## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The onboarding and company switcher UI are the first places users
create or select an organization
> - Some of that surface still used older team/workspace wording even
though the product model is company-centric
> - Mixed wording makes the setup path feel inconsistent and can make
users wonder whether they are creating a team, workspace, or company
> - This pull request updates the affected UI copy to consistently say
company
> - The benefit is a clearer first-run and navigation experience without
changing behavior
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public issue exists for this small UI polish change.
### Problem or motivation
The company creation and switcher surfaces used mixed
team/workspace/company wording for the same concept, which makes the
setup path feel inconsistent.
### Proposed solution
Update the visible copy, accessibility label, inline comment, e2e
expectations, and matching test expectations to use company-centric
language consistently.
### Alternatives considered
Leave the existing wording alone, but that preserves inconsistent
terminology in a high-traffic setup path.
### Roadmap alignment
This is focused UI polish and does not overlap with a roadmap-level core
feature.
### Additional context
The create action keeps its trailing ellipsis because it opens the
onboarding wizard rather than completing immediately.
## What Changed
- Updated front door and onboarding wizard labels from team-oriented
copy to company-oriented copy.
- Updated the sidebar company menu from workspace/team wording to
company wording, including the trigger accessibility label and empty
fallback text.
- Kept the sidebar create action ellipsis for the dialog/wizard
affordance.
- Updated component and Playwright test expectations for the new copy.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/SidebarCompanyMenu.test.tsx`
- Attempted `npx playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts
tests/e2e/onboarding.spec.ts tests/e2e/nux-phase4-screenshots.spec.ts
tests/e2e/planning-mode-visual-verification.spec.ts
tests/e2e/conference-room-typing-intro.spec.ts`; local browser launch is
blocked by missing host Chromium dependencies (`libatk1.0-0t64`,
`libatspi2.0-0t64`, `libxcomposite1`, `libxdamage1`, `libxfixes3`,
`libxrandr2`, `libgbm1`, `libasound2t64`).
- Screenshots intentionally omitted because this is a copy-only change
and no design screenshots are needed for review.
## Risks
Low risk. This is copy-only UI polish plus matching test updates; no
data model, API, migration, workflow, lockfile, or behavior changes are
included.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5 Codex (`gpt-5`) via the Paperclip Codex agent, with
tool-assisted repository inspection, GitHub CLI usage, 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
- [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.
> - Scheduled routines can prompt agents with variables that are filled
in at dispatch time.
> - Existing routine variable handling supported plain text-like values,
but date inputs need a structured contract so routines can pass
consistent date values.
> - Operators also need date variables to be easy to configure and
override from the routine UI.
> - This pull request adds a date variable type across shared
validation, server dispatch, and UI editing/run dialogs.
> - The benefit is that routine authors can define date inputs once and
agents receive validated ISO-style date values when routines run.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #219
Feature request:
- Problem/motivation: Scheduled routines need first-class, typed date
variables so operators can configure dates without relying on free-form
text conventions.
- Proposed solution: Add an `x-date` routine variable type with shared
parsing/validation, server dispatch support, and UI date-picker controls
in routine variable editors and run dialogs.
- Alternatives considered: Continue treating dates as plain text, but
that leaves validation and formatting to individual operators and
agents.
- Roadmap alignment: This is a focused improvement to the completed
Scheduled Routines milestone and does not duplicate an active roadmap
item.
Related PR search:
- Searched existing PRs/issues for `routine date picker`, `date
variables`, and `scheduled routine date variable`; no direct duplicate
PR was found.
## What Changed
- Added the shared `x-date` routine variable contract, parsing,
defaults, and validation coverage.
- Extended routine dispatch to validate and pass date variable values.
- Added date input controls to the routine variable editor and routine
run variables dialog.
- Added focused tests for shared validation, server dispatch, and the UI
date controls.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public/master...HEAD`
- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run
packages/shared/src/routine-variables.test.ts
packages/shared/src/validators/routine.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts
ui/src/components/RoutineRunVariablesDialog.test.tsx
ui/src/components/RoutineVariablesEditor.test.tsx`
- 5 test files passed
- 68 tests passed
## Risks
Low to medium risk. This adds a new routine variable type across
shared/server/UI paths, so the main risk is compatibility with existing
routine variable payloads. The change keeps existing variable types
intact and adds targeted validation tests for the new date 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 Codex coding agent based on GPT-5, with terminal, git, GitHub
CLI, and local test execution 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 app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The web UI (`ui/`) renders inside a single persistent shell
(`Layout`) whose `#main-content` element is the scroll container for
every route
> - Because that scroll container survives route changes, browser
back/forward (a history `POP`) lands on the previous page with the
scroll offset of the page you just left
> - Concretely: scroll deep into an issue detail, hit browser back, and
the inbox renders scrolled to the issue-detail offset instead of where
you left off — making it hard to find your place
> - The app already reset scroll for forward (`PUSH`) navigation but
deliberately did nothing on `POP`, so nothing restored the prior
position
> - This pull request records each history entry's scroll offset as the
user scrolls and restores it on `POP`, while keeping the existing
reset-to-top behavior for `PUSH`/`REPLACE`
> - The benefit is that back/forward returns you to the exact place you
were, so the inbox (and any scrolled page) keeps your reading position
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue — describing the bug inline following the bug
report template.
**What happened**
From the inbox, open an issue, scroll down within the issue detail, then
press the browser Back button. The inbox is restored at the wrong scroll
position — it shows the Y offset from the issue-detail page rather than
the position you had in the inbox.
**Expected behavior**
Browser back/forward returns the page to the scroll position it had when
you left it.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open the inbox and scroll to a known position partway down the list.
2. Click into an issue.
3. Scroll down within the issue detail.
4. Press the browser Back button to return to the inbox.
5. Observe the inbox is scrolled to the issue-detail offset instead of
where you left off.
**Deployment mode**
Web UI (`ui/`), any deployment — client-side scroll behavior only.
Root cause: `#main-content` is a single scroll container that stays
mounted across route changes. Scroll was only reset on forward (`PUSH`)
navigation and left untouched on `POP`, so the stale offset from the
outgoing page persisted onto the page being returned to.
## What Changed
- Added `NavigationScrollMemory` (`ui/src/lib/navigation-scroll.ts`): a
per-history-key map of `#main-content` scroll offsets, clamped to `>=
0`.
- Added `applyMainContentScrollTop` helper to restore a saved offset
onto the main content element (null-safe).
- In `Layout` (`ui/src/components/Layout.tsx`): continuously record the
active history entry's scroll offset on scroll, and on `POP` navigation
restore the remembered offset (re-applying on the next animation frame
so a late-laying-out cached page doesn't clamp the offset to a shorter
interim height). Forward `PUSH`/`REPLACE` keeps the existing
reset-to-top behavior.
- Added unit tests covering the remember/recall logic and the restore
helper.
## Verification
- `ui` unit tests pass, including the new `navigation-scroll` cases
(remember/recall per key, clamping, and DOM restore).
- TypeScript clean on the changed files.
- Manual: inbox → open issue → scroll down → browser Back returns the
inbox to its previous scroll position; forward navigation still resets
to top.
## Risks
Low risk. Scoped to client-side scroll restoration in the web UI; no
API, schema, or migration changes. The only behavioral change is that
`POP` navigation now restores a saved offset instead of leaving the
container untouched; `PUSH`/`REPLACE` behavior is unchanged. Memory is
per-session and bounded by visited history keys.
## Model Used
Claude (Anthropic), Opus-class model via Paperclip's `claude_local`
adapter, with extended thinking and 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
- [ ] 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
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The board UI needs to render issue details, comments, properties,
and rich external object labels clearly during normal operator
workflows.
> - Three small UI regressions made those workflows harder to scan: rich
object URLs could show weak labels, interrupting comments could briefly
flash in the wrong state, and watchdog labels could overflow the
properties panel.
> - These are related quality fixes in the same UI surface, with focused
regression coverage for each behavior.
> - This pull request groups the fixes so they go through normal review
instead of bypassing CI.
> - The benefit is a quieter, more predictable issue detail experience
for board operators.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue was found for these regressions after searching
related PRs and issues.
### Pre-submission checklist
- Existing open and closed GitHub issues and PRs were searched for
duplicates.
- The fixes are based on current `master` behavior.
- The regressions originate in Paperclip board UI code, not an adapter,
API provider, or local configuration.
### What happened?
In the board UI, three issue-detail regressions made normal review
workflows harder to scan:
- URL-rich external objects could fall back to a weak generic label
instead of showing a useful URL label.
- An interrupting issue comment could briefly flash through the wrong
state while issue run data refreshed.
- Long watchdog property instructions could truncate or overflow instead
of wrapping inside the properties panel.
### Expected behavior
- URL-rich external objects should surface a clear URL label.
- Interrupting comments should stay visually stable while live run state
refreshes.
- Long watchdog property values should wrap within the available
properties panel width.
### Steps to reproduce
1. Open an issue detail view that includes URL-rich external object
metadata, an interrupting run/comment state, or long watchdog
instructions.
2. Observe the rendered issue detail thread and properties panel.
3. Compare the rendered label, comment state, and watchdog row wrapping
against the expected stable/readable behavior above.
### Paperclip version or commit
Current `master`, fixed by this PR branch at
`1c763001c9a16fa6cf3faad6f58a83c4b202c928`.
### Deployment mode
Local dev (`pnpm dev`) / board UI.
### Installation method
Built from source (`pnpm dev` / `pnpm build`).
### Agent adapter(s) involved
Not adapter-specific (core board UI bug).
### Database mode
Not database-related.
### Access context
Board operator UI.
### Relevant logs or output
Not applicable.
### Relevant config
Not applicable.
### Additional context
The PR includes focused regression tests for all three behaviors.
Browser-visible before/after evidence for the watchdog wrapping change
was posted in
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/8613#issuecomment-4794863305.
### Privacy checklist
- All pasted output was reviewed for sensitive data; this PR body
contains no private config, logs, or internal instance links.
## What Changed
- Prefer direct URLs as rich object labels when rendering external
object metadata.
- Keep interrupting issue comments from flashing through the wrong
thread state while issue chat data is refreshing.
- Allow watchdog property labels to wrap cleanly inside the issue
properties panel.
- Added focused regression coverage for the external object helper,
issue detail interrupt behavior, and watchdog property wrapping.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/lib/external-objects.test.ts
ui/src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
Low risk. The changes are scoped to UI rendering/state handling and add
regression coverage for the touched behavior. No database, API,
workflow, lockfile, or migration 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
OpenAI Codex using GPT-5 (`gpt-5`) with repository shell/tool access.
The changes were prepared by an AI coding agent with local command
execution for git inspection and focused Vitest verification.
## 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 execution workspace subsystem powers project and workspace views
by listing runtime state, branch metadata, issue links, and status
summaries.
> - The existing workspace views relied on broad list data that can grow
expensive as a company accumulates many workspaces and linked issues.
> - That makes the Workspaces page and project workspace cards slower
than necessary because the UI does not always need the full workspace
detail payload up front.
> - This pull request adds a bounded overview contract for workspace
listings and moves the relevant UI surfaces to that cheaper path.
> - The benefit is faster workspace loading while preserving detail
fetches for pages that actually need full workspace data.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this change. Inline bug report follows
the repository bug template.
### What happened?
Workspace index-style screens can load too much execution workspace
detail before the user asks for it. Several UI surfaces used fuller
workspace data paths for summary displays, which can make workspace
loading slower as workspace history grows.
### Expected behavior
Overview screens should request a bounded summary payload, while detail
screens should keep using the full workspace detail endpoint.
### Steps to reproduce
1. Run Paperclip from source with enough execution workspace history to
make workspace lists non-trivial.
2. Open the Workspaces page or a project workspace summary card.
3. Observe that summary UI needs only bounded workspace metadata but can
depend on broader workspace payloads.
### Paperclip version or commit
`master` at the time this branch was prepared.
### Deployment mode
Local dev (`pnpm dev`)
## What Changed
- Added shared types, validators, and path constants for bounded
execution workspace overviews.
- Added server service and route support for overview queries with
bounded linked issue/runtime metadata.
- Updated workspace overview UI API calls, query keys, breadcrumbs,
quicklooks, close dialogs, project summaries, and detail links to
consume the cheaper overview shape where appropriate.
- Added regression coverage for the new server route/service behavior
and the UI overview consumers.
- Registered the new workspace overview route in the generated OpenAPI
spec.
- Kept overview totals aligned with the project join and preserved
project slug links in workspace headers.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/execution-workspaces-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/execution-workspaces-routes.test.ts
ui/src/api/execution-workspaces.test.ts
ui/src/components/ProjectWorkspaceSummaryCard.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/Workspaces.test.tsx`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/server typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui
typecheck`
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/execution-workspaces-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/execution-workspaces-service.test.ts`
- `pnpm test:run:serialized -- --shard-index 1 --shard-count 4`
## Risks
Low to medium risk. The change introduces a new overview contract across
shared/server/ui layers, so the main risk is a mismatch between summary
and detail payload expectations. The added route/service/UI tests cover
the intended split, and full detail pages continue using the detail
path.
> 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-based coding agent with repository tool use and
local command execution. Exact served model identifier and context
window were 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
- [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 orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - The `claude_local` adapter is the control-plane surface that turns
Paperclip agent settings into concrete Claude CLI invocations.
> - Issue #3777 reports that selecting Claude Haiku 4.5 from the
Paperclip UI causes Claude Code to request `claude-haiku-4-5-20251001`,
which some enterprise-scoped keys are not allowed to access.
> - In the current adapter model list, the direct Anthropic 4.5 entries
are version-pinned IDs, unlike the 4.6 entries which already use the
stable short aliases.
> - This pull request switches the direct 4.5 `claude_local` model
options to the short aliases Claude Code account access expects, while
leaving Bedrock-native IDs unchanged in the Bedrock-specific model list.
> - The benefit is that selecting Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Claude Haiku 4.5
from Paperclip no longer forces the CLI onto a more restrictive
versioned direct model name.
## What Changed
- Updated the direct `claude_local` adapter model list to use
`claude-sonnet-4-5` instead of `claude-sonnet-4-5-20250929`.
- Updated the direct `claude_local` adapter model list to use
`claude-haiku-4-5` instead of `claude-haiku-4-5-20251001`.
- Left the Bedrock-specific model IDs in `src/server/models.ts`
unchanged so AWS Bedrock routing still uses region-qualified native IDs.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-claude-local typecheck`
- Confirmed the only source change is
`packages/adapters/claude-local/src/index.ts`.
## Risks
- Low risk. This only changes the direct `claude_local` model IDs
advertised by Paperclip for the two 4.5 options.
- Bedrock behavior is unchanged because the Bedrock-native identifiers
are defined separately and were not modified in this PR.
