Files
PaperClipAI/packages/plugins/sdk/tests/host-client-factory.test.ts
DottaandPaperclip 1de0a3bb1e feat(mcp) [split 2/8]: add governed access contracts (#9557)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Governed MCP access spans contracts, runtime enforcement, adapters,
UI surfaces, and operator verification
> - The parity reference PR #9534 is too large for effective automated
or human review
> - The feature therefore needs a linear stack whose individual diffs
stay below the 100-file review limit
> - This pull request is split 2/8 and focuses on database schema and
shared governance contracts
> - The benefit is a standalone, testable review boundary while
preserving byte-for-byte parity at the top of the stack

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

- Related parity reference: #9534
- Problem: The governed access model needs additive persistence and
synchronized shared types before server enforcement can compile.
- Proposed solution: Adds migrations 0148–0169, tool-access and Smoke
Lab schema, shared types/validators/gallery helpers, and the minimal
compile-required contract consumers identified by boundary testing.
- Alternatives considered: keeping #9534 as one 403-file review, or
rewriting the feature to manufacture seams; both were rejected in favor
of path extraction plus compile-driven boundary moves.
- Roadmap alignment: this advances the existing governed MCP/tool-access
work already represented by #9534; it does not introduce a separate
roadmap initiative.
- Stack position: base branch is `pap10341-split/01-demo-servers`.
- Merge policy: merge bottom-up, in order, only after the complete
eight-PR stack has been reviewed and the top-of-stack parity gate
remains empty.
- Requested review: QA for migrations/validators; Greptile on every PR.

## What Changed

- Adds migrations 0148–0169, tool-access and Smoke Lab schema, shared
types/validators/gallery helpers, and the minimal compile-required
contract consumers identified by boundary testing.
- Keeps this PR below 100 changed files and independently typecheckable.
- Preserves the final tree from #9534 when combined with the other seven
stack levels.

## Verification

- `pnpm typecheck` — passed, including migration numbering and safety
checks
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db test` — passed
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared test` — passed

## Risks

- Migration or contract mistakes could affect every upper layer; all
migrations are additive/idempotent and compile consumers are included in
this boundary.
- Stack risk: merging out of order can expose incomplete layers;
mitigate by following the documented bottom-up merge policy.
- Parity risk: later edits to an intermediate branch can drift from
#9534; mitigate by re-running the empty top-of-stack diff before merge.

> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex, exact model ID `gpt-5.4`; runtime-managed context
window; medium reasoning with repository, shell, Git, GitHub CLI, and
code-execution tools enabled.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] Internal references are omitted except the execution-plan link
explicitly required for this coordinated split stack
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] 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


## Stack Coordination

- Internal execution plan:
[PAP-13874](/PAP/issues/PAP-13874#document-plan)
- Parity reference: #9534
- Stack: #9556 → #9557 → #9558 → #9559 → #9560 → #9561 → #9562 → #9563
- Merge bottom-up only after full-stack review and an empty parity diff
at #9563.

