mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-08 11:13:44 +02:00
f2715e02bb399bfbb97dc2fbb448cab2bb50686d
4815
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
f2715e02bb |
fix(native): surface model capacity errors and retry automatically (#15347)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native runs preserve provider events and results, then decide task state. > - Codex can fail a turn because the selected model is temporarily at capacity. > - Paperclip displayed a generic native-session failure and left the task in recovery. > - A known capacity failure needs a clear message and a durable delayed retry. > - This pull request uses committed terminal evidence, the status-effect ledger, and existing dispatch gates. > - The task can continue automatically without an unbounded retry loop or a model switch. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #13993 adds launcher capacity deferrals before provider startup. This change handles a committed native Codex `serverOverloaded` terminal after provider work has started. **What happened?** A native Codex turn ended with `codexErrorInfo: serverOverloaded` and “Selected model is at capacity. Please try a different model.” Paperclip saved the result, showed a generic failure, and required recovery instead of waiting and retrying. **Expected behavior** Show the capacity error directly. Schedule bounded retries after a short delay. Preserve saved work and honor current execution gates. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run a native Codex task. 2. Commit a `turn.failed` event with `serverOverloaded`, then accept a failed result for the same turn. 3. Inspect the task error and its recovery state. The regression test reproduces this without a paid provider call. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced against master `16b7db35ffa0f9a95913c8cbdeea3d595435691f`. ## What Changed - Classify capacity failures from committed runner events and the pinned execution identity. Preserve accepted results and display the specific capacity error. - Atomically persist one scheduled successor with the status decision. Retry after one minute, then two minutes. Share the existing failure budget and stop after two automatic retries. - Reuse dispatch gates for ownership, task holds, dependencies, budget, and locks. Wait for predecessor execution, finalization, and cleanup before claiming a retry. - Preserve pending reviewer authority and suppress retries after reassignment or a successor claim. - Consume the failed run's resume receipt and delivered wake input. Rebuild ordinary continuation from the failed run so explicitly resumed tasks can retry without borrowing one-run authorization. - Label scheduled retries “Model at capacity.” Add a Storybook example and avoid duplicate punctuation in the existing retry card. - Add regression coverage and document the runtime contract. ## Verification - Targeted recovery and UI suites: 125 tests passed. Additional final cleanup and lock regressions passed. - Latest-head continuation and authorization regressions: 57 tests passed, including all four capacity integration tests against an isolated PostgreSQL database. - Rechecked all four capacity integration tests with the full runner's isolated `PAPERCLIP_HOME`, config, temporary directory, and serial fork settings: passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. Final server typecheck passed. - `pnpm build`: passed. - `pnpm check:token-gates`: passed. - Browser: checked the real Storybook card. It shows the capacity message, automatic retry time, and existing Retry now action. - `pnpm test:run`: attempted and restarted after an interruption. The resumed run started before the final review correction and was stopped after recorded workspace/native test failures and the five-minute Git streaming timeout already documented on master. Exit 130; no complete local full-suite pass is claimed. Current-head isolated capacity tests and the complete CI suite pass. - A combined local recovery-suite attempt also hit PostgreSQL initialization failures at this macOS host's global shared-memory limit (32 slots). The focused recovery suites passed separately; final-head capacity tests also pass with the full runner's isolated environment settings. - Latest-head GitHub checks: all 56 checks green, including general and serialized test shards, browser E2E, typecheck, build, Runner verification, and canary dry run. No merge conflicts. - Greptile: 5/5 on `813a470b8c18c05aeb7e31e63e573c3a3a2f5cac`, with zero unresolved findings after fixing the resumed-task continuation issue. ## Risks - Capacity retries can repeat a task turn after partial work. They start a fresh provider session with task history and wait for predecessor cleanup. They do not resume the failed turn. - Retries retain the configured model unless an operator changes configuration. Persistent overload consumes the existing failure budget and then needs an explicit retry or model change. - Only run-bound native Codex `serverOverloaded` failures qualify. Usage-limit exhaustion, model/account incompatibility, unbound text, and unknown provider failures retain their current recovery behavior. - No schema migration is required. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The exact model ID and context-window size are not exposed to this session. Used reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser verification. No subagents. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1006.0-canary.16 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
16b7db35ff |
Shorten planning skills and measure task decomposition (#15296)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work for AI agents. > - Planning guidance helps agents choose owners and dependencies. > - The runtime skill favors few tasks, but the catalog skill requires a child-task breakdown. > - Both add repeated process instructions that can distract from the requested outcome. > - This change keeps the ownership and dependency rules and removes the required matrix and repeated checklist. > - A bounded Product E2E comparison measures saved outcomes and task handoffs before qualification. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #11057. Related measurement work: #15218. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Planning and delegation through the runtime plan-to-tasks and bundled task-planning skills. **Current behavior** The two skills contain about 1,900 words and conflicting guidance on whether plans require child tasks. **Proposed behavior** Keep cohesive work with one owner. Split only for a real owner, parallel output, dependency, independent review, or follow-up lifecycle. Preserve existing authorization and planning mechanics. ## What Changed - Shorten both skills to about 400 words combined. Preserve their keys and installed-version behavior. - Remove the duplicate operational-skill pointer and regenerate affected source metadata. - Add twelve explicit Product E2E cells: four scenarios with current, short and disabled planning skills. - Use the current task composer and actual create-response ID; calibrate public skill APIs and browser creation without providers. - Eliminate an observed collision in chat-test company prefixes with a per-suite sequence. - Grade saved documents, exact author/run attribution, child count, prerequisite execution order, review boundaries and completion handoffs. - Retain current skill bytes and report source, selections, run accounting and failures. ## Verification - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`: pass. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit`: 1,287 Vitest tests and 128 Node checks pass. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner -- --list --suite plan-task-guidance`: twelve local Codex cells. - Archived current skills match master `72ff3a9f27e581a27acb49771e8658bbb0bbaa47` exactly. - Corrected fixture: three real public-API/database calibrations pass with zero provider runs; all 35 evaluator checks and Product E2E typecheck pass. - Setup campaign [37399550253](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37399550253) was canceled after source review found unsupported bundled edits and automatic core reinstallation. Its paid-cell step was skipped: zero provider runs, no behavioral grade. - The next setup [37401094799](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37401094799) failed before task creation on the old title-field selector: zero actual runs, original FAIL retained, cleanup passed. A real browser/API calibration of the new helper passes with paused non-provider agents and zero runs. - Full local typecheck/build pass. Full local tests retain one unchanged five-minute Git streaming timeout (also fails isolated), 9,591 passes and 5,796 skips. CI's chat failure was a proven random fixture-prefix collision; five affected cases pass after the test-only repair. - Paid behavior comparison and new-head CI/review remain pending. This PR remains a draft. ## Risks - The shorter text may change delegation decisions. Live outcomes are not yet qualified. - The initial comparison uses one profile and one attempt per cell. It cannot establish cross-model reliability or cost trends. - Disabled means unassigned company-owned copies; the company library remains discoverable. This does not qualify global removal, automatic accepted-plan wiring changes, or installed-copy migration. - Skill availability does not prove a model read or cognitively used it. - No provider/tool protocol, permission, timeout or runtime lifecycle behavior changes in production. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with repository inspection, code editing and tool use. The exact backend model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. The declared eval model is native Codex `gpt-5.6-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 - [ ] 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> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
44e4979d23 |
Capture project and repository update lifecycle events (#15306)
## Thinking Path > - Existing lifecycle capture records agent transitions and project creation. > - Project and repository edits need matching project update records. > - The record must commit with the mutation so failed writes cannot lose a hook. > - Creation with repositories is one creation, and repository replacement is one update. > - Archive-only changes preserve project state without creating a hook. > - Plugin consumption and provider behavior are separate work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Problem or motivation** Project edits and repository/workspace changes lack durable lifecycle records. A future resource plugin needs those changes captured alongside the existing project creation hook. Archive-only changes must produce no hook. **Proposed solution** Allow project `update` records in the existing lifecycle journal. Record project and workspace mutations in their database transaction while holding the project row lock. Suppress intermediate workspace hooks during project creation and aggregate repository replacement. **Alternatives considered** Route-only hooks miss shared service callers. Recording after commit can lose an event. Emitting a hook for each child mutation exposes intermediate repository state. **Roadmap alignment** This completes project lifecycle capture begun in #15280. Plugin delivery, VM/volume provisioning, and backfill remain separate. Searches found no duplicate project lifecycle work; related #13306 concerns decision events on the in-process plugin bus. ## What Changed - Record project edits and workspace additions, updates, and removals as project `update` events. - Commit each event atomically with its mutation under the project row lock. - Keep project creation with repositories to one creation event and repository replacement to one aggregate update. - Ignore archive-only changes and retain workspace records. - Extend the journal action constraint and document project update capture. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed on the narrowed scope. - 57 tests passed across six lifecycle, project, repository, and chat-project suites. - Seven managed-sandbox workspace route tests and the CLI lagging-worktree migration regression passed (65 targeted tests total). - Full GitHub CI passed on `8ba6f97f22`; all required gates are green. - Greptile scored the final project-only commit 5/5 with zero unresolved review threads. - The branch is current with `master` and has no merge conflicts. - `git diff --check` and a local secret/PII scan passed. ## Risks - Apply migration `0300_chunky_chamber.sql` before running the new server. It permits project update actions and tolerates older JavaScript worktree backups that omitted the prior CHECK constraint. - Event-write failure intentionally rolls back the project or repository mutation. - Records contain identity and action; future consumers must load current authorized project/workspace data. - Plugin consumption, provider calls, volume cleanup, and backfill are outside this PR. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and tool use. 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>canary/v2026.1006.0-canary.15 |
||
|
|
1477d1ecea |
test: remove the no-op sequential describe modifier (#15286)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Paperclip runs the server and runner test suites with Vitest. > - Vitest 5 removes the deprecated `describe.sequential` property, so the pending Vitest 5 upgrade fails the type-check and test jobs. > - `describe.sequential` only changes behaviour inside a `describe.concurrent` suite, or when `sequence.concurrent` is on. > - This repository has neither, so the modifier changed nothing at run time. > - The benefit is that the Vitest 5 upgrade can land, and the test files lose a modifier that did no work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #12969 ## What Changed - Replace every `describe.sequential` use with a plain `describe` call. - Drop the `{ concurrent: false }` suite option from the two runner test files. - Add a comment to `server/vitest.config.ts` that records why these suites must run one test at a time. - Leave the package manifests and the lockfile unchanged. ## Why the modifier did nothing The Vitest documentation states that `describe.sequential` is useful to run tests in sequence inside a `describe.concurrent` suite, or with the `--sequence.concurrent` option. `sequence.concurrent` defaults to `false`. This repository satisfies neither condition: - No test file uses `describe.concurrent`, `it.concurrent`, or `test.concurrent`. - `server/vitest.config.ts` sets `sequence.concurrent: false`, with `maxWorkers: 1`, `maxConcurrency: 1`, and `isolate: true`. - `packages/paperclip-runner/vitest.config.ts` sets no `sequence` block, so the `false` default applies. `packages/db` and `cli` already run the same embedded-Postgres suites with a plain `describe`, and those jobs are green. The server package was the only outlier. The modifier did carry one real piece of knowledge: these suites need their tests to run one at a time. The new comment in `server/vitest.config.ts` records that reason next to the setting that enforces it. ## Verification - `git grep` for `describe.sequential` returns nothing outside `node_modules`. - The author ran the changed server test files under the installed Vitest 4, and the results match the results without this change. - Two very large embedded-Postgres test files exceeded the author's local memory limit, so the CI test jobs cover those two. - The two changed runner test files have pre-existing local failures caused by a missing Rust toolchain and a missing global `pnpm` binary. The failures are identical with and without this change. - The author type-checked the changed files and found no new error. - CI must pass the typecheck, build, server test, and runner verify jobs. ## Risks - Low risk. Suite execution stays serial, because the Vitest config enforces it. - The change adds no dependency and changes no package manifest or lockfile. - A future change that turns `sequence.concurrent` on would break these suites. The new config comment warns against it. ## Model Used - Claude Sonnet 5 — code edits and local verification. - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 — the earlier revision of this branch. ## Test plan - [x] Every CI check reaches a terminal green state. A pending or queued check is not a pass. - [x] The `Typecheck + Release Registry` job passes. This change must not introduce a type error. - [x] The `Build` job passes. - [x] The server test jobs and the runner verify jobs pass. - [x] Greptile re-reviews this commit set and posts a passing verdict. The dependabot waiver does not apply to this pull request. - [x] `mergeable` reads `MERGEABLE` as a terminal value. ## 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 linked the related public issue with `Refs: #12969` - [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 - [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: Priya Raman <priya.raman@paperclip.ing> --------- Co-authored-by: Priya Raman <priya.raman@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-authored-by: nickyleach <331803+nickyleach@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
90182b4f8b |
Report bounded Cloud portfolio failure diagnostics (#15340)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work for AI agents and their companies. > - Cloud instances proxy a trusted user's portfolio through the control plane. > - A failed request returns a generic error to the client. > - That replacement error loses the failure phase and network code in Sentry. > - Operators need bounded evidence without upstream messages or credentials. > - This PR adds safe diagnostics while preserving the existing request behavior. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #10850, which added the portfolio proxy. No open PR for this diagnostic gap was found. **What happened?** A rejected portfolio fetch becomes a generic 502 in Sentry. The event cannot distinguish a connection reset, deadline, HTTP response failure, or body failure. The route's previous warning also included the original error and a stack identifier. **Steps to reproduce** Make the portfolio proxy's fetch reject with a TypeError whose cause has `code: ECONNRESET`. The client correctly receives the generic 502, but the captured replacement error loses that code. **Expected behavior** Keep the existing client response. Attach only bounded server-side diagnostic fields to the failure event. Do not retry the request or expose the original error. ## What Changed - Add a typed portfolio error with a private frozen diagnostic record: phase, upstream HTTP status, elapsed milliseconds, and an allowlisted network code. - Read at most four error/cause objects through own data properties. Unknown codes, messages, getters, and out-of-range values do not enter the record. - Replace the route's raw-error warnings with safe fields. Send a plain error plus event-local context through the existing optional Sentry gate. Keep the route callsite and default fingerprint policy. - Preserve authentication, trusted headers, cookies, exact HTTP error bodies, cache behavior, the ten-second deadline, and one fetch per request. Public responses receive no diagnostic fields. - Document the fields and test HTTP behavior, privacy, and event isolation with the real Sentry SDK. ## Verification - `PAPERCLIP_REQUIRE_SENTRY_TEST_SDK=1 pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/cloud-portfolio-error.test.ts server/src/__tests__/cloud-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/sentry.test.ts server/src/__tests__/run-failure-sentry-real-sdk.test.ts`: 65 passed, with the audited optional SDK installed. - Full local `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on Node 24.21.0 and pnpm 9.15.4. - Independent review found no blockers and independently passed all 65 tests, including the real SDK checks, on this exact commit. - Full Linux CI passed on this exact commit and provides aggregate suite coverage (54 successful checks, 2 intentional skips). A duplicate full local aggregate was not run. - The first SDK contract job failed before tests when npm could not resolve an OpenTelemetry transitive package. A subsequent empty-cache install first encountered a missing tarball, then succeeded after the registry artifact became available. All 6 real-SDK tests passed against that fresh install; the single unchanged-head CI retry passed. The SDK pin, workflow, and dependency files are unchanged. - The first browser shard 8 run timed out waiting for the inbox retry reply after 45 seconds. The unchanged isolated case passed (1/1), and the test, UI handler, fixture, and recovery files match the base commit. The failed log contains no wakeup POST before the test's immediate navigation; a navigation/request timing race is suspected but unproven without a trace. The single unchanged-head shard retry passed (20 passed, 1 skipped); no timeout or source change was made. - Greptile reviewed this exact commit at 5/5 with no unresolved review threads. - No live portfolio request was replayed. Route tests use controlled local upstream responses. - The added diff passed the secret and PII scan and `git diff --check`. ## Risks This is a diagnostic change. It does not identify or repair the origin of a connection reset. Unknown transport failures remain `unknown`. Elapsed values outside 0–60,000 ms become null. Default Sentry fingerprinting remains enabled; exact historical group membership is not guaranteed. No retry, migration, deployment, or configuration change is included. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository editing, code execution, and independent agent review. 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> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
3290d97417 |
Scope the release smoke opening question to its card (#15339)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The release lane checks onboarding before it promotes a nightly candidate. > - The first task shows an unanswered-question summary and an open question card. > - Both display the same prompt, so the smoke test's page-wide text locator fails strict matching. > - This pull request scopes that assertion to the open interaction card. > - The smoke still requires the actual prompt and verifies that onboarding does not start an agent run. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** [Scheduled release run 37441718130](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37441718130) failed `smoke_nightly / smoke` on both attempts. The page-wide `getByText("What would you like to do?")` matched two elements: the timeline summary and the open question card. This skipped `publish_nightly`. **Expected behavior** The test confirms that the seeded task's open question card displays the exact prompt. A summary row alone must not satisfy that check. **Steps to reproduce** Run the Docker onboarding smoke against published candidate `2026.1006.0-canary.11`, then run the release-smoke Playwright spec. The old assertion fails after the greeting appears. **Paperclip version or commit** Release workflow commit `f858207161ba29c01c82f4674aef83d91b74480f`; published candidate `2026.1006.0-canary.11`. The assertion is unchanged on the current master base `9b3fe260bac576d622ffdfefb923db73cc5273f7`. **Deployment mode** Docker smoke harness, authenticated/private, with its existing mock provider. Related: #13166 added the first-task chat assertion. I also reviewed open #12316, which fixes a separate bootstrap race and does not change this selector. Searches found no duplicate selector fix or public issue. ## What Changed - Scope the exact opening-prompt text to `task-chat-interaction`. - Explain why the timeline summary cannot satisfy the assertion. - Preserve the rest of the smoke flow, including the 15-second check for no agent runs. ## Verification - Local Docker harness ran the exact failed published candidate, `2026.1006.0-canary.11`, with the existing mock provider. - The old spec reproduced the same two-element strict-mode error in Chrome. - The fixed spec passed the full authenticated onboarding flow and the 15-second no-run check: 1/1, 32.6 seconds. The executed spec copy was byte-identical to the changed repository file; only artifact output paths and the local port were overridden. - Independent Chrome checks: the scoped locator passes with both summary and card present. Summary-only, wrong prompt, hidden prompt, and duplicate active prompts each fail as intended. - `pnpm typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on Node 24.21.0. Canonical Linux CI passed all 55 checks (53 success, 2 intentional Storybook skips), including the full aggregate tests, build, typecheck, all eight E2E shards, and post-ready security scan. - Greptile scored the exact head `5a30e667396600a052a4041c819652c19b8c68ff` at 5/5 with no actionable issues. Independent review found no issues; there are no review threads. - `git diff --check` passed. The diff and PR text were scanned for secrets and private identifiers. ## Risks Low risk: one assertion in a release smoke test changes. A missing or hidden prompt still fails, and multiple matching prompts in interaction cards still fail strict mode. This does not change the product, release selection, or publishing. The scheduled release lane still needs its next normal successful run to prove nightly recovery. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, shell tools, and an independent Codex review. The exact serving 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 #` 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
|
9b3fe260ba |
fix(tasks): surface Codex ChatGPT model rejection (#15299)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native Runner runs report provider errors and can also save a structured failure result. > - Codex rejects a model that the user's ChatGPT account cannot use. > - Master now diagnoses this rejection, but the task's compact run data omits its message. The thread can still call it a generic run failure. > - Users need the account restriction and a clear step to repair the model selection. > - This pull request shows the existing diagnosis as “Model unavailable” on the task. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Codex returns HTTP 400 with `invalid_request_error` and the message `The 'gpt-6.1-sol' model is not supported when using Codex with a ChatGPT account.` Master now stores an actionable diagnosis for this rejection. The task thread still labels it “Run failed” and does not receive its error text in compact run data. **Expected behavior** Show the account restriction on the task and in the run error. Tell the user to choose a supported model or clear the task's model override before retrying. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Use a Native Runner Codex agent signed in with a ChatGPT account. 2. Select a model that produces the rejection above and start a task. 3. Let the runner save its generic failed result. Inspect the task's failure marker and recovery notice. **Additional context** Refs: #15304. That merged PR diagnoses the provider failure and preserves worker and review recovery rules. This PR adds its task-facing message and guidance without changing that diagnosis or those rules. Refs: #13134. That PR improves model discovery for ChatGPT accounts. This PR exposes the rejection when a configured model still fails at execution time. ## What Changed - Return a bounded model rejection message in compact issue-run data. - Show “Model unavailable” and model-change guidance in the task thread and recovery notice. - Add database and UI regression tests, including both the original rejection text and master's fixed diagnosis. Document the new failure message. ## Verification - Focused merged-branch validation: 279 tests passed across activity service, native provider failure observation and PostgreSQL integration, TaskChatThread, and ExecutionBlockerNotice. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `pnpm check:token-gates` passed on the merged source tree. - Greptile reviewed conflict-resolution commit `1db39c4e636a92e2e76ba224b71c6f1e2f556c81` at 5/5 with no findings or inline comments. - All 55 check runs completed without failure on that commit. The two optional Storybook jobs were skipped. The legacy Snyk status passed. The branch has no merge conflicts. - UI regression assertion: the task's failure marker says “Model unavailable” and retains the account restriction. It no longer says that this failure happened after a final response. ## Risks - Provider recognition and recovery are owned by the existing master implementation. This PR exposes only bounded error text for failed runs with `native_provider_model_rejected`. - Historical runs with the generic `adapter_failed` code are not reclassified. No stored run is rewritten. - Existing retry and reconciliation gates remain in place. No schema migration or model configuration change is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, code execution, and browser inspection. 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
