## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The board UI is the main daily navigation surface for agents,
projects, and their related resources.
> - Operators need a lightweight way to keep frequently used agents and
projects close without changing company-wide ordering or ownership.
> - Resource memberships already model per-user relationships to
projects and agents, so they are the right place to store user-specific
starred state.
> - This pull request extends that membership contract with a starred
timestamp and exposes star controls in list/detail views.
> - The sidebar then uses those starred memberships to show compact,
user-specific shortcuts.
> - The benefit is faster navigation without introducing a separate
favorites system or leaking preferences across users.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists.
Feature request:
## Problem or motivation
Users cannot pin frequently used agents or projects into the main
sidebar. Returning to important resources requires scanning full
project/agent lists or navigating through detail pages, which adds
friction to repeated daily workflows.
## Proposed solution
Store a per-user `starred_at` timestamp on agent and project
memberships, expose API actions to set or clear that state, add star
toggle controls to list/detail pages, and render starred projects and
agents as compact sidebar shortcuts.
## Alternatives considered
A separate favorites table would work, but it would duplicate membership
scoping and require another resource relationship model. Keeping starred
state on memberships preserves existing company/user boundaries and
avoids a second source of truth.
## Roadmap alignment
Checked `ROADMAP.md`; no overlapping planned core work for starred
resource/sidebar navigation was found.
## Additional context
The affected subsystems are `packages/db`, `packages/shared`, `server/`,
and `ui/`. The migration is idempotent with `IF NOT EXISTS` guards so
environments that saw an earlier local migration name can still apply
the final ordered migration safely.
## What Changed
- Added idempotent migration `0133_resource_membership_stars` for
`starred_at` columns and lookup indexes on agent/project memberships.
- Extended shared resource membership types and validators with starred
metadata and actions.
- Updated server resource membership services/routes to read and mutate
starred resource state.
- Added reusable star toggle UI and resource membership hook support for
starred state.
- Added starred projects and agents sidebar rendering, plus star
controls on list and detail pages.
- Added focused shared, server, and UI coverage for starred membership
behavior and sidebar rendering.
## Verification
- Rebased and force-with-lease pushed current PR head
`a086fc965391c9e50a51b5b83b5b44a797b2a6f4` onto current
`paperclipai/paperclip:master`; `gh pr view` reports `MERGEABLE` with no
merge conflicts. GitHub checks are green for this fresh head.
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/resource-memberships.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/resource-memberships-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts
ui/src/components/Sidebar.test.tsx
ui/src/components/SidebarAgents.test.tsx
ui/src/components/SidebarStarredProjects.test.tsx
ui/src/components/StarToggle.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/InstanceExperimentalSettings.test.tsx` passed after the
rebase: 8 files, 143 tests.
- Greptile re-review is 5/5; the remaining screenshot thread was
resolved as non-blocking because this task explicitly requested no
screenshots/images in the PR.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
ui/src/components/SidebarStarredProjects.test.tsx` passed after the
mobile pending-spinner fix.
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/resource-memberships.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/resource-memberships-routes.test.ts
ui/src/components/Sidebar.test.tsx
ui/src/components/SidebarAgents.test.tsx
ui/src/components/SidebarStarredProjects.test.tsx
ui/src/components/StarToggle.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/InstanceExperimentalSettings.test.tsx` passed: 7 files, 68
tests.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server
typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` passed
db/shared/server, then failed in pre-existing UI code outside this PR:
`src/pages/CompanyEnvironments.tsx` missing `@xterm/*` type declarations
and `previous` possibly null.
- Checked that the PR diff does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml` or
`.github/workflows` changes.
- Checked `ROADMAP.md` and found no overlapping planned core work for
starred resource/sidebar navigation.
- Searched existing GitHub PRs for duplicate starred-resource/sidebar
work and found none.
## Risks
- Migration touches membership tables. The SQL uses `IF NOT EXISTS` for
columns and indexes so environments that saw an earlier local migration
name can still apply this safely.
- Sidebar ordering and visibility changes could affect users who rely on
the previous flat sidebar layout.
- Starred state is per-user membership metadata; code paths must
continue preserving company/user scoping around memberships.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5 Codex, tool-enabled coding agent with shell/GitHub access.
Context window not disclosed 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 reports its own version through `server/src/version.ts`,
which is read by the `/health` endpoint and the telemetry client
> - When running from a cloned source tree, `server/package.json` is
frozen at the last published release version (e.g. `0.3.1`), so the
reported `serverVersion` never reflects how far the local checkout has
drifted from that release
> - Operators and support staff cannot tell from telemetry or health
output whether they are running a tagged release or a development build
with local commits on top
> - A `git describe --tags --match v* --long --dirty` call at startup
gives the exact nearest tag, number of commits since it, the current
SHA, and whether the tree is dirty — all the information needed to
compute a semantically meaningful version
> - This pull request replaces the static `pkg.version` export with a
`resolveServerVersion()` call that parses `git describe` output into
`YYYY.MDD.P+N.git.<sha>` (drift), `YYYY.MDD.P` (clean on-tag), or
appends `.dirty` for a modified tree, with a non-throwing fallback to
`package.json` when git is unavailable
> - The benefit is that from-source installs now report a version string
that lets operators and support quickly identify their exact checkout
state without running additional git commands
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No pre-existing public issue. Inline description:
**What happened?**
When Paperclip is installed from source (git clone + pnpm), `GET
/health` and the telemetry envelope report the version frozen at the
last published `package.json` value (e.g. `0.3.1`) regardless of how
many commits ahead of that tag the local checkout is.
**Expected behavior**
The reported version should reflect the actual local state — nearest
release tag, number of commits since that tag, abbreviated commit SHA,
and a dirty marker when the working tree has uncommitted changes.
**Steps to reproduce**
Clone the repo, run `pnpm install && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server
start`, then call `GET /health` or inspect telemetry envelopes. The
`serverVersion` field shows the `package.json` version even when the
checkout is dozens of commits ahead of that tag.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Affects all source-tree installs where `package.json` has not been
updated to match the current HEAD.
**Deployment mode**
Source install (git clone).
## What Changed
- `server/src/version.ts`: extracted `resolveServerVersion()` (replaces
the module-level `const serverVersion`) and `parseGitDescribeVersion()`
(exported for unit testing); the default implementation shells out to
`git describe --tags --match v* --long --dirty` with a 1 500 ms timeout;
falls back to `pkg.version ?? "0.0.0"` without throwing when git is
unavailable or the output cannot be parsed; replaced `logger` import
with a `console.debug`-based default to avoid pulling pino transport
side effects into a zero-dependency utility module
- `server/src/__tests__/version.test.ts`: 7-test unit suite covering
drift, clean on-tag collapse, dirty on-tag edge case, unparseable
fallback, `resolveServerVersion` happy path, and git-unavailable
fallback — all exercised via injected stubs without spawning a real git
process
## Verification
```sh
# Unit tests (7 tests)
pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/version.test.ts
# Type check
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck
# Health and telemetry regression
pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/health.test.ts server/src/__tests__/telemetry-client-flush.test.ts
# Runtime smoke (from-source checkout)
# git describe --tags --match 'v*' --long => v2026.626.0-58-g518fc71ce
# server startup => serverVersion = 2026.626.0+59.git.3367571cc
```
All commands passed at the committed HEAD.
## Risks
Low. The change is additive and self-contained to
`server/src/version.ts`:
- `git describe` is called once at module load with a 1 500 ms timeout;
failure (non-git environment, git not on PATH, timeout) is silently
caught and falls back to `pkg.version`, preserving existing behavior for
published-package installs
- No API surface, database schema, or migration is touched
- The telemetry envelope already carried `serverVersion`; only the value
changes for source-tree installs
## Model Used
Claude Sonnet 4.6 (`claude-sonnet-4-6`) with tool use and code
execution. Context window: 200 k tokens.
## 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)
- [ ] 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
- [ ] 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
> - When you swap an agent's adapter (e.g. from one LLM provider to
another), the server merges the incoming PATCH body with stored config —
keys listed in \`ADAPTER_AGNOSTIC_KEYS\` are preserved regardless of
which adapter is active
> - That constant was defined independently in two places:
\`server/src/agents.ts\` (used by the adapter-swap route) and
\`ui/src/lib/agent-config-patch.ts\` (used by the UI patch builder)
> - PR #8975 fixed the bug where \`paperclipSkillSync.desiredSkills\`
was dropped on adapter swap by adding it to the server-side constant,
but the UI-side copy was not updated in the same PR — creating ongoing
drift risk
> - This pull request hoists \`ADAPTER_AGNOSTIC_KEYS\` into
\`packages/shared\` so both consumers import the same constant
> - The benefit is a single source of truth: any future key addition is
made in one place and both the server route and the UI patch builder
pick it up automatically, with a drift guard to catch any accidental
re-duplication
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #8975 — follow-up deduplication: #8975 fixed the runtime bug but
left the constant duplicated across server and UI. This PR closes that
gap.
## What Changed
- Added \`ADAPTER_AGNOSTIC_KEYS\` constant and \`AdapterAgnosticKey\`
type to \`packages/shared/src/adapter-agnostic-keys.ts\`
- Updated \`server/src/agents.ts\` to import the shared constant,
removing the local copy
- Updated \`ui/src/lib/agent-config-patch.ts\` to import the shared
constant, removing the local copy
- Added \`packages/shared/src/adapter-agnostic-keys.test.ts\`: drift
guard asserting the expected key set and both consumer import sites
## Verification
\`\`\`bash
pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/adapter-agnostic-keys.test.ts
ui/src/lib/agent-config-patch.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/agent-instructions-routes.test.ts
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck
\`\`\`
All 15 tests pass across the three files; all three packages typecheck
clean.
## Risks
Low risk — behavior-preserving refactor. The key set is unchanged; only
the import source changes. The drift guard will fail loudly if someone
accidentally re-introduces a local copy or modifies one without updating
the other.
> 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
- Provider: Anthropic
- Model: Claude Sonnet 4.6 (\`claude-sonnet-4-6\`)
- Context: standard context window, tool use enabled
- Reasoning: standard mode (no extended thinking)
## 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)
- [ ] My branch name describes the change (e.g. \`docs/...\`,
\`fix/...\`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or
instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agent runs often need provider credentials, API tokens, and other
environment-bound secrets.
> - Company-level secrets work for shared credentials, but they do not
model values that should differ by human operator.
> - Without a user-scoped model, a run can dispatch without knowing
whether the responsible human has supplied the needed value.
> - Paperclip also needs run attribution to make those user-scoped
runtime checks deterministic and auditable.
> - This pull request adds user-specific secret definitions, per-user
values, environment bindings, responsible-user attribution, and runtime
resolution gates.
> - The benefit is that teams can define the secret once, let each user
provide their own value, and block runs before dispatch when required
user secrets or active definitions are unavailable.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #224
Refs #6057
This PR implements user-specific secret support as a core
secret-management capability rather than a one-off adapter setting. It
is related to existing public work on company secrets UI and runtime
secret refs, but is distinct because the value is owned by the
responsible user and resolved at run dispatch time.
Related PR search before opening found existing secrets work such as
#1550, #8256, #8614, #8634, and #8647; none of those add the full
user-secret definition/value/runtime gate covered here.
## What Changed
- Added user-secret definitions and per-user "My secrets" values,
keeping stored values out of access metadata.
- Added `user_secret_ref` environment bindings and UI affordances to
pick them alongside existing secret refs.
- Added responsible-user runtime resolution so user-secret refs resolve
against the human responsible for the run.
- Added pre-dispatch missing-secret gates so runs fail before adapter
dispatch when required user values are absent or definitions are
inactive.
- Added low-trust allowlist hardening for user-secret runtime access.
- Added issue, routine, run, and agent API key responsible-user
attribution and fail-closed dispatch behavior when attribution cannot be
resolved.
- Added denial-copy mapping so responsible-user authorization failures
surface as actionable run outcomes instead of opaque setup failures.
- Added OpenAPI documentation for the user-secret routes.
- Rebases cleanly on current `master`; migrations were renumbered
incrementally as `0128_user_specific_secrets`,
`0129_agent_api_key_responsible_user`, and
`0130_run_responsible_user_invariant` after upstream `0126`/`0127`
migrations.
- Removed previously committed local design screenshots so the PR
contains code/docs/tests only.
## Verification
- PASS: PR head `2527febd106bcf3ca264ca0da7fca491084192d6` is based on
`paperclipai/paperclip:master`.
- PASS: `git diff --check`
- PASS: `git diff --name-only public/master...HEAD | rg
'^(pnpm-lock\\.yaml|\\.github/workflows/|screenshots/)' || true`
produced no files.
- PASS: migration journal audit confirmed unique indexes through `130`
with tail entries `0126_issue_comment_derived_attribution`,
`0127_environment_custom_images_instance_scoped`,
`0128_user_specific_secrets`, `0129_agent_api_key_responsible_user`, and
`0130_run_responsible_user_invariant`.
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-responsible-user-invariant.test.ts`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-active-run-output-watchdog.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-stale-queue-invalidation.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-finalize-branch.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-monitor-scheduler.test.ts`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-accepted-plan-workspace-refresh.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-plugin-environment.test.ts`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/low-trust-red-team-routes.test.ts`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` (55 tests)
- PASS: `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/secrets-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` (89 tests after final
Greptile cleanup fixes)
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-issue-liveness-escalation.test.ts` (17 tests
after the final rebase CI fix)
- PASS: focused server Vitest batches covering heartbeat recovery,
project env, plugin env, routines, low-trust, pipelines, monitors,
watchdog, and stale queue paths.
- PASS: GitHub checks are green on
`2527febd106bcf3ca264ca0da7fca491084192d6`, including Typecheck +
Release Registry, Build, General tests, serialized server suites, e2e,
Canary Dry Run, verify, security checks, and Greptile Review.
- PASS: Greptile Review completed successfully on
`2527febd106bcf3ca264ca0da7fca491084192d6` with Confidence Score 5/5,
and GraphQL review-thread audit returned zero unresolved non-outdated
threads.
## Risks
- Runtime behavior now depends on a run having a correct responsible
user; missing or incorrect responsibility assignment can block runs
before adapter dispatch.
- `user_secret_ref` bindings intentionally expose metadata without
values, but UI/API callers may need to handle the new binding kind
explicitly.
- External secret providers and IAM policies are not automatically
provisioned by this PR; operators still need to configure provider-side
access for non-local vaults.
- The PR is broad across db/shared/server/UI/runtime paths, so release
validation should include both API and UI secret workflows before merge.
- The migration renumbering is intentionally incremental after upstream
migrations; the branch migrations use guarded
column/table/index/constraint creation so users who tested the older
draft numbering should not hit duplicate DDL for the existing objects.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent (`gpt-5`), Codex local adapter
with shell/tool use and code execution. Context window and internal
reasoning mode are not exposed by the runtime.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Each agent runs on an adapter (`claude_local`, `codex_local`, …) and
can be assigned company skills that are synced into its runtime
> - An agent's desired-skill selection is persisted inside its single
`adapterConfig` JSON blob under `paperclipSkillSync`, even though the
selection is a company-level, adapter-agnostic choice
> - When a user changes an agent's adapter type, both the server PATCH
handler and the UI patch builder rebuild `adapterConfig` and carry over
only a hardcoded allow-list of adapter-agnostic keys (`env`, `cwd`,
instructions bundle, …)
> - `paperclipSkillSync` was missing from both allow-lists, so switching
adapters (e.g. claude_local → codex_local) silently wiped every assigned
skill
> - This pull request adds `paperclipSkillSync` to the adapter-agnostic
preservation list on both layers and covers it with regression tests
> - The benefit is that switching an agent's adapter no longer destroys
its skill configuration — skills are preserved exactly like
env/cwd/instructions already are
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Fixes#8974
## What Changed
- **Server (authoritative fix)** — `server/src/routes/agents.ts`: added
`"paperclipSkillSync"` to the `ADAPTER_AGNOSTIC_KEYS` list in the
`changingAdapterType` branch of `PATCH /agents/:id`. On an adapter-type
change the handler now restores the skill-sync selection from the
existing persisted config when the incoming config omits it — the same
mechanism already used for `env`, `cwd`, and the instructions bundle.
This protects every API/CLI client, not just the UI.
- **UI (defense in depth)** — `ui/src/lib/agent-config-patch.ts`: added
`"paperclipSkillSync"` to the client-side `ADAPTER_AGNOSTIC_KEYS` in
`buildAgentUpdatePatch`, so the optimistic patch the client builds on an
adapter switch stops stripping the key before it reaches the server.
- **Tests** — added regression tests on both layers:
- `server/src/__tests__/agent-instructions-routes.test.ts`: `PATCH`ing
`adapterType` (claude_local → codex_local) with `replaceAdapterConfig:
true` keeps `adapterConfig.paperclipSkillSync`.
- `ui/src/lib/agent-config-patch.test.ts`: `buildAgentUpdatePatch`
preserves `paperclipSkillSync` when the overlay changes the adapter
type.
## Verification
```
# server (run from repo root)
cd server && ../node_modules/.bin/vitest run \
src/__tests__/agent-instructions-routes.test.ts \
src/__tests__/agent-skills-routes.test.ts \
src/__tests__/agent-adapter-validation-routes.test.ts \
src/__tests__/agent-permissions-routes.test.ts
# 83 passed
../node_modules/.bin/tsc --noEmit -p tsconfig.json # clean
# ui
cd ui && ./node_modules/.bin/vitest run src/lib/agent-config-patch.test.ts # 7 passed
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck # clean
```
Both new tests fail without the corresponding source change (verified
red → green).
Manual: create an agent on `claude_local`, assign skills, switch it to
`codex_local`, and confirm `GET /api/agents/:id/skills` still returns
the desired skills.
## Risks
Low risk.
- The change only *adds* one key to an existing preservation allow-list;
it does not alter how any other key is handled. Behavior for agents
without a `paperclipSkillSync` block is unchanged (the key is simply
absent and nothing is copied).
- `paperclipSkillSync` is adapter-agnostic (company skill keys, not
adapter-specific), so carrying it across an adapter switch is always
safe — a target adapter that does not support skill sync just ignores
it, and switching back restores the selection.
- Same-adapter config edits already merged and preserved the key; this
only closes the adapter-type-change gap, matching the existing
env/cwd/instructions behavior.
- Follow-up (not in this PR to keep it minimal): the server and client
`ADAPTER_AGNOSTIC_KEYS` lists are maintained separately and already
diverge (`instructionsFilePath` is client-only); a shared constant could
prevent future drift.
