Files
PaperClipAI/maps
DottaandPaperclip e5713d95c6 test(e2e): add scheduled routine journey (#18728)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agent work through tasks, projects, and routines.
> - Daily QA must exercise the staging app through normal browser and
API surfaces.
> - A schedule must create real work and retain its result and history.
> - Pausing that schedule must prevent the next invocation.
> - The routine journey in #18652 passed in QA, while its separate
completion journey has not passed.
> - This PR delivers the routine test independently and preserves its
measured flow and assertions.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #18652. This is the routine-only delivery from that PR. The
original completion implementation and its failed attempts remain on
#18652.

## What Changed

- Add the target-independent `routine-scheduled-run` journey with one
native run and seven required checks.
- Start from the measured routine source
`ac4efb7c6f4782ea806661683c656fd2b4cc3189`. Keep its request, seven
success assertions, one native-run limit, and 65-second pause check.
- Bound each observed GET by the original remaining journey deadline.
Preserve the normal API timeout for other callers. Keep the original
routine error if final trigger disabling also fails, save a closed
secondary receipt, and fail an otherwise successful journey when
disabling fails.
- Narrow the shared output-reader type to its one-argument GET
capability without changing its runtime code.
- Register only this case in the catalog, types, feature associations,
dispatcher, and definition hash. Keep the strict catalog expectation in
sync.
- Retain the real Routines component controls and the existing
project-flow coverage for the shared browser helper.
- Document resource cleanup and the 65-second pause observation.
Preserve the current routine map content.

## Verification

- The original source passed [QA staging run
41567574185](https://pages.paperclip.ing/evals-qa-smoke-41567574185-1/).
TestOps launch 1657 / result 3431 maps to case 718. All seven checks and
five phases passed. One scheduler-bound native run, saved output
attribution, the full pause window, and cleanup were verified.
- Current source `8f62137f130f59fd3e39276e3d60185ddff24517` passed
[fresh QA staging run
41582706162](https://pages.paperclip.ing/evals-qa-smoke-41582706162-1/)
against Core `09162fe893b464dd2ccdafd14bd3ef1611202a86`. TestOps launch
1855. All seven checks, five phases, and all three workflow jobs passed.
The run used one scheduler-bound native turn and observed 65.352 seconds
after pause and completion. Canonical evidence collection and normal
cleanup completed, with no active operations and the owned agent
terminal.
- This fresh pass covers the reviewed deadline and failure-reporting
changes in the current source. The earlier ac4 pass and the
byte-preserving b940 extraction remain historical records under their
original conditions; neither failed attempts nor prior source conditions
are regraded.
- Causal controls: six assertions failed on the old behavior, then all
62 focused controls passed after the repair. Local: 834 related support
tests, 41 shared chat/output-reader tests, and 26 unchanged real
component controls passed. Runner E2E typecheck, recursive typecheck,
build, maps, token gates, and `git diff --check` passed. The temporary
output-reader type mismatch exposed by typecheck was corrected by
narrowing the capability type.
- The first restricted build/typecheck invocations failed because local
tsx IPC was denied. A restricted support run also lacked the report CLI
output. The same source passed with normal owned local IPC allowed; the
original logs remain retained.
- The original head's hosted e2e shard 2/8 failed at the unchanged
mobile preference frame-count test: expected more than five frames,
observed five. The cause is unknown. Its original log remains retained;
it is not labeled a proven flake. No CI rerun was requested.
- Current-head full CI run 41580423918, attempt 1, passed. The fresh
review is 5/5 with zero unresolved threads. The broad local suite was
not repeated. The earlier full local run recorded in #18643 had four
failures and did not reach 164 serialized groups; this PR does not claim
an all-local pass.
- Prior failed routine attempts remain recorded. They exposed composer
focus, collapsed schedule controls, pending browser events, and Markdown
serialization problems. The measured later pass does not regrade those
attempts.

## Risks

- The shared browser-event helper also serves task creation and project
creation. Its regression tests and existing consumers remain included.
- The staging pass qualifies the captured source and configuration. The
coordinator retains source merging, daily pinning, and plan selection.
- The repository test and the unpassed completion test are not
registered by this PR.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool use and code execution. The exact
deployment ID and context window are not exposed by 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 issue/PR references)

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-11-02 23:25:56 -06:00
..

