policy. - Add regression and database coverage. Update the execution contract and verification recipe. ## Verification - Red: the new event-size regression failed because policy and PR body repeated. The GitHub continuation regression failed because it returned no compact prompt. - Green: focused policy, continuation, native input, and adapter prompt tests passed (231 tests). Native resume/fresh-bootstrap cases passed (9 tests). - The signed-webhook/database case passed at `6296168253`. It checks configuration edits, queued older snapshots, coalesced policy selection, discussion continuity, board follow-ups, and company/task/agent/comment boundaries. The private PostgreSQL template used 12 connections because the host reached its semaphore limit with the default settings. - The earlier broad channel/session integration run passed 1,432 tests. Later review fixes invalidated that run. The latest focused database case passed after those fixes. - Reviewer regressions failed against the previous lookup, then passed with the fix: a mixed-revision batch delivered multiple policies, and a discussion lost the configuration identity. The board wake-to-rendered-prompt regression also failed before repair. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `git diff --check` passed on the final source. - Full local `pnpm test:run` exposed follow-up/fixture failures during development. Those cases are fixed and pass separately. The stale run was stopped after source edits. Full-suite validation for the final commit passed in CI. - All required CI checks passed for `6296168253`, including tests, typechecks, build, and clean public npm install checks. The two unrelated Storybook checks were skipped. - A live two-turn Codex smoke could not start: the local macOS sandbox helper rejected execution of the installed Codex 0.153.4 binary. No live GitHub/provider acceptance or deployment is claimed. ## Risks Skipping instructions is safe only after a verified checkpoint resume with the correct previous run. The full bootstrap remains available if resume fails. Changed or previously unknown configuration is sent again. Tests cover these cases. Tool authorization and publication checks still run under the current server policy. No database migration is required. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool use and code execution. The exact deployment model identifier and context window are not exposed in this session. No delegated agents were used. ## 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
|
1f3695ac67 |
fix: expire native session failover backups after their issues close (#16866)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Native agent sessions that run in a remote sandbox keep a host-side
failover copy of the sandbox's harness state, so a replacement sandbox
can resume the conversation
> - Each session keeps that copy forever, and one copy can reach several
gigabytes
> - On a busy instance these copies fill the volume, and no existing
cleanup touches them
> - Once a session's work is closed, its copy matters only if someone
reopens that work later
> - This pull request expires the copy after the session's issues have
been closed for a configurable window, and makes a reopened issue start
a fresh session
> - The benefit is bounded disk use without breaking active,
recoverable, or leased sessions
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Bug report described in-PR (bug report template).
**What happened?**
After every remote turn, `checkpointRemoteRunner` writes the sandbox's
runner state and provider session home (for example `codex-home`) to
`durable-sessions/<scope>/failover-backups/current`. Only the same
session's next checkpoint replaces it. No code path deletes a session's
copy when the session ends, its issue closes, or its agent goes away, so
the instance volume fills. On one instance:
- 246 sessions held 17 GB of copies, 84 of them older than a week;
- 24 new sessions added 5 GB in a single day, one copy alone 3.2 GB.
**Expected behavior**
Disk used by failover copies stays bounded. A copy is kept while its
session can still resume (open issue, live run, pending recovery, or
live lease), and expires once the session's issues have been closed for
a while. A reopened issue then starts a fresh native session, instead of
failing with `runner_harness_backup_unavailable` on a replacement
sandbox.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run agents with a native runtime in a remote sandbox environment.
2. Let them complete many issues.
3. Watch
`<instance>/runtime/paperclip-runner/durable-sessions/*/failover-backups/current`
grow without bound after the issues close.
**Paperclip version or commit:** `master` at
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
813e808af4 |
Remove filesystem history authorization from workspace preparation (#16963)
Remove physical-root source/reader authorization and sticky directory classifications from workspace preparation. Preserve current task/run authority, app-record privacy, credential authorization, containment, and lifecycle/publication integrity.
Validate replacement selections against persisted new inputs and refresh verified checkout ownership so bounded reuse survives earlier workspace relocation. Add real PostgreSQL/Git regressions, a reproducible history-scaling benchmark, and documentation.
Full CI passed all 48 jobs and Greptile scored 5/5 at
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d84061b923 |
fix(runner): recover journaled completion proposals (#16962)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Native runs preserve provider sessions across controller restarts. > - A completion event can reach durable storage before the next session checkpoint. > - Recovery advanced the event cursor but lost the saved completion proposal. > - The completed turn then appeared to need another provider turn to report its result. > - This change restores the exact active turn's proposal before advancing the cursor. > - Recovery can finalize completed work without repeating its external actions. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** After a controller restart, a native run could fail with `native_finalization_missing` even though `run.result.proposed` was already durable. The recovered driver skipped that event when its cursor advanced, so the result was absent from its state. Automatic disposition retries could then encounter outstanding tool receipts and exhaust recovery. **Expected behavior** Restore the saved result for the exact active turn. Wait for provider termination, then use normal finalization. Do not start another provider turn to repeat completed work. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a native Codex task and save its active-turn checkpoint. 2. Persist its completion proposal, then lose the controller before another checkpoint. 3. Recover the same run after the provider completes. Before this change, finalization reports a missing result. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on `92b238137b`. The repair is based on `7c247243e5`. **Deployment mode** Native Runner with Codex. The incident used a remote sandbox; the regression covers controller event recovery. Related: #12845 and #15297. The older #12241 addresses provider process continuity; this change repairs the controller's saved event projection. ## What Changed - Restore valid completion proposals for the checkpoint's exact active turn during event replay. - Reject conflicting, invalid, or incorrectly bound proposals. Ignore proposals from another turn and prevent adoption after a newer turn starts. - Keep provider termination and normal finalization as separate requirements. - Add eight behavioral cases using the real Codex driver and a simulated transport, and document the recovery contract and verification scope. ## Verification - Red: the new restart regression failed with `native_finalization_missing` before the production change. - Green: 254 tests passed across the native runtime, backend adapter, and Codex recovery suites. The new cases check no repeated provider work, no early finalization, duplicate proposals, conflicts, invalid proposals, and stale turn/session bindings. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed locally. All CI gates passed on `2ac025a15c`; Greptile rated that commit 5/5 with no outstanding findings. The full local `pnpm test:run` was started after completing the embedded PostgreSQL installation, then stopped while still running once the complete CI test matrix passed; it is not reported as a completed local run. - Real local acceptance passed on `2ac025a15c` with the production Rust Runner transport, Codex CLI `0.160.0`, and `gpt-6.1-sol` on macOS arm64. Persisted the completion proposal while retaining the older active-turn checkpoint; let the provider finish without persisting its later controller events; stopped the exact owned runner/provider; recovered the same provider session and turn. Observed one accepted result, one durable `turn.start` command, and one line in the receipt file. Hosted sandbox restart and recovery of the original stopped task have not been performed. - Initial setup failures are retained: dependency drift caused diff-viewer type errors, and skipped PostgreSQL postinstall links prevented database startup. Dependency alignment and the package postinstall repaired those local prerequisites. Probe setup iterations failed on a direct-provider response schema, invalid probe input fields, and an original provider that still held its writer lock. Acceptance uses the production transport, validated input, and exact-owner shutdown. No production code changes were made for those probe setup failures. ## Risks - A stale proposal could finalize the wrong work. Recovery requires the checkpoint's active turn and matching run, session, and source. It rejects conflicting results and waits for provider termination. - The change uses the existing paginated recovery scan. It adds no database query per event or new retry allowance. - No schema migration or change to task authorization is included. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6, running as Codex with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact served model snapshot and context-window size are not exposed in this session. The live acceptance probe uses `gpt-6.1-sol`. ## 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
|
96824a71d1 |
fix(db): migrate connector hooks on SQL_ASCII databases (#16958)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work for AI agents. > - Server startup applies database migrations before accepting work. > - Some older embedded databases use SQL_ASCII encoding. > - Migration 0355 uses a Unicode escape literal that PostgreSQL rejects on those databases. > - A source rebuild can pass but the updated server cannot start. > - This change makes that migration portable and preserves its shipped receipt. > - Existing databases retain their newer connector triggers during upgrades. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A source deployment failed at startup with `conversion between UTF8 and SQL_ASCII is not supported`. Migration 0355 could not compile its connector policy function on an older embedded database. The previous app was restored while this repair was prepared. **Expected behavior** Supported legacy databases complete startup migrations. Connector selector trimming matches JavaScript `trim()`. A database that already applied 0355 must not replay it over the later 0356 connector trigger definition. **Steps to reproduce** Create a PostgreSQL database from template0 with SQL_ASCII encoding, then apply the current migration chain. The new regression fails with the observed conversion error before this change. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on `92b238137ba716cdf1746dd49969e2f5ab7af8fe`. The branch includes current master `f57ed25385`. **Database mode** Embedded PostgreSQL 18.1; legacy SQL_ASCII database. The UTF-8 path is also covered. Related background: #645 fixed encoding for new databases. Existing SQL_ASCII installations still need portable migrations. #16956 fixes a separate workspace lock timeout that motivated this deployment. ## What Changed - Build the whitespace pattern from UTF-8 bytes instead of a Unicode escape literal. - Match whole whitespace sequences so SQL_ASCII does not trim partial multibyte characters. - Recognize the original 0355 checksum as a valid receipt. This prevents replay of its older trigger body over 0356. - Add real PostgreSQL coverage for both encodings, selector behavior, and preservation of the later trigger definition and receipt count. - Document the legacy encoding and migration-history contract. ## Verification - Red: SQL_ASCII migration failed with the same conversion error; UTF-8 passed. - Second red: fixing only the SQL caused an existing receipt to replay and overwrite the later connector function. - Green: 29 focused tests passed across the new regression, migration replay tests, and database client tests. - Rebased regression: all 29 focused tests passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db check:migrations` passed. - Linux ARM64: clean build and 37 focused tests passed, including both encoding and workspace-lock regressions. - Live acceptance: the same legacy SQL_ASCII database completed all seven remaining migrations. The server reports the tested commit and healthy status. The restart report has no lost runs. - All 55 current-head checks passed; two unrelated Storybook checks were skipped. Full test, typecheck, build, runner, release, and E2E CI gates passed. The complete suite ran in CI; local verification used focused tests. - Greptile reviewed this exact commit at 5/5 with no findings. - Preserved failures: the initial unmodified-master startup failed at migration 0355 and was rolled back. A later build-cache path error in the deployment commands was corrected before the successful clean build; it required no source change. ## Risks The migration content changes, so receipt compatibility matters. The original checksum remains recognized to avoid replaying historical DDL. The tests compare complete later function definitions and receipt counts. The whitespace pattern contains encoded bytes; tests cover every ECMAScript whitespace character and preserve non-whitespace Unicode input. Database data and schema shape are unchanged by this repair. ## 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
|
7c247243e5 |