## Model Used
Claude Opus 4.8 (`claude-opus-4-8`, 1M-token context), extended thinking
enabled, with tool use (file edit, shell, GitHub CLI) via Claude Code. A
read-only sub-agent was used to trace the root cause across the server
and UI layers.
## 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 (bug fix, not a feature)
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above (none found)
- [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
(`fix/preserve-skills-on-adapter-type-switch`) 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 (N/A —
internal config-preservation fix, no user-facing docs or API contract
change)
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green (pending CI on this PR)
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
(pending review)
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agent heartbeats provision execution workspaces before invoking
local or sandboxed adapters.
> - Some follow-up issues intentionally request `reuse_existing` so they
continue in an inherited execution workspace.
> - The heartbeat provisioning path treated missing or archived
workspace rows as if no explicit reuse request existed.
> - That could silently realize and persist a fresh project/default
workspace over an explicit inherited-workspace binding.
> - This pull request keys explicit reuse off the issue preference and
workspace id, then either restores that workspace or fails with a
structured workspace validation error.
> - The benefit is that intentional workspace inheritance remains
auditable and does not silently degrade into unrelated fallback
workspaces.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #8058
Refs #6036
Refs #2203
This fixes a narrower heartbeat provisioning bug around explicit
`reuse_existing` issue runs: if the target inherited execution workspace
is missing, archived, or fails restore, provisioning now reports the
reuse failure instead of replacing the issue's workspace binding with a
freshly realized fallback.
## What Changed
- Added explicit helpers for resolving workspace reuse requests and
deciding whether reuse should restore, refresh metadata, or keep prior
replacement-class drift visible.
- Changed heartbeat workspace provisioning so explicit `reuse_existing`
requests go through restore-or-fail behavior instead of falling back to
`realizeExecutionWorkspace` when the stored workspace row is
unavailable.
- Added structured `workspace_validation_failed` details for inherited
workspace reuse failures.
- Added regression coverage for replacement-class drift, restore errors,
missing rows, archived rows, and restore misses.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk ensure-build-deps`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-session.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD`
- Scanned the branch diff and commit messages for credentials, tokens,
private URLs, PII-style values, and internal issue links before pushing;
no unsafe hits remained.
## Risks
- Explicit reuse requests whose stored workspace cannot be restored now
fail the run instead of opportunistically creating a replacement
workspace. That is intentional, but it may surface stale or archived
workspace rows as visible provisioning failures that require repair.
- Non-reuse workspace provisioning still uses the existing realization
path, so the behavior shift is scoped to issues that explicitly request
existing workspace reuse.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5 via Codex local agent, with shell/tool use enabled for
repository inspection, code editing, verification, git, and GitHub CLI
operations. Runtime context-window details were not exposed by the
adapter.
## 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.
> - Environment sandboxes already support custom image creation and
refresh through a temporary SSH setup session.
> - The existing workflow makes operators copy an SSH command into an
external terminal before they can install packages or make image
changes.
> - That extra context switch is slower, easier to get wrong, and less
integrated with the setup session Paperclip already tracks.
> - This pull request adds an embedded browser SSH terminal for custom
image setup, so operators can start working in the target sandbox
directly from the environment configuration flow.
> - The implementation uses short-lived websocket attachment tokens,
session-lifetime SSH host-key pinning, and server-managed terminal
cleanup so the feature fits the existing setup-session boundary.
> - The benefit is a smoother custom image creation and refresh
experience without asking users to leave Paperclip for routine sandbox
setup work.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists.
### Subsystem affected
Cross-cutting: `server/` custom image setup APIs and websocket handling,
`ui/` environment configuration UI, and shared custom image contracts.
### Problem or motivation
Custom image creation and refresh require an operator to open a separate
SSH client, paste the command shown by Paperclip, perform setup work,
then return to the browser to finish the image flow. This is functional
but awkward for a setup process that already starts and tracks a
temporary sandbox session.
### Proposed solution
Embed an SSH terminal in the custom image setup UI. When a setup session
exposes an SSH payload, Paperclip should open a browser terminal backed
by a server-side websocket session, let the operator run setup commands
in-place, and then close the terminal when setup is finished, cancelled,
expired, or disconnected.
### Alternatives considered
- Keep the existing copy/paste SSH command workflow. This remains a
fallback, but it does not streamline the common path.
- Put SSH credentials directly into websocket URLs. This was avoided so
terminal authentication can happen in an explicit first websocket auth
frame rather than in logged URLs.
- Trust the SSH host blindly for every reconnect. This PR instead pins
the observed host-key fingerprint for the setup-session lifetime.
### Roadmap alignment
This fits the roadmap theme of making agent workspaces usable in more
remote and sandboxed environments while preserving Paperclip's
control-plane model.
### Additional context
Public GitHub search did not find a duplicate issue or PR for `custom
image terminal ssh` in `paperclipai/paperclip`.
## What Changed
- Added server-side terminal session tracking for custom image setup
sessions, including connect-token issuance, websocket attachment,
expiry, resize, input, and shutdown handling.
- Added an embedded browser terminal to the custom image creation and
refresh flow when a setup session provides SSH connection details.
- Moved terminal token authentication out of the websocket URL and into
the first websocket JSON auth frame.
- Added SSH host-key SHA-256 pinning for each terminal session and
documented the provider convention for username-embedded SSH
credentials.
- Updated the custom image environment API and UI so the setup terminal
can open, reconnect, show status, authenticate, resize, and remain
active for the setup-session lifetime once attached.
- Kept custom image setup routes company-scoped and closed active
terminal sessions on setup finish/cancel.
- Added focused unit/integration/UI coverage for token expiry,
setup-session expiry, websocket close paths, host-key pinning, and
terminal session lifecycle behavior.
- Removed the generated lockfile delta from the PR; CI owns temporary
lockfile regeneration for manifest-changing PRs.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/environment-custom-image-terminal-ws.test.ts
server/src/services/environment-custom-image-terminal-sessions.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/environment-custom-image-routes.test.ts
packages/shared/src/environment-custom-images.test.ts
ui/src/pages/CompanyEnvironments.test.tsx`
- 6 test files passed
- 58 tests passed
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server build`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build`
- `pnpm run typecheck:build-gaps`
- `git diff --check`
- Local sensitive-content scan over the PR diff using patterns for API
keys, private keys, private hostnames, local paths, token fields, and
credential-like strings.
- Findings were limited to removed URL-token code and synthetic test
placeholders such as `ssh-token-secret` and
`terminal-token-terminal-token-123456`.
- No real credentials, private hostnames, local filesystem paths, or
instance-local links were found.
- Remote PR checks were green after the implementation commit, including
Build, Typecheck + Release Registry, General tests, serialized server
suites, e2e, verify, Socket, Snyk, Superagent, and Greptile 5/5.
- Post-merge PR hardening on July 3, 2026: merged `origin/master` at
`47448721e` into the branch, resolved the `CompanyEnvironments.tsx`
import conflict, reran focused tests, server/UI typechecks, server/UI
builds, `pnpm run typecheck:build-gaps`, and `git diff --check`, scanned
the final diff for sensitive content, pushed `4b43558cc`, and confirmed
all remote checks plus Greptile 5/5 were green.
- PR metadata correction on July 3, 2026: changed the title/body framing
from bug-fix language to feature-request language. No source files
changed for this metadata-only update.
## Risks
- Moderate surface area because this adds websocket routing,
setup-session runtime state, package dependencies, and a new custom
image UI path.
- New websocket attachments still require valid short-lived tokens;
established terminal sessions remain bounded by setup-session expiry,
explicit finish/cancel, client close, or server shutdown.
- The terminal-session store is in-memory, so active terminal websocket
tokens and host-key pins do not survive server restarts.
- SSH host-key verification uses session-lifetime TOFU pinning because
the current provider payload does not expose a trusted host-key
fingerprint.
- The external SSH command remains important as a fallback if a browser,
proxy, or network environment cannot sustain the websocket terminal.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent with shell/tool execution. Context
window size was not exposed in this 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
> - A core part of that experience is watching active agent runs without
dropping into raw logs first
> - Local and sandbox-backed adapters already record useful run output,
progress, and tool activity
> - But active issue threads could sit visually stale while the agent
was syncing workspaces, tailing sandbox output, or emitting incremental
tool-call updates
> - Operators need timely, human-readable progress while preserving the
raw transcript underneath
> - This pull request streams sandbox run-log progress into runtime
status, keeps visible issue threads refreshed, and folds repeated ACPX
tool updates into stable transcript cards
> - The benefit is that long-running agent work becomes easier to
supervise without changing the task/comment control-plane model
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this exact change.
Problem/motivation:
- During long-running sandboxed agent work, the issue UI can appear idle
even though the agent is actively syncing, running tools, or producing
incremental output.
- Operators need realtime feedback at the issue-thread layer, not only
after opening raw logs or waiting for the final heartbeat result.
- Related public context: #1808 previously added live-run status dots to
Projects; #4362 touches heartbeat wakeup behavior but is not a duplicate
of this runtime/UI feedback change.
## What Changed
- Added sandbox run-log streaming support and defaulted sandbox-capable
local adapters into the richer live-feedback path.
- Surfaced environment/sandbox sync progress through heartbeat runtime
status with bounded, redacted snippets.
- Added live issue-thread cache patching so visible active runs update
as progress events arrive.
- Folded repeated ACPX `tool_call` updates into one transcript card
instead of stacking duplicate cards.
- Updated adapter docs and added focused regression coverage for sandbox
log streaming, runtime status, ACPX parsing, live updates, transcript
rendering, and issue chat messages.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/context/LiveUpdatesProvider.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/heartbeat-run-runtime-status.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-runtime-state.test.ts
ui/src/context/LiveUpdatesProvider.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/adapter-utils/src/execution-target-sandbox.test.ts
packages/adapter-utils/src/sandbox-managed-runtime.test.ts
server/src/services/heartbeat-run-runtime-status.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/agent-live-run-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-runtime-state.test.ts
packages/adapters/acpx-local/src/ui/parse-stdout.test.ts
ui/src/context/LiveUpdatesProvider.test.ts
ui/src/components/transcript/RunTranscriptView.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx`
- GitHub PR workflow on head `8397953e7b41ccd42e5d9457ee7e4dfb996e4ec5`:
`verify`, build, typecheck/release-registry, e2e, general shards,
serialized server shards, and canary dry run passed.
- Greptile Review on head `8397953e7b41ccd42e5d9457ee7e4dfb996e4ec5`:
Confidence Score 5/5, no unresolved review threads.
## Risks
- Live issue-thread cache patching could miss an edge case for a route
shape not covered by tests.
- Surfacing active-run snippets needs continued care around redaction;
this PR keeps snippets bounded and adds redaction-focused coverage.
- More frequent active-run UI refreshes could expose performance issues
on very large issue threads, though updates are scoped to visible
run/query caches.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5 via Codex, operating as a tool-enabled coding agent with
shell, git, and repository-editing capabilities. Context window size is
not exposed in this 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.
> - Agent runs can execute inside reusable, runtime-created git worktree
execution workspaces.
> - Those managed worktrees record the expected branch so later
dispatches do not accidentally run an agent in the wrong checkout.
> - Successful run finalization already checked branch coherence, but it
treated every unrecorded branch switch as fatal.
> - A common publishing flow can briefly switch a clean worktree to a
PR/publish branch that points at the same commit as the recorded issue
branch, leaving no divergent work to protect.
> - This pull request keeps the strict finalization guard for unsafe
drift, but lets finalization restore the recorded branch when
same-commit repair is provably safe.
> - The benefit is fewer false failed runs after harmless branch
switches while preserving hard failures for divergent or dirty
worktrees.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public issue exists for this exact finalization failure. Related
public worktree-recovery context: #3087 and #3056, but those address
different worktree realization/reuse recovery paths rather than
successful-run finalization branch repair.
Bug report details:
**What happened?**
When an adapter run succeeded after switching a managed git worktree
from its recorded issue branch to a publish/PR branch, finalization
failed with a managed worktree branch mismatch even when the publish
branch and recorded branch pointed at the same commit and the worktree
was clean.
**Expected behavior**
Finalization should restore the recorded branch only when it can prove
the worktree is clean, registered, and the recorded branch points at the
current `HEAD`. If the actual branch has different commits or unsafe
state, finalization should continue to fail with bounded validation
evidence.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Create a runtime-managed `git_worktree` execution workspace for an
issue run.
2. During the adapter run, create and check out a new publish branch
without committing new changes.
3. Return adapter success and let heartbeat finalization run.
4. Before this change, finalization records a failed branch check and
fails the run even though the branches point at the same commit.
5. With this change, finalization records the repair operation, restores
the recorded branch, and records a successful finalize row.
6. Repeat with a commit on the publish branch; finalization still fails
because the branch heads differ.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduced against `master` at `bac7307ec`; fixed by this PR at
`64ec605cf`.
**Deployment mode**
Local dev / built from source.
**Agent adapter(s) involved**
Not adapter-specific. This is core heartbeat/workspace finalization
behavior.
**Database mode**
Embedded test Postgres in the focused server test.
**Access context**
Agent run finalization.
**Node.js version**
`v25.6.1`
**Operating system**
`Darwin 24.6.0 arm64`
**Relevant logs or output**
The new focused test intentionally exercises both outcomes:
```text
Test Files 1 passed (1)
Tests 3 passed (3)
```
**Relevant config**
Runtime-created `git_worktree` execution workspace.
**Additional context**
The unsafe divergent branch case still fails with
`workspace_validation_failed` and `git_worktree_branch_incoherence`
evidence.
**Privacy checklist**
Reviewed; this description avoids internal task links, local workspace
paths, credentials, and instance-specific URLs.
## What Changed
- Reused the existing guarded branch-coherence repair helper during
heartbeat finalization when the final branch inspection finds clean
same-commit branch drift.
- Recorded repair metadata in the `workspace_finalize` operation so
reviewers/operators can audit whether finalization repaired branch
drift.
- Preserved failure behavior for divergent branch heads and surfaced the
bounded workspace validation evidence from the repair helper.
- Added focused server coverage for safe finalization repair and unsafe
divergent branch failure.
- Updated execution semantics docs to describe the narrower finalization
rule.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-finalize-branch.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `git diff --check`
## Risks
Low to medium risk. The change affects successful-run finalization for
runtime-created git worktree execution workspaces. The repair path is
constrained to clean, registered, same-commit branch drift, and the
focused test confirms divergent branch heads still fail instead of being
restored silently.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent. Exact hosted model ID was not
exposed in the runtime; tool use and local shell execution were enabled.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Issue-thread interactions are the subsystem that lets board users
answer structured prompts and resume agent work
> - Checkbox confirmations capture a selected subset of known options,
then wake the assignee through continuation context
> - The wake context previously carried generic interaction metadata,
but not the accepted checkbox option ids or option labels
> - That meant the resumed agent could be woken after a checkbox
confirmation without seeing the board's selected options in the turn
context
> - This pull request carries accepted checkbox selections through the
interaction continuation wake snapshot and renders them into the adapter
wake prompt
> - The benefit is that agents can act on checkbox-confirmation
selections without refetching or guessing the user's choices
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this bug. Searched public issues and
PRs for checkbox confirmation / continuation selection duplicates and
found no matching issue or PR.
### Pre-submission checklist
- [x] I have searched existing open and closed issues and this is not a
duplicate.
- [x] I am on the latest released version of Paperclip or can reproduce
on `master`.
- [x] I have confirmed the error originates in Paperclip itself, not in
my agent adapter, API provider, or local configuration.
### What happened?
When a board user accepted a `request_checkbox_confirmation`
interaction, the assignee continuation wake included generic interaction
metadata but did not include the accepted checkbox selections. The
resumed agent turn therefore had no in-prompt access to the selected
option ids or option labels/descriptions.
### Expected behavior
When a `request_checkbox_confirmation` interaction is accepted, the
resumed agent wake should include the checkbox prompt, selected option
ids, and selected option labels/descriptions so the agent can act on the
selected subset directly.
### Steps to reproduce
1. Create an issue-thread `request_checkbox_confirmation` interaction
with multiple options and `continuationPolicy: "wake_assignee"`.
2. Accept the interaction with one or more selected options.
3. Inspect the continuation wake payload/prompt received by the
assignee.
4. Observe that the selected checkbox options are missing from the wake
context before this fix.
### Paperclip version or commit
Reproduced against the pre-fix code path on `master`; this PR head is
`9d17e70bce373e4850117f30c015c973c4b61789`.
### Deployment mode
Local dev (pnpm dev) / built from source.
### Installation method
Built from source (pnpm dev / pnpm build).
### Agent adapter(s) involved
Not adapter-specific (core bug). The Codex/local adapter path exposed
the missing wake context, but the missing field was in core interaction
continuation payload construction.
### Database mode
Embedded PGlite or external Postgres; the bug is not database-mode
specific.
### Access context
Both. Board users resolve the checkbox interaction, and agent bearer-key
wakes consume the continuation context.
### Node.js version
`v22.22.2`
### Operating system
Linux workspace.
### Relevant logs or output
No runtime exception is required to reproduce this. The failure mode is
missing `checkboxSelection` data in the resolved interaction
continuation wake payload.
### Relevant config
Not config-related.
### Additional context
Root cause: accepted checkbox interaction results were not extracted
into the continuation wake context, and adapter wake payload
normalization/rendering had no typed `checkboxSelection` field.
### Privacy checklist
- [x] I have reviewed all pasted output for PII (usernames, file paths,
API keys, tokens, company names) and redacted where necessary.
## What Changed
- Added checkbox selection extraction for accepted
`request_checkbox_confirmation` interactions and stored it in
interaction continuation wake context.
- Included checkbox selection context in heartbeat wake payload
construction.
- Added adapter-utils normalization and wake prompt rendering for
checkbox prompt, selected ids, and selected option details.
- Added regression coverage for route continuation context, heartbeat
payload summaries, and adapter wake prompt rendering.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-context-summary.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts`
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD`
- `rg -n "checkbox|confirmation|interaction|wake|continuation"
ROADMAP.md`
- `gh pr list --state all --search "checkbox continuation selection
repo:paperclipai/paperclip" --json number,title,state,url,headRefName
--limit 20`
- `gh issue list --state all --search "checkbox confirmation options
repo:paperclipai/paperclip" --json number,title,state,url --limit 20`
## Risks
Low risk. The new payload field is additive, only populated for accepted
checkbox confirmations, and existing continuation fields are preserved.
