## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The full-stack runner campaign checks local and Daytona runner
behavior.
> - A Daytona image content miss starts a cold multi-stage Docker build.
> - Stable dependency and agent CLI layers take most of the image build
time.
> - Development targets must not write shared cache state.
> - This pull request adds a registry cache with a default-branch write
gate.
> - It also puts volatile source inputs after stable install layers.
> - The benefit is a shorter Daytona image build without weaker secret
isolation.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
This improves the Daytona runner image stage in the full-stack E2E
workflow.
**Subsystem affected**
The GitHub Actions runner E2E workflow and its Daytona Docker image are
affected.
**Current behavior**
Each new Daytona image content ID starts with an empty BuildKit cache. A
runner source change also invalidates dependency and agent CLI install
layers because volatile inputs occur before those layers.
**Proposed behavior**
All authorized campaigns can read one GHCR BuildKit cache. Only a
campaign whose target ref is the repository default branch can update
that cache. The Dockerfile installs dependencies and agent CLIs before
it consumes volatile runner source or revision metadata.
**Reason and benefit**
The paid runner matrix spends several minutes building the image before
any selected cell can start. Cache reuse removes repeated stable setup
work and makes focused Daytona iterations faster.
**Breaking changes**
None. The immutable content tag, digest inspection, Cosign signature,
image labels, pinned base images, and provider credential boundary stay
unchanged.
## What Changed
- Read a registry-backed BuildKit cache for Daytona image content
misses.
- Export the cache only when the resolved target ref is the default
branch.
- Keep provider credentials outside the image build and cache.
- Install provider-pack dependencies before runner source is copied.
- Keep expensive agent CLI installs before source revision metadata.
- Add workflow and Docker layer-order contract checks.
## Verification
- `prettier --write .github/workflows/runner-full-stack-e2e.yml
tests/runner-e2e/daytona-image.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/workflow-security.test.ts`
- `actionlint .github/workflows/runner-full-stack-e2e.yml`
- `git diff --check`
- I did not run a test suite or Docker image build locally. The
requested iteration policy reserves those checks for GitHub Actions.
## Risks
Low risk. BuildKit can use a cache record only when its content key
matches the build instruction and input. Development targets have
read-only cache access. The cache contains public source and build
outputs, but it does not receive provider credentials or the GitHub
token as Docker build inputs.
> 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 with GPT-5, 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
- [ ] 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 manages AI agents and their work.
> - The runner executes agent turns on local and remote providers.
> - A remote per-turn session must save its state before Paperclip
releases its sandbox.
> - The session runtime returned after 100 milliseconds while the remote
checkpoint still ran.
> - The next turn also checked the local state path instead of the
verified remote backup.
> - This pull request waits for the bounded remote close and accepts
only a verified suspended backup.
> - The benefit is reliable multi-turn execution without weaker identity
checks.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
A successful remote agent turn released its sandbox before the runner
saved the verified continuation backup. The next turn failed with
`runner_state_identity_mismatch`.
**Expected behavior**
Paperclip must finish the bounded remote checkpoint before it releases
the sandbox. A later turn must validate and restore the digest-matched
suspended backup.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run a native ACPX Claude Plan test in a non-reusable Daytona sandbox.
2. Reject the first plan to start a second turn.
3. Observe that the second turn fails before provider execution.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The failure reproduced at `13775a90b078ff64872f50961ea1b83d575e7bc6`.
**Deployment mode**
GitHub Actions with a Daytona sandbox.
## What Changed
- Wait for the internally bounded remote runner close and checkpoint
before the host returns.
- Preserve the existing short cleanup bound for other providers.
- Validate remote continuation lifecycle from a complete digest-verified
backup when local runner state is absent.
- Keep corrupt, non-suspended, mismatched, and unverified state
fail-closed.
- Make native Plan completion and accepted-Plan wake prompts
deterministic.
## Verification
- A prior 45-cell local campaign passed 44 cells. The only failure was
the OpenCode Plan prompt variance fixed here.
- A focused OpenCode local Plan rerun passed.
- ACPX Claude Daytona message and question cells passed.
- Focused regressions cover delayed checkpoint close and verified remote
backup lifecycle.
- GitHub Build and the focused ACPX Claude Daytona Plan cell will
validate this exact head.
## Risks
Remote runnerd sessions now wait for their internally bounded
close/checkpoint path before returning; generic provider cleanup retains
the existing 100 millisecond bound. Durable run success still cannot be
reversed. The environment release guard still blocks sandbox destruction
when no verified backup stamp exists.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5.6, extended reasoning, with code execution and
GitHub Actions inspection.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal task
id
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open findings
- [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Picking a source starts the sign-in: the row collapses to the answer, the card opens where the credential link was, and the footer button walks Sign in -> Waiting for code -> Connecting before the step advances. Back unwinds it a beat at a time.
Nothing mounts to change layout - the card and the link are always rendered and their heights animate, with inert holding the a11y line - because a mount changes the page in one frame and no easing can smooth a step already taken.
Review fixes in the same branch: the displayed-code panel now reports its prompt upward (the OpenAI path could not leave the loading beat without it), the two-second hold is a cancellable beat rather than a dropped timer, unwinding a sequence that never opened a card no longer starts a login to cancel it, and the key field regains focus-on-open.
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip uses paid full-stack tests to verify local and Daytona
runner behavior.
> - Daytona tests reuse a content-addressed runner image when its
runtime inputs match.
> - The prior key covered the full runner package even when Docker
excluded development files.
> - Test-only and documentation changes could therefore force an
identical image rebuild.
> - This pull request aligns the Docker input closure and content-key
closure.
> - The benefit is faster paid-test iteration without unsafe image
reuse.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The Daytona paid-test workflow currently rebuilds its large runner image
after changes to runner tests, fixtures, smoke scripts, or
documentation. Those files do not enter the image and do not change its
runtime bytes.
**Subsystem affected**
The runner full-stack E2E workflow and its Daytona image build contract
are affected.
**Current behavior**
The content key hashes the full runner package. A development-only edit
changes the key even though the Docker build context excludes that edit.
**Proposed behavior**
The Dockerfile copies an explicit runtime build closure. The content key
hashes the same closure and continues to include every source, manifest,
lockfile, protocol, toolchain, and pinned image input that can affect
runtime bytes.
**Reason and benefit**
The workflow can reuse verified images for test-only changes. A runtime
change still creates a new immutable key and image.
**Breaking changes**
None. This changes only paid-test image cache identity and Docker build
inputs.
## What Changed
- Replace broad runner and eval package copies with explicit build
inputs.
- Advance the Daytona image content schema to version 5.
- Hash the matching explicit TypeScript, protocol, script, manifest,
lockfile, and Rust closure.
- Add contract coverage for runtime inputs and development-only
exclusions.
## Verification
- Focused Daytona image contract tests passed: 6 of 6.
- Exact-head ordinary CI [run
33913366909](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33913366909)
passed every job.
- The PR policy check passed on [run 33913366951, attempt
2](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33913366951).
- The one-cell paid [run
33916670340](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33916670340)
passed end to end.
- Image job 101165705592 built the explicit 6.33 MB context from exact
source revision `4bcfb3faa7694aad4ceca2193230d9693af6c9e0`.
- The workflow published content key
`3a3a8a19d2362263e972bead4427048c82a7da61dc203cd5c83aa40b88d90524` at
immutable digest
`sha256:a5b6f7517bc020ec2bae8075210d1a3f867284f4733042114528e19150ffac0a`.
- Cosign verified the image and recorded transparency log entry
2715972694.
- The sole `core-compatibility.legacy-codex.daytona.message-marker` cell
passed in job 101168063383.
- Campaign aggregation, immutable S3 history publication, and GitHub
Pages publication all passed.
- Full local test, build, and typecheck suites were not run.
## Risks
A future Docker build input could be omitted from the explicit closure.
Contract tests reject the prior broad copies and check the current
required runtime inputs. The real Daytona image build also qualified the
closure before merge.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex GPT-5.6 with agentic reasoning 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
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id
- [x] I have run focused 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
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Paid runner E2E tests verify the complete runner, control-plane, and
UI path.
> - A server restart could load a fresh task page while Playwright still
waited on an unsettled Vite navigation lifecycle.
> - The current server also ignored the isolated Vite cache path and
skipped Vite's per-request HTML transform from the known-green runner
snapshot.
> - A one-cell paid run then exposed that download-artifact v8 removes
the artifact-name directory for one pattern match.
> - This pull request restores the Vite contract, proves a fresh
document after restart, and accepts only the exact singleton artifact
layout.
> - The benefit is reliable local runner qualification without weaker
UI, source, or artifact checks.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12769
Refs #12828
Refs #12829
Refs #12833
**What happened?**
The structured-question restart test could time out after the
replacement server returned the task route and rendered the durable
pending interaction. A focused one-cell rerun passed the paid test but
failed aggregation because download-artifact v8 flattened its single
artifact.
**Expected behavior**
The test must prove that a new document loaded after the server restart
and that the same pending interaction survived. The aggregate must
accept the exact documented singleton download layout while it continues
to reject ambiguous or foreign artifacts.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run the local ACPX-Codex structured-question restart-resume cell.
2. Restart the isolated server while the question waits for an answer.
3. Observe that the route and task UI can reload before Playwright
settles the navigation promise.
4. Run a paid campaign with one selected cell.
5. Observe download-artifact v8 extract the sole campaign directory
directly into the requested path.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The local campaign reproduced the navigation failure at
`3586956a1b794b3cb4a9c5f57ffb7355e2b0c46d`. The one-cell aggregate
reproduced the singleton layout at
`f487660c0a06ba06ca140b57386f21ed39f13120`. This fix is
`de4ccceff453a4b39436bf9a2eb8f03924151af7`.
**Deployment mode**
Local development and paid GitHub Actions.
**Installation method**
Built from source.
**Agent adapter(s) involved**
ACPX-Codex. The Vite and aggregate fixes are provider-neutral.
## What Changed
- Prove a new post-restart browser document with an in-memory sentinel.
- Tolerate only Playwright's navigation timeout before the exact UI and
API checks run.
- Honor `PAPERCLIP_VITE_CACHE_DIR` in the embedded Vite server.
- Limit dependency optimization to the real UI entry.
- Run `vite.transformIndexHtml` for each request while caching only the
branded source template.
- Accept download-artifact v8's flattened layout only for one expected
cell with one unique recognized campaign.
- Keep source SHA, source ref, workflow URL, execution ID, attempt, and
unexpected-entry validation.
- Add focused positive and negative regressions for Vite rendering and
singleton artifact selection.
## Verification
- Exact 45-cell local campaign
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33888939013 passed
44/45. Its only failure was the post-restart navigation false negative
fixed here.
- Exact focused rerun
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33891207957 passed
the ACPX-Codex restart cell first attempt with the same session, two
durable runs, the terminal marker once, and cleanup complete.
- The focused Vite renderer suite passed 2/2 tests.
- The focused rerun-artifact selector suite passed 12/12 tests.
- Prettier and `git diff --check` passed.
- An exact-head 45-cell confirmation is pending.
## Risks
Low to medium risk. The Vite change restores known-green per-request
transforms and isolated cache behavior. It can affect all development UI
loads. The paid matrix and ordinary CI will verify that behavior. The
singleton selector remains fail-closed for ambiguous layouts and
validates every result source.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, `gpt-5.6-sol`, extended reasoning, tool use, code
execution, and parallel focused agents.
## 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.
> - Paid runner E2E tests verify the full control-plane path for
supported providers.
> - Native OpenCode could write the reserved terminal marker through
progress and final output.
> - The restart fixture also waited for all development assets after the
recovered UI was already usable.
> - These behaviors made two valid local runner paths fail
qualification.
> - This pull request makes the OpenCode write contract explicit and
uses the visible UI as the restart readiness gate.
> - The benefit is reliable local OpenCode qualification without weaker
duplicate detection.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12769
Refs #12829
Refs #12828
**What happened?**
The native OpenCode ask fixture allowed a progress tool call before the
final response. OpenCode could write the reserved terminal marker in
both places. The structured restart fixture could also time out while it
waited for `DOMContentLoaded` after the recovered UI was visible and
usable.
**Expected behavior**
The ask fixture must write the reserved marker once. The restart fixture
must continue when the recovered UI and interaction API prove that the
application is ready.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run the local native OpenCode ask-question paid cell.
2. Observe a run that calls `report_progress`, calls `paperclip_finish`,
and then emits the exact marker.
3. Run the local native OpenCode structured-question restart-resume cell
with a fresh Vite graph.
4. Observe that the page is usable before the navigation lifecycle event
completes.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The failures reproduced at `06cdf88bd9ac0fad82588025d23a68e810b20fd0`.
The fixes are at `f7e044e71df11a0582eafe28d2fd52ea7cd07948`.
**Deployment mode**
Local dev.
**Installation method**
Built from source.
**Agent adapter(s) involved**
OpenCode through the native runner.
## What Changed
- Require `paperclip_finish` to be the only tool call in the native ask
fixture.
- Forbid `report_progress` and other tool calls in that fixture.
- Wait for navigation commit after a server restart.
- Keep the explicit recovered UI and interaction API readiness checks.
- Add prompt contract assertions.
## Verification
- The exact two-cell paid run passed both affected cells on the AWS
runner fleet:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33883334853
- Native OpenCode ask-question passed in job
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33883334853/job/101058952662
- Native OpenCode structured restart-resume passed in job
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33883334853/job/101058952823
- Prettier passed for all three changed files.
- `git diff --check` passed.
- The run-level aggregate failed only because the workflow source still
used the pre-repair lockfile on `master`. PR #12828 repairs that
lockfile.
## Risks
Low risk. The prompt change affects native ask fixtures across provider
profiles. The navigation change remains guarded by explicit UI and API
assertions.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, `gpt-5.6-sol`, extended 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
- [ ] 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
## Thinking Path
Paid cells now reuse the AWS image's system Chrome, but Playwright video
recording still resolves its revision-pinned FFmpeg helper from the
Playwright cache. Run 33875618534 proved Chrome qualification succeeds
and then failed before provider startup because that helper was absent.
The same run also exposed that generic lock repair can churn unrelated
package platform metadata, so the automated repair paths need
resolution-only regeneration rather than lockfile-only metadata refresh.
## What Changed
- install Playwright FFmpeg only on the AWS/system-Chrome path
- retry the small helper installation up to three times before provider
secrets are exposed
- keep the GitHub-hosted Chromium fallback unchanged
- bind static coverage to the exact FFmpeg step block and its pre-secret
ordering
- add pnpm `--resolution-only` to all four automated lock-repair paths
while retaining full transitive resolution
- require resolution-only repair in the shared workflow regression
The actual generated lockfile correction remains bot-owned by PR #12828
and is intentionally not committed here.
## Verification
- `node --test
.github/scripts/tests/lockfile-refresh-workflows.test.mjs`
- `actionlint -ignore SC2012` on all modified workflows
- focused Prettier checks
- `git diff --check`
- prior run 33875618534: system Chrome 151 qualified; missing Playwright
FFmpeg was the sole cell startup failure
## Risks
Low. The new network operation is limited to Playwright's pinned FFmpeg
payload, happens before paid credentials are exposed, and leaves the
hosted-runner path unchanged. Resolution-only is still a full
dependency-resolution pass, unlike lockfile-only, while avoiding
unrelated current-platform metadata churn.
## Model Used
GPT-5
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip manages AI agents that perform work.
> - Paperclip Runner connects durable task runs to local provider
processes.
