## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The Paperclip Runner includes an issue-thread viewer for direct
Evalbook reports.
> - The runner package uses Vite 6.4.3.
> - Dependabot changed the React plugin from version 4.7.0 to version
6.1.1.
> - React plugin 6.1.1 requires Vite 7 or Vite 8 package internals.
> - The live evaluation workflow found this mismatch when it built the
viewer on a clean Linux worker.
> - This pull request restores the compatible plugin and adds the viewer
build to pull request CI.
> - The benefit is that CI detects this class of report-viewer build
failure before a paid evaluation campaign starts.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
The direct live evaluation workflow failed before model execution. The
`build:issue-thread` command could not load `@vitejs/plugin-react@6.1.1`
with Vite 6.4.3. The plugin imported the unavailable `vite/internal`
package path.
**Expected behavior**
The Evalbook issue-thread viewer must build from a clean frozen-lockfile
installation before the live evaluation matrix starts.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Check out commit `165ca56a22adb60e5fda56045442d9c8498116a8`.
2. Run `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts`.
3. Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner build:issue-thread`.
4. Observe the `ERR_PACKAGE_PATH_NOT_EXPORTED` error for
`vite/internal`.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`165ca56a22adb60e5fda56045442d9c8498116a8`
**Deployment mode**
Built from source in GitHub Actions on Ubuntu.
## What Changed
- Restore `@vitejs/plugin-react` 4.7.0 in the Vite 6 runner package.
- Follow the repository policy: trusted PR CI regenerates and verifies
the lockfile artifact, and the master refresh workflow commits the
lock-only update after merge.
- Build the Runner Evalbook viewer in pull request CI.
## Verification
- `ci / policy`: regenerated the dependency lock artifact successfully
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner build:issue-thread`
- `actionlint .github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml
.github/workflows/runner-protocol-live-evals.yml`
- `node --test
packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/runner-protocol-eval-workflow-security.test.mjs`
- `git diff --check`
## Risks
Low risk. This change restores the previous React plugin major version
for one package. The selected version declares support for Vite 6. Pull
request CI now builds the affected viewer directly.
> This bug fix does not add or change a roadmap feature.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex with GPT-5. Tool use and code execution were enabled. The
Codex app managed the context window.
## 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.
> - Paperclip uses a paid full-stack campaign to verify runner behavior
across providers and environments.
> - The campaign already creates an interactive report, workflow logs,
and retained evidence artifacts.
> - The merge job summary shows result totals but does not link to those
resources.
> - Reviewers must search several workflow jobs and artifacts to find
the executed cells.
> - This pull request adds direct and safe links to the exact campaign,
each cell, the workflow logs, and the artifacts.
> - The benefit is that a reviewer can inspect a result from the Actions
summary with one click.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
This improves the `Merge and enforce campaign result` summary in the
`Runner Full-Stack E2E` workflow.
**Subsystem affected**
The runner E2E report generator and its GitHub Actions workflow are
affected.
**Current behavior**
The summary lists each selected cell and its result. It does not link to
the published campaign report, the workflow logs, or the evidence
artifacts.
**Proposed behavior**
The summary includes a `View results` section. It links to the exact
immutable campaign report, the workflow logs, and the artifacts. Each
cell name links to its stable section in the campaign report.
**Reason and benefit**
The current summary does not show reviewers where to inspect the run.
Direct links make the result evidence discoverable without manual URL
construction or artifact searches.
**Breaking changes**
None. This change only adds links and stable HTML anchors to existing
report output.
**Additional context**
Related: #12904. The cited successful campaign is [run
34026735033](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34026735033).
## What Changed
- Add a safe URL builder for public campaign, workflow, and artifact
links.
- Add a `View results` section to the GitHub Actions campaign summary.
- Link each summary table cell to its exact section in the immutable
campaign report.
- Add stable execution anchors to the generated dashboard.
- Reject non-HTTPS, credential-bearing, malformed, and ambiguous link
destinations.
- Document the new links and their retention or publication timing.
## Verification
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit` — 116 tests passed.
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm typecheck` — passed, including migration safety.
- `pnpm build` — passed.
- `pnpm exec prettier --check ...` for all changed files — passed.
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` — passed.
- The full local server suite also ran. One unrelated macOS
workspace-runtime file passed 157 tests and failed 4 existing path and
port assumptions. Two failures compare `/var` with `/private/var`. Two
failures cannot reserve a port outside a hard-coded range. This PR does
not change that file or its dependencies.
## Risks
- The immutable campaign link becomes available after the history
publisher completes. The workflow and artifact links remain available
while publication runs.
- The artifact link requires GitHub access and follows the existing
30-day retention period.
- Invalid configured URLs are omitted instead of being rendered into the
summary.
> 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 desktop agent with GPT-5. The runtime does not expose the
context-window size. The agent used repository inspection, agentic
reasoning, code execution, and GitHub CLI 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/no-internal-issue-references`, `fix/sandbox-secret-resolution`,
`feat/adapter-retry-backoff`) 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
> - The merged direct live eval workflow must read the private
`paperclip-evals` repository at an exact commit.
> - Its first hosted dispatch failed before provider execution because
the GitHub App token was minted from the `paperclip` repository
installation.
> - GitHub returned 404 while resolving the private eval commit, proving
that token did not have the required repository scope.
> - Minting each short-lived token from the exact private eval
repository installation supplies only the cross-repository read boundary
the workflow needs.
> - A workflow regression now verifies every eval-token block keeps that
exact scope.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
The first default-branch run of Runner Direct Live Protocol Evals failed
in its immutable eval-commit verification step with HTTP 404. No
provider jobs ran and no provider spend occurred.
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
It allows the protected direct live eval workflow to verify and check
out the private `paperclipai/paperclip-evals` repository.
**Current behavior**
All four eval-token blocks set `GH_REPO` to `paperclipai/paperclip`,
selecting a token installation that cannot read the private eval
repository.
**Proposed behavior**
Set `GH_REPO` to the exact `paperclipai/paperclip-evals` repository in
authorization, catalog, matrix, and report jobs.
**Reason and benefit**
The app mints a short-lived token from the correct repository
installation while the main repository continues to use its ordinary
read-only workflow token.
**Breaking changes**
None.
## What Changed
- Scoped all four private-eval installation tokens to
`paperclipai/paperclip-evals`.
- Added a regression requiring that exact scope in every token block.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner
test:runner-protocol-eval-publish` — 15 passed.
- `node --test .github/scripts/tests/get-bot-token.test.mjs` — 3 passed.
- `actionlint .github/workflows/runner-protocol-live-evals.yml` —
passed.
- `git diff --check` — passed.
## Risks
- The workflow reads a private repository. The token is still
short-lived, repository-specific, masked immediately, and used only by
the protected default-branch workflow.
- This changes no provider execution, Runner behavior, report content,
S3 publishing, or browser E2E behavior.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex on GPT-5. The exact deployment ID and context-window size
are not exposed. The model used reasoning, repository inspection, code
editing, GitHub Actions diagnostics, 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 and contains no internal
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 where applicable
- [x] I have considered and documented 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
> - Daytona preserves a stopped sandbox filesystem, but deleting or
replacing a sandbox removes its only remote copy.
> - Warm reuse therefore improves latency but cannot be Paperclip's
durability boundary.
> - The host execution workspace must remain authoritative after every
successful turn, while same-run recovery must avoid overwriting
unexported remote work.
> - Result proposal, workspace export/merge, and terminal completion
need a durable, replayable ordering so a crash never starts a duplicate
provider turn.
> - A paid browser acceptance suite must exercise both legacy Codex and
Runner Codex for three real turns on one continuously warm Daytona
sandbox.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12901.
Runner Codex did not previously export successful Daytona workspace
changes back to the authoritative host workspace. That made warm reuse
depend on Daytona's remote filesystem and left deleted/replacement
sandboxes without a reliable reconstruction path. The existing paid
fixture also lacked a focused three-turn continuity case for both Codex
adapters.
## What Changed
- Persist versioned, atomic native workspace-sync descriptors and
durable seeds in `PAPERCLIP_HOME`, without credentials or a database
migration.
- Classify fresh, warm, replacement, and same-run-recovery workspace
preparation explicitly; ambiguous lease/root/digest evidence fails
closed.
- Finalize native workspace export/merge after semantic result proposal
and before run completion, with idempotent replay that never submits a
second provider turn.
- Surface legacy Codex workspace restoration failures instead of masking
them, while preserving an earlier provider error when both fail.
- Keep healthy reusable Daytona leases warm for legacy and native
adapters, stamp finalized workspace generations, and retain existing
cleanup behavior for per-turn or unhealthy leases.
- Preserve Runner Codex's provider process/session across warm turns,
including bounded post-terminal tail draining and exact authority
rotation.
- Add the exact paid `daytona-warm-continuity` matrix:
- `legacy-codex × daytona × warm-three-turn`
- `runner-codex × daytona × warm-three-turn`
- Drive all three turns through the browser, verify ordered file
continuity and stable lease/workspace/runtime identities, capture
per-turn timings, and delete the sandbox immediately after assertions.
- Document `pnpm test:e2e:runner -- --suite daytona-warm-continuity`; no
package script was added.
## Verification
- `pnpm typecheck` — passed, including migration safety (no migration
added)
- Focused server/runner Vitest coverage — 144 passed
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit` — 114 passed
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck` — passed
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:codex` — 66 passed,
1 helper ignored
- `native-session-executor.test.ts` — 139 passed, including safe
fail-closed cleanup after remote runner identity capture failure
- Paid local browser acceptance, exact post-rebase Linux/amd64 runner
binary:
- Runner Codex — passed in 1.7m; 3 runs; lease outcomes `created,
resumed, resumed`; 10/10 matchers; cleanup passed
- Legacy Codex — passed in 2.7m; 3 runs; lease outcomes `created,
resumed, resumed`; 10/10 matchers; cleanup passed
- [Protected paid GitHub Actions
campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34026735033)
against `7da42a91b95fa7fb2df126668ef7e37afb3b2b9d` — passed 2/2:
- Runner Codex — 3 runs; lease outcomes `created, resumed, resumed`;
evidence and cleanup passed
- Legacy Codex — 3 runs; lease outcomes `created, resumed, resumed`;
evidence and cleanup passed
- Merge/enforcement, S3 history, and Pages publication jobs passed
- Paid result artifacts were scanned for both provider credentials;
neither secret was present.
- Current PR checks — 31 passed, 1 expected Storybook skip; Greptile
5/5; Superagent security scan passed
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` — passed
- Confirmed no `package.json`, lockfile, migration, or SQL changes.
## Risks
- Workspace synchronization now sits on the terminal-success path, so a
remote export failure deliberately prevents false success. Retryable
state retains its lease/seed; loss of the only unexported remote copy
fails closed.
- Warm provider reuse has strict identity and quiescence checks.
Mismatched or ambiguous evidence blocks reuse rather than risking
concurrent provider work.
- The paid suite incurs Daytona and Codex cost only in the existing
protected scheduled/manual workflow and explicitly destroys its sandbox
after each cell.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5 agentic reasoning, repository inspection, real
browser E2E execution, Rust/TypeScript test execution, and GitHub
Actions diagnostics.
