Files
PaperClipAI/maps
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 6fae6f2cb8 fix(wake-queue): preserve pending work when a queued run is stopped (#16357)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The wake queue releases task locks and can promote saved follow-up
work when a run ends.
> - An operator can stop a queued run before dispatch selects its
runtime.
> - The legacy release path can promote the old follow-up after that
Stop.
> - For an obsolete routine cycle, this can conflict with the current
active cycle after cancellation has already committed.
> - This pull request preserves the deferred input without promoting it
at that release boundary.
> - The benefit is that a queued Stop stays stopped and does not return
an error from starting an obsolete follow-up.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Related: Refs #14300 and Refs #16339 describe other pre-dispatch
cancellation paths. Related PR #16238 changes former-owner wake
selection. This change addresses expected operator cancellation before
legacy runtime selection, without changing those contracts.

**What happened?**

Stopping an unstarted legacy run committed its cancellation, then tried
to promote a deferred wake. When another cycle of the same routine was
already active, the issue lock update failed against
`issues_open_routine_execution_uq`. The cancel request returned HTTP 500
even though the run was cancelled. Without a competing cycle, the Stop
launched the old follow-up.

**What did you expect to happen?**

Release the stopped run's own locks and preserve deferred input for a
later eligible instruction. Do not start the old queue as a side effect
of Stop.

**Steps to reproduce**

Create two cycles of the same routine. Keep the current cycle active.
Give the old cycle an unstarted legacy run with a verified bootstrap
record and a deferred wake. Cancel that run as a board operator, then
release its issue execution. The added database regression reproduces
the failed lock update before the fix.

**Paperclip version / commit**

Reproduced on parent commit `976cdc77ed564dc3e014621505890b647e554a7f`.

**Deployment mode**

A remote runtime exposed the symptom. The regression uses embedded
PostgreSQL and the real wake-queue adapter.

## What Changed

- Recognize an expected operator Stop only when the legacy run has no
runtime-selection time, start time, process-start time, or process
identity.
- Use the existing release boundary to preserve deferred input without
promoting it.
- Add database regressions for ordinary Stop, a competing routine cycle,
repeated release, provider cancellation, runtime selection, and
dispatched-run reconciliation.
- Document the behavior and update both recovery maps.

## Verification

- Before the fix, both queued Stop cases failed. The competing-cycle
case raised `issues_open_routine_execution_uq`. The three control cases
passed.
- `node node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/modules/wake-queue`: 7 files and 214 tests passed, including
all five new database cases.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and all 10 map-script tests passed
locally. The complete CI suite is green on
`8e204eef87f1a593df5c183abef764e4b9eb5fd1`. The remaining serial local
full-suite run was stopped once that unchanged-head CI verification
passed; a local full-suite pass is not claimed. Apex review passed at
5/5 on the same head with no review threads.

## Risks

- The change is limited to recorded operator cancellation before legacy
runtime selection. Selected runtimes, dispatched work, provider
cancellation, and native stop acknowledgement keep their existing paths.
- Deferred work is retained. A later eligible instruction must still use
normal admission and all current gates.
- No schema migration or new authority is required. This regression is
not proof of a live provider stop.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact serving snapshot ID and context window size are 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>
2026-10-14 18:18:26 -07:00
..

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.