Auto-generated lockfile refresh after dependencies changed on master.
This PR only updates pnpm-lock.yaml.
Co-authored-by: lockfile-bot <lockfile-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Local Claude, Codex, Gemini, and custom ACP adapters run through the
shared embedded ACPX engine
> - That engine wrapped every local agent command in a generated Bash
script to inject environment variables and filter child stderr
> - Windows cannot directly spawn that Bash wrapper, and npm/pnpm ACP
binaries are exposed through `.cmd` shims there
> - ACPX 0.12 already supports per-session child environment variables,
so the wrapper is unnecessary
> - This pull request registers agent commands directly, injects env
through ACPX session options, captures child stderr in-process, and adds
a real Node ACP spawn smoke on Ubuntu and Windows
> - The benefit is one cross-platform spawn path with a reusable smoke
test instead of parallel shell-wrapper implementations
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Fixes#9941.
Refs #9428 and #9771.
**What happened**
ACPX-backed local agents failed to start on Windows because Paperclip
registered a generated POSIX `.sh` wrapper as the agent command. Windows
also needs the `.cmd` npm/pnpm shim when resolving built-in ACP
binaries, and symlink creation can fail with `EPERM` for seeded
auth/skill files.
**Expected behavior**
The same ACPX engine path should spawn a real ACP agent on Windows and
Linux, forward Paperclip/runtime env without mutating `process.env`,
preserve filtered/unfiltered child stderr behavior, and fall back to
copies where Windows symlinks are unavailable.
**Steps to reproduce**
Run a local ACPX adapter on Windows with the prior wrapper path. ACPX
attempts to spawn the generated `.sh` file and the agent never
initializes.
**Deployment mode**
Local Paperclip adapters using
`packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/`.
## What Changed
- Removed generated Bash agent/env wrappers and registered local
commands directly with ACPX.
- Passed the resolved child environment through ACPX
`sessionOptions.env`, including resume retry paths.
- Added a minimal `acpx@0.12.0` package patch exposing child stderr
callbacks and allowing documented uppercase env-map keys in persisted
session options.
- Moved stderr tee/filter behavior in-process: raw stderr remains in the
per-run file while benign `nes/close` noise is omitted from live stderr.
- Preferred `.cmd` ancestor binaries on Windows and added `EPERM` copy
fallbacks for Codex auth seeding and Gemini skill materialization.
- Added a real Node ACP echo-agent spawn smoke that can run directly on
any supported platform.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/execute.test.ts
packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/spawn-smoke.test.ts` — 57 passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils typecheck` — passed.
- `node --test scripts/acpx-patch-packaging.test.mjs
scripts/release-lib.test.mjs` — 10 passed.
- Full canary release dry run under Node 24.18.0 / npm 11.16.0 — passed
in an isolated scratch clone.
- `git diff --check` — passed during implementation verification.
- One-time GitHub Actions proof: [Ubuntu ACPX spawn
smoke](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/29924348927/job/88937774579),
[Windows ACPX spawn
smoke](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/29924348927/job/88937774558),
and [Canary Dry
Run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/29924348927/job/88937774497)
passed on head `f345ac69f2`; the dedicated smoke jobs are intentionally
not retained in the recurring PR workflow.
## Risks
- The ACPX stderr callback and env persistence exemption are carried as
a pnpm dependency patch until ACPX exposes/fixes those behaviors
upstream.
- Child stderr is synchronously appended to preserve ordering and
failure diagnostics; unusually high-volume agent stderr could briefly
block the Node event loop.
- The Windows-specific `.cmd` resolution and symlink `EPERM` branches
are proven by the standalone smoke test and the linked one-time
`windows-latest` run rather than a permanent CI gate.
> 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 GPT-5.4 via Codex CLI, medium reasoning, repository/tool
execution enabled; context-window size is 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
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] 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>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source control plane people use to manage
AI-agent companies.
> - Agents already receive selected company secrets through `env.*`
bindings at run launch, but environment injection is ambient,
long-lived, and not suitable for every secret consumer.
> - The existing binding and secret-access-event models already provide
company-scoped authorization and per-resolution audit seams.
> - Agents need an explicit way to discover only the secrets granted to
them and fetch a value on demand without exposing the wider company
catalog.
> - That capability must remain run-bound, preserve low-trust token
carve-outs, and make every value read visible in both security and
operator audit trails.
> - This pull request adds an `access.*` delivery namespace, two
run-bound agent routes, dual audit logging, documentation, and an
operator grants editor.
> - The benefit is least-privilege, revocable, auditable secret access
while preserving existing env injection behavior.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No pre-existing public issue. Related work:
- Refs #9797 — existing in-sheet agent access UI that this PR extends to
distinguish env and API delivery.
- Refs #9918 — complementary searchable-agent picker improvement for the
same secrets sheet.
- Refs #9530 — related company-wide metadata catalog proposal; this PR
intentionally exposes only the authenticated run's granted aliases and
values.
**Problem / motivation:** Agents can currently consume secrets only
through process environment injection. This keeps values resident for
the run, does not support on-demand consumers, and cannot provide a
discrete operator-visible activity event for each agent-initiated read.
**Proposed solution:** Treat `company_secret_bindings` as the source of
truth for agent secret grants. Keep `env.KEY` as env delivery and add
`access.ALIAS` for API-only delivery; an env binding also implies read
access because the value is already present in the agent process. Add
run-bound list/fetch endpoints that derive scope from the authenticated
heartbeat run and never accept caller-selected overlays.
**Alternatives considered:** A company-wide agent-readable catalog was
rejected for this value path because it increases reconnaissance and
does not prove a per-secret grant. Reusing the ephemeral
environment-probe resolver was rejected because it lacks binding
enforcement. Approval-gated reads and user-scoped secrets remain
deferred beyond v1.
**Roadmap alignment:** This extends the completed **Secrets Manager with
per-agent access** roadmap capability from launch-time env injection to
explicit run-bound API delivery without duplicating a separate planned
initiative.
## What Changed
- Added `access.*` agent binding validation and a dedicated run-bound
resolver that combines `secrets:read` authorization with binding-context
enforcement.
- Added `GET /api/agents/me/secrets` for minimal granted metadata and
`POST /api/agents/me/secrets/:key/value` for on-demand value fetches
with `Cache-Control: no-store`.
- Preserved the existing denials for low-trust review agents,
task-bridge credentials, and skill-test tokens; standard long-lived
agent API keys cannot call the run-bound routes.
- Added dual audit behavior: value attempts write `secret_access_events`
and `activity_log` (`secret.value.read`), while metadata listing writes
the lighter `secret.access.listed` activity event.
- Kept env compatibility: `env.*` remains injected at launch and also
implies API read for the same bound agent; `access.*` never becomes an
environment variable.
- Added the agent-settings **Secret access** editor plus
delivery-mode/alias surfacing on the Secrets page, with focused UI tests
and tokenized layout styles.
- Updated OpenAPI, shared types, agent-facing skill documentation, and
API reference documentation.
### UI Screenshots
P3 produced and reviewed three screenshots using mock data; images are
intentionally not committed to the repository:
- `secret-access-editor.png` — agent settings grant editor.
- `secret-access-light.png` — Secrets-page delivery surfacing in light
mode.
- `secret-access-dark.png` — Secrets-page delivery surfacing in dark
mode.
The source attachments are retained with the implementation task and
linked in the internal handoff; the public page publisher was
unavailable in the PR-prep runtime.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/agent-secrets-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/secrets-routes.test.ts
ui/src/lib/secret-delivery.test.ts
ui/src/components/AgentSecretAccessEditor.test.tsx` — 5 files, 122 tests
passed.
- Security follow-up: `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/agent-secrets-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` — 2 files, 73 tests passed
after active-run and version-consistency fixes.
- Final-head CI: all feature, typecheck, build, e2e, security, and
review gates pass; `General tests (server (1/3))` remains red after one
rerun because unrelated `heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts` cleanup
deletes `heartbeat_runs` before referenced `activity_log` rows.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — feature-local arbitrary-value violations
fixed; command still reports five unchanged `#9627` literals outside
this PR.
- End-to-end QA passed all eight acceptance criteria: grant/list, fetch,
dual audit, env-implies-read, denial matrix, revocation, UI rendering,
and env-injection regression. Evidence:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/9921#issuecomment-5027455492
- Security review returned PASS-with-required-changes; the
implementation uses the required dedicated binding-enforcing resolver,
run-bound JWT restriction, run-derived overlays, minimal metadata, and a
resolver redaction-registration hook. Evidence:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/9921#issuecomment-5027455382
## Risks
- A compromised agent can exfiltrate any secret explicitly granted to
it; explicit company-scoped/run-scoped grants, revocation, and audit
reduce but cannot remove that inherent capability risk.
- The resolver invokes a redaction-registration hook before returning
values, but the current route has no persistent cross-request per-run
redaction registry. Paperclip-owned later comments/events therefore
cannot yet guarantee automatic scrubbing of a deliberately copied
fetched value; QA classified this as non-blocking residual hardening.
- Audit-event insertion currently fails open if the security-event
insert itself fails; the operator activity event provides partial
redundancy, but a future hardening change should define fail-closed
behavior for value delivery.
- This PR overlaps `ui/src/pages/Secrets.tsx` with #9918 and may require
a straightforward rebase after that PR moves.
> 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, `gpt-5.3-codex`, with reasoning, repository tool use,
terminal execution, Paperclip API access, and GitHub CLI capabilities.
Context-window size is not exposed by the runtime.
- Anthropic Claude Opus 4.8 with 1M context and tool use assisted with
the UI implementation commit.
## 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>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agent runs get their environment from user/adapter/project/routine
env bindings resolved by the server heartbeat, plus `PAPERCLIP_*`
runtime vars (identity, wake, workspace, API access) injected by the
harness
> - The heartbeat stripped **every** `PAPERCLIP_`-prefixed binding
before resolution, so legitimately user-named keys (e.g. cloud provider
token bindings like `PAPERCLIP_CLOUD_PROD_PROVIDER_RAILWAY_*`) were
silently dropped and never reached the run env
> - At the same time, several adapters honored an explicitly configured
`PAPERCLIP_API_KEY` over the harness-minted run token, which is exactly
the one key config must never control
> - This pull request replaces the blanket prefix strip with a precise
three-rule policy: never accept `PAPERCLIP_API_KEY` from config, always
let harness-assigned runtime vars win, and let every other
`PAPERCLIP_*`-named user binding flow through
> - The benefit is that user secrets with a `PAPERCLIP_`-style name work
like any other binding, while runtime identity and API credentials stay
fully harness-controlled
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Bug description** (no public issue exists):
- **What happened:** Env bindings whose key starts with `PAPERCLIP_`
(e.g. a cloud provider token a user deliberately named
`PAPERCLIP_CLOUD_PROD_PROVIDER_RAILWAY_TOKEN`) were silently stripped by
the server before secret resolution, so the spawned agent never received
them. No error, no access event — the variable just never appeared.
- **Expected behavior:** A user-named `PAPERCLIP_*` binding should reach
the run env unless the harness itself uses that key. Only
`PAPERCLIP_API_KEY` should be categorically rejected, and
harness-assigned runtime vars (`PAPERCLIP_RUN_ID`, `PAPERCLIP_AGENT_ID`,
wake/workspace vars, …) should always win over config.
- **Steps to reproduce:** Configure an agent/project env binding named
`PAPERCLIP_<ANYTHING>` (plain or secret_ref), run a heartbeat, and
inspect the spawned process env — the key is absent.
- **Deployment mode:** local server, any local adapter.
Related prior PRs (different, save-time/API-layer blanket-ban approach;
this PR supersedes that direction with a runtime allow-except-reserved
policy): Refs #8239, Refs #8439.
## What Changed
- `server/src/services/heartbeat.ts`: the pre-resolution strip now
removes only `PAPERCLIP_API_KEY` (hard denylist) instead of every
`PAPERCLIP_`-prefixed binding; other `PAPERCLIP_*` keys flow into
binding resolution. Low-trust inline-sensitive-env checks now also cover
those keys.
- `packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.ts`: new
`isForbiddenConfigEnvKey()` helper; the shared
`refreshPaperclipWorkspaceEnvForExecution` merge drops
`PAPERCLIP_API_KEY` from config and keeps harness-assigned `PAPERCLIP_*`
keys authoritative.
- `packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/execute.ts`: removed the
explicit-`PAPERCLIP_API_KEY`-from-config allowance; the run token
(`authToken`) is now always applied; config `PAPERCLIP_API_KEY` is
ignored.
- All local adapters (`claude-local`, `codex-local`, `cursor-local`,
`gemini-local`, `grok-local`, `opencode-local`, `pi-local`) plus
`cursor-cloud`, `hermes`, and the server `process` adapter: removed
`hasExplicitApiKey`-style allowances so the harness token always wins,
and guarded the remaining unguarded env-merge loops (claude-local inline
loop, process adapter) with the same policy.
- Tests updated/added: heartbeat binding-strip test now asserts the
three-rule policy; adapter-utils merge tests assert the
`PAPERCLIP_API_KEY` ban and `PAPERCLIP_*` pass-through; acpx engine
tests moved credential fixtures to `authToken` and assert config
`PAPERCLIP_API_KEY` is ignored while other `PAPERCLIP_*` config keys
forward and still bust the session fingerprint on rotation.
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts
packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/execute.test.ts` — 127 passed
- `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-project-env.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-local-environment.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/claude-local-execute.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/codex-local-execute.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/cursor-local-execute.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/gemini-local-execute.test.ts` — 68 passed
- Adapter package execute suites and the server tests touching API-key
fixtures (`heartbeat-run-log`, `redaction`,
`effective-run-config-fingerprints`, `agent-permissions-routes`) —
green. Three pre-existing sandbox/SSH fixture failures reproduce
identically on clean `master` on this host and are unrelated.
- `pnpm --filter <pkg> typecheck` for server, adapter-utils, and all
nine touched adapter packages — all pass.
## Risks
- Behavioral change: a deployment that relied on configuring a static
`PAPERCLIP_API_KEY` in adapter config env loses that override — by
design; the harness-minted run token is now the only source. When no run
token exists, no API key is injected at all.
- `PAPERCLIP_*`-named user bindings now reach binding resolution and run
envs; a key that collides with a harness runtime var is still discarded
at merge time, so runtime identity/wake/workspace vars cannot be
spoofed.