63f3aa2dbf |
fix(runner): continue restart-interrupted Codex turns (#15297)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native runs retain their provider conversation across server restarts. > - A dead runner can restore a Codex conversation after its active turn is lost. > - The old recovery path synthesized a failed task result from that interruption. > - The task then required operator action even though its conversation and workspace were available. > - This pull request preserves the interruption cause and uses the admitted restart attempt for one continuation in the same conversation. > - The agent can reconcile unfinished actions and complete the current request without resending the original task. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #12845 added native restart recovery. #15042 covers admission during shutdown. #14796 covers legacy shutdown recovery. This change covers a lost native Codex turn after successful conversation restoration. **What happened?** After a server restart killed the local runner, Paperclip restored the saved Codex thread. Runnerd found that the old turn was no longer active. It synthesized a failed terminal and a needs-review result from the last progress message. The transport also discarded the terminal error when it reconstructed thread history. The task failed instead of continuing. **Expected behavior** After proving that the old process stopped and admitting a bounded recovery attempt, resume the current request in the same conversation. Preserve the workspace. Inspect unfinished actions before proceeding. Keep real provider failures, accepted results, intentional stops, unknown unreconciled effects, and exhausted attempts subject to their existing rules. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a local native Codex run and leave its turn active. 2. Kill the isolated runner and provider processes, as can happen during a server restart. 3. Restore the same provider thread with no active turn. 4. Observe the synthetic task failure. The new real-process regression reproduces this boundary with a scripted provider. ## What Changed - Record an explicit recoverable process-loss cause without inventing a task result. - Preserve terminal errors and prior turns in reconstructed provider history. Recover the authoritative saved result when adopting an accepted continuation. - Send one continuation in the same conversation for an admitted dead-runner recovery. Require reconciliation of unfinished commands and external actions. - Persist the interrupted terminal before submission and retain the existing recovery marker across another controller loss. - Keep provider attempt limits, terminal failures, and intentional cancellation behavior. - Add red/green regressions, real process-kill coverage, restart checkpoint coverage, and retry-budget coverage. Document the behavior and run-log evidence. ## Verification - Red: the new native runtime regression rejected with `NativeProviderTerminalFailure` on the original code; the Rust restore regression found a missing recovery cause. - Red/green: if restoring the conversation fails and replacement is allowed, the replacement receives the full task and fresh-session handoff. Both prepared and legacy execution inputs are covered. - Red: a second controller crash after the provider accepted the continuation caused an extra `turn/start`. The regression now proves there are exactly two submissions total: the original and its continuation. - Green: focused runtime, backend, driver recovery, and real-process restart suites (207 tests). After the final history/result changes, driver recovery and real-process restart suites passed again (36 tests). - Green: complete Codex transport suite (186 tests), server restart classification/database integration suites (34 tests), and Rust Codex provider suite (92 passed, 2 ignored). - Full `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on `60141e649`. The subsequent replacement-prompt guard passed the Runner TypeScript check and the complete runtime plus process-restart suites (148 tests). - Local full-suite attempt: `pnpm test:run` reported two failures in the untouched chat integration suite. Both passed individually, and the complete chat suite passed on rerun (1,063 tests). After all remote test shards passed, the duplicate serial local run was stopped with SIGINT; it is not claimed as a full local-suite pass. - Latest-head CI (`b1297dcd4`): 55 successful checks and 4 intentionally skipped checks, including all test shards, typecheck, build, native Runner verification, end-to-end tests, and canary dry run. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37405346303). - Greptile: 5/5 on the latest head, with no unresolved review threads. The PR is mergeable. - The process tests use the real runner binary and a scripted Codex provider. They do not call a live model service. ## Risks - This changes local Codex recovery after process loss. A continuation can execute more work in the retained conversation. Its prompt requires state inspection before repeating an uncertain action; the system does not replay tool calls. - Recovery shares the existing three-attempt budget and one-shot continuation marker. Real failures and older unmarked failed checkpoints are not reopened. - No database migration or API change is required. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6. The exact model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. - Capabilities: reasoning, source inspection, tool use, code editing, code execution, and test analysis. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1006.0-canary.13 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
a1ab55a56d |
fix(agents): grant configuration access by default (#15283)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agent work and permissions for a company. > - Agent setup can require one agent to configure another agent. > - New standard agents could create agents, but they had no direct configuration grant. > - Existing agents must keep their current permissions after an upgrade. > - The requested new-agent defaults include 13 more direct permissions for suggestions, skills, tools, audit, inbox, and task assignment. > - This pull request adds the 14-grant set at creation and approval activation, retains it through invitations, and keeps existing agents unchanged. > - The change keeps low trust and built-in agents on their narrower permissions. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The agent creation and approval flows, and the agent configuration authorization path. **Current behavior** A new standard agent can create an agent. It cannot make protected changes to a peer agent unless an operator adds an `agents:configure` grant. **Proposed behavior** Add direct grants for `agents:configure`, `agents:suggest-changes`, `skills:create`, `skills:suggest-changes`, `tools:manage_connections`, `tools:manage_profiles`, `tools:view_audit`, `audit:view_agent_actions`, `tools:use`, `tools:manage_runtime`, `inbox:manage`, `tasks:assign`, `tasks:assign_scope`, and `tasks:manage_active_checkouts` to new standard agents. Scope `tasks:assign_scope` to the agent’s reporting subtree. Keep existing agents and their grants unchanged. **Reason and benefit** New standard agents can complete agent setup and the requested tool, skill, inbox, and task workflows under existing route, scope, and approval checks. **Breaking changes** Existing agents keep their current permissions. There is no permission migration. Related PR: #12212 adds scoped grant routes. This PR changes the default grant. ## What Changed - Add the 14 requested direct grants in agent creation and approval activation. Keep them when invitation approval replaces grants, preserving explicit scopes. Remove them when an agent is deleted. - Apply defaults only to new agents. Remove the existing-agent permission migration, its snapshot, and its journal entry. Preserve existing scoped grants. - Add permission, scope, invitation, and existing-agent regression tests. Document all default and excluded permissions. - Prevent agent keys from creating, changing, or restoring host-executed process or local adapter command settings, and from restoring workspace commands through rollback. ## Verification - Run `node_modules/.bin/vitest run server/src/__tests__/agent-default-configure-grants.test.ts server/src/__tests__/invite-join-grants.test.ts packages/db/src/migration-snapshot-drift.test.ts`. All 15 tests pass. These cover new-agent defaults, unchanged existing grants, pending approval, invitation grants, and migration history. - Run `node_modules/.bin/tsc -p server/tsconfig.json --noEmit`. It passes. - Run `packages/db/node_modules/.bin/tsx packages/db/src/check-migration-numbering.ts` and `packages/db/node_modules/.bin/tsx packages/db/src/check-migration-safety.ts`. Both pass. - Confirm that this PR has no files under `packages/db/src/migrations/` in its final diff. - GitHub CI at `e8173b2c41` passes build, typecheck, server suites, browser shards, and canary verification. One unchanged OpenCode transport test reached its five-second timeout in the first Runner shard run. That test passes locally in 2.55 seconds. The shard passed on one retry. All 54 checks pass, with two expected skips. - Greptile gives this exact head 5/5. Security review passes. The PR has no unresolved review threads or merge conflicts. ## Risks - The 14 default permissions apply only to new standard agents. Existing permissions stay unchanged. Low trust and managed built-in agents are excluded. - New grants include connection, runtime, and active-checkout management. Existing company, responsible-user, scope, and approval checks remain in force. The default inbox grant carries a responsible-user-only scope so it cannot override another user's inbox settings. - Protected changes still need the responsible user's authority when that check applies. Company boundaries and approval gates still apply. - Agent-authenticated requests cannot configure process adapters or host command settings on local adapters. Known provider credential references remain allowed, as do narrow plain authentication overrides on new peers when the caller uses an AI connection pool. Arbitrary environment settings remain blocked. Board operators retain the host configuration paths. > I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This is a narrow fix to existing agent configuration behavior. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 series. This runtime did not expose its exact hosted model ID or context window. This revision uses OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex with tool use, code execution, and tests. The runtime does not expose the exact hosted 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>canary/v2026.1006.0-canary.12 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
f858207161 |
Guard routine UUID lookups without narrowing valid inputs (#15313)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work for AI agents and their companies. > - Routines expose details, triggers, and management actions through resource IDs. > - These resource IDs are UUIDs. The UI and CLI do not resolve short prefixes. > - A malformed ID reaches a PostgreSQL UUID comparison and returns a server error. > - A lookup guard can return the existing not-found response before that query. > - This PR preserves valid PostgreSQL UUID input forms and the existing access checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #11471. This is a credited continuation of the lookup-guard approach from @mv2woods. That older PR remains open and unchanged. Its review requested the required PR description sections. This continuation uses current master and adds UUID compatibility and authorization coverage. The earlier `isUuidLike` guard restricts UUID versions to 1–5 and trims input. The database currently accepts other UUID values and input forms. This guard preserves the existing [PostgreSQL UUID input contract](https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/datatype-uuid.html), including uppercase, paired braces, omitted hyphens, and hyphens after groups of four digits. It rejects whitespace and short prefixes without rewriting the value sent to the database. ## What Changed - Guard the shared routine and private-trigger UUID lookups. Malformed resource IDs return null, so existing routes return their normal 404 response. - Keep company access, assignee permissions, body validation order, and database error propagation unchanged. - Add real PostgreSQL tests for stored UUIDv4, UUIDv7, nil, and max values in six input forms. Add no-query checks for malformed input and HTTP coverage across all 15 root-resource route handlers. - Document complete resource IDs and distinguish them from opaque public webhook IDs. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/routines-e2e.test.ts`: 91 passed, including the new PostgreSQL and HTTP regressions. - Independent review found no blockers and passed all 9 focused PostgreSQL and HTTP regression cases on this commit. - Full local `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on Node 24.21.0 with pnpm 9.15.4. - Full Linux CI passed on `0a2990eca2f904335821027a322e4db868151eb3`: 53 successful checks and 2 inapplicable Storybook skips. No retries were needed. This provides aggregate suite coverage; a duplicate full local aggregate was not run. - [Greptile reviewed this exact commit](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15313#issuecomment-6010222312) at 5/5 with no findings or unresolved threads. The PR is ready for review and has no merge conflicts. - `git diff --check` and the added-diff secret and PII scan passed. ## Risks Malformed routine and private-trigger IDs now return 404 instead of a database error. Full UUIDs retain the existing company and assignee checks. This change does not add prefix lookup, alter public webhook IDs, or validate unrelated nested revision/thread IDs or query parameters. No migration is required. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository editing, code execution, and independent agent review. 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>canary/v2026.1006.0-canary.11 |
||
|
Barış ÖZDEMİR
|
bf14f803d5 |
fix(ssh): transport project repositories as their own git checkouts (#14782)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - A project can attach more than one repository. The task workspace keeps the selected repository at its root and puts the other project repositories under `.paperclip-repositories/<name>-<key>`, each with its own `.git` > - Agents can run on an SSH execution environment. Paperclip copies the task workspace to the remote host before the run and restores it after the run > - The SSH copy excludes `.git` at every depth, but the restore baseline excludes it only at the workspace root > - So the other project repositories reach the remote host without Git, and the restore then deletes their `.git` directories on the Paperclip host > - The next run of the same task fails during workspace setup, and the agent cannot commit to those repositories on the remote host > - This pull request transports each project repository as a Git workspace of its own, the same way the sandbox path already handles them > - The benefit is that multi-repository projects work on SSH environments across consecutive runs ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #11632 (SSH workspace transfer exclude list). Related SSH workspace PRs: #14233, #14428, #14472. I found no issue or PR for this bug. **What happened?** A project has two repositories and its agent runs on an SSH environment. After the first run, the second repository under `.paperclip-repositories/` has no `.git` directory on the Paperclip host. The next run of the same task fails during setup with `Managed workspace path "…/.paperclip-repositories/<repo>" already exists but is not a git checkout.` On the remote host, `git` inside that repository resolves to the parent repository. **Expected behavior** Each project repository reaches the remote host as a Git checkout with its local changes. Remote commits and edits come back after the run. The next run of the same task starts normally. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a project with two repositories. 2. Configure an SSH execution environment and make it the agent's default environment. 3. Assign a task to the agent and let it run once. 4. Look at `.paperclip-repositories/<repo>` in the task workspace: `.git` is gone. 5. Wake the agent on the same task again: the run fails with `setup_failed`. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on `v2026.916.1` and on `master` (`5edf55d73`). **Deployment mode** Self-hosted (Docker), authenticated, with an SSH execution environment. ## What Changed - `ssh.ts`: `prepareWorkspaceForSshExecution` lists the project repositories under `.paperclip-repositories/`. It applies the discovery rules of `readGitWorkspaceSnapshot`: each entry must be a directory with a valid name and must be a Git repository root, else the prepare step fails before any transfer. - `ssh.ts`: the anchor copy leaves `.paperclip-repositories/` out. Each project repository then gets the same import, sync, and deleted-path steps as the anchor. The remote anchor repository ignores `/.paperclip-repositories/`, as the local checkout does. - `ssh.ts`: `prepareWorkspaceForSshExecution` returns the transported repositories (the field is present only when there are repositories). `restoreWorkspaceFromSshExecution` accepts them with their baselines. It validates each path and baseline first, then restores the repositories before the anchor and stops at the first failure, as the sandbox restore does. - `remote-managed-runtime.ts`: the anchor baseline excludes `.paperclip-repositories/`, and each project repository gets its own baseline for the restore merge. - `ssh-fixture.test.ts`: regression tests for two consecutive managed runs and for the direct restore path, on a workspace with a project repository (commits, dirty edits, and a deleted file). Two tests for the new validation. - `docs/guides/board-operator/execution-workspaces-and-runtime-services.md`: one line about project repositories in the SSH round trip. ## Verification - The new regression test fails on `master` (`expected 'backend initial\n?? ../\n' to contain 'frontend initial'`) and passes with this change. - `PAPERCLIP_ENABLE_DARWIN_SSH_ENV_LAB=1 npx vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/ssh-fixture.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/remote-managed-runtime.test.ts`: 32 passed, with the sshd fixture running. - `tsc --noEmit` passes for `packages/adapter-utils` and `server`, and `pnpm -r typecheck` passes for the other workspaces. The Rust step of `@paperclipai/paperclip-runner` did not run locally because `cargo` is not installed. - `node ./scripts/check-no-git-push.mjs` and `pnpm check:module-boundaries` pass. - `pnpm test:run` did not complete locally. Before it stopped, 5 tests failed: 2 in `server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts` and 3 in `server/src/__tests__/company-skills-service.test.ts`. The same 5 tests also fail on the base commit `5edf55d73` without this change. CI runs the full suite. - `pnpm build` passes for all workspaces except `@paperclipai/paperclip-runner` and `server`, because their build compiles the Rust runner binary and `cargo` is not installed. `tsc --noEmit` passes for `server`. - Manual test on a self-hosted `v2026.916.1` instance with the same change applied: a project with two repositories and an SSH environment. Two runs on the same task passed. After each run, the second repository keeps its `.git` on the host. On the remote host it is a Git checkout, and the remote anchor ignores it. ## Risks - Low risk. Workspaces without `.paperclip-repositories/` take the same path as before, and the return value is unchanged for them. - A workspace with an invalid entry under `.paperclip-repositories/` now fails the SSH prepare step. The sandbox path already rejects such entries. - If one repository fails to restore, the restore stops, as in the sandbox path. The remote run directory keeps the agent's work. - Each project repository adds one bundle import and one restore per run. The time grows with the number and size of the repositories. - Out of scope: other nested `.git` directories (for example a vendored checkout inside a repository) keep the existing SSH behavior. ## Model Used - Provider and model: Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), in Claude Code. - Capabilities: extended thinking, tool use, and code execution. The context window size was not recorded. - Use: the model investigated the bug, wrote the change and the tests, and ran the checks. A separate Claude Code agent reviewed the diff. The author reviewed the change. The manual test ran on the author's self-hosted instance. ## 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 mergecanary/v2026.1006.0-canary.10 |
||
|
Valentin PalkovicandClaude Opus 5.5
|
bb73f2fe39 |
feat(exe-dev): copy a source VM with exe.dev cp (#14975)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The exe.dev sandbox provider plugin gives each run its own exe.dev VM > - Today the plugin always creates that VM with `exe.dev new`, so every run starts from a bare image > - Large repositories need a long setup on each VM: toolchain, agent CLIs, package caches, and browsers for tests > - exe.dev has a `cp` command that copies an existing VM, disk and config included > - This pull request adds an optional `sourceVm` setting. When it is set, the plugin copies that VM with `exe.dev cp` instead of creating a new one > - The benefit is that operators prepare one VM once, and each run starts from it ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13575. That open PR rewrites this plugin for durable exe.dev environments. It does not add `cp`. The two changes touch the same files and can conflict. I found no issue for this. Feature description: **Subsystem affected** packages/plugins: the exe.dev sandbox provider plugin (`packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/exe-dev`). **Problem or motivation** Each run gets a fresh exe.dev VM from `exe.dev new`. We use a large monorepo (Storybook). Before the agent can work, each run must install Node, the agent CLIs, and Playwright browsers. Each run must also fill the package manager cache. This setup takes a long time on each run. **Proposed solution** Add a `sourceVm` setting ("Source VM" in the environment form). When it is set, lease acquisition and probes run `exe.dev cp <sourceVm> <generated-name> --json`. The command also sends the configured `cpu`, `memory`, and `disk`. The VM name, the SSH setup, the workspace, and the release and destroy steps do not change. When the setting is blank, the plugin uses `exe.dev new` as before. **Alternatives considered** - A custom image with `--image`: the operator must build and push a large image for each change. A private registry needs `--registry-auth`, and the plugin does not support it. - `--setup-script`: it runs on every new VM, so each run still pays the setup cost. It also has a 10 KiB limit. - `reuseLease`: it keeps one VM for one lease. It does not give each run a fresh copy of a prepared VM. **Roadmap alignment** The change stays inside an existing sandbox provider plugin. `ROADMAP.md` lists "Cloud / Sandbox agent support" as done and does not plan VM copies. CONTRIBUTING.md asks to discuss features in Discord `#dev` first. I open this pull request as a draft and start that discussion in `#dev`. **Additional context** exe.dev documents `cp` here: https://exe.dev/docs/cli-cp. exe.dev token permissions are documented here: https://exe.dev/docs/https-api. ## What Changed - `plugin.ts`: add `sourceVm` to the driver config. - `plugin.ts`: `buildCreateCommand` sends `cp` when `sourceVm` is set. - `plugin.ts`: config validation rejects `sourceVm` together with settings that `cp` cannot apply (`image`, `command`, `comment`, `env`, `integrations`, `tags`, `setupScript`, `prompt`). The error names the settings to clear. The server shows validation errors in the form, but it does not show warnings after a successful save. - `manifest.ts`: add the "Source VM" field to the "VM creation" group. Its description says that the API token must allow `cp`, because exe.dev returns 403 for a command that the token does not list. The API key description now also mentions `cp`. - `README.md`: document `sourceVm`, its limits, and the token permission. - `plugin.test.ts`: add tests for the `cp` command, the validation error, and the form field. Add `sourceVm: null` to the expected normalized config. ## Verification - `vitest run --config vitest.config.ts` in `packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/exe-dev`: 38 tests pass. The three new tests fail without the change. - `tsc --noEmit -p packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/exe-dev`: no errors. - Manual test on a self-hosted Paperclip instance (2026.1001.0). I applied the same change to the installed plugin. I prepared a source VM and set "Source VM" on an exe.dev environment. Then I ran agent tasks. Each run copied the source VM and ran in the copy. Paperclip deleted the copy at release. - With an API token that does not list `cp`, the run fails with `exe.dev API command failed (403) for: cp '<source>' '<name>' --json ...`. The new field description tells operators about this. ## Risks - Low risk. The new code runs only when `sourceVm` is set. The `new` path is unchanged. - `cp` uses the same `/exec` endpoint and its 30-second request limit. A copy of a very large disk can take longer than the limit. - Every copy inherits the source VM disk. The README tells operators not to keep secrets on the source VM. - Can conflict with #13575. ## Model Used - Provider and model: Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5. - Model ID: `claude-opus-5-5`. - Tool: Claude Code, with tool use (shell commands and file edits) and extended thinking. - Context window: the tool does not report it. - The model wrote the change and the tests. A human tested the feature on a real exe.dev setup. ## 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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) <img width="1166" height="852" alt="Bildschirmfoto 2026-10-02 um 23 04 32" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/c057bee4-9f27-4a69-945e-0f71d5bcc1ba" /> --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>canary/v2026.1006.0-canary.9 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
1d5a439e2b |