The main compatibility risk is downstream code assuming an exact wake
payload shape; adapter normalization treats the new field as optional.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex coding agent based on GPT-5, with shell/tool execution in
this workspace.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have 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>
Return blockedBy and blocks relation summaries from issue create paths after blocker relations are synced. Refresh child relation summaries after blockParentUntilDone adds a parent blocker relation.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Operators need to *see* how work actually flowed across their agents
over time — who was invoked, what they worked on, and how work was
delegated between them
> - The dashboard shows point-in-time state but nothing reconstructs the
temporal, cross-actor picture of heartbeat runs and delegations
> - A read-only company work-timeline endpoint was landed first (server
aggregation over runs/issues/activity); it had no frontend
> - This pull request adds the Gantt-style **Work Timeline** page that
renders that endpoint, plus the small additive server contract change it
needs (shared DTOs + a task title on each span)
> - The benefit is a single dense view — actor rows, concurrency lanes,
delegation connectors, zoom and a mini-map — that makes agent activity
legible without an N+1 fetch storm from the client
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue. Problem, in-PR:
- **Gap:** the company work-timeline aggregation endpoint has no UI.
There is no way to visually inspect how heartbeat runs unfolded over
time or how work was delegated between agents.
- **Solution:** a dashboard-adjacent Gantt-style page at
`/:companyPrefix/timeline`, linked from the sidebar's "Work" section,
rendering runs as bars on per-actor rows with delegation connectors,
kickoff chips, zoom, a lens filter, and a mini-map.
- Built with React + custom inline SVG (no chart dependency; consistent
with the existing Tailwind/Radix stack).
## What Changed
- **Frontend Gantt page** (`ui/src/pages/Timeline.tsx`,
`ui/src/components/timeline/WorkTimelineChart.tsx`): actor rows
(agents/system only — humans never get a row), overlapping runs packed
into concurrency sub-lanes, bars = heartbeat runs with a left colour tab
for issue identity, truncated task title + timing/status on hover,
click-through to the task.
- **Human activity markers & human rows** for kickoff/delegation
involving people, without giving humans their own run lane.
- **Kickoff avatar chips** at each bar's leading edge; straight
agent→agent delegation connectors (dashed for
retries/changes-requested); in-progress runs extend to a dashed "now"
line and fade out.
- **Zoom** (hour/day/week, auto-fit), full-window **mini-map** with a
draggable brush, **lens filter** (Everyone / per-user, server-side), and
colour **by task / by status**.
- **Pure layout/transform module** (`ui/src/lib/timeline/layout.ts`) —
packing, kickoff derivation, connector resolution, scales — unit-tested
in isolation.
- **Server contract (additive):** moved the `WorkTimeline*` DTOs into
`@paperclipai/shared` so the aggregation service and the UI consume one
contract; added `issueTitle` to each span so the tooltip shows the task
title with no N+1 client fetch.
- Sidebar link, query keys, API client (`ui/src/api/workTimeline.ts`),
and a Storybook story with fixtures.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared build` ✅
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` ✅ · `pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/ui typecheck` ✅
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/lib/timeline/layout.test.ts
src/components/timeline/WorkTimelineChart.test.tsx` ✅ (15/15)
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/work-timeline-service.test.ts` ✅ (5/5) — the DTO move +
`issueTitle` are additive; existing service tests use `objectContaining`
and still pass.
- Rendered `WorkTimelineChart` headless against a real slice of company
activity via a Storybook story; manual browser QA of the live page
passed on the feature branch.
## Risks
- **Low risk.** The change is UI-only plus an additive server DTO
refactor (types relocated to `@paperclipai/shared`, one new optional
field). No schema/migration changes, no change to endpoint behaviour
beyond the extra `issueTitle` field. The page is behind its own route
and does not alter existing views.
## Model Used
- Claude, Opus 4.8 (`claude-opus-4-8`), via Claude Code with extended
thinking and tool use.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above (only the merged endpoint PR #8875 is related; no duplicates)
- [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
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 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
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Operators need visibility into who initiated work, which agents ran,
and how tasks were delegated across a company.
> - The existing control plane stores the raw data across issues,
heartbeat runs, comments, approvals, interactions, and activity logs.
> - There was no single company-scoped API response that reconstructed
those records into timeline actors, spans, events, and edges for a
Gantt-style view.
> - This pull request adds that aggregation endpoint behind the same
company and issue read authorization model used elsewhere.
> - The benefit is that UI work can consume one bounded endpoint instead
of reimplementing timeline joins client-side.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this feature.
## Problem or motivation
Paperclip stores enough execution and delegation data to show work over
time, but consumers need a single endpoint that aggregates it
consistently.
## Proposed solution
Add `GET /api/companies/:companyId/timeline` with date and entity
filters, bounded windows, pagination, actor normalization, run spans,
human events, and delegation/assignment edges.
## Alternatives considered
Querying each source separately from the UI would duplicate ACL and
attribution logic and make client rendering depend on storage details.
## Roadmap alignment
This supports operator visibility and auditability, and does not
duplicate a listed roadmap item.
## What Changed
- Added a `workTimelineService` that aggregates issue candidates from
runs, activity, comments, approvals, interactions, and recently touched
issues.
- Added `GET /api/companies/:companyId/timeline` with `from`, `to`,
`userId`, `goalId`, `projectId`, `issueId`, `limit`, and `offset` query
parameters.
- Enforced company-scope access plus per-issue `issue:read` filtering
before emitting spans, events, or edges.
- Added 31-day window capping, in-progress span handling for null
`finishedAt`, retry/continuation metadata, user-lens subtree filtering,
and activity-log run attribution fallback.
- Added embedded-Postgres tests for aggregation joins, route behavior,
ACL filtering, window capping, and user-lens closure.
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/work-timeline-service.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec tsc -p server/tsconfig.json --noEmit`
Additional smoke attempted:
- `pnpm dev:once` did not start the local app because the existing
embedded instance has pending migration drift: Postgres rejected a
foreign key on `pipeline_case_blockers.company_id` because that column
does not exist. I did not manually alter the embedded database.
## Risks
- Medium risk: this introduces a new aggregate endpoint over several
tables, so query volume should be watched on very large companies.
- The endpoint caps windows and paginates issue candidates to keep the
first version bounded.
- ACL behavior is fail-closed per issue: unreadable issues are filtered
before response rows are emitted.
- No migrations or schema changes are included.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5 via Codex coding agent, with tool use for repository
inspection, editing, local Vitest execution, TypeScript checking, git,
and GitHub CLI operations.
## 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
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The inbox is where operators quickly scan which issues are active,
blocked, or waiting for attention
> - A blocked parent can still have active descendant work, but the
inbox previously depended on only loaded rows to infer that state
> - That made collapsed or partially loaded issue trees look more stuck
than they really were
> - This pull request carries live descendant summary data through the
issue list API and inbox UI
> - The benefit is a more accurate blocked-inbox signal, so operators
can distinguish truly stalled work from blocked parents that still have
live child activity
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue was found for this exact inbox descendant-status
polish.
Feature request fields:
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting: `server/`, `packages/shared`, plugin/MCP API surfaces,
and `ui/` inbox rendering.
**Problem or motivation**
Inbox rows need to show when blocked or collapsed parents still have
live descendant work, even when the live child row is not loaded in the
current client tree. Without a server-provided descendant summary, a
parent can look stalled even though active work continues below it.
**Proposed solution**
Expose an optional live descendant count on issue list results, request
it from inbox views, and use it to render covered blocked status and
live-below indicators. Keep the field opt-in so other issue list callers
keep their existing payload shape and query cost.
**Alternatives considered**
Relying only on client-loaded subtree state was ruled out because it
misses collapsed or unloaded descendants. Always returning the count was
also avoided because most list callers do not need this extra summary.
**Roadmap alignment**
This is scoped operator-visibility polish for the existing inbox. It
does not duplicate a named `ROADMAP.md` milestone.
**Additional context**
The recursive summary query is guarded against parent cycles, and the UI
still falls back to loaded subtree live counts when server summary data
is absent or stale.
## What Changed
- Added optional `includeLiveDescendantSummary` support to issue list
contracts, SDK surfaces, MCP tools, routes, services, and tests.
- Added `liveDescendantCount` to issue list results when requested.
- Updated inbox and blocked-inbox queries to request live descendant
summaries.
- Updated inbox row status rendering so blocked parents with live
descendants show covered blocker treatment without duplicating the
live-below chip.
- Hardened live descendant summary traversal against parent cycles and
preserved the loaded-subtree fallback path for blocked inbox rows.
- Added focused tests for the API parameter, service behavior, helper
logic, cycle handling, and inbox UI query/rendering behavior.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issue-list-assignee-filter-routes.test.ts
ui/src/lib/inbox-live-descendants.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueColumns.test.tsx
ui/src/components/BlockedInboxView.test.tsx ui/src/pages/Inbox.test.tsx`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- Rebased cleanly onto current upstream `master` before pushing.
- Confirmed the branch diff does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml` or
`.github/workflows/*` changes.
## Risks
Low to moderate risk. The new descendant count is opt-in on list
requests, but it adds query work when the inbox asks for it. The
recursive traversal now tracks visited ancestors to avoid cycle
failures. The UI uses the server count as a supplement to existing
loaded-tree state, so stale or absent counts fall back to the prior
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, GPT-5 coding agent, tool-enabled with local shell and git
access. Reasoning mode and context window are managed by the
Paperclip/Codex 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
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Environments are now managed as instance-level runtime resources
rather than per-company rows
> - The custom environment image setup tables were introduced with their
own `company_id` columns and route query parameters
> - That split made one saved environment image state depend on an extra
company context even though the environment itself is the durable owner
> - It also made saved-environment probes harder because applying the
active custom image template could require a company context when no
secret-backed config needed one
> - This pull request scopes custom image templates and setup sessions
directly to the saved environment
> - The benefit is that reusable environment images follow the same
instance-scoped model as environments while secret resolution still uses
company context only when secrets require it
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No matching public GitHub issue was found.
Bug report:
### What happened?
saved environment custom-image routes and persistence required a
`companyId` even though environments are instance-scoped, and saved
sandbox probes did not opt into active custom-image template application
unless a company context was present.
### Expected behavior
custom-image templates and setup sessions should be owned by the saved
environment, and saved sandbox probes should apply the active template
while still requiring a company context only for secret-backed runtime
config.
### Steps to reproduce
1. Configure an instance-scoped sandbox environment with custom-image
setup support.
2. Start or inspect a custom-image session or template for that saved
environment.
3. Probe the saved environment without a custom-image-specific
`companyId` query parameter.
### Paperclip version or commit
current `master` after the environment custom-image template migration.
### Deployment mode
Local dev (pnpm dev) or authenticated local Paperclip instance.
### Installation method
Built from source (pnpm dev / pnpm build).
### Agent adapter(s) involved
Not adapter-specific (core bug).
### Database mode
Embedded PGlite/Postgres dev database.
### Access context
Board human operator.
### Privacy checklist
No logs, secrets, tokens, private URLs, or local machine paths are
included.
Duplicate search performed:
- `gh search prs "environment custom image companyId
repo:paperclipai/paperclip" --state open --limit 20`
- `gh search prs "custom image environment scoped
repo:paperclipai/paperclip" --state open --limit 20`
- `gh search issues "environment custom image
repo:paperclipai/paperclip" --state open --limit 20`
The returned results were unrelated adapter, Docker, auth, or
stale-workspace items.
## What Changed
- Removed redundant `company_id` columns from environment custom-image
templates and setup sessions.
- Added migration `0127_environment_custom_images_instance_scoped` to
collapse duplicate active rows per environment before dropping the old
company-scoped indexes/columns.
- Updated custom-image services, route handlers, shared validators, and
UI API/query keys to use environment-scoped custom-image state.
- Kept runtime secret resolution company-aware only when secret refs or
bindings require a company context.
- Made saved sandbox environment probes opt into active custom-image
template application.
- Updated DB, shared, server, and UI tests for the new
environment-scoped contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db run check:migrations`
- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/db/src/environment-custom-images-schema.test.ts
packages/shared/src/environment-custom-images.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/environment-custom-image-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/environment-custom-images-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/environment-routes.test.ts
ui/src/pages/CompanyEnvironments.test.tsx`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm test:run` before rebasing onto latest `master`; after the rebase
only the migration number changed, and the migration check plus focused
suite, typecheck, and build were rerun.
- `pnpm build`
## Risks
- Migration safety: the migration supersedes duplicate active templates
per environment and fails duplicate active setup sessions before adding
environment-only unique indexes. Operators with duplicate historical
active rows should review which active template is kept.
- Behavior shift: plugin custom-image setup calls now receive
`companyId: "instance"` when no secret binding determines a concrete
company context.
- Secret-backed configs still require an explicit or uniquely inferable
company context; environments with secret bindings spread across
multiple companies continue to fail fast.
> 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 via the `codex_local` adapter, GPT-5-based coding model
with tool-enabled repository inspection, editing, testing, git, and
GitHub CLI access. Exact context-window metadata was not exposed by the
runtime.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] 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 local adapter and heartbeat recovery systems decide whether an
agent has a real control-plane mutation path.
> - Sandboxed local adapters split execution between the trusted host
process and the sandbox shell/tool surface.
> - A host-side adapter can still reach Paperclip while the sandbox
shell surface cannot, which leaves agents thinking no endpoint or
credentials are configured even though the host can still post comments.
> - Execution-policy review stages can also remain pending after a
reviewer run finishes without recording a decision.
> - This pull request makes the sandbox bridge available to the actual
shell mutation surface and adds bounded recovery for
terminal-but-still-pending review participants.
> - The benefit is that agents get a real reachable Paperclip API path
where they need it, and stalled review stages become visible recovery
work instead of silently drifting.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No exact public GitHub issue matched this combined failure. I searched
for exact and related terms including `cannot reach the Paperclip
control plane`, `execution_review_participant_recovery`, `sandbox
callback bridge`, `review participant in_review`, and `control plane
sandbox`.
Related public issues:
- Refs #8482 for `in_review` liveness invariant recovery.
- Refs #863 for prior agent API-key reachability confusion.
- Refs #248 for the broader sandboxed agent execution model.
Bug summary:
- What happened: a sandboxed local-adapter run could have host-side
Paperclip access while the sandbox Bash/tool surface lacked a reachable
API endpoint or usable run credentials. Separately, a reviewer run could
finish while its execution-review stage remained pending, leaving the
source issue in `in_review` with no decision and no live participant
run.
- Expected behavior: the mutation surface that agents actually use
should receive a run-scoped Paperclip bridge, and pending review
participants should get one bounded normal-model recovery wake before
moving to explicit blocked/source-scoped recovery.
- Steps to reproduce: run a sandbox-backed local adapter that needs
Bash/curl/tooling to call Paperclip from inside the sandbox, or finish
an execution-policy reviewer run without submitting the pending review
decision.
- Deployment mode: local/authenticated private development instance with
sandbox-backed local adapters.
## What Changed
- Changed sandbox callback bridge startup so bridge credentials are
passed through the sandbox runner environment instead of embedded in the
visible `nohup env ...` command string.
- Added adapter-utils coverage proving the sandbox shell can call
Paperclip through the bridge, forwards the host run JWT with
`X-Paperclip-Run-Id`, and does not leak host or bridge tokens into
stdout/stderr, runner command text, or runtime files.
- Added one bounded execution-review participant recovery path for
terminal reviewer runs whose `executionState` remains pending.
- Escalated exhausted or non-invokable review participant recovery to
blocked/source-scoped recovery with dedicated evidence, activity, and
next-action text.
- Documented the mutation-surface reachability contract in
`doc/execution-semantics.md` and updated the Paperclip skill
authentication guidance for sandbox bridge env vars.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/adapter-utils/src/execution-target-sandbox.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
--no-file-parallelism --maxWorkers=1`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `git diff --check`
- `curl -fsS $PAPERCLIP_API_URL/api/health` returned `status: ok` on the
local instance.
## Risks
- Medium behavioral risk: more `in_review` issues with
terminal-but-pending reviewer runs will now be retried once and then
blocked explicitly instead of remaining quiet.
- Low sandbox bridge risk: credential delivery moved from command text
to the runner environment, which is less leaky but depends on sandbox
providers honoring the env payload for startup commands.
- No database migration is included.
- Full repo build and CI were not run locally before opening the PR;
targeted server/adapter tests and typechecks passed.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5 via the Codex local agent, with repository tool use and
shell-based code execution. The runtime did not expose a precise
context-window value to the agent.
## 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
> - Task/issue threads render each comment as a chat bubble; the author
determines whether it shows as a left-aligned agent bubble (name + icon)
or a right-aligned "Board" bubble
> - Comments posted by an agent from a local execution environment are
written with a non-human author id (`local-board`/system), so they were
mis-rendered as blue "Board" bubbles instead of being attributed to the
authoring agent
> - This misattribution is confusing (it looks like the human board said
something an agent actually said) and it can drive false
wake/reconciliation behavior on the affected threads
> - This pull request adds server-side attribution derivation (lossless
run-id join first, then an explicit run-log post marker), persists the
derived agent so the read path stops re-scanning run logs, and stops the
client from labeling agent-derived comments "Board"
> - The benefit is agent comments render as the correct agent, genuine
human board comments are never reattributed, and reads get cheaper after
a one-time persistence
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
<!-- No public GitHub issue — describing the problem in-PR (bug report
shape). -->
**What happened?**
In a task/issue comment thread, comments authored by an agent from a
local execution environment are stored with a non-human author id
(`local-board`/system). The UI renders these as right-aligned blue
"Board" bubbles, implying a human board member authored them. The
mislabeling is also a wake/reconciliation hazard: an agent comment that
reads as "Board" can look like human board input.
**Expected behavior**
Such comments should render as the authoring agent (left-aligned bubble
with agent name + icon). Genuine human/board comments must continue to
render as "Board" and must never be reattributed to an agent.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Have an agent post a comment on an issue from a local execution
environment (author id `local-board`).
2. Open the issue comment thread in the UI.
3. Observe the agent's comment rendered as a right-aligned blue "Board"
bubble instead of the authoring agent.
**Root cause**
The read path did not resolve the authoring agent for these comments,
and the client fell back to a "Board" label for the `local-board`
author.
## What Changed
- **Server derivation (`server/src/services/issues.ts`):**
- Resolve the authoring agent from the comment's run id first
(`createdByRunId`/`derivedCreatedByRunId` → `heartbeatRuns.agentId`) —
lossless when present.