- Low risk otherwise: no migrations, no API surface changes.
## Model Used
- Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`, Anthropic Claude 5 family,
Mythos-class tier), extended thinking enabled, agentic tool use (file
edits, shell, test runner) via Claude Agent SDK.
## 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
- [ ] 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: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip manages AI agents for work; agents can run in remote
sandboxes via the codex-local adapter
> - When a remote sandbox run starts, the codex-local adapter syncs the
host CODEX_HOME directory into the sandbox so Codex can authenticate and
load its configuration
> - The old approach staged the entire CODEX_HOME and relied on a 4-name
denylist (`tmp`, `.tmp`, `sessions`, `shell_snapshots`) to exclude
unnecessary state
> - The denylist was too narrow: large host-local runtime files
(`logs_2.sqlite`, `plugins/`, etc.) still uploaded on every remote run —
state the sandbox never uses
> - Additionally, `config.toml` (which embeds the managed MCP
`Authorization: Bearer …` header) was staged at 0644, relying solely on
the staging directory's 0700 permission for protection — a
credential-bearing file without per-file least-privilege
> - This pull request replaces the denylist with an explicit allowlist:
only `{auth.json, config.toml, config.json, instructions.md, skills/}`
are staged into a private `0700` temp dir; all staged regular files are
written `0600` (fail-closed on any staging error)
> - The fix is adapter-local to `packages/adapters/codex-local` with
zero changes to the shared `packages/adapter-utils` seam; inbound
auth-merge and outbound copy-back are preserved unchanged
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue for this specific bug. Describing the problem
directly:
**Bug:** The codex-local remote sandbox sync uploads more CODEX_HOME
content than the sandbox uses, and stages a credential-bearing file with
an over-permissive mode.
- **What happened:** The codex-local adapter synced the entire
CODEX_HOME directory minus four directory names (`tmp`, `.tmp`,
`sessions`, `shell_snapshots`). Large host-local runtime artifacts — a
SQLite write-ahead log that can reach 420 MB, plugin directories, crash
logs — uploaded on every remote run. `config.toml` (which embeds the
managed MCP `Authorization: Bearer …` header) was staged at `0644`; only
the staging temp dir's `0700` mode prevented broader exposure.
- **Expected behavior:** Only the files Codex needs inside the sandbox
should sync: `auth.json`, `config.toml`, `config.json`,
`instructions.md`, and `skills/`. All staged regular files should use
mode `0600` (single-layer credential protection is insufficient for
secret-bearing files).
- **Steps to reproduce:** Run a remote codex sandbox from a host with a
mature CODEX_HOME. Observe the sync payload includes `sessions/`,
`*.sqlite`, `plugins/`, etc.
Related work: Refs #9621 (outbound auth sync-back in the same
codex-local adapter area; this PR covers the inbound staging direction)
## What Changed
- New `stageCodexHomeForSync(codexHomeDir)` helper in
`packages/adapters/codex-local/src/server/codex-home.ts` stages only
allowlisted files into a fresh `fs.mkdtemp`-created `0700` temp dir,
then registers that dir as the `home` asset (dropping the old `exclude`
field entirely)
- All staged regular files written with mode `0600` — auth.json holds
single-use OAuth tokens; config.toml embeds MCP bearer headers; least
privilege applies throughout
- Symlinks dereferenced to resolved file bytes (`auth.json` single-use
token, each `skills/` entry land as real files)
- Missing-but-optional allowlist entries skipped silently (keyring-only
mode with no `auth.json`; absent `config.json`)
- Staged temp dir removed on teardown AND on error; staging is
fail-closed — a staging error aborts the run rather than shipping a
partial CODEX_HOME
- `execute.ts` updated to call `stageCodexHomeForSync` instead of the
old whole-dir + denylist path; the `exclude` field is removed from the
`home` asset
- Adapter-local fix: zero diff to `packages/adapter-utils` (shared
managed-runtime seam untouched); inbound auth-merge (`provision`) and
outbound copy-back (`restore`) preserved unchanged
## Verification
```sh
# Full codex-local test suite
npx vitest run packages/adapters/codex-local
# 174/174 pass
# Shared seam regression — must be zero diff to packages/adapter-utils
npx vitest run packages/adapter-utils
# 14/14 pass; zero changes to packages/adapter-utils source
# TypeScript (both packages)
npx tsc --noEmit -p packages/adapters/codex-local/tsconfig.json
npx tsc --noEmit -p packages/adapter-utils/tsconfig.json
# Both clean
```
Key new test coverage
(`packages/adapters/codex-local/src/server/codex-home.test.ts`):
- Stager copies exactly the allowlisted entries and nothing else
- Staged `auth.json` dereferenced from symlink and written mode `0600`
- Staged temp dir created with mode `0700`
- ALL staged regular files mode `0600`, including `config.toml` carrying
an MCP bearer token (regression test fails against the pre-fix `0644`
path)
- Fail-closed: I/O error during staging removes the temp dir and
re-throws
- Missing-but-optional entries (`config.json`) skipped without error
- Dangling symlink entries skipped without error
Execute-path integration test (`execute.remote.test.ts`): home asset
uses staged dir; staged config preserves provider block; skills survive;
staged temp dir removed after run teardown.
## Risks
- **Allowlist narrower than denylist:** Any CODEX_HOME file not in
`{auth.json, config.toml, config.json, instructions.md, skills/}` is now
excluded. If a codex-local configuration stores additional files in
CODEX_HOME that the sandbox requires, those runs will miss that state.
This tradeoff is intentional — only known-necessary files sync.
- **Permission change:** `config.toml` previously staged at `0644`, now
staged at `0600`. Strictly more restrictive; no known behavioral impact
(the sandbox reads as the file owner). This was the security gap that
motivated the fix.
- **Fail-closed staging:** A staging error (disk full, temp dir creation
failed) now aborts the run rather than falling back to the raw
CODEX_HOME. This is the safer behavior, but it changes the failure mode
from "run with potentially wrong state" to "run aborted cleanly."
## Model Used
Claude Opus 4.8 (claude-opus-4-8), Anthropic. Reasoning/agentic tool-use
mode (extended thinking, multi-step tool calls).
## 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
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Harold Kim <harold@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Connections is the subsystem that lets operators connect external
apps and govern which subjects may use those credentials
> - #9958 established the v3 schema foundation and #9981 adds the
AppDefinition catalog layer
> - The runtime still needs subject-aware authorization state, scoped
key handling, and API/OpenAPI routes so connected apps can actually be
granted and used safely
> - This pull request adds the runtime grants/authorization behavior on
top of the catalog branch, while keeping unrelated dependency and
workflow sync commits out of the stack
> - The benefit is a reviewable runtime layer that can land after the
catalog PR, then unblock the wizard and orchestrator cutover work
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #9958 and #9981.
Refs #9981.
No public GitHub issue exists for this branch. This is the runtime layer
for the Connections v3 stack and is rebased onto `master` after #9981
landed.
## What Changed
- Adds the connection user authorization state migration and schema
wiring.
- Adds shared runtime subject/grant types and validators.
- Adds runtime grant and scoped key behavior in the tool-access service.
- Adds runtime route coverage and registers the routes in OpenAPI.
- Replays only the Connections runtime commits on top of the catalog
branch, dropping unrelated sync/dependency history from the prior closed
runtime PR.
## Verification
- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links`
- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/shared/src/validators/tool-access.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts`
## Risks
- Medium: runtime grant enforcement is security-sensitive and must fail
closed for unknown key scopes.
- Migration ordering depends on the schema and catalog layers already
merged through #9958 and #9981.
- This PR is rebased and retargeted to `master` with runtime-only
commits.
> 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 GPT-5 Codex coding agent with repository tool use.
## 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>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Connections is the subsystem that defines which external apps and
MCP-style integrations operators can browse, configure, and run
> - The v3 schema core in #9958 added stable connection identities, auth
metadata, and grant-aware contracts, but the app catalog still used the
older gallery shape
> - The product needs a richer, typed AppDefinition catalog so browsing
and setup can render provider-specific auth and configuration
requirements consistently
> - This pull request moves the Wave 1 app catalog onto generated
AppDefinition data and carries that shape through shared types, server
lookup paths, and app connection UI
> - The benefit is that follow-up runtime and wizard work can build
against one catalog contract instead of local-only mock/gallery data
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #9958.
No public GitHub issue exists for this branch. This is the catalog layer
for the Connections v3 stack after the schema-core foundation in #9958.
## What Changed
- Adds generated AppDefinition data for the Wave 1 catalog and ingestion
reporting.
- Replaces the legacy tool app gallery exports with
AppDefinition-centered shared contracts, validators, and tests.
- Updates server tool-access lookup behavior to use the AppDefinition
catalog.
- Updates app connection UI surfaces and tests to consume
AppDefinition-backed catalog data.
- Documents the catalog ingestion workflow in the connector playbook.
## Verification
- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links`
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/app-definitions.test.ts
packages/shared/src/app-definitions-url.test.ts
ui/src/pages/apps/AppsConnect.test.tsx
server/src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts`
## Risks
- Medium: this changes the catalog contract used by shared, server, and
UI app connection surfaces.
- Catalog data quality matters because generated definitions now drive
browse/setup display.
- Follow-up runtime and wizard PRs must rebase on this branch or on
master after this lands.
> 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 GPT-5 Codex coding agent with repository tool use.
## 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>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source control plane people use to manage
AI-agent companies and their governed access to external systems.
> - Connected Apps build on the existing Apps and MCP gateway substrate
so companies can configure reusable, auditable integrations.
> - The current connection record does not yet have a stable public
address, explicit ownership/auth method fields, or subject-specific
credential grants.
> - Without that schema core, later OAuth, per-user authorization, token
brokering, triggers, and connector-service phases cannot enforce tenant
and subject boundaries consistently.
> - This pull request adds the forward-compatible Connections v3 schema
core while preserving the existing connection lifecycle and directly
migrating the remote MCP transport name.
> - The benefit is a company-scoped, least-privilege foundation for
one-click integrations without bypassing Paperclip secrets, profiles,
rules, or audit controls.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No matching public issue was found.
**Problem**
Paperclip's current app connections need a durable identity and
authorization substrate before Connected Apps can safely support
multiple setup methods, per-user credentials, provider tenants, and
managed connector services. The existing schema only models a single
connection-level credential set and uses legacy transport terminology.
**Proposed solution**
Add a stable company-scoped connection UID, explicit
ownership/auth/transport fields, a subject-aware `connection_grants`
table, and multi-key credential annotations. Backfill existing
connections and workspace grants in a reversible migration, then update
shared/server/UI contracts to the new `mcp_remote` transport name.
**Related work**
- Related foundation: #9534
- Roadmap: Connected Apps (one-click integrations)
## What Changed
- Added company-scoped connection `uid`, `ownership`, `authKind`, and
canonical transport fields across database, shared contracts,
validators, services, and UI fixtures.
- Added `connection_grants` with workspace/user subject rules, provider
tenant metadata, credential secret refs, revocation state, company
scoping, and uniqueness constraints.
- Added migration `0182_connections_v3_schema_core` to backfill stable
UIDs, rename `remote_http` to `mcp_remote`, infer auth kinds, create
default workspace grants, and support rollback coverage.
- Added multi-key credential annotations and updated gateway/access
services without changing the existing lifecycle behavior.
- Updated the connection glossary, connector playbook, and security
threat model for the new identity, grant, and relay boundaries.
- Added explicit test UIDs to direct database fixtures so the new
non-null invariant is exercised across affected server suites.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/tool-gateway-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/tool-gateway.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-runtime-skills.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/tool-oauth-legacy-backfill.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/tool-access-policy-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-runtime-mcp-servers.test.ts
packages/db/src/connections-v3-schema-core-migration.test.ts
packages/shared/src/validators/tool-access.test.ts --config
vitest.config.ts` — 9 files, 218 tests passed.
- Latest-head GitHub Actions: build, typecheck, general/serialized
suites, backup/worktree restore coverage, both e2e shards, canary,
policy, and security scans pass.
- Greptile: 5/5 with zero unresolved threads.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` remains red only on five pre-existing `#9627`
color literals outside this change.
## Risks
- **Migration risk:** UID backfill and default-grant creation touch
every existing connection. The migration uses company-scoped uniqueness,
deterministic legacy UIDs with ID suffixes, and seeded up/rollback
coverage.
- **Authorization risk:** Grant rows carry credential references.
Constraints enforce workspace-vs-user subject shape, company/connection
lookup indexes, one default grant per connection, and one user grant per
connection/subject. Security review is requested specifically for this
design.
- **Compatibility risk:** `remote_http` is renamed directly to
`mcp_remote`; all repository call sites and fixtures are updated in the
same change.
- **Future-phase risk:** Subject-bound token issuance, triggers, and
connector-service relay verification remain fail-closed requirements
documented for later phases; this PR does not expose those capabilities.
> 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 CLI coding agent. The runtime did not expose an exact
underlying model ID or context-window size; capabilities used include
repository inspection, code editing, shell execution, test execution,
Git/GitHub CLI operations, and structured reasoning.
## 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>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The CLI's company import/export (portability) subsystem has a typed
manifest, `CompanyPortabilityCompanyManifestEntry`, that test fixtures
must satisfy
> - PR #2379 was authored in April and merged on 2026-07-21 without a
rebase; in the interim the manifest type gained five required fields
> - Its new test fixture predates those fields, so `tsc --noEmit` now
fails on master (TS2739), which fails the Release workflow's
`verify_canary / Typecheck` job and blocks canary publishing
> - This pull request adds the five missing fields to that one fixture,
matching the sibling fixtures in the same file
> - The benefit is a green typecheck on master, unblocking the Release
pipeline
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No open issue exists; the problem is described here (bug path):
- **What happens:** `pnpm typecheck` fails on master at
`cli/src/__tests__/company.test.ts:744` with `error TS2739: Type '{...}'
is missing the following properties from type
'CompanyPortabilityCompanyManifestEntry': attachmentMaxBytes,
feedbackDataSharingEnabled, feedbackDataSharingConsentAt,
feedbackDataSharingConsentByUserId, feedbackDataSharingTermsVersion`.
