## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and their work. > - First-task onboarding turns a user's goal into an approved proposal. > - The interview offers a plan and a team to carry out that plan. > - The instructions leave execution after acceptance unclear. > - An agent can add a plan-only approval boundary and finish without doing the requested work. > - This change makes the approval scope explicit and tests both execution and plan-only outcomes. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** An onboarding agent can treat an interview about building a product as a request for a plan only. It can then retain the approved plan and close onboarding without creating execution tasks. The interview evaluation previously accepted that result. **Expected behavior** Acceptance of an execution proposal starts its selected work. An explicit plan-only request stops after planning. User-requested separate approvals and existing permission and budget controls still apply. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Choose the onboarding interview and describe a deliverable. 2. Accept the saved plan proposal. 3. Check that the agent starts the approved work instead of closing with only a plan. ## What Changed - Clarify execution intent, approval wording, continuation, and completion in the first-task prompt. - Require assigned child work and saved output in the interview acceptance evaluation. Use checkbox acceptance in the regular interview journey and retain conversational acceptance in the approval-reply suite. - Add an explicit plan-only acceptance journey and nine grader regression checks. - Update evaluation counts, grading versions, and onboarding verification guidance. ## Verification - Passed: all applicable CI checks on `198a6b47cac7`, including typechecks, the general and serialized server tests, Runner checks, build, and browser E2E shards. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42324855376). - Passed locally: the full Runner support suite, 6,860 tests across 323 files (three skipped), plus 13 onboarding asset tests. - Passed locally: the full workspace build, workspace package typechecks (server rechecked after restoring excluded-plugin SDK links), and the Runner evaluation TypeScript check. - Passed: map validation and whitespace checks. - Initial broad local checks failed during checkout preparation because PostgreSQL library symlinks and runtime/SDK assets were missing. Restoring the dependency setup made the affected controls pass. The full root test suite passed in CI; it was not rerun locally after that repair. - Live model journeys have not been run. Grader tests do not prove model compliance. ## Risks - Prompt behavior needs live qualification across providers. This change adds no server-side enforcement or permission bypass. - The new plan-only case adds four local evaluation cells. A full campaign now has 56 first-task cells. - Existing proposals that reserve later approval keep that restriction. This change does not rewrite tenant data or start existing onboarding tasks. - No schema migration or deployment is included. ## Model Used - OpenAI `gpt-6.1-sol`, xhigh reasoning effort, with repository tools and local test execution. Context window size is not exposed by 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 (focused and full Runner support locally; full root coverage passed in CI) - [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>
15 KiB
Onboarding and first work — agent access
Product map: Onboarding and first work.
Feature ID: onboarding.
Review date: 2026-10-12. Source commit: f981fa3cc10cb8663a87dec60345fbff46d54d0a.
This is a source-reviewed baseline of representative operations and known gaps. Each capability needs operation-level review before its entire scope can be qualified. No live agent execution is claimed. Follow the map contract for format, permission checks, evidence and maintenance.
Scoped runner-default source review: 2026-10-12 at
eee0534154eaf5d0d3f2bbc97c1e24d86f34a5a5, limited to first-agent selection,
selected-runtime validation and draft restoration. Unrelated baseline entries
retain the original source commit; no live agent verification is added.
instance
Capability ID: onboarding/instance.
Review: baseline.
API: not-applicable — Bootstrapping an instance cannot depend solely on an API served
by that not-yet-running instance.
Agent access: operator-only — Existing CLI onboard/run/doctor / test-drive.
Policy: Instance setup is operator work; company creation is board; agent creation/task creation retain their individual permissions.
Evidence: source-only —
implementation at the reviewed
commit above.
Verification: not-run — exercise the listed local workflow in an authorized, owned
operator environment. Verify its isolation and result; do not count local machine
authority as company-agent API access.
Gaps: Bootstrapping an instance cannot depend solely on an API served by that not-yet-running instance.
company
Capability ID: onboarding/company.
Review: baseline.
API: present — representative operation IDs:
POST /api/companies.POST /api/companies/{companyId}/agents.
Agent access: partial — Board company creation; authorized in-company agent hiring
API.
Policy: Instance setup is operator work; company creation is board; agent creation/task creation retain their individual permissions.
Evidence: source-only —
implementation at the reviewed
commit above.
Verification: not-run — exercise a listed permitted operation with actual agent
credentials/run context; inspect its result and applicable persistence/attribution.
Assert the relevant denied actor, owner, company or mode from Policy. Review the
remaining operations before qualifying the whole capability.
Gaps: API building blocks exist; an ordinary agent cannot create its parent company with a company key.
adapter
Capability ID: onboarding/adapter.
Review: baseline.