> - The full-stack paid matrix exposed failures after the runner
integrity repair.
> - Verified JavaScript entrypoints lost their relative module graph
when Linux executed them through descriptor paths.
> - Returned provider startup errors also remained pending and became
indeterminate after recovery.
> - Sparse Codex tool lifecycle events lost the `write_document`
identity before task transcript projection.
> - This pull request repairs those three boundaries and makes the
structured-question fixture deterministic.
> - The benefit is repeatable provider startup, exact failure replay,
and correct inline Plan placement.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12721 and #12700.
**What happened?**
The paid runner matrix failed ACPX and OpenCode startup before provider
session creation. The runner journal then replaced the original startup
error with an indeterminate recovery result. Native Codex saved a Plan
but rendered it only as a fallback card. A legacy Claude waiting reply
could also echo the reserved terminal marker before the answer arrived.
**Expected behavior**
Verified JavaScript providers must start from immutable
descriptor-backed artifacts. Returned startup failures must persist as
terminal failed command results. Native tool lifecycle updates must
preserve the `write_document` boundary. Pre-answer fixture output must
not contain the reserved terminal marker.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run the local provider cells in the Runner Full-Stack E2E workflow.
2. Observe ACPX and OpenCode fail during `session.open` before provider
execution.
3. Observe recovery report `execution_indeterminate` instead of the
original startup error.
4. Run the native Codex Plan cell and observe the fallback Plan card
after the tool activity row.
5. Run the legacy Claude structured-question resume cell and observe an
early marker echo in waiting prose.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`0f9452101740835ce0b1488a204bf48acd5bafc3`
**Deployment mode**
Local development with the paid GitHub Actions acceptance workflow.
## What Changed
- Bundle the ACPX sidecar and OpenCode proxy as self-contained Node ESM
entrypoints before hashing and verified descriptor launch.
- Anchor ACPX dynamic provider package resolution at a
controller-derived provider-pack root and keep that root out of the
provider child environment.
- Persist executor-returned startup errors as redacted durable failed
command results while retaining indeterminate recovery for true process
death.
- Coalesce sparse native tool items by stable ID so a late
`write_document` name, input, and result reach the transcript boundary
once.
- Forbid the structured-question fixture from spelling or announcing its
reserved terminal marker before the user answers.
## Verification
- Rust and TypeScript regression tests cover durable failed replay, true
crash ambiguity, bundle closure, package-root derivation, environment
filtering, exact Codex tool lifecycle coalescing, and prompt
determinism.
- Local execution is intentionally limited to formatters and static diff
checks. GitHub Actions will run tests, type checks, builds, and security
checks.
- After ordinary CI is green, scoped paid cells will validate one ACPX
launch, one OpenCode launch, native Codex Plan projection, and legacy
Claude structured resume before a complete matrix rerun.
- Prior failing matrix:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33682434315
## Risks
- Bundling changes the bytes covered by provider launch hashes.
Provider-pack generation already hashes the final built files.
- ACPX still loads qualified provider packages dynamically. The
controller supplies a normalized package root, while existing version,
digest, path, and descriptor checks remain active.
- Durable `failed` is terminal. Replays return the same redacted result
and do not execute the provider effect twice.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex based on GPT-5 with agentic reasoning, repository
inspection, code editing, Git, parallel subagents, and GitHub Actions
coordination. The exact deployed snapshot and context-window size are
not exposed to this task.
## 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 linked related public work or described the bug in
this PR
- [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
ticket id
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass (intentionally deferred to
GitHub Actions)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] No documentation change is required for this runtime repair
- [x] I have considered and documented the 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
Connect starts the sign-in; the card that appears is the sign-in rather
than an offer of one; success advances to Review rather than reporting
itself. The two logins end in different places and the button says which:
Claude submits a code back here, so it spins on "Connecting"; OpenAI
finishes in another tab, so it stays a still, disabled Next until the
poll lands.
AdapterLoginPanel grows autoStart / onCancel / onConnected / chrome
rather than a second implementation — the session start, both polls, the
server deadline, the one-shot completion read and the unmount release are
the parts onboarding needs unchanged. Every prop is off by default, so
the agent form and the new-agent page render what they did before.
Claude's code auto-submits on the paste, not on every change:
isValidBrowserCode accepts any printable ASCII from one character up, so
a value-driven submit fired on the first keystroke of anyone who typed.
Also orders the OpenAI card and the settings displayed-code panel
code-above-link, with the instruction worded to match, and releases the
displayed-code session on unmount so an abandoned login stops holding the
one-per-owner reservation.
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip validates every change through an immutable reusable PR
workflow.
> - That caller still pinned a revision that ran pnpm setup before Node
setup.
> - The implementation fix in #12808 is therefore present on master but
inactive for ordinary PR CI.
> - Advancing the immutable caller pin activates the already tested
Node-first workflow.
> - A focused contract prevents the caller from silently returning to
the old revision.
> - The benefit is a faster PR feedback loop without changing product
code or secret boundaries.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12808
## What Changed
- Pin ordinary PR CI to trusted workflow revision
`a0a78ee60946a5f79f85b2bd0584fc766fae43bb`.
- Assert that the reusable workflow call is canonical, unique, and
SHA-pinned to that audited revision.
## Verification
- Focused workflow security test: 8/8.
- Prettier passed.
- Actionlint passed.
- `git diff --check` passed.
## Risks
Low risk. The change only advances an immutable reusable-workflow pin to
a revision whose full ordinary CI and security checks passed. Product
code and credentials are unchanged.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex GPT-5 with agentic reasoning and repository tool use.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used
- [x] I have linked the related public PR
- [x] I have not referenced internal issue links
- [x] My branch name describes the change
- [x] I have run focused tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have considered and documented risks
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the control plane for companies that use AI agents.
> - Apps give humans and agents controlled access to external services.
> - The existing app detail flow split permissions, tests, setup, and
activity across separate pages.
> - The split made access rules harder to understand and made reconnect
work hard to find.
> - New write actions also defaulted to Ask first, which did not match
the intended connection policy.
> - This pull request combines permission control and action testing,
removes the setup page, and moves connection activity into Audit.
> - The benefit is one clear place to configure, test, reconnect, and
review each app.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The installed app Permissions, Test, Setup, and Activity views.
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting. This change updates the React UI, shared app defaults,
server permission behavior, tests, smoke scripts, and connection
documentation.
**Current behavior**
App access and action testing use separate pages. The app detail view
also links to a setup page after installation. Connection activity uses
a separate tab. New write actions default to Ask first.
**Proposed behavior**
Permissions uses the connection access language from the initial flow.
It includes searchable Read and Write sections, a three-state permission
control, and a Test dialog for each action. Reconnect appears below a
Needs attention header on Permissions and Review. Old Setup and Test
links redirect to Permissions. Old Activity links redirect to the
filtered company Audit feed. New write actions default to Allowed.
**Reason and benefit**
A person can understand and test app access without moving between
several pages. Reconnect work stays visible where the person reviews the
connection. Audit events use one consistent feed and filter model. New
connections have the intended default policy.
**Breaking changes**
The Setup, Test, and app Activity tabs are removed. Existing deep links
redirect to their replacement pages. Existing saved action permissions
do not change. Only defaults for new write actions change.
**Additional context**
This builds on the managed app connection work in #12728. A search found
no duplicate open pull request or issue.
## What Changed
- Combined action testing with Permissions.
- Added searchable Read and Write action groups.
- Added Off, Ask first, and Allowed controls with tooltips.
- Added an action Test dialog with agent selection, arguments, and
formatted results.
- Removed the installed-app Setup and Activity tabs.
- Added reconnect guidance to Permissions and Review when a connection
needs attention.
- Routed connection activity into the company Audit feed and preserved
the Apps & tools filter in streamlined Audit.
- Moved connection removal to the Connectors-page management menu.
- Made new write actions default to Allowed across connection creation
paths.
- Updated regression tests, browser suites, smoke scripts, and
connection documentation.
## Verification
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/app-definitions.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/generic-mcp-connection.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts
ui/src/components/AppConnectionSidebar.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/apps/AppDetail.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/apps/AppNotConnected.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/apps/AppsConnect.test.tsx ui/src/pages/apps/Browse.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/apps/Connections.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/apps/composio-services.test.ts
ui/src/pages/audit/AuditFeed.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/tools/PasteConfigTab.test.tsx` (517 tests passed)
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/pages/apps/app-detail/TestPanel.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/audit/AuditHub.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/audit/AuditFeed.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/apps/AppDetail.test.tsx ui/src/pages/apps/Browse.test.tsx`
(96 tests passed)
- Targeted Playwright verification for connection removal, rename on
Permissions, inline action testing, and Smoke Lab Audit evidence (5
flows passed)
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- `pnpm test:run` completed with 5,755 passing tests and 20 unrelated
macOS harness failures. The failures use `/tmp` versus `/private/tmp`,
invalid ports above 65535, and workspace fixtures outside this change.
## Risks
- Low migration risk. This change has no database migration.
- Old app-detail URLs depend on redirect compatibility.
- New connections grant write actions by default. Finalization remains
configure-authorized and audited, Ask first and Off remain available per
action, and existing connections keep their saved policy.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected - check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, exact model ID `gpt-5`. The client does not expose the
context-window size. The model used reasoning, repository tools, code
execution, and browser 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
The trusted workflows currently invoke `pnpm/action-setup@v6` before
installing the repository Node version. On hosts whose ambient Node is
older than 22.13, the action downloads standalone `@pnpm/exe`, which has
repeatedly taken several minutes. Supplying Node 24 first lets the same
pinned pnpm action use its normal Node-backed path.
## What Changed
- install Node 24 before every trusted `pnpm/action-setup` invocation
- preserve the existing pnpm-store cache setup, pinned actions,
telemetry suppression, conditions, and secret boundaries
- enforce ordering, modern Node, condition parity, and cache counts in
the workflow security contract
## Verification
- workflow security: 7/7
- Prettier
- actionlint (excluding one pre-existing SC2129 in an untouched Daytona
shell block)
- `git diff --check`
## Risks
Low. Product code, providers, paid-runner selection, credentials, and
pnpm version are unchanged. Jobs that restore pnpm cache run
`setup-node` a second time after pnpm becomes available; the first setup
is deliberately cache-free.
## Model Used
Codex (GPT-5)
## Thinking Path
Trusted workflow-dispatch runs execute an authorized target SHA, but
GitHub context still describes the default-branch workflow revision.
Retained paid results and artifact names were therefore labeling
target-branch executions as master. The workflow must explicitly pass
its authorized target coordinates to target code and trusted reporting.
## What Changed
- emit the canonical authorized target ref alongside the immutable
target SHA
- pass those coordinates to paid cells and the trusted report
- name shared build/provider artifacts with the target SHA rather than
workflow SHA
- add workflow-security coverage for all trusted provenance wiring
## Verification
- focused workflow-security tests: 6/6 passed
- Prettier and git diff checks passed
- run 33823252706 independently proved the pre-fix defect: functionally
green target cells were retained as master SHA 0ad180b85 instead of
feature SHA 33c7646d3
## Risks
The execution checkout and secret boundary were already pinned
correctly; this changes retained attribution and artifact labels only.
Target-side report code on PR #12769 consumes these trusted environment
values and overwrites untrusted cell metadata.
## Model Used
Codex (GPT-5)
## Thinking Path
Every trusted PR and paid-workflow job invokes the pinned pnpm setup
action. Its internal npm install is currently waiting four to seven
minutes on npm audit telemetry before any Paperclip or provider code
runs. Audit, funding, and update notifications are not integrity
controls for this action; its committed lockfile still verifies
installed package bytes.
## What Changed
- disable npm audit, funding, and update-notifier telemetry narrowly on
all seven pinned setup steps in each of the trusted PR and full-stack
workflows
- add a workflow security contract proving every setup invocation
remains covered and the overrides do not leak elsewhere
## Verification
- focused workflow security tests: 6/6 passed
- Prettier and git diff checks passed
- observed unhealthy setup: 4-7+ minutes; historical healthy setup:
about four seconds
## Risks
This skips npm vulnerability-report telemetry for the setup action
bootstrap only. Repository dependency checks, lockfile integrity,
provider-secret authorization, and target-lock verification remain
unchanged.
## Model Used
Codex (GPT-5)
## Thinking Path
The reused Daytona image path already verifies the signed immutable
digest. It then downloads every filesystem layer only to read OCI config
fields. Buildx can retrieve the same config from that immutable digest
without pulling the layers. The assertions can therefore stay intact
while removing the expensive transfer.
## What Changed
- inspect the signed immutable Daytona image config through Buildx after
GHCR logout
- preserve digest, source revision, content ID, platform, user, and
provider-pack assertions
- extend the workflow contract test for the metadata-only path
## Verification
- Daytona image and workflow security tests: 10 passed
- Prettier and git diff checks passed
- observed full pull/prune cost: about 4m55s; metadata inspection: about
one second
## Risks
The current image has one runnable linux/amd64 platform plus its
attestation. A future genuinely multi-platform image would need explicit
linux/amd64 selection.
## Model Used
Codex (GPT-5)
<!-- Write all pull request text in Simplified Technical English
(ASD-STE100): short sentences, one instruction per sentence, simple
approved vocabulary, and the active voice. -->
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Operators use the main navigation, contextual navigation, and task
chat throughout the product.
> - The recent core UI refactor left uneven spacing and inconsistent
navigation styles.
> - The Apps label also did not match the Connectors product language.
> - The account area did not provide a clear direct path for feedback.
> - This pull request aligns these related core UI surfaces and
preserves their existing behavior.
> - The benefit is a more consistent interface with clearer navigation
and balanced task-chat layout.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
This improves the core sidebar, Settings navigation, Connectors catalog,
task-chat layout, and account controls.
**Subsystem affected**
`ui/` — React and Vite board UI.
**Current behavior**
The task chat had uneven edge treatment. Settings used a separate
contextual-navigation style. Apps used inconsistent product labels. The
account footer did not expose a direct feedback control.
**Proposed behavior**
The task chat keeps balanced content padding while its scrollbar sits at
the properties boundary. Settings replaces the primary sidebar with a
matching navigation surface and a Back to app link. Apps uses Connectors
and Browse labels. The account footer provides a dedicated feedback icon
with a tooltip.
**Reason and benefit**
These changes make related navigation and layout patterns predictable.
They reduce duplicate labels and improve access to feedback.
**Breaking changes**
None. Routes, APIs, and stored data do not change.
## What Changed
- Balanced the task-chat content gutter and moved its scrollbar to the
properties-panel boundary.
- Reworked Settings navigation to replace the main sidebar and use the
shared primary-sidebar style.
- Added a Back to app navigation item to Settings.
- Renamed Apps to Connectors in the main navigation and added the
`Unplug` icon.
- Renamed the Connectors contextual item to Browse.
- Added the Connectors top-level header and aligned the search field
with the connector cards.
- Added account-footer hover states and a direct feedback flag with a
Share feedback tooltip.
- Removed the duplicate Feedback item from the account popover.
- Added regression coverage for each changed UI surface.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/components/AppsSidebar.test.tsx
src/components/CompanySettingsSidebar.test.tsx
src/components/Layout.test.tsx src/components/Sidebar.test.tsx
src/components/SidebarAccountMenu.test.tsx
src/components/task-chat/TaskMessageScroller.test.tsx
src/pages/apps/Browse.test.tsx` — 90 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build` — passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — passed.
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` — passed.
