mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-30 13:20:54 +01:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
80a2b9284b
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and tasks. > - Runner reports durable run events through PRP. > - Runtime clients need a typed record of reported activity. > - The event must keep the normal run authority and read boundaries. > - This pull request adds the generic runtime activity event contract. > - Later PRs can publish and consume this contract without private plugin coupling. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description First feature prerequisite extracted from #18050. Runner publishing is #18050; the dependent consumer is #18131. Related independent test stability work: #18128. The parent search and review history is preserved in [the verification archive](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18050#issuecomment-6489369676). **Subsystem affected** Runner event protocol, server run-event persistence and redaction, and UI event taxonomy. **Problem or motivation** Core needs a durable, typed activity record tied to the authenticated run. A text marker is not an event contract. **Proposed solution** Add `runtime.activity.recorded` as a P1 event with a closed `{ namespace, activityKey }` payload. Runner knows no plugin or panel identity. Run/session identity, sequence and emission time stay in the outer envelope; Core resolves company, task and agent through the authorized run binding. Use the existing authenticated persistence, acknowledgement, replay and redaction paths. ## What Changed - Define and validate the event in PRP v1, v2 and v3. Update the generated protocol artifacts and event catalog. - Preserve saved and live event redaction. Test persistence, replay deduplication and the existing run-read boundary. - Register the event in the UI taxonomy without changing panel display behavior. - Advance the source-bound Copilot identity to 78. Retain all published historical identity fixtures without changing their bytes. ## Verification - Root `pnpm typecheck` and `pnpm build`: passed for the revised activity contract. - Node protocol checks: 14 passed. Provider identity and registry tests: 185 passed. Server tests: 103 passed. UI event registry: five passed. - Maintained Grok and Copilot identity generator checks and `git diff --check`: passed. - The first activity-contract review scored 4/5 because the dependent producer and readers still used the earlier contract. Both dependent PRs are now updated and restacked; the finding is resolved and review is running again. - Initial extraction retained a consumer-only import in one server suite. That suite failed to load. The consumer case and import were moved out; the final three server files passed all 103 cases. - Earlier panel-specific head `6137c50bc` had green CI and standard/Apex 5/5. Those scores do not qualify this revised activity contract. Fresh CI and reviews are pending. Earlier combined results in the archive apply only to their recorded source revisions. ## Risks This change is additive. It adds no route, publisher, filesystem transport, provider sandbox grant, or panel display behavior. Activation hints grant no permission to read a plugin view. Provider identities bind the changed protocol source; historical identities remain decode-only. No schema migration or dependency change is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools and code execution. The exact serving snapshot is not exposed. ## 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>