Diagnose native model rejections and preserve repairable reviews (#15304)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agent execution and recovery. > - A native provider can return a failed turn with an accepted result. > - This path replaced a structured model rejection with a generic failure. > - Finalization could also queue the same failed request for recovery. > - This change retains a bounded model and authentication diagnosis. > - Workers wait for a configuration fix; reviews retain their assignment. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Describe the bug** A native Codex turn can report HTTP 400 because the selected model is not supported by its ChatGPT connection. When the turn also returns a failed semantic result, the run shows `Native session failed` and `adapter_failed`. The native failed-result finalizer can create a retry intent before the adapter error is saved. **To Reproduce** Use a native Codex session that returns a structured `invalid_request_error` model/ChatGPT rejection and an accepted failed result. The regression tests reproduce this with a stub provider and a real isolated PostgreSQL database. No provider account or live request is needed. **Expected behavior** Show an actionable error and stop automatic retries of the rejected request. Block the current worker for a configuration fix. Preserve a pending review so its reviewer can explicitly retry after repair and resolve the original assignment. A stale run must not block a new task owner or override a completed review. **Version and deployment mode** The affected source path is present at `858094ba81`. This change applies to native Codex execution in local and remote environments. Related work: #13853 covers CLI protocol compatibility, #14942 refreshes runtime/model pins, and #12767 proposes legacy adapter model validation. This change concerns accepted native failed results and does not replace those changes. ## What Changed - Recognize only a bounded structured HTTP 400 provider error for the exact selected model and failed turn. - Save a fixed actionable error and four fixed diagnostic fields. Exclude raw provider text and model names from the new diagnostic. - Re-derive finalization evidence from the pinned execution and committed runner event, including its canonical hash and identity bindings. - Block only the current worker. For a current pending reviewer, preserve the original review decision and status version, release execution, and create no automatic recovery action. Recheck execution ownership under the issue lock. Preserve superseded and completed reviews. - Keep unknown failures, accepted results, cleanup, and ownership fences intact. Advance the status policy version to `phase6-v8`. - Route this exact failure code through the existing configuration recovery path. Permit an authenticated Board retry of this native failure only for its saved, still-pending review; discard caller review markers and revalidate at dispatch. ## Verification - Node 24: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. - Independent focused validation: 222 tests passed across the new observer and PostgreSQL integration suites, status arbiter, diagnostic redaction, recovery classification, wake policy, and wake use cases. - The integration tests use actual result persistence, finalization, and the wake dispatcher. They cover zero retry dispatch for an authorized rejection, repeated reconciliation, pending/superseded/resolved reviews, reassignment, and a same-agent successor at an unchanged status version. - Final-commit verification: full typecheck and build passed; independent route/integration/arbiter/review validation passed 136 tests with no remaining source findings. This includes authenticated retry refusals, actual heartbeat retry admission, atomic queued-review claim, and acceptance of the original review. - The local aggregate test run was stopped to avoid duplicating the canonical Linux CI aggregate on this development host. Its partial log showed no failures; no full local-suite pass is claimed. The full hosted Linux CI aggregate passed on the final commit. - No live provider calls, runtime changes, or schema changes were made. ## Risks The classifier is intentionally narrow. A changed provider response format remains an unknown failure. No global model restriction is introduced. The worker blocker requires current task authority and does not replace newer assignments or completed review decisions. A pending review remains in review and requires an explicit retry after configuration repair; it is not rebound to a new status decision. The retry decision is durable. There remains a small existing gap between status/effect commit and diagnostic metadata persistence; a crash there can leave a generic diagnostic while preserving the blocked decision. No schema migration is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact serving model suffix 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 #123` / `Refs #123` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub references) - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket id or instance-derived 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>canary/v2026.1006.0-canary.8 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
7eadc714d2 |
Verify native semantic input against its raw wire digest (#15301)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Native runners send authenticated semantic tool inputs to the control plane. > - The runner hashes the complete input, but the receiver used a redacted receipt hash. > - Protected fields and credential-like document text can therefore fail integrity validation even when the input is unchanged. > - This pull request verifies the complete input with the existing canonical hash function. > - Receipt redaction and permanent rejection of altered input remain in place. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** The Rust runner preserves tool arguments and hashes their canonical JSON. The TypeScript receiver instead redacts the input before hashing. A valid input such as a synthetic document containing `Bearer fixture_token_123456` fails with `native_event_replay_conflict`. A digest of redacted input can also pass without proving the original protected values. **Expected behavior** Verify the complete transmitted input after authentication and exact scope checks. Reject any incorrect digest before durable commit, dispatch, or ACK. **Steps to reproduce** Run the new authenticated controller regressions against the prior receiver. The protected-field and credential-like document cases fail, and the redacted-digest rejection case receives an ACK. The same tests pass with this change. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced from source at `858094ba8123c7edb56623597cd96f0391f7e2d4` with synthetic fixtures. Applies to native runner deployments. Related: #14937 preserves semantic input bytes for execution. GitHub issue and PR searches found no duplicate fix; #14591 touches a separate question-draft contract. ## What Changed - Use the existing bounded raw canonical digest for incoming semantic and MCP tool inputs. - Keep receipt and diagnostic redaction unchanged. - Share four digest fixtures between Rust and the authenticated TypeScript controller, including protected fields, document text, Unicode keys, and number boundaries. - Test raw acceptance, altered protected values, forged and redacted digests, canonicalization limits, permanent reconnect fences, and authentication/scope rejection. - Document the separate wire and receipt contracts and the unchanged recovery fence. ## Verification - Before the production fix, the new selected regressions produced three expected failures and eight passes. - Focused controller, receipt, and semantic-tool suites: 138 tests passed. - Rust shared digest fixture test: 1 test passed. - Full workspace typecheck and build passed; the final receiver delta also passed its TypeScript typecheck. Canonical Linux PR CI passed the full aggregate test gate, runner checks, build, and canary dry run at `efcd38e2d8a9fa6340db4f4e863b6febbe8ca32a`. - Independent review passed, including 18 independently run authenticated regressions and the Rust golden test, plus both matching-digest size-limit cases after the test-only follow-up. Greptile is 5/5 on the current head with no unresolved threads. Diff whitespace and local secret/PII scan passed; fixtures are synthetic. ## Risks The verifier remains strict: there is no redacted-digest fallback. Existing authentication, scope, sequence, replay, settlement, and authorization checks remain in force. Receipt storage and redaction behavior are unchanged. This patch does not clear failed-run fences or replay prior work. Synthetic tests prove the protocol mismatch; they do not identify the contents of any historical rejected input. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with reasoning, code execution, and independent agent review. The exact serving 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>canary/v2026.1006.0-canary.7 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
d21fe31243 |
Retry pooled execution projection reads after disconnects (#15300)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task run lists show current execution and recovery state. > - Their execution projection reads runs, finalizations, pending interactions, and recovery records. > - A temporary database disconnect in one lookup makes the run list fail. > - This pull request uses the existing bounded retry policy for these read-only lookups. > - It keeps transaction reads, authorization, and liveness writes outside the retry scope. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15248. This extends the same bounded SELECT retry policy to the execution projection used by task run lists. A wrapped `CONNECTION_CLOSED` error from the pending-interaction SELECT makes `GET /issues/:id/runs` fail. These lookups are safe to repeat on the pooled database connection. The shared projection helper also serves transaction callers, so retries must remain an explicit opt-in. ## What Changed - Opt the activity run list into per-query projection retries. Keep the default path single-attempt for transaction callers. - Rebuild only the failed SELECT. Use the existing three-attempt limit and 50/100 ms delays. - Keep completed reads, route authorization, and liveness backfill writes outside the retry callbacks. - Test each query, exhaustion, exact error preservation, non-transient errors, empty results, transaction defaults, run-list backfill behavior, and denied route access. - Document the pooled-read boundary. ## Verification - Frozen install passed with Node 24.21.0 and pnpm 9.15.4. - 92 focused tests passed across execution projection, activity service/routes, prior service-read retries, and the shared retry policy. - Independent review passed 56 projection, retry-policy, and route authorization tests with no blocking findings. - `git diff --check` and the staged diff and PR-text secret/PII scan passed. - Full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. - Greptile scored exact head `78783e84a5` 5/5 with no findings or open review threads. - Initial CI had one Runner test timeout: `stops and closes a timed-out consumer even when the caller requested a warm session` exceeded 5 seconds. Its fixture uses a 1 ms session timeout. The Runner package is unchanged from the base. The focused case passed locally (1 passed, 138 skipped). One unchanged-head rerun of that job passed all 1,219 Runner tests and the additional native-runtime integration test. All other CI lanes passed on the initial run. - Full Linux CI passed on exact head `78783e84a5`: 53 successful checks, two intentional Storybook skips, and no pending checks. It provides aggregate test coverage. A full local aggregate was not launched. The same host's prior aggregate exposed three known macOS immutable-cache rename failures in unchanged company-skills code, documented in #15298. ## Risks - An affected lookup can take up to two additional connection attempts plus 150 ms of delay. Persistent failures still return the final error. - The opt-in is only used by the pooled activity read path. No transaction, mutation, full request, or provider action is replayed. - No schema or response-shape changes. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository editing, code execution, and independent agent review. 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 references) - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused suites; aggregate coverage is described above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1006.0-canary.6 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
858094ba81 |
Fix browser polling for unsaved agent chats (#15298)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agent Chat uses the shared task surface and browser panel. > - An unsaved chat has a temporary ID instead of a stored task UUID. > - The browser poll sent that ID to a PostgreSQL UUID query and returned a server error. > - This pull request waits for a saved task and validates task IDs before the query. > - Saved chats keep their browser tools and access checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #14331. That report describes the same draft-ID problem in email requests. This change covers the browser routes; it does not change email behavior. Opening an unsaved Agent Chat sends `chat:<agent-id>` to `/issues/:issueId/browsers` every three seconds. PostgreSQL rejects this as a task UUID. The draft is only a UI view model. The first send or upload creates its stored task. ## What Changed - Disable browser polling for unsaved chat IDs. Resume polling when the chat has a task UUID. - Return the existing task-not-found response for malformed task IDs before database access. Keep board authentication first and company and credential checks unchanged. - Test all six task browser routes, draft-to-saved polling, normal tasks, saved chats, and denied access. Keep canonical UUID v4, v7, and nil values queryable. - Document the draft and saved-chat browser contract. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` passed with pnpm 9.15.4 and Node 24.21.0. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/browser-use-route-scope.test.ts server/src/__tests__/browser-use-connection.test.ts` passed all 35 tests. - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/hooks/useTaskBrowsers.test.ts` passed all 5 tests. - Independent review passed 14 hook and route tests plus both real task and saved-chat authorization cases. - `pnpm check:token-gates` and `git diff --check` passed. - Full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. - Full Linux CI passed on `dafff44a32`: 53 successful checks and two intentional Storybook skips. This includes all general and serialized test groups, UI and browser tests, typecheck, build, and the canary dry run. No CI retries were needed. - The full local `TMPDIR=/private/tmp pnpm test:run` started but did not complete. It was stopped after full Linux CI passed. Before the stop, three company-skills cache cases failed on macOS. A focused rerun reproduced all three as `EACCES` while renaming immutable cache staging directories. The test, company-skills service, and runtime cache files are byte-identical to the baseline previously reproduced on `e99854249c` for #15291. Other local groups were not reached; the full Linux CI run provides aggregate coverage. - Greptile scored the exact head `dafff44a32` 5/5 with no findings or unresolved review threads. ## Risks - Malformed task IDs now return 404 instead of reaching PostgreSQL and returning 500. The route does not map draft IDs to agents or tasks. - No schema, browser provider, task creation, or authorization policy changes. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository editing, code execution, and independent agent review. 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 references) - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused suites; full local run limitations are reported above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1006.0-canary.5 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
81cd03b3b5 |
test(ui): keep initial reasoning with the saved reply (#15107)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work. > - The issue thread shows saved replies and agent run history. > - History that appears after the reply can move the page. > - Master now waits for initial run history before it shows the thread in #15228. > - This pull request checks that reasoning and the saved reply appear together in the first visible frame. > - The test protects that behavior from a later change. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public issue tracks this report. This is a bug regression test. **What happened?** The issue thread showed a saved answer before its reasoning and tool history loaded. The later history moved the page. **Expected behavior** The first visible thread contains the initial reasoning and the saved reply in order. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open an issue with an agent run and a saved reply. 2. Delay initial run-history hydration. 3. Observe the saved reply before its reasoning appears. Related work: #15228 now contains the reveal gate. This PR adds a direct regression assertion for that gate. #14667 takes a different loading approach and remains open. ## What Changed - Add a saved agent reply to the initial-history test. - Assert that the native run's reasoning appears before that reply when the thread becomes visible. - Assert that the thread stays inert until history is ready. ## Verification - `vitest run ui/src/components/TaskChatThread.test.tsx ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx` passed: 353 tests. - `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` passed. - GitHub CI checks are in progress for the rebased head. ## Risks - Low risk. This PR changes only a test. - The production fix is already in #15228. This PR must not restore the older code from the previous branch head. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex CLI assisted with tool use and code execution. The exact model ID and context window were not exposed to this agent 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 remote 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 - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (no user-facing documentation changed) - [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
|
45862dd210 |
docs: add a product feature map (#15288)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Its user journeys span tasks, agents, projects, connected apps, governance, and CLI operations. > - Existing tests do not provide a shared index of entry points and verification steps. > - Contributors need to see which surfaces a change affects and what evidence exists. > - This pull request adds an optional product feature map with recipes and explicit coverage gaps. > - The map adds no CI checks or required maintenance for future pull requests. > - Contributors can use it to find verification steps and state what they checked. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Issue type** Missing documentation. **Where is the issue?** User-journey verification guidance in AGENTS.md and doc/DEVELOPING.md. **What's wrong?** There is no shared index of product features, user entry points, available test evidence, and remaining coverage gaps. Shared components can hide differences between their hosts. **Suggested fix** Add a documentation-only capability index and verification recipes. The format takes inspiration from [Omnigent's feature map](https://github.com/omnigent-ai/omnigent/tree/91acfbbb59f6fc210ff95a9e9428aadd62e06582/feature-map). The recipes describe Paperclip's own behavior and tests. Searched GitHub PRs and issues for `feature map` and `feature-map`. No duplicate change was found. Checked ROADMAP.md. This PR documents existing capabilities. ## What Changed - Added 35 feature recipes, 171 named sub-features, and 91 entry points across product, CLI, operator, and developer surfaces. - Each recipe describes setup, expected results, existing automated evidence, manual verification, and coverage gaps. - Added a dated source snapshot of 185 non-test page TSX modules in 15 areas. The snapshot describes documentation coverage, not runtime health. - Included entry points within existing pages, CLI/API operations, and experimental surfaces. Identified helper-only test evidence where a rendered journey has no automated proof. - Linked the map from AGENTS.md and doc/DEVELOPING.md as an optional reference. - The final diff contains only Markdown and the inventory JSON. It adds no checker, tests, package commands, workflows, dependencies, scheduled work, or mandatory inventory updates. ## Verification - PASS: local documentation links resolve and the inventory JSON parses. Confirmed the final PR diff contains only 39 documentation files. - PASS: `node --test '.github/scripts/tests/*.test.mjs'` — 381 existing tests after removal of the feature-map tests. - PASS: `git diff --check`. - Earlier local build and typecheck passed. The full local test run was stopped after 26 minutes with failures in unchanged chat-channel and native-runner integration tests. It did not complete. These application checks were not repeated for the documentation-only removal. - [CI on the preceding head](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37398407523) passed all applicable checks. Checks on the final documentation-only head are pending. - PASS: Greptile review on final head `45c4b0aeb26540324825da43e81bee2336ad1c1f` is 5/5. There are no unresolved findings. - Live product/provider journeys were not run to author the map. The recipes identify available evidence and manual steps, not new qualification results. ## Risks Low product risk: the PR changes documentation only. Recipes and the source snapshot can become stale. Maintenance is optional and based on review. Linked tests do not prove that every documented journey works. The map states remaining coverage gaps. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with repository inspection, reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context window were 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 - [ ] 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
|
0e0b63e5a5 |
feat(connections): add experimental task-pinned AI routing (#14967)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - AI Connections separate account access from models and harnesses. > - A pool must act as one connection while retaining each task’s account. > - Core must enforce member access and preserve session and recovery rules. > - A plugin supplies rotation policy without receiving credentials. > - This change adds durable routing and native connector setup and management. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** AI Connections, Connectors, plugins, run dispatch, and session compatibility. **Problem or motivation** Operators need to rotate new tasks across saved accounts while each task keeps its account and session. Pool setup must fit the existing connector catalog and account workflow. **Proposed solution** Add an experimental router binding, a capability-gated plugin hook, and transactional task pins. Plugins declare native pooled connectors through `aiConnectionRouter`. Core hosts the existing-account picker, ordering step, and account settings. Related usage contract: #14936. Companion private plugin: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-cloud/pull/643. **Roadmap alignment** This extends Apps and AI Connections. Core supplies generic enforcement and native connector UI; the private plugin owns rotation and quota policy. The prior duplicate search found no matching router implementation. ## What Changed - Add a router binding without changing existing concrete bindings. Keep the instance flag and new pools disabled by default. Require manual operator configuration. Show no routing toggle in Experimental settings on either open-source or Cloud installs, even after routing is enabled. - Persist company-scoped pools, one shared cursor per pool, and pins keyed by company, pool, agent, and task. Commit pins and cursor advances together with revision checks and bounded retries. Persist run-ID affinity before allocation. - Pass only authorized metadata and normalized usage to plugins. Core retains credential handling, member access checks, runtime qualification, and recovery evidence. Probe outside locks with a shared 15-second budget and freshness cache. - Resolve routing before credential preparation and backend selection. Preserve pins through turns, session resets, removed members, and quota waits. Retain admitted recovery after disable or uninstall. - Separate credential session epochs from token generations. Verified refresh preserves the epoch; reconnect and manual replacement change it. Include the credential slot ID in session and usage-cache identity, so reconnecting an indexed legacy account invalidates its old session even when both epochs are zero. - Validate pool member installations before accepting saved-agent bindings and recheck compatibility when the harness changes. Install only authorized members in the new-agent transaction and record their IDs in local activity. Pool membership cannot install a restricted shared connection. - Preserve pool bindings when agents hire teammates through either creation API or native caller runtime inheritance. Block stale manager credential references; retain explicit child authentication precedence and reject incompatible inherited pools. - Add native connector registration through plugin metadata. Reuse the Connectors catalog, setup header, account header, sidebar, dialogs, and usage display. Setup selects and orders saved connections. Advanced settings hold usage rules and member runtime defaults. New-account setup opens in another tab. - Use revision-checked pool archival from the Connectors catalog and account page. Keep task pins, cursors, recovery evidence, and underlying connections. Reject ordinary connection updates or removals that bypass pool revisions. - Add pool selectors, composer models, override notes, quota status, run details, activity records, and local run-log records. Keep session-adoption copy minimal. - Show **Used by** below the pool connections. List current company agents with shared avatars and profile links. Include paused agents; exclude terminated agents and agents using another pool. - Add Core stories for the generic connector workflow and runtime surfaces. Cloud stories reuse these production routes and tokens through a preview-only alias. ## Verification - Final head `73cb953bca30ed83e4505dd820edd9b5edffd28b`: full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `pnpm check:token-gates` pass locally. - All 422 focused connector/settings/shared-contract/migration tests and all 156 database-backed AI connection, hiring, reconnect, and durable-routing cases pass (69 hiring cases rerun after the final auth-precedence fix). The merged shared contract retains connection instructions and pool metadata. The pool migration is generated at sequence 0299 after the latest upstream migrations; this PR makes no lockfile changes. - All four full-app Playwright tests pass on the final head after a cold restart and migration, against the installed private plugin and isolated database, with no route or pool-API mocks. They cover hidden routing controls after manual opt-in, native pool creation, ordering, membership edits, rename, paused defaults, enabling/save/refresh persistence, stale edits, cancellation/removal, preserved underlying accounts, unavailable routers, and Used by avatars and profile links. Exact command: `PAPERCLIP_CONNECTION_POOL_E2E=1 AI_CONNECTIONS_TEST_COMPANY_ID=a37b9625-5ecf-4e29-8081-04df3d6e7d6f AI_CONNECTIONS_TEST_URL=http://127.0.0.1:3108 pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/ai-connections-app/playwright.config.ts connection-pools.spec.ts`. - [Native setup, ordering, and management screenshots](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/14967#issuecomment-6006976278) address the review follow-up. [Earlier selector, quota, and run-detail screenshots](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/14967#issuecomment-5971537316) show the runtime surfaces. Core previews: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui storybook`, then **Connectors / Pool host** or **AI Connections / Connection pools**. Cloud owns its host-backed plugin stories; both repositories’ Operator Setup Required story assertions pass. - Live acceptance used OpenAI/Codex and Anthropic/Claude ACPX, resumed both exact sessions after restart, preserved pinned accounts through explicit reset and controlled quota deferral/recovery, and committed only two allocations across fourteen runs. A later UI-created task test again rotated OpenAI then Anthropic and resumed OpenAI through follow-up/restart/quota recovery. That later Anthropic execution was blocked by its saved OAuth token expiring (provider 401). No live usage probes ran. - The full local `pnpm test:run` was attempted earlier and did not complete because of macOS embedded PostgreSQL bootstrap/shared-memory failures and the 40,000-file Git fixture timeout. The focused database suites above now pass; full-suite verification is provided by the split CI lanes. The preceding CI run had one runtime readiness timeout; it passes locally both alone and inside the larger runtime suite. That larger local suite also encountered an embedded PostgreSQL setup failure and two macOS temporary-path alias assertions; those two assertions pass with canonical TMPDIR=/private/tmp. All final-head CI checks are terminal green, including full general/serialized server suites, Runner checks, browser E2E shards, canary verification, build, and typecheck. Greptile is 5/5 on that exact head with no unresolved threads. ## Risks - The migration adds routing tables and a credential epoch column. Install the private plugin only with the compatible Core contract. - Routing and each pool require opt-in. Production distribution and fleet defaults remain unchanged. - Unknown usage stays eligible. Known pinned exhaustion waits; revoked access requires operator repair. - Legacy adapters require compatible members. Runner model and effort overrides remain limited by qualified backend support. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository editing, code execution, and browser 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 - [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 (targeted suites; full-suite limitations are reported above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1006.0-canary.4 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