Qualify and package Copilot for ordinary installations (#15706)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - A provider must work through normal installed packages on local and Daytona environments. > - Candidate-only success does not prove that the shipped package contains the manifest and native runtime needed for Daytona. > - The release must preserve saved-token access and task lifecycle guarantees. > - This pull request will qualify Copilot and include the exact-source remote manifest in normal release archives. > - The benefit is a reviewable part of the Copilot production release. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15701, #15703 and #15705. Supersedes qualification work in #15563 and the original candidate in #14434. Base: #15705. ## What Changed - Keep Copilot discovery passive during reconnect reconciliation; refresh on explicit opening, account/environment changes and reconnect. - Retain the selected Product cases, permission/continuity evidence and cleanup checks. - Build the Linux provider manifest from the existing pinned Docker stage in the cloud. - Join all four native daemon receipts with that manifest before server packing. - Reject missing or incompatible remote authority during normal release assembly; retain historical workflow compatibility. - Promote the completed profile47 qualification marker, publish the current qualification record and preserve every failed attempt. - Keep one current release checklist and the shipped-canary gates explicit. ## Verification Runtime #15701 is merged at `d855e550ad8d2a267312983f26457aabf5393c3a`. History #15703 is merged at `df80616d98119cbf5abd40549794d9980a5fabf6`. Remaining source [`42bcbd61299655f7e37aabe6bb5f19bba770ad1d`](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/commit/42bcbd61299655f7e37aabe6bb5f19bba770ad1d) contains the four-file authorization repair. The remaining PR trees preserve six nonoverlapping files from the newer public mainline managed-settings fix and the CI-owned lockfile. No unrelated provider is enabled. The security finding is repaired: existing-agent discovery requires `agent_config:update` before connection selection or token resolution. The saved environment is the default. Authorized editors can select a prospective environment. Both denied board-viewer and agent-reader regressions fail on the original source. All49 route tests and server typecheck pass with the fix. Denied requests perform no connection selection, credential resolution or probe. Current-head security scans pass on both remaining PRs; the repaired thread is resolved. Copilot CLI1.0.88 and profile47 retain digest `sha256:55044aa235e88b3fe36ec8a556ee1e3382590870aab907e4462ef7d64af49cea`. The [qualification record](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/42bcbd61299655f7e37aabe6bb5f19bba770ad1d/doc/plans/2026-10-20-copilot-qualification-v47.json) reports20/20 Product cells,154 assertions and7/7 protocol cases,46 assertions against frozen normal installed source `c2616370800f5f6df45246b0890ba35a7cd2faab`. The exact qualification model is `gpt-5.6-luna`. Every passing Product case confirms cleanup. Original failures remain recorded; automatic behavior retries are disabled. The route-only authorization repair changes no bound runtime/profile bytes and does not relabel the frozen campaign. The ordinary installed remote journey passed saved-token selection, model discovery, normal UI save/reopen, metadata-only Test, completed task, accepted receipt and exact19-byte browser download. An open model catalog caused no additional discovery requests during117seconds. Actual installed runtime smokes passed on macOS ARM64, macOS x64 under Rosetta and native Linux x64 on Daytona. Raw token browser entry was not exercised; encrypted connection creation used the normal API. The first Daytona file attempt timed out during delayed semantic dispatch; its precise stalled layer remains unresolved. Independent ordinary remote delivery and the other19 Product cells passed before one instrumented recheck passed8/8 with unchanged source,prompt,assertions and deadlines. No causal latency repair is claimed. Before the authorization repair, all four final PR heads passed required verify/E2E and fresh Greptile5/5 reviews with zero unresolved threads. Current-head CI/review is running for the two repaired heads. Local focused checks retain129 connection,59 runner,72 shared-eval and88 recovery/workspace passes, plus migration safety and token gates. The additive Copilot migration is361; released master history is preserved. [Cloud normal-package run39414239704](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39414239704) builds the pre-security source4f3f. All four native producers and Linux package assembly pass; the final clean installed consumers are finishing. All18 retained archives match their hashes;37,863 regular files contain zero selected credentials. That package does not contain the later route repair. The actual final published package must include it and pass the local/Daytona live canaries. The frozen Daytona image remains published and independently verified. No separate full-image scan is claimed. Docker builds run in the cloud. **Remaining:** current-head CI/review, setup and qualification merges, final publication, and ordinary local/Daytona canaries against the actual shipped package. The user explicitly authorizes the maintainer review override; CI remains a merge gate. No production deployment is claimed. Provider USD remains unknown and GitHub-attributed. ## Risks An omitted or mismatched image manifest prevents ordinary Daytona startup. Final normal archives must contain the matching image authority and platform daemons. The completed runtime campaign remains bound to its original source; the final UI-only repair needs its own normal-install setup proof. Credit notices are not measured USD receipts. Native steering, native plan mode and detached work remain outside this release. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed in this task. Used for code changes, review and tool-assisted verification. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
92b238137b |
Connect and configure GitHub Copilot through Apps (#15705)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Apps and AI Connections store credentials and govern access to agent runtimes. > - Users need a supported saved-token connection and config values that survive save and reopen. > - The release must preserve saved-token access and task lifecycle guarantees. > - This pull request will connect Copilot through the normal Apps and AI Connections path. > - The benefit is a reviewable part of the Copilot production release. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15701 and #15703. Supersedes setup work in #15562. Base: #15703. Next: #15706. ## What Changed - Require configuration update authority before Copilot credential-bearing model discovery; default to the saved environment and preserve explicit selection for editors. - Keep Copilot discovery passive during reconnect reconciliation; refresh on explicit opening, account/environment changes and reconnect. - Add GitHub AI token connections with encrypted storage, ownership, grants and audit logging. - Keep repository access separate from Copilot runtime authentication. - Probe the selected environment without sending a model prompt and preserve authenticated model selection through save/reopen. - Keep fresh execution admission consistent with normal Copilot setup; persist task model choices without changing provider or permission policy. - Refresh authenticated models after reconnecting the same saved Copilot account, including recovery from a previous authentication error. - Apply the additive provider-default constraint migration through the normal generated migration workflow. ## Verification Runtime #15701 is merged at `d855e550ad8d2a267312983f26457aabf5393c3a`. History #15703 is merged at `df80616d98119cbf5abd40549794d9980a5fabf6`. Remaining source [`42bcbd61299655f7e37aabe6bb5f19bba770ad1d`](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/commit/42bcbd61299655f7e37aabe6bb5f19bba770ad1d) contains the four-file authorization repair. The remaining PR trees preserve six nonoverlapping files from the newer public mainline managed-settings fix and the CI-owned lockfile. No unrelated provider is enabled. The security finding is repaired: existing-agent discovery requires `agent_config:update` before connection selection or token resolution. The saved environment is the default. Authorized editors can select a prospective environment. Both denied board-viewer and agent-reader regressions fail on the original source. All49 route tests and server typecheck pass with the fix. Denied requests perform no connection selection, credential resolution or probe. Current-head security scans pass on both remaining PRs; the repaired thread is resolved. Copilot CLI1.0.88 and profile47 retain digest `sha256:55044aa235e88b3fe36ec8a556ee1e3382590870aab907e4462ef7d64af49cea`. The [qualification record](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/42bcbd61299655f7e37aabe6bb5f19bba770ad1d/doc/plans/2026-10-20-copilot-qualification-v47.json) reports20/20 Product cells,154 assertions and7/7 protocol cases,46 assertions against frozen normal installed source `c2616370800f5f6df45246b0890ba35a7cd2faab`. The exact qualification model is `gpt-5.6-luna`. Every passing Product case confirms cleanup. Original failures remain recorded; automatic behavior retries are disabled. The route-only authorization repair changes no bound runtime/profile bytes and does not relabel the frozen campaign. The ordinary installed remote journey passed saved-token selection, model discovery, normal UI save/reopen, metadata-only Test, completed task, accepted receipt and exact19-byte browser download. An open model catalog caused no additional discovery requests during117seconds. Actual installed runtime smokes passed on macOS ARM64, macOS x64 under Rosetta and native Linux x64 on Daytona. Raw token browser entry was not exercised; encrypted connection creation used the normal API. The first Daytona file attempt timed out during delayed semantic dispatch; its precise stalled layer remains unresolved. Independent ordinary remote delivery and the other19 Product cells passed before one instrumented recheck passed8/8 with unchanged source,prompt,assertions and deadlines. No causal latency repair is claimed. Before the authorization repair, all four final PR heads passed required verify/E2E and fresh Greptile5/5 reviews with zero unresolved threads. Current-head CI/review is running for the two repaired heads. Local focused checks retain129 connection,59 runner,72 shared-eval and88 recovery/workspace passes, plus migration safety and token gates. The additive Copilot migration is361; released master history is preserved. [Cloud normal-package run39414239704](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39414239704) builds the pre-security source4f3f. All four native producers and Linux package assembly pass; the final clean installed consumers are finishing. All18 retained archives match their hashes;37,863 regular files contain zero selected credentials. That package does not contain the later route repair. The actual final published package must include it and pass the local/Daytona live canaries. The frozen Daytona image remains published and independently verified. No separate full-image scan is claimed. Docker builds run in the cloud. **Remaining:** current-head CI/review, setup and qualification merges, final publication, and ordinary local/Daytona canaries against the actual shipped package. The user explicitly authorizes the maintainer review override; CI remains a merge gate. No production deployment is claimed. Provider USD remains unknown and GitHub-attributed. ## Risks Bad credentials, missing entitlement, runtime installation and unavailable models must remain distinct failures. A connection must not adopt ambient credentials. The constraint migration changes accepted provider values, with no credential-storage migration. Current-master NewAgent fixture extraction is retained. Copilot cases use that shared support and test both passive discovery and explicit reconnect under the same setup lifecycle. The onboarding retry regression shares the component suite’s saved-connection, authenticated-model, draft, agent-list, hire and render lifecycle fixtures. Keeping it beside the existing onboarding failures makes adoption versus duplicate hire observable under the same lifecycle; this is the concrete cohesion reason for the existing large test file. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed in this task. Used for code changes, review and tool-assisted verification. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
0b266bd084 |
fix(workspaces): keep source preparation locks active (#16956)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Each task prepares its workspace before it starts the provider. > - Source preparation holds a transaction-scoped advisory lock on a dedicated database connection. > - Preparation can use other connections and the filesystem for longer than PostgreSQL allows that lock connection to stay idle. > - PostgreSQL then closes the connection and releases the lock while preparation still runs. > - This pull request reuses the workspace lock keepalive during source preparation. > - Slow preparation retains exclusion and returns its original result or error. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Tasks failed during workspace preparation with `CONNECTION_CLOSED` at the configured 60-second idle transaction timeout. No provider had started. A live retry showed the source-lock transaction idle while authorization reads ran on another connection. Its advisory-lock key matched the task's source-preparation key. PostgreSQL closed that transaction at the timeout. The same defect remains on current master. A real PostgreSQL regression also shows that another preparation can enter after the timeout while the original callback still runs. **Expected behavior** Source preparation must keep its advisory lock until the callback and any pending keepalive query finish. The ordinary pool must remain usable. The original preparation result or failure must survive. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Set `idle_in_transaction_session_timeout` to one second in a disposable PostgreSQL database. 2. Call `withIsolatedRepositorySourceLock` and keep its callback active for longer than one second without querying the lock connection. 3. Try to acquire the same source lock from another operation. 4. On the old code, the second operation enters and the first transaction fails with `CONNECTION_CLOSED`. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on source at `cde944ed75648adfb569e86133adc8b118b55dd6`. The repair is rebased onto `d855e550ad`. **Additional context** Refs #16340. That change introduced the keepalive for workspace copyback. This PR applies the existing helper to the source-preparation transaction. ## What Changed - Read the configured idle timeout in the same query that acquires the source lock. - Keep that dedicated connection active during source preparation with the existing helper. - Add two real PostgreSQL regressions for exclusion, company independence, a one-slot ordinary pool, nested acquisition, cleanup, and preservation of callback errors. - Update the execution contract and workspace verification maps. ## Verification - Red before the production edit: both new tests failed. A competing operation entered after the lock expired. A callback failure was replaced by `CONNECTION_CLOSED`. - Green after the repair: 86 tests passed across the source lock, source admission, keepalive, and heartbeat workspace preparation suites. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed on final commit `2b5000ce25`. - `git diff --check` passed. The lockfile is unchanged. - After rebase, the same 86 focused tests passed. The two source-lock tests passed again after the review cleanup change. - Live acceptance on `7df94d7a06`: a fresh local instance on macOS arm64, Node v26.4.0, native Codex `gpt-6.1-sol`, and permission mode `never`. PostgreSQL had a one-second idle transaction timeout. A temporary Git wrapper delayed repository reads by four seconds. Workspace preparation after environment acquisition took 8,297 ms. The real task completed, wrote and attached the correct line-count/SHA-256 report, reached `done` with native phase `committed`, and cleared its execution lock. The attachment matched the workspace file and survived browser reload. No dedicated lock connections remained. - The live probe initially used `gpt-5.4`, which the ChatGPT account rejected. Selecting the reported task model, `gpt-6.1-sol`, resolved that readiness failure. The local Claude CLI has no login, so no live Claude run is claimed. - Full CI passed on `2b5000ce25`: all general, chat, workspace, serialized-server, Runner, and E2E test shards, plus typecheck, build, and canary packaging. Both Greptile and Paperclip Review rated this commit 5/5 with no open findings. The Paperclip check concluded neutral; two unrelated visual checks were skipped. - The duplicate local `pnpm test:run` serial invocation was stopped with SIGINT after the complete CI test shards passed. It did not finish locally; no local full-suite pass is claimed. Local proof consists of the focused real PostgreSQL tests, typecheck, build, map checks, and the real task above. - The final commit changes test teardown only; production code matches the live acceptance commit. - Initial sandbox runs could not open test database ports or build IPC sockets. The same commands ran with local process access. The frozen install also found an existing manifest/lockfile mismatch; dependency resolution was local and the lockfile was restored. ## Risks - The lock connection sends one small query per keepalive interval. The helper derives that interval from the configured timeout and caps it at 30 seconds. It does no polling when the timeout is disabled. - The helper joins an in-flight query before the transaction ends. A slow database can therefore delay cleanup. - This change does not disable database deadlines, retry preparation, or recover an unexpected connection loss. It preserves existing admission checks and company/source lock keys. - Deployment and recovery of the reported tasks remain separate from code verification. ## 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
|
cde944ed75 |
fix(workspaces): keep retained readers valid after cross-task wake coalescing (#16928)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Before a run starts, repository admission checks every retained
reader of the physical repository root and of overlapping roots.