## 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 an existing issue or described the issue
in-PR
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [x] My branch name contains no internal ticket id
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have documented the dedicated suite invocation without adding a
package script
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green on the current revision
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
on the current revision
- [x] I will address all reviewer comments before requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The Runner executes agents through native and managed provider
drivers.
> - The direct live eval layer had drifted from the current Runner
contracts.
> - The old local workflow did not provide a complete parallel campaign
or durable report history.
> - The Runner also needed current native OpenCode and OpenRouter
qualification.
> - This pull request restores the direct campaign, corrects the runtime
gaps that the campaign found, and adds safe hosted Evalbook history.
> - The benefit is repeatable model comparison against an immutable
Runner and eval source revision.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #11297
Refs #11634
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
This improves the direct live `paperclip-runner` eval workflow, provider
execution contract, and static Evalbook reporting path.
**Current behavior**
The direct evals do not have one maintained full campaign on current
`master`. OpenCode has no qualified multi-model OpenRouter roster.
Parallel provider bursts can compact committed events before the
transport observes them. Local reports do not have a separate safe S3
history index.
**Proposed behavior**
Run one immutable roster-plus-case matrix. Use the shared paid AWS
runner fleet. Keep raw artifacts access-controlled. Publish a sanitized
canonical Evalbook report under the separate `runner-protocol-evals` S3
prefix. Keep immutable campaign directories plus root history, latest,
and latest-green pointers.
**Reason and benefit**
Maintainers can compare native Codex, native OpenCode, ACPX, Claude
Managed, and AWS AgentCore behavior over time. They can inspect failures
without mixing this direct protocol layer with browser full-stack E2E.
**Breaking changes**
None. The new workflow and S3 prefix are additive. The existing Runner
full-stack E2E workflow and report remain separate.
## What Changed
- Added a trusted two-shard direct live workflow for up to 393
roster-plus-case cells.
- Reused the numeric actor allowlist, protected paid environment, and
RunsOn fleet controls from Runner full-stack E2E.
- Added immutable Runner and eval revision resolution, exact credential
boundaries, bounded retries, and cost ceilings.
- Added a public report projection that removes sessions, transcripts,
tool payloads, state, traces, raw failures, remote profile identities,
and credential-shaped values.
- Added additive S3 history under `runner-protocol-evals`, with
immutable campaigns and mutable root index pointers.
- Added native OpenCode model injection and current OpenRouter pricing
contracts.
- Fixed direct eval completion, workflow execution, semantic discovery,
warm-attach state reset, executable binding, and event-burst handling.
- Kept Runner browser full-stack E2E behavior and publication separate.
- Documented local and hosted direct eval operation.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner
test:runner-protocol-eval-publish` — 15 passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner build:typescript` —
passed.
- `actionlint .github/workflows/runner-protocol-live-evals.yml
.github/workflows/runner-full-stack-e2e.yml` — passed.
- Local current matrix at the revision in
[paperclip-evals#17](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-evals/pull/17)
— 323 cells across 10 enabled configurations completed.
- Final local current matrix — 269 passed, 11 behavior failures, and 43
expected macOS-only ACPX platform failures.
- Targeted Runner checks — 13/13 eval-session tests, 15/15
publisher/security tests, and package typecheck passed; complete PR CI
is green, including all browser E2E shards.
## Risks
- Paid live campaigns can consume provider budget. Actor authorization,
exact per-cell ceilings, protected environments, and explicit schedule
enablement bound this risk.
- Public reports can leak provider data. The workflow publishes only a
separately projected report and validates every file before upload.
- The new workflow cannot publish until it is present on the default
branch. This pull request does not change the existing
`runner-full-stack-e2e` publication path.
- The campaign is large. It uses two GitHub matrices and caps combined
concurrency at the shared fleet limit.
> 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 on GPT-5. The exact deployment ID and context-window size
are not exposed. The model used reasoning, code editing, browser
inspection, repository tools, and live provider 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
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Managed GitHub connections resolve a responsible user's or dedicated
agent's identity into an audited, run-scoped credential projection.
> - An enrolled instance could retain a hidden managed setup method
after Cloud stopped advertising it, producing a blank, disabled setup
step.
> - Native runner processes also dropped the resolved GitHub projection
before the provider shell, so `gh` and Git could not use the selected
identity in Daytona.
> - Daytona already provides the outer isolation boundary. Applying
Codex's inner Linux sandbox there both duplicated containment and failed
because nested user namespaces are unavailable.
> - This change repairs setup fallback, carries only the bounded GitHub
projection across each runner boundary, and allows only a
controller-selected managed sandbox transport to act as the outer
sandbox.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
An enrolled self-hosted instance could show a blank GitHub setup step
when its managed profile was unavailable. Separately, a native Codex run
in Daytona could resolve a managed GitHub connection on the Paperclip
host but lose it before the provider shell. Once projected, Codex's
nested sandbox failed before commands could run because Daytona does not
expose the user-namespace operation used by the inner sandbox.
**Expected behavior**
Setup must select an advertised customer method when the managed method
is unavailable. A Daytona run must receive the exact managed GitHub
identity selected for that run, support `gh` and HTTPS Git, and rely on
Daytona as its outer sandbox without weakening local or SSH execution.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Enroll a self-hosted instance while Cloud does not advertise the
managed GitHub profile and open GitHub setup.
2. Observe the blank second step and disabled action.
3. Configure a native Codex agent with a Daytona environment and a
responsible-user GitHub grant.
4. Run `gh api user` or HTTPS Git from the agent shell.
5. Observe missing GitHub environment projection or nested-sandbox
startup failure.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The setup bug reproduces on `1dceee9a4`; the runner proof was developed
from the same branch and verified at the latest head below.
**Deployment mode**
Self-hosted Paperclip enrolled with Paperclip Cloud, using the Daytona
sandbox-provider plugin and native Paperclip runner.
## What Changed
- Wait for connector enrollment hydration, retain a hidden managed
method only while enrollment is needed, and otherwise select an
advertised customer fallback.
- Add a single bounded GitHub credential-environment projection for
`GH_TOKEN`, `GITHUB_TOKEN`, the process-only Git helper token, GitHub
commit identity, and at most 32 controller-generated Git config entries.
- Forward that projection through the durable controller, Codex
app-server transport, and Rust provider child without placing token
values in arguments or config.
- Allow Codex shell inheritance only for the exact projected GitHub keys
and enable provider network access only when the managed credential
exists.
- Derive outer-sandbox authority exclusively from a managed `sandbox`
transport; strip the same flag from configured, host, local, and SSH
environments.
- Define a named external-sandbox permission profile that Codex resolves
to `dangerFullAccess` for default-mode Daytona turns while plan mode
remains read-only.
- Add regression tests for setup fallback, credential projection,
local/SSH/sandbox authority separation, provider forwarding, and
permission-profile selection.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/pages/apps/AppsConnect.test.tsx` — 96
passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/drivers/codex/codex-security-config.test.ts
src/drivers/codex/app-server-transport.test.ts
src/control-plane/durable-prp-control-plane.test.ts` from
`packages/paperclip-runner` — 31 passed.
- Focused native-session executor tests — 3 passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed.
- `cargo test --manifest-path
packages/paperclip-runner/runner/Cargo.toml --locked -p
paperclip-runner-core --lib` — 194 passed.
- Real Codex app-server configuration probe accepted
`paperclip-runner-external-sandbox` and reported
`sandbox.type=\"dangerFullAccess\"` while using the named profile.
- [Signed Daytona image
workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33995270328)
built commit `86571f7997e7100e47bd131aac1f1e773112a0ce`; the isolated
environment was pinned to
`sha256:ecef21105f8de382d75787e59439d936be239b77ae74a31c8ed3a17cde39b023`.
- Live isolated Daytona proof passed: the three projected token
variables were non-empty and equal; the host-scoped Git credential
helper returned the same token without printing it; `gh api user`
resolved `cryppadotta`; authenticated `git ls-remote
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git HEAD` returned
`1dceee9a4e75b13456760bb54c752deb2dba1d79`; no repository mutation
occurred.
- The persisted 28,476-byte run log contains no GitHub token shape,
bearer header, credential-bearing URL, or private-key marker.
- Latest-head pull-request CI and reviews provide the remaining
full-suite gate.
## Risks
- This deliberately gives shell Git and `gh` access to the run's
resolved GitHub identity. It is the audited class-3 behavior required by
the GitHub connection design and is outside per-tool Ask-first controls.
- The credential source is the trusted broker projection, which
overwrites configured environment values. The helper is scoped to HTTPS
`github.com`, revalidates protocol and host, and never places its token
in command arguments, URLs, or files.
- Managed Daytona sandboxes become the containment boundary for
default-mode provider commands. Local and SSH targets retain the inner
Codex workspace sandbox, and plan mode remains read-only everywhere.
> 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, with reasoning, browser control, shell access,
and code execution. The product did 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
- [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 manages AI agent work and the execution state for each
task.
> - Remote agents run in sandbox environments such as Daytona.
> - Daytona keeps files while a sandbox is stopped, but deletion removes
those files.
> - Runner Codex did not copy successful remote workspace changes back
to the host workspace.
> - A warm sandbox could therefore hide data loss until Daytona replaced
or deleted the sandbox.
> - This pull request makes the host workspace durable after every
successful turn and keeps verified reusable sandboxes warm.
> - The benefit is reliable multi-turn work across warm reuse, restart,
stop, and sandbox replacement.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
A successful native Codex turn in Daytona could leave workspace changes
only in the remote sandbox. A later warm turn appeared to work because
it reused that filesystem. A replacement sandbox could start from stale
host data and lose the successful changes.
**Expected behavior**
Paperclip must merge each successful remote turn into the authoritative
host workspace before it completes the run. A verified warm lease may
reuse its remote files. A replacement lease must reconstruct the exact
durable workspace seed.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run Codex in a reusable Daytona environment.
2. Write a file during one successful turn.
3. Replace the Daytona sandbox before the next turn.
4. Observe that the next turn can start without the prior file on the
unpatched code.
Related remote workspace foundation: #10070.
## What Changed
- Added explicit `host_current`, `durable_seed`, and `adopt_remote`
workspace preparation modes.
- Added atomic, versioned native workspace descriptors and seed archives
under `PAPERCLIP_HOME`.
- Added real native sandbox export and three-way host merge before
terminal result completion.
- Added workspace-only recovery after a proposed result. Recovery does
not submit another provider turn or consume the provider retry budget.
- Added fail-closed handling when a sandbox with unexported changes is
gone.
- Kept healthy reusable Daytona sandboxes started for legacy Codex and
Runner Codex.
- Kept the Runner Codex process and provider session across verified
warm turns.
- Added the paid `daytona-warm-continuity` browser suite. It contains
exactly the legacy Codex and Runner Codex cells. Each cell performs
three measured turns.
- Documented `pnpm test:e2e:runner -- --suite daytona-warm-continuity`.
No package script was added.
- Added no database migration. The metadata format is backward
compatible and idempotent.
