Files
PaperClipAI/maps
DottaandPaperclip d64cb7be52 fix(ui): identify accounts in AI connection choices (#17738)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agent settings select an authorized AI account independently of the
harness and model.
> - Multiple accounts can have the same provider name.
> - The account picker and legacy adoption dialog showed only that name.
> - Operators could not distinguish a personal API key from a shared
subscription during credential repair.
> - This pull request shows the existing sign-in method, sharing scope,
and available account identity before selection and adoption.
> - Operators can select the intended account while the existing access
and validation checks remain effective.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #14970 for the shared account selection control. No duplicate
account-identity repair was found.

**What happened?**

Two authorized OpenAI accounts appeared as identical `OpenAI` choices.
The adoption dialog repeated that ambiguous name. The list response
already contained the account method, scope, and identity, but the UI
omitted them.

**Expected behavior**

An operator can distinguish a personal API key from a company-shared
subscription and confirm the selected account before saving.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Make a personal OpenAI API-key account and a shared OpenAI
subscription available to an agent. Give both the name `OpenAI`.
2. Open Harness / Runtime and choose a managed connection for a legacy
agent.
3. Inspect the two choices and the adoption confirmation.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced on master `a1f77821b9cd5c9c846fdf7a0fa5cc620ad2b6bb`.

**Deployment mode**

Hosted staging and the source UI regression.

## What Changed

- Show the sign-in method, personal/shared scope, and available account
or owner identity in connection labels.
- Use the same label in the selected value and legacy adoption
confirmation. Match the confirmation to both the connection and grant.
Wrap dropdown choices so narrow screens retain the account identity, and
expose the full selected label in the trigger title.
- Add a behavioral regression with duplicate provider names, exact grant
selection, and disabled unavailable accounts.
- Update affected Storybook interaction selectors, the account guide,
and the agent verification recipe.

## Verification

- Before the fix, the new regression fails because duplicate accounts
have no distinguishing metadata. The other 13 field tests pass.
- After the fix, all 67 tests in `ui/src/components/ai-connections`
pass. The regression selects the exact personal grant and keeps the
unavailable option disabled.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass locally. The full `pnpm
test:run` command was stopped after embedded PostgreSQL failed to
initialize after five attempts in an unrelated native-runtime suite. Its
log is retained. Current-head CI partitions must establish full test
coverage.
- Token gates, map checks, Storybook catalog checks, and all 30
map/catalog contract tests pass.
- In local Chrome, the existing production-component Storybook dropdown
shows method and scope. Its nine interaction steps pass, as do all 19
steps in the new-agent connection-modes story. At a 320-pixel preview
width, two shared OpenAI subscriptions show their distinct account
identities in full, including during keyboard selection. These fixtures
do not establish provider authentication.
- Separately, the staging credential-repair workflow validated an
existing authorized shared OpenAI connection, persisted the agent
binding across reload, and resumed the original task into real
provider/tool execution. This configuration recovery does not deploy
this UI patch or establish task completion.
- All CI completes on final head
`a283bda2ad2f026f4f3c0fee03bf2962b0ad6e02`: 55 successful checks, the
neutral Paperclip review, and two intentionally skipped Storybook
checks; no pending or failed checks. This includes the partitioned
tests, typecheck, build, runner suites, canary, and eight browser
shards. Greptile and Paperclip review both rate this exact head 5/5 with
no unresolved findings. [CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40338613167).
- The review's selected-trigger truncation finding is fixed in the final
head. Its title assertion failed before the fix, and all 67
account-selection tests, UI typecheck, and token gates pass afterward.

## Risks

- Labels are longer and can truncate in narrow selected-value controls;
the trigger title exposes the complete label. Dropdown choices wrap, and
the adoption dialog uses the complete label.
- The UI uses existing authorized account metadata. It adds no
credential reads, access grants, provider fallback, or account selection
policy.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex (GPT-6). The exact serving model identifier and context
window are not exposed in this session. The agent used code editing,
terminal tests, and browser tools.

## 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>
2026-10-26 10:28:59 -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.

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

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. 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.