## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agent work through tasks and governed execution. > - Connected conversations retain the source and authority for each request. > - Task Retry pins the full saved GitHub input batch before it waits for cleanup. > - Resuming that wait could append an independent board queue after authorization. > - Dispatch then rejected the changed batch before the provider started. > - This pull request keeps the authorized batch intact and restores certified undelivered input from historical failed attempts. > - Each board message retains a separate turn and its own admission checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A deferred GitHub task Retry could consume a separate board message while promoting its saved receipt. The new run then failed with `chat_failed_run_retry_not_authorized`. A second Retry could also fail because the historical run retained the mixed batch. **Expected behavior** Retry must preserve the source batch it authorized. Separate board input must keep its own execution path. Historical input may be restored only when durable evidence proves that the rejected attempt never started a provider. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Retain ten authorized GitHub requests behind a failed native turn. 2. Start task Retry while the predecessor still lacks its exact termination receipt. 3. Save an independent board message. 4. Complete cleanup and resume the same Retry receipt. 5. Observe the mixed batch rejected during dispatch. Retry that failed attempt to reproduce the second refusal. Refs #17725 for the existing saved-input Retry contract. This change repairs the later queue merge and its retained failed state. Related #17878 covers snapshot continuation and later turns in recovered directories; its workspace repair can be reviewed independently. ## What Changed - Keep deferred chat Retry promotion scoped to its exact receipt. Ordinary board Retry coalescing retains its existing behavior. - Let a new explicit task Retry restore a historical mixed batch only after strict never-started, source, ownership, allocation, board-comment and prior-delivery checks. - Preserve failed-run history and original budget-skipped receipts. Record restored queue ownership in activity. - Add production queue and HTTP-route regressions. Update the execution contract and verification maps. ## Verification - Before the repair, the deferred ten-input batch failed before identity initialization. The same regression now reaches the real initializer with the exact GitHub batch. The independent board message then reaches its own initializer in a separate turn. - Before historical recovery, ordinary task Retry refused the persisted mixed failed batch. The repair passes that case without changing the failed run. HTTP duplicate requests retain one Retry owner. An additional compatibility probe restored the old queue candidate predicate and removed all historical mixed-state fixture writes: the real producer created the exact batch and the complete historical HTTP recovery case passed (1/1). The fixed-source historical fixture now uses the production serializers. - The affected Retry group passes 86 cases on commit `325c00158df5569f5b42731cda4ecc4584909d99`, including already-coalesced external receipts. Refusals cover edited sources, active controllers, unresolved allocations, changed receipts, foreign external receipt ownership and prior delivery of either board or GitHub input, including immutable budget-skipped receipts. - Full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass with these source changes. Map, module-boundary and diff checks pass. - Full local `pnpm test:run` was started. The host cannot create additional PostgreSQL semaphores; database-dependent suites fail or skip at startup. The affected database group runs against a separate migrated PostgreSQL 17.10 test database with Node 24.22.0 on macOS arm64. - The regression deliberately stops after the real identity initializer to avoid provider allocation. It proves HTTP, queue, source authorization, identity and separate continuation behavior. It does not claim a live model result, GitHub publication, deployment or recovery of the original hosted task. - Current head `325c00158df5569f5b42731cda4ecc4584909d99`: all checks are terminal with no failures or pending checks; required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e` pass. Conditional Storybook checks are skipped. Greptile and Paperclip each reviewed this exact commit at 5/5. Both earlier review threads are resolved. Paperclip retains one optional robustness suggestion for batch ordering; the verified historical producer order remains a strict recovery contract. ## Risks Restoring input could repeat work if the prior turn had executed. The existing strict bootstrap proof rejects provider output, native state, process or controller evidence, and allocations. Restoration also checks current external authority, unchanged board revisions and other run history. An uncertain executor remains held. No migration, provider fallback or relaxation of dispatch validation is included. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository inspection, code editing and test execution. The exact runtime model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. A separately shared regression supplied independent reproduction evidence. ## 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 (affected database regressions; full local suite has the host limitation described 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>
23 KiB
navigation
| navigation | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
External chat and email
People can talk to an assigned agent through configured external channels, bind their identity, exchange files, and inspect delivery state. Each provider has a different identity, threading, and attachment contract.