## Verification
- `pnpm typecheck`
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit` — 114 passed
- Native workspace, finalizer, session, and environment tests — 232
passed
- Daytona provider tests — 150 passed
- Workspace staging and merge tests — 98 passed
- Runner transport tests — 63 passed
- Legacy Codex restore tests — 5 passed
- Rust format and compile checks pass through root typecheck
- The paid Daytona suite was not run locally because the required
Daytona, OpenAI, and immutable image credentials are not present.
## Risks
- The main risk is an incorrect workspace identity or merge after a
crash. Durable descriptors bind the run, workspace, lease, provider
lease, local root, remote root, and baseline digest. Ambiguous evidence
fails closed.
- The host merge may conflict with concurrent host edits. The existing
three-way merge and exclusion rules handle this case and surface
failures.
- A deleted sandbox cannot recover unexported bytes. Paperclip now
blocks with `workspace_sync_out_unrecoverable` instead of reporting
success or rerunning the provider.
- There is no database migration. Descriptor writes and recovery are
atomic and idempotent.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5. The run used agentic reasoning, repository
inspection, code execution, test execution, Git, and GitHub CLI 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
After a successful sign-in, a block of amber diagnostics flashed up and vanished as the step advanced. They are the identity and target INFO checks every environment test reports: they make the result a warn without blocking anything, and the step rendered any non-pass result, so they owned the screen for the window between the probe returning and setStep(5).
Gated on loading rather than the connect phase. A blocking result stops the hire and handleGiveHeartbeat clears loading in the finally after its early return, so a genuine block still shows its checks while a hire in flight shows none.
The button needed no change: step 4 forces the footer's loading to false and takes its label from connectCta, which reads Connecting for that whole window.
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agent authentication uses server sessions, plugin workers, and
browser login panels.
> - A page reload loses an active login session, and one worker permits
only one login terminal.
> - These limits cause lost work and prevent two owners from logging in
through one worker.
> - This pull request lets the browser resume active sessions and lets
workers serve concurrent login terminals.
> - The benefit is reliable login recovery with a bounded process-wide
route limit.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
It improves agent credential login recovery and concurrent login
terminal handling.
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting (multiple of the above).
**Current behavior**
A page reload loses the active login session. A shared plugin worker
rejects a second login terminal.
**Proposed behavior**
The browser reads and resumes the owner's active session. A worker
supports multiple login terminal routes under a process-wide ceiling.
**Reason and benefit**
Owners keep login progress after a reload. Two owners can log in through
one worker without removing the route limit.
**Breaking changes**
None. The change adds owner-scoped read routes and changes login
terminal concurrency.
## What Changed
- Replace the single worker login route with maps keyed by host route
and worker session identifiers.
- Add a process-wide login route ceiling and release each reserved slot
on every exit path.
- Add owner-scoped active-session reads with consistent negative
responses and private cache control.
- Keep the device-login prompt while the session has an active public
status.
- Add a durable setup-token cancel fallback for a lost in-memory
session.
- Resume active sessions when the agent configuration or onboarding
panel mounts.
- Remove routine unmount cancellation and keep explicit Cancel behavior.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclip/server test` — server route, service, and
plugin-worker-manager suites.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclip/plugin-sdk test` — worker RPC host suite.
- `cd ui && npx vitest run
src/components/AgentConfigForm.render.test.tsx
src/components/OnboardingWizard.test.tsx`.
- `cd ui && npx tsc -b`.
- `tests/e2e/onboarding.spec.ts` — reload during login.
- CI must pass on this pull request.
## Risks
The change affects agent authentication and the sandbox-to-host
boundary. Route cleanup must release every reserved slot. Owner checks
must prevent cross-owner session access. Tests cover route cleanup,
owner scope, reload recovery, and concurrent worker routes.
## Model Used
Codex, OpenAI GPT-5, tool use and code review support. The
implementation author owns the exact model details for the code changes.
## 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 with the relevant issue-template
fields
- [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
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented 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 server recovery service monitors active runs and applies
watchdog decisions
> - The watchdog rules and database operations lived in one large
recovery service
> - This structure made the rules harder to test and made company
scoping harder to inspect
> - This pull request moves the watchdog into domain, application, and
adapter layers
> - The benefit is a smaller recovery service, pure policy tests, and
clear company-scoped ports
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The active-run output watchdog that detects silence, suppression, and
terminal evidence.
**Current behavior**
The recovery service contains the watchdog policy, use cases, database
operations, and process control in one file.
**Proposed behavior**
A feature module separates pure policy, use cases and ports, and
Postgres and process adapters. The recovery service delegates its public
watchdog methods to this module.
**Reason and benefit**
The separation makes policy decisions easy to test. Company identifiers
on every reader and writer port make tenant scope clear. Smaller service
methods reduce change risk.
**Breaking changes**
None. The recovery service keeps its public methods and call sites.
Related public watchdog work includes
[#7043](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/7043) and
[#7770](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/7770).
## What Changed
- Add the `server/src/modules/active-run-watchdog/` feature module with
domain, application, and adapter layers.
- Move watchdog policy, use cases, Postgres access, and local process
control into the module.
- Keep the recovery service public methods and delegate them to the
module.
- Add 53 pure module test cases and retain 8 Postgres integration cases.
- Add company scoping and transaction rollback coverage.
## Verification
- Run `vitest run --config vitest.config.ts src/modules` and confirm 3
files and 53 cases pass.
- Run `vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-active-run-output-watchdog.test.ts` and confirm
1 file and 8 cases pass.
- Run the full server suite in pull request CI.
- Compare the type-check result with a fresh baseline on the same
checkout.
## Risks
The main risk is a behavior change in recovery decisions during the move
across layers. The pure policy tests cover the moved rules. The
integration tests cover database behavior, company scope, and
transaction rollback. Pull request CI runs the full server suite.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, runtime-managed context window, tool use, code
execution, and repository review support.
## 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] 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 that people use to manage AI agents
for work.
> - Connections give agents access to external services with a selected
credential identity.
> - A removed connection keeps its database row so Paperclip can retain
its history.
> - A fresh GitHub setup can select a different identity from the
removed connection.
> - The retained row incorrectly kept its old credential policy after
that new selection.
> - The GitHub callback then could not save the new grant and returned
the user to setup.
> - This pull request applies the explicit identity selection when
Paperclip revives an archived row.
> - The benefit is a successful GitHub reconnect after the user changes
from a dedicated agent account to a personal account.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
After a user removed a dedicated-agent GitHub connection, a fresh setup
with “My GitHub account” returned to the setup page with `oauth=failed`.
The Cloud claim succeeded, but the local connection still used the old
`per_agent` policy.
**Expected behavior**
A fresh setup must apply the explicit identity choice. An interrupted
draft or an explicit reconnect must keep its existing identity.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Connect GitHub with a dedicated agent identity.
2. Remove the connection.
3. Start a fresh GitHub connection with “My GitHub account.”
4. Complete GitHub OAuth.
5. Observe that Paperclip returns to the setup page instead of the
permissions page.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`342c01fee`
**Deployment mode**
Local dev (`pnpm dev`) with embedded Postgres and the staging managed
connector.
**Additional context**
This follows the GitHub access UI change in #12893.
## What Changed
- Apply an explicit Access identity when a fresh gallery setup revives
an archived connection row.
- Preserve the identity for interrupted drafts and explicit reconnects.
- Do not carry credential material across an identity change.
- Apply the omitted organization default during a fresh archived-row
recovery.
- Restore the prior grants and credential policy transactionally if a
revived setup rolls back.
- Disable the connection and surface a specific failure if that
restoration cannot complete.
- Preserve newer concurrent grant changes with a row lock and optimistic
version check.
- Preserve newer concurrent connection identity/configuration changes
with a locked state fingerprint.
- Add regressions for dedicated-to-personal OAuth, organization-default
recovery, rollback, rollback failure, and concurrent grant/connection
changes.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts` — 222 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed.
- Browser proof on an isolated local instance: dedicated connection
removed, personal setup selected, staging GitHub OAuth completed,
permissions page opened, connection reported active and healthy,
personal grant active, old agent grant revoked.
## Risks
- Low migration risk. This change has no schema migration.
- The behavior changes only when a fresh setup explicitly selects an
identity for an archived connection row.
- Existing draft resume and explicit reconnect behavior stays unchanged.
- Connection-manager checks still protect changes to a retained
credential identity.
> 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, 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 CLI provides a test-drive command for a ready local test
instance.
> - That command must accept a provider credential before it creates the
first agent.
> - The command did not accept a literal key and could lose an exported
key during server startup.
> - This pull request accepts both credential paths and captures the CLI
environment before startup.
> - The benefit is a reliable one-command test drive from an existing
shell.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12894
**What happened?**
`paperclipai test-drive --api-key <value>` failed because the option did
not exist. An exported canonical provider variable could also become
unavailable before the post-listen bootstrap read it.
**Expected behavior**
The command must accept a literal key when the operator requests it. The
command must also use a provider variable that was present when the CLI
started.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Export `ANTHROPIC_API_KEY` in the shell.
2. Run `pnpm paperclipai test-drive`.
3. Observe that bootstrap can report that no credential exists.
4. Run `pnpm paperclipai test-drive --api-key test-value`.
5. Observe that Commander reports an unknown option on the prior
implementation.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The problem exists on `master` after #12894.
**Deployment mode**
Local development with `pnpm` and the embedded database.
## What Changed
- Add the `--api-key <value>` test-drive option.
- Keep `--api-key` and `--api-key-env` mutually exclusive.
- Capture provider variables before in-process server startup changes
the process environment.
- Redact literal and environment-backed credentials from Paperclip
errors, including custom environment-variable names with surrounding
whitespace.
- Scrub split and joined literal-key forms from the JavaScript
`process.argv` view before telemetry, diagnostics, API work, or server
startup.
- Warn about process argument and shell history exposure without
printing the key.
- Add tests for literal keys, option conflicts, environment snapshots,
argv handling, and error redaction.
- Update the CLI and development documentation, including the remaining
external argv exposure tradeoff.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run cli/src/__tests__/test-drive.test.ts` passed 32
tests.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm build` passed.
- A live literal-key smoke test created one company and one CEO agent
without a provider call.
- A live exported-variable smoke test created the same clean instance
without credential flags.
- `pnpm test:run` completed locally with 5,870 passing tests and 19
host-dependent failures in six unrelated suites. The failures came from
macOS `/tmp` aliases, exhausted test ports, and existing
workspace-runtime fixture assumptions.
- GitHub CI passed the full build, typecheck, canary dry run, general
tests, serialized server tests, and e2e matrix on clean Linux runners.
- Greptile rated the exact latest head 5/5, Superagent passed, and all
review threads are resolved.
## Risks
- A raw value passed through `--api-key` can appear in operating-system
process listings, shell history, or parent-wrapper output before
Paperclip can scrub its own JavaScript argv view. The command warns
about this risk and Paperclip does not print the value.
- The environment snapshot contains the process environment only in
memory for the life of the foreground command.
- This change adds no schema migration and no REST endpoint.
> 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 exact deployment version and context window
are not exposed to the agent. Extended reasoning, tool use, code
execution, and GitHub access were enabled.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The server test suite checks issue-thread interaction routes
> - Shared Vitest mocks can keep queued one-shot values between tests
> - A leftover value can change the issue returned to a route and cause
a false authorization failure
> - This pull request resets all mocks and restores the plain
run-attribution value before each test
> - The benefit is stable interaction-route tests that do not depend on
test order
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
This pull request has no public issue link. The bug details follow.
