PaperClipAI

0 Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git synced 2026-10-19 20:44:16 +02:00

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Devin FoleyandPaperclip	0b62c736a0	feat(connections): add generic Daytona API and Toolbox access (#16483 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Apps connections give agents controlled access to external services. > - Daytona provides sandbox, file, command, Git, and account APIs. > - Operators need to assign this access without exposing a server credential. > - A small task-specific tool list cannot serve general Daytona work. > - This pull request adds the published HTTP actions through the existing connection gateway. > - Operators keep control of identity, agent access, and each action. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Problem or motivation Paperclip has a Daytona sandbox provider for its own execution infrastructure. It lacks a normal Apps connection for agents to manage an operator's Daytona account. Reusing the server's provider credential would bypass normal connection ownership and action permissions. Proposed solution Add a Daytona connection with personal or shared vault credentials. Generate its action catalog from the official platform and Toolbox API specifications. Use the existing run-bound gateway, grants, action policies, approvals, revocation, and audit paths. Sandbox IDs come from Daytona; tools need no Paperclip task or lease ID. Alternatives considered A four-action diagnostic subset cannot support general provider work. Launching the provider CLI would expose host filesystem behavior. Native OAuth is not included because a supported third-party registration path was not verified. The native method uses an organization API key. Existing Composio setup is a separate possible OAuth route and is not qualified by this change. Roadmap alignment This extends the existing Apps and Connections provider coverage in `ROADMAP.md`. It uses that system's credential and permission model. GitHub searches found no existing Daytona Apps connector PR or issue. ## What Changed - Add the Daytona catalog entry, provider source override, official theme logos, permission review, and setup documentation. - Generate 274 HTTP actions: 169 platform and 105 Toolbox operations. Record two WebSocket upgrades separately; do not advertise them as HTTP tools. Record source URLs and hashes. - Add provider-focused execution for sandboxes, snapshots, volumes, files, Git, commands, computer use, and account resources. Provider authority still limits which endpoints accept an organization key. - Validate action arguments. Resolve Toolbox targets through the fixed platform API. Check sandbox identity and organization before using an approved Daytona proxy. Keep normal guarded network requests and vault resolution. - Transfer file bytes without reading or writing host files. Share one caller deadline across prerequisite reads, dispatch, and response reading. Bound requests and responses. Do not automatically retry writes with unknown outcomes. Redact the selected credential from results and errors. - Classify credential access, access changes, interactive input, command execution, file permissions, and deletion (including TTL and auto-delete) as destructive actions. Keep new and changed actions under catalog review. - Upgrade saved catalogs and retire the earlier diagnostic names. Hide retired actions from the UI and agent discovery even when provider refresh fails. Preserve existing action choices and historical records. Reject stale same-name contracts during agent discovery and dispatch before a board refresh. - Add database-backed gateway and catalog-upgrade regressions, schema generator tests, a browser setup check, and both capability map updates. ## Verification - Passed on the review-fix head: 57 focused Vitest cases (18 Daytona database/client cases, five HTTP boundary cases, and 34 shared catalog cases), four generator tests, `pnpm -r typecheck`, and `pnpm build`. The five HTTP cases use a real local server through the pinned production transport. The normal browser setup check and 17 generator/artwork cases passed on the initial PR head; those UI and artwork paths are unchanged. - Passed on this branch: brand asset validation, token gates, map structure checks, and `git diff --check`. All latest-head GitHub checks pass on `ea979ccb3a64dc9508807823540f935c4316ea35`. Apex is 5/5, with all five findings addressed and zero unresolved threads. The branch has no merge conflicts. - The initial catalog-generation command could not find the external research corpus. The supported `--definitions-only` mode regenerated the definitions successfully. Unrelated generated drift was excluded. - An earlier full local Vitest attempt on the preview branch failed when bundled PostgreSQL could not start on macOS. After replay onto current master, all three unchanged event-sequencing cases pass with bundled PostgreSQL; the earlier startup cause remains uncertain. - The first full-suite command on this branch used my external test database override. Chat fixtures require a current migrated schema and failed because `agents.lifecycle_state` was absent in that disposable database. A focused comparison reproduces failure with the override and passes with normal setup. That attempt was stopped, and the full suite restarted without the override. Focused Daytona cases use their own migrated PostgreSQL 16 databases. - The clean local full-suite attempt recorded embedded PostgreSQL startup failures in two unchanged native-runtime cases and two failures in unchanged Git fixtures. It was stopped after these failures were isolated; no full local suite pass is claimed. The 15 matching native-runtime cases pass separately. The Git cases fail with the local `init.defaultBranch=main` setting and pass with `GIT_CONFIG_COUNT=1 GIT_CONFIG_KEY_0=init.defaultBranch GIT_CONFIG_VALUE_0=master` limited to the test command. No global Git setting was changed. Full Linux CI is green. - Fixtures use real database persistence and run-bound gateway sessions with provider responses replaced by fixtures. They cover personal/shared vault ownership, reads and writes, file bytes, Off policies, revocation, organization mismatch, untrusted proxy rejection, output bounds, saved catalog upgrades, failed refresh, and permission preservation. - The first Apex review found five valid issues: multipart transport compatibility, destructive classification, caller deadlines, audit filters, and stale saved contracts. All five were fixed with regressions before the second review. A typecheck then found the nullable saved schema hash; admission now accepts that stored type and rejects null as stale. - The browser check covers setup controls without submitting a provider key. No real Daytona account, provider write, native OAuth flow, or agent model run is qualified. Live provider read/write proof remains pending a test account. ## Risks - Daytona keys have broad Toolbox authority, including keys with no selected resource scopes. Only assign this connection to trusted agents and review its action permissions. - Remote writes or commands can continue after a timeout. Calls do not automatically retry an uncertain outcome. - The bridge targets Daytona Cloud. Proxy hosts are restricted; an unrecognized future regional host fails closed. - Files and responses have an 8 MiB bound. Each action has one caller deadline, capped at 30 seconds across all provider requests and response reading. Interactive WebSocket sessions are not exposed as HTTP actions. - The generated JSON snapshot exceeds 1,000 lines because it holds the provider input contracts. Generator logic and execution code remain in separate small modules. Updates require explicit regeneration and catalog review. - No database migration or lockfile change is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The runtime identifies the model family but does not expose the exact backend model ID or context window. Used reasoning, repository inspection, code editing, shell tools, database verification, and browser tests. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-15 14:05:26 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	676d3ec8d4	perf(ci): reuse package downloads and overlap runtime checks (#16474 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip contributors wait for CI before delivering changes. > - Build still finishes last after #16460. > - CI already downloads the public npm graph while the build runs. > - Bundled-package preparation ignores that cache and downloads the same archives again. > - Reuse the existing cache and overlap independent runtime checks while preserving fresh installs, integrity, offline lifecycle and admission verification. > - Measure staging and the full workflow separately. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16460 and #16434. This is a focused follow-up to merged #16460, now based directly on master. Current behavior: The Build workflow warms `PAPERCLIP_PUBLIC_INSTALL_NPM_CACHE`, but `startBundledInstalls` inherits the host's default npm cache. Server staging took 31.17 seconds in the latest passing run, before packing and the clean consumer install. Proposed behavior: Pass the verifier environment, including the explicitly configured warm cache, to the three existing staging children. Without an explicit shared cache, keep the usual producer npm configuration. Alternatives considered: Copying an installed dependency tree would bypass normal fresh installation. Adding jobs would add setup cost. This change reuses only npm's integrity-checked download cache. It does not remove coverage or change product behavior and does not overlap a roadmap feature. Open PR title search found no equivalent cache wiring change. ## What Changed - Initialize the existing consumer cache before package staging and expose it to producer npm only when explicitly configured. - Pass that environment to the existing bundled-install children. - Extend the child orchestration check to verify cache propagation and document the cache boundary. - Start Pi setup after the offline lifecycle, in its own download sandbox, while Codex and Grok probes run in separate offline sandboxes. Join successful Pi setup before lock verification and Pi admission. Name and clean up only the verifier-owned setup container. ## Verification - 33 focused public-install, closure and child-orchestration tests pass on Node 24.21.0. - A real server dependency staging experiment used `prepare-bundled-package.mjs`, its actual manifests, provider overrides and release patches. Built application payloads were omitted from this dependency-only measurement. - Cold cache: 16.139s. After the actual CI warm-up script: 6.980s. A fully warm producer cache took 6.127s. These are local sequential measurements, not a CI wall-clock claim; filesystem warmth and registry timing vary. - All 28,329 files/links, including both lockfiles, were byte-identical between the cold output and the actual-workflow-warm output. - The warm-up itself took 49.631s; CI already runs it during Rust restore/build. This change adds no warm-up operation. - First follow-up run [passed all 48 jobs](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38791277425), and Greptile gave the cache-only head 5/5. Server staging fell 31.172s → 17.565s and total staging 70.169s → 54.869s. But complete CI was 8m20s, slower than the parent's 8m04s; longer Codex/Pi probe times outweighed that saving. This is not a full-run speed improvement claim. - The next revision overlaps the independent probes instead of serializing Pi setup behind them. All 46 focused sandbox, staging, closure and process-supervision tests pass, including failed background children, parent exit and cancellation. Pre-retarget head `590873a44` passes all 48 jobs and Greptile 5/5 with no review findings. After #16460 merged, head `fe4f8d38e` incorporates master and retargets this PR directly to master. Its diff remains only four optimization/documentation/test files; 46 focused checks pass again. Fresh full CI and review are pending. The unchanged parent conflict-resolution run passed all 48 jobs in 8m04s: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38789785045. Final paired runs against the same updated master, both on `m7i-flex.xlarge`: \| Measurement \| Parent #16460 \| This PR \| \| --- \| ---: \| ---: \| \| Bundled server staging \| 22.220s \| 14.202s \| \| All package staging \| 61.277s \| 48.304s \| \| Clean consumer install \| 67.617s \| 73.490s \| \| Pi setup remaining wait \| 25.428s (serial setup) \| 20.719s \| \| Build job \| 385s \| 368s \| \| Build start after workflow creation \| 23s \| 136s \| \| Entire workflow, including admission and aggregates \| 452s (7m32s) \| 552s (9m12s) \| [Parent run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38792983313), [final run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38792986392). Build execution improved by 17s (4.4%) in this pair. The total workflow did not improve: it waited 113 seconds longer to start Build, and other lanes/aggregates also contribute. The overlapping setup ran for 25.667s while Codex/Grok took 4.946s, leaving 20.719s to wait. Actual installed Codex, Grok and Pi checks all passed with zero provider calls. These are individual samples with filesystem/network/CPU variance, not a claimed steady-state average. The earlier slower cache-only run is retained above. No tests were removed and no jobs were added. ## Risks Shared-cache contention can reduce the benefit if warm-up is still running. npm handles concurrent content-addressed cache writers and checks integrity; misses still download normally. Two runtime containers can now overlap and contend for host resources; the full CI run measures that tradeoff. They retain separate network policies and per-container bounds. Pi writes only its provider assets and a private receipt; the other probes inspect Codex/Grok. No installed tree, lock, test result or build output is reused. The consumer still starts empty and performs the full lifecycle and runtime checks. Normal unconfigured producer cache behavior is preserved. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository inspection, execution and GitHub tools. The serving model suffix and context capacity are not exposed to this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either linked existing issues or described the issue in this PR - [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no private ticket identifier - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation - [x] I have considered and documented the risks - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green (prior head passed; rerunning after master merge) - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations or follow-ups (prior head 5/5; current head pending) - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-15 15:16:52 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	307eb16c0c	perf(ci): avoid duplicate extraction in public install checks (#16460 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents for work. > - Contributors wait for CI before they can deliver changes. > - After #16434, Build is the longest CI job. > - Its clean public npm install spends about 90 seconds installing packed artifacts. > - npm extracts local archives to read metadata before it installs them. > - Serve metadata from those same packed artifacts, then let normal npm verify and install their bytes once. > - Preserve the offline lifecycle and runtime checks, and measure the complete workflow. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16434 and #16429. Current behavior: The Linux Build check installs every staged package by local tarball path. npm's file fetcher extracts an archive to obtain its manifest. Installation then extracts it again. In the last green run, Build took 408 seconds; consumer installation took 89.7 seconds. The full workflow took 8m06s. Proposed behavior: Read manifests directly from the packed archives. Serve those manifests and their SHA-512-bound tarballs from a temporary registry on container loopback. Use normal npm installation into the empty consumer. Other packages still resolve from the public npm registry. Alternatives: More parallel jobs would add setup and transfer work. Skipping the install or runtime probes would remove useful coverage. This change removes duplicate extraction instead. It does not add a product feature or duplicate a roadmap item. ## What Changed - Build a registry catalog from the actual tarball manifests and archive hashes. - Run the short-lived registry and npm in the existing unprivileged download container. No host port is exposed. - Preserve public dependency tarball URLs, archive integrity checks, disabled initial lifecycle scripts, the offline rebuild, lock checks and all Codex, Grok and Pi probes. - Close the registry before offline verification. Keep native ARM and Mac install qualification unchanged. - Add real npm parity and failure tests. Record metadata preparation time in the existing timing receipt. - Fix an existing policy false positive: the filename `docker-compose-secrets.test.mjs` is not a workflow credential. Inspect GitHub expressions and retain rejection of Honeycomb keys, dot/bracket secret reads and `toJSON(secrets)`. ## Verification - 31 focused install-contract checks pass on Node 24.21.0. All 16 targeted CI profile-policy tests also pass. - Real npm file and registry installs produce identical installed files, bundled dependencies, optional dependencies and executable links. Both defer lifecycle execution; offline rebuild works after the registry closes and preserves the lock. - npm rejects an archive whose gzip header changes while its extracted payload remains valid. The CLI propagates the failure. - The permanent real-npm parity test now includes non-catalog `is-number@7.0.0`. Both paths install it from its official npmjs tarball, and the test asserts the lock URL. Fetches have a 10-second bound and no retries. This addresses the first Greptile finding. A separate live probe also confirmed public provenance. - The first local run hit the host sandbox's loopback `EPERM`; the same checks passed with local listener access. An initial corrupted-gzip negative fixture hit decompression failure before integrity verification; the final fixture preserves valid gzip and specifically proves integrity rejection. An old command-shape assertion was updated for the new entry point without removing its ordering checks. - The [first CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38778371043) passed all test lanes and Build, but the existing credential-guard false positive failed policy and both aggregates. Its 7m25s full duration is not counted as a passing performance sample. The guard repair and public-download regression are on the new head. - The real Linux install passed all 18 packed packages, the lifecycle sentinel, offline rebuild, unchanged lock, official Codex payload/lease checks, Grok missing/present checks and Pi admission. The receipt confirms `artifactTransport: loopback-registry`. No provider calls ran. - Compared with the previous green run, consumer install fell 89.72s → 66.29s (26.1%), including 1.87s to prepare metadata. Build fell 408s → 374s. Both Build hosts were `m7i-flex.xlarge`; these are separate runs, so registry/cache and upstream changes remain confounders. - The base advanced since the previous 8m06s run, including runtime and test changes. Treat that duration as historical context, not an identical-source control. - Pre-conflict head `d8f9de1c` [passes all 48 workflow jobs](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38779549190), including both required branch-protection checks. Greptile is 5/5 on this head; its review thread is resolved. The non-required Superagent Security Scan is still running. \| Measurement \| Previous green run \| Final green run \| Observed change \| \| --- \| ---: \| ---: \| ---: \| \| Full CI, workflow creation through final aggregate \| 8m06s \| 7m35s \| 31s shorter (6.4%) \| \| Build job execution \| 408s \| 389s \| 19s shorter \| \| Clean consumer install, including catalog preparation \| 89.72s \| 69.69s \| 20.03s less (22.3%) \| The final catalog preparation took 1.87s and is included in the install figure. Both Build hosts were `m7i-flex.xlarge`. Build began 42 seconds after workflow creation instead of 53 seconds in the historical run, so faster queue/setup admission explains part of the 31-second total. Upstream code also advanced; these measurements are not a controlled causal estimate of the complete gain. The two candidate install measurements (66.29s and 69.69s) support the narrower reduction in install work. No tests or runtime probes were removed. - Conflict-resolution head `ea8287b81` [passes all 48 workflow jobs](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38789785045), including both required gates. Greptile re-reviewed this exact head at 5/5, with the sole earlier thread resolved. The conflict was the independent filename-policy fix; the stronger expression guard is retained. This run took 8m04s overall, Build 423s, consumer installation 80.56s and bundled-server staging 31.17s. This confirms meaningful run variance: the earlier 7m35s is a sample, not a guaranteed new wall-clock duration. - A second independent master update touched the same credential test. Final head `1c740b73e` resolves that conflict while retaining the same stronger guard. [All 48 jobs pass](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38792983313); Greptile re-reviewed this exact head at 5/5. This run took 7m32s overall, Build 385s, consumer install 67.62s. Auto-merge is enabled but GitHub requires code-owner approval. ## Risks The initial install now uses registry package specs instead of file specs. The parity test checks the resulting installed bytes. Full CI must still exercise real bundled provider graphs and all offline probes. The temporary consumer lock contains loopback artifact URLs; it is not exported or reused for another installation. Native release consumers retain their existing artifact install path. Queue, host and cache variance limit attribution from separate workflow runs. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository inspection, execution and GitHub tools. The serving model suffix and context capacity are not exposed to this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either linked existing issues or described the issue in this PR - [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no private ticket identifier - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation - [x] I have considered and documented the risks - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green (48 jobs and both required gates on conflict-resolution 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>	2026-10-15 14:52:15 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip	341cfbcea8	fix(docker): remap the node user without walking the app home (#16475 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The container image sets the node user's home to the app home, `/paperclip`, which is the data volume in container deployments > - When `USER_UID`/`USER_GID` differ from the image, the entrypoint runs `usermod -u` and `usermod -g` before the app starts > - `usermod` also re-owns every file under the user's home, so every boot walks the whole data volume first > - On a large volume this delayed each boot by about six minutes, and platforms that stop the old container before starting the new one serve errors for that whole time > - This pull request runs the remap while the home points at a path that does not exist, then restores it > - The benefit is that a UID/GID remap takes milliseconds, and deploys no longer wait for a full volume walk ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #15992 (skips the full-tree ownership probe on routine boots) and #10530 (ownership before the privilege drop). This removes the remaining per-boot full-tree walk. What happened? A deployment sets `USER_UID=1001`/`USER_GID=1001` on an image built with the default 1000. Every boot logs `Updating node UID to 1001`, and the next log line (`Updating node GID to 1001`) appeared six minutes later. During that time the app was not running. The volume holds many agent worktrees and dependency trees. No file had the old owner, so the walk changed nothing. Expected behavior Remapping the node account should not depend on the size of the data volume. Ownership repair belongs to the existing tiered ownership probe, which records a marker and skips the full walk on routine boots. Steps to reproduce 1. Build the image with the default `USER_UID=1000`. 2. Run it as root with `USER_UID=1001`, `USER_GID=1001` and a large app home. 3. Every boot spends the time of a full home walk in `usermod -o -u` before the app starts. Measured in the runtime image (Debian trixie) with 200,000 files under a user's home: `usermod -u` took 1,204 ms and re-owned every file. With the home moved away first, the three `usermod` calls took 124 ms and changed no file. ## What Changed - `scripts/docker-entrypoint.sh`: when a UID or GID remap is needed, read the node user's home with `getent passwd node` and point it at `/nonexistent/paperclip-uid-remap`. Then run the same UID and GID commands as before, and restore the home. Without a passwd entry, the remap runs as before. The ownership probe and repair logic are unchanged. After a real ID change, the home directory has the old owner, so the shallow probe detects the mismatch on the same boot and repairs the tree once. - `server/src/__tests__/docker-entrypoint.test.ts`: stubs `getent` and adds tests for the call order (UID+GID remap, GID-only remap), for repair after the remap, and for the fallback without a passwd entry. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run src/__tests__/docker-entrypoint.test.ts` (in `server/`): 22 passed. - `sh -n scripts/docker-entrypoint.sh`: passed. - Manual check in the runtime image with a throwaway user and 200,000 files (numbers above). The UID changed, file owners were not touched, and the passwd home was restored. ## Risks - `usermod -d` without `-m` only edits the passwd entry. The home is restored right after the ID change. If the entrypoint fails between the two calls, `set -e` stops the container before the privilege drop, and the next boot sets the home again, so a partial state does not persist past a restart. - Ownership after a real remap now depends on the existing probe instead of `usermod`. The probe's tests already cover the remap, fresh-mount, deep-mismatch and marker cases. ## Model Used - Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), 1M context, through Claude Code with tool use (shell, file edits, test runs, live measurement in a running container). ## 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 - [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-15 12:45:33 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	68a09dcb5f	perf(ci): shorten the test execution critical path (#16434 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Contributors wait for the full PR workflow before they can deliver fixes. > - Server shards still execute independent files in series, and a single Runner file serializes two long real-clock waits. > - Faster work outside the critical path does not prove a faster workflow. > - Overlap independent files while preserving isolation, test cases and real production deadlines. > - Compare complete baseline and candidate workflows, separating queue delay from execution cost. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16429. Related duration refresh: #12577. What existing behavior does this improve? The elapsed time from PR CI creation to the last required check. Current behavior General server shards use one worker. One Runner transport file takes about 333 seconds on Linux, including over 100 seconds in two real-clock regressions. These are the longest verification lanes after #16429. Proposed behavior Run independent general-server files in at most two isolated forks. Move the two intact Runner deadline regressions into a separate file to overlap their waits in the existing pool. Run two chat partitions per existing job, each with its own temporary home and embedded PostgreSQL. Preserve serial execution within files and every assertion and timing boundary. ## What Changed - Qualify both serial and parallel forks with real worker processes, isolated homes/configuration, timers, globals and environment. - Require both parallel workers to arrive before either exits. - Use two isolated forks for sharded general-server tests; retain one worker with an explicit shared test database. Other test groups keep their existing concurrency. - Extract the lease-expiry and Pi cold-admission regressions verbatim into a separate Runner test file; retain real waits and process/lease assertions. - Split each sharded chat job into two independent invocations; preserve serial shared-database execution. Await both children before failing the parent. Prove disjoint coverage and failure propagation. - Update the paired Linux benchmark to compare a complete general-server shard with identical case inventories. - Document concurrency and deadline-test placement. No production behavior, workflow topology or runner count changes. - Allow 15 seconds for snapshot integration cases that cold-start multiple real TypeScript workers. On the repeat, one-worker cases took 2.5–3 seconds, so queued or sequential starts could exceed the default five seconds. Preserve all cleanup, queue-release and filesystem assertions; these cases do not enforce a production latency deadline. ## Verification All 48 jobs passed on scheduling head `5d718e18` in [attempt 1](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38763885288/attempts/1). The [bounded repeat](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38763885288/attempts/2) failed two existing snapshot-worker tests at their default five-second timeout. Its shorter duration is not counted as a successful performance sample. The latest head `3c894462` adds a targeted test-budget repair and [passes all 48 CI jobs](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38768433532) in 8m06s (workflow creation to final required workflow job). This is 70 seconds / 12.6% shorter than the 9m16s intermediate run, but the earlier 9m23s result remains part of the evidence: a stable average improvement is not established. Both branch-protection checks (`ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`) pass. The non-required Superagent Security Scan is still running; external PR scans are separate from this workflow duration. \| Measurement \| Before \| After \| What it establishes \| \| --- \| ---: \| ---: \| --- \| \| General-server shard, paired on one Linux host \| 430.94s \| 292.99s \| 32.0% faster; identical 1,047 case inventory \| \| Chat job 1 \| 460s \| 211s \| Same full chat inventory spread across isolated partitions \| \| Chat job 2 \| 408s \| 274s \| Serial cases within each child, separate PostgreSQL instances \| \| Chat job 3 \| 408s \| 216s \| Total chat runner time fell from 1,276s to 701s \| \| Full PR workflow, first chat candidate \| 9m16s \| 9m23s \| Not an end-to-end win in this pair: unchanged Build rose from 365s to 465s \| \| Full PR workflow, final repaired head \| 9m16s \| 8m06s \| All 48 jobs pass; 70 seconds faster observed, not a controlled causal estimate \| - Latest [paired benchmark](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38763885223) passes. Earlier paired server measurements were 33.3% and 37.4% faster. Unchanged fixture timing noise is not attributed to this PR. - All 1,337 chat case identities and outcomes match exactly across [before-chat](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38760937988) and [after-chat](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38763885288/attempts/1), without duplicates or removals. Whole-suite records rose from 44,563 to 44,574: three new launcher checks and eight upstream warm-owner tests. Remaining name differences were generated fixture IDs/timestamps/PIDs, not removed tests. - The final run used `m7i-flex.xlarge` for Build (408s), with all chat jobs completing in 238s / 318s / 280s. It used the same actual merge base `afe5b341` as the first chat candidate. Optional profiling was disabled after the bounded measurement experiment; the full 48-job correctness workflow still ran. - The fleet used `m7i.xlarge` for the earlier Build and `m6a.xlarge` for the first chat candidate Build. Several unchanged compile/install/probe phases slowed together. This does not prove hardware alone caused the difference, and full-run attribution must account for runner/cache variance and the upstream base change. - Original full baseline: [all 48 jobs passed](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38753547876/attempts/2), 12m07s, including a server job that queued over five minutes. It is not a clean basis for attributing the whole elapsed-time reduction to this PR. An interrupted baseline and two misrouted candidate attempts were excluded and preserved; routing/trust rules were not weakened. - Local: 32 sharding/launcher checks pass, including disjoint coverage, shared-database fallback and a failed child that waits for its sibling. Real paired chat partitions passed 416 cases in 217.63s on independent embedded databases. - Both extracted Runner deadline regressions pass unchanged with real waits. An initial local attempt rejected a Node executable under the controller home; the identical binary in an owned non-home path passed without weakening that guard. - Real worker-isolation proof, actionlint and diff checks pass. Latest-head Greptile is 5/5, with no review threads or actionable findings. - The eight snapshot-worker cases pass locally with a private `PAPERCLIP_HOME`. The first direct local invocation failed to open the default-home lock database under the sandbox; no production guard was changed. ## Risks Parallel files and paired chat databases may expose shared-state assumptions or increase peak memory. Cases stay serial within each invocation, and explicit shared databases keep the serial path. Complete server coverage and the full 48-job CI workflow pass. Check external required PR scans before merge; the full-workflow measurements are observational and do not establish a steady 12.6% speedup. Queueing, cache state and runner variance must be distinguished from execution improvements. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository inspection, code execution and GitHub tools. The exact serving model suffix and context capacity are not exposed to this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green (48 jobs; both required branch-protection checks pass; non-required external security scan pending) - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-15 12:22:59 -05:00
