mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-17 10:06:42 +02:00
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Issue interactions give agents and people a structured decision record. > - Resolver routes used different authorization rules. > - Some routes blocked valid agents, including task watchdogs with normal issue access. > - The API did not show who could resolve a pending interaction. > - This pull request gives every interaction kind one resolver policy evaluator. > - The benefit is a clear decision path with consistent governance and company isolation. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Fixes: #8087 Refs: #7403 Related PR: #11082 proposes board-only confirmation rules. This change keeps human-only review as an explicit policy. **What happened?** Agents could create issue interactions. Some resolver routes still required board access. This left valid agent confirmations pending. Task watchdogs could see the same problem without board identity. **Expected behavior** Every interaction kind must use one resolver policy contract. The contract must support `anyone`, `not_creator`, and `human_only`. It must also apply all normal governance controls. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a `request_confirmation` interaction as an agent. 2. Resolve it with another authorized agent. 3. Observe the board-only denial. **Paperclip version or commit** The problem exists on `master` before this change. **Deployment mode** Local development with `pnpm dev`. ## What Changed - Add canonical policies for `anyone`, `not_creator`, and `human_only`. - Use one server evaluator for every interaction kind. - Apply named addressees, company limits, review rules, and task watchdog scope. - Charge cross-issue resolutions to the existing per-run action limit. - Return the effective resolver audience in attention and interaction data. - Show the audience, governance choices, and denial reasons in the board UI. - Add telemetry, API documents, product documents, and regression fixtures. - Add migration provenance for safe legacy behavior. - Make migration `0218` safe for complete replays and partial prior runs. ## Product Rules - An interaction records a response. It does not grant authority for the next action. - `anyone` lets any authorized issue participant respond. - `not_creator` requires a responder other than the interaction creator. - `human_only` requires an authorized person. - A named addressee, company policy, or governed action can narrow the audience. - These controls cannot widen the audience. - A task watchdog uses the same rules as an ordinary agent. - A task watchdog does not receive board authority. - An agent resolution on another issue uses the shared cross-issue action limit. - Legacy pending interactions keep their earlier restrictions. - The UI shows the effective audience and a permanent denial reason. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db check:migrations` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck` - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/db/src/issue-thread-interaction-resolver-policy-migration.test.ts` - The focused PostgreSQL test applies migration `0218` twice. - The test also completes a partial prior run and preserves existing provenance. - The latest GitHub head has 29 successful checks. - The opt-in Storybook visual check skipped as expected. - Greptile reports 5/5 with no open comments. ## Risks - New interaction writes use `anyone` by default. - Callers must select `not_creator` or `human_only` when they need stricter review. - Legacy pending interactions keep the old creator and human restrictions. - Migration `0218` fills only missing provenance fields during recovery. - Cross-issue resolutions can reach the existing action limit. - The shared evaluator affects every interaction kind. - Route, service, database, shared contract, and UI tests cover these rules. > This work matches the Agent Reviews and Approvals direction in `ROADMAP.md`. It does not duplicate a planned item. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The runtime does not expose the exact deployment ID or context window. The agent used reasoning, repository tools, shell commands, and test execution. ## 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 linked public issues or described the issue with the required labels - [x] I have not referenced internal Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket id - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation - [x] I have considered and documented the risks - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open comments - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
