Files
PaperClipAI/maps/agent-access-map
DottaandPaperclip b8f8b904fa feat(routines): preserve automation ancestry through webhooks (#18772)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Routines let external services start agent tasks through a normal
webhook.
> - A repair routine must recognize failures from work that it created.
> - The receiver added in #18714 put Sentry payload parsing and repair
policy in core routine intake.
> - This pull request replaces that receiver with verified creation
provenance on normal routine calls.
> - Sentry can filter the resulting tags before it sends a normal
routine webhook.
> - The benefit is reusable provenance and loop prevention without a
provider-specific route.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Problem or motivation**

A Sentry repair alert can start another repair when its own work fails.
The dedicated receiver in #18714 solved this through a Sentry-specific
payload contract. Ordinary routine webhooks also need a trusted way to
retain the automation that created their tasks.

**Proposed solution**

Use the existing public `/fire` route and its current authentication. An
optional source run credential proves a live Paperclip caller. Store the
caller separately from webhook JSON. Follow recorded task creation links
and export bounded ancestry tags on run-failure events. Let Sentry alert
filters exclude repair-origin work.

**Alternatives considered**

Keep the dedicated Sentry receiver, accept sender-supplied origin IDs,
or filter only the immediate routine. The first couples core intake to
one provider. The second accepts unverified claims. The third misses
child tasks, standalone follow-ups, and calls through another routine.

**Roadmap alignment**

This improves the shipped Scheduled Routines and Activity log
capabilities. It does not add a new scheduler or incident system.
Related work: #18714 is the implementation replaced here; #9727 adds
source-task navigation and UI attribution; #10206 proposes exception-led
routine dispatch. This PR uses existing task creation records and does
not implement either of those broader proposals.

## What Changed

- Remove the Sentry-only route, parser, authentication exception, and
payload-specific tests and documentation from #18714.
- Add optional `X-Paperclip-Source-Run-Token` support to normal routine
webhooks. Validate the standard run JWT, company, instance, agent, live
run, and cancellation state. Authenticated routine API calls also retain
their validated caller.
- Add nullable `routine_runs.created_by_run_id`. Keep the reference
after source-run deletion so missing history becomes unknown. Separate
callers during coalescing, including legacy open tasks.
- Follow company-scoped routine receipts, creator runs, task parents,
and legacy creation activity. Mark missing, foreign, cyclic, private, or
excessive ancestry for safe alert filtering.
- Add event-local `automation_origin_status`, `automation_routine_ids`,
and `task_shareable` tags through the existing Sentry SDK hook. Cap
ancestry at 32 reads and share a 750 ms deadline across metadata and
ancestry lookup. Keep the SDK one-second wait and eight-lookup
concurrency bound. Redact the source credential from HTTP logs and
Sentry request headers.
- Preserve unexpected database failures as server errors without
rejection bookkeeping in an aborted transaction. Document 409, 415, and
422 responses for the normal webhook.
- Keep `routineScopedRunId` as generic opt-in
`X-Paperclip-Idempotency-Scope: routine` support. Default trigger
receipts and timestamped HMAC replay protection retain their current
scope.
- Add [the Sentry repair
tutorial](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/codex/routine-creation-provenance/docs/guides/board-operator/sentry-run-failure-repairs.md),
API documentation, OpenAPI headers, and capability-map updates.

## Verification

At commit `0f4a0051528edd1367a921a76a8050c3fd087872`:

- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed for the full workspace.
Migration numbering and safety checks passed.
- The focused service, route, Sentry, redaction, and OpenAPI suites
passed 228 tests in five files. The database Sentry resolver and OpenAPI
invocation passed 33 tests in two files. These are separate invocations
with some overlap.
- The full routine HTTP suite passed all 15 tests. The authenticated API
case failed before the caller-wiring fix and passed after it. The
fixture loads the real route-owned services. No test deadline was
raised.
- The real `@sentry/node@10.71.0` suite passed all 12 tests. It uses an
in-memory transport and sends no events to Sentry. It covers terminal
failures, saved-message interruptions, event isolation, and source-token
redaction.
- Regression tests also cover forged, expired, foreign, and cancelled
caller credentials; payload spoofing; inherited routine ancestry; legacy
coalescing; deleted history; private work; cycles; query and time
limits; database error causes; and routine-wide receipts. The new error
and budget cases failed before their fixes.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` passed. The map
check covers 35 areas and 192 capabilities.
- The full local Vitest command was stopped for a required master merge
after four chat shards passed 1,278 tests. No full local pass is
claimed. An earlier combined HTTP run hit an existing malformed-ID
timeout whose original cause is not established; the final full HTTP
suite passes. An extra local run of the unchanged heartbeat scheduling
file passed 12 of 13 tests and failed a readiness-status assertion. Its
logs also reported a missing fixture user membership. The same 13-test
file now passes in current-head CI.
- All GitHub Actions checks pass on this commit. Three jobs initially
lost their self-hosted runners. One server shard initially failed while
deleting a company in an unchanged heartbeat test because of a
`company_skills` foreign key. One retry passed all affected jobs without
code changes. That server shard passed all 499 tests, and all eight
browser shards passed.
- Fresh Greptile review is 5/5 on this commit. All six review threads
are resolved. The separate Paperclip Review check remains queued. Its
bot reports that work is paused. A maintainer must resume the assigned
review work to complete that check. No full green check state is claimed
while this external gate is pending.
- Live Sentry configuration and deployment are outside this PR's
acceptance evidence. The tutorial describes setup, a controlled failure,
and a repair-origin exclusion check for operators to run after
deployment.

