Files
PaperClipAI/maps
Nicky LeachandPaperclip 35ab90ad0f Map runtime activity to authorized task plugin panels (#18131)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agents and tasks.
> - Plugins contribute views to the task sidebar.
> - A ready view can belong to an earlier task.
> - Runner records activity under its authenticated run.
> - This PR maps that activity to installed task-panel declarations.
> - The sidebar checks readiness after current-run use and restores use
after reconnect.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Builds on merged contract #18129 and Runner publisher #18050. This PR
targets
master and is ready for review. Earlier combined verification is
retained in
[the verification
archive](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18050#issuecomment-6489369676).

**Subsystem affected**

Run-event reads, plugin task contributions and the task sidebar.

**Problem or motivation**

Readiness polling can show a view left ready by another task. Reload and
reconnect must recover current-run use without losing concurrent live
activity.

**Proposed solution**

Map recorded activity to installed task-panel declarations. Merge
authorized
history and live activity, then perform bounded readiness checks for the
running agent. Preserve the existing read-only view.

## What Changed

- Add optional `{ namespace, activityKey }` activation mappings to
task-panel
declarations. Legacy declarations remain valid but contribute no task
panel.
- Add `view=plugin-panels` to the existing run-events route. Preserve
run-read and
telemetry-read authorization, secret redaction and private-run denial.
Map
activity to installed contributions and return at most 128 panel
identities.
- Scope activation caches to current panel versions and activity
declarations.
Preserve unchanged panels during unrelated plugin updates and history
reads.
- Merge history and live hints without losing concurrent activations.
Filter by
  company, task, run and agent. Restore history on mount and reconnect.
- Replace periodic availability checks with up to three readiness
attempts after
activity. Fresh activity restarts settled transient failures. Pending
checks,
  successful readiness and HTTP 4xx failures are left alone.
- Reuse live run updates with the panel cache key. Recover only panel
history
after a pending subscription read. Mark expected not-ready query results
so
  the global error reporter skips them; real failures remain reportable.
- Preserve current-run dismissal and the read-only plugin view. Update
manifest
  comments and producer/consumer documentation.

## Verification

- Current head: `5e04d757c`, based on master `09c05c550`. Range
comparison
confirmed all six feature commits were unchanged by the rebase. The
final
follow-up keys readiness by the plugin installation ID and availability
path.
- `cd ui && node ../node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run
src/hooks/useTaskPluginPanels.test.tsx`
— all 45 cases passed. `cd ui && node ../node_modules/typescript/bin/tsc
-b` passed.
- The shared query-client and live-update recovery selection passed 96
cases on
  `49c544cd2`. Token gates passed before the final hook-only changes.
- Earlier focused verification passed 57 manifest cases, 69
database/history cases,
event-registry cases and route authorization cases, including
private-run denial.
- Regression coverage includes subscription/history races, task changes
during
recovery, unfocused run completion, bounded readiness retries, denied
reads,
expected not-ready responses, changed activity mappings, unchanged panel
preservation, old cache scopes, and same-version route or installation
changes.
- [Current-head
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40942001707)
passed: 54 successful checks, two skips, no failures or pending checks.
- [Standard and final
review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18131#issuecomment-6489842168)
both scored 5/5 on `5e04d757c`. The final review used the Apex tier,
added no
comments, and left no unresolved findings. The PR is conflict-free and
ready for review.
- Local checks stay targeted. GitHub CI provides the broad build, test,
typecheck,
browser and Runner coverage. No deployment or live-provider acceptance
is claimed.