- Second tier `run_log_comment_post`: read the run log lazily (only for
still-unresolved comments) to match the explicit `comment id:` post
marker.
- **Guard:** never reattribute a comment whose author maps to a genuine
user profile. Only the non-human sentinel (`local-board`, which is
itself a `user` row) and authors absent from the `user` table are
eligible.
- Pure timing-overlap tiers are intentionally **not** used (Option A) —
an agent comment and a human board comment posted during the same run
are indistinguishable rows, so any timing guess risks mislabeling a real
human comment.
- **Persistence
(`packages/db/src/migrations/0126_issue_comment_derived_attribution.sql`,
`packages/db/src/schema/issue_comments.ts`):** add stored `derived_*`
attribution columns and write the resolved agent back with a single bulk
`UPDATE ... FROM (VALUES ...)`, so reads stop recomputing from run logs.
Migration is additive (new nullable columns) with a batched, idempotent
backfill of the lossless run-id tier over historical rows.
- **Types (`packages/shared/src/types/issue.ts`):** expose the persisted
attribution fields and the `IssueCommentDerivedAuthorSource` union.
- **Client (`ui/src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts`):** the message
builder already prefers a resolved agent id (`authorAgentId ??
runAgentId ?? derivedAuthorAgentId`), so once the server persists the
derived agent the bubble renders as the agent automatically — no client
code change needed. Adds a regression guard confirming a genuine board
comment with no derived agent is still rendered as "Board".
- **Tests:** derivation + message-building tests, including assertions
that genuine board/user comments are **not** reattributed.
## Verification
- `cd server && npx vitest run issues-service` — 94 tests pass: run-id
resolution, no-attribution on timing overlap alone (Option A), multi-run
ambiguity, same-agent multi-run, and the genuine-user guard. Exercises
the real persistence path (bulk UPDATE) against the test DB.
- `cd ui && npx vitest run issue-chat-messages` — 27 tests pass; client
no longer labels agent-derived comments "Board", and a genuine board
comment with no derived agent is not re-labeled.
- `cd server && npm run typecheck` — passes (exit 0).
- Manual: on a thread containing old agent-authored comments, the blue
"Board" bubbles render as the authoring agent; a genuine board comment
on the same thread still renders as "Board".
## Risks
- **Mis-reattributing a genuine board comment made during an agent run**
→ mitigated by the human-profile guard (only `local-board`/system
authors are eligible) and by dropping pure timing tiers (Option A): only
the lossless run-id join and the explicit run-log post marker attribute
history.
- **Backfill volume / run-log reads** → the migration backfill is
batched (5000 rows/loop) and results are persisted so reads stop
recomputing; the read-path persistence is a single bulk UPDATE rather
than per-comment round-trips. Migration adds only nullable columns (no
destructive change).
- The persistence/backfill has **not** been run against any production
database as part of opening this PR.
## Model Used
Claude Opus 4.8 (`claude-opus-4-8`), extended thinking, via Claude Code
with tool use.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs — related open
PRs (#6006 narrow attribution run scan, #4729 attribution roll-up, #7014
reaped-run attribution) address different attribution paths; none fix
the `local-board` "Board" bubble rendering this PR targets. Supersedes
#8832 (same change; branch renamed to drop an internal ticket id per
CONTRIBUTING → Branch Naming)
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Issue-thread interactions are how agents ask users or the board for
decisions and structured input
> - Product telemetry needs to understand when those interactions
resolve without exposing private interaction content
> - Resolution currently happens through several service paths, so
telemetry needs to be emitted consistently from the terminal transitions
> - The interaction service should describe the resolved interaction,
while the telemetry backend owns unknown-value normalization for
dimensions
> - This pull request emits `interaction.resolved` after successful
database writes and removes redundant client-side normalization from the
service
> - The benefit is aggregate-safe telemetry for interaction completion
behavior without leaking raw IDs, answer text, rejection reasons, or
document content
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this internal telemetry follow-up.
Feature context:
- Problem/motivation: Paperclip needs aggregate product telemetry for
issue-thread interaction resolution outcomes while preserving privacy
boundaries around user answers and internal identifiers.
- Proposed solution: Emit `interaction.resolved` once from terminal
interaction resolution paths, passing runtime dimensions through the
shared telemetry helper while preserving aggregate-safe counts and
ID/free-text omission.
- Alternatives considered: Normalizing interaction dimensions in the
interaction service duplicated telemetry backend responsibility and made
unknown-value handling inconsistent across telemetry clients.
- Roadmap alignment: This is a focused telemetry instrumentation
follow-up that builds on the generated telemetry event types from #8818.
## What Changed
- Wires `interaction.resolved` telemetry into terminal issue-thread
interaction resolution paths after successful database writes.
- Passes raw interaction kind, status, continuation policy, resolution
reason, target type, and creator agent role values to the shared
telemetry helper instead of maintaining service-local allowlists.
- Preserves resolver classification, target `none` derivation for
non-confirmation interactions, non-negative aggregate counts, raw ID
omission, and free-text omission.
- Logs telemetry failures without blocking interaction resolution.
- Adds service-level tests for accepted, rejected, answered,
stale-target expiry, superseded-comment expiry, and raw creator-role
pass-through payloads.
## Verification
- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interactions-telemetry.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/shared-telemetry-events.test.ts`
- `pnpm typecheck`
- GitHub PR checks on the latest head commit are green, including
`verify`, build, e2e, general tests, serialized server suites, security
scans, and Greptile Review.
- Security code review completed before this branch update.
## Risks
- Low operational risk: telemetry is emitted after successful
persistence and telemetry failures are logged without blocking the
user-visible interaction flow.
- Main behavioral risk is duplicate or missing telemetry from a
resolution path; the focused tests cover the terminal resolution
variants.
- Telemetry dimension normalization now depends on the shared telemetry
backend path instead of the interaction service, so backend
normalization must remain the source of truth for unknown or empty
dimension values.
- The existing PR branch name contains an internal task id because this
update continues an already-open PR branch instead of opening a
replacement PR.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5 Codex coding agent, API-based coding environment with
shell, repository, and GitHub CLI tool use. Context window size was not
reported 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)
- [ ] 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 issue workspaces are part of the control-plane runtime
boundary: the server records which git worktree and branch an agent run
is allowed to use.
> - Existing reuse checks validated the worktree path and cleanliness,
but did not fully validate that the actual checked-out branch still
matched the recorded execution workspace branch.
> - That gap let an agent run switch a managed worktree onto a
publishing branch without updating the execution workspace record, then
later reuse or finalize the workspace as though it were coherent.
> - The runtime needs a bounded repair path for provably safe mismatches
and a hard validation failure for dirty, divergent, or unrecorded branch
transitions.
> - This pull request adds branch coherence to managed git worktree
validation, records explicit recovery evidence, and prevents finalize
success when a run silently changes branches.
> - The benefit is that branch drift becomes either safely repaired or
visibly recoverable instead of silently corrupting managed workspace
state.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this bug.
Bug report:
- What happened: a managed agent workspace could be recorded for one
branch while the underlying git worktree was actually checked out on
another branch. Reuse and finalization could still treat the workspace
as healthy.
- Expected behavior: managed git worktrees should verify the actual
branch against the recorded execution workspace branch. Safe same-HEAD
clean mismatches may be repaired, while dirty, divergent, or unrecorded
branch transitions should fail into explicit workspace validation
recovery.
- Reproduction outline: create a runtime-managed issue worktree, switch
its checkout to another branch without updating the execution workspace
record, then attempt reuse or run finalization.
- Deployment mode: local/self-hosted Paperclip server using managed git
workspaces.
- Related public work: Refs #7644 and #7579. Related but not duplicate:
#8275 and #5851.
## What Changed
- Added managed git worktree branch inspection, formatted validation
evidence, and safe same-HEAD repair logic to the workspace runtime
service.
- Validated recorded managed workspace branch state before reuse and
during heartbeat setup.
- Added finalization-time branch guards so runs that silently switch
branches fail with `workspace_validation_failed` instead of recording a
successful finalize.
- Added recovery fingerprints and evidence for
`git_worktree_branch_incoherence`, including manual-repair next actions
for unsafe branch drift.
- Documented branch coherence as part of runtime-created git worktree
workspace coherence.
- Added focused tests for safe branch repair, dirty/divergent recovery
evidence, heartbeat setup validation, and finalize failure/success
paths.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD`
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-session.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-recovery-actions.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-finalize-branch.test.ts`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm test:run`
- `pnpm build`
Notes:
- An initial full `pnpm test:run` attempt hit a transient `socket hang
up` in one `plugin-routes-authz` case. The exact case passed when rerun
directly, the full `plugin-routes-authz` file passed, and the subsequent
full `pnpm test:run` passed.
- `pnpm build` still emits existing Vite CSS pseudo-element and
chunk-size warnings unrelated to this change.
## Risks
- This intentionally changes behavior for managed runs that switch
branches without recording the transition: they now fail during
workspace validation/finalization instead of silently proceeding.
- The automatic repair path is intentionally narrow. It only repairs
clean branch mismatches when both branches point at the same commit;
dirty or divergent worktrees require manual recovery.
- Recovery fingerprints now include workspace-validation evidence, so
duplicate recovery-action grouping is more precise for
branch-incoherence failures.
> 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 Codex CLI/API coding agent, with shell/git/test
execution and reasoning mode 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
- [ ] 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: Cody <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Cody <cody@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Telemetry is part of the control plane's operational visibility and
needs stable event contracts.
> - The shared telemetry client accepted first-party event names through
a broad string surface, which weakened compile-time guarantees.
> - Plugin telemetry still needs a dynamic path because plugin-defined
events cannot be enumerated in the core generated type module.
> - This pull request vendors generated Paperclip telemetry event and
dimension types, closes the first-party event-name union, and keeps
plugin telemetry on an explicit dynamic method.
> - Review feedback clarified that backend normalization should remain
the source of truth, so telemetry helpers now preserve raw categorical
values while keeping generated per-event type hints.
> - The benefit is stricter first-party telemetry typing without hiding
backend normalization signals or changing batching, flushing, schema
versioning, sinks, or endpoints.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this internal type-contract
maintenance change.
### Problem or motivation
The shared telemetry client should reject unregistered first-party event
names at compile time, while the plugin telemetry bridge must continue
to emit plugin-defined events through the existing batching and envelope
path. Helper wrappers should also avoid client-side enum coercion so the
backend can detect and record normalization when clients send unexpected
categorical values.
### Proposed solution
Generate and vendor the accepted Paperclip telemetry event and dimension
types, use those types for the first-party `track()` API, keep
plugin-defined telemetry on an explicit dynamic method, and let helper
wrappers pass raw categorical dimensions through to backend validation.
### Alternatives considered
Keeping `track()` open to arbitrary strings would preserve flexibility,
but it would not give first-party callers the type safety this change is
meant to provide. Enumerating plugin events in core was also ruled out
because plugin-defined events are not known to the core package.
Client-side enum normalization was removed after review because it
duplicates backend validation and can hide misbehaving-client signals.
### Roadmap alignment
This is a tightly scoped telemetry contract maintenance change and does
not overlap with a roadmap-level core feature.
## What Changed
- Vendored the generated Paperclip telemetry event and dimension type
module under shared telemetry code.
- Closed the first-party telemetry event-name union to generated
backend-accepted names plus an explicit `RegisteredPluginEventName =
never` extension point.
- Added `TelemetryClient.trackDynamic()` for plugin telemetry bridge
emission while keeping `track()` closed and typed.
- Added JSDoc explaining when to use `track()` versus `trackDynamic()`.
- Updated telemetry helper wrappers to type dimensions from each event's
generated schema entry while passing raw categorical values through for
backend normalization.
- Added `trackInteractionResolved()` and updated focused shared/server
tests for telemetry event typing, raw pass-through behavior, and plugin
telemetry bridging.
## Verification
Local verification passed before the latest push:
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/shared/src/telemetry/client-types.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/shared-telemetry-events.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-telemetry-bridge.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/project-goal-telemetry-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routine-run-telemetry.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-telemetry-routes.test.ts`
- `git diff --check`
Post-push verification completed on head
`3d973ffbea6154b19ad208dcffd1374d1b25b654`:
- GitHub PR checks passed, including `verify`, build, typecheck/release
registry, general test shards, serialized server shards, canary dry run,
e2e, and security checks.
- Greptile Review passed with 5/5 confidence.
- All PR review threads are resolved.
## Risks
Low runtime risk. The change is intended to affect TypeScript contracts
and helper typing while preserving the existing telemetry enqueue,
batching, and backend ingest path. The main intentional behavior shift
is that helper wrappers no longer coerce unexpected categorical values
on the client; those values reach the backend so backend normalization
can record the signal. Private company import source refs still use
`hashPrivateRef` when `isPrivate` is true.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5 Codex, tool-enabled coding agent. Exact context window was
not exposed by the runtime; the agent used repository file access, shell
commands, and GitHub CLI operations.
## 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
> - Issue-thread interactions are how agents ask board users for typed
decisions and structured answers inside an issue thread
> - Confirmation interactions already become stale when a later
board/user comment supersedes the pending decision
> - Question interactions had the same workflow risk, because a
board/user could answer in a comment while the old question card stayed
pending
> - This pull request extends the supersede-by-comment lifecycle to
ask-user-question interactions and makes that status visible in the UI
> - The benefit is agents get a clear continuation signal and users do
not see stale question forms after the discussion has moved on
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No exact public GitHub issue was found.
Bug report:
**Pre-submission checklist**
- [x] I have searched existing open and closed issues and this is not a
duplicate.
- [x] I am on the latest released version of Paperclip, or can reproduce
on `master`.
- [x] I have confirmed the error originates in Paperclip itself, not in
an agent adapter, API provider, or local configuration.
**What happened?**
Pending `ask_user_questions` interactions could remain open after a
later board/user comment changed or answered the request in-thread. That
left a stale form visible and kept the interaction in a pending state
even though the discussion had moved on.
**Expected behavior**
Question interactions should follow the same default
supersede-on-comment behavior as confirmation interactions, with an
explicit expired result that points to the superseding comment.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Create an `ask_user_questions` interaction on an issue.
2. Add a board/user comment created at or after that interaction.
3. Observe that before this change, the question interaction stayed
pending instead of expiring as superseded by the comment.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Current `master` before this PR.
**Deployment mode**
Self-hosted server or local dev. The bug is in shared issue-thread
interaction lifecycle handling.
**Installation method**
Built from source.
**Agent adapter(s) involved**
Not adapter-specific. This is a core issue-thread interaction bug.
**Database mode**
Applies to the normal Paperclip database-backed interaction lifecycle.
**Access context**
Board user comments supersede agent-created questions.
**Relevant logs or output**
No crash output. The stale pending interaction was visible in the issue
thread state.
**Relevant config (if applicable)**
None.
**Additional context**
Confirmation-style interactions already supported this stale-by-comment
behavior. This PR brings question interactions into the same lifecycle
model.
**Privacy checklist**
- [x] I have reviewed all pasted output for PII and included no private
instance links, local ticket ids, secrets, logs, or screenshots.
## What Changed
- Added `supersedeOnUserComment` support to `ask_user_questions`
payloads, defaulting it to `true` during interaction creation.
- Expire pending question interactions when a later board/user comment
supersedes them, including a result with `expirationReason:
"superseded_by_comment"` and the superseding `commentId`.
- Updated interaction summaries and cards so expired question requests
show a clear amber state with a jump link to the comment and correct
singular/plural copy.
- Updated agent onboarding guidance to describe the new default and how
to opt out.
- Added shared, server, and UI test coverage for the new lifecycle
behavior.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/shared/src/issue-thread-interactions.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interactions-service.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueThreadInteractionCard.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/issue-thread-interactions.test.ts --reporter=dot` passed: 5
files, 73 tests.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/server typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui
typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interactions-service.test.ts
--reporter=dot && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passed
after the final type-safety cleanup.
- Confirmed the branch is rebased on current `origin/master`.
- Confirmed the diff does not touch `pnpm-lock.yaml`,
`.github/workflows`, or database migrations.
## Risks
- Low-to-medium risk: `ask_user_questions` now defaults to expiring
after later board/user comments. Existing callers that need questions to
stay open through discussion can set `supersedeOnUserComment: false`.
- Expired question interactions store an empty `answers` array, so
downstream consumers should treat the explicit `expirationReason` as the
meaningful outcome.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent in Paperclip CodexCoder runtime,
with terminal and repository tool use. Exact context window is not
exposed in this 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.
> - Agent runs are assembled by the heartbeat service from agent config,
project workspaces, environment config, secret bindings, skills, and
runtime session state.
> - The heartbeat service intentionally reuses adapter sessions,
execution workspaces, and sandbox leases when that preserves useful
state.
> - Reuse becomes incorrect when the effective next-run config changes
after a saved session, workspace, or lease was created.
> - Stale reuse can make a later run appear pinned to old agent,
environment, secret, instruction, or workspace settings.
> - This pull request records non-sensitive fingerprints for the
effective session, workspace, and lease config at run boundaries.
> - When those fingerprints drift, Paperclip refreshes persisted runtime
config or starts fresh execution instead of reusing stale state.
> - The benefit is predictable next-run config freshness without storing
raw secret values, full env maps, provider credentials, or private path
details.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
- Refs #8058
- Related PRs checked during dedup search: #4968, #4155, #84, #8480.
These cover nearby workspace/session routing or model-config freshness
areas, but do not duplicate this effective run config fingerprinting
path.
## What Changed
- Added effective run config fingerprinting for session, workspace, and
lease reuse decisions, with canonicalization that ignores generated
runtime noise and redacts sensitive values.
- Updated heartbeat reuse logic to compare stored and next-run
fingerprints, reset stale saved sessions, refresh persisted workspace
config snapshots, replace stale reused workspaces when required, and
avoid stale sandbox lease reuse.
- Included plain environment value drift via value hashes, without
storing the raw env values.
- Root-bound instruction content hashing so legacy direct absolute
instruction paths are represented but not read for config fingerprints.
- Batched secret/version metadata lookups for environment lease
fingerprinting.
- Added workspace operation/run result freshness metadata so operators
can inspect non-sensitive decision categories.
- Surfaced config freshness labels and next-run copy in the UI and docs.
- Added focused coverage for fingerprint redaction, session reset
decisions, workspace refresh/replace behavior, environment lease drift,
and persisted workspace restoration.
