DottaandPaperclip
0f15f82b19
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Each agent stores its harness, model, account and runtime configuration. > - New Claude and Codex agents now use Paperclip Runner on qualified targets. > - Existing agents keep their legacy runner and need a clear upgrade action. > - The existing configuration API already translates settings and records revisions. > - This pull request adds an explicit upgrade action that uses that API. > - Operators can retain supported settings and correct rejected settings in place. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Existing Claude and Codex agent configuration. Related defaults: #15683 and #15993. **Current behavior** Existing agents retain their legacy runner. The operator must find the runner selector in Advanced to change it. **Proposed behavior** Show Upgrade runner when Paperclip Runner is the qualified default for the saved environment. One click saves pending edits and requests the existing server conversion. Show any rejected settings without changing saved configuration. **Reason and benefit** Operators can adopt the current runner while retaining their harness, model, account bindings, instructions and history. Unsupported settings remain visible and editable. **Breaking changes** None. Visiting configuration and saving unrelated changes do not upgrade an agent. The server API, authorization and conversion rules are unchanged. ## What Changed - Add an upgrade notice, pending state, saved result and retry feedback to the production configuration form. - Include pending profile, runtime and environment-variable edits in the upgrade request. - Bind asynchronous upgrade feedback and save receipts to their original agent. Navigating away cannot show success on another agent or redirect back. - Keep the notice absent for native agents, other harnesses, unavailable targets and failed discovery. - Add configuration/API regressions and database session-reset checks for Claude and Codex. - Add 13 production-page Storybook states with browser checks in both themes and on mobile. - Update the product contract and feature/access maps. ## Verification - Configuration form and original-agent save receipts: 135 tests passed. Existing agent route/rename helpers also pass. - Runner selection, configuration API and database migration regressions: 220 tests passed. - Storybook browser checks: 26 passed. Interactive cases wait for Storybook's visible Pass report. Static cases check the rendered production form. These use simulated HTTP boundaries. - Full typecheck, build, map checks and token gates passed on the current head. Storybook build and public preview verification passed. - Published fixture preview: https://storybook.paperclip.page/storybook/branches/codex~2Fagent-runner-upgrade/?path=/story/agents-runner-upgrade--legacy-codex - All 58 current-head PR checks passed, including the full test shards, browser suites, build and aggregate gates. The duplicate local pnpm test:run was stopped after 34 minutes once the same-head full CI suite passed; it had not finished its general-server phase. No local full-suite pass is claimed. - Real disposable local test drive: Codex used gpt-5.4 and Claude used claude-sonnet-4-6. Both completed one task on Legacy, upgraded through the browser button, and completed another task on Paperclip Runner with the same model and API credentials. Independent file checks confirmed saved instructions and environment bindings before and after conversion. - Reopened both configurations and compared identity, model, credential references, instruction hashes, working directories, run policies and configuration revisions. - A Claude Chrome setting produced a field-specific rejection. The saved agent stayed Legacy. Clearing Chrome in the form and clicking Upgrade runner saved the pending correction and completed conversion. ## Risks - The existing translator rejects settings that the new runner cannot honor. The notice shows that error and leaves the form available for correction. - Converted agents start fresh sessions. Prior runs remain available. - Real task execution was checked on local macOS with API credentials. SSH, sandbox targets and subscription credentials were not exercised in this change. - Storybook responses simulate persistence. The real test drive and database tests provide separate persistence evidence. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The exact serving variant and context-window size were not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, code editing, shell tools and browser interaction. No subagents. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [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>
Paperclip agent access map
This map accompanies the feature map. It records APIs, agent entry points, permission boundaries and verification for the same capability IDs. The shared contract defines the format and maintenance rules.
Use full capability IDs when referring to access contracts outside their file:
onboarding/company means the company capability in onboarding.md in both maps.
The feature index lists feature and
capability IDs; IDs and references
explains entry-point references and stable naming.
Browse access contracts
The same-named feature recipes define navigation and capability IDs. Run
node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs for the generated
maps/generated/agent-access-map.md index, or browse the
published feature guide.
Add or update the affected companion; there is no central registration or count.
Existing baseline source references describe the original inspection, not current verification. Record new executed evidence in the PR, issue, or CI artifact with its revision and scope. Do not refresh unrelated headers as bookkeeping.
Using an entry
Read its Policy and Gaps before selecting an agent path. Native fallback, legacy
REST/CLI, stdio MCP and a personal assistant connection can have different
authority and availability. Use a real admitted production binding; a scenario
declaration is not an installed tool. A restricted entry records current
enforcement and leaves any unresolved delegation decision visible.
For API catalog disagreements, follow the route/service authorization and record
discovery drift. For not-applicable, retain the concrete exception and local
path. Split shared business operations from client-only presentation.
Use maintain-verification-skill to reconcile changed source and both maps.
Use verify-paperclip and existing API/runner/MCP fixtures to collect the
permitted-agent and denial evidence; report blocked/not-run coverage honestly.
Run node scripts/check-maps.mjs after editing. The structural check does not
certify permissions, API catalog coverage, tool admission or live behavior.
Native REST transport
The call_api parity change reconciles affected baselines against
58e16dbddfc9c8d0cf60867f9d9847f0feda055b and the changes in this PR. Ordinary
REST operations use the same route authorization as legacy agent REST. Dedicated
tools remain optional for those operations; protocol endpoints still need their
existing clients. Board-only routes remain restricted for agent identity.
Native search_api / call_api requires operator rollout admission, a running
authorized native run, current task assignment and execution-run binding, company
and budget authority, task privacy, and a permitted work mode. Ask and Plan retain
mutation restrictions, and runs retain their admitted JWT scope during restart
recovery even when task mode changes. A waiting
agent does not gain independent native control just because a REST route exists.
Credential-bearing replies, including company exports and their legacy alias, stay inline under a 10 MiB limit and use encrypted mutation receipts. Other saved API snapshots are limited to the issuing actor and responsible user, plus authorized administrators. Artifact uploads enforce the same access checks as downloads; private snapshots are excluded from company exports and public company logos. Explicit deliverables use the existing sharing path. Native event history, checkpoints and completion records omit API bodies while preserving receipt metadata and replay digests. Restored webhook secrets use the same encrypted receipt and inline response policy as newly created webhook secrets. Task image access requires the company boundary and the task permission; skill-test and low-trust agents do not need company-wide browsing authority. Completion replay applies the same idempotent projection to stored and expected payloads; the run-log guide describes its fields.
Sources: API client,
catalog,
native authority,
credential storage classification,
snapshot access,
and history redaction. The affected entries remain
baseline and source-only; this reconciliation does not certify every operation.
Targeted real-route proof lives in the
API integration suite,
including owned routines, skill tests, scoped secrets, proposals and private export replay.