mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-06 21:05:21 +02:00
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Governed MCP access spans contracts, runtime enforcement, adapters, UI surfaces, and operator verification > - The parity reference PR #9534 is too large for effective automated or human review > - The feature therefore needs a linear stack whose individual diffs stay below the 100-file review limit > - This pull request is split 2/8 and focuses on database schema and shared governance contracts > - The benefit is a standalone, testable review boundary while preserving byte-for-byte parity at the top of the stack ## Linked Issues or Issue Description - Related parity reference: #9534 - Problem: The governed access model needs additive persistence and synchronized shared types before server enforcement can compile. - Proposed solution: Adds migrations 0148–0169, tool-access and Smoke Lab schema, shared types/validators/gallery helpers, and the minimal compile-required contract consumers identified by boundary testing. - Alternatives considered: keeping #9534 as one 403-file review, or rewriting the feature to manufacture seams; both were rejected in favor of path extraction plus compile-driven boundary moves. - Roadmap alignment: this advances the existing governed MCP/tool-access work already represented by #9534; it does not introduce a separate roadmap initiative. - Stack position: base branch is `pap10341-split/01-demo-servers`. - Merge policy: merge bottom-up, in order, only after the complete eight-PR stack has been reviewed and the top-of-stack parity gate remains empty. - Requested review: QA for migrations/validators; Greptile on every PR. ## What Changed - Adds migrations 0148–0169, tool-access and Smoke Lab schema, shared types/validators/gallery helpers, and the minimal compile-required contract consumers identified by boundary testing. - Keeps this PR below 100 changed files and independently typecheckable. - Preserves the final tree from #9534 when combined with the other seven stack levels. ## Verification - `pnpm typecheck` — passed, including migration numbering and safety checks - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db test` — passed - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared test` — passed ## Risks - Migration or contract mistakes could affect every upper layer; all migrations are additive/idempotent and compile consumers are included in this boundary. - Stack risk: merging out of order can expose incomplete layers; mitigate by following the documented bottom-up merge policy. - Parity risk: later edits to an intermediate branch can drift from #9534; mitigate by re-running the empty top-of-stack diff before merge. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, exact model ID `gpt-5.4`; runtime-managed context window; medium reasoning with repository, shell, Git, GitHub CLI, and code-execution tools enabled. ## 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] Internal references are omitted except the execution-plan link explicitly required for this coordinated split stack - [x] My branch name describes the change 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 - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge ## Stack Coordination - Internal execution plan: [PAP-13874](/PAP/issues/PAP-13874#document-plan) - Parity reference: #9534 - Stack: #9556 → #9557 → #9558 → #9559 → #9560 → #9561 → #9562 → #9563 - Merge bottom-up only after full-stack review and an empty parity diff at #9563. --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
51 lines
1.5 KiB
TypeScript
51 lines
1.5 KiB
TypeScript
import { describe, expect, it } from "vitest";
|
|
import {
|
|
createToolConnectionSchema,
|
|
toolRedactedValueSummarySchema,
|
|
toolTransportConfigSchema,
|
|
} from "./tool-access.js";
|
|
|
|
describe("tool access validators", () => {
|
|
it("rejects raw credential-looking fields in transport config", () => {
|
|
const parsed = toolTransportConfigSchema.safeParse({
|
|
url: "https://example.test/mcp",
|
|
headers: {
|
|
Authorization: "Bearer raw-token",
|
|
},
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
expect(parsed.success).toBe(false);
|
|
if (!parsed.success) {
|
|
expect(parsed.error.issues[0]?.message).toContain("credentialSecretRefs");
|
|
}
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
it("accepts secret references for connection credentials", () => {
|
|
const parsed = createToolConnectionSchema.safeParse({
|
|
applicationId: "11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111",
|
|
name: "GitHub fixture",
|
|
connectionKind: "managed",
|
|
transportConfig: { url: "https://example.test/mcp" },
|
|
credentialSecretRefs: [
|
|
{
|
|
secretId: "22222222-2222-4222-8222-222222222222",
|
|
configPath: "headers.Authorization",
|
|
versionSelector: "latest",
|
|
},
|
|
],
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
expect(parsed.success).toBe(true);
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
it("keeps invocation payload summaries redacted and bounded", () => {
|
|
const parsed = toolRedactedValueSummarySchema.parse({
|
|
summary: "Redacted arguments: 2 fields omitted.",
|
|
sha256: "a".repeat(64),
|
|
redactedFields: ["headers.Authorization", "body.token"],
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
expect(parsed.redactedFields).toEqual(["headers.Authorization", "body.token"]);
|
|
});
|
|
});
|