- Existing 4.6 model options are untouched.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex on a GPT-5-class coding model with terminal tool use and
local code execution in this workspace.
## 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [ ] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Fixes#3777
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agent configuration includes adapter model settings and optional
cheap model profiles used by runtime lanes.
> - The agent configuration screen already exposes a Test action for
adapter environment checks.
> - When a cheap model profile is configured, that Test action only
exercised the primary model configuration.
> - That left users able to save a cheap model profile that had not been
validated by the same configuration test flow.
> - This pull request makes the Test action probe both the primary model
and the configured cheap model.
> - The benefit is earlier feedback when the cheap model is unavailable
or misconfigured.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No exact public issue found.
Problem description:
- What happened: the agent configuration Test action validated the
primary adapter model but did not validate an enabled cheap model
profile.
- Expected behavior: when a cheap model is configured and enabled, the
Test action should also test that cheap model using the same environment
selection.
- Steps to reproduce: configure an agent with a primary model and
enabled cheap model profile, then click Test in the agent configuration
UI.
- Paperclip version/commit: current `master` at PR creation.
- Deployment mode: local development UI behavior.
Related public context found during GitHub search:
- #4881 added cheap model profiles for local adapters.
- #6534 is related cheap-primary-model preservation work.
- #6956 tracks broader agent configuration settings exposure.
GitHub searches performed:
- `cheap model config test`
- `AgentConfigForm cheap model`
- `modelProfiles cheap`
- `adapter environment cheap model`
## What Changed
- Updated `AgentConfigForm` so the adapter environment Test action runs
the primary model check first.
- Added a second cheap model check when the cheap profile is enabled and
resolves to a model.
- Built the cheap test payload from the resolved cheap profile config
instead of a model-only override, preserving adapter-default and saved
cheap-profile fields.
- Merged the individual results into a single labeled result so the UI
can show both outcomes together.
- Preserved request/API failures so they still surface through the
existing error UI instead of becoming synthetic adapter checks.
- Added render coverage asserting both primary and cheap test calls,
non-model cheap-profile fields, and request failure handling.
## Verification
- `git diff origin/master...HEAD | rg -n
"(API[_-]?KEY|SECRET|TOKEN|PASSWORD|PRIVATE[_-]?KEY|BEGIN RSA|BEGIN
OPENSSH|Bearer
[A-Za-z0-9._-]+|ghp_[A-Za-z0-9_]+|sk-[A-Za-z0-9]+|AIza[0-9A-Za-z_-]+|OPENAI_API_KEY|ANTHROPIC_API_KEY)"
|| true` produced no matches.
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/components/AgentConfigForm.render.test.tsx --reporter=dot`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- GitHub PR checks on head `3d9ba15d2` are green, including Build,
Typecheck + Release Registry, General tests, serialized server suites,
e2e, Canary Dry Run, security scans, and policy/review checks.
- Greptile Review passed on head `3d9ba15d2`; all review threads are
resolved.
## Risks
Low risk. The change is limited to the agent configuration UI test
action and its render test. The cheap-model probe now preserves
adapter-default and saved cheap-profile fields, matching the runtime
merge order more closely. The main residual risk is adapter-specific UI
coverage for cheap-profile fields that are stored but not directly
editable in this form.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5 Codex via the Codex local agent environment, with
terminal/tool use for repository inspection, implementation, GitHub CLI
operations, and local verification. Exact context window was not exposed
by the runtime.
## 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
> - Instance environments can store provider configuration fields as
Paperclip secret references
> - Environment save uses secret binding sync to keep persisted config
refs aligned with `company_secret_bindings`
> - Top-level secret-ref fields such as `apiKey` were not deleted during
sync because the cleanup only matched child paths like `apiKey.*`
> - Re-saving an environment with the same top-level secret ref could
therefore hit the target/path unique constraint and return a 500
> - This pull request makes the sync cleanup include the exact top-level
config path before reinserting current refs
> - The benefit is that saved environment provider configs can be edited
repeatedly without duplicate binding failures
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue found in duplicate search for this exact
environment secret-binding failure.
### Bug report
#### Pre-submission checklist
- I searched existing open and closed issues and this is not a
duplicate.
- I can reproduce this on the current `master` lineage.
- I confirmed the error originates in Paperclip secret-binding sync, not
the sandbox provider itself.
#### What happened?
Saving an instance environment whose provider config contains a
top-level secret-ref field can fail with a duplicate key error on
`company_secret_bindings_target_path_uq`.
#### Expected behavior
Saving the same environment config repeatedly should update/sync
bindings idempotently.
#### Steps to reproduce
1. Create or edit an instance environment with a provider config that
has a top-level secret-ref field such as `apiKey`.
2. Save the environment.
3. Save the environment again without moving that field under a nested
object.
4. The second save can attempt to insert a duplicate binding for the
same target/path.
#### Paperclip version or commit
Observed on local dev from current `master` lineage before this fix.
#### Deployment mode
Local dev (pnpm dev), authenticated private mode.
#### Installation method
Built from source (pnpm dev / pnpm build).
#### Agent adapter(s) involved
Not adapter-specific (core bug).
#### Database mode
Embedded local Postgres.
#### Access context
Board (human operator) environment settings save.
#### Relevant logs or output
The server returned a 500 after Postgres rejected a duplicate
`company_secret_bindings` row for the same environment target and
`apiKey` config path. Secret values and local paths are intentionally
omitted.
#### Privacy checklist
I reviewed the PR description for private instance links, local paths,
API keys, tokens, and company-specific secrets.
## What Changed
- Updated `syncSecretRefsForTarget()` so prefix cleanup removes both the
exact top-level config path and nested child paths.
- Added a regression test that syncs an environment top-level `apiKey`
secret ref repeatedly, then replaces it and verifies only one binding
remains.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `git diff --check`
- Local diff scan for internal issue links, local paths, bearer/session
tokens, and obvious secret literals returned no matches.
- GitHub duplicate searches for related environment secret-binding
issues/PRs returned no matches.
## Risks
Low risk. The change only broadens the existing target/path cleanup used
before reinserting secret refs. It preserves the existing child-path
cleanup behavior and adds the missing exact-path case.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5 Codex via the `codex_local` Paperclip adapter. Tool-using
coding-agent session with shell, git, and repository-edit capabilities.
Context window size was not exposed by the runtime.
## 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 board UI has been graduating experimental conference-room task
experiences into the default issue and onboarding flows
> - Several task UI improvements were still coupled to the Conference
Room Chat experimental flag even though they are useful outside chat
itself
> - That coupling meant disabling chat also reverted unrelated defaults
such as work-mode labels, task status colors, team creation copy, and
the graduated issue thread
> - This pull request keeps chat-specific gating scoped to chat while
making the graduated task UI the default experience
> - The benefit is that operators can use the newer task workflows
without needing to enable the separate chat experiment
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this exact change.
### Problem or motivation
The Conference Room Chat experimental flag was controlling unrelated
task UI defaults, which made non-chat workflows regress when chat was
disabled.
### Proposed solution
Remove that flag from task-thread, work-mode, onboarding, status, and
team-creation presentation paths while leaving chat-specific behavior
separately gated.
### Alternatives considered
Keeping the flag as a broad umbrella until chat graduates would avoid a
behavior change, but it keeps unrelated UI improvements hidden behind
the wrong capability switch.
### Roadmap alignment
Checked `ROADMAP.md`; this is focused graduation/polish for existing UI
surfaces rather than a new roadmap-level core feature.
Related search:
- Searched open PRs and issues for `conference room chat experimental
flag`: no matches.
- Searched open PRs and issues for `graduated issue thread`: no matches.
## What Changed
- Removes Conference Room Chat flag branching from task-thread
rendering, work-mode labels, task status colors, and team creation copy.
- Makes the onboarding completion path create/reuse an onboarding
project, create the first assigned task, and send the user to the
dashboard instead of chat.
- Deletes the legacy onboarding wizard and classic task-thread files now
that the graduated flow is the default.
- Updates focused UI tests and affected E2E specs for the default task
experience.
- Adds a user-visible onboarding error if restored state is missing the
company or agent required for launch.
## Verification
- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run
ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx
ui/src/components/OnboardingWizardVariant.test.tsx
ui/src/components/RunChatSurface.test.tsx
ui/src/components/SidebarCompanyMenu.test.tsx
ui/src/components/StatusBadge.test.tsx ui/src/lib/agent-order.test.ts
ui/src/lib/onboarding-launch.test.ts ui/src/lib/work-mode-meta.test.ts
ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `npx playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts --list
tests/e2e/conference-room-typing-intro.spec.ts
tests/e2e/planning-mode-visual-verification.spec.ts`
- Attempted targeted Playwright execution locally, but this host is
missing Chromium system libraries (`libatk1.0-0t64`, `libatspi2.0-0t64`,
`libxcomposite1`, `libxdamage1`, `libxfixes3`, `libxrandr2`, `libgbm1`,
`libasound2t64`). CI runs the specs in the proper Actions environment.
## Risks
- Medium UI behavior risk: this intentionally changes the default
experience for users who have not enabled Conference Room Chat.
- Medium onboarding risk: completion now creates/reuses a project and
creates the first task instead of only navigating.
- Low migration risk: no database schema or migration changes are
included.
- The PR avoids `pnpm-lock.yaml` and `.github/workflows` changes.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-class coding model, tool-enabled local repository
workflow with shell, git, and test 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
- [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
> - Skills can be installed, inspected, filtered, and grouped inside
company settings
> - Skill category metadata already exists in the data model and list
filters, but users could not edit categories after a skill was created
or imported
> - That made category filters and counts drift from the way operators
actually want to organize their skills
> - This pull request adds category editing to the existing skill
settings dialog and sends those edits through the existing
company-scoped skill update API
> - The server mutation now includes category information in the
activity log so settings changes are auditable
> - The benefit is that operators can keep installed skills organized
without reinstalling or recreating them
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No duplicate or closely related public GitHub issues or PRs were found
for `skill categories settings`.
Feature request fields:
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting: `server/` REST API routes/services and `ui/` React board
settings.
**Problem or motivation**
Company operators can create or import skills with categories, and
Paperclip already exposes category filters and category counts. After
installation, though, operators could not edit a skill's categories from
the skill detail settings screen. That made it difficult to keep skills
grouped correctly as workflows evolved.
**Proposed solution**
Add category editing to the existing skill settings dialog. The category
field accepts comma-separated values, normalizes them into slugs,
deduplicates repeated categories, allows clearing all categories, and
saves categories together with the existing sharing setting through the
company-scoped skill update API.
**Alternatives considered**
One alternative was to keep categories editable only during
create/import flows, but that forces users to recreate or reinstall
skills just to adjust grouping metadata. Another was a separate
categories-only action, but batching settings into one explicit Save
action keeps the dialog predictable.
**Roadmap alignment**
This supports the completed Skills Manager roadmap area by making
installed skills easier to organize and maintain inside company
settings.
**Additional context**
The server already persisted skill categories and supported category
list filters/counts. This PR wires the existing metadata into the
settings editing path and adds focused route, service, and UI tests.
## What Changed
- Added category editing to the skill detail settings dialog, including
comma-separated input, normalized deduplication, reset, dirty-state
handling, and save feedback.
- Updated the skill settings mutation path to save categories and
sharing scope together, then refresh detail/list cache entries.
- Included updated categories in `company.skill_updated` activity
details.
- Added server route/service coverage for category updates,
normalization, filtering, counts, clearing, and activity logging.
- Added UI coverage for saving category edits, clearing categories,
reordered no-op category sets, saving sharing changes together, and
preserving draft input after a failed save.
- Updated the Storybook skill detail harness for the renamed settings
callback props.
## Verification
- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/company-skills-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/company-skills-service.test.ts
ui/src/pages/CompanySkills.test.tsx`
- Latest-head GitHub checks are green for typecheck, build, e2e, general
tests, serialized server suites, policy, commitperclip review, Socket
Security, Snyk status, and Canary Dry Run.
- Greptile Review succeeded on the latest head with zero unresolved
review threads.
## Risks
Low risk. The change uses the existing company skill update API and
category normalization path. The main behavioral change is that the
settings dialog now batches sharing and category edits behind an
explicit Save button instead of saving sharing immediately on select
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 coding agent based on GPT-5, with tool-enabled repository
inspection, shell execution, git, and GitHub CLI 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 open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents and board users operate inside a company-scoped control plane
where permissions decide which mutating actions they can perform
> - Company skills are part of the reusable agent-company setup surface,
but skill mutation had been coupled to broader agent-creation authority
> - That coupling meant importing or managing skills required a
permission that also implies hiring power, which is broader than the
operation needs
> - Paperclip already has a grant-based permission vocabulary, so skill
mutation should be authorized through a dedicated `skills:create`
capability while preserving existing default behavior for trusted agents
> - This pull request adds the skill creation permission contract,
enforces it on company skill mutations, exposes it in agent permission
management, and documents the changed CLI/API expectations
> - The benefit is a narrower, auditable permission path for skill
import/create/update/delete flows without forcing agents to receive
broader agent-creation authority
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public issue is linked.
Problem: company skill mutation APIs were effectively tied to broader
agent creation authority. This PR splits skill mutation authorization
onto the public `skills:create` permission while keeping existing
default skill creation behavior for agents unless explicitly disabled.
Related public PR found during duplicate search: #5330. That PR uses an
older `canManageSkills` shape; this PR implements the `skills:create`
grant path instead.
## What Changed
- Added `skills:create` to shared permission constants and agent
permission types/validators as `canCreateSkills`.
- Backfilled default human/member role grants for `skills:create`.
- Updated company skill mutation routes to require board/user or agent
access to `skills:create`, while preserving legacy/default agent
behavior through `canCreateSkills` unless explicitly disabled.
- Updated agent permission update handling, UI permission controls,
duplicate-agent payloads, plugin SDK fixtures, and agent detail API
surfaces for `canCreateSkills`.
- Added regression coverage for skill route authorization, permission
schema/default behavior, invite grants, omitted permission updates, and
duplicate-agent payloads.
- Updated CLI and Paperclip skill documentation for the new skill
creation permission.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/agent-permissions-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/agent-permissions-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/company-skills-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/invite-join-grants.test.ts
ui/src/lib/duplicate-agent-payload.test.ts` — 5 files, 90 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/server typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui
typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm test:run ...changed files...` was attempted first, but the
stable wrapper rejects explicit file arguments; direct Vitest was used
for the same targeted files.
## Risks
- Moderate authorization risk: this changes the gate for company skill
mutations, so the tests cover board grant checks, agent explicit grant
checks, legacy default allowance, and explicit denial.
- Migration/backfill risk is low: the migration only grants
`skills:create` to existing human roles that already need broad
management capability.