## Verification
- `git diff --check`
- Sensitive-data scan before push:
- `git diff --unified=0 origin/master...HEAD | rg -n --pcre2
"(AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID|AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY|ghp_[A-Za-z0-9_]{20,}|github_pat_[A-Za-z0-9_]{20,}|sk-[A-Za-z0-9]{20,}|-----BEGIN
(RSA |OPENSSH |EC |DSA )?PRIVATE KEY-----|AKIA[0-9A-Z]{16})"`
- `git diff --unified=0 origin/master...HEAD | rg -n --pcre2
"[A-Za-z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Za-z0-9.-]+\\.[A-Za-z]{2,}"`
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/effective-run-config-fingerprints.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-session.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/environment-runtime.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db clean`
- `pnpm test:run`
- `pnpm build`
- UI screenshots from Cutter:
-
https://artifacts.cutter.sh/8797/run-2f4827c-2026-06-30T18-57-25/preview/change-01.png
-
https://artifacts.cutter.sh/8797/run-2f4827c-2026-06-30T18-57-25/preview/change-02.png
-
https://artifacts.cutter.sh/8797/run-2f4827c-2026-06-30T18-57-25/preview/change-03.png
## Risks
- Medium: overly broad fingerprints could start fresh sessions,
workspaces, or sandbox leases more often than necessary.
- Medium: missing a config category would allow stale reuse to persist
for that category.
- Medium: legacy direct absolute instruction paths are no longer
content-hashed unless they are paired with an absolute managed
instructions root.
- Low data risk: fingerprint metadata stores hashes and category names,
not raw secrets, raw env values, provider credentials, or private path
details.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5 via Codex CLI / Codex coding agent, tool-enabled with
shell, Git, GitHub CLI, local test execution, and code editing. The
exact deployed model variant and context window are not exposed by this
environment.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Cody <cody@paperclip.ing>
Bumps [dotenv](https://github.com/motdotla/dotenv) from 17.3.1 to
17.4.2.
<details>
<summary>Changelog</summary>
<p><em>Sourced from <a
href="https://github.com/motdotla/dotenv/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md">dotenv's
changelog</a>.</em></p>
<blockquote>
<h2><a
href="https://github.com/motdotla/dotenv/compare/v17.4.1...v17.4.2">17.4.2</a>
(2026-04-12)</h2>
<h3>Changed</h3>
<ul>
<li>Improved skill files - tightened up details (<a
href="https://redirect.github.com/motdotla/dotenv/pull/1009">#1009</a>)</li>
</ul>
<h2><a
href="https://github.com/motdotla/dotenv/compare/v17.4.0...v17.4.1">17.4.1</a>
(2026-04-05)</h2>
<h3>Changed</h3>
<ul>
<li>Change text <code>injecting</code> to <code>injected</code> (<a
href="https://redirect.github.com/motdotla/dotenv/pull/1005">#1005</a>)</li>
</ul>
<h2><a
href="https://github.com/motdotla/dotenv/compare/v17.3.1...v17.4.0">17.4.0</a>
(2026-04-01)</h2>
<h3>Added</h3>
<ul>
<li>Add <code>skills/</code> folder with focused agent skills:
<code>skills/dotenv/SKILL.md</code> (core usage) and
<code>skills/dotenvx/SKILL.md</code> (encryption, multiple environments,
variable expansion) for AI coding agent discovery via the skills.sh
ecosystem (<code>npx skills add motdotla/dotenv</code>)</li>
</ul>
<h3>Changed</h3>
<ul>
<li>Tighten up logs: <code>◇ injecting env (14) from .env</code> (<a
href="https://redirect.github.com/motdotla/dotenv/pull/1003">#1003</a>)</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
</details>
<details>
<summary>Commits</summary>
<ul>
<li><a
href="f116f70310"><code>f116f70</code></a>
17.4.2</li>
<li><a
href="3a8161274f"><code>3a81612</code></a>
fix visual order of faq</li>
<li><a
href="13f55a89e1"><code>13f55a8</code></a>
Merge branch 'skill'</li>
<li><a
href="4bbbf73f09"><code>4bbbf73</code></a>
reorganize faq</li>
<li><a
href="c3da64bb2b"><code>c3da64b</code></a>
Merge pull request <a
href="https://redirect.github.com/motdotla/dotenv/issues/1009">#1009</a>
from motdotla/skill</li>
<li><a
href="6f743b173f"><code>6f743b1</code></a>
update source</li>
<li><a
href="fc2c6247e8"><code>fc2c624</code></a>
update skill</li>
<li><a
href="972315ba74"><code>972315b</code></a>
Tighten up skill</li>
<li><a
href="2795fce3d1"><code>2795fce</code></a>
reorganize faq</li>
<li><a
href="d5495d4ae8"><code>d5495d4</code></a>
adjust skill</li>
<li>Additional commits viewable in <a
href="https://github.com/motdotla/dotenv/compare/v17.3.1...v17.4.2">compare
view</a></li>
</ul>
</details>
<br />
[](https://docs.github.com/en/github/managing-security-vulnerabilities/about-dependabot-security-updates#about-compatibility-scores)
Dependabot will resolve any conflicts with this PR as long as you don't
alter it yourself. You can also trigger a rebase manually by commenting
`@dependabot rebase`.
[//]: # (dependabot-automerge-start)
[//]: # (dependabot-automerge-end)
---
<details>
<summary>Dependabot commands and options</summary>
<br />
You can trigger Dependabot actions by commenting on this PR:
- `@dependabot rebase` will rebase this PR
- `@dependabot recreate` will recreate this PR, overwriting any edits
that have been made to it
- `@dependabot show <dependency name> ignore conditions` will show all
of the ignore conditions of the specified dependency
- `@dependabot ignore this major version` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this major version (unless you reopen
the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
- `@dependabot ignore this minor version` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this minor version (unless you reopen
the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
- `@dependabot ignore this dependency` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this dependency (unless you reopen the
PR or upgrade to it yourself)
</details>
Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>
Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Bumps
[@aws-sdk/client-s3](https://github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/tree/HEAD/clients/client-s3)
from 3.1072.0 to 3.1075.0.
<details>
<summary>Release notes</summary>
<p><em>Sourced from <a
href="https://github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/releases">@aws-sdk/client-s3's
releases</a>.</em></p>
<blockquote>
<h2>v3.1075.0</h2>
<h4>3.1075.0(2026-06-23)</h4>
<h5>New Features</h5>
<ul>
<li><strong>client-kafka:</strong> Amazon MSK Replicator now supports
mTLS authentication when connecting to external Apache Kafka clusters,
enabling customers to replicate data from clusters that require mutual
TLS for client authentication. This capability is supported when
replicating to Amazon MSK Express brokers. (<a
href="005f9529d4">005f9529</a>)</li>
</ul>
<hr />
<p>For list of updated packages, view
<strong>updated-packages.md</strong> in
<strong>assets-3.1075.0.zip</strong></p>
<h2>v3.1074.0</h2>
<h4>3.1074.0(2026-06-22)</h4>
<h5>Chores</h5>
<ul>
<li><strong>xml-builder:</strong>
<ul>
<li>move testing devDeps to root, remove unused nodable dep (<a
href="https://redirect.github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/pull/8118">#8118</a>)
(<a
href="ed82880d26">ed82880d</a>)</li>
<li>parse XML internally (<a
href="https://redirect.github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/pull/7863">#7863</a>)
(<a
href="74d0a07143">74d0a071</a>)</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<h5>Documentation Changes</h5>
<ul>
<li>typo in contributing.md (<a
href="https://redirect.github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/pull/8116">#8116</a>)
(<a
href="87ff33d30e">87ff33d3</a>)</li>
</ul>
<h5>New Features</h5>
<ul>
<li><strong>clients:</strong> update client endpoints as of 2026-06-22
(<a
href="3a55a33387">3a55a333</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-cloudwatch-logs:</strong> CloudWatch Logs Updates -
New APIs introduced to support syslog ingestion to a log group. For more
information, see CloudWatch Logs API documentation. (<a
href="01a3b51350">01a3b513</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-bedrock-agentcore:</strong> Adds an optional
extractionMode field to CreateEvent. SKIP retains the event in
short-term memory but excludes it from long-term memory extraction. (<a
href="749753adae">749753ad</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-omics:</strong> Adds support for scratch ephemeral
storage mounted at tmp (<a
href="331e3023c1">331e3023</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-application-signals:</strong> Application Signals now
supports dynamic instrumentation and Service Events telemetry. Add
instrumentation at runtime without restarts, and use fine-grained
profiling data to quickly pinpoint latency and error root causes. (<a
href="f93b1c0333">f93b1c03</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-mediaconnect:</strong> AWS MediaConnect now supports
Content Quality Analysis for Router Inputs, enabling detection of black
frames, frozen frames, and silent audio with configurable thresholds.
(<a
href="05054853a5">05054853</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-lambda-core:</strong> Initial release of the AWS
Lambda Core SDK with APIs to create, manage, and tag network connectors
that enable Lambda compute resources to access private resources in your
Amazon VPC. (<a
href="e35cdab89f">e35cdab8</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-lambda:</strong> Add support for tagging Network
Connector resources in AWS Lambda. (<a
href="fbfc40785e">fbfc4078</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-guardduty:</strong> Added AI-powered investigations
that automatically analyze security findings, correlate related
activity, and produce structured summaries with risk assessment,
confidence scoring, MITRE technique classification, and actionable next
steps. (<a
href="83c2983945">83c29839</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-lambda-microvms:</strong> Lambda MicroVMs GA launch.
Lambda MicroVMs enable isolated and highly responsive execution of
user-supplied or LLM-generated code. (<a
href="5519a7e28f">5519a7e2</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-kafka:</strong> Amazon MSK Replicator now supports
mTLS authentication when connecting to external Apache Kafka clusters,
enabling customers to replicate data from clusters that require mutual
TLS for client authentication. This capability is supported when
replicating to Amazon MSK Express brokers. (<a
href="ce7d1bf501">ce7d1bf5</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-quicksight:</strong> Updated the Amazon Quick Spaces
API to remove unsupported SPACE and ARTIFACT values from the
SpaceQuickSightResourceType enum. (<a
href="e1b325d42e">e1b325d4</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-ec2:</strong> This release adds support for AMI
Watermark and Allowed AMIs integration (<a
href="d1698bed39">d1698bed</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-direct-connect:</strong> Added VIF rate limiting
support for AWS Direct Connect, allowing customers to set bandwidth
allocations on virtual interfaces to manage traffic on dedicated
connections. (<a
href="228a95dc0c">228a95dc</a>)</li>
</ul>
<h5>Bug Fixes</h5>
<ul>
<li><strong>cloudfront-signer:</strong> filename asterisk apostrophe
encoding fix (<a
href="https://redirect.github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/pull/8119">#8119</a>)
(<a
href="35acab408b">35acab40</a>)</li>
</ul>
<hr />
<p>For list of updated packages, view
<strong>updated-packages.md</strong> in
<strong>assets-3.1074.0.zip</strong></p>
<!-- raw HTML omitted -->
</blockquote>
<p>... (truncated)</p>
</details>
<details>
<summary>Changelog</summary>
<p><em>Sourced from <a
href="https://github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/blob/main/clients/client-s3/CHANGELOG.md">@aws-sdk/client-s3's
changelog</a>.</em></p>
<blockquote>
<h1><a
href="https://github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/compare/v3.1074.0...v3.1075.0">3.1075.0</a>
(2026-06-23)</h1>
<p><strong>Note:</strong> Version bump only for package
<code>@aws-sdk/client-s3</code></p>
<h1><a
href="https://github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/compare/v3.1073.0...v3.1074.0">3.1074.0</a>
(2026-06-22)</h1>
<p><strong>Note:</strong> Version bump only for package
<code>@aws-sdk/client-s3</code></p>
<h1><a
href="https://github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/compare/v3.1072.0...v3.1073.0">3.1073.0</a>
(2026-06-19)</h1>
<p><strong>Note:</strong> Version bump only for package
<code>@aws-sdk/client-s3</code></p>
</blockquote>
</details>
<details>
<summary>Commits</summary>
<ul>
<li><a
href="29ee199934"><code>29ee199</code></a>
Publish v3.1075.0</li>
<li><a
href="c48dfa08aa"><code>c48dfa0</code></a>
Publish v3.1074.0</li>
<li><a
href="74d0a07143"><code>74d0a07</code></a>
chore(xml-builder): parse XML internally (<a
href="https://github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/tree/HEAD/clients/client-s3/issues/7863">#7863</a>)</li>
<li><a
href="ee71adc966"><code>ee71adc</code></a>
Publish v3.1073.0</li>
<li>See full diff in <a
href="https://github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/commits/v3.1075.0/clients/client-s3">compare
view</a></li>
</ul>
</details>
<br />
[](https://docs.github.com/en/github/managing-security-vulnerabilities/about-dependabot-security-updates#about-compatibility-scores)
Dependabot will resolve any conflicts with this PR as long as you don't
alter it yourself. You can also trigger a rebase manually by commenting
`@dependabot rebase`.
[//]: # (dependabot-automerge-start)
[//]: # (dependabot-automerge-end)
---
<details>
<summary>Dependabot commands and options</summary>
<br />
You can trigger Dependabot actions by commenting on this PR:
- `@dependabot rebase` will rebase this PR
- `@dependabot recreate` will recreate this PR, overwriting any edits
that have been made to it
- `@dependabot show <dependency name> ignore conditions` will show all
of the ignore conditions of the specified dependency
- `@dependabot ignore this major version` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this major version (unless you reopen
the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
- `@dependabot ignore this minor version` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this minor version (unless you reopen
the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
- `@dependabot ignore this dependency` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this dependency (unless you reopen the
PR or upgrade to it yourself)
</details>
Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>
Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - A growing part of that work runs in sandboxed environments rather
than on the operator's local machine.
> - Today sandbox providers can start fresh workspaces and run probes,
but they do not have a shared contract for capturing and reusing
prepared sandbox state.
> - Operators need a way to set up tools, credentials, and project
dependencies once, then reuse that prepared image for later agent runs.
> - This pull request adds reusable sandbox custom images across the
provider contract, server runtime, and board UI.
> - It also keeps probes and sandbox copy flows aligned with
pre-authenticated/custom-image environments.
> - The benefit is faster, more reliable sandbox runs without repeatedly
rebuilding the same environment setup.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue was found for this change. Inline feature request
follows.
### Problem or motivation
Sandboxed agents need reusable prepared runtime state so repeated runs
do not require manual setup every time. Operators often need system
packages, CLIs, SDKs, dependency caches, credentials, and project
tooling available before an agent can work productively.
### Proposed solution
Add a provider-level custom-image capability, server-side setup/capture
lifecycle, Daytona/fake provider support, and board UI controls for
creating, testing, selecting, and deleting custom images.
### Alternatives considered
Leaving this as provider-specific setup outside Paperclip would keep the
control plane blind to image state and would not give agents consistent
environment metadata. Re-running setup commands for every lease is
simpler, but slower and less reliable for interactive or credentialed
setup.
### Roadmap alignment
Checked `ROADMAP.md`; this aligns with the Cloud / Sandbox agents
roadmap area and does not duplicate any related public issue or PR found
by search.
Additional context:
- Subsystem affected: cross-cutting (`packages/db`, `packages/shared`,
`packages/plugins`, `server`, `ui`).
- Duplicate search: searched GitHub for `sandbox custom image` and
`sandbox template environment`; no related public issues or PRs were
found.
## What Changed
- Added custom-image shared types, validators, constants, API paths, and
database schema/migration.
- Added server services/routes for custom-image templates and setup
sessions, including runtime cleanup and provider metadata handling.
- Extended plugin/sandbox provider capabilities for interactive setup,
template capture, and template deletion.
- Implemented custom-image support in the fake sandbox provider and
Daytona provider.
- Updated environment runtime/config handling so active custom images
flow into leases, probes, and agent execution.
- Added board UI controls and API client support for custom-image setup,
capture, selection, status, and error states.
- Hardened sandbox copy/probe behavior for insecure clipboard contexts
and pre-authenticated sandbox images.
- Added targeted coverage across shared validators, DB schema, server
routes/services, provider plugins, adapter probes, and UI flows.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts`
- `pnpm vitest run
packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/test.probe.test.ts
packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/test.ts
packages/adapters/codex-local/src/server/test.remote.test.ts
packages/adapters/codex-local/src/server/test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-claude-local typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-codex-local typecheck`
- `pnpm vitest run
packages/db/src/environment-custom-images-schema.test.ts
packages/shared/src/environment-custom-images.test.ts
packages/shared/src/validators/plugin.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/environment-custom-images-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts
packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/daytona/src/plugin.test.ts
ui/src/pages/CompanyEnvironments.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/CompanySettings.test.tsx`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- `rm -rf packages/db/dist && pnpm test:run`
- Public-safety scan of the final diff found no internal Paperclip issue
links, private instance URLs, or real secret patterns.
## Risks
- Adds a database migration and new environment runtime tables, so
migration ordering and rollback need care.
- Provider implementations may differ in how reliably they can
capture/delete images; unsupported providers surface capability-gated UI
states.
- Custom-image state can contain operator-prepared tooling and
credentials inside the provider image, so providers must enforce their
own access controls and cleanup semantics.
- Broad surface area across shared contracts, server runtime, plugins,
adapters, and UI means CI and Greptile review should be watched closely.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5 (`gpt-5`) via Codex CLI with tool use and code execution.
Assisted with branch cleanup, conflict resolution, local verification,
and PR preparation. Earlier branch implementation work was assisted by
Paperclip-managed Claude/Codex 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
- [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.
> - Local adapters are the bridge between Paperclip's control plane and
provider CLIs such as Claude Code and Codex.
> - Those adapters can run either on the host machine or inside a
remote/sandbox execution target.
> - Sandbox probes need to validate the same auth/config path that real
sandbox execution will use.
> - The previous probe paths could surface misleading Claude errors,
rely on host-only Codex state, or upload far more Codex home state than
the probe needed.
> - This pull request fixes the Claude and Codex sandbox probe/runtime
behavior together while keeping provider-specific sandbox image work out
of scope.
> - The benefit is faster, clearer adapter health checks that better
match real sandbox execution.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue was found for this exact bug during duplicate
search.
Bug report:
**What happened?**
Sandboxed Claude/Codex adapter tests could diverge from real runtime
auth/config behavior. Claude sandbox probes could show the leading
stream init line instead of the real final error, and Codex sandbox
probes could upload full managed home state or mask a sandbox-local
login with an empty uploaded `CODEX_HOME`.
