## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their task workspaces. > - Isolated Git worktrees and private repository copies remain on the host after tasks finish. > - These files can fill the disk even when every commit is available upstream. > - Cleanup must retain unique files, local Git state, live work, and recovery data. > - This pull request records and verifies an exact-commit restoration recipe before expiration. > - Normal reopening restores that commit even after upstream advances. > - The benefit is lower host disk use while finished tasks remain available for later work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #10285 and #2022. Follows #16433 for skill-cache expiration. Related #11936 provides separate host-local cleanup tooling; this change extends the existing company-scoped lifecycle worker and normal workspace reopening. ROADMAP.md does not specify a competing implementation. ## What Changed - Add opt-in expiration for verified Paperclip-owned Git worktrees after their whole task tree has been done or cancelled for 24 hours. - Preserve active and scheduled runs, previews, pending reopening, unresolved recovery, dirty files, unknown ignored files, and unsupported or unique Git state. - Verify an authenticated fetch in a fresh object store. Save repository identity, exact commit, branch, and ownership before any deletion. - Rename eligible files into recorded managed trash. Resume interrupted cleanup under source and lifecycle locks. - Expire private base clones only after consumer, file, reference, reflog, and object checks pass. Preserve shared project base clones. - Rebuild missing bases and worktrees through normal reopening at the recorded commit. Return an explicit retryable error when repository access fails. - Add independent workspace/base switches, dry-run reports, reclaimed-byte counts, and operational documentation. No table, public API, UI, or recovery-retention change. ## Verification - Real local bare remote plus Postgres: create at A, advance upstream to B, expire the worktree and private base, reopen at A, then make and retain a subsequent commit. - Final lifecycle suite: all 20 tests passed in 46.41 seconds at `d72947a2e45be5d0c912debb03c46b15863b4798`. Review fixes cover second-cycle expiration, newer-branch recovery, normal preparation after restoration, branch adoption, and Git administration path controls. Eleven existing branch reconciliation controls also passed. Covers unique files and Git state, live descendants, scheduled runs, recovery, previews, unauthorized access, upstream failure, concurrent reopening, interrupted deletion, shared bases, and nested private worktrees. - Final guard regressions: 3 affected tests passed. Existing workspace/runtime/preparation/source controls: 328 tests passed in 238.69 seconds. - Full repository typecheck and build passed locally. The full local test attempt did not pass: initial native-session cases hit macOS Postgres shared-memory exhaustion, source changes invalidated two discovery cases, and the checkout disappeared near the end. The final-code retry of the remaining skill and unrelated controls passed all 103 tests. All checks passed on this exact head, including typecheck, general and serialized tests, Runner checks, build, canary dry-run, browser E2E, and security scans. Greptile reviewed the head at 5/5 with all findings resolved. - Fixed a blocking CI policy false positive for `docker-compose-secrets.test.mjs`. The test still rejects GitHub secret expressions, including dot, bracket, and multiline forms. Its full 15-test suite passes. - Map validation and `git diff --check` passed. - Staging dry-run inspection, measured reclamation, and ordinary product acceptance remain pending. No live acceptance is claimed. ## Risks - Git restoration depends on continued upstream availability and credentials. Cleanup skips unverified commits; restoration never substitutes the default branch. - File deletion requires multiple conservative proofs. Unknown or unsupported state is retained and can limit reclamation. - Source and lifecycle locks serialize preparation, reopening, and expiration. Remote verification has a deadline but can delay work on the same source. - Start with both expiration switches disabled. When enabled, dry-run remains the default. Rollback disables further deletion while retaining restoration support. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, tool use, and code execution. The exact backend model 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 (focused tests; full local limitation documented above) - [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.