See the failing Release run:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/29855224743/job/88718044096
- **Expected:** master typechecks cleanly and the Release workflow
publishes the canary
- **Cause:** semantic conflict — Refs #2379 (merged with pre-existing
green checks from April, before the manifest type gained the five
required fields)
## What Changed
- Added `attachmentMaxBytes: null`, `feedbackDataSharingEnabled: false`,
`feedbackDataSharingConsentAt: null`,
`feedbackDataSharingConsentByUserId: null`, and
`feedbackDataSharingTermsVersion: null` to the company manifest fixture
in the test "includes extension file even when all entities are
deselected" (`cli/src/__tests__/company.test.ts`), using the same values
and field order as the two sibling fixtures in the same file
## Verification
- `cd cli && pnpm typecheck` — fails on master with TS2739 at
`src/__tests__/company.test.ts:744`, passes with this change
- `cd cli && pnpm vitest run src/__tests__/company.test.ts` — all tests
pass (runtime behavior unchanged; the fixture only gains fields the code
under test does not read)
- CI: the `verify / Typecheck` job on this PR exercises the same gate
that is currently red on master
## Risks
- Low risk — a 5-line, test-only fixture change; no runtime code
touched. Worst case is a still-failing typecheck, which CI on this PR
verifies before merge.
## Model Used
- Claude Fable 5 (Anthropic, model ID `claude-fable-5`), via Claude Code
with extended thinking and tool use (GitHub CLI/API for investigation,
diff authored by the model)
## 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
- [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] 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)
https://claude.ai/code/session_01T5W8yjizAewpLtmsBHKPuA
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Summary
- always include the extension file in interactive import selection when
it exists
- add a regression test for the all-deselected case
## Why
In the interactive company import flow, clearing every entity selection
also drops `.paperclip.yaml`, which makes configuration-only imports
impossible even when the extension file is present.
## Testing
- pnpm test:run cli/src/__tests__/company.test.ts
Bumps
[radix-ui](https://github.com/radix-ui/primitives/tree/HEAD/packages/react/radix-ui)
from 1.6.0 to 1.6.4.
<details>
<summary>Changelog</summary>
<p><em>Sourced from <a
href="https://github.com/radix-ui/primitives/blob/main/packages/react/radix-ui/CHANGELOG.md">radix-ui's
changelog</a>.</em></p>
<blockquote>
<h2>1.6.4</h2>
<ul>
<li>Fixed a regression where importing primitives from the root
<code>radix-ui</code> entry point erased every primitive's types to
<code>any</code>.</li>
</ul>
<h2>1.6.3</h2>
<h3>Dialog</h3>
<ul>
<li>Fixed broken ARIA references in Dialogs where title or description
elements are not rendered.</li>
</ul>
<h3>Slider</h3>
<ul>
<li>Fixed a bug where <code>onValueCommit</code> was not called when a
slider thumb was dragged across another thumb.</li>
</ul>
<h3>Toast</h3>
<ul>
<li>Fixed <code>Toast</code> removing non-focused toasts when pressing
<code>Escape</code>.</li>
</ul>
<h3>Tooltip</h3>
<ul>
<li>Fixed a bug where <code>Tooltip.Content</code> children were mounted
to the DOM twice.</li>
</ul>
<h3>Other updates</h3>
<ul>
<li>Fixed overriding inline animation style in
<code>Popper.Content</code>.</li>
<li>Improved tree-shaking so bundlers can drop unused components.
Component parts are now marked <code>/* @__PURE__ */</code> and use
named render functions instead of <code>Component.displayName =
...</code> assignments, which previously prevented dead-code elimination
with some bundlers.</li>
<li>Widened <code>virtualRef</code> prop type to allow
<code>RefObject<Measurable | null></code> in popover
components.</li>
<li>Fixed dev-only checks with conditional exports to drop dev-warnings
from production builds.</li>
<li>Added per-primitive subpath entry points so each primitive can be
imported directly, eg. <code>import { Accordion } from
'radix-ui/accordion'</code> or <code>import * as Accordion from
'radix-ui/accordion'</code>. This mirrors the namespaced exports
available from the root <code>radix-ui</code> entry point.</li>
<li>Fixed a bug where updating a <code>Checkbox</code>,
<code>Switch</code>, or <code>RadioGroup</code> value programmatically
(eg. a "select all" control) while inside a
<code><form></code> would dispatch a <code>click</code> event from
the hidden bubble input that propagated to ancestor <code>onClick</code>
handlers.</li>
</ul>
<h2>1.6.2</h2>
<h3>Other updates</h3>
<ul>
<li>Added CSS custom properties for Navigation Menu item indicators'
translate values.</li>
<li>Fixed a bug in Dismissable Layer causing background nested popovers
to close all layers on outside click</li>
<li>Fixed runtime errors for <code>Form.Message</code>,
<code>Form.Control</code>, <code>Form.Label</code> and
<code>Form.ValidityState</code> that are correctly rendered outside of
<code>Form.Field</code> components</li>
<li>Fixed a bug in form control components to ensure their values are
updated when their associated form's is reset. This affects
<code>RadioGroup</code>, <code>Slider</code>, <code>Select</code>, and
<code>Switch</code>.</li>
<li>Fixed menu items, tab triggers, toolbar links, and select items
intercepting <code>Space</code>/<code>Enter</code> keys that originate
from focusable descendants.</li>
<li>Fixed a bug where calling an event handler without an argument would
throw, preventing successive event handlers from being called. This
affected all components that accept event handlers with internal
implementations.</li>
<li>Fixed a bug in Context Menu to ensure that the menu properly
re-anchors to the latest pointer position when re-triggered in its open
state.</li>
<li>Fixed stale <code>onEscapeKeyDown</code>/<code>onDismiss</code>
handlers on React 19.2.</li>
<li>Fixed items in a Roving Focus Group not being auto-focused on mount
within a Focus Scope component.</li>
<li>Fixed a regression in Dismissable Layer originating from a <a
href="https://redirect.github.com/react/react/pull/34831">bug in React's
<code>useEffectEvent</code></a>.</li>
<li>Fixed <code>--radix-scroll-area-corner-width</code> and
<code>--radix-scroll-area-corner-height</code> not resetting to
<code>0</code> when a corner is removed. Previously these values would
stick around and leave a permanent gap on the remaining scrollbar.</li>
<li>Fixed a bug in Slider where stepping with the keyboard would skip a
valid value when the current value is off the step grid. Stepping now
snaps to the next step-aligned value in the direction of travel,
matching native <code><input type="range"></code>
behavior.</li>
</ul>
<h2>1.6.1</h2>
<!-- raw HTML omitted -->
</blockquote>
<p>... (truncated)</p>
</details>
<details>
<summary>Commits</summary>
<ul>
<li>See full diff in <a
href="https://github.com/radix-ui/primitives/commits/HEAD/packages/react/radix-ui">compare
view</a></li>
</ul>
</details>
<details>
<summary>Attestation changes</summary>
<p>This version has no provenance attestation, while the previous
version (1.6.0) was attested. Review the <a
href="https://www.npmjs.com/package/radix-ui?activeTab=versions">package
versions</a> before updating.</p>
</details>
<br />
Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>
Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open-source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The `ui` package contains React components that drive the agent
scheduling and workspace configuration UX
> - Dependabot PR #9895 bumped `@radix-ui/react-*` from 1.6.0 → 1.6.4,
which changed the internal effect-scheduling order inside Dialog and
Select primitives
> - Two `workspaces-a` CI tests started failing:
`RoutineRunVariablesDialog` and `editable-sections / TriggersSection`
> - Root cause for both: radix 1.6.4's changed scheduling pushes a
cascaded state update one render-tick later, and each test asserted
before that tick landed
> - This PR fixes the two affected surfaces at the source (one
production fix, one test fix) so the radix bump can land cleanly
> - The benefit is unblocking PR #9895 without compromising test
fidelity or production correctness
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #9895 — this PR fixes the two `workspaces-a` test failures that
blocked the radix-ui 1.6.0 → 1.6.4 Dependabot bump.
**Root cause:** radix-ui 1.6.4 changed the internal effect-scheduling
order inside its Dialog and Select primitives, pushing certain cascaded
state updates one render-tick later than before. Two tests each asserted
against the intermediate state, before the deferred tick landed.
**Affected tests (both now pass at radix 1.6.0 AND 1.6.4):**
1. `editable-sections / TriggersSection` — `ScheduleEditor`
disabled-button assertion
2. `RoutineRunVariablesDialog` — workspace branch propagation assertion
Production behavior is unchanged and correct in both cases (verified via
tracing).
## What Changed
- **`ui/src/components/ScheduleEditor.tsx`** — `onValidityChange` is now
called synchronously inside the custom-cron `onChange` handler, not only
via the passive `useEffect` below. Previously there was a one-render
window where an invalid draft still read as valid to the parent (button
enabled); this closes that window. The effect call is preserved as a
safety net for other entry paths; only the `onChange` path is new.
- **`ui/src/components/RoutineRunVariablesDialog.test.tsx`** — the
post-mount settle loop now waits for the branch value to actually appear
in an `<input>` (`value === "pap-1634-routine-branch"`) rather than
exiting as soon as the workspace card mounts. The card reports its
branch name through an effect callback that triggers a follow-up render;
the old loop exited one tick too early. Iteration cap raised from 10 →
20 to give the extra tick room.
This PR intentionally does **not** bump radix-ui — that stays in #9895.
## Verification
```sh
# TypeScript — clean at radix 1.6.0 (master):
tsc -p ui/tsconfig.json
# Targeted vitest:
npx vitest run ui/src/components/RoutineRunVariablesDialog.test.tsx
npx vitest run ui/src/components/editable-sections
npx vitest run ui/src/components/ScheduleEditor
# Full ui suite — green with radix 1.6.4 installed locally (371 files / 3035 tests):
npx vitest run --project ui
# check-forbidden-tokens — clean
```
All of the above pass at **both** radix 1.6.0 (current master) and
1.6.4.
## Risks
Low risk. The production change (`ScheduleEditor.tsx`) adds a
synchronous call to an already-injected `onValidityChange` prop — same
value, earlier in the same event cycle. No new state, no new effects, no
API changes. The test change tightens an assertion (waits longer, checks
a more specific condition) rather than relaxing one.
## Model Used
Claude Sonnet (Anthropic) — Paperclip agent workflow; model family
claude-sonnet-4-x with tool use and extended reasoning enabled.
## 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: Harold Kim <harold@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents and board users can attach files to issues so context and
deliverables stay with the task
> - Some clients upload Microsoft Office files with generic binary MIME
types such as `application/octet-stream`
> - Current `master` now accepts arbitrary issue attachment MIME types,
so the upload should keep working for unknown binary files
> - Office files still benefit from being stored with a specific Office
MIME type when the filename makes that inference safe
> - Shared attachment allow-list defaults should also include common
Office MIME types for routes that still use that allow-list
> - This pull request keeps the current arbitrary-MIME issue upload
behavior and only narrows generic binary uploads to Office MIME types
for known Office filename extensions
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Fixes#8243
Duplicate search performed before implementation:
- No matching open or closed PR found for `8243`, `Office document`,
`attachment MIME`, or `openxmlformats`.
## What Changed
- Added common Office MIME types to the default shared attachment
allow-list.
- Added upload content-type normalization that maps generic binary
uploads to a specific Office MIME type only for known Office filename
extensions.
- Added an optional helper-level allow-list gate so callers that still
validate against an effective allow-list can keep generic binary uploads
generic when the inferred Office MIME type is not allowed.
- Reused the shared generic attachment content-type list for response
handling.
- Preserved current `master` behavior for issue uploads that use unknown
or arbitrary MIME types.
- Added regression coverage for default Office allow-list matching,
filename inference, optional allow-list fallback, official Office MIME
uploads, inferred generic Office uploads, and preservation of unknown
generic binary uploads.
## Verification
- `env CI=true corepack pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --force`
- `env CI=true corepack pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest
run src/__tests__/attachment-types.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts`
- `env CI=true corepack pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk
ensure-build-deps`
- `env CI=true corepack pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsc
--noEmit`
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD`
GitHub CI, security checks, and Greptile pass on rebased head
`acc364cfbe3440a59db6570bb907818046649eb4`.
## Risks
Low risk. The issue attachment route continues to accept arbitrary MIME
types as current `master` does; this change only stores a more specific
Office MIME type for generic binary uploads when the filename has a
known Office extension. Unknown generic binary uploads remain generic.
For callers that use an allow-list before storing uploads,
`normalizeUploadAttachmentContentType` supports an optional gate so
inference can be limited to MIME types that are already allowed.
No docs change included because this is a default upload compatibility
fix covered by server tests.
> 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`.
This is a narrow bug fix, not roadmap-level core feature work.
`ROADMAP.md` was checked.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex using GPT-5, tool-enabled coding agent. Context window
details are not exposed in this environment.
## 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: Sami Rusani <sr@samirusani>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Issues can carry an embedded multi-stage `executionPolicy` (e.g. QA
→ CodeReviewer → CodePusher) driven by
`applyIssueExecutionStageTransition` in
`server/src/services/issue-execution-policy.ts`
> - On approval, the next stage was picked with `nextPendingStage()`,
which scans the **whole** stage list from index 0 for the first id not
in `completedStageIds`
> - Stage ids are regenerated whenever the embedded policy is re-sent or
edited mid-flow (a supported operation — the existing "reassigns the
active stage when the current participant is removed" test depends on
it), so earlier `completedStageIds` can stop matching the current
policy; a final-stage approve then "finds" stage 1 pending again and
rebuilds a first-stage review (#7893) — an endless re-review loop that
can recycle indefinitely against a moving main tip
> - This pull request makes approvals advance with a forward-only scan
(only stages *after* the one being approved), so approving the last
stage always terminates the policy, and adds a guard so an
already-completed execution state is terminal for `status=done`
> - The benefit is final-stage approvals close the issue as the policy
intends, with no behavior change for non-final advancement or
reject/changes_requested verdicts
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Fixes#7893
## What Changed
- `server/src/services/issue-execution-policy.ts`:
- New `nextPendingStageAfter(policy, completedStage, state)` helper —
forward-only scan from the approved stage's index; the approval path
uses it instead of `nextPendingStage()`. Approving the final stage
therefore always yields `nextStage === null` → completed state → the
caller's `done` flows through.
- New guard: `requestedStatus === "done"` with an already-`completed`
execution state returns without restarting the chain at stage 1 (closes
the same loop when a stale completed state lingers).
- Reject/`changes_requested` verdicts and intact-state forward
advancement are untouched.