- UI/API compatibility risk is low: `canCreateSkills` remains default-on
for full agent permissions, and the update validator preserves omitted
values so unrelated permission edits do not re-enable disabled skill
creation.
> 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 coding agent with terminal/tool use 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: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The CLI (`paperclipai plugin ...`) installs and manages plugins
against a Paperclip server resolved from `--api-base` /
`PAPERCLIP_API_URL` / the active profile / an inferred default
> - During local plugin development you can have more than one Paperclip
running (a released host plus a branch build on another port), and
nothing told you *which* instance a command actually talked to
> - So a plugin that depends on a route or response field only present
on a feature branch could be silently installed/tested against a stale
host, returning `API route not found`, and look broken when the real
problem was the test target
> - This pull request makes the install target explicit: it probes `GET
/api/health` and prints the resolved API URL + server
status/version/mode/exposure before installing, and adds a `plugin
target` command plus docs for running and verifying against a branch
service
> - The benefit is that local plugin authors can confirm they are
exercising the runtime they intend to, instead of debugging phantom
plugin bugs caused by hitting the wrong server
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists, so the underlying problem is described
inline following the feature-request template.
**Problem or motivation**
Local plugin development assumes a single Paperclip on
`http://127.0.0.1:3100`. When a plugin depends on server code that only
exists on a feature branch (a new scoped route, a new response field, a
new managed-resource capability), installing it into a long-lived host
still on older code makes the route/field missing there. The plugin
falls back or errors and *looks* broken, when the real cause is that it
was tested against the wrong runtime. The CLI already let you point at
any server, but it never surfaced which server you ended up on — so the
mistake was invisible.
**Proposed solution**
Make the install target explicit. Before `plugin install` runs, probe
`GET /api/health` and print the resolved API URL plus server
status/version/deploymentMode/exposure, so the developer can confirm
which Paperclip they are installing into. Add a standalone `plugin
target` command to inspect the target without installing, a
`--no-verify-target` escape hatch, and docs covering how to run a branch
service on its own port and verify a branch route end-to-end.
**Alternatives considered**
- Do nothing and rely on the existing `--api-base` / `PAPERCLIP_API_URL`
resolution — rejected because the gap was never the inability to point
at a branch server, it was the lack of feedback about which server was
actually hit.
- Fail the install when the target looks stale — rejected as too
aggressive; the probe is advisory and degrades gracefully when health
details are not exposed or the server is unreachable.
## Dedup Search
- [x] I searched the open and recently closed GitHub PRs for similar or
duplicate PRs — this is not a duplicate
## What Changed
- Add `probeTargetDiagnostics` / `formatTargetDiagnostics` helpers
(`cli/src/commands/client/plugin.ts`) that read `GET /api/health` and
report the resolved API URL plus server `status` / `version` /
`deploymentMode` / `deploymentExposure`.
- `plugin install` now prints these target diagnostics before
installing, so you can confirm which instance you are installing into.
Skippable with `--no-verify-target`.
- `plugin install --json` keeps its original flat `PluginRecord` shape
(top-level `id` / `pluginKey` / `version` / `status` are unchanged);
when the target was probed it gains an additional top-level `target`
field. Existing automation that reads the plugin fields keeps working.
- Add a standalone `paperclipai plugin target` command to inspect the
install target without installing anything.
- Update `doc/plugins/LOCAL_PLUGIN_DEVELOPMENT.md`: how the CLI resolves
its target, how to run a branch service on its own port and point the
CLI at it explicitly, an end-to-end check that the branch route is
actually served, and a troubleshooting entry for the stale-target
symptom.
- Unit tests for the diagnostics helpers (reachable + unreachable probe,
and both render paths).
## Verification
- `npx vitest run cli/src/__tests__/plugin-init.test.ts` — 10/10 pass
(covers `probeTargetDiagnostics` success/failure and
`formatTargetDiagnostics` rendering).
- CLI typecheck (`tsc --noEmit` in `cli/`) — clean.
- Manual: with a server running, `paperclipai plugin target` prints
`Target Paperclip: <url>` and the health line; `plugin install` prints
the same block before installing and `--no-verify-target` skips it.
## Risks
Low risk. The probe is read-only (`GET /api/health`) and runs before
install; if the server does not expose details it degrades to `ok (no
details exposed)`, and an unreachable target prints a remediation hint
rather than failing the command. The `--json` output keeps its original
flat shape, so existing scripts are unaffected. No server or schema
changes.
## Model Used
Claude Opus 4.7 (`claude-opus-4-7`), extended thinking + tool use, via
Claude Code.
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Sandboxed agents can do useful work in a remote workspace, then
export that result back to a host review checkout.
> - A restore can leave the host checkout's index stale even when the
sandbox content and committed state are correct.
> - That drift makes reviewers see misleading missing-file or
dirty-state results after sandbox execution.
> - This pull request repairs the host index refresh path and surfaces a
clean/dirty restore signal during finalization.
> - The benefit is more reliable review checkouts and clearer sandbox
finalization status.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #248
No exact public GitHub issue was found for this restore/index
consistency fix. The underlying bug is that a sandbox restore can update
host working-tree content without leaving the host git index aligned, so
local review tooling may report stale deletions or misleading dirtiness.
This PR keeps the restore/export path consistent and reports the
resulting clean/dirty state.
GitHub search performed for related or duplicate work: `sandbox runtime
status`, `sandbox restore index`, and `runtime progress`. No direct
duplicate PR was found.
## What Changed
- Refreshed git workspace sync/index handling after sandbox
restore/export operations.
- Added finalization status that reports whether the restored host
checkout is clean or dirty.
- Preserved sandbox-managed runtime progress callbacks around restore
and finalization.
- Added adapter-utils tests covering the host index drift repair and
clean/dirty finalization signal.
## Verification
- Local PII scan before push: high-confidence secret patterns, internal
issue links, local user paths, and private URL patterns checked across
all three split diffs; no real secrets or internal links found.
- `git diff --check
feat/sandbox-runtime-status..fix/sandbox-restore-index-sync`
- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/adapter-utils/src/sandbox-managed-runtime.test.ts` — 1 file, 10
tests passed.
- `pnpm run typecheck` passed on `fix/sandbox-restore-index-sync`.
- `pnpm run build` passed on `fix/sandbox-restore-index-sync`; Vite
reported existing CSS `::highlight` and chunk-size warnings.
- `pnpm run test:run` was attempted on `fix/sandbox-restore-index-sync`;
it failed in two unrelated broad-suite tests. One depends on this host's
Git default branch behavior, and one depends on local Claude
model-discovery environment. The changed focused suite above passes.
## Risks
- Git index refresh behavior needs to remain conservative so it does not
hide real uncommitted user changes.
- The clean/dirty finalization signal is diagnostic; it should not by
itself mark a sandbox run successful or failed.
- This PR is stacked on the runtime-status branch so finalization
progress can reuse the same callback path.
> 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 coding agent, with shell/tool execution in a
local worktree. Exact context-window metadata is not exposed by the
runtime.
## 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 thread is where operators watch active agent work and
decide whether a run is healthy.
> - Backend runtime-progress plumbing can expose a concise current
status, but users only benefit if the issue UI renders it in context.
> - The UI should show that current status as part of the active run
surface without turning it into durable transcript content.
> - This pull request adds the issue-thread rendering and message
formatting needed for sandbox runtime status.
> - The benefit is that active sandbox setup phases are visible from the
normal issue detail view.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #248
No exact public GitHub issue was found for this UI rendering work. The
underlying problem is that active sandboxed runs can have backend
progress state without any concise issue-thread display, leaving users
to infer whether setup is still moving. This PR adds the UI layer on top
of the runtime-status API branch.
GitHub search performed for related or duplicate work: `sandbox runtime
status`, `sandbox restore index`, and `runtime progress`. No direct
duplicate PR was found.
## What Changed
- Included current runtime status in the heartbeat API client shape.
- Rendered active run status text in the issue chat thread when
available.
- Updated issue-chat message formatting helpers for runtime status
display.
- Added focused component and formatting tests for the new active-run
status behavior.
## Verification
- Local PII scan before push: high-confidence secret patterns, internal
issue links, local user paths, and private URL patterns checked across
all three split diffs; no real secrets or internal links found.
- `git diff --check feat/sandbox-runtime-status..feat/sandbox-status-ui`
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts` — 2 files, 91 tests passed.
- `pnpm run typecheck` passed on `feat/sandbox-status-ui`.
- `pnpm run build` passed on `feat/sandbox-status-ui`; Vite reported
existing CSS `::highlight` and chunk-size warnings.
- Visual evidence (desktop + mobile) is attached to the tracking issue
rather than committed to the repo.
## Risks
- This PR is stacked on the runtime-status API branch and depends on
that response/event shape.
- The status line is intentionally concise; long or sensitive status
content should continue to be bounded/redacted by the backend.
- The visual change is limited to active issue-thread runs with current
runtime status data.
> 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 coding agent, with shell/tool execution in a
local worktree. Exact context-window metadata is not exposed by the
runtime.
## 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 CTO <cto@paperclip.local>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip CTO <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Sandboxed agent runs can spend meaningful time preparing a remote
workspace before the agent transcript shows useful output.
> - Operators need short, current progress text for those setup phases,
but that text should not become durable run history.
> - The existing live-run websocket path already carries run updates to
the UI, so the backend can reuse that channel instead of adding polling.
> - This pull request adds an ephemeral runtime-progress contract, a
process-local status store, and heartbeat integration for
sandbox-managed runs.
> - The benefit is a clearer active-run experience without database
migrations or persistent progress rows.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #248
No exact public GitHub issue was found for this status-message plumbing.
The underlying problem is that active sandboxed runs currently have
setup phases, such as workspace sync and restore, where the operator
cannot see concise current progress through the live run state. This PR
addresses that gap for the backend/runtime layer while keeping progress
messages ephemeral.
GitHub search performed for related or duplicate work: `sandbox runtime
status`, `sandbox restore index`, and `runtime progress`. No direct
duplicate PR was found.
## What Changed
- Added shared runtime-progress types and the `heartbeat.run.progress`
live event type.
- Added a process-local heartbeat run runtime-status store with TTL,
bounded/redacted messages, and terminal cleanup.
- Threaded runtime progress callbacks through heartbeat execution and
active/live run serialization.
- Emitted sandbox-managed runtime phase updates for sync, adapter
startup, restore/export, and finalization paths.
- Added backend and adapter-utils tests for ephemeral status behavior,
terminal cleanup, live serialization, and sandbox progress callbacks.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- Local PII scan before push: high-confidence secret patterns, internal
issue links, local user paths, and private URL patterns checked across
all three split diffs; no real secrets or internal links found. The only
secret-like text is an intentional fake test fixture (`sk-test-secret`).
- `git diff --check origin/master..feat/sandbox-runtime-status`
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/heartbeat-run-runtime-status.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-runtime-state.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/agent-live-run-routes.test.ts
packages/adapter-utils/src/sandbox-managed-runtime.test.ts` — 4 files,
23 tests passed.
- `pnpm run typecheck` passed on both top stacks that include this
branch: `feat/sandbox-status-ui` and `fix/sandbox-restore-index-sync`.
- `pnpm run build` passed on both top stacks that include this branch;
Vite reported existing CSS `::highlight` and chunk-size warnings.
- `pnpm run test:run` was attempted on `fix/sandbox-restore-index-sync`;
it failed in two unrelated broad-suite tests. One depends on this host's
Git default branch behavior, and one depends on local Claude
model-discovery environment. The changed focused suites above pass.
## Risks
- Runtime progress is process-local by design, so status disappears
after TTL, terminal cleanup, or server restart.
- Clients that do not consume `heartbeat.run.progress` simply keep
existing behavior.
- Message redaction is intentionally generic; overly specific phase
details should stay out of runtime-progress payloads.
> 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 coding agent, with shell/tool execution in a
local worktree. Exact context-window metadata is not exposed by the
runtime.
## 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 CTO <cto@paperclip.local>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip CTO <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work, and task status is one of the most-scanned signals across its
whole UI.
> - The Tasks UI shows status through small coloured ring icons and
chips spread across the list, kanban, task detail, the properties
flyout, inline `@`-mentions and the breadcrumb.
> - Those ring glyphs lean heavily on colour to distinguish states,
which is hard to read for colour-blind users, and the status hues were
hard-coded in component classes rather than a single source.
> - We want color-blind-safe, distinct *shapes* per status plus a single
`--status-*` colour-token system the chips and icons share.
> - This pull request adds a unified `StatusGlyph` (one shape per
status) and the `--status-*` colour-token system, and adopts them across
every task-status surface so the new glyphs + colours render by default.
> - The benefit is a more accessible, consistent status language with
one source of truth for status hues.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
This is a **feature** (no public issue filed). Following the feature
issue template:
- **Problem / motivation:** Task status is communicated mostly by colour
(ring fills/borders), which is hard to distinguish for colour-blind
users, and the status hues are duplicated across component classes with
no single source of truth. Several community PRs have nibbled at parts
of this (see related PRs below).
- **Proposed solution:** A single `StatusGlyph` component with a
distinct *shape* per status (not just colour), backed by a `--status-*`
CSS-variable colour system (base hues + AA-tuned icon hues +
`.status-chip` / `.status-fill` color-mix helpers), adopted across all
task-status surfaces.
- **Alternatives considered:** Recolouring the existing rings in place
(rejected — still colour-only, no shape differentiation).
- **Roadmap alignment:** Additive UI only; no overlap with planned core
work.
Related community PRs (partial / different approaches to the same area —
not duplicates):
- Refs #3806 — Show issue ref and status icon in breadcrumbs and
properties
- Refs #1760 — Improve design of cancelled task status icon
- Refs #1856 — a11y title/aria-label on status and priority icons
## What Changed
- **Colour token system:** `--status-agent-*` / `--status-task-*` base
hues, AA-tuned `--status-task-icon-*` hues (light + dark), and
`.status-chip` / `.status-fill` color-mix helpers in `index.css`;
matching status→CSS-var maps in `status-colors.ts`.
- **`StatusGlyph`** — one `viewBox="0 0 24 24"` glyph per status with
distinct, color-blind-safe shapes (dashed ring, open ring, half-fill,
ring+dot, disc+check, ring+bar, ring+slash, and `in_queue` = the blocked
shape recoloured blue). Sizes `sm`/`md`/`lg`.
- **Adoption (renders by default)** across `StatusIcon`, `StatusBadge`
(agent + issue chips), `MarkdownBody` inline mentions, `IssueRow`,
`IssuesList`, `IssueProperties`, `BreadcrumbBar` + `BreadcrumbContext`,
and the task-detail header/breadcrumb.
- **Tests** for `StatusGlyph`, `StatusIcon`, `StatusBadge`, `IssueRow`,
`IssuesList`, `MarkdownBody` lock the rendered behaviour.
