DottaandPaperclip
c74171d620
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip coordinates agents while retaining their work and execution authority. > - A failed native run can schedule an exact-session retry and retain a sandbox. > - An explicit task Retry can already have completed successfully on a successor. > - Recovery correctly refuses the old run after its task execution lock changes. > - It nevertheless leaves that old retry scheduled and its workspace without a preservation owner. > - This change retires that proven superseded retry and registers exact-source preservation together. > - Existing stop receipts and saved-file verification still control workspace switching. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A native sandbox run failed before starting a provider turn. An explicit Retry completed on a linked successor. The original coordinator remained in `retryable_failure` with an active sandbox lease. Restart recovery returned `issue_execution_lock_changed`, while the ordinary sweep kept delaying it. A pending workspace selection then made every new task run fail during setup. **Expected behavior** Stop replaying a failed retry after its linked explicit successor has completed. Preserve the original files through the existing system worker. Keep the current task, ownership, pending choice, and unresolved action outcomes intact. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Persist a failed, unowned native run with a prepared remote workspace and `retryable_failure` coordinator. 2. Complete a same-company/task/agent explicit Retry linked to that run. 3. Release the task's old execution lock and schedule a workspace selection. 4. Run startup or ordinary retry recovery. Observe the old retry remain scheduled and the selection fail with an unfinished-recovery conflict. **Paperclip version or commit** Regression reproduced against `644937c931`. The current repair is based on refreshed master `60b8089a44`. **Deployment mode** Native Runner with remote sandbox workspaces. The reported runtime used ACPX Claude with per-turn lifecycle. The original provider session-resume rejection is not independently reproduced or claimed fixed here; this PR addresses the subsequent stranded recovery. Related: #17839 records preservation when restart classification becomes terminal. This change handles the earlier lock-mismatch return and ordinary retry admission after a completed explicit successor. It uses the same preservation service and does not require that PR. ## What Changed - Share a narrow superseded-retry settlement between startup recovery and the ordinary retry sweep. - Require a failed source with no coordinator owner or process, its exact prepared source lease, and a completed linked successor under the same company, task and agent. - Atomically retire replay and register preservation. Do not alter task state or create another provider run. - Add PostgreSQL lifecycle/safety regressions, a real-file preservation and workspace-selection regression, and execution/map documentation. ## Verification - Red: both startup and ordinary admission regressions left the old coordinator in `retryable_failure` with no preservation obligation. - Green: the same two cases retire the retry and retain the exact lease without another run or task mutation. - The assembled PostgreSQL/filesystem regression passes: workspace selection remains blocked before preservation, the existing service saves `saved.txt` and preserves newer local work, then the normal selection guard applies the pending shared workspace. - All 90 native retention/resumption cases pass. Three neighboring startup-recovery cases pass, including the blocked-owner inventory. Full recursive typecheck and full build pass at runtime head `23ddb213b4`; final `19d7738ae3` only moves the function comment into execution documentation. Map, module-boundary and diff checks pass. The duplicate full local Vitest run was stopped after 20 minutes in its first long general shard once the complete current-head hosted test gates passed; no complete local-suite pass is claimed. - Current-head CI has 53 passing checks and two intended Storybook skips, including full typecheck, all test shards, build, Runner verification, browser shards and both aggregate gates. The separate `commitperclip PR Review` job is still queued on `ubuntu-latest` with no assigned runner; its outcome remains pending. Greptile reviewed exact head `19d7738ae3` at 5/5, with zero unresolved threads. - Live acceptance passes on exact final source `19d7738ae3`: a disposable Daytona Linux sandbox, the current immutable staging fleet snapshot, SDK 0.203.0, a Darwin arm64 source host and Node 26.4.0. The real native workspace preparation/export and provider stop/start paths preserve an unpredictable report and newer host files. The ordinary workspace-selection guard stays blocked until preservation commits, then applies the pending shared workspace. - The old workload's start count and side-effect marker each remain one. Recovery creates no new run or native result. The sandbox finishes stopped and is then deleted by the probe; a final provider read confirms it is absent. - A second live acceptance also passes on the original runtime's older immutable snapshot with the source explicitly archived before recovery. It verifies cold source reopening, the same report/newer-file checks, one workload start and side effect, pending workspace application, and confirmed deletion. Its initial probe attempt used immediate archive/deletion reads and failed during asynchronous cleanup observation; bounded provider-state polling fixed the probe without a product change. The abandoned probe allocation is independently confirmed absent. - Scope: database fixtures represent the already-failed run and completed explicit successor. The old workload is a persistent shell process with observable file/side-effect markers, not a paid Claude turn. This qualifies the repaired recovery handoff and real provider preservation; it does not reproduce the initial ACPX session-resume rejection. - The original hosted task has only been inspected read-only. No rollout or original-task recovery is claimed. ## Risks - Incorrect successor classification could retire legitimate work. Matching requires the server-persisted explicit Retry link, same company/task/agent, later successful committed execution, no current source execution lock, no recorded process, no coordinator owner, and no workspace finalization owner. - Retirement is not a stop receipt. The exact source remains retained, unknown effects remain unknown, and workspace switching still waits for the existing worker's stop and file-persistence proof. - A failed preservation transaction rolls back retirement. No new scan, retry budget, schema or public API is introduced. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use and code execution. The host does not expose a more specific model ID or the context-window size. ## 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 suites and live acceptance; full-suite status 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 — separate template-review job still queued as noted above - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups — exact head `19d7738ae3` - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Paperclip agent access map
This map accompanies the feature map. It records APIs, agent entry points, permission boundaries and verification for the same capability IDs. The shared contract defines the format and maintenance rules.
