## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Sandbox providers let agents run in remote environments
> - The Daytona login flow creates a home directory for each login
session
> - The create path ran owner, mode, and link-type checks inside the
sandbox
> - These checks cannot protect the host because sandbox code can change
the checked state
> - This pull request uses one `mkdir -p` command and removes the unused
helper scripts
> - The benefit is a simpler login path with the host-side credential
checks unchanged
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
The Daytona login flow used helper scripts and inside-sandbox checks for
the session-home directory. The standalone package build also copied a
scripts directory that no longer existed after the helper scripts were
removed.
**Expected behavior**
The login flow must create the session home with one `mkdir -p` command.
The package build must complete without copying a removed directory.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Build the Daytona plugin package.
2. Start a Daytona device login.
3. Inspect the session-home create command and the package output.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Commit `dfdf5914ba37caa1e3bc380236844a7d76237e12`.
**Deployment mode**
Built from source.
## What Changed
- Replace the session-home helper checks with one `mkdir -p` command.
- Remove the two unused session-home helper scripts.
- Remove the dead build copy steps for the deleted scripts directory.
- Add coverage for a failed session-home create command.
- Keep the host-side credential reader unchanged.
- Keep the Kubernetes provider package unchanged.
## Verification
- Package unit tests pass: 220 passed, 6 skipped.
- Package typecheck passes.
- The package build passes and emits 56 files in `dist`.
- The roadmap check confirms that this change stays within the planned
sandbox-provider work.
- GitHub search found no open duplicate or related pull request.
## Risks
The login flow no longer reports owner, mode, or link-type errors from
inside the sandbox. Those checks did not protect the host. The host-side
credential reader still uses no-follow path opens and accepts only a
regular file with owner and exact mode `0600`. Risk is low because this
change removes checks that cannot enforce the host security boundary.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. This pull request updates an
existing sandbox-provider path, not a new core feature.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The runtime provides tool use and code execution.
The runtime does not expose the context window size or a more specific
model identifier.
## 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
> - Agent adapters use provider-specific login flows
> - Codex device login needs a live pseudo-terminal (PTY), while the
shared channel still uses Claude-specific names
> - The old streamed-exec path does not provide the prompt transport
that Codex needs
> - This pull request moves Codex device login to the shared login PTY
and removes the dead streamed-exec path
> - The benefit is one controlled login transport with fail-closed
capability checks and safer credential reads
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Problem or motivation**
Codex device login used a streamed-exec path that did not provide the
required prompt transport. The shared login channel also exposed
Claude-specific names outside Claude code.
**Expected behavior**
The host selects a fixed login command from trusted adapter data. Codex
login uses the provider login PTY. Providers without that capability
fail closed.
**Proposed solution**
Use a server-controlled session home, create and validate it as a fresh
0700 directory, read credentials from one validated descriptor, and
rename shared channel names to the neutral login PTY family.
**Alternatives considered**
Keep the shared login PTY as the single transport. Do not keep the
removed streamed-exec path because it cannot provide the required prompt
transport.
**Roadmap alignment**
This change supports the planned login transport work. It does not add a
separate roadmap item.
## What Changed
- Route Codex device login through the shared login PTY transport.
- Select the login command from a closed internal command key.
- Carry a server-controlled session home through the launch contract.
- Create and validate the session home as a fresh 0700 directory owned
by the login user.
- Read the credential file with descriptor-relative, no-follow path
walking and final descriptor checks.
- Gate the login route and run lease on the provider login PTY
capability.
- Rename shared channel names to the neutral login PTY family.
- Remove the streamed-exec transport value, selector field, driver
branch, and related tests.
- Hide Codex login in the user interface when the provider lacks the
login PTY capability.
## Verification
- Server unit suites pass: 89/89.
- Adapter-utils suites pass: 262/262.
- Codex-local suites pass: 326/326.
- Credential-read reader suite passes: 20/20.
- Daytona login PTY suite passes: 30/30.
- Device-login suites pass: 56/56.
- TypeScript checks pass for server, adapter-utils, and UI.
- GitHub Actions must pass after pull request creation.
- Greptile review must reach 5/5 with no open P2 findings,
recommendations, or follow-ups.
## Risks
- Providers without a login PTY capability lose Codex login support by
design.
- The credential read rejects invalid ownership, mode, type, path, and
size.
