DottaandPaperclip
dc9f387edc
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agents discover supported API operations through the public OpenAPI
catalog.
> - Importing existing skill content must retain its source provenance.
> - A normal source-import query misses the applicable operation on its
first page because that operation has little search metadata.
> - This pull request describes the existing import operation and its
source boundaries.
> - The benefit is clearer discovery without changing search scoring or
import authority.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
`search_api` does not return `POST
/api/companies/{companyId}/skills/import` in the first ten results for
`import skill from source SKILL.md`. Source-management operations rank
ahead of the import operation. The import entry has only the summary
“Import a skill.”
**Expected behavior**
Ordinary source-import discovery should surface the existing operation.
Its documentation should explain that imported content retains
provenance and remains subject to company policy and source checks.
**Steps to reproduce**
Call `searchRunnerApi({ query: "import skill from source SKILL.md",
limit: 10 })`. Inspect the operation IDs on the first page. The new
regression sends this result through the real bounded MCP serializer.
Related: #18717 clarifies the separate `create_skill` tool. This change
covers the existing source-import HTTP operation. Neither PR is merged
by this work.
## What Changed
- Expand only the source-import OpenAPI summary and description.
Describe allowed local skill directories, supported remote sources,
retained provenance and existing access checks.
- Add a first-page discovery regression through the actual authenticated
MCP bridge and serializer. Keep non-import lookup, company/mode refusal
and denial forwarding controls.
- Update the feature and access maps with the test scope and its limits.
## Verification
- Parent regression: the controlled loopback MCP response lacked the
applicable import operation on the first page.
- Focused current checks: 2,060 tests pass in
`skill-import-discovery.test.ts` and the existing `runner-api.test.ts`
owner.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passes. This checks map structure only.
- The first head had one server test job cancelled after a runner
shutdown signal. The reason for the shutdown is unknown. The reviewed
successor removes only two test comments required by contribution rules;
its four focused controls pass. The remaining obsolete CI run was
cancelled after that successor was published. No same-head retry was
used.
- The new test is under `server/src/__tests__`, which the production
server typecheck excludes and the server Vitest suite includes.
- No local app, database, native agent or provider model was run. Normal
PR CI on `a4aaae8e320fb1d56cdbff9f376ec832a634a5da` passed with 48
successful jobs and one skipped job, including the required `ci /
verify` and `ci / e2e` checks. No completed agent-import journey or
reliability result is claimed.
- Greptile is 5/5 on the current head with no unresolved threads. The
optional Paperclip Review check remains queued. This is not merge
authorization.
- Keep this core PR open and unmerged. Do not enable auto-merge.
## Risks
The expanded metadata can change where this operation ranks for related
queries. Search weights, request schemas, HTTP routes, source parsing,
authorization and company skill policy are unchanged. The synthetic 403
control proves denial forwarding; it does not qualify the real policy or
source-import route. A live import still needs separate acceptance.
## Model Used
OpenAI `gpt-6.1-sol`, through Codex with reasoning, source review and
code execution tools. The exact context-window size is not exposed by
this environment. A separate agent reviewed the source and contract
before publication.
## 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.
The chat scenario catalog uses these same IDs for human requests and expected outcomes. Its scenarios retain the access boundaries here; neither a CEO role nor a planned scenario grants board authority or establishes a working production tool binding.
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 is enabled by default, but explicit server,
company-allowlist and binding settings can narrow admission. It requires 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.
Connection-management reads support Standard, Ask and Plan; mutations require
Standard. Skill-test runs and nonstandard task-bridge keys cannot administer
connections. These gates supplement each operation's grants, resolved resource
and target scope, and responsible-user authority. See the
rollout policy
and connection authorization.
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.