mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-14 00:26:28 +01:00
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and their AI Connections. > - Codex and Claude subscription sign-in can run on a company agent computer. > - Core stores the credential and uses connection permissions to control access. > - The Connections page asks the user to choose a computer just to host sign-in. > - This change lets Core choose an eligible computer when sign-in starts. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #20410 and #20417. **What existing behavior does this improve?** OpenAI and Anthropic subscription sign-in from Connections with an agent computer as the sign-in environment. **Current behavior** The user must choose a sign-in computer before the provider flow can start. **Proposed behavior** Start sign-in from the provider form. Core chooses a computer in the company and sign-in environment. The session stays bound to that computer and reports when no eligible computer is available. **Reason and benefit** The saved credential and its permissions are independent of the computer that hosts sign-in, so users can proceed without picking an agent. ## What Changed - Select an eligible computer when a managed Codex or Claude login starts without an explicit target. Prefer ready computers and skip active login leases. - Remove the picker and let the browser resume the existing session by environment and connection intent. Continue to honor explicit agent targets in agent settings. Remove the unused picker fallback from the legacy form. - Update the AI Connections guide, the plugin environment contract, and the OpenAPI descriptions. ## Verification - Passed server and UI typechecks. - Passed 317 tests across the login environment, setup-token route, device-login service, and two UI suites. The Postgres test covers eligibility, inherited environments, explicit targeting, occupied computers, and the no-computer response. - Passed 45 OpenAPI route tests. - Reran the affected UI suites on the final revision. All 230 tests passed. - UI tests cover starting from the provider form and resuming both provider flows with a server-selected target. - [CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/43086849302) and [Greptile 5/5](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/20906#issuecomment-6805135968) passed on the final commit. - Local verification used test transports. Live provider sign-in remains to be checked in a Cloud composition that contains this change. ## Risks - Two sign-ins that select a computer before either lease is recorded can contend for the same computer. The existing provider admission guard handles the conflict. A retry can select another computer once the lease is visible. - The computer selection uses existing lifecycle and lease data. Plugin admission still validates the live computer. - No schema migration or plugin protocol change is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with shell execution and local test tooling. ## 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 - [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