mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-10 20:46:28 +01:00
Harjoth KharaandClaude Sonnet 5.5
d53fa727e1
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Every agent has a role, and the API only accepts the values in `AGENT_ROLES` (`z.enum(AGENT_ROLES)` in `packages/shared/src/validators/agent.ts`) > - The board-operator guide, the API docs and the agent-facing API reference are where operators and agents learn which role values to send > - They name `manager` as a role, but `manager` is not in `AGENT_ROLES`, so creating an agent with it is rejected with `invalid_value` > - This pull request replaces the unsupported value with supported ones in the guide and in the two places that show the same invalid value in an example > - The benefit is that the documented role values match what the API accepts ## Linked Issues or Issue Description - Fixes: #15687 ## What Changed - `docs/guides/board-operator/managing-agents.md`: the Role list now reads `ceo`, `cto`, `pm`, `engineer`, `researcher`, etc. (`pm` replaces the unsupported `manager`). The next bullet already says Reports to is the agent's manager in the org tree, so the hierarchy is still described and no extra wording was added. - `docs/api/agents.md` and `skills/paperclip/references/api-reference.md` (two examples): the same invalid value appeared as `"role": "manager"` in response examples for an "EngineeringLead" / "VP Engineering" agent. Changed to `cto`, which is a supported role and fits those examples. These are single-word changes made so the documented examples do not contradict the guide. - Left alone on purpose: ordinary uses of the word "manager" in prose (reports-to wording, AWS Secrets Manager), the "Worked Example: Manager Heartbeat" heading, the planning docs under `doc/plans/`, and a code test fixture (`ui/src/components/RoutineOverview.test.tsx`). - No code, validation or enum change; no new role. ## Verification - Before: the guide lists `manager`, and `AGENT_ROLES` (`packages/shared/src/constants.ts`) is `ceo, cto, cmo, cfo, security, engineer, designer, pm, qa, devops, researcher, general`, with no `manager`; the create validator uses `z.enum(AGENT_ROLES)`. - After: every role value named in the changed lines (`ceo`, `cto`, `pm`, `engineer`, `researcher`) is in `AGENT_ROLES`. `git diff --check` is clean. `pnpm-lock.yaml` is unchanged. - This is a docs-only change (3 files, 4 lines), so I did not run the test suite and did not add a test; there is no docs lint script that runs without installing dependencies. - To check by hand: send `POST /api/companies/{companyId}/agents` with `"role": "manager"` (rejected with `invalid_value`) and with `"role": "pm"` (passes role validation). ## Risks - Low. Documentation only, no runtime behavior change. - `cto` in the two example responses is a judgment call for the "EngineeringLead" / "VP Engineering" sample; any supported role would also be valid there. The two extra files are example-only and can be dropped if a maintainer prefers this PR to touch only the guide. > 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 - Implementation: Anthropic Claude Sonnet 5.5 (`claude-sonnet-5-5`), medium reasoning effort, with tool use and code execution through Claude Code. Context window not reported by the runtime. - Coordination and this description: Anthropic Claude Sonnet 5.5 (`claude-sonnet-5-5`). - Independent review of the exact head: OpenAI Codex `gpt-5.6-sol`, medium reasoning effort, read-only, no findings. - The issue was picked by an automated screening agent; a human contributor directed the work and owns the change. ## 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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>