72ff3a9f27 |
Measure native tool context and expand bounded workflow evals (#15218)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages persistent agents and their assigned work. > - Agents receive both fixed instructions and tool definitions. > - Moving a procedure into a tool description still adds model context. > - We need to measure the complete delivered catalog and test real outcomes. > - The tested reductions saved little space and introduced failing outcomes. > - This PR keeps measurement, bounded eval coverage and the original evidence. > - Production prompts, tools and runtime behavior stay unchanged. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #15151, #14961, #14948, #14985. This adds the measurement and eval coverage needed to assess further native instruction changes. The attempted hiring and dependency reduction failed qualification and is excluded from the final diff. ## What Changed - Measure the actual standard-mode tool authority, including all 39 tools and their input schemas. Capture scripted native start, resume and continuation payloads and the OpenCode MCP declaration list. - Add OpenCode to the two explicit-only local hiring/reuse and delegation/feedback stories. Preserve the original task requests and independent oracles. - Apply one attempt per selected story and explicit company and lead-agent budget stops. - Select managed hiring credentials from the requested profile, including OpenRouter. - Run the existing Node test files under Node instead of collecting them as Vitest suites. - Retain sanitized comparison reports, original failed grades, source hashes and evidence gaps. ## Verification Final source: `2e7cef78eef7cdfe02265e0dcb03e855b8e50bd8`. Local verification passes: - Full repository `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. - Eval-support unit tests: 1,252 Vitest checks and 128 Node checks. - Eval TypeScript check and six final-source measurement tests. All 36 normalized components across nine scripted deliveries and the OpenCode MCP catalog match the baseline exactly; the complete standing projection is 49,200 bytes. Fresh review of this exact head is [5/5 with no remaining findings](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15218#issuecomment-5996723170); all three review threads are resolved. [Final-head CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37354539126) passes all 47 jobs, including repository typecheck, build, tests, runner checks, browser shards and the canary check. One initial annotation-test timeout is retained in attempt 1; its seven-test suite passed locally, and the affected CI lane passed on one targeted retry. No source or paid eval rerun was needed. Both ready-transition security scans passed with zero annotations. The PR is out of draft and conflict-free. GitHub still requires code-owner approval for the `package.json` test-script change; its requested reviewers are already set. A byte-for-byte comparison against master context `a65ca0950834a85bb93bcc4b4042ecacdebfef53` confirms no production changes under `packages/` or production `server/` paths. The only server addition is a measurement test. No new paid rerun is needed to compare unchanged production bytes. This does not claim that existing product defects have been fixed. The rejected corrected experiment had baseline **5 PASS / 1 FAIL** and candidate **3 PASS / 3 FAIL**, including **two newly failing pairs**. The later readiness experiment had candidate **3 PASS / 3 FAIL** and baseline **3 PASS / 2 FAIL / one setup cell without a behavioral grade**. Its five comparable pairs had two new failures, two new passes and one unchanged pass. The missing baseline Codex cell never reached its provider step because Docker setup timed out. The observed missing behaviors include parent continuation, waiting for the latest child revision, revised ZIP delivery and OpenCode credential persistence. Those failures remain failures. Source review and passing CI do not regrade them. The original reduction saved 460 bytes; its first repair saved only 125 bytes, and the larger unqualified runtime repair increased the full projection. None of those production changes is shipped here. Read the [report](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/2e7cef78eef7cdfe02265e0dcb03e855b8e50bd8/doc/plans/2026-10-05-native-procedure-guidance.md) and its linked sanitized receipts for exact sources, original campaign links, pair-level results and evidence limitations. ## Risks - Full-catalog bytes are not model tokens, invoices, private vendor prompts, lazy-loading behavior or truncation proof. - The two stories are explicit-only and do not prove general coding quality or arbitrary resume behavior. Single trials do not establish causation or performance trends. - The retained OpenCode candidate credential guard failed. Cleanup removed the original provider database, so the precise persistence mechanism remains unknown. The guard is unchanged. - ACPX provider-execution IDs lack proven host-call mapping. No extra-work or feedback-consumption claim is inferred by matching names, order or counts. - PostgreSQL cannot start locally while the host's shared-memory slots are exhausted. Hosted CI must supply the full database checks; the full local database suite is not claimed green. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository tools and code execution. The exact deployment model ID and context-window limit are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1006.0-canary.3 |
||
|
github-actions[bot]andlockfile-bot
|
5537d61794 |
chore(lockfile): refresh pnpm-lock.yaml (#14872)
Auto-generated lockfile refresh after dependencies changed on master. This PR only updates pnpm-lock.yaml. Co-authored-by: lockfile-bot <lockfile-bot@users.noreply.github.com>canary/v2026.1006.0-canary.2 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
efac8ff2f4 |
Add bounded Git integration restore diagnostics (#15291)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Sandbox runs must restore their workspace before finalization can succeed. > - Restore diagnostics identify the failed phase and operation. > - A Git integration exit code can still describe several different failures. > - This pull request adds fixed command labels and supported failure classes. > - Operators can distinguish these failures without collecting private Git output. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15005. This branch includes merged #15268. It labels that change's locked ref transaction and nested branch probe without changing their behavior. **What happened?** A failed Git integration can report only `git_integration`, `unknown`, and an exit code. That evidence does not identify the failed command. Some Git versions also return exit 1 for both a merge conflict and an invalid object. **Expected behavior** Record a fixed command family and a supported failure class. Keep unknown cases as `unknown`. Exclude command arguments, process output, paths, repository URLs, filenames, and ref names. **Steps to reproduce** The tests create local repositories with conflicting commits, a missing object, and an expected-old ref mismatch. They call the real Git operations and inspect the resulting diagnostic. No hosted workspace or external provider is used. **Paperclip version or commit** Base: `e99854249c`. **Deployment mode** Built from source. The diagnostic applies to sandbox workspace restore. ## What Changed - Label Git integration calls with a closed command enum. Preserve arguments, options, errors, and retry behavior. - Recognize supported object and ref errors and OS permission codes. Require both exit 1 and completed tree output for a merge conflict. - Carry the closed fields through the existing restore receipt, saved adapter result, and Sentry projection. Revalidate saved metadata before projection. - Test nested wrappers, parallel failures, reused errors, handled probes, result settlement, and privacy with the real Sentry SDK. - Document the field contract and its limits. ## Verification - Eight focused suites pass: 295 tests. These cover Git sync, restore diagnostics, result settlement, teardown, sandbox runtime, failure projection, the real Sentry SDK, and native warm-workspace Git history. - `PAPERCLIP_REQUIRE_SENTRY_TEST_SDK=1 pnpm exec vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/workspace-restore-diagnostics.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/workspace-restore-result.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/git-workspace-sync.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/workspace-restore-teardown.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/sandbox-managed-runtime.test.ts server/src/services/__tests__/run-failure-diagnostics.test.ts server/src/__tests__/run-failure-sentry-real-sdk.test.ts server/src/__tests__/native-workspace-sync-history.test.ts` - Local checks use Node 24.21.0 and the pinned pnpm 9.15.4. The optional Sentry SDK is pinned to the declared 10.71.0 and uses an in-memory transport. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`: pass on the rebased head. - The full local `pnpm test:run` was stopped before source changes when #15268 merged and required a rebase. It reported three pre-existing company-skill cache test failures on macOS. The same three cases fail on clean bases `2c43b39167` and `e99854249c` and the earlier head with `EACCES` when publishing a read-only cache directory. The relevant test, service, and cache source blobs are identical. No cache changes are included. Later local test groups were not reached. - All 54 checks pass on exact head `8448896bc6`, including the post-ready security scan, with two intentional Storybook skips. Greptile scores this head 5/5 with no review threads. Full Linux CI covers the local groups that were not reached. - Independent review found no blocker. Its diagnostics, Git workspace, and native history suites pass 115/115 on this head. - A source comparison confirms that removing only diagnostic wrappers yields the merged upstream Git integration code exactly, including ref locks, transaction protocol, arguments, options, and retry decisions. - The clean base has stale dependency overrides in its lockfile. Local installation resolved them as the existing PR CI fallback does. No manifest or lockfile change is included. - `git diff --check` and a local secrets/PII review pass. ## Risks A Git version or localized message may not match a known failure form. Such cases remain `unknown`. Up to 16 KiB of stderr and the bounded tree-ID prefix of stdout are inspected only in memory. The saved fields contain enum values only. These diagnostics do not establish workspace recovery or authorize retries. Restore decisions and Git mutations are unchanged. No schema migration is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The service does not expose the exact model deployment ID or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1006.0-canary.1 |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
e99854249c |
fix(workspaces): restore rebased sandbox history against its starting snapshot (#15268)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and preserves their work across runs. > - Sandbox execution restores Git history and files to the host workspace. > - An agent can rebase or amend its branch before it finishes. > - Restore currently treats the original and rewritten tips as concurrent work. > - That merge can conflict even when the host has not changed. > - This change uses the starting Git snapshot to accept rewritten history safely. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A successful sandbox turn can end with `workspace_restore_failed` after the agent rebases and pushes its branch. The restore step merges the original host tip with the rewritten sandbox tip. This can recreate conflicts that the agent already resolved. **Expected behavior** Accept the rewritten history when the host still has the recorded starting branch and commit. Preserve concurrent host work through the existing merge and recovery paths. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a sandbox from a feature branch. 2. Rebase that branch onto an upstream commit that changes the same file. Resolve the conflict in the sandbox. 3. Restore the sandbox while the host remains on the original commit. 4. The old implementation attempts a conflicting Git merge and fails the run after the agent finishes. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on `cab4263dc9` with a real Git rebase fixture. **Deployment mode** Self-hosted server with sandbox execution. Related work: #15005 records restore failure stages. #11638 preserves unrelated imported history with a graft. #10601 handles bundle prerequisites. Those changes do not distinguish a rebase from a concurrent host edit. ## What Changed - Pass the run's starting Git branch and commit into sandbox history integration. - Adopt a related rewritten tip when the host still matches that snapshot. Keep the expected-old-value ref update and bounded retry. - Verify the branch attachment inside a prepared Git transaction while Git holds its ref locks. Abort if a checkout changed the branch. - Check host and sandbox Git identity before warm reuse, including nested repositories. Restage when their tips or branches differ. - Reject host branch changes and unrelated imports after a concurrent host commit. - Retain the existing unrelated-history graft for an unchanged host and the conservative behavior for callers without a snapshot. - Export a full bundle for an intentional reset to an ancestor so restore receives the actual sandbox tip. - Add real Git and sandbox restore regressions. Document the restore contract. ## Verification - Eight Git sync, sandbox restore, and native workspace suites pass: 255 tests. - The new checkout-race and warm-reuse regressions failed before the fixes. Real Git hooks verify that prepared transactions prevent a concurrent HEAD change. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed after rebasing onto `984f092ddf` and applying the Apex findings. - `pnpm build` passed on `f5132603d6`. - The earlier `pnpm test:run` attempt reported three `company-skills-service.test.ts` failures on macOS (`EACCES` renaming a read-only staging directory). The same failures reproduced on unchanged master. The broader run was stopped after confirming that baseline failure; it was not a full-suite pass. Those source and test files are unchanged in the current base. - [Apex review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15268#issuecomment-6002549219): 5/5 on `f5132603d6`, requested with `@greptileai apex review`. All three historical findings are addressed and all review threads are resolved. - All CI gates passed on `f5132603d6` (53 successful checks, two skipped). The signoff-policy browser fixture initially timed out waiting for a local process-agent run; its one retry passed without code changes. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37387511152) ## Risks - A recorded starting snapshot now authorizes replacement of related rewritten history. A stale or changed host tip retains the concurrent-history path. Ref writes still compare the expected old commit. - Branch changes and unrelated rewrites after host advancement require recovery instead of replacing host work. - An intentional reset to an ancestor uses a full bundle. Large histories can increase transfer time in that case. - The existing directory merge rules remain in force. The fix does not resolve an earlier failed restore or replay its external actions. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex, with reasoning, repository analysis, code editing, and local test execution. The exact deployment model ID and context window were 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 — 255 affected tests; the broader-suite baseline failure 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
|
4857799a88 |
feat(connections): deliver saved instructions to authorized agent turns (#15216)
Persist optional connection instructions and deliver authorized snapshots to agent execution prompts. Keep provider templates with each app definition, preserve edits and opt-outs, and replace sessions when guidance or access changes. Use shared production settings across setup and Permissions, with source visibility in agent Instructions. Add the initial memory-provider defaults and managed Honcho workspace configuration. Include migration 0298 and regression coverage for generic providers, runtime delivery, authorization, and catalog regeneration. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1005.0-canary.5 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
2c43b39167 |
refactor(ui): share task composer and project/worktree controls (#15091)
Use the shared composer for new tasks, including project and worktree selection, rich mentions and slash commands, and remembered task settings. Save project preferences after successful task updates. Show known agent models by name and use Default for unknown runtime defaults. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1005.0-canary.4 |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
984f092ddf |
Add project and agent resource lifecycle hooks (#15280)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and projects for work. > - Plugins need reliable lifecycle hooks for these resources. > - In-process notifications can disappear during a restart. > - A lifecycle record must commit with the resource change. > - This pull request adds a generic lifecycle journal without provider calls. > - A later plugin delivery layer can use these records without losing lifecycle changes. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Problem or motivation** Resource provisioning needs durable hooks for agent hiring, pause, resume, termination, and project creation. Hooks must cover shared service callers, budget actions, and approval paths. Capture should work for all plugins and deployment modes. **Proposed solution** Record content-free events in the resource transaction. Deduplicate creation and unchanged status. Preserve each pause/resume cycle. Commit approval, activation, and creation together. Commit termination and API-key revocation together. **Alternatives considered** Event subscriptions alone cannot survive process failure. Cloud-only capture would exclude other plugins. Provider calls inside tenant transactions would couple resource creation to external services. **Roadmap alignment** This is lifecycle infrastructure for the existing plugin system. It adds no provider, adapter, UI, or plugin read API. Repository mutations and backfill remain separate work. Searches found no duplicate lifecycle-journal PR. ## What Changed - Add a company-scoped lifecycle journal and an additive migration. - Record hired-agent and project creation from shared services. - Record agent pause, resume, and termination, including generic updates and budget actions. - Lock agent state changes to suppress concurrent duplicate hooks. - Make hire approval, rejection, and termination transactions atomic with their lifecycle records. - Document capture, ordering, future per-plugin acknowledgments, and migration scope. ## Verification - Full workspace typecheck: `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. - Production build: `pnpm build` passed. - Focused agent, project, approval, budget, and built-in regressions: 102 tests passed across 9 suites. - Final lifecycle journal check: 14 tests passed. It covers repeated/concurrent transitions, rollback, key revocation, self-hosted capture, and company boundaries. - Review regression: 32 lifecycle and approval tests passed, including rejected-hire rollback and retry; server typecheck passed after the fix. - The initial local `pnpm test:run` overlapped the rejection fix and reported the new rollback regression against the earlier service code. A fresh lifecycle run passed all 14 tests. Fresh full local shards were stopped once the complete CI test matrix passed on the final commit. - `git diff --check` and a local secret/PII scan passed. - Greptile: 5/5 on `3ee3903f8e1a171ea3ba2bea9caa2b5766a3f807`, with the review thread resolved. - [Complete CI passed](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37374227222) on `3ee3903f8e1a171ea3ba2bea9caa2b5766a3f807`: general server/chat/workspace tests, serialized server suites, runner checks, build, typecheck, canary, and all end-to-end shards. The requester waived CI during the Actions outage, but the workflow subsequently completed successfully. ## Risks - The migration creates an empty table. It does not scan or backfill existing resources. - Apply the normal database migration before running this server version. Event-write failure intentionally rolls back the resource change. - Pending hires cannot bypass approval through pause or resume. - Capture works on all deployments. Plugin delivery, retention, retries, and provider actions remain separate work. No plugin can read this journal through a new API in this PR. - Future delivery must enforce company scope, track acknowledgments per plugin, and preserve resource order. A global sequence cursor can skip uncommitted transactions. - A termination hook does not authorize deleting persistent volumes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and tool use. 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
ad0c4f0767 |
fix(ui): keep mobile task output above the composer (#15282)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - People read agent output in the task conversation. > - Mobile tasks scroll the document and keep the composer above the footer. > - The document body keeps a fixed height while the thread grows. > - The old observer misses late thread growth, and a layout scroll event can cancel follow mode. > - This pull request observes the thread and preserves follow mode until the reader scrolls up. > - The benefit is visible new output without repeated manual scrolling. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** New task output can move behind the mobile composer while the reader is already at the bottom. Late content layout does not resize the fixed-height body. A scroll event after layout growth can also clear follow mode before the resize observer runs. **Expected behavior** Keep new output visible above the composer while the reader follows the bottom. Hold the reading position after an upward scroll. Resume following when the reader returns to the bottom. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open a long task conversation on mobile and scroll to the bottom. 2. Let a streamed row or delayed content grow after the parent renders. 3. Check whether the latest output stays above the composer. 4. Scroll up to read earlier output, then return to the bottom. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced by regression tests against master at |
||
|
|
6c36c07a4f |