**Expected behavior**
Sandbox probes should exercise the remote runtime contract, preserve
useful sandbox credentials, avoid relying on unrelated host state, and
report actionable probe failures.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Configure a remote/sandbox execution target for `claude_local` or
`codex_local`.
2. Run the environment Test/probe path where host credentials differ
from the sandbox's runtime credentials or the managed Codex home
contains session history.
3. Observe that probe behavior can differ from the actual sandbox
runtime path or surface an unhelpful Claude stream initialization line.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Current `master` before this PR, based on `4a2447da3`.
**Deployment mode**
Local development/control-plane deployment with remote sandbox execution
targets.
Related search performed:
- Public issues: `Claude sandbox probe`, `Codex CODEX_HOME sandbox`
returned no matches.
- Public PRs: `Claude Codex sandbox probe`, `codex home sandbox`,
`claude auth sandbox` returned no matches.
## What Changed
- Made Claude sandbox Test probes materialize the same Paperclip-managed
Claude config seed path used by sandbox execution.
- Preserved sandbox-local Claude credentials when materializing remote
Claude config and expanded auth-required detection for `/login` API-key
failures.
- Improved Claude hello-probe diagnostics so the final result/error is
surfaced instead of the unhelpful stream init event, with transient
upstream failures downgraded to warnings.
- Changed Codex probe behavior to upload only minimal auth/config files
instead of the full managed `CODEX_HOME`.
- Let Codex sandbox probes leave `CODEX_HOME` unset when the host has no
credentials, so pre-authenticated sandbox images can be tested directly.
- Excluded bulky host-local Codex session/shell state from sandbox
runtime home uploads.
- Switched the Codex local default model away from the
ChatGPT-unsupported `gpt-5.3-codex` option.
- Added regression coverage for Claude parsing/probe paths, Codex
adapter metadata/argument/probe behavior, and server-level Claude
sandbox environment behavior.
## Verification
Passed locally:
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `pnpm vitest run
packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/parse.test.ts
packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/test.probe.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/claude-local-adapter-environment.test.ts`
- `pnpm vitest run packages/adapters/codex-local/src/index.test.ts
packages/adapters/codex-local/src/server/codex-args.test.ts
packages/adapters/codex-local/src/server/test.remote.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-claude-local typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-codex-local typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `git diff --check`
## Risks
- Adapter configuration behavior is sensitive to local vs sandboxed
execution mode, so review should focus on environment detection,
argument construction, and any state written during probe/test runs.
- The Codex default-model change may affect newly created agents that
rely on the adapter default instead of an explicit model.
- Excluding Codex session/shell state from sandbox uploads should be
safe for fresh sandbox runs, but reviewers should confirm no runtime
resume path depends on that host-local state.
- Provider-specific setup/capture behavior is intentionally left to
separate work.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5 Codex via Paperclip `codex_local`; tool-enabled local
coding session with terminal access. Context window size was not exposed
by the runtime.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Pipeline automations let operators standardize repeated issue and
workflow actions.
> - Pipeline-created issues currently need a way to derive useful titles
from routine variables.
> - Without a configurable title template, automated pipeline output is
harder to scan and distinguish.
> - This pull request adds a title-template field through shared
contracts, server persistence, API routes, and the pipeline settings UI.
> - The benefit is clearer issue titles for pipeline-created work while
preserving the existing pipeline behavior when no template is
configured.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #8790
This PR adds configurable generated-issue title templates for pipeline
automations.
## What Changed
- Added `issueTitleTemplate` to the shared pipeline automation contract
and field constants.
- Persisted and returned the title template through pipeline service and
route code.
- Applied title-template rendering when pipeline automations create
issue work.
- Added pipeline settings UI controls for editing the title template and
reusing routine variables.
- Moved title-token cursor restoration out of the React state updater
and into a layout effect.
- Added server and UI coverage for storing, returning, and rendering
pipeline title templates.
## Verification
- `NODE_ENV=test pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && NODE_ENV=test
pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/pipelines-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/pipelines-routes.test.ts
ui/src/pages/PipelineSettings.test.ts`
- Result before review follow-up: 3 files passed, 58 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/pages/PipelineSettings.test.ts`
- Result after review follow-up: 1 file passed, 7 tests passed.
- Branch was merged with current `paperclipai:master` at `f019f54bb3`
before opening this PR.
- Searched existing PRs for the same head branch and for pipeline
title-template duplicates; no matching existing PR was found.
- Note: GitHub could not open a PR directly from `cryppadotta/paperclip`
because that repository is not a fork of `paperclipai/paperclip`. The
same updated branch SHA was pushed to `paperclipai/paperclip` so this PR
can compare normally against `master`.
## Risks
Low to moderate risk. The change touches pipeline automation persistence
and generated issue creation, so regressions would most likely appear as
missing or incorrectly rendered generated issue titles. Existing
behavior should remain unchanged when `issueTitleTemplate` is unset.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent, tool-enabled execution in a
Paperclip heartbeat, with repository inspection, Git, GitHub CLI, and
local test execution.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] 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.
> - Heartbeat monitoring is the subsystem that keeps agent execution
visible and recovers work only when execution continuity is genuinely
lost.
> - Routes and scheduler paths can construct separate heartbeat service
instances inside the same server process.
> - Active adapter execution tracking was scoped to each service
instance, so the periodic orphan reaper could miss a run that another
service instance was actively executing.
> - Remote or sandbox adapters are especially exposed because they may
not persist a local process PID/group and may go quiet while the remote
command is still alive.
> - This pull request makes active in-process adapter execution tracking
shared across heartbeat service instances and adds a regression for the
cross-instance reaper case.
> - The benefit is fewer false `process_lost` failures for long-running
or quiet sandbox/remote agent runs.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists. This PR describes the bug inline using
the bug report template fields.
### What happened?
An actively executing heartbeat run could be finalized as `process_lost`
by the orphan reaper when adapter execution was active through one
`heartbeatService()` instance but the reaper ran through another
instance in the same server process.
### Expected behavior
The orphan reaper should skip runs that are still actively executing
in-process, regardless of which `heartbeatService()` instance is doing
the reaping.
### Steps to reproduce
1. Create two `heartbeatService()` instances in the same process.
2. Start an adapter run through the first instance.
3. Backdate the run row enough for orphan reaping to consider it stale.
4. Run orphan reaping through the second instance while the first
instance is still awaiting adapter execution.
5. Observe that the old instance-local tracking can mark the live run as
`process_lost`.
### Paperclip version or commit
Reproduced against `master` before commit
`44ba6d8bb4f7ae1ca3715697f750844d770d83a3`.
### Deployment mode
Self-hosted/local server process with route and scheduler code paths
constructing separate heartbeat service instances. Remote or sandbox
adapters are the highest-risk case because they may not have local PID
metadata and can be quiet while still running.
## What Changed
- Moved active adapter execution tracking from the `heartbeatService()`
closure to module-level process state shared by heartbeat service
instances.
- Added a regression test that starts a run through one heartbeat
service instance and runs orphan reaping through another, proving the
active run is not reaped and can finish normally.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` passes: 61
tests.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passes.
- `pnpm build` passes; existing UI build warnings remain for
`::highlight(...)`, large chunks, and a mixed static/dynamic import.
- `pnpm test:run` does not fully pass in this local environment: 1
unrelated existing failure in
`server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts` for `auto-detects the
default branch via symbolic-ref when origin/HEAD is set`. The fixture
command fails with `git push -u origin main master` because the temp
repo has no `master` ref.
- Reran the isolated failing test with `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts -t "auto-detects the
default branch via symbolic-ref when origin/HEAD is set"`; it reproduces
the same missing-`master` ref failure.
## Risks
- Low risk for single-process Paperclip servers: this only broadens
in-process active run tracking across service instances.
- Multi-process deployments still need persisted or distributed
execution liveness to coordinate reaping across processes; this PR does
not claim to solve cross-process recovery.
- A run could be skipped by the reaper while its adapter promise is
active, but the existing `finally` path removes the active marker after
execution settles.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5 via Codex, with tool use and local command execution. The
runtime did not expose a separate context-window value.
## 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 — targeted regression,
typecheck, and build pass; full `pnpm test:run` has the unrelated
missing-`master` ref fixture failure documented above
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes — no
docs change needed for this internal bug fix
- [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 Agent <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The experimental server info debug view helps local operators
inspect what code a running dev instance is actually serving
> - The view was moved into the account-menu drawer, which only mounts
while that drawer is open
> - That made stale health-query data easier to see after restarts, and
the server was also caching the running commit at process boot
> - A clean commit label alone is incomplete when the checkout has
uncommitted local changes
> - This pull request keeps the drawer health data fresh, refreshes git
metadata on demand, and adds a path-free checkout-state summary
> - The benefit is that the debug view reports restart time, running
commit, and dirty-checkout state without exposing local paths, secrets,
logs, or environment details
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Fixes: #8752
## What Changed
- `SidebarServerInfo.tsx`: refetch the health query whenever the drawer
opens and poll every 2s while the dev server is active.
- `server-info.ts`: keep `processStartedAt` stable while refreshing git
HEAD through a short TTL cache instead of freezing commit metadata at
module boot.
- Shared health contract/OpenAPI: add `serverInfo.git.localChanges` with
only staged, unstaged, and untracked counts plus safe unavailable
fallbacks.
- `SidebarServerInfo.tsx`: add a `Checkout state` row that renders
clean/dirty/unavailable copy without file paths.
- Tests: cover stale drawer refresh, interval polling, TTL commit
refresh, health response shape, checkout-state count parsing, and
path-free UI rendering.
## Verification
- `npx vitest run server/src/__tests__/server-info.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/health.test.ts
ui/src/components/SidebarServerInfo.test.tsx` -> 3 files / 19 tests
passing.
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts` -> refreshed stale
workspace links without lockfile/source churn.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared --filter @paperclipai/server
--filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` -> passing.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` -> passing after the
Greptile test-coverage fix.
- `pnpm check:tokens` -> no forbidden tokens found.
- Local diff scans for obvious secrets, credentials, private URLs, local
paths, and PII patterns -> no matches.
- GitHub PR checks on head `56defd446` -> all green, including `verify`,
canary dry run, e2e, security scans, and Greptile Review.
- Greptile latest summary -> Confidence Score 5/5, 0 new comments; the
prior P2 polling-coverage thread is resolved.
## Risks
Low risk. The UI remains behind the experimental
`enableServerInfoDebugView` flag. The extra git status call is throttled
by the existing server-info TTL and reports only counts, not paths or
file names. If git status is unavailable, the commit row still works and
the checkout-state row shows clear fallback copy.
## Model Used
Claude Opus (claude-opus-4-8), extended thinking, with tool use / code
execution assisted the original stale-metadata fix. OpenAI GPT-5 via
Codex local, with tool use and code execution, added the checkout-state
follow-up, Greptile fix-up, and PR verification.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Planning work relies on issue documents, request-confirmation
interactions, and inline plan annotations
> - Agents can be woken after a plan comment, annotation, or
confirmation decision
> - The wake payload needs enough plan-review context for the agent to
act on the specific feedback instead of losing the thread and falling
back to broad refetches
> - This pull request adds bounded plan-review context to wake payloads
and heartbeat context
> - It also teaches the adapter wake prompt renderer to surface those
open plan annotations and interaction results directly
> - The benefit is that agents can continue plan review and plan
acceptance flows with the relevant comments in hand while keeping wake
payloads bounded and company-scoped
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No matching public GitHub issue was found.
### Subsystem affected
Cross-cutting: `server/`, `packages/shared`, and
`packages/adapter-utils`.
### Problem or motivation
Plan-review continuations can wake an agent after a plan comment, inline
annotation, or request-confirmation decision without enough inline
context about the open plan annotations or accepted/rejected
confirmation target. That makes scoped wakes less reliable because the
agent may need to refetch broad issue history before it can tell what
feedback should be incorporated.
### Proposed solution
Include bounded, company-scoped plan review context in wake payloads and
heartbeat context. The context includes open `plan` annotation threads,
recent annotation comments, truncation metadata, and plan-confirmation
interaction target/result details. Render that information in the
adapter wake prompt so agents see the relevant plan-review feedback
immediately.
### Alternatives considered
Relying on agents to fetch the full issue thread after every plan-review
wake was rejected because it is slower, harder to audit, and easier to
mishandle when the wake is meant to be scoped to a specific comment,
annotation, or interaction result.
### Roadmap alignment
This supports the roadmap areas for Agent Reviews and Approvals, Deep
Planning, and Enforced Outcomes by making plan approval continuations
explicit and actionable.
### Additional context
The implementation keeps payload size bounded with per-thread,
per-comment, and total-body limits. Resolved annotation threads are
intentionally omitted so the wake focuses on feedback still needing
action.
## What Changed
- Added shared `PlanReviewContext` types for plan annotation threads,
comments, interaction targets, and continuation results.
- Added server-side plan review context assembly for open `plan`
annotation threads with bounded thread/comment/body limits.
- Included plan review context in heartbeat context and scoped wake
payloads for planning, annotation, comment, and plan-confirmation
interaction wakes.
- Rendered plan annotation deltas, open plan comments, interaction
results, and accepted target revisions in adapter wake prompts.
- Added focused regression coverage for scoped plan review context, wake
prompt rendering, annotation filtering, and safe standard-mode
annotation wakes.
- Addressed Greptile feedback by bounding the plan-comment DB fetch and
removing unused plan review context input fields.
## Verification
- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links`
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/adapter-utils
packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
--no-file-parallelism --maxWorkers=1
server/src/__tests__/document-annotations-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issues-goal-context-routes.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `git diff --check public-gh/master...HEAD`
- GitHub PR checks are green on
`36d0ac6a5dce27b9d62e201bf6d9829170c5974e`n- Rebased onto current
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` and confirmed GitHub reports the PR as
mergeable
- Greptile Review completed successfully after 2 comments were addressed
and resolved; 0 unresolved review threads remain
## Risks
- Medium: wake payloads now include additional plan-review data, so
limits and truncation behavior need to stay conservative as annotation
volume grows.
- Low migration risk: no database schema or migration changes.
- Low repository hygiene risk: this PR does not touch `pnpm-lock.yaml`,
`.github/workflows`, or media assets.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex using `gpt-5` as a coding agent with shell/tool execution.
Reasoning mode and exact context window were 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 core server and database packages should only carry features
that are ready to remain in the product surface.
> - The X mention poller backend added database tables, Drizzle schema
exports, a server service, and a server test suite.
> - That backend work needs to be removed from core for now so the main
app does not carry unused X mention poller infrastructure.
> - A clean revert is safer than leaving partially unused database and
service code behind.
> - This pull request removes the poller backend artifacts and keeps the
migration journal aligned with the reverted migration history.
> - The benefit is that fresh environments no longer create or expose
the X mention poller backend tables or service code.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this revert.
Duplicate PR search: searched open PRs in `paperclipai/paperclip` for "x
mention poller"; only this PR matched.
### What happened?
Core contained X mention poller backend infrastructure that should not
remain in the main Paperclip product surface right now.
### Expected behavior
Fresh core installs and migrations should not create the X mention
poller tables, and the server/db packages should not expose the removed
poller service or schema exports.
### Steps to reproduce
1. Inspect the prior migration journal after the original poller backend
commit.
2. Inspect the Drizzle schema exports.
3. Inspect the server services and tests for X mention poller backend
artifacts.
### Paperclip version or commit
This PR reverts the backend artifacts from the current `master` history.
### Deployment mode
Local development and CI.
## What Changed
- Deleted the `0125_x_mention_poller` migration and removed its journal
entry so fresh environments do not create the X mention poller tables.
- Removed the X mention Drizzle schema file and schema exports from the
db package.
- Removed the X mention poller server service and its server test suite.
- Left the functional diff unchanged from the original revert.
## Verification
- `rg -n "x_mentions|x-mention-poller|mention
poller|0125_x_mention_poller|xMention" packages server` returned no
matches.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- Current functional CI checks are green; this metadata update is
intended to re-run and clear the `commitperclip PR Review` gate.
## Risks
- Developers who already applied migration `0125_x_mention_poller`
locally will keep four stale tables that Drizzle no longer tracks:
`x_mention_sources`, `x_mention_author_allowlist`, `x_mentions`, and
`x_mention_budget_ledger`.
- Manual local cleanup for those developers is to drop the stale
`x_mention_*` tables from their local database after confirming they do
not need that local data.
- Fresh environments that have not applied the removed migration should
be unaffected.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 family, via the ACPX-backed Codex local adapter.
Tool use included local shell inspection and GitHub CLI metadata
updates.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents and operators increasingly need external event sources to
become durable Paperclip work inputs
> - X mentions are one such source, but intake needs to be safe before
any downstream automation consumes them
> - The backend needs stable source state, idempotent mention storage,
author gating, rate-limit handling, and budget accounting
> - This pull request adds the database contract and service layer for X
mention polling and hydration queueing
> - The benefit is that future X-triggered workflows can build on a
controlled, test-covered ingestion path instead of calling the X API
directly
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
- No public GitHub issue exists for this exact backend extraction.
- Problem: Paperclip does not yet have a durable, budget-aware backend
path for ingesting X mentions as external work inputs.
- Proposed solution: add X mention source, mention, allowlist, and
budget ledger tables plus a poller service that stores mentions
idempotently, queues only allowlisted authors for hydration, tracks
cursor state, records spend decisions, and fails closed when cost
estimates are unavailable.
- Related but not duplicate: #8609, #8199, and #7316 touch internal
mention wake behavior rather than X API mention ingestion.
## What Changed
- Added X mention poller database tables and schema exports for sources,
stored mentions, author allowlists, and budget ledger entries.
- Added a server-side X mention poller service with cursoring,
idempotent upsert behavior, allowlist gating, hydration queue handling,
rate-limit backoff, and budget pause behavior.
- Added focused Vitest coverage for intake gating, duplicate retries,
cursor safety, rate limits, budget failures, and hydration budget
pauses.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/x-mention-poller.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
## Risks
- Migration ordering matters because this adds migration
`0125_x_mention_poller.sql`; it should merge after the existing `0124`
migrations on `master`.
- The service is backend-only and adapter-driven in this PR, so product
behavior should not change until callers wire it into a runtime path.
- Budget accounting intentionally fails closed when estimates are
missing, which may pause a source rather than risk unbounded API spend.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent, tool-enabled local repository
and terminal workflow.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Paperclip runs agents through adapters, including built-in local and
gateway-style adapters.
