<!-- entire-trail-link-start --> https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/205/changes/paperclip/205 <!-- entire-trail-link-end --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents receive selected company skills before each turn. > - Imported skills can need files from the whole source repository. > - The current path stores those files in Postgres and reads large JSON payloads during preparation. > - This pull request stores verified packages in the configured file or object store and keeps preparation queries small. > - It also converts old rows automatically and restores missing files from the exact saved commit. > - The result reduces database traffic while preserving skill versions and repository dependencies. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Company skill import, version storage, and preparation before agent turns. **Current behavior** Repository snapshot bodies live in JSONB. Skill preparation can read those bodies again even when the files already exist on disk. Historical packages and native assets also need a bounded cleanup path. **Proposed behavior** Store package archives and manifests through the existing storage service. Keep version identities, receipts, hashes, and recovery metadata in Postgres. Convert legacy rows after the stored package passes read-back verification. A missing package can use legacy bytes or its exact Git commit under current repository authorization. No separate data-migration command is required. **Reason and benefit** The warm path sends no repository bodies through SQL and reads no object bytes. Cleanup runs through the existing deadline coordinator. Current versions, active runs, explicit pins, and authored content retain their protection. **Breaking changes** The normal application schema upgrade is required. Single-version and skill-file responses keep their existing shape. Version lists, current-version summaries, and test-run version summaries now contain file names and kinds without file bodies. Diff and restore fetch selected versions through the existing single-version endpoint. Older server builds must not write after conversion unless they support the new package format. The storage override and rollback limits are documented in `doc/skill-package-storage.md`. **Additional context** Related work: #15731 preserves repository dependencies; #17923 changes version-cache scheduling; #18080 changes delivery to remote Codex homes. This change owns package persistence, acquisition, and expiry. It does not replace those delivery or scheduler changes. ## What Changed - Add company-scoped archive receipts, exact-commit recovery recipes, migration deadlines, and a durable object-deletion queue. - Add bounded archive upload, read-back verification, extraction, concurrent request coalescing, and verified local caches. - Convert old snapshots and versions automatically. Keep legacy bytes when verification fails. - Recover missing files through current source authorization and the original commit. Validate repository identity, file hashes, modes, and the aggregate hash. - Expire unused recoverable Git packages and native assets after 30 days. Preserve active pins and the durable copy of authored or unproven content. - Keep warm preparation queries metadata-only. Bound file digest caches and avoid repeated body hashing when file identities are unchanged. - Extend the existing storage contract with cancellation. Register package work with the existing coordinator. Optional conversion retries retain the original bytes and may wait for ingress without blocking sleep. - Add regression tests, operating guidance, a deep trace, benchmark receipts, and an optional maintenance command. ## Verification ### Final master integration and review repair — October 29, 2026 Current head: `a6065424249e763dfeac37161f1b52a9f25bd9b7`. Commit `f8bbdd3dbd` resolves the conflicts with master `76a796e964`; the final two commits repair the Apex deletion findings below. - Keep both package-maintenance and version-retention notifications in their write transactions. - Keep the shared run-pin predicate and master's controller-lease deadline metadata. Package expiry reads the updated protected-version result. - Preserve every master migration entry. Generate migration **0415 (`0415_zippy_zemo.sql`)** after master's 0414. Its skill SQL is byte-for-byte unchanged from the previously tested idempotent migration. Retain only the five newest schema snapshots. Migration numbering and safety checks pass. - Repair failed file/folder deletion: preserve a complete temporary subtree until transaction commit, restore on upload or SQL failure, and restore callback failures before releasing the mutation lock. Both PostgreSQL regressions reproduced missing files before the fix and now pass. They cover binary data, executable permissions, empty folders, unlisted files, unchanged database/version rows, successful retry after upload-claim expiry, and historical reads. - Reconcile lost commit replies under the same advisory and row locks. Check the saved version and source identity before restoring. Keep committed deletions intact and preserve backups when the database outcome is unknown or a newer edit exists. Four real-PostgreSQL outcome tests pass; the prior code failed three of them. - Full workspace typecheck and production build pass on the final commit. All **204** focused PostgreSQL package/cache/retention/authoring and filesystem-boundary tests pass, with none skipped. - Apex review **18 passes 5/5**, with zero new comments on the exact final head. All **34** review conversations are resolved. - [Final-head CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40914116508) completes successfully on attempt 2. The head has **55 successful checks**, two neutral reports, two skipped checks, and a successful Snyk status. No checks are pending or failing. All eight browser shards pass. - Runner Vitest 2/2 timed out once in the unchanged ACPX controller-replacement fixture. The same job passed on the preceding commit. One unchanged CI retry passes all five ACPX recovery cases, **2,253** Runner package cases and **126** native server integration cases; their standard one and five skips remain. The initial timeout's root cause is not established. Local diagnosis also hit the fixture's eight-second session.open timeout with an authenticated Runner; no local Runner pass is claimed. - Both full local `pnpm test:run` attempts were stopped when Apex identified deletion defects and source repair became necessary; neither is claimed as a passing full local run. The final **204** focused tests, full workspace typecheck, and production build pass. Full-suite acceptance uses the final-head CI jobs. The superseded merge-head CI included runners terminated by shutdown signals; each source repair started a new full run. - Auto-merge is enabled for squash merge. The final head is conflict-free and all checks pass. GitHub's active master ruleset still requires a code-owner approval for the dependency files. The existing review requests are with `devinfoley`, `nickyleach`, and `forgottendev`; no policy bypass was used. - The earlier hosted stress and full native receipts below remain tied to `a2e597d800`; they are not relabeled as a deployment of this final integration. The earlier local PostgreSQL startup failure remains recorded below; PostgreSQL ran successfully for this integration verification. ### Full native skill execution — October 29, 2026 The full native-agent acceptance gap is closed on candidate `a2e597d800eb989d565780e7aa947d5368676444`. Two qualifying native turns used OpenAI API / `gpt-5.4-mini` in real Daytona sandboxes, on the same disposable hosted TEST tenant as the stress test. A follow-up on the same task consumed a newly saved skill version. The task text asked for the assigned