Scope notes: no experimental flag and no Theme Editor surfaces. The
generic `StatusBadge` (runs/goals/approvals) is unchanged.
Project-status recolour is deferred (no in-scope consumer).
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared build` — green (tsc).
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build` — green (tsc + vite).
- Targeted unit tests green: `StatusGlyph`, `StatusIcon`, `StatusBadge`,
`IssueRow`, `IssuesList`, `MarkdownBody`, plus consumer suites that
render these (`IssueProperties`, `IssueDetail`, `Search`,
`IssueChatThread`, `IssueFiltersPopover`, `InterruptHandoffViews`) — all
passing.
- Remaining: interactive light + dark visual confirmation across list /
kanban / detail / properties / inline mentions / breadcrumb. The glyph
shapes + AA-tuned hues were previously QA'd on the originating feature
branch.
## Risks
Low risk. Additive UI: a new component + CSS tokens, adopted at existing
status call sites. The generic `StatusBadge` and all non-status UI are
untouched; no schema/migration changes. Behaviour is exercised by unit +
consumer test suites.
## Model Used
Claude Opus 4.8 (`claude-opus-4-8`), extended thinking, with tool use /
code execution (file edits, local builds + vitest).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [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
- [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 Opus 4.8 <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
> - The new issue dialog lets operators create follow-up tasks and
optionally reuse an existing execution workspace
> - Reusing a workspace depends on a searchable selector that can
include workspace names, branches, and local paths
> - The selector previously treated all matched text equally, so hidden
path text could outrank the visible workspace label and unrelated fuzzy
letter matches could leak into results
> - The reusable workspace popover also needed to stay inside the modal
so scrolling and layering behave like the rest of the dialog
> - This pull request improves the shared searchable select scoring and
applies it to reusable execution workspace choices
> - The benefit is a more predictable workspace reuse flow when an
operator searches by branch, task name, or workspace label
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue found for this selector bug.
### Pre-submission checklist
- [x] I have searched existing open and closed issues and this is not a
duplicate.
- [x] I am on the latest released version of Paperclip (or can reproduce
on `master`).
- [x] I have confirmed the error originates in Paperclip itself — not in
my agent adapter, API provider, or local configuration.
### What happened?
Workspace searches could rank hidden path matches ahead of direct
visible label matches, and broad fuzzy matching could match letters
spread across unrelated workspace metadata.
### Expected behavior
Direct label/name matches should sort ahead of weaker hidden metadata
matches, and fuzzy matching should stay constrained enough to avoid
unrelated workspace results.
### Steps to reproduce
1. Open the new issue dialog.
2. Choose reuse existing execution workspace.
3. Search for a term that appears in one workspace label and only in
another workspace path.
4. Observe that the path-only match can rank ahead of the direct visible
label match.
### Paperclip version or commit
Current `master` before this change.
### Deployment mode
Local dev (`pnpm dev`).
### Installation method
Built from source (`pnpm dev` / `pnpm build`).
### Agent adapter(s) involved
- [x] Not adapter-specific (core bug)
### Database mode
Not database-related.
### Access context
Board (human operator).
### Node.js version
Not version-specific.
### Operating system
Not OS-specific.
### Relevant logs or output
No logs; this is client-side selector behavior.
### Relevant config (if applicable)
None.
### Additional context
This PR also keeps the reusable workspace selector popover inside the
modal and contains command-list scroll events to keep the dialog
interaction stable.
### Privacy checklist
- [x] I have reviewed all pasted output for PII (usernames, file paths,
API keys, tokens, company names) and redacted where necessary.
## What Changed
- Added fuzzy scoring helpers for searchable text fields, including
field weights for visible labels versus secondary search metadata.
- Updated `SearchableSelect` to sort filtered results by score while
preserving original order for ties and custom filters.
- Updated reusable execution workspace matching to prefer visible
labels, then descriptions, then hidden search text.
- Kept the reusable workspace selector popover inside the new issue
modal and contained wheel/touch scrolling in the command list.
- Added unit/component coverage for selector ranking, reusable workspace
matching, modal popover containment, and scroll containment classes.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/lib/searchable-select.ts
ui/src/lib/reusable-execution-workspaces.test.ts
ui/src/components/SearchableSelect.test.tsx
ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
## Risks
Low risk. The change is scoped to client-side searchable selector
ranking and modal popover behavior. The main behavior shift is that
searches are intentionally less permissive for unrelated fuzzy letter
spreads, which should reduce noisy results but could hide a result
someone previously reached through very loose matching.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent with repository file access,
shell/tool execution, and medium reasoning effort. Exact hosted model
build and context window were not surfaced 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: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Local adapters can run agents against sandboxed execution targets by
syncing the workspace and selected runtime assets into the sandbox.
> - The Codex local adapter includes a managed Codex home asset so
sandboxed Codex runs can use the expected auth, config, skills, and
session state.
> - That asset follows symlinks, which is useful for real Codex home
content but unsafe for transient launcher directories.
> - Transient `tmp` and `.tmp` directories can contain symlinks to large
host binaries, so the sandbox archive can inline large executable
targets instead of just the small home directory content.
> - This pull request excludes transient Codex home directories from the
sandbox home asset while preserving the required Codex home files.
> - The benefit is a much smaller and more predictable sandbox setup
upload without changing the runtime files Codex actually needs.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public issue was found for this exact sandbox archive-size bug.
Bug description:
- What happened: sandboxed `codex_local` runs sync the managed Codex
home as a `home` asset with `followSymlinks` enabled. If transient Codex
home dirs such as `tmp` or `.tmp` contain symlinks to a large host
binary, the archive can inline that binary and make `Syncing home to
sandbox` much larger than the managed home directory itself.
- Expected behavior: sandbox setup should include the Codex home files
needed for auth, config, skills, and session continuity, but should not
archive transient launcher scratch directories.
- Reproduction shape: create a managed Codex home with normal
auth/config/skills files and a `tmp/arg0` or `.tmp` symlink to a large
host executable, then start a sandboxed `codex_local` run. The home
asset archive grows by the symlink target size.
- Version/commit: observed on local `master` before this change.
- Related public context: #5028 covers a different managed Codex home
reliability issue around stale auth files; this PR addresses sandbox
archive bloat from transient symlink targets.
## What Changed
- Excluded `tmp` and `.tmp` from the Codex `home` asset that is uploaded
for sandboxed runs.
- Added regression coverage proving transient symlinked home dirs are
excluded from the tar while required auth/config/skills files remain
included.
- Kept `followSymlinks` behavior for the rest of the Codex home asset so
existing non-transient symlink behavior is preserved.
## Verification
- `git diff --check`
- Local PII/secret pattern scan over the committed diff
- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/adapter-utils/src/sandbox-managed-runtime.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-codex-local typecheck`
## Risks
Low risk. The exclusion is limited to transient Codex home scratch
directories, and the regression test verifies the files needed in the
sandbox are still archived. The main compatibility risk is if a user
intentionally placed required persistent Codex state under `tmp` or
`.tmp`; those paths are treated as volatile scratch space by this
change.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex coding agent based on GPT-5, with shell, git, and GitHub
CLI tool use. Exact hosted model build and context-window size were not
exposed in the local adapter runtime.
## 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.
> - Agents rely on local skills, provider-backed secrets, and workspace
file previews during normal execution.
> - Local skill imports need bounded reference-file inventory so direct
skill discovery stays accurate without accidentally walking too much of
the filesystem.
> - Secrets provider setup needs actionable AWS discovery errors so
operators can recover from IAM/config problems without losing manual
form input.
> - The issue detail file viewer should reopen cleanly after the first
close so users can keep inspecting files during task review.
> - This pull request collects the small fixes and regression tests for
those related operator workflows.
> - The benefit is more predictable local skill imports, clearer secrets
setup failure states, and a less brittle file preview interaction.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
- No public GitHub issue was found for this extracted local work.
- Related prior sync context: #8536.
- Problem: local skill reference discovery, AWS provider-vault discovery
errors, and issue file preview reopening each had narrow workflow
regressions that made operator recovery harder.
- Expected behavior: skill imports inventory reference files within
bounded local skill directories, AWS discovery failures present safe
actionable guidance while preserving manual values, and closing the
first file preview does not prevent opening another preview.
- Reproduction scope: import a local skill with referenced files,
attempt AWS Secrets Manager discovery with insufficient IAM/list
permissions, and open/close/reopen file previews from an issue detail
page.
- Duplicate search: searched GitHub PRs/issues for `skill inventory
secrets file viewer` and `skill inventory secrets AWS file viewer`; no
matching public duplicate was found.
## What Changed
- Bounded direct local skill file inventory discovery and added
regression coverage for reference file imports.
- Preserved and surfaced safe, actionable AWS Secrets Manager
discovery/import errors in server responses and the secrets UI.
- Kept AWS provider-vault manual form values intact when discovery fails
or returns no candidates.
- Fixed issue file viewer state so closing the first preview still
allows later file previews to open.
- Updated the secrets render test harness to avoid the missing
`React.act` export in the current React package set.
## Verification
- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/company-skills-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/secrets-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts
ui/src/context/FileViewerContext.test.ts
ui/src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx`
- Result: 5 test files passed, 116 tests passed.
- Install note: the isolated worktree needed `NODE_ENV=development pnpm
install --frozen-lockfile --prod=false --force` before local
verification because it initially had no dev dependencies installed.
## Risks
- Low-to-medium risk: this touches skill import inventory,
secrets-provider error handling, and file-viewer UI state, but each
change is covered by focused regression tests.
- No migrations.
- No dependency or lockfile changes.
- CI is rerunning on the latest head after review fixes; Greptile is 5/5
with no unresolved Greptile threads.
> 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 coding agent, GPT-5-family model as provided in the
Paperclip run environment, with repository tool use 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
- [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
> - CI runs a Canary Dry Run job that exercises `release.sh`, which
builds the standalone sandbox-provider packages for publish
> - That step (`scripts/build-standalone-public-packages.mjs`) built the
7 provider plugins serially — each doing `rm -rf dist && tsc` — making
it the dominant cost (~49s) inside the slowest PR check (~4.9m wall)
after the general-server lane was already sharded
> - The packages are independent (their own `node_modules` via
`--ignore-workspace`, their own `dist`), so the serial build is pure
latency with no correctness benefit
> - This pull request builds them with a bounded-concurrency pool sized
to the runner CPU count (overridable via
`STANDALONE_BUILD_CONCURRENCY`), buffering each package's output and
flushing it as one block so parallel logs stay readable, and aggregating
failures by original index
> - The benefit is a faster Canary Dry Run / PR feedback loop without
changing what gets built or published
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists. Inline feature/perf description:
### Problem or motivation
`build-standalone-public-packages.mjs` builds standalone provider
packages serially, making it the largest single cost inside the slowest
PR check.
### Proposed solution
Run independent per-package builds through a bounded-concurrency worker
pool sized to runner CPU count, with an env override and readable
buffered logs.
### Alternatives considered
Keep the serial build for simpler logs, but that preserves the avoidable
CI latency.
### Roadmap alignment
This is CI maintenance and does not overlap planned core roadmap work.
## What Changed
- `scripts/build-standalone-public-packages.mjs`: replaced the serial
per-package build loop with a bounded-concurrency pool (default = runner
CPU count, override via `STANDALONE_BUILD_CONCURRENCY`); per-package
stdout/stderr is buffered and flushed as a single block; failures are
aggregated by original package index so one failure neither aborts the
others mid-flight nor obscures which package broke.
- `scripts/__tests__/build-standalone-concurrency.test.mjs`: new
`node:test` unit suite covering the pool (limit respected, all items
run, ordered failure aggregation, env-override resolution).
- `.github/workflows/pr.yml`: wired the new unit test into the policy
job.
## Verification
- `node --test
./scripts/__tests__/build-standalone-concurrency.test.mjs` → 6/6 pass
- `node ./scripts/release-package-map.mjs check` → OK (29 enabled for CI
publish)
- `git diff --check origin/master..HEAD` → clean
## Risks
- Low risk. Build inputs/outputs are unchanged; only scheduling differs.
The concurrency is bounded by CPU count and overridable; output is
buffered per package so logs remain attributable. If a package fails,
all failures are still reported with their package index.
## Model Used
- Claude (Anthropic), `claude-opus-4-8`, extended thinking with 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 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
- [ ] 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>
Fixes#5997, fixes#4081, fixes#4723, fixes#6625, fixes#3923
Refs #6606 — this PR removes the rejected root `paperclip` field, but
#6606 also requires the protocol v3→v4 bump, which is out of scope here;
referencing rather than closing it.
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the control plane that wakes and coordinates agent
workers across company-scoped execution flows.
> - The `openclaw_gateway` adapter is part of that wake path, so its
outbound payload contract has to match the gateway's validated `agent`
schema.
> - `master` currently reintroduces a previously fixed regression by
sending a top-level `paperclip` property in `agentParams` (see #3923,
which reverts the original fix in #626).
> - The gateway rejects unknown root params, which means OpenClaw wakes
fail before the remote agent can start work.
> - The actual wake context already rides in the generated `message`, so
the extra root property is both redundant and harmful.
> - This pull request removes that leaked root property, adds a focused
regression test around param construction, and updates affected server
expectations/docs to the supported contract.
> - The benefit is that OpenClaw Gateway agents wake successfully again
without losing inline wake context.
## What Changed
- Removed the top-level `paperclip` field from OpenClaw Gateway
`agentParams` and extracted `buildAgentParams()` so the contract is easy
to test.
- Added a package-level regression test that proves
`payloadTemplate.paperclip` is stripped while explicit
`agentId`/`timeout` behavior stays intact.
- Updated server tests that inspect OpenClaw Gateway payloads to assert
wake data is delivered in `message` instead of a rejected root field.
- Updated the adapter configuration docs to state that wake context is
embedded in the generated message text, not sent as a top-level param.
### Rebase onto current `master` (conflict resolution)
This branch was opened against an older `master`; re-merging current
`master` required:
- Resolving conflicts in `execute.ts` — `master` hoisted
`configuredAgentId` and moved the agentId/timeout precedence inline;
this PR keeps the `buildAgentParams()` extraction that strips the
gateway-rejected root `paperclip`.
- Updating tests `master` added **after** this branch's base that assert
the old root-`paperclip` contract. These suites use the OpenClaw gateway
adapter purely as a delivery harness (`adapterType: "openclaw_gateway"`
+ a mock gateway) and observe wake content via the gateway payload, so
dropping the root field requires them to read wake context from
`message` instead:
- `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts`
- `server/src/__tests__/low-trust-red-team-routes.test.ts` (redaction
guarantees preserved — sanitized body + `expectNoCanary` on the raw
canary)
- Replaced brittle JSON-substring assertions (flagged by Greptile) with
a shared `parseWakePayloadFromMessage()` helper + `toMatchObject`,
robust to serialization/key-order changes.