> - Each retained reader records the run, task, agent and responsible
user that the server admitted.
> - A wake for another task can coalesce into a running run. The merge
replaces `contextSnapshot.issueId` and `taskId` with the other task.
> - The retained-reader check used that mutable context task before the
run's immutable task binding. The old reader then looked like a changed
identity.
> - When a later run admits an overlapping root, such as a shared
project checkout that contains earlier task worktrees, every admission
on that root fails. The root stays blocked and no operator action can
repair it.
> - This pull request accepts a retained reader when its task matches
the run's immutable binding or its current context task.
> - The benefit is that legitimate wake coalescing no longer blocks a
shared root, and missing or truly mismatched identities still fail
closed.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #16717 and #16832. Those cover retained readers whose run, agent or
task was deleted. This pull request covers a different cause: every
identity still exists, but wake coalescing changed the run's context
task. #16832 keeps identity mismatches fail-closed, so it does not fix
this case. Both pull requests change the same condition in
`execution-workspace-root-readers.ts`. The pull request that merges
second must rebase.
**What happened?**
A scheduled routine run failed in setup with `Repository root retains a
reader whose identity is no longer available` (403). Every later run of
the routine failed in the same way, for eight hours in a row. Two
earlier runs of the same agent were the retained readers. Each run
started for its own task and recorded its reader. About 10 to 16 minutes
later, a monitor wake for a different task coalesced into the running
run with reason `issue_execution_same_name`.
`mergeCoalescedContextSnapshot` set `contextSnapshot.issueId` to the
other task. `heartbeat_runs.issue_id` stayed on the original task,
because the `heartbeat_runs_set_scope_kind` trigger makes the binding
immutable. The readers were on per-task worktree roots, so nothing
failed at first. Then the routine's tasks changed to the shared project
checkout. That root contains those worktrees, so admission loaded the
two readers, compared them with the changed context task, and threw.
**Expected behavior**
A retained reader stays valid while its run, agent, task and responsible
user still exist and still match what the server admitted. A context
change from wake coalescing must not make the reader unavailable. A
reader whose task matches neither the run's binding nor its context must
still be rejected.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Admit run R for task A on a nested root, for example
`<checkout>/.paperclip/worktrees/a`.
2. Coalesce a wake for task B into R. `contextSnapshot.issueId` becomes
B. `heartbeat_runs.issue_id` stays A.
3. Admit or publish another task on the parent root `<checkout>`.
4. Observe the 403 `Repository root retains a reader whose identity is
no longer available`. Every later admission on that root fails in the
same way.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduced on `master` at
|
||
|
|
b448710986 |
fix: derive startup warmth from per-layer reuse evidence (#16908)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and inspect their work. > - Agent startup can reuse a lease, workspace, Runner, process, or session. > - A session ID can remain the same when other resources are new. > - The old cold/warm label did not show these separate decisions. > - This pull request records closed reuse receipts and derives labels from them. > - Reports now show partial reuse and missing evidence. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #11685. That issue tracks a specific ACPX fingerprint repair. This change records reuse evidence across startup resources. It does not repeat that repair. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Startup labels in the operator trace and Product E2E reports. **Current behavior** A cached runtime or a continuous session can suggest a warm startup even when workspace staging or provider launch work occurs. **Proposed behavior** Record each layer's reuse decision and a closed reason. Record observed provider launch counts. Use `warm`, `cold`, `partial_reuse`, or `unknown` from those receipts. Keep old runs unknown when they have no receipts. ## What Changed - Add local run-log receipts for the lease, workspace, Runner, provider process, and provider session. - Count physical ACPX launches, including respawns. Preserve the reason for a new process. - Reuse native workspace adoption and session lifecycle evidence. Keep native and bridged remote provider-process reuse and launch counts unknown where physical evidence is absent. - Show the per-run summary in retained results and the dashboard. Keep missing legacy values explicit. - Set the legacy trace boolean only for fully evidenced cold or warm startup. Keep the operator OTLP gate. Add no first-party Telemetry. - Test full reuse, workspace invalidation, two direct provider launches with session continuity, and report generation. - Start the final diagnostic write without waiting for persistence. Keep lease cleanup independent of a stalled event sink. - Keep remote provider evidence unknown after runtime setup fails or the host relay starts twice. - Align a stale Pi support-test expectation with current master profile 28 and its suite fingerprint. Keep the qualification rules unchanged. ## Verification - Passed: all 319 runtime, startup-timing, reuse-summary, and native workspace-history tests. Disposable local Git tests used the native Git binary. - Passed on the current commit: all 2,768 Runner E2E support tests across 128 files. This includes report and history tests for generated HTML and normalized JSON. - Passed: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils typecheck`. - Passed on `df60f8dbdbfcb6d80c84cd3bf563f8d58b2f9f03`: all PR CI gates, including repository typecheck and build, all test shards, and browser tests. Both automated reviews are 5/5. GitHub reports 55 successful checks, one neutral review, and two skipped Storybook checks. - The first server shard run failed because an unchanged workspace-runtime fixture did not accept health connections within 10 seconds. Its isolated local test and the single failed-jobs rerun both pass. This establishes recovery; the cause of the first timeout remains unknown. - Passed in the hosted source run on this exact commit: recursive typecheck, token gates, the large Runner E2E typecheck, Runner E2E unit tests, and build. The retained `source.txt` matches this PR head. - The extra unsharded `pnpm test:run` reached its 60-minute limit (exit 124). It has no complete verdict. The broad workflow therefore reports failure. No assertion-failure marker appears in the retained partial log. Full-suite acceptance uses the passing canonical PR CI partitions. A read-only inventory check found no gaps across 1,023 general server files, 161 serialized suites, and 20 workspace projects. The separate chat/native Runner lanes cover the excluded server files. No tests or timeouts were weakened. The local environment has 4 GiB of memory. Use CI for the large Runner E2E typecheck. - The initial report tests failed because the harness could not resolve package imports from the repository root. Relative source imports fixed that failure. - The first broad local run had timeouts from the environment Git bridge. Native Git resolves the ancestry timeout and all runtime tests pass. The added report fixture lacked its required screenshot; the corrected report tests pass. A stale master assertion expected Pi profile 27, while the generated profile is 28. Updated its expectation and exact suite fingerprint; all 78 targeted support tests pass. The clean full support run passes all 2,768 tests. - The three review regression cases failed before repair. They showed remote counts of zero and two, and a completed run that waited for the final diagnostic sink. They now pass. The stalled-sink case keeps persistence pending while the run returns, both bridge stops run once, and the staging lock map becomes empty. - Hosted evidence for this commit: [source verification](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39335475416), [retained command logs and status table](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39335475416/artifacts/12228829282). All listed commands exited zero except the incomplete unsharded test command described above. - The physical-launch test drives the executor's spawn callback twice. The native workspace test uses real Git repositories and verifies reuse and invalidation. These are deterministic tests, not a paid provider qualification campaign. ## Risks - Consumers must handle `partial_reuse` and `unknown`. Partial evidence no longer produces a legacy cold/warm boolean. - Native and remote bridged provider process evidence is still unavailable on some paths. The report shows unknown values for those paths. - Receipt emission is best effort. Missing receipts reduce confidence in a label and must not change execution or settlement. - No schema migration, first-party Telemetry event, or endpoint default changes are included. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, used reasoning, repository tools, and code execution. The exact provider model ID and context window are not exposed to this session. The existing implementation checkpoint was preserved from the earlier agent 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> Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
bc091f0a21 |
fix(recovery): recover retained workspaces before saved messages (#16906)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - A stopped run can leave useful files in its original sandbox. > - The server keeps that sandbox when it cannot confirm file copyback. > - The task can then save new user input but offers no safe way to recover the files. > - A retry of the old agent turn can repeat work that already finished. > - This pull request recovers files through the existing workspace owner and delivers only saved human input. > - The user can recover a task without certifying infrastructure facts or losing completed work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16883 and #16835 for publication receipts and verified process termination. Related: #16478 clears stale holds after copyback already succeeded. This change performs the missing export and records its proof. #16901 manages the main GitHub response comment and does not perform workspace repair. **What happened?** A failed run retained its workspace. A later user message stayed saved behind a file-repair hold. The task asked the user to verify process termination and file recovery but offered no repair control. Sending a message could show an optimistic Working state and move the task to Todo before admission succeeded. **Expected behavior** The harness should recover the original files when it can prove ownership and termination. It should preserve newer edits and completed operations. Only waiting user input may start another turn. Missing evidence must keep the source held with a specific explanation. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Interrupt a sandbox run before workspace finalization succeeds. 2. Retain its exact allocation and save a user follow-up. 3. Observe the file-repair hold and missing end-user repair path. ## What Changed - Add source-bound background recovery for native and legacy runs. An accepted native result is not required. - Share the physical copyback lock and durable owner. Resume only the exact stopped allocation, export files, verify persistence and obtain a fresh stop receipt. - Persist retry limits and idempotent requests on the existing recovery record. Limit each server to two background exports. Add an indexed candidate scan and a separate cleanup obligation. - Add a task-editor recovery endpoint. Deny agents and viewers. Reject caller-supplied stop or repair claims. - Deliver waiting human input once through ordinary admission. Preserve pause, approval, budget and assignment gates. Require historical conversational-adapter evidence for legacy-to-Runner continuation. - Include exact GitHub publication receipts in continuation context. Preserve unknown effects and the original failed run. - Show observed recovery progress, a transient-failure retry action and specific service blockers. Keep saved messages visible. Suppress false startup feedback and implicit Todo promotion behind a file hold. Hide unavailable workspace links. - Update execution semantics, capability maps and production-component stories. ## Verification - Red: the original read model failed the new recovery-progress assertion; the other 23 checks in that file passed. - Passed: recovery regressions with 28 cases with real PostgreSQL, files, tar and Git operations. Lifecycle provider calls are controlled test boundaries. Coverage includes native/legacy export, concurrent owners, rollback after export, interrupted archive export with a new database connection, lost replies, historical discovery, durable retry limits, separate cleanup and saved-input delivery. The actual candidate query uses its partial index with 3,000 unrelated history rows. A first automatic repair can bind verified old-controller stop proof without an accepted native result. Review also reproduced and fixed export-only continuation and cleanup lost after a committed repair. Cleanup remains discoverable without waiting input and after task reconciliation. - Passed: two GitHub integration cases verify that continuation context carries the existing publication receipt and does not write another response. Company and task boundaries are checked. - Passed: 293 continuation, workspace-sync, platform-receipt and OpenAPI checks. After file repair, actual dispatch retains pause, cancellation, approval, real budget-policy and assignment gates. - Passed: 174 route checks, including editor admission, agent/viewer denial and rejection of fabricated repair claims. - Passed: 351 task detail, workspace properties and comment-reopen checks after updating the new read boundaries and asynchronous workspace-link expectations. Two new route cases keep held tasks Blocked when a comment is saved. - Passed: 265 task-thread and recovery-notice checks. The broader continuation suite also passed; its new legacy migration case first exposed a gap that the focused recovery suite now covers. - Passed after rebase: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. The later master merge adds an unrelated permission migration; recovery migration generation and safety checks passed after the merge. - Passed: token gates, module boundaries, map structure and migration checks. The recovery index is migration 0360 after current master. - Browser: inspected the production recovery component and its retry-to-queued transition with fixture data. The first dev dependency load failed; a reload after optimization resolved it. This is UI evidence, not a live provider recovery claim. - Every test shard passed on final commit `bbbc09efb4`. The older local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after the complete CI test matrix passed. Local full typecheck and production build passed. The first CI build compiled and booted, then lost its runner during the clean public npm-install check. An isolated retry passed the build, production boot and clean public npm-install verification. - Greptile reviewed final commit `bbbc09efb4` at 5/5. All review threads are resolved. - The change is not deployed. Hosted recovery remains unverified until the served revision includes this change. ## Risks - Recovery crosses process, provider and persistence boundaries. Missing or mismatched ownership, stop, descriptor or file evidence keeps the hold. It never selects a replacement allocation or silently starts over. - File recovery does not certify external action outcomes or authorize replay. New input still uses normal execution admission. - Historical sources without sufficient durable evidence can remain blocked. Destructive reconstruction stays separate. - The index migration is idempotent. It changes no task data. Snapshot pruning follows repository policy. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, `gpt-6.1-sol`, with code execution and browser tools. `gpt-6-astra` assisted earlier investigation. The runtime does not expose the context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#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