skill workflow. It did not contain the proof nonce or expected receipt. The assigned authored skill contained a Python verifier and a random package-local nonce. The agent read the actual installed skill files and executed that verifier against the imported, automatically converted 1,360-file repository package. It checked the repository file count and reference/binary bytes, and directly executed the repository's executable probe. Independent verification matched the emitted JSON to the nonce and expected byte hashes. The agent persisted the same receipt as its task response; native finalization committed, workspace finalization succeeded, and task state became Done. | Qualifying turn | End-to-end run time | Recorded skills.prepare | Repository files | Binary hex | Shell receipt SHA-256 | |---|---:|---:|---:|---|---| | Initial task | 47.881 s | 1822 ms | 1360 | `00ff07800a` | `a1deb30dc095f2306c7aa9cc5ec396da12c68961cf5b809f4d7c20f7fc68493b` | | Corrected follow-up, new nonce/version | 37.974 s | 377 ms | 1360 | `00ff07800a` | `dbcdc33fa1376b4edc136feae1cdf770560a73292467e93619efdda20e4282a7` | Both successful shell receipts reported `probe: STRESS18082` and `assetSha256: e8ea7a2f15f7bb3b332a46adbef848465884c8996595aa234748befd544d1f3a`. Their proof nonces, selected version IDs and receipt hashes differed, and both ran on the same task. These are observed timings, not latency SLOs; they include real provider work. The service stress-test timings remain a separate measurement boundary. Earlier failures remain in the evidence: - The original five-minute Daytona allocation timeout never reached model execution. After normal owned-stack restore, its durable cleanup record was `expired` / `success`. The cause of that original allocation timeout remains unknown; a later success establishes recovery only. - Initial continuation setup used unsupported generic agent-update fields and returned HTTP 409 before dispatch. Setup was corrected to use the supported skill-assignment and versioned instruction commands. - The intervening completed native turn read repository bytes and ran the probe, but omitted the verifier JSON under the older test agent's overly-specific instruction file. Its strict receipt validator failed; it is not counted as a qualifying turn. Correcting the test agent's instruction file and sending an explicit task-scoped wake produced the qualifying follow-up above. - The pinned application's immutable rate card omits `gpt-5.4-mini`, so completed usage triggered the normal block-on-unpriced budget policy. Supported append-only accounting corrections estimated the three completed runs using the [official OpenAI model rate card](https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/models/gpt-5.4-mini): $0.75 input, $0.075 cached input, $4.50 output per million tokens, assuming standard processing. Estimates totaled 12.482655 cents. Original usage and missing-price records are preserved; the $1 hard stop and unpriced-usage guard stayed active. - Model shell attempts included a missing `xxd` command and incorrect guessed file paths. Those failed calls and subsequent successful actual verifier calls remain visible in complete event streams. No zero-tool-error claim is made. No product source changed during this continuation. The previously measured contention, cold-start and memory limits remain. The later merge resolution is covered by the separate integration checks above; these hosted receipts qualify their recorded candidate. ### Hosted stress test — October 29, 2026 **Hosted acceptance:** full native-agent execution and a changed-skill follow-up pass on the recorded hosted candidate. The final integration section above records the subsequent conflict resolution and its separate checks. Tested baseline `929e840595c8933ca485ac7a2e99413e1e11ca64` and this exact candidate sequentially on one disposable TEST tenant, with external Neon PostgreSQL and actual S3. The fixture contained **1,360 files / 22.4 MB / ten skills sharing one repository**. Measurements cover deployed skill-preparation and native-context services in an adjacent diagnostic process, not a complete agent turn. The container had **24 vCPU / 24 GB**. | Warm workload | Median before → after | p95 before → after | DB returned value bytes/preparation before → after | |---|---:|---:|---:| | One skill, serial | 1,060 → 125 ms | 1,303 → 155 ms | 22,610,389 → 1,771 | | One skill, four concurrent | 4,415 → 297 ms | 5,143 → 328 ms | 22,610,389 → 1,771 | | Ten skills, serial | 5,723 → 535 ms | 6,057 → 600 ms | 224,739,030 → 10,671 | | Ten skills, four concurrent | 24,410 → 1,986 ms | 24,833 → 2,221 ms | 224,739,030 → 10,671 | - Candidate warm preparation performed **zero S3 GETs**. Ordinary-pool queries fell from 16 to 9 for one skill and 61 to 9 for ten, excluding dedicated lock connections. DB numbers measure returned values before Drizzle decoding, not wire bytes. Baseline/candidate sample counts were 30/100, 32/100, 5/50 and 8/48 respectively; the small baseline ten-skill samples are comparative evidence, not SLO estimates. - **Application-UID soak:** 800 ten-skill preparations over 10.3 minutes, four workers paced by 2.5 seconds; **zero failures**, median **559 ms**, p95 **775 ms**, p99 **910 ms**, zero warm S3 reads. All 726 accompanying health/company-list requests returned HTTP 200. Their end-to-end p95 was 569/502 ms, including network latency. The probe overlaps most of the soak. Soak DB-response capture was limited to its first 60 seconds. - **Important remaining costs:** an unpaced 16-way ten-skill burst had p95 **8.32 seconds** because company-level preparation serializes. Cold preparation took approximately **1.1–2.5 seconds** for one skill and **7.4–10.0 seconds** for ten. Ten-skill diagnostic RSS remained about **1.17 GiB** (baseline 1.18 GiB), and the soak peaked at **1.35 GiB**. A concurrent whole-container sample was 3.45 GB. This does not establish suitability for a small-memory host or eliminate per-entrypoint native asset duplication. - **Upgrade without a manual data migration passed:** legacy snapshot JSON shrank from 22,465,691 bytes to `[]`, with a stored package and zero pending conversions. - **Recovery passed:** sixteen concurrent cold requests coalesced into two S3 GETs; full bytes/binary/executable modes matched; same-size corruption repaired; an injected storage failure preserved warm access and failed cold access safely. A disabled public-Git source denied recovery, and after the actual five-minute backoff its exact SHA reconstructed all 229 files. Cross-company descriptor access was denied. Private-Git credential revocation was not tested. - **Retention passed:** reclaimed 27,754,496 allocated cache bytes, deleted an unreferenced package row and both objects, preserved aged authored history, and expired/reacquired reconstructible Git content. A version pinned by the failed native run was correctly retained. Only owned fixture timestamps were aged. - **Browser UI passed:** authored skill creation, saved edit surviving reload, version history, and restoration of earlier content. - **Initial native attempt (superseded by the qualifying turns above):** one real run failed at Daytona allocation after five minutes (`setup_failed`), before any model execution. Provider cleanup also reported failure. That attempt does not count as a passing native turn. Its receipt and all evidence remain preserved; its cleanup later recorded success after normal restoration. - Initial A/B commands ran as SSH root. Diagnostic-owned lock/cache permissions caused one setup HTTP 500 and the first UID-1000 soak to fail; exact fixture paths were repaired. The final soak, retention and recovery ran as application UID 1000. A fresh UID-1000 one-skill batch also passed (30 samples, median 116 ms, p95 321 ms, 1,771 DB value bytes/preparation). Earlier