The strict contract is confirmed upstream: OpenClaw's
`AgentParamsSchema` is `Type.Object(..., { additionalProperties: false
})` with no `paperclip` field, so a root `paperclip` is rejected
(`invalid agent params: at root: unexpected property 'paperclip'`).
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-openclaw-gateway typecheck` —
clean
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — clean
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/openclaw-gateway-adapter.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/low-trust-red-team-routes.test.ts` — 26 passed (7 +
11 + 8)
- `packages/adapters/openclaw-gateway/src/server/execute.test.ts` — 6
passed (run via a local temp vitest config because the root
`vitest.config.ts` does not include this package)
## Risks
- Low risk: this narrows the outbound payload to the gateway-supported
contract and keeps wake context in the already-supported `message`
channel.
- Any downstream consumer that incorrectly depended on a top-level
`paperclip` field from the gateway mock payloads would need to follow
the supported `message` contract instead.
> 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 via API authored the original change;
exact underlying model ID and context window were not exposed in that
environment.
- Rebase/conflict resolution and the test-assertion migration were done
with Claude Code (Claude Opus 4.8, 1M context).
## 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 the
related issues above
- [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
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: serenakeyitan via breeze-runner <serenakeyitan@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Andrew Aymeloglu <aaymeloglu@gmail.com>
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
> - Agents run their work inside sandboxes, provisioned through
pluggable sandbox-provider plugins; the Daytona plugin is one of them
> - Daytona bills storage against an org-wide disk quota, and a
*stopped* sandbox still counts against that quota — only an *archived*
sandbox is moved to cold storage and stops counting
> - The Daytona plugin created sandboxes without supplying any
auto-stop/auto-archive/auto-delete intervals, so Daytona fell back to
its own defaults (archive after 7 days, never auto-delete)
> - When in-product cleanup fails or never runs (crashed runs, failed
lease destroys, orphaned probes), stopped sandboxes then sit for a week
at a few GiB each until the org storage quota fills and blocks all
workers
> - This pull request makes the Daytona plugin apply quota-safe defaults
on create (auto-stop 15m, auto-archive 60m, auto-delete 7d) so every
sandbox eventually leaves the disk quota on its own, even when our own
cleanup fails
> - The benefit is that the storage quota no longer fills from
leaked/idle sandboxes, while operators keep full control to override the
intervals per environment
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue. Describing in-PR (bug report):
### What happened
Running many agents in Daytona sandboxes eventually exhausted the org's
storage quota, and Daytona returned an out-of-disk error that blocked
all sandbox creation. Root cause: a *stopped* Daytona sandbox still
consumes disk quota; only an *archived* sandbox is moved to cold storage
and frees it. The plugin created sandboxes without specifying
auto-stop/auto-archive/auto-delete intervals, so Daytona used its
built-in defaults (auto-archive after 7 days, auto-delete disabled). Any
sandbox that our own cleanup failed to remove — or that was orphaned by
a crashed run — therefore lingered for up to a week, accumulating until
the quota filled.
### Expected behavior
Idle/leaked sandboxes should leave the storage quota automatically
within a short window, without relying solely on in-product cleanup
succeeding.
### Steps to reproduce
1. Configure the Daytona sandbox provider with no explicit
auto-stop/auto-archive/auto-delete intervals.
2. Run many agent sandboxes over time (or leak some via crashed/failed
runs that skip in-product cleanup).
3. Observe stopped-but-not-archived sandboxes accumulating against the
org's 30 GiB storage quota until Daytona returns an out-of-disk error
and blocks new sandbox creation.
### Deployment mode
Self-hosted Paperclip using the Daytona sandbox-provider plugin.
## What Changed
- `daytona/src/plugin.ts`: `parseDriverConfig` now defaults
`autoStopInterval` → 15 min, `autoArchiveInterval` → 60 min,
`autoDeleteInterval` → 7 days when the value is unset. Explicit
per-environment values (including `0` and `-1`) are preserved and passed
through unchanged.
- `daytona/src/manifest.ts`: documents the new defaults and the quota
rationale on each field, and sets the manifest `default` so the values
surface in the environment configuration screen where operators can
override them.
- `daytona/src/plugin.test.ts`: adds tests covering the new defaults and
that explicit values / disabling sentinels (`0`, `-1`) are respected.
## Verification
```
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-daytona test
```
- 24 tests pass, including the new default-behavior tests.
- Confirmed an explicit `autoArchiveInterval: 0` / `autoDeleteInterval:
-1` in config is still forwarded unchanged (defaults only apply when the
field is absent).
## Risks
Low risk. Behavior change is limited to sandboxes created with no
explicit interval config: they now auto-stop/archive/delete on
Daytona-managed timers instead of Daytona's longer built-in defaults.
Auto-archive is reversible (resuming an archived sandbox restores it).
The only persistent action is auto-delete, which is a 7-day backstop for
sandboxes nobody resumes, matching prior intent. Any environment that
needs long-lived warm sandboxes can override the intervals (including
disabling them with `0`/`-1`).
## Model Used
Claude Opus (claude-opus-4-8), via the Paperclip agent harness with tool
use. 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
- [ ] 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
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Remote sandbox providers are part of the execution environment layer
that lets agents run outside the local host.
> - The Daytona sandbox-provider plugin exposes CPU, memory, disk, and
GPU settings so operators can request larger execution sandboxes.
> - The plugin was forwarding resource settings through snapshot/default
creation, but Daytona rejects resource overrides on that path.
> - Image-backed Daytona creation does support resource settings, so
Paperclip should only send those values when an image is configured.
> - This pull request makes the Daytona contract explicit in validation
and runtime acquisition.
> - The benefit is that operators get a clear Paperclip error for
unsupported snapshot/default resource configs, while image-backed
sandboxes still receive the requested allocation.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists.
### What happened?
Daytona sandbox environments can be configured with CPU/memory/disk/GPU
resource settings, but snapshot/default Daytona sandbox creation rejects
those resource overrides. Paperclip could pass unsupported resource
fields through to Daytona and surface an opaque provider error.
### Expected behavior
Paperclip should only send resource fields on Daytona creation paths
that support them, and it should reject unsupported resource
configurations before creating a sandbox.
### Steps to reproduce
1. Configure a Daytona sandbox environment with resource values such as
`cpu: 4` and `memory: 4`.
2. Leave the environment on snapshot/default creation by not setting an
image.
3. Acquire a Daytona sandbox lease.
4. Observe Daytona reject the resource override on the snapshot/default
path.
### Paperclip version or commit
Reproduced against the current Daytona sandbox-provider plugin behavior
before this PR. This PR fixes the contract in the plugin code and tests.
### Deployment mode
Local authenticated Paperclip instance using the Daytona sandbox
provider.
Additional scope:
- Daytona provider only.
- No schema changes.
- No non-Daytona provider changes.
Related search performed:
- `gh search issues "Daytona resources snapshot
repo:paperclipai/paperclip" --limit 10`
- `gh search prs "Daytona resources snapshot repo:paperclipai/paperclip"
--limit 10`
## What Changed
- Restrict Daytona `resources` create params to image-backed sandbox
creation.
- Add validation/runtime guard for resource settings without an image.
- Keep image-backed resource metadata and reusable-lease sentinel
behavior covered by tests.
- Update Daytona plugin tests for image-backed resources and
snapshot/default rejection.
## Verification
- `pnpm -C packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/daytona test`
- `pnpm -C packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/daytona build`
- Manual Daytona SDK probe in a local authenticated instance:
image-backed creation with `daytonaio/sandbox:0.8.0` returned a 4 CPU /
4 GiB sandbox and deleted cleanly.
- Greptile Review: 5/5, no inline comments.
## Risks
- Existing Daytona environments that set resource values while relying
on snapshot/default creation will now fail validation/acquisition with a
clear error instead of calling Daytona and failing there.
- Operators who need custom resource sizes should use image-backed
creation or a provider-side resource-sized snapshot workflow.
- Low migration risk: no database schema changes and no changes to
non-Daytona providers.
> 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 coding agent. Exact context window is not exposed in
this environment. Tool-enabled workflow with shell, GitHub CLI, database
inspection, and local test/build 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
- [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 <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The JavaScript workspace depends on a frozen pnpm lockfile so CI and
installs resolve the same dependency graph everywhere.
> - PR #8557 updated the React package manifests and overrides to
`^19.2.7`, but master kept a stale lockfile.
> - That left master unable to run `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
because the lockfile override metadata no longer matched `package.json`.
> - This pull request refreshes only `pnpm-lock.yaml` from current
master so the dependency graph matches the already-merged manifests.
> - The benefit is that master CI can install dependencies again and
React/React DOM consistently resolve to `19.2.7`.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Bug fix: PR #8557 merged React/React DOM manifest and override
alignment, but the resulting master branch retained a stale
`pnpm-lock.yaml`. Running `CI=true pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` on
master failed with `ERR_PNPM_LOCKFILE_CONFIG_MISMATCH`, and the lockfile
still resolved React packages through `19.2.4` entries instead of
`19.2.7`.
Related public PR: #8557.
## What Changed
- Refreshed `pnpm-lock.yaml` from current master.
- Kept the diff lockfile-only.
- Brought `react` and `react-dom` lockfile resolution to `19.2.7`.
## Verification
- `CI=true pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `git diff --name-status origin/master..HEAD` shows only
`pnpm-lock.yaml`.
- Lockfile inspection shows `react@19.2.7` and `react-dom@19.2.7`
entries.
## Risks
Low risk. This is a generated lockfile-only refresh. The main risk is
merge-time lockfile drift if master changes dependencies before this
lands; if that happens, regenerate the lockfile instead of taking the
stale master side.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5 Codex via Codex CLI, with repository tool use and 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: lockfile-bot <lockfile-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The board UI, plugin examples, and plugin SDK all share the same
React dependency graph.
> - Dependabot PR #8471 raised `react` and `@types/react`, but left
`react-dom` and `@types/react-dom` on older 19.x ranges.
> - That let dependency resolution install incompatible React runtime
versions, which makes React refuse to run and breaks UI-oriented test
suites.
> - Current PR policy keeps `pnpm-lock.yaml` owned by CI for
non-dependabot authors, so this PR updates manifests and lets CI
regenerate the lockfile artifact.
> - This pull request replaces #8471 with a complete React toolchain
alignment across the package manifests it touched.
> - The benefit is a single React 19.2.7 runtime graph that keeps
dependency consumers from deduping onto a stale `react-dom` patch.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #8471
This PR replaces #8471, which updated `react` and `@types/react` but
left `react-dom` and `@types/react-dom` behind. The resulting dependency
graph can install mismatched `react` and `react-dom` versions, producing
React's incompatible-version runtime error in UI tests.
## What Changed
- Aligned `react-dom` package ranges to `^19.2.7` anywhere the React
dependency set is present.
- Aligned `@types/react-dom` package ranges to the 19.2 line.
- Kept the `react@^19.2.7` and `@types/react@^19.2.17` bumps from #8471.
- Added root pnpm overrides for `react` and `react-dom` so peer-only
consumers resolve to the same 19.2.7 runtime instead of a stale patch.
- Left `pnpm-lock.yaml` out of the PR, per the PR workflow policy; CI
regenerates and shares the lockfile artifact when manifests change.
## Verification
- `cd ui && NODE_ENV=test npx vitest run` passed locally before handoff:
243 files / 1739 tests.
- `NODE_ENV=development pnpm install --lockfile-only --ignore-scripts
--no-frozen-lockfile` passed locally on the rebased branch.
- Confirmed regenerated `pnpm-lock.yaml` resolves `react` and
`react-dom` to 19.2.7 and contains no `react@19.2.4` /
`react-dom@19.2.4` entries.
- GitHub Actions are green on this PR, including `policy`, `Typecheck +
Release Registry`, all general test shards, `Build`, `e2e`, and
`verify`.
- Greptile completed at 5/5 with zero unresolved threads.
## Risks
Low risk. This is a dependency-version alignment only, but React
dependency changes can expose package-manager resolution issues. The
root overrides intentionally constrain the React runtime pair to the
same patch version to avoid that class of failure.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex based on GPT-5, using command-line tool execution and
GitHub CLI operations in a Paperclip-managed workspace.
## 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>
[//]: # (dependabot-start)
⚠️ **Dependabot is rebasing this PR** ⚠️
Rebasing might not happen immediately, so don't worry if this takes some
time.
Note: if you make any changes to this PR yourself, they will take
precedence over the rebase.
---
[//]: # (dependabot-end)
Bumps [esbuild](https://github.com/evanw/esbuild) from 0.28.0 to 0.28.1.
<details>
<summary>Release notes</summary>
<p><em>Sourced from <a
href="https://github.com/evanw/esbuild/releases">esbuild's
releases</a>.</em></p>
<blockquote>
<h2>v0.28.1</h2>
<ul>
<li>
<p>Disallow <code>\</code> in local development server HTTP requests (<a
href="https://github.com/evanw/esbuild/security/advisories/GHSA-g7r4-m6w7-qqqr">GHSA-g7r4-m6w7-qqqr</a>)</p>
<p>This release fixes a security issue where HTTP requests to esbuild's
local development server could traverse outside of the serve directory
on Windows using a <code>\</code> backslash character. It happened due
to the use of Go's <code>path.Clean()</code> function, which only
handles Unix-style <code>/</code> characters. HTTP requests with paths
containing <code>\</code> are no longer allowed.</p>
<p>Thanks to <a
href="https://github.com/dellalibera"><code>@dellalibera</code></a> for
reporting this issue.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Add integrity checks to the Deno API (<a
href="https://github.com/evanw/esbuild/security/advisories/GHSA-gv7w-rqvm-qjhr">GHSA-gv7w-rqvm-qjhr</a>)</p>
<p>The previous release of esbuild added integrity checks to esbuild's
npm install script. This release also adds integrity checks to esbuild's
Deno install script. Now esbuild's Deno API will also fail with an error
if the downloaded esbuild binary contains something other than the
expected content.</p>
<p>Note that esbuild's Deno API installs from
<code>registry.npmjs.org</code> by default, but allows the
<code>NPM_CONFIG_REGISTRY</code> environment variable to override this
with a custom package registry. This change means that the esbuild
executable served by <code>NPM_CONFIG_REGISTRY</code> must now match the
expected content.</p>
<p>Thanks to <a
href="https://github.com/sondt99"><code>@sondt99</code></a> for
reporting this issue.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Avoid inlining <code>using</code> and <code>await using</code>
declarations (<a
href="https://redirect.github.com/evanw/esbuild/issues/4482">#4482</a>)</p>
<p>Previously esbuild's minifier sometimes incorrectly inlined
<code>using</code> and <code>await using</code> declarations into
subsequent uses of that declaration, which then fails to dispose of the
resource correctly. This bug happened because inlining was done for
<code>let</code> and <code>const</code> declarations by avoiding doing
it for <code>var</code> declarations, which no longer worked when more
declaration types were added. Here's an example:</p>
<pre lang="js"><code>// Original code
{
using x = new Resource()
x.activate()
}
<p>// Old output (with --minify)<br />
new Resource().activate();</p>
<p>// New output (with --minify)<br />
{using e=new Resource;e.activate()}<br />
</code></pre></p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Fix module evaluation when an error is thrown (<a
href="https://redirect.github.com/evanw/esbuild/issues/4461">#4461</a>,
<a
href="https://redirect.github.com/evanw/esbuild/pull/4467">#4467</a>)</p>
<p>If an error is thrown during module evaluation, esbuild previously
didn't preserve the state of the module for subsequent module
references. This was observable if <code>import()</code> or
<code>require()</code> is used to import a module multiple times. The
thrown error is supposed to be thrown by every call to
<code>import()</code> or <code>require()</code>, not just the first.
