mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-14 17:40:37 +02:00
DottaandPaperclip
433d94ee0b
## 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>
69 lines
4.2 KiB
Markdown
69 lines
4.2 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
navigation: {"section":"Apps, channels, and extensions","sectionOrder":50,"order":50}
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Secrets and proposals
|
|
|
|
Operators manage company secret references, users supply their own credentials where required, and reviewers decide proposed secret changes without exposing secret values in ordinary UI evidence.
|
|
|
|
Implementation: [secrets page](../../ui/src/pages/Secrets.tsx), [personal secrets](../../ui/src/pages/secrets/MyUserSecretsTab.tsx), [proposals](../../ui/src/pages/secrets/ProposalsTab.tsx).
|
|
|
|
Agent access: [companion](../agent-access-map/secrets.md).
|
|
|
|
## Sub-features
|
|
|
|
- `company-secrets`: create/update secret references and control their bindings.
|
|
- `user-secrets`: define required user credentials and set a value for the current user.
|
|
- `proposals`: review proposed changes with the appropriate authority.
|
|
- `vault-import`: import eligible external-vault references through the offered flow.
|
|
- `runtime-delivery`: deliver only the secret references authorized for the run/actor. Agent-owned instance secrets stay in the trusted server runtime and are never delivered to an agent.
|
|
|
|
## How to get to it (user POV)
|
|
|
|
### `secret-management`
|
|
|
|
Open company Settings → Secrets and the company/personal secret views.
|
|
|
|
### `proposal-import`
|
|
|
|
Use the Proposals tab or Import from vault where available.
|
|
|
|
## Driving it with Playwright and the Paperclip CLI
|
|
|
|
Preconditions: follow the [baseline](./README.md#before-driving-a-journey). Use dummy credentials in an isolated company, two user identities, and a test agent. Never print actual secret values in evidence.
|
|
|
|
### `secret-management`
|
|
|
|
Automated: [secrets service](../../server/src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts) and [user ownership](../../server/src/__tests__/secrets-service-user-secret-owner-scoped.test.ts) cover storage/access contracts. [Instance-secret tests](../../server/src/__tests__/agent-instance-secrets.test.ts) cover local encrypted storage, owner isolation, and exclusion from ordinary bindings.
|
|
|
|
Manual: Create a dummy secret reference, bind it through a supported field, and verify its use in a harmless run without logging the value. Update it and reload. Switch users and confirm personal values remain owner-scoped and missing credentials produce an actionable state.
|
|
|
|
### `proposal-import`
|
|
|
|
Automated: [proposal routes](../../server/src/__tests__/secret-proposals-routes.test.ts) and [vault import dialog](../../ui/src/pages/secrets/ImportFromVaultDialog.test.tsx) cover route/UI layers; a real vault integration needs live validation.
|
|
|
|
Manual: Review a dummy proposal, reject one and accept another, then inspect the resulting reference state and history. Preview a vault import, select only disposable entries, and verify imported references and denied-access errors after reload.
|
|
|
|
## Gotchas
|
|
|
|
- Vault import currently targets eligible AWS Secrets Manager providers.
|
|
Organization-secret checks in local-trusted mode do not establish two-user
|
|
personal-secret ownership or actual external-vault import.
|
|
|
|
- A displayed reference name is not proof that the actor can resolve its value at runtime.
|
|
- Company secrets and user-specific values have different ownership.
|
|
- Redaction needs verification in errors, activity, and run logs as well as the form.
|
|
|
|
### Storybook verification
|
|
|
|
#### `proposals`
|
|
|
|
Scope: ui
|
|
Storybook: Mount ProposalsTab pending secret/binding proposals, blocked authority, expired/resolved proposal, approval/rejection pending/error, and redacted metadata.
|
|
Production: GET /companies/{id}/secret-proposals and POST approve/reject must enforce company/admin/target authority, durable resolution and redaction; verified run-bound agent proposal creation is separate.
|
|
Sources: Source: [ProposalsTab.tsx](../../ui/src/pages/secrets/ProposalsTab.tsx), [secrets.ts](../../server/src/routes/secrets.ts), [secret-proposal-authorization.ts](../../server/src/services/secret-proposal-authorization.ts). Tests: [ProposalsTab.render.test.tsx](../../ui/src/pages/secrets/ProposalsTab.render.test.tsx), [secret-proposals-routes.test.ts](../../server/src/__tests__/secret-proposals-routes.test.ts)
|
|
|
|
### Documentation scope: Secrets and secret proposals
|
|
|
|
Company/user/proposal/vault and runtime-binding paths are mapped; every secret provider, rotation scenario, and delivery context needs separate validation.
|