DottaandPaperclip
0e15c92073
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents use installed skills and exact version pins during execution. > - Managed skills still depended on mutable directories on the web server. > - A replacement server could lose acknowledged edits or remove an unassigned skill whose directory was absent. > - This pull request makes immutable versions the authority for managed content and installed repository reads. > - The server can rebuild delivery files from durable content after replacement. > - This establishes skills readiness for ephemeral web servers. General server draining and workspace recovery remain separate work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Skills services, shared contracts, database receipts, Skill Studio, and runtime delivery. **Problem or motivation** A fresh web server must discover, read, edit, and deliver protected installed skills using the same database, object storage, secrets, and supported application artifacts. It must not need its predecessor's files or process memory. **Proposed solution** Use `managed` ownership with a null source locator. Read installed content by immutable version. Prepare packages before a short publication transaction. Persist execution selections before materialization. Recover exact pinned runtime assets and reject deletion while active or recovering pins exist. **Alternatives considered** Reconstructing a mutable installed directory preserves the old source-of-truth ambiguity. Permanent dual writes create two competing authorities. This change uses one managed model after a bounded legacy conversion. **Roadmap alignment** This improves the existing Skills Manager, Studio, version history, and Cloud execution capabilities. The maintainer supplied the implementation contract. This does not add a separate skills product or deploy fleet changes. Related work: #18082 supplies immutable package storage. #17273 addresses edits outside the API for linked local skills; this PR keeps that source category separate. #2648 is a closed earlier ephemeral-filesystem proposal. ## What Changed - Add managed ownership and focused content publication and execution materialization modules. Keep the archive format and package storage tables. - Publish managed create, save, delete, fork, rename, restore, and catalog content with version checks. Add durable create receipts. Preserve file-save receipt responses. - Return file version identities. Keep Studio drafts after a conflict and provide an explicit reload action. A delayed reload cannot overwrite newer typing or navigation. - Persist exact runtime selections, including empty selections. Rebuild pinned assets and verify their admitted digests on a replacement server. - Preserve source access on forks and disconnected copies. Keep the existing workspace policy category for managed skills. - Add bounded conversion, eligibility, and independent verification phases. Load persisted Cloud configuration in the standalone CLI without seeding or changing it. Reject partial current versions against installed inventories; recover only complete saved content or the exact source. Document storage migration blockers and the compatible rollback floor. - Add separate-process PostgreSQL/S3 qualification and update domain, retention, policy, and UI regressions. - Pass the plugin worker manager into Studio execution, admit restricted `skill_test` mode through native Runner contracts, and preserve admitted scope across native and REST tools. Native tests cannot create ordinary tasks, browse company data, or use external tools. - Select the exact durable Studio revision even when unassigned or Beta skills is off. Persist Studio output and audit atomically with native task completion, preserving the result on replay. ## Verification - Final revision `13e8af480b88ba6fea5737bac4bd81104d604792` passed full CI: all 49 workflow jobs completed successfully ([run 41127396098](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41127396098)). This includes typecheck, test suites, Runner checks, browser checks and build. Greptile review 15 is 5/5 on that same revision, with zero unresolved threads. The PR is ready for review. - Local workspace typecheck and build passed after integrating master. Focused checks passed: 33 execution/completion cases, 52 Runner HTTP cases, 16 managed-content cases, 17 Studio cases, the new real-process CLI regression, map checks and UI token gates. The CLI regression proves inspection does not seed missing Cloud configuration. Server typecheck passed after that fix. - The independent-process PostgreSQL/S3 matrix passed through normal HTTP skill routes. It covers A → B → C replacement, lost commit responses, upload crashes, concurrent saves, binary contents and executable delivery. Metadata listing and warm selected delivery retain zero object downloads. Local timing measurements are recorded; they do not establish hosted latency. - Hosted A → B → C passed on the owned disposable test tenant with external Postgres, S3 and a real remote Paperclip Computer. Predecessor temporary homes were absent. C read and executed B's acknowledged managed save. New runs used repository v1 while v2 was installed. Hashes matched an independently checked exact upstream commit. - Compatible image rollback to `6518b323` passed. Studio retained the unassigned fork's C save. A fresh remote run executed the newer managed content and historical repository pin. The actual shell event confirmed expected hashes, stdout, exit 0 and mode 0555. - Runtime candidate `9200e3fcb4` deployed successfully ([Cloud run 41124147876](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-cloud/actions/runs/41124147876)). The final Studio test delivered only the unassigned fork's exact v3, executed its script and persisted a successful output snapshot. Independent command-event inspection confirmed all three hashes, stdout, exit 0 and mode 0555. All 14 installations were version-backed. Independent verification checked all 25 versions: 23 remote objects, two bundled database snapshots, zero blockers. - The deployed image is `9200e3fcb4`. Later master integration, the client-only delayed-reload draft guard and the CLI bootstrap have separate automated proof. The CLI bootstrap was also exercised against the tenant's stored configuration and storage through the same read-only services. This PR does not claim that the deployed image is the final PR revision. - Live Studio checks exposed worker wiring, admission, access scope, exact selection and completion-publication gaps. They are fixed. Failed attempts remain in the evidence. The full local suite exceeded 80 minutes under host contention and was stopped. Later combined/isolated local attempts also timed out; they are not counted as passes. Full CI covers the integrated suites. Earlier CI found an obsolete restart-scope fixture, which was corrected and passed all 52 HTTP cases. - Reproduction and migration: [`doc/skill-ephemeral-web-servers.md`](doc/skill-ephemeral-web-servers.md). Source revisions, deployments, versions, run IDs, hashes and failure history: [`doc/plans/2026-10-30-ephemeral-web-skills.md`](doc/plans/2026-10-30-ephemeral-web-skills.md). ## Risks - Legacy conversion requires stopped admission and retired filesystem-authoritative writers. Pre-conversion binaries are not supported rollback targets afterward. - Cloud readiness requires remote object storage. Local provider receipts and provider mismatches remain blockers until objects are copied and verified. - Linked local sources retain filesystem semantics and are outside the cloud guarantee. - Cold reads still fetch the existing archive format. Warm runtime preparation retains the verified-cache path. - Bundled reconciliation preserves an installed head. Existing release snapshots remain selectable. An older server must not replace a newer head with its shipped files. - No production volumes, fleet defaults, or general deployment coordination change in this PR. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser use. The exact backend model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. No subagents were used. ## 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.