Huanyi Xie	95692b7785	fix(docker): forward tool action signing secret in Compose (#15202 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip can run through Docker Compose. > - Approval-gated tools need an independent signing secret. > - The guide sets that secret before starting Compose. > - Neither Compose file passes it into the container. > - This pull request forwards the operator's configured secret. > - Documented setup can issue signed tool-action approvals. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Fixes: #15064 ## What Changed - Forward PAPERCLIP_TOOL_ACTION_SIGNING_SECRET in both shipped Compose environments. - Document persistent deployment secrets and reuse on restart. - Explain that it is independent from the session secret. - Keep an empty default so deployments without approval-gated tools retain their existing startup behavior. ## Verification - Docker Compose config before the fix drops a supplied synthetic secret in both files. - After the fix, both preserve the supplied value. - Both also resolve successfully when the optional signing secret is absent. - Used --env-file /dev/null and synthetic values. No containers were started. - `node --test scripts/docker-compose-secrets.test.mjs`: 2 passed. - The Docker context CI lane runs this integration test. - git diff --check passes. ## Risks The value is visible to the container as intended. Operators must protect it as a secret. This does not change admission rules or require a new startup value for existing deployments. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, assisted with source review, implementation and local test execution. The exact deployment model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (targeted local checks and full remote CI pass) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable (Hermes regression / real Compose interpolation checks) - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (Hermes has no configuration changes; Compose documentation is updated) - [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	2026-10-15 10:03:01 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	7ec6fd0972	perf(ci): remove repeated test setup and fixture work (#16429 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - CI must check changes without making contributors wait for repeated setup. > - A complete CI profile showed 158 serialized Vitest launches and repeated dependency installs. > - A large fixture also transferred 40,000 files to prove two different size boundaries. > - This PR removes repeated controller, install, build, transfer, and wait work. > - It keeps isolated test processes and all useful regression boundaries. > - Paired command benchmarks check speed and test inventories before we claim a benefit. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16423 for the complete CI profiling data path. No duplicate optimization PR was found. Current behavior Each serialized file starts a new Vitest controller. Each CI lane restores the pnpm store and installs dependencies. Large Git scanning and staging share one 40,000-file fixture. A readiness regression waits over a minute for the default database idle deadline. Proposed behavior Use one controller per serialized shard, with a fresh fork for each file. Restore exact installed dependencies and certified shared/SDK build outputs when inputs match. Keep the normal install and build paths on a miss. Separate the 32 MiB Git scan proof from staging above command argument limits. Cross a real database idle deadline with a one-second fixture setting. Reason and benefit The paired Linux CI benchmark reduced the complete 566-case serialized shard from 303.43s to 246.96s (18.6%). The Git/database fixture command fell from 156.54s to 33.78s (78.4%). Exact dependency/build restoration reduced setup from 56s to 19s (66.1%). These are measured command/setup times. They do not establish a controlled reduction in the full workflow's queue-to-completion time. Breaking changes None to application behavior. Tests still run in full. Test results are not cached. Cache misses preserve the existing lockfile resolution fallback. ## What Changed - Batch serialized files into one isolated, single-worker Vitest invocation per shard. Give each worker its own home, config and instance ID. - Add a real two-order isolation check for processes, environment, globals, timers and filesystem state. - Add exact dependency keys for all manifests, lockfile, workspace settings, patches, installer, runtime, platform, libc, pnpm, store and checkout path. Cache only installed package directories, not source fixtures. - Add a separate content key for the shared/SDK dependency graph. Retain the existing source/output fingerprint verifier and rebuild path. Only an exact canonical master push can populate normal caches. Stale lockfile fallback runs cannot publish entries. - Keep four real Git filename lanes above 32 MiB. Use a separate 4,000-file staging/deletion case above 2 MiB. Check every staged file, unusual names, cleanup and bounded commands. - Configure a real one-second PostgreSQL idle timeout in the readiness fixture. Assert that the backend connection changes and that another connection can write the parent row. - Add an opt-in, unprivileged Linux benchmark under `profile-ci`. It compares the tested merge tree with its actual first parent on one runner. It also removes installed outputs and qualifies a real cache restore using temporary PR-scoped entries. ## Verification - Local Node 24.19.0: unchanged serialized shard 255.69s; candidate 231.44s; all 566 cases pass in both. - Local fixture command: unchanged 189.13s; candidate 43.39s. Candidate scan 18.58s, staging 13.41s, database case 2.80s. All three candidate cases pass. - Negative control: moving readiness back inside the real parent-lock transaction fails the shortened regression at the parent-write assertion. The production source was restored and is absent from the diff. - Worker isolation check passes in both file orders. - 565 CI policy, partition and workflow regression checks pass with local HTTP/IPC access enabled. The first sandboxed attempt was denied listen access; it was not a code failure. - `actionlint` passes for the three changed workflows. - [All 48 main CI jobs passed](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38745643045) on head `5bec2edb2b194e74352ca697f3fd1d0ac03ce967`, including full typecheck, tests, build, browser E2E and release checks. All 158 serialized files and 3,250 cases passed through 9 controller invocations. Full typecheck/test/build were verified in CI; they were not all repeated locally. - [Paired Linux benchmark passed](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38745643127) on Node 24.21.0. Its baseline is `57fa6b358de62922cfa9a67766b2a227c434fcdf`; its candidate merge tree is `f68f1b32966090f11647502e31852130c20237cf`. The artifact contains results, exact case inventories, setup times and raw logs. Serialized case identities match exactly. All three fixture contracts execute in both variants. \| Measured work \| Baseline \| Candidate \| Reduction \| \|---\|---:\|---:\|---:\| \| Complete serialized shard, 566 cases \| 303.43s \| 246.96s \| 18.6% \| \| Git/database fixture command \| 156.54s \| 33.78s \| 78.4% \| \| Dependency/build setup, cold vs exact hit \| 56s \| 19s \| 66.1% \| - [Honeycomb profile export succeeded on its second attempt](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38747237615/attempts/2). The first attempt failed on GitHub HTTP 503 while downloading an artifact, before export. Only the export was retried; tests were not repeated. The temporary PR-scoped qualification caches were removed after validation, reclaiming 3.34 GB. Timing artifacts remain available. - Greptile is 5/5 on the current head, with no unresolved review threads. Its P1 checkout-prefix finding was fixed in `5bec2edb2`; the corrected reporter paths and paired comparison passed. Earlier runs were superseded while this was fixed. A copy-batching experiment did not speed up the Git fixture and was replaced by the two-boundary fixture split. ## Risks - A persistent controller retains transform state longer. The local shard's maximum RSS rose from about 1.52 GB to 1.99 GB. Full CI must confirm all shards fit the runner budget. - Materialized caches are larger than metadata caches. The Linux benchmark measured real archive transfer and validation after removing installed outputs. Its hit took 19s versus 56s cold. Normal PR lanes cannot publish cache entries. Exact misses run installation. Canonical cache warming requires a frozen-lockfile install; the existing stale-lockfile fallback remains uncached. - The PR uses the trusted reusable workflow from master. The paired benchmark directly exercises the candidate dependency action; normal workflow adoption still requires this PR to merge. This PR does not change the trust references. The completed main workflow took 11m02 including queue time. No controlled full-workflow latency improvement is claimed before this workflow adopts the cache change. - Only deterministic dependency/build outputs are reused. Broad dependency-based test omission and caching successful test results are deliberately excluded from this change. - The real Runner lease minimum and cold-admission waits remain. They protect protocol boundaries and were not shortened by weakening production limits. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, shell execution and code tools. The runtime does not expose a more specific 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>	2026-10-15 09:23:47 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	7420af26fc	fix(ci): finish large Honeycomb profile exports (#16423 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip uses pull request CI to check changes before merge. > - The merged CI profiler records a selected full PR suite in Honeycomb. > - A real 48-job profile exposed an export failure after Honeycomb accepted only part of the trace. > - The same run exposed three fixture subprocesses that looked like incomplete test launches, one direct reporter without a launcher marker, and one overlong test name. > - The exporter needs to handle temporary ingest rejection without sending accepted spans again. > - This pull request fixes those cases and documents the trace display limit. > - The benefit is a complete, checkable CI waterfall with test-file timings. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What happened? The first live `profile-ci` run on #16423 completed all 48 jobs, but the post-run exporter stopped when Honeycomb rejected part of a batch. The initial trace had no root span. Its coverage flag also reported four unfinished invocations and one invalid timing record. Expected behavior The exporter should pace large uploads, retry only temporarily rejected events, and publish the root after every child is accepted. Completed reporters should count as complete. Long test names should not erase test timing. Steps to reproduce 1. Add `profile-ci` to a CI CODEOWNER PR with the merged profiler. 2. Run the full PR suite, as in [run 38732093469](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38732093469). 3. Inspect the separate [failed exporter run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38733393370) and the trace coverage fields. Paperclip version or commit `12612b06eb4332844ac4c8770a1fb6c6b7eccbc9` (PR run head, based on merged #16378). ## What Changed - Pace Honeycomb uploads and retry only transiently rejected events from each batch. - Preserve overlong test timings with bounded names and count complete reporter pairs without a launcher record. - Keep nested Vitest fixture runs from inheriting CI profiling and creating false coverage gaps. - Clarify ordinary CI access, large-trace display limits, and export behavior in the operator guide. ## Verification - [Full PR suite](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38732093469/attempts/1): 48 of 48 jobs succeeded; 10m 29s wall time. The selected jobs used the AWS public PR fleet. The protected exporter used a separate GitHub-hosted runner. - [Clean Honeycomb file waterfall](https://ui.honeycomb.io/paperclip/environments/test/datasets/paperclip-ci/trace?trace_id=01ed0c541b0442e613a030ffb6dc8d9b&trace_start_ts=1792065955&trace_end_ts=1792066584): 48 jobs, 822 steps, 2,622 file spans, and `ci.profile_complete=true`. It was reconstructed from that run's 45 timing artifacts after identifying three nested fixture records. The full trace also recorded 44,497 tests; Honeycomb's chart omits some deep test spans because it displays at most 32,000 spans per trace. - The original exporter stopped after a partially accepted batch. A local replay of that batch succeeded. I used the authorized local test-environment key to complete the original upload and create the file-level view. No key was added to this branch or PR. - `node --test .github/scripts/tests/ci-profile.test.mjs scripts/ci-profile/reporters.test.mjs`: 18 passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/vitest-chat-shards.test.ts`: 1 passed. - `git diff --check`: passed. - The local `pnpm -r typecheck` and profiled fixture rerun could not start: the package-manager shim could not verify the `pnpm@9.15.4` registry signature because its fetches failed. `pnpm test:run` and `pnpm build` were not run locally; hosted CI is pending. - The updated exporter has not yet run from protected `master`; this PR remains draft until CI and review finish. ## Risks - A 48,000-span export now takes about three extra minutes due to pacing. Retry limits still fail a persistently rejected batch and keep the root unpublished. - Honeycomb may retain duplicates from an already partial export. The clean file-level evidence trace uses a separate trace ID. - The API key stays only in the protected `ci-profiling` environment. PR jobs write timing artifacts but never receive it. > 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 — see `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, code execution, GitHub API, and browser inspection. The runtime does not expose the exact serving model 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 - [ ] 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>	2026-10-15 07:51:02 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	6acec4266e	feat(ci): profile full CODEOWNER PR suites in Honeycomb (#16378 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Its PR workflow runs dozens of parallel build and test jobs. > - Individual job durations do not show the elapsed cost of the whole suite. > - Maintainers need one shared timeline to find slow work and repeated setup. > - This pull request adds full-suite profiles for selected CI CODEOWNER PRs. > - Honeycomb shows each job, step, test file, and supported test on that timeline. > - The benefit is evidence for changes that reduce total CI time. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What existing behavior does this improve? The main PR workflow has about 48 jobs. Maintainers need to compare their overlapping work and find which jobs delay completion. Current behavior GitHub shows job and step durations separately. Test files and tests are not joined to a full workflow trace. Proposed behavior A CI CODEOWNER adds `profile-ci` to a PR. The tested code stays on that PR branch. All main PR lanes run, including lanes normally skipped for stack position or release notes. A trusted post-run exporter sends one wall-clock trace to Honeycomb. Reason and benefit The trace supports decisions about which CI work to speed up or remove. Ordinary PRs do not export traces. The roadmap and related-PR search found no duplicate CI profiling work. ## What Changed - Add label selection and a full-suite override. Verify the PR author, original actor, and rerun actors against the trusted `.github/` CODEOWNERS rule. - Record Vitest, Playwright, and Node test file/test timings in local artifacts. Keep ordinary reporter behavior and failing exit codes. - Add a trusted `workflow_run` exporter. Use actual GitHub timestamps for all jobs, setup, steps, waiting, and teardown. Mark missing test data and partial reruns. - Keep the ingest key out of PR jobs. Store it only in the `ci-profiling` environment, restricted to `master`. The exporter reads bounded JSON and never executes artifact code. - Record expected test invocations outside reporters so a missing invocation cannot appear complete. Preserve `node --test` on older PR checkouts. Flush large shard inventories before exit. - Add security, timing, routing, and real-reporter checks. Document operation and activation. Protect the exporter with CODEOWNERS. ## Verification - 509 focused workflow/reporter/shard checks passed. They include outside authors, outside rerun actors, bots, stale revisions, malicious ZIP paths, incomplete reports, and partial ingestion failures. - Final revision `3bf5d9017d` adds multi-file qualification and fixes short-file step parenting and duplicate Node file-wrapper events. Greptile reviewed this exact revision at 5/5 with no unresolved threads. [Main PR CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38728040302): the initial attempt had 54 successful checks, 3 intentional skips, and one serialized-shard failure from an unchanged workspace-authorization test exceeding its 15-second timeout. The single failed-shard retry passed: the final result is 55 successful checks and 3 intentional skips. The same timeout reproduces locally with profiling disabled; both assertions pass with a diagnostic 60-second timeout override (about 23 seconds total). No source or CI timeout was changed. - A dry run against real GitHub attempt 2 of run `38677445871` produced exactly 3 executed jobs, 40 spans, and 510 seconds, excluding 45 carried-over jobs. The partial trace remains explicitly incomplete; this validation did not upload data. - `actionlint` passed for all four changed workflows. `git diff --check` passed. - Full Node 24 `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. The local full `pnpm test:run` was stopped after it reported a setup-token timeout and a distribution-plugin-catalog fixture failure. The 30 setup-token tests passed on focused rerun. The plugin fixture fails at `rmSync` of a directory symlink on this macOS/Node 24.11.0 host; the same failure reproduces with the unchanged base Vitest configuration and unchanged test/service files (10 other tests pass). The local full test suite is therefore not claimed green. - A real root-config Vitest probe passed 13 tests with profiling both off and on. Multi-file Vitest, Playwright, and Node probes each verify two distinct filename rows and four correctly parented tests, including repeated test names across files. Separate passing probes exercise the full exporter hierarchy `workflow → job → step → filename → tests`. Intentional failing probes preserve failing exit status. - Verified all 48 measured jobs in latest-head run `38728040302` used AWS: one `paperclip-ci-routing-x64` gate and 47 `paperclip-public-pr-x64` jobs. Profiling preserves AWS authorization and its GitHub-hosted fallback. The separate privileged exporter runs on `ubuntu-latest` outside the measured suite. - [Live Honeycomb baseline](https://ui.honeycomb.io/paperclip/environments/test/datasets/paperclip-ci/trace/oaPMzw8zGwG): 48 jobs, 731 spans, 479 seconds. It matches [GitHub run 38671274294](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38671274294). This historical trace has job/step data only; it is not proof of the future label-triggered test-reporting journey. - Verified the dedicated Honeycomb key is ingest-only with dataset creation disabled. Verified the GitHub environment allows only the `master` branch. No repository-level secret of that name exists. Both credential values were scanned absent from source and branch history. After merge, add `profile-ci` to a CI CODEOWNER PR, wait for the entire PR run and exporter, then follow the run-summary link. Collapse job children to compare parallel lanes; expand a job to inspect its steps and tests. ## Risks - Activation requires merging the trusted workflow definitions to `master`. This PR continues using the current trusted reusable workflows until then. - Selected runs produce many spans and artifacts. Oversized artifacts fail export instead of truncating data. Missing or cancelled reporters are marked incomplete. - GitHub timings have second precision. Node test times use reporter receipt time. Rust retains job/step timing but lacks per-test wall timestamps. - CI CODEOWNERS are individual users in the explicit `.github/` rule. Unsupported team rules and identity lookup failures disable profiling. - An interrupted upload can leave partial data. Retrying uses the same span IDs, but the Events API does not promise deduplication. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, code execution, repository tools, and browser verification. The runtime does not expose the exact serving model 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 - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-15 06:59:50 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	1897080a6d	test(scripts): retire duplicate provisioning fallback launch (#16110 ) Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-15 00:02:38 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	5c65525219	test(scripts): consolidate stable shard selection cases (#16109 ) Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-15 00:02:23 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	445feaa7aa	fix(server): index retained workspace task authorization (#16334 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Before an agent starts, repository admission checks access to retained workspace files. > - Admission holds a company provenance lock while it checks each source and reader. > - The retained-task query cast the indexed task ID to text. PostgreSQL could evaluate privacy across company history before it matched one source ID. > - Repeated slow checks kept the lock for hours and blocked other agent launches. > - This change looks up the canonical source UUID through the existing primary key before it checks privacy. > - The query does less work and keeps the same access decisions. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What happened? Nine runs appeared active but had no provider process or log file. Read-only database inspection found a transaction holding the company repository-provenance lock for more than ten hours. Eight other transactions waited for that lock. The owner repeatedly ran workspace authorization queries. The company had about 13,400 tasks and 8,500 workspaces. Expected behavior A retained-source check should find the referenced task before it evaluates that task's privacy. Unrelated task history should not multiply the privacy work for every source and reader. Steps to reproduce 1. Run the new `workspace-authorization-query.test.ts` against authorization code from `5c7a025032`. 2. The real PostgreSQL fixture has 1,200 unrelated tasks and one retained source. The regression fails with 2,402 recursive privacy traversals, above the bound of 100. The other five access tests pass. 3. Apply this change and run the same test. All six tests pass. Related: Refs #16330 adds workspace timing evidence. This PR fixes a measured SQL plan. It does not change those tracing boundaries. ## What Changed - Compare the UUID task column with a guarded canonical UUID from the retained-source JSON key. - Reuse `canonicalExecutionUuid`. Invalid and noncanonical keys still match nothing and cannot cause a UUID parse error. - Add real PostgreSQL coverage for query work, missing and foreign sources, malformed and uppercase IDs, both agent and sponsor grants, and grant revocation. - Add a reproducible baseline comparison and document its scope in `doc/DATABASE.md`. ## Verification - Red: the unchanged query fails the new work-bound regression. Five access cases pass. - Green: 101 tests pass across the new query suite, workspace binding, and the production privacy review suite. - Full `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`: pass. Dependencies use the repository's pinned pnpm 9.15.4. - All current-head CI checks pass, including the full server, chat, workspace, serialized, Runner, and eight E2E test lanes. Build, typecheck, canary, and security checks pass. Head: `ad907f6e14c2d773fa8c20692e5ccc10215c9297`. - Greptile: 5/5 on that head, with no actionable findings or unresolved review threads. The branch is mergeable. - The local full `pnpm test:run` was started, then stopped after a concurrent disposable-database check hit the macOS shared-memory limit. This is not counted as a local full-suite pass. The benchmark passed when rerun alone; the complete suite passed in CI. - `git diff --check`: pass. The branch has no lockfile or workflow changes. Synthetic SQL comparison on PostgreSQL 18.1, with 13,429 tasks and one retained source: \| Query \| Median \| Five measured samples \| Recursive privacy traversals \| \| --- \| --- \| --- \| --- \| \| Baseline `5c7a025032` \| 42.57 ms \| 42.57, 47.71, 44.51, 41.29, 41.44 ms \| 26,860 \| \| Fixed \| 2.37 ms \| 2.76, 2.35, 2.37, 2.11, 3.33 ms \| 4 \| Both versions return identical complete rows. The benchmark alternates variants after two warmup rounds. It loads the baseline authorization module with current dependencies; the UUID helper is unchanged. The measured gain is about 18x for this SQL fixture. The final committed benchmark also passed a second isolated run: 55.44 ms baseline and 3.26 ms fixed, with identical complete rows (about 17x). Two read-only queries on the affected database also returned identical complete rows. One changed from 129 ms to 7 ms; a workspace with 49 retained sources changed from 576 ms to 11 ms. These are single paired measurements, not endpoint or startup benchmarks. Reproduce: ```sh pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/workspace-authorization-query.test.ts server/src/__tests__/task-workspace-binding.test.ts server/src/__tests__/privacy-production-review.test.ts pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsx ../scripts/benchmark-workspace-authorization.ts --baseline-ref=5c7a025032 pnpm -r typecheck pnpm test:run pnpm build ``` ## Risks - A direct UUID cast could broaden or break access for malformed keys. The existing canonical guard and regression cases preserve the former text-match behavior. - Planner choices can differ across PostgreSQL versions and data sets. The regression bounds real privacy work rather than elapsed time or one exact plan shape. - Admission still checks every retained source and reader under its existing lock. This removes a measured query cost; it does not claim a bound for the full admission process. - No schema migration, permission change, lock removal, or live deployment is included. Recovery of the affected runs remains unverified until rollout. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool use and code execution. The exact served model variant and context-window size are not exposed to this task. ## 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>	2026-10-14 16:55:34 -05:00
Devin Foley devinfoley Claude Opus 5.5	b226336762	ci: skip full CI for release-notes-only pull requests (#16207 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Each beta release ends with a pull request that adds one release notes file under `releases/` > - PR CI runs the full build, test, and e2e matrix for that pull request > - No build, test, or e2e lane reads `releases/v.md` or `releases/beta/v.md` > - The full matrix takes about 30 minutes, and lost runners or flaky e2e specs can make it run again > - This pull request lets the existing CI scope gate skip the heavy lanes when a pull request changes only release notes > - The benefit is that release notes pull requests get a green result in minutes, and code pull requests keep full CI ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Issue type CI efficiency enhancement. Where is the issue? The `Select stacked PR CI scope` step in `.github/workflows/ci-routing.yml`. This step sets the `full_ci` output for PR CI. What's wrong? The step sets `full_ci=false` only for middle pull requests in a stack. A pull request that changes only one release notes markdown file runs the full matrix. For example, #16053 changed one file in `releases/beta/`. Its CI ran two times: on the first run, 8 shards lost their runners, and on the second run, one Playwright spec flaked and needed a rerun. Suggested fix Read the pull request diff from the GitHub compare API in the scope step. When every changed path is release notes, set `full_ci=false`. The callers already support this value. I found no open pull request or issue for this change. ## What Changed - `ci-routing.yml`: the scope step (renamed to `Select PR CI scope`) also sets `full_ci=false` when every path in the diff matches `releases/v.md` or `releases/beta/v.md`. - The step reads the diff from `compare/<event base SHA>...<event head SHA>`. The SHAs come from the event, so a later push cannot change the decision for this run. - For a renamed file, the step checks the old path and the new path. - The step keeps full CI when the event is not `pull_request`, a SHA is malformed, the API call fails, the diff is empty, or the file list has 300 entries. The compare API can truncate a list at 300 entries. - The step does not change the stacked pull request rules. It checks the paths only when the stack rules select full CI. - `ci-routing.test.mjs`: the GitHub stub now returns `files` for compare calls. 17 new cases cover release notes paths, mixed diffs, renames, non-markdown files, nested folders, empty and truncated lists, API failure, non-PR events, malformed SHAs, and stack interaction. - `e2e-shard.test.mjs`: the test now uses the new step name. - `doc/DEVELOPING.md`: added a short description of the CI scope rules. ## Verification - `node --test .github/scripts/tests/ci-routing.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/e2e-shard.test.mjs`: 73 pass, 0 fail. - `node --test '.github/scripts/tests/.test.mjs'`: all pass. - I ran the jq filter on real compare API responses. #16053 (one file in `releases/beta/`) returns `true`. #16082 (10 files) returns `false`. - After merge: open a pull request that changes only a `releases/beta/v.md` file. The `Select trusted runner` job shows the notice `release notes only; full_ci=false`. The heavy lanes show as skipped. The `policy`, `verify`, and `e2e` checks pass. Note: `pr.yml` calls `pr-trusted.yml@master`, and that workflow calls `ci-routing.yml@master`. This pull request does not change its own CI run. The change applies after merge. ## Risks - Low risk. The skip uses the existing `full_ci=false` path. The `verify` and `e2e` aggregate checks already accept that value, and the `policy` job always runs. - A future job that reads release notes files would not run for notes-only pull requests. Today, only the release workflows read these files, and those workflows do not run on pull requests. - The step now uses `GH_TOKEN` to call one more read-only API endpoint. The workflow still does not check out or run pull request code, and its permissions do not change. ## Model Used - Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic. Agentic coding with tool use (shell, file edits, GitHub CLI). ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-10-14 13:16:34 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	ad0bd26bb7	perf(heartbeat): avoid Git inspection for stored workspace reads (#16306 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Heartbeat selects and restores a saved execution workspace before dispatch. > - These reads used the workspace detail reader, which also scans Git and resolves delivery state. > - Configuration reads do not use those live display fields. Each extra process can delay other controller work. > - This pull request adds a stored-record reader and uses it in configuration, environment selection, and finalization. > - It also derives ancestry from the existing ahead/behind result and skips delivery HEAD reads for unfinished tasks. > - The benefit is fewer Git processes while live execution and cleanup guards remain in place. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #16282, #16302, #13619. Those changes reduce background or display scan demand. This change removes live display inspection from execution configuration reads. What existing behavior does this improve? Heartbeat workspace configuration reads and workspace close-readiness checks. Current behavior Reading saved workspace configuration also loads runtime health, Git status, ancestry, and delivery state. Close readiness walks history twice to determine ancestry. Proposed behavior Execution reads stored configuration through a company-checked method. Live branch validation and destructive cleanup still inspect current Git state. Close readiness uses its ahead/behind result to determine ancestry. Reason and benefit A synthetic benchmark of the actual service returned identical stored fields for 20 workspaces. Detail reads launched 60 Git commands and took 689 ms. Stored reads launched zero Git commands and took 8 ms. This was a local macOS measurement, not an end-to-end cloud latency claim. Breaking changes None to public APIs or saved data. Workspace detail responses keep their live fields. ## What Changed - Add `getStoredById(companyId, id)` and use it in three heartbeat reads. - Preserve the access-denied error for a foreign-company workspace. - Remove the extra `merge-base` process and the unused HEAD read for unfinished tasks. - Add recovery, company-boundary, ancestry, and cleanup regressions. - Add a repeatable database/Git benchmark and document the read boundary. ## Verification - The new environment-selection regression failed before the fix with `Live Git inspection is unavailable` and passes after it. All eight environment-selection tests pass. - On the final rebased commit, workspace service, environment selection, and branch finalization: 89 tests passed. Branch-containment, runtime-execution, and display-cache suites also passed during development. - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm build`: passed. - `pnpm test:run`: started locally, then stopped after all full-suite CI test shards passed on the final commit. The complete local run was not finished; CI provides the full-suite result. - Final commit `9a13ef0481b7bf6a60b2b7ac13f35f78a14e232c`: 55 successful checks and 2 expected skips. Greptile: 5/5, no actionable findings. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsx ../scripts/benchmark-workspace-record-reads.ts`: identical stored fields, 60 to zero Git commands, 689 ms to 8 ms for 20 reads. ## Risks - Execution callers must use saved fields only. Detail readers and live branch and cleanup guards remain separate. - A failed ancestry comparison stays unknown. Automatic cleanup still rejects unknown delivery state and rechecks Git before deletion. - This patch has not been deployed. It does not prove the full slow-run latency is resolved. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact model identifier and context window are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, repository inspection, code editing, and local command execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-14 12:53:41 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	bd64eb27b0	perf(recovery): use indexed execution identity lookups (#16291 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their execution. > - Recovery must keep old execution ownership visible before new work starts. > - Ownership reads filter large run contexts through a combined text expression. > - Recovery and status delivery also cast indexed UUID columns to text. > - These reads can scan history before finding the requested execution. > - This pull request preserves identity and ownership rules while using existing indexes. > - The benefit is less database work during recovery and task polling. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #14406. Related community report: #15275. This is an independent implementation. It does not use that pull request's code or commits. It covers the reported execution joins and the additional ownership query hotspot. What happened? Accumulated staging query statistics showed 11,782 ownership reads at 51 ms each. A paired recovery-action read averaged 22 ms. Both queried large run JSON. Text casts also prevented indexed UUID lookups in recovery and status delivery. What did you expect to happen? Recovery must find the same execution evidence through existing indexes. Malformed identifiers must match nothing without a cast error. Native issue bindings must retain precedence. Missing termination evidence must continue to block new work. Steps to reproduce Run the disposable benchmark below. It loads the original service modules from the baseline revision. It compares their exact ownership, blocker action and status-delivery SQL with the current modules on 1,400 synthetic runs, 350 historical recovery actions and 192 KiB contexts. ## What Changed - Convert saved text to UUID only after checking its canonical lowercase form. - Keep indexed run and task UUID columns unchanged in execution joins. - Split native and legacy issue predicates so existing indexes can filter ownership candidates. - Preserve company scope, native precedence, process and lease holds, recovery eligibility and delivery receipts. - Add real PostgreSQL identity and ownership regressions, a reproducible benchmark and database documentation. ## Verification - Local service SQL benchmark: ownership 78.30 ms to 1.14 ms, with the same two complete rows. Blocker action read 76.94 ms to 22.55 ms, with the same complete row. These are synthetic SQL timings, excluding process probes, provider calls and HTTP. - Status delivery returned the same 100 rows. Timing was neutral on the small-task fixture: 7.85 ms before and 8.30 ms after. No speedup is claimed for that case. - 231 local tests passed across six server suites. They cover malformed identifiers, canonical spelling, company scope, native precedence, retained processes, workspace restore, native replacement, conversations and delivery. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. - `git diff --check` passed. - All current-head CI and security checks passed, including the full general and serialized suites, browser shards, Runner verification and build. Greptile reviewed the exact commit at 5/5 with no actionable findings. - The older full local sweep in the companion worktree was stopped after final-commit complete CI passed. It is not claimed as a completed local pass. The 231 focused tests above passed locally on this branch. ```sh pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/services/conversation-continuation.test.ts src/services/legacy-execution-recovery.test.ts src/__tests__/legacy-workspace-restore-recovery.test.ts src/__tests__/chat-completion-delivery.test.ts src/__tests__/agent-conversations.test.ts src/services/native-runtime/native-safe-replacement.test.ts pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsx ../scripts/benchmark-recovery-queries.ts --baseline-ref=1e731520bb ``` ## Risks - PostgreSQL accepts more UUID spellings than the old text joins. The explicit guard preserves the old lowercase spelling requirement. - Query plans depend on the data distribution. Small task sets can show neutral status-delivery timing. The benchmark is not a production latency claim. - Recovery ownership checks remain conservative. Process, lease, workspace and no-replay rules are unchanged. - No migration, new index, cache, cleanup change or lock removal is included. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, shell tools and local code execution. The runtime does not expose a more specific backend model 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>	2026-10-14 10:14:58 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	ebeac833a6	perf(runs): bound history and reduce repeated context reads (#16286 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps operators manage AI agents and inspect their work. > - Run history supplies recent execution records to the board and API clients. > - The list repeats eight reads of a large stored JSON context. > - A caller can also omit the limit and read the complete history. > - This pull request expands context fields once and bounds every list read. > - The benefit is lower database cost and bounded redaction work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #958. Related community reports: #13962 and #10631. This is an independent implementation. It does not use their commits or code. It covers the history bounds reported in both. Process memory monitoring from #10631 is outside this change. What happened? The run-history query repeatedly extracts fields from large context JSON. Requests without a limit also load every historical run before authorization and redaction. Accumulated staging query statistics showed 271 ms for summary history and another 58 ms for its redaction lookup. What did you expect to happen? Normal reads must use a bounded recent history. Context projection must preserve the existing values and privacy behavior with less repeated database work. Steps to reproduce Run the disposable benchmark below against the baseline revision. It creates 1,400 synthetic runs with 192 KiB contexts. It compares the exact service SQL and every returned column for both summary and full history. ## What Changed - Expand context fields with one lateral record projection. Preserve non-object legacy contexts and the first-class issue binding. - Enforce a 200-row default and a 1,000-row maximum in the route and service. - Apply the default in the shared UI client, including both agent detail implementations. - Preserve response arrays, authorization, result projection and secret redaction. - Fetch older linked runs by ID in both agent pages. Check company and agent scope, navigation races and visible retry errors. - Update OpenAPI, data-path documentation and capability maps. - Add real PostgreSQL and HTTP regressions plus a reproducible benchmark. ## Verification - Local benchmark: summary history 37.72 ms to 19.34 ms; full history 37.84 ms to 19.01 ms. All 200 complete positional rows match in each comparison. These are synthetic local SQL timings, excluding HTTP and redaction. - History, route, privacy and redaction suites: 160 server tests passed across six files. Twenty-two UI API, selection, run-panel and log-visibility tests passed. Both agent-page variants render an older linked run with an empty history page on desktop and mobile. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. - Map validation and `git diff --check` passed. - All current-head CI and security checks passed, including the full general and serialized suites, browser shards, Runner verification and build. Greptile reviewed the exact commit at 5/5 with no remaining findings. - The full local sweep began before the final compatibility fixes. It was stopped after the final commits passed complete CI. The focused local suites listed above passed on the final code. Before interruption, the broader local sweep passed 31,743 tests across the general server, UI and several package groups, with no reported failures. The full local command is not claimed as a completed pass. ```sh pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/services/heartbeat/run-state.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-list.test.ts src/__tests__/agent-live-run-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/run-secret-redaction.