|
3b8324a233 |
fix(github): keep one main PR review comment and reconcile stopped work (#16901)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - GitHub connections send review requests to an assigned agent. > - A PR needs one main comment that shows its current review state. > - The response ledger used one comment per incoming request. Pushes and follow-up messages created more placeholders. > - Thread subscriptions also accepted requests addressed to external bots. Recovery could leave an acknowledged request without a final notice. > - This pull request shares the main PR comment, filters other recipients, and reconciles stopped work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #16874 showed the repeated placeholders. #15416 introduced the per-request response path. The prior summary path used one PR-level marker. **What happened?** Repeated pushes created new main PR comments. A subscribed `@greptile review` message also woke the Paperclip bot. If execution stopped before staging a milestone, its comment could keep claiming that work was active. **Expected behavior** One bot keeps one main comment per PR. Progress and review results update it. A message addressed to another recipient does not wake the bot unless it also explicitly mentions this bot. Stopped work gets an accurate notice. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Accept two review requests in one PR conversation. 2. Add `@greptile review` to that subscribed conversation. 3. Fail the assigned run before it stages a milestone. Run channel maintenance. ## What Changed - Add a durable main PR response target. Keep per-request receipts and the existing publication lease. - Recover the target from App-owned provider markers. Adopt older placeholders and point verified duplicates to the current review. - Use a queued notice before a PR run starts. Preserve version ordering and final responses. - Filter leading mentions addressed to another recipient. Explicit mentions of this bot take precedence. Incidental mentions keep normal thread behavior. - Reconcile acknowledged requests after terminal execution. Show paused state for saved requests on a blocked task. Preserve newer work and confirmed or uncertain tool delivery. - Keep a request open when its stale acknowledgement is suppressed. Close placeholders after replies published elsewhere. Retire old coalesced placeholders before replacing their receipts. Resolve native request identity when legacy wake fields are absent. - Update guidance, connection documentation, and feature/access maps. ## Verification - Red: all three behavioral regressions failed on the original code. A second review created a second comment; an external-bot request was processed; stopped execution retained its working placeholder. - Green: the same three cases passed after the fixes. - Review regressions also failed before their repairs: a delayed acknowledgement closed a new request; normal and stored formal-review receipts left a live placeholder; coalesced completion lost a duplicate receipt; native terminal work without legacy wake fields stayed queued. All 13 combined regression and safety cases passed after repair. - The same legacy receipt-loss bug was also reproduced in the superseded-acknowledgement branch. Its four affected cases passed after adding retirement before that receipt replacement. - A further review regression reproduced paused requests rejecting resumed progress and skipping stopped-run cleanup. Four cases failed before repair; all eight resume and neighboring safety cases passed afterward. Both paused-notice branches keep the request open. - Repeated paused maintenance reproduced two needless GitHub edits. The writer now skips an identical complete comment body. Nine affected cases passed, covering repeated maintenance, resumption, stopped work, final assessment preservation, and main-comment reuse. - Safety cases cover lost receipts, legacy adoption, newer progress, published assessments, provider-verified mention aliases, and old replies that must not complete new requests. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, map validation, and module boundaries passed. The server TypeScript check passed after the final repair. The broader local GitHub workflow and policy run passed 188 tests. Full CI passed on the final commit (`554979d79285b68bcbf90cd639e3d2d053f4ea4b`), including all three chat shards, server/workspace/Runner suites, typecheck, build, and E2E gates. Greptile is 5/5 with no open review findings. One serialized job received a runner shutdown signal mid-test; its single retry passed. - Preserved failure evidence: the first CI run exposed an overbroad recipient filter and an old queued-text assertion. The next commit passed all three CI chat shards. Greptile then found the receipt transitions covered by the new regressions above. Local full-suite runs were stopped when those defects required source changes; no clean full local pass is claimed. - Tests use real PostgreSQL and controlled provider responses. They do not establish a live GitHub App rollout. The original instance needs the fixed server before its comments change. ## Risks - Leading mentions now select a recipient even when that account has no Paperclip connection. A leading human mention also selects that person. Mid-message incidental mentions retain normal subscription behavior. - Existing comment adoption edits only comments proven by this endpoint's request ledger or prior summary marker and App identity. Deleted and replaced comments remain protected. - Failure cleanup uses current authority and does not replace newer progress or unresolved provider writes. It does not restart failed execution. - No schema migration is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. The model used reasoning, tools, 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
16689de291 |
fix: add one-click retry for restricted workspace setup (#16909)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Tasks need a clear way to resume after a setup failure. > - A shared repository can contain another task that the assigned agent cannot read. > - Paperclip correctly stops before the agent starts, but the user must then understand workspace settings to recover. > - This pull request gives that failure a single Retry button and selects a clean copy of the configured repository through normal admission. > - The task keeps its assigned agent and execution settings, while access checks and existing work remain protected. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #16895 classifies the restricted source failure. This change adds the user recovery action. #16906 handles retained files after execution; this change handles a setup failure before execution starts. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Recovery of a task whose shared repository includes a task workspace the assigned agent cannot read. **Current behavior** The task stops before provider work and asks the user to understand workspace choices or access grants. **Proposed behavior** Show Retry above the task message box, independent of loaded conversation history. One click requests one attempt using a clean checkout of the configured remote. Show Retrying while the request is pending. Show an error only if the request fails. **Reason and benefit** The user can resume work without understanding repository isolation or changing access to another task. **Breaking changes** None. The recovery source value is server-owned. The public workspace selection request does not accept it. No migration is required. ## What Changed - Add one Retry control above the composer in both task conversation views. It stays available when an older notice is outside the loaded comment pages. - Bind recovery to the latest failed run, current assignee, and recorded proof that provider work did not start. - Use the existing atomic recovery route and pending workspace selection. Normal admission clears the old session and creates the isolated checkout. - Choose a fresh task-owned branch for recovery, including fixed project branches, existing task branches, and adapter branch overrides. Preserve the model, environment, setup commands, pending user workspace choices, previous files, and all execution gates. - Update execution documentation and both workspace maps. ## Verification - Passed all 461 tests in the eight affected database, Git, HTTP, workspace binding, and conversation suites after the review fixes. An additional 292 tests passed after the final compatibility fixes, including IssueDetail and recovery action routing. - Concurrent HTTP retries produce one wakeup. Paused projects and runs that started provider work reject recovery without changing the workspace. - Real Git tests exclude private files, private commits, and unpublished original files from the clean checkout, preserve the original, and exercise reuse, cleanup, and reopen. - Verified in a running local app: a task failed twice, displayed only Retry, and reached Done after one click. A second browser test put the failure notice behind 501 newer comments and used a fixed project branch. Retry stayed visible and the task reached Done. The credential-free process worker used the selected checkout and wrote its result there. This does not claim a live model-provider run. - The first manual fixture lacked a responsible-user membership and failed after successful workspace recovery. Corrected the fixture, retained that failure evidence, and verified the full flow with ordinary authorization. - Full typecheck, build, token gates, and map checks passed. The full local suite was stopped after review changed its source during execution; current-head CI provides the complete suite result. - An earlier unrelated peer-comment read test hit a socket hangup. The next complete affected-suite run passed; the first failure is retained in local evidence. - Current-head CI hit an unchanged runner credential-concurrency test failure. That lane passed on the preceding commit, and all 42 credential tests passed locally. The original failed job is retained; the one-time rerun passed. All latest-head CI checks are green (55 success, 2 skipped, 1 neutral), and Greptile is 5/5 with both review threads resolved. ## Risks - A remote repository outage can still prevent the next attempt. Retry does not grant access or copy unpublished files from the old checkout. - Recovery accepts only the latest recorded pre-provider failure and preserves normal execution gates. This limits duplicate work and stale recovery requests. - No database migration, dependency, or lockfile change. - The first review found fixed-branch retry loops and dependence on paginated notice history. Both had failing regressions before the fixes and now pass targeted tests and the combined browser journey. - Full CI then caught assumptions about missing run evidence and unrelated recovery actions. The final changes tolerate absent evidence and scope the new lookup to board-owned actions with valid run IDs. The previously failing suites now pass locally. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser verification. 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 - [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
|
d9bcf4dfe8 |
fix(auth): let Cloud stack admins manage experimental settings (#16907)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - People use experimental settings to opt into product features. > - Cloud stack Admins can manage their company, but cannot save an experiment. > - Requiring an Owner role adds unrelated privileges to this workflow. > - This pull request gives trusted Cloud stack Admins permission to update experiments. > - Other instance administration and platform settings keep their existing checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A person with the Cloud stack Admin role receives “Instance admin access required” when they enable an experimental setting, such as Fast responses. **Expected behavior** Cloud stack Admins can save editable experimental settings. This permission does not grant general instance-admin authority. Members, Support users, and agents cannot change experiments. Cloud-managed and operator-hidden settings remain protected. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Sign into a Cloud staging workspace as a stack Admin. 2. Open Settings → Experimental. 3. Enable Experimental fast responses. 4. Observe the permission error instead of a saved setting. **Additional context** Related: #10343 introduced computed Owner elevation. #15748 added Fast responses and the company Connections settings page. The roadmap and existing PRs were checked. This is a small authorization fix for the existing settings path. ## What Changed - Derive experiment-management authority from the current trusted Cloud stack Admin role on each request. - Apply that authority only to the experimental settings PATCH route. Keep general settings, environment defaults, and task drain restricted to instance admins. - Preserve existing hidden-setting checks, managed feature restrictions, and activity records. - Add role and role-downgrade regressions, allowed and denied route cases, staging coverage, and updated OpenAPI and access documentation. ## Verification - Before the fix, the Admin fast-response request returned 403 and the new role assertions failed. The first sandboxed HTTP run could not bind local sockets; the regression run outside that sandbox reached the expected authorization failures. - Focused Cloud actor, settings route, managed-overlay, and health tests: 149 passed. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` pass. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. - Greptile reviewed commit `7c33b90066121f03183579d2fae2650755e025e4` at 5/5. Its one style finding is fixed and resolved. - The full local `pnpm test:run` did not pass. It reported two early collection failures before workspace build outputs were ready and a 15-second timeout in the unchanged AgentMail recovery test. The run was stopped after those failures while the full CI suite continued. No full local-suite pass is claimed. - The first current-head CI attempt failed the unchanged Runner test “preserves a real listening process and its marker when a health RPC times out” with `runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable` / `process_identity_changed`. The test passes in a local isolated run. This recovery does not establish the CI failure's cause. [Failed job](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39332989655/job/118336142261). The failed shard passed on its single rerun. The failure cause remains unconfirmed. All CI checks on commit `7c33b90066121f03183579d2fae2650755e025e4` are now green. [Final CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39332989655). - No deployed staging behavior is claimed. Manual acceptance after deployment: as a stack Admin, enable Fast responses, reload, and confirm Connections appears. Confirm Members and Support users still cannot save experiments. ## Risks - This intentionally extends experimental settings write access to Cloud stack Admins. It does not persist an instance-admin role or expand other instance controls. - Production retains its existing managed feature policy. Staging retains its editable experiment allowlist and protected execution and owner-elevation settings. - No database migration or UI change is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser inspection. The runtime does not expose an exact model snapshot or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and 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> |