The chat scenario catalog describes how people might request these capabilities in conversation, including setup and permission branches. These are planned Product E2E journeys, not live coverage results.
IDs and references
Use the existing IDs in issues, PRs, Storybook annotations, tests, and verification evidence:
| Reference | Example | Defined by |
|---|---|---|
| Feature ID | onboarding |
The recipe filename without .md. |
| Capability ID | onboarding/company |
The feature ID plus a key from its Sub-features list, separated by /. |
| Entry-point reference | onboarding.md#web-wizard | The recipe filename plus its entry-point heading. The local entry-point ID is web-wizard. |
For example, report verifying onboarding/company through web-wizard.
Capabilities describe behavior; entry points identify the surface used to exercise
it. Entry-point IDs are separate from generated capability IDs. Both maps and
Storybook use the same full capability IDs. Each child page states its feature
ID; recipe bullets show the full capability ID beside the local key, and access
companions show it beneath the local heading. Local keys remain unchanged for
parsing and existing anchors.
Keep recipe filenames, sub-feature keys, and entry-point keys stable when changing display titles or navigation. Renaming a filename or key changes its references. The section headings below are navigation labels, not additional IDs.
Browse features
Use this index to open a recipe or copy its feature and full capability IDs.
Getting started and access
| Feature ID | Recipe | Capability IDs |
|---|---|---|
onboarding |
Onboarding and first work | onboarding/instance, onboarding/company, onboarding/adapter, onboarding/first-task, onboarding/resume |
access |
Login, invitations, and access | access/login, access/invitations, access/membership, access/resources, access/cli-auth |
companies |
Companies and portability | companies/selection, companies/identity, companies/decision-models, companies/prompt-injection-prevention, companies/fast-responses, companies/agent-observability, companies/archive, companies/portability |
Tasks and conversations
| Feature ID | Recipe | Capability IDs |
|---|---|---|
tasks |
Task creation and lifecycle | tasks/create, tasks/organize, tasks/properties, tasks/discussion, tasks/completion, tasks/privacy |
task-coordination |
Delegation, dependencies, and signoff | task-coordination/delegation, task-coordination/dependencies, task-coordination/signoff, task-coordination/tree-control |
inbox-search |
Inbox, decisions, and search | inbox-search/views, inbox-search/triage, inbox-search/decisions, inbox-search/search, inbox-search/toasts |
agent-chat |
Agent conversations and project handoff | agent-chat/discovery, agent-chat/history, agent-chat/handoff, agent-chat/conference-room |
questions-and-approvals |
Questions and approvals | questions-and-approvals/questions, questions-and-approvals/dismiss-and-reopen, questions-and-approvals/confirmations, questions-and-approvals/plan-review, questions-and-approvals/audience, questions-and-approvals/governance, questions-and-approvals/tool-review, questions-and-approvals/continuation |
steering |
Steering and queued messages | steering/queue, steering/edit-order-discard, steering/steer, steering/interrupt, steering/stop-and-pause, steering/drafts, steering/approval-queue |
documents-artifacts |
Documents, attachments, and work products | documents-artifacts/documents, documents-artifacts/annotations, documents-artifacts/attachments, documents-artifacts/work-products, documents-artifacts/library |
Agents and reusable capabilities
| Feature ID | Recipe | Capability IDs |
|---|---|---|
agents |
Hiring, configuration, and organization | agents/hire, agents/grok-bot, agents/instructions, agents/organization, agents/primary-agent, agents/lifecycle, agents/built-in, agents/api-keys, agents/managed-agent-setup |
runs-adapters |
Runs, harnesses, and model accounts | runs-adapters/availability, runs-adapters/validation, runs-adapters/runs, runs-adapters/session |
skills |
Skills and Skill Studio | skills/discovery, skills/authoring, skills/versions, skills/policy, skills/testing |
teams |
Team packages and installation | teams/discovery, teams/preview, teams/install, teams/configuration |
Projects and execution
| Feature ID | Recipe | Capability IDs |
|---|---|---|
projects |
Projects and repositories | projects/lifecycle, projects/task-context, projects/repositories, projects/defaults, projects/privacy |
goals |
Goals and work alignment | goals/hierarchy, goals/alignment, goals/navigation |
workspaces |
Workspaces, services, and files | workspaces/binding, workspaces/provisioning, workspaces/services, workspaces/files-git, workspaces/closure |
execution-environments |