API: present — representative operation IDs:
GET /api/companies/{companyId}/adapters/{type}/models.POST /api/companies/{companyId}/adapters/{type}/test-environment.
Agent access: partial — Permitted agent/model API; operator
provider-account/environment setup.
Policy: Instance setup is operator work; company creation is board; agent creation/task creation retain their individual permissions.
The wizard selects the Codex harness and lets the server resolve an automatic
new-agent runner without a runner dropdown. Explicit runner requests remain
available through the agent creation API. Supported-platform and
immutable sandbox evidence follow environment probe policy.
Creation/discovery do not provision a target to determine this default. Adapter
setup validation requires agents:create, plus saved-agent update access when
testing an existing agent; interactive account login additionally requires a
board user and owner-bound session. An agent's right to hire is not login or
instance-environment administration authority.
First-agent onboarding limits the provider picker to Claude and Codex. Other providers remain available through normal agent creation; this UI choice does not change adapter APIs or hiring permissions.
A name-only, held setup has no provider selection yet, so the wizard omits its runner choice until the provider is chosen. The existing board-only setup and saved-agent update permissions remain; normal runner compatibility validation is unchanged. No runnable legacy fallback is created.
Scoped source-only runtime preparation: the existing authorized adapter test
prepares the default Claude CLI in its already acquired sandbox when the image
version is too old for the selected model. It installs a pinned package into a
workspace-private versioned prefix and verifies the executable before the hello
test. This adds no installation API, account grant, environment authority or
engine fallback. Cloud UI omits manual shell debugging and legacy operator hints
while retaining check messages and details. Local, SSH and custom
commands remain operator-managed. Controls:
runtime,
probe, and
wizard. Live managed
authorization and subscription execution remain not-run for this change.
For fresh managed Codex Auto setup, the wizard's explicit Connect path can call
POST /api/environments/{environmentId}/probe?companyId={companyId} before
selected-runtime testing, then refresh scoped adapter discovery. This reuses the
existing board instance-admin/local-implicit probe gate; agents:create alone
is insufficient. A 403, absent proof, changed configuration, missing response
identity or unconfirmed cleanup remains visible. No probe is added to creation
or discovery, no agent/company grant is broadened, and provider authentication
errors never cause an automatic runner switch.
Native setup derives outer sandbox isolation from the server-resolved execution target, as task execution does. This is an internal transport choice, not a request/configuration permission. Local and SSH setup keep Codex isolation; caller-supplied environment flags do not authorize an external sandbox. Existing company, account, probe and registration-cleanup gates still apply. The bounded hello probe retains read-only permissions and no dynamic tools. Its trusted launch skips project-instruction discovery in the new, empty setup workspace. This grants no filesystem or networking permission and does not change instruction discovery for ordinary task execution.
Scoped source review: 2026-10-13, exact baseline
1a0ca66242121e39d88455aa2b52a07acc4a07d9 plus the privately composed onboarding
correction. Wizard controls
and existing Product E2E observer controls
exercise mocked allowed/denied setup and sticky unknown cost coverage. They do
not prove live actor authorization or provider execution. The explicit manual
confirmation-replies.runner-codex.daytona.task-card-accept case requires an
eligible immutable OCI target and the existing probe authority, two identified
setup leases and separately authorized paid/cleanup reservations. Its fixture
neither prequalifies the environment nor creates the agent. Actual Cloud named
snapshot binding, warm/cold signup and live allowed/denied agent checks remain
not-run.
Evidence: source-only —
implementation at the reviewed
commit above.
Scoped Evidence: source-only — wizard/default selection,
creation resolver and
setup/login authorization at the scoped
commit. Existing agent/approval execution preservation follows
hiring access; no live onboarding proof is claimed here.
Verification: not-run — exercise a listed permitted operation with actual agent
credentials/run context; inspect its result and applicable persistence/attribution.
Assert the relevant denied actor, owner, company or mode from Policy. Review the
remaining operations before qualifying the whole capability.
Gaps: Account authorization, environment administration and model selection need separate checks.
Verify automatic onboarding without a post-hire runner change, explicit Legacy,
saved configuration after reload and the actual selected runtime's useful task
plus follow-up. Assert denied agent login/probe and foreign-company account or
environment access separately. These agent-context checks remain not-run.
first-task
Capability ID: onboarding/first-task.
Review: baseline.
API: present — representative operation IDs:
POST /api/companies/{companyId}/issues.POST /api/issues/{issueId}/children.
Agent access: available — Native create_task / agent REST / CLI issue.
Policy: Instance setup is operator work; company creation is board; agent creation/task creation retain their individual permissions.