||
|
|
7b9334cd10 |
Draft: Build agent-ready design proposal system (#16875)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work. > - People need consistent UI patterns to review and control that work. > - The current board uses related layouts and controls with different spacing, type, and behavior. > - That drift makes it hard for a designer or an agent to build a new page from a reliable reference. > - Storybook can show the shared patterns and the states they need to support. > - This pull request adds design proposals, a local sandbox, and reusable UI controls so people can compare the patterns in context. > - The benefit is a clearer design system that agents can use to build consistent UI. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** `ui/` — React board UI and Storybook. **Problem or motivation** Board pages repeat visual and interaction decisions. Storybook did not provide a complete reference for task views, conversation states, typography, toolbars, tabs, and light/dark colors. People could not compare a proposed pattern with the running board in one place. **Proposed solution** Add a staged Design Proposals catalog with foundations, components, layouts, and page specimens. Add an opt-in sandbox. Reuse production components where possible. Include synthetic conversation states and shared controls so reviewers can compare and refine them. **Alternatives considered** Separate static mockups would not show keyboard behavior, responsive layout, or real component states. Rebuilding each page only in Storybook would allow the reference to drift from the board. **Roadmap alignment** This improves existing board UI and Skills Manager surfaces. It does not add a new control-plane capability. ## What Changed - Added dark and light color references, typography and conversation specimens, and component stories for buttons, tabs, toolbars, sidebar, popovers, activity, and task lists. - Added a local design sandbox with synthetic task conversation playback and representative states. - Shared collection toolbars and navigation patterns across task, agent, project, routine, skill, connector, and artifact pages. - Added the streamlined Skills tabs and a My Skills collection that uses the shared skill cards. - Restored saved-thread access during synthetic playback, kept connector searchbox semantics, and updated reproduction checks after moving trial stories. - Documented the proposed patterns and added focused UI, catalog, and browser checks. ## Verification - `pnpm check:token-gates`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --check` passed. - Full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed after merging master. After the review fixes, focused UI typecheck, `pnpm build-storybook`, 23 Skills Sources tests, and all 15 Storybook typography browser tests passed. - Focused task-thread and system-notice suites passed: 251 tests. Connector Browse passed 84 tests; the connector, attachment, recovery, and Storybook flyout browser journeys passed locally. - A local full Vitest run hit one intermittent chat-channels integration failure; that test passed in isolation. GitHub CI [39347996059](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39347996059) passed on the exact latest commit: 55 successful checks and two skipped draft-only Storybook jobs. - Greptile reviewed the exact latest commit at 5/5 with no new comments or open review threads. GitHub reports the branch as cleanly mergeable. ## Risks - This PR changes 206 files and exceeds the repository's 100-file review target. Review by commit and consider a scoped split before merge. - Design Proposals are staged references. Fixture interactions do not prove API behavior, permissions, or provider execution. - UI changes to shared controls may affect pages outside the proposal sandbox. Focused browser checks and the full CI matrix passed. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact runtime model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. The model used reasoning, code execution, browser inspection, and local tests. Earlier branch commits were also AI-assisted in this Codex conversation. ## 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 available in this session) - [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 where applicable - [x] I have either linked existing issues or described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue 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] I have run focused tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented 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: Scott Tong <scott@scotts-mbp-m5-max.local> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
7ec6e1a237 |
fix(runner): explain invalid arguments for assigned tools (#16905)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip coordinates agents through authorized tools. > - The native runner validates arguments before it dispatches a tool call. > - Schema failures give repair guidance for only five built-in tools. > - Assigned-tool discovery receives a generic rejection, so an agent can mistake invalid arguments for missing access. > - This PR applies the existing safe schema feedback to every authorized tool. > - Agents can correct their calls while authorization, approval, and replay checks remain in force. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** An invalid `paperclip_search_assigned_tools` call returned only `Paperclip rejected this semantic tool call`. The call never reached the assigned-tool gateway. The same feedback gap affects arbitrary assigned app tools. **Expected behavior** Identify argument validation as the cause. Return bounded schema locations and ask the provider to correct its arguments. Do not expose submitted values or grant access to unassigned tools. **Steps to reproduce** Prepare an authorized discovery tool. Submit an invalid query or optional argument through the native runner. Observe the generic error before this fix. Correct the arguments and confirm one dispatch after this fix. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on master at `4970d5ed3d`. The incident did not retain its rejected arguments, so the tests cover representative invalid inputs rather than claim to replay that exact payload. **Deployment mode** Native runner with the Codex app-server driver. Local verification uses macOS ARM64 and controlled provider fixtures. Related: #16868 added bounded monitor validation feedback. #16723 changes runtime MCP catalog loading; this PR changes the Rust runner validation response and does not depend on that work. ## What Changed - Supply generic repair guidance for any authorized tool whose arguments fail JSON Schema validation. Preserve specific built-in hints. - Keep the existing three-location and 512-byte limits. Do not include input values or unknown keys. Preserve generic authorization failures and the existing retry flag. - Cover missing fields, wrong types, null optional fields, bounds, unknown fields, unchanged rejected-call state, corrected calls, and completed-call replay protection. - Exercise rejection, correction, one dispatch, and successful completion through the real Codex driver with a controlled provider subprocess. - Document the behavior and its verification scope in execution semantics and the agent access map. ## Verification - Red: both new runner regressions failed on the original generic rejection. The existing API-validation regression passed. - Green: all seven selected validation tests passed. The new Codex transport regression passed with one rejection and one corrected dispatch. - `cargo fmt --manifest-path packages/paperclip-runner/runner/Cargo.toml --all -- --check`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `git diff --check` passed. - Full Rust workspace tests, the repository build, and sequential repository typecheck passed. The existing assigned-tool gateway suite passed all 30 tests. All hosted test and end-to-end jobs passed on this head. The duplicate local `test:run` was interrupted after the hosted suites passed; its local result is incomplete. The hosted build and clean public npm installation check also passed. All current-head CI gates are green, including the final verify and e2e aggregates. - Greptile reviewed commit `3e2743e1e15b3b13a7d803ce4d828510e41fb22a`: 5/5, no actionable findings. - Setup evidence: master has a stale dependency lockfile. Dependencies were resolved with the pinned pnpm 9.15.4; lockfile changes are excluded. The first full typecheck overlapped the build and failed copying a generated shared-package file. The sequential rerun passed with no source change. The initial copy failure remains recorded here; the concurrent build-output race was not separately reproduced. - The provider is simulated. This proves runner validation and transport recovery, not that a live model always retries or that GitHub credentials work. ## Risks The provider now sees schema locations for all authorized tools. The existing sanitizer and bounds still apply. Unknown input keys and values remain excluded. No schema, permission, approval, automatic tool replay, database, or connection-auth changes are made. Unauthorized tools still get a generic rejection. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with reasoning, source inspection, and tool execution. The exact runtime 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
|
e5927e1db9 |
fix: give commentary its own default read permission (#16903)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and inspect their work. > - Commentary collects agent suggestions and complaints for company members. > - Commentary used the permission for detailed agent-action audits. > - Owners, admins and viewers could therefore receive a permission error when they opened Commentary. > - This pull request gives commentary its own permission and enables it for all human company roles. > - Members can read feedback while task privacy and detailed audit access keep their own checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16884, which added the Commentary browser. A search found no open PR for this permission fix. **What happened?** Commentary returned `Missing permission: audit:view_agent_actions` for company members without the detailed audit grant. Default owners, admins and viewers did not receive that grant. **Expected behavior** All human company roles can read commentary by default. A separate `commentary:view` permission controls this access. Private source tasks remain private. Commentary access does not grant detailed agent-action audits or CSV exports. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Sign in as an active company owner, admin or viewer without `audit:view_agent_actions`. 2. Open Audit, then Commentary. 3. Observe the permission error before this change. **Paperclip version or commit** Base commit: `7c58ea07b2`. **Deployment mode** Authenticated server or Cloud tenant. ## What Changed - Add `commentary:view` to the shared permission contract and all human role defaults. - Require that permission for commentary list and detail reads. - Add an idempotent upgrade migration for existing active human members. Preserve existing grants and scopes. - Add the commentary default when approving saved human invitation grants that omit it, including pre-upgrade invitations. Preserve explicit commentary scopes. - Add regression coverage for role defaults, permission removal, audit separation, private tasks and migration replay. - Update the API description, specifications, database notes and access maps. ## Verification - Passed 68 tests across commentary reads, role grants, old-invitation HTTP acceptance, migration replay, agent audit routes, access services and migration snapshot drift under the repository's locked dependencies. - Confirmed the new role and read tests failed before the implementation. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed. - Migration numbering and safety checks passed during the build. - Full `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed locally after the invitation fix. - The final-commit CI matrix passed, including all test shards, typecheck, build, public-install checks and canary smoke. The redundant local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after the full CI matrix completed; the 68 focused local regressions passed separately. - The first install bypassed the stale lockfile and selected a newer diff-viewer API. The initial typecheck and build failed in that unrelated plugin. Installing the locked versions cleared both failures; the tracked lockfile is unchanged. - The first locked-dependency regression run hit the 15-second limit while importing the audit route graph in its first test. Moving that import into suite setup fixed the timeout; all 58 regressions then passed. - Greptile found that pre-upgrade invitations retain old grant lists. New helper and HTTP regressions reproduced this gap before the fix, then passed after approval added the missing commentary default. - Greptile reviewed the final commit at 5/5 with no remaining actionable findings. Its earlier thread is resolved. - No UI code changed. The permission tests use real disposable PostgreSQL databases and HTTP routes. ## Risks - The upgrade deliberately enables commentary for every existing active human company member, including viewers. Existing commentary grants retain their saved scopes. - Source-task privacy still filters previews, counts, searches and full messages. Agent-authenticated browsing remains denied. - Agent-action audit grants, detailed filters and CSV export permissions keep their current behavior. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository editing and command execution. The exact runtime model ID and context window 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4970d5ed3d |