## Risks

- Normal app webhooks retain the sender's full JSON in company-readable
routine history and the execution task. Alert filters and task
visibility are not content scrubbers. Operators must scrub sensitive
event data in Sentry before forwarding it and keep connection tests in
setup mode.
- Existing users of `/sentry-run-failures` must move to `/fire` and add
the documented Sentry filters before enabling repair intake. The old
route is removed. Stored tasks and receipts remain.
- The additive migration uses `ADD COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS`. It does not
rewrite historical tasks or infer missing provenance.
- Unknown or unshareable ancestry is excluded by the tutorial's alert
rule. Missing history, an enrichment timeout, or more than five routine
IDs can therefore suppress a repair webhook while retaining the Sentry
error.
- An external webhook without a verified source credential starts a new
receiving-routine origin. Its JSON cannot establish upstream Paperclip
ancestry. Sentry must not store a Paperclip run credential.
- Routine-wide receipt reuse needs a stable sender key. A static Sentry
custom header is not a per-event key. The tutorial keeps delivery
deduplication separate from loop prevention.

> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 model family, with reasoning, repository access,
code editing, and test execution. The session does not expose the exact
model variant or context window size.

## 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
- [ ] 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>
2026-11-03 09:33:17 -06:00
..

Paperclip agent access map

This map accompanies the feature map. It records APIs, agent entry points, permission boundaries and verification for the same capability IDs. The shared contract defines the format and maintenance rules.

The chat scenario catalog uses these same IDs for human requests and expected outcomes. Its scenarios retain the access boundaries here; neither a CEO role nor a planned scenario grants board authority or establishes a working production tool binding.

Use full capability IDs when referring to access contracts outside their file: onboarding/company means the company capability in onboarding.md in both maps. The feature index lists feature and capability IDs; IDs and references explains entry-point references and stable naming.

Browse access contracts

The same-named feature recipes define navigation and capability IDs. Run node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs for the generated maps/generated/agent-access-map.md index, or browse the published feature guide. Add or update the affected companion; there is no central registration or count.

Existing baseline source references describe the original inspection, not current verification. Record new executed evidence in the PR, issue, or CI artifact with its revision and scope. Do not refresh unrelated headers as bookkeeping.

Using an entry

Read its Policy and Gaps before selecting an agent path. Native fallback, legacy REST/CLI, stdio MCP and a personal assistant connection can have different authority and availability. Use a real admitted production binding; a scenario declaration is not an installed tool. A restricted entry records current enforcement and leaves any unresolved delegation decision visible.

For API catalog disagreements, follow the route/service authorization and record discovery drift. For not-applicable, retain the concrete exception and local path. Split shared business operations from client-only presentation.

Use maintain-verification-skill to reconcile changed source and both maps. Use verify-paperclip and existing API/runner/MCP fixtures to collect the permitted-agent and denial evidence; report blocked/not-run coverage honestly. Run node scripts/check-maps.mjs after editing. The structural check does not certify permissions, API catalog coverage, tool admission or live behavior.

Native REST transport

The call_api parity change reconciles affected baselines against 58e16dbddfc9c8d0cf60867f9d9847f0feda055b and the changes in this PR. Ordinary REST operations use the same route authorization as legacy agent REST. Dedicated tools remain optional for those operations; protocol endpoints still need their existing clients. Board-only routes remain restricted for agent identity.

Native search_api / call_api is enabled by default, but explicit server, company-allowlist and binding settings can narrow admission. It requires a running authorized native run, current task assignment and execution-run binding, company and budget authority, task privacy, and a permitted work mode. Ask and Plan retain mutation restrictions, and runs retain their admitted JWT scope during restart recovery even when task mode changes. A waiting agent does not gain independent native control just because a REST route exists. Connection-management reads support Standard, Ask and Plan; mutations require Standard. Skill-test runs and nonstandard task-bridge keys cannot administer connections. These gates supplement each operation's grants, resolved resource and target scope, and responsible-user authority. See the rollout policy and connection authorization.

Credential-bearing replies, including company exports and their legacy alias, stay inline under a 10 MiB limit and use encrypted mutation receipts. Other saved API snapshots are limited to the issuing actor and responsible user, plus authorized administrators. Artifact uploads enforce the same access checks as downloads; private snapshots are excluded from company exports and public company logos. Explicit deliverables use the existing sharing path. Native event history, checkpoints and completion records omit API bodies while preserving receipt metadata and replay digests. Restored webhook secrets use the same encrypted receipt and inline response policy as newly created webhook secrets. Task image access requires the company boundary and the task permission; skill-test and low-trust agents do not need company-wide browsing authority. Completion replay applies the same idempotent projection to stored and expected payloads; the run-log guide describes its fields.

Sources: API client, catalog, native authority, credential storage classification, snapshot access, and history redaction. The affected entries remain baseline and source-only; this reconciliation does not certify every operation. Targeted real-route proof lives in the API integration suite, including owned routines, skill tests, scoped secrets, proposals and private export replay.