feat(adapters): add GPT-6.1 Sol and refresh shared coding harness pins (#14942)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents run through coding-agent adapters and the native runner. Both use the same installed provider CLIs, model catalogs, and reasoning controls. > - OpenAI released GPT-6.1 Sol (`gpt-6.1-sol`) in Codex. Anthropic released Claude Sonnet 5.5. The static Codex, Bedrock, and OpenCode catalogs do not list these IDs. > - The shared provider pack pins Codex 0.156.0 and OpenCode 1.18.32. The evaluation image pins older Grok, Gemini, Kimi, Cursor, and GitHub CLI releases. Codex 0.156.0 has no bundled metadata for GPT-6.1 Sol. > - A model entry without a current harness, or a harness pin without its runner integrity checks, fails at run time. > - This pull request adds the verified model IDs and moves the harness pins, executable digests, controller checks, and image pins together. > - The benefit is that operators can select the current models, and the native and local adapters share one current CLI installation. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13829 and #13838 (the September 22, 2026 model and harness refresh). Related pull requests: #14993 (merged October 5, 2026, superseding #14816) added the direct Claude Sonnet 5.5 entry and refreshed the Claude runtime to Agent SDK 0.3.286 / Claude Code 2.1.286. This pull request does not change the Claude runtime or the direct Claude model list; it keeps the #14993 pins and adds only the Bedrock Sonnet 5.5 ID. After #14993 merged, this branch was rebased onto `master` (October 5, 2026). The six overlapping pin regions (`docker/daytona-runner/Dockerfile`, `docker/daytona-runner/README.md`, `package.json`, `pnpm-workspace.yaml`, `packages/adapters/claude-local/src/index.test.ts`, `packages/paperclip-runner/src/backends/native-backend-factory.test.ts`) were resolved by keeping this pull request's Codex 0.160.0 and OpenCode 1.18.34 pins next to #14993's Claude 0.3.286 / 2.1.286 pins, taking the union of the Sonnet 5.5 model IDs in the Claude test, and merging both README paragraphs. The Sonnet 5.5 effort and CLI-gate lines in the Claude adapter were identical in both pull requests and merged without a diff. #14917 and #14918 reordered the Claude and Codex model lists earlier; the new entries sit where those ordering rules put them. Sources checked on 2026-10-02: - [OpenAI Codex models](https://learn.chatgpt.com/docs/models): GPT-6.1 Sol uses `gpt-6.1-sol`, supports reasoning efforts from Light to Ultra, and has Standard and Fast modes at launch. The page also records that `gpt-5.4` and `gpt-5.4-mini` retired from Codex with ChatGPT sign-in on August 31, 2026, and that `gpt-5.5` retires on October 14, 2026. Neither retirement applies to the OpenAI API. - [Codex CLI releases](https://github.com/openai/codex/releases) 0.157.0 through 0.160.0. The bundled model metadata in the 0.160.0 Linux binary contains `gpt-6.1-sol`. - [Claude Sonnet 5.5](https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/models/sonnet-5-5/overview): Bedrock ID `anthropic.claude-sonnet-5-5`, released September 28, 2026. - [OpenCode releases](https://github.com/anomalyco/opencode/releases) 1.18.33 and 1.18.34 (fixes only). The OpenCode model registry lists both added provider-qualified IDs. - npm `latest` tags for `@xai-official/grok` 1.0.46, `@google/gemini-cli` 0.62.0, and `@moonshot-ai/kimi-code` 2.1.1. [xAI](https://docs.x.ai/docs/models), [Google](https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/models), and [Kimi](https://www.kimi.com/code/docs/en/kimi-code/models.html) list no newer coding models. - Cursor CLI 2026.10.01-e373342 is the version the official installer resolves. The pinned digest is the SHA-256 of the versioned Linux x64 archive. - [GitHub CLI 2.102.0](https://github.com/cli/cli/releases/tag/v2.102.0) (security fixes). The pinned digest matches the release `checksums.txt`. ## What Changed - Codex adapter: add `gpt-6.1-sol` to the model list, the Fast mode list, and the Ultra effort set. It is the first entry: #14918 orders the list newest version first, and its description notes the ChatGPT app lists GPT-6.1 Sol first. Update the adapter documentation text. - Claude adapter: add `us.anthropic.claude-sonnet-5-5` (Bedrock Sonnet 5.5) to the Bedrock catalog in the newest-Sonnet slot after Opus 5.5; `us.anthropic.claude-sonnet-5` moves into the older-Sonnet group, matching what `sortClaudeModels` from #14917 produces at runtime. Any Sonnet 5.5 ID (direct or Bedrock-qualified) now gets the documented `xhigh` and `max` efforts and requires Claude Code 2.1.284 or later on the CLI lane (the Claude Code changelog entry for 2.1.284 adds `claude-sonnet-5-5`). These two lines are identical to the ones #14993 merged, so the branch carries no diff for them. - OpenCode adapter: add `openai/gpt-6.1-sol` and `anthropic/claude-sonnet-5-5` to the static fallback catalog. - Codex runtime pin 0.156.0 → 0.160.0 in the root and workspace overrides, the runner package, the Codex ACP package patch, the qualified ACPX profiles, the Linux x64 executable digest, the Rust provider backend and its tests, the provider-pack manifest pins, the remote controller pins, the sandbox npm install spec, and the opt-in qualification scripts. - Remote Codex compatibility window: upper bound 0.157.0 → 0.161.0. The minimum stays at 0.149.0. - OpenCode runtime pin 1.18.32 → 1.18.34 in the runner package, the materialization script, the server and Rust qualified versions, the eval and live-session labels, fixtures, and the configuration label. - Evaluation image (`docker/daytona-runner/Dockerfile`): Grok CLI 1.0.46, Gemini CLI 0.62.0, Kimi Code 2.1.1, Cursor CLI 2026.10.01-e373342 with its digest, GitHub CLI 2.102.0 with its digest, Codex and OpenCode version probes, and the refreshed lockfile digest. The Claude Code 2.1.286 probe comes from #14993 and is unchanged here. - `pnpm-lock.yaml` is not part of this pull request. The repository's pull request gate rejects lockfile edits, and the refresh bot regenerates the lockfile on master (the same flow #13838 used). The Dockerfile `PAPERCLIP_RUNNER_LOCK_SHA256` default is the digest of the lockfile that `pnpm install --resolution-only --ignore-scripts --no-frozen-lockfile` (the refresh workflow's command) produces for the combined pins on the rebased branch (`e1856797…`); that lockfile differs from master only in the `@openai/codex` 0.160.0 platform packages, the `@anthropic-ai/claude-agent-sdk` 0.3.286 override that #14993 introduced (the open refresh-bot pull request #14872 carries that part), `opencode-ai` 1.18.34 with its Linux x64 baseline, and the `codex-acp` patch hash. - Documentation: runner README, runner compatibility doc, environment variable example, and a new `doc/adapter-model-audit-2026-10-02.md` with sources and deferred items. - Tests: Codex adapter catalog, server adapter models, Codex compatibility window, native session executor pins, runner package contract, OpenCode materialization, and UI effort options. Unchanged on purpose: Claude Agent SDK 0.3.286 / Claude Code 2.1.286 (already on `master` from #14993), ACP bridges (`acpx` 0.13.1, `claude-agent-acp` 0.73.0, `codex-acp` 1.6.2; newer upstream releases need a separate qualification), the native Grok runtime 1.0.13, Pi 0.84.2 / 0.87.1 (the Pi 1.0 runner stack covers it), and Hermes 0.19.0 (current). `gpt-5.4` and `gpt-5.4-mini` stay in the picker because the OpenAI API still serves them. ## Verification Run on Linux x64 with Node 25.9.0 and pnpm 9.15.4 after `pnpm install --no-frozen-lockfile` (the refreshed lockfile stays local; see above). The results below were re-run on the rebased head (October 5, 2026) for the suites the conflict resolution touches; the other rows are from the original run and are covered by CI on every push: - Rebased head: `packages/adapters/codex-local` 482 passed; `packages/adapters/claude-local` 340 passed, 4 failed (`execute.remote`, `test.probe`, `execute.acp-fallback`, `acp` spawn/env-hardening cases that fail identically on unchanged `master` in this host environment); `server` adapter-models + codex-runtime-compatibility + native-session-executor + adapter-registry 607 passed, 1 failed (the same adapter-registry override-pause case as before, also failing on `master` here); `packages/paperclip-runner` native-backend-factory + qualified-profiles 36 passed; `ui` codex-reasoning-effort + config-fields + model-utils 19 passed. Rust, full typecheck, build, and the Docker image are left to CI as before. - `vitest run` in `packages/adapters/codex-local`: 13 passed. `vitest run` in `packages/adapters/claude-local` (whole package, including the new Sonnet 5.5 gate and effort tests): see the latest CI run and the comment below. `vitest run` in `packages/adapters/opencode-local`: 48 passed, 1 failed (`runtime-config.test.ts` reads the host `PAPERCLIP_OPENCODE_PROVIDERS` variable; it fails the same way on the unchanged base). - `vitest run src/__tests__/adapter-models.test.ts src/services/native-runtime/codex-runtime-compatibility.test.ts src/__tests__/adapter-registry.test.ts` in `server`: 84 passed, 1 failed (`adapter-registry.test.ts` override pause test; it fails the same way on the unchanged base). - `vitest run` in `ui` for `codex-reasoning-effort`, `agent-setup-fields`, `config-fields`, and `ComposerRunSettingsPicker`: 25 passed. - `node --test test/acpx-codex-package-contract.test.mjs scripts/materialize-opencode-binary.test.mjs scripts/runner-protocol-eval-campaign.test.mjs` in `packages/paperclip-runner`: 23 passed. The package contract test verifies the installed Codex ACP executable digest and the 0.160.0 patch pin. - `vitest run src/drivers/acpx src/backends src/drivers/opencode src/live/live-session.test.ts` in `packages/paperclip-runner`: 626 passed, 5 failed, 1 skipped. The 5 failures (`installation-integrity.test.ts` `/proc/self/fd` module loading and one OpenCode answer-selection test) also fail on the unchanged base under Node 25; Linux CI runs Node 24. - `pnpm run test:opencode:qualification` in `packages/paperclip-runner` against the installed OpenCode 1.18.34 executable: passed. - `codex --version` from the installed pack prints `codex-cli 0.160.0`. The Linux x64 executable digest `12eb3e81…652aad` was computed from the `@openai/codex@0.160.0-linux-x64` archive after checking its registry `dist.integrity`. - `pnpm check:token-gates`: all gates clean. - `pnpm run typecheck:typescript` in `packages/paperclip-runner`: passed. Package typechecks ran one at a time; see the comment below for the server and UI results. Not run here, and needed from CI: - Rust tests and `pnpm -r typecheck` / `pnpm build` for the server (no `cargo` in this environment; the server typecheck prepares the runner vendor build). - The Docker evaluation image build and the real-binary Codex startup and session-resume probes (no Docker; the probes need the compiled `paperclip-runnerd`). The trusted CI runner workflow covers them. - Authenticated inference with any new model. This change is metadata and startup validation only. ## Risks - Codex 0.160.0 changes the bundled model catalog and app-server behaviour (authoritative provider catalogs, incremental running-turn tracking). The patched `codex-acp` 1.6.2 bridge is unchanged and declares `^0.148.0`; it worked with 0.156.0 under the same override. If CI probes show a protocol change, the pin can return to 0.156.0 by reverting this pull request. - The compatibility window upper bound moves to `<0.161.0`. Remote images with Codex 0.157 to 0.160 become accepted. Older images stay accepted down to 0.149.0. - Until the refresh bot lands the regenerated lockfile on master, the Dockerfile lockfile digest default does not match the committed lockfile. The trusted CI workflow computes the digest from its own resolution at build time, so this affects only a local build that passes no digest. - Existing saved model selections and effort settings are not changed. Agents on `gpt-5.4` or `gpt-5.5` with ChatGPT sign-in need a model change before the OpenAI retirement dates; that is documented, not enforced. - Rollout order: deploy the controller and runner from this change before promoting a sandbox image that carries these pins. Older controllers reject the new provider-pack pins. ## Model Used - Claude Fable 5.1 (Anthropic, model ID `claude-fable-5-1`), 1M context window, adaptive thinking, tool use. The model ran as a Paperclip agent through the Claude Code harness, performed the web research, edited the code, and ran the tests listed above. ## 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: Bender (Fable) <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>canary/v2026.1005.0-canary.3 |
||
|
|
e9d64ec1be |
docs(release): add two missed user-facing changes to the v2026.1005.0 notes (#15251)
<!-- Write all pull request text in Simplified Technical English (ASD-STE100). --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The release pipeline promotes a soaked beta to stable. The stable job publishes `releases/beta/v<beta-version>.md` from `master` as the GitHub Release body, pinned at dispatch time. > - Beta `2026.1002.0-beta.0` (source `467125fafb47a8520856504fecc48d6e32055db1`, 179 commits after v2026.1001.0) has soaked for more than three days. The stable version for 2026-10-05 is `v2026.1005.0`. > - The curated notes from #14928 already carry the correct header, date, commit count, migration range, environment defaults, and Contributors section. > - A pre-dispatch audit of every in-range PR found two self-hosted user-facing changes that the notes do not cite. > - This pull request adds those two items before the stable dispatch, so the public release page is complete. > - The benefit is that users of external chat and the native runner can see what changed for them. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Issue type** Docs: release notes. **Where is the issue?** `releases/beta/v2026.1002.0-beta.0.md` on `master`. **What's wrong?** Two user-facing changes in `git log v2026.1001.0..467125fafb47a8520856504fecc48d6e32055db1` are missing from the notes: - #13818: Slack- and Discord-origin tasks that lose their review path now recover with their message bindings intact. - #13852: native agents get a governed `hire_agent` action with a closed runtime inheritance allowlist. Paperclip Cloud tenant changes (#13791, #13922, #14407) stay out of these notes. The maintainer asked for this, and it matches the curation in #14928. **Suggested fix** Add one clause for each item in the matching section. Change nothing else. ## What Changed - Fixes → Scheduler and recovery: added the external-chat review recovery fix ([#13818](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13818)). - Improvements: added the native `hire_agent` action ([#13852](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13852)). - No other lines changed. The header `# Paperclip v2026.1005.0`, `> Released: 2026-10-05`, the 179-commit count, and the Contributors section were already correct. - The second commit removes a Paperclip Cloud sentence that the first commit added. The net diff is the two clauses above. ## Verification - Docs only. `scripts/release.sh stable --print-version --date 2026-10-05` on `master` prints `2026.1005.0`, which matches the header. - `git rev-list --count v2026.1001.0..467125fafb47a8520856504fecc48d6e32055db1` is 179, which matches the notes. - All 133 PR numbers cited before this change are in that range. The two PR numbers added here are also in that range. - The remaining 40 uncited in-range PRs are CI, tests, evals, lockfile refreshes, release-notes bookkeeping, a dev-mode-only fix, an internal prompt-context refactor, and Paperclip Cloud changes. - Migrations `0284`–`0293` match `packages/db/src/migrations` in the range. Environment defaults were read from `runner-api-rollout.ts`, `runner-api-response-limits.ts`, `git-workspace-sync.ts`, and `workspace-manifest.ts` at the beta source. - `git shortlog -sn` over the range gives 7 contributors (excluding `github-actions[bot]`); the external handles are `@MrBlackTongue` and `@gentslava`. ## Risks Low. Documentation only. This must merge before the stable dispatch, because the stable job pins the `master` revision of this file at dispatch time. ## Model Used Anthropic Claude Fable 5.1 (`claude-fable-5-1`) via Claude Code, with 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 (docs only; no tests apply) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable (none apply) - [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 (re-running on the second commit) - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups (first commit passed with zero threads; re-running) - [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: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandClaude Sonnet 5
|
41c1431d66 |
fix(server): remove the fixture-cleanup deadlock in the stale queued-run test (#14968)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The server heartbeat tests use shared database fixtures and concurrent run execution. > - The stale queued-run test checked the database before all active executions finished. > - A late run writer could then hold a row lock while fixture cleanup held another table lock. > - PostgreSQL could report a deadlock, and the test cleanup could fail. > - This pull request waits for active executions and shares the deadlock retry helper. > - The benefit is reliable test cleanup without a production code change. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #14198 **What happened?** The stale queued-run test could fail during fixture cleanup. Its cleanup poll could miss a run that had not written its database row. A later writer could then deadlock with the cleanup `TRUNCATE` operation. **Expected behavior** Fixture cleanup must wait for active run executions. It must retry transient PostgreSQL deadlocks and foreign-key races. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run the server heartbeat tests with concurrent test activity. 2. Let an active run write its database row after the cleanup poll starts. 3. Observe a PostgreSQL `40P01` deadlock during fixture cleanup. **Paperclip version or commit** `master` at the base commit for this pull request. **Deployment mode** Test-only change against the server test database. ## What Changed - Replace the local cleanup poll with `drainHeartbeatRunsToQuiescence`. - Add the shared `truncateTablesWithDeadlockRetry` test helper. - Retry PostgreSQL `40P01` deadlocks and the existing foreign-key race. - Use the shared helper in both heartbeat test files. - Remove the private duplicate helper. - Change no production code. ## Verification - `vitest run server/src/__tests__/helpers/truncate-with-deadlock-retry.test.ts` passes. - `vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-active-run-output-watchdog.test.ts` passes. - The target stale queued-run test passes in the engineer validation run. - CI must confirm the full stale queued-run test file and the required server checks. ## Risks Low risk. This change affects test cleanup only. The helper keeps a bounded retry count and rethrows persistent errors. The full stale queued-run test file needs CI because the local sandbox lacks the managed Codex home required by an existing pre-dispatch credential gate. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, with tool use and code review assistance. ## 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 (no documentation change is needed for this test-only change) - [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 ## Test plan - [x] CI `General tests` passes for the `server` shards. - [x] CI `verify` passes. - [x] `vitest run server/src/__tests__/helpers/truncate-with-deadlock-retry.test.ts` passes. - [x] `vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-active-run-output-watchdog.test.ts` passes. - [x] `vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-stale-queue-invalidation.test.ts` passes. ## Note on the sandbox test gap The engineer could not run the full `heartbeat-stale-queue-invalidation.test.ts` file green in the development sandbox. A pre-dispatch credential gate in `heartbeat.ts` needs a usable Codex home for `codex_local` agents, and that sandbox has no managed home. The engineer proved the failure is pre-existing: they stashed both test-file changes, reran the unmodified file, and got the identical 25 failures with the identical error. CI supplies the full-file run. Treat the CI result for this file as the authoritative check. Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
b43073d11f |
feat(connections): sync and group accounts managed by aggregators (#15254)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Connections give agents governed access to external tools. > - Aggregator gateways can expose accounts that users already connected upstream. > - The Apps catalog did not show those accounts or their current provider status. > - Separate cards and setup tasks also made account ownership unclear. > - This pull request discovers upstream accounts and groups them under one app card. > - Users can find connected apps while each provider keeps control of its accounts. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Connections across the database, shared contracts, server, and board UI. **Problem or motivation** Users cannot see which apps are connected through a saved aggregator gateway. Native and upstream accounts need one app card. Discovery must preserve company, user, gateway, and credential boundaries. **Proposed solution** Sync account metadata from Composio, Arcade, and supported Executor gateways. Keep upstream account management in each provider. Use source chips and search to browse the catalog. Preserve native setup and the gateway's existing access policy. **Alternatives considered** Creating a local executable connection for each upstream account would duplicate authorization state. Using an agent task for routine Composio setup would add an unnecessary step. The board now calls the saved gateway directly for that setup. **Roadmap alignment** This extends the shipped Connected Apps and MCP Tool Gateway features in ROADMAP.md. The duplicate search found no open PR for managed account discovery. Related work: Refs #13755, Refs #13941, Refs #14725, Refs #13855. Open PR #12906 covers adjacent toolkit routing work. ## What Changed - Add provider-neutral discovery, sync, and refresh APIs. Preserve the Composio API paths. - Cache observations by company, saved gateway, viewing user, and credential version. Retain stale observations after failed or incomplete scans. - Add optional Arcade account sync credentials in the vault. Discover Executor accounts through its supported inventory interface. - Group native and upstream accounts in one app card. Imported account menus open their provider. Gateway menus own refresh and sync setup. - Add Paperclip, Composio, Arcade, Installed, and All chips. Show 50 catalog entries per page. Keep connected accounts above discovery. Keep explicit provider searches scoped. - Simplify Composio app setup and refresh its connected app list on the gateway Permissions page. - Add a compact agent access card and task creation defaults for connection setup. Preserve explicit blocks and approval policies. - Add two replay-safe migrations, service and UI tests, Storybook journeys, and acceptance stories. ## Verification - Passed the repository typecheck, full build, token gates, and migration ordering check. - Passed the focused provider adapter, connection interaction, and catalog tests after rebasing onto master. - Passed all nine database sync and migration replay tests using a disposable database on the test-drive PostgreSQL cluster. Removed that database after the run. - Verified Arcade cursor pagination against its official Go SDK and passed all eight adapter tests, including short and incomplete pages. - Passed all 45 interaction tests after making the exact requested tools and their Allowed/Ask first permissions visible before granting access. Verified the compact card in Storybook. - Passed the complete UI suite on the final code: 683 files and 7,432 tests, including the corrected Composio destination assertions. Passed 130 focused tests for the UUID, management-link, and health-status corrections. - Passed 22 Composio setup/sync tests, 23 connection-intent service tests, and the connection migration test in separate disposable databases. Database startup alone was substituted; the suites exercised their real SQL and services. - Passed all 10 OpenAPI route checks and the full-stack connection-intent browser test, including scoped consent, agent continuation, and task completion. - The local full runner encountered embedded PostgreSQL startup failures on this loaded macOS host. The earlier in-flight run also held the pre-fix Arcade transform; a fresh run of the final provider suite passes. The final-head CI is queued during GitHub’s active Actions incident: https://www.githubstatus.com/. The previous run also lost several runners simultaneously; its real catalog assertion failures are fixed and the fresh complete UI suite passes. - Tested the real test-drive server in the embedded browser with a live Composio gateway. Detected Airtable and Circleback. Verified refresh progress, account rows, source chips, search scope, and 50-entry pagination. - Arcade and Executor coverage uses provider fixtures. Live credentials were unavailable. - Storybook builds successfully and includes grouped native/provider accounts, stale and unavailable discovery, optional Arcade setup, and mobile states. The acceptance document records the simulated and live coverage separately. - Greptile reviewed final commit `217b024c27b5933e773ce9419c4e92b1032042c6` at 5/5. All six review threads are resolved, security scans pass, and the PR has no merge conflicts. The outstanding remote checks are `ci / Select trusted runner` and `review`, queued by GitHub. They need to complete before merge. ## Risks - Provider response changes can break inventory discovery. Failed scans retain observations and show stale status. - Composio scans only the supported catalog and can take time. Large inventories run in the background with progress and a bounded lease. - Arcade requires a project API key and user ID when the gateway cannot supply them. This key is used only for discovery. - Executor discovery depends on the server's exposed inventory tools. Unsupported servers report unavailable discovery. - Cached account rows do not grant access or create executable connections. Gateway policies still govern tool use. Account deletion and per-app authorization remain upstream. - The migrations add tables and one nullable column. Replay preserves existing rows and company-scoped foreign keys. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6. The session does not expose a more specific serving model ID or context limit. Used reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser 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 - [ ] 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 - [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
|
55e0c895ef |
test(ui): finish sidebar focus cleanup before JSDOM teardown (#15255)
Finish deferred Radix focus cleanup before the sidebar test environment closes. Use React act and controlled timers, check the real unmount focus events for both menus, and assert no timer work remains. Validation: all 7,368 UI tests, repository typecheck and build passed. Hosted CI passed, including server tests, browser tests and canary packaging. Greptile 5/5 on the exact reviewed head; no unresolved comments. Local full-suite limitations and clean-base comparisons are recorded in the PR. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
|
cab4263dc9 |
