mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-23 09:07:46 +02:00
DottaandPaperclip
9db3a5726e
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their access to external tools. > - Tool connections discover repositories through GitHub account grants. > - The tool-access service mixes GitHub response parsing with grant authorization and persistence. > - These responsibilities have different inputs and failure rules. > - This PR puts GitHub discovery in one provider module. > - The service keeps current authority checks and stored grant updates. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The ownership and review of GitHub access discovery in the tool-access service. **Current behavior** The 21,525-line service contains GitHub pagination, account metadata validation, and grant lifecycle code. **Proposed behavior** A GitHub module returns normalized access metadata. Existing service exports remain compatible. This is the first PR in a three-part refactor stack. No behavior change is intended. A search found no existing tool-access refactor PR or issue. Stack order: this PR, #17146, then #17147. Each PR targets its predecessor. ## What Changed - Move six functions into `tool-access/github-access-discovery.ts`. Their bodies are unchanged. - Keep grant selection, credential resolution, refresh retry, membership locks, revision checks, and webhook updates in the service. - Add public-entry characterization tests for HTTP error classification and invalid pagination. - Record five candidate boundaries and the initial three-PR scope in the dated plan. - Reduce `tool-access.ts` from 21,525 lines / 829,519 bytes to 21,237 lines / 820,116 bytes. The new module is 294 lines / 9,722 bytes. ## Verification - Before and after: `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/github-grant-metadata.test.ts server/src/__tests__/project-repositories.test.ts` — 13 tests pass. - Before and after: `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts -t 'GitHub|github'` — 11 selected tests pass with disposable PostgreSQL; 455 cases are outside this selection. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passes. - Exact text comparison confirms all six moved bodies match the base. `git diff --check` passes. - The initial baseline attempt failed because the plugin SDK had not been built. The normal workspace prerequisite build resolved it before behavioral validation. - Final-stack local verification: `pnpm -r --workspace-concurrency=2 typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. CI is green at `07e78dd1b1c26e0bd4234006766444c71e234451`. Greptile is 5/5 with no actionable findings. - Full local-suite limitation: `pnpm test:run` was interrupted after 79 minutes during the serial general-server phase, after CI had completed the full test matrix. Before interruption, it flagged the unchanged `company-search-service.test.ts` suite (26 database cases skipped). One isolated rerun passed all 28 cases without code changes. The original log and a pre-interruption copy are preserved. The original failure cause was not reproduced. The full local suite and its later groups are not claimed as passed; the complete CI matrix is green on this stack. ## Risks - Import wiring could break existing consumers. Existing imports remain supported and all four production call sites are unchanged. - Provider requests retain their ordering, timeout, fixed GitHub origin, and response redaction. The new module has no database dependency or shared mutable state. - Tests simulate GitHub responses. They do not qualify live GitHub access. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with code execution and repository tools. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## 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>