With this release, esbuild will now throw the same error every time you
call <code>import()</code> or <code>require()</code> on a module that
throws during its evaluation.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Fix some edge cases around the <code>new</code> operator (<a
href="https://redirect.github.com/evanw/esbuild/issues/4477">#4477</a>)</p>
<p>Previously esbuild incorrectly printed certain edge cases involving
complex expressions inside the target of a <code>new</code> expression
(specifically an optional chain and/or a tagged template literal). The
generated code for the <code>new</code> target was not correctly wrapped
with parentheses, and either contained a syntax error or had different
semantics. These edge cases have been fixed so that they now correctly
wrap the <code>new</code> target in parentheses. Here is an example of
some affected code:</p>
<pre lang="js"><code>// Original code
new (foo()`bar`)()
new (foo()?.bar)()
<p>// Old output<br />
new foo()<code>bar</code>();<br />
new (foo())?.bar();</p>
<p></code></pre></p>
</li>
</ul>
<!-- raw HTML omitted -->
</blockquote>
<p>... (truncated)</p>
</details>
<details>
<summary>Changelog</summary>
<p><em>Sourced from <a
href="https://github.com/evanw/esbuild/blob/main/CHANGELOG.md">esbuild's
changelog</a>.</em></p>
<blockquote>
<h2>0.28.1</h2>
<ul>
<li>
<p>Disallow <code>\</code> in local development server HTTP requests (<a
href="https://github.com/evanw/esbuild/security/advisories/GHSA-g7r4-m6w7-qqqr">GHSA-g7r4-m6w7-qqqr</a>)</p>
<p>This release fixes a security issue where HTTP requests to esbuild's
local development server could traverse outside of the serve directory
on Windows using a <code>\</code> backslash character. It happened due
to the use of Go's <code>path.Clean()</code> function, which only
handles Unix-style <code>/</code> characters. HTTP requests with paths
containing <code>\</code> are no longer allowed.</p>
<p>Thanks to <a
href="https://github.com/dellalibera"><code>@dellalibera</code></a> for
reporting this issue.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Add integrity checks to the Deno API (<a
href="https://github.com/evanw/esbuild/security/advisories/GHSA-gv7w-rqvm-qjhr">GHSA-gv7w-rqvm-qjhr</a>)</p>
<p>The previous release of esbuild added integrity checks to esbuild's
npm install script. This release also adds integrity checks to esbuild's
Deno install script. Now esbuild's Deno API will also fail with an error
if the downloaded esbuild binary contains something other than the
expected content.</p>
<p>Note that esbuild's Deno API installs from
<code>registry.npmjs.org</code> by default, but allows the
<code>NPM_CONFIG_REGISTRY</code> environment variable to override this
with a custom package registry. This change means that the esbuild
executable served by <code>NPM_CONFIG_REGISTRY</code> must now match the
expected content.</p>
<p>Thanks to <a
href="https://github.com/sondt99"><code>@sondt99</code></a> for
reporting this issue.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Avoid inlining <code>using</code> and <code>await using</code>
declarations (<a
href="https://redirect.github.com/evanw/esbuild/issues/4482">#4482</a>)</p>
<p>Previously esbuild's minifier sometimes incorrectly inlined
<code>using</code> and <code>await using</code> declarations into
subsequent uses of that declaration, which then fails to dispose of the
resource correctly. This bug happened because inlining was done for
<code>let</code> and <code>const</code> declarations by avoiding doing
it for <code>var</code> declarations, which no longer worked when more
declaration types were added. Here's an example:</p>
<pre lang="js"><code>// Original code
{
using x = new Resource()
x.activate()
}
<p>// Old output (with --minify)<br />
new Resource().activate();</p>
<p>// New output (with --minify)<br />
{using e=new Resource;e.activate()}<br />
</code></pre></p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Fix module evaluation when an error is thrown (<a
href="https://redirect.github.com/evanw/esbuild/issues/4461">#4461</a>,
<a
href="https://redirect.github.com/evanw/esbuild/pull/4467">#4467</a>)</p>
<p>If an error is thrown during module evaluation, esbuild previously
didn't preserve the state of the module for subsequent module
references. This was observable if <code>import()</code> or
<code>require()</code> is used to import a module multiple times. The
thrown error is supposed to be thrown by every call to
<code>import()</code> or <code>require()</code>, not just the first.
With this release, esbuild will now throw the same error every time you
call <code>import()</code> or <code>require()</code> on a module that
throws during its evaluation.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Fix some edge cases around the <code>new</code> operator (<a
href="https://redirect.github.com/evanw/esbuild/issues/4477">#4477</a>)</p>
<p>Previously esbuild incorrectly printed certain edge cases involving
complex expressions inside the target of a <code>new</code> expression
(specifically an optional chain and/or a tagged template literal). The
generated code for the <code>new</code> target was not correctly wrapped
with parentheses, and either contained a syntax error or had different
semantics. These edge cases have been fixed so that they now correctly
wrap the <code>new</code> target in parentheses. Here is an example of
some affected code:</p>
<pre lang="js"><code>// Original code
new (foo()`bar`)()
new (foo()?.bar)()
<p>// Old output<br />
new foo()<code>bar</code>();<br />
new (foo())?.bar();<br />
</code></pre></p>
</li>
</ul>
<!-- raw HTML omitted -->
</blockquote>
<p>... (truncated)</p>
</details>
<details>
<summary>Commits</summary>
<ul>
<li><a
href="bb9db84c02"><code>bb9db84</code></a>
publish 0.28.1 to npm</li>
<li><a
href="9ff053e53b"><code>9ff053e</code></a>
security: add integrity checks to the Deno API</li>
<li><a
href="0a9bf2135b"><code>0a9bf21</code></a>
enforce non-negative size in gzip parser</li>
<li><a
href="e2a1a71320"><code>e2a1a71</code></a>
security: forbid <code>\\</code> in local dev server requests</li>
<li><a
href="83a2cbfc35"><code>83a2cbf</code></a>
fix <a
href="https://redirect.github.com/evanw/esbuild/issues/4482">#4482</a>:
don't inline <code>using</code> declarations</li>
<li><a
href="308ad745d8"><code>308ad74</code></a>
fix <a
href="https://redirect.github.com/evanw/esbuild/issues/4471">#4471</a>:
renaming of nested <code>var</code> declarations</li>
<li><a
href="f013f5f99a"><code>f013f5f</code></a>
fix some typos</li>
<li><a
href="aafd6e48b1"><code>aafd6e4</code></a>
chore: fix some minor issues in comments (<a
href="https://redirect.github.com/evanw/esbuild/issues/4462">#4462</a>)</li>
<li><a
href="15300c30b5"><code>15300c3</code></a>
follow up: cjs evaluation fixes</li>
<li><a
href="1bda0c31d7"><code>1bda0c3</code></a>
fix <a
href="https://redirect.github.com/evanw/esbuild/issues/4461">#4461</a>,
fix <a
href="https://redirect.github.com/evanw/esbuild/issues/4467">#4467</a>:
esm evaluation fixes</li>
<li>Additional commits viewable in <a
href="https://github.com/evanw/esbuild/compare/v0.28.0...v0.28.1">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 [@cursor/sdk](https://github.com/cursor/cursor) from 1.0.18 to
1.0.19.
<details>
<summary>Commits</summary>
<ul>
<li>See full diff in <a
href="https://github.com/cursor/cursor/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>
Bumps [@codemirror/view](https://github.com/codemirror/view) from
6.39.15 to 6.43.1.
<details>
<summary>Changelog</summary>
<p><em>Sourced from <a
href="https://github.com/codemirror/view/blob/main/CHANGELOG.md">@codemirror/view's
changelog</a>.</em></p>
<blockquote>
<h2>6.41.0 (2026-04-01)</h2>
<h3>Bug fixes</h3>
<p>Fix an issue where <code>EditorView.posAtCoords</code> could
incorrectly return a position near a higher element on the line, in
mixed-font-size lines.</p>
<p>Expand the workaround for the Webkit bug that causes nonexistent
selections to stay visible to be active on non-Safari Webkit
browsers.</p>
<h3>New features</h3>
<p>The new <code>EditorView.cursorScrollMargin</code> facet can now be
used to configure the extra space used when scrolling the cursor into
view.</p>
<h2>6.40.0 (2026-03-12)</h2>
<h3>Bug fixes</h3>
<p>Fix a bug that caused Shift-Enter/Backspace/Delete on iOS to lose the
shift modifier when delivered to key event handlers.</p>
<p>Fix an issue where <code>EditorView.moveVertically</code> could move
to the wrong place in wrapped lines with a large line height.</p>
<p>Make sure the selection head associativity is properly set for mouse
selections made with shift held down.</p>
<h3>New features</h3>
<p><code>WidgetType.updateDOM</code> is now called with the previous
widget value as third argument.</p>
<h2>6.39.17 (2026-03-10)</h2>
<h3>Bug fixes</h3>
<p>Improve touch tap-selection on line wrapping boundaries.</p>
<p>Make <code>drawSelection</code> draw our own selection handles on
iOS.</p>
<p>Fix an issue where <code>posAtCoords</code>, when querying line
wrapping points, got confused by extra empty client rectangles produced
by Safari.</p>
<h2>6.39.16 (2026-03-02)</h2>
<h3>Bug fixes</h3>
<p>Perform scroll stabilization on the document or wrapping scrollable
elements, when the user scrolls the editor.</p>
<p>Fix an issue where changing decorations right before a composition
could end up corrupting the visible DOM.</p>
<p>Fix an issue where some types of text input over a selection would be
read as happening in wrong position.</p>
</blockquote>
</details>
<details>
<summary>Commits</summary>
<ul>
<li>See full diff in <a
href="https://github.com/codemirror/view/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>
Bumps
[hermes-paperclip-adapter](https://github.com/NousResearch/hermes-paperclip-adapter)
from 0.2.0 to 0.3.0.
<details>
<summary>Commits</summary>
<ul>
<li>See full diff in <a
href="https://github.com/NousResearch/hermes-paperclip-adapter/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-agent
companies.
> - The control plane coordinates issues, workspaces, documents,
routines, and board review flows across company-scoped data.
> - The local source branch contained related schema, service, and UI
changes for workspace issue scoping and document/routine annotations.
> - These changes need to move together because db schema, shared types,
server services, and UI consumers form one contract.
> - This pull request extracts the migration-bearing control-plane work
from the source branch onto `origin/master`.
> - The benefit is a standalone branch with deterministic migration
order and focused review for the highest-risk part of the split.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No GitHub issue exists for this branch split. Internal source task:
[PAP-11234](/PAP/issues/PAP-11234).
Problem/motivation:
- Workspace operations need explicit issue scoping so readiness and
blocker handling can be derived correctly.
- Document annotations need reliable live updates, save failure
surfacing, normalized activity keys, and better comment panel behavior.
- Routine descriptions need the same annotation contract as issue
documents so operators can discuss and edit routine text without
special-case infrastructure.
Proposed solution:
- Add the workspace-operation `issueId` migration and readiness scoping.
- Add routine document/annotation schema, shared types, services,
routes, and UI editing support.
- Keep the related migrations in one PR so the renumbered `0106` and
`0107` migrations land in a deterministic order after current `master`.
Alternatives considered:
- Split migrations into separate PRs, rejected because that would create
migration-numbering conflicts and make each branch less standalone.
- Merge this with UI polish, rejected because this branch needs deeper
server/db review.
Roadmap alignment:
- Checked `ROADMAP.md`; the roadmap mentions future recurring routine
capabilities generally, but no duplicate implementation PR for these
annotation/workspace changes was found.
## What Changed
- Added `0106_workspace_operations_issue_id.sql` and
`0107_routine_description_annotations.sql`, plus schema exports.
- Scoped workspace readiness to blocker issues and attached workspace
operation issue ids.
- Scoped issue-thread interaction accept finalization to the source run.
- Added routine document annotation contracts across
db/shared/server/UI.
- Improved document annotation live updates, activity-key normalization,
save failure surfacing, and comment panel behavior.
- Added issue workspace property controls and compact
blocked-by/quick-control UI updates.
- Added focused server and UI regression tests for the new contracts.
## Verification
- `CI=true NODE_ENV=development pnpm install --frozen-lockfile
--prefer-offline`
- `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest
server/src/__tests__/document-annotation-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interactions-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routine-document-annotation-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routines-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueDocumentAnnotations.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx
ui/src/components/WorkspaceRuntimeControls.test.tsx
ui/src/context/LiveUpdatesProvider.test.ts --run` — 10 files, 273 tests
passed.
- `NODE_ENV=test pnpm -r --filter @paperclipai/db --filter
@paperclipai/shared --filter @paperclipai/server --filter
@paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed, including db migration numbering
check.
## Risks
- Migration-bearing PR; merge this branch before any later PR that adds
migrations with higher numbers.
- Cross-layer contract risk across db/shared/server/ui, mitigated with
targeted tests and affected-package typecheck.
- Review should pay special attention to company scoping in new
routine/document annotation paths.
> 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 via Paperclip `codex_local` / CodexCoder, GPT-5-class
coding model with tool use and shell execution. Exact runtime snapshot
and context-window setting were not exposed by the Paperclip run
context.