feat(claude-local): add Sonnet 5.5 and refresh the qualified Claude runtime (#14993)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The Claude local adapter lists models for users with a Claude subscription. > - The list needs Claude Sonnet 5.5 and its supported effort levels. > - Sonnet 5.5 needs Claude Code 2.1.284 or later on both execution paths. > - The qualified ACP runtime previously used Claude Code 2.1.280. > - This change adds Sonnet 5.5 and pins Agent SDK 0.3.286, which includes Claude Code 2.1.286. > - Users can select the model and run it with a qualified runtime. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #3936. This replaces #14816 because the maintainer integration cannot write to the contributor fork. Thank you to @SkilLab-Tech for the model support, runtime refresh, tests, and platform digest verification. This branch preserves both original commits: `8d2f3261af61a2ac1120e51e8a8618732ace543b` and `e68d1d002a3ed745f016fb11c50ac5a3c5a9ff8d`. Related work: - #14917 added Claude model ordering. This branch includes that merged change and resolves its conflicts with #14816. - #14942 updates the other models and harnesses. It remains separate. Its matching Sonnet effort and CLI-gate changes are identical. Both PRs merge with master. The second PR will need a rebase after the first merges because adjacent runtime-pin and test edits conflict. - #14954 is another Sonnet 5.5 change. It overlaps with the model additions but does not include the qualified runtime refresh. - #14039 makes the per-task effort picker model-aware. #3937 is also related to effort selection. The original author checked the [Claude Code changelog](https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/blob/main/CHANGELOG.md) and [effort documentation](https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/build-with-claude/effort) on 2026-10-01. ## What Changed - Add the direct `claude-sonnet-5-5` model and Low, Medium, High, X-High, and Max effort levels. - Require Claude Code 2.1.284 or later for that model on the CLI path. - Put Sonnet 5.5 after Opus 5.5 in the current-model group. Keep Sonnet 5 in the older-model group. - Retain the Sonnet 5.5 assertions and the model-order assertions in the server tests. - Pin Agent SDK 0.3.286 and Claude Code 2.1.286 across overrides, integrity digests, qualified profiles, Rust provider pins, and the Daytona version check. - Update the related adapter and runtime documentation. ## Verification Local verification uses the resolved source tree and pnpm 9.15.4. Model tests passed on Node 25.9.0. Runtime integrity tests use CI's Node 24.21.0. - Five focused Claude test files pass: 62 tests. They cover model defaults, model ordering, CLI gates, and remote execution probes. - Server model-list and UI setup tests pass: 30 tests. - The Claude adapter typecheck passes. - Runner integrity and qualification tests pass on Node 24.21.0: 78 tests. Four descriptor-loader tests fail on Node 25.9.0; all four pass on the CI version. - The runner package contract passes: 10 tests. - Full local typecheck stopped with exit 137 in the database package under the container's 4 GB memory limit. The production build reached the runner Rust build, then stopped because `cargo` is absent. - The full stable local Vitest run was stopped after all current-head CI test shards passed. It did not complete locally. The 180 focused tests listed above passed. - `git diff --check` passes. The branch changes 20 files against master. It has no lockfile or workflow changes. - The original author verified all three platform digests against registry integrity and ran the Linux executable. Its version was `2.1.286 (Claude Code)`. See #14816 for that evidence. - Greptile reviewed head `6db3d3f1` and gave 5/5 with zero comments. Both Superagent scans and Commitperclip pass. All current-head CI jobs pass, including build, typecheck, Rust, test shards, browser tests, and the canary dry run. ## Risks - The controller and provider pack must use matching runtime pins. Deploy them together. - CI owns `pnpm-lock.yaml`. The master lockfile refresh must resolve the SDK override. Refresh the Daytona lock digest with that lockfile. - Images built with Claude Code older than 2.1.284 need a rebuild before the CLI path can use Sonnet 5.5. - The runtime remains at SDK 0.3.286. This PR does not take the later 0.3.287 patch. - A live Sonnet 5.5 session and a Daytona image build are not part of the local verification. ## Model Used - Original work: Anthropic Claude Code, `claude-sonnet-5-5`. Review: `claude-opus-5-5`. The author reported `xhigh` effort, tool use, and code execution. The original context window was not reported. - Merge repair and PR preparation: OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with tool use and code execution. The runtime does not expose the exact model identifier or context window 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 ## Squash Attribution Keep these trailers in the squash commit to preserve the original author and AI attribution: ```text Co-Authored-By: Claude Code (Ivan) <SkilLab-Tech@users.noreply.github.com> Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> ``` --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Code (Ivan) <ivan@skillab.com.br> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
17fa718675 |
Retry transient disconnects in scoped read queries (#15248)
Apply existing bounded transient-disconnect retries to audited dashboard, heartbeat-list, and base issue reads. Rebuild each query per attempt and preserve authorization, company scope, enrichment, and final error propagation. Validation: exact-head Greptile 5/5, passing CI, no unresolved review threads, and a clean merge. Detailed verification and limitations are recorded in the pull request. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
3b47a6befd |
Record bounded workspace restore failure stages (#15005)
Capture allowlisted restore substep and failure metadata for future diagnosis while preserving workspace recovery behavior, error identity, cleanup ordering, and privacy. Validation: exact-head Greptile 5/5, passing CI, no unresolved review threads, and a clean merge. Detailed verification and limitations are recorded in the pull request. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
2e67ea8dc7 |
fix: renew explicit continuation authorization for bounded retries (#14987)
Preserve exact user-authorized continuation receipts across bounded retries and retain the task claim through owned retry admission. Stop, reassignment, superseding input, and active cleanup continue to block unsafe continuation. Validation: exact-head Greptile 5/5, passing CI, no unresolved review threads, and a clean merge. Detailed verification and limitations are recorded in the pull request. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
7498705642 |
fix(ui): stabilize mobile task reading and document navigation (#15228)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - People read tasks and send instructions from phones as well as desktop browsers. > - The mobile footer let page text show through its labels, and small text fields made Safari zoom on focus. > - Small scroll changes made the footer switch direction, and its changing page padding moved the conversation. > - Task pages also showed comments before question cards and run history arrived, so the composer and reading position moved again. > - Document links also used native navigation, which reset the reading position or reloaded a task through its UUID URL. Desktop tabs were crowded in the mobile drawer. > - This pull request keeps navigation steady, opens documents in the mounted task, and gives mobile readers a full-height panel with a vertical tab selector. > - The benefit is a stable task view and smoother scrolling on mobile. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** The mobile footer was translucent. Safari zoomed when a person focused a small text field. The footer switched abruptly while scrolling. A large task could show saved comments, then move the page again when a question card or run history arrived. In a local test with delayed responses, a late question moved the mobile composer by about 374 pixels. Opening a plan from the feed could reset the view or reload the task through a UUID link. The mobile document drawer left part of the feed exposed above small desktop tab controls. **Expected behavior** The footer has an opaque surface and moves smoothly after deliberate scrolling. Text fields do not cause automatic focus zoom. A task shows its initial conversation and composer together at the final scroll position. Background refreshes keep the existing conversation visible. Document links open in the mounted task with its existing cache and reading position. Mobile documents fill the viewport, show a clear close button, and offer a vertical list of open tabs. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open a task with many long comments and a pending question in iOS Safari. 2. Delay its interactions, activity, and runs responses by different amounts. 3. Reload the page and watch the conversation and composer move as each response arrives. 4. Scroll down and back up, including small direction changes and edge bounce. 5. Focus the task composer, search field, and new-task title and description. 6. Open a plan or another task document from the feed, including a link that uses the task UUID. Close the panel and check the reading position. 7. Open several documents on a phone. Switch tabs and close both active and inactive tabs. **Paperclip version or commit** Developed from `1c07b5903` and rebased onto `59015846a`. **Deployment mode** Built from source. Tested in an isolated local test drive with iOS 26.5 Simulator Safari and Chrome. A temporary local proxy delayed independent responses for the layout test. Related work found in the duplicate search: - Refs #14727. It made saved replies appear before supporting history. This PR keeps its parallel requests and narrows the tradeoff in favor of a stable first layout. - Refs #14667. This open PR takes a different approach with per-run placeholders and retries. This PR fixes the observed question/composer movement and mobile navigation behavior. - Refs #13095 and #13597. These earlier fixes added task scroll anchors and skipped transcript waits for scheduled retries. - Refs #6550. Earlier mobile board polish. - Refs #9467. This related open PR changes list and generic tab reflow. The task-pane selector uses a separate component. ## What Changed - Give the mobile footer an opaque semantic surface. - Set a base-size floor for editable text on touch devices to prevent Safari focus zoom. Preserve larger title text. - Share mobile scroll tracking between both layouts. Accumulate scroll distance, ignore edge bounce and changed document bounds, and update once per frame. - Use shared motion tokens for the footer and composer. Keep page padding stable and honor reduced motion. - Wait for the initial question cards, attachments, work products, activity, runtime selection, plan, and relevant transcript history before the first reveal. Skip scheduled retries and older runs outside the initial comment window. - Bound the first reveal to 15 seconds. A stalled supporting request leaves saved conversation and the composer accessible with an explicit loading notice. - Keep concealed mobile history from stretching the document. Keep the composer mounted but concealed until the same reveal. Keep both visible during later refreshes. - Route first and repeated same-task document clicks in place. Recognize UUID and identifier links. Preserve the thread history entry and feed position. Keep modifier clicks, downloads, external links, and classic document behavior. - Give the mobile task panel the full viewport and safe-area padding. Use a visible X and 44-pixel touch controls. Replace the horizontal tab strip with a vertical selector that wraps titles and supports keyboard focus. - Add four interactive Storybook states for a few tabs, long names, many tabs, and the last tab. Reuse the production selector and tab controller. - Add navigation and tab regressions, update first-reveal regressions, and document the behavior in `DESIGN.md`. ## Verification - 392 tests passed across the seven focused task-loading, scroll, mobile-navigation, layout, and composer suites. After review fixes, all 339 tests across the four affected suites passed, including stalled-loading fallback on mobile and desktop and the motion-token catalog. - All 442 focused document, tab, task-thread, and scroll tests pass. The final click-propagation cleanup also passes all 136 task-detail tests. UI typecheck, UI production build, and `pnpm check:token-gates` passed. - All four cases in `artifact-tab-arrival.spec.ts` and `text-attachment-tabs.spec.ts` pass locally, covering desktop and mobile selection, composer focus, document rendering, and downloads of the original bytes. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build-storybook` passed. Open the mobile tab stories under `Prototypes/Task detail/Mobile tabs`. - A local diagnostic proxy measured cached plan content at about 250 ms after the first click. The HTML load count and task request count did not change. Feed scroll stayed at the same position. First, repeated, and UUID document links were tested at phone and desktop widths. Task-reference links close their preview before the document reader opens. - In Chrome at desktop and phone widths, the delayed-response task showed one complete reveal. The late question no longer moved an already visible composer. - In iOS Simulator Safari, verified the large-task reload, opaque footer, navigation hide/reveal, and search/new-task/composer focus without automatic zoom. - Full workspace typecheck and build passed. The updated UI also passes typecheck, production build, and token gates. - All 54 checks pass on the final commit `bf5c9914e61833e7cc8794a69d72cf8c7057b952` (two additional checks are intentionally skipped). Greptile reviewed that commit at 5/5, and all review threads are resolved. - Full local `pnpm test:run` was attempted but stopped after server-fixture failures. Embedded PostgreSQL startup failure reproduced in an isolated native-interaction fixture after five startup attempts. The broad run also reported a rapid Slack callback ordering test failure. These server paths are unchanged by this PR, and their CI shards pass on the latest head. The full local suite is not claimed as passing. - A localhost proxy stalled the activity response for 30 seconds. Chrome revealed the available conversation after the 15-second deadline at both desktop and phone widths, kept the composer accessible, and cleared the loading notice when the response arrived. ## Risks Slow initial history requests can delay the first conversation reveal by up to 15 seconds. If that deadline expires, late data can change the available conversation while a loading notice remains visible. The reveal waits only for runs in the initial comment window, and later refreshes do not conceal an existing conversation. The larger editable text can change line wrapping on phones. Mobile navigation and composer motion use shared tokens and respect reduced-motion settings. Mobile tab selection changes the control layout. Document links retain URL history while sharing the task reading position; other tasks and external links keep their normal navigation behavior. I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This is a fix for existing UI behavior. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 in Codex. The runtime does not expose a more specific model ID or context-window size. The agent used reasoning, code editing, terminal tools, and Chrome and iOS Simulator testing. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1005.0-canary.2 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
59015846ae |
fix(chat): keep dismissed task questions in the feed (#15229)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents ask users questions in task chats and Agent Chat. > - Agent Chat keeps unanswered questions as compact entries in the feed. > - Regular task chats still show a pending composer badge after dismissal. > - A page reload can also open a dismissed question form again. > - This pull request applies the same feed behavior to both chat types and saves dismissal per person and task. > - Users can continue the chat and return to the original question later. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Dismissing a question in a regular task chat leaves a pending composer badge. The question can return after a page reload. The earlier feed behavior only applied to Agent Chat. **Expected behavior** A dismissed question stays in the feed. Its form and pending badge leave the composer. Reload preserves dismissal. Opening the feed entry restores the original question and draft answer. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open a regular task chat with a pending question. 2. Select an option, then dismiss the form. 3. Reload the page. Check that the composer stays clear. 4. Open the question in the feed. Check that the draft is restored. 5. Submit the answer. Check that the answered receipt appears. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on master at `a386a599983519eb1d399f8b770bfccdb2a74762`. **Deployment mode** Browser UI in local and authenticated instances. This change does not depend on the agent adapter. Related work: Refs #14613, which added the Agent Chat feed behavior. Refs #9141, which validates real answers on the server. Refs #11434, which tracks comment-driven changes to interaction state. This PR changes question presentation only. ## What Changed - Show compact unanswered question entries in regular task chats. - Exclude durable questions from composer pending counts and navigation. - Save dismissal in local storage per person and task. Merge the latest saved IDs so dismissals from another tab survive reload. A new question can still open its form. - Keep the original question pending and answerable. Keep approval and permission controls. - Run the question-history regressions in both chat modes. Add reload, new-question, user/task scope, and stale-tab coverage. - Share the real-component Storybook fixture. Add a regular task test drive and an interactive dismissal/answer scenario. - Update the planning-mode browser test to check a dismissed question in the feed after reload and on mobile. - Update the design rules, implementation spec, and preview instructions. ## Verification - 329 focused thread, composer, and interaction-card tests pass. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passes. The UI typecheck also passes after the review fix. - `pnpm build` passes for the full repository. - UI build, Storybook build, and token gates pass. The UI build and token gates were rerun after the review fix. - Greptile gives final commit `98f71f221` a 5/5 score. The current-head check passes, and there are no unresolved review threads. - All 56 current-head checks are terminal: 54 pass and two conditional Storybook jobs skip. The CI run includes the full test shards, build, typecheck, browser tests, aggregate verification gate, and package canary. - The stale-tab regression fails in both chat modes before the review fix and passes after it. - `pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts tests/e2e/planning-mode-visual-verification.spec.ts` passes against a throwaway local server. It checks dismissal, reload, task navigation, and desktop/mobile planning controls. - The duplicate local `pnpm test:run` attempt was stopped after the full CI test suites passed. It did not complete locally. - Manual browser test: select Green, dismiss, reload, reopen, submit the saved answer, and inspect the answered receipt. Also send a new message while the unanswered question remains in the feed. The test drive uses real UI components with fixture response callbacks. - To repeat the browser test, run `pnpm storybook`. Open **Chat & Comments → Task Chat Unanswered Questions → Test Drive**. ## Risks - Dismissal is a browser-local preference. It does not sync to another browser or device. Clearing local storage removes it. - When local storage is unavailable, dismissal lasts for the mounted thread only. - Unanswered questions can accumulate in the feed. They stay pending until answered or resolved through the existing API. - No database migration, API change, or change to approval permissions. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, `gpt-6.1-sol`, with xhigh reasoning, repository editing, code execution, and browser control. The context-window size 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 - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1005.0-canary.1 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
a65ca09508 |
fix(runner): settle accepted results after shutdown failures (#15217)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and the tasks they perform. > - The native runner saves tool results and completion reports before it releases a session. > - Large project discovery responses can exceed the durable command limit. > - A shutdown failure can leave a saved answer waiting for workspace repair. > - Recovery reused the old assessment for a different status decision, which violated a database constraint. > - This pull request bounds discovery responses and lets recovery commit the saved result after workspace repair. > - The benefit is a task that reaches its correct final status without another provider turn. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A native run can save its final answer, fail during shutdown, and leave the task In Progress after workspace repair succeeds. Reconciliation tries to reuse the failed-workspace assessment for a new decision. The one-decision-per-assessment constraint rejects the write. Replaying the old decision can also retain a fresh coordinator lease. Separately, retained session cleanup only recognizes the old `adapter_failed` label. The project-list tool returns full project records, including large descriptions and workspace configuration. A large response exceeds the runner's durable command limit. The settlement diagnostic previously recorded only a failure flag. **Expected behavior** Project discovery stays within the command limit. Recovery finishes the saved result after workspace repair, releases its lease, and preserves the original error for inspection. It does not repeat provider work or relax session ownership checks. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Return large project records from `list_projects` and observe an oversized semantic result. 2. Persist an accepted native completion result, then record a shutdown failure. 3. Finalize with a failed workspace, repeat that attempt, then record successful workspace repair. 4. Reconcile the run. Before this fix, the issue stays In Progress. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on `a386a599983519eb1d399f8b770bfccdb2a74762`. **Deployment mode** Self-hosted server with Paperclip Runner. Related transport work: #12208 drains queued events; #12241 resumes interrupted semantic calls. This change addresses bounded project discovery and accepted-result finalization. ## What Changed - Read bounded project summary projections from the database and return at most 50 authorized summaries with a continuation cursor and explicit description truncation. Agent and run trust boundaries narrow the database candidates; project-specific policies still receive full authorization. Only visible projects determine continuations. The default project-list API remains unchanged. - Record bounded, content-free settlement failure causes for command limits, storage errors, and rejected dispatch. - Include workspace state in assessment identity. Preserve the initial assessment for interrupted finalization, and commit replacement assessment and decision references together. - Release the coordinator lease when an existing decision is replayed, without repeating its effects. - Clear stale errors when recovery succeeds and retain them in `recoveredExecutionFailure`. - Accept both current and legacy close-failure labels in the existing exact-state cleanup path. - Add regression tests and update the tool contracts and recovery documentation. ## Verification - Red: the new project paging, settlement diagnostic, current cleanup label, and repaired-workspace regressions failed on the original implementation. - Green: protocol/catalog/tool checks (117 tests), the full project-tool and finalizer suites (47 tests), cleanup ownership cases (70 tests), and cleanup sweep cases (4 tests) pass. Database-backed pagination covers large descriptions/configuration, complete enumeration, uppercase cursors, agent/run restrictions, project-policy scope contributions, and identical results/cursors when hidden projects are added. - The initial CI failures in interrupted Board waits, contended endpoint proof, and semantic schema validation were reproduced and fixed; all affected cases pass locally. - `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed. - `pnpm build` — passed. - `pnpm test:run` — started before the review corrections; it spanned several source revisions and was stopped after reporting old-behavior and timing failures. It is not claimed green. Fresh project and recovery suites pass; the recovery suite also passes all 25 cases with the broad runner’s isolated home/config. The Slack timing case passed in isolation. Latest-head CI is the authoritative complete test matrix. - Existing authorization suite — 66 tests passed. - Latest-head CI on `8e5763d915aa6f375bdab6601996899ea01496fc` — 55 checks passed, 4 intentionally skipped, no pending or failing checks. - Greptile — 5/5, zero unresolved threads on the same commit. - `git diff --check` — passed. ## Risks - `list_projects` now returns summaries. Callers must follow `nextCursor` and use the authorized project API for full records. Candidate narrowing is only an optimization: project policy and responsible-user authorization remain authoritative. - Assessment identity changes for workspace finalization. Existing evidence remains intact; no migration is needed. - Cleanup still requires matching identities, settled tool evidence, and verified process ownership. Unknown tool outcomes remain blocked from session reuse. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, code execution, and GitHub tools. 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
|
a386a59998 |
Reduce repeated native completion guidance and preserve final replies (#15151)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native agents receive task constraints and completion tools from Paperclip. > - Completion tools already define the procedure for reporting a result. > - Repeated procedure text adds instructions to each full task turn. > - The final reply must still explain a blocker and link a saved document. > - This pull request removes repeated procedure text and keeps these visible outcome requirements explicit. > - A document receipt supplies the exact link, and stricter evals check the persisted reply and browser navigation. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #14961. Related: #14948 and #15007. **What happened?** Native task envelopes repeat completion procedure text. A reduced envelope needs explicit final-reply requirements. The `write_document` receipt also lacks a canonical document link. **Expected behavior** Keep the completion tools as the source of procedure details. Require one accepted completion result before the final reply. A blocked reply must explain the reason, owner and unblock action. A document reply must contain a working link to the saved document. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run the native assigned-skill document case and native blocker case. 2. Inspect the run-attributed provider final and its persisted comment. 3. Check the blocker explanation or open the final reply's document link. ## What Changed - Remove repeated completion procedure text from the native task constraints and backend instructions. - Keep explicit blocker and document-link requirements in full task turns. - Return a company/task-scoped `documentHref` from `write_document`. Preserve the link in the idempotent mutation receipt. - Repeat canonical links for this run's current saved revisions in accepted completion feedback. Give blocked providers final-response guidance for the cause, owner and unblock action. - Keep internal document/comment anchors when Markdown issue links load cached issue details. - Add a manual six-cell comparison suite with strict source, build, default-instruction and budget admission. - Capture eighteen shared runnerd RPC projections and six direct OpenCode HTTP projections across start, resume and continuation phases, using scripted local transports and no provider execution. - Apply v3 checks only to the manual instruction comparison; preserve v2 checks for the existing native completion suite. Check the actual persisted blocker reason and exact saved-document link. Click the rendered document link and check the original content marker in the classic document card or the new document tab. - Forward exact OpenCode finishing calls through the controller. Wait for acceptance, keep accepted feedback and concrete rejection text, and reject malformed responses. Preserve ordinary dynamic-tool response handling. - Settle the completion decision and tool response before mapping a racing idle/error/abort event or handling explicit close/interruption. Reject a concurrent finishing call before controller admission. - Add a provider-free regression through real runnerd, the OpenCode proxy and a fake provider. Reject the first completion, accept the corrected report in the same turn, and propose one result. - Keep all original verdicts unchanged. Treat replay under new checks as separate diagnostics. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass locally. - Native document-authority tests pass, including company/run authorization and idempotent replay. - Native runtime-context, backend and measurement tests pass. - Final-answer calibration, protocol scoring, source-admission and catalog tests pass. Wrong reasons, absent links and wrong link targets fail. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck` passes. Discovery lists exactly six single-attempt local cells with the declared models. - Exported `prepareNativeInstructionPreflight` then `verifyNativeInstructionPreflight` pass on this clean committed source. They build locally and make zero provider calls. - Corrective live confirmation is incomplete. Sourcecanary/v2026.1005.0-canary.0 |
