Nicky LeachandPaperclip
190080642e
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - MCP discovery publishes tools that setup and access profiles use. > - Large catalogs currently write one row at a time. > - Repeated page entries can produce duplicate results, and profile writes can partly commit. > - This pull request publishes tools in bounded chunks and makes profile synchronization atomic. > - The result supports large catalogs before connector runtime hooks are enabled. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Catalog refresh performs one database write per tool. Repeated tool names across discovery pages appear more than once in the result. Default-profile synchronization uses separate statements, so failure can leave a profile without its binding. OAuth callbacks also acquire connection/application locks in the reverse order from publication and setup, allowing a concurrent refresh to deadlock. **Expected behavior** Publish at most 500 tools per catalog statement. Keep one result per tool name, using its last descriptor. Preserve existing IDs, first-seen timestamps, disabled actions, and unchanged review decisions. Commit or roll back default-profile changes together. OAuth persistence must acquire application then connection locks before secret or connection writes. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Refresh a synthetic MCP catalog with 2,500 tools. 2. Return the same tool on two discovery pages with different descriptions. 3. Fail the profile-binding insert during default-profile creation. 4. Overlap personal, organization, or managed OAuth persistence with setup finalization or discovery of a new tool. **Additional context** This is the first feature extracted from #16503. The separate test-only maintenance PRs #16601 and #16610 are merged. This PR now targets master and is the active review. Standing assignments #16603, tool definitions #16604, and access/credential hooks #16605 remain stacked drafts without review requests. ## What Changed - Deduplicate discovery results by tool name and keep the last descriptor. - Upsert catalog rows in transactions of at most 500 tools. - Preserve row identity and operator-disabled status on conflict. Determine default-access candidates from the rows read under each publication lock, so an overlapping refresh cannot restore an action turned Off after another refresh finishes. - Lock the application before the connection during publication, setup finalization, removal, and all three OAuth persistence paths. The OAuth ordering fix is included here so this PR is independently safe; it does not depend on #16605. - Synchronize the managed default profile, its entries, bindings, and managed policies in one transaction. - Add PostgreSQL publication tests and document partial-failure recovery. - Target the existing callback failure injection at profile creation instead of a transaction ordinal. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/tool-catalog-publication.test.ts server/src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts`: 436 tests passed with the OAuth and overlapping-refresh corrections on top of the merged #16610 fix. - The new tests exercise real PostgreSQL with 250 and 2,500 tools, repeated discovery pages, preserved choices, lock contention, and failures between chunks and during profile creation. - Four selected regression cases fail with the production source restored to the parent commit. The implementation was then restored and rechecked. - Six additional real-PostgreSQL regressions cover personal, organization, and managed OAuth persistence against both setup finalization and new-tool discovery. All six reproduce PostgreSQL deadlock `40P01` with the OAuth ordering fix removed; all six pass with it restored. Discovery uses synthetic credential headers to isolate publication locking from credential rotation. - Apex initially returned 3/5 on `0d6013a9649388041975406fe4b0247cd0e695aa`, identifying an overlapping-refresh permission race. Two new PostgreSQL regressions cover both absent and quarantined tools; both prove an agent goes from deny back to allow without the correction, and remains denied with it. The test pauses one refresh after its initial catalog snapshot, completes another refresh, turns the action Off through the service, and resumes the stale refresh. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`: passed. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`: passed (structural validation only). - `git diff --check`: passed. - Reviewed the complete diff for secrets and personal data before push. - Earlier hosted run 38975428064 failed the maximum-size newline skill-audit watchdog; other interrupted jobs reported runner shutdown/cancellation. The original watchdog failure did not identify whether startup or auditing timed out, so its exact cause remains unknown. The separate merged #16610 isolates the audit deadline from module startup and preserves the audit hang guard. This branch is rebased onto that fix. - Full local build and repository-wide tests were not run. At the previous head `0d6013a9649388041975406fe4b0247cd0e695aa`, all 55 hosted checks succeeded (two optional Storybook checks skipped), and standard Greptile returned 5/5 before Apex identified the permission race above. At corrected head `dc120d2bc879c54c14347db30e74c753bcff61e6`, all 55 hosted checks succeeded (two optional Storybook checks skipped), and a fresh standard review returned 5/5 with no open findings. The second Apex review also returned 5/5 on that exact head (successful Apex check completed 2026-10-16T23:36:44Z). Both earlier findings are addressed, there are no open review threads, and the branch is mergeable against master. ## Risks Each successful catalog chunk remains committed if a later operation fails. A retry completes publication. Provider discovery occurs outside database locks. Default-profile changes commit separately from the catalog chunks and roll back together on failure. Tests use a controlled MCP response; they do not qualify a live provider. There is no schema migration or new plugin API in this PR. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and testing. The exact deployment model ID and context window are 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 - [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 maps
The maps describe the same capabilities from two perspectives:
- Feature map: what a person can do, where to reach it, and how to verify the user journey. Preserve its Poteto format.
- Agent access map: the APIs and agent entry points for those capabilities, their permission boundaries, and access verification.
These are sibling directories under maps/. Each feature file has a same-named
agent access companion. Reuse the product map's sub-feature IDs, so tasks/create
identifies the same capability in both maps. Product behavior remains governed by
the implementation spec; a map cannot grant
authority or redefine a permission denial as success.
Access contract
Every business operation needs both an API and a usable agent entry point for an
actor authorized to perform it. A dedicated tool is optional when REST, the CLI,
an assigned MCP client, or native search_api / call_api already provides the
operation. Record which agent surfaces actually have that path; an installed CLI
or optional MCP package cannot be assumed available to every native/remote run.
