DottaandPaperclip
cd12432947
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and keeps their results attached to tasks. > - Native tools return links to saved task documents. > - Completion feedback asks agents to include those links. > - The file-delivery validator treated every such relative link as a workspace path. > - A valid document and CSV result could therefore fail completion when it cited the supplied document link. > - This change derives document links from the same verified publication projection for guidance and validation. > - Requested files still need their own verified delivery evidence. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** The native document tool and completion feedback produce a link such as `/EX/issues/EX-1#document-output`. When a task also requests a downloadable CSV, citing that link causes completion to reject it as a workspace-only file. This occurs even when the document is published and the file has a valid current-run delivery receipt. **Expected behavior** Accept a server-derived document link only when it names the current company/task and a currently attached revision with a matching native publication receipt. Keep the separate requested-file requirement and all foreign, stale, missing, and workspace-file guards. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Save a task document through the native `write_document` tool. 2. Publish a CSV through `register_deliverable`. 3. Ask completion feedback for the final-response guidance. 4. Cite its returned document link alongside the file receipt in the next completion report. 5. The old validator rejects the valid document link as a workspace-only file. **Paperclip version or commit** Current source checkout. The regression exercises the real native document producer and completion validator. **Deployment mode** Local source verification on macOS arm64 with Node 24.22.1, pinned pnpm 9.15.4, locked dependencies, temporary PostgreSQL, and a controlled remote file-reader boundary. No live provider or hosted deployment is included. ## What Changed - Derive the canonical document href in the existing company/task/current-revision publication query. - Use that same verified href in completion guidance and reference validation. - Keep file registration and hash/size receipt requirements separate from document evidence. - Cover evidence, artifact, and criterion references; foreign companies/tasks; bogus keys; local paths; and lost current-revision publication proof. - Exercise actual native document writes and CSV registration, including attachment download query and fragment links. - Update the execution contract and the document feature/access maps. ## Verification - Red before the production edit: native completion generated a real saved-document link, then rejected the same link alongside a valid published file. The failure was the workspace-only-file guard. - Green: 210 tests across native completion feedback, explicit output validation, and the existing native file-handoff suite pass. These use real PostgreSQL and native tool receipts; the remote file reader is controlled. - A saved document link alone still fails the explicit CSV requirement. A document whose current revision lacks its publication receipt is rejected. Foreign task/company links, missing keys, malformed links, and workspace paths remain rejected. - Full workspace typecheck, server typecheck, and production build pass. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, `node scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs`, and `git diff --check` pass. Map checks establish structure only. - Full `pnpm test:run` is running separately. There is no full-suite verdict yet. CI and review are pending. - Hosted acceptance and any recovery of existing tasks remain separate steps. This PR does not change final-response recovery or scheduling. ## Risks - An overly broad URL exception could admit foreign or unpublished output. The validator accepts only exact hrefs from the authenticated publication projection. - Document evidence could hide a missing requested file. A separate regression keeps that delivery gate effective. - The shared projection adds current task/company joins. Existing document feedback and publication tests cover those consumers. ## Model Used OpenAI `gpt-6.1-sol` through Codex, with reasoning, code editing, shell execution, and automated tests. The context-window size is 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 - [ ] 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.