- `server/src/__tests__/issue-execution-policy.test.ts`: 4 regression
tests, including one that reproduces the exact rewind (regenerated stage
ids + final-stage approve → previously reassigned QA at
`currentStageIndex 0`; now terminal completed) and an explicit
final-stage rejection test pinning the unchanged path.
## Verification
- `npx vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-execution-policy.test.ts` →
54 passed (50 pre-existing + 4 new).
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` → clean.
- The rewind was confirmed empirically against unmodified code first (a
test asserting the buggy output passed pre-fix and flips post-fix), plus
brute-forced realistic operation sequences (checkout dances, status
round-trips, interim comments per the agent flow documented around
#4889) to verify intact-state flows are unaffected.
- Related suites (`issue-execution-policy-routes`,
`issue-comment-reopen-routes`, `issues-service`,
`issue-thread-interaction-routes`,
`issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes`) also pass locally.
## Risks
- Behavior deliberately preserved: non-final approvals (forward scan is
identical when state is intact), rejections at any stage,
reopen-from-done (state cleared on reopen, fresh chain still starts at
stage 1), and explicit `in_review` restarts.
- The policy schema has no terminal-state field, so per the issue's Ask
the policy simply terminates and the requested `done` status flows
through.
## Model Used
- Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`, Anthropic) via Claude Code, agentic
mode with tool use (subagent implementation + independent adversarial
review subagent), extended thinking enabled.
## 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 (none found for #7893)
- [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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots (N/A — server-only change)
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (N/A —
internal stage-advance semantics)
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green (will confirm once CI runs on
this PR)
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
(pending first review)
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies, and
humans onboard into companies via invite links.
> - Some invite types (`company_join` with
`requires_company_admin_approval`) require an admin to approve the join
request after the invitee submits it.
> - While the requester waits, the invitee sees the
`AwaitingJoinApprovalPanel` in `InviteLanding`, which describes where
the admin needs to go to approve the request.
> - That panel rendered the destination — "Company Settings → Access" —
as two clickable `<a href="/company/settings/access">` links, even
though the surrounding copy is plainly addressed to the admin ("Ask
**them** to visit ..."), not the requester.
> - First-time invitees naturally click the only underlined link on the
screen, are sent to `/company/settings/access`, hit the "No company
access" panel (they have no membership yet), and conclude the invite
flow is broken.
> - This PR removes the navigation by rendering both "Company Settings →
Access" references as plain styled text (`<p>` / `<span>`), so the
guidance stays visible but cannot be followed by the requester.
> - The benefit is that the post-submit invite experience matches the
copy's intent — guidance for the admin, not navigation for the
requester.
Fixes#6784.
## What Changed
- `ui/src/pages/InviteLanding.tsx` — In `AwaitingJoinApprovalPanel`,
replace the two `<a href={approvalUrl}>Company Settings → Access</a>`
elements with `<p>` and `<span>` containing the same text. Remove the
now-unused `approvalUrl` constant.
- `ui/src/pages/InviteLanding.test.tsx` — Update the existing "pending
approval page" test: it previously asserted two anchor tags pointing at
`/company/settings/access`; it now asserts **zero** anchors while the
text "Company Settings → Access" still appears twice (in the "Approval
page" box and inline in the "Ask them to visit ..." sentence). Renamed
the test description from "...linked access instructions" to
"...non-clickable access instructions" to reflect the contract.
## Verification
```
pnpm vitest run ui/src/pages/InviteLanding.test.tsx
```
Result: 8 / 8 pass, including the updated "shows the pending approval
page with the company icon and non-clickable access instructions" case.
Manual reproduction (master @ `242a2c2f`,
`deploymentMode=authenticated`, `bind=lan`, embedded Postgres):
1. As instance admin, generate a `company_join` invite that requires
admin approval.
2. In a fresh browser profile, open the invite link.
3. Fill **Create your account** and submit.
4. The "Request to join \<company\>" panel appears.
5. Hover the "Company Settings → Access" mentions — no underline, no
link cursor; clicking does nothing. The text is still readable and the
surrounding copy ("Ask them to visit ...") still conveys the instruction
to the requester.
Before / after screenshots: see issue #6784 — the "before" state lands
users on `/company/settings/access` which renders "No company access".
After this PR the guidance is informational only.
## Risks
Low. UI-only change confined to one function in `InviteLanding.tsx` plus
its matching test. No API contracts, routes, or data shapes are
modified. The removed `approvalUrl` constant was only referenced by the
two anchor elements.
## Model Used
- Anthropic Claude Opus 4.7 (`claude-opus-4-7`, 1M context, extended
thinking enabled).
- Tools: file editing, Bash, Playwright reproduction against a
self-hosted Paperclip instance running master @ `242a2c2f`, and the
Paperclip monorepo's own Vitest suite for verifying the test update.
## 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots (will attach in PR thread)
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (no
docs files needed updating)
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The server config loader reads `.paperclip/config.json` and feeds it
into the shared Paperclip config schema.
> - When a config file exists but cannot be parsed or fails schema
validation, Paperclip should not silently ignore it.
> - The current `readConfigFile()` catch block treats invalid files the
same as missing files, so startup falls back to defaults while the
banner can still point at the ignored config path.
> - This pull request keeps the missing-file fallback, but makes present
invalid config files fail with a path-specific error.
> - The benefit is safer startup behavior and a clear diagnostic that
points at the invalid config field.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Fixes#8908
## What Changed
- Changed `readConfigFile()` to return `null` only when the config file
is absent.
- Added explicit errors for unreadable/invalid JSON config files.
- Added explicit Zod validation errors that include the config path and
invalid field path without printing config contents.
- Added server tests for missing config, invalid JSON, schema validation
failure, and valid config parsing.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/config-file.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
## Risks
Low risk for valid configs and missing configs. This intentionally
changes behavior for present invalid config files from silent fallback
to startup failure, which is the issue being fixed.
> 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 based on GPT-5, with repository file inspection, GitHub
CLI, and local command 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
- [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
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Fixes#4206
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents on issues with checkout/release
semantics for execution locks
> - `POST /api/issues/:id/release` clears checkout and execution locks
when a heartbeat ends without finishing the issue
> - `issues.release()` unconditionally set `status: "todo"`, undoing
terminal and waiting states (`done`, `cancelled`, `in_review`,
`blocked`) set during the session
> - Agents reported status drift after release (e.g. `in_review` →
`todo`, `done` → `todo`), forcing manual PATCH recovery and risking
silent stalls
> - This pull request gates the `todo` re-queue to `in_progress` issues
only and preserves all other statuses on release
> - The benefit is lock cleanup without destroying workflow state agents
already recorded
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
- Fixes#4206 — `issues.release()` must not downgrade terminal/waiting
statuses
- Related internal incident: AIT-114 status drift on terminal issue
release (AI Trading Council)
## What Changed
- `server/src/services/issues.ts` — `releaseStatus` is `todo` only when
`existing.status === "in_progress"`; otherwise preserves
`existing.status`
- `server/src/__tests__/issue-stale-execution-lock-routes.test.ts` —
regression tests: release preserves done, cancelled, in_review, blocked
keeps `done` and clears lock fields
- `server/package.json` — patch bump `0.3.1` → `0.3.2`
- `server/CHANGELOG.md` — documents the fix
## Verification
```sh
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server test issue-stale-execution-lock-routes
```
- 7/7 tests pass (parametrized done, cancelled, in_review, blocked)
(includes new `preserves terminal status when releasing a done issue`
and existing `in_progress` → `todo` on release)
- CI: Build, Typecheck, serialized server suites, e2e, Canary Dry Run
green on latest head `f31b55f`
## Risks
Low risk. Behaviour change is intentional: non-`in_progress` releases no
longer force `todo`. Agents that relied on release to re-queue
`in_review`/`blocked` work must PATCH status explicitly (documented in
agent lifecycle guidance). Rollback: revert this commit and redeploy
`@paperclipai/server` 0.3.1.
## Model Used
Anthropic Claude Opus 4.6 (extended thinking mode) — 200K context
window, tool use enabled. Assisted implementation and PR packaging for
AI Trading Council upstream port from local hotfix.
## 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots (N/A)
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
(CHANGELOG)
- [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
(re-review requested on head `f31b55f`)
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
Co-authored-by: brandon <brandonburr@gmail.com>
Bumps [react-i18next](https://github.com/i18next/react-i18next) from
17.0.9 to 17.0.10.
<details>
<summary>Changelog</summary>
<p><em>Sourced from <a
href="https://github.com/i18next/react-i18next/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md">react-i18next's
changelog</a>.</em></p>
<blockquote>
<h2>17.0.10</h2>
<ul>
<li>fix(warnings): the <code>useTranslation</code> and
<code>Trans</code> "You will need to pass in an i18next
instance" warnings now match the <code>useSSR</code> wording,
mentioning the props/context alternatives and the most common
unexplained cause at scale: duplicate react-i18next copies in monorepo
setups. The <code>Trans</code> variant also referenced the internal
<code>i18nextReactModule</code> name; it now points to the public
<code>initReactI18next</code> API.</li>
<li>feat(warnings): development-only warning
(<code>SUSPENDED_WHILE_LOADING</code>, logged once) right before
<code>useTranslation</code> suspends while translations are loading.
With the default <code>useSuspense: true</code> and no
<code><Suspense></code> boundary this previously surfaced as a
blank screen or a cryptic React error; the warning now names both fixes
(add a <code><Suspense></code> boundary or set
<code>react.useSuspense: false</code>). No-op in production builds; the
<code>process.env.NODE_ENV</code> check is wrapped so runtimes without a
<code>process</code> global (raw ESM in the browser, some edge runtimes)
stay silent instead of throwing.</li>
<li>ci: weekly workflow typechecking the test suite against
<code>@types/react@next</code> / <code>@types/react-dom@next</code>, so
the next React major's type changes (like the React 18
<code>TFunctionResult</code>/children wave) surface before user
reports.</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
</details>
<details>
<summary>Commits</summary>
<ul>
<li><a
href="3b71c2766c"><code>3b71c27</code></a>
17.0.10</li>
<li><a
href="57c3500e6a"><code>57c3500</code></a>
build</li>
<li><a
href="c62476f4d1"><code>c62476f</code></a>
chore: sync package-lock with i18next ^26.2.0 devDependency bump</li>
<li><a
href="0126bd1cad"><code>0126bd1</code></a>
improve instance warnings (monorepo hint) + dev-only suspense warning +
weekl...</li>
<li>See full diff in <a
href="https://github.com/i18next/react-i18next/compare/v17.0.9...v17.0.10">compare
view</a></li>
</ul>
</details>
<br />
[](https://docs.github.com/en/github/managing-security-vulnerabilities/about-dependabot-security-updates#about-compatibility-scores)
Dependabot will resolve any conflicts with this PR as long as you don't
alter it yourself. You can also trigger a rebase manually by commenting
`@dependabot rebase`.
[//]: # (dependabot-automerge-start)
[//]: # (dependabot-automerge-end)
---
<details>
<summary>Dependabot commands and options</summary>
<br />
You can trigger Dependabot actions by commenting on this PR:
- `@dependabot rebase` will rebase this PR
- `@dependabot recreate` will recreate this PR, overwriting any edits
that have been made to it
- `@dependabot show <dependency name> ignore conditions` will show all
of the ignore conditions of the specified dependency
- `@dependabot ignore this major version` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this major version (unless you reopen
the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
- `@dependabot ignore this minor version` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this minor version (unless you reopen
the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
- `@dependabot ignore this dependency` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this dependency (unless you reopen the
PR or upgrade to it yourself)
</details>
Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>
Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Bumps [ws](https://github.com/websockets/ws) from 8.19.0 to 8.21.1.
<details>
<summary>Release notes</summary>
<p><em>Sourced from <a
href="https://github.com/websockets/ws/releases">ws's
releases</a>.</em></p>
<blockquote>
<h2>8.21.1</h2>
<h1>Bug fixes</h1>
<ul>
<li>Empty fragments are now counted toward the limit (a2f4e7c0).</li>
<li>The default values of the <code>maxBufferedChunks</code> and
<code>maxFragments</code> options have
been reduced (f197ac65).</li>
</ul>
<h2>8.21.0</h2>
<h1>Features</h1>
<ul>
<li>Introduced the <code>maxBufferedChunks</code> and
<code>maxFragments</code> options (2b2abd45).</li>
</ul>
<h1>Bug fixes</h1>
<ul>
<li>Fixed a remote memory exhaustion DoS vulnerability (2b2abd45).</li>
</ul>
<p>A high volume of tiny fragments and data chunks could be sent by a
peer, using
modest network traffic, to crash a <code>ws</code> server or client due
to OOM.</p>
<pre lang="js"><code>import { WebSocket, WebSocketServer } from 'ws';
<p>const wss = new WebSocketServer({ port: 0 }, function () {
const data = Buffer.alloc(1);
const options = { fin: false };
const { port } = wss.address();
const ws = new WebSocket(<code>ws://localhost:${port}</code>);</p>
<p>ws.on('open', function () {
(function send() {
ws.send(data, options, function (err) {
if (err) return;
send();
});
})();
});</p>
<p>ws.on('error', console.error);
ws.on('close', function (code, reason) {
console.log(<code>client close - code: ${code} reason:
${reason.toString()}</code>);
});
});</p>
<p>wss.on('connection', function (ws) {
ws.on('error', console.error);
ws.on('close', function (code, reason) {
console.log(<code>server close - code: ${code} reason:
${reason.toString()}</code>);
});
});
</code></pre></p>
<!-- raw HTML omitted -->
</blockquote>
<p>... (truncated)</p>
</details>
<details>
<summary>Commits</summary>
<ul>
<li><a
href="ae1de54330"><code>ae1de54</code></a>
[dist] 8.21.1</li>
<li><a
href="8e9511b86b"><code>8e9511b</code></a>
[ci] Trust Coveralls Homebrew tap</li>
<li><a
href="f197ac6514"><code>f197ac6</code></a>
[fix] Lower default values of <code>maxBufferedChunks</code> and
<code>maxFragments</code></li>
<li><a
href="8df8265c2f"><code>8df8265</code></a>
[ci] Update actions/checkout action to v7</li>
<li><a
href="a2f4e7c046"><code>a2f4e7c</code></a>
[fix] Count empty fragments toward the limit (<a
href="https://redirect.github.com/websockets/ws/issues/2329">#2329</a>)</li>
<li><a
href="e79f912cb3"><code>e79f912</code></a>
[pkg] Approve install scripts for bufferutil and utf-8-validate</li>
<li><a
href="4ea355d6d3"><code>4ea355d</code></a>
[doc] Document 32-bit signed integer coercion for option values</li>
<li><a
href="2120f4c8c6"><code>2120f4c</code></a>
[example] Remove uuid dependency</li>
<li><a
href="4c534a6b8a"><code>4c534a6</code></a>
[security] Add latest vulnerability to SECURITY.md</li>
<li><a
href="bca91adf15"><code>bca91ad</code></a>
[dist] 8.21.0</li>
<li>Additional commits viewable in <a
href="https://github.com/websockets/ws/compare/8.19.0...8.21.1">compare
view</a></li>
</ul>
</details>
<br />
[](https://docs.github.com/en/github/managing-security-vulnerabilities/about-dependabot-security-updates#about-compatibility-scores)
Dependabot will resolve any conflicts with this PR as long as you don't
alter it yourself. You can also trigger a rebase manually by commenting
`@dependabot rebase`.
