Files
PaperClipAI/maps/feature-map
DottaandPaperclip 7c7d2d8d2c fix(runtime): continue from saved sources after workspace loss (#16690)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The runtime must preserve saved work and prevent duplicate
execution.
> - Older cleanup could destroy a sandbox before its workspace export
finished.
> - The existing recovery controls require either the original sandbox
or recovered original files.
> - Surviving attachments can support a rebuild, but they do not prove
that missing edits were recovered.
> - This pull request adds an explicit reconstruction decision and one
fresh continuation through the normal execution gates.
> - Operators can continue useful work while the original failed run
remains truthful.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A historical failed export can have an accepted result, a prepared
workspace descriptor, and a confirmed destroyed sandbox. Its notice can
also say `new_source_execution_path` and disappear. The task then has
neither a truthful original-file repair path nor a supported
reconstruction path.

**Expected behavior**

Keep the missing-file obligation visible. Let an authorized operator
choose surviving task attachments and record lost work and external
action outcomes. Start one fresh continuation after current execution
checks. Keep the old result and failed export intact.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Seed a failed native export with a prepared descriptor and an exact
destroyed-lease receipt.
2. Resolve its notice with the historical `new_source_execution_path`
bookkeeping value.
3. Read the task. The baseline hides the hold even though no source
reconciliation exists.
4. With this change, choose **Continue from saved sources** and submit a
reconstruction decision.

Related public work: #16451 preserves healthy warm sessions. #16583
prevents destructive cleanup of unexported work. This change handles
historical source loss that those fixes cannot undo. Searches of open
and closed work found no equivalent reconstruction endpoint.

## What Changed

- Add a board-only reconstruction endpoint with `runtime:manage` and
task visibility checks.
- Validate the exact run, result, descriptor and destroyed lease. Reject
active copyback, competing owners, newer work, stale task status, and
foreign attachments.
- Record attachment hashes, missing work, and external action outcomes.
Preserve the original failed run, accepted result, prepared descriptor
and terminal failure.
- Hold other continuation paths until the durable reconstruction intent
admits its successor. Record that successor in the same transaction and
preserve the retry count.
- Add an operator control that distinguishes reconstruction from
original-file recovery. Update the recovery runbook and capability maps.

## Verification

- Exact baseline source returns no blocker for the destroyed-source
fixture. The same fixture returns a required recovery hold with this
change.
- New real PostgreSQL and assembled API/heartbeat suite: 25/25 pass. It
covers duplicate submissions, lost acknowledgement, context reset,
source identity, task ownership, concurrent execution attachment scope,
later human blocks, deleted sources and agent pause.
- Existing export retry, explicit continuation and recovery-action
suites: 386 cases pass. One new-fixture constraint error in the combined
run was corrected; the full new suite then passed.
- UI recovery suites: 46/46 pass across three files. They cover disabled
actions, loss acknowledgement, failure retention and runtime authority.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. The first sandboxed
typecheck attempt could not open the TypeScript IPC socket; the
authorized rerun passed.
- Module boundaries, map checks, token gates and diff whitespace checks
pass.
- OpenAPI route coverage: 21/21 pass. The first CI head exposed a
missing endpoint registration; this head adds the registration and the
focused suite passes.
- Review identified a missing dispatch-time check and an isolated
attachment cache. Both are fixed. Claim and final handoff recheck the
exact successor, sources and current execution gates. A controlled
post-claim operator block prevents the assembled heartbeat from entering
the provider. The shared attachment cache refreshes uploads and removes
deleted selections.
- Final focused run: 180/180 pass across six suites, including
reconstruction, existing dispatch/stale-queue contracts and UI recovery.
- A second review reproduced cancellation by an already satisfied
historical connection card while the task was `todo`. Read-only
connection availability now works before checkout; active-task mutation
checks remain strict. The baseline failed two cases; after the fix all
74 connection and reconstruction tests pass, including revoked access,
pending questions and pending approvals.
- All current-head CI gates pass on
`9d197236da11fa24f1ceadf5589cb2b81179d824`, including general/serialized
tests, Runner, build and browser gates. Greptile is 5/5 for that exact
head with no unresolved threads. The full local `pnpm test:run` is still
running its serial server group; no full local pass is claimed. Live
staging recovery is pending deployment.

## Risks

- Reconstruction cannot restore missing bytes. The operator must
identify surviving sources and actions that must not be repeated. The
agent must verify those attachments before rebuilding.
- This path is limited to exact, confirmed destroyed remote sources with
an accepted result. Retained or uncertain sources keep their existing
repair path.
- No schema migration, credential change, budget increase or
warm-session policy change is included. Normal pause, ownership, budget,
approval and dispatch gates still apply.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, tool use and code execution.
The session does not expose an exact backend model ID or context-window
size.

## 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 (focused suites; full local
run limitation recorded 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>
2026-10-17 22:57:10 -05:00
..

