Files
PaperClipAI/maps
DottaandPaperclip 7c58ea07b2 fix(issues): guard prepared task promotion by status version (#16893)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Integrations can prepare a backlog task before its assigned agent
starts.
> - A person can change its status or assignment during preparation.
> - An unconditional promotion can replace that newer decision.
> - Safe promotion needs a saved revision that includes every assignment
path.
> - This pull request checks that revision under the task row lock and
derives policy cleanup from the locked row.
> - The benefit is safe initialization recovery with the existing
company, task, and run authority.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Prerequisite #16896 has merged. This PR now targets master and contains
only the conditional promotion API. The prerequisite fixed the confirmed
baseline first-upload browser regression.

**What happened?**

A client that saves a task's initial documents and then sends an
unconditional status update can override a concurrent status or
assignment decision. The update validator previously dropped an expected
version, so clients could not make this promotion conditional. Some
direct assignment and release paths also did not advance the revision.

**Expected behavior**

A prepared task moves from backlog to todo only if its original status
and assignment revision still matches. A stale request returns 409
before a task mutation, audit publication, or wake. Policy cleanup
preserves unrelated saved settings.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create a backlog task and save its statusVersion before preparing it.
2. Release its assignment, or change an assignee and then restore that
assignee.
3. Send `{ "status": "todo", "expectedStatusVersion": <original
revision> }` to its PATCH endpoint.
4. The stale promotion must return 409. A matching revision on an
unchanged backlog task must succeed.

Duplicate and related PR searches found no existing prepared-task
promotion fix.

## What Changed

- Accept an optional nonnegative expectedStatusVersion for exactly a
status-only backlog-to-todo promotion. Reject extra public fields before
parsing can discard them.
- Check the current revision and backlog state under the issue row lock.
Reject stale requests before checkout adoption or execution-control
effects.
- Add SQL migration 0358 to advance the revision for both assignee
fields at the database boundary. Release, administrative release, direct
writes, and assignment round trips now invalidate an old version.
- Derive guarded policy cleanup from the locked row. Preserve review
limits and protected authorization when removing a monitor. Reject
derived ownership changes or review decisions.
- Add schema, real HTTP/PostgreSQL, concurrency, migration replay, and
policy regression coverage. Update the response type, OpenAPI, developer
docs, and access map.

## Verification

- Red before the initial fix: stale requests returned 200 instead of
409, validation removed the expected version, and a stale active task
could adopt a checkout.
- Review found two further defects. Four new release/direct-assignment
tests showed unchanged revisions. The real HTTP/service test returned
422 for a valid two-field promotion after monitor cleanup. Helper tests
also proved that cleanup lost valid review limits and protected
authorization. All now pass after focused repairs.
- Green: 124 route and policy tests, including 7 real Express/PostgreSQL
cases, 37 existing route tests, and 80 policy/helper tests. The real
row-lock race preserves a policy edit committed while promotion waits.
- Green: all 23 database client tests, plus 9 focused assignment and
replay checks. Historical migration 0227 receipt recovery cannot remove
the new assignment trigger. Reapplying migration 0358 leaves existing
rows unchanged and installs one trigger. Combined status/assignment
writes increment once; unchanged assignees do not increment.
- Earlier verification passed all 218 schema/route/service cases and the
generated OpenAPI capability test. Rebased focused regressions passed
all 27 selected cases. Final server TypeScript passed after all repairs;
shared TypeScript passed. Migration safety/numbering, five-snapshot
retention, map validation, and diff checks pass.
- The baseline browser attachment case failed twice on the earlier head.
Separate #16896 proved the lost-composer cause, passed 335 component
tests and the real first-upload journey, and has green CI with a 5/5
review. No assertion or timeout was weakened.
- Some early local checks were blocked by missing or stale sibling
dependency artifacts. This worktree now has its own frozen offline
install and standard SDK prerequisites. The failures and successful
reruns remain in the task evidence.
- Before rebasing, head `3304bb00de6ad6a248b5e046c008072ad20ac8f5`
passed all CI (55 successful checks and one neutral), Greptile 5/5, and
a secondary source review at 5/5 with no unresolved findings. The
secondary reviewer did not execute project tests, inspect CI, or
exercise a live agent journey. Earlier incomplete and must-fix
assessments remain visible; both established findings are repaired
above.
- After #16896 merged, all five CAS commits were rebased onto master
`87d9386ae637c652d1fed09d2046be1bcaeb413b`. Migration 0358 was
regenerated because master added another 0357. Range comparison shows no
other change to the CAS patches; inherited UI commits are absent. The
original head is preserved locally.
- Rebased head `1c0264e51a280b1dbf597725a7e42e72d4be1b1b` passes all 124
route/policy tests, 9 selected assignment/promotion tests, and all 24
database client/snapshot-drift tests. Database build, migration checks,
generated snapshot linkage, five-snapshot retention (0354–0358), maps,
and diff checks pass. Fresh-head CI and review are pending. No
deployment or live agent journey was performed for this API.

## Risks

- The guard supports prepared backlog promotion only. Other statuses or
mixed public mutation fields return 422. A stale revision or non-backlog
row returns 409.
- Preserve the original version from a server that already advertises
this guard before initialization. Older versions did not track every
assignment path. Reconcile older or uncertain initialization instead of
fetching a new revision and blindly retrying.
- Migration 0358 is SQL-only and idempotent. It adds no table, column,
or task backfill. Its separate trigger survives historical
status-migration replay.
- Existing authorization and unguarded updates remain in place. Guarded
promotion does not provide a general lifecycle or review-stage control
API.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact serving model ID and context
window are not exposed by this session. Used tool calls, code execution,
and test-first regression verification.

## 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>
2026-10-19 16:27:11 -05:00
..

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.