mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-06 21:05:21 +02:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
88bf71b84e
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is an open-source platform for orchestrating AI agents;
agents run inside execution workspaces that range from a shared
container to full git worktrees cloned from a project repository.
> - Isolated git-worktree workspaces require a project to determine
which repository to clone — without a project the worktree base path
cannot be computed.
> - A task pinned to `isolated_workspace` + `git_worktree` with no
project was previously accepted at creation time but failed late at
dispatch with the opaque `workspace_validation_failed` /
`git_worktree_base_agent_home` error — only after the heartbeat
attempted to provision the workspace.
> - Fail-closed validation should happen in two places: (1) explicit
create/update pins that contradict the requirement are rejected at the
HTTP layer with a structured 422; (2) rows that reach the heartbeat
dispatcher with this invalid combination (e.g. through inheritance or a
retroactively-removed project) are blocked before any heartbeat run or
adapter spawn.
> - This PR adds the shared detection policy, the create/update guard in
the issues service, and the heartbeat pre-dispatch guard, together with
focused unit tests for all three layers.
> - The benefit is deterministic early failure with a clear remediation
message instead of a late, cryptic runtime error.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No upstream public GitHub issue — describing the problem inline
(bug-report format).
**What happened?**
Creating an issue with `executionWorkspaceSettings: { mode:
"isolated_workspace", type: "git_worktree" }` and no `projectId` was
accepted without error. The issue then became blocked at dispatch time
with the opaque message `git_worktree_base_agent_home` /
`workspace_validation_failed` — surfaced only after the heartbeat
attempted to provision the workspace.
**Expected behavior**
The platform should reject the invalid combination at create/update time
with a structured 422 that includes a clear remediation message, before
any heartbeat resource is consumed.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Call `POST /api/issues` (or `PATCH /api/issues/:id`) with
`executionWorkspaceSettings: { mode: "isolated_workspace", type:
"git_worktree" }` and omit `projectId` (or set it to `null`).
2. Observe: request succeeds (200/201).
3. Assign the issue to an agent and watch it enter `blocked` with a
cryptic `workspace_validation_failed` error at dispatch.
**Related prior fix** — Refs #4844 (`fix(validator): reject static cwd
combined with git_worktree strategy`) — same validation area, different
dimension (static cwd vs. missing project).
**Paperclip version / commit**
Latest `master` (pre-this-PR).
**Deployment mode**
Standard (app-global server).
## What Changed
- **`execution-workspace-policy.ts`** — new shared
`detectWorkspaceWorktreeRequiresProject` function returning a stable
`workspace_worktree_requires_project` policy violation when an isolated
git-worktree task has no project, project workspace, or reusable
execution workspace; exports canonical remediation text used by both the
HTTP guard and the heartbeat guard.
- **`issues.ts`** — create and update paths check the new policy before
persisting; explicit pins to `isolated_workspace` / `operator_branch` +
`git_worktree` with no project are rejected with a 422 including the
policy code and remediation text.
- **`heartbeat.ts`** — pre-dispatch preflight checks the same policy for
rows that reach the heartbeat with the invalid combination (e.g. through
inheritance); such rows are marked `blocked` with a skipped wakeup
request, durable issue comment, and activity log before any heartbeat
run or adapter spawn.
- **`execution-workspace-policy.test.ts`** — focused policy-layer unit
tests for detection logic and remediation text.
- **`issues-service.test.ts`** — create/update 422 guard tests for the
new policy.
- **`heartbeat-workspace-branch-containment.test.ts`** — pre-dispatch
blocking test for inherited/ambiguous invalid rows; also fixes a cleanup
race in the existing test suite.
## Verification
```sh
pnpm exec vitest run \
server/src/__tests__/execution-workspace-policy.test.ts \
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts \
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-branch-containment.test.ts
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck
# Targeted regression
pnpm exec vitest run \
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-branch-containment.test.ts \
-t "blocks projectless isolated git-worktree issues before dispatch"
```
All three test files and typecheck passed locally before this PR was
opened.
## Risks
**Low risk.** The policy detection function is pure with no side
effects. The create/update guard only triggers on explicit
`isolated_workspace` or `operator_branch` + `git_worktree` pins combined
with a missing project — it does not fire on inherited settings (handled
by the heartbeat preflight), so there is no false-positive rejection
risk for valid tasks. The heartbeat guard fires before any resource is
provisioned; the only behavioral change for already-invalid rows is that
they receive a clear `blocked` status and durable comment instead of a
late cryptic error.
## Model Used
Claude Sonnet 4.6 (`claude-sonnet-4-6`), 200k context window, tool use
enabled (agentic coding). Used to implement all server-side changes and
tests in this PR.
## 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
- [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>