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 feature map
Start here when reproducing a user-facing bug, verifying a change, or deciding which surfaces a fix must cover. Each recipe describes what a person can do, where they can do it, the expected result, and the evidence needed to verify it. Product behavior is still governed by the implementation spec.
The sibling agent access map records APIs, agent entry points and permission boundaries for the same capability IDs. Follow the shared map contract when maintaining either map.
Browse features
Open the published Storybook guide for the assembled feature and capability index. The Markdown recipes in this directory are the authored source. Each has a same-named agent-access companion.
Run node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs to generate local navigation in
maps/generated/feature-map.md, maps/generated/agent-access-map.md, and the
Storybook guide. A new recipe is discovered automatically; do not register it in
this README or maintain counts here.
Before driving a journey
- Use this checkout's isolated test drive for manual product checks. It creates a temporary instance and prints its URL and data directory. Do not guess that a server on port 3100 belongs to you.
- Record the commit, URL, company, login role, relevant experimental settings, adapter, runtime mode, and live versus simulated dependencies. Use disposable tasks and provider resources. A fresh test drive creates a company and CEO, but no task or first run.
- Use the current navigation and company prefix. Paths in recipes omit that prefix. Record whether the streamlined or production shell is selected; Agent Chat, chat connectors, and the combined Inbox/Tasks view have separate gates. A hidden surface is an unmet prerequisite, not a successful test.
- Run the smallest relevant test first. Vitest commands below run from the repository root after installing dependencies. Playwright recipes use their named configuration and its isolated environment, not an unrelated running instance. Reserve expensive runner/provider tests for the behavior at issue.
- Exercise the actual user action, inspect its result, reload, and verify the persisted state or continuation. Use read-only API checks to corroborate UI evidence; creating state through the API does not prove the creation UI.
For agent-driven acceptance work, start with the Paperclip verification skill for an isolated launch, ownership/readiness checks, browser driving, evidence, and cleanup. It uses this directory as its feature map. The existing dev-workspace run/verify skill and evaluation skill describe runtime ownership and evidence handling. Reuse them; this map introduces no environment launcher, credentials, scheduled job, or second test framework.
Evidence contract
Report each entry point as passed, failed, blocked (with its missing prerequisite), or not run. Include the feature filename and entry-point ID, commit/environment, user action, expected and observed result, command/exit code, and evidence links. Screenshots or traces should show both the action and the discriminating result. Include task/run/request IDs when relevant, without secrets.
A fix is verified across its affected surfaces only when each has evidence or an explicit reason it does not apply. Shared code alone does not prove parity. Keep product regressions visible; do not change the recipe to bless a failure. For Paperclip-assigned work, attach evidence through the artifact workflow.
Inventory and remaining depth
The generated maps/generated/coverage.json lists the current non-test TSX page
modules and the recipes that directly reference each one. An unreferenced module
is a documentation candidate, not proof that its feature is absent or untested.
Remaining workflow limits live in each recipe. Inventory and example associations
describe documentation scope, not runtime health.
Maintaining the reference
The map documents user journeys. It does not execute them automatically; generated inventories record documentation scope rather than live test health.
When maintaining a recipe, compare its entry points and expected results with
the current source. Check that linked tests still exercise the stated behavior
and that local references still exist. Keep the same-named agent access companion
and stable sub-feature IDs aligned when behavior or access changes. Source-only
access inventory remains distinct from live verification. Run
node scripts/check-maps.mjs after map edits for structural/reference checks;
follow the shared contract for the source and behavioral checks it cannot perform.
Each recipe starts with a small frontmatter navigation record, then an H1:
---
navigation: {"section":"Tasks and conversations","sectionOrder":20,"order":10}
---
The H1 supplies the feature title, and the first paragraph supplies its summary. Orders are local to the section; leave gaps for additions. Equal orders use the stable filename as a tie-breaker. Keep a section's name/order consistent across its recipes. A new feature or capability needs only its recipe and companion.
Optional ### Storybook verification guidance lives inside the recipe's Gotchas
section. Each level-four heading contains a backtick-quoted capability key and
has Scope (ui, cli, or browser),
Storybook, Production, and Sources fields. These are verification instructions
and intentional scope limits, not run results or a required story for every API.
The generated gap report combines this guidance with current story associations.
After frontmatter, each recipe starts with an H1 and a user-visible description, then exactly:
- Sub-features — stable backticked IDs and observable behavior/states.
- How to get to it (user POV) — one H3 backticked entry-point ID per surface.
- Driving it with — starts with
Preconditions:; repeat each entry-point H3, withAutomated:andManual:paragraphs. Name test scope and gaps honestly. - Gotchas — misleading look-alikes, feature gates, and invalid evidence.
New or updated entries follow
Poteto's feature-map examples.
Existing entries with a Driving it heading can adopt the named harness when
their recipes are updated. The original format was inspired by
Omnigent's feature map.
Paperclip's recipes and checks follow its own task model and test infrastructure.