- `env PAPERCLIP_PLAYWRIGHT_CHANNEL=chrome PAPERCLIP_E2E_PORT=3201 pnpm
exec playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts
tests/e2e/apps-dark-mode-shots.spec.ts
tests/e2e/sidebar-takeover.spec.ts` — 10 tests passed.
- The full workspace typecheck and build reached the Rust runner and
stopped because `cargo` is not installed on this machine.
- The full test suite exposed unrelated server and workspace-runtime
failures and was stopped after the affected suites completed. No changed
UI test failed.
- Manually verified the changed Settings, Connectors, task-chat, and
account-menu surfaces in the running app.
## Risks
- Low risk. The change affects layout and navigation presentation only.
- The Settings sidebar now replaces the main sidebar by design. Users
must use Back to app to return to the application navigation.
- The task scrollbar offset depends on the existing responsive page
gutters. Regression tests cover both narrow and desktop spacing.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, `gpt-5.6-sol`, extended reasoning with tool use and code
execution. The host does not expose the context-window size.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Scott Tong <scott@scottsmbpm5max.lan>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their provider runtimes.
> - The paid runner workflow installs target dependencies with lifecycle
scripts disabled.
> - The bundled Daytona plugin depends on an audited repo-local plugin
SDK link.
> - The lifecycle-safe install path did not create that link.
> - This pull request restores only the trusted Daytona preparation step
before provider secrets are exposed.
> - The benefit is a working Daytona canary without enabling dependency
lifecycle scripts.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
The Daytona paid canary stopped before lease or provider startup. The
trusted paid job disabled root lifecycle scripts, so the repo-local
plugin SDK link was absent. The plugin install returned a missing
runtime dependency error for @paperclipai/plugin-sdk.
**Expected behavior**
The trusted workflow must prepare the bundled Daytona plugin without
running untrusted dependency lifecycle scripts. The paid cell must start
only after its runtime dependencies and entrypoints pass validation.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Dispatch the runner full-stack paid workflow for
core-compatibility.runner-acpx-claude.daytona.message-marker.
2. Let the trusted job install root dependencies with lifecycle scripts
disabled.
3. Observe the Daytona plugin installation fail before a lease or
provider process starts.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Feature head 781ac7e08c. The failed canary
is Actions run 33803959325.
**Deployment mode**
GitHub Actions paid runner validation.
**Agent adapter(s) involved**
ACPX Claude through the bundled Daytona plugin.
**Additional context**
This is a small trusted-workflow prerequisite for public PR #12769. Old
green run 33118525827 created the SDK link through root postinstall.
This change keeps lifecycle scripts disabled and restores only the
audited prerequisite.
## What Changed
- Install standalone Daytona dependencies with lifecycle scripts
disabled.
- Run the audited repo-local plugin SDK linker before provider secrets
are exposed.
- Build the bundled Daytona plugin and verify its runtime dependency
plus both entrypoints.
- Add a security regression for ordering, scope, and secret isolation.
## Verification
- Five focused workflow-security tests passed.
- Seven focused linker tests passed.
- The exact Daytona preparation command completed locally in nine
seconds.
- Prettier and diff whitespace checks passed.
## Risks
Risk is low and limited to Daytona paid cells. The setup still disables
dependency lifecycle scripts. The trusted step runs before provider
credentials enter the job. Any missing or mismatched path fails closed
before provider startup.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5 Codex with repository tools 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 described the issue in this PR with the bug template labels
- [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change
- [x] Focused local tests pass
- [x] I added tests for the change
- [x] I updated the relevant trusted-workflow security regression
- [x] I documented the risks above
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their provider runtimes.
> - Paid runner validation installs target dependencies with lifecycle
scripts disabled.
> - OpenCode leaves a sentinel executable until its package lifecycle
script runs.
> - Running arbitrary lifecycle code would weaken the paid-secret
boundary.
> - This pull request materializes one exact pinned binary before
secrets are exposed.
> - The benefit is working OpenCode validation without trusting
dependency install scripts.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
Every local OpenCode paid cell stopped before provider startup because
`pnpm install --ignore-scripts` correctly retained
`opencode-ai/bin/opencode.exe` as a sentinel.
**Expected behavior**
The trusted workflow must make the exact lockfile-pinned OpenCode
executable available without running package lifecycle scripts.
**Steps to reproduce**
Run a local legacy or native OpenCode paid cell from the trusted
workflow after the target dependency install. The provider health check
reports that the OpenCode postinstall script was not run.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Default branch commit `865b4854fb44d3689f1c0ff17e3e715d52aaea73`.
## What Changed
- Materialize only `opencode-linux-x64-baseline@1.18.17` into the
matching `opencode-ai@1.18.17` package.
- Verify package identity, version, regular-file type, SHA-256 equality,
executable permissions, and runtime `--version`.
- Invoke the helper for local OpenCode and breadth cells and for remote
provider-pack assembly.
- Retain `pnpm install --ignore-scripts`.
- Add helper and trusted-workflow security regressions.
## Verification
- Helper syntax checks passed.
- Helper unit tests passed: 2/2.
- Workflow-security tests passed: 5/5.
- Prettier, actionlint, and diff whitespace checks passed.
## Risks
Risk is low and contained to paid runner setup. The helper supports only
Linux x64, fails closed on package or version drift, and runs before
provider credentials enter the job.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5 Codex with repository tools 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.
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this does not duplicate
planned core work.
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and found
none.
- [x] I have described the issue in this PR with the bug template
labels.
- [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local issues.
- [x] My branch name describes the change.
- [x] Focused local tests pass.
- [x] I added tests for the change.
- [x] I updated the runner E2E security documentation.
- [x] I documented the risks above.
## Thinking Path
> - Paid cells repeated the same TypeScript and Rust builds even when
one campaign selected dozens of cells.
> - The trusted workflow can compile once without provider credentials
and distribute run-scoped, digest-verified artifacts.
> - The paid cell can then disable install lifecycle scripts, verify
each artifact before extraction, and expose provider credentials only to
the final test step.
> - Local JS-backed providers also need the setup-node interpreter
permission-qualified before Rust verifies the launch artifact.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Run 33786122875 proved target-lock setup and catalog selection, then
failed before provider creation because trusted master did not yet
qualify the setup-node interpreter. The same workflow also rebuilt
TypeScript and Rust inside every matrix cell.
## What Changed
- Build runner TypeScript and native binaries once per campaign in a
credential-free job.
- Build the remote provider pack once only when selected Daytona cells
require it.
- Upload run-scoped bundles with SHA-256 manifests and verify before
extraction in each paid cell.
- Remove repeated TypeScript, provider-pack, and Rust builds from paid
cells.
- Qualify the local provider Node interpreter before verified launch.
- Propagate the resolved target lockfile through all five target-code
jobs.
- Keep local-only selection off Daytona and exclude Xiaomi from the
67-cell catalog.
## Risks
A shared build artifact could fan out a bad payload to many cells. The
producing jobs receive no provider credentials, use the exact authorized
target SHA and resolved lockfile, and publish run-scoped artifacts.
Every consuming job verifies SHA-256 before extraction. Paid dependency
setup keeps lifecycle scripts disabled and provider credentials remain
scoped to the final test step.
## Verification
- Focused runner workflow-security, catalog, and Daytona-image tests:
25/25 passed.
- Prettier passed.
- Actionlint passed with only the two pre-existing SC2129 style notices
ignored.
- Git diff check passed.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5.
## Checklist
- [x] Build jobs are credential-free.
- [x] Paid installs disable lifecycle scripts.
- [x] Artifacts are run-scoped and digest-verified before extraction.
- [x] Trusted report and history jobs remain isolated from target
artifacts.
- [x] No Daytona or Xiaomi paid run was started for this change.
## Thinking Path
> - The trusted target-branch runner workflow checks out PR code before
paid tests.
> - PR policy intentionally forbids manual lockfile commits.
> - Some runner changes legitimately alter pnpm patch hashes.
> - Frozen installs therefore fail before test selection.
> - Resolve one script-disabled lockfile from the authorized immutable
target SHA and distribute it by exact artifact ID and digest.
> - Keep provider credentials and trusted reporting outside this
resolution job.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Target-branch paid runner campaigns currently fail frozen install when a
PR changes pnpm patch content, even though ordinary PR CI regenerates
the lockfile.
## What Changed
- Added one credential-free target-lock job that resolves the authorized
immutable target SHA with lifecycle scripts disabled.
- Uploaded the resolved lockfile with its SHA-256 and restored it by
exact artifact ID before every target-code frozen install.
- Left trusted reporting and history jobs on the workflow SHA.
- Changed the disabled-AWS fallback from unavailable ubuntu-latest-m to
ubuntu-latest.
## Risks
The workflow evaluates pnpm lockfile resolution from authorized target
code. That job receives no provider credentials, disables lifecycle
scripts, rejects unrelated workspace mutations, and exposes only a
digest-verified lockfile artifact. Paid-secret jobs consume only that
lockfile after exact artifact-ID and SHA-256 validation.
## Verification
- Runner workflow-security focused tests pass.
- actionlint passes.
- Prettier and git diff checks pass.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5.
## Checklist
- [x] Change is narrowly scoped to paid runner orchestration.
- [x] Target lock resolution has no provider credentials and disables
lifecycle scripts.
- [x] Downloaded artifacts are selected by exact artifact ID and
verified by SHA-256.
- [x] Trusted reporting and history jobs remain on the workflow SHA.
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip uses paid runner tests to qualify agent execution.
> - The runner workflow controls provider secrets and AWS runner access.
> - The trusted workflow must stay on the protected default branch.
> - The code under test often exists on a branch before merge.
> - CODEOWNERS need a safe way to select that branch.
> - This pull request separates workflow authority from the code under
test.
> - The benefit is pre-merge AWS testing without target-controlled
workflow code.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The manual Runner Full-Stack E2E workflow can test only the default
branch.
**Subsystem affected**
GitHub Actions and the paid runner E2E security boundary.
**Current behavior**
A CODEOWNER must merge runner changes before the trusted AWS workflow
can test them.
Selecting another branch as the workflow ref is rejected.
**Proposed behavior**
A CODEOWNER starts the workflow from `master` and supplies a
same-repository branch in `target_branch`.
The authorization job resolves the branch to one commit SHA.
Catalog, image, and paid test jobs check out that SHA after
authorization.
Report sanitization and AWS publication use the trusted workflow SHA.
**Reason and benefit**
This permits paid pre-merge qualification on AWS.
It keeps the workflow definition, report sanitizer, history publisher,
environment deployment, and runner-group permission on `master`.
**Breaking changes**
None.
The new input is optional.
An omitted input still tests the default branch.
## What Changed
- Add the optional `target_branch` workflow input.
- Resolve only a branch in `paperclipai/paperclip` to an immutable SHA.
- Pin catalog, image, paid test, and Daytona provenance to the target
SHA.
- Pin report sanitization and AWS history publication to the trusted
workflow SHA.
- Disable persisted checkout credentials in every job.
- Key cancellation by the selected target branch.
- Add policy regression coverage and operator documentation.
## Verification
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit` passes with 65 tests.
- `actionlint -ignore SC2129
.github/workflows/runner-full-stack-e2e.yml` passes.
- Prettier checks pass for all changed files.
- `git diff --check` passes.
## Risks
A CODEOWNER can authorize selected branch code to receive a cell-scoped
provider credential.
This is the intended trust decision.
The workflow rejects fork refs and target-controlled workflow
definitions.
The trusted workflow SHA owns report sanitization and AWS history
publication.
> 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.
The exact serving snapshot and context-window size are not exposed.
The model used tool-enabled reasoning 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
- [ ] 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 manages AI agents that perform work.
> - The paid runner matrix verifies complete runner behavior with real
providers.
> - Each matrix job currently repeats work on GitHub-hosted runners.
> - Paperclip has an ephemeral AWS runner fleet for trusted workflows.
> - The paid workflow needs a reviewed and fail-closed route to that
fleet.
> - This pull request adds that route and keeps the existing hosted
runner as the disabled-state fallback.
> - The benefit is faster paid campaigns with the same actor,
environment, and secret boundaries.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
The Runner Full-Stack E2E workflow always uses `ubuntu-latest-m`. It
limits the matrix to 57 parallel jobs. The repository AWS fleet can run
100 ephemeral jobs, but the paid workflow cannot select it.
**Expected behavior**
An explicit repository flag must select the reviewed AWS fleet label. A
missing or invalid flag must keep the existing hosted runner. The
workflow must authorize the stable actor identity before it routes any
paid job.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Dispatch the Runner Full-Stack E2E workflow from `master`.
2. Inspect a paid matrix job.
3. Observe that the job requests `ubuntu-latest-m` even when the AWS
fleet should be used.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`da0947d3582ac7779d6bf11851c9938eca6c5c8c`
**Deployment mode**
GitHub Actions paid runner campaign.
## What Changed
- Add a fail-closed `RUNNER_E2E_AWS_ENABLED` switch.
- Select only the reviewed AWS fleet label or the existing hosted label.
- Permit up to 100 parallel jobs in AWS mode.
- Keep the hosted-runner limit at 57.
- Reauthorize paid execution before checkout and provider access.
- Stop paid checkouts from storing GitHub credentials.
- Cancel superseded validation-ref campaigns while preserving `master`
audit runs.
- Add workflow policy checks and operator documentation.
## Verification
- `git diff --check`
- `actionlint -ignore SC2129
.github/workflows/runner-full-stack-e2e.yml`
- The organization runner group permits this workflow only from
`refs/heads/master`.
- The repository AWS switch remains disabled until this pull request is
merged and a one-cell probe succeeds.
## Risks
- A wrong fleet policy can leave jobs queued. The disabled state keeps
the existing hosted runner.
- The AWS fleet uses paid compute. The workflow validates a configured
maximum of 100 jobs.
- The runner group, actor allowlist, and paid environment remain
separate enforcement layers.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex based on GPT-5 with agentic reasoning, repository
inspection, code editing, Git, GitHub API coordination, and static
workflow analysis. The exact deployed model identifier and
context-window size are not exposed to this task.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Onboarding creates an organization in the browser.
> - The browser keeps onboarding drafts for the same origin.
> - A new data directory does not clear that browser data.
> - The organization create request refreshes the company list.
> - The old gate unmounted the live wizard during that refresh.
> - This pull request keeps the wizard mounted after its first draft
check.
> - The customer can continue to the agent step after the organization
is created.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No matching public issue was found. Related earlier fix: Refs #12667.
**What happened?**
A local canary install could create an organization through the API and
then return the browser to an empty organization-name screen.
**Expected behavior**
The wizard must continue to the agent step after it creates the
organization.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Keep a Paperclip onboarding draft in the browser.
2. Run npx paperclipai@canary onboard with a new data directory.
3. Open /onboarding.
4. Enter an organization name and select Continue.
**Paperclip version or commit**
2026.902.0-canary.7. The fix is based on current master.
**Deployment mode**
Local trusted mode through the Paperclip CLI.
**Install method**
npx package install.
**Agent adapter(s) involved**
Not adapter-specific.
**Database mode**
Embedded PostgreSQL.
## What Changed
- Keep the onboarding wizard mounted after its first successful draft
ownership check.
- Keep a failed ownership check retryable, so a later verified fetch
restores the saved draft.
- Add component, source E2E, and published-canary coverage for the
retained-draft refetch case.
## Verification
- Confirmed that the new canary scenario fails against
2026.902.0-canary.7 before this fix.
- pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/OnboardingWizard.test.tsx
- PAPERCLIP_E2E_PORT=3245 pnpm exec playwright test --config
tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts tests/e2e/onboarding.spec.ts
--reporter=line
- pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck
- pnpm check:token-gates
## Risks
Low risk. The initial ownership check still waits for a fresh company
list. A later successful retry can restore a retained draft. Later
background refetches preserve live wizard state.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. Reasoning, tool use, code editing, terminal
execution, and browser testing were used. The execution environment does
not expose a context-window size.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used with version and capability
details
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the bug issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the control plane for agents that perform work.
> - Paperclip Runner connects durable provider sessions to individual
task runs through PRP.
> - Provider continuity and per-run authority are different lifetimes.
> - The existing implementation mixed those lifetimes and lost event
metadata between provider frames, runnerd, persistence, API
sanitization, and the task thread.
> - That caused failed continuation, missing progress and Plans,
duplicate replies, hidden failures, and unsafe recovery.
> - This repair gives every heartbeat fresh authority, preserves
qualified provider-session continuity, and restores one lossless
presentation path without changing direct adapters.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
A second native heartbeat could reuse tickets, leases, command receipts,
sequence state, and run identity from the first heartbeat. Provider
phase and item identity could be lost before the UI read them. Redaction
could corrupt protocol discriminators while still missing malformed
credential tails. The task thread could fold progress into the final
response, hide failures, or show more than one final answer. Native
Codex also exposed approval modes that do not yet have a durable
approval bridge.
**Expected behavior**
Each heartbeat uses a new PRP authority epoch. Codex and OpenCode
preserve exact qualified provider sessions; ACPX emits an explicit
continuity event when its qualified process-replacement policy is used.
Every accepted provider event is presented, classified as internal, or
surfaced as unsupported. The task page shows chronological progress,
reasoning summaries, activity, Plans, interactions, terminal failures,
and exactly one final reply. Direct adapters retain their existing path.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Enable the unified experimental Paperclip Runner setting.
2. Create a local native Codex, OpenCode, ACPX Claude, or ACPX Codex
agent.
3. Run response, Plan, structured-question/resume, restart,
cancellation, and failure scenarios.
4. Reload the task while active, waiting, failed, and settled.
5. On the old implementation, observe stale run authority, missing
classifications, incomplete output, or duplicated/folded replies.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The repair is based directly on `master` at
`87d05e194b643810d16d20612115acd01d735d43`.
**Deployment mode**
Local development with the embedded database.
Related work: Refs #12616, #12646, #12666, #12685, and #12700.
## What Changed
- Rotates PRP control-plane, outbox, ticket, lease, command, receipt,
and sequence authority for each heartbeat while carrying forward only a
validated provider-session identity.
- Reads `control-plane-state.json`, validates both durable schemas and
lifecycle values, resumes coherent current runs, archives qualified
settled authority, and quarantines malformed or mismatched scoped state
without moving ambiguous live legacy state.
- Preserves Codex provider phase and stable item identities so
commentary remains progress and only `final_answer` becomes final.
- Adds raw OpenCode HTTP/SSE boundary coverage and canonical reasoning
lifecycle mapping.
- Makes ACPX normalization lossless for visible reasoning, tool
lifecycle metadata, stable bounded identities, Plan revisions,
structured requests, failures, and qualified process replacement. Only
the compatible terminal assistant message is promoted as final.
- Applies schema-aware redaction before generic JWT-shaped detection and
scans every diagnostic string leaf. Malformed raw/escaped quoted
credential tails are redacted in both server and durable Rust state.
- Restores snapshot-style chronological task presentation, expandable
tool activity, inline Plan cards, visible waiting/resume/cancel/failure
states, and exactly one final answer.
- Makes `never` the only qualified native Codex permission mode and
rejects unsupported persisted native modes with remediation. OpenCode
and ACPX policies remain intact.
- Keeps the unified experimental Runner setting as the only enablement
flag. Onboarding and direct Codex, Claude, and OpenCode stay on their
legacy execution/finalization paths.
- Adds cross-language goldens, authority/recovery/fault coverage, exact
response/count assertions, and native plus legacy acceptance scenarios.
## Verification
- Pull-request GitHub Actions run Rust formatting/tests, TypeScript
checks, server/UI tests, builds, protocol drift checks, browser E2E, and
security scans.
- A separate workflow-only validation ref is pinned directly on this PR
head and runs the 35-cell paid local matrix: three core scenarios plus
structured-question resume and restart/resume for native Codex, native
OpenCode, ACPX Claude, ACPX Codex, and direct Codex/Claude/OpenCode.
Run: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33682434315
- Acceptance requires exact single visible replies, monotonic sequences,
matching envelope discriminators, one semantic terminal, one run
terminal, no unresolved interaction, no duplicate mutation, no secret
leakage, provider continuity, and zero native rows for direct adapters.
- Per maintainer direction, tests are running in GitHub Actions rather
than on the slower local host. Only formatters and static diff checks
were run locally.
## Risks
- Recovery from old or partial filesystem state is sensitive. The repair
fails closed, preserves active or unverifiable authority, and
quarantines only state whose scoped ownership is safe to move.
- Provider event formats can change. Closed validators and boundary
goldens turn new or malformed events into visible diagnostics instead of
silent drops.
- Shared task presentation could affect direct adapters. Runtime-fact
gating plus the direct-adapter matrix protect the existing path.
- Managed and remote providers are not qualified here. Shared code
continues to compile and fail safely, but live qualification is
deferred.
> 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 deployed snapshot and
context-window size are not exposed to this task. It used agentic
reasoning, repository inspection, code editing, Git, parallel subagents,
and GitHub Actions.
## 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
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass (intentionally deferred to
GitHub Actions)
- [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 risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] The paid local-provider matrix is 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
Takes the four tenant onboarding steps to the design, and makes the model
choice explicit.
**Nothing is preselected on the connect step.** It arrived with a source
already chosen, which made the row read as a confirmation rather than a
question and let a customer pass the step having touched none of it. The
step now opens unanswered and cannot advance until a source is selected in
the visible row.
Two defects fell out of that, both found by Greptile in review:
- A saved draft can name an adapter the row does not show — one the registry
dropped, or one in the advanced list. The gate asked `sourcePicked`, which
only means "a draft named something", so Next stayed live on a step that
had visibly asked nothing and would hire against the hidden name. It now
asks `sourceSelected`, read off the visible row, and the snap that replaces
an unofferable adapter clears the pick rather than presenting its
replacement as chosen.
- Cmd+Enter bypassed that gate entirely, because the condition was written
out twice and drifted. Both paths now ask one predicate.
Also: selection is a fill rather than a border; the input canvas opens only
for a chosen source; the close control is gone from every step (nothing
downstream of the connect step works until a model is connected); the arc
draws to the design's 424px column with a filled 44px name field; the CTA
reads "Next" through the arc and "Get started" at the end; the login spinner
reads "Preparing..."; the OAuth panels number their fields and show the URL
above the code.
Storybook: the arc stories waited for a button named "Connect" and had been
silently rendering the wrong step since the CTA was renamed. They now wait on
the destination heading. Three e2e specs had the same fault and now select a
source before advancing.
One test was removed rather than replaced — `hydrates again when the same
company comes back through onboarding` drove the close control, and three
substitutes each passed against a wizard with the behaviour deleted. The
reason is recorded where it stood.
Known and not fixed here: SidebarCompanyMenu opens the wizard at step 1 for
"create a new organization", and with no exit an existing user who changes
their mind is trapped.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The Apps subsystem gives humans and agents governed access to
external tools.
> - The current connection flow hides Apps behind an experimental gate
and repeats setup text.
> - Google sharing choices and generic MCP permissions do not use one
consistent opening model.
> - Self-hosted installs also need a safe default origin for managed
OAuth without a manual config file.
> - This pull request makes Apps available, simplifies connection setup,
and applies one governed permissions model.
> - The benefit is a shorter connection flow that works on a clean
self-hosted install.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
This improves the Apps connection setup flow, managed Google connection
flow, generic MCP connection flow, navigation, and runtime origin
discovery.
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting. This changes `ui/`, `server/`, `packages/shared/`,
connector documentation, and browser tests.
**Current behavior**
Apps require an experimental switch. Setup pages repeat titles and
explanatory copy. Connection names require manual input. Google
credential sharing does not always offer both personal and organization
access. Generic MCP providers do not start with the same permission
choices. Managed OAuth needs a public URL setting even when the request
already has a safe HTTPS origin.
**Proposed behavior**
Apps are available by default. Setup asks only for required permissions
and sharing choices. Paperclip creates conflict-free connection names.
Google apps and generic MCP providers use the same human and agent
access model. Managed OAuth derives a validated same-origin HTTPS URL
when no explicit public URL is set.
**Reason and benefit**
A clean self-hosted install can connect a managed Google app without
hidden setup. Humans can share a service account with their
organization. The shorter flow reduces duplicated choices and setup
errors.
**Breaking changes**
The Apps experimental switch is removed. Existing connection APIs remain
compatible. New connections can receive a numeric suffix when a name
already exists.
No duplicate or related public issue was found.
## What Changed
- Removed the Apps experimental gate and the breadcrumb that leaves the
Apps section.
- Simplified all connection setup pages and moved optional provider
requirements into one small link.
- Added consistent human and agent access choices for Google apps,
Zapier, and generic MCP connections.
- Added organization sharing to Google Workspace credentials while
keeping personal access available.
- Generated connection names automatically and resolved name conflicts
with numeric suffixes.
- Derived a validated public HTTPS origin from the request for
config-free managed OAuth.
- Updated connector contracts, tests, browser coverage, and authoring
documentation.
## Verification
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/generic-mcp-connection.test.ts` (273 passed)
- Targeted UI/service regression suite (308 passed)
- Six targeted Playwright connection journeys on a fresh onboarding
instance (6 passed)
- Fresh-install browser proof through Tailscale HTTPS: enrolled with
Paperclip Cloud, connected managed Google Drive, and completed a real
read operation.
- [Exact-head CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33669760711):
all 23 matrix jobs passed, including build, typecheck, server,
serialized, canary, and all browser shards.
- Greptile 5/5 on `0ae2a859f269984ee950d0af231a5b09a06f3dfd`, with no
unresolved review threads.
## Risks
Apps are now visible to all operators. The removed experimental flag no
longer hides unfinished app definitions. Managed Google availability
still depends on the Cloud profile rollout and active instance
enrollment. Automatic conflict handling changes only the display name of
a newly conflicting connection.
> I checked [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md). MCP Tool Gateway and Apps are
shipped. Connected Apps is planned, and this change improves the
existing shipped connection flow.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, with reasoning, browser control, 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>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The runner subsystem executes agent work across local and managed
provider backends.
> - The lower pull requests restore the task runtime, provider backends,
and managed-provider control plane.
> - The restored system needs repeatable full-stack checks before it can
ship safely.
> - Paid live checks also need clear access, cost, and secret controls.
> - This pull request adds acceptance, live evaluation, chaos, and
release gates for the restored runner stack.
> - The benefit is measurable runner parity with safer release
decisions.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting. This change covers runner tests, release workflows,
server contracts, and evaluation tools.
**Problem or motivation**
The runner stack did not have one complete acceptance surface for native
Codex, ACPX, Claude Managed, and AWS AgentCore. Release checks could
miss provider drift, task-view regressions, cost-policy errors, and
destructive cleanup errors.
**Proposed solution**
Add a 57-cell full-stack catalog, a Daytona image, and opt-in paid
workflows. Add live evaluation, chaos, cost-limit, redaction, and
release contract checks. Add AWS AgentCore infrastructure and guarded
provisioning tools. Keep the native runner experimental flag off by
default.
**Alternatives considered**
We considered manual smoke tests only. They do not give repeatable
evidence and they do not protect release branches. We also considered
one large pull request. The stacked pull requests keep each review below
the Greptile file limit.
**Roadmap alignment**
This work supports the shipped Cloud / Sandbox agents milestone and the
shipped Agent evals & feedback milestone in `ROADMAP.md`.
Related stack:
- #12699 adds managed provider backends and lifecycle support.
- #12691 adds qualified OpenCode and ACPX provider backends.
- #12685 restores task runtime rendering and steering.
## What Changed
- Add the runner full-stack harness with 57 catalog cells and 60 unit
tests.
- Add a Daytona runner image with digest-pinned base images and
base-aware image-content checks.
- Add guarded live evaluation and chaos workflows with a fixed
40-execution matrix; live and full-stack paid schedules now run only on
Sundays or by manual dispatch.
- Add in-flight reported-usage cost stops, post-turn cost caps,
exact-threshold failure classification, secret redaction, retry
classification, and actor authorization.
- Reattach stream and hard-budget listeners before restart-recovery
continuations so restored paid sessions cannot bypass in-flight
interruption.
- Preserve OpenCode usage and cost across tool-loop messages and turns
while exposing an explicit current-run delta to durable accounting.
- Keep PNG/WebM evidence in access-controlled artifacts only, reject
SVG, and publish only pruned inert structured per-attempt evidence.
- Add AWS AgentCore infrastructure, provisioning checks, and smoke
tools; reject unsafe model identifiers, require exact stack ownership
markers, and make failed-stack replacement explicit.
- Add evaluation-session contracts and capability reports.
- Add release workflow checks for immutable action pins, frozen
dependency installs, exact weekly cron shape, paid-run guards,
provider-secret isolation, and chaos test paths.
- Reauthorize the original and triggering numeric actor IDs as the first
step of every provider-secret job, including partial reruns, before
checkout or provider access.
- Give each full-stack matrix cell only its matching provider
credential, expose Daytona only to Daytona cells, and disable shared
dependency caches anywhere paid credentials or OIDC write access are
present.
- Protect the legacy manual E2E workflow with the same default-branch,
allowlist, environment, and per-job authorization boundary.
- Rotate live-eval candidates by week and retain 120 days of compatible
history so the seven-week trend window remains viable.
- Restore the root runner-acceptance commands and reconcile reported
snapshots,
raw receipts, and terminal usage without double counting or losing late
usage.
- Mark ACPX token deltas exact only when every budget field is present,
keep
cumulative cost/request authority separate, reject non-USD cost
labeling,
and include thought tokens in output-token budgets.
- Keep `enableNativeRunner` off by default. The acceptance harness
enables it only in its isolated test instance.
## Verification
Passed locally:
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner typecheck`
- `pnpm test:runner-acceptance:typecheck`
- `pnpm test:runner-acceptance` (19 tests)
- focused OpenCode proxy, driver, runnerd transport, live-session, and
turn-stream tests (106 tests)
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner exec vitest run
src/live/clean-room-server.test.ts` (22 tests)
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit` (62 tests)
- `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner
test:runner-workflow-evals` (22 tests)
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- `node --test
packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/aws-agentcore-provisioning.test.mjs`
(6 tests)
- `git diff --check`
- `cargo test --manifest-path
packages/paperclip-runner/runner/Cargo.toml -p paperclip-runner-core
--lib --locked` (161 tests)
- focused ACPX provider-event tests (10 tests)
- The rebased PR changes 92 files. `pnpm-lock.yaml` is unchanged.
I did not run paid live provider jobs or provision AWS resources. Those
checks need credentials and can create cost.
## Risks
The paid workflows can create provider cost. They require an allowlisted
original and triggering actor, the protected `runner-e2e-paid`
environment, explicit opt-in variables, and cost limits. The four
provider credentials exist only in that master-only environment, which
requires allowlisted reviewer approval and disables administrator
bypass; repository and organization Actions scopes contain no copies.