117 lines
3.8 KiB
TypeScript
117 lines
3.8 KiB
TypeScript
import { randomUUID } from "node:crypto";
|
|
import { and, eq } from "drizzle-orm";
|
|
import { afterAll, afterEach, beforeAll, describe, expect, it } from "vitest";
|
|
import {
|
|
activityLog,
|
|
agents,
|
|
companies,
|
|
createDb,
|
|
heartbeatRuns,
|
|
} from "@paperclipai/db";
|
|
import {
|
|
getEmbeddedPostgresTestSupport,
|
|
startEmbeddedPostgresTestDatabase,
|
|
} from "./helpers/embedded-postgres.js";
|
|
import {
|
|
CROSS_ISSUE_INFLUENCE_ENFORCE_AT,
|
|
observeCrossIssueInfluence,
|
|
} from "../services/cross-issue-influence-limit.js";
|
|
|
|
const embeddedPostgresSupport = await getEmbeddedPostgresTestSupport();
|
|
const describeEmbeddedPostgres = embeddedPostgresSupport.supported ? describe : describe.skip;
|
|
|
|
describeEmbeddedPostgres("cross-issue influence limit PostgreSQL serialization", () => {
|
|
let db!: ReturnType<typeof createDb>;
|
|
let tempDb: Awaited<ReturnType<typeof startEmbeddedPostgresTestDatabase>> | null = null;
|
|
|
|
beforeAll(async () => {
|
|
tempDb = await startEmbeddedPostgresTestDatabase("paperclip-cross-issue-cap-");
|
|
db = createDb(tempDb.connectionString);
|
|
}, 20_000);
|
|
|
|
afterEach(async () => {
|
|
await db.delete(activityLog);
|
|
await db.delete(heartbeatRuns);
|
|
await db.delete(agents);
|
|
await db.delete(companies);
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
afterAll(async () => {
|
|
await tempDb?.cleanup();
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
it("allows exactly one of concurrent attempts 20 and 21", async () => {
|
|
const companyId = randomUUID();
|
|
const agentId = randomUUID();
|
|
const runId = randomUUID();
|
|
const sourceIssueId = randomUUID();
|
|
const targetIssueId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(companies).values({
|
|
id: companyId,
|
|
name: "Paperclip",
|
|
issuePrefix: `C${companyId.replace(/-/g, "").slice(0, 6).toUpperCase()}`,
|
|
defaultResponsibleUserId: "board-user",
|
|
});
|
|
await db.insert(agents).values({
|
|
id: agentId,
|
|
companyId,
|
|
name: "Concurrent Coder",
|
|
role: "engineer",
|
|
adapterType: "codex_local",
|
|
adapterConfig: {},
|
|
runtimeConfig: {},
|
|
permissions: {},
|
|
});
|
|
await db.insert(heartbeatRuns).values({
|
|
id: runId,
|
|
companyId,
|
|
agentId,
|
|
status: "running",
|
|
responsibleUserId: "board-user",
|
|
contextSnapshot: { issueId: sourceIssueId },
|
|
});
|
|
await db.insert(activityLog).values(
|
|
Array.from({ length: 18 }, () => ({
|
|
companyId,
|
|
actorType: "agent" as const,
|
|
actorId: agentId,
|
|
agentId,
|
|
runId,
|
|
action: "issue.cross_issue_influence_observed",
|
|
entityType: "issue",
|
|
entityId: targetIssueId,
|
|
})),
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
const input = {
|
|
companyId,
|
|
runId,
|
|
agentId,
|
|
targetIssueId,
|
|
targetIssueIdentifier: "CAP-2",
|
|
kind: "comment" as const,
|
|
now: CROSS_ISSUE_INFLUENCE_ENFORCE_AT,
|
|
};
|
|
// A comment, a PATCH, and an issue-thread interaction resolution race for the
|
|
// last slot of the shared budget: the row lock must let exactly one of 19/20
|
|
// through per attempt and fail the twenty-first closed.
|
|
const decisions = await Promise.all([
|
|
observeCrossIssueInfluence(db, input),
|
|
observeCrossIssueInfluence(db, { ...input, kind: "update" }),
|
|
observeCrossIssueInfluence(db, { ...input, kind: "interaction_resolution" }),
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
expect(decisions.map((decision) => decision?.allowed).sort()).toEqual([false, true, true]);
|
|
expect(decisions.map((decision) => decision?.count).sort((a, b) => Number(a) - Number(b)))
|
|
.toEqual([19, 20, 21]);
|
|
|
|
const recorded = await db
|
|
.select({ action: activityLog.action })
|
|
.from(activityLog)
|
|
.where(and(eq(activityLog.companyId, companyId), eq(activityLog.runId, runId)));
|
|
expect(recorded.filter((row) => row.action === "issue.cross_issue_influence_observed")).toHaveLength(20);
|
|
expect(recorded.filter((row) => row.action === "issue.cross_issue_influence_cap_rejected")).toHaveLength(1);
|
|
});
|
|
});
|