> - Hermes gateway users need to connect Paperclip to an already-running
Hermes API server.
> - The gateway setup flow was missing clear non-local adapter
configuration fields and accepted fewer URL shapes than operators
naturally paste from Hermes.
> - It also surfaced sparse diagnostics when the gateway was unreachable
or when Paperclip generated onboarding prompts for gateway agents.
> - This pull request tightens Hermes gateway configuration, URL
normalization, diagnostics, and onboarding defaults.
> - The benefit is that Hermes gateway setup is easier to complete and
easier to debug without affecting unrelated adapters.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public issue found for this exact follow-up. Related prior/in-flight
Hermes work:
- Refs #2363
- Refs #4359
- Refs #6473
Problem statement:
- **Type:** Adapter follow-up / setup reliability
- **Adapter:** `hermes_gateway`
- **Motivation:** Operators configure `hermes_gateway` against a running
Hermes API server, but the UI and onboarding flow did not expose enough
gateway-specific configuration or diagnostics.
- **Expected behavior:** Paperclip should render the gateway fields,
normalize common Hermes dashboard/API URL inputs, preserve sensible
gateway onboarding defaults, and report reachability failures with
actionable detail.
- **Deployment mode:** Built-in adapter package in the Paperclip
monorepo.
## What Changed
- Added UI config fields for non-local Hermes gateway settings,
including tests for rendering and field behavior.
- Accepted Hermes dashboard URLs by normalizing them to gateway API URLs
for execution.
- Improved gateway reachability and run URL diagnostics.
- Updated Hermes gateway onboarding text/default behavior so join
prompts preserve gateway configuration.
- Added focused server, UI, and adapter tests for the gateway
configuration and onboarding paths.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --prefer-offline`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/hermes-paperclip-adapter exec vitest run
src/gateway/server/execute.test.ts` — 20 passed
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/invite-accept-gateway-defaults.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/invite-onboarding-text.test.ts
ui/src/adapters/hermes-gateway/config-fields.test.tsx
ui/src/components/AgentConfigForm.render.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/agent-onboarding-prompt.test.ts` — 23 passed across 5 files
- Confirmed the PR diff excludes `pnpm-lock.yaml` and
`.github/workflows`.
## Risks
Low to moderate risk. The changes are scoped to Hermes gateway
configuration/onboarding and generic non-local adapter field rendering.
The main risk is rejecting an unusual Hermes URL shape that should be
accepted; the normalization tests cover dashboard and API URL variants
added here.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent in a tool-enabled local CLI
environment, with shell/GitHub/Paperclip API access. Exact runtime model
identifier was not exposed in this session.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The dev/server UI exposes a `/api/health` endpoint and a lower-left
account drawer, but nothing surfaces *which* build the running instance
is on or when it last restarted
> - When iterating on a local dev instance it is hard to tell whether
the server you're looking at has actually restarted onto your latest
commit, or how stale the running process is
> - Developers need a lightweight, opt-in way to confirm the running
instance's identity without digging through logs or shelling into the
host
> - This pull request adds an experimental "Server Info Debug View"
setting that surfaces the running instance's last-restart time and
current commit as read-only rows in the account drawer
> - The benefit is a quick, in-UI sanity check of what the live server
is actually running, behind an experimental flag so it ships zero cost
to users who don't opt in
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists. Describing the underlying request inline
following the feature request template:
**Problem or motivation:**
When working against a local Paperclip dev instance there is no in-UI
way to confirm what the running server is — its current commit or when
it last restarted. You have to check logs or the host shell to know
whether the process picked up your latest build.
**Proposed solution:**
An opt-in experimental setting ("Server Info Debug View") that, once
enabled, renders a small read-only "Server" section at the bottom of the
lower-left account drawer showing **Last restarted** (the server process
start time) and **Running commit** (the current git HEAD short SHA +
subject).
**Alternatives considered:**
A separate top-right pill/overlay (like the work-life-balance plugin).
The account drawer was chosen to reuse existing menu-row styling and
avoid adding new always-present chrome.
**Roadmap alignment:**
Small, self-contained developer-experience aid gated behind an
experimental flag; does not overlap planned core roadmap work.
## What Changed
- Added `server/src/server-info.ts`: captures a `serverInfo` snapshot
once at boot — process start time and current git commit (SHA +
subject). Git is read via `execFileSync` with SHA validation and a
timeout.
- `/api/health` exposes the `serverInfo` snapshot, but only on
full-details health responses (board/agent in authenticated mode, or
local-trusted dev).
- Gated the UI surface behind a new `enableServerInfoDebugView`
experimental setting, wired through the shared instance type, validator,
settings normalizer, and OpenAPI schema.
- UI: added `SidebarServerInfo` rendering the read-only rows in the
account drawer (`BreadcrumbBar` / `SidebarAccountMenu`), plus the
experimental settings toggle and a typed `health` API client.
- Moved `ServerGitInfo` / `ServerInfoSnapshot` into
`@paperclipai/shared` so the server and UI share one definition instead
of duplicating it.
- Added unit tests for the server-info snapshot, health route exposure,
validator/normalizer, settings routes, the experimental settings page,
and the sidebar component.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/health.test.ts src/__tests__/server-info.test.ts
src/__tests__/instance-settings-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/instance-settings-routes.test.ts` — 32 passed
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/components/SidebarServerInfo.test.tsx
src/pages/InstanceExperimentalSettings.test.tsx` — 9 passed
- `tsc --noEmit` on both `@paperclipai/server` and `@paperclipai/ui` —
clean
- Manual: enable **Settings → Experimental → Server Info Debug View**,
refresh the UI, open the lower-left account drawer — a "Server" section
shows Last restarted and Running commit.
## Risks
- Low risk. The UI surface is fully opt-in via an experimental flag and
defaults off.
- The `serverInfo` field on `/api/health` is access-controlled to
full-details responses only (board/agent in authenticated mode, or
local-trusted dev) — never anonymous authenticated callers — so the git
SHA is not broadly exposed.
- The only new server work is a one-time git read at boot, guarded with
SHA validation and a timeout; failures degrade gracefully (the git block
reports `available: false` rather than throwing).
## Model Used
Claude — `claude-opus-4` (Anthropic), extended thinking with tool use,
via 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 and contains no
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.
> - Agent adapters are the boundary between the control plane and the
runtimes that actually do work.
> - Hermes support needs to be available as first-class local and
gateway adapters while still preserving the adapter-manager override
path for external packages.
> - The adapter work touches runtime execution, UI adapter metadata,
onboarding prompts, scoped credentials, release packaging, and smoke
coverage, so the handoff needs concrete verification rather than only
unit tests.
> - This pull request adds built-in Hermes local and Hermes gateway
support, keeps external adapter overrides compatible, and
documents/tests the gateway flow end to end.
> - The benefit is that operators can hire Hermes-backed agents without
a manual plugin install, while self-hosted installs can still
override/shadow the built-ins through Adapter manager packages.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this exact Hermes built-in adapter,
gateway onboarding, and release-source work.
Problem description:
- Hermes local and gateway adapters need a public, reviewable source
path in the monorepo so package artifacts and built-in adapter behavior
match the application source.
- Operators need built-in `hermes_local` and `hermes_gateway` adapter
choices without losing the ability to install external Hermes packages
as overrides.
- Gateway onboarding needs secure defaults for API server URLs, API
keys, and generated agent setup text.
- Hermes-originated task bridge credentials need narrower API-key scope
configuration.
- Related public PRs found during duplicate search include #3027, #2363,
#7544, #7950, #8095, and #8543.
## What Changed
- Added the unified Hermes adapter package with local and gateway
server/UI/CLI exports, config schemas, transcript parsing, model
detection, and package metadata.
- Registered `hermes_local` and `hermes_gateway` as built-in adapters
across shared constants, server registries, CLI packaging, and UI
adapter registries.
- Kept the external adapter override path compatible so installed Hermes
packages can shadow built-ins and restore the built-in parser when
disabled.
- Added Hermes gateway onboarding docs, board-operator docs, Docker
smoke assets, and shell smoke harnesses for join/e2e validation.
- Added scoped task-bridge API-key support, authorization checks,
issue-origin handling, and tests for Hermes-created Paperclip tasks.
- Hardened gateway transport and redaction behavior for API keys,
headers, session data, and smoke diagnostics.
- Updated release packaging/bootstrap checks for the Hermes packages
while leaving `pnpm-lock.yaml` out of the PR per repository policy.
## Verification
Targeted local verification recorded before PR handoff:
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/hermes-paperclip-adapter exec vitest run
src/gateway/server/execute.test.ts` — 14/14 passed.
- `pnpm test:hermes-gateway-smoke` — 6/6 passed.
- Hermes package typecheck/build checks passed.
- Focused server/UI adapter tests passed — 31/31.
- Release helper Node tests passed — 18/18.
- `git diff --check origin/master..HEAD` passed.
Fresh Docker E2E smoke evidence:
- Ran `pnpm smoke:hermes-gateway-e2e` on 2026-06-26 with a fresh state
directory and fresh Docker container against a live Paperclip dev
server.
- Hermes direct execution reached `completed`.
- Hermes stop/cancel path reached `cancelled`.
- Hermes gateway created a Paperclip task, Paperclip ran the Hermes
agent, and the task reached `done` with the expected marker response.
- Temporary board auth keys, token files, smoke state, and Docker
containers were cleaned up after the run.
PR checks on head `b5eae40ce`:
- GitHub Actions passed: `policy`, `review`, `Typecheck + Release
Registry`, all general test shards, all serialized server shards,
`Build`, `Canary Dry Run`, `e2e`, and aggregate `verify`.
- External checks passed: Snyk and Socket Project Report.
- External Socket Pull Request Alerts remained pending after the
first-party CI matrix completed.
## Risks
- Medium risk: this spans adapter registration, package publishing,
gateway execution, onboarding docs, API-key scoping, and UI adapter
metadata.
- Migration risk is low: the scope-config migration adds a nullable
column and does not rewrite existing keys.
- Gateway execution depends on operator-provided Hermes API
configuration; the smoke covers the Docker gateway path but real
deployments may differ by network/auth setup.
- Direct Greptile review on the latest expanded diff is file-count
limited, although the commitperclip review gate passed.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent, tool use enabled in a local repository
workspace. Context window size is not exposed in this environment.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Commitperclip review gate is green; direct Greptile review is
file-count limited on the latest expanded diff
- [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 pipeline subsystem models repeatable work as items moving
through stages, with agent automation, review gates, blockers, drift
notices, and linked work.
> - Operators need this to be usable as one coherent workflow surface,
not just as backend primitives or disconnected route experiments.
> - The branch now carries the pipeline data model, service/routes,
CLI/tutorial path, aggregation feeds, operator UI, stage automation
controls, liveness/retry handling, and follow-up polish that make the
primitive reviewable end to end.
> - This pull request is the single review target for that pipeline
workflow primitive stack.
> - The benefit is that reviewers can evaluate the full operator
experience and server contract together against `master`.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this work. The underlying feature
request is described inline.
### Problem or motivation
Paperclip needs a first-class way to model multi-stage agent/company
workflows where upstream items can spawn downstream work, request
review, carry fields across pipelines, surface drift, retry automation,
and show operators where work is blocked or active. Without a unified
pipeline primitive, these workflows spread across ad hoc issues,
routines, and comments, making the state hard to inspect or operate.
### Proposed solution
Add the pipeline workflow primitive stack: database schema and
migrations, shared validators/types, server services and REST routes,
aggregation and liveness helpers, CLI/tutorial smoke support, and the
React operator UI for pipeline lists, boards, item detail,
review/learnings views, settings, stage automation, secrets, carry-over
fields, and retry/recovery flows.
### Alternatives considered
- Keep workflows as loosely linked issues and routines: rejected because
operators need a single board/detail/settings surface for repeated
workflow patterns.
- Ship backend primitives first and defer UI: rejected for this branch
because the operator experience is the main way to validate the
primitive.
- Add a narrower one-off content workflow: rejected because the same
primitives are useful across future company processes.
## What Changed
- Added and evolved pipeline schema, migrations, shared contracts,
server services, REST routes, route tests, and CLI/tutorial smoke
support.
- Added pipeline aggregation, health/liveness, drift acknowledgment,
blocker/carry-over, automation retry, stage automation environment, and
permission recovery behavior.
- Added the operator UI for pipeline index/board/item
detail/settings/review/learnings flows, including stage secrets,
automation controls, markdown/item descriptions, linked issue assets,
liveness banners, and source automation metadata.
- Refactored issue document frame rendering through the shared
`DocumentFrameHeader` component to keep document controls consistent
with the pipeline document surfaces.
- Kept this PR as the single base-branch review target for the current
pipeline branch.
## Verification
Current branch refresh:
- `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/pipelines-service.test.ts` — 31
passed
- `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/pipelines-routes.test.ts` — 19
passed
- `pnpm --filter ./server typecheck` — passed
- `pnpm --filter ./ui typecheck` — passed
- Verified Pipelines remains gated by `enablePipelines === true`:
sidebar item is hidden unless the flag is enabled, direct pipeline
routes redirect to `/dashboard` when disabled, and the Experimental
settings UI still has no Pipelines toggle.
- GitHub status checks on `df071c710646de625131064c3fb6588b5e97964a` —
all complete with no failing conclusions, including Actions, Socket,
Superagent/Security, and Greptile Review
- Greptile summary on `df071c710646de625131064c3fb6588b5e97964a` —
Confidence Score 5/5
- GitHub review-thread sweep — 0 unresolved Greptile threads
Previously recorded during branch development:
- Server pipeline service/route and aggregation tests
- Shared validator tests
- UI pipeline page/settings/item-detail/learnings/liveness tests
- Pipeline tutorial smoke path
## Risks
- High review surface: this is a large feature branch spanning database,
shared contracts, server behavior, CLI/docs, and UI.
- Migration ordering and schema compatibility need reviewer attention
because this branch has been kept current across multiple `master`
syncs.
- GitHub still reports merge state `BLOCKED` because the PR is awaiting
normal human review/branch-protection completion; all current status
checks are green.
- Branch-name checklist exception: this PR uses the pre-existing
requested branch name, which predates the current public-branch naming
rule. The PR title/body avoid internal issue references.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex coding agent based on GPT-5, with repository tool use,
shell execution, git/GitHub CLI operations, and local verification
commands. Earlier commits in this branch were assisted by Paperclip
agents and other AI coding agents as recorded in commit authorship.
## 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)
- [ ] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Scheduled routines can prompt agents with variables that are filled
in at dispatch time.
> - Existing routine variable handling supported plain text-like values,
but date inputs need a structured contract so routines can pass
consistent date values.
> - Operators also need date variables to be easy to configure and
override from the routine UI.
> - This pull request adds a date variable type across shared
validation, server dispatch, and UI editing/run dialogs.
> - The benefit is that routine authors can define date inputs once and
agents receive validated ISO-style date values when routines run.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #219
Feature request:
- Problem/motivation: Scheduled routines need first-class, typed date
variables so operators can configure dates without relying on free-form
text conventions.
- Proposed solution: Add an `x-date` routine variable type with shared
parsing/validation, server dispatch support, and UI date-picker controls
in routine variable editors and run dialogs.
- Alternatives considered: Continue treating dates as plain text, but
that leaves validation and formatting to individual operators and
agents.
- Roadmap alignment: This is a focused improvement to the completed
Scheduled Routines milestone and does not duplicate an active roadmap
item.
Related PR search:
- Searched existing PRs/issues for `routine date picker`, `date
variables`, and `scheduled routine date variable`; no direct duplicate
PR was found.
## What Changed
- Added the shared `x-date` routine variable contract, parsing,
defaults, and validation coverage.
- Extended routine dispatch to validate and pass date variable values.
- Added date input controls to the routine variable editor and routine
run variables dialog.
- Added focused tests for shared validation, server dispatch, and the UI
date controls.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public/master...HEAD`
- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run
packages/shared/src/routine-variables.test.ts
packages/shared/src/validators/routine.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts
ui/src/components/RoutineRunVariablesDialog.test.tsx
ui/src/components/RoutineVariablesEditor.test.tsx`
- 5 test files passed
- 68 tests passed
## Risks
Low to medium risk. This adds a new routine variable type across
shared/server/UI paths, so the main risk is compatibility with existing
routine variable payloads. The change keeps existing variable types
intact and adds targeted validation tests for the new date behavior.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex coding agent based on GPT-5, with terminal, git, GitHub
CLI, and local test execution capabilities.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The execution workspace subsystem powers project and workspace views
by listing runtime state, branch metadata, issue links, and status
summaries.
> - The existing workspace views relied on broad list data that can grow
expensive as a company accumulates many workspaces and linked issues.
> - That makes the Workspaces page and project workspace cards slower
than necessary because the UI does not always need the full workspace
detail payload up front.
> - This pull request adds a bounded overview contract for workspace
listings and moves the relevant UI surfaces to that cheaper path.
> - The benefit is faster workspace loading while preserving detail
fetches for pages that actually need full workspace data.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this change. Inline bug report follows
the repository bug template.
### What happened?
Workspace index-style screens can load too much execution workspace
detail before the user asks for it. Several UI surfaces used fuller
workspace data paths for summary displays, which can make workspace
loading slower as workspace history grows.
### Expected behavior
Overview screens should request a bounded summary payload, while detail
screens should keep using the full workspace detail endpoint.
### Steps to reproduce
1. Run Paperclip from source with enough execution workspace history to
make workspace lists non-trivial.
2. Open the Workspaces page or a project workspace summary card.
3. Observe that summary UI needs only bounded workspace metadata but can
depend on broader workspace payloads.
### Paperclip version or commit
`master` at the time this branch was prepared.
### Deployment mode
Local dev (`pnpm dev`)
## What Changed
- Added shared types, validators, and path constants for bounded
execution workspace overviews.
- Added server service and route support for overview queries with
bounded linked issue/runtime metadata.
- Updated workspace overview UI API calls, query keys, breadcrumbs,
quicklooks, close dialogs, project summaries, and detail links to
consume the cheaper overview shape where appropriate.
- Added regression coverage for the new server route/service behavior
and the UI overview consumers.
- Registered the new workspace overview route in the generated OpenAPI
spec.