Feature ID: chat-channels.
Implementation: endpoint setup, endpoint detail, email setup.
Agent access: companion.
Sub-features
providers:chat-channels/providers— configure the available Slack, Discord, Microsoft Teams, Telegram, GitHub, AgentMail, and experimental iMessage Photon and Speko paths; availability still depends on gates and provider support.identity:chat-channels/identity— link the external sender to the intended authorized Paperclip identity.conversation:chat-channels/conversation— route inbound messages to the selected agent and send replies to the correct thread.attachments:chat-channels/attachments— transfer supported files with inspectable delivery and failure states.lifecycle:chat-channels/lifecycle— inspect endpoint activity, repair auth, and disable delivery when required.outbound-email:chat-channels/outbound-email— start a task-bound AgentMail conversation, reply to its exact message, and inspect deduplicated publication and provider delivery.
How to get to it (user POV)
external-thread
Message the configured bot/address from its external provider and follow the corresponding Paperclip conversation/task.
endpoint-management
Delegated setup can save ordinary bot tokens and API keys. Provider verification keys require the addressed human credential-entry step or verified provider provisioning. Generic setup returns the saved handoff without changing those keys, and generic connection updates cannot replace channel credential references. A replacement card waits for an actual protected-value change and restored verification; old health, unchanged entry and unrelated bot-token repair do not complete it. Fresh GitHub handoffs open the import form; configured endpoints retain reconnect. Credential-entry field sets and completion modes stay distinct while matching retries reuse their saved baseline. Complete human replacements can repair disabled, deleted or unreadable old vault values. Saved links name the requested fields and completion mode; configured GitHub forms support targeted replacements while keeping other saved credentials. Provisioned Slack challenge proof survives runtime storage only for the same signing key and callback URL. The actual-auth Slack/GitHub fixtures cover these boundaries, retries, revocation and permitted bot-token repair; live provider repair remains separately qualified.
Open /apps/chat/:endpointId/settings and the endpoint’s other available tabs; identity confirmation uses /chat-identity/confirm.
For GitHub external contributors, open the connection's Access tab and look up a username. The lookup uses that endpoint's active GitHub App installation with a metadata-only token. Verify that a person or bot resolves to its numeric identity and that unavailable accounts, rate limits, and installation failures show distinct errors. Lookup regressions use provider fixtures; live installation lookup remains separate evidence.
For delegated Slack test messages and identity invitations, apply a Block or Ask first rule to the calling agent while allowing the endpoint's assigned agent. Verify no message is sent. Exercise caller, target and shared rate limits: one shared quota admits one send and the next distinct request is denied. For a saved GitHub identity handoff on an otherwise healthy endpoint, verify the card stays pending before identity confirmation and after an OAuth callback alone. Confirm the addressed user's identity through their human session, then verify continuation becomes available. Revoked, expired, wrong-user and wrong-installation links must keep the handoff blocked. These cases pass through the assembled API with real key/JWT/session middleware and deterministic providers; live Slack/GitHub consent remains separate evidence.
outbound-agentmail
Use paperclipai email inboxes --company-id <company-id>, then email send --company-id <company-id> --file <new-email.json> or email reply --company-id <company-id> --file <reply.json>. Inspect email thread <email-task-id> --company-id <company-id> and email delivery <publication-id> --company-id <company-id>. Agent mutations must provide --run-id or the active PAPERCLIP_RUN_ID.
Driving it with Playwright and provider clients
Preconditions: follow the baseline. Use a
test provider account/channel with permission to send messages. Gates differ:
AgentMail bypasses the chat-connectors UI gate, GitHub uses
enableGitHubReviewBots, and other chat providers use enableChatConnectors.
Setup is covered in connection setup.
external-thread
Automated: channel integration uses provider fixtures; it does not prove a live Slack, Discord, Teams, Telegram, GitHub, email, or Photon delivery.
Monitor continuation regression: database checks verify the exact originating conversation, rejected forged/mismatched receipts, one working publication, no completion for a yielded run, and saved-response recovery. In a disposable live thread, request work that needs deferred repository preparation. Verify a useful continuation explanation, automatic resumption, and the final result in that same thread. A successful provider turn alone is insufficient.
