Preserve migration SQL hashes when renumbering and keep sandbox HOME with managed GitHub shell profiles.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Codex filters explicit environment overrides through include_only. Retain the scoped home and standard executable path without allowing provider or host secrets into shell commands.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Several people can send instructions to the same agent and task.
> - A fixed GitHub token in the provider process can keep the first
person's access after another person's message is accepted.
> - Task ownership cannot select credentials for each accepted
instruction or preserve the identity of an operation already in
progress.
> - This pull request records ordered execution identity contexts and
resolves credentials when managed Git, gh, or GitHub tools start.
> - The benefit is automatic personal GitHub access for shared agents,
with durable continuation rules and no teammate credential fallback.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting: orchestration, connection grants, database, runtime
adapters, native runners, and run details.
**Problem or motivation**
A shared agent must use the person whose instructions it has accepted. A
queued message must retain its author. A retry or approval without new
instructions must retain the originating identity. GitHub must remain
optional for ordinary work.
**Proposed solution**
Persist execution identity separately from task ownership. Give new
processes a run-scoped broker capability and token-free managed
launchers. Capture identity at operation start. Keep an explicit
dedicated-agent grant as an override. Show redacted diagnostics in run
details.
**Alternatives considered**
Per-task ownership, fixed provider tokens, and mutable repository author
configuration do not handle accepted steering or concurrent operations.
A manual account-selection action would add unnecessary setup to each
turn.
**Roadmap alignment**
This completes the existing Multiple Human Users, MCP Tool Gateway &
Apps, Secrets Manager, and Self-healing Runs capabilities. The
implementation follows the maintainer-approved plan.
Related work: Refs #12843, Refs #12907. Existing proposals #4618 and
#8945 cover per-agent or per-worktree author configuration. This change
instead follows the accepted human instruction across runtime types.
Refs #11831 for governed personal connection delegation; this change
preserves connection audience checks and does not use standing
delegation as a personal credential fallback.
## What Changed
- Add durable, ordered identity contexts and active run references.
Preserve message authors through consolidation, steering, retries,
delegation, approvals, routines, and restart.
- Add an authenticated operation-time GitHub credential broker and
local/remote managed git and gh launchers. Keep personal tokens out of
the long-lived provider process.
- Resolve GitHub gateway and server-side Git operations through the same
responsible-person or dedicated-grant selection rules.
- Make absent and unavailable GitHub credentials non-blocking at generic
startup. Clear host and prior-person credentials. Keep anonymous Git
access where supported.
- Add run-detail identity history and the dedicated-account warning.
Keep task ownership and queue-versus-steer decisions unchanged.
- Preserve personal OAuth declarations through connection edits. Retain
exact selected grants in the gateway.
- Fix continuation races found during real acceptance: verify a warm
owner before credential rotation, and wait for bounded durable runner
suspension before the next run starts.
- Make migrations replay-safe. Retain identity through agent/run
deletion, remove it with its company, and clean terminal launcher
directories before releasing execution environments. Document
coordinated release and rollback.
## Verification
- Full workspace typecheck, build, and token gates passed. The complete
local suite passed in its normal test groups: 17,120 passing tests,
including all 143 serialized server suites. After integrating the newly
merged runner API work, full local typecheck and build passed again,
along with 890 focused integration tests. All 31 checks on the
integrated revision passed, including build, browser E2E, release
registry, canary dry run, typecheck, security and all test suites.
Greptile is 5/5 with all review threads resolved.
- Current focused checks passed: 142 native executor tests, 67 runtime
lifecycle tests, 9 durable identity tests, 75 credential/routine tests,
19 low-trust/resumption tests, and the executable migration replay test.
- Authenticated browser acceptance with two Paperclip users and two
GitHub accounts on one shared native agent passed. Real commits and
pushes followed A → B accepted steering → queued A continuation in the
same saved conversation. GitHub commit author and committer identities
matched all three operations. Both runs succeeded and task ownership
stayed unchanged.
- Real GitHub MCP calls switched from A to B after accepted steering. A
delegated subtask retained its originating identity across a server
restart.
- Disabling B's GitHub connection left ordinary work successful. Managed
gh was unauthenticated and the provider had no inherited GH_TOKEN or
GITHUB_TOKEN.
- The browser displayed run-detail diagnostics and the exact
dedicated-account warning. A final controller-restart check followed by
another-person continuation retained the conversation, selected the
correct GitHub login and Git author, and removed each terminal launcher
directory.
- Company-lifetime migration and all five previously failing CI suites
passed locally (167 tests). Same-token gateway A → B → A and six
broker/launcher boundary tests passed.