[//]: # (dependabot-automerge-start)
[//]: # (dependabot-automerge-end)
---
<details>
<summary>Dependabot commands and options</summary>
<br />
You can trigger Dependabot actions by commenting on this PR:
- `@dependabot rebase` will rebase this PR
- `@dependabot recreate` will recreate this PR, overwriting any edits
that have been made to it
- `@dependabot show <dependency name> ignore conditions` will show all
of the ignore conditions of the specified dependency
- `@dependabot ignore this major version` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this major version (unless you reopen
the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
- `@dependabot ignore this minor version` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this minor version (unless you reopen
the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
- `@dependabot ignore this dependency` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this dependency (unless you reopen the
PR or upgrade to it yourself)
</details>
Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>
Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Bumps [@codemirror/language](https://github.com/codemirror/language)
from 6.12.3 to 6.12.4.
<details>
<summary>Commits</summary>
<ul>
<li>See full diff in <a
href="https://github.com/codemirror/language/commits">compare
view</a></li>
</ul>
</details>
<br />
[](https://docs.github.com/en/github/managing-security-vulnerabilities/about-dependabot-security-updates#about-compatibility-scores)
Dependabot will resolve any conflicts with this PR as long as you don't
alter it yourself. You can also trigger a rebase manually by commenting
`@dependabot rebase`.
[//]: # (dependabot-automerge-start)
[//]: # (dependabot-automerge-end)
---
<details>
<summary>Dependabot commands and options</summary>
<br />
You can trigger Dependabot actions by commenting on this PR:
- `@dependabot rebase` will rebase this PR
- `@dependabot recreate` will recreate this PR, overwriting any edits
that have been made to it
- `@dependabot show <dependency name> ignore conditions` will show all
of the ignore conditions of the specified dependency
- `@dependabot ignore this major version` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this major version (unless you reopen
the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
- `@dependabot ignore this minor version` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this minor version (unless you reopen
the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
- `@dependabot ignore this dependency` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this dependency (unless you reopen the
PR or upgrade to it yourself)
</details>
Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>
Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The CLI is one external control-plane surface for scripts and
operators.
> - Board API keys are the headless credential path for
board-authenticated automation.
> - The CLI already exposes board token create/list/revoke commands.
> - The existing token tests covered the generic agent token lifecycle,
but did not directly cover the board token lifecycle.
> - This pull request adds focused tests for board token creation,
listing, revocation, and expiration payload handling.
> - The benefit is safer CLI credential-management work without changing
runtime behavior.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public issue found. This is a test coverage follow-up for CLI board
token lifecycle behavior described in
`doc/plans/2026-05-23-cli-api-parity.md`.
Related context: #4220 tracks/contains board API key product work; this
PR only adds tests for the current CLI command behavior on this branch.
## What Changed
- Added `token board create` coverage for `--ttl-days` expiration
payloads.
- Added `token board create` coverage for `--never-expires` payloads.
- Added `token board list` and `token board revoke` coverage, including
the DELETE route assertion.
## Verification
- `./node_modules/.bin/vitest run cli/src/__tests__/token.test.ts
--config cli/vitest.config.ts` passes: 1 file, 6 tests.
## Risks
Low risk. This is test-only coverage for existing CLI behavior.
> 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 GPT-5 Codex in Codex desktop, with repository inspection, shell
command execution, GitHub CLI usage, and code editing tools.
## 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
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] 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: 馨冉 <xinxincui239@gmail.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The CLI is one external control-plane entry point for scripts,
operators, and agent handoff flows.
> - Prompt handoff intentionally maps prompts back to Paperclip work
objects: issues, comments, and optional wakeups.
> - The existing prompt tests covered the agent-authenticated path, but
the board-authenticated path had less direct coverage.
> - That left regressions in persona validation, board issue creation,
comment append, and no-wake behavior harder to catch.
> - This pull request adds focused tests for those board prompt handoff
paths.
> - The benefit is safer CLI parity work without changing runtime
behavior.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public issue found. This is a test coverage improvement for the CLI
prompt handoff workflow described in
`doc/plans/2026-05-23-cli-api-parity.md`.
## What Changed
- Added `runBoardPrompt` coverage for rejecting agent persona profiles.
- Added board-authenticated issue creation coverage, including target
agent resolution and wakeup.
- Added board-authenticated comment append coverage with `wake: false`
to verify no wakeup request is sent.
## Verification
- `./node_modules/.bin/vitest run cli/src/__tests__/prompt.test.ts
--config cli/vitest.config.ts` passes: 1 file, 6 tests.
- `pnpm --filter paperclipai typecheck` was attempted, but this local
checkout fails before reaching this change because
`@paperclipai/plugin-sdk` dist artifacts are missing for server imports;
representative errors include `Cannot find module
@paperclipai/plugin-sdk` from `server/src/app.ts` and
`server/src/routes/plugins.ts`.
## Risks
Low risk. This is test-only coverage for existing CLI behavior.
> 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 GPT-5 Codex in Codex desktop, with repository inspection, shell
command execution, and code editing tools.
## 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
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] 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: 馨冉 <xinxincui239@gmail.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The CLI is one of the main operator and agent-facing control
surfaces.
> - CLI commands build API paths from dynamic company, issue, project,
agent, and other resource identifiers.
> - Dynamic path segments need to be encoded so reserved characters
cannot reshape the request URL.
> - Empty dynamic path segments should fail locally instead of creating
malformed API routes.
> - The shared `apiPath` helper already implements those safeguards, but
its behavior was not directly covered in the common CLI tests.
> - This pull request adds focused coverage for path segment encoding
and empty-segment rejection.
> - The benefit is stronger regression coverage around a small but
security-relevant CLI routing helper.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
- Bug: `apiPath` is the shared CLI helper for constructing API paths
with dynamic identifiers, but the common CLI tests did not directly
assert that dynamic segments are URL-encoded or that empty segments are
rejected before a request is made.
## What Changed
- Imported `apiPath` into `cli/src/__tests__/common.test.ts`.
- Added coverage that verifies reserved characters in dynamic path
segments are encoded.
- Added coverage that verifies empty and undefined dynamic path segments
throw before producing a malformed path.
## Verification
- `./node_modules/.bin/vitest run cli/src/__tests__/common.test.ts
--config cli/vitest.config.ts` passed (10 tests).
- `git diff --check` passed.
## Risks
- Low risk. This is test-only coverage for existing helper behavior.
- If future code intentionally wants query-string construction through
this helper, it should use static template text for the query string and
keep dynamic values as path segments or use a dedicated query builder.
> 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 GPT-5 via Codex, with code editing and local command 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
- [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
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] 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: 馨冉 <xinxincui239@gmail.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source control plane people use to manage AI
agents and their work
> - Operators rely on task detail properties and header actions to scan
linked resources and make quick decisions
> - External GitHub objects used a long pull-request label and repeated
mention counts that added visual noise without adding state
> - The task-detail star action also rendered as a labelled outline
button, unlike the compact star controls used elsewhere
> - These inconsistencies made dense task-detail surfaces slower to scan
and broke Paperclip's content-first visual language
> - This pull request shortens the GitHub pull-request label, removes
duplicate mention-count decoration, and aligns the detail star action
with the icon-only control pattern
> - The benefit is a calmer, more consistent task-detail experience with
accessible labels preserved for assistive technology
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No matching public GitHub issue or open pull request was found.
**What happened?**
On the task detail surface, linked GitHub pull requests were labelled
`Github Pull Request` and could show a repeated `×N` mention count. The
detail-header star control used a labelled outline button rather than
the compact icon-only star pattern.
**Expected behavior**
Linked pull requests should use the concise `Github PR` label without
duplicate mention-count decoration, and the detail star action should
render as an accessible icon-only ghost button consistent with
neighboring controls.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open a task with a linked GitHub pull request mentioned more than
once.
2. Inspect the external-object property label and value row.
3. Inspect the star action in the task detail header.
**Paperclip version or commit:** `230126d80b` (`master` at preparation
time)
**Deployment / installation:** Local development, built from source.
**Scope:** Core UI; not adapter-specific, database-related, or
configuration-related.
## What Changed
- Render GitHub pull-request property labels as `Github PR`.
- Remove repeated external-object mention-count decoration from property
values.
- Render detail-header star controls as icon-only ghost buttons while
preserving `aria-label`, pressed, busy, error, and tooltip states.
- Expand component coverage for concise labels, duplicate-count
suppression, visual variants, and accessible star actions.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx
src/components/StarToggle.test.tsx` — 54 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed.
- Visual review (before/after plus normal, starred, pending, and error
states):
45cb492185/star-toggle-review.html
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — reports five existing `#9627` violations in
files unchanged by this PR; the same values are present on `master`.
## Risks
- Low risk: changes are limited to task-detail presentation and tests.
- The star action remains fully accessible through its existing ARIA
label and tooltip, but it no longer displays visible text.
- External-object mention counts remain available in data; only the
redundant property-row decoration is removed.
> 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, GPT-5.3 Codex, tool-enabled coding agent with repository
and shell access.
## 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>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the control plane operators use to coordinate AI-agent
companies and review work needing attention.
> - The Inbox is the operator-facing surface that aggregates tasks
requiring attention across server state and shared client polling.
> - Archiving a task optimistically removed it, but ordinary background
activity and stale polling responses could make it reappear seconds
later.
> - The server therefore needs to distinguish genuine user-attention
events from routine agent/system activity.
> - The client also needs a bounded local archive guard across every
Inbox query path while the server mutation and in-flight polls settle.
> - This pull request fixes both resurrection paths and adds
race-focused regression coverage.
> - The benefit is stable archive behavior without hiding a genuine
archive failure after reconciliation or reload.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
### Pre-submission checklist
- [x] Searched existing open and closed issues and pull requests; no
duplicate implementation was found.
- [x] Reproduced on `master` before this branch.
- [x] Confirmed this is a Paperclip core bug, not adapter or provider
behavior.
### What happened?
Archiving an Inbox task hid it optimistically, then background refresh
activity could insert it back into the list seconds later.
### Expected behavior
A successfully archived task remains hidden during normal polling. A
genuine failed archive may become visible again after reconciliation or
reload.
### Steps to reproduce
1. Open Inbox with a visible task.
2. Archive the task.
3. Wait for shared polling or routine agent activity to refresh task
data.
4. Observe the archived task reappear without a hard page refresh.
### Paperclip version or commit
`master` before this branch.
### Deployment mode
Built from source using the local development application.
### Installation method
Built from source (`pnpm`).
### Agent adapter(s) involved
Not adapter-specific; this is a core Inbox bug.
### Database mode
Not database-mode-specific.
### Access context
Board (human operator).
### Additional context
The failure had independent server and client causes: routine activity
could resurface archived rows server-side, while stale shared-poll
responses could bypass optimistic client removal.
## What Changed
- Restrict server-side Inbox resurfacing to explicit user-attention
events rather than any issue activity write.
- Add a bounded client-side archive guard with confirmation, failure
restoration, and cache reconciliation behavior.
- Apply the guard to Inbox rendering, badge counts, optimistic cache
updates, and shared-poll result application.
- Classify the generic compact Inbox query so stale shared-poll data
cannot bypass the guard.
- Add server visibility-matrix tests and UI race-condition regression
tests.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/hooks/useSharedPolling.test.ts src/lib/inboxArchiveCache.test.ts
src/pages/Inbox.test.tsx` — 25 passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` — 107 passed.
- Branch rebased cleanly onto current `origin/master` before push.
## Risks
- Low-to-moderate behavioral risk: resurfacing is intentionally
narrower, so the server tests cover human comments, mentions,
interactions, and status transitions that must still regain attention.
- The client guard is bounded and cleared on mutation failure, limiting
the risk of hiding a task whose archive did not persist.
- No schema, migration, public API, workflow, dependency-lock, or
visual-token changes.
> 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
- Anthropic Claude via Claude Code (`claude_local`; prior
implementation/review run, exact underlying model ID and context window
were not retained in the handoff metadata), with repository tool use and
test execution.
- OpenAI `gpt-5.5` via Codex CLI for final review repair and PR
preparation, with reasoning, repository editing, GitHub tooling, 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/described the result 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 task identifier
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation where needed; no
documentation change is required for this bug fix
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [x] All Paperclip-authored commits include the required co-author
trailer
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The Secrets UI lets operators navigate slash-delimited secret names
as folders
> - PR #9913 shipped create-in-folder behavior for company and per-user
secrets
> - The production behavior is already on master, but several
create-in-folder interaction paths lack retained regression coverage
there
> - Without that coverage, prefix composition, derived keys, prefix
removal, and staged empty folders could regress unnoticed
> - This pull request adds focused render tests without changing
production behavior
> - The benefit is safer maintenance of the folder-based secrets
workflow with a small, reviewable patch
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
- Refs #9913
## What Changed
- Added render coverage for creating a company secret from a folder and
deriving its key from the full slash-delimited name.
- Added coverage for per-user secret prefixes and exposing the full name
when the prefix chip is removed.
- Added coverage for inline folder-name validation and URL-backed
staging of an empty folder.
## Verification
- `env -u PAPERCLIP_IN_WORKTREE -u PAPERCLIP_WORKTREE_NAME -u
PAPERCLIP_CONFIG -u PAPERCLIP_HOME -u PAPERCLIP_INSTANCE_ID -u
PAPERCLIP_CONTEXT pnpm exec vitest run
ui/src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx` — 29 tests passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — reports five existing `#9627` literals in
unrelated files; this PR changes no token-gated component code and
introduces no new violation.