||
|
|
1c07b5903b |
feat: Chat leads the left nav, agent work beside chats, and a Combined Inbox + Task List flag (#15100)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The left nav is the main way people move between tasks, the inbox, and Agent Chat > - The nav has separate Inbox and Tasks rows that show overlapping work, and Chat is one row among many > - The side panel beside a chat shows the conversation's own artifacts, not the work the agent did > - People want Chat to be easy to find, and they want one place for their task views > - This pull request moves Chat to the top of Work, shows the agent's tasks and artifacts beside each chat, and adds an experimental flag that folds Inbox into Tasks > - The benefit is a shorter nav and a chat view that shows what the agent is working on. Both changes stay off until an operator enables them ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #14706 (the secondary Agent Chat navigation this change builds on) Refs #14848 (reopen the last visited agent chat) **Subsystem affected** UI navigation (left nav, mobile tab bar), Agent Chat side panel, task list and inbox, and the company artifacts API. **Problem or motivation** Inbox and Tasks are two nav rows for overlapping work. Chat sits in the top group with no clear home. The chat rail lists only agents you already talked to, so you cannot see your other teammates there. The side panel beside a chat shows only the conversation's own artifacts. It does not show the tasks and files the agent made. **Proposed solution** With Agent Chat on, Chat leads the Work section and the rail lists every eligible agent. The chat side panel opens on the agent's tasks as cards, and the agent's artifacts are available from +. A new experimental flag, Combined Inbox + Task List, makes Inbox a set of views inside Tasks. **Alternatives considered** Rebuilding the inbox inside the task list. Instead, `/issues` hosts the existing Inbox component for inbox views and the existing task list for status views, so all inbox behaviour stays the same. **Roadmap alignment** Agent Chat (ROADMAP.md, "Agent Chat (including CEO Chat)"). All changes are behind experimental flags that are off by default. ## What Changed - **Agent Chat nav (streamlined shell):** Chat is the first row of Work, not a top-group row. Workspaces leaves the nav while Agent Chat is on. The mobile tab bar is Home · Chat · + · Tasks · Agents. The legacy shell keeps master's top-group Chat row. - **Chat rail:** `AgentConversationsSidebar` lists every eligible agent. The open chat is first, then conversations by recent activity, then the rest of the roster alphabetically. Terminated agents and agents you left are omitted unless you have history with them. The picker still marks only real conversations as "Open chat". - **Chat side panel:** a new default Tasks tab shows one card per task the agent created, was assigned, commented on, or acted on, newest first. It has the task list's filter popover and a sort control. **+ → Artifacts** shows the agent's artifacts as cards. Cards open in a new tab. Agent Chat off keeps the old Artifacts tab. - **Artifacts API:** `GET /api/companies/:companyId/artifacts` accepts `agentId`. The filter applies to documents, work products, and attachments by the agent each result is attributed to. The shared validator and the UI client carry the new parameter, and the OpenAPI entry picks it up from the shared schema. - **Combined Inbox + Task List flag (`enableCombinedInboxTasks`, off by default):** new card in Settings > Experimental. The Inbox row goes away and its badge moves to Tasks. A Views menu on `/issues` covers Mine, Unread, Blocked, Recent, Everything, All, Active, Backlog, and Done. Bare `/issues` opens the last-used view (default Mine). Links that carry `assignee`, `workspace`, `participantAgentId`, or `q` open All so the filter is kept. `/inbox/*` and `/issues/{all,active,backlog,done,recent}` redirect to the matching view. `/inbox/requests` stays its own page. - **Task detail breadcrumb:** the view key now decides the source, so quick-archive still works after a reload from an inbox view. - **Docs:** `doc/PRODUCT.md` and `doc/SPEC.md` describe the chat rail, the chat side panel, and the new flag. ## Verification - `cd ui && npx vitest run --no-file-parallelism src/components/chat src/components/task-side-panel/TaskSidePanel.test.tsx src/components/AgentConversationsSidebar.test.tsx src/components/Sidebar.test.tsx src/components/SidebarCompanyMenu.test.tsx src/components/Layout.test.tsx src/pages/AgentChats.test.tsx src/pages/InstanceExperimentalSettings.test.tsx src/lib/task-views.test.ts src/lib/issueDetailBreadcrumb.test.ts src/pages/Inbox.test.tsx src/pages/Issues.test.tsx src/App.test.tsx src/App.activity-routing.test.tsx src/components/MobileBottomNav.test.tsx src/components/CommandPalette.test.tsx`: 20 files, 356 tests pass. - `cd server && npx vitest run src/__tests__/company-artifacts-service.test.ts`: 13/13 pass, including the new agent-filter test across all three artifact sources. - The new rail test fails against the unmodified rail. - `pnpm check:token-gates`: all gates clean. - Manual: enable Agent Chat in Settings > Experimental. Open Chat. The rail lists all agents. Open a chat. The side panel shows the agent's tasks. Use **+ → Artifacts** to see the agent's artifacts. Then enable Combined Inbox + Task List. The Inbox row goes away, and Tasks shows a Views menu. - Snapshot baselines are intentionally not updated. See `doc/design/DECISION-SHEET.md`, "Per-change snapshot verification demoted to dormant (Jul 13 2026)". ## Risks - With both flags off, the app behaves like master. The only exception is the API: it accepts a new optional query parameter. - With Agent Chat on, the rail can list many agents in a large company. It uses the agent list the app already loads, and search filters it. - The Tasks panel reads at most 200 recently updated tasks per agent and says so when it reaches the limit. The Artifacts panel reads at most 500 of the agent's artifacts. - Combined Inbox + Task List changes what bare `/issues` opens for people who enable it. Deep links with a task filter still open All. ## Model Used - Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-opus-5-5`, through Claude Code with tool use (shell, file edit, test runs). Extended thinking was enabled. ## 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: scotttong <squadbot000@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>canary/v2026.1004.0-canary.2 nightly/v2026.1004.0-nightly.0 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
994d6edcdd |
Fix Markdown in provisional task titles (#15047)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip uses issues to organize work for AI agents. > - Paperclip creates a provisional issue title from the issue description. > - A description can start with a Markdown image or other Markdown syntax. > - The old title logic truncated the raw Markdown source. > - This pull request parses Markdown before it truncates the title. > - The benefit is a short and readable provisional title. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** When an issue description started with a Markdown image, Paperclip used the raw image syntax and URL in the provisional title. Other common Markdown markers could also appear in the title. **Expected behavior** Paperclip must remove Markdown syntax before it creates the 120-character provisional title. It must keep useful text, such as link labels and inline code content. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create an issue without an explicit title. 2. Start the issue description with a Markdown image. 3. Add Markdown text after the image. 4. Observe that the provisional title contains raw Markdown syntax or an image URL. **Paperclip version or commit** The problem reproduces on `master` before this change. **Deployment mode** Local development with the embedded PGlite database. ## What Changed - Parse the description and remove image nodes before title generation. - Convert the remaining Markdown to plain text before the 120-character limit. - Keep link labels, inline code, and identifier punctuation. - Use image alt text, or `Image`, for an image-only description. - Fall back to a simple 120-character title if Markdown parsing or conversion fails. - Add regression tests for image and inline-code titles, parser failures, and text-conversion failures. ## Verification - `./node_modules/.bin/vitest run server/src/__tests__/task-title-routes.test.ts` - `./node_modules/.bin/tsc -p server/tsconfig.json --noEmit` - Full GitHub CI matrix passed on commit `663f3a0517c9e450f174b6c37970756457067ba5`. - Greptile reviewed the latest commit with a 5/5 confidence score and no unresolved findings. ## Risks - Low risk. This change only affects generated provisional titles. It does not change explicit titles or full issue descriptions. - The implementation uses the Markdown parser and plain-text converter that are already present in the server. > This is a focused bug fix. It does not add planned core work from `ROADMAP.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex with GPT-5. The run used reasoning, tool use, code execution, and repository access. The runtime did 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>canary/v2026.1004.0-canary.1 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
db72ad4c73 |
fix(ui): explain branch artifacts without remote links (#15051)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage agent work and inspect its results. > - The issue artifact list presents those results as work-product cards. > - A branch can have no remote URL or structured metadata. > - The current card hides its summary and has no action in that case. > - This pull request shows the summary and provides an accessible details action. > - The card labels the absent link without making a false link. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A branch work product without a URL showed a short title and an icon. It did not show the saved summary or provide an action. **Expected behavior** The card must show what the branch contains. People must be able to open the saved details. It must not imply that a remote URL exists. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open the artifact list of an issue with a branch work product that has `url: null` and `metadata: null`. 2. Find the branch card. Its summary and details action are missing before this change. Related work: #12717 introduced rich work-product cards. ## What Changed - Keep linkless branch cards concise: show the title and no-link state. Keep the full summary behind an optional Saved description toggle. - Label a branch with no URL as having no remote link. Let a person open its details with a keyboard-accessible button. - Add a focused interaction test and two Storybook states for the no-link branch. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` passed. - Focused Vitest tests passed: 45 tests in two files. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build` passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build-storybook` passed. - `pnpm check:token-gates` passed. - The Storybook collapsed and expanded states rendered in Chromium. Both screenshots were captured. - Full workspace typecheck could not finish: the runner Rust package requires `cargo`, which is not installed in this environment. ## Risks - Low risk. The change affects card text and the action for records without a URL. It does not change the saved data or routes. - Long saved summaries on other linkless work products expand the card height after a person selects Details. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex coding agent. The execution environment does not expose the exact model ID or context window to this agent. It used code execution and a browser to validate the change. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [ ] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details (the managed execution workspace fixes this branch name) - [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 (Storybook examples) - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1004.0-canary.0 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
2a8a99e4a5 |
fix(ui): reveal completed thinking caret beside label (#15048)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work. > - The task thread shows completed agent work and its reasoning. > - The completed work row places the disclosure caret at the far right. > - The caret stays visible even when the reader does not inspect the row. > - The row needs a quiet control that stays close to the work label. > - This pull request places the caret after that label and shows it on hover or keyboard focus. > - The change keeps the timestamp on the right and does not move content on hover. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** The completed agent work row shows a disclosure caret at the far right of the task thread. The caret stays visible when the pointer is elsewhere. **Expected behavior** The caret stays near the work label. It appears on hover or keyboard focus. The timestamp stays on the right. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open a task with a completed agent run. 2. Look at the completed work row without hovering over it. 3. Hover over the row and then use the keyboard to focus its button. Related: #11772 addresses a different caret and composer layout. ## What Changed - Move the completed work caret next to the work label. - Keep its space reserved. Show it on hover or keyboard focus. - Add a test for caret position, visibility classes, and the open state. ## Verification - `node node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx` passes all 100 tests. - `node scripts/check-token-gates.mjs` passes all token gates. - `git diff origin/master...HEAD --check` passes. - CI passes on the latest head, including typecheck, build, tests, and verification. The local isolated worktree could not run typecheck because dependency installation failed while applying the existing `codex-acp` patch. ## Risks - Low risk. The same button still opens the work detail. Only the caret position and visibility change. - On a touch device, the caret is not visible without hover. The work row stays a button that users can tap. > This is a focused UI fix. It does not add a planned core feature from `ROADMAP.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex coding agent. The runner does not expose the exact model ID or context window. The agent used reasoning, shell tools, 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 the details available in this runner - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either linked public issues or described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket ID - [x] I have run focused tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have checked documentation impact; no documentation change is needed for this visual fix - [x] I have considered and documented the risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1003.0-canary.9 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
1c3abf5075 |
fix(ui): use available space for composer labels (#15050)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work. > - The task composer shows the next assignee and model before a message starts work. > - Fixed width limits shortened both labels when the composer had unused space. > - People could not read the selected agent and model even when the full text could fit. > - This pull request makes the capsule use the available composer width. > - It keeps the ellipsis when Plan mode or a narrow layout causes real space pressure. > - The benefit is clearer run settings without damage to the compact composer layout. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** The task composer truncated the assignee name at 6rem and the complete assignee and model capsule at 16rem. It did this even when the composer had more available space. **Expected behavior** The composer must show the complete assignee and model labels when they fit. It must use an ellipsis only when another control or a narrow viewport limits the available width. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open a task composer with a long assignee name and a long model name. 2. Use a wide desktop layout. 3. Observe that the old capsule shortened both labels while unused space remained. **Paperclip version or commit** Current `master` before this change. **Deployment mode** Local dev (`pnpm dev`). **Installation method** Built from source. **Agent adapter(s) involved** Not adapter-specific. This is a core UI bug. **Database mode** Not database-related. **Access context** Board. **Additional context** The Storybook cases cover a wide composer and a narrow composer with Plan mode. ## What Changed - Removed the fixed maximum width from the assignee and model capsule. - Removed the fixed maximum width from the assignee label. - Kept overflow ellipsis behavior when the parent row has insufficient space. - Added stable label selectors and focused component coverage. - Added Storybook cases for complete labels and Plan-mode truncation. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk build` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `vitest run ui/src/components/task-chat/ComposerRunSettingsPicker.test.tsx` - `node scripts/check-token-gates.mjs` - Storybook production build under Node.js 24.20.0 - Captured and inspected the two new Storybook cases. - The complete repository typecheck and build reach the Rust Runner step. This local environment does not have `cargo`. Hosted CI supplies the Rust toolchain. - The repository test suite reaches workspace-runtime tests. This local runner does not allow their required temporary home directories. Hosted CI supplies a writable test home. ## Risks - Low risk. The change only removes fixed width limits from one flex item. - A very narrow composer can still shorten both labels. This is the intended fallback. - The Storybook constrained case verifies that Plan mode and Send remain usable. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-5 through the Paperclip Codex runner. The run used reasoning, tool use, code execution, browser automation, and image 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) - [ ] 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
|
eb049aebf2 |
feat(skills): let agents update company skills safely (#15049)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is an open source control plane for AI-agent companies. > - Company skills give agents reusable work instructions. > - Skill Studio can edit skill files and save version history. > - Agents can create a skill, but they do not have a first-class update tool. > - An agent update needs a version check and safe retry behavior to prevent lost edits. > - This pull request adds `update_skill` through the existing company skill file API. > - The change keeps company policy, version history, and audit records in one path. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting: the server API, shared validation, and runner tool catalog. **Problem or motivation** An agent can create a company skill but cannot update its `SKILL.md` through a first-class tool. An unguarded retry can also create duplicate versions or overwrite a newer edit. **Proposed solution** Add `update_skill` with a required current version ID and a retry key. Route it through the existing skill file API. Reject stale versions and changed-input retries. Save the version and audit event together. **Alternatives considered** A separate write endpoint would duplicate the Skill Studio mutation path and policy checks. This PR reuses that path instead. **Roadmap alignment** This work extends Skills Manager and Skill Studio, which are listed in `ROADMAP.md`. **Additional context** The tool accepts a complete `SKILL.md`, not a partial patch. Callers must read the current version before they edit it. ## What Changed - Add optional version and retry fields to the existing skill file update contract. - Add a guarded API update with a stable retry receipt and attributed audit event. - Add `update_skill` to native and semantic runner tool catalogs, with mode and policy gates. - Add unit, integration, protocol, and semantic-tool regression coverage. - Document agent use and extend the OpenAPI request contract. ## Verification - Focused tests and direct server and runner TypeScript checks passed before this PR. - `git diff --check` passed after the rebase onto `master`. - CI passed on the latest PR head, including the full test matrix, typecheck, and build. Local full typecheck and build stopped because `cargo` is not installed. The local full test run ended without a verdict. - No dedicated end-to-end eval scenario was added or run. The protocol coverage and semantic-tool test cover the new action deterministically. - Reviewers can read a skill version, call `update_skill`, repeat the same key, then try a stale version and a changed-input key. Only the first edit must create a new version. ## Risks - File writes and database transactions must stay in sync when a write fails. The integration tests cover failed writes and retry behavior, but CI must verify them on the PR head. - Existing Skill Studio callers do not send the new optional coordination fields. Their request shape remains valid. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex CLI assisted with this change. The runner did not expose the exact model ID or context window. The agent used code execution and repository tools. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details; exact model ID and context window were not exposed) - [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 tests; full suite is pending CI) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green (53 pass, 4 skip on the latest head) - [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
|
b17019e14d |
fix(agents): reduce default instructions and qualify stock harnesses (#14948)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Its adapters supply task context and access to Paperclip skills and tools. > - The default hire manual and shared prompts also repeat general work procedures. > - Those procedures overlap with stock provider instructions and the Paperclip skill. > - Existing E2E fixtures supply a QA manual, so they do not qualify the production default. > - This pull request reduces the generic instructions and adds real default-hire coverage. > - The benefit is less competing guidance, with inspectable evidence for preserved skills and task context. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #14920. That merged change preserves native Codex base instructions. This PR covers the default manual, shared legacy prompts, operational skill guidance, and the narrowly approved ACP skill-discovery/session-environment repair for measured delivery and credential-persistence failures. **What existing behavior does this improve?** New non-CEO hires without a custom bundle and legacy task/chat startup and continuation prompts. **Current behavior** The shipped default manual contains 602 words. Generic task/chat prompts and ordinary resume deltas repeat work procedures already available through the harness and Paperclip skill. **Proposed behavior** The default manual contains only the eight-word company identity. Shared startup prompts retain identity and connection guidance. Ordinary resume deltas retain current work context without the generic execution contract. **Reason and benefit** Let the stock harness guide general work. Keep Paperclip-specific capabilities and independently test default hires, skills, ordered comments, and chat restart. **Breaking changes** New default hires receive less guidance. Existing saved manuals, explicit custom bundles, CEO templates, and specialized wake contracts retain their behavior. The obsolete includeExecutionContract option remains accepted for source compatibility. ## What Changed - Reduce the default hire manual to one sentence. - Reduce shared task/chat defaults and remove the generic ordinary-resume contract. - Keep connection guidance, auth, skills, custom prompts, and specialized wake context. - Add credential-free instruction-boundary gates and 26 explicit Product E2E cells across eight legacy/native profiles, including two focused Paperclip-storage cases. - Capture public hire receipts before providers run, then grade delivered prompts and independent task/chat outcomes. - Add an early legacy skill API recipe for saving a task document, checking the saved revision receipt and linking the document. Improve stock task/heartbeat skill-selection metadata and show a clickable Markdown UI-link example. Keep native tool completion separate. - Advertise bounded routing descriptions and exact successfully staged SKILL.md paths in legacy ACP Claude; keep full bodies on demand and preserve remote path rebasing. - Remove only the provider environment from copied persisted ACP session records, while loading current run credentials and preserving all other options/conversation state. - Regenerate both capability metadata inventories and reject stale manifests/inventories before provider admission. - Publish the original reduction and focused skill-repair comparisons, preserving all failures, automatic recovery, cost coverage and limitations. ## Verification **Behavioral qualification remains pending.