mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-28 20:21:50 +01:00
DottaandPaperclip
623f1dc289
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents can propose secrets and bindings for approval. > - Pending proposals already contain their expiry and encrypted value. > - The server scans for expired proposals on every maintenance tick, even when none exist. > - Committed proposal changes and saved expiry times provide the required triggers. > - This PR uses those triggers and preserves scrubbing, approval checks, and recovery. > - Empty and completed proposal history no longer causes recurring expiry queries. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17443. This is the second PR in the sleep migration stack and targets its branch. **What problem does this solve?** The periodic proposal scan contacts PostgreSQL when no proposal needs maintenance. That obstructs idle database behavior across tenant instances. **What is the proposed solution?** Use transaction-aware notifications for creation and resolution. Reconstruct the earliest pending expiry at startup. Run cleanup at that deadline, or retry while reconciliation remains unfinished. **Why is this useful?** It removes an idle scan while retaining security checks and physical ciphertext cleanup. No queue table or migration is required. ## What Changed - Added intent notifications before secret/binding creation, approval, terminal transitions, and linked interaction resolution. The existing outer transaction owns settlement. - Kept expiry selection, ciphertext scrubbing, dependent rejection, and authorization in the secret-proposal service. - Registered a startup and deadline worker in place of the aggregate maintenance sweep. Empty/terminal states disarm; overdue batches and failures retain retries. - Reused shared scoped deadline dispatch for secret expiry. The service owns company-filtered SQL and expiry policy. Custom-image expiry continues to use `registerDeadlineWork`. - Added real PostgreSQL producer, outer-transaction, concurrent-write, expiry, restart, interaction resolution, and drain/resume tests. Updated startup wiring fixtures and documented the supported writer/lifecycle contract. ## Verification - Landing reconciliation at `c10eb1bcf752b058713e05d3345e5cf38dd3fa72`: 160 tests pass across the complete secret-proposal, scoped deadline, company batch, coordinator, startup, custom-image service and custom-image worker suites; no cases skipped in the accepted runs. Server typecheck passes. This integrates master after #17443 landed; fresh remote CI and Ponytail review are required before merge. Current head: `5bbe17ad9ebc4573b08ed1a9323644ef9608ca09`. This remains a single-duty PR stacked on #17443. - Integrated pinned master `8548173fc9efdc0fa07644fb92dcc0b6851a95e5` with normal merges. Every branch passed generated-schema checks and its target-branch migration-order gate. Existing SQL is unchanged; the 25 stack migrations follow master’s new migration. - Duty-specific producer coverage, lifecycle tests, and earlier failure records: [2026-10-08-instance-sleep-and-scheduler-inventory.md](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/5bbe17ad9ebc4573b08ed1a9323644ef9608ca09/doc/plans/2026-10-08-instance-sleep-and-scheduler-inventory.md), [2026-10-24-recurring-server-sleep-stack.md](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/5bbe17ad9ebc4573b08ed1a9323644ef9608ca09/doc/plans/2026-10-24-recurring-server-sleep-stack.md). - Combined tip `51e6cbe67979b55b340ea9f0f434c5b5c682ccd6`: **355 startup/cancellation/recovery/dispatch/preservation tests**, **75 connection-management tests**, and production server typechecking pass. These combined checks do not mean every intermediate PR independently ran the full repository suite. - Real master-to-stack database upgrade passes: **379 unchanged prior migration receipts plus 25 new migrations**, with the gateway responsibility fixture preserved. - Owning-branch checks: 84 runner installation/settlement cases plus runner typechecking and generated TypeScript/Rust profile agreement; 253 GitHub review workflow cases. Stop-attribution and held-worker readiness regressions failed before their fixes. - Failure accounting: the initial combined run passed 349 cases and failed six idle assertions in a reused preservation database containing old cancelled runs. Repeating the combined command with a fresh preservation database passed. Earlier invalid project selection, merge import/type errors, and the interrupted full local suite are not counted as passing checks. - **Latest-head CI and review remain required.** Prior CI findings include GitHub idle observation, route teardown, attention cleanup, touch-picker E2E, workspace health, and voice-cleanup timing; local passes do not erase those failures. No full local repository-suite, deployed sleep, fleet cost, or live Copilot qualification claim is made. ## Risks - Notifications cover supported writers sharing the database signal owner. Independent SQL writers and other process roots require a separate ingress contract; startup recovery alone is not live replica support. - The shared coordinator and scoped worker also serve later stack duties. Their defaults remain intact; existing voice, chat, native, and startup consumers are included in integrated verification. - Startup now checks overdue proposals immediately. During drain, physical cleanup waits; approval still rejects expired proposals synchronously. - Each due company pass remains bounded to 100 rows. Failed scopes back off from 30 seconds to five minutes; healthy overdue work keeps draining. Self-generated write hints coalesce and do not erase a failed sweep's backoff. - Heartbeat-disabled behavior and Cloud sleep-safety gates remain unchanged. This does not establish deployed suspension or external wake coverage. Tool review and gateway token cleanup remain separate slices. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning and code execution. The exact serving model identifier and context window were 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 - [ ] 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>