- Remote callback, launcher, sandbox, and runtime contract tests passed.
Both native and legacy Codex completed actual Daytona executions on the
integrated revision ([campaign
results](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34155056509)).
The remote package-manager shim staging regression also passed locally.
## Risks
- Deploy the migrations, server broker, launchers, and runner artifacts
together. Existing processes finish with their original contract. New
managed processes need the broker endpoint for GitHub operations.
- Finish or stop new managed executions before rolling application code
back. Keep the additive schema and identity history during rollback.
- Scripts that require a persistent raw GH_TOKEN must use managed git,
gh, or GitHub gateway tools. Run capabilities authorize code executing
within that run to acquire its current identity; this is not
hostile-code isolation within one execution principal. Managed commands
prevent automatic credential carryover; arbitrary code deliberately
copying a credential is outside that boundary.
- Uncertain steering acknowledgement deliberately holds new credential
acquisition until reconciliation. Already-started operations retain
their captured identity.
- GitHub private access and provider outages can still fail the specific
operation that needs them. Dedicated grant failure does not fall back to
personal access.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex assisted implementation, review, shell
execution, and browser acceptance. The exact model variant and
context-window size are not exposed in this session. Tool use included
TypeScript and Rust tests, database integration tests, GitHub CLI, and
authenticated browser control.
## 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>
Use object-storage artifact URLs and Actions build artifacts without creating releases. Fix both native session entry points, preserve the primary workspace environment, and declare upload headers in OpenAPI. Tests cover sandbox home confinement, session dispatch, and generated headers.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Introduce company-scoped task, agent, user and project files, recoverable trash, object-backed repository checkpoints, and a shared 180-second lifecycle for sandbox execution. Wire file browsing and save status into the owner surfaces. This is an implementation checkpoint; staging acceptance and the complete merge gate remain outstanding.
## Thinking Path
> - Daytona preserves a stopped sandbox filesystem, but deleting or
replacing a sandbox removes its only remote copy.
> - Warm reuse therefore improves latency but cannot be Paperclip's
durability boundary.
> - The host execution workspace must remain authoritative after every
successful turn, while same-run recovery must avoid overwriting
unexported remote work.
> - Result proposal, workspace export/merge, and terminal completion
need a durable, replayable ordering so a crash never starts a duplicate
provider turn.
> - A paid browser acceptance suite must exercise both legacy Codex and
Runner Codex for three real turns on one continuously warm Daytona
sandbox.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12901.
Runner Codex did not previously export successful Daytona workspace
changes back to the authoritative host workspace. That made warm reuse
depend on Daytona's remote filesystem and left deleted/replacement
sandboxes without a reliable reconstruction path. The existing paid
fixture also lacked a focused three-turn continuity case for both Codex
adapters.
## What Changed
- Persist versioned, atomic native workspace-sync descriptors and
durable seeds in `PAPERCLIP_HOME`, without credentials or a database
migration.
- Classify fresh, warm, replacement, and same-run-recovery workspace
preparation explicitly; ambiguous lease/root/digest evidence fails
closed.
- Finalize native workspace export/merge after semantic result proposal
and before run completion, with idempotent replay that never submits a
second provider turn.
- Surface legacy Codex workspace restoration failures instead of masking
them, while preserving an earlier provider error when both fail.
- Keep healthy reusable Daytona leases warm for legacy and native
adapters, stamp finalized workspace generations, and retain existing
cleanup behavior for per-turn or unhealthy leases.
- Preserve Runner Codex's provider process/session across warm turns,
including bounded post-terminal tail draining and exact authority
rotation.
- Add the exact paid `daytona-warm-continuity` matrix:
- `legacy-codex × daytona × warm-three-turn`
- `runner-codex × daytona × warm-three-turn`
- Drive all three turns through the browser, verify ordered file
continuity and stable lease/workspace/runtime identities, capture
per-turn timings, and delete the sandbox immediately after assertions.
- Document `pnpm test:e2e:runner -- --suite daytona-warm-continuity`; no
package script was added.