## Risks
- Low risk: test-only change with no production, API, schema, migration,
dependency, or runtime behavior changes.
- The tests exercise existing DOM interactions and may need updates if
the Secrets creation UI copy or controls intentionally change.
> 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 CLI managed coding agent with repository inspection, code
execution, Git/GitHub, and Paperclip API tools. The managed harness does
not expose the exact underlying model ID or 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)
- [ ] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
— the assigned execution branch name is fixed by the task
- [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 — no
documentation change is needed for test-only coverage
- [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>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The README is the first project surface most prospective users and
contributors see
> - The existing Star History presentation only showed one static chart
at the bottom of the page
> - The project also lacked the compact Star History Rank badge
alongside its other top-level badges
> - The chart should respect the reader's light or dark color scheme
while preserving the existing history link
> - This pull request adds the rank badge and replaces the chart with
responsive light/dark sources
> - The benefit is a more useful, theme-aware project-growth snapshot in
both prominent README locations
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this documentation request.
- **Problem / motivation:** The README's Star History presentation is
less visible than the other project badges and its chart does not adapt
to light and dark themes.
- **Proposed solution:** Add Star History's rank badge to the centered
badge row and use the provider's responsive `<picture>` markup for the
chart section.
- **Alternatives considered:** Keeping the current single static chart
would avoid markup changes but would not provide theme-aware rendering
or the requested rank badge.
- **Roadmap alignment:** Documentation-only presentation change; it does
not add or duplicate a product roadmap item.
- **Related PR:** #9922 refreshed the surrounding README roadmap content
before this focused follow-up.
## What Changed
- Added the Star History Rank badge to the README's centered badge row.
- Replaced the single Star History image with light- and dark-theme
chart sources using the supplied sealed chart URL.
- Preserved the existing Star History destination and accessible chart
label.
## Verification
- `git diff --check`
- Confirmed the badge, light chart, and dark chart endpoints each return
HTTP 200.
- Rendered the updated section through GitHub's GFM API and confirmed
GitHub preserves the linked `<picture>` and both theme sources.
- Confirmed the diff contains only `README.md`.
## Risks
- Low risk: documentation-only change with no runtime, API, dependency,
or migration impact.
- The chart depends on Star History's hosted badge/chart endpoints and
supplied sealed token remaining available.
> 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 `gpt-5.4` via Codex CLI; context-window size not exposed by the
runtime; medium reasoning with repository, shell, GitHub API, and live
HTTP verification tools.
## 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>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The telemetry subsystem (`packages/shared/src/telemetry`) flushes
event batches to an ingest endpoint; today the client drops batches
silently on 429 / 413 / 400 / network error with no re-queue and no
retry
> - The current behaviour is uncharacterised — there are no regression
tests pinning it, so any future retry work could accidentally change the
drop semantics without a test failing
> - Before adding retry logic it is critical to lock the current
baseline as an explicit, documented contract so regressions are
immediately visible
> - Additionally, the retry/cap design needs a config surface
(`maxEventsPerBatch`, `maxBodyBytes`, `maxPendingRetryBatches`,
`backoff`) so operators can tune behaviour without forking; that surface
should be defined and defaulted before the first consumer lands, not
after
> - This pull request adds characterisation tests that pin today's
silent-drop baseline and adds an optional, additive config surface with
resolved defaults — `client.ts` is untouched so no behaviour changes
> - The benefit is that the retry work in the follow-up PR can build on
a verified baseline, safe defaults, and a pre-wired config contract
rather than specifying everything at once
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No pre-existing public GitHub issue. Underlying problem described below
(feature-request template).
**Problem or motivation**
The telemetry client in `packages/shared/src/telemetry/client.ts` has no
regression tests covering its error-path semantics. On 429 / 413 / 400 /
network failure the current code drains the whole queue via `splice(0)`
and discards the batch — silent drop, no retry. That behaviour is
correct for a best-effort client today, but nothing verifies it. When
retry logic lands, there is no safety net to confirm it does not
accidentally re-queue already-dropped batches. In parallel, the retry
design requires a typed config surface (`maxEventsPerBatch`,
`maxBodyBytes`, `maxPendingRetryBatches`, `backoff`) that the client and
its callers need to agree on before the first consumer is wired up.
**Proposed solution**
Two-phase additive scaffolding:
1. Lock the silent-drop baseline as pinned tests (temporary; Impl-2
replaces them when retry lands).
2. Add the config surface and defaults now so Impl-2 can consume them
immediately.
**Alternatives considered**
Writing the tests and config surface inside the retry PR — rejected
because it makes the retry diff much harder to review and loses the
regression-safety benefit of a committed baseline.
**Roadmap alignment**
Maintenance / client-correctness improvement; not a core roadmap
feature.
## What Changed
- **`client.test.ts`** — 5 new Phase-1 characterisation tests pinning
silent-drop on 429, 413, 400, and network-error. A
`stubFetchStatus(status)` helper DRYs the four drop cases. These are
temporary regression anchors: marked `TODO(impl-2): replace when retry
lands`.
- **`config.ts`** — `TELEMETRY_DEFAULTS` constant (frozen) +
`resolveCaps()` + `resolveTelemetryConfig()`. Provides a single exported
source of truth for defaults; nothing reads these yet.
- **`types.ts`** — 4 optional, additive `TelemetryConfig` fields:
`maxEventsPerBatch` (default 50), `maxBodyBytes` (default 524 288),
`maxPendingRetryBatches` (default 20), `backoff` (exp-with-jitter
shape). All optional and backward-compatible.
- **`index.ts`** — re-exports `TELEMETRY_DEFAULTS` and
`resolveTelemetryConfig` from the public package surface.
- **`client.ts`** — no changes (verified via `git diff --stat`).
## Verification
```bash
# Unit tests — 16 passed (5 new Phase-1 pins + 2 new Phase-2 config tests + 9 existing)
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared exec vitest run src/telemetry
# Type check — clean
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck
# Confirm client.ts untouched (zero output expected)
git diff HEAD~1 -- packages/shared/src/telemetry/client.ts
```
All three commands verified locally before push.
## Risks
**Low risk.** `client.ts` is untouched — no behaviour change. All four
modified files are additive:
- New tests cannot regress production behaviour.
- New config fields are `optional` and their defaults match the current
implicit constants in `client.ts`, so any future reader gets identical
semantics until it overrides them.
- `resolveTelemetryConfig` replaces no existing function; it is new.
- No envelope / wire change; no new PII / crypto / sink.
The `TODO(impl-2)` markers on the Phase-1 pins make their temporary
nature explicit in code.
## Model Used
- **Provider:** Anthropic
- **Model:** Claude Sonnet 4.6 (`claude-sonnet-4-6`)
- **Context window:** 200k tokens
- **Capabilities:** Tool use, code execution, agentic task completion
via Paperclip agent SDK
- **Mode:** Standard (no extended thinking)
## 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: Harold Kim <harold@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The CLI API client is the shared request layer used by command tests
and board/agent workflows.
> - Its unit tests replace the global `fetch` function so requests can
be asserted without a live server.
> - `vi.restoreAllMocks()` restores spies and mocks, but it does not
undo `vi.stubGlobal()` replacements.
> - That means a mocked global `fetch` can leak into later tests that
share the same Vitest worker.
> - This pull request makes the API client test cleanup match the safer
CLI test pattern by unstubbing globals after each test.
> - The benefit is more reliable CLI test isolation without changing
runtime behavior.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
- Bug: `cli/src/__tests__/http.test.ts` stubs global `fetch` in multiple
tests but only calls `vi.restoreAllMocks()` during cleanup. Vitest does
not use `restoreAllMocks()` to undo `vi.stubGlobal()`, so later tests in
the same worker can inherit a mocked `fetch` and exercise the wrong
behavior.
## What Changed
- Added `vi.unstubAllGlobals()` to the API client test `afterEach`
cleanup.
- Kept the change limited to test isolation; no runtime code changed.
## Verification
- `./node_modules/.bin/vitest run cli/src/__tests__/http.test.ts
--config cli/vitest.config.ts` passed (5 tests).
- `git diff --check` passed.
## Risks
- Low risk. This only changes test cleanup and should make tests less
order-dependent.
- If a future test intentionally relies on a global stub persisting
across test cases, it will need to move that setup into its own
`beforeEach`; that would be a healthier test shape.
> 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 GPT-5 via Codex, with code editing and local command 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
- [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
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] 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: 馨冉 <xinxincui239@gmail.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The pull request workflow is the main merge gate for changes to that
app.
> - The Playwright e2e lane is expensive because every spec shares one
isolated server and runs serially.
> - Splitting that lane across runners shortens the critical path, but
the public required-check contract still needs a check named exactly
`e2e`.
> - This pull request shards the real e2e work while preserving a fast
aggregate `e2e` job for branch protection.
> - The benefit is a faster PR workflow without making otherwise-good
PRs unmergeable because a legacy required check disappeared.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this CI follow-up.
Related prior CI work:
- Refs #8360
- Refs #9168
- Refs #9516
Bug report:
### What happened?
Sharding the PR e2e lane directly at the workflow job level changes the
emitted check names to shard-specific names, while existing branch
protection expects a check named exactly `e2e`.
### Expected behavior
The PR workflow should be able to run e2e specs across multiple runners
while still emitting a stable aggregate check named `e2e`.
### Steps to reproduce
1. Open a PR against `master`.
2. Run the PR workflow with the e2e lane split only as a matrix job.
3. Observe that the shard checks complete, but a required check named
exactly `e2e` never appears.
### Paperclip version or commit
Current `master`.
### Deployment mode
GitHub Actions pull request workflow.
## What Changed
- Added `scripts/e2e-shard.mjs`, which partitions default Playwright e2e
specs by recorded per-spec duration.
- Added `scripts/e2e-shard-durations.json` with measured e2e spec
durations so the slow smoke-lab spec does not dominate one runner.
- Split the PR workflow e2e lane into two `e2e_shards` matrix jobs and
added a fast aggregate job named exactly `e2e`.
- Added `scripts/__tests__/e2e-shard.test.mjs` to lock the shard
partition, ignored-spec sync, manifest coverage, and aggregate
required-check contract.
## Verification
- `node --test scripts/__tests__/e2e-shard.test.mjs`
- `node --test scripts/__tests__/run-vitest-stable-shard.test.mjs`
- `git diff --check upstream/master..HEAD`
- Searched GitHub for duplicate or related e2e-shard / required-check
PRs and issues before opening this PR; no direct duplicate was found.
## Risks
Low risk. The main risk is that the duration manifest can drift as specs
are added or runtimes change; missing specs fall back to the median
known duration, and the focused shard test catches empty, overlapping,
or badly imbalanced partitions.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5 via Codex CLI coding agent, with shell/tool execution and
repository inspection.
## 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>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the control plane people use to manage AI-agent
companies.
> - Operators need to grant secrets to specific agents safely and
efficiently.
> - The secrets access sheet previously used a native select while
similar agent-assignment surfaces use a searchable picker.
> - That inconsistency makes finding an agent slow and error-prone as
companies grow.
> - This pull request reuses the shared agent picker behavior for
single-agent secret access grants.
> - The benefit is a consistent, searchable selection experience without
changing secret-access semantics.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #9797
**Problem / motivation:** The in-sheet agent access form introduced in
#9797 renders every grantable agent in a native select. In companies
with many agents, operators cannot filter by name or title and the
experience differs from other agent-selection surfaces.
**Proposed solution:** Add a single-select variant beside the existing
`AgentMultiSelect`, then use it in the secret access grant form.
**Alternatives considered:** Keeping a native select would preserve less
code but would not scale or align with existing searchable agent
selection.
**Roadmap alignment:** This is a focused usability fix for an existing
core control-plane surface and does not overlap an unstarted roadmap
initiative.
## What Changed
- Added `AgentSelect`, a searchable single-agent popover that filters by
agent name and title.
- Replaced the secret access form's native select with the shared
searchable picker.
- Added focused coverage for filtering, selecting, callback behavior,
and popover closure.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/AgentMultiSelect.test.tsx` —
passes (3 tests).
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passes.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — branch adds no violations; the command
currently fails on five unchanged `#9627` literals already present on
`master`.
- Manual: open Secrets, choose a secret, add agent access, filter by
agent name or title, select the result, and grant access.
## Risks
- Low risk: the change is limited to agent selection UI and preserves
the existing grant request payload.
- The new picker depends on the existing popover/input primitives and
resets its filter when closed.
> 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, GPT-5-series coding agent (exact runtime model ID and
context-window size are not exposed), with reasoning, repository tool
use, terminal execution, and GitHub CLI capabilities.
## 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>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source control plane people use to organize
and govern companies of AI agents
> - The README is the project’s front door, while `ROADMAP.md` is the
detailed statement of shipped and planned product direction
> - The existing README roadmap had fallen behind capabilities that are
already available and did not explain the product’s organizing model
> - That drift made current features look unfinished and left the
relationship between tasks, organization, training, and infrastructure
implicit
> - This pull request synchronizes the roadmap preview with the detailed
roadmap and introduces the four-pillar product framing
> - The benefit is a more accurate, coherent first impression for users
and contributors, with theme-aware visuals that render correctly on
GitHub
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
- **Subsystem affected:** Documentation (`README.md`, `ROADMAP.md`, and
documentation assets); no runtime subsystem changes.
- **Problem or motivation:** The README roadmap understated shipped
capabilities, the detailed roadmap had corresponding stale statuses, and
the README did not clearly explain the four product pillars that connect
Paperclip’s task, organization, training, and infrastructure surfaces.
- **Proposed solution:** Refresh both roadmap views from one ordered
list, add the four-pillars section and light/dark graphic, and keep
future capabilities explicitly marked as planned or partial.
- **Alternatives considered:** Updating only `ROADMAP.md` would leave
the project’s front page stale; updating only the README would create a
second source of truth; a single non-theme-aware image would be less
legible for half of GitHub’s color schemes.
- **Roadmap alignment:** This change directly updates `ROADMAP.md` and
its README preview rather than introducing an unplanned runtime feature.
- **Additional context:** Searched open pull requests for related README
roadmap/four-pillars work and found no duplicate.
## What Changed
- Added a **The four pillars** section covering Agentic Task Manager,
Org Chart for Agents, Agent Employee Training, and Agentic OS, with a
theme-aware `<picture>` graphic.