GitHub review comment regression (2026-10-19): repeated PR review requests reuse
one main App comment, including across restart and reconnect. Test a leading
request for an external bot (@greptile review) and verify it creates no wake or
acknowledgement. Stop execution before a milestone is staged, run maintenance,
and verify the existing comment reports the stop; saved requests on a blocked
task show paused state. Preserve newer progress and confirmed or uncertain replies.
Repeat terminal reconciliation with native identity and no legacy wake fields.
Check delayed acknowledgements, check-only assessments followed by formal reviews,
and combined requests with separate pre-upgrade placeholders.
GitHub review attention regression: publish a 3/5 assessment, then wait for the next provider event. The task stays in review without a completion card or Mine entry. A later 5/5 review with passing required checks can finish quietly. A real repository-access request enters Mine until resolved. The native external-chat database suite checks these states and revoked endpoints using stored provider receipts; live model adherence remains a separate check. It also checks saved monitors, disabled repositories, multiple reviewed heads, read-only finish validation, withdrawal rollback, and separate approval gates. Repeat the review wait after a tree resume and a same-agent continuation with no new provider message. Accepted requester lineage and the latest saved review publication keep the task in review without a self-wake or duplicate publication. A newer unreviewed head, changed requester/repository, or revoked access cannot inherit the prior head's passive wait. Omitted/null yielded continuation is filled from authorized server task context after a current-head review, an accepted tree resume inheriting it, or a same-head follow-up with this run's processed useful reply bound to its exact current source. Pending or ambiguous replies and acknowledgements do not authorize this fallback. A malformed first report can recover by omitting the continuation; explicit malformed input remains rejected. Revocation between context read, finish and commit preserves the task without self-waking. Done policy is unchanged.
Manual: For each supported provider being changed, send a unique message, verify the intended agent/company receives it, and inspect the actual external reply in the original thread. Repeat with an unlinked/unauthorized sender, duplicate inbound delivery, and one supported attachment. Record provider-specific results separately.
GitHub review prompt regression: open a PR and push twice. Each task message contains the event and commit identifiers; configuration comes from the admitted delivery snapshot and the PR description is fetched when needed. Inspect the native provider's submitted envelopes: a verified resume sends only the current batch and any changed configuration, while a fresh session receives full review instructions and task context. Change configuration between pushes and verify the queued older request retains its original snapshot. Integration fixtures cover the database and prompt contracts; they do not prove live provider delivery.
For Slack, enable Require at-mention and Allow direct messages. Send a plain DM and follow up without a mention: both should reach the agent, with top-level replies to top-level DMs. Channel messages and thread replies still require a mention when that setting is enabled. Disable direct messages and confirm a plain DM is rejected. Use a private channel for threaded conversations.
For Slack acknowledgement latency, mention the bot with and without an attachment.
Eyes should appear after authorized task/comment persistence, independently of
file preparation, subscription and agent startup. Duplicate delivery must keep
one receipt; the final reply must remove only its source message's eyes. Record
live mention-to-reaction timing separately from the PostgreSQL fixture tests and
the chat.slack.receipt transport span described in Observability.
During a top-level DM run, verify that the bot adds eyes to the source message and removes them when the final reply arrives. The pinned Slack SDK encodes a linear DM with an empty thread timestamp; receipt transport accepts that address while still validating the channel and the source message timestamp.
For an agent with two linked Slack endpoints, compare assignment preparation and tool discovery in the run trace. Endpoint checks may overlap in pairs. Confirm that both permitted tool sets remain available, then revoke one linked identity and confirm that the next preparation excludes it. The database regression uses real PostgreSQL with one connection and controlled credential resolution; it does not prove live provider latency or an end-to-end response target.
Catalog discovery rechecks live authority and current credentials without computing the unused compatibility fingerprint. Assignment snapshots and governed calls retain full revision resolution. The same regression verifies identical catalog membership, absence of digest SQL during discovery, and revocation on the next preparation. A faster component is not proof of a faster Slack reaction or final reply; measure those separately on the deployed revision.