An authenticated run bound to the server-created onboarding first task must
obtain persisted human acceptance of the latest ordinary proposal before creating
new tasks through native create_task or REST. Its authenticated run determines
this admission even for an explicit standalone task. A card decision or a saved
conversational resolution with a genuine later same-task user message supplies
acceptance; an agent-only resolution does not. A plan approval must name the
current same-task revision. Newer pending/rejected proposals stop new creation.
Already admitted task replay and ordinary delegation retain their existing rules.
Native proposal metadata version and supersedeOnUserComment stays inside
request_human_input.payload. Invalid root metadata is rejected before dispatch;
repair guidance keeps the approval kind instead of replacing it with questions.
The shipped recipes are checked against the advertised schema and the real
interaction service. Idempotent proposal replay still needs a saved human decision.
An accepted onboarding execution cannot create a new task blocked by its
authenticated onboarding source. Native and REST creation return a recoverable
input error before committing that task or its wake. The same source restriction
applies to later blocker edits, using database UUID identity. A child's own agent
run also cannot add its server-owned onboarding parent as a blocker. Native dependency
edits carry their authenticated run. Empty-list corrections and other blockers
remain available without a new proposal decision. The API keeps its normal
attempt audit. A corrected creation call retains
the human acceptance and can reuse the unconsumed command key. Other blocker
relationships remain available. The child needs self-contained approved inputs;
the parent uses set_dependencies to wait on the child, not the reverse.
Native paperclip_finish does not grant completion authority from an opening
answer. The onboarding parent requires a trusted saved human decision on its
latest proposal. Acceptance permits completion under the existing policy;
rejection permits acknowledgment and closure without authorizing new work.
The native status commit checks this decision again under its existing task/run
locks. This adds no new agent endpoint or cross-company authority. The
native completion controls
check persisted outcomes on disposable PostgreSQL; they are not live Cloud
credential or onboarding qualification.
Source: creation admission.
Controls: native/REST PostgreSQL regressions.
These controls do not qualify a live Cloud provider journey.
Evidence: source-only —
implementation at the reviewed
commit above.
Verification: not-run — exercise a listed permitted operation with actual agent
credentials/run context; inspect its result and applicable persistence/attribution.
Assert the relevant denied actor, owner, company or mode from Policy. Review the
remaining operations before qualifying the whole capability.
Gaps: Task creation is agent-accessible where permitted; scheduling/readiness does not follow from successful creation. The Codex first-task fixture's operator cost guard uses the existing board agent-configuration PATCH before admitting work. This is not evidence of agent permission to update its runtime; the listed agent-context checks remain not-run.
Scoped source review: 2026-10-13, the first-task asset correction against
ea6c8eb5e16d61111968f633a66748b397b64a3e. The existing
first-task instructions
send file-producing work through the child's own execution and existing
dependency/block controls. Native register_deliverable retains its current-task
binding; this adds no cross-task file-registration authority or permission.
Document-only work may use the existing child-document API inline. Acceptance
of an execution proposal authorizes its selected tasks and proposed team within
existing hiring, budget, and connection controls. An explicitly plan-only
approval does not authorize implementation; requested separate approvals remain
in force. The existing asset tests check
wording only. The literal baseline live attempt failed child-file delivery and
completion reporting; revised live authorization and execution remain not-run.
resume
Capability ID: onboarding/resume.
Review: baseline.
API: not-applicable — No server onboarding-draft API for this browser-local state;
classify explicitly or intentionally make it a cross-client product feature.
Agent access: not-applicable — Browser localStorage wizard draft; persisted resources
use their domain APIs.
Policy: Instance setup is operator work; company creation is board; agent creation/task creation retain their individual permissions.
Evidence: source-only —
implementation at the reviewed
commit above.
Verification: not-run — use the product recipe for the local/developer surface. Verify
listed shared-resource reads separately; local presentation alone is not agent API
evidence.
Gaps: No server onboarding-draft API for this browser-local state; classify explicitly or intentionally make it a cross-client product feature.
Scoped source review of draft restoration preserves harness/runner intent and invalidates obsolete setup-test results after a selection change. Browser draft continuity is not API or live-agent evidence, and opening a saved Legacy agent does not apply new-agent defaults.
The initial matching route opening preserves the authorized saved wizard step on bare and company-prefixed reloads. Explicit new-company or changed-company openings retain their navigation override and clear foreign company resource IDs. Existing component controls exercise these presentation and account boundaries. This scoped correction adds no server draft API, agent grant or proof of live actor authorization. The managed first-task eval still reloads before Get started and remains a separate live acceptance gate. The existing mocked-login browser case also checks the same company-scoped active session and saved selection through route reopening and a real reload, with one login start and no pending-login hire. These fixture assertions do not prove server authorization or live credential use.