Paperclip maps

The maps describe the same capabilities from two perspectives:

  • Feature map: what a person can do, where to reach it, and how to verify the user journey. Preserve its Poteto format.
  • Agent access map: the APIs and agent entry points for those capabilities, their permission boundaries, and access verification.

The chat scenario catalog adds natural-language requests, starting context and expected conversational outcomes for the same capability IDs. It lives with Product E2E as planning data; a scenario reference is neither a registered execution nor evidence that a journey passed.

These are sibling directories under maps/. Each feature file has a same-named agent access companion. Reuse the product map's sub-feature IDs, so tasks/create identifies the same capability in both maps. Product behavior remains governed by the implementation spec; a map cannot grant authority or redefine a permission denial as success.

Capability identifiers

The feature ID is the recipe filename without .md, such as onboarding. The full capability ID joins that feature ID and a Sub-features key with /: the company key in feature-map/onboarding.md is onboarding/company. Its agent-access-map/onboarding.md companion uses the same local company key. The feature-map index lists the existing feature and full capability IDs.

Each child page states Feature ID: `onboarding`. after its introduction or product-map link. In feature recipes, show the full ID beside the parsed local key: - `company`: `onboarding/company` — create a company. In access companions and Storybook verification guidance, keep the existing local heading and put Capability ID: `onboarding/company`. beneath it. These labels make the existing identifiers visible without changing keys, anchors, or ID generation.

Use full capability IDs in cross-feature references, Storybook annotations, tests, issues, PRs, and verification evidence. Both segments use lowercase letters, digits, and hyphens. Keep filenames and keys stable when display titles or navigation labels change; renaming either changes the capability ID.

Entry-point IDs describe a surface, such as web-wizard, and are scoped to their recipe. Reference them with a recipe link, such as onboarding.md#web-wizard, and record the capability exercised separately. Navigation section labels are not capability IDs. See IDs and references for examples.

Access contract

Every business operation needs both an API and a usable agent entry point for an actor authorized to perform it. A dedicated tool is optional when REST, the CLI, an assigned MCP client, or native search_api / call_api already provides the operation. Record which agent surfaces actually have that path; an installed CLI or optional MCP package cannot be assumed available to every native/remote run.

Track these independently:

Dimension Values and meaning
API present, missing, not-applicable, or unreviewed. Use exact methods/paths; distinguish protocols from REST.
Agent access available, partial, missing, restricted, operator-only, not-applicable, or unreviewed. Name the supported surface and actual entry point.
Policy Actor, action/grant, company/resource/ownership scope, responsible-user intersection, run requirements, work modes, and gates relevant to the operation.
Evidence source-only, verified, failed, blocked, or not-run. Source presence and successful board calls are not agent verification.
Review depth baseline records representative operations and known gaps; operation-reviewed enumerates the capability's meaningful operations and their individual access contracts.

Broad capabilities such as task properties must be split into operations before they count as operation-reviewed: renaming, metadata edits, assignment, dependencies, and lifecycle changes can use different tools and permission rules. An available read path cannot certify a write path. List/get/create/update/delete, execution/control, credential handling, and resolution are separate where their authority or transport differs. Do not duplicate request schemas from OpenAPI.

Exceptions and restrictions

Presentation-only state, static developer fixtures, and pre-start/local operator work may use not-applicable for a domain API, with a concrete reason and the existing local path. When a capability combines shared data with presentation, split the operations: browser recents do not exempt resource lookup from API coverage. Promoting local state to a shared feature requires revisiting the entry.

A board-only endpoint is restricted for agent identity, not an automatic exception or a missing API. Cite the enforced policy and record whether the agent can request the authorized human's action and observe its result. An unresolved delegation question remains in Gaps. Company access, a job title, a personal assistant's OAuth grant, or an accepted interaction does not grant board identity. Keep budget, approval, secret and execution authority intact.

Check actual route/service authorization and production tool admission. OpenAPI actor labels and scenario/evaluation tool declarations are supporting metadata; record disagreements rather than using them as proof of access. Native API fallback restrictions, tool field/scope limits, and rollout settings are part of the agent path, even when a legacy agent can call the REST endpoint directly.