- The launch-time sandbox directory race remains outside the threat
model because the login runs inside the sandbox and a hostile sandbox
already controls its credential.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, tool use and code review assistance. The exact
context window and reasoning mode are 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.
> - Paperclip runs across the CLI, server, adapters, plugins, CI, and
container images.
> - These surfaces declared different Node.js versions from 20 through
24.
> - A newer `@types/node` major can expose APIs that the supported
runtime does not provide.
> - Node.js 20 is no longer a suitable project baseline, and Node.js 24
is the current LTS line.
> - This pull request sets Node.js 24.11.0 as one repository-wide
baseline, adds a drift check, and gives users actionable startup
guidance when their runtime is too old.
> - The benefit is one clear runtime contract for development, release,
installation, and published packages.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #2734
Refs #11727
Refs #739
## What Changed
- Require Node.js 24.11.0 or newer in all 42 package manifests and
runtime checks.
- Use Node.js 24 in GitHub Actions, Docker images, smoke images, sandbox
setup, portable installs, and esbuild targets.
- Align every direct `@types/node` declaration on `^24.0.0`.
- Prevent Dependabot from opening major `@types/node` upgrades without a
matching runtime decision.
- Add `.nvmrc` and a CI policy check for Node version drift.
- Update ACP version gates, tests, and user documentation for the new
minimum.
- Print a non-blocking warning on CLI and server startup when Node is
unsupported, with remediation through a version manager or the
documented downloaded `install.sh` workflow.
- Deduplicate that warning when `paperclipai run` boots the CLI and
server in the same process.
## Verification
- `node scripts/check-node-version-policy.mjs`
- `node --check scripts/check-node-version-policy.mjs`
- `node --check cli/esbuild.config.mjs`
- `node --check scripts/generate-npm-package-json.mjs`
- `bash -n scripts/install.sh scripts/test-install-sh-docker.sh
scripts/e2e-install-lifecycle.sh`
- Parsed all 42 package manifests and confirmed `engines.node` is
`>=24.11.0`.
- `git diff --check`
- `vitest run
packages/adapter-utils/src/sandbox-install-command.test.ts` passed with
3 tests.
- `vitest run cli/src/node-version.test.ts` passed with 4 tests.
- Directly exercised the shared warning helper for unsupported-version
messaging and same-process deduplication.
- The focused exe.dev suite could not resolve the locally unbuilt plugin
SDK from this isolated worktree. A full offline workspace install was
also blocked because the package-manager signature verifier requires
registry access. The full suite was not run locally; draft CI performs a
clean install and evaluates the wider impact.
## Risks
- This is a breaking runtime change for users, plugins, and deployments
that still use Node.js 20 or 22.
- Published workspace packages will now produce an engine warning or
failure in strict package managers on older Node.js releases.
- Node.js 24 can reveal dependency, native module, Playwright, or agent
CLI compatibility issues in CI.
- The bootstrap installer now installs Node.js 24 when the current
runtime is older than 24.11.0.
- The portable sandbox fallback is pinned to Node.js 24.11.0 and depends
on that upstream tarball remaining available.
- Unsupported runtimes continue booting after a warning, so a later
incompatibility can still fail at its point of use.
- The CLI and server share the warning policy through the published
`@paperclipai/shared` package; packaging checks must keep that subpath
export available.
- This PR does not commit `pnpm-lock.yaml` because repository policy
assigns lockfile generation to CI.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex based on GPT-5. The exact deployment ID and context
window are not exposed in this session. Reasoning, repository tools,
shell execution, and GitHub tools 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
> - Agent runs execute inside sandbox environments. Sandbox provider
plugins (Daytona, Modal, exe.dev, and others) declare a JSON-Schema
`configSchema`. The Environment configuration form renders from that
schema.
> - The sizing and image fields open empty. Users must guess working
values. The Modal form cannot submit at all until the user types an app
name and an image by hand.
> - The form renderer already pre-fills every field that declares a
JSON-Schema `default`. The manifests do not use this mechanism for
sizing or image fields.
> - This pull request adds optional `default` values to the Daytona,
Modal, and exe.dev manifest schemas.
