Files
PaperClipAI/maps
DottaandPaperclip 519b345d69 fix(ui): expose governed retained-file recovery (#18848)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The control plane must preserve saved work before it admits another
attempt.
> - Retained-file recovery already has an authorized API and a bounded
worker.
> - The task UI hid that operation when workspace repair blocked
execution.
> - The run inspector could check source identity but could not request
preservation.
> - This pull request exposes that existing operation with its exact
source binding.
> - The worker still owns file verification, stop receipts, and
execution release.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #18678 and #18803 for the existing retained-source and continuation
contracts.

**What happened?**

A failed native run could leave an active, system-owned export recovery
action. The task showed a generic Retry control. Its workspace repair
gate correctly refused another provider turn. The run inspector offered
only read-only source inspection. The authorized file-preservation API
had no production UI caller.

**Expected behavior**

An authorized board operator can request preservation of the exact
retained files. The UI keeps the repair hold until the server records
verified preservation. A lost response must keep the same request
identity.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Use an active retained-export action whose workspace recovery is
blocked and retryable.
2. Open its source task while `workspaceRepairRequired` is true.
3. Open the exact failed run and inspect recovery.
4. Before this change, neither surface can request the existing
file-preservation operation.

**Paperclip version or commit**

The focused regression fails on master
`1f55073f96b2485f49f98ee8c261aa14ec2f79ac` before the production UI
edits.

I checked the roadmap and searched open public PRs for this UI repair.
No duplicate was found. This is a repair to the existing recovery
capability.

## What Changed

- Add Recover saved files to the existing task recovery area and
exact-run inspector. Reuse the current board task-mutation access check
and the existing `recoverWorkspace` API.
- Read the exact action, run, company, task, and source observation
again before sending. Refuse changed, retired, foreign, unverified, or
non-retryable sources.
- Save one account-scoped request before POST. Keep its key through a
lost response and reload. Reconcile with GET before an explicit resend.
Use a new key only after an explicit click and a fresh, confirmed
exhausted attempt; do not resend automatically.
- Show queued, recovering, blocked, and verified receipt states
separately. A request acknowledgement does not mark files saved or
resolve the task hold. Hide generic Retry for native export holds. Keep
the existing Retry path for legacy restoration.
- Cover both mounted surfaces and negative access, source, account,
persistence, duplicate-click, and lost-response cases. Update the
existing design guidance and correct the affected run-detail recipe
only.

## Verification

- RED: the new component regression fails with `missing Recover saved
files` before production changes. The original failure is retained.
- GREEN: 265 tests pass across
`WorkspaceExportRecovery.control.test.tsx`,
`WorkspaceExportRecovery.test.tsx`,
`RunWorkspaceRecoverySurface.test.tsx`, and the full
`IssueDetail.test.tsx` suite.
- Review RED/GREEN: the prior UI reused the failed key after a confirmed
exhausted attempt. A focused regression now proves a different key for
an explicit new attempt, while the lost-response controls still prove
key reuse. Mounted task controls prove that verified native preservation
stays available, unverified or stale native sources never offer generic
Retry, and viewers cannot mutate. A separate RED against the exact prior
UI proves the lost legacy control. Its GREEN clicks the existing legacy
Retry API while the workspace hold remains active.
- Full UI TypeScript check passes: `node scripts/run-tsc.mjs -p
ui/tsconfig.json --noEmit`.
- `node scripts/check-token-gates.mjs`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`,
and `git diff --check` pass. The map check proves structure only.
- One early legacy test probe used an unsigned fixture and a readonly
array; those setup failures are retained. The corrected same-user
fixture proves the source RED and GREEN. The first test command used an
unnamed project filter and stopped before loading tests. The corrected
package configuration produced the recorded RED. One initial storage
fault probe did not intercept jsdom's storage method; the corrected
prototype fault proves that unavailable storage sends no POST.
- Dependencies use Node 24.22.2 and a frozen pnpm 9.15.4 install with
scripts disabled. The maintained shared and SDK prerequisite builds pass
on this base. No dependency or lockfile changes are included.
- A later Paperclip Review follow-up found the plain-HTTP UUID gap. Its
focused regression fails before POST with the prior direct call, then
passes with the existing UUID helper. The same storage, lost-response,
retry and source controls remain green.
- Original full CI `41715060582` fails two Cloud-auth task-entry browser
checks at their existing heading assertion. The retained original
artifacts show a late task pane (one already contains the heading; one
still shows Loading conversation). The cause remains unproven. No auth,
fixture, timeout or assertion change is included. Fresh Greptile is 5/5
with zero open threads and Paperclip Review passes on the UUID fix head.
Current full CI `41720068249` attempt 1 failed. Three workers were
terminated by AWS Spot capacity loss. The CLI startup and dense-ZIP
checks also timed out at their unchanged deadlines. The CLI/shared input
trees match a previous passing CI job, and the dense-ZIP case passes one
focused local check. The CLI timeout cause remains unknown. The
coordinator requested one bounded recheck. Attempt 2 succeeds on the
same source, with all current checks green. No source, fixture, timeout
or assertion changed for that recheck. The worker issued no retry. This
pass does not establish the original CLI timeout cause.
- Full recursive typecheck, repository tests, and application build were
not run locally under the bounded UI verification scope. Full CI is
requested.
- No live preservation request, provider turn, deployment, or sandbox
cleanup was performed for this repair. Original saved-file recovery
remains unverified until rollout and real acceptance.

