DottaandPaperclip
dcc0878b32
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The agent runtime page saves account, model, and environment settings. > - The save handler starts a computer and runs a live account test before it writes the edit. > - A slow computer or provider can make a healthy account save take tens of seconds. > - Saved account health, access, installation, and compatibility can be checked without a runtime test. > - This pull request uses those checks for ordinary configuration saves. > - Legacy adoption, task adoption, and Copilot model checks keep live verification. > - The benefit is a fast save while Test and execution retain runtime checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Saving a new AI account selection on an existing agent can take 20–30 seconds. Model edits can take the same path. The configuration PATCH acquires a computer, prepares account credentials, runs a provider/runtime probe, and releases the computer before it saves. **Expected behavior** A healthy installed account can be saved after current access and compatibility checks. A save confirms persistence. Test verifies the runtime. An unverified legacy account must still pass live adoption checks. **Steps to reproduce** Run the PostgreSQL regression with a 20-second controlled delay at computer allocation. On the original route, a successful save takes 20,191 ms and calls allocation and the runtime probe once. With the first patch, the same fixture takes 51 ms; with the environment-guard correction, it takes 37 ms and calls neither operation. Each timing has one sample. This is a local fault experiment with real HTTP and PostgreSQL. It is not a hosted latency measurement. Related: #17760 addresses binding comparison and prospective probe environment resolution. This change deliberately removes the live probe from ordinary healthy-account saves. It keeps live checks for legacy and task adoption. #17965 fixes the result of an explicit managed Runner test. Neither change removes this save-time wait. #18687 optimizes a different Apps configuration read. ## What Changed - Replace the internal probe boolean with explicit none, legacy, and always modes. - Use legacy mode for ordinary configuration saves. Keep current account health, access, installation, compatibility, environment, audit, and revision checks. - Keep the environment company check before the live-probe branch. Keep the live task-adoption transaction and Copilot model checks. - Add twelve real PostgreSQL save-route regressions, including company-bound environment checks. Keep the existing inherited-sandbox adoption fixture for legacy and task adoption. - Cover healthy and legacy settings changes separately. Keep provider rejection and reconnect tests on the legacy save path. - Update the specification and feature/access maps to distinguish saving from runtime verification. The configuration route owns this policy. The account service still owns account access and health. The existing environment test service still owns live probes. No new endpoint, migration, dependency, background job, or provider protocol is added. ## Verification Base: `3f8ebfff8aa9febd0733c6f65b07485dcadfd0e2`. - Original route with initial regressions: three failures and two passes. Healthy saves reached computer allocation. The controlled 20-second baseline saved successfully but failed the no-allocation assertion. - Initial save/adoption/Copilot selection: 21 passed. The name filter excluded 141 unrelated tests. The seven new cases cover persistence, revision and activity records, model edits, roster edits and stale retries, missing installation, revoked grants, legacy verification, and controlled allocation latency. - Explicit Test-route suite: 55 passed. The first attempt reached the 30-second import hook limit. The same suite passed with a 90-second hook limit. - Saved harness preflight suite: six passed. Account revocation, compatibility, probe failure and target release checks remain. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check`: passed. - Review revision: both full save/account suites passed, 96 tests total. The controlled save took 37.08 ms with zero computer allocations and zero provider probes. The five new environment checks passed after the three foreign-environment cases failed against the first patch. - Local full `pnpm -r typecheck`: unavailable because cargo is missing. - Local full `pnpm build`: unavailable at the verified Copilot runtime prerequisite. Server typecheck preparation also reaches missing cargo. - Local full `pnpm test:run`: stopped after concurrent broad checks exceeded the container memory limit. No full-suite pass is claimed. Direct server TypeScript checking and its bounded retry were also killed by the container memory limit. The first remote Typecheck + Release Registry check passed; the next head still requires fresh CI. Reproduce the controlled timing: ```sh cd server PAPERCLIP_CONFIG_SAVE_PROFILE_DELAY_MS=20000 pnpm exec vitest run src/__tests__/agent-configuration-save.test.ts --hookTimeout 90000 ``` The fixture keeps real Express, authorization, account selection, PostgreSQL persistence, revisions and audit writes. Only remote allocation and the provider probe are controlled. The default tests do not contact a provider. Successful configuration saves no longer depend on either controlled operation. A later explicit Test or task must still verify the actual runtime. Review follow-up: the first Greptile review found that the new healthy-account path skipped the environment company guard. The corrected route checks the effective environment before it decides whether to probe. Five real PostgreSQL cases cover foreign, same-company and global environments, inherited defaults, and an existing account binding. Against the first patch, the three foreign-environment cases returned 200 and failed their expected 403 assertions; the two allowed cases passed. Initial fixture attempts hit unique environment constraints; the fixture now uses distinct sandbox rows and names. The first CI server shard found 11 tests that required a live probe for every save. Those expectations are changed to the documented healthy/legacy split, with additional healthy-selection cases. The build and Runner jobs were cancelled after this test failure. Their logs show no separate compile or test verdict. No cancelled check is counted as a pass. Latest commit `6257e9e67f289e1c650a8b4c2b818fcca37e2800`: [CI run 41542980091](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41542980091) passed typecheck, build, all test shards, Runner checks, and E2E. All 55 check runs are complete: 52 passed and 3 were skipped by their workflow conditions. The commit status check also passed. [Greptile review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18690#issuecomment-6590555746) is 5/5 for this commit with no new findings. The earlier environment ownership thread is resolved. These remote results complete the checks that the local tool and memory limits prevented. The earlier local failures remain recorded above. ## Risks A healthy saved account can become invalid at the provider before the next runtime use. Ordinary saves no longer detect that through a live test. They still reject unhealthy, revoked, incompatible, or uninstalled accounts in current storage. Explicit Test and execution retain provider authentication and project-authentication checks. Legacy-account adoption, task connection adoption, and Copilot account-specific model checks keep their existing live validation. There is no migration. Reverting the route change restores the earlier synchronous probe behavior. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with repository tools and code execution. This runtime does not expose the exact model ID, context-window size, or reasoning setting. Those values are not inferred. ## 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 and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused suites; full-suite limits are above) - [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>
Paperclip feature map
Start here when reproducing a user-facing bug, verifying a change, or deciding which surfaces a fix must cover. Each recipe describes what a person can do, where they can do it, the expected result, and the evidence needed to verify it. Product behavior is still governed by the implementation spec.
The sibling agent access map records APIs, agent entry points and permission boundaries for the same capability IDs. Follow the shared map contract when maintaining either map.
The chat scenario catalog describes how people might request these capabilities in conversation, including setup and permission branches. These are planned Product E2E journeys, not live coverage results.
IDs and references
Use the existing IDs in issues, PRs, Storybook annotations, tests, and verification evidence:
| Reference | Example | Defined by |
|---|---|---|
| Feature ID | onboarding |
The recipe filename without .md. |
| Capability ID | onboarding/company |
The feature ID plus a key from its Sub-features list, separated by /. |
| Entry-point reference | onboarding.md#web-wizard | The recipe filename plus its entry-point heading. The local entry-point ID is web-wizard. |
For example, report verifying onboarding/company through web-wizard.
Capabilities describe behavior; entry points identify the surface used to exercise
it. Entry-point IDs are separate from generated capability IDs. Both maps and
Storybook use the same full capability IDs. Each child page states its feature
ID; recipe bullets show the full capability ID beside the local key, and access
companions show it beneath the local heading. Local keys remain unchanged for
parsing and existing anchors.
Keep recipe filenames, sub-feature keys, and entry-point keys stable when changing display titles or navigation. Renaming a filename or key changes its references. The section headings below are navigation labels, not additional IDs.
Browse features
Use this index to open a recipe or copy its feature and full capability IDs.