> - The benefit is a form that opens with known-good values. Users can
create a working environment without provider research.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Current behavior**
The Environment configuration form opens with empty sizing and image
fields for the Daytona, Modal, and exe.dev sandbox providers. Users must
find working values in provider documentation. Modal declares `appName`
and `image` as required with no default, so the form blocks submission
until the user invents both values.
**Proposed behavior**
The provider manifests declare JSON-Schema `default` values. The
existing form renderer pre-fills them:
- Daytona: CPU `4`, memory `4` GiB, disk `10` GiB, image
`daytonaio/sandbox:0.8.0`
- exe.dev: CPU `4`, memory `4GB`, disk `20GB`
- Modal: app name `paperclip`, image `node:22`
Secret-ref fields (API keys, tokens) get no defaults on purpose. The
form persists a raw string in a secret-ref field as a company secret on
save. A placeholder default would become a stored secret with a bogus
value. Each plugin test suite now guards this invariant.
**Reason and benefit**
New users can create a working sandbox environment without guessing. The
defaults stay optional: users can clear or change every value, and the
schema marks no new field as required. The Modal image default `node:22`
satisfies the sandbox runtime contract in `SANDBOX-REQUIREMENTS.md`
(`node`, `sh`, and `tar` on PATH).
**Subsystem affected**
Sandbox provider plugins (`packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/*`):
environment driver `configSchema` manifests.
**Breaking changes**
None. Defaults only seed the create-mode form. Saved environments keep
their stored config. E2B, Novita, Cloudflare, and Kubernetes manifests
do not change: E2B and Novita already default to their base templates,
and the Cloudflare bridge and Kubernetes cluster fields have no sensible
universal value.
## What Changed
- Add `default` values for `cpu`, `memory`, `disk`, and `image` in the
Daytona manifest. Trim the memory description to match.
- Add `default` values for `cpu`, `memory`, and `disk` in the exe.dev
manifest.
- Add `default` values for `appName` and `image` in the Modal manifest.
Extend the image description with the runtime-contract rationale.
- Add manifest tests in all three plugins: defaults match expected
values, defaults satisfy their own schema constraints, and no secret-ref
field declares a default.
- Bump plugin versions: daytona and modal `0.1.0` → `0.1.1`, exe-dev
`0.1.1` → `0.1.2`.
## Verification
- Run `pnpm test` in `packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/daytona`,
`.../modal`, and `.../exe-dev`. The new `* manifest form defaults`
suites pass.
- Run `./node_modules/.bin/tsc --noEmit` in each of the three packages.
Typecheck passes.
- Manual: rebuild the plugins (`pnpm build` in each package), let the
plugin dev-watcher refresh the manifest, then open Environments → New
environment. The Daytona form shows CPU 4, Memory 4, Disk 10, and image
`daytonaio/sandbox:0.8.0`. The Modal form shows `paperclip` and
`node:22`. The API key fields stay empty.
- Verified live on a local instance: the served `configSchema` in the
plugin registry carries the new defaults, and existing environments are
unchanged.
## Risks
- Low risk. The change touches only manifest schema metadata and tests.
No runtime code path changes.
- New environments created with untouched forms now request 4 CPU / 4
GiB / 10 GiB from Daytona instead of provider minimums. This can raise
cost per sandbox for users who previously saved empty fields.
- The Daytona image default pins `daytonaio/sandbox:0.8.0`. The default
needs a manual bump when Daytona ships new sandbox images.
> 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
- Claude Fable 5 (Anthropic, model ID `claude-fable-5`), via the Claude
Code CLI, 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
- [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
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The Daytona sandbox provider lives in
`packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/daytona`
> - That plugin depends on `@daytonaio/sdk` for session control and
command execution
> - The stable SDK version moved forward, but the plugin still used an
older pin
> - This pull request pins the SDK to the current stable release and
keeps the package build and tests green
> - The benefit is the plugin uses the current client surface with a
very small change set
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The Daytona plugin keeps an older `@daytonaio/sdk` pin than the current
stable release.
**Current behavior**
The plugin depends on `^0.171.0`.
**Proposed behavior**
The plugin pins `@daytonaio/sdk` to `0.203.0`.
**Reason and benefit**
The plugin uses the current stable client. The build and the existing
tests still pass with the real 0.203.0 types. The change keeps the
tracked diff small.
**Breaking changes**
None. The package manifest changes only the SDK pin. The workspace
package is excluded from the root lockfile.