Track these independently:
| Dimension | Values and meaning |
|---|---|
| API | present, missing, not-applicable, or unreviewed. Use exact methods/paths; distinguish protocols from REST. |
| Agent access | available, partial, missing, restricted, operator-only, not-applicable, or unreviewed. Name the supported surface and actual entry point. |
| Policy | Actor, action/grant, company/resource/ownership scope, responsible-user intersection, run requirements, work modes, and gates relevant to the operation. |
| Evidence | source-only, verified, failed, blocked, or not-run. Source presence and successful board calls are not agent verification. |
| Review depth | baseline records representative operations and known gaps; operation-reviewed enumerates the capability's meaningful operations and their individual access contracts. |
Broad capabilities such as task properties must be split into operations before they count as operation-reviewed: renaming, metadata edits, assignment, dependencies, and lifecycle changes can use different tools and permission rules. An available read path cannot certify a write path. List/get/create/update/delete, execution/control, credential handling, and resolution are separate where their authority or transport differs. Do not duplicate request schemas from OpenAPI.
Exceptions and restrictions
Presentation-only state, static developer fixtures, and pre-start/local operator
work may use not-applicable for a domain API, with a concrete reason and the
existing local path. When a capability combines shared data with presentation,
split the operations: browser recents do not exempt resource lookup from API
coverage. Promoting local state to a shared feature requires revisiting the entry.
A board-only endpoint is restricted for agent identity, not an automatic
exception or a missing API. Cite the enforced policy and record whether the
agent can request the authorized human's action and observe its result. An
unresolved delegation question remains in Gaps. Company access, a job title,
a personal assistant's OAuth grant, or an accepted interaction does not grant
board identity. Keep budget, approval, secret and execution authority intact.
Check actual route/service authorization and production tool admission. OpenAPI actor labels and scenario/evaluation tool declarations are supporting metadata; record disagreements rather than using them as proof of access. Native API fallback restrictions, tool field/scope limits, and rollout settings are part of the agent path, even when a legacy agent can call the REST endpoint directly.
Companion file format
Each agent-access-map/<area>.md has an H1, a relative link to its product file,
followed by one H2 backticked ID per product
sub-feature. Each capability contains these fields:
- Review:
baselineoroperation-reviewed. - API: presence state and exact operation IDs, or a reasoned exception.
- Agent access: availability state and concrete entry points by surface.
- Policy: relevant permission and runtime boundaries, with source references.
- Evidence: evidence state, reviewed commit and sources or executed proof.
- Verification: allowed/denied assertions and observable result; record what has actually run separately from the proposed recipe.
- Gaps: missing APIs/paths, discovery drift, unreviewed operations or policy
decisions; use
noneonly for the enumerated scope that was reviewed.
For an operation-reviewed capability, use H3 backticked operation IDs and repeat
API, Agent access, Policy, Evidence, Verification and Gaps for each operation.
Use small operation names such as create, update, read, or run-now.
The enclosing capability has Review: operation-reviewed only after its
meaningful operations have been enumerated. The following excerpt shows one
operation; include the others before using that review label:
## `definition`
Review: `operation-reviewed`.
### `create`
API: `present` — POST /api/companies/{companyId}/routines.
Agent access: `available` — agent REST, CLI routine create and native call_api
under the enabled rollout and active-run/mode gates.
Policy: same company; assigneeAgentId must be the calling agent; cite the
routine authorization and native API policy sources.
Evidence: `source-only` — reviewed commit and source links; no live proof.
Verification: `not-run` — create an owned routine; reject assignment to another
agent; inspect saved configuration, attribution and retry behavior.
Gaps: verify ownership and responsible-user resolution with a permitted agent
context; source presence alone does not qualify this operation.
Keeping the maps synchronized
When a change adds/removes a capability or changes its behavior, API, permission, tool binding, CLI support, or work mode, update the affected companion and product recipe as appropriate in the same change. Preserve IDs across renames where the capability is unchanged; update the affected cross-links together. Indexes discover recipes automatically. An API-only change may update the companion without rewriting unchanged user instructions.
maintain-verification-skill owns reconciliation of both maps. It follows changed source and authorization, checks real agent reachability, and records product gaps without implementing them during a maintenance pass. The creation skill uses this structure. verify-paperclip consumes the relevant recipes and reports evidence/drift; map editing belongs to maintenance.
Run the structural check after map changes:
node scripts/check-maps.mjs
It checks paired areas/IDs, navigation metadata, required fields, and local references. It does not certify endpoint authorization, production bindings, operation completeness, or live behavior. Source audits must check those against the existing API and tool contracts; avoid a second schema catalog or runtime.
For live access proof, use Paperclip's existing API/runner/MCP fixtures or an owned
isolated instance. Use the actual agent identity, target and work mode. Assert the
allowed result and relevant denial (another company/private resource, wrong
owner, missing grant, invalid run, restricted mode or resolver). Mutations also
need persisted state/attribution and retry behavior. Capture evidence using the
existing artifact workflow; keep executed run results
separate from generated maps/generated/coverage.json, which lists page references.
Local authorship and generated indexes
Change only the recipes, access contracts and stories whose behavior or intent
changed. Feature recipes own navigation metadata; stories own small
parameters.paperclip annotations. Do not register entries or refresh counts in
shared READMEs, inventories, fingerprints or review journals.
node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs validates and generates aggregate navigation,
Storybook data, verification routes and the page inventory. All outputs live in
ignored maps/generated/, ui/storybook/generated/, and the ignored Storybook
preview.tsx wrapper. Start/build and UI typechecking generate their own inputs.
A clean merged checkout therefore assembles both branches' changes automatically.
Git provides history and diffs. PRs, issues and CI artifacts retain review/run evidence for the named revision. Capability associations do not create whole-file review dependencies. Keep durable scenario limits in the affected recipe or story.