<details>
<summary>Retained failures and recovery evidence</summary>

- `ac9329548` twice failed a browser reload assertion while conversation
history
was concealed. Master fixed its readiness wait in #17923. The approve
journey
then passed locally on `fea63a418` with installed Chrome (1 passed, 39
seconds).
All eight browser shards passed in later CI. The browser test is outside
this diff.
- A canary checkout failed with Git HTTP 408; its unchanged-head retry
passed.
- `de07d09fa` failed the mobile Cases card click after a ten-second
stability wait.
The same read-only journey passed locally on that exact head (1 passed,
26 seconds).
Its unchanged-head CI retry passed 22 cases, with one skip. The original
artifact
  is retained; the cause of that click timeout is not established.
- [CI on
`49c544cd2`](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40903679075)
passed 54 checks with two skips. CI also passed on `de07d09fa` after the
recorded retry.
- The `1e59ab441` merge checkout passed all browser and server suites.
Runner
shard 2 passed 2,252 cases and timed out waiting for a
controller-recovery command.
The test had landed on master in #18161 after the former branch base.
Rebasing
aligned the local checkout with that code; Runner shard 2 then passed on
`fcf7380d3`.
The original timeout cause remains unproven; no unrelated timeout was
changed.
- [CI on
`fcf7380d3`](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40940235193)
recorded runner shutdown signals in typecheck and a workspace shard. A
chat
recovery test observed a null wake deadline, and one Runner transport
fixture
failed during close. Those separate assertion failures remain
unexplained.
All of those jobs passed on the final readiness-key head. Those later
passes
establish recovery; they do not prove the cause of the earlier assertion
failures.
- Local browser setup first stopped at pnpm version-download
verification, then a
sandbox IPC restriction, then a missing bundled browser. Installed pnpm
9.15.4
  and Chrome completed the journeys. No dependency files were changed.
- Earlier optional-property TypeScript errors were corrected. Embedded
PostgreSQL
needed its install hook run from its package directory. Older CI also
recorded
fixture-cleanup lock timeouts, attention-fixture timeouts, and canceled
server
shards after runner shutdown. The parent fixed its FIFO snapshot-copy
failure
before merge. The linked verification archive retains earlier combined
evidence.

</details>

## Risks

Activity is a hint and grants no access. Missing plugins, denied reads
and
unavailable views contribute no panel. Older runs without activity
records show
no task plugin tab. A used view stays available for the running task;
reconnect
reconciles readiness. Matching producer and consumer builds are
required. No
migration, dependency, image publication or deployment is included.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools and code
execution.
The exact serving snapshot is not exposed.

## 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>
2026-10-29 13:56:48 -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.

The chat scenario catalog adds natural-language requests, starting context and expected conversational outcomes for the same capability IDs. It lives with Product E2E as planning data; a scenario reference is neither a registered execution nor evidence that a journey passed.

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.

Capability identifiers

The feature ID is the recipe filename without .md, such as onboarding. The full capability ID joins that feature ID and a Sub-features key with /: the company key in feature-map/onboarding.md is onboarding/company. Its agent-access-map/onboarding.md companion uses the same local company key. The feature-map index lists the existing feature and full capability IDs.

Each child page states Feature ID: `onboarding`. after its introduction or product-map link. In feature recipes, show the full ID beside the parsed local key: - `company`: `onboarding/company` — create a company. In access companions and Storybook verification guidance, keep the existing local heading and put Capability ID: `onboarding/company`. beneath it. These labels make the existing identifiers visible without changing keys, anchors, or ID generation.

Use full capability IDs in cross-feature references, Storybook annotations, tests, issues, PRs, and verification evidence. Both segments use lowercase letters, digits, and hyphens. Keep filenames and keys stable when display titles or navigation labels change; renaming either changes the capability ID.

Entry-point IDs describe a surface, such as web-wizard, and are scoped to their recipe. Reference them with a recipe link, such as onboarding.md#web-wizard, and record the capability exercised separately. Navigation section labels are not capability IDs. See IDs and references for examples.

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, and its feature ID, followed by one H2 backticked local key per product sub-feature. Each capability starts with its full capability ID and 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. Update the corresponding chat scenarios when their request, assumptions or expected outcome changes; use multiple cases for meaningfully different starting conditions rather than treating an API path as conversational coverage.

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. Keep the feature-map README's readable ID index aligned with those sources; it does not register entries for generation. Do not 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.