Getting started and access
| Feature ID | Recipe | Capability IDs |
|---|---|---|
onboarding |
Onboarding and first work | onboarding/instance, onboarding/company, onboarding/adapter, onboarding/first-task, onboarding/resume |
access |
Login, invitations, and access | access/login, access/invitations, access/membership, access/resources, access/cli-auth |
companies |
Companies and portability | companies/selection, companies/identity, companies/decision-models, companies/prompt-injection-prevention, companies/fast-responses, companies/agent-observability, companies/archive, companies/portability |
Tasks and conversations
| Feature ID | Recipe | Capability IDs |
|---|---|---|
tasks |
Task creation and lifecycle | tasks/create, tasks/organize, tasks/properties, tasks/discussion, tasks/completion, tasks/privacy |
task-coordination |
Delegation, dependencies, and signoff | task-coordination/delegation, task-coordination/dependencies, task-coordination/signoff, task-coordination/tree-control |
inbox-search |
Inbox, decisions, and search | inbox-search/views, inbox-search/triage, inbox-search/decisions, inbox-search/search, inbox-search/toasts |
agent-chat |
Agent conversations and project handoff | agent-chat/discovery, agent-chat/history, agent-chat/handoff, agent-chat/conference-room |
questions-and-approvals |
Questions and approvals | questions-and-approvals/questions, questions-and-approvals/dismiss-and-reopen, questions-and-approvals/confirmations, questions-and-approvals/plan-review, questions-and-approvals/audience, questions-and-approvals/governance, questions-and-approvals/tool-review, questions-and-approvals/continuation |
steering |
Steering and queued messages | steering/queue, steering/edit-order-discard, steering/steer, steering/interrupt, steering/stop-and-pause, steering/drafts, steering/approval-queue |
documents-artifacts |
Documents, attachments, and work products | documents-artifacts/documents, documents-artifacts/annotations, documents-artifacts/attachments, documents-artifacts/work-products, documents-artifacts/library |
Agents and reusable capabilities
| Feature ID | Recipe | Capability IDs |
|---|---|---|
agents |
Hiring, configuration, and organization | agents/hire, agents/grok-bot, agents/instructions, agents/organization, agents/primary-agent, agents/lifecycle, agents/built-in, agents/api-keys, agents/managed-agent-setup |
runs-adapters |
Runs, harnesses, and model accounts | runs-adapters/availability, runs-adapters/validation, runs-adapters/runs, runs-adapters/session |
skills |
Skills and Skill Studio | skills/discovery, skills/authoring, skills/versions, skills/policy, skills/testing |
teams |
Team packages and installation | teams/discovery, teams/preview, teams/install, teams/configuration |
Projects and execution
| Feature ID | Recipe | Capability IDs |
|---|---|---|
projects |
Projects and repositories | projects/lifecycle, projects/task-context, projects/repositories, projects/defaults, projects/privacy |
goals |
Goals and work alignment | goals/hierarchy, goals/alignment, goals/navigation |
workspaces |
Workspaces, services, and files | workspaces/binding, workspaces/provisioning, workspaces/services, workspaces/files-git, workspaces/closure |
execution-environments |
Execution environments | execution-environments/configuration, execution-environments/capabilities, execution-environments/probe, execution-environments/assignment, execution-environments/images |
recovery |
Recovery | recovery/diagnosis, recovery/bounded-continuation, recovery/source-action, recovery/exhaustion, recovery/workspace, recovery/unknown-outcome, recovery/user-continuation, recovery/reconnect |
Apps, channels, and extensions
| Feature ID | Recipe | Capability IDs |
|---|---|---|
connection-setup |
Connection setup | connection-setup/catalog, connection-setup/identity-and-access, connection-setup/credentials, connection-setup/handoff, connection-setup/draft-recovery, connection-setup/task-request, connection-setup/channel-setup, connection-setup/failure |
assistant-connections |