** Original legacy ACP Claude loses the issue document only in the reduced cohort beneath an unchanged credential failure. A source-backed diagnosis finds that neither ordinary assignment reads the staged operational skill, while the runtime persists provider environment in session state. The new common repairs expose skill metadata/path and omit persisted env; strict document and credential guards stay intact. [Inspectable diagnosis and retained hashes](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/9f654db4541d3d002769c988f6e51fc0b08dadbd/doc/plans/2026-10-03-legacy-acp-claude-readiness.md). Current repair head `de0965984ff3edf611ae6d0e7ca5c7d5ae3947bb` incorporates master `569c7203aa24b95440682983ce7940ba1d4247bd` (merged #14961/#15007). All 222 affected adapter tests, adapter-utils/E2E typechecks, and final 96 variant/grader/retry calibrations pass. The frozen historical comparator is `c25697f4260b6f3adfea143c3ae9932e2f42986d`: 8,280 of 8,291 paths identical, exactly two production instruction paths plus nine declared unit expectations differ. The operational skill/discovery/environment repairs, selected model/profile/task/core grader/auth/permissions/retry policy are identical. Both actual launcher prepare→verify admissions pass with zero providers. [Immutable manifest and exact receipts](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/9f654db4541d3d002769c988f6e51fc0b08dadbd/doc/plans/2026-10-03-legacy-acp-claude-evidence/manifest.json). One original legacy ACP Claude cell per variant is authorized, with enforced single campaign attempts, 12-minute deadlines and company/agent 1,000-cent hard stops; every product recovery run/cost is counted. Actual live outcomes are pending. Current normal CI has one failed server shard and failed aggregate verify under diagnosis; other normal gates including typecheck/build/Rust/all eight browser shards pass. Fresh review completed successfully; the valid historical startup/resume masking finding was fixed with per-invocation task/chat checks and strict complete-snapshot capture, calibrated and resolved. Prior heads, failures and campaigns below remain historical evidence, not checks on this repair head. - Prior head `36aa4d81c49a1a8f6f04b1a068fae19aa901955f` is replayed on merged hiring master `862a5758ba0e88a33232c1f1fa645e85c38a3113`. All 52 current-head checks pass with two intentional Storybook skips, including repository typecheck/test/build and the browser shard. Fresh Greptile is 5/5 with zero unresolved review threads. Exact-head stock prerequisites pass 599 assertions (598 TypeScript + 1 Rust), all six gates and retained receipt verification, zero providers/source errors. Fingerprint `a7f5a22d860a88fe20cce213c6d5e0004788f32c8363930729aea4fd740ad16d`. Combined catalog/hiring calibrations pass 67 assertions, E2E typecheck and 26-cell stock discovery pass. Canonical contract/inventory checks and the later issue-derived reference calibration are retained; that reference-only follow-up is not live-qualified by earlier frozen runs. - Prior full repository typecheck/build passed. The complete local Vitest run executed 14,956 tests: 14,870 passed, 83 skipped, three timing failures. All three affected files passed unchanged narrow reruns; original failures remain retained. Current-head CI now passes the full general checks; the original local failures remain retained. - The original 24-pair default-manual/shared-prompt comparison has two new overall classic Claude/OpenCode document-delivery failures plus an additional legacy ACP Claude document loss beneath an unchanged credential-guard failure (not closed by later runs), two newly passing OpenCode ordered cases, seven unchanged failures and 13 unchanged passes. Equal 15/24 totals do not establish behavioral equivalence. [Complete original report](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/875f4c397d9e8c3f12f39dedd59abaf1eaf5236e/doc/plans/2026-10-02-stock-harness-live-comparison.md). - The skill-only repair holds the eight-word manual/shared prompts and merged #14920 fixed. All four matched profile configurations and 203 fixture/behavior files match. Candidate `abd0b628ca642c09a54a4edc56a5227402f6686e` varies only the two skill sources against baseline `bc83fe030234439ac51279502a28803958963e2e`. [Candidate workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37060885547) and [baseline workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37060888047) each pass 571 exact-source prerequisites before providers; all eight cells clean up successfully. Failed campaigns publish successfully and remain failed. - Repair pairs: Claude original Fail → Pass; Claude explicit Pass → Pass; both OpenCode cases Fail → Fail. Explicit OpenCode's handoff worsens beneath the unchanged failing UI-link grade: baseline gives a clickable API URL, candidate gives a code-formatted path without an anchor. The request's usable-link wording is narrower in the UI-only oracle. [Complete repair report and safe projection](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/875f4c397d9e8c3f12f39dedd59abaf1eaf5236e/doc/plans/2026-10-02-legacy-document-skill-repair.md). - The subsequent narrow stock metadata/link correction has two matched Pass → Pass cases, zero new machine failures/passes and no pending pairs. Both original-case handoff links remain deficient: candidate uses a wrong PAP prefix, baseline supplies a bare prefix-less slug path; the preserved original oracle only requires a durable document. Both explicit clickable UI-link cases pass revision/content/link grading. All four exact-source 587-check gates, single assignment runs and cleanup pass. This does not establish fix causality because baseline also succeeds. [Candidate workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37069547401) freezes `fe9dc1e3c518825242ed889ab9c8352986f8c2ed`; [matched baseline](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37069552374) freezes `0d7ecfa96d72fba79b7f0a25052b42c0686c0488`. This is a skill-only comparison with reduced manuals/shared prompts held constant, not a repeat of the historical-manual comparison. Only original and clarified explicit classic OpenCode cases are selected, two per variant/four expected turns. 8,242 other tracked files and both profile hashes match; protected workflows admit each exact source before credentials. [Complete qualification report](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/74d0d3d945f4c52d0814b5a845ab5bd09f33cd6b/doc/plans/2026-10-02-opencode-skill-routing-link-qualification.md). Candidate original loads Paperclip/reference before saving publicly; baseline original loads it after writing locally, then saves publicly within the same assignment. Reported cost totals are $0.0107824490 candidate / $0.0107909015 baseline, with unmetered runtime. The later reference-only issue-derived link correction is provider-free calibrated and **not live-qualified** by these frozen runs; no further paid runs. - Retained tool calls show the repaired original OpenCode assignment loads only its assigned output skill before writing locally. Operational Paperclip is first loaded during automatic disposition recovery; its early recipe is visible then, but it never saves the missing document. Explicit candidate loads Paperclip and reads the new reference before saving successfully. All nine actual runs are counted. Reported LLM totals are $0.3802537209 baseline and $0.4918990161 candidate; local runtime is unmetered. - Initial setup, packaging, cancelled/missing-cell recovery, callback test and relative-output attempts remain retained. No completed provider failure was rerun. Frozen measurement branches are unchanged by later canonical metadata maintenance. - Run `pnpm test:e2e:runner:stock-harness`, `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit`, and `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`. Select `stock-harness` explicitly for paid execution; it is excluded from `--all`. Prior-head integration: `36aa4d81c49a1a8f6f04b1a068fae19aa901955f` replays this PR on merged hiring #14985 (`862a5758ba0e88a33232c1f1fa645e85c38a3113`), preserving the four explicit custom-CEO-bundle checks, minimal generic manual boundary, and both suites. The combined fixture catalog and hiring calibrations pass 67 assertions; exact-head stock prerequisites pass 599 assertions (598 TypeScript + 1 Rust), all six gates and retained-receipt verification, zero providers/source errors, fingerprint `a7f5a22d860a88fe20cce213c6d5e0004788f32c8363930729aea4fd740ad16d`. E2E typecheck and 26-cell stock discovery pass. Fresh current-head CI passes all 52 checks with two intentional skips, and fresh Greptile is 5/5 with zero unresolved review threads. The prior source-plan browser failure is retained: a deterministic process fixture replayed its last `fixture:plan` command on `chat_task_completed`, writing revision 2 with identical body after the approval handoff. This was not paid provider execution. Rebased current-head CI passes the same assertion without an old-head retry or a change to that browser fixture. The merged hiring change was measured separately on immutable matched unions, with this reduced/shared/operational context and native completion guidance held constant. [Complete original two-profile report](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/f0512647656be78e48abd8c22a3078db8bf6bcd2/doc/plans/2026-10-02-hiring-template-live-comparison.md): [candidate](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37075466208) / [historical baseline](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37075469463), 705 provider-free prerequisites each. Both pairs are unchanged Fail → Fail on the exact-five count, with six core delivery checks passing all four cells; 28 actual successful runs include eight automatic completion wakes, zero retries, four successful cleanups. Source-read coverage is uncomparable, actual model charges unknown. Separately versioned provider-free accounting remains analytical work; original verdicts are preserved. This does not rerun or qualify the completed default-manual or native campaigns. ## Risks - Legacy ACP Claude's additional delivery loss is not closed by any later matched run and blocks the no-extra-failing-behavior merge criterion. Legacy document delivery may have relied on the prior manual/shared prompts. The early skill repair improves Claude in one trial; the later OpenCode pairs pass in both variants and cannot establish causality or robust recovery. Both original-case links remain deficient beneath the storage-only grade. The later issue-derived reference correction has only provider-free validation. Native finish/block descriptions must not be supplied to legacy agents. - The comparison holds merged native Codex fix #14920 constant; it cannot measure that fix's before/after task performance. - These bounded skill/context/chat workflows do not measure general coding quality. Unrepresented providers remain unqualified. - Saved manuals and old Codex sessions are not automatically migrated. Codex through ACP still has a separate base-instruction follow-up. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family as identified by this session. The exact deployment ID and context-window size are not exposed. The assistant used reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and delegated PR/eval work. ## 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 (relevant suites and all three unchanged narrow reruns pass; complete-run timing failures retained in Verification) - [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 on the new repair head (prior-head checks retained above) - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups on the new repair head - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1003.0-canary.8 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
569c7203aa |
fix(ui): use latest issue runtime callbacks (#14863)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and their work. > - The issue page uses an external-store adapter for comments. > - The adapter must keep one identity during an unrelated render. > - The adapter must also call the newest send and cancel functions. > - Passive effects update those functions too late for a synchronous runtime call. > - This pull request updates the function refs during render and adds a regression test. > - The benefit is a stable comment thread with no stale comment action. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #3678 **What happened?** The issue comment runtime can call the prior send function after a render. The callback refs do not update until passive effects run. **Expected behavior** The stable runtime adapter must call the newest function as soon as the render supplies it. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Render the issue runtime with one send function. 2. Render it again with a new send function and the same thread data. 3. Call the stable adapter before passive effects run. 4. Observe that the prior send function runs. **Paperclip version or commit** `6395cae072` **Deployment mode** Local development from source. **Agent adapter(s) involved** This is a core UI bug. It is not adapter-specific. ## What Changed - Update the latest send and cancel refs during render. - Keep the external-store adapter stable across callback-only renders. - Add a test for a runtime callback before passive effects run. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/hooks/usePaperclipIssueRuntime.test.tsx` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `pnpm check:token-gates` - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm test:run` - `pnpm build` ## Risks - Low risk. The change only updates two refs earlier in the same render. - The adapter identity and its data dependencies do not change. > This bug fix does not add or overlap with a roadmap feature. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex with GPT-5. The exact deployed model ID and context window are not exposed. Reasoning, tool use, and local code execution were enabled. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1003.0-canary.7 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
78e0034498 |
fix(evals): account for hiring completion notifications (#15007)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Product E2E evals check real hiring and delegated task completion. > - The hiring fixture requires three requested CEO turns and two coder executions. > - The server can also wake the CEO when each delegated task completes. > - Two exact-five-run guards rejected these valid completion turns in all four retained cells. > - This pull request validates bounded completion turns in both guards. > - The benefit is accurate workflow grading while all actual runs and coverage failures remain visible. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #14985, #14948, #14961. **What happened?** The original hiring comparison reports Codex Fail → Fail and Claude Fail → Fail. Each cell has seven successful runs. The five requested work turns are accompanied by two server task-completion notifications. All six other delivery checks pass. **Expected behavior** Require exactly three distinct user-requested CEO turns and one coder execution for each of two known tasks. Admit at most two strictly attributed server completion turns, including one turn that batches both tasks. Reject unknown, duplicate, failed, retried or extra-work runs. **Steps to reproduce** Inspect the retained four-cell report linked below. Each original result fails `five-successful-turns`. The same exact count was also enforced by the final chat-flow guard. ## What Changed - Add one typed lifecycle helper shared by the hiring scorer and the hiring-only final chat guard. - Validate public run ledgers, company/user/account identity, request attribution, task origins, completion deliveries, timing and replies. - Keep exactly five required work turns; declare seven maximum total turns for cost and timeout planning. - Count all actual runs, including notification runs and unexpected resets. Keep other chat count guards unchanged. - Version the hiring grader as v3 (turn accounting v2) and include the helper and chat guard in its definition digest. - Keep source-read, exact coder-body and all six other delivery checks unchanged. - Add 144 focused helper/scorer/settlement calibrations and separately versioned exact retained-input replay reports. - Retry complete bracketed observations, await both owed callbacks and attributed replies, and refresh the final guard consistently. - Reject unrelated completion writes and failed mutation attempts using exact canonical/native action IDs. Missing identity mapping is uncomparable action coverage. ## Verification - All 977 credential-free E2E support tests pass across 64 files, including 144 focused lifecycle/action/scorer/settlement calibrations. - E2E typecheck, ordinary plugin SDK and Runner TypeScript dependency builds, capability contract/inventory checks and the existing two-cell hiring discovery pass. - [Executable replay report](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/fed1729018cc100f5f4bbfb692777e49009c423b/doc/plans/2026-10-02-hiring-executable-accounting-replay.md) pins current code revision `e4077ade1818d98b9862ae79ee1d49a007dcf9c1`, v3 definition digest, exact source/input hashes and each original/new check. - The stricter replay verifies both Codex variants through both executable guards. ACPX Claude action attribution remains unresolved/uncomparable because provider execution IDs cannot be exactly joined to native request IDs; guards fail closed. No notification writes are observed. All six other outcomes and every original source/template coverage check stay unchanged. Original files and Fail → Fail machine verdicts remain preserved; zero providers are called. - Full attempts remain uncomparable in both profiles. Historical Claude also keeps its six-backtick exact-template mismatch. This grading repair does not prove model-performance equivalence. - The limited sidecar-v1 and initial executable-v2 passes checked notification-created tasks but could miss unrelated document writes. Those assessments remain preserved and do not prove harmless notifications. The stricter v3 replay is separate. - [Original measurement and separate sidecar](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/8eb517ca1497687237163bdef4dfc4d3332ea916/doc/plans/2026-10-02-hiring-template-live-comparison.md) retain 28 actual runs, eight automatic notifications, four successful cleanups and unknown actual model charges. No models are rerun. - The branch is replayed on master `59c07ede7`. Intervening master changes are UI-only; eval source bytes and replay verdicts match. The four-cell provider-free replay was repeated against the reachable code revision. - Initial-head normal CI retained browser failures in agent-run denial feedback and touch-picker scroll position. Those browser paths and imports were unchanged, but their cause was not established. The necessary review-fix head passes both browser checks; no blind rerun was requested. - Local full repository typecheck/test/build were not repeated. Exact-head normal CI passes the required repository gates, including typecheck, tests, build and browser shards. Fresh Greptile review completed on `fed1729018cc100f5f4bbfb692777e49009c423b` with 5/5 and zero unresolved threads. An independent rerun of the 144 focused helper/scorer/settlement tests passes on the unchanged head. **Merge readiness:** This PR repairs the evaluator. Its positive and negative calibrations pass, both guards reject missing action attribution, current-head CI and review pass, and there are no merge conflicts. The retained ACPX cells remain uncomparable because their action IDs cannot be joined. That coverage limit remains a separate follow-up; it does not require relaxing this grader or changing the old results. No model calls, production instructions, carrier changes, or historical regrades are part of this readiness update. ## Risks - Missing or inconsistent public lifecycle evidence fails the bounded helper. The focused calibrations reject plausible false positives and malformed observations. Unmatched action IDs fail closed and are reported as uncomparable rather than a model task regression. - Source-read evidence remains incomplete. This PR does not change provider event carriers or relax the coverage oracle. - The versioned count check differs from original v1 results. Reports retain both versions and exact input hashes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family as identified by this session. The exact deployment ID and context-window size are not exposed. The assistant used reasoning, repository tools, code execution and delegated calibration work. ## 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 normal CI gates are green (exact head `fed1729018cc100f5f4bbfb692777e49009c423b`; fresh review tracked separately below) - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups (completed exact-head review; zero unresolved threads) - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
dd868ed125 |
fix(runner): share native completion tool guidance (#14961)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Native Runner agents report completion through finish and block tools. > - The providers receive different descriptions for those tools. > - Completion guidance belongs with the tools that enforce the result. > - This pull request shares the descriptions and refreshes retained catalogs. > - A separate native suite checks completion and blocking on production defaults. > - Legacy agents retain their separate skill and API paths. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #14920, #14948, #14985. **Current behavior** Native Codex and MCP bridges describe finish and block differently. Retained provider sessions can keep old descriptions. **Proposed behavior** Native providers receive the same finish and block descriptions. The descriptions cover report selection, validation feedback, returned outcomes, approval gates and final-answer timing. Retained native sessions refresh from v13 to v14. **Reason and benefit** Put the completion procedure next to its native tool. Preserve stock base instructions, schemas, permissions and terminal semantics. This PR now stands alone on master. It contains no reduced manual, shared prompt or operational-skill changes from #14948. ## What Changed - Add canonical native finish and block descriptions. Use them in direct Codex and both native MCP bridges. - Advance the native tool contract to v14. Cover old-v13 refresh without replacing task identity or prior history. - Check authenticated tool catalogs, provider start/resume frames and serialized daemon catalogs. - Add an independent, explicit-only native completion suite. Preserve the original assigned-skill durable-document journey. Pair it with a concrete whole-task blocker across Codex, ACPX Claude and OpenCode. - Verify the actual public production default bundle and budgets before execution. Require independent durable disposition, native result/terminal receipts and observable provider-final ordering. - Correct the blocker browser oracle to accept the requested explanation. Keep exact owner/action/scope checks. Calibrate positive, missing and contradictory replies. - Preserve only actual `tool_call` terminal names (`paperclip_finish` / `paperclip_block`) in the native compatibility run-log projection. Require the same named call ID through its finishing result; retain all other redaction boundaries. - Admit verified hosted shallow checkout/build hydration and bind the selected runnerd to exact source/archive/binary provenance. Hosted cells truthfully reuse the existing trusted build; local admission executes Rust calibration. Forward only public source/run identifiers through both launcher preflight subprocess paths. - Enforce single attempts in the launcher for opted-in fixtures. Keep ordinary retry policy unchanged. Run exact-source, credential-free admission before credential loading. ## Verification - Frozen candidate: `d6e59e4712a3158ab4cd7d58deff1389b4578c21`, based on master `59c07ede72dc08b8aba149a01cc11e0b7a204621`; historical descriptions: `e74ed61a69fbdd8b3a8f15dd6456bc3140246e33`. Exactly the five original native production files and six unit tests differ. Both carry identical corrected fixtures, strict named finishing-call grader, closed compatibility carrier and admission. Defaults, profiles/models/auth/permissions and manifest bytes match. - Actual launcher `prepareNativeCompletionPreflight` → `verifyNativeCompletionPreflight` admission passes on both exact refs with zero providers: candidate 132 / historical 127 selected TypeScript assertions, 128 Node calibrations and one Rust normalization calibration each; E2E typecheck, manifest checks, selected binary provenance and six-cell discovery pass. Each has 257 explicitly skipped unrelated assertions, not coverage. The credential-free environment calibration exercises both real prepare/verify subprocess options with public hosted identifiers and rejects credential/ambient overrides. Complete actual launcher prepare→verify also passes on both frozen refs with explicitly synthetic hosted metadata/verified archives, separately labeled as calibration rather than a trusted GitHub run. Exact framed provenance parsing and mock source identity are calibrated without relaxing the real verifier. - [Complete matched qualification report](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/532066620b88e8731a5211fbe1cbc48ce8c7dd1a/doc/plans/2026-10-02-native-completion-master-qualification.md), [immutable manifest](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/532066620b88e8731a5211fbe1cbc48ce8c7dd1a/doc/plans/2026-10-02-native-completion-calibrated-manifest.json) and [closed retained audit/hashes](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/532066620b88e8731a5211fbe1cbc48ce8c7dd1a/doc/plans/2026-10-02-native-completion-calibrated-results/comparison.json) are inspectable. All six candidate cells pass; historical descriptions pass five. Paired outcomes: **zero new failures, one new pass (Codex blocker), five unchanged passes, zero pending pairs**. [Candidate campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37098728980) and [historical campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37098815696) each execute six original attempt-1 native runs, with no campaign retry and successful cleanup. Their trusted workflow revision is `215586d127e97c9301d86e769a39a15c13298ca2`, separate from measured source. [Candidate public HTML](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-37098728980-1/index.html) and [historical public HTML](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-37098815696-1/index.html) retain declared screenshots. - Independent candidate evidence agrees with all original grades: 51 strict native checks, 12 served-default/budget checks and 21 original skill/document checks pass. The historical Codex blocker saves the correct whole-task blocker but omits the required marker from its actual provider final and identical saved reply. This is not semantic-summary fallback. Its original browser/matcher failure stays retained; the additional native snapshot/grade and workspace before/after digest were never written and are not fabricated by the separate API/PRP audit. Historical Codex completion has one failed finish followed by success within the same native run; the public receipt records no failure reason. All twelve runs and their usage remain counted. Reported model-cost subtotals are $0.00421482 historical/$0.00437391 candidate; Codex/Claude zero entries have unknown billing type, actual invoices are unverified and hosted execution cost is unmetered. One matched trial supports no extra failure within these six cases, not broad statistical or coding-quality equivalence. - Initial hosted `e18c2cf9` / `459455ac` and subsequent `0a9c5a7` / `00a761b` cohorts each stopped before providers in all twelve cells. The latter failed a mocked-receipt unit test under ambient hosted metadata; all source/build proofs passed. [All twelve later setup receipts](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/402ee94c52273ad58de355ae9a7d562dd22f8101/doc/plans/2026-10-02-native-completion-qualified-hosted-setup.json) are retained. [Exact failed setup receipts](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/27653eb1a8f8ce839776d760f4563f672e5a706c/doc/plans/2026-10-02-native-completion-master-hosted-setup.json) and the original manifest remain intact. Local sandbox-denied loopback and stale anchor-expectation attempts are retained separately; unchanged appropriate assertions were corrected/admitted before paid dispatch. Old anonymous OpenCode streams are not assigned inferred tool names or retroactively passed. - Full provider-free E2E support previously passed 927 tests in 67 files. Exact-head d6 normal CI run `37098409915`, attempt 1 passes full repository typecheck/build/tests, Runner Rust/static checks, all browser shards/aggregate and canary: 52 check-runs pass, four intentional skips, Snyk passes. Fresh Greptile check `111132956342` is 5/5 with zero unresolved threads. Source-specific deterministic tests do not substitute for the bounded live comparison. - Earlier native source `9138f570c341c251a5727c32d6615ce238bc8e03` is archived. Its [complete reduced-manual-context report](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/9138f570c341c251a5727c32d6615ce238bc8e03/doc/plans/2026-10-02-native-completion-live-comparison.md) remains intact, including original failures, grader limits and provider-free replay. It is not current-master-context qualification. ## Risks Changed tool text can change model behavior. The completed six-pair qualification shows no extra failing outcomes in this bounded trial; other tasks and repeated-run variance remain unmeasured. Observable final ordering does not prove provider feedback consumption. Public evidence can fail closed if a provider does not expose the required result sequence. This slice does not remove native fixed prompts or measure general coding quality. No database, schema, permission or legacy completion changes occur. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with code inspection, execution and tool use. The exact deployment ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. They are unavailable rather than inferred from the model menu. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>canary/v2026.1003.0-canary.6 |