Provider usage arrives after a billable request, so the live guard
cannot prevent one request from crossing a threshold. It interrupts
immediately on the first reported threshold hit and permits no
continuation.
Visual evidence can contain secrets rendered as pixels. PNG/WebM remain
only in access-controlled workflow artifacts; SVG and per-attempt XML
are excluded, and S3/Pages receive a pruned structured dashboard.
The AWS scripts can create cloud resources. They use explicit commands,
least-privilege roles, KMS encryption, saved nonsecret metadata, and
explicit teardown.
This pull request does not enable the experimental native runner for
existing instances.
> 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 with GPT-5. The model used extended reasoning, tool use,
code execution, and parallel subagents.
## 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
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - New customers meet it through onboarding, whose last three steps run
inside the tenant: create an agent, connect a model, review
> - The connect step is the one that decides whether the agent can run
at all, and it had drifted — three contributors changed it in parallel,
and its visual language no longer matched the rest of the flow
> - It also could not be looked at without a provisioned stack, so
defects in it were only found by walking a real signup, and the review
step behind it could not be reached at all when it failed
> - This pull request brings the visual work onto the sign-in behaviour
that already shipped, and adds Storybook coverage for all three steps
> - The benefit is that the step is easier to read, and that it can now
be inspected and driven before it ships rather than after
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The onboarding connect-a-model step. It presented the model choice as a
dropdown plus an "Advanced settings" disclosure, and put each credential
type in a different place, so the controls below moved whenever the
choice changed.
**Subsystem affected**
Tenant onboarding wizard (`ui/src/components/OnboardingWizard.tsx`) and
its Storybook coverage.
**Current behavior**
The step offered every registered adapter through a disclosure.
Credential entry appeared in a different shape per source. None of the
three agent-arc steps could be rendered outside a provisioned cloud
stack, so the sign-in panel and the review step were only reachable by
walking a real signup.
**Proposed behavior**
Two brand tiles for the recommended sources, a link that switches
between subscription and API-key credentials, and one canvas that holds
whichever input the current choice needs. Storybook stories mount the
real wizard against fixtures and walk it forward, so every step and its
states can be inspected locally.
**Reason and benefit**
The step reads as one decision rather than three scattered ones, and its
furniture stays still while the choice changes. The stories mean a
regression in it is visible before release instead of during a signup.
**Breaking changes**
No API or schema change. One behavioural narrowing, described under
Risks.
## What Changed
- Replaces the adapter dropdown and "Advanced settings" disclosure with
`ModelSourceTiles` — brand tiles for Claude Code and Codex.
- Adds `CredentialModeLink`, a text toggle between subscription sign-in
and API keys, replacing the disclosure.
- Adds `ConnectInputCanvas`: one surface that holds the sign-in panel or
the API-key field and resizes between them, so the Connect button below
does not move.
- Keeps the existing sign-in behaviour unchanged. `AgentConfigForm`
changes are presentation only — the provider name in the title, the CTA
wording, and `space-y` to `gap`. No change to the login mutations,
queries, or session handling.
- Restores the sleep marks on the dormant agent for the two steps before
the hire.
- Adds Storybook stories for all three agent-arc steps, with fixtures
for the environments, auth signal, both adapters' login flows, and the
hire.
- Copy: names the provider being signed in to ("Sign in to
Anthropic"/"Sign in to OpenAI"), and drops "Clippy" from the agent-name
helper text.
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run src/components storybook` in `ui/` — 139 tests over
the touched suites, 1986 across `src/components`.
- `pnpm typecheck` in `ui/` — clean.
- Storybook, `Onboarding/Agent arc`: walk each story. Step 1 has no Back
button, steps 2 and 3 do.
- The sign-in gate: on `Connect a model`, press Connect without signing
in. It holds on step 2 and reports "No working authentication was
found." On `Review`, which fixtures an authenticated signal, Connect
reaches the review step.
- Both providers' login flows: press Sign in on the Claude tile for the
authorization URL and browser-code field, and on the Codex tile for the
device URL and code.
- The Claude sign-in was also walked end to end on a staging tenant,
including the OAuth redirect and pasting the code back.
## Risks
- **Onboarding now offers two model sources instead of every registered
adapter.** `ModelSourceTiles` is fed the `recommended` set, which is
`claude_local` and `codex_local`; Gemini, Cursor, Grok, Kimi, OpenCode
and Paperclip Runner are no longer selectable *during onboarding*. This
is deliberate. The full list is unchanged in agent settings, which is
where an adapter can still be switched after the agent exists, and
adding a source back is one `recommended: true` in
`adapter-display-registry.ts`. Flagging it because it is the one
behavioural narrowing here and it is not visible from the diffstat.
- The API key entered on this step is held in component state and
deliberately never written to the onboarding draft, because that draft
is `localStorage`. A customer who leaves mid-step re-enters the key;
that is the intended trade.
- Storybook-only risk: the fixtures now answer the environment test from
the story's auth state. If a future change moves the hire's gate off the
`adapter_auth_missing` check code, the stories would keep passing while
the product regressed. The gate is asserted in the adapter packages' own
tests, not here.
- Motion changes are low risk and reversible: the input canvas animates
its contents only, and its container was deliberately left unanimated
after an animated wrapper clipped the sign-in panel.
## Model Used
Claude Opus 5 (`claude-opus-5`), via Claude Code with extended thinking,
tool use, and browser-driven verification of the Storybook stories.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The onboarding command starts the local server and opens the
first-run wizard.
> - Interactive onboarding stopped opening the browser by default.
> - Organization creation could also succeed in the API while the wizard
stayed on the name step.
> - The npm canary workflow did not prove that the published package
could complete this path.
> - This pull request repairs the startup and organization transitions
and adds an exact-version canary smoke gate.
> - The benefit is a quickstart that works for users and is tested after
each canary publish.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Related: #12557 covers a separate final-route onboarding handoff.
**What happened?**
Interactive `paperclipai onboard` runs did not open the onboarding page.
The organization API request could succeed while a same-company context
update caused the wizard to stay on the organization step. The canary
release lane did not test the exact published npm package through this
path.
**Expected behavior**
Interactive onboarding must open the browser once. A successful
organization request must advance to the first-agent step when the
surrounding context adopts the same organization. Each published canary
must install in a clean environment and reach the model connection step.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run `npx paperclipai@canary onboard --data-dir "$(mktemp -d
/tmp/paperclip-canary.XXXXXX)"` in an interactive terminal.
2. Enter an organization name while the company context refreshes from
the create response.
3. Observe that the browser does not open or that the wizard can remain
on the organization step after the API creates it.
4. Inspect the canary release lane and observe that no post-publish
onboarding test runs against the exact npm version.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The issue reproduced with `2026.901.0-canary.8` and the source state
before this pull request.
**Deployment mode**
Local trusted quickstart with embedded PostgreSQL. The install source
can be npm or a source checkout.
## What Changed
- Open the browser once for interactive foreground onboarding.
- Preserve explicit browser opt-outs and restore the prior environment
value after startup.
- Accept a same-company context update after organization creation and
reject a different-company takeover with an explicit error.
- Export the exact canary version from the publish job.
- Install and test that exact npm version in a clean Playwright smoke
job through the "Connect a model" step.
- Upload server logs, traces, screenshots, and the Playwright report
when the canary smoke fails.
- Document the interactive default and headless opt-outs.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run cli/src/__tests__/onboard.test.ts
ui/src/components/OnboardingWizard.step.test.tsx --reporter=dot` passes
with 37 tests.
- `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs`
passes with 9 tests.
- `pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts
tests/e2e/onboarding.spec.ts` passes with 2 tests.
- `PAPERCLIPAI_VERSION=2026.901.0-canary.8 pnpm run
test:canary-onboarding-smoke` passes against the published npm package.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passes.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passes.
- `pnpm build` passes.
- A fresh interactive source run opens the browser and reaches "Connect
a model" after organization and agent naming.
## Risks
- Low risk. Automatic browser opening only applies to interactive
foreground onboarding.
- `PAPERCLIP_NO_BROWSER=1` and `PAPERCLIP_OPEN_ON_LISTEN=false` keep
headless runs silent.
- A different organization context still blocks the pending create
transition.
- The canary package is immutable before the smoke runs. A smoke failure
leaves the package published but makes the release workflow red.
- This change does not modify REST APIs, database schemas, or shared
data types.
> 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 runtime does not expose the exact
deployment snapshot or context-window size. The model used reasoning,
browser automation, repository tools, shell commands, code editing, 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.
> - Paperclip supports direct adapters and an experimental native Runner
path.
> - These paths need one stable compatibility matrix.
> - The matrix must not launch providers or load credentials during
normal tests.
> - Result handling must reject incomplete output and sensitive values.
> - This pull request adds a credential-free acceptance foundation.
> - The benefit is a reviewable contract for later end-to-end executors.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
This improves verification for direct adapters and Paperclip Runner
providers.
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting test infrastructure for adapters, the server runtime, and
the task thread.
**Current behavior**
The repository has subsystem tests. It does not have one declarative
matrix for direct and native compatibility.
**Proposed behavior**
Add a pure acceptance catalog, result validator, redaction helpers, and
failure classification. Keep all execution authority outside this
change.
**Reason and benefit**
The matrix makes legacy isolation and native recovery requirements
explicit. The helpers let later executors report safe and complete
results.
**Breaking changes**
None. This change does not alter production runtime selection or start
any provider.
## What Changed
- Add a catalog for built-in direct adapters and qualified native
provider profiles.
- Add compatibility cases for runtime selection, task threads,
questions, and flag-change recovery.
- Add pure redaction and transient-failure classification helpers.
- Add fail-closed Markdown and JUnit report aggregation.
- Add isolated test and type-check commands.
- Document the credential-free boundary and deferred live execution
work.
## Verification
GitHub Actions must run:
- `pnpm test:runner-acceptance`
- `pnpm test:runner-acceptance:typecheck`
- The repository test, type-check, build, policy, and security gates.
No local test command was run. The repository owner requested
GitHub-only verification.
## Risks
Low production risk. The change adds test-only files and root scripts.
The catalog can drift when a built-in adapter changes. Its validation
fails closed on that drift.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with the GPT-5 agent model. The work used high reasoning,
repository inspection, tool use, and parallel code review.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip uses browser tests to protect critical operator flows.
> - The trusted pull request workflow runs the E2E catalog on three
existing runners.
> - Smoke Lab was one 168-second spec, so the shard scheduler could not
divide it.
> - The spec also repeated service-start calls, page loads, and
full-page screenshots.
> - This pull request removes that repeated work and divides the
scenario catalog into two independent specs.
> - The benefit is a shorter Smoke Lab run and a balanced E2E lane
without more AWS capacity.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs: #10629
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
This improves the trusted pull request E2E lane and its Smoke Lab
Playwright coverage.
**Current behavior**
Smoke Lab is one indivisible 168-second CI spec. It starts services for
every scenario, loads the same evidence page twice, and captures a
full-page success screenshot for all 56 lifecycle steps.
**Proposed behavior**
Start Smoke Lab services once per spec. Keep the per-scenario fixture
reset. Capture one representative success screenshot per scenario and
keep every failure screenshot. Run P1–P4 and P5–P7 as separate specs so
the existing duration-aware scheduler can put them on different runners.
**Reason and benefit**
The optimized lifecycle reduced local Smoke Lab wall time from 57.68
seconds to 37.04 seconds. This is a 35.8% reduction. The two halves also
let the existing three runners target about 125, 124, and 124 seconds of
recorded spec work instead of about 168, 125, and 124 seconds.
**Breaking changes**
None. The same seven scenarios and eight lifecycle steps still run. The
result API still records every step. Successful non-connect steps no
longer attach redundant screenshots.
## What Changed
- Reused one Smoke Lab service start within each spec while retaining
isolated fixture installation for every scenario.
- Removed the duplicate catalog evidence navigation.
- Reduced success screenshots from 56 to 7 while retaining screenshots
for every failed step.
- Split the shared lifecycle runner into P1–P4 and P5–P7 specs.
- Mark each successful split result as partial and keep dashboard health
amber until one run covers the full catalog.
- Updated the duration manifest and contributor docs for the split.
## Verification
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed on Node.js 24.20.0.
- `pnpm build` passed on Node.js 24.20.0.
- `node --test scripts/__tests__/e2e-shard.test.mjs` passed 9 tests.
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/pages/tools/smoke-lab-matrix.test.ts`
passed 8 tests.
- Both split specs passed together on Node.js 24.20.0 after the review
fixes: 2 passed in 35.7 seconds; shell wall time was 36.86 seconds.
- The pre-change Smoke Lab baseline passed with a 57.68-second shell
wall time. The optimized unsplit A/B run passed with a 37.04-second
shell wall time.
- The full local E2E catalog passed 44 tests and skipped 2 tests. One
existing `pipelines-tutorial-flow.spec.ts` assertion failed again when
run alone.
- The broad local unit run reproduced failures in untouched
workspace-runtime suites. Typecheck, build, shard tests, and all changed
browser coverage pass. CI remains the authoritative full-suite result.
## Risks
- The split duration weights use the measured local reduction and the
previous 168-second CI weight. They should be refreshed after two real
pull request runs.
- Service state is shared within each half. Fixture installation still
runs before every scenario to reset connection, policy, and catalog
state.
- Each half records passed execution with partial coverage. Dashboard
health recognizes the partial flag and stays amber because no single
runner covers the full catalog. A failed half still records failed/red.
- Fewer success screenshots reduce redundant artifacts. Every scenario
keeps its connect screenshot, and every failure still captures evidence.
> 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. The exact deployment ID and context window are
not exposed in this session. The model used agentic reasoning, code
editing, shell execution, browser testing, and GitHub tools.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The CLI can save a configuration and start the local server in one
command.
> - The onboarding path set a browser-open environment variable without
an explicit user request.
> - Headless test servers use the same onboarding path.
> - Each server restart could therefore open a system browser.
> - This pull request removes the implicit browser-open request and
fixes test servers to disable it explicitly.
> - The benefit is predictable foreground and test startup without
unsolicited browser windows.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
This is stack 11 of 11. It depends on stack 10.
**What happened?**
`paperclipai onboard --yes --run` set `PAPERCLIP_OPEN_ON_LISTEN=true`.
Headless server users, including browser test runners, opened the system
browser on each server restart.
**Expected behavior**
Server startup must not open a browser unless the caller explicitly sets
`PAPERCLIP_OPEN_ON_LISTEN=true`.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run `paperclipai onboard --yes --run` from a clean source checkout.
2. Wait for the server to listen.
3. Observe that the default system browser opens.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduced on `dbf052577` plus the dependent stack.
**Deployment mode**
Local dev from source.
## What Changed
- Stop onboarding from setting `PAPERCLIP_OPEN_ON_LISTEN=true` for
foreground startup.
- Set `PAPERCLIP_OPEN_ON_LISTEN=false` in E2E and issue-detail
performance test servers as defense in depth.
- Preserve the existing explicit environment opt-in in the server.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run cli/src/__tests__/onboard.test.ts` — 10 tests
passed.
- `pnpm --filter paperclipai typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed on the stacked head.
- `pnpm build` — passed on the stacked head.
- Playwright was not run locally by request.
## Risks
- Low risk. The only behavior change removes an unsolicited side effect.
- A caller that wants browser startup can still set
`PAPERCLIP_OPEN_ON_LISTEN=true` explicitly.
- No database or migration change exists in this layer.