fix(skills): unblock agent attachment and preserve Latest selections (#16899)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Operators attach company skills to agents from the skill library. > - Attachment first reads the agent's skill snapshot to preserve other assignments. > - That read materialized and validated repository files for the entire library, even in read-only mode. > - The response also treated resolved runtime versions as stored pins. Saving could then fail with beta pins disabled. > - This pull request makes version-cache inspection lightweight and returns the stored assignment choices. > - The benefit is a responsive attachment flow that preserves Latest and explicit pins. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Adding a repository skill to an agent could stall before the save request. The prerequisite snapshot read projected or checked every file in every installed repository skill. Once it returned, an existing Latest assignment could become a version pin in the save payload. The server then rejected that save when beta skill pins were disabled. **Expected behavior** Reading assignments must not prepare all repository snapshots for execution. Adding a skill must preserve the other assignments and their Latest or pinned choices. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Install repository-backed skills with stored immutable versions and cold disk caches. 2. Assign one repository skill to a Claude agent with Latest selected. Leave beta skill pins disabled. 3. Open another skill, select Add to agent, choose the same agent, and save. 4. Observe the expensive prerequisite read and the beta-pin rejection after that read completes. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced from master at `ac9459bae3329395f10bc81c638a374eef152baa`. **Deployment mode** Observed in hosted staging. Reproduced with a disposable local instance, embedded PostgreSQL, and the Claude local adapter on macOS arm64 with Node 26.4.0. Related: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/9995 adds a separate read-only assignment endpoint for peer-agent access. This fix keeps the existing configuration-gated snapshot and its permissions. ## What Changed - Respect read-only listing for current and pinned version caches. Check directory and entrypoint safety without projecting repository contents, reading all support files, or updating cache access records. - Keep complete snapshot restoration and byte validation at run preparation. Missing caches are restored from stored data. Corrupted files are repaired there. - Return stored assignment version choices in both list and sync responses. Keep runtime version details in the snapshot entries. - Add database-backed regressions for cold and warm reads, pinned versions, execution repair, and unsafe entrypoints. Add HTTP regressions for save round trips and explicit pins. - Update developer documentation and verification recipes. ## Verification - Red: both latest and pinned read-only cache regressions failed on the original code. The original code created caches during listing. - Red: the HTTP save-roundtrip regression returned 400 with the beta-pin error. The explicit-pin regression also failed. - Green: the updated API and cache suites passed all 145 tests. The three related company-skill service suites also passed. - Real browser: attached a repository skill to a paused test agent with another repository skill already set to Latest and beta pins disabled. The success toast appeared. The skill's Agents tab retained the assignment after reload. API reads confirmed both assignments remained unpinned and no repository version caches were created. - Local synthetic fixture: six skills share a 606-file repository snapshot. A cold HTTP skill-list request completed in 241 ms. This is local evidence, not a staging latency measurement. - Real service comparison on that fixture: the baseline cold list wrote 3,648 version/cache files. A warm baseline list read 3,642 version files and wrote six access records (457 ms). The fixed warm list read and wrote zero version/cache files (61 ms). Both services returned the same 16 library entries. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. The final API edit also passed the server typecheck. - `pnpm build` passed. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` passed. - The broad `pnpm test:run` invocation reported six failures in the untouched `tool-gateway-service.test.ts` suite. An isolated rerun passed all 59 tests. The broad run was stopped after recording those failures, so it is not a green full-local result. The PR CI matrix separately passed those suites. Greptile completed on the current commit with 5/5, zero comments, and no open threads. - One CI shard was interrupted by runner shutdown, with no failed assertion in its log. A single failed-job retry passed on the same commit. The aggregate CI gate passed. All current-head PR checks are complete with no failing or pending checks. - This PR does not claim that the fix has been deployed to staging. ## Risks - Settings reads check cache locations and entrypoints. They defer full support-file validation to execution. Regression tests verify that execution still repairs corrupt bytes and restores missing versions. - The response now distinguishes stored pins from resolved runtime versions. Explicit historical pins remain intact. Company, configuration, connector, and beta-pin authorization gates keep their existing behavior. - No schema migration or dependency change. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, code execution, and browser tools. The exact runtime build 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
|
7c58ea07b2 |
fix(issues): guard prepared task promotion by status version (#16893)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Integrations can prepare a backlog task before its assigned agent starts. > - A person can change its status or assignment during preparation. > - An unconditional promotion can replace that newer decision. > - Safe promotion needs a saved revision that includes every assignment path. > - This pull request checks that revision under the task row lock and derives policy cleanup from the locked row. > - The benefit is safe initialization recovery with the existing company, task, and run authority. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Prerequisite #16896 has merged. This PR now targets master and contains only the conditional promotion API. The prerequisite fixed the confirmed baseline first-upload browser regression. **What happened?** A client that saves a task's initial documents and then sends an unconditional status update can override a concurrent status or assignment decision. The update validator previously dropped an expected version, so clients could not make this promotion conditional. Some direct assignment and release paths also did not advance the revision. **Expected behavior** A prepared task moves from backlog to todo only if its original status and assignment revision still matches. A stale request returns 409 before a task mutation, audit publication, or wake. Policy cleanup preserves unrelated saved settings. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a backlog task and save its statusVersion before preparing it. 2. Release its assignment, or change an assignee and then restore that assignee. 3. Send `{ "status": "todo", "expectedStatusVersion": <original revision> }` to its PATCH endpoint. 4. The stale promotion must return 409. A matching revision on an unchanged backlog task must succeed. Duplicate and related PR searches found no existing prepared-task promotion fix. ## What Changed - Accept an optional nonnegative expectedStatusVersion for exactly a status-only backlog-to-todo promotion. Reject extra public fields before parsing can discard them. - Check the current revision and backlog state under the issue row lock. Reject stale requests before checkout adoption or execution-control effects. - Add SQL migration 0358 to advance the revision for both assignee fields at the database boundary. Release, administrative release, direct writes, and assignment round trips now invalidate an old version. - Derive guarded policy cleanup from the locked row. Preserve review limits and protected authorization when removing a monitor. Reject derived ownership changes or review decisions. - Add schema, real HTTP/PostgreSQL, concurrency, migration replay, and policy regression coverage. Update the response type, OpenAPI, developer docs, and access map. ## Verification - Red before the initial fix: stale requests returned 200 instead of 409, validation removed the expected version, and a stale active task could adopt a checkout. - Review found two further defects. Four new release/direct-assignment tests showed unchanged revisions. The real HTTP/service test returned 422 for a valid two-field promotion after monitor cleanup. Helper tests also proved that cleanup lost valid review limits and protected authorization. All now pass after focused repairs. - Green: 124 route and policy tests, including 7 real Express/PostgreSQL cases, 37 existing route tests, and 80 policy/helper tests. The real row-lock race preserves a policy edit committed while promotion waits. - Green: all 23 database client tests, plus 9 focused assignment and replay checks. Historical migration 0227 receipt recovery cannot remove the new assignment trigger. Reapplying migration 0358 leaves existing rows unchanged and installs one trigger. Combined status/assignment writes increment once; unchanged assignees do not increment. - Earlier verification passed all 218 schema/route/service cases and the generated OpenAPI capability test. Rebased focused regressions passed all 27 selected cases. Final server TypeScript passed after all repairs; shared TypeScript passed. Migration safety/numbering, five-snapshot retention, map validation, and diff checks pass. - The baseline browser attachment case failed twice on the earlier head. Separate #16896 proved the lost-composer cause, passed 335 component tests and the real first-upload journey, and has green CI with a 5/5 review. No assertion or timeout was weakened. - Some early local checks were blocked by missing or stale sibling dependency artifacts. This worktree now has its own frozen offline install and standard SDK prerequisites. The failures and successful reruns remain in the task evidence. - Before rebasing, head `3304bb00de6ad6a248b5e046c008072ad20ac8f5` passed all CI (55 successful checks and one neutral), Greptile 5/5, and a secondary source review at 5/5 with no unresolved findings. The secondary reviewer did not execute project tests, inspect CI, or exercise a live agent journey. Earlier incomplete and must-fix assessments remain visible; both established findings are repaired above. - After #16896 merged, all five CAS commits were rebased onto master `87d9386ae637c652d1fed09d2046be1bcaeb413b`. Migration 0358 was regenerated because master added another 0357. Range comparison shows no other change to the CAS patches; inherited UI commits are absent. The original head is preserved locally. - Rebased head `1c0264e51a280b1dbf597725a7e42e72d4be1b1b` passes all 124 route/policy tests, 9 selected assignment/promotion tests, and all 24 database client/snapshot-drift tests. Database build, migration checks, generated snapshot linkage, five-snapshot retention (0354–0358), maps, and diff checks pass. Fresh-head CI and review are pending. No deployment or live agent journey was performed for this API. ## Risks - The guard supports prepared backlog promotion only. Other statuses or mixed public mutation fields return 422. A stale revision or non-backlog row returns 409. - Preserve the original version from a server that already advertises this guard before initialization. Older versions did not track every assignment path. Reconcile older or uncertain initialization instead of fetching a new revision and blindly retrying. - Migration 0358 is SQL-only and idempotent. It adds no table, column, or task backfill. Its separate trigger survives historical status-migration replay. - Existing authorization and unguarded updates remain in place. Guarded promotion does not provide a general lifecycle or review-stage control API. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed by this session. Used tool calls, code execution, and test-first regression verification. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
b928c6698f |
fix(heartbeat): explain deferred monitor dispatch (#16891)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - One-shot task monitors request future work through the normal heartbeat queue. > - Queue admission can hold execution until recovery or ownership is reconciled. > - The scheduler retained those monitor schedules but recorded no monitor diagnostic. > - Agents could repeatedly reschedule the same blocked check without seeing why it did not run. > - This pull request records safe deferral and failure activity while retaining all execution gates. > - Agents and operators can inspect the actual blocker and use its existing recovery path. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #15556 handles transient monitor client errors. #14590 handles parked monitor wakes. This change records the diagnosis when queue admission defers or fails; it does not change their admission or monitor consumption policies. **What happened?** A due monitor on a task with an unresolved execution-recovery hold was claimed, passed to queue admission, and released without monitor activity. The saved monitor continued to look scheduled. Unexpected dispatch errors had the same audit gap. Repeated rearming could not clear the recovery hold. **Expected behavior** Keep the monitor and the recovery hold. Record the reason that prevented its wake. Do not execute uncertain work or consume an attempt. Limit repeated identical diagnostics. If audit storage fails, release the claim so a later tick can retry. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Schedule a due monitor on an agent-owned task in progress. 2. Add an active recovery action for an interrupted legacy execution. 3. Run the monitor scheduler twice. No provider may start while the hold remains. 4. Before this fix, neither attempt writes monitor deferral activity. 5. Resolve the hold through its existing recovery path. The saved monitor can then request one wake. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on master |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
370fb50ad4 |
fix(mcp): keep sibling tools available after transient calls (#16890)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents use remote MCP tools through a governed gateway. > - The gateway lists tools only while their shared connection is healthy. > - One failed call currently marks the whole connection as unhealthy. > - Later calls to healthy sibling tools then fail with `tool_not_found`. > - This pull request keeps non-authentication call failures on their invocation. > - Agents can continue their work while credential and access gates remain in force. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #10147. Related work: #15462 fixed oversized and malformed response handling. #15448 covers timeout and JSON-RPC health handling together with separate SSE and catalog discovery changes. Its patch still marks fetch failures and HTTP failures as connection errors. #15325 proposed a transport failure counter; it has merge conflicts and has not changed since October 6. #11910 is an older timeout fix with merge conflicts. This PR covers the remaining fetch and HTTP failure paths on current master, with the same narrow call-health rule for timeouts and JSON-RPC failures. It does not include the SSE or discovery changes from #15448. The timeout session-reset check follows the recovery case discussed in #15448. **What happened?** A shared remote MCP connection works until one call has a network failure, timeout, HTTP 503, or JSON-RPC error. Every later call on that connection returns `tool_not_found`, including healthy sibling tools. Connection setup then asks for user attention even though the failure did not prove that credentials need repair. **Expected behavior** The original invocation retains its failure. Authorized sibling tools remain callable. The gateway does not replay an ambiguous action. HTTP 401/403, missing credentials, and explicit insufficient scope keep their access gates. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Give an agent access to two read tools on one remote MCP connection. 2. Make one tool fail with a network error or HTTP 503. 3. Call the other tool in the same gateway session. 4. Before this fix, the second call fails with `tool_not_found` before provider dispatch. **Paperclip version or commit** `master` at `e6dcd1e8e9`. The regression runs against source with synthetic data. **Deployment mode** Any deployment that uses a shared remote MCP connection. This is a core gateway issue. ## What Changed - Preserve connection health after a network failure, timeout, non-authentication HTTP error, or JSON-RPC error from one tool call. - Retain HTTP 401/403 and insufficient-scope health gates. - Retain HTTP 401/403 gates during MCP initialization and its initialized notification, with HTTP 503 controls for both stages. - Discard only the upstream session used by a network failure or timeout. Let the next explicit call initialize again. - Add sibling-tool regression cases, authentication controls, and real HTTP header/body timeout checks. - Update runtime recovery guidance and the feature and access maps. ## Verification - Red: the four new sibling-tool cases failed on the original implementation. Each second call returned HTTP 404 with `tool_not_found`. HTTP 401/403 control cases passed. - Green: the same six-case selection passed after the production change: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/tool-gateway-service.test.ts -t 'keeps sibling MCP tools usable|keeps the connection blocked' --maxWorkers=1`. - The regression checks the actual gateway and embedded PostgreSQL. The injected provider fault preserves the call boundary. It checks failure recording, no automatic replay, catalog retention, and successful sibling dispatch. - The real local HTTP fixture checks cancellation before headers and during a body, then a successful explicit call with a fresh MCP session. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` pass. - Complete nearby suites pass: 166 tests across `tool-gateway-service.test.ts`, `tool-gateway.test.ts`, `remote-mcp-protocol.test.ts`, and `mcp-http.test.ts`, with one test worker. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsc --noEmit` passes after refreshing Runner TypeScript declarations. The first package typecheck used declarations from before the rebase and failed two unchanged native-session call sites; rebuilding that dependency resolved both errors. - The rebased head also passes all 11 selected sibling/authentication/session regressions. - Review regression red: setup-stage HTTP 401/403 controls failed because connection health stayed `ok`; the two setup-stage HTTP 503 controls passed. Green: all six setup controls and the complete 166-test nearby run pass. The fix separately handles typed initialization authentication failures and preserves the existing caller error. The server compiler also passes after this change. - Full repository CI passes on `256a65ccc302c1c31a80e87f1f91411d955028de`: typecheck, build, test shards, Runner checks, browser checks, Canary dry run, and aggregate gates. All checks are terminal: 55 successful, 2 expected skips, and the separate Paperclip Review check is neutral. Greptile is 5/5 on this exact head, with no open findings. - Full repository checks were run in CI. Local verification in this worktree used the focused suites and server compiler to keep parallel work bounded. - This change has no live provider or staging deployment proof. ## Risks - A provider that remains unavailable can stay listed until a health check detects the outage. Each call still fails with its original controlled reason code. - No automatic retry occurs because a failed remote action may already have run. - Already unhealthy connections still need a successful health check after an upgrade. - No schema, credential policy, or permission contract changes. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with tool use and code execution. The runtime does not expose the exact serving 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 #` / `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
