Files
PaperClipAI/maps
DottaandPaperclip 4460785534 fix(skills): preserve referenced files in large repository imports (#16308)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agents use skills imported from project repositories.
> - Large repositories fall back to isolated skill folders.
> - That fallback drops shared files and turns advisory links into
import failures.
> - This pull request retains bounded referenced files and keeps missing
references advisory.
> - Users can import valid skills such as test-audit without editing the
source repository.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16066. Refs #16256. Refs #16288. Related draft #15730 adds
optional reference selection to individual skill packages. This fix
applies automatic repository fallback and does not add that selection
UI.

**What happened?**

A project source showed 86 warnings. It rejected 23 skills solely
because references were absent from the isolated package. It also
treated web routes and inline Markdown examples as files. For
test-audit, repository scripts were resolved inside the skill folder.

**Expected behavior**

Retain referenced files that fit the package limits. Missing references
must not block an otherwise valid selected skill. Preserve content
validation and installed shared files.

**Steps to reproduce**

Import paperclipai/paperclip at commit
09a2f0b7b0 as a repository source. Select
test-audit. Inspect its references and saved files. Repeat with a skill
whose optional reference is missing.

## What Changed

- Add a bounded fallback that keeps skill folders and transitive
Markdown references with their original repository paths.
- Resolve existing repository-root resource paths. Ignore site-relative
web links and inline Markdown examples.
- Keep missing references advisory, including explicit imports and
automatic project imports.
- Share fallback with file previews. Reinspect cached dependency
failures at an unchanged upstream commit.
- Retain existing versions when fallback cannot preserve installed
shared files. Keep file limits, content audits, authorization and work
budgets.
- Update product contracts and Skills maps. No schema or public API
changes.

## Verification

- Red/green: three original regression cases failed before the fix and
passed afterward. Two review controls also reproduced omitted directory
siblings and duplicate blob reads before their fixes.
- Focused scanner, repository package, persistence, project
synchronization and GitHub access tests: 126 cases passed across local
and isolated Linux runs.
- Full recursive typecheck and `pnpm build` passed locally on
`555bd3fc90314dbf23ed0ffe7034429946c1a471`. The [full Paperclip CI
workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38596749890)
passed on that head, including all general, serialized, Runner and eight
browser test shards. The duplicate local `pnpm test:run` was stopped
after CI completed (exit 143); it is not claimed as a completed local
full-suite pass.
- Real GitHub scan at the pinned public commit: 77 skills, 454 retained
files, 9,117,635 bytes. test-audit has no missing references. The full
source reports 23 warnings, including remaining file validation and
genuine missing-reference notices.
- Local browser: scanned the public repository, selected test-audit and
create-issue-interaction-ui, and imported both. The second skill
retained an advisory missing-reference warning. Both remained installed
after reload. The saved package exposes `scripts/run-vitest-stable.mjs`
(25,813 bytes) and `scripts/general-server-shard.mjs` (2,813 bytes). No
GitHub responses were mocked. No model execution was needed for this
import fix.
- Map checks and Git whitespace checks passed. Greptile is 5/5 on the
current head with both review findings resolved. The external Superagent
security scan concluded neutral/inconclusive after its agent exceeded
the prompt deadline. A check-run retry request returned HTTP 404. All
Paperclip CI gates passed, but merge is held pending a conclusive
security scan; this is not an all-checks-green claim.

## Risks

- Dependency detection covers explicit Markdown links and resource
paths. It does not infer all script imports or runtime dependencies.
- Referenced content can exceed package limits. The existing bounds
still apply, and warnings disclose omissions.
- Content validation still rejects invalid entrypoints and omits
rejected support files. This change does not make every upstream skill
importable.
- No migration is required. Existing sources with the old dependency
error are inspected again on refresh.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The runtime did not expose the exact serving
model ID or context window. Used reasoning, code editing, terminal
execution and browser tools. No subagents were used.

## 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>
2026-10-14 12:53:04 -05:00
..

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.