harness-export, SSH, npm provenance, backoff and UI-wait failures remain recorded alongside their successful retries. - Private evidence includes raw timings, assertions, HTTP probes, screenshots and failure/cleanup receipts. Initial failed-campaign cleanup suspended and retained the owned TEST tenant and released the shared QA account lease at **15:22:41 UTC**. The tenant was subsequently resumed under its existing ownership for the native execution qualification above. Final cleanup completed at **15:53:09 UTC**: the account lease is released and the tenant is suspended/retained under the original October 30, 12:24:52 UTC retention deadline. Its separate stack lease remains held; no active or pending-cleanup environment lease remained. The original retention window is deliberately preserved even after successful continuation. - Earlier hosted-tested head: `a2e597d800eb989d565780e7aa947d5368676444`, integrated with master `929e840595`. The earlier merge conflicts were resolved at this head. [Current-head CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40884087629) passed; all checks are complete with 55 successes, two neutral reports, two skips, and no failures. [Apex review 15](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18082#issuecomment-6480257258) passed 5/5 with zero findings on this exact head. All review conversations are resolved. - Ten real-filesystem boundary cases and server typecheck pass locally for the security fix. Coverage includes cache roots, descendants, individual files, symlink aliases, recursive ancestors, a future concurrent cache fill, and allowed sibling directories. [Current-head private-project integration tests](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40884087629/job/123483306405) passed all 29 cases, including authorized and unauthorized imports of a cached private package. Full typecheck, build, server suites, all eight browser shards, and Runner checks passed in current-head CI. Local database tests could not run because PostgreSQL could not initialize; this limitation is recorded below. - The earlier generated migration preserved the newest five snapshots. The final integration renumbers its unchanged SQL to 0415. Migration safety/numbering checks pass. Its SQL is byte-for-byte identical to the previously verified idempotent skill migration; repeated application on this latest schema was blocked by the same local database startup failure. - The broader verification before the final migration-only rebase passed 1,025 package, lifecycle, remote-launch, native-session, and asset-retention tests, 52 focused UI tests, full workspace typecheck/build, token gates, and map checks. The linked complete CI run passed before the latest focused fixes. - A disposable MinIO instance passed multipart upload, verified read-back, and cold restoration of an 18 MB archive. - Twenty warm samples with a synthetic 1,349-file, 22.8 MB repository retained five metadata queries and zero object reads. Median preparation was 256 ms for one selected skill and 691 ms for ten, with 5 ms emulated network delay each way. These are local measurements, not production latency guarantees. - No production instance was changed. Earlier verification failures and their disposition are retained below. <details> <summary>Earlier failures, review findings, fixes, and rerun evidence</summary> - The first CI pass found a stale inventory-span expectation and a missing repository-read span. Both are fixed; all three observability tests pass. One browser test copied page text into its YAML parser after reload; its first unchanged-head retry passed, but the race recurred after rebasing. The test now waits for the renamed URL and completed reload before copying the editor, retaining its original assertions. The earlier full local suite did not complete cleanly: it reported setup timeouts and assertions, while isolated relevant reruns passed. The complete current-head CI run closes that broad verification gap. No production instance was changed. - The first Apex review scored 2/5 and identified six issues. The fixes protect authored history even when it shares an in-flight Git upload, recheck upload expiry during orphan deletion, bound failed-upload cleanup, retain per-version kind/encoding metadata, add sanitized failure diagnostics, and correct the migration guide. The final focused run passes all 140 tests; the preceding eight-file run passed all 149 tests, including local storage and S3 diagnostics. Server typecheck and migration safety/numbering checks pass after the fixes. The second Apex review scored 1/5 and found unbounded maintenance storage calls and mismatched package/Git batch limits. Those are fixed with a 30-second cancellable cleanup deadline, shared 100 MiB/10,000-file scanner and storage limits, and bounded Git read batches. The proposed manual lockfile edit was rejected with evidence of the enforced CI-owned lockfile policy. All 19 storage/recovery unit tests and server typechecking pass. The new database-backed cleanup/conversion tests were locally skipped because the host exhausted its PostgreSQL semaphore capacity (confirmed directly by initdb). That gap is closed by current-head CI: [package-store tests](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40771320775/job/123109300889) pass all 18 cases and [package-worker tests](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40771320775/job/123109301157) pass all 7, with no skips in either suite. The corrected YAML browser shard passes. A separate planning-fixture test failed its cleanup DELETE with an activity-log foreign key violation after its behavior assertions passed; its one unchanged-head retry passed. The third Apex review scored 1/5 and identified a one-slot pool deadlock, projected path limits, cleanup holding the preparation lock during archive reads, and a publication/expiry race. These are fixed with transaction-local reads, prefix-aware bounds, isolated verification, and shared package row locks with a publication grace. The separate Paperclip review also found stale historical inspection, eager history downloads, and conversion retries blocking sleep. Those are fixed. Local PostgreSQL capacity recovered: the new database regressions ran, including the one-slot fork, paused storage during a warm turn, and a locked publication during expiry. The expanded run passed 144/145 tests; its remaining assertion still expected file bodies from the version list and was updated to fetch the selected version. The corrected company-skill suite passes all 81 tests, and the final package/projection run passes all 27. All 52 focused UI tests pass after updating their query-provider fixtures; the first UI run exposed a fixture remount, and the follow-up exposed an editing syntax error, both corrected. Full workspace typecheck and build, token gates, and map checks pass. The sandbox initially blocked the build tool’s local IPC socket; the authorized build rerun passed. Master then claimed migration 0401. The branch is rebased onf8226b0515, the unchanged SQL is regenerated as 0402, and repeated application passed twice on the combined schema. Post-rebase workspace typecheck passes. All 1,025 package, lifecycle, remote-launch, native-session, and asset-retention tests pass on the combined head. All CI checks passed for head 9d80a3b52d. The fourth Apex review scored 3/5 and found a save/edit lock-order cycle, a retry retaining an uncommitted source ID in its recovery recipe, and a summary read racing conversion. Commit b7d9237c6a fixes all three. The new concurrency and retry tests pass within all 61 package/source tests, and server typecheck passes. Master then claimed migration 0402. The branch is now rebased on65fa1cd617and the unchanged SQL is regenerated as 0403. All 68 package, source, and worker regressions, server