## Verification
- `pnpm typecheck` — passed, including migration safety (no migration
added)
- Focused server/runner Vitest coverage — 144 passed
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit` — 114 passed
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck` — passed
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:codex` — 66 passed,
1 helper ignored
- `native-session-executor.test.ts` — 139 passed, including safe
fail-closed cleanup after remote runner identity capture failure
- Paid local browser acceptance, exact post-rebase Linux/amd64 runner
binary:
- Runner Codex — passed in 1.7m; 3 runs; lease outcomes `created,
resumed, resumed`; 10/10 matchers; cleanup passed
- Legacy Codex — passed in 2.7m; 3 runs; lease outcomes `created,
resumed, resumed`; 10/10 matchers; cleanup passed
- [Protected paid GitHub Actions
campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34026735033)
against `7da42a91b95fa7fb2df126668ef7e37afb3b2b9d` — passed 2/2:
- Runner Codex — 3 runs; lease outcomes `created, resumed, resumed`;
evidence and cleanup passed
- Legacy Codex — 3 runs; lease outcomes `created, resumed, resumed`;
evidence and cleanup passed
- Merge/enforcement, S3 history, and Pages publication jobs passed
- Paid result artifacts were scanned for both provider credentials;
neither secret was present.
- Current PR checks — 31 passed, 1 expected Storybook skip; Greptile
5/5; Superagent security scan passed
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` — passed
- Confirmed no `package.json`, lockfile, migration, or SQL changes.
## Risks
- Workspace synchronization now sits on the terminal-success path, so a
remote export failure deliberately prevents false success. Retryable
state retains its lease/seed; loss of the only unexported remote copy
fails closed.
- Warm provider reuse has strict identity and quiescence checks.
Mismatched or ambiguous evidence blocks reuse rather than risking
concurrent provider work.
- The paid suite incurs Daytona and Codex cost only in the existing
protected scheduled/manual workflow and explicitly destroys its sandbox
after each cell.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5 agentic reasoning, repository inspection, real
browser E2E execution, Rust/TypeScript test execution, and GitHub
Actions diagnostics.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either linked an existing issue or described the issue
in-PR
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [x] My branch name contains no internal ticket id
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have documented the dedicated suite invocation without adding a
package script
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green on the current revision
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
on the current revision
- [x] I will address all reviewer comments before requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Managed GitHub connections resolve a responsible user's or dedicated
agent's identity into an audited, run-scoped credential projection.
> - An enrolled instance could retain a hidden managed setup method
after Cloud stopped advertising it, producing a blank, disabled setup
step.
> - Native runner processes also dropped the resolved GitHub projection
before the provider shell, so `gh` and Git could not use the selected
identity in Daytona.
> - Daytona already provides the outer isolation boundary. Applying
Codex's inner Linux sandbox there both duplicated containment and failed
because nested user namespaces are unavailable.
> - This change repairs setup fallback, carries only the bounded GitHub
projection across each runner boundary, and allows only a
controller-selected managed sandbox transport to act as the outer
sandbox.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
An enrolled self-hosted instance could show a blank GitHub setup step
when its managed profile was unavailable. Separately, a native Codex run
in Daytona could resolve a managed GitHub connection on the Paperclip
host but lose it before the provider shell. Once projected, Codex's
nested sandbox failed before commands could run because Daytona does not
expose the user-namespace operation used by the inner sandbox.
**Expected behavior**
Setup must select an advertised customer method when the managed method
is unavailable. A Daytona run must receive the exact managed GitHub
identity selected for that run, support `gh` and HTTPS Git, and rely on
Daytona as its outer sandbox without weakening local or SSH execution.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Enroll a self-hosted instance while Cloud does not advertise the
managed GitHub profile and open GitHub setup.
2. Observe the blank second step and disabled action.
3. Configure a native Codex agent with a Daytona environment and a
responsible-user GitHub grant.
4. Run `gh api user` or HTTPS Git from the agent shell.
5. Observe missing GitHub environment projection or nested-sandbox
startup failure.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The setup bug reproduces on `1dceee9a4`; the runner proof was developed
from the same branch and verified at the latest head below.
**Deployment mode**
Self-hosted Paperclip enrolled with Paperclip Cloud, using the Daytona
sandbox-provider plugin and native Paperclip runner.
## What Changed
- Wait for connector enrollment hydration, retain a hidden managed
method only while enrollment is needed, and otherwise select an
advertised customer fallback.
- Add a single bounded GitHub credential-environment projection for
`GH_TOKEN`, `GITHUB_TOKEN`, the process-only Git helper token, GitHub
commit identity, and at most 32 controller-generated Git config entries.
- Forward that projection through the durable controller, Codex
app-server transport, and Rust provider child without placing token
values in arguments or config.
- Allow Codex shell inheritance only for the exact projected GitHub keys
and enable provider network access only when the managed credential
exists.
- Derive outer-sandbox authority exclusively from a managed `sandbox`
transport; strip the same flag from configured, host, local, and SSH
environments.
- Define a named external-sandbox permission profile that Codex resolves
to `dangerFullAccess` for default-mode Daytona turns while plan mode
remains read-only.