For GitHub and Slack tool continuity, start a task from the channel, then admit a later monitor or retry run for the same task. Check that the later run can discover and call its channel tools without a new inbound message. For GitHub, also continue from a board message by the same accepted requester and complete the review in the original conversation, including when the original source is recorded only in legacy wake metadata. Revoke the linked identity and check that the next call fails. Repeat the boundary checks with another task, agent, company, and requester. The channel and provenance fixtures above cover these contracts with synthetic providers; record a live journey separately. For a long-lived task, repeat more than 100 continuations and check that tool access remains available. Fail a later GitHub run after a final answer and check that the earlier answer remains intact. After publishing a PR assessment, deliver an ordinary no-new-work author reply. Hold native presentation after execution succeeds. Verify maintenance makes no provider write while undecided, including repeated passes and the explicit fallback path. Commit either a passive wait, genuine missing response, or failure and verify that the same request settles once with the corresponding behavior. Verify the actual shared summary stays unchanged during queued/running acknowledgements and after the committed passive wait, including maintenance, restart and cleanup. Confirm the per-request acknowledgement is terminal and a second maintenance pass makes no write. Then request a real same-head and changed-head assessment and confirm canonical publication can replace it. Real-PostgreSQL provider fixtures cover this producer and missing/error/unknown write safety; record hosted destination acceptance separately.
endpoint-management
Automated: channel integration covers shared endpoint/delivery behavior; live credential repair and provider ownership remain manual checks.
Manual: Inspect the bound agent and identity, recent activity, and delivery failure details. Repair a disposable credential, retry a safe message when offered, and verify exactly one external reply. Disable the endpoint and confirm new traffic is not silently processed.
For publication failures, reject one operation with a provider 403 and verify that its failure remains visible while unrelated tools and publications continue. Repeat with an authentication failure: the endpoint must require attention and stop provider traffic, while the connection's enabled setting remains unchanged. Reconcile persistent receivers and restart the service; authentication failures must remain stopped while transient disconnections can still recover. The PostgreSQL suite uses controlled provider failures for these cases; live provider credential repair remains a separate acceptance check.
GitHub connections in attention or revoked state show a repair notice above the settings. Reconnect GitHub → Reconnect saved App checks the same App with stored credentials and repairs delivery. Replace App credentials is the fallback, with the saved App ID, a link to its GitHub settings, and PEM upload or paste instructions. The production management Storybook's 04 Recovery group covers these views, pending/failure/success, mobile, and light theme with simulated provider responses. Verify actual credential validity and restored delivery separately against GitHub; a Storybook success does not establish live recovery.
For an agent-requested GitHub credential handoff, open the saved link as the addressed human and verify it asks for exactly the requested fields and all/any completion mode. A fresh App opens import; a configured App opens replacement through reconnect and retains credentials omitted from the request. Interrupt the response after a successful rotation, reload, and verify the saved rotation resumes without replacing the key again. Wrong-user access, unchanged credentials and missing verification must not complete the request. After OAuth, confirm the addressed user's exact endpoint identity before expecting task continuation.
For GitHub, submit a disposable PR and verify the summary heading uses the bot's display name and the check remains Paperclip Review. For two separate bots on one PR, verify their App-scoped checks and comments remain independent.
For GitHub publication recovery, interrupt a response after GitHub accepts a
write and verify one summary, finding, and App-scoped check. Retry the same tool
call and verify it returns the saved receipt. Include text longer than 500
characters and coverage with more than 50 entries. Change only the text suffix
or final coverage entry and verify rejection without another write. Remove the
completed durable publication and verify that a retry cannot dispatch a new write.
Also interrupt metadata reads before publication staging, repeat the exact
begin_review and submit_review requests, and verify typed results and one
assessment publication. Let the original metadata read finish alongside its
retry and verify that both converge on the same publication. Changed requests
and revoked access must still stop preflight recovery.
Leave a transient failure queued,
restart the instance, and verify publication resumes at its saved deadline
without another inbound message. Revoked access and permanent rejections must
stop retries. These recipes are separate from live provider proof.
Configure optional project and workspace defaults at the connection and destination levels. Start a new conversation and inspect its task workspace. Verify that inheritance, an explicit selection, and clearing a default remain distinct. Changing defaults must not move an existing conversation or interrupt its run.