typecheck, migration safety/numbering, and repeated migration application pass on current head62553671a0. Subsequent verification and review outcomes are recorded below. - The fifth Apex review scored 4/5 and found cached version reads unnecessarily depending on object storage and conversion reads missing the coordinator cancellation signal. Commit1eb90d80befixes both: cached reads verify bytes without the preparation lock; manifest and archive reads carry cancellation through conversion. The first focused run passed 70/71 tests, including all three new cases, but the existing diagnostic test observed no warning. Its fixture now sets an explicitly expired migration deadline; the final worker suite passes all nine cases. Server typecheck passes. - The sixth Apex review scored 4/5 with one finding: concurrent cached inventories were unbounded. Commit4b7589e14cgives cached inventories and previews a two-reader/32-waiter limit independent of cold storage. The first expanded pressure test observed a third reader before the preview path had the same bound; both paths now share the local limit. All 73 focused cases pass, followed by all 29 package cases after the final overload adjustment; server typecheck passes. The separate Paperclip review found no must-fix or should-fix issues. Its optional suggestion to persist durability verification was considered: cleanup intentionally verifies current external bytes before discarding the last local authored copy, and the missing-object regression requires that check. Shared-package eviction happens on cold fills with at most two attempts and a ten-second budget. - The seventh Apex review reached 5/5 with one remaining P2: timeout-bearing manifest reads bypassed request coalescing. The security review also found repeated archive acquisition after a cold administrative read. Commit79a80a39d2shares manifest loads with per-caller cancellation and cancels the underlying work when the last caller leaves; coalesces identical cold version/file requests; and publishes verified restored packages into the shared cache. Publication uses a short nonblocking lock, while eviction verification runs outside it. The first expanded run passed 73/74 tests and exposed a missing originating DB for cache publication inside read-only inspection; transaction readers now pass that owner explicitly, keeping metadata on the transaction. The corrected run passed 75/75. A final eviction test initially expected the shared package to remain after only its separate runtime projection was reused; it now explicitly accesses the shared package during verification. All 32 final package tests pass, including independent caller cancellation, one acquisition across concurrent/repeated reads, and warm preparation during stalled eviction verification. Server typecheck passes. - The eighth Apex review scored 4/5 with one finding: decoded cold inventories outlived the storage semaphore while waiting for cleanup. Commit9d7921d1ecadds a separate two-response/32-waiter lifetime bound held through cleanup, preserving the independent warm-read queue and forwarding cancellation through eviction verification. The new regression pauses cleanup after two responses decode, verifies a third archive stays queued, and completes warm preparation before releasing cleanup. All 77 package/source/worker cases and server typecheck pass. On the preceding head, serialized server shard 6/9 was interrupted with “The operation was canceled” after 57 seconds of tests; the log contains no failing assertion. Fresh latest-head CI reruns that shard along with the other gates. - The ninth Apex review scored 4/5 with one P1: cold responses could own both permits while waiting on a one-slot ordinary database pool held by a queued transaction reader. Commita94f0e409freads caller-scoped metadata before admission and isolates all acquisition/cleanup SQL on a private connection. The new real-PostgreSQL regression reproduces the deadlock against the previous head and passes with the fix; all 78 focused cases and server typecheck pass. The previous CI run completed with 54 successful checks, including both formerly interrupted/stuck serialized shards. - The tenth Apex review scored 4/5 with one P1: preloading legacy bodies before admission could retain many full repositories in queued requests. Commit276e353a37removes that preload and also bounds legacy manifest derivation/fallback, using private connections inside the I/O slot. All 80 focused tests pass; the final synchronized package suite passes all 36 tests and server typecheck passes. - Apex review 11 returned 5/5 with zero comments on276e353a37. While it ran, master8bc051245fadded migration 0403, creating a metadata conflict. Merge commite1783764d9integrates master and generates 0404_clumsy_leo.sql; its skill SQL is byte-for-byte identical to the previously verified migration. The combined schema passes migration safety/numbering, repeated SQL application twice, all 80 focused PostgreSQL tests, full workspace typecheck, and full build. The precedinga94f0e409fCI run was superseded and cancelled while its final runner job was active; no old-head success is claimed for that run. - Final acceptance: Apex review 12 returned 5/5 with zero comments one1783764d9. All 28 review threads are resolved. The final head has 55 successful checks, two neutral reports, two skipped checks, and no pending or failing checks; the PR workflow completed successfully. Superseded run 40789121902 was cancelled to free its workflow slot for the final head; normal cancellation did not finish promptly, so force cancellation completed it. - October 29 conflict resolution (867c00673b): master929e840595added installed-selection reuse and bundled relocation, routine cleanup notifications, a hardened YAML copy helper, and migrations through 0413. The merge retains those behaviors together with package read scoping and the public-selection fast path; restricted selections still reauthorize and the full row read rechecks scope. Generated migration 0414 retains the existing SQL unchanged. Workspace typecheck/build and migration checks pass. Local database verification is unavailable: initdb reports semget / “could not create semaphores: No space left on device”; all 168 cases skipped, and repeated migration application failed at startup. Docker returned HTTP 500 during container creation, so no Docker test pass is claimed. Current-head CI must close this gap. - Apex review 14 scored 3/5 with one P1: a local import could copy cached private package files into a company-wide skill. Commita2e597d800rejects cache trees and ancestors through a canonical filesystem boundary, including aliases and ancestors checked before a concurrent fill. Ten local filesystem tests and server typecheck pass. The existing private-project integration case now rejects package-cache imports for both authorized and unauthorized users. The preceding merge commit’s complete CI run passed, and logs confirm all 168 locally skipped cases executed successfully: package store 36, sources 35, package worker 9, runtime selection 4, observability 3, authoring 81. - Apex review 15 returned 5/5 with zero new findings ona2e597d800. The separate Paperclip review found no must-fix or should-fix issues. Its optional suggestions were considered: unexpected filesystem cleanup failures remain visible, the durable marker cannot replace checking that bytes still exist before deleting a last local authored copy, and administrative history batching remains outside the pre-turn optimization. The cache-path literal centralization suggestion is also optional; the current producer and guard use the same directory, covered by the new integration regression. All review conversations are resolved. - Earlier October 29 CI/Apex acceptance:a2e597d800was mergeable at that check, Apex review 15 