Companion file format

Each agent-access-map/<area>.md has an H1, a relative link to its product file, and its feature ID, followed by one H2 backticked local key per product sub-feature. Each capability starts with its full capability ID and contains these fields:

  • Review: baseline or operation-reviewed.
  • API: presence state and exact operation IDs, or a reasoned exception.
  • Agent access: availability state and concrete entry points by surface.
  • Policy: relevant permission and runtime boundaries, with source references.
  • Evidence: evidence state, reviewed commit and sources or executed proof.
  • Verification: allowed/denied assertions and observable result; record what has actually run separately from the proposed recipe.
  • Gaps: missing APIs/paths, discovery drift, unreviewed operations or policy decisions; use none only for the enumerated scope that was reviewed.

For an operation-reviewed capability, use H3 backticked operation IDs and repeat API, Agent access, Policy, Evidence, Verification and Gaps for each operation. Use small operation names such as create, update, read, or run-now. The enclosing capability has Review: operation-reviewed only after its meaningful operations have been enumerated. The following excerpt shows one operation; include the others before using that review label:

## `definition`

Review: `operation-reviewed`.

### `create`

API: `present` — POST /api/companies/{companyId}/routines.
Agent access: `available` — agent REST, CLI routine create and native call_api
under the enabled rollout and active-run/mode gates.
Policy: same company; assigneeAgentId must be the calling agent; cite the
routine authorization and native API policy sources.
Evidence: `source-only` — reviewed commit and source links; no live proof.
Verification: `not-run` — create an owned routine; reject assignment to another
agent; inspect saved configuration, attribution and retry behavior.
Gaps: verify ownership and responsible-user resolution with a permitted agent
context; source presence alone does not qualify this operation.

Keeping the maps synchronized

When a change adds/removes a capability or changes its behavior, API, permission, tool binding, CLI support, or work mode, update the affected companion and product recipe as appropriate in the same change. Preserve IDs across renames where the capability is unchanged; update the affected cross-links together. Indexes discover recipes automatically. An API-only change may update the companion without rewriting unchanged user instructions. Update the corresponding chat scenarios when their request, assumptions or expected outcome changes; use multiple cases for meaningfully different starting conditions rather than treating an API path as conversational coverage.

maintain-verification-skill owns reconciliation of both maps. It follows changed source and authorization, checks real agent reachability, and records product gaps without implementing them during a maintenance pass. The creation skill uses this structure. verify-paperclip consumes the relevant recipes and reports evidence/drift; map editing belongs to maintenance.

Run the structural check after map changes:

node scripts/check-maps.mjs

It checks paired areas/IDs, navigation metadata, required fields, and local references. It does not certify endpoint authorization, production bindings, operation completeness, or live behavior. Source audits must check those against the existing API and tool contracts; avoid a second schema catalog or runtime.

For live access proof, use Paperclip's existing API/runner/MCP fixtures or an owned isolated instance. Use the actual agent identity, target and work mode. Assert the allowed result and relevant denial (another company/private resource, wrong owner, missing grant, invalid run, restricted mode or resolver). Mutations also need persisted state/attribution and retry behavior. Capture evidence using the existing artifact workflow; keep executed run results separate from generated maps/generated/coverage.json, which lists page references.

Local authorship and generated indexes

Change only the recipes, access contracts and stories whose behavior or intent changed. Feature recipes own navigation metadata; stories own small parameters.paperclip annotations. Keep the feature-map README's readable ID index aligned with those sources; it does not register entries for generation. Do not refresh counts in shared READMEs, inventories, fingerprints or review journals.

node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs validates and generates aggregate navigation, Storybook data, verification routes and the page inventory. All outputs live in ignored maps/generated/, ui/storybook/generated/, and the ignored Storybook preview.tsx wrapper. Start/build and UI typechecking generate their own inputs. A clean merged checkout therefore assembles both branches' changes automatically.

Git provides history and diffs. PRs, issues and CI artifacts retain review/run evidence for the named revision. Capability associations do not create whole-file review dependencies. Keep durable scenario limits in the affected recipe or story.