DottaandPaperclip
370fb50ad4
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents use remote MCP tools through a governed gateway. > - The gateway lists tools only while their shared connection is healthy. > - One failed call currently marks the whole connection as unhealthy. > - Later calls to healthy sibling tools then fail with `tool_not_found`. > - This pull request keeps non-authentication call failures on their invocation. > - Agents can continue their work while credential and access gates remain in force. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #10147. Related work: #15462 fixed oversized and malformed response handling. #15448 covers timeout and JSON-RPC health handling together with separate SSE and catalog discovery changes. Its patch still marks fetch failures and HTTP failures as connection errors. #15325 proposed a transport failure counter; it has merge conflicts and has not changed since October 6. #11910 is an older timeout fix with merge conflicts. This PR covers the remaining fetch and HTTP failure paths on current master, with the same narrow call-health rule for timeouts and JSON-RPC failures. It does not include the SSE or discovery changes from #15448. The timeout session-reset check follows the recovery case discussed in #15448. **What happened?** A shared remote MCP connection works until one call has a network failure, timeout, HTTP 503, or JSON-RPC error. Every later call on that connection returns `tool_not_found`, including healthy sibling tools. Connection setup then asks for user attention even though the failure did not prove that credentials need repair. **Expected behavior** The original invocation retains its failure. Authorized sibling tools remain callable. The gateway does not replay an ambiguous action. HTTP 401/403, missing credentials, and explicit insufficient scope keep their access gates. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Give an agent access to two read tools on one remote MCP connection. 2. Make one tool fail with a network error or HTTP 503. 3. Call the other tool in the same gateway session. 4. Before this fix, the second call fails with `tool_not_found` before provider dispatch. **Paperclip version or commit** `master` at `e6dcd1e8e9`. The regression runs against source with synthetic data. **Deployment mode** Any deployment that uses a shared remote MCP connection. This is a core gateway issue. ## What Changed - Preserve connection health after a network failure, timeout, non-authentication HTTP error, or JSON-RPC error from one tool call. - Retain HTTP 401/403 and insufficient-scope health gates. - Retain HTTP 401/403 gates during MCP initialization and its initialized notification, with HTTP 503 controls for both stages. - Discard only the upstream session used by a network failure or timeout. Let the next explicit call initialize again. - Add sibling-tool regression cases, authentication controls, and real HTTP header/body timeout checks. - Update runtime recovery guidance and the feature and access maps. ## Verification - Red: the four new sibling-tool cases failed on the original implementation. Each second call returned HTTP 404 with `tool_not_found`. HTTP 401/403 control cases passed. - Green: the same six-case selection passed after the production change: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/tool-gateway-service.test.ts -t 'keeps sibling MCP tools usable|keeps the connection blocked' --maxWorkers=1`. - The regression checks the actual gateway and embedded PostgreSQL. The injected provider fault preserves the call boundary. It checks failure recording, no automatic replay, catalog retention, and successful sibling dispatch. - The real local HTTP fixture checks cancellation before headers and during a body, then a successful explicit call with a fresh MCP session. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` pass. - Complete nearby suites pass: 166 tests across `tool-gateway-service.test.ts`, `tool-gateway.test.ts`, `remote-mcp-protocol.test.ts`, and `mcp-http.test.ts`, with one test worker. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsc --noEmit` passes after refreshing Runner TypeScript declarations. The first package typecheck used declarations from before the rebase and failed two unchanged native-session call sites; rebuilding that dependency resolved both errors. - The rebased head also passes all 11 selected sibling/authentication/session regressions. - Review regression red: setup-stage HTTP 401/403 controls failed because connection health stayed `ok`; the two setup-stage HTTP 503 controls passed. Green: all six setup controls and the complete 166-test nearby run pass. The fix separately handles typed initialization authentication failures and preserves the existing caller error. The server compiler also passes after this change. - Full repository CI passes on `256a65ccc302c1c31a80e87f1f91411d955028de`: typecheck, build, test shards, Runner checks, browser checks, Canary dry run, and aggregate gates. All checks are terminal: 55 successful, 2 expected skips, and the separate Paperclip Review check is neutral. Greptile is 5/5 on this exact head, with no open findings. - Full repository checks were run in CI. Local verification in this worktree used the focused suites and server compiler to keep parallel work bounded. - This change has no live provider or staging deployment proof. ## Risks - A provider that remains unavailable can stay listed until a health check detects the outage. Each call still fails with its original controlled reason code. - No automatic retry occurs because a failed remote action may already have run. - Already unhealthy connections still need a successful health check after an upgrade. - No schema, credential policy, or permission contract changes. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with tool use and code execution. The runtime does not expose the exact serving model ID or context window. ## 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 feature map
Start here when reproducing a user-facing bug, verifying a change, or deciding which surfaces a fix must cover. Each recipe describes what a person can do, where they can do it, the expected result, and the evidence needed to verify it. Product behavior is still governed by the implementation spec.