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-run-privacy-routes.test.ts pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/api/heartbeats.test.ts pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsx ../scripts/benchmark-run-history.ts --baseline-ref=1e731520bb ``` ## Risks - Clients that relied on an unbounded array now receive 200 rows by default. Explicit limits allow up to 1,000. This change does not add pagination. - Legacy context conversion must stay identical. Real database regressions cover null, array, scalar, nested values and native issue precedence. - No schema migration or persistent cache is introduced. Redaction and access checks remain active. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, shell tools and local code execution. The runtime does not expose a more specific backend model 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>	2026-10-14 10:14:41 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	e9b6c4d44c	perf: remove history scans from task and chat queries (#16278 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task reads and external chat notices must remain responsive as run history grows. > - The chat notice sweep casts indexed UUID columns to text. > - Run redaction and task provenance filter large JSON contexts with expressions that lack matching indexes. > - These queries scan history and read large stored contexts on common requests. > - This pull request adapts two existing fixes to current master and adds the missing provenance index. > - The benefit is less database work with the same query results and access rules. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15927. This change adapts that chat sweep fix to the extracted inbound notice module and retains the contributor credit. Refs #12499. This change adds that missing nested-context index through a current, concurrent migration. It retains the contributor credit. This combined change replaces those older layouts for the measured query paths. It also covers task creation provenance, which those pull requests do not address. What happened? The chat notice sweep scans wakeup history. Issue redaction scans run contexts because only one branch of its JSON condition has an index. The task creation-source filter also scans contexts because its native and legacy ID expression lacks an index. Expected behavior The queries use indexed lookups and return the same rows. Company access, task origin precedence, secret redaction, and chat notice ordering remain the same. Steps to reproduce Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsx ../scripts/benchmark-slow-queries.ts --baseline-ref=f8af817f8d`. The benchmark creates disposable PostgreSQL data and compares the old query with the current query on the same fixture. ## What Changed - Compare chat UUID columns directly with safely parsed payload IDs. Reject malformed and noncanonical IDs without a cast failure. - Add the nested `paperclipIssue.id` run-context index and the exact native/legacy task-provenance expression index. - Build both indexes concurrently. Register the migration for top-level execution and invalid-index retry repair. - Extend chat payload and migration regression coverage. - Add a repeatable synthetic SQL benchmark and document its scope and command. - Keep the five newest schema snapshots. ## Verification - Focused local checks: 76 selected tests passed in five files. These cover FIFO notices, malformed IDs, conversation state, redaction, provenance, and company boundaries. - Disposable PostgreSQL 18.1 fixture: 335 tasks, 1,400 runs, 13,000 wakeups, 377 actions, and 192 KiB synthetic contexts. - Five warm samples per query, after two warmups. Every returned SQL column matched before and after, compared as positional tuples so duplicate unnamed projections are retained. \| Query \| Before, median \| After, median \| Improvement \| \| --- \| ---: \| ---: \| ---: \| \| Chat notice candidates \| 26.21 ms \| 6.43 ms \| 4.1× \| \| Task creation-source list \| 159.69 ms \| 6.51 ms \| 24.5× \| \| Issue redaction contexts \| 131.88 ms \| 0.34 ms \| 389.1× \| The run-history context projection returned the same 200 rows and kept the same index plan and buffer counts. Its timings were noisy (37.30 ms before and 56.78 ms after in the last run; 34.25 ms and 34.14 ms in the previous run). No improvement is claimed for this control. Its repeated JSON projection remains a separate optimization opportunity. The populated plans use the wakeup primary key, the provenance expression index, and a BitmapOr over both redaction indexes. These are local SQL measurements. They do not prove an equivalent change in hosted API latency. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed locally. - The full local `pnpm test:run` was started and then interrupted (exit 130) when the Mac reached its PostgreSQL shared-memory limit. It did not complete and is not reported as passed. The final SQL benchmark passed after its disposable database resources were released. The full general and serialized test suites passed in CI. - All CI checks for final head `193acca6abaa992acad12f4b631bd31dd3234641` passed, including full Vitest coverage, E2E checks, typecheck, build, migration order, and lifecycle boundaries. - Greptile reviewed that exact head at 5/5 with no actionable comments. ## Risks - Both indexes add storage and write cost. Initial builds read stored run contexts and can take time on large histories. - Concurrent index builds avoid holding a write-blocking table lock for the whole build. The existing migration retry path removes invalid partial indexes before retrying. - The chat parser accepts only canonical lowercase UUID text. This preserves the prior text comparison, including rejection of uppercase and malformed values. - Staging has not been migrated or deployed. Local PostgreSQL and synthetic data do not reproduce hosted load or network latency. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6. The exact serving model ID and context window were not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, repository tools, browser inspection, and local code execution. The adapted fixes retain their original contributor credits. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-14 07:37:51 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip	b7f41ee51d	perf(ci): warm the public-install npm cache during pnpm build (#16204 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Each pull request runs the Trusted PR CI. The `ci / Build` lane is the longest check, or close to the longest, in each green run. > - On 2026-10-13, `ci / Build` took 415-446s in runs 38426120144, 38432086560 and 38423713537. Of that, the public-install verifier took 226-241s. > - In the verifier, the consumer `npm install` took 119-129s. It downloads the full public registry graph into an empty npm cache. > - Source manifests set that graph. Thus CI can download it before `pnpm build` makes any tarball. > - This pull request fills the npm cache in the background while the Rust restore, Evalbook and `pnpm build` run. Then the verifier reads that cache. > - The benefit is a shorter `ci / Build` lane. The verifier keeps all its checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15213, #15849, #15868, #15888 (earlier changes that made this verifier faster). Enhancement description The `ci / Build` lane runs the public-install verifier after `pnpm build`. The verifier starts with an empty npm cache. Its consumer install then downloads the full public registry graph: 119-129s of a 226-241s step. Proposed change Download the same registry graph into an npm cache in the background, during the earlier part of the lane. Give that cache to the verifier. Why it helps The download moves off the critical path of the lane. A local test of the same 628-package install took 51s with a cold cache and 21s with a warm cache. ## What Changed - Add `scripts/public-install-closure.mjs`. It holds the one definition of the public package closure: `@paperclipai/server`, `paperclipai`, and each public workspace package that they reach through `workspace:` specs. It also gives the registry dependencies of that closure. - Add `scripts/warm-public-install-npm-cache.mjs`. It installs those registry dependencies into a temporary consumer, with scripts disabled, to fill `PAPERCLIP_PUBLIC_INSTALL_NPM_CACHE`. Then it removes the temporary consumer. - `scripts/verify-grok-npm-install.mjs` now gets its closure from the shared module. When `PAPERCLIP_PUBLIC_INSTALL_NPM_CACHE` is set, it uses that directory as the consumer npm cache. When the variable is not set, it uses a new empty cache, as before. `docker-runner-check.yml` and `release-smoke.yml` do not change. - `pr-trusted.yml` (Build job): a new step starts the warm-up in the background after `Install dependencies`. The verify step waits for the warm-up for a maximum of 180s and then gives the cache to the verifier. If the warm-up fails, the step writes a notice and the verifier continues as before. - Add `scripts/__tests__/public-install-closure.test.mjs` and add it to `test:release-registry`. Update the closure assertions in `grok-public-install-sandbox.test.mjs`. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/public-install-closure.test.mjs`: 4/4 pass. - `node --test scripts/__tests__/grok-public-install-sandbox.test.mjs`: 24/24 pass. - `node --test scripts/__tests__/run-vitest-stable-shard.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/e2e-shard.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/runner-release-crate-cache.test.mjs`: all pass. - `release-verify-workflow.test.mjs`: the two "publisher lockfile" tests fail in my sandbox on clean master too, because they need pnpm. Two canary git-fixture tests timed out once under load. They pass when they run alone. - I ran the warm-up against current master: 62 direct dependencies, 628 packages, 51s cold. The same install with the warm cache took 21s. - Important: `pr.yml` calls `pr-trusted.yml@master`. Thus the CI of this pull request runs the refactored verifier on its default path (empty cache), but not the new warm-up steps. The warm-up steps start after merge. To measure them, compare the `consumer_install_ms` value in the `paperclip.public-npm-install.timing.v1` line of a Build job before and after merge. - Final review: all latest-head CI checks pass (54 successes, one neutral result, two intentional skips). Fresh Apex is 5/5 on `64d091b8b0c5359fa3dc0edb1fd7ef9d24294477` with no unresolved findings. The two relevant local script suites pass all 28 tests. Current master combines cleanly. ## Risks - Low risk. The verifier result does not change. npm checks each cached tarball against the integrity of its own resolution, and the consumer directory and lock start empty. - npm can use a cached registry packument that is a maximum of about 5 minutes old (registry `max-age`). This has the same effect as starting the verifier a few minutes earlier. - The warm-up runs at the same time as `pnpm build`. It uses network, disk and some CPU. In the measured runs, `pnpm build` took 76-96s. - If the warm-up is slow or fails, the verify step waits a maximum of 180s and then continues with what is in the cache. - The verifier receipt still reports `cleanNpmInstall: true`. The consumer install is clean. Only the download cache is shared. ## Expected time savings - `ci / Build`: an estimated 65-85s less, from 415-446s to about 340-370s. The consumer install goes from 119-129s to about 40-55s, from the local cold/warm ratio. - Full PR time: after this change, `ci / Build` is no longer the longest lane. The longest lanes become `General tests (server N/12)` and `Verify Paperclip Runner (vitest 1/2)` at about 405-496s. Thus the full PR time decreases only when Build is the critical path. That is approximately 0-30s in the runs above. ## Model Used - Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), with tool use and code execution in a Paperclip agent run. OpenAI GPT-6 (`gpt-6`) through Codex assisted the final repository review and targeted script validation. This session does not expose an exact 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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-13 17:18:44 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	22d05644f4	feat(ui): add Speko voice setup, task calls, and Storybook coverage (#15728 ) Runtime #15727 is merged. This PR adds the UI. Qualification follows in #15729. ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agent work through tasks and governed connections. > - Chat connections already bind external conversations to those tasks. > - Speko handles voice and telephony, while the selected Paperclip agent does the work. > - A call needs durable session authority, ordered follow-ups, and safe result delivery. > - This PR adds the Speko setup and call controls to the existing Apps and task UI. > - This PR depends on #15727. The qualification suite follows separately. Speko stays experimental. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Problem or motivation Phone and browser voice conversations cannot use the chat connection task lifecycle. A separate voice runtime is needed to preserve task authority, retries, and reply history. Proposed solution Add company-scoped voice sessions, signed callbacks, durable replies, inbound intake, and an agent-facing outbound-call tool. Reuse existing tasks, queues, secrets, and publications. Roadmap alignment This extends the experimental chat connector entry points under Agent Chat and Connected Apps. The project owner requested this feature. Refs #11418 for the original provider catalog proposal. This implementation uses the newer chat connection infrastructure rather than an MCP catalog-only integration. Refs #15721 for remote OpenCode startup. ## What Changed - Add the Speko Apps catalog entry, provider artwork, and browser SDK. - Reuse existing agents in setup. Keep the optional Company Phone Agent in the catalog, with connection instructions available to any assigned agent. - Add task voice controls, transcripts, phone callbacks, inbound-line settings, and call Activity entries. - Surface retryable connection and incoming-task inventory failures, preserve active call controls and cached tasks, restore keyboard focus after recovery, and bound notification polling so a stuck request cannot hide later results. - Put Save & exit and Connect Speko in the credential step’s shared footer. - Add deterministic production-component Storybook fixtures for setup, lifecycle, failures, permissions, and phone surfaces. - Include voice components in the design guide. Stories never request a real microphone or place calls. ## Verification - All 27 focused UI/controller regressions, UI typecheck, token gates, and 28 map/catalog structural tests pass. The shared connection cache test covers pause/resume invalidation during the 30-second fresh period. - Storybook builds 157 Speko production-component stories. The complete prior 156-story set passed all 624 checks on UI source `249cbc616a`. After the final cache repair, all 152 affected page/launcher checks passed across both themes, 390/1200 widths and reduced motion. Real microphone access and external provider requests are blocked. - Source annotations follow the current generated-catalog contract. No generated catalog or lockfile is included. Three inherited GitHub-heading tests passed after master reconciliation. - Latest-head CI and Greptile review must pass before merge. Local fixture success does not establish provider or spoken-playback acceptance. - The separate integrated browser run passed two journeys and failed browser answer retrieval. Real browser/telephone playback and timing acceptance remain outstanding. See the dated qualification report and E01–E16 runbook. Speko stays experimental. ## Risks - Voice sessions add migrations and provider-dependent lifecycle behavior. Migrations preserve existing chat and AI transports. - Callback origins must be reachable HTTPS. Provider keys and signing secrets remain vaulted. - Unverified callers receive task-scoped low-trust authority. Caller ID does not grant private task access. - Outbound telephony incurs provider charges. Provider acceptance is not proof that the caller heard an answer. - Keep the feature behind the existing experimental chat setting until the real browser, inbound, outbound, and delayed-result acceptance matrix passes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with tool use and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-13 16:26:38 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	433d94ee0b	refactor(maps): generate indexes from local story and feature metadata (#16214 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Feature recipes and Storybook help contributors find behavior, examples, and verification steps. > - Independent feature changes currently update shared catalogs, indexes, and review hashes. > - Those shared files cause merge conflicts and repeated bookkeeping during parallel work. > - This pull request stores metadata in each feature recipe and story, then generates the combined views. > - Contributors can merge independent work without editing a common index. Git and PR evidence retain change and review history. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What existing behavior does this improve? Maintaining the product, agent-access, and Storybook maps while multiple agents change different features. Current behavior A story or recipe change can update `catalog.json`, `INDEX.md`, review hashes, verification tables, and tracked generated navigation. Two unrelated changes then conflict in the same files. Proposed behavior Each story declares capability links and classification in `parameters.paperclip`. Each feature recipe declares its navigation and optional verification guidance. Startup, build, and UI typechecking discover these sources and generate ignored indexes and Storybook pages. Reason and benefit A routine change edits its own source files. Aggregate metadata is rebuilt from the merged checkout. There is no sidecar registry, shared review journal, or hash acknowledgment to maintain. Breaking changes The tracked Storybook catalog and index paths are retired. Consumers use `ui/storybook/generated/` or `maps/generated/` after generation. Contributor instructions and the existing feature-gap browser suite use the new paths. Story and overview IDs remain stable. ## What Changed - Move the existing annotations into 262 story files. Preserve classifications, capability associations, exports, and explicit IDs. - Discover all 35 feature recipes. Store section/order beside each recipe and move durable verification routes out of the shared table. - Remove tracked catalogs, inventories, overview pages, and inline preview ordering. Keep authored preview behavior in `preview-base.tsx`. - Generate the Storybook guide, feature/access Markdown indexes, gap report, page-reference inventory, and preview wrapper automatically. - Update the map contracts and maintenance skills to use Git history and revision-specific PR/CI evidence. - Add schema, identity, regeneration, and actual Git merge tests. Run these through the existing UI Vitest suite. Add focused browser navigation checks. This is one coordinated migration. Most of the 367 changed files contain only moved metadata or deleted generated content. Review the generator scripts, map contracts, Storybook configuration, and tests first. No product API or authorization behavior changes. ## Verification Passed: - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`: 35 paired areas and 175 capabilities. - `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --check`: 262 suites and 2,485 authored stories after incorporating current master. - `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs scripts/storybook-catalog.test.mjs scripts/storybook-feature-index.test.mjs`: 28 tests, including independent branches merged in both orders with identical generated output and no tracked changes. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run storybook/map-tooling.test.ts`: the CI entrypoint runs those map tests. - `pnpm check:token-gates`. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` before the final master rebase. - `pnpm build-storybook`: all 2,517 original story/docs URLs retained. Current master contributes exactly four additional recovery stories. - Focused Playwright navigation checks: search and open a feature without examples; expand verification guidance and check source links; retain capability order and follow a related Foundations suite. The final clean Storybook build passed after deleting every ignored map output. Post-rebase UI typechecking and both browser tests passed. The working tree stays clean after generation. The concurrent-cleanup regression fails with `ENOENT` without the fix and passes with it. All GitHub CI gates passed on `00fc7ec18e`, which also received Greptile 5/5 with no unresolved findings. The final merge commit `1c3c5143a6` incorporates master and resolves only the two modify/delete conflicts by retaining removal of the aggregate index and catalog. Master’s new workspace feature and access guidance is preserved. Map validation, catalog generation, overview generation, all 28 map tests, and diff checks pass after conflict resolution. The maintainer explicitly requested merging without another Greptile review. CI has not been rerun to completion on this merge commit. The local repository-wide `pnpm test:run` was stopped before completion after the earlier CI matrix passed; it is not reported as a local pass. No screenshot baselines or production acceptance are claimed. To repeat the browser check against an owned Storybook server: ```sh PAPERCLIP_GAP_STORYBOOK_URL=http://127.0.0.1:6136 pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/storybook-visual/feature-gap-stories.config.ts map-navigation.spec.ts ``` ## Risks - Existing branches need a one-time rebase to move their catalog changes into local annotations. The PR incorporates the recovery changes from current master. - Changing the same story or capability can still produce a meaningful conflict. This removes the shared aggregate bottleneck. - The generator uses Storybook's existing CSF parser. Literal-only annotations and parser regression tests protect the current contract. - Generated Markdown is available after running the generator; the published Storybook provides a browsable guide. - Shared source changes still require review. Removing hashes removes mechanical acknowledgments; it does not establish runtime parity. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository inspection, code execution, and browser-test tools. 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 - [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 on the previously reviewed head `00fc7ec18e`; final conflict-resolution checks are documented above - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups on `00fc7ec18e`; another review was waived by the maintainer - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-13 15:27:23 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	5e8e992df2	fix(storybook): reconcile capability associations and map omissions (#16154 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work. > - The feature map describes user capabilities and verification recipes. > - Storybook holds isolated examples of those capabilities. > - Missing catalog links can hide existing examples. > - Some stories also expose shipped capabilities absent from the map. > - This pull request adds verified source associations and three paired map entries. > - Readers can find existing examples without changing their homes or URLs. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16052, #16049 and #16046. What existing behavior does this improve? Storybook capability lookup and the feature/agent access maps. Current behavior Seventy capabilities have no example link. Some matching stories already exist. Primary-agent preferences and company decision/fast-response services appear only under broad neighboring capabilities. Proposed behavior Add source-supported links across 34 suites. Keep shared foundations in place while cross-listing them. Add primary-agent, decision-model and fast-response capabilities to both upstream maps. Retain explicit simulation and partial-example limits. Reason and benefit The catalog distinguishes missing associations from missing examples. The upstream map describes three existing product capabilities more precisely. Breaking changes None to product behavior, story exports, folders, sidebar titles or URLs. A shared foundation can declare a reasoned `home: "foundations"` override while referencing related capabilities. ## What Changed - Add 55 references across 34 suites. Replace primary-agent suites' reporting-line association with their own capability. - Add three source-reviewed capabilities and their API/actor boundaries to paired maps. - Preserve the shared Foundations home when cross-listing developer design examples. Add a validation regression test. - Record which exports demonstrate each association and what remains simulated or unverified. - Regenerate the catalog and capability data. Preserve all original 223 authored suites and 2,210 story IDs. Retain the two skill-removal stories added by current master, for 2,212 authored stories in total. - Reduce empty example lookups from 70 of 171 capabilities to 59 of 174. Links do not establish complete capability coverage. ## Verification - Passed: 27 catalog/generator/map tests, catalog validation, map structural checks, token gates and skill validation. - Passed: source inventory comparison preserves all authored files, titles, meta IDs and story IDs. - Passed: repository typecheck/build and Storybook build. Final built index has 2,248 entries and preserves all previous entries, including the two skills stories added by current master. - The broad local repository test run was interrupted before completion to resolve a new master conflict. A complete local suite pass is not claimed; fresh CI passed on the reconciled branch. - Browser: Design links to preserved Foundations stories; company-service sections link settings/history/journey suites; decision SetupToHistory passed 12 interaction steps; primary-agent ReplacePrimary passed four steps. No console errors in selected checks. - Greptile: 5/5 on final commit `805a8af62abe589907e7cc6ca1b415ce1e0cc3c0`, with no findings or unresolved threads. - Final-revision CI passed all 57 checks/statuses, including all eight browser shards, server and Runner tests, typecheck and build. The unchanged Cloud-auth mocked-response race seen on a superseded revision did not recur on the final commit. No test expectations were changed. - New agent-access evidence is source-only. Live provider and agent-credential verification is not established. ## Risks - Suite-level associations can represent only selected states. Notes retain those limits and existing review classifications. - In-memory connection drafts do not prove reload persistence. Resume-failure UI does not prove successful continuation. No-op budget controls do not prove relief or resumption. - Three map capabilities document existing behavior. No permission, API, provider or production component changes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, code execution and source inspection. The exact runtime 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>	2026-10-13 08:11:15 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	60bc0d5fee	fix(release): run native builds and canary smoke after skipped channels (#16149 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents for work. > - Published packages need the native runner artifacts from their exact source. > - The release workflow selects one channel and deliberately skips the other channels. > - The native producer used an implicit success condition across those skipped dependencies. > - The merged-source release selected native artifacts but skipped their build and canary publication. > - This pull request makes the existing producer and canary smoke conditions explicit. > - Successful source selection, artifact verification and cancellation checks still apply. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16028. What happened? [Release 38389963483](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38389963483) passed source selection, then skipped native production, canary publication and onboarding smoke. The exact source script requires native artifacts; the API does not expose the source job outputs. The registry canary still points to an older source. Expected behavior The selected release channel builds its required native artifacts, publishes its verified package, then runs the exact-version onboarding smoke. Skipped inactive channels must not suppress these jobs. Steps to reproduce Inspect the linked master-push run at `d67e3507b23041212fa26302ce6de078c5ebcc05`. Compare the successful source job and exact source script with the three skipped jobs. The two existing workflow contract cases also fail against the original conditions. Paperclip version or commit `d67e3507b23041212fa26302ce6de078c5ebcc05`. Deployment mode GitHub Actions release workflow. ## What Changed - Require `!cancelled()`, successful source selection and `required=true` for native production. - Require `!cancelled()` and successful publication for canary onboarding smoke. - Extend the existing workflow tests for selected channels, skipped ancestors, missing outputs, failed jobs and cancellation. ## Verification - The two affected contract cases fail before treatment and pass after treatment. - Focused source controls cover 28 producer and five smoke condition combinations. - Independent source review found no changes to source, trust, artifact, channel, permission or publication gates. - These tests check source predicates. Actual hosted routing and publication must still pass after merge. - Full existing release suite: 70/70 pass. Existing source-verification neighbors: 20/20 pass. - Workflow structure passes actionlint. Full shell lint reports five hints in unchanged commands. - Full hosted checks and fresh Greptile review are pending. ## Risks The producer serves all release channels. The explicit source-result and required-output checks retain each channel's admission gates. Cancellation still prevents new work. This does not change runtime code, packages, agent selection, or stored configurations. [GitHub documents the implicit status check](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/reference/workflows-and-actions/expressions#status-check-functions) and [skipped dependency behavior](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/how-tos/write-workflows/choose-what-workflows-do/use-jobs). ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning and code tools. This session does not expose a verifiable exact model 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 - [ ] 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>	2026-10-13 07:12:11 -05:00
Dotta Paperclip copilot-swe-agent[bot]	9bd820e687	feat(storybook): mirror the complete feature-map index (#16052 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The feature map describes its user-facing capabilities and verification recipes. > - Storybook provides isolated UI examples for those capabilities. > - The previous organization showed only features with primary story suites. > - This pull request derives the complete Storybook index from the upstream map. > - Readers can find the same features in both places and see related examples or explicit gaps. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16046 and #16049. What existing behavior does this improve? Storybook navigation and the downstream feature catalog. Current behavior The sidebar has 28 primary feature homes. The feature map lists 35. The main guide groups suites alphabetically by area slug. Related examples can live under a different feature. Proposed behavior Use the feature map's eight sections and 35 features in the same order. Give each feature an Overview page with all its capabilities, related example links, and missing-example messages. Keep shared foundations outside the product index. Preserve all existing stories and URLs. Reason and benefit Readers can move between the feature map and Storybook without learning a second index. A feature without cataloged examples remains visible. Breaking changes None to existing story IDs or product behavior. Storybook start and build now reject stale generated feature pages and ordering. Run the catalog generator after upstream changes, inspect the output, and review affected source fingerprints. ## What Changed - Generate 35 feature Overview stories and capability data from the upstream map. Generate the inline sidebar order required by Storybook. - Replace the main guide with the full ordered feature index and search. Link all related suites from feature pages, even across primary homes. - Preserve all 223 authored files, 2,210 story IDs, and the existing docs ID. Keep status, implementation, and fixture classifications visible. - Put the generated Markdown catalog in feature-map order. Keep generated guides outside example counts. - Update maintenance and review skills, documentation, and generator tests. Keep the feature map independent of Storybook. ## Verification - Passed: 16 catalog and generator tests; map checks; token gates; both skill validators. - Passed: `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and the Storybook build. - Built-index comparison preserved all 2,211 previous entries and added only 35 feature overviews. Feature order matches the map. - Browser: inspected the complete index and sidebar, searched for Goals, opened its overview, and followed a related suite under Projects. The original suite renders. - Passed: all 8,170 UI tests in 728 files. Browser checks also covered empty search, capability-ID search, missing-example pages, the original editable-text bookmark, the CLI sidebar label, and searching/opening shared foundations. - The broad local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after a failure in the unchanged GitHub chat test `authorizes description edits as the editor, never inheriting the original author's access`. That exact test passed alone without code or expectation changes. A complete local repository suite pass is not established. - Original revision CI passed after one runner retry. The merged revision `5ca01c70716f23974680a8019ddc613035d11bc4` passed fresh CI. Local UI typecheck, catalog checks, 16 generator tests, map checks and token gates pass. - Greptile: 5/5 on final commit `5ca01c70716f23974680a8019ddc613035d11bc4`, with all findings resolved. - Master merge: inspected source drift in 61 catalog entries and regenerated INDEX, preserving upstream notes. Marked the sidebar suite that mounts IssueDetail unreviewed for the new activity query; recorded limits for composer and channel-default changes. No stories removed. - Final Storybook build passed. Browser filename searches for `new-task-composer` and `forms-editors` return the expected feature and shared example. - No visual-baseline or full production acceptance claim. The deeper authored scenario groups remain intact. ## Risks - The parser depends on the feature-map Markdown contract. It rejects unknown index rows, omitted feature recipes, and unexpected generated files. - A suite can reference several capabilities. A link proves catalog association, not complete behavior coverage or production parity. - Storybook treats `/` as a folder separator. Sidebar labels use a comma for that character; the guide and page headings retain the upstream name. - No database, API, authorization, or production component changes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, code execution, and browser inspection. The exact runtime 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> Co-authored-by: copilot-swe-agent[bot] <198982749+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>	2026-10-13 07:01:29 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	d67e3507b2	feat(runner): qualify Codex platform packages and cache hosted builds (#16028 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native execution needs a compatible installed daemon and provider dependency. > - The Codex-default work found missing platform packages and clean-install startup failures. > - Release builds also repeat dependency compilation and run preparation serially. > - This prerequisite packages four daemon targets and verifies installed native startup. > - It also caches hosted Cargo dependencies and overlaps JavaScript preparation with compilation. > - Agent creation defaults and experimental gates stay at the current master behavior. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15683. Refs #15555. Refs #15422. Refs #15926. Refs #15932. Extract runtime and installation support from #15683. This prerequisite has 65 changed files. Creation, onboarding, imports, UI runner selection and graduation remain in the dependent PR. Feature/access maps and the Storybook source catalog stay synchronized. Existing agents keep their execution choices. ## What Changed - Correct the existing runner test fixtures. Reserve owned credential quorum listeners through the existing bounded fixture helper. Keep foreign listeners intact, run actual credential staging once, and preserve its rejection and unchanged-auth assertions. Reuse the durable-resume outer-limit correction. Wait for actual warm-completion and held-authorization callback entry under the existing recovery deadline and surface early request errors. Preserve every semantic assertion. - Retain bounded installation failure diagnostics through the existing qualification receipt upload. Keep the original error, 10-minute deadline and all success checks. - Keep startup ownership until credential preparation and registration drain. Reject duplicate and post-close startup/resume work. Observe shutdown during normal and adopted authentication readiness. Preserve the primary failure and retain private state when cleanup is unconfirmed. - Package Linux x64/ARM64 and macOS Apple Silicon/Intel daemons. Verify target headers, source identities, manifests, and hashes before assembly and installation. - Reuse the existing release producer/consumer workflows. Cache Cargo dependencies by target, OS, compiler, lockfile, and contract inputs. Rebuild workspace binaries. Permit trusted cache writes only for canonical exact-source master pushes. - Overlap JavaScript preparation with native compilation. Join both commands and failure/cancellation cleanup before artifact verification. - Preserve shell positional arguments in the shared SSH runner and apply environment assignments correctly. Reject environment option keys. Six before/after controls and two real SSH subprocess paths pass with zero provider calls; this fix lands before both Codex and Claude defaults. - Admit verified suspended SSH backups during cold controller continuation, using the same full-scope, integrity and lifecycle checks as sandbox targets. Two positive SSH cases fail before; all 14 positive/negative matrix cases pass afterward. Active ownership and corrupt/malformed/nonempty state remain rejected. - Record measured sandbox platform facts through the existing explicit environment probe. Bind facts to the company, effective provider configuration, immutable OCI image and actual captured image binding. Check the returned cleanup receipt. Reject client-authored proof and stale or named boot identities. Creation and discovery allocate nothing. Preserve connection-only behavior. - Resolve the actual remote Codex target and preserve same-host development overrides. Preserve runtime artifact verification. Use actual protocol/model compatibility rather than a numerical CLI version fence. - Resolve the installed Codex login dependency on 64-bit Linux and Mac independently of the daemon libc baseline. Preserve account homes and safe errors. - Fix actual clean-install TOML table comparison. Preserve strict semantic checks, comments, private writes, and malformed-input rejection. Preserve primary startup failures and bounded cleanup. - Document GNU libc 2.39+ and stock Ubuntu sandbox prerequisites. Qualify ARM startup with a scoped distribution profile and unchanged global restrictions. Preserve Windows and Alpine deferral. - Preserve selected and saved native Codex reasoning effort in the existing UI builder, while excluding it from other providers. This small shared correction prevents import edits higher in the stack from dropping effort. - Reuse existing installed-package checks and assertions. Paperclip tarballs contain no Codex native payloads. Official npm dependencies supply the consumer's Codex binaries. All Docker and native builds stay remote. ## Verification Candidate: `271d434c170e74bdedde65d0b13059a55419c943`. It includes current master `e168512f7bdbb6af6ea01954c6d7ed80b91e903e` and preserves prior candidates through ordinary commits. Current [full CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38346601686) is successful on attempt 2. GitHub reports 54 successful checks and four conditional skips, including required verify and browser aggregates, workspace typecheck/tests/build, Linux DB controls, both runner shards and [isolated native compilation](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38346601609). Fresh current-head Greptile is 5/5 with all four threads resolved. The passing build's clean Grok/Codex report records CI merge source `7a82a37438e6e448abc7cc5caa60dc2519a97be0`, 18 installed packages, omitted Codex payloads, official host-only npm dependencies and zero provider calls. Pi setup and its no-prompt lease verification also pass. The first attempt's single 60-second Node archive download timeout remains retained; its DNS/TLS/download cause remains unknown. One unchanged-source retry was requested through the normal Build-job dialog with debug logging disabled. GitHub's attempt 2 graph reports the other CI jobs as well; no second retry or source/deadline relaxation was made. The [final exact-source package campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38347027535) is successful on literal `271d434c170e74bdedde65d0b13059a55419c943`. It passes all four native producers, public Linux package assembly and clean installed consumers on Apple Silicon, Intel Mac and Linux ARM64. The nine qualification-mode skips are intentional; full CI above covers their ordinary gates. Native builds and Docker assembly ran remotely. The predecessor [`dae808` package campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38342104102) remains literal historical evidence. Only tests and the dated record differ from that source; runtime, package and workflow code is unchanged. The reused credential fixture correction passes all 42 canonical Node 24 controls with synthetic data and independent matching-source review, and the current hosted runner shard passes. Production credential behavior is unchanged. Merge hold: current-source CI, fresh 5/5 review and exact-source package qualification pass. Actual code-owner approval and normal protected merge remain pending. No slice has merged or deployed. GitHub CLI authentication needs refresh; the normal signed-in embedded GitHub UI provided this status without credential workarounds. - The master merge preserves both Storybook source-review appendices and the guarded test-home cleanup. All six existing cleanup controls pass without skips. Master's isolated-home helper/test/setup are byte-identical. The two existing whitespace lines in master's unrelated privacy test remain outside this PR's diff. - Canonical Node 24 passes all 24 existing public-install helper tests. Three narrow added cases prove bounded/redacted failure metadata, symlink exclusions, original exception identity, failed diagnostic writes and no false failure on success. The Mac installer now uses `--timing`; at most two 16 KiB tails and 32 structured entries per tail enter the existing receipt upload. Raw argv, URLs, environment, error text and stacks are omitted. A failed receipt explicitly remains FAILED/unqualified/runtime-not-attempted. The 600,000 ms install deadline and every real package/hash/payload/lock/lifecycle/runtime oracle are unchanged. - Canonical Node 24 reproduces the durable-resume outer timeout under controlled fake latency. Only its outer test limit changes to 15 seconds; internal 500 ms/5 second deadlines and usage/effect assertions remain. Controlled warm-recovery and before-bootstrap authorization scheduling delays reproduce their callback polling failures, while the explicit entry signals pass. Early recovery errors surface unchanged. Independent review is clear. Historical mock binaries support the fixture controls; fresh full hosted CI remains decisive. The original hosted callback failure cause is inconclusive. - The composed runner/surfaces/server/E2E TypeScript checks pass. Map checks pass 35 areas/171 capability IDs. Token gates pass. The existing Storybook catalog passes 223 files/2,210 stories; story IDs and classifications remain intact. The current master had 25 inherited stale fingerprints from three changed map recipes. Only those guarded fingerprints and a source-only review note change; all 92 non-map story/component/fixture inputs remain unchanged. Existing classifications are retained. This proves source structure, not visual or live acceptance. - The 65-file contribution audit has no code file crossing from below 1,000 lines to above the limit. Earlier comment cleanup preserves executable emissions, parsed workflows and action pins. Independent cleanup/catalog and three-file reporting reviews are clear. No new workflow, suite, grader or local native/Docker build was added. Prior `dae808` gate evidence: fresh Greptile is 5/5 with four resolved threads, isolated native compilation and the browser aggregate pass. Its first runner shard passes the previous two corrections but fails a different held-authorization cell at the implicit one-second polling deadline. It records 1,672 passes/one failure/three skips. This candidate applies the verified entry-signal correction without changing production deadlines or any semantic assertions. Its original hosted cause remains inconclusive until fresh CI. Previous-source evidence, kept literal: the [exact `16a532` package campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38338806076) passes all four native producers, public Linux package assembly, Apple Silicon, Intel Mac and Linux ARM64 installed consumers. Its fresh review is 5/5 with all four threads resolved. Full CI records 52 successful checks, four conditional skips and the two fixture failures corrected here. This is not a green full-CI candidate or proof for the new source. `64c074fb8da1b31f8d6042c4fef48dc4164e759b` passed [full CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38332726938), 54 checks/four conditional skips, [isolated native compilation](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38332726787/job/115085895328), and fresh Greptile 5/5/all four resolved threads. The hosted transport suite passed 246 tests and startup trust passed 22, closing that source's local fake-binary limitation. These are historical after reconciliation. The [previous exact-source package campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38332921463) built all four platform daemons and passed public Linux package assembly plus Apple Silicon and Linux ARM64 installed consumers. Intel Mac failed: its initial scripts-disabled npm install timed out before lifecycle/runtime assertions. The underlying download/resolution/host cause is unknown because the old helper deleted the npm logs. This is the concrete baseline for the diagnostic change. The failed campaign remains failed; no all-platform signoff or automatic retry is claimed. The earlier `a200495` [four-target campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38283695248) and [scoped ARM qualification](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38291535914) remain component evidence. Cargo restores were cold misses; no warm-cache speedup is claimed. Paperclip tarballs contain no Codex payloads. Official npm dependencies supply Codex on the user's platform. Current-source full workspace typecheck/tests/build, Linux DB controls, static/Rust/native tests, all browser shards and exact-source package consumers must pass. New-agent defaults and final managed onboarding belong to #15683. Actual private Cloud composition, warm/cold signup, task/follow-up and rollback compatibility remain later release gates. Source audits found that ordinary managed onboarding does not run the saved platform probe and Cloud distributes named snapshots without a verified final boot-image binding. These dependent release blockers remain open; prequalified E2E fixtures do not close them. Master adds task-workspace migrations; the final image/migrator and previous-image checks must include them. ARM paid task/follow-up and ordinary OS APT installation are not proven. ## Risks - Multi-target packages require source and header agreement. Missing or mismatched artifacts fail explicitly. Existing execution choices remain unchanged. - Linux requires GNU libc 2.39+ and compatible sandbox prerequisites. The scoped hosted ARM preparation does not qualify arbitrary containers or kernels. Windows, 32-bit ARM, and Alpine remain deferred. - Only dependency crates are cached. Preview jobs cannot write trusted caches. Concurrent command cleanup must preserve the primary failure. - Native-free Paperclip packaging retains official Codex npm dependencies. No Codex payload bundling, schema migration, automatic agent migration, or production deployment is included. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and parallel agents. The exact serving model snapshot and context-window size are not exposed. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-13 06:24:07 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	88bf4c6c1d	refactor(storybook): organize folders and navigation by feature map (#16049 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The feature map describes product areas and verification entry points. > - Storybook has 223 story suites that show production components, proposals, and retained history. > - The parent PR maps those suites to features, but their folders and sidebar still use unrelated groups. > - This pull request puts the existing suites under feature folders and uses the feature map's names and order in the sidebar. > - Explicit meta IDs preserve existing story links while the titles change. > - Contributors can find stories through the same product structure without losing examples. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16046. This is the requested follow-up. Parent #16046 is merged. This PR now targets master, with its single follow-up commit rebased onto the parent squash merge. The Storybook implementation is unchanged by that rebase. Related open Storybook PRs were checked; this change organizes existing suites and adds no product capability. ## What Changed - Move all 223 story files into folders named for their primary feature area. Keep useful scenario groups below the feature's sidebar label. - Order the sidebar by the eight feature-map sections. Put Overview first and shared Foundations last. Leave areas with no stories out of the sidebar. - Move 19 support files into `ui/storybook/support/` and update relative imports and active documentation. - Preserve all 2,210 story IDs and the single docs ID through explicit CSF meta IDs. Keep all entry names and story exports. - Record stable IDs and sidebar titles in the downstream catalog. Validate feature folders, title prefixes, and IDs. Update the maintenance skill and review evidence. ## Verification - Storybook build passed. Built index comparison against parent `75bd3c977cd828d5222823850339e8204f40eb47` found the same 2,211 entries, IDs, and names. - UI typecheck passed (`ui/node_modules/.bin/tsc -b` from `ui`, invoked as `./node_modules/.bin/tsc -b`). - UI Vitest project: 728 files and 8,176 tests passed. - Catalog checker and its nine tests passed. Feature-map checks, token gates, and the maintenance-skill validator passed. - Chromium: nine existing play cases and one render case reached `storyFinished: success` with no page exceptions. The guide rendered, sidebar sections followed map order, and a search for `steering/queue` opened its preserved story link. - Source comparison found only meta title/ID changes, rebased relative references, and updated fixture path text in story files. - To inspect: build Storybook, start `node scripts/serve-storybook-static.mjs --port 6136`, and open the Overview guide. Expand feature folders and use existing story links. - The complete repository suite was not repeated for this organization change. The parent records a backend timeout that passed in isolation, without a complete broad-suite pass. Visual comparisons remain blocked by the unpublished empty baseline. The separate fixture-server story was not run. ## Risks - Open branches that add stories under old paths will need to choose a feature folder and update the catalog. Cross-feature suites have one primary home and retain related capability references. - Sidebar paths change; story and docs IDs remain stable. Automated references to source paths may need the new location. - This is one requested follow-up with 258 changed files, mostly moves. It exceeds the usual review-size guideline because splitting it would leave the sidebar and folder convention partly migrated. - Browser verification samples ten stories, not all 2,210. Existing production/prototype classifications and review gaps remain unchanged. - Required CI gates and a 5/5 review passed on the original head. Fresh checks and review are running for the rebased head. Catalog validation and all nine checker tests passed after rebase; UI, map, skill, and checker contents are identical to the original reviewed head. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact runtime model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and local browser automation. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-12 22:29:22 +00:00
DottaandPaperclip	9e721264e9	feat: maintain Storybook through a downstream feature catalog (#16046 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Storybook supports review of its production UI and proposed designs. > - Its 223 story files have no consistent link to product capabilities or record of component and mock provenance. > - Old compositions can drift while they still look like current product examples. > - This pull request adds two maintenance skills and a catalog that consumes the existing feature map. > - The first audit preserves all stories and fixes proven fixture drift. > - Contributors can now find examples by feature and see what still needs review. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What existing behavior does this improve? Storybook maintenance, feature discovery, and the accuracy of isolated UI examples. Current behavior Stories are already centralized under `ui/storybook/`, but their sidebar has 51 top-level groups. Production components, local prototypes, and historical designs are not consistently distinguished. The old guide uses manual coverage claims. GitHub searches found no duplicate feature-map catalog change. Proposed behavior Keep existing story locations and IDs. Add a downstream catalog keyed to stable feature capabilities. Record product status, rendered subject, data boundary, and declared review dependencies separately. Use dedicated maintenance and review skills to reconcile drift and report evidence. Reason and benefit The catalog makes existing examples reusable without treating mock behavior or old designs as production acceptance. The feature map remains independent of Storybook. ## What Changed - Add `maintain-storybook` and `review-storybook` skills with contributor guidance. - Inventory all 223 story files. Generate a feature index and provide searchable navigation in the existing Overview story. Track direct subjects through relative imports and local wrappers, including the primitives demonstrated by foundation suites. - Add a checker for inventory, capability references, duplicate IDs, and declared-source drift, with eight regression tests. The parser test covers real nested CSF files, export filters, explicit IDs, and play counts. - Preserve historical designs and classify mixed wrappers. Record the initial audit and remaining parity work. - Align the question-dismiss/send fixture with production behavior. Add dismissal and confirmation-reopen regressions and repair the editor selector. - Exclude three exported fast-response fixtures from story discovery and add the missing render-time callback spy. ## Verification - Passed: `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs`, `node --test scripts/storybook-catalog.test.mjs` (8 tests), and `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`. - Passed: validators for both new skills, `pnpm check:token-gates`, `pnpm -r typecheck`, and `pnpm build`. - Passed: final Storybook build; nine selected browser `play` cases; three fast-response render cases; feature-guide search/link navigation; question-fixture reset on reload. - Built-index comparison preserved all 2,208 original story IDs and added only two new regression cases. - Passed: `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui` (728 files, 8,176 tests). - The full `pnpm test:run` has reported a 15-second timeout in the untouched backend case `connects advertised Workspace gmail.read without mutating definitions in authenticated`. The exact test passed standalone without changing code, expectations, or timeouts. The remaining broad run was stopped after this failure. The full suite is not verified. - Visual comparison is blocked by the existing empty baseline manifest. The managed-accounts API/DB fixture was not started. See `maps/storybook-map/REVIEW.md` for exact scope. ## Risks - This is an initial inventory and targeted audit. 188 suites still require deeper state and fixture parity review. - Review hashes cover declared dependencies. They do not follow all transitive production imports or prove semantic correctness. - The catalog requires upkeep when stories, mapped recipes, or declared subjects change. Shared mocks still need feature-by-feature contract review. - No production application source, database schema, or upstream feature-map contract changes. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex. Used reasoning, shell tools, file editing, and Chromium browser verification. The exact runtime model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] 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>	2026-10-12 17:20:00 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	f5346c05b9	ci: route PR admission through reserved AWS capacity (#16042 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip uses CI to verify changes before release. > - Trusted PR tests can run on isolated AWS workers. > - Their runner-selection job currently waits for GitHub-hosted capacity. > - A large hosted test queue therefore blocks admission to AWS. > - A dedicated routing workflow lets us reserve capacity for metadata validation. > - This PR moves the routing job to reserved AWS capacity after the bootstrap workflow and pool are available. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Issue type CI reliability enhancement. Where is the issue? The Select trusted runner job in PR CI. What's wrong? The routing job competes with a large hosted test queue. Its sampled median wait was about 20 minutes. AWS tests cannot begin before this job finishes. Suggested fix Add a protected reusable routing workflow. Deploy its dedicated AWS pool, then switch the PR caller in a follow-up PR. No overlapping open PR or issue was found. ## What Changed - Call ci-routing.yml on protected master from pr-trusted.yml. - Check the canonical repository and approved PR author/sender before allocating reserved AWS metadata capacity. Unapproved PRs continue to use hosted routing. - Permit approved manual routing canaries on protected master. - Use a validated roster snapshot for placement. Invalid JSON, missing settings, stale snapshots, and unapproved identities select hosted routing without a placement-time JSON parse. - Preserve the full in-job identity, rerun actor, repository, head, merge, and stack checks. - Update stack-scope and placement regression tests and document the pool and rollback. ## Verification - The routing scripts and placement expression tests passed (44 tests), routing-plus-shard tests passed (56 tests), and the existing .github/scripts suite passed (381 tests). - Existing routing allow/deny scenarios passed with the extracted script (16 cases). - actionlint passed with the dedicated custom runner label declared in its local configuration. - git diff --check passed. - Full pnpm typecheck/test/build cannot run in this worktree because dependencies are not installed. The change is limited to workflow YAML and Node tests. - The dedicated pool is deployed with two warm On-Demand workers and a four-worker ceiling. The routing qualification passed: it started about five seconds after workflow creation, selected AWS, and finished while the hosted gate in the same PR remained queued. - Bootstrap https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16039 is merged. The deployed group now authorizes only ci-routing.yml on protected master, and its master canary passed. ## Risks - The maintainer explicitly approved a queued-CI admin bypass after current-head Greptile 5/5 and focused verification. - Activation requires the deployed routing Fleet and its group to authorize the routing workflow on protected master. Keep the bootstrap dependency explicit. - The group must authorize only ci-routing.yml on protected master and canonical repository ID 1170821064. - The routing workflow runs no checkout or PR code and has read-only permissions. The test admission checks are unchanged. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex, with reasoning, shell tools, and file editing. The exact runtime 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 (focused routing and workflow tests; full pnpm commands are blocked by missing worktree dependencies) - [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] Required CI status checked; the maintainer explicitly approved admin bypass for queued CI after clean current-head review and focused verification - [x] Greptile is 5/5 on `993fbe695a` with no open findings or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-12 16:47:57 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	7d9b93aee2	docs: establish paired feature and agent access maps (#16025 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Contributors use the feature map to understand and verify product capabilities. > - Agents need APIs and usable entry points within their permission boundaries. > - Product recipes and agent access need separate records with shared capability IDs. > - This pull request establishes that contract and gives maintenance ownership of both maps. > - The benefit is repeatable access review without changing product behavior or permissions. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #15983, which added the portable verification skills and updated the feature map. This is its contract-only follow-up. Related: #15288 added the original feature map. Issue type Missing documentation and maintenance contract. Where is the issue? The product map, its missing agent access companions, and the verification skills. What's wrong? There is no shared convention for API presence, agent entry points, permission boundaries, access gaps, or evidence. An API declaration does not prove that a permitted native or remote agent can use it. Suggested fix Keep the product and agent access maps as siblings under `maps/`. Reuse capability IDs. Record representative source inventory separately from operation review and live proof. Keep both maps aligned through the maintenance skill. ## What Changed - Move the existing product map to `maps/feature-map/`. Preserve its recipes and Poteto format. Update relative links and add companion links. - Add `maps/agent-access-map/` with 35 area files and 171 matching capability IDs. Seed representative API operations, agent paths, policies and known gaps from the reviewed source inventory. Mark entries as `baseline`, `source-only`, and live verification `not-run`. - Define the shared contract in `maps/README.md`. Track API presence, agent availability, policy, evidence and review depth separately. Require operation enumeration before marking a broad capability operation-reviewed. - Extend `maintain-verification-skill` to reconcile both maps and inspect actual route policy and production tool admission. Update creation, verification, notices and contributor references to use the shared contract. - Add `scripts/check-maps.mjs` and ten regression tests. Check matching areas/IDs, indexes, references, contract fields, API method/path examples, justified exceptions and evidence-state consistency. - Keep the coverage inventory unchanged. Preserve skill invocation policies and both MIT license blocks. No product API, permission, UI, runtime helper, migration, dependency or workflow changes. ## Verification - Passed: `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` reports 35 paired areas and 171 matching capability IDs. All local map references resolve. - Passed: `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs` runs ten tests. Fixtures cover missing companions, renamed/orphan/duplicate IDs, broken references, missing operation fields, empty exceptions, missing API examples, empty policy fields, and verified evidence without passed verification. - Passed: metadata validation for all three verification skills. Skill and contributor links resolve. Invocation policies and both license blocks are unchanged. - Compared relocated recipes with current master. Contents differ only in relative links and companion links. `coverage.json` is byte-for-byte unchanged. Master's updated read-only interaction test reference is retained. - Passed: `git diff --check`. The branch starts from current master and contains only this contract change. - Repository-wide typecheck, tests and build were not run locally for this documentation and Node structural-check scope. Live agent access was not exercised. Those gaps are explicit in the baseline entries; the structural check does not certify behavior. CI and automated review are pending. ## Risks - The companions are representative source baselines. They are not complete operation inventories or passed agent journeys. - The checker cannot establish actual permissions, native tool admission, operation completeness or truthful live evidence. Maintenance must inspect source and verify with the actual permitted agent context. - External links to the old product-map directory may need updates. Repository references have been updated. - Existing access gaps and board/user restrictions remain recorded. This contract does not change authority or implement missing paths. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex assisted with this change. The session does not expose the exact serving model ID, configured context-window size, or reasoning setting. Capabilities used: source analysis, file edits, shell commands, and structural regression tests. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-12 14:52:28 -05:00
Devin Foley devinfoley Claude Fable 5.1	8227485372	perf(ci): cache the Runner's release crate artifacts keyed by their inputs (#15932 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Its trusted PR workflow builds the Runner's Rust binary in five jobs: Typecheck + Release Registry, Build, Canary Dry Run, and the `rust` and `vitest 2/2` lanes of Verify Paperclip Runner. The `Build` job is the slowest check in almost every green run (461s, 489s and 515s in runs 38180574768, 38182717052 and 38183149920 on 2026-10-11). > - Each of those jobs restores master's `release-runner-v2` dependency cache. That cache holds only third-party crates. `rust-cache` removes workspace crates when it saves, and a fresh checkout invalidates cargo's mtime fingerprints for workspace crates in any case. So cargo compiles `paperclip-runner-core` in release mode from scratch on every run. The job logs show one `Compiling` line and 28s to 49s for it. > - 18 of the 239 commits on `master` in the seven days before this change touched the crate's inputs. The other 221 compiled the same sources to the same binary again. > - This pull request adds a second cache that holds only that crate's release artifacts (about 70 MB). The key is made from the compiler, the checkout root and a hash of every input the build reads. The master Rust lane writes it. A pull request whose merge tree has byte-identical inputs restores it and marks the artifacts newer than the checkout, so cargo keeps them. Every other pull request misses and compiles as before. > - The benefit is about 28s to 49s less on `Build`, which is the run's critical path, and the same on Typecheck, Canary Dry Run and two Runner lanes, for about nine of ten pull requests. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No GitHub issue exists for this. The description below follows the enhancement template. What existing behavior does this improve? The time the trusted PR workflow spends to compile the Runner's own crate on every run. Subsystem affected CI / build Current behavior Every PR job that builds the Runner binary compiles `paperclip-runner-core` in release mode from scratch. The compile takes 28s to 49s on the `runs-on` fleet (one `Compiling paperclip-runner-core` line, then `Finished release profile` in runs 38169436532 to 38183149920 on 2026-10-11). The shared Rust cache cannot help: it holds only third-party crates, and a fresh checkout gives every source a new mtime, which makes cargo discard the crate's fingerprints. Proposed behavior The master Rust lane in `release-verify.yml` saves the crate's release artifacts under a key made from the compiler, the checkout root and a hash of every input the release build reads. The PR jobs that build the binary restore that entry read-only. On a hit, a script sets the mtime of every restored artifact to now, so cargo sees every source as older than the build and keeps the artifacts. `pnpm build` then prints `Finished release profile` in under a second for that crate. On a miss, cargo compiles the crate exactly as before. Reason and benefit About 28s to 49s off `Build`, the slowest check in almost every green run, and the same off the Typecheck, Canary Dry Run and two Verify Paperclip Runner lanes. The saving applies to every pull request whose merge tree does not change the crate's inputs, which was 221 of 239 `master` commits in the week before this change. Breaking changes None. The checks are unchanged. A miss or an eviction costs the compile time it costs today and nothing else. Additional context This is a workflow change. `pr.yml` calls `pr-trusted.yml@master`, so this pull request's own run uses the current reader steps, and the writer runs only on a master push. The saving becomes visible on the first PR runs after the merge and after the next master push has written the entry. ## What Changed - `scripts/runner-release-crate-cache.mjs` (new): the one place that defines the cached path list (`CACHED_PATHS`), the hashed inputs (`HASHED_INPUTS`) and the files a restore must contain (`REQUIRED`). The `scope` subcommand prints the platform, the `rustc --version --verbose` release, commit and host, and a hash of the checkout root. The `mark-current` subcommand sets the mtime of every restored artifact to now and prints a `paperclip.runner-release-crate.v1` JSON line with the file count and bytes. If the restored set lacks any of the seven files cargo's freshness check reads or checks for (the fingerprint hash and dep-info of each unit, the lib's rlib and rmeta, the binary under `deps`), it removes the restored files, prints `action: discarded` naming the missing file, and exits 0, so cargo compiles as on a miss. - `.github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml`: after the `release-runner-v2` restore in `typecheck_release_registry`, `build` and `canary_dry_run`, and in the `rust` and `vitest 2/2` lanes of `verify_paperclip_runner` (new matrix key `release_crate: true`), three steps: compute the key scope, `actions/cache/restore` the crate under `runner-release-crate-v1-<scope>-<hashFiles(...)>` with no `restore-keys`, and run `mark-current` when `cache-hit == 'true'`. The `hashFiles` list covers the toolchain pin, the manifests and lockfile, the crate sources, the protocol tree and the three fixture trees the test modules include (two under the Runner package and `tests/runner-e2e/fixtures` at the repository root). - `.github/workflows/release-verify.yml`: in the Rust lane of an own-repository master push, after the debug warm-up: compute the key scope, look the key up (`lookup-only: true`), and on a miss run `cargo clean --release -p paperclip-runner-core` and `pnpm build:binary` (the exact command the readers run, so the entry carries no test-profile variants), then `actions/cache/save` the same path list under the same key. - `scripts/__tests__/runner-release-crate-cache.test.mjs` (new, 10 tests, in `test:release-registry`): the path list and hashed inputs are the expected ones and exist; every `include_str!` and `include_bytes!` in the crate sources resolves under a hashed input, whether its argument is a literal or a `concat!` of literals, `env!("CARGO_MANIFEST_DIR")` and macro metavariables, and any other form fails the test by name (this guard found the `test/fixtures` tree during development and the `tests/runner-e2e/fixtures` tree in review); the parser itself is tested on a synthetic crate for each supported form and six rejected ones; every PR reader restores after the dependency cache and marks before its build command with the script's exact path list and key and no `restore-keys`; the Verify lanes are gated by `release_crate`; the writer runs after the checks with the lookup, the clean and build, and the save under the readers' exact path list and key; the scope changes with the compiler and the checkout root and survives a missing `rustc`; `mark-current` makes every artifact newer than the checkout, leaves a dependency's artifacts alone, discards a restore missing any one of the seven required files (one case each, checking the named reason), and still marks a restore missing any one of the seven files cargo does not need. ## Review fixes Greptile's two findings on the first commit were both valid and are fixed in the second commit: - Incomplete caches looked usable. `REQUIRED` checked four files, but cargo's freshness check needs seven. Measured with cargo 1.97.1 on the real crate (restore, touch the artifacts, delete one file, build): without the lib's fingerprint hash, dep-info, rlib or rmeta it recompiles the crate (24s to 27s); without the bin's fingerprint hash, dep-info or the binary under `deps` it relinks (1.5s); without either `.json` fingerprint record, either rustc `.d` file, the uplifted binary or its `.d` it reports the crate fresh in 0.15s and recreates the uplifted binary from `deps`, and the staging step then copies it. `REQUIRED` now lists exactly the seven files, the glob for the binary under `deps` excludes the `.d` beside it, and the test removes each of the seven in turn (discarded, naming it) and each of the other seven in turn (still marked). - Composed include paths escaped the guard. The regex matched only `include_str!("literal")` and skipped `include_str!(concat!(...))`, which the crate uses four times (30 of 34 includes were checked). The guard now parses every include argument and resolves the `concat!` forms; one of them, in `provider_events.rs`, reads `tests/runner-e2e/fixtures/native-completion/terminal-tool-carrier.json` at the repository root, outside every hashed input. It is test-only, so today's release binary does not read it, but the key is meant to cover every include whatever its build, so `tests/runner-e2e/fixtures/*` (9 files, 80 KB) joins `HASHED_INPUTS` and the six key embeddings in the two workflows. With the first commit's input list, the new guard fails on exactly that include. - `doc/RELEASE-AUTOMATION-SETUP.md`: a "Runner release crate cache" section under the Runner verification dependency cache, with the key, the writer, the readers and the trust boundary. - `package.json`: the new test file in `test:release-registry`. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/runner-release-crate-cache.test.mjs`: 10 tests pass, three consecutive runs. - The second commit, with the real toolchain on the real crate (`rustc 1.97.1`, cold build 2m20s, the crate's artifacts 74 MB): every source touched to a fresh-checkout mtime and the archived artifacts restored, cargo compiles (`Compiling paperclip-runner-core`, 24.8s and 25.1s, the two controls); restored and marked by `mark-current`, `Finished release profile in 0.16s` with no `Compiling`, and the same on a second build. Then, for each of the fourteen files cargo wrote for the two units, one at a time: restored, marked and that file deleted, cargo recompiles without any of the seven `REQUIRED` files and reports fresh without any of the other seven; restored with that file deleted and run through `mark-current`, the seven required ones print `action: discarded` naming the file and the others print `marked`. A restore holding only the seven required files builds fresh in 0.15s, cargo recreates the uplifted binary, and `stage-runner-binary.mjs` copies it into `dist/bin`. - `node --test '.github/scripts/tests/.test.mjs'`: 378 of 381 pass. The 3 failures are in `docker-canary-promotion.test.mjs` and fail the same way on an unmodified `master` checkout in this sandbox (the stand-in docker writes no `calls.jsonl`). - `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/e2e-shard.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/run-vitest-stable-shard.test.mjs`: 99 of 101 pass; the 2 failures spawn `pnpm`, which is not on this sandbox's PATH, and fail the same way on `master`. - Both workflows parse as YAML. No job has a duplicate step name or step id. - The mechanism, with the real toolchain (`rustc 1.97.1`, the package's pin) on a copy of the crate: a cold `cargo build --release -p paperclip-runner-core --bin paperclip-runnerd` (2m23s here). Then the artifact set was archived with `tar`, removed, every source re-copied so each had a new mtime, and the set restored: - restored, not marked: `Compiling paperclip-runner-core`, 24.6s (the control; this is what CI does today); - restored and marked by `mark-current`: `Finished release profile in 0.15s`, no `Compiling`; a second build is the same; - one Rust source edited after a marked restore: `Compiling`, 24.0s; - one protocol schema edited after a marked restore: `Compiling`, 23.9s (the protocol files enter cargo's dep-info as absolute paths and are hashed into the key); - the rlib removed from a restored set: `mark-current` prints `action: discarded, reason: incomplete: the lib rlib is missing` and removes the rest, and cargo compiles. - Not run here: the workflow steps themselves. `pr.yml` pins `pr-trusted.yml@master`, so this pull request's own `Build` job runs the current reader steps, and the writer runs only on a master push. The first PR runs after the merge and after the next master push show the `Restore the Runner release crate` step's result and the `paperclip.runner-release-crate.v1` line in their `Build` logs. ## Risks - Correctness: a reader can only restore artifacts that master built from inputs byte-identical to its own merge tree, because every input the build reads is in the key, and the key has no prefix match. A pull request cannot write. The trust boundary is unchanged: master writes, a pull request restores master's entry. - An input the build reads that is outside the hashed patterns would let a stale artifact pass. The release dep-info lists the crate sources and the protocol schemas and fixtures; all are hashed. The guard test resolves every `include_str!` and `include_bytes!` in the crate, literal or `concat!`, and fails if one lands outside the hashed inputs or uses a form it cannot resolve, so a new include form cannot slip past it by not matching a regex. - GitHub-hosted runners check out under `/home/runner/work`, the `runs-on` fleets under `/home/runner/_work`. Cargo records the included protocol files as absolute paths, so an entry from one root is useless under the other. The checkout root is in the key, so the other root misses instead of restoring something cargo then discards. - A cache that does not keep mtimes on restore changes nothing: the artifacts are then already newer than the checkout, and `mark-current` sets them to now in any case. - Cost: one new entry of about 70 MB per distinct input set, written only by the master Rust lane on a miss, plus one `cargo clean` and `build:binary` (about 40s to 50s) on that lane when the inputs changed. The readers pay one restore of about 70 MB (two to three seconds at the fleet's observed restore speed) and a sub-second `mark-current`. - An incomplete entry (a writer that saved a partial set) is discarded by `mark-current` and costs one compile, the same as a miss. ## Model Used - Claude (Anthropic), model id `claude-fable-5-1` (Claude Fable 5.1), extended thinking, with tool use (shell, file editing, GitHub CLI, a local Rust toolchain for the experiment) in a Paperclip 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 branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-10-12 11:25:31 -07:00