- Flipped four roadmap entries from ⚪ to ✅: Cloud / Sandbox agents,
Artifacts & Work Products, Deep Planning, and Enforced Outcomes.
- Added shipped ✅ entries for MCP Tool Gateway & Apps, per-agent Secrets
Manager access, activity logging and action attribution, self-healing
recovery, and agent evals/feedback; expanded the skills entry to include
Skill Studio and Skills Store.
- Added planned ⚪ entries for Bring-your-own-ticket-system and Connected
Apps, resolving the README FAQ inconsistency around external ticket
systems.
- Moved Cloud deployments to 🟡 and documented the shipped multi-tenant
isolation, local-to-cloud sync, and cloud-managed bootstrap scope.
- Synchronized the README preview and `ROADMAP.md` ordering/statuses: 18
✅, 9 ⚪, and 1 🟡 entry.
## Verification
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD`
- Focused Node consistency check confirms README and `ROADMAP.md` have
the same 28 ordered entries/statuses and expected 18 ✅ / 9 ⚪ / 1 🟡
counts.
- `file doc/assets/four-pillars-light.png
doc/assets/four-pillars-dark.png` confirms both assets are valid
3840×2160 RGB PNGs.
- Visual QA rendered the README through GitHub’s GFM API in Chromium at
GitHub content width under both light and dark `prefers-color-scheme`
modes; the correct graphic swapped per theme, all links resolved, the
section placement/table were correct, and `ROADMAP.md` matched the
README preview.
### Visual Evidence
**Light theme**
**Dark theme**
- Prettier was not run because this repository does not expose a
configured `prettier` binary; markdown whitespace was checked with `git
diff --check` and the rendered QA above.
## Risks
- Low risk: documentation and image assets only; no application code,
API contract, schema, dependencies, lockfile, or workflow changes.
- Roadmap status wording can become stale as product work evolves, so
future shipped capabilities should update both the README preview and
`ROADMAP.md` together.
> 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, exact model ID `gpt-5.6-sol`, with reasoning,
terminal/tool use, GitHub API access, and Paperclip control-plane
integration. The model context-window size was not exposed by this
execution environment.
## 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>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The issue-comments API (`POST /api/issues/:id/comments`) attributes
each comment to the run that created it via `created_by_run_id`, a
foreign key into `heartbeat_runs`
> - In multi-agent local control-plane usage, board/session clients
sometimes forward an `X-Paperclip-Run-Id` that is not a real run row — a
non-UUID client request id, a synthetic string, or a since-deleted run
> - That value was written straight to the FK column, so the insert died
with a Postgres FK violation and the endpoint returned HTTP 500,
breaking agent coordination
> - This PR resolves the run id defensively before insert: reject
non-UUID shapes, verify the row exists for the company, and null out
anything unresolvable while logging a warning
> - The benefit is that a bad run-id header degrades gracefully to an
unattributed comment (201) instead of a 500, so comment creation stays
up
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public issue exists; describing inline (bug):
**What happened:** `POST /api/issues/:id/comments` returns HTTP 500 when
the request carries an `X-Paperclip-Run-Id` that does not correspond to
a row in `heartbeat_runs` (non-UUID value, synthetic client id, or
deleted run). The value is written to the `created_by_run_id` FK, and
Postgres rejects the insert with a foreign-key violation (SQLSTATE
23503).
**Expected:** the comment is created (HTTP 201); an unresolvable run id
is dropped to `null` rather than failing the request.
**Impact:** in multi-agent usage, comment creation — and the agent
coordination that depends on it — fails whenever a client forwards a run
id that isn't a live run.
## What Changed
- Add `resolveCommentCreatedByRunId(dbOrTx, companyId, runId)` — trims
and validates UUID shape, then checks existence in `heartbeat_runs`
scoped to the company; returns `null` for missing/invalid ids.
- `addComment` now resolves the run id through that helper before insert
and logs a warning when a supplied run id is dropped.
- Add embedded-Postgres regression tests for the three cases (non-UUID
header, unknown UUID, valid run id).
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter server test issues-service` — the new
`issueService.addComment createdByRunId` block passes.
- Cases covered: non-UUID header → 201, `createdByRunId: null`; UUID
absent from `heartbeat_runs` → 201, `null`; valid run id present for the
company → preserved.
## Risks
Low. Purely defensive — valid run ids are still preserved, only
unresolvable ones are nulled. Adds one indexed, tenant-scoped `SELECT`
per comment insert.
## Model Used
Claude Opus 4.8 (extended thinking), via the Paperclip PR-triage
cockpit, produced the added regression tests and this description. The
original implementation is by @digitalflanker-ux; the author's model is
unspecified.
## 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)
- [ ] 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 (related: #4795 same fix; #8065 sibling FK-guard on the
activity-log path)
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues OR (b) described the
issue in-PR following the relevant issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [ ] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] 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: Claude Haiku 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Andrew Aymeloglu <aaymeloglu@gmail.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Operators rely on Paperclip server logs for maintenance, incident
triage, and support handoffs.
> - The HTTP logger persisted request metadata and only redacted
authorization headers.
> - Request cookies and set-cookie headers can contain active session
material and should not be written to durable logs.
> - This pull request keeps the fix intentionally narrow: centralize the
HTTP log redaction path list and include cookie-bearing headers.
> - The benefit is lower credential/session leakage risk from routine
server.log collection or sharing.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No GitHub issue exists for this exact local finding. Inline bug report:
- Type: security/privacy bug.
- Affected area: server HTTP logging middleware.
- Observed problem: local Paperclip maintenance found raw cookies
present in server.log.
- Expected behavior: durable HTTP logs redact authorization and
cookie-bearing request/response headers.
- Impact: anyone with access to copied/exported logs could see
session-bearing cookie values.
- Related/open PRs found during dedup search: #7242, #7306, #7346. This
PR is the minimal local fix branch created from the verified local
maintenance patch; those PRs may be better upstream candidates if
maintainers prefer their broader coverage.
## What Changed
- Added `HTTP_LOG_REDACT_PATHS` for HTTP logger redaction paths.
- Kept existing `req.headers.authorization` redaction.
- Added redaction for `req.headers.cookie`, request `set-cookie`, and
response `set-cookie` paths.
- Added focused tests asserting the required redaction paths are present
and that pino-http output redacts live request/response header secrets.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/http-log-redaction.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- Pre-commit TruffleHog scan: 0 verified/unverified secrets.
- PR CI observed passing so far for policy, Typecheck + Release
Registry, Build, e2e, Socket, Snyk, security-review, and
serialized/workspace suites; remaining jobs may still be running.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk: this only expands pino redaction paths.
- Possible coverage risk: broader redaction helpers in related PRs may
cover more serialized variants beyond the pino-http request/response
header pipeline tested here.
- No migrations, schema changes, or UI changes.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex via Hermes Agent, model gpt-5.5, tool-using coding/ops
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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] 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: Andrew Aymeloglu <aaymeloglu@gmail.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Operators store company and user secrets under human-readable names
> - Slash-delimited names already express useful hierarchy, but the
Secrets page previously rendered them as one flat list
> - Large secret collections therefore became harder to scan, navigate,
and create within consistently named groups
> - A client-derived folder model preserves the existing server contract
while making those names navigable
> - This pull request adds folder browsing, URL-addressable paths,
global search, and create-in-folder behavior without adding folder
records
> - The benefit is a more scalable secrets workflow with no migration or
API compatibility risk
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Slash-delimited secret names such as `dev/github/oauth/clientid`
currently appear as raw flat rows. This change treats name prefixes as
client-side navigation folders on the main Secrets tab while leaving
stored names, API contracts, validation, and the database unchanged.
- Wireframes and interaction specification:
https://pages.paperclip.ing/pap-14698-secrets-folders/
- Folder paths are derived only from secret names; there is no
server-side folder entity or data-model change.
## What Changed
- Added pure secret-path utilities for normalized segments, breadcrumbs,
nested folder listings, counts, and leaf/path rendering.
- Added a Folders/Flat view to the main Secrets tab with folder-first
sorting, breadcrumbs, empty-folder states, filters, and global search
results.
- Added URL navigation through `?path=<normalized/path>` so deep links,
reload, browser Back, and new-tab folder navigation work.
- Persisted the preferred view in `localStorage` under
`paperclip.secrets.viewMode`; an explicit `?path=` deep link takes
precedence for that visit.
- Added create-in-folder behavior with a removable prefix chip, staged
New folder paths, inline segment validation, and full-name key
derivation.
- Kept My secrets flat while rendering slash-delimited names with muted
paths and emphasized leaves.
- Added unit/render coverage for path helpers, folder navigation, and
create-in-folder behavior.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/pages/secrets/secret-path.test.ts
ui/src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx` — 35 tests passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm test:run` — server suite passed 2,707 tests and UI suite passed
3,022 tests; one unrelated CLI doctor test was environment-sensitive
because this agent inherited AWS variables.
- `env -u AWS_PROFILE -u AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID -u AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY -u
AWS_SESSION_TOKEN -u AWS_REGION -u AWS_DEFAULT_REGION pnpm exec vitest
run cli/src/__tests__/secrets.test.ts` — 8 tests passed.
- `pnpm build` — passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — feature files are clean; the command
reports five existing `#9627` color literals outside this diff.
## Risks
- Low data risk: folders are derived client-side from existing names,
with no schema, migration, API, or stored-name changes.
- URL behavior changes only the main Secrets tab and uses the additive
`?path=` contract.
- View preference is browser-local and scoped to the
`paperclip.secrets.viewMode` key.
- Renaming or deleting the last secret under an open prefix
intentionally leaves the user on an empty-folder state instead of
redirecting.
- “Move to folder…” bulk prefix rename remains deferred because it is a
multi-secret mutation with separate conflict and partial-failure
semantics.
> 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 `gpt-5.5` via Codex CLI for PR preparation, verification,
GitHub/Paperclip tool use, and codebase analysis; the managed harness
does not expose the active context-window size.
- Anthropic Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) and Claude Fable 5 assisted
earlier implementation/design commits, as recorded in their commit
trailers; both used repository and code-editing tools.
## 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)
- [ ] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
— the assigned shared execution branch name is fixed for this work
- [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: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Paperclip instances can be self-hosted, or provisioned and managed
by a cloud control plane that authenticates users through trusted
headers validated against `PAPERCLIP_CLOUD_TENANT_SERVER_TOKEN`
(`resolveCloudTenantActor`)
> - In `authenticated` deployment mode, the health route reports
`bootstrapStatus: bootstrap_pending` until at least one `instance_admin`
exists, and the UI locks everyone out at the "waiting on its first
admin" claim screen until then — correct for self-hosted instances,
where a human operator must claim the instance
> - But the cloud-tenant trust middleware, by deliberate security
hardening, never grants `instance_admin` and actively purges legacy
grants — so a cloud-managed instance can never leave
`bootstrap_pending`: the gate demands a role the middleware forbids
> - Every control-plane-provisioned instance is therefore permanently
locked at the claim screen even though its users and memberships exist
> - This pull request makes the gate cloud-aware: when the tenant server
token is configured, the instance is considered bootstrapped, because
the control plane owns identity and there is no operator claim step
> - The benefit is that cloud-managed instances become usable while
self-hosted behavior stays byte-for-byte identical, now pinned by a
previously missing regression test
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #2927 (introduced the browser-native first-admin bootstrap flow
this gate feeds). No existing public issue for the deadlock; inline
description per the bug report template:
- **What happened?**: an instance configured with
`PAPERCLIP_DEPLOYMENT_MODE=authenticated` and
`PAPERCLIP_CLOUD_TENANT_SERVER_TOKEN` reports `bootstrapStatus:
bootstrap_pending` forever. All users — including ones created via the
trusted-header path with owner-level company membership — are locked out
at the "This Paperclip is waiting on its first admin" screen.
- **Expected behavior**: a control-plane-managed instance has no
first-admin claim step; users arriving with control-plane identity
should reach the app.
- **Steps to reproduce**:
1. Run the server with `PAPERCLIP_DEPLOYMENT_MODE=authenticated` and a
`PAPERCLIP_CLOUD_TENANT_SERVER_TOKEN` set
2. Create users only through trusted cloud headers (the middleware
upserts them but never grants `instance_admin`, and purges any legacy
grants)
3. `GET /api/health` → `bootstrapStatus` stays `bootstrap_pending`; the
UI shows the claim screen for every visitor, and no supported path
exists to create the `instance_admin` the gate requires
- **Paperclip version or commit**: reproducible on `master` as of
2026-07-20; present since the cloud-tenant `instance_admin` purge
hardening landed.
## What Changed
- `server/src/middleware/auth.ts`: new exported
`isCloudManagedInstance()` predicate beside the trust middleware that
defines the tenant-token contract.
- `server/src/routes/health.ts`: the authenticated-mode first-admin gate
is skipped when the instance is cloud-managed; `bootstrapStatus` reports
`ready`.
- `server/src/__tests__/health.test.ts`: two new tests — authenticated
without the token → `bootstrap_pending` (previously untested regression
baseline), and with the token → `ready` despite zero instance admins.
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run src/__tests__/health.test.ts` in `server/` — 13/13
- `pnpm vitest run src/middleware/cloud-tenant-actor.test.ts` — 6/6
- Manual: with the env vars from the repro steps set, `GET /api/health`
now returns `bootstrapStatus: "ready"`; without the token, behavior is
unchanged
## Risks
- None for self-hosted deployments: without the env var the gate is the
prior behavior, now pinned by the new regression test.
- For cloud-managed instances the claim screen and
`bootstrapInviteActive` flow no longer appear — intended; browser-based
claim was already disabled in that configuration.
## Model Used
- Claude (Anthropic) — model id `claude-fable-5`, via the Claude Code
CLI harness with tool use (shell, file edits, test execution). Diagnosis
and change agent-assisted, human-directed.
## 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 (n/a —
behavior documented in code comments and pinned by tests)
- [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
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Paperclip publishes Docker images from this repo that self-hosters
and orchestration tooling deploy; the server refuses to start when its
database is missing any schema migration the build bundles
(`ensureMigrations`)
> - Anything that deploys these images therefore needs to know an
image's schema expectations *before* deploying it — today that requires
pulling the image or checking out the matching commit, both heavyweight
for tooling that just wants to answer "will this image boot against a
database migrated to N?"