Assistant connections (MCP) | assistant-connections/setup, assistant-connections/consent, assistant-connections/device-login, assistant-connections/client-use, assistant-connections/revocation |
app-permissions |
App access and action permissions | app-permissions/agent-access, app-permissions/action-policy, app-permissions/catalog-change, app-permissions/test-action, app-permissions/account-maintenance |
chat-channels |
External chat and email | chat-channels/providers, chat-channels/identity, chat-channels/conversation, chat-channels/attachments, chat-channels/lifecycle, chat-channels/outbound-email |
gateways-profiles |
Tool gateways and access profiles | gateways-profiles/gateway, gateways-profiles/profiles, gateways-profiles/client-connect, gateways-profiles/tokens, gateways-profiles/activity |
secrets |
Secrets and proposals | secrets/company-secrets, secrets/user-secrets, secrets/proposals, secrets/vault-import, secrets/runtime-delivery |
plugins |
Plugins | plugins/installation, plugins/configuration, plugins/contributions, plugins/lifecycle |
Automation and structured work
| Feature ID | Recipe | Capability IDs |
|---|---|---|
routines |
Routines, schedules, and triggers | routines/definition, routines/triggers, routines/run-now, routines/history, routines/management |
cases |
Cases | cases/browse, cases/structure, cases/history, cases/task-links, cases/handoffs |
status-cards |
Status cards | status-cards/authoring, status-cards/generation, status-cards/inspection, status-cards/archive |
Oversight and operation
| Feature ID | Recipe | Capability IDs |
|---|---|---|
budgets-costs |
Costs and budgets | budgets-costs/cost-reporting, budgets-costs/budgets, budgets-costs/incidents, budgets-costs/resolution, budgets-costs/subscriptions, budgets-costs/accounting-recovery |
activity |
Dashboards and audit trails | activity/overview, activity/activity, activity/runs, activity/routine-audit, activity/timeline, activity/agent-commentary |
navigation-preferences |
Navigation, profile, and announcements | navigation-preferences/navigation, navigation-preferences/preferences, navigation-preferences/profile, navigation-preferences/announcements, navigation-preferences/fallbacks, navigation-preferences/command-palette |
instance-operations |
Instance operations | instance-operations/install-update, instance-operations/server-service, instance-operations/configuration, instance-operations/diagnostics, instance-operations/backup, instance-operations/runtime-setup |
cli-operations |
CLI/API and local worktrees | cli-operations/context, cli-operations/domain-commands, cli-operations/outputs, cli-operations/run-controls, cli-operations/worktree-instances, cli-operations/feedback-export |
Contributor surfaces
| Feature ID | Recipe | Capability IDs |
|---|---|---|
developer-labs |
Developer previews and diagnostic labs | developer-labs/design, developer-labs/interaction-labs, developer-labs/performance, developer-labs/route-gates |
Open the published Storybook guide for the assembled feature and capability index. The Markdown recipes in this directory are the authored source. Each has a same-named agent-access companion.
Run node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs to generate local navigation in
maps/generated/feature-map.md, maps/generated/agent-access-map.md, and the
Storybook guide. Recipes are discovered automatically from their navigation
metadata; generation does not depend on this high-level index.
Before driving a journey
- Use this checkout's isolated test drive for manual product checks. It creates a temporary instance and prints its URL and data directory. Do not guess that a server on port 3100 belongs to you.
- Record the commit, URL, company, login role, relevant experimental settings, adapter, runtime mode, and live versus simulated dependencies. Use disposable tasks and provider resources. A fresh test drive creates a company and CEO, but no task or first run.
- Use the current navigation and company prefix. Paths in recipes omit that prefix. Record whether the streamlined or production shell is selected; Agent Chat, chat connectors, and the combined Inbox/Tasks view have separate gates. A hidden surface is an unmet prerequisite, not a successful test.