The sibling agent access map records APIs, agent entry points and permission boundaries for the same capability IDs. Follow the shared map contract when maintaining either map.
Browse features
Open the published Storybook guide for the assembled feature and capability index. The Markdown recipes in this directory are the authored source. Each has a same-named agent-access companion.
Run node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs to generate local navigation in
maps/generated/feature-map.md, maps/generated/agent-access-map.md, and the
Storybook guide. A new recipe is discovered automatically; do not register it in
this README or maintain counts here.
Before driving a journey
- Use this checkout's isolated test drive for manual product checks. It creates a temporary instance and prints its URL and data directory. Do not guess that a server on port 3100 belongs to you.
- Record the commit, URL, company, login role, relevant experimental settings, adapter, runtime mode, and live versus simulated dependencies. Use disposable tasks and provider resources. A fresh test drive creates a company and CEO, but no task or first run.
- Use the current navigation and company prefix. Paths in recipes omit that prefix. Record whether the streamlined or production shell is selected; Agent Chat, chat connectors, and the combined Inbox/Tasks view have separate gates. A hidden surface is an unmet prerequisite, not a successful test.
- Run the smallest relevant test first. Vitest commands below run from the repository root after installing dependencies. Playwright recipes use their named configuration and its isolated environment, not an unrelated running instance. Reserve expensive runner/provider tests for the behavior at issue.
- Exercise the actual user action, inspect its result, reload, and verify the persisted state or continuation. Use read-only API checks to corroborate UI evidence; creating state through the API does not prove the creation UI.
For agent-driven acceptance work, start with the Paperclip verification skill for an isolated launch, ownership/readiness checks, browser driving, evidence, and cleanup. It uses this directory as its feature map. The existing dev-workspace run/verify skill and evaluation skill describe runtime ownership and evidence handling. Reuse them; this map introduces no environment launcher, credentials, scheduled job, or second test framework.
Evidence contract
Report each entry point as passed, failed, blocked (with its missing prerequisite), or not run. Include the feature filename and entry-point ID, commit/environment, user action, expected and observed result, command/exit code, and evidence links. Screenshots or traces should show both the action and the discriminating result. Include task/run/request IDs when relevant, without secrets.
A fix is verified across its affected surfaces only when each has evidence or an explicit reason it does not apply. Shared code alone does not prove parity. Keep product regressions visible; do not change the recipe to bless a failure. For Paperclip-assigned work, attach evidence through the artifact workflow.
Inventory and remaining depth
The generated maps/generated/coverage.json lists the current non-test TSX page
modules and the recipes that directly reference each one. An unreferenced module
is a documentation candidate, not proof that its feature is absent or untested.
Remaining workflow limits live in each recipe. Inventory and example associations
describe documentation scope, not runtime health.
Maintaining the reference
The map documents user journeys. It does not execute them automatically; generated inventories record documentation scope rather than live test health.
When maintaining a recipe, compare its entry points and expected results with
the current source. Check that linked tests still exercise the stated behavior
and that local references still exist. Keep the same-named agent access companion
and stable sub-feature IDs aligned when behavior or access changes. Source-only
access inventory remains distinct from live verification. Run
node scripts/check-maps.mjs after map edits for structural/reference checks;
follow the shared contract for the source and behavioral checks it cannot perform.
Each recipe starts with a small frontmatter navigation record, then an H1:
---
navigation: {"section":"Tasks and conversations","sectionOrder":20,"order":10}
---
The H1 supplies the feature title, and the first paragraph supplies its summary. Orders are local to the section; leave gaps for additions. Equal orders use the stable filename as a tie-breaker. Keep a section's name/order consistent across its recipes. A new feature or capability needs only its recipe and companion.
Optional ### Storybook verification guidance lives inside the recipe's Gotchas
section. Each level-four heading contains a backtick-quoted capability key and
has Scope (ui, cli, or browser),
Storybook, Production, and Sources fields. These are verification instructions
and intentional scope limits, not run results or a required story for every API.
The generated gap report combines this guidance with current story associations.
After frontmatter, each recipe starts with an H1 and a user-visible description, then exactly:
- Sub-features — stable backticked IDs and observable behavior/states.
- How to get to it (user POV) — one H3 backticked entry-point ID per surface.
- Driving it with — starts with
Preconditions:; repeat each entry-point H3, withAutomated:andManual:paragraphs. Name test scope and gaps honestly. - Gotchas — misleading look-alikes, feature gates, and invalid evidence.
New or updated entries follow
Poteto's feature-map examples.
Existing entries with a Driving it heading can adopt the named harness when
their recipes are updated. The original format was inspired by
Omnigent's feature map.
Paperclip's recipes and checks follow its own task model and test infrastructure.