mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-07 07:23:08 +02:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
5cffd5c72e
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane for AI agent companies > - Sandbox providers move files between the host and the sandbox > - The runtime needs advisory data for which sync paths are writable > - The host already knows that intent when it prepares the sync map > - Daytona can record that intent for later use > - This pull request adds the advisory access field and collects writable paths > - The benefit is that later runtime work can use the data without changing current flow ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists for this change. The description below follows the feature-request template fields. ### Problem or motivation An agent runs inside an ephemeral sandbox. Some sandbox paths keep agent changes; other paths do not. Today the runtime has no declared signal for which sync destinations the agent may change and keep. A later feedback wrapper needs this signal to give the agent real-time feedback when a write lands on a non-persistent path. ### Proposed solution Add an optional advisory `access: "rw" | "ro"` field to the sync file-mapping types. The host sets `rw` for the workspace, git-history, and asset destinations, and `ro` for referenced-project trees. An absent value defaults to `ro`. The Daytona provider collects the `rw` target directories into a per-lease writable set for later use. This change adds the metadata and the collection only. No execution path reads the writable set yet, so runtime behavior does not change. ### Alternatives considered Derive a static writable set in provider code. This alternative is weaker: the layer that authors each sync destination already knows the intent, so a per-operation declaration is more accurate and does not hard-code a path list. ### Roadmap alignment This is the first step toward an advisory sandbox feedback wrapper. The wrapper is best-effort and adds no security. The ephemeral sandbox stays the only boundary. ### Additional context The field is advisory metadata. It does not change the file transfer and adds no security. ## What Changed - Added an optional `access` field to the sync file mapping types. - Set the workspace, git history, and asset destinations to writable. - Set referenced project destinations to read only. - Added a writable set store in the Daytona provider. - Recorded the parent directory of each writable sync mapping during sync in. ## Verification - The handoff reports these checks before push. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils exec vitest run sandbox-managed-runtime.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk exec tsc --noEmit` - `vitest run src/plugin.test.ts` in the Daytona package - `tsc --noEmit` in the Daytona package ## Risks - Low risk. - The new field is advisory. - The writable set store is best effort and in memory. - A cold store falls back to the workspace baseline. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, tool use, code execution. ## 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 linked existing issues or described the issue in the PR - [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [ ] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [ ] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>