- Kept overview totals aligned with the project join and preserved
project slug links in workspace headers.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/execution-workspaces-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/execution-workspaces-routes.test.ts
ui/src/api/execution-workspaces.test.ts
ui/src/components/ProjectWorkspaceSummaryCard.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/Workspaces.test.tsx`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/server typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui
typecheck`
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/execution-workspaces-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/execution-workspaces-service.test.ts`
- `pnpm test:run:serialized -- --shard-index 1 --shard-count 4`
## Risks
Low to medium risk. The change introduces a new overview contract across
shared/server/ui layers, so the main risk is a mismatch between summary
and detail payload expectations. The added route/service/UI tests cover
the intended split, and full detail pages continue using the detail
path.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent with repository tool use and
local command execution. Exact served model identifier and context
window were not exposed in this session.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Instance environments can store provider configuration fields as
Paperclip secret references
> - Environment save uses secret binding sync to keep persisted config
refs aligned with `company_secret_bindings`
> - Top-level secret-ref fields such as `apiKey` were not deleted during
sync because the cleanup only matched child paths like `apiKey.*`
> - Re-saving an environment with the same top-level secret ref could
therefore hit the target/path unique constraint and return a 500
> - This pull request makes the sync cleanup include the exact top-level
config path before reinserting current refs
> - The benefit is that saved environment provider configs can be edited
repeatedly without duplicate binding failures
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue found in duplicate search for this exact
environment secret-binding failure.
### Bug report
#### Pre-submission checklist
- I searched existing open and closed issues and this is not a
duplicate.
- I can reproduce this on the current `master` lineage.
- I confirmed the error originates in Paperclip secret-binding sync, not
the sandbox provider itself.
#### What happened?
Saving an instance environment whose provider config contains a
top-level secret-ref field can fail with a duplicate key error on
`company_secret_bindings_target_path_uq`.
#### Expected behavior
Saving the same environment config repeatedly should update/sync
bindings idempotently.
#### Steps to reproduce
1. Create or edit an instance environment with a provider config that
has a top-level secret-ref field such as `apiKey`.
2. Save the environment.
3. Save the environment again without moving that field under a nested
object.
4. The second save can attempt to insert a duplicate binding for the
same target/path.
#### Paperclip version or commit
Observed on local dev from current `master` lineage before this fix.
#### Deployment mode
Local dev (pnpm dev), authenticated private mode.
#### Installation method
Built from source (pnpm dev / pnpm build).
#### Agent adapter(s) involved
Not adapter-specific (core bug).
#### Database mode
Embedded local Postgres.
#### Access context
Board (human operator) environment settings save.
#### Relevant logs or output
The server returned a 500 after Postgres rejected a duplicate
`company_secret_bindings` row for the same environment target and
`apiKey` config path. Secret values and local paths are intentionally
omitted.
#### Privacy checklist
I reviewed the PR description for private instance links, local paths,
API keys, tokens, and company-specific secrets.
## What Changed
- Updated `syncSecretRefsForTarget()` so prefix cleanup removes both the
exact top-level config path and nested child paths.
- Added a regression test that syncs an environment top-level `apiKey`
secret ref repeatedly, then replaces it and verifies only one binding
remains.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `git diff --check`
- Local diff scan for internal issue links, local paths, bearer/session
tokens, and obvious secret literals returned no matches.
- GitHub duplicate searches for related environment secret-binding
issues/PRs returned no matches.
## Risks
Low risk. The change only broadens the existing target/path cleanup used
before reinserting secret refs. It preserves the existing child-path
cleanup behavior and adds the missing exact-path case.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5 Codex via the `codex_local` Paperclip adapter. Tool-using
coding-agent session with shell, git, and repository-edit capabilities.
Context window size was not exposed by the runtime.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Skills can be installed, inspected, filtered, and grouped inside
company settings
> - Skill category metadata already exists in the data model and list
filters, but users could not edit categories after a skill was created
or imported
> - That made category filters and counts drift from the way operators
actually want to organize their skills
> - This pull request adds category editing to the existing skill
settings dialog and sends those edits through the existing
company-scoped skill update API
> - The server mutation now includes category information in the
activity log so settings changes are auditable
> - The benefit is that operators can keep installed skills organized
without reinstalling or recreating them
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No duplicate or closely related public GitHub issues or PRs were found
for `skill categories settings`.
Feature request fields:
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting: `server/` REST API routes/services and `ui/` React board
settings.
**Problem or motivation**
Company operators can create or import skills with categories, and
Paperclip already exposes category filters and category counts. After
installation, though, operators could not edit a skill's categories from
the skill detail settings screen. That made it difficult to keep skills
grouped correctly as workflows evolved.
**Proposed solution**
Add category editing to the existing skill settings dialog. The category
field accepts comma-separated values, normalizes them into slugs,
deduplicates repeated categories, allows clearing all categories, and
saves categories together with the existing sharing setting through the
company-scoped skill update API.
**Alternatives considered**
One alternative was to keep categories editable only during
create/import flows, but that forces users to recreate or reinstall
skills just to adjust grouping metadata. Another was a separate
categories-only action, but batching settings into one explicit Save
action keeps the dialog predictable.
**Roadmap alignment**
This supports the completed Skills Manager roadmap area by making
installed skills easier to organize and maintain inside company
settings.
**Additional context**
The server already persisted skill categories and supported category
list filters/counts. This PR wires the existing metadata into the
settings editing path and adds focused route, service, and UI tests.
## What Changed
- Added category editing to the skill detail settings dialog, including
comma-separated input, normalized deduplication, reset, dirty-state
handling, and save feedback.
- Updated the skill settings mutation path to save categories and
sharing scope together, then refresh detail/list cache entries.
- Included updated categories in `company.skill_updated` activity
details.
- Added server route/service coverage for category updates,
normalization, filtering, counts, clearing, and activity logging.
- Added UI coverage for saving category edits, clearing categories,
reordered no-op category sets, saving sharing changes together, and
preserving draft input after a failed save.
- Updated the Storybook skill detail harness for the renamed settings
callback props.
## Verification
- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/company-skills-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/company-skills-service.test.ts
ui/src/pages/CompanySkills.test.tsx`
- Latest-head GitHub checks are green for typecheck, build, e2e, general
tests, serialized server suites, policy, commitperclip review, Socket
Security, Snyk status, and Canary Dry Run.
- Greptile Review succeeded on the latest head with zero unresolved
review threads.
## Risks
Low risk. The change uses the existing company skill update API and
category normalization path. The main behavioral change is that the
settings dialog now batches sharing and category edits behind an
explicit Save button instead of saving sharing immediately on select
change.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex coding agent based on GPT-5, with tool-enabled repository
inspection, shell execution, git, and GitHub CLI access.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents and board users operate inside a company-scoped control plane
where permissions decide which mutating actions they can perform
> - Company skills are part of the reusable agent-company setup surface,
but skill mutation had been coupled to broader agent-creation authority
> - That coupling meant importing or managing skills required a
permission that also implies hiring power, which is broader than the
operation needs
> - Paperclip already has a grant-based permission vocabulary, so skill
mutation should be authorized through a dedicated `skills:create`
capability while preserving existing default behavior for trusted agents
> - This pull request adds the skill creation permission contract,
enforces it on company skill mutations, exposes it in agent permission
management, and documents the changed CLI/API expectations
> - The benefit is a narrower, auditable permission path for skill
import/create/update/delete flows without forcing agents to receive
broader agent-creation authority
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public issue is linked.
Problem: company skill mutation APIs were effectively tied to broader
agent creation authority. This PR splits skill mutation authorization
onto the public `skills:create` permission while keeping existing
default skill creation behavior for agents unless explicitly disabled.
Related public PR found during duplicate search: #5330. That PR uses an
older `canManageSkills` shape; this PR implements the `skills:create`
grant path instead.
## What Changed
- Added `skills:create` to shared permission constants and agent
permission types/validators as `canCreateSkills`.
- Backfilled default human/member role grants for `skills:create`.
- Updated company skill mutation routes to require board/user or agent
access to `skills:create`, while preserving legacy/default agent
behavior through `canCreateSkills` unless explicitly disabled.
- Updated agent permission update handling, UI permission controls,
duplicate-agent payloads, plugin SDK fixtures, and agent detail API
surfaces for `canCreateSkills`.
- Added regression coverage for skill route authorization, permission
schema/default behavior, invite grants, omitted permission updates, and
duplicate-agent payloads.
- Updated CLI and Paperclip skill documentation for the new skill
creation permission.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/agent-permissions-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/agent-permissions-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/company-skills-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/invite-join-grants.test.ts
ui/src/lib/duplicate-agent-payload.test.ts` — 5 files, 90 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/server typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui
typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm test:run ...changed files...` was attempted first, but the
stable wrapper rejects explicit file arguments; direct Vitest was used
for the same targeted files.
## Risks
- Moderate authorization risk: this changes the gate for company skill
mutations, so the tests cover board grant checks, agent explicit grant
checks, legacy default allowance, and explicit denial.
- Migration/backfill risk is low: the migration only grants
`skills:create` to existing human roles that already need broad
management capability.
- UI/API compatibility risk is low: `canCreateSkills` remains default-on
for full agent permissions, and the update validator preserves omitted
values so unrelated permission edits do not re-enable disabled skill
creation.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent with terminal/tool use enabled.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Sandboxed agent runs can spend meaningful time preparing a remote
workspace before the agent transcript shows useful output.
> - Operators need short, current progress text for those setup phases,
but that text should not become durable run history.
> - The existing live-run websocket path already carries run updates to
the UI, so the backend can reuse that channel instead of adding polling.
> - This pull request adds an ephemeral runtime-progress contract, a
process-local status store, and heartbeat integration for
sandbox-managed runs.
> - The benefit is a clearer active-run experience without database
migrations or persistent progress rows.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #248
No exact public GitHub issue was found for this status-message plumbing.
The underlying problem is that active sandboxed runs currently have
setup phases, such as workspace sync and restore, where the operator
cannot see concise current progress through the live run state. This PR
addresses that gap for the backend/runtime layer while keeping progress
messages ephemeral.
GitHub search performed for related or duplicate work: `sandbox runtime
status`, `sandbox restore index`, and `runtime progress`. No direct
duplicate PR was found.
## What Changed
- Added shared runtime-progress types and the `heartbeat.run.progress`
live event type.
- Added a process-local heartbeat run runtime-status store with TTL,
bounded/redacted messages, and terminal cleanup.
- Threaded runtime progress callbacks through heartbeat execution and
active/live run serialization.
- Emitted sandbox-managed runtime phase updates for sync, adapter
startup, restore/export, and finalization paths.
- Added backend and adapter-utils tests for ephemeral status behavior,
terminal cleanup, live serialization, and sandbox progress callbacks.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- Local PII scan before push: high-confidence secret patterns, internal
issue links, local user paths, and private URL patterns checked across
all three split diffs; no real secrets or internal links found. The only
secret-like text is an intentional fake test fixture (`sk-test-secret`).
- `git diff --check origin/master..feat/sandbox-runtime-status`
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/heartbeat-run-runtime-status.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-runtime-state.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/agent-live-run-routes.test.ts
packages/adapter-utils/src/sandbox-managed-runtime.test.ts` — 4 files,
23 tests passed.
- `pnpm run typecheck` passed on both top stacks that include this
branch: `feat/sandbox-status-ui` and `fix/sandbox-restore-index-sync`.
- `pnpm run build` passed on both top stacks that include this branch;
Vite reported existing CSS `::highlight` and chunk-size warnings.
- `pnpm run test:run` was attempted on `fix/sandbox-restore-index-sync`;
it failed in two unrelated broad-suite tests. One depends on this host's
Git default branch behavior, and one depends on local Claude
model-discovery environment. The changed focused suites above pass.
## Risks
- Runtime progress is process-local by design, so status disappears
after TTL, terminal cleanup, or server restart.
- Clients that do not consume `heartbeat.run.progress` simply keep
existing behavior.
- Message redaction is intentionally generic; overly specific phase
details should stay out of runtime-progress payloads.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5 via Codex coding agent, with shell/tool execution in a
local worktree. Exact context-window metadata is not exposed by the
runtime.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip CTO <cto@paperclip.local>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip CTO <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agents rely on local skills, provider-backed secrets, and workspace
file previews during normal execution.
> - Local skill imports need bounded reference-file inventory so direct
skill discovery stays accurate without accidentally walking too much of
the filesystem.
> - Secrets provider setup needs actionable AWS discovery errors so
operators can recover from IAM/config problems without losing manual
form input.
> - The issue detail file viewer should reopen cleanly after the first
close so users can keep inspecting files during task review.
> - This pull request collects the small fixes and regression tests for
those related operator workflows.
> - The benefit is more predictable local skill imports, clearer secrets
setup failure states, and a less brittle file preview interaction.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
- No public GitHub issue was found for this extracted local work.
- Related prior sync context: #8536.
- Problem: local skill reference discovery, AWS provider-vault discovery
errors, and issue file preview reopening each had narrow workflow
regressions that made operator recovery harder.
- Expected behavior: skill imports inventory reference files within
bounded local skill directories, AWS discovery failures present safe
actionable guidance while preserving manual values, and closing the
first file preview does not prevent opening another preview.
- Reproduction scope: import a local skill with referenced files,
attempt AWS Secrets Manager discovery with insufficient IAM/list
permissions, and open/close/reopen file previews from an issue detail
page.
- Duplicate search: searched GitHub PRs/issues for `skill inventory
secrets file viewer` and `skill inventory secrets AWS file viewer`; no
matching public duplicate was found.
## What Changed
- Bounded direct local skill file inventory discovery and added
regression coverage for reference file imports.
- Preserved and surfaced safe, actionable AWS Secrets Manager
discovery/import errors in server responses and the secrets UI.
- Kept AWS provider-vault manual form values intact when discovery fails
or returns no candidates.
- Fixed issue file viewer state so closing the first preview still
allows later file previews to open.
- Updated the secrets render test harness to avoid the missing
`React.act` export in the current React package set.
## Verification
- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/company-skills-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/secrets-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts
ui/src/context/FileViewerContext.test.ts
ui/src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx`
- Result: 5 test files passed, 116 tests passed.
- Install note: the isolated worktree needed `NODE_ENV=development pnpm
install --frozen-lockfile --prod=false --force` before local
verification because it initially had no dev dependencies installed.
## Risks
- Low-to-medium risk: this touches skill import inventory,
secrets-provider error handling, and file-viewer UI state, but each
change is covered by focused regression tests.
- No migrations.
- No dependency or lockfile changes.
- CI is rerunning on the latest head after review fixes; Greptile is 5/5
with no unresolved Greptile threads.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex coding agent, GPT-5-family model as provided in the
Paperclip run environment, with repository tool use and local command
execution.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Fixes#5997, fixes#4081, fixes#4723, fixes#6625, fixes#3923
Refs #6606 — this PR removes the rejected root `paperclip` field, but
#6606 also requires the protocol v3→v4 bump, which is out of scope here;
referencing rather than closing it.
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the control plane that wakes and coordinates agent
workers across company-scoped execution flows.
> - The `openclaw_gateway` adapter is part of that wake path, so its
outbound payload contract has to match the gateway's validated `agent`
schema.
> - `master` currently reintroduces a previously fixed regression by
sending a top-level `paperclip` property in `agentParams` (see #3923,
which reverts the original fix in #626).
> - The gateway rejects unknown root params, which means OpenClaw wakes
fail before the remote agent can start work.
> - The actual wake context already rides in the generated `message`, so
the extra root property is both redundant and harmful.
> - This pull request removes that leaked root property, adds a focused
regression test around param construction, and updates affected server
expectations/docs to the supported contract.
> - The benefit is that OpenClaw Gateway agents wake successfully again
without losing inline wake context.
## What Changed
- Removed the top-level `paperclip` field from OpenClaw Gateway
`agentParams` and extracted `buildAgentParams()` so the contract is easy
to test.
- Added a package-level regression test that proves
`payloadTemplate.paperclip` is stripped while explicit
`agentId`/`timeout` behavior stays intact.
- Updated server tests that inspect OpenClaw Gateway payloads to assert
wake data is delivered in `message` instead of a rejected root field.
- Updated the adapter configuration docs to state that wake context is
embedded in the generated message text, not sent as a top-level param.
### Rebase onto current `master` (conflict resolution)
This branch was opened against an older `master`; re-merging current
`master` required:
- Resolving conflicts in `execute.ts` — `master` hoisted
`configuredAgentId` and moved the agentId/timeout precedence inline;
this PR keeps the `buildAgentParams()` extraction that strips the
gateway-rejected root `paperclip`.
- Updating tests `master` added **after** this branch's base that assert
the old root-`paperclip` contract. These suites use the OpenClaw gateway
adapter purely as a delivery harness (`adapterType: "openclaw_gateway"`
+ a mock gateway) and observe wake content via the gateway payload, so
dropping the root field requires them to read wake context from
`message` instead:
- `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts`
- `server/src/__tests__/low-trust-red-team-routes.test.ts` (redaction
guarantees preserved — sanitized body + `expectNoCanary` on the raw
canary)
- Replaced brittle JSON-substring assertions (flagged by Greptile) with
a shared `parseWakePayloadFromMessage()` helper + `toMatchObject`,
robust to serialization/key-order changes.
The strict contract is confirmed upstream: OpenClaw's
`AgentParamsSchema` is `Type.Object(..., { additionalProperties: false
})` with no `paperclip` field, so a root `paperclip` is rejected
(`invalid agent params: at root: unexpected property 'paperclip'`).
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-openclaw-gateway typecheck` —
clean
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — clean
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/openclaw-gateway-adapter.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/low-trust-red-team-routes.test.ts` — 26 passed (7 +
11 + 8)
- `packages/adapters/openclaw-gateway/src/server/execute.test.ts` — 6
passed (run via a local temp vitest config because the root
`vitest.config.ts` does not include this package)
## Risks
- Low risk: this narrows the outbound payload to the gateway-supported
contract and keeps wake context in the already-supported `message`
channel.
- Any downstream consumer that incorrectly depended on a top-level
`paperclip` field from the gateway mock payloads would need to follow
the supported `message` contract instead.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex CLI coding agent via API authored the original change;
exact underlying model ID and context window were not exposed in that
environment.
- Rebase/conflict resolution and the test-assertion migration were done
with Claude Code (Claude Opus 4.8, 1M context).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked the
related issues above
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: serenakeyitan via breeze-runner <serenakeyitan@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Andrew Aymeloglu <aaymeloglu@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Dotta
Nicky Leach
fengqing
Devin Foley
scotttong
dependabot[bot]
Serena
