## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Developers can run Paperclip from linked Git worktrees.
> - The server development watcher scans paths near the active checkout.
> - A main checkout can contain many complete sibling worktrees under
`.paperclip/worktrees`.
> - Scanning those sibling checkouts can stall the watcher before it
starts the server.
> - This pull request excludes the shared worktree directory from the
development watcher.
> - The benefit is that development startup stays responsive as the
number of worktrees grows.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
The server development watcher traversed sibling checkouts under
`.paperclip/worktrees`. Large worktree collections could make `pnpm dev`
stall before the watcher started the server process.
**Expected behavior**
The watcher must observe only source paths that can reload the active
checkout. It must ignore sibling worktrees in both a main checkout and a
linked worktree.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Create several linked worktrees under `.paperclip/worktrees`.
2. Add normal dependency and build output trees to those worktrees.
3. Run `pnpm dev` from the main checkout or one linked worktree.
4. Observe the watcher scan sibling worktrees before it starts the
server.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduced on `master` before this change.
**Deployment mode**
Local development with `pnpm dev`.
## What Changed
- Detect whether the active server root is inside the managed
linked-worktree directory.
- Ignore the shared `.paperclip/worktrees` root from both main and
linked checkouts.
- Add regression coverage for the resolved ignore path and its globstar
form.
## Verification
- `./node_modules/.bin/vitest run
server/src/__tests__/dev-watch-ignore.test.ts --reporter=verbose`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
## Risks
- Low risk. The change affects only local development watch exclusions.
- A non-standard checkout that copies the same `.paperclip/worktrees`
directory layout will receive the same exclusion.
> 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, context window not disclosed, with reasoning,
tool use, and code execution.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [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>
scotttong
dotta