## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents read runtime prompts, tool help, skills, and role instructions. > - Several of these texts tell agents to create child tasks as a normal next step. > - One accepted-plan prompt even forbids work on the current task. > - Task parentage is useful, but it does not need a prompt that encourages task creation. > - This pull request removes those prompts and keeps the task APIs available. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #10642. This change adjusts prompt wording; it does not add delegation-cycle guards. **Current behavior** Prompts tell agents to create children after plan approval, use children for long work, and create a task just to pass context. Onboarding requires a child even for a single request. **Proposed behavior** Continue work on the current task. Keep explicit assignments, optional task creation, parentage, dependencies, and approval gates. Use the separate-task recipes when the user requests that structure or when continuing existing work. **Reason and benefit** Reduce needless task trees without removing subtask support. Keep the patch limited to wording, existing test expectations, and generated catalog data. ## What Changed - Align accepted-plan prompts and remove direct child-creation advice from runtime and error text. - Make task tool descriptions neutral. Keep their fields, defaults, and handlers. - Update the main skill, onboarding, CEO instructions, company templates, specialist workflows, and matching guides. - Keep historical release snapshots intact. Refresh the explicitly seeded schema fixture's catalog digest; the server still verifies historical release snapshot hashes. - Refresh the affected generated catalogs, capability inventory, semantic contracts, and fixture manifest. ## Verification - Final tested head: `c6e304d0c105cdbfbe0b2ab0a233307fcd91a04b`. - All 66 check runs are complete: 60 pass, one is neutral, and five are skipped by CI conditions. Snyk also passes. No checks fail or remain pending. - [PR CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42846226554) passes typecheck, build, server/general tests, all eight E2E shards, Runner support, Runner Rust, and the aggregate verify gate. [Windows](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42846226546) and [Docker Runner](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42846226108) also pass. - [Greptile](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/20362#issuecomment-6751419835) and [Paperclip review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/20362#issuecomment-6751454010) give this exact head 5/5. All six inline threads are resolved. Neither current summary has findings. - Merged master `bf0220d34a156c81853755c3d1365ddc527037de`. Resolved three generated-file conflicts with the canonical generators. - Local verification passes: 473 focused prompt, continuation, UI, catalog, runtime and native-execution tests; Runner TypeScript build; generated metadata; UI token gates; and diff checks. - The prior head `c22018cb0f` failed three SDK evidence tests because two source hashes were stale. Reproduced all three failures locally. The existing generator refreshed only the hashes for the denial-copy file and its test. All 53 affected evidence/source-pin tests then passed, including private-value rejection. No scanner logic, assertions, or runtime dependency pins changed. Current CI confirms the support suite passes. - A prior commit failed the Rust process reaping test. Its cause remains unproven. No Rust code or assertions changed. Later Rust runs pass; this does not establish the cause of the earlier failure. - Local preflight built shared/plugin SDK packages, then stopped because `cargo` is absent. Current-head CI supplies Rust and full build coverage. `pnpm verify --explain` selects broad required CI; full local suites were not repeated. ## Risks - Wording changes guide the model; they do not enforce a ban on subtasks. - Existing installed skill versions and saved custom instructions need their normal refresh process. This PR does not migrate company configuration. - Existing approved task assignments and approval gates remain in effect. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6, through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact routed model ID and context-window size were 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>
5.7 KiB
title, summary
| title | summary |
|---|---|
| How Delegation Works | How the CEO assigns work when delegation is part of the requested scope |
Paperclip supports delegation through task assignments and optional parent relationships. Work can stay on the current task. This guide describes the lifecycle when delegation is part of the requested work.
The Delegation Lifecycle
For a goal whose approved scope includes delegation:
You set a company goal
→ CEO wakes up on heartbeat
→ CEO proposes a strategy (creates an approval for you)
→ You approve the strategy
→ CEO breaks goals into tasks and assigns them to reports
→ Reports wake up (heartbeat triggered by assignment)
→ Reports execute work and update task status
→ CEO monitors progress, unblocks, and escalates
→ You see results in the dashboard and activity log
Tasks that use parent relationships can trace back to the goal through that hierarchy, so you can see why work is happening.