**What happened?**
The interaction-route server test suite failed intermittently in
continuous integration. The test named `lets a watchdog-scoped assignee
withdraw through ordinary containment` sometimes failed because
`withdrawInteraction` received no call. The test suite used
`vi.clearAllMocks()`, which clears call history but does not clear
queued one-shot mock values. A queued value from
`mockIssueService.getById` could change a later test's issue and make
the route return `403`.
**Expected behavior**
Each test must start with empty mock queues and the default
run-attribution value. Test results must not depend on test order.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run the interaction-route test file many times in sequence.
2. Run the same file with shuffled test seeds.
3. Observe the intermittent containment failure before this change.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Current `master` plus commit `8cd56b38a77f1feecac495f57a48d3f0a1b3b01c`.
**Deployment mode**
Built from source. The failure occurs in the server test suite.
## What Changed
- Replace the partial mock reset with `vi.resetAllMocks()`.
- Reset `mockRunAttribution.value` before each test.
- Keep the change within the interaction-route test file.
## Verification
- The target suite passes 77 of 77 runs.
- The test count remains 64 `it(...)` sites, including five
`it.each(...)` blocks that expand to 77 runs.
- The file contains no skipped or focused tests.
- The diff changes no production code.
- A defect-detection round trip reproduces the failure when the
containment guard is broken and passes after the guard is restored.
- Ten sequential runs and five shuffled-seed runs pass 77 of 77.
## Risks
Low risk. The change affects test setup only. It does not change
production code or route behavior.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5, exact runtime model `gpt-5`, tool use and code execution,
context window not exposed by the runtime.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The server test suite checks issue comment and cancellation routes.
> - The comment-cancel route suite reloaded about 40 modules before
every test.
> - Repeated module reloads created a race between service mocks and
real services.
> - The race caused an HTTP 500 when the test expected HTTP 200.
> - This pull request loads the mocked module graph once for the suite.
> - The benefit is stable route tests with clearer diagnostics for
future failures.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
The comment-cancel route test suite failed intermittently in continuous
integration with an HTTP 500 where the test expected HTTP 200. The suite
reset modules and re-imported the route graph before every test. A
re-import could bind the real service module to the test's minimal fake
database and cause a `TypeError`.
**Expected behavior**
The suite must run all seven route tests without intermittent HTTP 500
responses. A future server error must show its underlying cause in the
test output.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-comment-cancel-routes.test.ts`.
2. Repeat the test command under continuous integration load.
3. Compare the result with a run that reloads the route module graph
before every test.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`0a6a7087ed6c3bb1cadf59fcfec362d6fc9a6d14`
**Deployment mode**
Built from source with the server test runner.
**Installation method**
Built from source.
**Agent adapter(s) involved**
Not adapter-specific (core test issue).
**Database mode**
Not database-related.
**Access context**
Unclear / not applicable.
**Additional context**
The route module and error-handler middleware remain real. The service
layer remains mocked. Authorization and non-leakage assertions remain
unchanged.
## What Changed
- Register mocks once and load the route module graph once through
`hoistModuleGraph`.
- Remove the per-test module reset and re-import.
- Add a `res.on("finish")` diagnostic listener for server error context.
- Keep all seven test titles and the existing authorization assertions.
## Verification
- Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-comment-cancel-routes.test.ts`.
- Confirm that all seven tests pass.
- Confirm that the full continuous integration suite passes on this pull
request.
## Risks
Low risk. This change modifies one test file and does not change
production code or test coverage. The local worktree cannot start this
suite because it lacks `packages/adapters/droid-local`; continuous
integration must verify the complete repository dependency set.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The model used repository tools, GitHub tools, and
code review reasoning. The execution context window is not exposed by
the runtime.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` /
`Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the
relevant issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Approval routes use server tests to protect access and idempotency
behavior
> - The approval routes test suite loaded mocked modules at the same
time
> - Concurrent module loading could lose a service mock and produce a
false test failure
> - This pull request loads the shared module graph once and reuses it
across the suite
> - The benefit is stable approval route tests with unchanged coverage
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
The approval routes test suite loaded two mocked modules in one
concurrent import. A module interleaving could remove the approval
service mock. The route then returned HTTP 404 instead of the expected
HTTP 403.
**Expected behavior**
The suite must keep the approval service mock when it loads the route
modules. The access test must return HTTP 403 on every run.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run `npx vitest run
server/src/__tests__/approval-routes-idempotency.test.ts`.
2. Repeat the test command while the test runner loads the module graph.
3. Observe a false HTTP 404 result when the module mock interleaves.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Current `master` at the base commit of this pull request.
**Deployment mode**
Built from source with the server test runner.
## What Changed
- Reused the existing `hoistModuleGraph` helper for the approval route
modules.
- Loaded the route modules once in sequence instead of in one concurrent
import.
- Kept per-test mock behavior, Express app setup, database doubles, test
names, and assertions unchanged.
## Verification
- `npx vitest run
server/src/__tests__/approval-routes-idempotency.test.ts` — 11 of 11
tests passed.
- Ten repeat runs passed.
- `npx tsc --noEmit -p server` produced no new errors against the base
branch.
- All Paperclip CI checks passed.
- Greptile reported 5/5 with no open findings.
## Risks
This change affects test module setup only. It does not change
production code or test coverage. Risk is low.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with the `gpt-5` model family. The serving snapshot and
context-window size are not exposed. The agent used reasoning,
repository tools, code execution, 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 found no
duplicate for this test race
- [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 user interface tests verify company skill installation flows.
> - The install-preview dialog sets state through passive React effects.
> - The local test helper flushed render work but did not flush passive
effects.
> - Timer hops did not guarantee that React completed those effects
before user actions.
> - This pull request delegates the helper to React act and removes the
timer hops.
> - The benefit is deterministic CompanySkills tests without a
product-code change.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
The CompanySkills install-preview dialog tests used a timer hop after
opening the dialog. The timer could run before React completed passive
effects. A later click then used stale dialog state.
**Expected behavior**
The test helper must flush passive effects before the test interacts
with the dialog. The tests must pass without a race between timer
callbacks and React scheduler tasks.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run the CompanySkills test file many times from the ui directory.
2. Observe intermittent failures that report an empty agent list or a
null slug.
3. Run the same tests with React act to flush passive effects.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Commit 834f33c31b.
**Deployment mode**
Local dev (pnpm dev).
**Installation method**
Built from source (pnpm dev / pnpm build).
**Agent adapter(s) involved**
Not adapter-specific (core bug).
**Database mode**
Not database-related.
## What Changed
- Delegate the local test helper to React act.
- Remove four setTimeout(0) hops that no longer provide synchronization.
- Keep all 29 tests and all product code unchanged.
## Verification
- Run npx vitest run src/pages/CompanySkills.test.tsx from ui/.
- Run pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec tsc --noEmit.
- Confirm that the full CI suite passes.
## Risks
Low risk. The change affects one test helper and one test file. It
changes test synchronization only.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, with tool use and code review support. The exact
context window and reasoning configuration are not exposed in this run.
## 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 (for example test/...) and
contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Connections show the identity and access that agents use
> - The GitHub permissions page showed several operational fields in one
large status card
> - That card made the repository actions harder to scan
> - A dedicated GitHub identity also named its agent without linking to
the agent
> - The permanent shell Git warning also competed with the controls it
explained
> - This pull request replaces the card with two compact action rows,
links the agent label, and reveals the warning only when an action
permission is changed
> - The benefit is a shorter page with direct navigation to the controls
that matter
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Related: #12891
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The GitHub connection permissions view.
**Subsystem affected**
`ui/` — React and Vite board UI.
**Current behavior**
The view shows installation, token, webhook, event, and refresh metadata
in a large card. The dedicated-agent text is not interactive, and a
shell Git warning is always visible even before the user interacts with
action permissions.
**Proposed behavior**
Show one repository-management row and one access-refresh row. Link the
dedicated-agent text to that agent. Hide the shell Git warning until the
user changes an action permission, then show it in the Actions section.
**Reason and benefit**
The two actions are easier to find. Users can open the dedicated agent
directly, and see the shell Git limitation at the moment it becomes
relevant.
**Breaking changes**
None. This change removes secondary display fields from this view. It
does not change GitHub credentials, grants, or API data.
## What Changed
- Replaced the GitHub status card with repository and refresh rows.
- Kept the token-backed all-repositories warning inside the repository
row.
- Added explicit labels for selected, all, mixed, and empty repository
access.
- Added a direct link from “Used only by” to the dedicated agent.
- Moved the shell Git/`gh` warning into the Actions section and reveal
it only after a permission-change attempt.
- Added render coverage for the rows, removed fields, links, actions,
and contextual warning.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/pages/apps/AppDetail.test.tsx` — 50 tests
passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build` — passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — passed.
- Verified the live page initially hides the shell warning, then shows
it after changing an action permission; restored the test permission
afterward.
## Risks
Low risk. This is a display-only change. The existing management URL,
refresh action, and action-permission mutations are unchanged.
> 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, tool use, code
execution, browser control, and multi-file repository editing. The
context window size 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 uses runner end-to-end reports to compare agent profiles
and execution environments
> - The report dashboard shows each reviewed final-state screenshot as a
thumbnail and gallery item
> - The public history publisher removed all per-attempt images before
it regenerated the dashboard
> - Therefore the public dashboard had the new layout but could not show
the screenshots from the run
> - The publisher needs a narrow rule that keeps only screenshots from
the exact live fixture issue route
> - This pull request keeps those trusted PNG files in every future
public S3 and GitHub Pages report
> - The benefit is that each future report can show its screenshot
gallery without exposing logs, traces, videos, archives, arbitrary
images, or generated report trees
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
The runner E2E job captured final-state screenshots in its private
artifact. The public S3 and GitHub Pages publication step removed those
screenshots before it regenerated the dashboard. As a result, the public
report showed the new dashboard controls but no screenshot thumbnails or
gallery items.
**Expected behavior**
Each future public runner E2E report must include reviewed PNG
screenshots from the live fixture issue. Other captures and active or
unsafe evidence must stay private.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run the runner full-stack E2E workflow on `master` before this
change.
2. Open the private `runner-e2e-report-*` artifact and confirm that it
contains per-attempt PNG screenshots.
3. Open the public campaign URL and confirm that the dashboard has no
screenshot gallery items.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The issue was reproduced on commit `64d8929`, after the report design
change in PR #12889.
**Deployment mode**
GitHub Actions with the public S3 and GitHub Pages report publishers.
Related design work: Refs #12889.
## What Changed
- Mark screenshots from the exact server-created live fixture issue
route with `public-runner-fixture`.
- Keep marked PNG files in both the S3 history bundle and the GitHub
Pages bundle.
- Keep captures from other issue routes, sensitive routes, and external
origins private.
- Bind public files to the normalized execution ID, attempt, and safe
PNG base name.
- Validate every retained image with the existing PNG signature and 12
MiB size checks.
- Skip missing-artifact sentinel results with attempt `0` when they have
no public screenshots.
- Continue to remove unmarked images, videos, traces, archives,
generated HTML reports, and other private evidence.