> 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. The exact deployment suffix and context window
are not exposed. The model used reasoning, repository tools, code
execution, Git, and GitHub API 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
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The backend now turns agent requests into durable connection
intents.
> - Operators need a clear path to inspect, configure, and finish those
requests.
> - The experience must preserve identity, agent access, and interrupted
setup state.
> - This pull request adds the connection intent setup experience across
the app UI.
> - The benefit is one guided flow from agent request to governed
connection.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #11965
This is stack 9 of 11. It depends on stack 8 and replaces another
reviewable part of #11965.
## What Changed
- Add connection intent cards and setup flow integration.
- Add browse, connection, app detail, and sidebar experience updates.
- Preserve exact draft identity and access choices across resume and
OAuth recovery.
- Add focused UI, architecture, policy, and end-to-end coverage.
- Keep transient retained-connection lookup failures retryable instead
of misclassifying them as missing targets.
- Align the dark-mode E2E contract with the intentionally hidden
Gateways and Profiles sidebar tabs.
## Verification
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- Focused UI result: 372 tests passed across 20 files.
- AppsConnect regression suite: 80/80 passed, including failed
connection and application lookups during retained reconnect.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/components/AppsSidebar.test.tsx` (1 passed)
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db check:migrations`
- `pnpm build`
## Risks
- An interrupted OAuth flow can leave a durable draft that needs resume.
- The UI resumes the exact draft and keeps its identity and agent access
settings.
- Retained reconnect retries refetch connections and applications
together to avoid mixing partial snapshots.
- Gateways and Profiles remain route-accessible but intentionally absent
from the sidebar until their existing ship gate is lifted.
- The change does not add a database migration.
> I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This stack continues the existing app
connection work from #11965 and does not duplicate another planned item.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The runtime model ID and context window were not
exposed. The model used 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 linked the public source pull request with `Refs #`
- [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have 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.
> - External tools need explicit identity and access boundaries.
> - Shared connection credentials cannot represent every user-scoped use
case.
> - Grants must stay company-scoped and support safe delegation.
> - This pull request adds connection grants, identity rules, and their
database contract.
> - The benefit is durable control over which identity an agent may use.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #11965
This is stack 3 of 11. It depends on stack 2 and replaces another
reviewable part of #11965.
## What Changed
- Add company and user connection grants.
- Add delegated identity and membership rules.
- Synchronize database, shared, server, and UI contracts.
- Register the grant-member replacement route in the OpenAPI surface in
the same layer that mounts it.
- Add migration 0231 with replay-safe guards and coverage.
## Verification
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts` (5 passed)
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db check:migrations`
- `pnpm build`
## Risks
- Incorrect grant selection could expose the wrong credential scope.
- The service enforces company and subject boundaries before credential
use.
- Migration 0231 is generated, ordered after 0230, and safe to replay.
> I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This stack continues the existing app
connection work from #11965 and does not duplicate another planned item.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The runtime model ID and context window were not
exposed. The model used 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 linked a public issue or pull request with `Refs #`
- [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have 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.
> - App connections must work in both the operator UI and agent tool
gateway.
> - The first stack layer adds secure remote connections.
> - Operators still need clear setup, test, and recovery states.
> - This pull request adds the gateway behavior and the workspace
connection experience.
> - The benefit is a connection flow that is easier to understand and
recover.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #11965
This is stack 2 of 11. It depends on stack 1 and replaces another
reviewable part of #11965.
## What Changed
- Improve remote tool gateway connection behavior.
- Add clearer app setup, test, and recovery states.
- Add focused server and UI tests for the new paths.
- Keep the diff isolated from later identity and catalog work.
- Stabilize DNS-pinned remote HTTP protocol fixtures and the
managed-runtime public-origin fixture for this independently tested
layer.
## Verification
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts` (150 passed)
- `pnpm test:run`
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `pnpm build`
## Risks
- Gateway errors now surface through new user-facing states.
- A stale connection can require a new setup attempt.
- The change does not add a database migration.
- The injected HTTP transport and public URL are test-only fixtures;
production DNS pinning and runtime behavior are unchanged.
> I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This stack continues the existing app
connection work from #11965 and does not duplicate another planned item.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The runtime model ID and context window were not
exposed. The model used 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
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have 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.
> - Apps give those agents governed access to external tools.
> - Remote MCP setup needs secure endpoint validation and durable
credentials.
> - PostHog needs both browser sign-in and personal API key setup paths.
> - This pull request adds the shared remote MCP foundation and the
PostHog definition.
> - The benefit is a secure and reusable base for later app connection
work.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #11965
This is stack 1 of 11. It replaces the first reviewable part of #11965.
## What Changed
- Add guarded remote MCP setup and credential handling.
- Add PostHog OAuth and API key connection methods.
- Add focused server, shared contract, and UI coverage.
- Keep the migration replay-safe and idempotent.
- Give the late-close security regression the same 10-second CI headroom
as the adjacent real-timer handshake test.
- Synchronize fake-timer handshake tests at the exact ensure-session
boundary so real filesystem setup cannot race the fake deadline.
- Drive PTY overflow coverage only after listener registration so
scheduling cannot reorder the test fixture.
## Verification
- pnpm exec vitest run
packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/execute.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-worker-manager.test.ts (220 passed; affected
cases also passed five focused stress repetitions)
- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/execute.test.ts -t "never leaks a
sandbox-provided value from a late close rejection into logs or the
result"` (1 passed)
- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/execute.test.ts -t "never
promotes a late ensureSession resolution|closes a late-resolving real
handle exactly once"` (2 passed)
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db check:migrations`
- `pnpm build`
## Risks
- Remote endpoint validation can reject configurations that previously
passed without checks.
- OAuth configuration errors can block setup until the operator corrects
the provider settings.
- The migration uses guarded statements so repeated execution is safe.
- The test-only synchronization changes do not affect runtime behavior;
they remove filesystem/fake-clock and listener-registration races
observed under parallel CI load.
> I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This stack continues the existing app
connection work from #11965 and does not duplicate another planned item.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The runtime model ID and context window were not
exposed. The model used 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 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
> - New organizations create their first agent through the onboarding
wizard
> - The wizard does not show provider sign-in when a host credential is
absent or unknown
> - The create step also gives unclear feedback when the provider needs
authentication
> - This pull request adds a safe auth signal and a provider sign-in
step for sandbox drivers
> - The benefit is a clearer onboarding path with no token or account
data in the signal
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting (server API, shared types, and UI)
**Problem or motivation**
The onboarding wizard can fail when the selected provider needs
authentication. It does not tell the person how to complete sign-in.
**Proposed solution**
Add a status-only provider auth signal. Show the sign-in panel for
sandbox drivers when the signal says `absent` or `unknown`. Apply a
stored Claude login to the new agent and block creation when the adapter
test reports missing authentication.
**Alternatives considered**
The wizard could hide the sign-in panel when the signal read fails. This
would hide a needed action, so this pull request shows the panel when
the signal is unknown.
**Roadmap alignment**
The change supports the roadmap goal for scoped and audited credential
bindings.
**Additional context**
The auth signal returns only `present`, `absent`, or `unknown`. It never
returns a token, identifier, or account name.
## What Changed
- Add `GET /api/companies/:companyId/adapters/:type/auth-signal` with
company and permission checks.
- Add shared auth-signal types and the UI query path.
- Apply a stored Claude login by reference without reading its token.
- Show the provider sign-in panel only for sandbox drivers with
interactive terminal support.
- Block agent creation when the provider test reports missing
authentication.
- Add route, wizard, and end-to-end test coverage.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server test adapter-auth-signal-routes`
passes 50 tests.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui test OnboardingWizard` passes 69 tests.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec tsc --noEmit` exits with code 0.
- The `e2e_shards` lane runs `tests/e2e/onboarding.spec.ts`.
## Risks
The route reads a host-local readiness signal. It returns `unknown` on
read errors and never exposes credential data. The UI may add a sign-in
step when the signal is unavailable.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, extended reasoning, tool use, and code execution.
The exact context window was not provided.
## 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
> - A release is gated by the release smoke: it installs the published
`paperclipai` artifact into a Docker container and drives the sign-in →
onboarding → first-agent path with Playwright
> - That suite runs only from the release pipeline, never on a pull
request, so it sees the UI only after the UI has already changed
> - The onboarding wizard was rebuilt into the agent arc. The "Name your
organization" step, the "Start Onboarding" launcher, and the agent role
picker are all gone
> - The spec still waited for those, so it failed on its first assertion
and blocked every nightly and beta release
> - The failure was also hard to read. The workflow uploaded no
container logs, because it learned the container's name only after the
harness succeeded, and the harness ran the container with `--rm` and
deleted it before anything read it
> - This pull request rewrites the spec to follow the current arc, and
repairs the log capture at both ends
> - The benefit is that nightly and beta releases are unblocked, and the
next failure arrives with the logs attached
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No existing issue. Describing it inline, following
`.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml`.
Refs #12274 (removed the company-naming step from the wizard).
Refs #12135 (the previous alignment of this spec, before #12274).
Refs #12316 (open; also edits `scripts/docker-onboard-smoke.sh`, in the
bootstrap helpers rather than the container lifecycle, so the two
changes do
not overlap. Whichever lands second should rebase and re-run).
**What happened?**
The release smoke fails.
`tests/release-smoke/docker-auth-onboarding.spec.ts`
never gets past its first wait:
```
✘ tests/release-smoke/docker-auth-onboarding.spec.ts:43:3 › Docker authenticated onboarding smoke › logs in, completes onboarding, and hires the lead agent
Error: expect(locator).toBeVisible() failed — element(s) not found (timeout 20000ms)
> 33 | await expect(wizardHeading.or(startButton)).toBeVisible({ timeout: 20_000 });
```
The spec waits for an `h3` reading "Name your organization" or a
"Start Onboarding" button. Neither exists. #12274 removed the
company-naming
step; the string now survives only in a code comment and in
`ui/src/components/OnboardingWizard.step.test.tsx`, which asserts it is
*absent*. The steps after the first wait are stale too: the CTA on step
1 is
"Continue" and not "Next", the organization input's placeholder changed,
and
the agent step's `#onboarding-agent-role` picker is gone, so every
onboarding
hire is filed under the neutral `general` role.
The suite runs only from the release pipeline, so nothing on a pull
request
saw the drift. Both `smoke_nightly` and `smoke_beta` call the same
reusable
workflow, so every nightly and every beta was blocked.
The failure also arrived without diagnostics. The job's "Capture Docker
logs"
step is `if: always()`, but it is guarded on `SMOKE_CONTAINER_NAME`,
which the
"Launch Docker smoke harness" step writes to `$GITHUB_ENV` only *after*
the
harness returns. On any failure before that the guard is false, the step
does
nothing, and the upload reports "No files were found". Below that,
`scripts/docker-onboard-smoke.sh` starts the container with
`docker run -d --rm`, so the `docker stop` in its EXIT trap deletes the
container and its logs together — and a container that crashes on its
own is
removed the instant its process exits.
**Expected behavior**
The spec walks the onboarding arc the app actually presents, and proves
the
company is created, the lead agent is hired, and the first task is
seeded and
dispatched. When the smoke fails, the run's artifact carries the
container's
logs.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run the Release Smoke workflow against a published artifact that
carries
#12274, or run it locally:
`PAPERCLIPAI_VERSION=2026.828.0-canary.3 SMOKE_DETACH=true
./scripts/docker-onboard-smoke.sh`
2. Run `pnpm run test:release-smoke` against that container.
3. The single spec fails at `openOnboarding()` after 20 seconds.
4. In CI, open the run's `release-smoke` artifact. It has no
`docker-onboard-smoke.log`.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`2026.828.0-canary.3` (commit 8316ceb0b).
**Deployment mode**
Docker.
**Installation method**
npm / pnpm global install (the container runs `npx
paperclipai@<version>`).
**Node.js version**
v24.20.0 inside the container.
**Relevant logs or output**
```
Running 1 test using 1 worker
✓ 1 [chromium] › tests/release-smoke/docker-auth-onboarding.spec.ts:76:3 › Docker authenticated onboarding smoke › logs in, completes onboarding, and hires the lead agent (7.0s)
1 passed (8.7s)
```
That is the result after this change. Before it, the same command failed
at
the first wait, as quoted above.
## What Changed
- `tests/release-smoke/docker-auth-onboarding.spec.ts` now follows the
current
arc. It signs in, opens `/onboarding`, names the organization and
presses
"Continue" (which creates the company and routes straight to the agent
step,
because onboarding no longer asks for a mission), names the lead and
presses
"Next", presses "Connect" on the default adapter to hire, then presses
"Get started" to launch.
- The spec addresses controls by role and accessible name, or by id
where one
exists (`#onboarding-agent-name`). Step 1's field has no id and no
associated
label, so it is found as the wizard's only text box rather than by its
placeholder copy.
- The spec asserts the hired agent's role is `general`, which is what
the arc
files every onboarding hire under. Every other API assertion is
unchanged.
- The spec navigates to `/onboarding` explicitly and drops any saved
onboarding
draft first, so it can run twice against one instance. The suite retries
once
in CI. It still asserts that a company-less board routes sign-in into
onboarding, guarded on the board actually being empty.
- `scripts/docker-onboard-smoke.sh` accepts `SMOKE_CONTAINER_NAME`,
drops
`--rm`, removes the container itself, and dumps `docker logs` to
`SMOKE_LOG_FILE` before the teardown.
- `.github/workflows/release-smoke.yml` pins the container name in the
job's
`env`, so every `always()` step has it before anything runs. The capture
step
refreshes the log from a live container when there is one, keeps the
harness's dump when there is not, and writes a one-line explanation when
there is neither. The upload's paths are literals, and
`if-no-files-found: error` makes a broken diagnostics path fail rather
than
warn.
- `scripts/docker-onboard-smoke.test.mjs` pins that wiring. It is added
to
`test:release-registry`, which runs on every pull request.
- `doc/DOCKER.md` documents `SMOKE_CONTAINER_NAME` and `SMOKE_LOG_FILE`.
## Verification
The spec was run against a real container built from the published
`2026.828.0-canary.3` artifact, exactly as the workflow runs it.
```sh
SMOKE_CONTAINER_NAME=release-smoke-onboard \
HOST_PORT=3232 DATA_DIR=<tmp>/smoke-data \
PAPERCLIPAI_VERSION=2026.828.0-canary.3 \
SMOKE_READY_TIMEOUT_SECONDS=420 SMOKE_DETACH=true \
SMOKE_METADATA_FILE=<tmp>/release-smoke.env \
SMOKE_LOG_FILE=<tmp>/docker-onboard-smoke.log \
./scripts/docker-onboard-smoke.sh
PAPERCLIP_RELEASE_SMOKE_BASE_URL=http://localhost:3232 \
PAPERCLIP_RELEASE_SMOKE_EMAIL=smoke-admin@paperclip.local \
PAPERCLIP_RELEASE_SMOKE_PASSWORD=paperclip-smoke-password \
PAPERCLIP_PLAYWRIGHT_CHANNEL=chrome \
pnpm run test:release-smoke
```
```
Running 1 test using 1 worker
✓ 1 [chromium] › tests/release-smoke/docker-auth-onboarding.spec.ts:76:3 › Docker authenticated onboarding smoke › logs in, completes onboarding, and hires the lead agent (7.0s)
1 passed (8.7s)
```
The same command was run a second time against the same, now non-empty,
instance. That covers the retry path, and it also passes.
