mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-10 12:07:09 +02:00
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The runner package already provides the production protocol and execution spine. > - Contributors still need stable SDK surfaces, deterministic test tools, and local inspection tools. > - Those surfaces share generated contracts and must change as one package boundary. > - This pull request adds the package-local SDK, labs, examples, and drift checks. > - The benefit is a reviewable developer platform that does not change application execution selection. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** `packages/paperclip-runner` — runner SDK, conformance tools, and developer tooling. **Problem or motivation** The production runner spine is present, but package consumers cannot build deterministic integrations, inspect sessions, or verify provider-neutral behavior through supported surfaces. **Proposed solution** Add browser, React, standalone, live-session, scenario, conformance, and evaluation surfaces. Add generated contract inventories and package-local verification scripts. Keep production application routing unchanged. **Alternatives considered** We considered splitting each generated catalog, SDK surface, and demo into separate pull requests. Those changes share exports, fixtures, and drift gates. Splitting them would create intermediate package states that do not build. **Roadmap alignment** No overlapping item appears in `ROADMAP.md`. This work extends the runner package that is already on `master`. ## What Changed - Add browser, React, standalone, live-session, and issue-thread SDK surfaces. - Add deterministic mock control-plane, scenario, conformance, replay, and evaluation tools. - Add bounded Codex, OpenCode, and ACPX development transports and fixtures. - Keep deferred managed-provider execution fail-closed. Persisted compatibility data remains readable. - Add generated capability inventories with their source files and drift checks. - Add examples, package documentation, browser checks, and clean-consumer checks. - Preserve the reviewed protocol bounds, replay compatibility aliases, process environment isolation, and semantic redaction limits. - Update the ACPX package patch that the existing workspace patch registry already tracks. - Do not change `pnpm-lock.yaml`, repository workflows, server runtime selection, or the application UI. ## Verification GitHub Actions is the verification authority for this pull request. The repository CI, package TypeScript and Rust checks, package tests, generated-output drift checks, browser checks, security scans, and Greptile review must pass on the exact head. Local test suites were not run because this series uses parallel GitHub Actions for verification. ## Risks This is a large greenfield package change. The main risks are public export drift, generated-output drift, and optional React consumer compatibility. Package boundary checks, clean-consumer checks, and browser tests cover those risks. Production adapter selection and server execution are outside this pull request. ## Stack 1. **This PR:** runner SDK and developer tooling. 2. [Codex production server integration](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12616). 3. [Provider-neutral task-thread UI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12617). ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, high-reasoning mode, with tool use and 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 described the issue in-PR following the feature request template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id - [ ] 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 risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge
180 lines
7.9 KiB
Markdown
180 lines
7.9 KiB
Markdown
# Capability Clean-Start Tutorial: Capability Contract, Mock Control Plane, and Scenario Explorer
|
|
|
|
**Time to first success: about 5 minutes.** Two commands take you from a clean
|
|
checkout to 106 passing conformance cases and a browser you can click through.
|
|
The whole tutorial runs from the repository root. It starts no Paperclip
|
|
service, contacts no Paperclip control plane, clones no external eval
|
|
repository, and holds no provider credential. Everything it needs is checked in
|
|
under `packages/paperclip-runner/`.
|
|
|
|
Capability does not integrate the runner into Paperclip. It builds a package-local
|
|
model of what a native Paperclip run *would* do — a deterministic mock control
|
|
plane, a transport-neutral semantic tool catalog, an authorization engine, a
|
|
106-case conformance suite derived from the Paperclip Evals corpus, and a
|
|
read-only browser explorer over all of it. Real integration is future upload integration and
|
|
requires separate approval. See
|
|
[the future binding boundary reference](../capability-future-binding-boundary.md).
|
|
|
|
## What you need
|
|
|
|
- Node.js 20 or newer and pnpm 9 or newer. This tutorial was verified with Node
|
|
22.22.2 and pnpm 9.15.4.
|
|
- No Rust toolchain. Every command in this tutorial is TypeScript/Node only. (A
|
|
full `verify` still builds Rust, but nothing here does.)
|
|
- No network access after `pnpm install`.
|
|
|
|
Install the package workspace from the repository root:
|
|
|
|
```sh
|
|
pnpm install --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner --lockfile=false --offline --ignore-scripts --dev
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## 1. Prove the 106-case conformance suite (about 1 minute)
|
|
|
|
```sh
|
|
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:capability-evals
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
This runs the eval-derived conformance suite entirely in-process against the
|
|
mock control plane. Expected final line:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Test Files 1 passed (1)
|
|
Tests 1 passed (1)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
The single test file drives all 106 cases across the 16 eval groups. To see the
|
|
per-group counts, assertion classes, the fake-agent operation matrix, and the
|
|
bounded Codex binding sample, generate the parity report:
|
|
|
|
```sh
|
|
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner report:capability-evals
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Expected final line:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Capability eval conformance passed: 106 cases across 16 groups.