passed 5/5 with zero findings, and all review conversations were resolved. The hosted verification above records the later acceptance limits and renewed conflicts. Workflow 40884087629 completed successfully, with 55 successful checks, two neutral reports, two skips, and no pending or failed checks. The project-skill-sources job log confirms all 29 cases ran and passed, closing the latest integration gap. The preceding merge workflow also confirmed all 168 focused database cases ran and passed. No local PostgreSQL or Docker pass is claimed. </details> ## Risks - First use after eviction can require storage or Git access. Revoked grants, removed sources, and unreachable commits can prevent reconstruction. Recovery never substitutes a newer commit. - Historical packages without a proven recipe keep durable bytes. Cleanup favors retention when a run pin cannot be interpreted safely. - New uploads and conversion use bounded work and persisted retries. Large initial conversions still add temporary storage and database load. - Optional cleanup can wait until the next server wake. Supported notifications assume one owning server process. - Per-entrypoint native tree duplication and cold preparation cost remain. The final ten-skill cold sample took 47.6 seconds on the shared host. - Generic authored edits can still hold an existing edit transaction while a package uploads. - Explicit file/folder deletion uses temporary disk space for rollback. An uncertain commit with a changed skill or unavailable database retains that backup and logs its location for recovery. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and tests. The exact served model ID and context window 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>
31 KiB
Paperclip — Product Definition
Reusable workflows stay inside the Cases experiment. A workflow is a company-shared name and Markdown prompt; a case may adopt, leave and revisit workflows without changing its primary task. The task's workflow document is the effective copy, so shared edits affect future adoptions and explicit refreshes. Existing handoffs record workflow/phase movement and document revisions, including names as they were at the time. Authoring starts with agents/APIs; the case UI reads current workflow information and history.
What It Is
Paperclip is the control plane for autonomous AI companies. One instance of Paperclip can run multiple companies. A company is a first-order object.
Core Concepts
Company
A company has:
- A goal — the reason it exists ("Create the #1 AI note-taking app that does $1M MRR within 3 months")
- Employees — every employee is an AI agent
- Org structure — who reports to whom
- Revenue & expenses — tracked at the company level
- Task hierarchy — all work traces back to the company goal
Employees & Agents
Every employee is an agent. When you create a company, you start by defining the CEO, then build out from there.
Each employee has:
- Adapter type + config — how this agent runs and what defines its identity/behavior. This is adapter-specific (e.g., an OpenClaw agent might use SOUL.md and HEARTBEAT.md files; a Claude Code agent might use CLAUDE.md; a bare script might use CLI args). Paperclip doesn't prescribe the format — the adapter does.
- Role & reporting — their title, who they report to, who reports to them
- Capabilities description — a short paragraph on what this agent does and when they're relevant (helps other agents discover who can help with what)
Example: A CEO agent's adapter config tells it to "review what your executives are doing, check company metrics, reprioritize if needed, assign new strategic initiatives" on each heartbeat. An engineer's config tells it to "check assigned tasks, pick the highest priority, and work it."
Then you define who reports to the CEO: a CTO managing programmers, a CMO managing the marketing team, and so on. Every agent in the tree gets their own adapter configuration.
Each person also has a personal primary agent per company. Their first human-created agent becomes primary automatically; they can choose another from its profile. An existing primary is replaced only after confirmation. The crown appears on the profile and roster, while the primary stays first in the Agents sidebar without a sidebar crown. Stars remain independent. Task drafts, explicit assignments, and recent choices take precedence over the primary; Chat similarly reopens a valid recent conversation before falling back to the primary. Opening Chat does not start execution. This preference does not change the org chart or permissions.
Agent Execution
Agents have an Advanced tab for editing their settings across all configuration tabs as a versioned YAML document. Instructions, skills, tools, channels, trust, secret operations, API keys, and revision restore use their existing domain APIs. It edits the same configuration as the regular settings pages, validates before saving, preserves masked secrets, and rejects stale edits. See Agent configuration YAML.
Existing Claude, Codex, and Grok Build agents can upgrade from the legacy runner on their Harness / Runtime page when Paperclip Runner is the qualified default for their environment. One action saves pending edits and translates compatible settings while keeping the harness, selected model, account bindings, instructions, and history. Unsupported settings produce an actionable error without changing the saved agent. Future runs start fresh sessions.
Qualifying an existing agent's sandbox for that upgrade uses the same agent configuration permission as saving the upgrade. The server checks the saved computer and its company binding. Company owners do not need instance-admin access for this step; general instance environment management remains restricted.
Paperclip supports several ways to run an agent's heartbeat:
- Local CLI/session adapters — Paperclip starts or resumes local coding-tool sessions such as Claude Code, Codex, Gemini, OpenCode, Pi, and Cursor, then tracks the run.
- Run a command — Paperclip kicks off a process (shell command, Python script, etc.) and tracks it. The heartbeat is "execute this and monitor it."
- Fire and forget a request — Paperclip sends a webhook/API call to an externally running agent. The heartbeat is "notify this agent to wake up." OpenClaw-style hooks work this way.
- External adapter plugins — Paperclip loads adapter packages through the plugin/adapter flow so self-hosted installs can add runtimes without hardcoding them in core.
Agent runs can use project and execution workspaces, managed runtime services such as preview/dev servers, adapter-specific session state, and HTTP/webhook-style execution. We provide sensible defaults, but the adapter is still the boundary: if a runtime can be invoked, observed, and authorized, Paperclip can coordinate it.
Task Management
Task management is hierarchical. At any moment, every piece of work must trace back to the company's top-level goal through a chain of parent tasks:
I am researching the Facebook ads Granola uses (current task)
because → I need to create Facebook ads for our software (parent)
because → I need to grow new signups by 100 users (parent)
because → I need to get revenue to $2,000 this week (parent)
because → ...
because → We're building the #1 AI note-taking app to $1M MRR in 3 months
Tasks have parentage. Every task exists in service of a parent task, all the way up to the company goal. This is what keeps autonomous agents aligned — they can always answer "why am I doing this?"
The current issue model includes stable issue identifiers, parent/sub-issues, blockers, a single assignee, comments, issue documents, attachments and work products, and review/approval handoffs. That structure keeps work inspectable by both the board and agents while still allowing agents to decompose work into smaller tasks.