## 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 available from the run context)
- [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 per source task: do not add screenshots/images unless
specifically part of the work)
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (N/A;
no public docs changed)
- [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
> - This change touches several already-shipped subsystems —
document-comment annotations, the selected-agent Conference Room chat
surface, routine description annotations, workspace-operation tracking,
and the board polling/inbox UI
> - A batch of incremental fixes and two small backend additions had
accumulated on a local mainline and were deployed to a live instance,
but never landed upstream — so each `origin/master` sync kept
re-diverging
> - Leaving them un-upstreamed means the same delta has to be re-merged
on every sync and risks being lost or silently reverted
> - This pull request rebases that delta cleanly on top of current
`origin/master` (preserving recent upstream work such as reusable
sandbox leases and the relation-list collapse controls) and brings it up
for review
> - The benefit is that mainline and the deployed instance converge, and
these fixes/additions get normal review + CI + Greptile coverage
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No single GitHub issue tracks this; it is a bundle of bug fixes and two
small feature additions. Following the issue-template fields:
**Bug fixes (what was wrong → what this does):**
- Document comments rendered out of document order, didn't live-update
across clients, swallowed save failures, and lost the markdown text
selection on re-render. Now: doc-order sort, live updates, surfaced
save-failure state, stable selection across re-renders.
- The board polling hot path returned oversized payloads on every poll.
Now: an opt-in `summary` projection trims the heartbeat-run list
payload.
- Assorted UI fixes: sidebar nav peek/streamlining edge cases, markdown
file-viewer re-mount/line-height issues on iOS Safari, inbox badge/skill
deep-link tab selection, and `⌘.` work-mode cycling on iOS.
**Feature additions:**
- `workspace_operations.issue_id` — associate a workspace operation with
the issue that triggered it (new migration `0106`, schema, service,
shared type).
- Routine **description annotations** — comment threads on a routine's
description document, mirroring issue document annotations (new
migration `0107`, `routine_documents` schema, routes/service,
editable-sections UI).
- Selected-agent **Conference Room chat** surface wiring and live
issue-thread updates.
**Related PR:** #8229 (`feat(control-plane): add annotation and
workspace controls`, draft) covers overlapping
annotation/workspace-control territory — flagging it so a reviewer can
reconcile the two rather than double-merging.
## What Changed
- `feat(workspace)`: `workspace_operations.issue_id` migration +
schema/service/type; issue workspace property controls reconciled with
upstream's evolved "Service" row.
- `feat(routines)`: routine description annotations —
`routine_documents` schema, migration `0107`, routes/service,
`editable-sections` UI.
- `fix(document-comments)`: doc-order sort, live updates, save-failure
surfacing, stable markdown selection (+ storybook story, rerender test).
- `feat(chat)`: selected-agent Conference Room chat surface and live
issue-thread updates (`LiveUpdatesProvider`, `issue-chat-messages`,
interactions service).
- `perf(board)`: opt-in `summary` projection for the board
polling/heartbeat-run list payload, plus assorted sidebar / file-viewer
/ inbox / IssueProperties UI fixes.
Organized into 5 logical commits. Migrations are numbered incrementally
after upstream's latest (`0105`) — `0106` then `0107`, no journal
collision.
## Verification
- Built by 3-way merging the deployed delta onto current
`origin/master`; the only merge conflict (`IssueProperties.test.tsx`,
two adjacent test blocks) was resolved in favor of upstream's evolved
"green service link above the workspace row" layout, which matches the
merged component's rendered output.
- Confirmed recent upstream work is preserved post-merge: reusable
sandbox lease teardown (`#8513`), the IssueProperties relation-list
collapse controls, and the sidebar streamlined-nav default.
- Confirmed the net diff vs `origin/master` is exactly the intended
feature delta (65 files) and that overlapping server files (`issues.ts`,
`agents.ts`, `heartbeat.ts`) only add feature code without disturbing
upstream logic.
- This delta is already running on a live deployed instance.
- Full typecheck/test suite + Greptile to run in CI (see checklist).
## Risks
- Two new migrations (`0106`, `0107`). Both are additive (new table /
new nullable column) and ordered after upstream's `0105`; no data
backfill, low risk. If another migration-bearing PR merges first,
renumber before merge.
- Largest blast radius is in the merged overlapping UI/service files;
covered by the existing test suites for those files plus CI.
- Overlaps thematically with draft PR #8229 — reviewers should reconcile
rather than merge both blindly.
## Model Used
Claude Opus 4.8 (`claude-opus-4-8`), extended thinking, with tool use
(git, shell). Agentic coding workflow.
## 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)
- [ ] 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: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source control plane people use to coordinate
AI agents, issues, approvals, comments, and work products.
> - The involved subsystem is issue context: markdown links, issue
properties, related work, lists, filters, inbox/sidebar status, and
plugin-provided external context.
> - The gap is that URLs to external systems currently remain mostly
plain links, so humans and agents must manually open them to understand
status, identity, and liveness.
> - This matters because external work objects such as GitHub issues and
pull requests are part of the operational state of a Paperclip company.
> - The implementation keeps core provider-neutral: shared contracts,
storage, sync, routes, and UI surfaces live in core while providers can
contribute detection and status resolution.
> - This pull request adds the external object reference foundation,
GitHub provider support, issue-surface rendering, filters,
sidebar/list/inbox signals, and test/story coverage.
> - The benefit is that linked external work becomes inspectable
Paperclip context without hardcoding every provider directly into the
UI.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this work.
Feature request:
- Problem: URLs in Paperclip issues, comments, documents, and related
surfaces do not expose provider status or object identity inline.
- Proposed behavior: detect supported external object URLs, persist
normalized references, refresh provider status, and render concise
status-aware links across issue surfaces.
- Users affected: board users, agents, and maintainers who triage issues
containing external work links.
- Acceptance: external object references are company-scoped,
provider-extensible, visible in key issue surfaces, filterable where
relevant, and covered by focused shared/server/UI tests.
Related PR search:
- No open duplicate PRs found for `external object references`.
- Closed related prior attempt: #4556.
## What Changed
- Added shared external-object contracts, validators, status/liveness
helpers, and plugin protocol declarations.
- Added database schema and additive migrations for external objects,
source mentions, and display metadata.
- Added server services/routes for detecting, syncing, summarizing,
refreshing, and resolving external objects across issues, documents,
comments, projects, and plugins.
- Added a GitHub external-object provider plus plugin SDK authoring
docs.
- Wired UI presentation across markdown links, comments, issue chat,
documents, properties, related work, issue rows, filters, inbox/sidebar
badges, and Storybook stories.
- Rebasing cleanup: moved the branch onto current `master`, repaired
stale worktree provision config, hardened environment-sensitive
tests/mocks, and removed committed screenshot artifacts from the PR
branch to keep the reviewable file set below tool limits.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/external-objects.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/external-object-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/external-objects-service.test.ts
ui/src/components/ExternalObjectPill.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/external-objects.test.ts` passed after rebasing: 5 files, 56
tests.
- Historical branch verification before this PR creation included `pnpm
test:run`, `pnpm -r typecheck`, and `pnpm build`; this PR body does not
claim those were rerun after the final rebase.
## Risks
- Medium: this adds a new cross-surface sync path on
issue/document/comment writes. The implementation uses safe sync
wrappers so external-object failures warn instead of blocking core
mutations.
- Medium: the migrations introduce new tables and indexes. They are
additive and company-scoped.
- Medium: provider-specific URL parsing can miss or misclassify edge
cases. Shared canonicalization tests and provider tests cover current
GitHub shapes.
- Low: UI badge/filter behavior could add visual noise for object-heavy
issues; component tests and Storybook stories cover the intended
surfaces.
> Roadmap checked: `ROADMAP.md` references the plugin system as the
current extension path and does not list a duplicate core feature.
Related long-range docs discuss external references, work products,
preview URLs, and plugin extension points; this PR implements the scoped
external-object reference foundation.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding-agent runtime, with shell and GitHub CLI tool
use. Reasoning mode: medium. Exact deployed runtime model ID and context
window were not exposed in the 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 page is one of the main surfaces where operators read
agent updates and manage task relationships.
> - On narrow mobile viewports, agent chat bubbles kept the desktop
`max-w-[85%]` cap, leaving the right side overly indented.
> - The same issue sidebar can also become noisy when many blockers or
sub-tasks are attached to a task.
> - This pull request adjusts the mobile chat bubble width while
preserving the existing desktop cap.
> - It also limits long issue-relation previews until the operator
expands them, then allows collapsing them again.
> - The benefit is a denser, more readable mobile issue page without
changing the underlying issue data model.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this internal report.
Bug report:
- On mobile issue pages, agent chat bubbles are unnecessarily narrow
because the desktop max-width applies at all breakpoints.
- Long blocked-by and sub-task relation lists can dominate the issue
properties area before the operator needs the full list.
- Related prior work: #4861 improved issue-thread scale and markdown
polish, but did not address this mobile bubble width regression.
## What Changed
- Added a responsive agent-comment bubble width class so mobile bubbles
use `max-w-[calc(100%-0.5rem)]` and desktop keeps `sm:max-w-[85%]`.
- Added test coverage for the responsive agent bubble classes.
- Added a five-item preview limit for blocked-by and sub-task relation
pills in issue properties.
- Added an inline `and N more...` / `show less` toggle for long
blocked-by and sub-task relation lists.
- Reset relation preview expansion when the `IssueProperties` panel
receives a different `issue.id`.
- Added component test coverage for collapsed, expanded, re-collapsed,
and issue-switch reset states.
## Verification
- Passed: `pnpm exec vitest run
ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx` (`27 passed`).
- Attempted: `pnpm exec vitest run
ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx`.
- Result: failed before reaching the changed assertion because the
existing suite imports `act` from `react`, which resolves to a
non-function in this local Vitest environment.
- Scope: 50 render tests fail with `TypeError: act is not a function`; 8
non-render tests pass.
- Attempted: `pnpm --dir ui exec vitest run
src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx` with the same `act is not a
function` result.
- Passed: Greptile rerun reported Confidence Score 5/5 on commit
`e0f9c40b7faedcfb877d4f4b0e9f2c77a6593c16`.
- Passed: all latest-head PR checks/statuses are green, including
Typecheck + Release Registry, Build, general tests, serialized server
suites, e2e, canary dry run, policy, security review, Socket, Snyk, and
Greptile.
## Risks
Low risk:
- The chat change only alters max-width classes on agent comment bubbles
and preserves the desktop cap.
- The relation-list change is presentational; hidden blockers and
sub-tasks remain in memory and can expand/collapse in place.
- Expansion state now resets when navigating between issues in a reused
panel instance.
- Main residual risk is visual polish on real mobile devices because
local browser screenshot verification was not run in this heartbeat;
screenshots were not added because the source task explicitly requested
not adding screenshots/images unless specifically part of the work.
> 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 coding agent based on GPT-5, with repository tool use,
shell execution, GitHub connector access, local Vitest verification,
Greptile follow-up, and PR check monitoring.
## 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)
- [ ] 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
- [ ] 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
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agent configuration is where operators set identity, adapter
behavior, and execution environment defaults.
> - The environment override control should only appear when there is a
meaningful choice beyond the always-available local environment, or when
an existing saved override must remain visible so it can be inspected or
cleared.
> - The previous UI used an "Execution" header, explanatory helper copy,
and verbose inherited-default wording that made the agent config feel
noisier than necessary.
> - This pull request narrows the selector visibility to real
alternatives and forced Kubernetes mode, then updates the visible copy
to match the environment-focused mental model.
> - The benefit is a cleaner agent configuration surface that only asks
operators to make an environment choice when that choice exists.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this change. Public GitHub searches
for related issues and PRs returned no matches:
- `agent config environment selector`
- `execution environment agent config`
Bug-style issue description:
What happened?
The agent config form could surface an environment override section even
when the operator had no meaningful non-local execution environment
choice. The section was labeled "Execution", included helper/inheritance
text, and described the inherited local default as "Inherit instance
default (Local)".
Expected behavior:
The selector should stay hidden unless there is more than one configured
environment choice, the section should be labeled "Environment", helper
text should be removed, and the inherited default option should read
like `Default: Local`. Existing saved non-local overrides should remain
visible even if the target environment is no longer runnable, so
operators can inspect or clear the stale selection.
Steps to reproduce:
1. Run Paperclip from `master` with environments enabled and only the
implicit local default, or Local plus one runnable non-local
environment.
2. Open an agent configuration form.
3. Inspect the environment override section visibility and copy.
Paperclip version or commit: `0b945f449` / current `master` before this
branch.
Deployment mode: Local dev (`pnpm dev`).
Installation method: Built from source.
Agent adapters involved: Not adapter-specific.
Database mode: Not database-related.
Access context: Board operator UI.
## What Changed
- Shows the environment override selector only for forced Kubernetes
mode, at least one runnable non-local environment, or an existing saved
non-local override.
- Keeps Local out of the runnable environment count so Local-only setups
do not show a redundant selector.
- Preserves stale saved non-local overrides in the selector options so
operators can see and clear them.
- Renames the section header from "Execution" to "Environment".
- Removes the helper/inheritance text above the selector.
- Changes the inherited option copy from `Inherit instance default
(...)` to `Default: ...`.
- Adds focused render tests for Local-only hiding, Local plus one
runnable non-local environment showing the concise selector copy, and
stale non-runnable override recovery.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/components/AgentConfigForm.render.test.tsx`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD`
- Checked `ROADMAP.md` for overlapping planned core work.
- Searched public GitHub issues and PRs for duplicate or related work;
no matches found.
## Screenshots
Before, when the selector was visible:
```text
Execution
Environment override
Inheriting the instance default: Local.
[Inherit instance default (Local)]
```
After, when Local plus a runnable non-local environment exists:
```text
Environment
Environment override
[Default: Local]
[E2B · sandbox]
```
After, when only Local is configured:
```text
(no Environment section is rendered)
```
## Risks
Low risk. This is isolated to the agent config UI. The main behavioral
risk is hiding the selector in an environment edge case; the current
branch keeps forced Kubernetes mode, runnable non-local environments,
and pre-existing saved non-local overrides visible. The added render
tests cover the Local-only, single non-local alternative, and stale
override cases.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex local adapter, GPT-5-based Codex coding session. The exact
hosted backend model ID is not exposed in the runtime. Tool use and
local shell execution were 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: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The board UI has an experimental streamlined left navigation mode
that changes how projects and agents appear in the sidebar.
> - Today that mode is opt-in, so users keep seeing the classic
navigation unless they find and enable the experiment.
> - The requested product behavior is to make streamlined navigation the
default experience while keeping an explicit experiments opt-out.
> - This pull request flips the shared/server default, updates UI
consumers to treat only explicit `false` as classic mode, and covers
both the default-on path and opt-out behavior in tests.
> - The benefit is that new and legacy settings get the streamlined
sidebar by default without removing the classic-sidebar escape hatch.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #7645
Related: #8430 takes the broader route of removing the classic sidebar.
This PR intentionally keeps the opt-out path.
## What Changed
- Default `enableStreamlinedLeftNavigation` to `true` in shared
validation and server-side normalization.
- Preserve explicit stored `false` as the experiments opt-out for the
classic sidebar.
- Render the sidebar and experimental settings toggle as streamlined-on
unless the setting is explicitly `false`.
- Add regression coverage for loading/default streamlined sidebar
behavior and the opt-out patch from the experiments page.