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
The report is written to
|
|
`.paperclip-local/evidence/capability/eval-parity-report.{json,md}`. It is a
|
|
generated-on-demand artifact, not a committed file; a clean checkout does not
|
|
contain it. Delete it before you run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner docs:validate`
|
|
(the report carries no OKF frontmatter and would otherwise fail the knowledge
|
|
bundle check — see [Known gaps](#known-gaps-and-boundaries)).
|
|
|
|
The 16 groups and case counts are fixed by the capability contract:
|
|
|
|
| Group | Cases | Group | Cases | Group | Cases | Group | Cases |
|
|
| --- | ---: | --- | ---: | --- | ---: | --- | ---: |
|
|
| hb | 5 | co | 6 | st | 8 | cm | 6 |
|
|
| se | 4 | su | 4 | bl | 5 | dp | 3 |
|
|
| ix | 9 | ap | 6 | ar | 4 | er | 9 |
|
|
| rf | 22 | mh | 4 | rs | 3 | wk | 8 |
|
|
|
|
## 2. Open the scenario explorer (about 2 minutes)
|
|
|
|
```sh
|
|
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner demo:scenarios
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Open `http://127.0.0.1:4183/scenario-explorer/`. The explorer is read-only. It
|
|
runs each scenario in the browser against the same mock control plane and
|
|
renders the run artifact; it never re-judges parity and never leaves its own
|
|
origin. Walk this path:
|
|
|
|
1. **Home.** Confirm 16 group facets whose counts sum to 106.
|
|
2. **Pick a scenario.** Filter to `ap` and open `ap-mcp-gate-01`. The
|
|
authorization view shows a deny row and a "1 deny" tab chip; the typed
|
|
denial card carries no task data.
|
|
3. **Read a heartbeat.** Open `hb-context-01`. The control-plane checkout entry
|
|
is labelled "no agent tool exists for this" — it is control-plane-owned, not
|
|
a semantic tool.
|
|
4. **Inspect a manager scenario.** Open `rf-api-mgr-heartbeat-01`. Optional
|
|
tools are listed with the grant that unlocked them, alongside the
|
|
control-plane "no tool" list and a traceability panel.
|
|
5. **Confirm the credential boundary.** Codex mode is a disabled option with a
|
|
stated reason. `localStorage` holds no run artifact or grant, and the page
|
|
makes no request beyond its own assets.
|
|
|
|
The explorer imports the frozen `0.1.2` SDK through the package-local
|
|
`@paperclip-runner-local/capability` alias — deliberately not the published package
|
|
name. See [the browser explorer reference](../capability-scenario-explorer.md).
|
|
|
|
## 3. Read what each surface guarantees
|
|
|
|
The explorer renders four surfaces produced by the runtime. Each has a
|
|
package-local reference page:
|
|
|
|
- [Capability disposition](../capability-disposition.md) — how every
|
|
skill/reference behavior and eval case is classified as control-plane-owned,
|
|
always-agent-tool, or optional-agent-tool, and how the generated contract is
|
|
produced and checked.
|
|
- [Mock ControlPlanePort](../capability-mock-control-plane-port.md) — the
|
|
deterministic in-memory adapter, its entity domains, and its boundary.
|
|
- [Semantic tool catalog](../capability-semantic-tools.md) — the
|
|
transport-neutral tools an agent may call.
|
|
- [Authorization and exposure](../capability-authorization-and-exposure.md) —
|
|
grants, typed denials, and secret redaction.
|
|
- [Eval conformance](../capability-eval-conformance.md) — how the 106 cases are
|
|
derived from the checked-in traceability derivative with no external repo.
|
|
|
|
## 4. Run the full focused verification set
|
|
|
|
Every command below is offline, deterministic, and package-local. The
|
|
[verification commands reference](../capability-verification-commands.md) lists
|
|
each one with its purpose and expected result.
|
|
|
|
```sh
|
|
# Capability contract: completeness, uniqueness, one-to-one MCP folds, no drift.
|
|
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner check:capability-inventory
|
|
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:capability-inventory
|
|
|
|
# Mock control plane adapter and shared ControlPlanePort conformance.
|
|
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner exec vitest run \
|
|
src/conformance/control-plane-port.test.ts \
|
|
src/mock-core/capability-mock-control-plane-adapter.test.ts
|
|
|
|
# Semantic tool catalog and authorization/redaction engine.
|
|
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner exec vitest run \
|
|
src/tools/capability-semantic-tools.test.ts
|
|
|
|
# 106-case conformance and the parity/fake-agent/bounded-Codex report.
|
|
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:capability-evals
|
|
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner report:capability-evals
|
|
|
|
# Scenario runtime, explorer components, and route determinism (49 tests).
|
|
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:scenarios
|
|
|
|
# Browser information architecture, accessibility, determinism, and boundary.
|
|
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:browser:scenarios
|
|
|
|
# Deterministic 24-image screenshot acceptance set.
|
|
# Recorded evidence generation is deferred from this release.
|
|
|
|
# Documentation links.
|
|
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner docs:validate
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Known gaps and boundaries
|
|
|
|
- **Reports are local.** `report:capability-evals` writes ignored output under
|
|
`.paperclip-local/evidence/`; `docs:validate` does not scan it.
|
|
- **Codex mode is disabled.** The explorer offers a bounded real-Codex binding
|
|
sample only through `report:capability-evals`; the browser holds no credential
|
|
and the in-page Codex mode is inert with a stated reason.
|
|
- **No Paperclip integration.** Nothing here touches a real control plane,
|
|
database, or provider. future upload integration (ACPX) binds the real adapter behind the same
|
|
seam and requires separate CTO approval.
|
|
|
|
## Where this sits
|
|
|
|
- Plan: Capability plan, issue `TASK-16897` (see its `#document-plan` document).
|
|
- Child issues: 7A capability inventory (TASK-16898), 7B UX map (TASK-16899),
|
|
7C mock adapter (TASK-16900), 7D semantic tools and authorization (TASK-16901,
|
|
security gate TASK-16902, remediation TASK-16909), 7E conformance suite
|
|
(TASK-16903), 7F browser explorer (TASK-16904, UX gate TASK-16905), 7G docs and
|
|
evidence (TASK-16906), 7H clean-room QA (TASK-16907), Capability checkpoint
|
|
(TASK-16908).
|