**Additional context**
Refs #7333, which updated the same package to `0.183.0`.
## What Changed
- Updated `packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/daytona/package.json` to
pin `@daytonaio/sdk` at `0.203.0`.
- Kept the change limited to the plugin package manifest.
## Verification
- `pnpm run build` in the plugin directory passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config
packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/daytona/vitest.config.ts` passed.
- `git status` showed only the one-line manifest change before the PR
open step.
- `git fetch origin chore/daytona-sdk-0-203-0` returned
`d2592644e80dfac2cfae6d9ccc2188267fe75758`.
- `git diff --stat origin/master...HEAD` showed only the one manifest
file change.
## Risks
- Low risk. The change only updates a package pin.
- The plugin build and tests already passed against the new SDK surface.
- A future SDK release could need a follow-up pin update.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, 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 and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [ ] 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
- [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
> - Sandbox-provider plugins (cloudflare, daytona, e2b, exe-dev,
kubernetes, modal, novita) and `plugin-workspace-diff` are published as
standalone npm packages, but during local dev they need the in-repo
`@paperclipai/plugin-sdk` symlinked in
> - Each of these plugins shipped a `postinstall` lifecycle script that
traversed *out* of its own package directory (`node
../../../../scripts/link-plugin-dev-sdk.mjs`) to do that linking
> - The publishable manifest is built by a `prepack` whitelist that
drops the `scripts` field, so npm consumers don't see the postinstall
today — but that safety property depends entirely on `prepack` running
on every publish. A publish that skips lifecycle scripts would ship a
tarball whose postinstall escapes its package directory at consumer
install time
> - This pull request removes the escape-the-package-dir lifecycle
script from every plugin source manifest and moves the dev linking to a
single root-level postinstall that iterates the excluded plugin
directories itself
> - The benefit is that plugin tarballs can no longer carry an
install-time script that reaches outside their own directory, regardless
of whether `prepack` runs
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
This is a follow-up hardening change flagged during review of the Novita
sandbox provider PR (#7595).
**Problem (security):** Excluded plugin packages each carried
`"postinstall": "node ../../../../scripts/link-plugin-dev-sdk.mjs"`. The
relative path traverses outside the package root. Today the published
manifest is sanitized by a `prepack` whitelist that drops `scripts`, so
consumers are unaffected in the normal publish path. The risk is that
this is a defense-in-depth gap: if a publish ever skips lifecycle
scripts (e.g. `npm publish --ignore-scripts` is *not* used, or a tool
publishes the raw manifest), the tarball would ship a postinstall that
runs out-of-tree code at the consumer's install time.
## What Changed
- Added a single root `package.json` `postinstall`: `node
scripts/link-plugin-dev-sdk.mjs`.
- Rewrote `scripts/link-plugin-dev-sdk.mjs` to iterate the excluded
plugin directories itself (`packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/*` + the
orchestration smoke example) instead of relying on each plugin to invoke
it from its own cwd. Preserves both prior behaviors: leave a real
installed SDK dir alone, and skip when already correctly symlinked
(idempotent).
- Removed `scripts.postinstall` from all 7 sandbox-provider plugins
(cloudflare, daytona, e2b, exe-dev, kubernetes, modal, novita).
- Removed `scripts.postinstall` from `plugin-workspace-diff` (a pnpm
workspace member — pnpm already links the SDK, so the script was a no-op
there).
## Verification
- `node scripts/link-plugin-dev-sdk.mjs` from repo root: links the SDK
into the excluded plugins and reports skipped (already-linked) dirs;
re-running is idempotent.
- `grep -r "link-plugin-dev-sdk" packages/plugins/*/package.json
packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/*/package.json` returns no matches —
no plugin source manifest references the linker any longer.
- All affected `package.json` files re-validated as parseable JSON.
## Risks
Low risk. Dev-only tooling: the linker only runs at the repo root during
local install and only touches `node_modules/@paperclipai/plugin-sdk`
symlinks inside excluded plugin dirs. No change to published plugin
behavior or runtime code. Worst case if the root postinstall failed to
run, local dev of an excluded plugin would not find the SDK symlink —
easily re-run manually.
## Model Used
Claude Opus (claude-opus-4-8), extended reasoning, with tool use / code
execution in an agentic coding harness.