- Remove internal issue identifiers from newly touched source comments
before publishing.
## Verification
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` — passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/instance-settings-service.test.ts
ui/src/components/Sidebar.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/InstanceExperimentalSettings.test.tsx` — passed, 3 files /
27 tests.
- `pnpm build` — passed, with existing Vite/CSS/chunk-size warnings.
- `pnpm test:run` — failed in unrelated
`server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts`: the test `auto-detects
the default branch via symbolic-ref when origin/HEAD is set` creates a
temp repo on `main` then runs `git push -u origin main master`; `master`
does not exist in that temp repo. Summary: 1 failed, 214 passed, 1780
tests passed, 1 skipped.
## Risks
Low-to-medium behavioral risk: the default sidebar changes for users who
never explicitly set the experiment. Explicit `false` remains respected,
so users can still opt out via experimental settings.
> 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 local adapter, with tool use and code execution.
Exact context window was not surfaced in the runtime.
## 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 board issue thread composer is the subsystem involved here.
> - The composer can show both the mention coaching warning and the
handoff preview row near the send controls.
> - The handoff preview row sat flush against nearby composer UI, making
the warning and send-control area feel crowded.
> - This pull request adds vertical spacing around the visible handoff
preview row and avoids rendering a spacer when there is no preview.
> - The benefit is a cleaner, less cramped composer layout without
changing handoff behavior.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs: PAP-11281
Refs: PAP-11598
No public GitHub issue exists for this Paperclip task, so the issue is
described inline using the bug report template fields.
### What happened?
In the issue chat composer, the handoff preview row could render flush
against the mention coach warning above it and the send controls below
it.
### Expected behavior
When the handoff preview is visible, it should have a small amount of
vertical breathing room. When there is no preview, no empty wrapper
should add phantom margin.
### Steps to reproduce
1. Open an issue thread.
2. Type a reply that produces an active handoff preview near the mention
warning/send controls.
3. Inspect the composer spacing around the handoff preview row.
### Paperclip version or commit
Reproduced on the PAP-11281 work branch before this fix.
### Deployment mode
Local dev worktree.
## What Changed
- Added a `my-2` wrapper around `ComposerHandoffPreviewRow` in
`IssueChatThread`.
- Guarded the wrapper behind a named
`shouldRenderComposerHandoffPreview` helper so empty previews do not add
phantom vertical margin.
- Added a focused UI unit test covering the empty-preview and
visible-preview spacing guard.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/components/IssueChatComposerHandoffPreview.test.ts` passed locally.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` passed locally.
- `git diff --check` passed before the follow-up commit.
- Reviewed the one-file UI diff and focused test diff.
Screenshots: intentionally omitted for this tiny spacing-only branch
because PAP-11598 explicitly says not to add design screenshots or
images to this PR unless they are specifically part of the work. No
screenshot or wireframe image files are committed.
## Risks
Low risk. This is a narrowly scoped layout-only change in the composer.
The main risk is slightly different vertical rhythm around the handoff
preview row.
> 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 coding agent, GPT-5-class model in tool-use/code-execution
mode. Exact hosted deployment identifier and context window were not
exposed in the runtime.
## 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
- [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
Notes for draft status: remote CI and Greptile are re-running after the
follow-up push. The checklist records the required PR-ready criteria;
this PR should remain draft until GitHub reports those checks green.
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Companies are the primary tenant boundary for agents, board users,
settings, and portability operations.
> - CEO agents need limited same-company management powers, but those
powers must not cross into another company.
> - The affected company routes mixed route-level access checks with
validation middleware and repeated CEO checks, which left adjacent
mutation and portability surfaces easy to drift.
> - This pull request centralizes same-company CEO-or-board
authorization for those company-scoped surfaces.
> - It also adds regression coverage proving a CEO agent from one
company cannot read, mutate, archive, delete, export, or import against
another company.
> - The benefit is tighter company isolation without removing legitimate
same-company CEO operations.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Internal task: PAP-11205 / PAP-11347.
Bug report:
- What happened: same-company CEO authorization for company settings,
branding, and portability routes was implemented per-route, making it
possible for adjacent surfaces to drift and risking company-boundary
mistakes.
- Expected behavior: an agent API key must only manage the company that
owns the authenticated agent, and only CEO agents should get the limited
same-company management permissions.
- Steps to reproduce: authenticate as a CEO agent from Company A and
call Company B company routes such as `PATCH /api/companies/:companyId`,
`PATCH /api/companies/:companyId/branding`, export/preview export, safe
import preview/apply, archive, delete, or read.
- Version/commit: fixed on this branch at `45edaccb8` on top of
`public/master` `ddc193c2b`.
- Deployment mode: server API behavior; no UI change.
Related search results reviewed, not duplicates of this exact route
hardening:
- Refs #2212
- Refs #1083
- Refs #8053
## What Changed
- Added a shared `assertSameCompanyCeoAgentOrBoard` company route guard
and reused it for company settings, branding, export, and safe import
endpoints.
- Moved request parsing after authorization on sensitive company
mutation/export/import routes so unauthorized cross-company callers are
rejected before route body validation side effects or service calls.
- Tightened archive and delete ordering to assert route company access
before board-only mutation authorization.
- Added a cross-company company-route authorization regression suite
covering read, settings, branding, archive, delete, export, export
preview, import preview, and import apply paths.
- Extended adjacent route/service tests to prove non-CEO and
cross-company agent keys are rejected on the relevant company-scoped
surfaces.
- Addressed Greptile follow-ups by removing a redundant board assertion
and inlining the portability authorization wrapper.
## Verification
Local focused verification on rebased head `45edaccb8`:
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/companies-route-cross-company-authz.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/company-branding-route.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/company-portability-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/agent-permissions-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/authorization-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/openclaw-invite-prompt-route.test.ts`
- 6 test files passed
- 127 tests passed
Remote PR checks on rebased head `45edaccb8`:
- Paperclip PR workflow: green, including policy, typecheck, build, e2e,
canary dry run, workspace tests, server general tests, and all
serialized server shards.
- Greptile Review: success with 5/5 confidence on `45edaccb8`.
- Greptile review threads: all resolved.
## Risks
Low to moderate risk. This intentionally tightens company route
authorization and changes whether some unauthorized requests fail at the
authz layer before schema validation. Legitimate board users and
same-company CEO agents remain covered by tests, but callers that
depended on validation errors from unauthorized company routes will now
receive authorization errors first.
No migrations. No `pnpm-lock.yaml` changes. No `.github/workflows`
changes. No screenshots or design images added.
> 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-5.5-based coding agent with tool use, terminal
execution, repository inspection, and GitHub connector 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 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: no UI change)
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (N/A:
no docs needed beyond this PR description)
- [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
> - Paperclip planning skills turn approved plans into executable issue
graphs for agents
> - The executor starts assigned tasks that have no open blockers
> - Parent/child nesting gives structure, but it does not create
execution dependencies
> - Planning guidance that does not make this distinction can let
dependent tasks run too early
> - This pull request clarifies that hard dependencies must be encoded
as `blockedByIssueIds`
> - The benefit is that agents converting plans into tasks have a
clearer checklist for creating and verifying runnable task graphs
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue was found for this documentation update.
Problem:
- The planning guidance could be read as if hierarchy, phase order, or
prose blocker notes were enough to sequence execution.
- In Paperclip, only explicit blockers prevent an otherwise-ready
assigned task from starting.
Expected behavior:
- Skill guidance should tell planners to encode each hard dependency as
`blockedByIssueIds` on the dependent issue.
- It should also tell planners to verify the created issue graph before
closing the source planning issue.
## What Changed
- Clarified that parent/child issue nesting is structural and not an
execution blocker.
- Added guidance to build a compact task matrix with task, owner,
initial status, and blockers when converting accepted plans into tasks.
- Added verification guidance to re-fetch or otherwise inspect created
issues before marking the source planning issue done.
- Updated the bundled task-planning skill handoff text to point at the
same dependency expectations without duplicating the full companion
skill text.
## Verification
- Ran `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` locally.
- Rebased cleanly onto the latest `master` from `paperclipai/paperclip`
before pushing.
- Greptile completed at 5/5 on the latest head; the previous P2 wording
thread was fixed and resolved.
- GitHub PR checks are green on latest head
`2b07db9aef22ca32c65fa66fcca2db86c5b01220`, including policy,
commitperclip review, typecheck/release registry, general test shards,
build, serialized server suites, e2e, canary dry run, verify, Socket,
security-review, Snyk, and Greptile.
- No additional local unit test command was run because this is a
documentation/skill-text-only change and the remote PR suite covered the
repository gates.
## Risks
Low risk. This changes skill guidance only; it does not alter runtime
behavior, database schema, migrations, workflows, or UI code.
> 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-based coding agent in the Paperclip local adapter
runtime. Exact backend model ID and context window were not exposed by
the runtime. Used shell, git, GitHub CLI, and the GitHub connector for
repository inspection and PR creation.
## 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
- [ ] 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
- [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>
Fixes#7578
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - Blocked issue health is surfaced through blockerAttention so
operators can see whether blocked work has a live path.
> - The blockerAttention graph uses both explicit blockedBy edges and
direct child issue edges.
> - Done children were already ignored, but cancelled direct children
still appeared as unresolved blockers.
> - Explicit cancelled dependencies should remain visible as dependency
problems, but terminal direct children should not inflate a parent
blocker count.
> - This pull request narrows child-edge traversal to non-terminal
children and adds a regression test for the observed case.
> - The benefit is that cancelled child issues no longer make blocked
parents look like they have extra unresolved blocker attention.
## What Changed
- Added terminal child status filtering for blockerAttention
parent-child traversal so cancelled direct children are ignored with
done children.
- Added a server regression test where a blocked parent has active
explicit blockers plus a cancelled direct child; the cancelled child no
longer increases unresolved counts or becomes the sample blocker.
## Verification
- `perl -e 'alarm shift; exec @ARGV' 300 pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issue-blocker-attention.test.ts` -> 19 tests
passed.
## Risks
- Low risk: the change only affects implicit direct-child
blockerAttention edges.
- Explicit blockedBy edges to cancelled issues are intentionally
unchanged and remain represented as attention-required dependency
problems.
## Model Used
- OpenAI GPT-5, Codex coding agent in tool-enabled CLI environment;
reasoning and code execution used for repository inspection, patching,
git operations, and targeted test verification.
## 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
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots (not applicable; no UI change)
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (not
applicable; bugfix covered by regression test)
- [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 `codex_local` adapter spawns the Codex CLI for an agent, and
`server/src/routes/agents.ts` normalizes each agent's
`adapterConfig.env` on create/hire/update
> - PR #8272 added an isolation guard that, on every codex_local agent,
force-set a per-agent `CODEX_HOME` and injected `OPENAI_API_KEY = ""`,
and rejected any "shared" home
> - This broke the common case: operators who deleted `CODEX_HOME` /
`OPENAI_API_KEY` in the UI saw them silently re-appear on save, and
every agent was forced into an isolated home instead of sharing the
device's existing Codex login (`~/.codex` / `$CODEX_HOME`)
> - This pull request replaces the always-on isolation guard with
key-scoped isolation: a keyless agent gets no env overrides and inherits
the host Codex login at runtime; we only carve out an isolated per-agent
`CODEX_HOME` when the agent sets its own `OPENAI_API_KEY`
> - The benefit is that env-var deletion now persists, agents on one
device share the host login by default, and per-account isolation is
still available by setting a per-agent key
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists. Bug report (following `bug_report.yml`):
**What happened?** In a `codex_local` agent's configuration, removing
the `CODEX_HOME` and `OPENAI_API_KEY` env vars via the UI (clicking the
X) appears to work, but on save they instantly re-appear. The persisted
config never loses the slots.
**Root cause.** `applyCodexLocalIsolationGuard` in
`server/src/routes/agents.ts` (added in #8272) re-injected `CODEX_HOME`
(defaulting to a per-agent home) and `OPENAI_API_KEY = ""` on every
create/hire/update, and rejected shared homes outright. So a PATCH that
omitted those keys had them written back server-side.
**Expected behavior.** Deleting these env vars should persist. A
codex_local agent with no key should inherit whatever Codex login
already exists on the device.
**Steps to reproduce.**
1. Open a `codex_local` agent's configuration with `CODEX_HOME` and
`OPENAI_API_KEY` set.
2. Remove both env vars and save.
3. Re-open the config — both slots are back.
Related (different approach): Refs #8399 (keeps per-agent isolation,
fixes only the empty `OPENAI_API_KEY` slot), Refs #8272 (introduced the
guard), Refs #8403 (managed-auth seeding into isolated homes).
## What Changed
- `server/src/routes/agents.ts` — replaced
`applyCodexLocalIsolationGuard` (+ `assertCodexLocalHomeIsNotShared` /
`normalizeCodexLocalHomePath`) with `applyCodexLocalKeyIsolation`. A
codex_local agent now receives **no** env overrides unless it explicitly
sets `OPENAI_API_KEY`; only then is an isolated per-agent `CODEX_HOME`
injected (and only if the agent has not set its own `CODEX_HOME`).
Keyless agents fall back to the host Codex login at runtime. Dropped the
now-unused `node:os` import and the shared-home rejection.
- `server/src/__tests__/agent-adapter-validation-routes.test.ts` —
updated the validation-route tests to assert env-var deletion persists,
keyless agents get no overrides, and key-bearing agents still get an
isolated `CODEX_HOME`.
## Verification
```bash
cd server && npx vitest run src/__tests__/agent-adapter-validation-routes.test.ts
```
All 6 tests pass locally. Manually verified in the live UI: removing
`CODEX_HOME` and `OPENAI_API_KEY` from a codex_local agent and saving
now persists the deletion (slots no longer re-appear on reload).
## Risks
- **Host-key leak for keyless agents on a host with `OPENAI_API_KEY`
set.** Low/intended: the product direction here is that codex_local
agents inherit the host's Codex login by default; per-account isolation
is opt-in via a per-agent `OPENAI_API_KEY`, which then gets its own
`CODEX_HOME`.
- **Divergence from #8399.** That PR retains the per-agent isolation
default and only stops injecting the empty key, so it does not address
the `CODEX_HOME` re-injection half of this bug. This PR intentionally
changes the default to host-login inheritance. Reviewers should pick one
direction.
- **No migration.** Existing agents that already store these slots are
not auto-cleaned, but operators can now delete them and the deletion
sticks.
## Model Used
- Provider: Anthropic (Claude)
- Model ID: `claude-opus-4-8`
- Capabilities: tool use, code execution, extended reasoning, agentic
workflow
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] 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
- [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Dotta
Devin Foley
LeonSGP
scotttong
Serena
dependabot[bot]
github-actions[bot]
Nicky Leach
Lennie Sliwinski
Svetlana Zolotenkova