Automatic monitor checks pause when a task is blocked. A person can use Check now to request one check of a retained monitor through normal execution admission. Dependencies, recovery, pause, budgets and ownership still apply. Provider-usage recovery stays paused until the task resumes. A check that cannot start reports that result instead of claiming it was queued.
The experimental Cases feature also supports persistent work records and
prompt-driven agent handoffs. Native case creation requires kickoff and creates
one primary task; later handoffs move that same task
between agents with a phase and instructions. The case retains facts, document references,
and history while normal task assignments form each agent's queue. Task sessions,
workspaces, private access, review rules, and human intervention remain part of
the ordinary execution model. Ordinary task completion leaves case status unchanged.
An explicit handoff to done closes the case when primary-task completion is
accepted through the existing gates; review and human waits keep it open.
Native agents can create, read and update case facts through dedicated tools.
Creation always includes a kickoff and either workflowId or explicit workflow_document_text.
The latter becomes the primary task's Markdown workflow document, describing
phase owners, routing, evidence and completion rules. Agents read it before
choosing their next step. Recommended authoring includes both a Mermaid
stateDiagram-v2 map and prose explaining each transition's conditions, evidence,
destination agent, human waits and correction limits. Transitions remain advisory. Initial documents belong to
the first task and are saved before its agent wakes; the case displays documents
from its primary and accessible linked tasks without copying them. Agents use
ordinary task document tools; historical case-owned documents remain readable.
Each phase receives its current handoff instructions;
compatible resumed sessions receive changed facts without repeating unchanged
case contents. Agents can read current persisted data whenever they need it.
Case pages are a lightweight read-only view: search or filter the list, open a record, read its findings and documents, and follow its current task and handoff history. Agents and APIs author the records; the pages have no editing controls.
When a task is assigned to the current human, the message composer defaults to the latest agent that assigned it to them. If no assignment is available, it uses the latest other commenter, or leaves the recipient empty. A manual recipient choice stays selected while task data refreshes.
Task collection creation filters
Tasks and project lists hide agent-created and system-created tasks by default. The Filters menu's show agent-created tasks checkbox includes routine runs, recovery/watchdog tasks, chat-channel tasks, and other automation. Channel tasks remain bot-created for this filter even when a human starts the conversation. The choice is saved per company and collection; Clear filters restores the hidden default. Nested lists preserve ancestors and expandable subtasks as context without promoting unrelated automated work to independent results. Agent profiles, routine histories, and task-detail subtasks retain their full history.
Mine contains personal work. Channel tasks, routine tasks, and agent-created tasks stay outside Mine by default. This includes routines that a person starts manually. Linked accounts, creator IDs, responsible-user IDs, synchronized provider comments, and read markers do not establish participation in automatic work. Direct board or human API comments, human assignment, and deliberate user mutations do establish participation. Open requests addressed to the person also admit the task until resolution. Ordinary human-created tasks keep their creator's participation. These rules apply to existing tasks, Mine, unread counts, badges, and task toasts. Approvals retain their existing recipient and permission rules.
An advisory PR review does not require human completion approval because its rating is low, CI is pending or failing, or the PR is unmerged. After publication, the bot may stay in review with an authorized provider-event wait or a saved monitor. Neither wait enrolls a person in Mine. Human requests are for concrete dependencies of the assigned review, such as missing repository access. A later published review with no human dependency withdraws the same bot's earlier completion request for a published review when its result commits and independent gates are clear. Finish-report validation is read-only. Independent approval gates and requests without that review evidence remain unchanged.
New inbound comments retain their provider in metadata.sourceChannel. Historical
imports use inbound message links or the stored provider-sender metadata. These
checks preserve direct board comments on channel tasks. If both historical
records are absent, the comment remains unclassified and keeps its previous
behavior. A task origin alone cannot prove the source of an old comment.
Inbox discovery searches and Blocked hide unrelated automatic tasks unless the checkbox is checked. The checkbox does not subscribe a person to automatic work. Source feeds and project task lists retain their existing access rules.
Company Skills and Policy
Company skills are shared operating capabilities, not privileged objects by default. Every authenticated agent in a company can create, import, install, edit, update, test, reset, and remove that company's skills unless the company has configured an explicit restriction.
The governing rule is: skill permissions are opt-in restrictions, not opt-in capabilities. Missing skill grants never create a denial in an otherwise unconfigured company, and ordinary skill work does not require board confirmation, a draft-only workflow, or an activation approval.
Core Paperclip owns the skill runtime, company-boundary enforcement, policy evaluation contract, API denials, validation, path containment, secret redaction, and activity logging. Those safety invariants cannot be disabled by policy. Open-by-default skill work never authorizes arbitrary host-path reads, unsafe executable content, or policy edits: local imports and scans must stay within Paperclip-known workspace or managed-skill roots, remote sources must resolve to validated immutable content, and platform safety denials must stay distinct from optional administrative restrictions. Paperclip EE may provide detailed administration for per-agent, per-role, per-action, per-source, and protected-skill rules, but EE is not required to use skills and is not an enforcement boundary. Without EE, companies remain open by default and any already-configured restrictions continue to be enforced by core.
GitHub repositories attached to new projects automatically become skill sources. Paperclip imports their skills and checks the configured branch every five minutes, using the setup person's authorized GitHub connection. New skills import automatically unless excluded. Existing projects can adopt their repositories from Skills → Sources; existing manually imported sources preserve their selections and gain automatic updates. Refresh remains available, and operators can pause automatic updates. Independent skill sources have a searchable branch picker with the repository's default branch marked. People can also enter a branch name that is not listed. Saving checks GitHub access and the selected ref before changing tracking; failed saves keep the selection and installed content. Project refs remain owned by project configuration so changing a source cannot redirect another project's tracking. If a repository exceeds the supported package size, Paperclip first packages its skill folders and referenced repository files, preserving their original paths. Missing references are advisory: a valid selected skill can still be imported. Unavailable files are listed, and existing installed dependencies are retained when a bounded refresh cannot preserve them. File limits and content validation still apply; importing never executes repository code. Authored and unproven legacy versions retain an independent recovery copy. Unused Git packages with an exact restore recipe may expire; later use requires access to that original repository and commit. External package storage keeps repository contents out of the control-plane database; per-turn checks reuse verified local files while rechecking current skill access. See automatic storage and recovery.