## Risks

The client access check is a display guard. The existing server
authorization and physical source, ownership, stop, and snapshot checks
remain authoritative. Unavailable browser storage blocks the request
before POST. A failed acknowledgement retains the request for its owner.
The UI never calls task Retry, recovery resolution, reconstruction,
provider execution, or destructive cleanup. The existing worker retains
its bounded recovery policy and may finish the saved result after real
preservation.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with repository inspection, code editing,
and test execution. The exact runtime model ID and context-window size
are not exposed to this agent.

## 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>
2026-11-03 16:00:03 -06:00
..

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.

The chat scenario catalog adds natural-language requests, starting context and expected conversational outcomes for the same capability IDs. It lives with Product E2E as planning data; a scenario reference is neither a registered execution nor evidence that a journey passed.

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.

Capability identifiers

The feature ID is the recipe filename without .md, such as onboarding. The full capability ID joins that feature ID and a Sub-features key with /: the company key in feature-map/onboarding.md is onboarding/company. Its agent-access-map/onboarding.md companion uses the same local company key. The feature-map index lists the existing feature and full capability IDs.

Each child page states Feature ID: `onboarding`. after its introduction or product-map link. In feature recipes, show the full ID beside the parsed local key: - `company`: `onboarding/company` — create a company. In access companions and Storybook verification guidance, keep the existing local heading and put Capability ID: `onboarding/company`. beneath it. These labels make the existing identifiers visible without changing keys, anchors, or ID generation.

Use full capability IDs in cross-feature references, Storybook annotations, tests, issues, PRs, and verification evidence. Both segments use lowercase letters, digits, and hyphens. Keep filenames and keys stable when display titles or navigation labels change; renaming either changes the capability ID.

Entry-point IDs describe a surface, such as web-wizard, and are scoped to their recipe. Reference them with a recipe link, such as onboarding.md#web-wizard, and record the capability exercised separately. Navigation section labels are not capability IDs. See IDs and references for examples.

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, and its feature ID, followed by one H2 backticked local key per product sub-feature. Each capability starts with its full capability ID and 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

Add entries only for substantial new features under the feature-map scope rule. Routine fixes, polish, refactors, performance work, and test changes do not require map updates. Correct or remove existing text only when behavior or access changes make it materially inaccurate; keep the correction local to the affected recipe or companion. 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. Update the corresponding chat scenarios when their request, assumptions or expected outcome changes; use multiple cases for meaningfully different starting conditions rather than treating an API path as conversational coverage.

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. Keep the feature-map README's readable ID index aligned with those sources; it does not register entries for generation. Do not 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.