|
6f045207bb |
fix(runner): explain rejected API response windows (#16889)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents use the API fallback when dedicated tools cannot express an operation. > - Large responses can be read in bounded text windows. > - The declared schema rejects windows larger than 24576 bytes. > - The runner hid the rejected field behind a generic semantic tool error. > - This pull request returns safe schema locations and the accepted byte range. > - Agents can correct a call without guessing or changing route permissions. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #16868, which added repair guidance for task monitor arguments. **What happened?** A native call_api request with responseText.limitBytes set to 60000 returned invalid_tool_call with no field or size guidance. The declared 4..24576 byte range already matches the server validator. The missing repair guidance is in the runner bridge. **Expected behavior** Reject invalid input before dispatch. Show bounded schema locations and the accepted window range. Do not echo submitted values or unknown field names. A corrected request can reuse the rejected call ID. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Use the generated call_api tool contract to request a GET text window with limitBytes 60000. 2. Read the semantic tool error. Before this fix, it contains only a generic rejection. 3. Retry with limitBytes 16000. The corrected call must be admitted. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on master |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
24067a16b5 |
fix(workspaces): classify restricted shared repository admission (#16895)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents, their tasks, and their saved work. > - Workspace preparation must check access before an agent starts. > - A shared project checkout can contain another task's private worktree. > - The access guard correctly rejects a run that cannot read that work. > - The isolated-source path reports this as a configuration blocker after #16545. > - Shared project repository admission missed that classification and returned a generic setup failure. > - This change uses the same blocker at that boundary so recovery names the required workspace repair. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16545 and #16095. The open retained-reader repair in #16832 addresses deleted identities, a separate condition. **What happened?** A task reused a shared project workspace. Another worktree in that checkout retained a private task that the run could not read. Repository admission rejected access before provider startup. The run reported `setup_failed`, and recovery showed a generic no-live-execution notice. **Expected behavior** Keep the access denial. Report `configuration_incomplete` with reason `workspace_source_restricted`. Preserve the workspace and files. Give the owner the existing workspace repair action. Do not queue an automatic failure retry or report this expected blocker as an unexpected Sentry failure. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Bind a task to a shared project checkout. 2. Add a private task worktree beneath that checkout. 3. Continue the shared task as an agent that cannot read the private task. 4. Inspect the run result and recovery action. **Version and deployment** Reproduced in the full heartbeat service from source revision `06d4fe3121`, with PostgreSQL and real Git worktrees on macOS. The provider never starts. The regression also covers the existing Git-worktree path. ## What Changed - Apply the existing restricted-source classifier to task repository admission. - Extend the heartbeat regression to shared project workspaces. - Assert one run and one recovery action, no provider start, no unexpected Sentry report, and preserved binding and files. - Update the workspace documentation and both capability maps. ## Verification - Red: the shared project regression returned `setup_failed`; the Git-worktree control passed. - Green: the same two cases pass after the change. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` passed. - Current head `e26cdd45da76c6edaa1622856f9c69e9f48b81fb`: 55 successful checks, one neutral check, two skipped Storybook checks. Greptile 5/5, no review threads, mergeable. - All 337 tests passed across `heartbeat-workspace-branch-containment`, `heartbeat/workspace-preparation`, `run-failure-report`, and `recovery/stranded-notice`. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. All full current-head CI suites passed in [run 39315969013](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39315969013). The duplicate local full Vitest run was stopped after 11 minutes when CI completed; it has no local full-suite completion claim. The 337 affected local tests completed successfully. - Running-app acceptance at `e26cdd45da76c6edaa1622856f9c69e9f48b81fb`: a synthetic private Git worktree caused the shared task to stop with the visible Workspace source restricted notice and no process start. The normal workspace API selected a separate task directory. Resolving the recovery action resumed the same assignee. A real process fixture completed, the output persisted after reload, and both source files remained intact. Checkout and execution locks cleared. There were no automatic failure retries. - The first recovered process wrote its report to the command cwd. This was a fixture output-path mistake. The corrected fixture reads the selected workspace from the authenticated API before writing. One explicit additional admission verified that output. The record retains both successful process runs and the earlier configuration-blocked run. This is local process-adapter acceptance, not live Codex/provider qualification. - Staging diagnosis confirmed a retained private source and failure before provider startup. The original task has not been recovered. The deployed UI hides its workspace selector, and no authenticated task-write API is available in this session. No live Codex recovery is claimed. ## Risks The same exact 403 denial is now a configuration blocker during shared repository admission. Other failures retain their original type. Access policy, cloning, credentials, provider execution, and workspace contents do not change. An existing task still requires a permitted workspace repair before it can run. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, code execution, and browser 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
ac9459bae3 |
feat: configure company agent observability (#16874)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Companies use several agent harnesses and execution environments. > - Operators need one place to select where native agent logs and traces go. > - An inference proxy would add a dependency to the agent request path. > - This pull request supplies native OpenTelemetry settings to managed Codex and Claude Code processes. > - Company secrets protect destination credentials. Export failure does not change the task result. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Company settings, shared contracts, database, server, adapters, and runner. **Problem or motivation** An operator cannot configure a company destination for native agent logs and traces. Manual harness configuration is hard to apply across local and remote execution. **Proposed solution** Add one company destination: Braintrust or a custom OTLP HTTP/protobuf endpoint. Apply a transient snapshot when execution preparation starts. Keep credentials out of API reads, task environment manifests, recovery files, and command arguments. Replace a warm process when its export settings change and preserve its conversation. **Alternatives considered** Multiple destinations can use a user-operated collector for fan-out. This change does not add a collector, an inference proxy, or transcript scraping. **Roadmap alignment** This extends company settings, secret management, and support for multiple harnesses. The maintainer requested this implementation. Searches for observability and Braintrust found no duplicate company destination feature. Related infrastructure tracing work in #16236 has a separate content-free contract. ## What Changed - Add strict schemas, revision checks, encrypted secret storage, activity records, and board-only settings routes. - Add explicit synthetic logs and traces tests with a bounded HTTP request and sanitized results. - Supply native Codex configuration and Claude Code environment values through local and remote launch paths. - Preserve Codex login refresh through the existing managed credential link. Retain unsaved drafts across background reads. Require complete custom header re-entry when the endpoint origin changes. - Separate process export compatibility from conversation identity. Isolate generated Codex configuration and preserve resumable sessions, including remote home refresh after export changes. - Advance the immutable Pi/Copilot source attestations for shared environment and sidecar code changes. Keep their provider payloads unchanged and retain prior identities for decoding. - Redact destination credentials throughout launch diagnostics and HTTP logs. - Add the production settings form, Storybook states and journey, documentation, and feature/access map entries. ## Verification - Real managed local Codex 0.160.0 and Claude Code 2.1.286 tasks exported to Braintrust. API readback and the Braintrust UI showed the test records. A real remote Daytona Codex task exported through the legacy `exec` path. - Live tests exercised content capture off, export disabled, warm conversation reuse, and a destination that accepted connections but never replied. Agent work succeeded and export requests stopped at the configured three-second timeout. The UI connection test returned “Test payload accepted”; the saved API key stayed masked after reload. - All current-head CI test lanes, typechecks, packaging/build checks, and required aggregates passed on `71e994b2be9c8fb6d6e938a4ad7cf4c95fdafe31` ([CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39319194318)). Greptile completed on that exact commit at 5/5, with zero unresolved review threads. The additional optional Paperclip Review check remains queued waiting for its assigned agent. - Local workspace typecheck and build passed. Focused verification included 239 combined runner tests, 789 API/native-session tests, 107 Codex home/ACP/sandbox-site tests, 204 feature/privacy tests, and the affected Rust suites. Migration, token, map, Storybook catalog, and Storybook build checks passed during acceptance. These checks ran at the relevant implementation or merge boundary; the current-head CI is the complete final gate. - Managed AI credential projections now receive enabled and disabled company export settings; genuine caller-owned Codex homes remain untouched. Two regressions reproduced the skip before the repair. All 276 engine/lifecycle tests and adapter-utils typecheck pass afterward. The launched TOML retains provider/MCP settings, credential continuity, and redaction. - Settings saves, removal, and the real company-deletion owner acquire secret mutation ownership before database locks. PostgreSQL NOWAIT probes cover all three paths; concurrent save/rotation/removal/deletion requests settle correctly. The affected suites passed 137 tests, followed by all 32 service/connection cases after expanded deletion coverage. Server and Codex adapter typechecks pass. - Codex source profiles use the effective CLI argument list. A spawned fixture CLI reproduced both ignored-argument failures; all three precedence/fallback cases now pass. - Real tar staging reproduced remote conversation loss in both API-key and subscription modes before the repair. Both now pass: changing managed settings preserves sessions, archives, native indexes, and refreshed subscription credentials. A corrupt upload preserves the prior config and conversation. - Preserved failure evidence: initial CI caught stale Pi/Copilot source attestations, a missing test-harness helper, and packaging fixture/probe mismatches; those were corrected and covered by focused checks. Superseded heads had intermittent attachment-composer timeouts despite successful uploads; [the original trace and screenshot remain available](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39309701089/artifacts/12215109203). The same attachment case passed on the final head: [25/25 tests in shard 3](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39319194318/job/118288637051). - A connection-fault fixture also exposed a stale pooled socket after its hang case; closing fixture responses isolated scenarios and the full affected suite passed. - The broad local test run was not clean: database resource failures, timeouts, an older cached module graph, and a stale optional-resource manifest assumption were recorded. Focused checks passed after the documented fixes. This does not establish a clean full local pass. - Native remote Codex, remote Claude, and the full ACPX Codex bridge remain unqualified. The direct Codex resume test does not establish full bridge acceptance. ## Risks - Native exporters perform network requests from each execution environment. A server connection test does not prove remote reachability. - Prompts, assistant responses, and tool content are enabled by default when supported. Native caps and harness-specific controls still apply. - Caller-owned Codex homes are unsupported for automatic configuration and remain untouched. - Native harnesses and their tool processes can inspect export credentials. The settings form and documentation advise using ingestion-scoped credentials. Retained headers remain bound to their saved scheme, host, and port; changing origin requires fresh values or removal. - Migration 0357 adds a company-scoped row and secret reference. It is safe to reapply. Secret removal and company deletion use the existing secret lifecycle. - Slow or unavailable destinations must not block task settlement. Export settings take effect at the next execution preparation boundary. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, code execution, and browser verification. 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
