mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-19 10:36:26 +02:00
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Governed MCP access spans contracts, runtime enforcement, adapters, UI surfaces, and operator verification > - The parity reference PR #9534 is too large for effective automated or human review > - The feature therefore needs a linear stack whose individual diffs stay below the 100-file review limit > - This pull request is split 6/8 and focuses on UI API, shared components, and Tools/Profile surfaces > - The benefit is a standalone, testable review boundary while preserving byte-for-byte parity at the top of the stack ## Linked Issues or Issue Description - Related parity reference: #9534 - Problem: Operators need typed clients and administration surfaces that compile independently before navigation exposes them. - Proposed solution: Adds UI APIs, hooks, libraries, shared components, Tools/Profiles pages, and the plugin settings consumer required by the new company-scoped API. - Alternatives considered: keeping #9534 as one 403-file review, or rewriting the feature to manufacture seams; both were rejected in favor of path extraction plus compile-driven boundary moves. - Roadmap alignment: this advances the existing governed MCP/tool-access work already represented by #9534; it does not introduce a separate roadmap initiative. - Stack position: base branch is `pap10341-split/05-runtime-integration`. - Merge policy: merge bottom-up, in order, only after the complete eight-PR stack has been reviewed and the top-of-stack parity gate remains empty. - Requested review: UXDesigner sanity pass on Tools/Profile surfaces; Greptile on every PR. ## What Changed - Adds UI APIs, hooks, libraries, shared components, Tools/Profiles pages, and the plugin settings consumer required by the new company-scoped API. - Keeps this PR below 100 changed files and independently typecheckable. - Preserves the final tree from #9534 when combined with the other seven stack levels. ## Verification - `pnpm typecheck` - `pnpm check:token-gates` — all gates clean - Focused UI Vitest run with `NODE_ENV=test` — 28 files, 183 tests passed ## Risks - Large dead-code UI additions can drift from activation routes; PR 7 supplies the registration layer and top-level parity catches omissions. - Stack risk: merging out of order can expose incomplete layers; mitigate by following the documented bottom-up merge policy. - Parity risk: later edits to an intermediate branch can drift from #9534; mitigate by re-running the empty top-of-stack diff before merge. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, exact model ID `gpt-5.4`; runtime-managed context window; medium reasoning with repository, shell, Git, GitHub CLI, and code-execution tools enabled. ## 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] Internal references are omitted except the execution-plan link explicitly required for this coordinated split stack - [x] My branch name describes the change 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 ## Stack Coordination - Internal execution plan: [PAP-13874](/PAP/issues/PAP-13874#document-plan) - Parity reference: #9534 - Stack: #9556 → #9557 → #9558 → #9559 → #9560 → #9561 → #9562 → #9563 - Merge bottom-up only after full-stack review and an empty parity diff at #9563. ## UI Evidence QA captured these from the live Garden MCP split stack at 1440px and verified clean rendering:    --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
56 lines
1.7 KiB
TypeScript
56 lines
1.7 KiB
TypeScript
const REDACTED_URL_VALUE = "REDACTED";
|
|
|
|
const SENSITIVE_URL_FIELD_PATTERN =
|
|
String.raw`(?:code|state|nonce|key|[A-Za-z0-9_-]*(?:api[-_]?key|access[-_]?token|auth(?:[-_]?token)?|token|authorization|bearer|secret|passwd|password|credential|jwt|private[-_]?key|cookie|connectionstring)[A-Za-z0-9_-]*)`;
|
|
const SENSITIVE_URL_FIELD_RE = new RegExp(`^${SENSITIVE_URL_FIELD_PATTERN}$`, "i");
|
|
|
|
function redactSearchParams(params: URLSearchParams): boolean {
|
|
let changed = false;
|
|
for (const key of [...params.keys()]) {
|
|
if (!SENSITIVE_URL_FIELD_RE.test(key)) continue;
|
|
params.set(key, REDACTED_URL_VALUE);
|
|
changed = true;
|
|
}
|
|
return changed;
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
function redactUrlHash(url: URL) {
|
|
const hash = url.hash.slice(1);
|
|
if (!hash.includes("=")) return;
|
|
|
|
const params = new URLSearchParams(hash);
|
|
if (redactSearchParams(params)) url.hash = params.toString();
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
function redactUrlUserInfo(url: URL) {
|
|
if (!url.username && !url.password) return;
|
|
url.username = REDACTED_URL_VALUE;
|
|
url.password = "";
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
function redactUrlWithParser(value: string): string | null {
|
|
try {
|
|
const url = new URL(value);
|
|
redactUrlUserInfo(url);
|
|
redactSearchParams(url.searchParams);
|
|
redactUrlHash(url);
|
|
return url.toString();
|
|
} catch {
|
|
return null;
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
function redactUrlWithFallback(value: string): string {
|
|
const secretAssignment = new RegExp(
|
|
`([?&#;]\\s*${SENSITIVE_URL_FIELD_PATTERN}\\s*=)[^&#;\\s]*`,
|
|
"gi",
|
|
);
|
|
return value.replace(secretAssignment, `$1${REDACTED_URL_VALUE}`);
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
export function redactUrlSecrets(value: string): string {
|
|
const trimmed = value.trim();
|
|
if (!trimmed) return value;
|
|
return redactUrlWithParser(trimmed) ?? redactUrlWithFallback(value);
|
|
}
|