## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native restart recovery decides whether an interrupted provider session can continue. > - An unusable checkpoint must stop provider replay. > - The failed run can still own a remote sandbox and files that need saving. > - The blocked restart path recorded failure but omitted the existing workspace preservation obligation. > - Saved user comments then waited for cleanup that had no file-recovery owner. > - This change records that obligation in the same transaction as the failure. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A native run failed after its provider reported a terminal connection error. Restart recovery rejected its failed checkpoint and marked the run failed. Its prepared workspace and active sandbox lease had no preservation record. A later user continuation waited for the old environment to stop and could not start. **Expected behavior** When restart recovery blocks a run, preserve its exactly bound workspace through the existing stop-and-save service. Keep provider replay blocked. Stop proof and saved files must still precede any successor. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Prepare a native run with a remote workspace descriptor and its matching lease. 2. Persist a permanently failed provider checkpoint. 3. Run native restart recovery. 4. Observe a failed run with an active lease and no required workspace-recovery record. Refs #17801 and #17439. Those PRs add lease-settlement notifications and remote controller adoption. This change records the missing preservation obligation in the current restart failure producer. ## What Changed - Call the existing native workspace preservation service before the blocked restart transaction commits. - Keep the existing company, coordinator ownership, source lease and descriptor checks. - Add real PostgreSQL cases for exact binding, an unrelated source, a live owner, and rollback when preservation cannot commit. - Verify that preservation creates no replacement run or wake and retains the provider attempt count. - Document the transaction and recovery contract. ## Verification - Updated the existing branch with master at `09c05c55050fede448196637cbaa543a154da76e`. Both sides of the overlapping test additions remain. The production fix is still two added lines. - Current source verification: macOS arm64, Node 25.6.1, and disposable Homebrew PostgreSQL 16.14. No deployment or live task replay was performed for this branch update. - **113 tests pass** across `native-failed-workspace-recovery.test.ts` and `native-restart-recovery.test.ts`. Run them with `PAPERCLIP_TEST_DATABASE_URL` set to a disposable database ending in `_test`. Coverage includes exact source binding, live-owner protection, transaction rollback, no replacement run or wake, cancellation preservation, and orphan preservation. - Full local `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. Map checks, module-boundary checks, and the PR diff whitespace check pass. - Local verification limits remain explicit. The embedded PostgreSQL probe fails during `initdb`. The full `pnpm test:run` invocation hit that startup failure and was stopped. A broader restart integration invocation against disposable PostgreSQL did not finish while checkpoint-backlog work remained pending and was stopped. Neither invocation is a passing acceptance result. Hosted CI must qualify the updated head. - Prior-head evidence retained: the preservation regression first failed because its required fields were absent. The original verification passed 105 locally available cases and skipped nine real-runner process cases because the local binaries were unavailable. Previous-head hosted CI passed full typecheck/build, test shards, Runner checks, and browser shards. Those results do not qualify the updated head. - Prior live-repair evidence retained: an audited call to the existing preservation service registered the missing obligation for an exactly bound source. Normal workers confirmed termination, released the source lease, and preserved the prepared files before an assigned continuation started. This was an earlier repair, not acceptance of the current branch update. - Updated-head hosted CI passes on `a22feeb54daa2e9325a55d0ccd86515e64cbd47d`, including typecheck/build, all test shards, Runner checks, and browser shards. Apex is 5/5 on the same commit with no actionable findings or unresolved review threads. GitHub reports a clean merge state. The patch is not deployed. The original provider connection failure remains unexplained by this change. ## Risks - Preservation adds database work only when a restart classification becomes terminal. It adds no recurring scan or timer. - A failed preservation write now rolls back failure settlement. The existing owner can retry instead of leaving cleanup without an owner. - A live coordinator or mismatched source remains protected. This change neither destroys the sandbox nor starts provider work in the recovery transaction. - Existing cleanup must still prove termination and preserve files. A terminal run alone does not authorize continuation. ## Model Used OpenAI `gpt-6.1-sol` through Codex in T3 Code, with xhigh reasoning effort, repository inspection, tool use, and code execution. The runtime does not report the context-window size. Earlier implementation used the OpenAI Codex model recorded in the PR history. ## 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>
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.
The chat scenario catalog adds natural-language requests, starting context and expected conversational outcomes for the same capability IDs. It lives with Product E2E as planning data; a scenario reference is neither a registered execution nor evidence that a journey passed.
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.
Capability identifiers
The feature ID is the recipe filename without .md, such as onboarding.
The full capability ID joins that feature ID and a Sub-features key with /:
the company key in feature-map/onboarding.md is onboarding/company.
Its agent-access-map/onboarding.md companion uses the same local company key.
The feature-map index lists the existing
feature and full capability IDs.
Each child page states Feature ID: `onboarding`. after its introduction or
product-map link. In feature recipes, show the full ID beside the parsed local
key: - `company`: `onboarding/company` — create a company. In access
companions and Storybook verification guidance, keep the existing local heading
and put Capability ID: `onboarding/company`. beneath it. These labels make
the existing identifiers visible without changing keys, anchors, or ID generation.
Use full capability IDs in cross-feature references, Storybook annotations, tests, issues, PRs, and verification evidence. Both segments use lowercase letters, digits, and hyphens. Keep filenames and keys stable when display titles or navigation labels change; renaming either changes the capability ID.
Entry-point IDs describe a surface, such as web-wizard, and are scoped to their
recipe. Reference them with a recipe link, such as
onboarding.md#web-wizard, and record the
capability exercised separately. Navigation section labels are not capability IDs.
See IDs and references for examples.
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,
and its feature ID, followed by one H2 backticked local key per product
sub-feature. Each capability starts with its full capability ID and contains
these fields:
- Review:
baselineoroperation-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
noneonly 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. Update the corresponding chat scenarios when their request, assumptions or expected outcome changes; use multiple cases for meaningfully different starting conditions rather than treating an API path as conversational coverage.
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. Keep the feature-map README's readable ID
index aligned with those sources; it does not register entries for generation.
Do not 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.