|
8a3d2cb04f |
fix(recovery): avoid recursive holds for undispatched waits (#16894)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Queue admission must stop work while a previous execution needs recovery. > - The final dispatch gate can cancel a queued run before it starts. > - Legacy recovery treats this known wait as an unknown provider outcome and creates another hold. > - The extra hold can survive repair of the original execution and leave saved messages stuck. > - This pull request uses one database proof to prevent the extra incident and recognize old false holds. > - Saved input can then pass through normal admission with the original work and safety gates intact. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15483. **What happened?** The dispatcher writes an `execution_reconciliation_required` cancellation when an existing recovery hold denies a queued run. No runtime is selected and no provider starts. Legacy recovery later creates a `legacy_execution_requires_reconciliation` action for that cancelled admission. Its settled `replay: blocked` record remains an effective hold after the real source recovery finishes. The task has saved messages but no eligible Retry or Continue action. **Expected behavior** A verified admission denial stays a wait. It must not create another provider-outcome incident. Existing false incidents must stop blocking after the server verifies their recorded source. Real execution, uncertain outcomes and file recovery stay held. The harness determines these infrastructure facts; the user does not certify them in a form. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Persist a queued-run gate cancellation with its task-bound `executionWait` receipt and no execution authority or resource evidence. 2. Run legacy reconciliation. On the old code, it creates a second incident. 3. Persist the old incident as resolved with replay blocked, then clear the original source hold. 4. Restart queue recovery with saved user messages. On the old code, no successor is admitted. Related work: #15965 covers other pre-start dispatch cancellations but explicitly excludes this existing-hold code and leaves historical holds unchanged. #16634 covers stale-cancel classification and queue drain, without re-evaluating historical effective holds. #15383 covers an operator Stop during conversation startup. This change addresses the existing-hold receipt and its persisted false incident; it does not copy those broader changes. ## What Changed - Add one database proof for a legacy admission denied by an existing execution hold. Require the exact dispatcher receipt, matching task identity, no runtime or process claim, no lease or finalization coordinator, and no execution events. - Use the proof before legacy recovery creates an incident and when it computes effective historical holds. Keep the old audit rows. - Preserve source file obligations and the original recovery action. Keep the normal queue, pause, ownership, company and budget checks. - Add real PostgreSQL regressions for incident prevention, old state, concurrent queue recovery, message order, conflicting evidence and scope boundaries. - Update the execution contract and both recovery maps. ## Verification - Red: the regression on unfixed source fails on incident classification, historical hold projection and actual periodic saved-message admission. The other 24 safety cases pass. - Green: all 27 new database cases pass. Two safety assertions were aligned with the existing contract: daily limits stop dispatch after queue promotion; a human comment can intentionally reopen a terminal task. The final regression checks the real daily dispatch gate and agent pause. - Existing `explicit-native-continuation.test.ts`: 255 tests pass. Existing legacy recovery and PostgreSQL dispatcher suites: 61 tests pass. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` pass. - GitHub PR CI run `39313204660` passed on `ef6009e656b7c9b4c788480dce322874565960ac`. All 54 successful check-runs and the Snyk status are green. Two optional Storybook checks were skipped. The independent Paperclip Review completed with a neutral check and a 5/5 assessment with no findings. Greptile also reports 5/5 on the same commit. There are no unresolved review threads. - `pnpm test:run` is still running locally. Its overall result is pending; no full local suite pass is claimed. The exact-head GitHub CI suite passed. - A read-only probe of an affected hosted task verifies the same database proof and projects no false blocker with the working source. No live rows were changed. Deployment and a real resumed provider run remain unverified. ## Risks - An incorrect exclusion could admit work with uncertain effects. The proof fails closed on missing receipts, source mismatches, runtime/process ownership, any retained lease, coordinator, execution event or file obligation. Real upstream file recovery remains blocking in the regression. - The effective-hold query adds indexed existence checks scoped to the recorded run and company. It makes no provider calls and performs no database repair writes. - Historical audit records keep their recorded outcome. Only their effective blocking status changes when the server can prove the admission never ran. - No schema, permission, credential or UI form changes are included. Live recovery still needs verification after rollout. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, model ID `gpt-6.1-sol`, with reasoning, tool use and code execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [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> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
313fb265db |
feat(plugins): invalidate runtimes when connector access changes (#16605)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Runtime preparation depends on access and credential state as well as tool definitions. > - Grant, membership, secret, and endpoint changes need committed invalidation. > - Their writers must acquire locks before journal fanout can lock agent rows. > - This pull request adds access hooks with the corresponding transaction guards. > - Plugins can refresh preparation immediately while task-time authorization remains authoritative. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Grant changes, credential rotation and revocation, company access changes, and connector endpoint configuration do not request runtime synchronization. Journal fanout exposes lock inversions between credential persistence, access cleanup, and connection assignment writers. **Expected behavior** Committed access changes request runtime preparation without polling or credential values in the journal. Agent-specific secret bindings and new personal delegations affect their target agent. Company access changes remain conservative. Provider bookkeeping does not create preparation work. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Change an audience, delegation, membership permission, referenced credential, vault configuration, or endpoint instruction. 2. Expect a committed runtime event in the correct company and scope. 3. Run reconnect, credential refresh, SSH setup, or membership cleanup concurrently with related writes. 4. Expect both operations to preserve access checks and finish without a lock-order cycle. **Additional context** Final feature extraction from #16503. The earlier slices, #16604, and the separate delivery-test correction #16871 are merged. This PR is now the active change against master. The rebase preserves the merged assignment and definition recipient rules, Unicode selector semantics, and profile/reference transaction guards. ## What Changed - Add migration 0356 for grants, audiences, delegation, membership/permissions, secret bindings, referenced credentials and vaults, and chat/email endpoint configuration. - Keep events content-free. Ignore health, delivery, publication, Vercel verification, and GitHub webhook bookkeeping while retaining credential and repository-access changes. - Target agent secret bindings and all personal delegation changes to their old and new target agents. Coalesce delegation changes per transaction. - Lock existing grants before connections and credential persistence in OAuth and cleanup writers. - Reject superseded refresh leases before rotating stored credentials. Ignore lease acquisition and release when access metadata is unchanged. - Serialize audience replacement, validate membership, and preserve unchanged audiences. - Lock membership before permission-only saves and grant before Railway SSH setup. Individual delegation revocation locks its grant and target. Whole-grant and membership cleanup lock company recipients before deleting scoped delegations. - Lock grants and connection inputs before static-key reconnect writes. Lock company agents before cascading secret deletion; use a nonblocking secret lock and bounded retries to avoid a new cycle with credential writers. - Add PostgreSQL concurrency coverage for access writers and endpoint publication/configuration behavior. - Preserve the owner lock for plugin instance-secret removal; these secrets cannot use ordinary bindings. - Align Slack search refresh, callbacks, and disconnect with grant-before-connection locking. Recheck newly discovered grants without waiting before provider work. - Retry complete membership transactions when a credential deletion candidate is busy. Cover all four cleanup entry points and process company access in ID order. - Document final invalidation coverage and task-time authorization boundaries. ## Verification - Current head: `78aace55bef7f52bc5742b131e0b3961eb5c0f11`. All 1,061 tests across 23 affected suites pass. The named Slack authorization integration scenario also passes; it exercises authorization, refresh, disconnect, and rejection of a late callback. Server/database typechecks, migration safety and numbering, five-snapshot retention, feature maps, and diff checks pass. The complete PR diff was reviewed for secrets and personal data before push. Final acceptance: [CI run 39308303837, attempt 2](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39308303837) is green, with 55 successful checks and two optional Storybook skips. The current-head Greptile reassessment returned **Apex 5/5** at 19:16 UTC on 2026-10-19. Its full summary reports no actionable issues. Security passed, all threads are resolved, and GitHub reports no merge conflicts. The reassessment was requested as a standard review after the fixes; Greptile retained the Apex tier. - On this head, [CI run 39308303837](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39308303837) failed the unchanged adapter-utils HTTP/2 fixture with `EADDRINUSE` before READY. Its closed probe left a port handoff race. That test and its gateway are byte-identical on master. No upstream fix was found. The deterministic fixture correction is isolated in #16888; no adapter test changes are included here. The failed jobs recovered on retry without a feature source change. The original failure remains documented here, and #16888 carries the fixture correction separately. That retry demonstrates recovery; the held-probe negative control establishes the port handoff race. - Rebased onto master `194fc11406`, including merged #16604 and #16871. Replayed only the access-hook commit. Resolved OAuth, test, and documentation conflicts while retaining both sets of tests. Migration 0356 preserves the merged assignment/definition recipient rules, Unicode selector semantics, and profile/reference guards. - Apex returned 3/5 on `0fb65bc27`. Negative controls reproduce its Slack delegation and member-cleanup deadlocks (`40P01`) and unwanted Vercel/GitHub bookkeeping events. Slack grant writers now take their locks before the connection. A separate late-grant control reproduces `40P01` without the post-lock recheck; the complete guard passes. All four membership cleanup commands retry from a fresh transaction when the credential is busy. Tests verify successful cleanup and no journal rows from failed attempts. Credential IDs and repository-access changes still notify runtimes. - Earlier review corrections remain covered: static-key reconnect and cascading secret removal each reproduce `40P01` without their guards. Grant lease acquisition/release is ignored. Secret removal releases agent locks when a credential writer is busy. Instance-secret removal retains the owner lock and passes its public plugin API contention regression. Delegation updates and revocations target old/new agents; unrelated-peer, coalescing, unchanged-update, and rollback cases pass. Three negative controls verify the required whole-grant and membership cleanup guards after narrowing delegation scope. - Preserve prior acceptance failures: the first rebased 20-suite run passed 1,025/1,026; its only failure was a draft uninstall fixture blocking a random peer. Blocking the assigned agent corrected that assumption, and all 44 access/assignment tests passed. Later, all 1,044 tests across 21 suites, [CI run 39302185527](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39302185527), standard Greptile 5/5, and security passed on `0fb65bc27`. That did not clear the later Apex findings described above. Draft run 38975428081 failed a server shard; its cause was not re-investigated. A later green run does not establish that earlier cause. - Local fixture corrections are recorded separately from product failures: an assignment filename filter initially matched no file; the actual suite was included in full runs. A delegation fixture omitted its required creator, and a guard run omitted a query import. The new global-access cleanup fixture now uses its own user to avoid earlier fixtures' memberships. All were corrected before publishing their final iterations. - Local checks target affected services and real PostgreSQL boundaries. A full local build and repository-wide test run were not performed. Hosted CI supplies broader verification. Provider responses in tests are controlled; live provider behavior was not qualified. ## Risks Migration 0356 adds triggers without changing table schema. Apply it through the normal migration flow. Most access changes retain synchronous company-wide invalidation. Company fanout takes O(eligible company agents) locks and journal rows, without a fanout ceiling or mutation quota. Agent secret bindings and individual delegation changes retain narrower recipients. Events contain no credentials. Physical removal of non-instance secrets takes ordered locks on all company agents before cascading into bindings. This costs O(company agents) locks even for an otherwise unreferenced secret. Instance secrets cannot use ordinary bindings and retain their owner lock. A busy secret lock releases the transaction guards and retries up to three times. Continued contention returns a retryable conflict. Provider deletion stays outside that transaction; a retry resumes removal of an already disabled secret. Membership cleanup uses nonblocking credential guards and retries the full membership transaction. Slack search adds two grant queries, scoped to the subject and connection. Its retries occur before provider work or credential persistence. Each retry loop is limited to three attempts. Invalidation requests preparation; task-time authorization and provider session activation remain authoritative. Provider calls use fixtures; no live provider qualification is claimed. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and testing. The exact deployment 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 - [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> |