The log capture was verified by making the container die during startup:
```sh
PAPERCLIPAI_VERSION=0.0.0-no-such-version \
SMOKE_CONTAINER_NAME=release-smoke-onboard SMOKE_LOG_FILE=<tmp>/fail.log \
./scripts/docker-onboard-smoke.sh
```
`<tmp>/fail.log` was written and carried the cause:
```
npm error code ETARGET
npm error notarget No matching version found for paperclipai@0.0.0-no-such-version.
```
The container was removed afterwards. On `master` this file is never
written,
because `--rm` deletes the container the moment its process exits.
The workflow's capture step was run by hand against three states: a live
container (258 lines), a removed container with the harness's dump
already on
disk (258 lines kept), and neither (a one-line explanation).
Unit coverage:
```sh
pnpm run test:release-registry # 93 tests, 93 pass
```
Nothing under `ui/` changed, so `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui
typecheck` was
not required. `tests/release-smoke` is outside the TypeScript project
references; Playwright compiles it at run time, which the runs above did
three
times.
## Risks
Low risk. Nothing ships to users. The change touches one Playwright
spec, one
smoke script, and one workflow.
Points worth a reviewer's attention:
- **This suite gates every nightly and beta, and it runs only
post-merge.**
`smoke_nightly` and `smoke_beta` both call `release-smoke.yml`, and no
pull
request runs it. Drift between the wizard and this spec is therefore
invisible until a release is already blocked, which is how this bug
reached
a release train. I think the arc deserves an earlier check. The cheapest
version is the one added here: `scripts/docker-onboard-smoke.test.mjs`
runs
on every pull request and pins the harness wiring. The full container
smoke
is too slow for the pull request path, but a UI-level test of the arc's
step
sequence would catch exactly this class of drift, and
`ui/src/components/OnboardingWizard.step.test.tsx` is already the right
home for it. I did not add it here, to keep this change to the repair.
- **Dropping `--rm`.** The container is now removed by the script's
cleanup
instead of by Docker. The script already ran `docker rm -f` before
starting,
and the workflow's final step removes it too, so a leaked container is
cleaned up on the next run either way. A developer who kills the script
with
`SIGKILL` will leave a stopped container behind, where previously they
would
not.
- **`if-no-files-found: error` on the upload.** The capture step now
always
writes the log file, so the upload always has at least one path to
match. If
that ever stops being true, the job fails instead of warning. That is
deliberate.
- **The spec drops the saved onboarding draft before it walks.** A stale
draft
makes step 1 skip company creation and hire into the previous run's
company.
That state only exists when the spec runs twice against one instance. A
fresh
release-smoke container never has it.
## Model Used
Claude (Anthropic), Claude Opus, 1M context, extended thinking, agentic
tool
use via Claude Code. The container, the Playwright runs, and the failure
injection were driven as real commands on a local Docker host.
## 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
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A new customer's first session ends in the tenant's agent arc:
create an agent, connect a model, review
> - Walking it turned up questions the arc had no business asking — a
role picker using a vocabulary the customer has not been given, a model
picker asking them to judge models they have not met — and chrome
restating what they had just watched happen
> - Each one costs a first-session customer attention at the exact
moment they are deciding what this product is
> - This pull request cuts the arc to what it must ask, and draws the
agent as itself so the arc has a visible subject
> - The benefit is three steps that each ask one thing, ending on an
agent that is visibly ready
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public issue exists. The changes come from walking the sign-up arc
end to end.
**What happened:**
The agent step asks for a role from a fixed enum before asking for a
name. The model step shows two "Recommended" badges (on both options),
an "Adapter type" eyebrow, and a model picker. The review step lists a
three-row checklist of work the customer just performed. The progress
strip is a full-width segmented bar.
**Expected behavior:**
The agent step asks for a name. The model step offers the two harnesses
and hides the rest behind advanced settings. The review step says the
agent is ready. The strip counts three discrete steps.
**Steps to reproduce:**
1. Sign up and enter the tenant wizard on the agent arc.
2. Observe the role select above the optional name field.
3. Continue to the model step: both options carry a "Recommended" badge,
and a model picker sits below.
4. Continue to review: a checklist restates the organization name,
agent, and model.
**Additional context:**
The brand pill assets (`pill-1-dormant.svg`, `pill-1-alive.svg`) are
transcribed verbatim into a component rather than approximated. The role
removal exposed a latent silent-failure path — see Risks.
## What Changed
- `PillGuy` renders the brand pill in two states; the arc holds one
instance, dormant through create and connect, alive on review.
- The agent step asks for a name only. The name is required; the role
picker is gone.
- `DEFAULT_AGENT_ROLE` (`general`) backs every onboarding hire, and
`agentRole` now defaults to it rather than empty.
- The model step drops both "Recommended" badges, the "Adapter type"
eyebrow, and the model picker; "More Agent Adapter Types" becomes
"Advanced settings"; the sub-line becomes "Paperclip works with your
existing subscription or API keys."
- The review step drops its checklist; the heading becomes "Let's get
started..." with "[name] is ready to work!".
- The progress strip renders three left-aligned dots at the previous
gap.
- Five e2e specs and both wizard unit suites migrate off
`#onboarding-agent-role`.
## Verification
Run the tenant suite:
```
cd ui && npx vitest run
```
- 4398 tests pass across 474 files; `npx tsc --noEmit` clean.
- Walked live in a local instance: agent step (dots, dormant pill, name
placeholder), model step (no badges/eyebrow/picker, "Advanced
settings"), review (pill alive, new copy, no checklist).
- The retargeted role test asserts the hire payload carries `role:
"general"` and the typed name — it is the test that catches the silent
failure below.
## Risks
- **A latent silent failure, now closed.** `handleGiveHeartbeat` returns
early when `agentRole` is empty. With the picker removed and no default,
Connect would have hired nobody and shown no error. The default closes
it; the guard stays for any future path that clears the role.
- **Behavioral change:** every onboarding hire is filed as `general`
rather than a chosen role. The role remains editable in the app.
- **Behavioral change:** the model is no longer chosen during
onboarding. Every adapter offered here resolves its own default in
`buildAdapterConfig`, and the model is changeable later.
- **Assets:** the pill carries its own gradient fills and does not
follow the theme. That is deliberate — the agent looks like itself on
either ground.
## Model Used
Claude Opus 5 (`claude-opus-5`) via Claude Code, with 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
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id
- [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: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The nightly release lane publishes only after the release smoke
suite passes against the newest canary
> - Onboarding was reordered: step 1 now creates the company and routes
straight to the agent step, and the mission step is gone (collected
later in the tenant app, deliberately writing no goal)
> - The smoke spec still walked the removed mission step, so the
scheduled nightly has been red since the reorder shipped
> - This pull request updates the spec to the current flow and asserts
the deliberate empty goal list
> - The benefit is a green nightly lane and an unblocked beta promotion
from current master
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
The scheduled `Release` nightly run fails in `smoke_nightly / smoke`
since 2026-08-23 (runs 32630184811, 32710905212):
`docker-auth-onboarding.spec.ts` waits for the `Define your mission`
heading after step 1, but the wizard now routes 1 → 3 with no mission
step (the step buttons literally skip from 1 to 3). The retry then fails
on step 1 because the first attempt's company persists.
**Expected behavior**
The smoke passes against canaries carrying the reordered wizard, and the
nightly lane publishes again.
**Steps to reproduce**
Run `scripts/docker-onboard-smoke.sh` with
`PAPERCLIPAI_VERSION=2026.824.0-canary.7` and `pnpm run
test:release-smoke` against it.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`2026.824.0-canary.7`
Related (not duplicates): #11565 updated this same spec for the
chat-first rewrite; this is the follow-up for the mission-less reorder.
## What Changed
- Remove the mission-step interaction; step 1's "Next" now creates the
company and the spec goes straight to the agent step.
- Replace the mission-goal API assertion with the truthful one:
onboarding deliberately writes no goal, so a fresh company's goal list
is empty.
- Update step comments to match the shipped flow.
## Verification
- Local run of the exact CI harness against
`paperclipai@2026.824.0-canary.7`: 1 passed (6.8s), exit 0.
- The suite's remaining API assertions (company, CEO agent, seeded task
assignment, landed issue URL, assignment-sourced heartbeat run) pass
unchanged.
## Risks
- Low risk: test-only. The spec remains copy-coupled to the wizard —
this is the third drift in two weeks; stable `data-testid` hooks in the
wizard remain the durable fix and can follow separately.
## Model Used
Claude Fable 5 (Claude Code)
## Pre-submission 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
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Sandbox adapters provide controlled execution for untrusted provider
environments.
> - The sandbox channel needs one persistent duplex transport with
strict host control.
> - The transport must remain off unless the instance setting and
provider capability both allow it.
> - The host must detect loss, bound resource use, and expose only safe
telemetry.
> - This pull request adds the broker, gated selection, kill-switch
wiring, fixed observability, and real-process proof.
> - The benefit is safer sandbox execution with bounded failure behavior
and inspectable transport results.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public issue exists for this change. The related pull requests are
#11738 and #11750.
**Problem or motivation**
The sandbox duplex channel needs a host-controlled broker, strict
transport gates, bounded provider input, and safe loss telemetry.
Without these controls, a provider can cause replay, resource growth,
unsafe endpoint selection, or data exposure through telemetry.
**Proposed solution**
Add a host broker with nested time limits, request limits, one-shot
loss, and per-id deduplication. Select duplex transport only when the
instance setting and provider capability both equal true. Assign the
endpoint and nonce on the host. Reject invalid readiness data and use
the file bridge on failure. Add fixed redacted telemetry and a
real-process end-to-end test harness.
**Alternatives considered**
Keep the file bridge as the only transport. This avoids new channel
behavior but does not provide persistent duplex operation for supported
sandbox providers.
**Roadmap alignment**
This change supports the Cloud / Sandbox agents section in ROADMAP.md.
## What Changed
- Add the duplex bridge broker with bounded forward, response, and
gateway wait budgets.
- Bound concurrent requests, lifetime requests, and request-id bytes
before retention or forwarding.
- Select duplex transport only when both required gates are true.
- Assign the loopback port and nonce on the host and enforce a
liveness-only READY frame.
- Fall back to the file bridge after invalid readiness, contamination,
bind failure, or timeout.
- Carry the kill switch through the server, acpx engine, and six local
adapters.
- Add fixed, redacted duplex telemetry with a provider allowlist.
- Add a real-process end-to-end harness for readiness, round trips,
loss, and teardown.
- Add regression coverage for limits, loss, UTF-8 splits, concurrency,
and telemetry dimensions.
## Verification
- Adapter-utils, server, and Daytona typechecks pass locally.
- Adapter-utils tests pass, including the codec, broker,
execution-target sandbox, and real-process harness.
- Server kill-switch tests pass.
- Live Daytona tests pass with the required provider key and skip
without that key.
- The root pnpm-lock.yaml file has no diff.
- The branch contains ten commits after origin/master.
## Risks
- Duplex transport remains disabled unless both gates equal true.
- A provider remains an untrusted boundary and needs least-privilege
credentials and quotas.
- The server telemetry recorder stays deferred; the default recorder
does nothing.
- A provider that pre-binds the host port causes a fail-closed fallback
to the file bridge.
- The change adds no database migration and changes no root lockfile.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5, exact model family GPT-5, large context window, reasoning,
and tool use. The model assisted with Git handoff validation and PR
preparation. The implementation commits came from the engineering
worktree.
## 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/... or 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
- [x] I searched the GitHub PR list for similar PRs and confirmed this
is not a duplicate
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - New customers arrive through an onboarding arc that spans Paperclip
Cloud and the tenant app
> - Cloud's naming screen stopped asking for the company mission, but
the tenant wizard still decided its first step by asking whether the
company had one
> - Every Cloud-created company therefore looked mission-less on
arrival, so every walk detoured through a "Define your mission" screen
the design had already removed
> - This pull request removes that step from the arc, and makes step 1
create the company itself
> - The benefit is a shorter arc that matches the design, and a
three-step progress strip that now counts the steps that exist
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public issue exists. The problem was found by walking staging end to
end.
**What happened:**
A new customer signs in, names their organization, and waits for it to
build. The tenant wizard then asks "Define your mission" before it asks
for the first agent. Cloud no longer collects a mission, so this screen
appears for every new customer.
**Expected behavior:**
The wizard asks for the first agent, the model, and a review. The
progress strip counts three steps.
**Actual behavior:**
The wizard asks for the mission first. The progress strip counts five
segments, because the run does not enter on the agent arc.
**Additional context:**
Three merged pull requests built the mission-based step choice this
change removes: #11352, #11416 and #11429. The mission is now collected
later, inside the tenant app, so onboarding does not ask for it at all.
## What Changed
- `onboardingStepForCompany` always returns the agent step. The
`companyHasMission` parameter is removed, because it cannot change the
answer.
- `resolveRouteOnboardingOptions` no longer accepts `companyHasMission`.
- The dashboard no longer waits for the goal lookup before it opens the
wizard. That wait only chose a step, and the step is now fixed.
- Step 1 creates the company in a new `handleCreateCompany`. Company
creation used to sit at the end of `handleConfirmMission`.
- No company goal is written during onboarding.
- The three-step strip now shows on the agent, model and review steps,
because every Cloud-first run enters on the arc.
- The full-length bar drops its second segment. No run can fill it.
- The grow path keeps its step 2 questionnaire. Only the create path
skips ahead.
- Back from the agent step goes to the screen the run came from.
- Four end-to-end specs no longer drive the wizard through the mission
step.
## Verification
Run the tenant test suite:
```
cd ui && npx vitest run
```
- 4356 tests pass. 471 files pass.
- `npx tsc --noEmit` reports no errors.
- Fault injection: forcing `skipsMissionStep` to `true` fails the grow
questionnaire test. Removing the Back rule fails the Back test. Both
tests fail on the exact defect they guard.
- The three-step strip is asserted by an existing test. It checks `Step
1 of 3` and `aria-label="Create your first agent"`.
Manual check on staging after the paired Cloud change:
1. Open a new incognito window.
2. Sign in with a new account.
3. Name the organization.
4. Confirm the wizard shows "Create your first agent" and "Step 1 of 3".
## Risks
- **Behavioral change.** Onboarding no longer writes a company goal. An
agent hired during onboarding starts without a seeded mission. This is
intended. The mission moves to the tenant app.
- **Dead code.** `ONBOARDING_MISSION_STEP` and the mission screen stay
in the codebase, but nothing in the app opens them. They wait for the
surface that collects the mission later.
- **Grow path.** The grow path is unchanged, but it shares step 2 with
the removed screen. New tests cover it.
- **Superseded work.** #11352, #11416 and #11429 tuned the mission-based
step choice. This change removes the branch they tuned.
## Model Used
Claude Opus 5 (`claude-opus-5`), extended thinking, with tool use and
code execution through Claude Code.
## 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
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id
- [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: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The onboarding wizard in `ui/` hires that first agent. It runs three
steps: create the agent, connect a model, and review
> - A standalone prototype holds the agreed design for these steps.
#10786 ported that prototype, but #11067 reverted it in full because the
port deleted `OnboardingWizard.tsx` while four pull requests were
editing that file
> - Those four pull requests have since merged. The revert said the port
can "re-land incrementally", and this is that re-land
> - This pull request takes the presentational layer from the prototype
only. It keeps master's wizard as the source of behaviour, so the eight
onboarding fixes merged since the revert stay in place
> - The benefit is that the three agent steps match the agreed design,
and no merged fix is lost to get there
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #10786 — the first attempt to land this design.