- Update publisher tests, workflow checks, report copy, and the
public-evidence security documentation.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts
tests/runner-e2e/history.test.ts tests/runner-e2e/report.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts
tests/runner-e2e/workflow-security.test.ts -t "uses environment-scoped
OIDC"`
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`
- `PAPERCLIP_PLAYWRIGHT_CHANNEL=chrome pnpm exec playwright test
--config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts
tests/e2e/runner-e2e-dashboard.spec.ts`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- Regenerated the dashboard from retained evidence for Actions run
`33968240659` without a paid matrix rerun. The public-stage proof
contained 121 screenshot gallery items and thumbnail frames, with zero
generated HTML report files. The trusted-fixture marker and route gate
have separate focused tests.
- All pull request CI checks pass on commit `ccd2b49e1`.
## Risks
- This change intentionally makes marked fixture screenshots public at
the campaign URL. A screenshot can show data that a raw-byte secret scan
cannot detect.
- The capture helper marks a screenshot only on the exact loopback issue
route for the fixture that the harness created. A different issue,
sensitive page, or external origin stays private.
- The publisher also requires the marker, a safe normalized path, a
valid PNG signature, and the size limit.
- The change does not publish videos, logs, traces, archives, arbitrary
images, or generated browser report trees.
> 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, model `gpt-5.6-sol`, with high reasoning, repository
tool use, shell execution, browser inspection, and GitHub CLI access.
The working context was the Codex desktop task context.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
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
> - Managed connections let agents use provider credentials without
exposing those credentials to the control plane UI
> - A self-hosted instance must first establish a trusted credential
destination with Paperclip Cloud
> - The GitHub connection flow repeated that trust decision before
provider consent
> - The local setup route also lost step 2 after enrollment and could
display the PAT identity defaults before enrollment
> - This pull request makes enrollment a one-time instance decision and
sends later provider starts directly to provider consent
> - The benefit is a shorter flow with one clear Paperclip approval and
no required service restart
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12843.
Companion Cloud change:
[paperclipai/paperclip-cloud#391](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-cloud/pull/391).
## What Changed
- Made `stage=setup` authoritative during initial route hydration and
enrollment return.
- Added a contained one-time enrollment screen with provider-specific
copy.
- Accepted a provider `authorizationUrl` from Paperclip Cloud only when
it matches the exact GitHub or Google OAuth endpoint.
- Preferred the direct provider URL while retaining the legacy
confirmation URL fallback.
- Preserved the company-bound identity and agent-access draft across the
full-page enrollment callback, including cold company-context hydration.
- Kept GitHub defaulted to “My GitHub account” and “Any agent,”
including before Cloud advertises the managed method.
- Updated GitHub identity and agent-access copy for responsible-person
and dedicated-agent behavior.
- Labeled the provider action “Continue to GitHub.”
- Added parser, routing, cold-hydration, access-restoration, visibility,
fallback, defaults, and copy tests.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/paperclip-cloud-connector.test.ts
ui/src/pages/apps/AppsConnect.test.tsx` (114 tests passed)
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- Live browser proof used a new data directory on `127.0.0.1:3117` and
the exact Cloud PR revision on staging.
- The fresh flow selected “My GitHub account” and “Any agent,” showed
one enrollment approval, returned to local step 2, and connected GitHub
without a second Paperclip confirmation or login.
- The connected screen showed one selected repository, a long-lived
token, installation metadata, a successful access refresh, and healthy
webhook delivery.
- Gmail on the same instance went directly to Google consent without
another Paperclip approval.
- Restarting the same data directory preserved enrollment. A second new
data directory required exactly one new approval.
- A final fresh-data-dir rerun selected a dedicated GitHub identity for
Ada before enrollment, approved the instance once, returned to step 2,
retained Ada after a Back check, connected directly through GitHub, and
finished with “Used only by Ada,” one selected repository, and a
long-lived token.
- Port 3100 remained untouched throughout the proof.
## Risks
- The new Cloud field is additive and restricted to the exact GitHub and
Google OAuth origins and paths, with no embedded credentials or URL
fragment.
- An older Cloud response still works through `confirmationUrl`.
- A self-hosted instance still requires one signed Cloud enrollment.
Managed Cloud instances do not render the enrollment screen.
- Provider authentication and consent remain mandatory after instance
enrollment.
- No schema migration is included in this pull request.
> 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, tool use, code
execution, browser control, and multi-file repository editing. The
context window size 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
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The runner E2E suite verifies complete agent tasks against real
providers.
> - A Codex Plan test finished in 76 seconds, but its Playwright process
stayed alive for 25 more minutes.
> - The launcher accepted the saved passing result after its watchdog
killed the process.
> - The existing Plan limits also allowed much more time than recent
successful runs need.
> - This pull request adds a bounded result-to-exit check and safe
process evidence.
> - It also reduces the Plan limits while it keeps large headroom over
measured success times.
> - The benefit is faster diagnosis and no false green result after a
teardown stall.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Pre-submission checklist**
I searched open pull requests for runner E2E timeout and Playwright
cleanup changes. I found no duplicate. The problem reproduces on
`master`.
**What happened?**
The local Codex Plan cell completed its test in 76 seconds. Playwright
then stayed alive for about 25 minutes. The launcher watchdog killed it
after 26.5 minutes, but the launcher still accepted the saved passing
result.
**Expected behavior**
The launcher must stop a process that stays alive after all results
exist. It must report a cleanup failure instead of a pass. Plan tests
must also use limits that match measured successful runs.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run `core-compatibility.runner-codex.local.plan-revise-accept`.
2. Observe a valid result and the Playwright pass output.
3. Observe that the process can stay alive until the old launcher
watchdog stops it.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The evidence came from `bcc6fe7a442dae74ab0321ad472f7536ffa58f04` in
[Actions run
33963318820](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33963318820).
## What Changed
- Reduce the Plan attempt limit from 20 to 8 minutes for local
execution.
- Reduce the Plan attempt limit from 35 to 12 minutes for Daytona
execution.
- Stop Playwright after it stays alive for 120 seconds after every
result exists.
- Record only allowlisted process kinds in the stall diagnostic.
- Validate process identities before cleanup and retain continuously
live process groups through member replacement.
- Treat watchdog, post-result, cleanup, and nonzero-exit conflicts as
cleanup failures.
- Keep interactive `--ui` and `--debug` sessions exempt from the
result-to-exit check.
## Verification
- Prettier completed for all changed files.
- `git diff --check` passed.
- Static review confirmed the timeout derivation and cleanup boundaries.
- An independent review found no blocking issue in the final patch.
- I did not run local tests, builds, or type checks because this
workstation must use the lightweight workflow.
- GitHub CI and the exact paid Codex Plan cell will verify this commit.
## Risks
The main risk is a false cleanup failure when Playwright needs more than
120 seconds after it writes all results. The allowance is separate from
the task limit. Interactive modes are exempt. The diagnostic does not
print command arguments or environment values.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5.6, 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
- [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 that people use to manage AI agents
for work.
> - The runner E2E system verifies agent profiles across supported
execution environments.
> - Its generated report is the main surface for inspecting those
results and their visual evidence.
> - Expanded matcher content could change the matrix column widths and
make comparisons difficult.
> - Screenshots also required extra navigation, and the report did not
have current-result search and filters.
> - This pull request stabilizes the matrix layout and makes visual
evidence directly browsable.
> - The benefit is faster inspection of retained test evidence without
another paid matrix run.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
The runner E2E report changed matrix column widths when a matcher table
expanded. The report also made screenshot comparison and current-result
discovery slower than necessary.
**Expected behavior**
The matrix columns must remain stable. Each retained screenshot must
appear as a thumbnail. The gallery must support keyboard navigation and
show the relevant execution metadata. The report must support
client-side search and filters.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open a runner E2E matrix report that contains retained screenshots.
2. Expand the matcher details in a matrix cell.
3. Observe the matrix column movement in the old report.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`8430bd897`
**Deployment mode**
Generated static runner E2E report.
## What Changed
- Keep matrix and matcher table widths stable when details expand.
- Show retained screenshot thumbnails in each test card.
- Add a full-screen evidence gallery with mouse, keyboard, and swipe
navigation.
- Show agent, environment, runtime, status, duration, token, and matcher
data in the gallery header.
- Add client-side search and profile, environment, suite, and status
filters below the report section tabs.
- Keep the filters in normal document flow while the report tabs remain
sticky.
- Add report generator assertions for the new layout and controls.
- Add Playwright coverage for filtering, stable matcher expansion, and
filtered gallery navigation.
## Verification
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts
tests/runner-e2e/report.test.ts`
- `PAPERCLIP_PLAYWRIGHT_CHANNEL=chrome pnpm exec playwright test
--config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts
tests/e2e/runner-e2e-dashboard.spec.ts`
- `node --test ./scripts/__tests__/e2e-shard.test.mjs`
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm test:run`
- `pnpm build`
- Regenerated the report from GitHub Actions run `33963318820` without
rerunning the matrix.
- Verified 121 retained thumbnails across 66 results in a local browser.
- Verified that expanded matchers keep matrix widths at 260, 486, and
486 pixels in a 1280-pixel viewport.
- Verified search, filters, modal metadata, and arrow-key gallery
navigation.
## Risks
Low risk. This change only modifies the static runner E2E report
generator and its tests. It does not change runner execution or retained
evidence data.
> This work is focused report polish. It does not duplicate planned core
work in `ROADMAP.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with `gpt-5.6-sol`. Codex desktop managed the context
window. The model used reasoning, filesystem tools, code execution,
GitHub CLI access, and in-app 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
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source 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
The shell carried two comments arguing opposite things: the older made the case for a 64px inset and said 40px was too wide, the newer made the case for the 40px the code uses. The older one had also drifted from the code independently - it described 68px sides and a 424px column while the file used --sz-64px, a 432px column.
One comment now: 40px sides, a 480px column, the measure the connect sequence is drawn to and which the arc shares. The earlier objection is kept and marked untested, with a note that if step 1 or step 3 reads loose the fix belongs in those steps' content rather than the shared shell.
Comment-only; no behaviour change.
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 is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Pull request CI runs through `pr.yml`, which pins the reusable
`pr-trusted.yml` workflow by commit SHA, so `pr-trusted.yml` changes
take effect only when the pin moves.
> - PRs #12855 and #12858 added the `docker_context_integrity` job and
wired it into the `verify` aggregate, but the pin still points at a
commit from before them.
> - Until the pin moves, a pull request that strips a committed Docker
build input still merges green and breaks every post-merge image build.
> - This pull request bumps the pin to the #12858 merge commit, the
standard second step of every `pr-trusted.yml` change.
> - The benefit is that the Docker context integrity gate now blocks
merges, which closes out the 2026-09-04 image-publishing incident end to
end.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12855 and #12858 (the gate this activates) and #12769 (the
incident that motivated it).
**What happened?**
The `docker_context_integrity` job exists on master but does not run on
pull requests, because `pr.yml` pins `pr-trusted.yml` at `a0a78ee6`,
which predates it.
**Expected behavior**
Pull requests run the gate, and the `verify` required check fails when a
change strips a committed Docker build input.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open any pull request before this change: the ci run shows no "Docker
context integrity" job.