- Run the smallest relevant test first. Vitest commands below run from the repository root after installing dependencies. Playwright recipes use their named configuration and its isolated environment, not an unrelated running instance. Reserve expensive runner/provider tests for the behavior at issue.
- Exercise the actual user action, inspect its result, reload, and verify the persisted state or continuation. Use read-only API checks to corroborate UI evidence; creating state through the API does not prove the creation UI.
For agent-driven acceptance work, start with the Paperclip verification skill for an isolated launch, ownership/readiness checks, browser driving, evidence, and cleanup. It uses this directory as its feature map. The existing dev-workspace run/verify skill and evaluation skill describe runtime ownership and evidence handling. Reuse them; this map introduces no environment launcher, credentials, scheduled job, or second test framework.
Evidence contract
Report each entry point as passed, failed, blocked (with its missing
prerequisite), or not run. Include the feature ID, full capability IDs and
entry-point ID (for example, onboarding/company through web-wizard), plus the
recipe link, commit/environment, user action, expected and observed result,
command/exit code, and evidence links. Screenshots or traces should show both the
action and the discriminating result. Include task/run/request IDs when relevant,
without secrets.
A fix is verified across its affected surfaces only when each has evidence or an explicit reason it does not apply. Shared code alone does not prove parity. Keep product regressions visible; do not change the recipe to bless a failure. For Paperclip-assigned work, attach evidence through the artifact workflow.
Inventory and remaining depth
The generated maps/generated/coverage.json lists the current non-test TSX page
modules and the recipes that directly reference each one. An unreferenced module
is a documentation candidate, not proof that its feature is absent or untested.
Remaining workflow limits live in each recipe. Inventory and example associations
describe documentation scope, not runtime health.
Maintaining the reference
The map documents user journeys. It does not execute them automatically; generated inventories record documentation scope rather than live test health. Product E2E reports reuse these capability IDs through the journey associations. Their coverage view shows which scenarios in a campaign are linked to each capability and the associated test results. An association or passing scenario does not certify the whole capability; unselected and unmapped journeys remain distinct.
When maintaining a recipe, compare its entry points and expected results with
the current source. Check that linked tests still exercise the stated behavior
and that local references still exist. Keep the same-named agent access companion
and stable sub-feature IDs aligned when behavior or access changes. Source-only
access inventory remains distinct from live verification. Run
node scripts/check-maps.mjs after map edits for structural/reference checks;
follow the shared contract for the source and behavioral checks it cannot perform.
Each recipe starts with a small frontmatter navigation record, then an H1:
---
navigation: {"section":"Tasks and conversations","sectionOrder":20,"order":10}
---
The H1 supplies the feature title, and the first paragraph supplies its summary. Orders are local to the section; leave gaps for additions. Equal orders use the stable filename as a tie-breaker. Keep a section's name/order consistent across its recipes. Discovery uses the recipe and companion; keep the readable ID index above aligned when features or capability IDs change.
Optional ### Storybook verification guidance lives inside the recipe's Gotchas
section. Each level-four heading contains a backtick-quoted capability key and
has Scope (ui, cli, or browser),
Storybook, Production, and Sources fields. These are verification instructions
and intentional scope limits, not run results or a required story for every API.
The generated gap report combines this guidance with current story associations.
After frontmatter, each recipe starts with an H1 and a user-visible description, then exactly:
- Sub-features — stable backticked local keys, full capability IDs, and observable behavior/states,
such as
- `company`: `onboarding/company` — create a company. - How to get to it (user POV) — one H3 backticked entry-point ID per surface.
- Driving it with — starts with
Preconditions:; repeat each entry-point H3, withAutomated:andManual:paragraphs. Name test scope and gaps honestly. - Gotchas — misleading look-alikes, feature gates, and invalid evidence.
New or updated entries follow
Poteto's feature-map examples.
Existing entries with a Driving it heading can adopt the named harness when
their recipes are updated. The original format was inspired by
Omnigent's feature map.
Paperclip's recipes and checks follow its own task model and test infrastructure.