Files
PaperClipAI/maps
cafa25029c fix(native-runtime): recover unclaimed remote startup (#16349)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The native runtime preserves task execution across server restarts.
> - Remote workspace preparation can finish before the executor claims
its first provider attempt.
> - The recovery classifier required a provider checkpoint even when the
durable coordinator proved that execution had never started.
> - A deployment during this interval therefore left safe startup work
on a permanent recovery hold.
> - This pull request admits that narrow startup state to the existing
same-run bootstrap path. Existing execution and ownership checks remain
in force.
> - The original preparation yields when recovery owns the coordinator.
It cannot fail or clean up the recovered run.
> - Tasks can continue after this interruption without an operator retry
or a duplicate provider turn.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A server deployment interrupted a prepared remote workspace before the
native executor's first claim. The coordinator had attempt zero,
controller generation zero, and no owner, process, provider event, or
checkpoint. Restart classification returned
`ambiguous_remote_recovery_evidence` and blocked the task.

**Expected behavior**

The server should recognize this durable never-claimed state and
continue the original run through normal execution admission. A prior
claim, uncertain ownership, or contradictory execution evidence must
retain the recovery hold.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Prepare a remote workspace for a native run.
2. Stop the controller before the executor commits its first claim.
3. Restart the controller and classify the running native task.
4. Observe that the old classifier blocks it because no provider
checkpoint exists.

Related: #16341 preserves remote recovery failure reasons. #16344
strengthens remote restart qualification. Neither changes admission for
an untouched remote startup.

## What Changed

- Require a server-owned fencing version written only with fresh native
identities. Older unmarked preparations stay held during rolling
upgrades; caller profile data cannot add that marker to an existing run.
- Leave the current server's active preparation with its existing
execution.
- Yield through the controller-detachment path when a different
execution owns the coordinator lease. Lease expiry does not grant
takeover authority.
- Preserve run-scoped gateway tokens during detachment so stale
preparation cannot revoke the recovered worker's tools.
- Admit a valid prepared remote workspace only when the locked
coordinator proves attempt and controller generation zero, no owner, and
no prior session or execution evidence.
- Check launch receipts and provider source events before granting
bootstrap recovery.
- Keep the original run and session. Preserve atomic recovery claims,
executor durable-state checks, and normal admission gates.
- Add real PostgreSQL regression tests for competing controllers and
seven contradictory evidence cases.
- Update recovery documentation, the run-log reason, and both capability
maps.

## Verification

- The competing-controller regressions failed before the ownership fix
and pass for both live and expired foreign leases.
- On the final revision, 77 runtime-selection, restart recovery, real
PostgreSQL, and heartbeat boundary tests pass with no skips, including
all local runner process fixtures. The full native executor file passes
all 698 tests.
- Another 91 live-run route tests pass locally. An earlier CI timeout in
that unrelated file passed on retry; the complete final-head CI passed
without that failure.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and
`git diff --check`: passed locally. The map check verifies structure
only.
- Local `pnpm test:run` did not finish: an early attempt had
build-related collection failures, and later full-suite execution was
stopped after complete CI passed. Targeted suites passed after build
preparation. This is not a local full-suite pass.
- The complete [PR
workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38669996667)
passed on `2baffb3652bfeb4705a30ca3706fbda6c3d72aa4`, including all test
shards, build/typecheck, runner verification, and browser E2E. All 55
applicable review/security/CI checks succeeded; two Storybook checks
were skipped.
- [Greptile
Apex](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16349#issuecomment-6180848957):
5/5 on the same final head, with no unresolved findings.
- No live remote provider restart is claimed by the database regression.

## Risks

- A bare executor can no longer take a foreign coordinator lease after
expiry. A verified recovery claim must transfer authority first.
- Existing preparations without the server-owned fencing marker retain
their recovery hold during rolling upgrades.
- Incorrect admission could duplicate provider work. This path requires
a positive durable never-claimed receipt, rejects contradictory launch
evidence, and keeps the executor's existing durable-root verification.
- Previously claimed or incomplete remote recovery evidence remains
blocked. This change does not clear historical terminal holds.
- No schema, API, dependency, or UI changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, code execution,
and browser inspection. The exact serving snapshot ID and context window
size are 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>
Co-authored-by: Devin Foley <devin@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 19:32:39 -07:00
..

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.

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.

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, followed by one H2 backticked ID per product sub-feature. Each capability 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.

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. Do not register entries or 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.