Devin Foley	4f399cec9f	fix(docker): skip the full-tree ownership walk on routine boots (#15992 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The Docker image keeps all instance state under `PAPERCLIP_HOME`, and deployments mount a volume there > - Before it drops privileges, the entrypoint makes sure that the `node` user owns the home (#10530) > - The ownership probe is a first-mismatch `find` over the whole tree. When ownership is correct, `-quit` never fires, so every boot stats every file on the volume > - On homes with many agent worktrees and `node_modules` trees, this walk takes minutes before Node starts. That is close to common 300s healthcheck windows > - This pull request keeps a cheap shallow probe on every boot. It runs the full-tree probe only once per volume and node UID/GID, and records the result in a marker file > - The benefit is that routine boots no longer scale with the file count, and the original root-owned-volume fix stays in place ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #10431 (the open follow-up about the remaining cost of the ownership walk). Related: #10530 (the change that added the full-tree probe). What happened? On a hosted multi-instance deployment, we measured the time from container start to the first app log line. Instances with many files on the volume (agent worktrees with `node_modules`) took about 190-235s. Small instances took 5-22s. One 30 GB volume with few files took 24s, so the cost follows the file count, not the volume size. Almost all of this time is the `find "$home_dir" $ ! -user node -o ! -group node $ -print -quit` walk in `scripts/docker-entrypoint.sh`. When ownership is already correct, `-quit` never fires, so the walk stats every inode on every boot. Expected behavior When ownership is already correct, the entrypoint pre-start phase is short and does not depend on the number of files in `PAPERCLIP_HOME`. A fresh root-owned volume, a UID/GID remap, and an upgrade from an older image are still repaired before the privilege drop. Steps to reproduce 1. Run the image with a volume on `/paperclip` that holds a few hundred thousand files, all owned by `node:node`. 2. Restart the container. 3. Compare the container start time with the first server log line. The gap grows with the file count, even though no `chown` runs. Paperclip version or commit `master` at `a9830414c7` Deployment mode Docker production image (any platform that mounts a volume on `PAPERCLIP_HOME`) ## What Changed - `scripts/docker-entrypoint.sh`: the ownership probe is now tiered. - Every boot runs a shallow probe (`find -maxdepth 3`) over the home and its first three levels. A fresh root-owned mount and a UID/GID remap both change the owner of the home directory, so this probe catches them. - The full-tree probe runs only when `PAPERCLIP_HOME/.paperclip-ownership-verified` is missing or records a different node UID/GID (format `v1 <uid>:<gid>`). This catches deep mismatches, including the first boot after an upgrade from an older image. - Any mismatch repairs the whole tree with `chown -R node:node`, as before. After a clean probe or a repair, the entrypoint writes the marker as the `node` user (through `gosu`), so the marker never trips the shallow probe. A failed marker write is ignored: the only cost is a full probe on the next boot. If `find` exits non-zero without a mismatch (for example, an I/O error), the walk is incomplete, so the entrypoint does not write the marker and the next boot probes again. - `scripts/docker-entrypoint.sh`: timestamped log lines at entrypoint start, around the full probe and the repair (with durations), and right before the `exec` of the server. You can now measure the pre-start phase from the container log. - `server/src/__tests__/docker-entrypoint.test.ts`: the `find` stub now tells the shallow probe from the full probe. New tests cover each path (see Verification). - `doc/DOCKER.md`: documents the marker, how to force a full check, and the new log lines. ## Verification - `cd server && npx vitest run src/__tests__/docker-entrypoint.test.ts src/__tests__/container-init-reaping.test.ts src/__tests__/docker-build-stamp.test.ts`: 40 passed. New cases: - correct ownership + current marker → shallow probe only, no full walk, no `chown` - current marker + deep-only mismatch → full walk skipped (this is the documented trade-off) - no marker (upgrade) → one full walk, no `chown`, marker written as `v1 1000:1000` - no marker + deep mismatch → full walk finds it, `chown -R`, marker written - root-owned top level with a current marker → `chown -R` without a full walk - full walk fails without a mismatch → no `chown`, no marker, retry logged - marker for another UID/GID → full walk runs again, marker rewritten as `v1 1001:1001` - timestamped `starting`, `ownership repair finished in Ns`, and `starting app as node` lines, in order, before the command runs - The new tests fail against the old script. The 11 existing tests pass unchanged. - `cd server && npx tsc --noEmit`: passes. - `shellcheck -s sh scripts/docker-entrypoint.sh`: clean. `dash -n`: syntax OK. - Manual run with the real `find` (BSD find, script run under `dash`) against a 200k-file tree. Only `id`/`usermod`/`groupmod`/`chown`/`gosu` were stubbed, and `node` was mapped to the local user and group: - boot 1, no marker, one deep group mismatch → full probe, `chown -R`, marker written - boot 2, marker present → no full probe, no `chown` - boot 3, no marker, clean tree → full probe, no `chown`, marker written - boot 4, marker present, clean → no full probe, no `chown` - boot 5, top-level group mismatch with marker → `chown -R` - I did not build the image or measure boot time in a container. Docker was not available on the machine I used. On a warm local disk the full walk is sub-second, so the local timings say nothing about cold network block storage. ## Risks - Once the marker is current, a mismatch deeper than three levels is not detected automatically. Examples: files written as root by `docker exec` or a restore run as root, after the first verified boot. Before this change, those files were repaired on the next boot. The workaround is in `doc/DOCKER.md`: delete the marker and restart. A remap, a fresh volume, and a root-owned top level are still detected on every boot. - On the first boot after an upgrade, each existing volume pays one full walk (the same cost as today). Later boots skip it. - The marker is a new dotfile in `PAPERCLIP_HOME`. Backups and copies that include the home carry it along. This is safe, because the marker records the UID/GID that it verified, and a different UID/GID forces a new full probe. - The non-root path (restricted PodSecurity, OpenShift) does not change, apart from two new stdout log lines. ## Model Used - Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`, 1M context) via Claude Code, with tool use (shell, file editing). Default reasoning mode. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] 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	2026-10-12 10:22:43 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	db2f00947b	fix(runner): include Claude ACP in the server package (#15912 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The server ships a copy of Paperclip Runner for native agent execution. > - The Claude ACP bridge is a runner dependency, but it was absent from the server package. > - The runner resolves this bridge dynamically, so the import-based packaging check missed it. > - A Claude session then failed before startup and showed a generic connection error. > - This pull request ships the qualified bridge and reports a missing runtime with repair steps. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What happened? A server install with the vendored runner could not load `@agentclientprotocol/claude-agent-acp/package.json`. The runtime test suggested checking the model or provider connection. The task reported an interrupted runner session. Expected behavior The server package includes its qualified Claude ACP runtime. A missing bundled runtime reports an installation error and explains how to repair it. Steps to reproduce 1. Use a server install with the vendored runner and no Claude ACP bridge. 2. Select the Paperclip Runner ACP harness and the Claude provider. 3. Run the runtime test or open a session. 4. Observe a missing-module failure before Claude starts. Paperclip version or commit Reproduced on `e733bddc45`. This branch is based on current master. Deployment mode Self-hosted server built from source. Related: #15224 upgrades the Claude bridge. This PR fixes its omission from the server package and keeps the current qualified version. A future bridge upgrade must update the server pin too. ## What Changed - Add Claude ACP `0.73.0` to the server dependencies and bundled dependencies. - Pin the qualified Claude SDK and bridge dependencies in the npm bundle producer graph. Publish its native packages as consumer optional dependencies instead of shipping the producer executable. - Bind source-built vendored runners to the shared pnpm dependency store while retaining the server manifest as the provider authority. Keep published npm and self-rooted deployment roots unchanged. - Include dynamically resolved Claude and Codex bridges in the vendor dependency check. - Preserve the missing-package category through the sidecar, Rust transport, and native session executor. Stop automatic retries for this installation failure. - Show Runtime missing in the runtime test and task thread. Explain the reinstall or rebuild, server restart, and runtime test steps. - Add regression tests and document the repair procedure. ## Verification - Red/green comparison with the production sidecar: the same missing-package setup returns a raw require-stack error on the original code and an actionable, non-retryable missing-runtime error on this branch. - The rebuilt server's vendored Claude installation probe passes using the source-server authority selected by the launcher, without starting a provider or making a model request. - Focused server verification: 830 tests passed. Runner installation and sidecar error tests: 83 passed, with 6 platform-specific skips. Packaging tests: 28 passed. Rust transport tests: 7 passed. - Source/deployment authority tests: 3 passed. Red/green packaging tests include a Linux-produced Claude SDK bundle, actual npm pack, and closed executable admission on Linux x64 and macOS ARM64/x64. - Full UI suite: 8,113 tests passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on the rebased branch. - Full current-head CI passed, including all general and serialized test lanes, Runner Rust/Vitest verification, typecheck, build, and all eight e2e shards. Greptile reviewed `d6a2741834ff922956560f2f689382827bbaf9e0` at 5/5 with no unresolved threads. - Local full-suite limitation: an earlier parallel attempt hit Postgres startup failures and timeouts; the affected server tests and a database fixture passed in isolation. The subsequent serial `pnpm test:run` was stopped while still running after complete CI passed. Focused local tests, full UI tests, typecheck, and build completed as listed above. - Token gates and `git diff --check` passed. ## Risks - Bundling the Claude bridge increases the server package size. The producer graph retains the qualified SDK version and existing isolation patch. Native platform declarations move to the published server manifest, while the runtime keeps its exact version, declared-slot, no-follow, and executable digest checks. - The new failure category is permanent. Operators must repair the server installation before they retry the task. - Existing failed runs retain their recorded error. The clearer message applies to new runtime tests and runs. - No database schema or migration changes. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The system reports the model family; the exact deployment ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, browser inspection, tool use, and code execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-12 06:51:22 -05:00
Devin Foley Bender Claude Fable 5.1 devinfoley	2223b7de9e	perf(ci): stop building the standalone packages inside the public-install verifier (#15908 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Every pull request runs the `Build` check. Its last step is the public npm install verifier, `scripts/verify-grok-npm-install.mjs`, which stages the eighteen public packages reachable from the server and the CLI, packs them, and installs them in a clean consumer. > - Before it stages anything, the verifier runs `scripts/build-standalone-public-packages.mjs`. That script installs and compiles the seven sandbox-provider plugins that live outside the pnpm workspace: one network `pnpm install --ignore-workspace` and one `tsc` per plugin. The line was copied from the build block of `release.sh` when the verifier was written in #14024. > - release.sh needs that build because it publishes those plugins. The verifier does not for anything it stages. Its package closure follows `workspace:` specs from the server and the CLI, and a `workspace:` spec can only name a workspace package, so none of the eighteen packages it packs is a standalone package and no tarball reads that build's output. > - One optional path at the end of the verifier does read it: qualification-package retention, which `docker-runner-check.yml` enables with `PAPERCLIP_RUNNER_QUALIFICATION_PACKAGES_DIR` after running only `pnpm build`, packs the Daytona plugin from its `dist`. The PR `Build` job never sets that variable. > - The timing line from #15868 and #15888 puts the verifier's staging phase at 75.8s on the latest run, of which the staged sources, the bundled installs and the packs account for 46.5s. The rest, about 29s, is the work before staging, and the standalone build is almost all of it. `Build` at 433-530s is the slowest check in most PR runs once the server shards drop, so that time sits on the run's critical path. > - This pull request runs the standalone build only when retention is requested, keeps the `ui-dist` copy the server package needs, and times both on the timing line so what is left before staging is visible. > - The benefit is a `Build` job about 21-28s shorter, with no change to what the verifier installs or checks, no loss of coverage for the standalone build because Canary Dry Run still runs it through `release.sh`, and no change to the retention path that reads it. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Replaces #15892, which GitHub closed automatically when the branch of #15888 (its base at the time) was deleted on merge. Same two commits, rebased onto `master` on top of #15888 (`1ac48aff`), #15868 (`026bdcd0`) and #15861 (`85f4205d`), which are all merged. #15892 reached Greptile 5/5 with every check green on the same content; the review history is there. What existing behavior does this improve? The `Build` PR check. Its public npm install verifier builds the seven standalone sandbox-provider plugins before it stages the eighteen packages it installs, and none of those packages uses that build. Subsystem affected CI and release scripts (`scripts/verify-grok-npm-install.mjs`, `scripts/build-standalone-public-packages.mjs`). Current behavior The verifier runs `node scripts/build-standalone-public-packages.mjs` and then `bash scripts/prepare-server-ui-dist.sh` before it stages any package, on every run. The first script removes each sandbox-provider plugin's `node_modules`, runs `pnpm install --ignore-workspace` against the registry, links the in-repo plugin SDK, and runs the plugin's `tsc` build, four plugins at a time. On the last `Build` run before this change ([38146108750](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38146108750)) `stage_packages_ms` was 75.8s and the staged sources, bundled installs and packs inside it took 0.9s, 15.7s and 29.9s, which leaves about 29s before staging. The verifier's package closure, computed in the same way as the script computes it, contains eighteen workspace packages and no sandbox-provider plugin. Proposed behavior Run the standalone build only when `PAPERCLIP_RUNNER_QUALIFICATION_PACKAGES_DIR` is set, because that is the one path that reads it, and report it as `stage_standalone_build_ms` when it runs. Always run the `ui-dist` copy before staging. With `PAPERCLIP_RELEASE_REUSE_UI_DIST=1`, which the verifier already sets, that copies the `ui/dist` that `pnpm build` produced into `server/ui-dist`, which the server package publishes. Report that copy as `stage_ui_dist_ms` on the timing line. Leave `release.sh` unchanged, so the release flow and Canary Dry Run still build the standalone packages where they are published. Reason and benefit The verifier proves that the eighteen public packages install cleanly from the public registry. The standalone build adds seven network installs and compiles whose output is never packed. Removing it from the PR path shortens the staging phase by about 21-28s. Measured on this PR's first commit ([38150787810](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38150787810)): `stage_packages_ms` 54.2s against 75.8s, with `stage_ui_dist_ms` 21ms, and the time before staging, `stage_packages_ms` minus the four staging keys, down from about 29s to under 0.1s. Breaking changes None. The same eighteen packages are staged, packed, checked and installed from the same sources. The retention path builds exactly what it built before. `scripts/build-standalone-public-packages.mjs` exports two existing helpers for the new guard test and otherwise does not change. ## What Changed - `scripts/verify-grok-npm-install.mjs`: the `build-standalone-public-packages.mjs` call before staging runs only when `PAPERCLIP_RUNNER_QUALIFICATION_PACKAGES_DIR` is set, in the same position as before, and reports `stage_standalone_build_ms`. The flag is read once into `retainQualificationPackages`, and the retention call at the end is gated by the same variable, so the build and the retention that reads it cannot diverge. The `prepare-server-ui-dist.sh` call stays, is timed, and reports `stage_ui_dist_ms`. The comment explains why release.sh and the retention path need the standalone build and the staged packages do not. The timing-line comment lists both new keys. - `scripts/build-standalone-public-packages.mjs`: `parseWorkspaceEntries` and `isWorkspacePackage` are exported. No behavior change. - `scripts/__tests__/grok-public-install-sandbox.test.mjs`: one new guard test. It asserts the verifier references the standalone build exactly once, inside the retention gate, timed under its own key, and that no second reading of the retention variable exists; that `retain-runner-qualification-packages.mjs` still packs the Daytona plugin from its `dist`, and that the Daytona plugin is a standalone package, so the gate cannot pass vacuously; recomputes the verifier's package closure from `release-package-map.mjs list` and the manifests through `workspace:` specs; checks that the public package map still carries packages outside the pnpm workspace; checks that every package in the closure is inside the workspace globs of `pnpm-workspace.yaml`; checks that the server package still publishes `ui-dist`; and checks the order: closure, gated standalone build, `ui-dist` copy, then staging, with the reuse flag set and the timing keys written. ### Review fix, second commit Greptile's P1 on the first commit was valid: `docker-runner-check.yml` runs `pnpm build` and then the verifier with `PAPERCLIP_RUNNER_QUALIFICATION_PACKAGES_DIR` set, and `retainRunnerQualificationPackages` copies `packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/daytona/dist`. The Daytona plugin is excluded from the pnpm workspace, so `pnpm build` never produces that directory and the first commit would have failed that job with `ENOENT` after every install check had passed. The second commit restores the build on exactly that path: the verifier builds the standalone packages when, and only when, retention is requested, and the guard test pins the gate to the reason for it. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/grok-public-install-sandbox.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/pack-staged-packages.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/stage-bundled-packages.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/prefetch-child.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/retain-runner-qualification-packages.test.mjs`: 37 tests pass. - The updated guard test fails against the first commit's verifier (no retention gate around the build) and passes with the second commit. The first commit's test failed against #15888's verifier the same way. - `node --check` passes on the verifier. - The verifier itself needs Docker and a network, which this workspace does not have. The first commit's `Build` job ([38150787810](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38150787810)) ran the branch's verifier and measured the saving: `stage_packages_ms` 54.2s (was 75.8s), `stage_ui_dist_ms` 21ms, `stage_sources_ms` 0.8s, `stage_bundled_ms` 21.0s, `stage_pack_ms` 32.4s, so under 0.1s remains before staging where about 29s was. The second commit does not change the PR path: the gate is false on every PR run, so that job's timing line should show the same shape with no `stage_standalone_build_ms` key. - The retention path was not run here: it needs Docker and the `docker-runner-check` workflow's inputs. The code on that path is the same `run(process.execPath, [...build-standalone-public-packages.mjs])` call the verifier made before this PR, in the same position. - `scripts/__tests__/release-dry-run-notes.test.mjs` exercises the standalone build inside `release.sh` and is unchanged; 11 of its 12 tests spawn `pnpm`, which is not installed in this workspace, and fail the same way on #15888's head. They pass in CI, where `pnpm` is installed. - The first commit's run failed only on `General tests (server (11/12))`: all 74 files and 1257 tests passed, then Vitest caught a teardown `EACCES` removing the per-worker `PAPERCLIP_HOME` under `native-session-resumption.test.ts`, the same error as the first attempt of #15888's run 38146108750. Neither PR touches server code; the failure is noted on the tracking issue. ## Risks - If a future change makes a package the verifier installs depend on a standalone package, the verifier would stage an unbuilt `dist`. That cannot happen through a `workspace:` spec, which is the only kind the closure follows, and the guard test fails if the closure ever contains a package outside the workspace globs. - If a future path in the verifier reads a standalone build without setting the retention variable, it would see no `dist`. The guard test pins the single reference to the gate; a new reader has to extend the gate and the test together. - The sandbox-provider plugins' builds are no longer exercised on every PR by the `Build` job. They are still built by `release.sh` in Canary Dry Run on every PR, by the verifier whenever retention is requested, and the `build-standalone-concurrency` and `release-dry-run-notes` tests still cover the script. - Low risk otherwise. The bundled installs, the packs, the consumer install, and every probe are unchanged. > 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 - Claude Fable 5.1 (Anthropic), model ID `claude-fable-5-1`, run as a Paperclip agent through the Claude Code local adapter with tool use (shell, file edits, GitHub CLI). Reasoning mode: extended thinking. ## 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 (CI is running on the second commit) - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups (the P1 on the first commit is fixed in the second; re-review pending) - [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) <bender-fable@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com>	2026-10-11 12:14:32 -07:00
Devin Foley devinfoley Claude Fable 5.1	1ac48aff8d	perf(ci): pack the verifier's staged packages concurrently (#15888 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Every pull request runs the `Build` check. Its last step is the public npm install verifier, `scripts/verify-grok-npm-install.mjs`, which stages the eighteen public packages, packs them, and installs them in a clean consumer. > - The verifier packs the eighteen packages one after another with `npm pack`. Each pack is a Node start-up plus gzip of that package's files. The timing line added in #15868 shows this loop at 35.6-37.9s on four `Build` runs, the largest part of the staging phase now that the bundled installs overlap. > - `Build` at 433-530s is the slowest check in most PR runs once the server shards drop, so its staging phase sets the wall-clock time of the run. > - Each pack reads only its own `package-<index>` directory and writes one tarball. The runner has four cores and the packs are CPU-bound. There is no reason to run them one after the other. > - This pull request runs the packs as concurrent children through the prefetch helper, one per core, bundled packages first, each into its own directory, and puts the results back into dependency order before every tarball is checked. > - The benefit is a shorter `Build` job, and a timing line that reports the packs' serial cost next to their wall time, so the saving is measured on this PR's own run instead of estimated. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15868, #15861. This branch is stacked on the branch of #15868, which is stacked on #15861, because the same execution branch holds both open PRs. The diff here is this PR's one commit. After #15868 merges, this PR is retargeted to `master` and rebased. What existing behavior does this improve? The `Build` PR check. Its public npm install verifier packs the eighteen public packages in one serial loop. Subsystem affected CI and release scripts (`scripts/verify-grok-npm-install.mjs`, `scripts/prefetch-child.mjs`). Current behavior After the bundled installs are joined, the verifier runs `npm pack --pack-destination <root>` for each of the eighteen packages in turn, finds the new tarball by listing the shared root, and checks it with `tar -tzf`. `stage_pack_ms` was 35.8s, 37.1s, 35.6s and 37.9s on the four runs of #15868. The parent is idle apart from the one pack it waits on, and three of the four cores are idle. Proposed behavior Start the packs as children through `startPrefetch`, at most one per core (`os.availableParallelism()`), bundled packages first because they make the largest tarballs. Each child packs into its own `pack-<index>` directory, so the tarball a package produced is read from there instead of guessed from a shared directory. Register each child for cleanup as it starts. Put the results back into dependency order, then check every tarball with `tar -tzf` as before, then copy them into the assets directory as before. Report `stage_pack_check_ms`, `pack_concurrency`, `pack_serial_ms` and `pack_longest_ms` on the timing line, and keep `stage_pack_ms` as the whole step. Reason and benefit With four slots the step takes about the longest single pack or a quarter of the serial sum, whichever is larger. The expected saving is 20-25s of the 36-38s, measured on this PR's own `Build` job by `pack_serial_ms` against `stage_pack_ms`. Measured on this PR's first run ([38146108750](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38146108750), `Build` 433s, verifier 214s): `stage_pack_ms` 29.9s against 35.6-37.9s before, so the step shed 6-8s, not the 20-25s estimated. `pack_serial_ms` is 44.4s with `pack_concurrency` 4, and `pack_longest_ms` is 28.3s: one pack (the server with its 513 MB bundled closure, gzip level 9 inside npm) runs for almost the whole step, so the step is bounded by that pack and not by the slot count. The seventeen other packs fit inside it. The serial sum is 7-9s higher than the old serial step, which is the four processes contending for the runner's cores. `stage_packages_ms` 75.8s against 80.4-89.6s on #15868's runs; `image_wait_ms` and `grok_wait_ms` stay 0. Breaking changes None. The same packages are packed with the same `npm pack` arguments, the tarballs are checked the same way, and the consumer receives them in the same order. ## What Changed - `scripts/pack-staged-packages.mjs` (new): `packStagedPackages` launches the packs in the order given with at most `concurrency` children at once, through the prefetch helper, and resolves with each entry's tarball path and wall time in the same order. Every child is passed to `register` as it starts. The first failure rejects with the tail of that child's log and nothing further is launched. A child that leaves anything other than one tarball in its directory is a failure. `packConcurrency` is one per core. `packTimings` gives the timing-line keys. - `scripts/verify-grok-npm-install.mjs`: each entry gets its `index` and its own `pack-<index>` destination. The pack loop is replaced by one `packStagedPackages` call, launched bundled-first and registered into the `prefetches` list as each child starts, so an earlier failure stops any pack still running before the scratch root is removed. The results are sorted back into dependency order, every tarball is checked in that order, and the copy into the assets directory is unchanged. Only the lifecycle sentinel is still packed in-process. - Timing line: `stage_pack_check_ms`, `pack_concurrency`, `pack_serial_ms` and `pack_longest_ms` are added. `stage_pack_ms` still covers the whole step, so the before and after numbers compare directly. - `scripts/__tests__/pack-staged-packages.test.mjs` (new): five tests with a local stand-in for npm and no network. The default concurrency and the pack arguments; four packs with two slots run the two slow packs together, start a third only once a slot is free, receive the exact `npm pack` argument list, register every child, and come back in entry order with their tarballs and timing keys although the fast packs finish first; a failed pack rejects with its log tail, launches nothing more, and leaves the running pack to be stopped; a pack that produces two tarballs or none is a failure; and no entries resolve at once. - `scripts/__tests__/grok-public-install-sandbox.test.mjs`: the guard test on the verifier source now checks the import, the bundled-first launch with cleanup registration, the reorder before the checks, the checks before the copy, that only the sentinel is packed in-process, that each pack has its own directory, and the new timing keys. - `package.json`: the new test file is in `test:release-registry`. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/pack-staged-packages.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/grok-public-install-sandbox.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/stage-bundled-packages.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/prefetch-child.test.mjs`: 35 tests pass (30 on #15868's head plus the five new ones). The new file passes three consecutive runs. - `node --check` passes on both scripts. - With the real npm 11.12.1 on Node 25.9: two small packages packed through `packStagedPackages` with two slots produce one tarball each in their own `pack-<index>` directory, with the expected `package/` listing from `tar -tzf`. - The verifier itself needs Docker and a network, which this workspace does not have. This PR's own `Build` job runs the branch's verifier; its timing line carries `stage_pack_ms`, `pack_serial_ms`, `pack_longest_ms` and `pack_concurrency`, which is the measurement. Before, on #15868's four runs: `stage_pack_ms` 35.8s / 37.1s / 35.6s / 37.9s. - `docker-runner-check.yml` runs the same script after `pnpm build` and needs no change. ## Risks - Four `npm pack` processes run at once and share the host npm configuration and cache. `npm pack --ignore-scripts` reads the package directory and writes one tarball; it does not write to the cache beyond its per-process log file. If a shared-state race appears, the failing pack's log tail is in the error and the fix is to lower the concurrency. - Memory and CPU: four Node processes instead of one on the four-core `Build` runner, for about thirty seconds. The largest pack (the server with its bundled dependencies) is the same process as before. - The pack output moves from the CI log into per-pack log files in the scratch root. A failure reports the last 2000 characters of the failing pack's log; a successful pack's output is discarded with the scratch root. - The tarball checks (`tar -tzf`) now run after all packs instead of after each pack. A bundled Codex payload is still rejected before any tarball reaches the consumer; the only change is that the error arrives a few seconds later. - Low risk otherwise. The bundled installs, the consumer install, and every probe are unchanged. > 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 - Claude Fable 5.1 (Anthropic), model ID `claude-fable-5-1`, run as a Paperclip agent through the Claude Code local adapter with tool use (shell, file edits, GitHub CLI). Reasoning mode: extended thinking. ## 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 (run 38146108750: `server (11/12)` failed on its first attempt on a teardown `EACCES` while removing the per-worker `PAPERCLIP_HOME` after all 74 files and 1257 tests had passed, in a file this PR does not touch; the re-run of that job passed and every check is 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) Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-10-11 12:02:19 -07:00