Refs #11067 — the revert that asked for it to re-land in smaller steps.
No public issue exists for the re-land. The problem is described below.
**Subsystem affected**
The `ui` package. The change touches the onboarding wizard, the agent
capsule,
and one Storybook story. It adds four small presentational components
under
`ui/src/components/onboarding/`.
**Current behavior**
The wizard's agent steps do not match the prototype. Each step shows a
small
heading beside an icon, above a form. The agent capsule sits below that
heading and does not animate. The agent gets a name but no role, so
every
first agent is created as `ceo`.
The wizard also shows a five-segment progress bar on these steps. A
walker who
enters on the agent step cannot reach the first two segments, so two of
the
five can never be filled.
**Proposed behavior**
The three steps use the prototype's card, its centred display heading,
and its
footer. One capsule sits above the heading and stays mounted across all
three
steps, so it reads as one object being built rather than three screens
that
each show their own.
A three-segment strip counts these steps for a walker who enters on
them. The
full-length bar stays for a walker who starts at step one, so that count
never
restarts partway.
The agent step gains a role. The options come from the agent role enum,
not
from the prototype's mock list.
**Reason and benefit**
The design is agreed and already built once. Re-landing it
presentation-first
keeps the behaviour that master gained after the revert.
Sourcing roles from the enum matters. The prototype offers "Coder",
which is
not a valid role — the enum uses `engineer` — so a walker who picked it
would
fail validation at hire time.
**Breaking changes**
None. The wizard keeps its routes, its draft format, and its hire call.
The
draft gains one optional field, `agentRole`. A draft saved before this
change
loads without it and falls back to the default.
## What Changed
- Add `ui/src/components/onboarding/`: `Stepper`, `OnboardingCard`,
`OnboardingHeading`, `FooterNav`, `AgentPreview`, and shared motion
constants
- Rebuild wizard steps 3–5 on those parts: one card, the capsule above a
centred heading, and one footer
- Hold one `AgentCapsule` across the three steps. It springs in once,
then
morphs from dashed slot to traced outline to filled
- Add `strokeDraw` to `AgentCapsule`. It traces the outline instead of
cross-fading it. The dashed layer holds until the trace ends
- Add a role select to the agent step. Choosing a role fills the name,
unless
the walker typed one
- Show one progress indicator per run, not two
- Label strip segments by destination, not by number
- Add `motion` to the `ui` package
- Add a Storybook story for the strip and the capsule states
## Verification
Run the tests:
```
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec tsc -p tsconfig.json --noEmit
```
4235 tests pass. The typecheck is clean.
To see the steps, start the app and open `/<PREFIX>/onboarding` for a
company
that has a company-level goal. The wizard opens on the agent step. Step
three
requires a hire.
Three absence assertions were checked by fault injection. Each one fails
when
the old behaviour returns:
- put the step counter back, and the "shows no step counter" test fails
- default `strokeDraw` to true, and the cross-fade test fails
- restore the timer gate on the strip, and the indicator test fails
## Risks
Low to medium.
`motion` is one new dependency in `ui`. #11067 gave dependency weight as
one
of three reasons to revert #10786, so this branch carries the smallest
set
that works. `motion` drives the step transitions and the capsule
choreography,
and three files import it.
An earlier revision of this branch also added `three` and
`@types/three`. Both
are removed. They existed for the 3D backdrop, which belongs to the auth
and
welcome screens rather than to these three steps, so nothing on this
branch
imported them.
The role select changes what the wizard sends. Before this change every
first
agent was hired as `ceo`. Now the walker chooses. The values come from
the
enum, so the server accepts all of them.
Steps 1 and 2 keep the older design. They do not run on the Cloud-first
path,
where the company already exists.
## Model Used
Claude Opus 5 (`claude-opus-5`), with extended thinking, tool use, and
code
execution. Used for the code, the tests, and this description.
## 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 Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The task composer and the New Task dialog show a work-mode chip (how
the agent will run a task)
> - The default mode was labeled "Agent mode", and the New Task dialog
chip abbreviated every mode to one word ("Auto", "Plan", "Ask")
> - "Agent mode" is confusing because every mode runs an agent, and the
abbreviated chip hid what the label means
> - This pull request renames the mode to "Auto mode" and makes every
mode chip show the full label
> - The benefit is a clearer, consistent mode name in every place the
user selects a work mode
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this change. Description follows the
enhancement template:
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The work-mode selector chips in the task composer and in the New Task
dialog.
**Subsystem affected**
UI (`ui/src/lib/work-mode-meta.ts`,
`ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.tsx`).
**Current behavior**
The default work mode is labeled "Agent mode". The New Task dialog chip
shows a shortened label ("Auto", "Plan", "Ask") from a separate
`shortLabel` field.
**Proposed behavior**
The default work mode is labeled "Auto mode". Every chip shows the full
label ("Auto mode", "Plan mode", "Ask mode"). The `shortLabel` field is
removed so no surface can fall back to the short form.
**Reason and benefit**
"Agent mode" does not describe the behavior — all modes use an agent.
"Auto mode" states what the mode does. One label field keeps every
surface consistent.
**Breaking changes**
None. This is a display-string change only. No API, storage, or mode-key
changes.
## What Changed
- Renamed the `standard` work-mode label from "Agent mode" to "Auto
mode" in `ui/src/lib/work-mode-meta.ts`, the single source for all mode
chips.
- Changed the New Task dialog mode chip to render the full `label`
instead of `shortLabel`.
- Deleted the `shortLabel` field from `WorkModeMeta` so nothing can
silently regress to the short form.
- Updated unit tests and fixtures to pin the full labels.
## Verification
- Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui test --
src/lib/work-mode-meta.test.ts src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx
src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/components/task-chat/TaskChatComposer.test.tsx`. All tests pass. The
tests assert the labels are exactly "Auto mode", "Plan mode", and "Ask
mode".
- Manual: start the dev server, open the board, press `c` to open the
New Task dialog, and press Cmd+Period to cycle modes. The chip reads
"Auto mode", "Plan mode", then "Ask mode". The composer chip on an open
task shows the same labels.
## Risks
- Low risk. Display strings only. The chip is a few pixels wider in the
New Task dialog; no layout overflow was observed in any of the three
modes.
## Model Used
- Claude Fable 5 (Anthropic, model ID `claude-fable-5`), extended
thinking with tool use, run inside a Claude Code agent session.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
<!-- Write all pull request text in Simplified Technical English
(ASD-STE100): short sentences, one instruction per sentence, simple
approved vocabulary, and the active voice. -->
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The server authenticates each agent request in `actorMiddleware`
before it attributes chat comments
> - When an agent bearer token failed verification, the middleware
called `next()` with no error and the request continued without an agent
actor
> - The request then fell back to the local user actor, so the server
stored agent replies as user comments
> - The task chat UI renders user comments in blue bubbles, so agent
messages appeared as blue user bubbles
> - This pull request rejects invalid agent credentials with 401 instead
of a silent downgrade
> - The benefit is that agent messages keep agent attribution, and
broken credentials fail loudly with a clear retry message
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
A user cancelled an onboarding question card. The agent posted a
follow-up reply. The reply appeared in a blue bubble, which the UI
reserves for human messages. The agent run held an expired local agent
JWT. The auth middleware could not verify the token, called `next()`
without an actor, and the request fell back to the local user identity.
The server stored the agent comment as a user comment.
**Expected behavior**
Agent messages always render as agent bubbles. A request with invalid
agent credentials must fail with 401 so the adapter can refresh
credentials and retry. It must not post content under a human identity.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start a local Paperclip instance.
2. Give an agent run an expired or malformed agent JWT.
3. Let the agent post an issue comment through the API bridge.
4. Before this change: the comment is stored with the local user
identity and renders as a blue bubble. After this change: the request
fails with 401 and a message that tells the caller to obtain fresh
credentials.
## What Changed
- `server/src/middleware/auth.ts`: a bearer token that fails
verification now produces a 401 `unauthorized` error instead of a silent
fall-through to the anonymous/local-user actor.
- The 401 message states the cause: expired token, unverifiable token,
empty bearer token, missing agent record, agent record in another
company, terminated agent, or agent pending approval.
- The API-key path now also rejects an agent record whose company does
not match the key.
- `packages/adapter-utils/src/execution-target.ts`: the bridge proxy now
writes a `comment id: <id>` marker to the run log for each posted issue
comment, so misattributed comments can be traced to a run.
- `ui/src/components/task-chat/task-chat-adapter.test.ts`: a regression
test asserts that a recovered `local-board` comment with a derived agent
author renders as an agent bubble, not a user bubble.
- `server/src/__tests__/agent-auth-middleware.test.ts` and
`packages/adapter-utils/src/execution-target-sandbox.test.ts`: new tests
cover each rejection path and the log marker.
## Verification
- Run `pnpm vitest run src/__tests__/agent-auth-middleware.test.ts` in
`server/` — 14 tests pass.
- Run `pnpm vitest run execution-target-sandbox` at the repo root — 44
tests pass.
- Run `pnpm vitest run
src/components/task-chat/task-chat-adapter.test.ts` in `ui/` — 4 tests
pass.
- Manual check: post an issue comment with an expired agent JWT; the API
returns 401 with a retry message and no comment is stored.
## Risks
- Behavioral shift: requests that previously continued as anonymous or
local-user actors after a failed agent-token verification now receive
401. Any caller that relied on the silent downgrade must refresh its
credentials. This is the intended fix, and the adapters already handle
401 with a credential refresh.
- No schema or migration changes. Low risk otherwise.
> 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 (Anthropic), model ID `claude-fable-5`, via Claude Code with
extended thinking and tool use (agent harness with shell, file, and git
tools).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] 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>
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The release channel system publishes a nightly build only after the
release smoke suite passes against the newest canary
> - The scheduled nightly run has failed every night since August 12, so
no nightly, and therefore no beta candidate, has shipped for six days
> - The failures are stale test locators, not a product regression: the
chat-first onboarding rewrite (#11101) changed wizard copy and the
post-launch destination
> - This pull request updates the smoke spec to match the current wizard
> - The benefit is a green nightly lane and an unblocked beta promotion
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
The scheduled `Release` nightly run fails in `smoke_nightly / smoke`
every night since 2026-08-12. The failing spec is
`tests/release-smoke/docker-auth-onboarding.spec.ts`. Four assertions no
longer match the product after the chat-first onboarding rewrite
(#11101):
- The step-1 heading is now "Name your organization", not "Name your
company".
- The step-4 hire button is now "Connect", not "Give it a heartbeat".
- The seeded first task is now titled "Paperclip onboarding".
- A successful launch navigates to the seeded task's thread
(`/issues/<ref>`), not `/dashboard`.
**Expected behavior**
The smoke suite passes against a canary that contains the current
onboarding wizard, and the nightly lane publishes again.
**Steps to reproduce**
Run `.github/workflows/release-smoke.yml` against `paperclipai@canary`
(any version at or after the rewrite), or dispatch `release.yml` with
`channel: nightly`. Example red runs: 32014452506 (Aug 17), 31938284401
(Aug 16).
**Paperclip version or commit**
`2026.817.0-canary.12`
Related (not duplicates): #11190 updated this same spec for the
mission-first wizard; this PR is the follow-up for the chat-first
rewrite that landed after it.
## What Changed
- Update the step-1 wizard heading locator to "Name your organization".
- Update the step-4 hire button locator to "Connect" and reword the step
comment.
- Update `FIRST_TASK_TITLE` to "Paperclip onboarding" (the wizard's
current `DEFAULT_TASK_TITLE`).
- Assert the post-launch URL is the seeded task's thread (`/issues/`),
not `/dashboard`.
## Verification
- Local run of the exact CI harness: `scripts/docker-onboard-smoke.sh`
with `PAPERCLIPAI_VERSION=2026.817.0-canary.12`, then `pnpm run
test:release-smoke` against the container — 1 passed.
- The suite's later API assertions (company, CEO agent, mission goal,
seeded issue assignment, assignment-sourced heartbeat run) all pass
unchanged against the current canary.
## Risks
- Low risk: test-only change; no product code is touched.
- The spec remains copy-coupled to the wizard. If wizard copy churn
continues, a follow-up could add stable `data-testid` hooks to the
wizard so the smoke spec stops breaking on wording changes.
## Model Used
Claude Fable 5 (Claude Code)
## Pre-submission 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
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Archiving a company hides it from the sidebar switcher, but
remembered last-visited paths, browser history, bookmarks, and restored
tabs keep depositing users onto its URLs long after archiving
> - Since the selection ping-pong fix (#11300) those arrivals render,
but the user is stranded inside a workspace the sidebar refuses to show
— and unarchiving had no UI anywhere, so the only way back was a
hand-typed settings URL
> - This pull request bounces cold arrivals at archived company URLs to
an active company (with a toast naming why), lets deliberate visits
stick, and adds an Unarchive action to the companies list
> - The benefit is that stale URLs stop stranding users in retired
workspaces, and archived companies become restorable from the one page
that still lists them
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Follow-up to #11300. No existing issue for the remaining gap;
description follows the enhancement template:
**What happened?**
After #11300, opening an archived company's URL (stale tab, history,
bookmark, remembered path) renders that company's pages — but the
sidebar switcher does not list it, so the user is stranded in a
workspace they retired, and every stale URL pulls them back in.
Separately, unarchiving a company has no UI: the archive button lives in
company settings, which becomes unreachable through normal navigation
once the company is archived.
**Expected behavior**
Arriving cold at an archived company's URL lands the user in an active
workspace, with a toast explaining the redirect. Explicitly choosing the
archived company (from the companies list) still works, so its pages
remain reachable. Archived companies can be restored from the companies
list.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Create two companies; archive one.
2. Open `/{archivedPrefix}/dashboard` directly — before: renders the
archived workspace with no sidebar presence; after: bounces to the
active company's dashboard with a toast.
3. On the companies list, open the archived company's row menu — before:
no restore action anywhere; after: Unarchive.
## What Changed
- `ui/src/lib/company-selection.ts`: `resolveArchivedCompanyBounce` —
pure policy: bounce when the URL names an archived company that is not
the current selection and an active company exists; prefer the currently
selected active company as the destination.
- `ui/src/components/Layout.tsx`: the route-sync effect applies the
bounce (toast + selection + `replace` navigation) before syncing
selection from the route.
- `ui/src/pages/Companies.tsx`: Unarchive action (`PATCH status:
"active"`) in the row menu for archived companies.
- Tests: unit cases for the bounce policy; the e2e now drives all three
behaviors (direct-load bounce with toast, re-arrival bounce, deliberate
visit sticks) on top of the existing crash regression.
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run src/lib/company-selection.test.ts
src/context/CompanyContext.test.tsx src/pages/Companies.test.tsx` in
`ui/` — 20 tests pass.
- `npx playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts
archived-company-url` — passes, covering bounce, toast, and
deliberate-visit paths.
- `pnpm typecheck` in `ui/` — clean.
## Risks
Low risk. The bounce only fires for archived-company URLs when the
archived company is not already selected and an active company exists;
all-archived instances render as before. Deliberate selection from the
companies list is unaffected (selection equals the matched company, so
no bounce). Unarchive reuses the existing `PATCH /api/companies/:id`
status transition the server already supports.
## Model Used
- Claude (Anthropic), Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), via Claude Code
CLI with extended thinking and tool use (code search, edit, test
execution, Playwright e2e).
## 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
Dotta
Tonio
scotttong
Nicky Leach
Devin Foley