DottaandPaperclip
47027e7ba5
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Routines save work for later execution under a responsible person's authority. > - An agent can create a routine through its normal REST or native API tools. > - The create route kept the agent creator but dropped the authenticated responsible user. > - The service then selected a parent task's user or a company default, even when the source run had a different user. > - This pull request passes the authenticated responsible user separately from creator attribution. > - Future automatic runs then use the authenticated responsible user saved in the routine revision. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** An authenticated native agent created a routine without a parent task. The stored responsible user became a different company owner. An unrelated parent task could also replace the authenticated user. The defect changes the identity saved for future automatic work. **Expected behavior** Creation must use the server-resolved responsible user from the authenticated run or API key. The agent remains the creator. A person who clicks Run now still supplies that manual run's identity. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create an active company member and a different company owner. 2. Initialize a native agent run with the member's identity. 3. Use `call_api` to create a paused, self-assigned routine without a parent. 4. Read the routine and its first revision. Before this fix, both use the company owner. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on master `56517dda6c5b32bc901b7dbf1605eaaa041c5fba`. **Deployment mode** Local source integration with real HTTP routes, agent authentication, native tool authority, and embedded PostgreSQL. No provider turn is needed for the reproduction. Related work: [#19128](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/19128) adds board controls for saved responsibility. [#15207](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15207) repairs synthetic identities from built-in installers. Neither fixes this authenticated create path. ## What Changed - Pass the authenticated agent's responsible user as a separate internal actor field. - Select the board user first, then the agent’s server-resolved responsible user, before the existing parent and company fallback. - Keep creator attribution, initial revision attribution, manual dispatch identity, and existing records intact. - Add real native API, HTTP, and PostgreSQL regressions for identity selection, replay, client spoofing, stale claims, revoked membership, cancellation, cross-company calls, API keys, and fallback behavior. - Document the creation and manual dispatch identity rules in the execution contract. Correct the obsolete responsibility sentence in the agent access map. - Make the existing live-retry route fixture wait for its committed comment’s durable wake before draining. Keep all process and saved-owner assertions. ## Verification - Captured a failing native `call_api` test before changing production code. The persisted responsible user was the unrelated company owner. - The same real route and database boundary passes after the fix. - Initial affected routine and identity checks: 131 passed. The existing pending-AI-card fence also passed. - Follow-up routine checks: 118 passed. The owning scheduled-retry suite passed all 31 tests. - Initial CI serialized shard 7/9 failed with a `23503` wake-to-agent foreign key error during test cleanup. A controlled real-route/PostgreSQL pause reproduced that exact error on unchanged base `56517dda6c`. The drain returned before the route registered its deferred comment wake. The same pause passed after the fixture waited for the actual commentId’s durable wake receipt. The original failure is preserved. - Affected server typecheck after the fixture query change: passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm build`: passed. - `pnpm test:run`: still running as supporting coverage. The worktree changed during the run: map cleanup, then the six-line fixture wait. Production and routine-test files stayed unchanged. This is mixed-working-tree coverage, not an immutable full-suite pass for a commit. Exact next-head CI remains required. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check`: passed. - Exact head `a12e3f6c42b8ad5826fd58faa3cd9553ea251e09`: all CI gates passed. Greptile and the native substantive review both gave 5/5 with no open findings. The native reviewer did not run tests or exercise shadow-mode authorization. - Live provider execution remains unverified. This change does not grant access to another person's AI account. ## Risks New agent-created routines now use their authenticated responsible user before a parent or company default. This is the intended behavior change. The service keeps its fallback when no bound identity exists. Missing agent-key identity still fails authentication. Missing personal AI configuration still blocks execution. Existing routines, revisions, tasks, grants, and manual dispatch behavior do not change. The fixture waits for a persisted wake record before draining; its original live-process and saved-owner assertions remain. ## Model Used OpenAI `gpt-6.1-sol` with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The host did not expose the context window size. ## 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.
The chat scenario catalog uses these same IDs for human requests and expected outcomes. Its scenarios retain the access boundaries here; neither a CEO role nor a planned scenario grants board authority or establishes a working production tool binding.
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 is enabled by default, but explicit server,
company-allowlist and binding settings can narrow admission. It requires 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.
Connection-management reads support Standard, Ask and Plan; mutations require
Standard. Skill-test runs and nonstandard task-bridge keys cannot administer
connections. These gates supplement each operation's grants, resolved resource
and target scope, and responsible-user authority. See the
rollout policy
and connection authorization.
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.