Devin Foley Bender Claude Fable 5.1 devinfoley	026bdcd046	perf(ci): run the verifier's bundled-dependency installs concurrently (#15868 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Every pull request runs the `Build` check. Its last step is the public npm install verifier, `scripts/verify-grok-npm-install.mjs`, which stages the eighteen public packages and installs them in a clean consumer. > - The verifier stages the packages in one serial loop. Three packages bundle dependencies (`@paperclipai/server`, `@paperclipai/adapter-utils`, `@paperclipai/db`). Each one runs a host-side `npm install` of its bundled closure in-process, one after the other, and nothing in the loop overlaps anything else. The staging phase took 102-116s on recent `Build` jobs. > - `Build` at 433-530s is the slowest check in most PR runs once the server shards drop, so its staging phase sets the wall-clock time of the run. > - The three installs write only their own directories and read nothing from each other. There is no reason to run them one after the other. > - This pull request starts the three installs together as child processes and copies the other fifteen packages while they run. Packing stays serial and in order. > - The benefit is a shorter `Build` job, and a timing line that reports each install, so the saving is measured on this PR's own run instead of estimated. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15861. This branch is stacked on the branch of #15861 because the same execution branch holds that open PR. The diff here is this PR's three commits. After #15861 merges, this PR is retargeted to `master` and rebased. What existing behavior does this improve? The `Build` PR check. Its public npm install verifier stages the eighteen public packages in one serial loop. Subsystem affected CI and release scripts (`scripts/verify-grok-npm-install.mjs`, `scripts/prepare-bundled-package.mjs`, `scripts/prefetch-child.mjs`, `scripts/prefetch-supervisor.mjs`). Current behavior The staging loop calls `prepareBundledPackage` in-process for the three packages that bundle dependencies. Each call runs a host-side `npm install` of that package's bundled closure, applies the repo patches, and rewrites the manifest, before the loop moves to the next package. The timing line reports the whole staging phase as one number, 102-116s on recent runs. The three installs are the only network work in that phase. Proposed behavior Stage the three bundled packages' sources first, start their installs at the same time as children of the script's own CLI entry (the same path `release.sh` uses), copy the other fifteen packages while the installs run, join the installs, and then pack every package in dependency order as before. Report `stage_sources_ms`, `stage_bundled_ms`, `stage_pack_ms`, `bundled_wait_ms` and one `stage_bundled_<package>_ms` per install on the timing line. Reason and benefit The staging phase shortens by the two shorter installs. Measured on this PR's first run (below): the three installs sum to 25.9s and take 16.4s of wall time together, so the overlap removes about 9.5s from the phase, and the timing line now shows that packing (35.8s) and the standalone-package build before the loop (about 27s) are the larger remaining costs. The original estimate of 30-50s was too high because it assumed the installs were about half of the phase; they are a quarter. Breaking changes None. The packed tarballs are produced by the same script, in the same order, and are checked the same way. ## What Changed - `scripts/stage-bundled-packages.mjs` (new): `startBundledInstalls` starts one child per bundled package through the prefetch helper from #15849, with the child's output in a log file. `bundledInstallTimings` reads each child's wall time for the timing line. `bundledPackageSlug` maps a package name to its log and timing key. - `scripts/verify-grok-npm-install.mjs`: the staging loop is split. The bundled packages' sources are staged first and their installs start together. The other packages are copied while the installs run. The install handles are pushed into the `prefetches` list at once, so an earlier failure stops any install still running before the scratch root is removed. The join comes before the first `npm pack`. The pack loop walks every package in `needed` order and checks each tarball as before. `prepareBundledPackage` is no longer imported. - Timing line: `stage_sources_ms`, `stage_bundled_ms`, `stage_pack_ms`, `bundled_wait_ms` and `stage_bundled_server_ms`, `stage_bundled_adapter_utils_ms`, `stage_bundled_db_ms` are added. `stage_packages_ms` and the download keys are unchanged, so the before and after numbers compare directly. - `scripts/__tests__/stage-bundled-packages.test.mjs` (new): five tests with local Node children and no network. The slug mapping; the children run the CLI entry `release.sh` runs and never an in-process call; two installs run at the same time, each with its own source and target, and their logs and timing keys are correct (each child exits only after the other has started, so serial children would fail); a failed install rejects with its own log tail while the other is still running and is then stopped; and stopping the installs after one fails also stops the stand-in npm process the other wrapper is blocked on. - `scripts/__tests__/grok-public-install-sandbox.test.mjs`: one guard test on the verifier source. The bundled sources are staged before the installs start, the installs are registered for cleanup before the other packages are copied, the join comes before the pack loop, the pack loop is in order, there is still exactly one package pack loop, and the timing keys are reported. - `package.json`: the new test file is in `test:release-registry`. ### Review fix (second commit): stop a prefetch's whole process tree Greptile pointed out that `stopPrefetches` signalled only the Node wrapper of each install, while the wrapper is blocked in `execFileSync('npm', ['install', ...])`. After one install failed, the other wrapper died and its npm process kept writing into the scratch root the verifier was about to remove. - `scripts/prefetch-child.mjs`: on POSIX every prefetch child is started `detached`, so it leads its own process group. `stopPrefetches` signals the group (`process.kill(-pid, ...)`) and waits until no member of the group exists, with `SIGKILL` after the grace period and a second grace period before it gives up so cleanup cannot hang. On Windows the child is signalled directly as before. - `scripts/__tests__/prefetch-child.test.mjs`: two tests. A stopped prefetch's grandchild is gone after `stopPrefetches` returns, and a `SIGINT` to a separate parent process reaches the grandchild while the parent still exits with `SIGINT`. Both are skipped on Windows. - `scripts/__tests__/stage-bundled-packages.test.mjs`: one test, the cancellation case Greptile asked for. The stand-in `prepare-bundled-package` blocks in `execFileSync` on a stand-in npm that announces its pid; after the other install fails, `stopPrefetches` must leave that pid gone. All three new tests fail against the previous helper (`grandchild <pid> outlived stopPrefetches`, `outlived the parent's SIGINT`, `stand-in npm <pid> outlived stopPrefetches`) and pass with the fix. ### Review fix (third commit): the parent runs no signal handler Greptile pointed out that the second commit forwarded the terminal's signals to the detached groups through a JavaScript handler in the parent. The verifier spends most of its time blocked in `execFileSync` (the standalone builds, every `npm pack`), where no handler can run, and installing the handler also replaced the parent's immediate default termination. So a Ctrl-C during a synchronous phase did nothing until that command returned, and the detached installs and downloads kept running meanwhile. Confirmed with the new test against the second commit's helper: the parent survived the `SIGINT`, exited with code 1 once the synchronous command had died, and its handler never ran. - `scripts/prefetch-supervisor.mjs` (new): every prefetch command now runs under this small Node script as the leader of its own process group. The supervisor holds a pipe from the parent on stdin (which the parent writes to only to request a stop where it cannot signal the group; see the fourth commit). The kernel closes it when the parent exits for any reason, including a signal delivered while the parent is blocked, or `SIGKILL`, and the supervisor then stops its group (`SIGTERM`, `SIGKILL` after the grace period) and says so in the log. It passes group-wide signals on to the command and stays alive until the command exits, so its own exit reports the command's exit code or signal. Run by hand with a terminal or `/dev/null` on stdin it watches nothing. - `scripts/prefetch-child.mjs`: `startPrefetch` spawns the supervisor with the command, with stdin as the pipe. The forwarding handlers are gone; the parent installs no signal handler, so its default termination stays immediate. `stopPrefetches` is unchanged. - `scripts/__tests__/prefetch-child.test.mjs`: the first test asserts the parent has no `SIGINT`/`SIGTERM`/`SIGHUP` listener after a prefetch starts. The "signal to the parent" test now runs for `SIGINT` and `SIGKILL` and checks the supervisor's log line. One new test gives a separate parent its own process group, blocks it in `execFileSync` on a 20s command, and sends `SIGINT` to that group the way a terminal sends Ctrl-C: the parent must die of `SIGINT` within two seconds and the prefetch's grandchild must be gone. Against the previous helper the parent exits with code 1 instead, the grandchild outlives `SIGKILL`, and the handler-count assertion fails. ### Review fix (fourth commit): a deliberate stop on Windows goes through the pipe Greptile pointed out that on Windows, where `startPrefetch` now returns the supervisor, `stopPrefetches` called `child.kill('SIGTERM')` on it. Windows has no process groups and `kill` there ends a process outright, so the supervisor died without running its handler and its command kept running after cleanup returned. - `scripts/prefetch-child.mjs`: without process groups, the graceful stop no longer signals the supervisor. `stopPrefetches` writes a stop request to the pipe the supervisor already watches for the parent's exit (`stdin.end('stop\n')`). Only the `SIGKILL` escalation targets the supervisor itself, after it has had its grace period. POSIX keeps the group signal, so `stopPrefetches` and the existing stop and failure tests are unchanged there. - `scripts/prefetch-supervisor.mjs`: data on stdin is a stop request and EOF is the parent's exit; both end the group the same way (`SIGTERM`, `SIGKILL` after the grace period) and the log line names which one it was. - `scripts/__tests__/prefetch-child.test.mjs`: one new test writes the stop request to a running prefetch's pipe instead of calling `stopPrefetches`. The supervisor must exit with `SIGTERM`, the command's grandchild must be gone, and the log must say `stop requested` and not `parent exited`. The previous supervisor fails it on the log line, since it treated the request as the parent's exit. The Windows kill itself cannot be reproduced on the Linux runners, so the Windows branch of `signalTree` is verified by that supervisor test plus reading its two lines. The stand-in that ignores `SIGTERM` is now skipped on Windows, where `kill` cannot be ignored. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/stage-bundled-packages.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/grok-public-install-sandbox.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/prefetch-child.test.mjs`: 30 tests pass (was 19 before this PR, 24 after the first commit, 27 after the second, 29 after the third). The three files pass three consecutive runs. - `node --check` passes on all four scripts. - The verifier itself needs Docker and a network, which this workspace does not have. This PR's own `Build` job runs the branch's verifier. Measured on all four commits' runs ([38132868803](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38132868803): `Build` 428s, `pnpm build` 112s, verifier step 214s; [38136912842](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38136912842): `Build` 447s; [38139871529](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38139871529): `Build` 432s; [38142762538](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38142762538): `Build` 457s, `pnpm build` 123s, verifier step 231s): \| Key \| Run 1 \| Run 2 \| Run 3 \| Run 4 \| Before \| \| --- \| --- \| --- \| --- \| --- \| --- \| \| `stage_packages_ms` \| 80.4s \| 84.9s \| 81.5s \| 89.6s \| 102-116s on master runs 38112764439, 38111191543, 38110932348, 38110914319, 38110897745, 38127611057; 84.5s on #15849's run on a runner as fast as these \| \| `stage_sources_ms` \| 1.4s \| 0.7s \| 0.9s \| 0.9s \| (inside the number above) \| \| `stage_bundled_server_ms` / `adapter_utils` / `db` \| 16.3s / 5.0s / 4.6s \| 14.9s / 3.6s / 3.3s \| 16.4s / 5.2s / 4.7s \| 17.1s / 4.4s / 3.8s \| ran one after another, 21.8-25.9s together \| \| `stage_bundled_ms` (wall, all three) \| 16.4s \| 15.0s \| 16.5s \| 17.2s \| 21.8-25.9s \| \| `bundled_wait_ms` \| 15.3s \| 14.7s \| 16.1s \| 16.7s \| — \| \| `stage_pack_ms` \| 35.8s \| 37.1s \| 35.6s \| 37.9s \| (inside the number above) \| \| `consumer_install_ms` \| 94.4s \| 97.8s \| 95.7s \| 99.8s \| 97-134s \| \| `image_prefetch_ms` / `image_wait_ms` \| 33.7s / 0ms \| 31.8s / 0ms \| 34.7s / 0ms \| 33.7s / 0ms \| unchanged \| \| `grok_prefetch_ms` / `grok_wait_ms` \| 2.1s / 0ms \| 2.1s / 0ms \| 2.0s / 0ms \| 2.1s / 0ms \| unchanged \| The overlap removed about 7-10s from the staging phase on each of the four runs (21.8-25.9s of installs in 15.0-17.2s of wall time). The third and fourth commits changed no timing: both waits stay at 0ms and the staging phase sits inside the band of the first two runs. The rest of the phase is the standalone-package build and the server UI dist prep before the loop (about 27-32s) and the eighteen serial `npm pack` plus `tar -tzf` checks (36-37s). - `docker-runner-check.yml` runs the same script after `pnpm build` and needs no change. ## Risks - Three `npm install` processes share the host npm cache at the same time. npm's cache (`cacache`) is designed for concurrent writers, and the three installs have disjoint target directories. If a shared-cache race appears, the failing install's log tail is in the error and the fix is to serialize again. The first CI run showed none. - The install output moves from the CI log into per-install log files in the scratch root. A failure reports the last 2000 characters of the failing install's log; a successful install's output is discarded with the scratch root. - Memory: three concurrent installs on the `Build` runner instead of one. The closures are small (the server's eight bundled packages are the largest), so this stays well under the runner's memory. - Process groups: a detached child no longer receives the terminal's signals on its own. The supervisor stops its group when the parent is gone, which it learns from the kernel closing the stdin pipe, so this holds for a Ctrl-C while the parent is blocked in synchronous work and for `SIGKILL` alike. The parent keeps Node's default signal handling. If the supervisor itself is killed with `SIGKILL` before its command, the command is orphaned and finishes on its own (each install ends within seconds; the image pull within a minute), the same as any orphaned grandchild before this PR. - One extra Node process per prefetch (five per verifier run). Each costs about 40ms to start, inside the time the parent spends staging anyway. - Low risk otherwise. Packing, the tarball checks, the consumer install, and every probe are unchanged. > 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 - Claude Fable 5.1 (Anthropic), model ID `claude-fable-5-1`, run as a Paperclip agent through the Claude Code local adapter with tool use (shell, file edits, GitHub CLI). Reasoning mode: extended thinking. ## 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 on all four commits - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups (on the fourth commit Greptile reviewed 8 files and added no comments; all three earlier threads are resolved) - [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) <bender-fable@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com>	2026-10-11 11:19:44 -07:00
Devin Foley devinfoley Claude Fable 5.1	42ecc96556	perf(ci): prefetch the consumer image and Grok binary during package staging (#15849 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Pull requests to this repository run a large CI matrix. The slowest check sets the time a contributor waits for a green run. > - After #15826 leveled the server shards and #15831 split `workspaces-b`, the `Build` lane is the slowest check: 634s in run 38107578322 (2026-10-11 03:11Z), ahead of the next server shard at 574s. It was 533s in run 38107430861 and 543s to 568s in earlier runs that night. > - `Build` is about 100s of setup, 148s to 195s of `pnpm build`, and 278s to 320s of `scripts/verify-grok-npm-install.mjs`. The verifier stages and packs the public packages first (84s to 100s of CPU work), and only then pulls the pinned `node:24-trixie` consumer image (8 layers, 440 MB compressed) and downloads the Grok binary (65 MB gzip, 166 MB verified). Both network waits sit after the staging work on the critical path. > - Neither download depends on the packed packages. The image is pinned by digest and the Grok binary is checked against its pinned sha256 by the provisioning script, so starting them early changes no verified property. > - This pull request starts both downloads as background children before staging and joins them where they are needed: the image before the first sandbox, the binary after the negative probe. It also prints one timing line per phase so the next slow part is visible in the CI log. > - The benefit is that the whole pull and the whole Grok download hide behind the staging phase. The verifier should shed the full pull time on a fresh runner, and the next cycle can read the phase split instead of inferring it from log gaps. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Describe the enhancement The `Build` PR check is now the slowest check in the run. Its last step, the public npm install verifier, pulls the consumer Docker image and downloads the Grok binary only after it has finished staging and packing the eighteen public packages. Both downloads could run while the packages are staged. Why is this needed The slowest check decides the wall-clock time of every PR run. In the most recent fully green run (38107578322), `Build` took 634s: `pnpm build` 195s and the verifier 320s. The verifier's log shows the staging phase ends at +100s and the Grok result arrives at +267s. The image pull and the Grok download are inside that second window, in series with the consumer install and the probes. Proposed solution Start `docker pull --platform linux/amd64 <pinned image>` and `provision-grok.mjs` as background children at the top of the verifier, before the staging loop. Await the image right before the first sandbox call. Provision Grok into a prefetch directory and rename it into `native/grok` only after the "npm must not provision Grok" assertion and the negative probe, so that assertion keeps its meaning and only the positive probe sees the binary. Print a `paperclip.public-npm-install.timing.v1` line with wall time per phase and the time the main flow waited on each prefetch. Alternatives considered - Run the verifier as its own job in parallel with `Build`. It needs the full `pnpm build` output, so that job would be as long as `Build` is now. - Warm the consumer npm cache from an Actions cache. That changes the "clean public npm install" property the verifier reports. Not done here; the new timing line will show whether the consumer install is worth that discussion. - Pack the eighteen packages concurrently. The three bundled packages run their own npm installs in series inside `prepareBundledPackage`, which is synchronous. A larger restructure; left for a later cycle with timing data. - Overlap the Pi runtime setup with the Grok probes. Both use the same consumer directory from separate containers, and the probes after provisioning are short. Not worth the concurrency on shared state. ## What Changed - `scripts/prefetch-child.mjs` (new): `startPrefetch({ name, cmd, args, cwd, env, logPath })` spawns a background child with no inherited terminal and its stdout and stderr in a log file, and returns `{ name, child, done, durationMs }`. `done` resolves on exit 0 and otherwise rejects with the tail of the log; the rejection is observed inside the helper, so an unawaited failure never becomes an unhandled rejection. `durationMs` ends at the child's last write to its log (the exit event is observed late when the caller is blocked in synchronous work; both downloads print their final status line as they complete). `stopPrefetches(prefetches, { graceMs })` sends `SIGTERM` to every child still running, escalates to `SIGKILL` after the grace period, and resolves only once all of them have exited. - `scripts/verify-grok-npm-install.mjs`: the image pull and the Grok provisioning start through the helper inside the `try` block, before the staging loop. The main flow awaits the image before the first `npm install` sandbox and awaits Grok after the negative probe, then renames the staged binary into `native/grok` before the positive probe. The `finally` block awaits `stopPrefetches` and only then removes the scratch root, so cleanup never races a child's writes. The script prints one timing JSON line after the Pi probe, with the per-phase wall times, the two `_wait_ms` values, and the corrected `_prefetch_ms` values. - `scripts/__tests__/prefetch-child.test.mjs` (new): seven tests run small local Node children, with no Docker or network: a successful prefetch resolves and keeps its output; the duration ends at the download even when the parent is blocked for 1.5s; a nonzero exit rejects with the log tail; a command that cannot start rejects instead of hanging the join or the stop; stopping a running child waits for its exit; a child that ignores `SIGTERM` is killed after the grace period; an unawaited failure does not produce an unhandled rejection in a fresh process. - `scripts/__tests__/grok-public-install-sandbox.test.mjs`: the source test asserts that exactly the pinned image is pulled for `linux/amd64`, that Grok is provisioned into the prefetch directory and never straight into `native/grok`, that both prefetches start before staging, that the image is joined before the first sandbox, that the rename happens after the npm assertion and the negative probe and before the positive probe, that the verifier imports the helper, and that `stopPrefetches` is awaited before the single `rmSync(root, ...)`. - `package.json`: `test:release-registry` runs the new test file. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/prefetch-child.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/grok-public-install-sandbox.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/cursor-public-install-sandbox.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/retain-runner-qualification-packages.test.mjs`: 22 pass (7 new in `prefetch-child.test.mjs`, 12 in the sandbox file). The new file passed on three consecutive runs. - `node --check scripts/verify-grok-npm-install.mjs` passes. - `node packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/provision-grok.mjs <scratch>/prefetch/grok` on this host: `Verified Grok 1.0.13 (linux-x64)` in 1.0s, `native/grok` absent before the move, 166079904 bytes in place after it. - Docker is not installed on the host that produced this PR, so the verifier was not run end to end locally. This PR's own `Build` job runs `node scripts/verify-grok-npm-install.mjs` from the branch checkout, so it exercises the change in full. Measured on this PR's first CI run ([38108964834](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38108964834), created 03:37Z), against two `master` runs created in the same twelve minutes: \| \| 38108878166 (`master`, 03:35Z) \| 38108995800 (`master`, 03:37Z) \| 38108964834 (this PR, 03:37Z) \| \| --- \| --- \| --- \| --- \| \| Verifier step \| 307s \| 248s \| 219s \| \| `Build` job \| 555s \| 484s \| 459s \| \| Slowest check in the run \| `Build` 555s \| server (8/12) 535s \| server (12/12) 547s \| The PR run's timing line: `stage_packages_ms 84464`, `image_wait_ms 1`, `consumer_install_ms 97305`, `lifecycle_rebuild_ms 3545`, `codex_probe_ms 1211`, `grok_wait_ms 0`, `grok_probes_ms 626`, `pi_setup_ms 22194`, `pi_probe_ms 7753`. Both waits are at most 1ms, so the staging phase hid both downloads in full. The window from the end of staging to the Grok result went from 161s to 167s on the two runs that motivated this PR to 102s here, so the hidden downloads were about 60s on a fresh `runs-on` spot instance. Against the two same-window `master` runs, the verifier step is 29s to 88s shorter and `Build` is 25s to 96s shorter; the spread is runner variance in `pnpm build` and the consumer install. The `image_prefetch_ms` and `grok_prefetch_ms` values on that first run (84550 and 186696) were the parent's late observation of each exit, not download times; that is the first Greptile finding, fixed by the second commit, which measures from the download's last output instead. ## Risks - Low risk. The verifier proves the same properties in the same order. The only ordering change is that the downloads start earlier; every assertion, probe, and sandbox argument is unchanged. - The Grok binary is written under the scratch root in a `prefetch` directory during staging. That directory is never mounted into a container, and the `native/grok` assertion still runs against an absent path. - A prefetch that fails early now fails the step at its join point, where the old code would have failed at the same download a few seconds later. Same outcome, same message source. - `*_prefetch_ms` is a last-output time. A child that printed early and then kept working silently would be under-reported; neither `docker pull` nor `provision-grok.mjs` behaves that way (both print their final status as they finish), and a silent child falls back to the observed exit time. - Cleanup now waits up to 5s for a child that ignores `SIGTERM` before killing it, so a failing run can end up to 5s later than before. Both children exit promptly on `SIGTERM` in practice. - The timing line is one more stdout line. Nothing in the repository parses the verifier's stdout; the two workflows that run it write the output to the job log or to a file. ## Model Used - Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-fable-5-1`, running as a Paperclip agent through the Claude local adapter with tool use (shell, file edits, GitHub CLI). The agent collected the CI data, made the change, ran the tests, and wrote this description. ## 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 - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-10-10 21:10:13 -07:00
Devin Foley Bender devinfoley	8dd381f5dd	perf(ci): run the db project as its own workspaces-c lane (#15831 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Pull requests to this repository run a large CI matrix. The slowest check sets the time a contributor waits for a green run. > - The `General tests (workspaces-b)` lane runs every non-server Vitest project except `ui` and `cli` in one job, one project after the other. After #15826 leveled the server shards, this lane became the slowest check: 593s in run 38084171761, 523s in 38083084276 and 499s in 38083020834 (all 2026-10-10). > - The `@paperclipai/db` project alone is 168s to 250s of that lane's 436s to 513s of vitest time. Its `client.test.ts` suite is 117s to 189s and `backup-lib.test.ts` is 70s to 107s. The other seventeen projects together are only 263s to 276s. > - Vitest's native `--shard` does not level this lane. The db project is already file-parallel, and a hash-ordered slice can put both slow suites on one runner. > - This pull request moves the db project into its own `workspaces-c` lane in both `pr-trusted.yml` and `release-verify.yml`. The runner script gains a `general-workspaces-c` group, and `general-workspaces-b` drops the db project. > - The benefit is that both lanes should finish in about 230s to 340s instead of 499s to 593s, and `workspaces-b` leaves the critical path. The cost is one more job per run, about 60s of setup. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Describe the enhancement The `General tests (workspaces-b)` PR check is the slowest check in the run. It runs seventeen Vitest projects in sequence on one runner. The `@paperclipai/db` project is one third to one half of its vitest time. Why is this needed The slowest check decides the wall-clock time of every PR run. In the last three fully green runs on the current server-shard manifest, `workspaces-b` took 499s, 523s and 593s (runs 38083020834, 38083084276 and 38084171761, 2026-10-10). The next slowest lanes, `Build` and the server shards, sit at about 480s to 570s. A split of `workspaces-b` removes 170s to 250s from this lane. Proposed solution Run the `@paperclipai/db` project as its own lane, `general-workspaces-c`. Keep the other seventeen projects in `general-workspaces-b`. Add the lane to both the PR and the release verification matrix. Extend the guard tests so the three workspace lanes still cover the root Vitest project list exactly once, so the new group rejects shard flags, and so both workflows carry the lane unsharded. Alternatives considered - Vitest native `--shard` on `workspaces-b`, as `workspaces-a` does. The db project is already file-parallel and its wall time is set by two long suites, so a hash-ordered slice does not give a predictable split. - Move `adapter-utils` (115s to 117s) into the new lane as well. That makes the db lane 285s to 366s of tests and the rest 147s to 160s, which is less level than db alone (168s to 250s) against the rest (263s to 276s). - Three lanes. Not needed now: after this split both lanes sit under the server shards and `Build`, so a third runner would not shorten the run. ## What Changed - `scripts/run-vitest-stable.mjs`: new `general-workspaces-c` group that runs `@paperclipai/db` alone. `general-workspaces-b` now excludes it. Local `--mode all` runs all four general groups, so every project still runs once. The dry-run output reports the new group's projects. - `.github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml`: a `workspaces-c` entry in the general tests matrix, with a comment that records the 2026-10-10 measurements. - `.github/workflows/release-verify.yml`: the same `workspaces-c` entry, to keep parity with the PR workflow. - `scripts/__tests__/run-vitest-stable-shard.test.mjs`: the coverage test includes the new group; shard flags are rejected for both `workspaces-b` and `workspaces-c`; a new test asserts that `workspaces-c` runs only the db project, that `workspaces-b` no longer carries it, and that both workflows list both lanes without shard arguments. The workflow check parses each `- group:` matrix entry with comment lines removed, so a comment between keys cannot hide a shard setting, and it first confirms the parser sees the shard keys on the `workspaces-a` entries. A small parser test covers the comment-between-keys case (Greptile P2). - `scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs`: the release workflow must carry `general-workspaces-c`. ## Verification - `GITHUB_WORKFLOW= node --test scripts/__tests__/run-vitest-stable-shard.test.mjs`: 32 pass (was 29). - `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs`: the workflow parity test passes. Two unrelated tests in that file (`a publisher lockfile lets a fresh smoke install retain validation after ... drift`) fail on my machine on pristine `master` too, because `pnpm` is not on its PATH. They pass in CI. - `node scripts/run-vitest-stable.mjs --mode general --group general-workspaces-c --dry-run` reports `["@paperclipai/db"]`; `--group general-workspaces-b` reports the other seventeen projects. - Both workflow files parse as YAML; the general tests matrix has 19 entries in `pr-trusted.yml` and 17 in `release-verify.yml`. - This PR's own run exercises the script change but not the workflow change: `pr.yml` calls `pr-trusted.yml@master`, so the matrix comes from `master` and the `workspaces-c` job appears only on PR runs created after the merge. Because the script comes from this branch, the `workspaces-b` job in this PR's run (38090713637) ran the seventeen remaining projects and finished in 340s, inside the expected 325s to 340s band. No job in that run ran `@paperclipai/db`. - To cover the gap, I ran the new lane locally with the same command CI uses, `pnpm test:run:general -- --group general-workspaces-c`: 49 test files, 180 tests, all passed, 111s of vitest time (`c324d0080`, Node 25, PGlite). Expected result on the first PR run after merge, from the three measured runs: \| Check \| Before \| After (expected) \| \| --- \| --- \| --- \| \| `General tests (workspaces-b)` \| 499-593s \| ~325-340s (263-276s of vitest time plus ~60s of setup) \| \| `General tests (workspaces-c)` \| (new) \| ~230-310s (168-250s of vitest time plus ~60s of setup) \| \| Slowest check in the run \| `workspaces-b` \| `Build` (497-570s) or a server shard (~480-520s) \| ## Risks - Low risk. The group split only changes which job runs the db project. The guard test asserts that the three workspace lanes cover the root Vitest project list exactly once, so a project cannot be dropped or run twice. - One more job per PR and release verification run, about 60s of setup time on the runner fleet. - The lane names are matrix labels only. The required checks are `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`, which aggregate the matrix, so no branch ruleset needs an update. ## Model Used - Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-fable-5-1`, running as a Paperclip agent through the Claude local adapter with tool use (shell, file edits, GitHub CLI). The agent collected the CI data, made the change, ran the tests, and wrote this description. ## 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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Bender (Fable) <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com>	2026-10-10 20:25:44 -07:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip	07f3536e37	fix(connections): discover Sentry OAuth through its MCP resource (#15837 ) Correct Sentry OAuth discovery and cover new and saved client registration. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-10 17:10:23 -07:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip	4f680bc85c	fix(release): retry verified canary tarball 404s (#15768 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Canary releases test the published npm packages through a clean onboarding install. > - A package can be announced in registry metadata while a fresh install gets a tarball 404. > - The existing ETARGET retry does not cover that distinct error. > - This pull request retries only a verified public canary tarball acquisition failure. > - Permanent errors still fail, and onboarding runs once after acquisition succeeds. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #15743 What happened? The [Release run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37998601578) published canary `2026.1009.0-canary.17`. Its registry verification and publisher install passed. The separate fresh onboarding install then failed with a final npm E404 for that exact `@paperclipai/server` tarball. The tarball was available on a later read. This is a separate failure from ETARGET; it does not prove the cause of the registry visibility difference. Expected behavior Allow a bounded acquisition retry when the effective registry is public npm and fresh primary metadata announces the exact released canary tarball. Keep other E404, authentication, configuration, and onboarding errors fatal. Steps to reproduce 1. Run the offline helper fixture with a first-attempt E404 for an allowlisted package at the requested canary version. 2. Return canonical effective npm registry configuration and matching primary metadata. 3. Make the second install succeed. Confirm two installs and one onboarding invocation. 4. Keep the tarball unavailable. Confirm three installs, a final failure, and no onboarding invocation. Paperclip version or commit The observed run used commit `ce024457f3d747657501fbcfe8eac71f6772150f`. This fix builds on the merged acquisition helper and current master. Deployment mode Other: the published npm canary onboarding check in release CI. ## What Changed - Add a canary-only classifier for one unambiguous final E404 at the canonical tarball URL of a CI-published package from the existing release manifest. - Query effective npm registry configuration in the failed install's prefix, environment, and working directory. Keep bounded configuration output in memory without logging it. Respect scoped registry precedence. - Require fresh primary metadata to match the package, version, tarball URL, and valid SHA512 integrity syntax. Reject redirects, conflicting errors, truncated logs, other artifacts, and unknown or custom effective registries. - Share one five-second configuration and metadata deadline within the existing two-minute acquisition budget. Keep three install attempts, refreshed retry metadata, process cleanup, and one onboarding invocation. - Bound metadata header and body waits even if transport abort propagation stalls. Cancel the reader and any late response body without waiting for cancellation acknowledgements. - Preserve the existing ETARGET classifier and its character-based stderr tail. Add offline subprocess, actual npm configuration, body cancellation, budget, identity, and failure tests. Document the scope and limits. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs scripts/cloud-source-verification.test.mjs scripts/standard-image-contract.test.mjs`: 73 passed, no skips, under Node 22 on the PR head. - `pnpm test:release-registry`: 153 passed, no skips, on the PR head. This includes the existing real Playwright cleanup and startup timeout tests. - [Hosted CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38011028296) passed on this head. The rollup has 53 successful checks and two expected Storybook skips. This includes typecheck, build, the full general and serialized test suites, E2E, and Canary Dry Run. - The new tests use fixture-owned npm configuration and local HTTP servers. No published canary tarballs were downloaded or installed for this change. No release or deployment was triggered. - `pnpm test:run` was not run locally. The full split test suites passed in hosted CI. Independent source checks on this head passed 46 committed tests, 22 boundary checks, and six negative controls. Greptile scored this head 5/5 with no unresolved threads. - The source diff and PR text were checked for secrets, private identifiers, and unintended artifacts. ## Risks - The new retry is conservative. A configuration capture over 4 KiB, metadata over 64 KiB, or a check that exceeds five seconds denies retry. A persistent tarball failure still fails after three installs. - Matching primary metadata proves the announced artifact identity and integrity syntax. It does not independently verify tarball bytes. The subsequent npm install retains its integrity check. - Registry checks use npm's resolved global and applicable scope values. They do not add credentials or change npm configuration. Existing ETARGET behavior, onboarding assertions, and overall startup deadlines remain unchanged. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 (Codex). The exact model variant and context window are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, code execution, offline fixtures, and GitHub API tools. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-10 16:49:15 -07:00