Project-derived skills inherit current project access. Access through any originating project is sufficient, including the responsible-user restrictions on agent execution. Existing explicit company imports retain their visibility. Editable copies inherit project restrictions; private content cannot be published or exported implicitly. Detachment retains installed content and access provenance. Deleting its last project never makes a skill company-visible.
Task and routine skill mentions remain stable references to the latest installed version. Each execution records the immutable versions it uses; resuming keeps those versions, while a new execution resolves latest again. Upstream failures and removals preserve installed snapshots. GitHub refresh does not delay task execution.
Old, unused skill-version disk caches expire automatically while current and in-use versions remain. Saved database snapshots rebuild an expired copy on demand, including when its upstream repository is unavailable. Recovery data has separate retention.
Disconnecting removes a repository from Sources after an explicit choice: keep independent editable copies in My Skills, or delete its imported skills. Kept copies and derived forks retain their project access restrictions. Copies preserve agent assignments; skills used by agents must be detached before deletion.
An explicit restricted policy may deny selected operations or switch to a default-deny preset with explicit allow rules. Core exposes a stable versioned policy API so EE and other administrative clients configure and simulate the same evaluator used by skill mutation routes. Core Skill Studio only needs to perform normal skill work, explain an explicit denial, and point administrators to EE when its richer policy UI is available; it must not recreate a partial enterprise permission editor.
Principles
-
Unopinionated about how you run your agents. Your agents could be OpenClaw bots, Python scripts, Node scripts, Claude Code sessions, Codex instances — we don't care. Paperclip defines the control plane for communication and provides utility infrastructure for heartbeats. It does not mandate an agent runtime.
-
Company is the unit of organization. Everything lives under a company. One Paperclip instance, many companies.
-
Adapter config defines the agent. Every agent has an adapter type and configuration that controls its identity and behavior. The minimum contract is just "be callable."
-
All work traces to the goal. Hierarchical task management means nothing exists in isolation. If you can't explain why a task matters to the company goal, it shouldn't exist.
-
Control plane, not execution plane. Paperclip orchestrates. Agents run wherever they run and phone home.
User Flow (Dream Scenario)
- Open Paperclip, create a new company
- Define the company's goal: "Create the #1 AI note-taking app, $1M MRR in 3 months"
- Create the CEO
- Choose an adapter (e.g., process adapter for Claude Code, HTTP adapter for OpenClaw)
- Configure the adapter (agent identity, loop behavior, execution settings)
- CEO proposes strategic breakdown → board approves
- Define the CEO's reports: CTO, CMO, CFO, etc.
- Each gets their own adapter config and role definition
- Define their reports: engineers under CTO, marketers under CMO, etc.
- Set budgets, define initial strategic tasks
- Hit go — agents start their heartbeats and the company runs
Guidelines
There are two runtime modes Paperclip must support:
local_trusted(default): single-user local trusted deployment with no login frictionauthenticated: login-required mode that supports both private-network and public deployment exposure policies
Canonical mode design and command expectations live in doc/DEPLOYMENT-MODES.md.
Further Detail
See SPEC.md for the full technical specification and TASKS.md for the task management data model.
Paperclip’s core identity is a control plane for autonomous AI companies, centered on companies, org charts, goals, issues/comments, heartbeats, budgets, approvals, and board governance. The public docs are also explicit about the current boundaries: tasks/comments are the built-in communication model, Paperclip is not a chatbot, and it is not a code review tool. The roadmap already points toward easier onboarding, cloud agents, easier agent configuration, plugins, better docs, and ClipMart/ClipHub-style reusable companies/templates.
What Paperclip should do vs. not do
Do
- Stay board-level and company-level. Users should manage goals, orgs, budgets, approvals, and outputs.
- Make the first five minutes feel magical: install, answer a few questions, see a CEO do something real.
- Keep work anchored to issues/comments/projects/goals, even if the surface feels conversational.
- Treat agency / internal team / startup as the same underlying abstraction with different templates and labels.
- Make outputs first-class: files, docs, reports, previews, links, screenshots.
- Provide hooks into engineering workflows: worktrees, preview servers, PR links, external review tools.
- Use plugins for edge cases like rich chat, knowledge bases, doc editors, custom tracing.
Do not
- Do not make the core product a general chat app. The current product definition is explicitly task/comment-centric and “not a chatbot,” and that boundary is valuable.
- Do not build a complete Jira/GitHub replacement. The repo/docs already position Paperclip as organization orchestration, not focused on pull-request review.
- Do not build enterprise-grade RBAC first. Paperclip now has authenticated mode, company memberships, instance roles, and permission grants, but fine-grained enterprise governance should remain secondary to the core company control plane.
- Do not interpret agent-profile privacy flags as project/issue privacy. Work remains company-open by default, while explicitly private issues and projects use their own task ACLs.
- Do not lead with raw bash logs and transcripts. Default view should be human-readable intent/progress, with raw detail beneath.
- Do not force users to understand provider/API-key plumbing unless absolutely necessary. There are active onboarding/auth issues already; friction here is clearly real.
Specific design goals
-
Time-to-first-success under 5 minutes A fresh user should go from install to “my CEO completed a first task” in one sitting.
-
Board-level abstraction always wins The default UI should answer: what is the company doing, who is doing it, why does it matter, what did it cost, and what needs my approval.
-
Conversation stays attached to work objects “Chat with CEO” should still resolve to strategy threads, decisions, tasks, or approvals.
-
Progressive disclosure Top layer: human-readable summary. Middle layer: checklist/steps/artifacts. Bottom layer: raw logs/tool calls/transcript.
-
Output-first Work is not done until the user can see the result: file, document, preview link, screenshot, plan, or PR.
-
Execution visibility without log worship Active runs, recovery issues, blockers, and work products should be first-class surfaces. Raw transcripts are available when needed, but they are not the primary product surface.
-
Local-first, cloud-ready The mental model should not change between local solo use and shared/private or public/cloud deployment.
-
Safe autonomy Auto mode is allowed; hidden token burn is not.
-
Thin core, rich edges Put optional chat, knowledge, and special surfaces into plugins/extensions rather than bloating the control plane.
