Files
PaperClipAI/maps
DottaandPaperclip b8ffeb973a feat(runner): add experimental Grok Bot agent participation (#16219)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents that perform work for a company.
> - The shared Runner owns task admission, authority, receipts and
finalization.
> - An existing Grok Bot needs to receive assignments and return results
through that Runner.
> - The Bot also needs governed access when it starts work from its own
conversation.
> - This PR adds agent-purpose MCP access and routine webhook dispatch.
> - It reuses the external-agent Rust Runner and keeps Grok capabilities
explicit.
> - The provider stays experimental until the real-client managed
journeys pass.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Agent or provider**
Grok Bot, distinct from the Grok Build coding runtime in #13882.

**Why this adapter is useful**
Users can assign work to an existing Bot, receive progress, questions,
documents and files in Paperclip, and let the Bot initiate work under
its agent permissions.

**How the agent is invoked**
A webhook-only routine delivers bounded references. Dedicated
named-agent OAuth and MCP provide inbound calls. Setup follows [Grok
routines](https://cursor.com/help/grok-bot/routines) and [custom
plugins](https://cursor.com/help/grok-bot/connect-plugins). The current
desktop app needs its Bot-generated Webhook URL navigation link when
routine-row clicks fail.

The GitHub search found related Grok Build runtime work, but no existing
Grok Bot agent provider. This extends the roadmap’s existing agent,
Runner, governance and artifact foundations.

## What Changed

- Add default-off Grok Bot participation through the shared real Rust
external backend, preserving native provider identity guarantees and
distinguishing session closure from remote termination.
- Bind agent OAuth to company, agent, client, gateway and authorizer;
recheck permissions and task-bound execution authority without
manufacturing a native identity.
- Persist routine configuration, dispatch intents, authenticated
acknowledgement and recovery holds. Store URL/key together in encrypted
secret storage, use guarded public egress, and never automatically
replay ambiguous HTTP delivery.
- Reuse native tools, durable waiting, completion assessment and review.
Add task-bound file grants through existing artifact storage; suppress
proactive echo dispatch and synchronous result wake loops.
- Enforce the current native deliverable work-mode policy at file-ticket
issuance and use. Add operator retries for confirmed rejected wakes,
with retained receipts, stable retry intent and current-authority
checks. Recovery locks bindings before routine rows. Thread Stop
resolves the selected run and its agent.
- Cancel queued and preparing Stop targets before assignment creation,
restore saved setup after a failed request and successful retry, and
publish the Grok provider descriptor schema. Advance the versioned
Copilot source declaration for the shared schema change; its
qualification remains pending.
- Filter task summaries with the shared privacy policy, preserve
feedback admission when wake delivery is blocked, reconcile settled
delivery receipts without restoring work authority, and bind every Stop
control to its displayed run. Recovery records distinguish dispatch
uncertainty from a revoked session.
- Add resumable guided setup, credential replacement, consent,
management, observed work status and stop/recovery controls, plus an
interactive Storybook journey using the production task thread, question
form and report card. Grok’s own apps remain available; Paperclip
workspace and third-party tools are deferred.

## Verification

- Five focused protocol, authorization, person MCP and Runner files: 192
tests pass. The Grok assigned-work case executes the actual Rust Runner,
saves a document, uploads/deduplicates a file and reaches ordinary
finalization.
- Proactive intake/deduplication and renewed-session recovery pass.
These use scripted clients and synthetic storage; they are not
real-provider acceptance.
- Repository typecheck, production build, token gates, map checks and
Storybook build/catalog checks pass. The local full-suite campaign was
stopped after macOS shared-memory exhaustion repeatedly prevented
embedded PostgreSQL startup. No local aggregate pass is claimed. The
first clean-worker CI run identified avatar fixture/configuration, flag
defaults, feature-card ordering and OpenAPI route-coverage gaps; all
four focused regressions pass after correction. Those regressions pass.
The latest clean-worker CI run also found a Copilot source-hash
declaration mismatch after the shared descriptor update; the corrected
declaration passes all 28 integrity tests. The next review corrections
pass 144 rendered UI tests, 21 OpenAPI tests and 82 Runner
contract/integrity/history tests. The latest database fixtures were
blocked at startup by host shared-memory exhaustion; clean-worker CI
must execute their new regressions. Full current-head CI now passes: 54
successful checks and four intentional skips. The database regression
uses the PostgreSQL driver result shape; file-policy, rejected-feedback
and lock-order cases pass on clean workers. Current-head Greptile is 5/5
with no unresolved findings.
- Rendered setup steps and outbound-only verification were walked
through in Storybook. Simulation cannot enable Done without an
authenticated-reply state.
- Actual client OAuth, continued access, reconnect and one routine wake
with an exact chat acknowledgement were observed separately. This
candidate’s live authenticated challenge, assigned/proactive workflows,
Linux managed artifact, restart and cleanup are not yet qualified. The
provider stays disabled by default.
- The separate Cloud ingress change forwards only exact task-bound
upload/download paths and preserves host identity and header stripping.
- Current Cloud policy reserves Test for pre-merge app/harness
experiments; Staging accepts only master-derived revisions. Real-client
qualification needs a supported, authorized deployment target and
remains outstanding.

## Risks

One append-only migration adds routine/dispatch state and extends shared
bindings and file tickets. The unshipped migrations were regenerated
after upstream consumed their original numbers. Rolling back code
retains the durable rows; revoke grants and inspect unknown remote
activity before resuming dispatch. Grok cannot confirm remote
termination, stream its complete transcript or report spending. Plugins
are account-wide and do not isolate credentials between Bots.
Real-client managed acceptance remains required before enabling the
experimental provider.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex based on GPT-6, with reasoning, code execution and
browser/native UI tools. The exact deployment model ID and
context-window size are not exposed by this runtime.

## 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>
2026-10-13 20:57:42 -05:00
..

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.

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.

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, followed by one H2 backticked ID per product sub-feature. Each capability contains these fields:

  • Review: baseline or operation-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 none only 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.

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. Do not register entries or 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.