> - Getting this wrong is expensive: an image ahead of the applied
schema crash-loops at startup and fails healthchecks after deployment
resources are already created
> - This pull request labels every published image with its bundled
migration set (last migration file and count), computed at build time
from `packages/db/src/migrations` in the same tree the image is built
from
> - The benefit is image/schema compatibility verification with two
cheap registry requests (manifest + config blob), no pull, and no drift
risk between label and image contents
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No existing public issue; inline description per the feature request
template:
- **Subsystem affected**: Docker image publishing
(`.github/workflows/docker.yml`), `packages/db` migrations
- **Problem or motivation**: deployment tooling cannot cheaply determine
which schema migrations a published image expects; the only options are
pulling the image or checking out the matching commit. Deploying an
image whose bundled migrations exceed the applied schema makes the
server refuse to start, so this check is needed *before* resources are
created.
- **Proposed solution**: OCI labels
(`io.github.paperclipai.schema.last-migration`,
`io.github.paperclipai.schema.migration-count`), computed from the
migrations directory at build time via the existing
`docker/metadata-action` step. Keys use org-based reverse-DNS (the
GitHub org) so the label contract survives product-domain migrations.
- **Alternatives considered**: a schema manifest published beside the
image (second artifact to keep in sync — rejected); encoding schema info
in tags (tags already carry semver/sha meaning — rejected).
- **Roadmap alignment**: checked `ROADMAP.md` — no overlap with planned
core work; this is build metadata only.
## What Changed
- `.github/workflows/docker.yml`: a `Compute schema migration labels`
step (`ls` + `sort` over `packages/db/src/migrations/*.sql`) feeding two
custom labels into the existing `docker/metadata-action` step.
## Verification
- Workflow YAML validated locally.
- The label-computation commands run against the current tree produce
`last=0181_decision_training_retention_policy.sql`, `count=180`.
- After merge, verify with: fetch the image config blob for a fresh
`sha-*` tag from ghcr and confirm both `io.github.paperclipai.schema.*`
labels are present.
## Risks
- Low. Labels are metadata only; no change to image contents. If the
migrations directory ever moves, the label step fails the workflow
loudly (`ls` exits non-zero) rather than publishing wrong labels.
## Model Used
- Claude (Anthropic) — model id `claude-fable-5`, via the Claude Code
CLI harness with tool use (shell, file edits). Change authored and
verified agent-assisted, human-directed.
## 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 (YAML validation; label
commands — no app code changed)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable (n/a — CI metadata
only)
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (n/a —
workflow comment documents the labels)
- [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
Release changelog for **v2026.720.0** (released 2026-07-20). Supersedes
#9612 (the 7/15 draft — that cut was never released, no `v2026.715.0`
tag exists).
Range is the full `v2026.707.0..master` — **195 commits from 16
contributors**.
## New since the 7/15 draft
- **Decision Training** — library + inspector, snapshot foundation,
decision image galleries
- **Built-in Summarizer & summary slots**
- **Skill organization** — nested folders, "My Skills",
import-from-project, open-by-default company skill policy (alongside
Skill Studio)
- **Issue monitor visibility** across task surfaces + issue properties
- **Reworked secrets dialog** with in-sheet per-agent access
- **Active PR-gardening workflow**
- Recovery / hot-restart / codex-auth reliability fixes and inbox/list
polish
No `BREAKING:` signals — DB migrations are additive and run
automatically (captured in the Upgrade Guide).
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source control plane people use to supervise
AI-agent companies.
> - Operators need task execution state to be visible where they read,
reply to, and manage an issue.
> - Scheduled monitor state was easy to miss because it lived in a
description-area card and used inconsistent, mostly static time copy.
> - The task page, composer, retry card, and properties panel therefore
needed one shared monitor-state and countdown language.
> - This pull request adds shared live-ticking time utilities, moves
monitor status into a top-of-page banner and composer strip, and
redesigns the properties row with complete read-only details.
> - The benefit is that operators can immediately understand when an
agent resumes, why it is waiting, and how to act without hunting across
the page.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Issue monitors can schedule a future agent check, retry, or wake, but
the UI did not present that state consistently or prominently. The
existing description-area activity card competed with issue content, the
composer did not explain that replying wakes the agent early, compact
properties copy truncated important details, and relative times did not
share a live two-unit formatter.
This change makes scheduled monitor state visible and consistent across
the issue header, reply composer, properties panel, and scheduled-retry
card. Related prior server-side recovery visibility work: #9629
(distinct scope).
## What Changed
- Added shared two-unit monitor ETA/offset formatters and a live-ticking
countdown hook, including compact absolute-time rules for Today,
weekday, and cross-year dates.
- Replaced the description-area monitor activity card with a top-of-page
status banner and added an inline composer strip that explains replies
wake the agent before the scheduled check.
- Redesigned the properties Monitor row as readable two-line copy with
attempt state, due/overdue/cleared wording, click-to-edit behavior, and
a hover/tap details tooltip.
- Adopted the shared two-unit formatting in the scheduled-retry card and
added focused coverage for monitor formatting, state transitions,
visibility, and controls.
- Added the approved wireframe package and published reference:
https://pages.paperclip.ing/pap-14557-monitor-visibility/
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run ui/src/lib/issue-monitor.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssueMonitorBanner.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx` — 3 files, 74 tests passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm build` — passed with existing Vite optimization/chunk-size
warnings.
- UX review approved the rendered real components across desktop/mobile,
light/dark, and the scheduled/retrying/due/overdue/cleared/none state
matrix.
- QA passed 6/6 criteria in Chromium, including a live countdown
transition without refresh. Review evidence included the P2 banner
state-matrix screenshot and the P3 properties-row and details-tooltip
screenshots, plus a dark-mode capture.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` currently reports five pre-existing `#9627`
comment literals on `origin/master`; this branch introduces none of
those literals or any new token violation.
## Risks
- Low-to-moderate UI behavior risk: monitor copy and placement change
across several issue surfaces, but all derive from one shared state
builder and focused tests cover the state matrix.
- Countdown rendering wakes once per minute while a visible monitor is
scheduled; the hook is limited to active monitor surfaces and stops when
hidden.
- No database, API contract, migration, telemetry, or authorization
behavior changes.
> 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, `gpt-5.6-sol`; context-window metadata was unavailable
in this runtime; reasoning, repository tool use, command execution, and
test execution enabled. Earlier implementation commits were assisted by
Claude Fable 5 and Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context), as credited in their
commit trailers.
## 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: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source control plane people use to manage AI
agents and the credentials those agents need for work.
> - The secrets UI is responsible for making credential creation
understandable and for showing where credentials are used.
> - The create flow previously exposed an editable generated key too
early, used an unnatural field order, and rendered uneven provider tab
rows.
> - The detail sheet also lacked an in-context way to see and manage
which agents reference a selected secret.
> - This pull request makes the create dialog follow a predictable
name-to-value flow and adds agent access management directly to the
secret details sheet.
> - The benefit is a clearer secrets workflow with fewer accidental key
edits and less navigation when granting or revoking agent access.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected:** `ui/` — React + Vite board UI
**Problem or motivation:** Creating a secret currently makes its
generated key look immediately editable, places fields in an awkward
keyboard order, and applies provider-tab overrides that produce uneven
rows. After creation, operators cannot inspect or change agent access
from the selected secret's detail sheet.
**Proposed solution:** Generate the key from the path-style name and
keep it read-only until an explicit Edit action; place Value directly
after Name; use the standard tab sizing; and add an Agent access section
that reads and updates `secret_ref` / `user_secret_ref` environment
bindings through agent adapter configuration.
**Alternatives considered:** Keeping access management only on agent
configuration screens was rejected because it hides a secret-centric
question—“which agents can use this?”—and requires repetitive
navigation. Keeping the key always editable was rejected because the
generated value should be the safe default.
**Roadmap alignment:** No matching item was found in `ROADMAP.md`; this
is a focused usability and access-management improvement to the existing
secrets surface.
**Additional context:** GitHub search found no duplicate PR for this
dialog and in-sheet access change. PR #9321 also mentions user-secret
resolution but addresses unrelated skills-route behavior.
## What Changed
- Auto-generate the create-secret key from Name, keep it read-only by
default, and expose an explicit Edit action.
- Use a path-style Name placeholder (`/dev/foo/bar`) and place Value
immediately after Name for natural keyboard navigation.
- Remove tab sizing/whitespace overrides that caused uneven provider-tab
row heights.
- Add an Agent access section to the Details tab that lists referencing
agents and grants or revokes `secret_ref` / `user_secret_ref`
environment bindings in place.
- Cover company secrets and each-user definitions with focused render
tests.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx` — 17/17
passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — changed files are clean; the
repository-wide command currently reports five pre-existing `#9627`
violations in unrelated files (`Sidebar.tsx`, `Inbox.tsx`,
`IssueDetail.tsx`, `Issues.tsx`, and `Routines.tsx`).
- Additional secrets verification completed during implementation: 35/35
adjacent secrets tests passed, and the flow was checked in a real
browser in light and dark themes.
## Risks
- Agent access mutations update adapter environment configuration, so
malformed legacy env entries could affect how a binding is displayed or
revoked.
- Each-user definitions use `user_secret_ref` rather than `secret_ref`;
focused tests cover selecting the correct binding type.
- No database or API contract changes are included.
> 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
- Anthropic Claude Fable 5 assisted with the implementation using
repository-aware code editing and test execution.
- OpenAI GPT-5.5 via Codex CLI assisted with PR preparation, branch
hygiene, focused verification, GitHub operations, and review/check
loops.
## 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: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Its web UI is a long-lived single-page app; users leave tabs open
for hours/days
> - We chased multi-GB tab memory growth through several fixes (#9569,
#9624, #9627, #9701) that cut real churn — but the footprint kept
climbing
> - A heap-snapshot diff on a 12-hour tab finally showed the true cause:
of 13.2M heap nodes, **12.1M were `PerformanceMeasure` objects** — React
19.2 emits a `performance.measure()` per component render for its
DevTools "Performance Tracks" and never clears them
> - These are native objects, so `performance.memory` never reported
them (it read a flat ~74 MB while the real heap was ~308 MB), which is
why our earlier heap/DOM sampling looked stable while the footprint
ballooned
> - This pull request periodically clears the User Timing measure
buffer, since nothing in the app consumes it
> - The benefit is that long-lived tabs stop accumulating millions of
native `PerformanceMeasure` objects, eliminating the remaining unbounded
growth
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists; describing inline per CONTRIBUTING.md →
"Link Issues or Describe Them In-PR", following the bug report template.
This is the root-cause fix for the memory growth chased in #9569 / #9624
/ #9627 / #9701.
**What happened?**
Long-lived browser tabs grew to multiple GB of memory footprint over
hours/days. A heap snapshot of a 12h tab showed **13.2M nodes, of which
12.1M were `PerformanceMeasure`** (vs ~1.0M total nodes on a fresh tab).
Live capture showed **~340 `performance.measure()` calls/sec**, named
after React components with a `detail.devtools` payload — React 19.2's
"Performance Tracks". Nothing ever clears them, so they accumulate
without bound.
**Expected behavior**
A long-lived tab should not accumulate millions of `PerformanceMeasure`
entries. Idle/long-running tabs should hold a bounded footprint.
**Steps to reproduce**
Open the app (React 19.2 production build), leave a tab open with normal
activity, and run `performance.getEntriesByType('measure').length`
periodically — it climbs unbounded (12.3M after ~12h).
`performance.clearMeasures()` drops it to near-zero and frees the
memory.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Branch `fix/react-perf-measure-leak`, off `master` (after #9701).
**Deployment mode**
Local dev (`pnpm dev` build served by the dev instance), web UI. React
19.2.7. Not adapter-specific.
## What Changed
- **`ui/src/lib/perf-measure-reaper.ts` (new)** —
`startPerfMeasureReaper(intervalMs = 10_000)` clears
`performance.clearMeasures()` on a timer and returns a stop function. It
never calls `getEntriesByType('measure')` (which would materialize the
huge buffer). Honors a `window.__paperclipKeepPerfMeasures = true`
opt-out so a developer recording a React Performance Track in DevTools
can keep the entries.
- **`ui/src/main.tsx`** — start the reaper at app boot.
- Only *measures* are cleared — React's tracks pass explicit start/end
times and leave no marks, and the app doesn't use the User Timing API at
all (verified), so nothing else is affected.
## Verification
- **Root cause proven** by heap-snapshot diff: fresh tab ~1.0M nodes vs
12h tab 13.2M nodes, 12.1M of them `PerformanceMeasure`; live capture
showed ~340 measures/sec with `detail.devtools` and React component
names.
- **Fix proven live**: `performance.clearMeasures()` on the aged tab
dropped the buffer from **12,418,266 → 1,500** and reclaimed the memory
(heap `perf.memory` 308 → 269 MB, plus the ~12M native objects, which
are the bulk of the footprint).
- `vitest`: `perf-measure-reaper.test.ts` — interval clearing, `stop()`,
opt-out flag, and no-API no-op. All pass.
- `tsc -b` clean.
## Risks
Very low, client-only.
- Clearing the User Timing measure buffer only affects the DevTools
Performance panel's React track *history*; normal users never consume
it. Developers who want to record it can set
`window.__paperclipKeepPerfMeasures = true`.
- Only `performance.clearMeasures()` is called (not `clearMarks`), so
any mark-based timing elsewhere is untouched; a grep confirmed the app
makes no `performance.mark()/measure()` calls of its own.
- Adds exactly one 10s interval (negligible), and `clearMeasures()` does
not materialize the buffer.
Note: this is a React 19.2 upstream behavior (its performance tracks are
emitted in the production build and never cleared). If React later gates
or clears them, this reaper can be removed.
## Model Used
- **Provider:** Anthropic, via the Claude Code CLI.
- **Model:** Claude Opus 4.8 (`claude-opus-4-8`).
- **Reasoning mode:** Extended thinking enabled.
- **Capabilities used:** tool use (shell, file editing), the Chrome
DevTools MCP to reproduce and profile, and a streaming heap-snapshot
parser to identify the `PerformanceMeasure` accumulation.
## 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 (continues #9701; no duplicates)
- [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
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (N/A —
no user-facing docs; rationale documented inline)
- [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)
Dotta
github-actions[bot]
Nicky Leach
Andrew Aymeloglu
Kevin Manase
dependabot[bot]
Sam
Harshit Khemani
le-czs
Stefano Maffeis
Harsh Kotak
馨冉
Devin Foley
openclaw-fmag
NoSoloSoft