Paperclip feature map

Start here when reproducing a user-facing bug, verifying a change, or deciding which surfaces a fix must cover. Each recipe describes what a person can do, where they can do it, the expected result, and the evidence needed to verify it. Product behavior is still governed by the implementation spec.

The sibling agent access map records APIs, agent entry points and permission boundaries for the same capability IDs. Follow the shared map contract when maintaining either map.

Browse features

Open the published Storybook guide for the assembled feature and capability index. The Markdown recipes in this directory are the authored source. Each has a same-named agent-access companion.

Run node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs to generate local navigation in maps/generated/feature-map.md, maps/generated/agent-access-map.md, and the Storybook guide. A new recipe is discovered automatically; do not register it in this README or maintain counts here.

Before driving a journey

  1. Use this checkout's isolated test drive for manual product checks. It creates a temporary instance and prints its URL and data directory. Do not guess that a server on port 3100 belongs to you.
  2. Record the commit, URL, company, login role, relevant experimental settings, adapter, runtime mode, and live versus simulated dependencies. Use disposable tasks and provider resources. A fresh test drive creates a company and CEO, but no task or first run.
  3. Use the current navigation and company prefix. Paths in recipes omit that prefix. Record whether the streamlined or production shell is selected; Agent Chat, chat connectors, and the combined Inbox/Tasks view have separate gates. A hidden surface is an unmet prerequisite, not a successful test.
  4. Run the smallest relevant test first. Vitest commands below run from the repository root after installing dependencies. Playwright recipes use their named configuration and its isolated environment, not an unrelated running instance. Reserve expensive runner/provider tests for the behavior at issue.
  5. Exercise the actual user action, inspect its result, reload, and verify the persisted state or continuation. Use read-only API checks to corroborate UI evidence; creating state through the API does not prove the creation UI.

For agent-driven acceptance work, start with the Paperclip verification skill for an isolated launch, ownership/readiness checks, browser driving, evidence, and cleanup. It uses this directory as its feature map. The existing dev-workspace run/verify skill and evaluation skill describe runtime ownership and evidence handling. Reuse them; this map introduces no environment launcher, credentials, scheduled job, or second test framework.

Evidence contract

Report each entry point as passed, failed, blocked (with its missing prerequisite), or not run. Include the feature filename and entry-point ID, commit/environment, user action, expected and observed result, command/exit code, and evidence links. Screenshots or traces should show both the action and the discriminating result. Include task/run/request IDs when relevant, without secrets.

A fix is verified across its affected surfaces only when each has evidence or an explicit reason it does not apply. Shared code alone does not prove parity. Keep product regressions visible; do not change the recipe to bless a failure. For Paperclip-assigned work, attach evidence through the artifact workflow.

Inventory and remaining depth

The generated maps/generated/coverage.json lists the current non-test TSX page modules and the recipes that directly reference each one. An unreferenced module is a documentation candidate, not proof that its feature is absent or untested. Remaining workflow limits live in each recipe. Inventory and example associations describe documentation scope, not runtime health.

Maintaining the reference

The map documents user journeys. It does not execute them automatically; generated inventories record documentation scope rather than live test health.

When maintaining a recipe, compare its entry points and expected results with the current source. Check that linked tests still exercise the stated behavior and that local references still exist. Keep the same-named agent access companion and stable sub-feature IDs aligned when behavior or access changes. Source-only access inventory remains distinct from live verification. Run node scripts/check-maps.mjs after map edits for structural/reference checks; follow the shared contract for the source and behavioral checks it cannot perform.

Each recipe starts with a small frontmatter navigation record, then an H1:

---
navigation: {"section":"Tasks and conversations","sectionOrder":20,"order":10}
---

The H1 supplies the feature title, and the first paragraph supplies its summary. Orders are local to the section; leave gaps for additions. Equal orders use the stable filename as a tie-breaker. Keep a section's name/order consistent across its recipes. A new feature or capability needs only its recipe and companion.

Optional ### Storybook verification guidance lives inside the recipe's Gotchas section. Each level-four heading contains a backtick-quoted capability key and has Scope (ui, cli, or browser), Storybook, Production, and Sources fields. These are verification instructions and intentional scope limits, not run results or a required story for every API. The generated gap report combines this guidance with current story associations.

After frontmatter, each recipe starts with an H1 and a user-visible description, then exactly:

  1. Sub-features — stable backticked IDs and observable behavior/states.
  2. How to get to it (user POV) — one H3 backticked entry-point ID per surface.
  3. Driving it with — starts with Preconditions:; repeat each entry-point H3, with Automated: and Manual: paragraphs. Name test scope and gaps honestly.
  4. Gotchas — misleading look-alikes, feature gates, and invalid evidence.

New or updated entries follow Poteto's feature-map examples. Existing entries with a Driving it heading can adopt the named harness when their recipes are updated. The original format was inspired by Omnigent's feature map. Paperclip's recipes and checks follow its own task model and test infrastructure.