2. After this change, the job runs on every full-CI pull request and
`verify` requires its result.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Pin moves from `a0a78ee60946a5f79f85b2bd0584fc766fae43bb` to `03609aa6`
(the #12858 merge commit).
**Deployment mode**
GitHub Actions pull request CI.
## What Changed
- `.github/workflows/pr.yml`: the `pr-trusted.yml` pin moves to the
#12858 merge commit. One line.
## Verification
- The pinned commit is master's current tip and contains the job, the
`verify` wiring, and both probe revisions; its own CI (on #12855 and
#12858) is fully green.
- This PR's ci run itself executes the newly pinned workflow, so the
gate's first live run is visible on this very pull request.
## Risks
- Low. Identical mechanism to every previous pin bump. If the new lane
misbehaves on some runner, reverting this one line restores the previous
pin.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
Claude Fable 5 (Anthropic, model id `claude-fable-5`), extended
thinking, agentic tool use in 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 (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 (one-line pin bump; the
pinned workflow's tests ran green on #12855/#12858)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable (covered by the pin
tests updated in #12855)
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (not
applicable to a pin bump)
- [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.
> - GitHub Actions builds the Docker images that ship Paperclip, and the
image build re-runs the runner's committed-artifact checks.
> - PR #12855 restored the capability-contract files that PR #12769's
context slimming stripped, and image builds then progressed one step
further in the chain.
> - The next check, `check:runner-workflow-traceability`, access()es
every regression test its spec names — `src/**/*.test.ts` files that the
same slimming block also strips.
> - Every image build since #12855 merged now fails there with ENOENT,
so image publishing is still down.
> - This pull request restores those files with one more narrow
exception and teaches the context probe to derive the required paths
from the spec itself.
> - The benefit is that image publishing recovers, and the probe now
covers this input class without a hand-maintained path list that could
rot.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12855 (first restoration from the same incident) and #12769 (the
context-slimming change).
**What happened?**
After #12855 merged, every `Docker` workflow run on master still failed,
now inside `check:runner-workflow-traceability`: `Error: ENOENT ...
access
'/app/packages/paperclip-runner/src/contracts/native-execution.test.ts'`.
The check access()es all 29 regression tests named by
`spec/evals/stress-workflow-traceability.json`; they are
`src/**/*.test.ts` files, and the
`packages/paperclip-runner/**/*.test.ts` ignore rule strips them from
the build context.
**Expected behavior**
The Docker build context must contain every file the image build reads.
The context-integrity probe must catch this class on the pull request,
including inputs named dynamically by a spec.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Check out master after #12855.
2. Run `docker buildx build -f .github/docker-context-checks.Dockerfile
.` with this PR's probe, or the real `Docker` workflow build.
3. Observe the ENOENT above; with this PR's `.dockerignore` exception,
both pass.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`bb920fb8` (first post-#12855 failing image build) through master tip.
**Deployment mode**
GitHub Actions image builds (`docker.yml`), consumed by managed cloud
deployments.
## What Changed
- `.dockerignore`: re-include
`packages/paperclip-runner/src/**/*.test.ts` and `.tsx` — the
traceability spec references only files under `src`, so the remaining
test exclusions stay.
- `.github/docker-context-checks.Dockerfile`: new spec-driven existence
walk that replicates the traceability check's own access() loop against
the exact build context. The path list comes from the spec at probe
time, so a future spec change is covered automatically; the check itself
still runs only inside the real image build, where `dist/` exists.
## Verification
- `docker buildx build -f .github/docker-context-checks.Dockerfile .`
without the `.dockerignore` exception: fails with the exact production
ENOENT (`src/contracts/native-execution.test.ts`).
- Same command with the exception: passes end to end (all probe stages,
including the drift checks from #12855).
- Static re-sweep of the remaining image-build chain steps
(`build:binary`, replay goldens, semantic-action catalog) against the
ignore rules: their inputs are all in the context; cargo needs no
`tests` directories (no crate declares an explicit `[[test]]` target).
## Risks
- Low. The exception re-adds source test files to the build context
only; image contents do not change (tests are neither compiled into the
production output nor run in the image build — the check only requires
that the referenced files exist).
- The probe addition is one dependency-free Node one-liner.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
Claude Fable 5 (Anthropic, model id `claude-fable-5`), extended
thinking, agentic tool use in Claude Code: GitHub Actions log forensics,
spec-driven path inventory, and local docker buildx verification in both
failing and fixed states.
## 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 (the probe in both
failing-before and passing-after states)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable (the spec-driven
probe walk is the regression test)
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
(inline comments explain the invariant)
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The main navigation and task detail view are core operator surfaces.
> - Several controls used different hover states, popover layouts, and
spacing rules.
> - Recent task actions also needed a compact menu and correct inbox
archive behavior.
> - These differences made the interface feel inconsistent and caused
some content to look crowded or clipped.
> - This pull request aligns these surfaces with the Paperclip design
tokens and current interaction patterns.
> - The benefit is a simpler and more consistent operator experience in
light and dark modes.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
Profile and organization popovers used inconsistent layouts. Navigation
controls used different hover and selected backgrounds. Task warnings
and the composer could crowd nearby content. Archiving a recent task
could also remove it from more than the inbox.
**Expected behavior**
Popover menus should use the same compact visual language. Navigation
controls should share readable hover and selected tokens. Task detail
content should keep consistent spacing. Archiving should hide a task
from the inbox while keeping it in the task list.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open the main sidebar in light or dark mode.
2. Open the profile and organization menus.
3. Hover navigation items, the organization trigger, the profile
trigger, and the feedback flag.
4. Open a task with a warning banner and a long thread.
5. Use the recent task overflow menu and archive a task.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduced on `master` before this branch.
**Deployment mode**
Local dev (`pnpm dev`).
## What Changed
- Rebuilt the profile and organization popovers with compact token-based
layouts.
- Matched organization popover width and alignment to the profile
popover.
- Unified sidebar hover and selected states in light and dark modes.
- Added a recent task overflow menu with rename, archive, and pause or
restart actions.
- Kept archived tasks in the task list while removing them from the
inbox.
- Improved warning banner and composer spacing in task detail views.
- Added and updated focused UI tests for the changed behavior.
## Verification
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` passed.
- The seven affected UI test files passed with 216 tests.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build` passed.
- GitHub CI passed the full build, typecheck and release registry,
general test, serialized server, canary dry-run, and end-to-end
matrices.
- Greptile reviewed commit `6e296be85` at 5/5 with no outstanding
actionable findings.
## Risks
- Risk is limited to sidebar presentation, recent task actions, and task
detail layout.
- The recent task archive action now follows inbox-only archive
semantics.
- No database schema or public API contract changed.
> I checked [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md). This pull request does not
duplicate planned core work.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5.6. The model used high reasoning, tool use, and
code execution. The context window size was not exposed.
## 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: Scott Tong <scott@scottsmbpm5max.lan>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents need source control access for repository work
> - A shared token cannot preserve the responsible person's identity or
an agent's dedicated identity
> - GitHub App tokens also need durable refresh, repository access
checks, and webhook delivery
> - Paperclip already has managed connections, encrypted grants, run
secret leases, and merge-confirmation behavior
> - This pull request extends those systems with GitHub identities
instead of adding a parallel credential system
> - The benefit is durable GitHub access with explicit identity,
repository, runtime, and webhook boundaries
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue describes this connection change. This
description follows the feature request template.
**Subsystem affected**
Connected Apps, connection grants, secret resolution, native Git runtime
setup, webhook processing, and the Apps UI.
**Problem or motivation**
Users need to connect GitHub once and let agents use the correct GitHub
identity. A run should use a dedicated agent account when one exists.
Otherwise, it should use the responsible person's account. The
connection must survive token expiry, repository access changes, and
temporary instance downtime.
**Proposed solution**
Add user-owned and agent-owned GitHub grants to the existing connection
model. Resolve one identity for MCP, Git, `gh`, health checks, and
webhook bindings. Store provider tokens in the existing encrypted secret
system. Refresh expiring token pairs under the existing lease and
compare-and-swap path. Register signed Cloud webhook bindings and
process normalized pull request and installation events through a
durable local inbox.
**Alternatives considered**
An organization-wide GitHub token would lose person and agent
attribution. Environment variables alone would bypass the managed
connection and grant model. A new GitHub-only credential store would
duplicate the existing secret and access systems. GitHub App
installation tokens and private-key custody remain outside this first
version.
**Roadmap alignment**
This change implements the Connected Apps direction. It also extends the
shipped MCP Tool Gateway, per-agent secret access, and
action-attribution systems. It does not add a repository catalog. The
open repository catalog work in
[#11234](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/11234) is related
and complementary.
## What Changed
- Added agent-owned connection grants and a per-agent credential policy
with company and subject constraints.
- Added a managed GitHub App method while keeping the personal access
token method as an advanced fallback.
- Added durable access-token and refresh-token handling with proactive
rotation and one automatic recovery after a provider `401`.
- Added GitHub identity and installation summaries without storing
repository-name lists.
- Added signed Cloud webhook binding, event lease, acknowledgement,
local idempotency, pull request merge processing, and installation
access handling.
- Added one identity resolver for MCP, native Git, `gh`, checkout,
health checks, and webhook bindings.
- Added a class-3 run projection for `GH_TOKEN`, `GITHUB_TOKEN`, a
`github.com`-only credential helper, SSH-to-HTTPS rewrite, and GitHub
noreply commit attribution.
- Added personal and dedicated-agent setup choices plus identity,
repository, continuity, and webhook status in the Apps UI.
- Added schema migrations, tests, and connection documentation.
## Verification
- The current head is fully green in GitHub CI, including build,
typecheck, all serialized/general server shards, all browser shards,
policy, canary dry run, review, and security checks.
- Live staging proof completed with a non-expiring GitHub App user
token, selected-repository installation, repository add/remove refresh,
managed MCP, native `gh`, HTTPS clone/push/delete, GitHub noreply commit
attribution, signed merged-PR webhook acceptance, durable
Cloud-to-instance delivery, and installation-access event processing.
Temporary branches and temporary repository access were removed
afterward.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed before and after the rebase onto
`origin/master`.
- `pnpm build` passed.
- The focused connector suite passed 285 tests after the rebase.
- The full stable suite passed 5,790 tests and failed 22 tests across 8
general server files. The failures reproduced as shared-runner
environment issues. They included `/tmp` versus `/private/tmp`, closed
database connections, and invalid high ephemeral ports. The focused
connection tests pass in isolation.
## Risks
- Migrations add agent grant subjects and a durable connection-event
inbox. Migration numbering and safety checks pass.
- A raw GitHub user token enters the agent process for Git and `gh`.
Per-tool Ask-first controls cannot limit those shell operations. The UI
warns users about this boundary.
- GitHub App user tokens can be non-expiring. Paperclip performs a
continuity check every 30 days, but provider revocation still requires a
reconnect.
- The webhook path accepts only signed and bounded payloads. It stores a
minimal normalized record and no raw provider payload.
- GitHub repository permissions remain authoritative. Removed access can
make a cached repository count temporarily stale, but runtime access
fails immediately.
