mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-26 02:00:52 +01:00
## 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>
235 lines
7.6 KiB
TypeScript
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();
|
|
});
|
|
});
|