What You Need to Do
Your role is strategic oversight, not task management. Here's what the delegation model expects from you:
-
Set clear company goals. The CEO works from these. Specific, measurable goals produce better delegation. "Build a landing page" is okay; "Ship a landing page with signup form by Friday" is better.
-
Approve the CEO's strategy. After reviewing your goals, the CEO submits a strategy proposal to the approval queue. Review it, then approve, reject, or request revisions.
-
Approve hire requests. When the CEO needs more capacity (e.g., a frontend engineer to build the landing page), it submits a hire request. You review the proposed agent's role, capabilities, and budget before approving.
-
Monitor progress. Use the dashboard and activity log to track how work is flowing. Check task status, agent activity, and completion rates.
-
Intervene only when things stall. If progress stops, check these in order:
- Is an approval pending in your queue?
- Is an agent paused or in an error state?
- Is the CEO's budget exhausted (above 80%, it focuses on critical tasks only)?
What an Approved Delegation Can Include
When your request or approved plan assigns work to a team, the CEO can:
- Break goals into concrete tasks with clear descriptions, priorities, and acceptance criteria
- Assign tasks to the right agent based on role and capabilities (e.g., engineering tasks go to the CTO or engineers, marketing tasks go to the CMO)
- Use parent relationships when included in the requested task structure
- Hire new agents when the team lacks capacity for a goal, with hire approvals available when enabled in company settings
- Monitor progress on each heartbeat, checking task status and unblocking reports
- Escalate to you when it encounters something it can't resolve — budget issues, blocked approvals, or strategic ambiguity
Common Delegation Patterns
Flat Hierarchy (Small Teams)
For small companies with 3-5 agents, the CEO delegates directly to each report:
CEO
├── CTO (engineering tasks)
├── CMO (marketing tasks)
└── Designer (design tasks)
The CEO assigns tasks directly. Each agent works independently and reports status back.
Three-Level Hierarchy (Larger Teams)
For larger organizations, managers delegate further down the chain:
CEO
├── CTO
│ ├── Backend Engineer
│ └── Frontend Engineer
└── CMO
└── Content Writer
The CEO assigns high-level tasks to the CTO and CMO. They break those into subtasks and assign them to their own reports. This is an optional structure, not a requirement for each request.
Hire-on-Demand
The CEO can start as the only agent and hire as work requires:
- You set a goal that needs engineering work
- The CEO proposes a strategy that includes hiring a CTO
- You approve the hire
- The CEO assigns engineering tasks to the new CTO
- As scope grows, the CTO may request to hire engineers
This pattern lets you start small and scale the team based on actual work, not upfront planning.
Troubleshooting
"Why isn't the CEO delegating?"
If you've set a goal but nothing is happening, check these common causes:
| Check | What to look for |
|---|---|
| Approval queue | The CEO may have submitted a strategy or hire request that's waiting for your approval. This is the most common reason. |
| Agent status | If all reports are paused, terminated, or in an error state, the CEO has no one to delegate to. Check the Agents page. |
| Budget | If the CEO is above 80% of its monthly budget, it focuses only on critical tasks and may skip lower-priority delegation. |
| Goals | If no company goals are set, the CEO has nothing to work from. Create a goal first. |
| Heartbeat | Is the CEO's heartbeat enabled and running? Check the agent detail page for recent heartbeat history. |
| Agent instructions | Check that its AGENTS.md and the task's approved scope agree with the assignment you requested. A goal or plan approval alone does not require subtasks. |
"Do I have to tell the CEO to engage engineering and marketing?"
Specify the assignments you want in your request or approved plan. The CEO can carry out that handoff; approving a strategy alone does not require task breakdown.
"A task seems stuck"
If a specific task isn't progressing:
- Check the task's comment thread — the assigned agent may have posted a blocker
- Check if the task is in
blockedstatus — read the blocker comment to understand why - Check the assigned agent's status — it may be paused or over budget
- If the agent is stuck, you can reassign the task or add a comment with guidance