Devin Foley devinfoley Claude Fable 5.1	9ba5569030	ci: refresh the general-server shard durations (#15826 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Pull requests to this repository run a large CI matrix. The slowest check sets the time a contributor waits for a green run. > - The general-server vitest lane runs with one worker per job, so it can only go faster across runners. Twelve shards share its suites, and a recorded duration manifest decides which suite goes to which shard. > - That manifest was recorded on 2026-09-15 from 646 suites. The lane now has 871 suites and about 5031s of serial vitest time. 230 suites have no record and get the median weight, so the shards drifted apart. In run 38076972444 (2026-10-10) they ran 313s to 554s of tests, and `General tests (server (2/12))` at 618s was the slowest check of the whole run. > - An unbalanced lane wastes the runner time it already spends. The total work does not change, but one shard holds the run. > - This pull request records the current duration of every suite from two recent PR runs and keeps the same twelve shards. > - The benefit is that the twelve shards level to about 415s of tests each. The slowest server shard should drop from about 618s to about 480s, and this lane leaves the critical path. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Describe the enhancement The general-server PR test lane is out of balance. Its shard manifest, `scripts/general-server-shard-durations.json`, is three and a half weeks old and misses 230 of the 871 current suites. The heaviest shard runs 554s of tests while the lightest runs 313s. Why is this needed The slowest check decides the wall-clock time of every PR run. In the last fully green runs the slowest check was a general-server shard (618s, 562s, 585s, 646s in runs 38076972444, 38076844891, 38076844368 and 38073555316). A balanced lane removes about 135s from that shard at no extra runner cost. Proposed solution Re-record the per-suite durations from two recent PR runs (38076844891 and 38076972444) with the method that the manifest's `$comment` documents: diff consecutive per-suite completion timestamps in each shard log, and measure the first suite from the Vitest `RUN` banner. Average the two runs. Keep the chat and native-runner entries from the old manifest, because those suites run in their own lanes and do not appear in the shard logs. Drop the two suites that no longer exist. Alternatives considered More shards would also shorten the lane (fourteen shards level at about 355s, sixteen at about 311s). They are not needed now: `Build` (489-592s) and `General tests (workspaces-b)` (513-618s) already sit above the balanced twelve-shard level, so extra runners would not shorten the run. Those two checks are the next targets. ## What Changed - `scripts/general-server-shard-durations.json`: 873 recorded suites (was 646). 870 come from the two 2026-10-10 runs, 3 carry over (chat and native-runner suites), 2 obsolete entries are gone. The `$comment` names the source runs, the fleet, and the carry-over rule. - `.github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml`: a comment on the general tests matrix records the 2026-10-10 measurements and why the shard count stays at twelve. No workflow behavior changes. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/run-vitest-stable-shard.test.mjs`: 29 pass. This covers the manifest coverage check, the duration-balance check (spread must stay under the heaviest suite), and the complete non-overlapping partition. - `node --test .github/scripts/tests/pr-dependency-cache.test.mjs .github/scripts/tests/pr-runner-rust-cache.test.mjs .github/scripts/tests/lockfile-refresh-workflows.test.mjs`: 17 pass. - Measurement check: the per-shard sum of the recorded durations matches Vitest's own `Duration` line within 1s on all 24 shard logs. - Simulation with the real planner (`scripts/run-vitest-stable.mjs --dry-run`, `GITHUB_WORKFLOW=PR`) on the current suite list: with the old manifest the twelve shards carry 321s to 510s of recorded tests; with this manifest they carry 413s to 415s. - Expected result on the first PR run after merge: every `General tests (server (n/12))` job finishes in about 480s (415s of tests plus about 65s of setup) instead of 374s to 618s. ## Risks - Low risk. The file only sets weights for the shard planner. A wrong weight moves a suite to a different shard; it cannot drop or duplicate a suite, because the guard tests assert the partition is complete and non-overlapping. - The durations come from the `runs-on` public PR fleet. GitHub-hosted runners are faster in absolute terms, but the relative weights, which are all the planner uses, are the same. - The manifest will go stale again as suites grow. The guard test fails when coverage drops under 50%, and the matrix comment records how to refresh it. ## Model Used - Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-fable-5-1`, running as a Paperclip agent through the Claude local adapter with tool use (shell, file edits, GitHub CLI). The agent collected the CI data, built the manifest, ran the tests, and wrote this description. ## 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 - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-10-10 13:52:05 -07:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip	40701adecf	fix(release): preserve pinned master identity for canary publishing (#15770 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - A master push publishes a canary from its exact source commit. > - The publisher now checks out that commit by SHA. Git leaves HEAD detached. > - The release script requires the local branch name to be master. > - This pull request verifies the trusted push and source before attaching local master at the same commit. > - The canary can pass the existing branch guard without following a newer master tip. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #15712 pinned the publisher checkout and bound the smoke lockfile to its source. I searched open PRs and issues for canary, detached HEAD, and checkout fixes. No overlapping fix was found. #15768 addresses a later tarball visibility error and does not change this branch guard. What happened? The canary publisher checks out the exact push SHA. The checkout is detached. `release.sh canary --skip-verify` then fails because the local branch is not master. Publication does not start. The [failed master run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38008956836) shows this failure. Expected behavior The trusted master publisher must keep the exact verified push commit and pass the existing local master guard. It must not follow a newer branch tip. Steps to reproduce 1. Check out a master push commit by its full SHA. 2. Confirm that HEAD is detached. 3. Run the real `require_on_master_branch` helper from `scripts/release-lib.sh`. 4. Observe the detached-HEAD rejection. The tests reproduce this without calling a publisher. Paperclip version or commit `baa94bbea58919bcc6cf247a708f04e6e1002679`. Deployment mode The GitHub Actions master canary publishing lane. ## What Changed - Add one step immediately after the pinned publisher checkout. - Require the canonical repository, a push event, and the master ref before changing any Git ref. - Validate the full source SHA and require the checked-out HEAD to match it. - Attach local master to that exact SHA and recheck HEAD. Do not fetch or select a floating branch. - Preserve release scripts, local branch guards, package authentication, other publishing lanes, and source-named lockfile artifacts. - Add disposable real-Git tests for a pinned source behind local and remote master, rejected trust and SHA inputs, unchanged refs on rejection, and the original branch guard. Document the branch handoff. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs scripts/cloud-source-verification.test.mjs scripts/standard-image-contract.test.mjs scripts/release-lib.test.mjs` passed all 82 tests on Node 25.6.1. Twelve new cases include eleven real-Git fixtures and one workflow invariant check. The tests run the actual workflow shell and the unchanged release guard. - `actionlint -shellcheck= .github/workflows/release.yml` passed. ShellCheck passed for the new shell. Full local actionlint reports four pre-existing advisories in other steps; their text matches the base exactly. This change adds no advisory. - Workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on Node 25.6.1. The local tests cover the changed release flow; the full application test suite runs in hosted CI. - [Hosted full CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38011530698) passed all 47 jobs at commit `ffff774a2629663fa71e2fad5143da0696afc5e6`. This includes policy, typecheck, release registry, build, runner tests, application tests, browser tests, and the canary dry run. Hosted policy ran all 12 new guard tests and passed all 67 source-policy tests. - Greptile scored the same commit 5/5 with no actionable issues. There are zero review threads. Separate source review approved all three changed files and 32 dependencies. It passed 82 tests and caught four broken variants. - The supply chain scanner returned neutral with zero annotations. It cannot verify this inline workflow change and reports limited coverage for existing action references. Manual review confirmed that all action references and pins are unchanged. The security, Socket, and Snyk checks passed. - No live canary install, registry publication, Docker image operation, workflow rerun, or deployment was performed. Tests use disposable Git repositories and local fixtures. ## Risks Low risk. The new step changes only local Git state in the trusted canary publisher. A wrong event or source fails before ref changes. The original release and authentication guards remain in place. The exact checkout and artifact source stay unchanged. Revert the new step to restore the previous behavior. No runtime or database change is required. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. Used repository inspection, code execution, Git and Bash fixtures, and independent agent review. The runtime does not expose a more specific model snapshot or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-10 13:33:34 -07:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip	e9dae72c0c	ci: use a Docker Hub mirror for image builds (#15756 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Image workflows build the exact source selected for a release. > - BuildKit fetches the Dockerfile frontend and base images from Docker Hub. > - Docker Hub token failures can stop these builds before application code runs. > - BuildKit supports a public image cache with canonical Docker Hub fallback. > - This pull request configures that cache in the two affected image builders. > - The build inputs and publication gates stay the same. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What happened? [Docker run 37995539183](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37995539183) failed before application builds started. The AMD64 job received HTTP 504 from the Docker Hub token endpoint while it fetched `docker/dockerfile:1.20`. The ARM64 job fetched the frontend, then received the same error while it resolved `node:24-trixie-slim`. [Release preview run 37992058052](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37992058052) also failed while it fetched the frontend. Expected behavior Use the supported public cache when it has the requested Docker Hub image. Retain canonical Docker Hub fallback when the cache has no usable copy. Preserve build and publish failures. Steps to reproduce Run either affected image builder during a Docker Hub token failure. The unconfigured BuildKit container contacts Docker Hub for the frontend and base image. It cannot use a host Docker daemon mirror for those build requests. Paperclip version or commit The observed Docker run used `00d944f96c8c4aba8332ce224df2be73a601228a`. The preview used `b6b3cb3761dabd1bd668054e7a99a245d53707c4`. Deployment mode GitHub Actions image builds. No application runtime change. The public PR and issue search found no matching open registry-mirror change. #15743 addresses a separate npm canary dependency publication failure. ## What Changed - Add the official `docker.io` to `mirror.gcr.io` BuildKit configuration to the public Docker build matrix and the release preview image builder. - Keep all existing action references, image sources, targets, build arguments, platforms, credentials, cache settings, outputs, permissions, triggers, and publication gates. - Extend the existing dependency-free workflow tests to check mirror placement, verified HTTPS, both native platforms, preview isolation, and publication access. - Document cache eviction, tag freshness, canonical fallback, and builder bootstrap limits. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs scripts/cloud-source-verification.test.mjs scripts/standard-image-contract.test.mjs`: 43 passed on the final source. No dependency install required. - Six offline controls removed each builder's mirror, changed the registry or cache host, enabled insecure transport, or added preview registry login. Each control failed the new check as expected. - `actionlint -shellcheck='' .github/workflows/docker.yml .github/workflows/release.yml`: workflow validation passed. With optional ShellCheck enabled, the ten diagnostics match the unchanged base exactly. This PR changes no shell scripts. - A real TOML parser accepted the inline configuration. Removing the new block from each workflow produced byte-identical base files. - Read-only registry metadata checks confirmed matching raw bytes and SHA256 values for the current Node24 index and both native manifests. The Dockerfile frontend index and both native manifests also match Docker Hub and Google. No image config blobs or layers were fetched. - Full application tests, typecheck, and build were not repeated locally because application source is unchanged. [Hosted CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37998739440) passed the full required checks on `25fd57f`, including all test shards, build, typecheck, policy, E2E, and canary dry run. - The supply-chain advisory returned neutral because it cannot verify these infrastructure edits. It reported zero annotations. Independent review confirmed all action references, Dockerfiles, package files, and lockfiles are unchanged. The other 53 checks passed; two Storybook checks skipped as expected. - Independent review approved all four changed files and the workflow graph. Greptile scored the same source 5/5 with no unresolved comments. - No Docker build, workflow rerun, image publish, or deployment was started for verification. A normal image workflow after merge must prove full image acquisition. ## Risks Google is a cache, not an outage guarantee. It can evict images. Mutable tags can lag upstream changes or deletions. Matching manifests now does not prove future tag freshness or blob availability. A cache miss can still fail when Docker Hub is unavailable. The initial `moby/buildkit:buildx-stable-1` bootstrap uses the host Docker daemon before this configuration takes effect and remains dependent on Docker Hub. The registry mirror applies to image pull and resolution only. GHCR publication and cache writes keep their existing routes. See [Docker's supported configuration](https://docs.docker.com/build/ci/github-actions/configure-builder/#registry-mirror) and [Google's cache limits](https://docs.cloud.google.com/artifact-registry/docs/pull-cached-dockerhub-images). ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning and code execution tools. The exact service variant and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes: #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-09 17:15:50 -07:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip	935fb63ed5	fix(release): retry incomplete canary dependency publications (#15743 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Release checks must test the exact package that a new user installs. > - The canary onboarding smoke uses a fresh npm dependency graph. > - An upstream package can reference a dependency before that version is available. > - The smoke then exits before Paperclip onboarding starts. > - This pull request retries only that npm acquisition failure within the existing startup limit. > - Onboarding still runs once, and all other errors remain visible. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What happened? [Release run 37986221440](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37986221440) published `2026.1009.0-canary.13`, then failed the onboarding smoke. The retained server log contains npm `ETARGET` for `@aws-sdk/credential-provider-env@^3.972.73`. The upstream parent package was published before this dependency. The missing version became available during the smoke startup. Paperclip onboarding never ran. Expected behavior Retry a short dependency publication window before onboarding starts. Stop on a permanent install failure. Never repeat onboarding to hide a startup failure. Steps to reproduce 1. Start the exact-version canary smoke with an empty npm cache. 2. Make the first npm install return `ETARGET` because a dependency version is not available. 3. Make the next install succeed after registry metadata changes. 4. Confirm that onboarding starts once. Repeat with permanent `ETARGET` and an unrelated failure; onboarding must not start. Paperclip version or commit The observed release source was `cb291bf1298ab484a2792c05eb977f3440f1f351`. Deployment mode Linux release CI. The change affects the canary smoke harness. Related: #15712 fixes a separate lockfile mismatch in the smoke's repository dependency install. This change covers the fresh published-package npm install. ## What Changed - Separate npm package acquisition from the onboarding command. - Retry only the final npm `ETARGET` error, up to three attempts with online metadata and clean temporary prefixes. - Share a two-minute acquisition budget across attempts and backoff. Keep the existing five-minute Playwright startup limit. - Run the installed exact-version CLI once. Preserve authentication, network, lifecycle, and onboarding failures. - Stop owned process groups on cancellation and remove owned install prefixes. Keep server logs and instance data for diagnostics. - Keep dependency-free helper subprocess tests in the required policy lane. Run real Playwright lifecycle tests in the required release-registry lane after its dependencies are installed. - Document the bounded behavior in the release runbook. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs`: 24 passed in a clean source snapshot with no `node_modules`. These cover transient and permanent missing versions, other npm errors, nested error codes, onboarding failure, deadline expiry, and cancellation. - `pnpm test:release-registry`: 153 passed, including real Playwright teardown with a descendant that ignores SIGTERM and startup-timeout cleanup of a detached npm installer. - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm build`: passed. - `pnpm test:run`: deliberately stopped after complete hosted CI passed; this is not a local full-suite pass. The run's 15 warm-runtime real-DB cases failed before assertions because the local macOS PostgreSQL package lacked library symlinks after installation with `--ignore-scripts`. After running the package's local hydration step, all 15 affected cases passed in a targeted rerun. The remaining aggregate was stopped with exact owned-process cleanup. - [Hosted CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37994486323) is complete and green at `1c80e6f`: all tests, build, typecheck, policy, release registry, E2E, and canary dry run passed. Greptile scored the same head 5/5 with no unresolved comments. - Independent review covered all seven changed files and the exact policy and release-registry commands. It also used real npm 11.9 against a loopback registry: a required version was absent, then became available. The retry refreshed metadata and started the installed exact-version CLI once. The one-attempt negative control failed. - The new subprocess tests use local npm and CLI fixtures. They do not contact a registry or start a real Paperclip instance. - The patch preserves the exact-version clean-install check. It adds no dependency pins, credentials, or workflow reruns. ## Risks The install phase now has a two-minute budget inside the existing five-minute startup limit. An unusually slow valid install can still fail the smoke. Permanent missing versions remain failures after the bounded retry. The lifecycle tests cover the Linux release runner behavior; Playwright does not support graceful SIGTERM on Windows. No application, database, or deployment behavior changes. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning and code execution tools. The exact service variant and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-09 17:15:02 -07:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip	23b9aaa8e6	fix(release): reuse publisher lockfile for canary smoke (#15712 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Every master push publishes an exact canary and tests its onboarding flow. > - The publisher resolves dependencies before building, while the smoke job checks out the committed lockfile again. > - Patch or manifest changes can land before the separate lockfile refresh, so the smoke fails before testing the published app. > - This pull request passes the publisher's resolved lockfile to the same-source smoke job. > - The smoke keeps frozen dependency validation and tests the exact published canary version. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #10393, #13689. Related work: #13690 documents lockfile drift; #12115 addresses refresh-PR check triggering. This change addresses the canary smoke handoff. #15678 only refreshed the opencode importer. #15164 incidentally corrected the earlier patch hash on master. What happened? Canary publication succeeded, but the fresh onboarding smoke install failed with `ERR_PNPM_LOCKFILE_CONFIG_MISMATCH` on sources `0b80ea17ef` and `ab8dcab809`. The committed `acpx@0.13.1` hash no longer matched its patch. A later run on `6080daf262` failed with `ERR_PNPM_OUTDATED_LOCKFILE` after an `opencode-ai` manifest addition. The current master lockfile has since caught up; the workflow still permits this race on future changes. Expected behavior The exact published canary reaches the onboarding smoke with test dependencies resolved for its source. A mismatched or missing lockfile must fail validation. Steps to reproduce Check out either affected source and run `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` with pnpm 9.15.4. The smoke fails before a browser starts, although the publisher already installed that source with a resolved lockfile. ## What Changed - Pin both canary publisher and onboarding smoke checkouts to the triggering SHA. - Save the publisher's resolved lockfile before restoring tracked files or rewriting release versions. - Restore that same-run, source-named artifact before the unchanged frozen smoke install. - Add offline real-pnpm regressions for patch-hash and manifest drift, plus wrong-source rejection and workflow binding checks. - Document artifact retention and job reruns. No manifest or committed lockfile changes. ## Verification - Focused release workflow, exact-source verification and image-contract tests: 45 passed. - Negative control: both new real-pnpm fixture cases fail against the original workflow with their respective original lockfile errors; both pass with the handoff. - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` passed on the current source. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed after reclaiming disposable build-cache space. - The browser onboarding smoke passed against exact published `2026.1009.0-canary.7`: 1 test passed using a fresh temporary instance. - Full local `pnpm test:run` was attempted twice. The first hit disk exhaustion; the second reported one chat integration failure and then a Vitest worker `ENOTCONN` crash before completing. This is not a full-suite pass. The named chat case passed in isolation without changes. All full sharded PR CI checks passed on the final head. - Independent source review and a clean-checkout run also passed all 45 focused tests, with separate real-pnpm negative controls. - The supply-chain scan is neutral because managed intelligence could not scan the pinned official `download-artifact` action. It reported no defect; independent review inspected the action source, same-run scope and v4/v4 compatibility. - Reviewed the diff for secrets, personal data and generated artifacts; none found. ## Risks - The smoke now depends on a same-run GitHub artifact retained for 14 days. A missing artifact intentionally fails instead of resolving a different dependency set. - A publisher rerun replaces its source-named artifact; a smoke-only rerun reuses the retained artifact. - Frozen validation and the exact published version remain required. The source app and publication logic do not change. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool execution and parallel independent review. The exact serving variant and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-09 17:14:32 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	0726a00e80	feat(apps): qualify Bitly, Context7, Hugging Face and Resend MCP (#15686 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and govern their tools. > - Apps already supports provider-hosted MCP servers. > - Useful providers still need real setup and read proof before Browse exposure. > - Browser testing found a Bitly token-format failure and an OAuth callback that replaced an explicit empty agent selection. > - This PR qualifies four provider methods and fixes those shared OAuth paths. > - Providers that still need login or approval remain withheld from new Browse listings. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #15621, the merged hosted MCP qualification batch. Searches found no duplicate Bitly or Context7 implementation PR. What existing behavior does this improve? Apps setup, provider MCP discovery, token exchange, and saved agent access through an OAuth callback. Subsystem affected Shared Apps definitions, the server tool-access service, and the UI setup/recovery route. Current behavior Bitly's callback can fail with `oauth_access_token_missing` when its token response is not JSON. Curated MCP callbacks can treat an explicitly saved empty install set as access for all agents. Context7 is hidden and Hugging Face lacks a curated anonymous method. Saved drafts for hidden providers cannot finish setup through their catalog wizard. Proposed behavior Request JSON token responses. Record explicit remote MCP install choices in the install transaction and preserve them at callback. Keep managed subject/default access when no choice was saved. Expose the qualified Bitly and Context7 methods, add anonymous Hugging Face Hub access, and record Resend qualification. Resume hidden providers only through an exact matching company-visible saved draft. Reason and benefit People can connect useful hosted tools through the existing Apps flow. An explicit zero-agent selection survives authorization. Public documentation lookups need no OAuth app, account, or key. Breaking changes Explicitly saved empty MCP install choices now remain empty. Existing managed defaults without a saved choice retain their behavior. No schema migration or API shape change. ## What Changed - Qualify Bitly OAuth, Context7 public MCP, Hugging Face public MCP, and Resend OAuth with real browser setup, useful UI reads, and reload checks. - Negotiate JSON OAuth token responses and preserve explicitly saved MCP agent reach with a transactional config marker. - Add durable provider overrides, permission reviews, dated text-only evidence, and official branding provenance. Remove all seven evidence images and their report references. - Restore Finish setup for hidden-provider drafts with company/application/provider checks; keep fresh setup withheld. Preserve success after the exact resumed draft becomes active, and restore valid completed URLs to that exact saved Permissions page; reject initially active, disabled, or archived resume targets. Align the Context7 route assertion with its new qualified availability. - Retain hidden ClickUp, Klaviyo, and monday.com research with exact login/approval gates. monday.com requires provider callback allowlisting. ## Verification - Connector service suite: 420 passed, including default/empty/agent/company reach and managed OAuth lifecycle coverage. - Shared catalog: 36 passed. Override tests: 3 passed. Brand checks: 101 identities passed. - Focused UI setup/recovery, Browse, and OAuth-helper suites: 306 passed. Actual hidden-draft resume/reload passed; a public Context7 draft seeded in the isolated app completed through the active-state refetch and persisted with zero agents after reload. The completed URL refresh and View connection open the exact saved Permissions page. Fresh hidden setup, normal initially active resume, disabled/archived status, and provider mismatch are rejected; a draft at the completion stage stays in setup. - Recursive typecheck and build passed again after rebase. The full local Vitest run began before rebase and was cancelled as superseded while still in the general-server phase; it is not a completed pass. Exact-head CI supplies broad coverage. The focused connector service suite passed against the final code. UI typecheck, build, and token gates passed again after the draft-recovery fix. - Targeted mock MCP Playwright journey: 1 passed (34.9s). It now verifies View connection reaches the exact saved Permissions route, both discovered actions, and reload persistence. This replaces the stale Browse expectation found by CI. - All CI gates passed on final commit `32bb4c6422411eee632486950e45e2735102d1b3`. The inherited-pause test timed out in the cleanup run and passed on one retry without code changes; the entire file also passed locally, 36/36. Its exact timing cause remains unresolved. A signoff timeout on the preceding production-code commit also passed on its single retry. Greptile reviewed the final commit at 5/5 with no open findings. - Actual UI reads: Bitly current-user read; Resend List Domains including a fresh setup after the final callback refinement; Context7 React docs; Hugging Face public docs search. No provider writes or real agent runtimes ran. - [Text-only qualification report](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/32bb4c6422411eee632486950e45e2735102d1b3/doc/connections/easy-mcp-batch-2-2026-10-09.md) include evidence limits and exact blockers. Account/profile/domain results are omitted. ## Risks - Bitly `mcp.all` and Resend `full_access` remain broad provider grants. Qualification kept writes Off and selected no agents. Read proof does not establish write behavior or refresh rotation. - The explicit-choice marker applies to new install saves; older unmarked flows keep their existing defaults. Its JSONB merge avoids overwriting concurrent config fields. - Public provider catalogs and rate limits can change. Unqualified providers remain withheld from new Browse entries; retained connections remain available for recovery. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, plus OpenAI `gpt-6-luna` subagents for provider research, browser testing, and review. The exact primary serving variant and context-window size are not exposed by this runtime. Used reasoning, code execution, and browser tools. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-09 11:52:33 -05:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	2dd9811e8b	Own agent hiring and termination in a lifecycle module (#15631 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Agent creation, approval, pause, and termination change whether an agent can work. > - These changes currently use separate service and database paths. > - Some agents need setup after their record exists and before their harness can run. > - This PR adds one module that owns those state changes and their transactions. > - The module records progress and retries incomplete work after a server restart. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Problem or motivation A hire can become active before its execution environment is ready. Direct agent state writes also bypass one common lifecycle boundary. Termination does not have a durable step for resource cleanup. Proposed solution Use agent lifecycle commands for hiring, approval, pause, resume, and termination. Keep proposed hires pending until approval. Prepare each approved hire, test its saved harness configuration, and then permit work. Wait for required plugin work before completing a step. Alternatives considered A general database commit hook would expose transaction details to callers. A timer alone would delay each new hire. This module owns each command transaction and starts its worker after commit. A periodic scan recovers work after a process stops. Roadmap alignment This change adds the lifecycle boundary for the existing agent and plugin systems. It does not add a user interface or a provider implementation. It replaces the lifecycle delivery approach in #15391. Related proposals include #11475 and #13099; this change does not add their external executor protocols. ## What Changed - Add durable approval, preparation, verification, pause, resume, stop, and cleanup states. - Keep agent creation, lifecycle state, configuration writes, and agent record deletion behind `modules/agent-lifecycle`. Keep validation, credential rules, reads, onboarding, invitations, general approvals, and company data deletion in their services. - Commit a hire before the remaining onboarding or invitation work. Serialize requests with the existing dedicated database connection helper. Reuse the hire after a failed attempt. - Keep accepted work in the run queue during setup. Require execution and cleanup evidence before completing pause or termination. - Retain the original credential owner when approving migrated hires. - Start lifecycle work after each command commits. Use database leases and revision checks for retries and late results. - Add a generic required plugin method and capability. Store the required plugin IDs for each agent. Track host and plugin completion separately. - Keep harness verification and credential rules in services. Supply their results to lifecycle through explicit ports. Reject failed logins and incomplete probes. - Remove reverse imports from lifecycle adapters into services. Share record queries and validation below both layers. - Use one hire decision path for agent IDs and approval IDs. Resolve the approval and agent change in one transaction. Expose policy reconciliation on the command object. - Save configuration and verification invalidation through one module operation. Ordinary commands own their transaction. Restrict the shared transaction integration to its listed callers. Reject identity, company, accounting, timestamp, and unknown fields. - Require completed termination before deleting agent records. The company deletion service calls the module through a separate deletion interface. - Save an approved secret before applying its agent binding. A failed binding leaves the secret approved. A retry reuses it. - Remove old permission and metadata export files. Move hire configuration rules out of lifecycle persistence. - Report failed worker steps and scans with operation context and known error codes. Omit provider messages, stacks, and configuration values. Document ordinary application use and extension rules. - Recover expired native owners only after execution stops. Retry cleanup of failed retained leases. Wait for setup in the live smoke script. - Keep manual, budget, and company pause reasons separate. Guard execution status writes with the ready state. - Add a migration, boundary checks, regression tests, and a lifecycle guide. Keep the current UI. - Limit periodic policy checks to 100 eligible agents per minute. Continue from the last agent ID. Exclude pending hires and agents in termination or a final state. Keep explicit company and budget updates immediate. ## Verification - Latest head `ccc3c86b0` aligns the shared status update schema with the PATCH route. All 15 shared tests, 104 server route/OpenAPI tests, 2 CLI tests, and shared/server/CLI TypeScript checks pass. The Greptile comment is fixed. CI is running; no new Apex review was requested for this small fix. - Rebase `75708ac94` rebases onto master at `2eb5187e4`. The backup test uses the shared 90-second timeout from master; the older timeout commit was removed. The affected backup test passes. - Agent budget edits now pass the target agent ID through enforcement. All 50 affected tests, server TypeScript, and 11 boundary tests pass. Both configuration update paths have regression coverage. CI is running on the latest head. No new Apex review was requested for these small fixes. - Rebase `9b568666a` preserves the run-control extraction and delivery-work startup changes from master. All 559 affected tests, server TypeScript, and 11 boundary tests pass. CI and Apex review are running on the final head. - The policy scan fix passes 56 lifecycle and diagnostic tests, 24 policy and caller tests, and 11 boundary tests. A regression test checks the page limit, interval, excluded states, and cursor wraparound. - Rebase `fd4698750` passes all 611 tests in eight affected lifecycle, route, and heartbeat suites. Server TypeScript and all 11 module boundary tests pass. The company deletion rollback and concurrent hire tests are included. - Follow-up `00aac7646` fixes the failed decision deletion test and the public update schema. All 126 affected server tests, 8 shared tests, 2 CLI tests, and 11 boundary tests pass. Shared, server, CLI, and UI TypeScript checks pass. - Server TypeScript passes: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsc --noEmit`. - All 11 boundary tests pass: `node --test scripts/check-module-boundaries.test.mjs`. The repository boundary scan also passes. - All 68 lifecycle, failure diagnostic, and harness verification tests pass. Tests reject forbidden fields through the root command, combined transition command, and restricted transaction integration. They also check invalid fields returned by configuration preparation. - Failure tests cover host work, plugin work, claims, renewals, deferrals, and scans. Log tests check known error codes and exclusion of private error contents. - All 355 tests in 10 existing caller suites pass. These tests cover secret approval, pairing, pending hires, credentials, company import, built-in agents, managed agents, instructions, and skills. - The branch is rebased onto `origin/master` at `2eb5187e4`. The queue guards and cancellation lock fix use the extracted heartbeat queue. Agent cancellation uses the extracted run-control file. The source diff scan found no secrets or private URLs. - Earlier checks cover approval retries, rollback, late verification results, policy holds, deletion rollback, concurrent company deletion, and queue admission during setup. - Before the rebase, CI passed on `00aac7646` and Greptile Apex rated it 5/5 with no open comments. CI and a new Apex review are pending for the rebased commit. The branch has no merge conflicts. - The full local build and native Dot suite were not run. The host has no Cargo. No live provider test was run. ## Risks - Background policy recovery takes more than one minute when more than 100 agents are eligible. Explicit company and budget updates still reconcile immediately. - The restricted configuration integration keeps an agent reference and its dependent records in one transaction. It cannot change a budget or invoke a lifecycle transition. A periodic scan starts pending setup after that transaction commits. - Secret approval and binding use separate transactions. A failed binding can leave an approved secret with no agent binding. - New approved hires remain unavailable until setup and verification complete. Existing clients see `paused` during these steps. This PR does not change the UI. - Migration `0320_daily_onslaught.sql` maps existing statuses and pause reasons. It does not create external resources or claim that an existing harness passed verification. - Use a coordinated server update for this migration. Older server versions can write legacy status without the new lifecycle checks. - A failed onboarding or invitation request can leave a committed hire. A retry reuses that hire and completes the remaining records. - Deletion requires completed termination. Company deletion can require another request while cleanup is pending. - Required plugins must make repeated calls safe and reject older revisions. A disabled or removed required plugin blocks completion until it is restored. - A new hire can run a second harness test after the existing UI test. Some adapters can charge for this test. - No live provider test was run. Provider implementation and resource backfill remain separate work. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, code tools, and local test execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have described the issue in this PR with the feature request field labels - [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation - [x] I have considered and documented risks - [x] Targeted local tests pass - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green on the new commit - [x] Greptile Apex is 5/5 with no open comments on the new commit - [x] I will address review comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-09 09:05:12 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	57e977be72	feat: integrate Pi 1.0 into the experimental Runner (#14921 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - The experimental Runner owns provider processes and durable sessions. > - Pi needs working task execution and human controls. > - The five-PR stack must preserve changes already on master. > - Each layer now carries the complete integrated source for a safe sequential fallback. > - This PR belongs to native GitHub stack #15602, ending at #14956. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #14436, #14631, #14743 and #14956. Ship Pi 1.0 through the experimental Paperclip Runner. The five PRs are #14921, #14922, #14923, #14924 and #14956. The user authorized the complete merge after checks pass. Existing `pi_local` execution is unchanged. Accounting and wider provider/platform qualification remain deferred. ## What Changed - Recover missing final replies after workspace finalization changes owners, using accepted-turn evidence without rerunning work or granting external-chat publication. - Preserve the admitted Pi instruction root across warm runs, while retaining changed-root rejection. - Give Pi a bounded 15-second default shutdown grace so stop, drain acknowledgement and durable suspension can complete. Explicit deadlines and other providers retain their existing behavior. - Integrate the Pi 1.0 runtime and master contracts. - Use Pi profile 22. Preserve explicit caller-selected models and exact native thinking levels. Keep Pi's wrapper, helper, extension and question/control behavior unchanged from the qualified profile-19 runtime. - Preserve master's Dot lifecycle and consent fields, configured task environment, status guards and current Codex/Claude dependency versions. Cursor stays qualified. Copilot stays pending; profile 17 binds the changed shared protocol validation sources. - Exclude general AWS IAM credentials from Pi static/custom provider bindings and selected task projections; preserve the provider-scoped Bedrock bearer key. Profile 21 is retained as historical provenance. Rust and cloud install probes use the current declaration. - Patch bundled brace-expansion 5.0.9 to the exact official 5.0.12 payload. Pin the patch and complete runtime closures. Include the patch in normal installed setup tooling. Keep the upstream Pi shrinkwrap as provenance and permit only this exact security correction. - Include current attestation files in the Docker build context. Keep the repository lockfile unchanged from master. CI and private image builds resolve manifest changes before their frozen installation. ## Verification - Full local `pnpm -r typecheck` passes, including Runner Rust, server and UI. Focused integration checks pass: 194 Runner admission/environment tests, 63 profile/credential tests with one expected skip, 152 Dot/UI configuration tests, and Pi transcript/notice tests. - Full local `pnpm build` passes on the final source. - Fresh final-source checks pass: all 698 Rust workspace tests (32 binaries), 156 credential/profile/controller tests with one expected skip, Runner TypeScript typecheck, and 20 package/setup/sandbox tests. - The profile-21 Pi materializer passes on the native host with the official pinned Node 24.21.0 and its npm. It verifies all 150 locked packages, the patched dependency and the exact closure. Setup/package bundle tests and UI token gates pass. - The old hashes were reproduced for all three supported targets before calculating the patched graph. New closure hashes are darwin-arm64 `282022db10150c6632b3444df421342e7d534bdf5d5fb1097a2e79d0625a2bcf`, darwin-x64 `64e251e19009f755c0b04f73ce2138246faab71a961b0f13d75ebfcc34bef12e`, and linux-x64 `713b1fdff42fb56a1518bdc084f181d70bee8ebadc3e4b1d76321ed9108c8410`. Independent native platform execution is separate from graph identity reproduction. - Historical cloud qualification remains unchanged: all seven core cases pass on shipping source `10dc43c9ec65d88c2f782d62afb296d09494f215`, harness `1a4408a48cfb5a1f094a311141c257c92cd7a893`, image `sha256:5b3a775b383591bda1b0c1889e509acc70ce7f37c53f09733c81d59037f02280`, and accepted Sonnet 4.6/low fixture. All 215 canonical files and all seven cleanup checks pass independent verification. These are profile-19 results and are not relabeled as fresh profile-22 runs. - Current Pi digest: `sha256:e92078bee3c23bec4100aa589013a44613d054cd686826534025d8019e9f39a9`. [The readiness plan](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/codex/pi-production-readiness/doc/plans/2026-10-02-pi-production-readiness.md) preserves campaign and failed-attempt provenance. - Merge only after every PR's current-head CI and fresh review pass. Linux CI covers the full suites, build and browser tests. The local embedded Postgres API-authority suite cannot start on this macOS/Node 26 host, so Linux CI must confirm that suite. ### Fresh profile-22 core qualification — 2026-10-08 All seven accepted core cases pass canonically on Pi profile 22, with `openrouter/anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6` and native-confirmed low thinking. This model is a fixture; production accepts the caller's explicit Pi provider/model. Runtime/install source: `3241a992f2a7703e59e97ed0fd3e5d6405de4401`. Frozen accepted harness: `1a4408a48cfb5a1f094a311141c257c92cd7a893`. Immutable cloud image: `ghcr.io/paperclipai/paperclip-daytona-runner@sha256:506f22db7edd78f37c0c40bec1cc084af1850455026dbf467194bfbb8fcef141`. Pi digest: `sha256:e92078bee3c23bec4100aa589013a44613d054cd686826534025d8019e9f39a9`. [Hosted Linux image and clean-install verification](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37868328023) passes, including all 20 source-bound archives, normal CLI/Pi setup, companion import and the production pack reader. This exact installation source includes the latest master integration and the corrected Pi warm instruction-root fence. Full local typecheck/build and current-head hosted CI verify the final stack. All 13 focused real-root regressions pass. The full local executor suite passed 662 tests; 15 database tests could not start the Mac embedded PostgreSQL service. Hosted Linux CI passes the full required verification and E2E checks. These fresh results keep their own source identity; profile-19 results remain historical. \| Core path \| Canonical campaign \| Retained archive SHA-256 \| \| --- \| --- \| --- \| \| File edit, validation, download and Done \| `pi-core22-replyfix-0-1791511228` \| 23 files; `a473e8603a3dd4737863291f8d3d1e392391f0b16d433c3e0e0e9d8baf7a97b0` \| \| Pending question and controller restart \| `pi-core22-replyfix-1-1791511376` \| 33 files; `6b829c4eb74e1f32a89c692a4ae7130dbfc1c6d3cf13915effe2103d9e242c8e` \| \| Three-turn session/process/workspace continuity \| `pi-core22-replyfix-2-1791511587` \| 23 files; `7a87021f8f9a3fdd3c58bb4467f8d82c635e3ea4795d6e75f144d9aa14818df8` \| \| Four typed questions and browser reconnects \| `pi-core22-replyfix-3-1791511881` \| 42 files; `9e31755252be1f4f9cb0626c984c142d4d1ae5f5bee3a7af08444db8d12c280a` \| \| Plan approval and completion \| `pi-core22-replyfix-4-1791512031` \| 22 files; `a0383ce1aab38e7b5a25ce0e9dd3bebea5c037ebd96ae6b29dae19015da2ae2c` \| \| Same-turn steering and permission denial \| `pi-core22-replyfix-5-1791512261` \| 39 files; `c929b8c7070f0b66aedc17e65ca46e6beab1e363926ac9f7e2a75fb250f05949` \| \| Stop during pending permission \| `pi-core22-replyfix-6-1791512390` \| 33 files; `7f0a58ae0f4d5bfc76149435f4e322537089c5bd16e7ffe9b5ad71f10a621a07` \| All 215 canonical files (28714587 bytes) are independently hash-verified. All seven cleanup grades pass, with no owned runtime process or temporary root after each case. Automatic retries are zero. The owned cloud host stopped normally after retention. The prior profile-22 warm attempt remains failed and separately retained: archive SHA-256 `1e54eba5ec72b50cee1534b23d1d1d4f21a090006b8a64501ba70db972abfde5`. Its original canonical classification is preserved. Diagnosis reproduced a product bug comparing an agent-files root against an unset checkpoint-only field. The fix stores the admitted physical root separately from the adopted per-run collection capability. The real-root regression fails before the fix and passes afterward, including rejection of a changed physical root. Fixture, grader, model and all seven accepted case IDs are unchanged; this fresh campaign tests final-reply publication after file registration first. The intermediate restart attempt also remains failed and retained: archive SHA-256 `5dcaefdf1d17cf4cd54fd4cf810f45e736667392339b8ce7caf08bb4e225277f`. Its original canonical classification is preserved. Pi resumed, wrote the verified answer and completed its task; exact runner suspension was proven, but idle stop consumed about 5.2s and left under 3s for the drain acknowledgement. The Pi-only default shutdown grace is now 15s, preserving a full 5s drain round trip and a finite suspension reserve. Explicit caller deadlines, other provider defaults, literal drain receipts and exact suspension identity checks remain unchanged. The timing regression fails before this correction and passes afterward; all 18 focused settlement tests and Runner typecheck pass. The final-source file attempt is also preserved as failed (`candidate_failure`), archive SHA-256 `db6767b6773ea618997927ac77bdb005a5ac81492c7b9c0ffbc900449f829bc9`. Native edit, validation, exact downloadable artifact and Done/succeeded all passed, and the exact final reply was durably recorded. A workspace recovery owner completed before the live heartbeat reached presentation, leaving that reply absent from task chat. Recovery now materializes only a completed final reply from the accepted turn of an ordinary internal Done task, preserving issue/run/contract binding, suppression, external-chat authorization and same-run deduplication. The database regression covers the generated file-preparation receipt, suppression, unapproved external continuation and replay. Server typecheck and all 49 response-selection tests pass; hosted Linux verifies the database regression because embedded PostgreSQL cannot start on this Mac. The delayed-final-answer database regression passes on [the final root-source Linux server shard](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37868262553/job/113628594152), alongside 1,108 passing tests. The first root Runner shard had one unchanged durable-resume test exceed its 5-second timeout; the identical top-source shard and the isolated exact test passed. One rerun of that failed job and its required aggregate passed without source or test changes. The original failed job log and the single-rerun receipt remain retained. ### October 9 merge verification Current merge head: `5a8fe63512a7166aaef5cf50065a25008aa8b44b`. All current-head checks pass, including `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`; exact-head Greptile review is 5/5 with no unresolved threads. Current master conflicts are resolved. The user authorized the maintainer override of the code-owner review gate after these checks. The seven retained live core cases remain bound to source `3241a992f2a7703e59e97ed0fd3e5d6405de4401` and its recorded cloud image. ## Risks - The security correction changes the dependency closure and profile identity. Old sessions must reopen on the new profile. Exact identities and credential bindings fail closed. - The runner remains experimental and requires explicit selection. Legacy Pi Local is unchanged. Caller model IDs pass through; the E2E model is a fixture. - Accounting and the broad platform/provider matrix remain deferred. This merge does not publish a release or deploy a service. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex assisted with reasoning, repository inspection, editing and tool use. The exact serving ID and context window are not exposed in this session. Final live qualification uses Pi 1.0.0 with `openrouter/anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6` and native-confirmed low thinking. ## 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>	2026-10-09 08:56:41 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	6f9d0a56ba	fix: resolve installed Codex and preserve npm host dependencies (#15555 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Installed agents need their own runtime dependencies. > - Native Codex startup and browser login could depend on a global CLI. > - npm bundles do not inherit workspace dependency overrides or patches. > - Codex native packages must come from npm for the consumer host. > - This PR fixes executable resolution and the required npm dependency layout. > - Usable installed CLI versions can run without a numeric version gate. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #15422. This is a prerequisite for the later Codex-default change. What happened? Packaged native Codex startup and browser login could require a global Codex CLI. The server's vendored runner lacked its own declared Codex bridge. A bundled wrapper could retain producer-host binaries or select the legacy adapter's separate platform version. Expected behavior Prefer the installed Codex executable. Accept usable older or newer versions. Use the selected host's PATH when the dependency is absent. Keep the patched JavaScript graph. Let npm install official native packages for the consumer platform. Grant sandbox reads only to the selected vendor resources. Steps to reproduce 1. Prepare a clean npm installation without a global Codex command. 2. Start native Codex or its browser login. 3. Inspect the selected executable, installed host package, and sandbox resource paths. Paperclip version or commit Frozen master base: `1881894973a2b25838d8abed9bd8aeebc3af4441`. Deployment mode Source and packaged self-hosted installation. ## What Changed - Share installed Codex command resolution across native startup, direct evals, and browser login. Accept usable version differences. Preserve explicit commands, recorded sessions, remote host boundaries, and the Linux ARM64 legacy login path. Return safe errors for missing executables and failed login terminals. - Declare the server's Codex bridge. Retain the patched JavaScript dependency graph in npm packages. Strip Codex native payloads. Declare official optional host packages on the published server manifest so native and legacy versions remain separate. Preserve consumer esbuild platform dependencies. - Adjust resource lookup for npm's separate platform packages. Retain package identity, path containment, resolver ownership, and narrow sandbox reads. Keep exact version and digest checks for explicit ACPX artifact qualification. - Extend existing packaging, installed-consumer, login, selection, recovery, and integrity tests. Document the retained behavior. The diff is now 23 files, 1,709 additions, and 53 deletions. The prior diff had 35 files and about 3,700 changed lines. Removed work is preserved on `codex/runner-packaging-full-snapshot` at `6f3060beaa842ffcee21af058370d3cab5f571e9`. Removed from this PR: release workflows and assembly, provider-pack changes, Docker materialization, Git installer changes, extra login HOME/working-directory isolation, and unrelated CI fixture repairs. This PR does not change agent defaults, stored runner choices, UI, schema, or provider qualification. ## Verification - Final candidate: `dde37d7ed0121c10b60b8801eda80f8dc17909ad`. [All 47 ordinary CI jobs passed](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37842288835) on attempt 1, including typecheck, tests, build, E2E, runner checks, and the installed-consumer canary. [Fresh Greptile review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15555#issuecomment-6059581546) is 5/5 on this head; no unresolved threads remain. Human approval is still outstanding. - Reused focused controls passed with Node 24: 71 initial narrowed checks, then 56 affected Codex/selection/eval checks after the relative PATH correction. Runner TypeScript no-emit, syntax, and diff checks passed. The existing fixture reproduces the original relative PATH failure and verifies working-directory selection, empty entries, ordering, and absolute launch. One CLI entrypoint test was initially blocked by sandbox IPC and passed with its existing local socket allowed. Login HOME, config-directory assignments, and working directory match master. - [The actual clean Linux npm consumer](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37842288835/job/113535523044) passed on the final candidate's CI integration. All 17 Paperclip tarballs omit native Codex payloads. Official npm host packages retain their own integrity and `inBundle=false`. Native Codex selects 0.160.0; the legacy closure retains 0.156.1. Package admission, command leases, narrow native sandbox resources, consumer hooks, preserved lock, and offline lifecycle controls passed. Provider calls were zero. No new workflow is added. - Actual official Codex 0.156.1 passed on the final committed source on macOS ARM64: installed dependency preference, absolute and relative PATH fallback, narrow resource lookup, and app-server initialize/initialized. Executed module hashes match the candidate. One scripts-disabled install, three version probes, and one handshake completed in 26 seconds; owned files and process group were removed. No login, account/model request, or provider task ran. - CI checked out `dfda8e708e87306d22ed735d78bdfcbe770e99b7` on base `65b558180533039a891ee0cd1ccab9988aa79adc`. Its 13 upstream paths do not overlap this PR's 23 paths or alter packaging/Codex inputs. The consumer report records producer `7b8e94c08657b5ddc265946459762340f125726c`, after the existing canary staged a generated-lock-only commit (one file, three insertions). These identities are kept separate; raw generated-lock bytes were not retained. - No local Docker or Rust build, paid provider turn, merge, or deployment. Later PRs must prove live onboarding and production cloud packaging before changing defaults. ## Risks - npm must install optional host dependencies. Missing dependencies still return errors. Paperclip tarballs do not pre-bundle Codex executables. - The repository requires CI-owned lockfile updates. PR CI resolves the changed manifest and stages its own producer lockfile. A raw source Docker build with `--frozen-lockfile` must wait for the existing master lockfile bot to merge its refresh, or use a disposable resolved checkout. No Docker build or deployment is qualified by this PR. - Ordinary Codex startup accepts version differences. Actual protocol or login failures remain errors. Explicit ACPX artifact checks retain their release pins. - The published server delegates platform installation outside its bundled JavaScript graph. Focused negative controls reject unsafe package metadata and paths. The hosted consumer test passed on this candidate’s CI integration. - Existing agents retain their stored runner choices. There is no data migration or automatic upgrade. Release pipeline and platform qualification work remain separate prerequisites for later defaults. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, code execution, and parallel agents. The exact serving snapshot 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>	2026-10-09 08:19:51 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	2b688a8fe3	feat(connections): add verified MCP providers and setup fixes (#15621 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Apps give agents governed access to external tools. > - Several provider MCP servers lacked a supported catalog entry or failed during setup. > - Real browser tests identified specific registration, session, and form defects. > - This pull request adds seven catalog entries and fixes the shared paths used by eleven verified providers. > - Users can connect these providers through the existing Apps flow and control each action. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What existing behavior does this improve? The Apps catalog and remote MCP setup, discovery, and action tester. Subsystem affected Shared app definitions, the server tool services, and the Apps UI. Current behavior Seven providers lack a catalog entry. Airtable can select an advertised client-metadata flow that fails. Calendly rejects the registration name. Tavily needs an initialized session before a call. Firecrawl exposes invalid defaults for optional nested form objects. HTTPS setup can display a callback that differs from the server callback. Proposed behavior Add Calendly, Exa, Firecrawl, GSC Wizard, Parallel Search, Tavily, and Windsor.ai. Preserve Airtable, Linear, Make, and PostHog. Use reviewed provider options through the shared MCP and OAuth paths. Display the callback supplied by the server. Omit untouched optional object inputs. Reason and benefit Eleven providers passed bounded reads through the real Paperclip browser action tester. This PR includes that verified set and its required shared fixes. Unfinished providers remain outside this change. AgentMail keeps its existing integration. Breaking changes No database migration. Existing OAuth credentials and action policies keep their ownership and access rules. Airtable's reviewed method re-registers a retained client-metadata binding through DCR. Tavily's reviewed method initializes sessions before dispatch. The existing customer, managed, and Vercel OAuth gateway paths now refresh on upstream 401 and return `oauth_refreshed_retry_required` (409), requiring an explicit caller retry. They do not replay the rejected call automatically; the next invocation initializes a fresh credential-scoped session when required. Related catalog work: #15545. This branch preserves current master catalog entries and does not add another Google Workspace integration. Open and closed provider PRs and public MCP issues were searched. No duplicate for this verified set was found. The change extends the shipped Connected Apps roadmap item. ## What Changed - Add seven catalog entries with official provider branding and reviewed permissions. - Update Airtable, Linear, and Make metadata and show Make in Apps. - Add authoritative provider source overrides that use the existing generation and review checks. - Add the reviewed Airtable DCR option and compatible Calendly registration names. - Initialize Tavily sessions before discovery and calls, including retained connections. Keep credential-scoped session caching and single call dispatch. - Use the server's callback URL in the OAuth setup UI. - Omit untouched optional object defaults; keep supplied empty strings, false, zero, and object values intact in the action tester, with strict required-child validation. - Require an explicit retry after OAuth refresh instead of replaying a tools/call with missing session headers. - Record all eleven successful reads, write policies, auth-method limits, and qualification caveats. Omit credentials and private account data. - Find chat connector cards through catalog search in browser tests, so pagination does not hide Slack or other later entries. ## Verification - Real browser qualification: eleven bounded reads passed. Catalog refresh and reload proof are recorded in `doc/connections/verified-mcp-qualification-2026-10-08.md`. - Provider writes and actual agent-adapter sessions were not run. Alternative documented auth methods and expiry refresh remain unqualified. - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm build`: passed. - Focused shared/catalog tests: 41 passed. Source override tests: 3 passed. Catalog regeneration fixture suite: 9 passed. Latest form regression suites: 31 passed. Gateway suite: 38 passed. Other focused UI suites passed before these last fixes. - UI token gates and both token sync checks: passed. - The catalog regeneration fixture includes the authoritative provider overrides; its full suite passes. The focused OAuth socket case passed on isolated rerun. - Complete local UI suite: 7,866 passed. CLI suite: 511 passed, 6 skipped. Complete shared suite: 892 passed. - The unchanged AgentMail/ClickUp discovery fallback suite passes all 45 cases. An OpenAI login test passed on isolated rerun. - Local broad database coverage is limited by macOS PostgreSQL shared-memory exhaustion (`shmget: No space left on device`, not disk space). The broad run was interrupted after diagnosis; no host settings or other running services were changed. - CI found that the Slack browser test assumed its catalog card was on the first page. The test now uses catalog search; the Slack case passes locally. Adjacent GitHub and iMessage cases could not start locally because embedded PostgreSQL initialization failed before browser assertions. - Final commit [`febe4520e`](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/commit/febe4520e13d4b3a4121eafc3d22540c2b11379d): all 54 checks passed, with none pending or failed. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37847182065) passed typecheck, build, all general and serialized test suites, all eight browser shards, runner checks, canary dry run, and the aggregate verification gate. - Greptile reviewed that exact final commit at 2026-10-08 21:33 UTC and returned 5/5 with no outstanding findings or unresolved threads. - PR UI preview against the existing local test server: Calendly catalog/setup observed; Firecrawl read passed after expanding More options with nested optional inputs untouched. This retest proves frontend behavior, not the revised OAuth backend against a live provider. <details> <summary>Browser evidence</summary> ![Calendly catalog](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/codex/verified-mcp-connectors/doc/connections/verified-mcp-qualification-2026-10-08/calendly-catalog.jpg) ![Calendly setup](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/codex/verified-mcp-connectors/doc/connections/verified-mcp-qualification-2026-10-08/calendly-setup.jpg) ![Firecrawl read](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/codex/verified-mcp-connectors/doc/connections/verified-mcp-qualification-2026-10-08/firecrawl-read.jpg) </details> ## Risks - Provider registration and consent behavior can change. Airtable's DCR option is explicit and keeps the existing issuer, resource, redirect, and PKCE checks. - Tavily uses initialized sessions without automatic call retries. After a successful OAuth refresh following 401, callers now receive a retry-required result. A later explicit retry can still require reauthorization if the provider rejects the refreshed token. Provider writes are not live-qualified. - Optional object cleanup affects the shared action tester. Regression tests cover absent objects, required children, defaults, and populated values. - GSC Wizard's underlying Google data scopes and Google flow completion were not independently verified. Its account reported paid/trial metadata of unknown origin. No purchase was performed. - No database migration, new AgentMail integration, or change to existing action grants is included. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex assisted with implementation, research, tool use, and code execution. The root backend model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. The cheaper subagents used OpenAI `gpt-6-luna`. No model context size is inferred. ## 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 — targeted checks and complete UI/CLI/shared suites passed; the broad local database run was blocked by the macOS PostgreSQL startup limitation documented above. The full database/workspace suite passed in CI. - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-09 08:10:46 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip	4265cb3a2b	fix(ci): cache native server integration builds in release verification (#15619 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Release verification must run the same server integration coverage as PR verification. > - Three server suites use real Rust Runner binaries. > - PR checks already run them with the shared Rust dependency cache, but release checks cold-build them inside ordinary server test shards. > - A cold Dot Runner build can consume its entire setup deadline before any test runs. > - This pull request gives release verification a required cached native integration lane and preserves every test. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What happened? On master commit `1881894973a2b25838d8abed9bd8aeebc3af4441`, [Cloud readiness run 37837810707](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37837810707) failed in server shard 7. Dot Runner's `cargo build --release` exceeded its 300-second child-process deadline. The other 1,640 tests in that shard passed. The failed setup then tried to remove an undefined temporary path and emitted a second error. Cargo output was captured as an opaque buffer, which obscured build progress. What did you expect to happen? Build fixture binaries before tests in a lane with the existing Rust dependency cache. Run all native integration tests and make their result required for release readiness. A setup failure should keep its original diagnostic. Steps to reproduce Run release verification on a clean runner. The existing `general-server-without-chat` group retains the three Cargo-backed suites outside the PR workflow. The Dot suite can time out during a cold release build. Run the new workflow and partition tests against the previous source to reproduce five routing and coverage failures deterministically. Version / commit Observed at `1881894973a2b25838d8abed9bd8aeebc3af4441`; this change is based on `ed6abbf158b`. Deployment mode GitHub Actions Release and Cloud readiness verification. No application runtime or deployment action changes. Related work: #15581 also edits Dot integration tests for onboarding behavior. It does not repair release test routing. Searches found no open PR for this failure. ## What Changed - Add an explicit server test group that excludes the dedicated chat and native suites. Preserve the existing PR and local test groups. - Run all three native server suites in one required matrix lane with the existing trusted Rust dependency cache. - Build debug and release fixture binaries in a visible step with a 10-minute limit before tests start. Keep Cargo freshness checks and the existing test deadlines. - Stream Cargo diagnostics and clean up safely when Dot setup stops before creating its temporary directory. - Test complete, non-overlapping partitions for Release, Cloud readiness, other callers, and existing PR/local groups. Check cache restrictions, build order, and the source verification dependency. ## Verification - Passed 44 workflow and partition tests: `node --test scripts/__tests__/run-vitest-stable-shard.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs`. - The same tests fail in five relevant cases against the previous workflow and selector. They pass after this correction. - An independent review repeated all 44 tests successfully. - Passed `actionlint .github/workflows/release-verify.yml`, `git diff --check`, and a secret scan. - Passed all 381 workflow policy tests: `node --test '.github/scripts/tests/*.test.mjs'`. - Passed full `pnpm build` in a clean worktree. - Built debug and release fixture binaries, then passed all 32 tests in the three real native integration suites: `pnpm test:run:general -- --group general-server-native-runner` (49.5 seconds, no skips). - Passed full `pnpm -r typecheck`. - Injected a synthetic Cargo setup failure. The suite reports that failure without the secondary undefined-path cleanup error. - Exact-head CI completed: 53 successful checks, including all server shards, both native Runner lanes, build, typecheck, browser tests, and the canary dry run. Two optional Storybook checks were skipped. - Started the duplicate local `pnpm test:run` aggregate and stopped it after exact-head CI passed. No completed local aggregate result is claimed. All test processes owned by that run exited. - Greptile scored the final head `ffe5ab5a28af2dfea9db1c1952c652f070bf52f8` at 5/5 with no review threads. - `Superagent Supply Chain Scan` is neutral, not passed: it only supports exact dependency pin replacements and cannot verify structural edits to `.github/workflows/release-verify.yml`. It reported no annotations. Independent source review, Greptile, actionlint, and the workflow policy tests cover this structural change. - GitHub still requires a code-owner review for the workflow files. There are no merge conflicts. ## Risks - Adds one CI matrix job, which increases concurrent runner demand. The existing cache writer and trust restrictions stay in place. - Missing dependencies still compile from the lockfile. A build that exceeds its step limit fails visibly; failed tests still block source verification. - Workflow execution uses the new lane after merge. PR tests validate the workflow contract and run the existing native test lane. - The supply chain scanner cannot analyze this workflow structure. Its neutral result is an explicit coverage limit; it is not counted as a successful scan. - No runtime, schema, deployment, publication, credential, or test-timeout changes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository inspection, code execution, and independent agent review. The exact deployed model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-08 14:33:10 -07:00
Devin Foley	53105d5830	feat(apps): add Gauge connection (#15596 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents reach external services through the Apps catalog. Each catalog entry is a reviewed `AppDefinition` that connects a provider's hosted MCP server to Paperclip's shared vault, grants, policies, gateway, and audit trail. > - Gauge (`withgauge.com`) measures how AI answer engines mention and cite a brand. Its hosted MCP server also gives SEO, analytics and ads reports, and runs a content pipeline that can publish to a connected CMS. > - Gauge is not in the catalog. Operators must use the generic "Connect your own MCP server" flow. That flow has no branding, no organization guidance, and no warning about live CMS publishing. > - The connector playbook supports this provider with existing definition fields. The server supports dynamic client registration with a reviewed `mcp` scope, and it accepts an organization API key as a bearer header. > - This pull request adds the Gauge definition, its artwork, the research and permission-review ledger rows, documentation, and deterministic tests. > - The benefit is a branded, governed Gauge connection with browser sign-in, an API-key option, and a clear publish warning. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Problem or motivation Marketing and growth teams use Gauge to track their brand in AI answers and to run content workflows. They want their Paperclip agents to read visibility, keyword and traffic data, and to prepare content. Gauge is not in the Apps catalog. Operators must paste the MCP URL into the generic remote-MCP flow, which gives no branding, no method guidance, and no warning that content tools can publish live. Proposed solution Add a catalog-only Gauge connection built from the connector playbook. Browser sign-in uses Gauge's dynamic client registration and requests only the reviewed `mcp` scope. The user selects one Gauge organization on the consent screen. An optional method sends a customer-created organization API key as an `Authorization: Bearer` header. Both methods warn the operator to set publish actions to Ask first. Every discovered tool stays governed by the normal per-action policies. Alternatives considered A plugin was not needed because no custom UI, tables, workers, or webhooks are involved. The identity scopes that Gauge also advertises (`openid`, `profile`, `email`, `organizations`) are not requested, because Gauge selects the organization on its consent screen. A Gauge-specific `classifyRisk` rule was not added, because the tool names cannot be seen without an account. The generic rule already classifies `publish`, `create` and `update` tools as writes. Roadmap alignment This extends the existing self-serve remote-MCP connection catalog and does not overlap planned core work. ## What Changed - Added the `gauge` provider to `scripts/ingest-app-definitions.mjs` (category `analytics`, API-key placement, guidance, warnings, description) and regenerated `packages/shared/src/app-definitions/gauge.json` and the generated registry. - Added the Gauge row to the self-serve MCP research ledger with `dcr_or_api_key` auth and risk tier S3. - Added permission reviews for `gauge/mcp-oauth` (explicit scope `mcp`, from Gauge's live authorization-server metadata) and `gauge/mcp-api-key` (provider key), with evidence links. - Added Gauge's mark (`ui/public/brands/apps/gauge.png`, the avatar of Gauge's official GitHub organization) and the brand manifest entry. - Added gallery copy for the Gauge card. - Added `doc/connections/GAUGE.md` (endpoints, scopes, administrator setup, capabilities and policy, manifest, brand provenance, validation hook) and linked it from the connections README and the permission audit. - Tests: Gauge definition shape, store visibility and artwork, URL recognition, reviewed scope, bearer-header placement, the connect form's sign-in default and API-key gating, and the pinned catalog counts. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/app-definitions.test.ts packages/shared/src/app-definitions-url.test.ts ui/src/pages/apps/AppsConnect.test.tsx ui/src/pages/apps/Browse.test.tsx ui/src/lib/app-brand-assets.test.ts ui/src/pages/apps/AppLogo.brand-assets.test.tsx server/src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts` — 738 passed. - `node scripts/check-app-brand-assets.mjs` and `node --test scripts/app-brand-validation.test.mjs` — passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`, `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`, `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — clean. - `node scripts/ingest-app-definitions.mjs --definitions-only` produces no Gauge drift. - Manual: on a local instance, open Apps → Browse and confirm the Gauge card and icon. Open `/apps/connect?source=gauge` and confirm that sign-in is the default and that the API-key method is under Advanced. - Live metadata probe on 2026-10-08: an unauthenticated `initialize` on `https://app.withgauge.com/mcp` returns 401 with `resource_metadata`. Both `.well-known` documents return the recorded endpoints and scopes. Dynamic client registration succeeds. The authorize endpoint accepts `scope=mcp` and rejects an unknown scope with HTTP 400. ## Risks - Low risk to existing providers: the change is additive catalog data plus tests. The generated registry only gains one import. - Gauge content tools can publish to a connected CMS, including live, and a bulk keyword update replaces each prompt's keyword list. Both methods warn the operator, and the API-key helper text tells operators to set publish actions to Ask first. - Gauge API keys are not scoped and reach the whole organization. Paperclip cannot narrow an issued key. - The permission-review ledger records live proof for both methods as not run. The lifecycle checklist in `doc/connections/GAUGE.md` still needs a documented pass with a Gauge organization. > 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 - Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`, 1M context) in Claude Code, with tool use (shell, file editing, web research). ## 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	2026-10-08 12:37:06 -07:00

1 2 3 4 5 ...