Experimental iMessage Photon channel
A Photon Cloud project can represent one agent through the existing experimental channel subsystem. DMs and explicitly enabled groups create or continue task-bound conversations. Linked sender identity is the default; telephone numbers, email addresses, names, and group membership do not grant Paperclip authority. Photos/files and ordinary questions/confirmations use the existing attachment, interaction, continuation, and publication contracts. Pause and Disconnect govern runtime behavior independently of the UI gate. Local Mac access, unsolicited conversations, and SMS/RCS fallback are excluded. Live qualification is required before release readiness. Pro shared allocation supports DMs only, with sender enrollment in Photon and separate identity linking in Paperclip. Shared channels reserve one project, not a pool phone number; group admission and publication are disabled. Dedicated allocation retains one selected number and individually enabled groups.
See iMessage Photon for the implementation contract, setup, recovery, boundaries, and qualification status.
Experimental persistent agent conversations
Agent Chat is an opt-in core task presentation (enableAgentChat, off by default). Each person has one persistent task-backed conversation per agent and company, with ordinary company task visibility. The shared task composer, transcript, tools, files, and document panel remain the interaction surface. Agents clarify goals and hand substantial execution to linked, assigned tasks; a reply ends a turn without completing the conversation. /new starts fresh provider context in the same conversation while preserving visible history and artifacts. Healthy idle conversations wait for a message and do not count as unfinished execution work. See doc/plans/2026-09-10-agent-chat.md for the implementation contract.
Agent chat project handoff (2026-09-11)
Chat supports research and full plan drafting/revision in its existing plan document. On handoff, each ordinary assigned task receives the relevant plan in its own plan document, committed with task creation before execution is scheduled. The source plan remains in the conversation. Plan acceptance hands off execution; it never switches the conversation into implementation.
Chat instructions require selecting a suitable project, reusing an existing one where appropriate. The project requirement is prompt-only; ordinary projectless tasks remain supported. New parent relationships beneath conversation tasks are rejected by task services, including direct API creation and reparenting. Existing children remain readable/editable and can be moved elsewhere. The Subtasks panel is unchanged.
The create_project runtime tool uses the normal project API with durable idempotency. list_projects and list_project_repositories support selection. Multiple repositoryIds select authorized catalog entries; multiple HTTPS GitHub repositoryUrls register existing repositories absent from the catalog. IDs and URLs may be combined, but cannot accompany an explicit workspace. URLs do not create repositories on GitHub or grant credentials. Execution uses normal repository access rules. Repository IDs are revalidated against the authenticated run's responsible user and connection grants. Agents should consider proper available repositories, clarify material ambiguity, and use repository-free projects when appropriate for non-code work.
Confirmed project creation appears as a durable card in the shared task transcript, including selected repository links. Tasks are linked inline. Failed creation never produces a success card. Tool evals cover planning/handoff, project/repository selection, retries, permission and mode denials, and ordinary delegation regressions using the production chat directive.
In-app announcements
An optional announcement card shares product news with board users on opening or returning to Paperclip. Dismissals persist per user across companies and browsers within an instance. Operators can disable fetching independently of telemetry. See Announcements.
Agent chat discovery
With Agent Chat enabled, Chat is the first row of the Work section and opens a secondary sidebar beside the primary nav. It lists every agent you can chat with: the open conversation first, then your other conversations by recent activity, then the rest of the roster alphabetically. Terminated agents and agents you have left are omitted unless you have history with them. Search filters by name, title, or role; + starts or reopens a conversation. Selecting an agent opens their persistent conversation; it does not reset history or create a task until the existing first-write flow requires one.
Beside a conversation, the side panel opens on the agent's tasks: one card per task the agent created, was assigned, commented on, or acted on, newest first, with the task list's filters and a sort control. The agent's artifacts are a second card stack available from the panel's + menu. Both open in a new tab so the conversation stays open.
Combined Inbox + Task List
An opt-in experimental setting (enableCombinedInboxTasks, off by default)
folds Inbox into Tasks. The Inbox nav row goes away and its unread badge moves
to Tasks. A Views menu on the task list covers the inbox views (Mine, Unread,
Blocked, Recent, Everything) and the task-status views (All, Active, Backlog,
Done). Bare /issues opens the last-used view, defaulting to Mine; links that
carry a task filter open All. Old /inbox links redirect to the matching view.
CSV file previews
Task attachment and workspace file tabs render CSV files as tables by default. The first record supplies column headers. Row numbers, row and column counts, and sticky headers help operators scan exports. Rendered and raw view icons remain next to download; raw view preserves the original source. The table shows up to 500 data rows and 100 columns, with a notice when the preview is limited. Download retains the complete file.
Filesystem access boundary (2026-10-20)
Filesystem isolation belongs to the OS, execution environment, and storage layout. Paperclip authorizes the current task/run, company, explicitly selected configuration, execution policy, and repository credentials. It does not infer file permissions from other tasks or agents that previously used the same directory, overlapping roots, symlink aliases, or shared Git storage. Existing files under an authorized task root may be read subject to OS access and API path containment.
Private task records, comments, attachments, run logs, full workspace metadata, and
operation logs retain their app authorization. Workspace _issuePrivacySources and
operation privacy metadata protect app-record disclosure; they do not grant or deny
filesystem execution or task-bound file browsing. Current trust and sandbox policy,
publication receipts, binding checks, and lifecycle locks remain authoritative.
Agent connection administration (2026-10-13)
Standard agents can configure connections through the same domain APIs used by the app, bounded by their grants and their responsible user's current authority. Fresh standard agents for default Operators can manage app/tool connections, chat/email channels, AI accounts and pools, profiles and gateways without additional grants. Existing grants are not backfilled; explicit restrictions persist. Gateway administration retains the responsible human's administrative permission and does not grant agents blanket tools:admin.
The agent performs authorized setup, reuses saved accounts and drafts, and hands off only required human authentication, consent, credential entry or identity confirmation. Saved handoffs resume through existing task continuation after current authority is rechecked. Management, tool execution and approval remain separate. Private accounts, host commands and stored credentials retain their boundaries; agent-issued gateway clients preserve issuer and responsible-user restrictions at use time.
Authorized policy administration includes user-requested changes that loosen the acting agent’s own tool controls. These writes remain bounded by management grants, resource scope and the responsible user’s current authority; they do not need an additional approval solely because the agent is a target. Subsequent tool calls obey the resulting policy. Agents cannot approve their own governed action requests or edit their own principal permission grants.
The implementation, operation inventory, permission matrix and fixture qualification are recorded in Agent API parity for connection configuration. Provider fixtures establish API behavior; they do not constitute live provider setup or an empirical agent-success claim.