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-07-14 12:57:20 -05:00

235 lines
7.6 KiB
TypeScript

import { describe, expect, it, vi } from "vitest";
import type { HostServices } from "../src/host-client-factory.js";
import {
CapabilityDeniedError,
createHostClientHandlers,
InvocationScopeDeniedError,
} from "../src/host-client-factory.js";
import { PLUGIN_RPC_ERROR_CODES } from "../src/protocol.js";
describe("createHostClientHandlers invocation company scope", () => {
it("rejects worker-selected config and secret company ids without a host invocation scope", async () => {
const configGet = vi.fn(async () => ({ apiKeyRef: "unreachable" }));
const secretsResolve = vi.fn(async () => "unreachable");
const services = {
config: { get: configGet },
secrets: { resolve: secretsResolve },
} as unknown as HostServices;
const handlers = createHostClientHandlers({
pluginId: "paperclip.test",
capabilities: ["secrets.read-ref"],
services,
});
await expect(
handlers["config.get"]({ companyId: "company-a" }),
).rejects.toBeInstanceOf(InvocationScopeDeniedError);
await expect(
handlers["secrets.resolve"]({
companyId: "company-a",
secretRef: { type: "secret_ref", secretId: "secret-a" },
}),
).rejects.toBeInstanceOf(InvocationScopeDeniedError);
expect(configGet).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
expect(secretsResolve).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
});
it("allows explicit config and secret company ids only when they match the host invocation scope", async () => {
const configGet = vi.fn(async () => ({ apiKeyRef: "ref" }));
const secretsResolve = vi.fn(async () => "resolved");
const services = {
config: { get: configGet },
secrets: { resolve: secretsResolve },
} as unknown as HostServices;
const handlers = createHostClientHandlers({
pluginId: "paperclip.test",
capabilities: ["secrets.read-ref"],
services,
});
const context = { invocationScope: { companyId: "company-a" } };
await expect(
handlers["config.get"]({ companyId: "company-a" }, context),
).resolves.toEqual({ apiKeyRef: "ref" });
await expect(
handlers["secrets.resolve"]({
companyId: "company-a",
secretRef: { type: "secret_ref", secretId: "secret-a" },
}, context),
).resolves.toBe("resolved");
expect(configGet).toHaveBeenCalledWith({ companyId: "company-a" }, context);
expect(secretsResolve).toHaveBeenCalledWith({
companyId: "company-a",
secretRef: { type: "secret_ref", secretId: "secret-a" },
}, context);
});
it("rejects company-scoped host calls outside the current invocation company", async () => {
const projectsList = vi.fn(async () => []);
const services = {
projects: {
list: projectsList,
},
} as unknown as HostServices;
const handlers = createHostClientHandlers({
pluginId: "paperclip.test",
capabilities: ["projects.read"],
services,
});
await expect(
handlers["projects.list"](
{ companyId: "company-b" },
{ invocationScope: { companyId: "company-a" } },
),
).rejects.toBeInstanceOf(InvocationScopeDeniedError);
await expect(
handlers["projects.list"](
{ companyId: "company-b" },
{ invocationScope: { companyId: "company-a" } },
),
).rejects.toMatchObject({
code: PLUGIN_RPC_ERROR_CODES.INVOCATION_SCOPE_DENIED,
});
expect(projectsList).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
});
it("filters companies.list to the current invocation company", async () => {
const services = {
companies: {
list: vi.fn(async () => [
{ id: "company-a", name: "Company A" },
{ id: "company-b", name: "Company B" },
]),
},
} as unknown as HostServices;
const handlers = createHostClientHandlers({
pluginId: "paperclip.test",
capabilities: ["companies.read"],
services,
});
await expect(
handlers["companies.list"](
{},
{ invocationScope: { companyId: "company-a" } },
),
).resolves.toEqual([{ id: "company-a", name: "Company A" }]);
});
it("rejects company-scope store access for a different company", async () => {
const stateGet = vi.fn(async () => null);
const services = {
state: {
get: stateGet,
},
} as unknown as HostServices;
const handlers = createHostClientHandlers({
pluginId: "paperclip.test",
capabilities: ["plugin.state.read"],
services,
});
await expect(
handlers["state.get"](
{ scopeKind: "company", scopeId: "company-b", stateKey: "settings" },
{ invocationScope: { companyId: "company-a" } },
),
).rejects.toBeInstanceOf(InvocationScopeDeniedError);
expect(stateGet).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
});
it.each([
[
"access.members.list",
"access.members.read",
{ companyId: "company-a" },
(services: HostServices) => vi.mocked(services.access.listMembers),
],
[
"access.members.update",
"access.members.write",
{ companyId: "company-a", memberId: "member-a", patch: { status: "active" } },
(services: HostServices) => vi.mocked(services.access.updateMember),
],
[
"authorization.grants.set",
"authorization.grants.write",
{ companyId: "company-a", principalType: "agent", principalId: "agent-a", grants: [] },
(services: HostServices) => vi.mocked(services.authorization.setGrants),
],
[
"authorization.policies.update",
"authorization.policies.write",
{ companyId: "company-a", resourceType: "agent", resourceId: "agent-a", policy: null },
(services: HostServices) => vi.mocked(services.authorization.updatePolicy),
],
[
"authorization.audit.search",
"authorization.audit.read",
{ companyId: "company-a" },
(services: HostServices) => vi.mocked(services.authorization.searchAudit),
],
] as const)(
"rejects %s when the plugin lacks %s",
async (method, capability, params, getDelegate) => {
const services = {
access: {
listMembers: vi.fn(async () => []),
updateMember: vi.fn(async () => ({ id: "member-a" })),
},
authorization: {
setGrants: vi.fn(async () => []),
updatePolicy: vi.fn(async () => ({ policy: null })),
searchAudit: vi.fn(async () => []),
},
} as unknown as HostServices;
const handlers = createHostClientHandlers({
pluginId: "paperclip.test",
capabilities: [],
services,
});
await expect(
(handlers as Record<string, (input: unknown) => Promise<unknown>>)[method](params),
).rejects.toMatchObject({
name: "CapabilityDeniedError",
message: expect.stringContaining(capability),
});
await expect(
(handlers as Record<string, (input: unknown) => Promise<unknown>>)[method](params),
).rejects.toBeInstanceOf(CapabilityDeniedError);
expect(getDelegate(services)).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
},
);
it("checks invocation company scope before exposing authorization data", async () => {
const searchAudit = vi.fn(async () => []);
const services = {
authorization: {
searchAudit,
},
} as unknown as HostServices;
const handlers = createHostClientHandlers({
pluginId: "paperclip.test",
capabilities: ["authorization.audit.read"],
services,
});
await expect(
handlers["authorization.audit.search"](
{ companyId: "company-b" },
{ invocationScope: { companyId: "company-a" } },
),
).rejects.toBeInstanceOf(InvocationScopeDeniedError);
expect(searchAudit).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
});
});