Execution environments | execution-environments/configuration, execution-environments/capabilities, execution-environments/probe, execution-environments/assignment, execution-environments/images |
recovery |
Recovery | recovery/diagnosis, recovery/bounded-continuation, recovery/source-action, recovery/exhaustion, recovery/workspace, recovery/unknown-outcome, recovery/user-continuation, recovery/reconnect |
Apps, channels, and extensions
| Feature ID | Recipe | Capability IDs |
|---|---|---|
connection-setup |
Connection setup | connection-setup/catalog, connection-setup/identity-and-access, connection-setup/credentials, connection-setup/handoff, connection-setup/draft-recovery, connection-setup/task-request, connection-setup/channel-setup, connection-setup/failure |
assistant-connections |
Assistant connections (MCP) | assistant-connections/setup, assistant-connections/consent, assistant-connections/device-login, assistant-connections/client-use, assistant-connections/revocation |
app-permissions |
App access and action permissions | app-permissions/agent-access, app-permissions/action-policy, app-permissions/catalog-change, app-permissions/test-action, app-permissions/account-maintenance |
chat-channels |
External chat and email | chat-channels/providers, chat-channels/identity, chat-channels/conversation, chat-channels/attachments, chat-channels/lifecycle, chat-channels/outbound-email |
gateways-profiles |
Tool gateways and access profiles | gateways-profiles/gateway, gateways-profiles/profiles, gateways-profiles/client-connect, gateways-profiles/tokens, gateways-profiles/activity |
secrets |
Secrets and proposals | secrets/company-secrets, secrets/user-secrets, secrets/proposals, secrets/vault-import, secrets/runtime-delivery |
plugins |
Plugins | plugins/installation, plugins/configuration, plugins/contributions, plugins/lifecycle |
Automation and structured work
| Feature ID | Recipe | Capability IDs |
|---|---|---|
routines |
Routines, schedules, and triggers | routines/definition, routines/triggers, routines/run-now, routines/history, routines/management |
cases |
Cases | cases/browse, cases/structure, cases/history, cases/task-links, cases/handoffs |
status-cards |
Status cards | status-cards/authoring, status-cards/generation, status-cards/inspection, status-cards/archive |
Oversight and operation
| Feature ID | Recipe | Capability IDs |
|---|---|---|
budgets-costs |
Costs and budgets | budgets-costs/cost-reporting, budgets-costs/budgets, budgets-costs/incidents, budgets-costs/resolution, budgets-costs/subscriptions, budgets-costs/accounting-recovery |
activity |
Dashboards and audit trails | activity/overview, activity/activity, activity/runs, activity/routine-audit, activity/timeline, activity/agent-commentary |
navigation-preferences |
Navigation, profile, and announcements | navigation-preferences/navigation, navigation-preferences/preferences, navigation-preferences/profile, navigation-preferences/announcements, navigation-preferences/fallbacks, navigation-preferences/command-palette |
instance-operations |
Instance operations | instance-operations/install-update, instance-operations/server-service, instance-operations/configuration, instance-operations/diagnostics, instance-operations/backup, instance-operations/runtime-setup |
cli-operations |
CLI/API and local worktrees | cli-operations/context, cli-operations/domain-commands, cli-operations/outputs, cli-operations/run-controls, cli-operations/worktree-instances, cli-operations/feedback-export |
Contributor surfaces
| Feature ID | Recipe | Capability IDs |
|---|---|---|
developer-labs |
Developer previews and diagnostic labs | developer-labs/design, developer-labs/interaction-labs, developer-labs/performance, developer-labs/route-gates |
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. Recipes are discovered automatically from their navigation
metadata; generation does not depend on this high-level index.
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 ID, full capability IDs and
entry-point ID (for example, onboarding/company through web-wizard), plus the
recipe link, 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. Product E2E reports reuse these capability IDs through the journey associations. Their coverage view shows which scenarios in a campaign are linked to each capability and the associated test results. An association or passing scenario does not certify the whole capability; unselected and unmapped journeys remain distinct.
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. Discovery uses the recipe and companion; keep the readable ID index above aligned when features or capability IDs change.
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 local keys, full capability IDs, and observable behavior/states,
such as
- `company`: `onboarding/company` — create a company. - 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.