> 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, tool use, code
execution, browser control, and multi-file repository editing. The
context window size 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
- [ ] 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 Runner owns durable provider sessions and streams their
work to the control plane.
> - Pull request #12845 added native restart recovery for live and dead
local runners.
> - A real browser test found three live-adoption gaps after that pull
request merged.
> - Lazy runner process ownership was not always stored before restart.
> - The old controller did not release its PRP authority without closing
the provider turn.
> - Reconnect events could arrive before the active provider turn was
restored.
> - This pull request closes those gaps and proves the same turn
completes after a UI hot restart.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12845
Related search results: #12646 covers indeterminate command results
after a runner restart. It does not cover controller adoption or
active-turn rebinding. No open duplicate pull request was found.
## What Changed
- Store lazy runnerd process ownership after provider session creation,
read, and resume.
- Detach native PRP controller authority during coordinated hot
shutdown. Keep the live provider turn running.
- Restore the exact checkpointed provider session when bounded PRP
identity events have been compacted.
- Restore the active provider turn before reconnect events are replayed.
This prevents `turn_binding_mismatch`.
- Keep exact live ownership by the current controller out of generic
orphan recovery.
- Add driver, transport, and server regression tests for these paths.
## Verification
- Ran 12 Codex driver lifecycle tests.
- Ran 53 runnerd transport tests.
- Ran 143 recovery and orphan-reaper server tests.
- Ran all 8 real-process restart recovery scenarios.
- Ran all 96 existing runner E2E unit tests.
- Ran runner TypeScript typecheck.
- Ran server TypeScript typecheck.
- Ran the migration replay test and migration safety checks.
- Tested the board UI on an isolated local instance. A real local
Codex-backed turn entered a 120-second terminal wait. The UI `Restart
now` action replaced the server and kept the same runner PID, process
start time, run ID, native session ID, runner ID, provider session ID,
and active turn. The original turn then completed.
- Confirmed one heartbeat run, no retry row, one result, one
proposed-result event, one terminal event, no protocol errors, no active
recovery state, and no surviving runner or provider process.
## Risks
- A live runner can continue provider work while no server owns the
control route. Recovery fails closed when the process fingerprint or
durable identity is ambiguous.
- Provider identity can be restored from the database only for an exact
verified adoption claim. An authenticated live `session.snapshot`
validates that identity before the driver can resume.
- The new detach path applies only to native sessions that expose
restart detachment. Other adapters keep their existing shutdown
behavior.
- This follow-up does not change the database migration or
`package.json`. The migration in #12845 remains replay-safe through `ADD
COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS` and its embedded-Postgres idempotence test. The
dedicated real-process command remains in `doc/DEVELOPING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex based on GPT-5. The exact serving build and
context-window size are not exposed. The run used extended reasoning,
repository tools, shell execution, and in-app browser automation.
## 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
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - GitHub Actions builds the Docker images that ship Paperclip, and
downstream deployments consume the `-cloud` image variant on every
master merge.
> - PR #12769 slimmed the Docker build context with a broad
`.dockerignore` block for `packages/paperclip-runner`, and the block
also removed three files the image build itself reads.
> - The image build re-runs the runner's generated-file drift checks, so
it found no committed capability contract in the context and failed on
every master commit after the merge.
> - PR CI never runs those checks against the Docker context, so the
pull request stayed green and the breakage only appeared post-merge, on
every image build.
> - This pull request restores the three files with narrow
`.dockerignore` exceptions and adds a PR CI job that runs the drift
checks against the exact Docker build context.
> - The benefit is that image publishing works again now, and the next
context-slimming regression fails the pull request instead of every
post-merge image build.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12769 (the context-slimming change that exposed this) and #12608
(which committed the generated contract outputs the image build checks).
**What happened?**
Every `Docker` workflow run on master failed from 2026-09-04 12:58Z
onward, in both the `build-and-push` and `build-and-push-cloud` jobs.
The failing step reported `Generated contract drift:
generated/capability/capability-contract.md` from
`check:capability-contract` inside `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server
build`. The committed contract file is current — regeneration on a full
checkout is a no-op. The file was simply absent from the build context:
the new `packages/paperclip-runner/**/*.md` ignore rule strips the
committed drift-check outputs
(`generated/capability/capability-contract.md`,
`generated/capability/downstream-handoff.md`), and the
`packages/paperclip-runner/docs` rule also strips
`docs/capability-contract.md`, which `check:capability-inventory` reads
next in the chain. No cloud image published for eight hours, which
stalled every downstream deployment that consumes the canary images.
**Expected behavior**
The Docker build context must contain every file the image build reads,
and a change that removes one must fail the pull request that introduces
it, not every image build after the merge.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Check out master at any commit from `af3023f1` onward.
2. Run `docker buildx build -f .github/docker-context-checks.Dockerfile
.` (the probe added by this PR), or start the real `Docker` workflow
build.
3. Observe `Generated contract drift:
generated/capability/capability-contract.md` — while `node
packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/generate-capability-contract.mjs
--check` passes on the same checkout outside Docker.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`d593463ab` (master tip at diagnosis time; first failing commit
`af3023f1`).
**Deployment mode**
GitHub Actions image builds (`docker.yml`), consumed by managed cloud
deployments.
## What Changed
- `.dockerignore`: narrow exceptions (last match wins) re-include the
committed drift-check outputs
(`!packages/paperclip-runner/generated/**`) and the inventory check's
documentation input
(`!packages/paperclip-runner/docs/capability-contract.md`). Every other
exclusion from #12769 stays: no crate declares an explicit `[[test]]`
target, so cargo builds without the `tests` directories, and the image
build chain never runs the excluded smoke scripts.
- `.github/docker-context-checks.Dockerfile` (new): a small probe that
COPYs the real build context — identical `.dockerignore` semantics — and
runs the dependency-independent drift checks inside it
(`generate-capability-contract.mjs --check`,
`check-capability-inventory.mjs`). ajv installs in an isolated directory
for schema validation only; codegen checks such as
`generate-protocol-schema-module` stay out because their emitted bytes
vary with the ajv release and would raise false drift alarms outside the
locked dependency tree.
- `.github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml`: new `docker_context_integrity` job
builds the probe on every full-CI pull request, and the existing
`verify` aggregate now requires its result, so the guard gates merges
through the same required check as the other lanes.
- Activation note: `pr.yml` pins `pr-trusted.yml` by commit SHA, so the
new job starts gating pull requests after the usual follow-up `ci:
activate ...` pin bump once this merges. The `.dockerignore` fix needs
no activation — `docker.yml` reads it directly, so image builds recover
on the first master commit after this merges.
## Verification
- `docker buildx build -f .github/docker-context-checks.Dockerfile .` on
master (before the `.dockerignore` fix): fails with the exact production
error, `Generated contract drift:
generated/capability/capability-contract.md`.
- Same command with the `.dockerignore` exceptions applied: passes,
which also proves BuildKit honors the `!` exceptions, including the file
inside the excluded `docs` directory.
- `node scripts/generate-capability-contract.mjs --check` on a full
checkout: passes both before and after, which confirms the committed
contract was never stale — only missing from the context.
- Static sweep of every script in the image build chain (`build`,
`build:typescript` and their `check:*` steps) against the ignore rules:
the three restored files are the only build inputs the #12769 block
strips.
- YAML for `pr-trusted.yml` lints clean.
## Risks
- Low. The `.dockerignore` exceptions only re-add three committed files
to the build context; image contents do not change otherwise.
- The probe job adds one context transfer and two Node scripts per
full-CI pull request run (about one to two minutes, no dependency
install beyond one isolated ajv package).
- The `verify` aggregate now also requires the new job, mirroring the
existing pattern for the other lanes; on non-full-CI runs the job skips
and `verify` asserts the skip, unchanged from how the other lanes
behave.
- The new job only takes effect for pull requests after a follow-up pin
bump in `pr.yml` (same two-step flow as every `pr-trusted.yml` change).
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
Claude Fable 5 (Anthropic, model id `claude-fable-5`), extended
thinking, agentic tool use in Claude Code: GitHub Actions log forensics
to isolate the failing check, static analysis of the build-chain scripts
against the ignore rules, and local docker buildx runs to reproduce the
failure and verify the fix.
## 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 (the docker probe, both
failing-before and passing-after; the drift checks themselves on a full
checkout)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable (the probe IS the
regression test for this class)
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
(inline comments in `.dockerignore` and the probe explain the invariant)
- [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 that people use to manage AI agents
for work.
> - The Codex local adapter supplies model metadata to the server and
the user interface.
> - OpenAI now lists `gpt-6-astra` as a supported Codex model.
> - Paperclip did not list this model or its model-specific controls.
> - This pull request adds the model through the existing adapter
metadata path.
> - The benefit is that agents and task overrides can use the exact
model ID and supported controls.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
`packages/adapters` and `ui`
**Problem or motivation**
Paperclip does not expose `gpt-6-astra` in Codex model selectors.
Operators cannot select and save the model through the normal agent and
task forms.
**Proposed solution**
Register the exact model ID in the Codex local adapter. Use the adapter
as the source for the model-specific reasoning options. Preserve the
current default model. Forward the saved model, reasoning effort, and
fast-mode controls through both Codex execution lanes.
**Alternatives considered**
A user-interface-only model list would duplicate adapter metadata. A
model alias would not match the official model ID. Both options were
rejected.
**Roadmap alignment**
This is a small adapter compatibility update. It does not duplicate a
planned item in `ROADMAP.md`.
## What Changed
- Added `gpt-6-astra` to the Codex local adapter model registry and
fast-mode support list.
- Added the official Astra reasoning efforts: `low`, `medium`, `high`,
`xhigh`, `max`, and `ultra`.
- Used the adapter metadata in agent and task model selectors.
- Preserved supported effort choices when the model changes. Cleared an
effort only when the new model does not support it.
- Added tests for registration, user-interface selection, configuration
persistence, and CLI and ACP forwarding.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/adapters/codex-local/src/index.test.ts
packages/adapters/codex-local/src/server/acp.test.ts
packages/adapters/codex-local/src/server/codex-args.test.ts
packages/adapters/codex-local/src/ui/build-config.test.ts
ui/src/lib/codex-reasoning-effort.test.ts
ui/src/components/AgentConfigForm.render.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx
ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/issue-assignee-overrides.test.ts` passed 245 tests.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passed all four gates across 939 files.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build` passed and supplied isolated
user-interface build proof.
- `pnpm build` passed.
- `pnpm test:run` passed 5,812 tests and failed 24 workspace-runtime
tests in this isolated host. The failures use invalid generated ports
above 65,535, incomplete nested-worktree fixture configuration, or
`/tmp` path aliases. The focused tests for this change all pass. GitHub
CI must pass before review handoff.
- GitHub CI run `33918372718` passed all required checks and the
aggregate verify gate on exact head
`6ac6be2cee0a5996c82bdf674fcb7f46cb4c5fde`.
- Independent engineering review approved the exact remediation head
after 170/170 reviewer tests passed.
- Greptile reported 5/5 with no open review threads on exact head
`6ac6be2cee0a5996c82bdf674fcb7f46cb4c5fde`.
- The model ID and capabilities were checked against the [official
OpenAI Codex model list](https://developers.openai.com/codex/models).
