mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-09 16:35:27 +02:00
Dotta
fe2ddfad2b
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The runner needs a bounded process boundary for each qualified provider runtime > - The ACPX transport now verifies frame shape, sequence, run scope, and turn scope > - The sidecar schema keeps event payloads open so each event family needs a second validation boundary > - A later provider adapter must not retain or act on malformed payload fields > - This pull request validates and redacts package-local payloads and keeps the provider unselected > - The benefit is a typed fail-closed boundary before provider state or semantic tools can consume an event ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #12414 Refs #12412 ## What Changed - Decode sidecar payloads only after run and turn scope validation passes. - Limit each decoded payload to 256 KiB. - Add typed payload variants for runtime events, permission requests, input requests, semantic tool calls, terminal events, process events, and diagnostics. - Admit only the nine runtime event shapes emitted by the reviewed Codex ACPX sidecar. - Validate runtime text, plan entries, tool locations, semantic result identities, notices, errors, and terminal status values. - Validate input requests against `paperclip.question_set.v1`. - Reject duplicate question IDs and duplicate option IDs within one question. - Require bounded control identities and object-shaped operational values. - Redact diagnostic, error, process, permission, tool, and retained runtime values before they can enter provider state. - Add six integration tests for every admitted shape, malformed values, scope-before-decode ordering, size limits, question ambiguity, and secret redaction. - Document the payload boundary. - Do not change dependencies, lockfiles, workflows, runnerd selection, server behavior, UI, or migrations. ## Verification - Replay base: `3db24d9366831559b1219782475e760ec041b639` (`master` after #12414 merged). - Exact replay head: `de045b42b5b52cca6c3021380747c56693ccd179`. - Stable patch ID: `90a6f0ed68b2ca7fa5397a8bf93e5e95df5bb58c`, identical to the reviewed `972a3b38..9bb85e93` delta. - The exact delta is 4 files and 806 additions, all in `packages/paperclip-runner`; it contains no lockfile, workflow, server, UI, or migration change. - Focused Rust payload, package, repository, security, and Greptile checks: **PASSED** on the replayed exact head. Full CI run `33360832792` completed 23/23 jobs successfully, Greptile is exact-head 5/5, all security checks pass, and no review threads remain unresolved. - No local test result is claimed. GitHub Actions is the authoritative verification environment for this replayed revision. ## Risks - This decoder is a security boundary because later code can act on decoded semantic tool calls and input requests. - It validates event authority before it inspects a payload. - It fails closed on unknown runtime event types, malformed fields, ambiguous question identifiers, unsupported terminal states, and oversized payloads. - It applies the existing durable redaction policy to retained values. - The package exports a new Rust module, but no production path constructs it in this pull request. - A later provider adapter must preserve this validation order and must not consume raw sidecar payloads directly. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex with GPT-5.6, agentic reasoning, tool use, and code execution. ## 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 - [ ] 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