Files
PaperClipAI/maps
Nicky LeachandPaperclip 5fbece9dcc Synchronize assigned skills through agent runtime hooks (#16501)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages shared skills and agent assignments.
> - Runtime plugins need installed skills before a task starts.
> - Skill content can change without changing the agent row.
> - Source access and version pins also affect delivered files.
> - This pull request feeds those changes into the durable runtime
stream.
> - The runtime reader resolves the same immutable skill sources used
for execution.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Builds on merged PR #16499. This pull request now targets `master` and
contains only the five skill synchronization commits.

**Problem**

Plugins receive no durable notification when an assigned skill changes.
A saved assignment can also become inaccessible after private-source
access changes.

**Proposed solution**

Invalidate referencing agents at installed skill mutations. Invalidate
inherited access when source bindings, project privacy, or policy
change. Return authorized skill sources and version IDs through the
owning runtime reader.

**Alternatives considered**

Activity-only subscriptions miss service writers. Per-task
synchronization adds preparation work. Copying current files would
ignore version pins.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends existing skills, source synchronization, and plugin runtime
support.

## What Changed

- Defer multi-skill source runtime hooks until commit, after publication
holds all skill rows. Keep file-save journaling immediate to preserve
filesystem rollback.

- Add transactional invalidations for skill content, companion files,
versions, rename, deletion, policy, source access, and pin-setting
changes.
- Recognize canonical keys and supported legacy aliases.
- Reuse the execution skill resolver, current agent access, and instance
version-pin rules.
- Resolve and materialize sources outside the agent row lock. Recheck
ownership and runtime revision afterward.
- Keep task-only mentions and running-task snapshots in the execution
path.
- Document conservative invalidations for pinned assignments and
inherited access.

## Verification

- Rebased onto origin/master `9f4a956b90`, which contains merged PR
#16499. All five commits are unchanged according to `git range-diff`; no
conflict resolutions or source changes were needed.
- On rebased head `58b065941`, all 237 focused tests passed: runtime
skill hooks/source publication (41), plus content service, assignment
routes, policy routes, and project source access (196).
- Server typecheck passed after rebuilding Runner with the installed
Rust toolchain. Migration numbering/safety and map checks passed;
snapshot pruning made no changes. Migration CLI checks required local
IPC permission.
- Real PostgreSQL coverage includes concurrent source
publication/version saves, policy-only tightening/restoration,
referencing-agent fanout, company isolation, no-op counters, supporting
files, rename/deletion, rollback, private-source access, pinned/latest
bytes, and unassignment.
- Earlier stack validation passed workspace typecheck/build. Fresh
hosted CI and review must verify the rebased head before handoff.
- The broad local suite was previously limited by an unchanged
diagnostic test that rejects "private" in an error stack under this
/private/tmp worktree; that unchanged suite passed all 108 tests in the
original checkout. Hosted full-suite checks provide exact-head
verification.
- Diff whitespace and full PR secret/PII scan passed.
- All hosted CI/security checks are green on `58b065941`; fresh standard
Greptile and Apex both returned 5/5 with no findings or unresolved
threads. The PR targets master and is mergeable without conflicts.

## Risks

- Apply migration 0348 after the runtime-stream migration in #16499.
- Content invalidations include pinned assignments. The resolved version
stays pinned; consumers can avoid writes when its version/hash is
unchanged.
- Project access and source changes invalidate only agents assigned
skills from the affected sources. Company policy still invalidates the
company. Source polling bookkeeping and popularity counters do not
create work.
- The reader rebuilds installed caches without upstream requests.
Concurrent changes cause a bounded retry and then a conflict.
- Private transport integration and live remote computer qualification
remain separate.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository inspection, code
execution, and testing. The exact deployment model ID and context window
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 references)
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused suites; broad
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>
2026-10-16 08:28:47 -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.

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.

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, followed by one H2 backticked ID per product sub-feature. Each capability 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.

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. Do not register entries or 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.