The chat scenario catalog uses these same IDs for human requests and expected outcomes. Its scenarios retain the access boundaries here; neither a CEO role nor a planned scenario grants board authority or establishes a working production tool binding.
Use full capability IDs when referring to access contracts outside their file:
onboarding/company means the company capability in onboarding.md in both maps.
The feature index lists feature and
capability IDs; IDs and references
explains entry-point references and stable naming.
Browse access contracts
The same-named feature recipes define navigation and capability IDs. Run
node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs for the generated
maps/generated/agent-access-map.md index, or browse the
published feature guide.
Add or update the affected companion; there is no central registration or count.
Existing baseline source references describe the original inspection, not current verification. Record new executed evidence in the PR, issue, or CI artifact with its revision and scope. Do not refresh unrelated headers as bookkeeping.
Using an entry
Read its Policy and Gaps before selecting an agent path. Native fallback, legacy
REST/CLI, stdio MCP and a personal assistant connection can have different
authority and availability. Use a real admitted production binding; a scenario
declaration is not an installed tool. A restricted entry records current
enforcement and leaves any unresolved delegation decision visible.
For API catalog disagreements, follow the route/service authorization and record
discovery drift. For not-applicable, retain the concrete exception and local
path. Split shared business operations from client-only presentation.
Use maintain-verification-skill to reconcile changed source and both maps.
Use verify-paperclip and existing API/runner/MCP fixtures to collect the
permitted-agent and denial evidence; report blocked/not-run coverage honestly.
Run node scripts/check-maps.mjs after editing. The structural check does not
certify permissions, API catalog coverage, tool admission or live behavior.
Native REST transport
The call_api parity change reconciles affected baselines against
58e16dbddfc9c8d0cf60867f9d9847f0feda055b and the changes in this PR. Ordinary
REST operations use the same route authorization as legacy agent REST. Dedicated
tools remain optional for those operations; protocol endpoints still need their
existing clients. Board-only routes remain restricted for agent identity.
Native search_api / call_api is enabled by default, but explicit server,
company-allowlist and binding settings can narrow admission. It requires a running
authorized native run, current task assignment and execution-run binding, company
and budget authority, task privacy, and a permitted work mode. Ask and Plan retain
mutation restrictions, and runs retain their admitted JWT scope during restart
recovery even when task mode changes. A waiting
agent does not gain independent native control just because a REST route exists.
Connection-management reads support Standard, Ask and Plan; mutations require
Standard. Skill-test runs and nonstandard task-bridge keys cannot administer
connections. These gates supplement each operation's grants, resolved resource
and target scope, and responsible-user authority. See the
rollout policy
and connection authorization.
Credential-bearing replies, including company exports and their legacy alias, stay inline under a 10 MiB limit and use encrypted mutation receipts. Other saved API snapshots are limited to the issuing actor and responsible user, plus authorized administrators. Artifact uploads enforce the same access checks as downloads; private snapshots are excluded from company exports and public company logos. Explicit deliverables use the existing sharing path. Native event history, checkpoints and completion records omit API bodies while preserving receipt metadata and replay digests. Restored webhook secrets use the same encrypted receipt and inline response policy as newly created webhook secrets. Task image access requires the company boundary and the task permission; skill-test and low-trust agents do not need company-wide browsing authority. Completion replay applies the same idempotent projection to stored and expected payloads; the run-log guide describes its fields.
Sources: API client,
catalog,
native authority,
credential storage classification,
snapshot access,
and history redaction. The affected entries remain
baseline and source-only; this reconciliation does not certify every operation.
Targeted real-route proof lives in the
API integration suite,
including owned routines, skill tests, scoped secrets, proposals and private export replay.