## Risks
- Low risk. The change adds one model and model-specific selector
options. It does not change the default model.
- OpenAI can change model capabilities later. The adapter metadata must
stay aligned with the official Codex metadata.
> 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 model ID `gpt-5.6-sol`, a 272,000-token context
window, reasoning, tool use, and code execution.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## 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.
> - The Paperclip Runner keeps durable run and provider state outside
one server process.
> - A server restart can leave that runner alive or can interrupt it
after a provider checkpoint.
> - The old startup path used handoff intent and PID evidence, but it
did not reconstruct native ownership.
> - That gap could block the issue, create a replacement run, or start
duplicate provider work.
> - This pull request adds durable same-run recovery for coordinated and
uncoordinated restarts.
> - The benefit is exact recovery of the run, runner, session, provider,
steering, and finalization state.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #9628. That pull request added earlier local-adapter hot-restart
work. This change adds native PRP authority reconstruction and same-run
provider resume.
Refs #10935. That pull request handles missing hot-restart snapshots.
This change also supports hard restarts with no snapshot.
Refs #11624. That pull request prevents unsafe retry after an adopted
legacy process exits. This change reconciles native terminal evidence
before provider recovery.
Refs #12070. That pull request improves process liveness checks. This
change also binds recovery to a process-start fingerprint and fails
closed on ambiguity.
**What happened?**
The server could record hot-restart intent, but startup did not rebuild
native runner ownership. A live runner could not re-register its PRP
authority. A dead runner could not resume the exact native and provider
session on the same heartbeat run. Generic recovery could then block the
issue or create replacement work.
**Expected behavior**
A live native runner must reconnect with the same PID and logical
identities. A dead runner must resume the same durable session and
heartbeat run with only a new operating-system PID. A proposed or
terminal result must finalize once before any provider turn starts.
Ambiguous process or session evidence must stay blocked without a signal
or duplicate spawn.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start a Paperclip Runner heartbeat and wait for an active provider
turn.
2. Restart only the Paperclip server, with or without a hot-restart
marker.
3. Observe that the old startup path does not reconstruct the native
control-plane authority.
4. Kill both the server and runner after a provider checkpoint.
5. Observe that the old path cannot resume the exact native session on
the original heartbeat run.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The defect was reproduced from commit
`1991f31fd53e7f7794d5c2e4b93be384ade2b41d`. This branch is rebased onto
the current `master`.
**Deployment mode**
Local development and self-hosted server deployments that use the local
Paperclip Runner.
## What Changed
- Added correlated hot-restart requests and version-compatible native
handoff fields.
- Added controller boot identity, process-start identity, controller
generation, recovery state, request id, and bounded history to the
native finalization ledger.
- Added transactional recovery claims for live-runner reattach,
dead-runner resume, and incomplete bootstrap.
- Added fail-closed ownership takeover rules and process identity
validation.
- Added live runner adoption to the local runner transport without a
duplicate spawn.
- Added same-run provider checkpoint resume and legacy retry-row
compatibility.
- Reconciled proposed and terminal results before runner or provider
recovery.
- Bound the HTTP and PRP listener before startup recovery and delayed
scheduling and generic reapers until classification completes.
- Added restart-aware health diagnostics, run-log recovery transitions,
durable runner diagnostics, and bounded shutdown finalizer draining.
- Moved restart-survivable diagnostics into runner-owned, pre-redacted
bounded writes; raw stdout and stderr are never persisted.
- Added process-start fencing for controller, runner, and provider PIDs;
startup classifies every candidate without an implicit cap.
- Added crash-recoverable, contention-safe development restart-request
coordination and failed-startup listener cleanup.
- Added a credential-free real-process restart suite for eight restart,
scale, and identity scenarios.
- Documented native restart operation, persistence, diagnostics, and
verification.
## Verification
- The documented native restart commands passed. They ran eight
real-process/database recovery scenarios and the live runner adoption
transport test.
- Native executor tests passed: 111 tests.
- Heartbeat recovery tests passed: 124 tests.
- Hot restart, health, and shutdown tests passed: 52 tests.
- The broader affected server suite passed: 350 tests.
- Focused native recovery and startup tests passed: 49 tests.
- Runner transport and control-plane tests passed: 63 tests.
- Runner-owned diagnostic tests passed for write-time bounding,
credential redaction, private file modes, and raw stream
non-persistence.
- Development restart coordination tests passed: 11 tests.
- Database migration checks and the partial-application/replay
regression test passed.
- Server, database, and Paperclip Runner typechecks passed.
- `git diff --check` passed.
- Full Paperclip PR CI passed, including build, canary, all five general
server shards, all five serialized server shards, all three browser E2E
shards, workspace suites, and release-registry verification.
- Greptile completed at 5/5 with no outstanding findings,
recommendations, follow-ups, or open review threads.
## Risks
- Moderate risk. This changes startup ordering and ownership transfer
for active native runs.
- The migration adds nullable columns and does not rewrite existing
rows.
- Recovery fails closed when process or durable session identity is
incomplete or contradictory.
- The first implementation supports the local Paperclip Runner. Remote
targets keep their existing behavior.
- The real-process suite covers cleanup and asserts that no runner or
provider process survives each test.
> 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 runtime did not expose a more specific
model revision or context-window size. Repository editing, shell
execution, database tests, and real-process test execution were enabled.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The issue detail page shows a live agent run and accepts follow-up
instructions.
> - A follow-up must stay in a stable queue until the user sends,
reorders, or removes it.
> - Native runners can receive a steering event in the active run.
> - Legacy runners must interrupt the active run and start a follow-up
run.
> - The current UI moved comments between the queue and the transcript
and could show duplicate text or ambiguous chronology.
> - This pull request makes the queue projection durable, keeps each
message in one clear place, and labels when queued input was actually
steered or delivered.
> - The benefit is predictable steering with stable ordering, no
duplicate messages, and visible causal timing.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #11374.
Refs #12591.
**What happened?**
During an active run, a new follow-up could first appear as a transcript
bubble and then move into the steering queue. After a steer or remove
action, it could appear again. Progress text could also repeat the final
response text. Once consumed, a queued bubble displayed only its
original submission time even though it moved to its later causal slot,
and a native run split by steering looked like two unrelated runs.
**Expected behavior**
An active-run follow-up must appear in the queue immediately. A native
steer must move it once into the active run. A legacy interrupt must
move it once into the follow-up run. A removed item must stay removed.
Progress text that is identical to the final response must appear once.
Consumed follow-ups must show both queue and steer/delivery times, and
post-steer native segments must identify themselves as continuations of
the same run.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start a long-running task.
2. Send two or more follow-up messages while the agent is active.
3. Reorder the messages and remove one message.
4. Send the first queued message as steering.
5. Observe the queue and transcript during and after both runs.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The problem reproduced on commit `da1e40302`.
**Deployment mode**
Local development with the embedded database.
## What Changed
- Project queued comments into the steering well for native and legacy
live runners.
- Send native steering to the active run and use interrupt-and-follow-up
for legacy runners.
- Keep optimistic queue order stable across refreshes and roll back
failed actions.
- Remove discarded comments from the transcript cache and keep them
removed when the queue becomes empty.
- Collapse only the final progress occurrence matching the durable
response, including across steered transcript segments.
- Show `Queued … · Steered …` for same-run input and `Queued … ·
Delivered …` for successor-run input at their causal positions.
- Label settled and live post-steer segments `Continued after steering`
and time them from the steer boundary.
- Add regression tests for queue display, steering, fallback interrupt,
reorder, remove, rollback, duplicate text, causal timestamps, and
live/settled continuation headers.
## Verification
- Ran the final focused steering/chronology UI suite with 233 passing
tests.
- Ran the activity-service regression suite with 5 passing tests.
- Ran the broader queue-focused UI suite with 298 passing tests before
the final chronology refinement.
- Ran `pnpm -r typecheck` successfully.
- Ran `pnpm build` successfully.
- Ran `pnpm check:token-gates` successfully.
- Tested native steering in a real browser with a 90-second baseline
wait and a three-second steering correction.
- Confirmed that the old final response did not appear before the
steered response.
- Tested three queued messages in a real browser.
- Confirmed that reorder changed delivery order and that the removed
message was never sent or shown again.
- Tested a legacy runner in a real browser.
- Confirmed that it used the interrupt fallback and showed the follow-up
once.
- Reloaded a saved mixed-steer/successor-run thread and confirmed the
causal timestamps and continuation header render in the correct
positions.
- The complete macOS suite reaches five unrelated platform assertions in
workspace-runtime tests. Two compare `/var` with `/private/var`. Three
require Linux `/proc` listener data. GitHub Actions provides the
authoritative Linux run.
## Risks
- Low risk. The change is limited to issue-chat queue projection and
transcript presentation.
- The server run-history API adds only a read-only `contextIssueId`
projection; the database schema does not change.
- Optimistic actions restore the prior UI state when a request fails.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex with GPT-5, extended reasoning, browser automation, shell
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 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.
> - 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
> - Paperclip records agent run outcomes through telemetry and run
lifecycle services
> - Terminal run transitions need one consistent event for outcome
analysis
> - The current paths do not report every terminal transition through
one event
> - This pull request adds the agent.task_run event and emits it at each
terminal transition
> - The benefit is complete run outcome data without exposing raw task
identifiers
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
Paperclip telemetry reports agent activity, but it does not report every
terminal task run through one event.
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting (multiple of the above): packages/shared telemetry and
server run lifecycle services.
**Current behavior**
Several run paths write a terminal status without a matching
agent.task_run telemetry event.
**Proposed behavior**
Each terminal run transition emits one agent.task_run event. The event
records the terminal state and uses the existing pseudonym helper for
the optional task identifier.
**Reason and benefit**
Complete terminal-run data helps operators measure agent outcomes. The
pseudonym helper prevents the raw task identifier from leaving the
installation.
**Breaking changes**
None. The change adds an event and keeps existing event behavior
compatible.
## What Changed
- Add the agent.task_run telemetry contract and client helper.
- Reuse the existing pseudonym helper for the task identifier. The
helper hashes the identifier with a per-installation salt and returns 16
hexadecimal characters. The raw identifier never leaves the
installation. Existing identifiers do not move.
- Emit one event from each legacy, native, recovery, and issue terminal
transition.
- Keep emissions outside database transactions and make delivery
best-effort.
- Add regression tests for event shape, hashing, terminal transitions,
and emission failures.
- Document the event and its privacy rule in the telemetry data
contract.
## Verification
- `npx tsc --noEmit` in `server/` passes at the submitted commit.
- The pull-request CI suite must pass. CI is the authority because local
Vitest has a known dependency artifact.
- The added regression tests cover event output shape, per-installation
hash divergence, raw identifier handoff, omitted identifiers, and
non-throwing emits.
## Risks
- A missed terminal path could reduce event coverage.
- Telemetry delivery remains best-effort and cannot change run
finalization.
- The pseudonym helper uses installation-specific state, so identifiers
differ between installations.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, tool use and code execution. Context window details
were 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 have addressed 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.
> - 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
Dotta
lockfile-bot
Dotta
Tonio
Nicky Leach
Devin Foley
scotttong
Michael Nguyen
github-actions[bot]