DottaandPaperclip
0eb2c964a7
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agent owners configure the harness and computer used for that work. > - A legacy runner upgrade must first qualify an unverified sandbox. > - The upgrade called an instance-admin probe, so a company owner with agent configuration permission received HTTP 403. > - This pull request qualifies the saved computer through the agent's existing configuration authorization. > - Company owners can complete the upgrade while general instance environment management stays restricted. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17361. Related: #17122. **What happened?** Upgrade runner displayed for an existing Claude agent on a Daytona Paperclip Computer. Clicking it returned “Instance admin access required” for a cloud company owner. The agent remained on the legacy runner. **Expected behavior** A caller permitted to update the agent can qualify that agent's saved computer and upgrade. Instance-admin access is not required for this agent-scoped operation. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Sign in as a cloud company owner with `agents:configure` and no instance-admin role. 2. Open an existing legacy Claude agent on an unqualified Daytona snapshot. 3. Select Upgrade runner. ## What Changed - Add `POST /api/agents/{id}/qualify-runner` with the existing `agent_config:update` guard. - Reuse the server's effective environment resolver. The submitted environment ID only detects stale state; it cannot select a different computer. - Preserve company binding checks, check binding again at lease acquisition, and record agent-scoped audit activity. - Return qualification status and the lease receipt without instance-level provider metadata or raw provider errors. - Use the new endpoint for the existing-agent upgrade. Keep the generic environment probe restricted to instance admins. - Disable Upgrade runner when an unsaved computer change resolves to a different target, with a save-first explanation. Other draft settings still accompany an upgrade. - Add real-database authorization regression tests and update the API contract and access maps. ## Verification - Red: the existing UI called the instance-wide probe and failed the new agent-scoped call assertions in eight upgrade cases. - Green: 349 related route, provider qualification, runner selection, and UI tests passed. - Green: 12 authorization cases passed with real PostgreSQL, real HTTP routes, real saved role grants, and a simulated provider boot. They cover the cloud owner, removed grants, foreign agent/computer, inherited targets, stale target, invalid body, archived/local target, redacted failure, audit scope, and unchanged agent settings. - Review regression: two cases first reproduced the enabled upgrade button after an unsaved computer change; both now pass, along with all 168 related UI tests. Qualified/unqualified computers and restoring the saved selection are covered. - All 26 OpenAPI cases passed; the 12 real-database authorization cases also passed after rebase. - The host exhausted PostgreSQL semaphores. For the 12 cases, a temporary local-only setup used disposable PostgreSQL 18 in Docker instead of the embedded database launcher. The committed tests use the normal embedded database helper. No authorization decisions were mocked. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `pnpm check:token-gates`, map validation, module-boundary validation, and `git diff --check` passed. - `pnpm test:run` was attempted but did not establish a full local pass: the host could not start embedded PostgreSQL clusters. All current-head CI gates passed, including the full suite in CI. The commitperclip review workflow timed out before reporting any executed steps on its first attempt and passed on one retry. - Fresh staging acceptance remains pending deployment. Verify persisted native configuration and a successful runtime test on the existing Daytona computer after merge. Earlier live Daytona proof from #17361 is separate evidence. ## Risks - Qualification can start a fresh, temporary sandbox. It uses the existing probe lifecycle and cleanup contract. - The new path must remain scoped to the saved agent and its company. Denial and redaction tests cover that boundary. General instance probe authorization is unchanged. - No migration, role change, credential change, or automatic agent upgrade is included. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, code execution, and browser tools. The exact deployed model variant and context-window size were 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 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.