## 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 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 (added
`scripts/link-plugin-dev-sdk.test.js`, wired into
`test:release-registry`)
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots (N/A — no UI change)
- [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (N/A)
- [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
> - Test infrastructure across server, ui, packages/* runs on Vitest
> - Dependabot opened a narrow bump (3.2.4 → 3.2.6), but the wider
workspace is on 3.2.4 and the major-version bridge to v4 needs a
coordinated change set across configs and tests
> - Staying on 3.x indefinitely leaves us behind on Vitest 4 (perf,
pool, and config improvements) and forces repeated patch-only dependabot
churn
> - This pull request upgrades Vitest to 4.1.8 across the workspace,
updates `server/vitest.config.ts` and `scripts/run-vitest-stable.mjs`
for the new API, and adjusts two UI tests for the new assertion
semantics
> - The benefit is a single, coherent Vitest 4 upgrade that supersedes
#7570 and gets us on the supported major line
## What Changed
- Bump `vitest` from `3.2.4` to `4.1.8` across root, `server`, `ui`, and
all `packages/*` (including plugin examples and sandbox providers)
- Update `server/vitest.config.ts` for Vitest 4 config surface
- Update `scripts/run-vitest-stable.mjs` to match the new runner
behavior
- Adjust `ui/src/components/CommentThread.test.tsx` and
`ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx` for Vitest 4 matcher/timing
semantics
- Refresh `pnpm-lock.yaml`
## Verification
- `pnpm install` resolves cleanly with the new lockfile
- `pnpm -w -r test` (server, ui, packages) runs under Vitest 4.1.8
## Risks
- Major-version Vitest bump: behavioral changes in pools, fake timers,
and matcher strictness can surface flake. Test config and the two UI
tests were updated to match v4 semantics; broader test runs should be
watched on CI before merge.
- Supersedes dependabot PR #7570 (3.2.4 → 3.2.6); that PR should be
closed.
## Model Used
- Claude (Anthropic) — `claude-opus-4-7`, extended thinking, 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
- [ ] 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
Closes#7570
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - Agents need isolated sandbox environments to execute work safely;
Paperclip already supports E2B as a sandbox provider plugin
> - Users want to use Daytona (https://www.daytona.io/) as an
alternative sandbox backend, but no plugin existed for it
> - Without a Daytona plugin, teams that prefer Daytona's
pricing/regions/runtime can't run Paperclip agents on it
> - This pull request adds a `@paperclip/sandbox-provider-daytona`
plugin that mirrors the existing E2B plugin shape and wires up Daytona's
`@daytonaio/sdk` for sandbox lifecycle, command execution, and shell
detection
> - The benefit is that operators can pick Daytona as a first-class
sandbox provider without touching core code, broadening Paperclip's
runtime options
## What Changed
- New plugin package `packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/daytona` with
manifest, worker entry, and provider implementation backed by
`@daytonaio/sdk`
- Implements sandbox create/destroy/exec/upload/download lifecycle,
shell command detection, and config/env wiring consistent with the E2B
plugin
- Adds unit tests under `src/plugin.test.ts` and a README documenting
setup and the `DAYTONA_API_KEY` requirement
- Minor adjustments in `scripts/paperclip-issue-update.sh`,
`packages/shared/src/issue-thread-interactions.test.ts`, and
`packages/shared/src/validators/issue.ts` to support the integration
## Verification
- Re-ran the full sandbox provider matrix on the QA Paperclip instance
using Daytona as the runtime — all 6 adapters executed inside the
Daytona sandbox with zero `environmentExecute` timeouts
- 5/6 adapters pass cleanly (or with informational warns); the only
failure is `codex_local`, which is an OpenAI quota/billing issue
unrelated to Daytona
- `pnpm --filter @paperclip/sandbox-provider-daytona test` runs the
plugin unit tests
## Risks
- New optional plugin; no behavior change for users who don't enable it
- Requires `DAYTONA_API_KEY` for runtime use — documented in the plugin
README
- Daytona SDK is a new external dependency; tracked in the plugin's own
package.json so it doesn't affect the core install footprint
## Model Used
- Claude Opus 4.7 (`claude-opus-4-7`), extended thinking, 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 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 (N/A — backend plugin)
- [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: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Nicky Leach
Devin Foley