For experimental Speko, enable chat connectors, choose an agent during setup, and verify the provider credentials. On an assigned task, use Talk to agent to open browser voice controls. Check microphone denial, mute, end/restart, navigation during a call, and access revocation. Inspect transcripts and the connection's call history. Callback preferences, incoming phone configuration, and incoming-call approval are separate settings and authorization journeys. The voice components and fixture tests cover presentation; they do not establish live answer retrieval or telephone playback. Those provider outcomes remain explicit release gates.
outbound-agentmail
Automated: Email channel integration uses controlled providers to test durable child tasks/intents, deduplication, reply binding, attachments, delivery, revocation, budgets, run authority, and company boundaries. No dedicated end-to-end CLI email test was identified; these fixtures do not establish actual recipient delivery.
Manual: Use a disposable parent task, authorized AgentMail inbox, and recipient you own. Put endpointId, a stable UUID idempotencyKey, text, parentIssueId, to, and subject in the new-message JSON; supply eligible attachmentIds only if needed. Send, inspect the child conversation/publication, and verify actual received mail. Repeat the identical request/key and confirm one child and provider send; changed content with that key must conflict. Reply with endpointId, conversationId, exact replyToMessageId, text, and a fresh stable idempotencyKey; inspect the actual recipients and received reply. Replies must reject caller-supplied recipient/subject/parent overrides. Test wrong inbox/task/company/run, a canceled task, revoked access/credentials, and an inaccessible attachment. Inspect uncertain provider outcomes before using the administrative resolution path.
Sources: Email CLI, request schema, email routes, and email authority/publication.
Gotchas
-
New outbound email requires a parent task. A reply binds to its stored conversation/message and cannot replace recipients or subject; a queued 202 is not a delivered message.
-
Visibility flags do not pause existing delivery. Disable the disposable endpoint itself to test stopped traffic.
-
One provider’s passing fixture does not qualify another provider or live delivery.
-
An accepted send request does not prove the recipient received the message or file.
-
Use steering and questions for their channel-specific interaction checks.
Storybook verification
attachments
Capability ID: chat-channels/attachments.
Scope: ui Storybook: Mount TaskChatBubble attachments and ChatEndpointDetail provider-specific consent/upload/delivery failure and unknown-outcome states. Local email attachment dialog remains a prototype. Production: Transfer a disposable supported file through each affected provider; verify recipient delivery, read scope, duplicate/replay handling and failure/unknown state without treating notification as file-upload proof. Sources: Source: TaskChatBubble.tsx, ChatEndpointDetail.tsx, chatEndpoints.ts, chat-channels.ts. Tests: TaskChatBubble.test.tsx, task-chat-attachments.test.ts, chat-channels.integration.test.ts, issue-attachment-routes.test.ts
Documentation scope: Chat and email channel setup
Shared recipes name provider checks; each provider transport/thread/identity/file-size/type combination needs separate live evidence and deeper instructions.
Saved-input Retry regression: fail a disposable GitHub turn, change the configured instruction skill, and send a new authorized request while an agent budget gate blocks admission. Clear that gate and use the task thread's ordinary Retry control. Verify the new saved message and its admitted skill snapshot reach one run, rather than replaying the previous failed request. Preserve both original receipts. With a committed failed native result, continuation requires verified controller and environment cleanup; an unknown executor remains held. After successful admission, reload and verify that the prior skipped receipt does not strand a later real provider reply or tree resume. Provider fixtures support this behavior; live fixed-source runtime and destination proof remain separate.
Also defer Retry behind cleanup, queue an independent board message, then complete cleanup. Verify one run receives the exact GitHub batch and the board message enters its own turn. For an older mixed batch rejected before provider startup, ordinary task Retry must recover only certified undelivered receipts. Changed input, active ownership, allocations and prior delivery must keep the refusal effective. Check the restoration audit and unchanged failed-run history.
delegated-configuration
Endpoint activity hides private-task events while retaining a next-page cursor across private-only windows, so older readable history stays reachable. Actual-JWT fixtures verify this separately from live provider delivery.
See the canonical delegated configuration guidance and acceptance evidence.