- Add regression tests for setup fallback, credential projection,
local/SSH/sandbox authority separation, provider forwarding, and
permission-profile selection.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/pages/apps/AppsConnect.test.tsx` — 96
passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/drivers/codex/codex-security-config.test.ts
src/drivers/codex/app-server-transport.test.ts
src/control-plane/durable-prp-control-plane.test.ts` from
`packages/paperclip-runner` — 31 passed.
- Focused native-session executor tests — 3 passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed.
- `cargo test --manifest-path
packages/paperclip-runner/runner/Cargo.toml --locked -p
paperclip-runner-core --lib` — 194 passed.
- Real Codex app-server configuration probe accepted
`paperclip-runner-external-sandbox` and reported
`sandbox.type=\"dangerFullAccess\"` while using the named profile.
- [Signed Daytona image
workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33995270328)
built commit `86571f7997e7100e47bd131aac1f1e773112a0ce`; the isolated
environment was pinned to
`sha256:ecef21105f8de382d75787e59439d936be239b77ae74a31c8ed3a17cde39b023`.
- Live isolated Daytona proof passed: the three projected token
variables were non-empty and equal; the host-scoped Git credential
helper returned the same token without printing it; `gh api user`
resolved `cryppadotta`; authenticated `git ls-remote
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git HEAD` returned
`1dceee9a4e75b13456760bb54c752deb2dba1d79`; no repository mutation
occurred.
- The persisted 28,476-byte run log contains no GitHub token shape,
bearer header, credential-bearing URL, or private-key marker.
- Latest-head pull-request CI and reviews provide the remaining
full-suite gate.
## Risks
- This deliberately gives shell Git and `gh` access to the run's
resolved GitHub identity. It is the audited class-3 behavior required by
the GitHub connection design and is outside per-tool Ask-first controls.
- The credential source is the trusted broker projection, which
overwrites configured environment values. The helper is scoped to HTTPS
`github.com`, revalidates protocol and host, and never places its token
in command arguments, URLs, or files.
- Managed Daytona sandboxes become the containment boundary for
default-mode provider commands. Local and SSH targets retain the inner
Codex workspace sandbox, and plan mode remains read-only everywhere.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, with reasoning, browser control, shell access,
and code execution. The product did not expose the context-window size.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Paperclip Runner owns durable provider sessions and streams their
work to the control plane.
> - Pull request #12845 added native restart recovery for live and dead
local runners.
> - A real browser test found three live-adoption gaps after that pull
request merged.
> - Lazy runner process ownership was not always stored before restart.
> - The old controller did not release its PRP authority without closing
the provider turn.
> - Reconnect events could arrive before the active provider turn was
restored.
> - This pull request closes those gaps and proves the same turn
completes after a UI hot restart.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12845
Related search results: #12646 covers indeterminate command results
after a runner restart. It does not cover controller adoption or
active-turn rebinding. No open duplicate pull request was found.
## What Changed
- Store lazy runnerd process ownership after provider session creation,
read, and resume.
- Detach native PRP controller authority during coordinated hot
shutdown. Keep the live provider turn running.
- Restore the exact checkpointed provider session when bounded PRP
identity events have been compacted.
- Restore the active provider turn before reconnect events are replayed.
This prevents `turn_binding_mismatch`.
- Keep exact live ownership by the current controller out of generic
orphan recovery.
- Add driver, transport, and server regression tests for these paths.
## Verification
- Ran 12 Codex driver lifecycle tests.
- Ran 53 runnerd transport tests.
- Ran 143 recovery and orphan-reaper server tests.
- Ran all 8 real-process restart recovery scenarios.
- Ran all 96 existing runner E2E unit tests.
- Ran runner TypeScript typecheck.
- Ran server TypeScript typecheck.
- Ran the migration replay test and migration safety checks.
- Tested the board UI on an isolated local instance. A real local
Codex-backed turn entered a 120-second terminal wait. The UI `Restart
now` action replaced the server and kept the same runner PID, process
start time, run ID, native session ID, runner ID, provider session ID,
and active turn. The original turn then completed.
- Confirmed one heartbeat run, no retry row, one result, one
proposed-result event, one terminal event, no protocol errors, no active
recovery state, and no surviving runner or provider process.
## Risks
- A live runner can continue provider work while no server owns the
control route. Recovery fails closed when the process fingerprint or
durable identity is ambiguous.
- Provider identity can be restored from the database only for an exact
verified adoption claim. An authenticated live `session.snapshot`
validates that identity before the driver can resume.
- The new detach path applies only to native sessions that expose
restart detachment. Other adapters keep their existing shutdown
behavior.
- This follow-up does not change the database migration or
`package.json`. The migration in #12845 remains replay-safe through `ADD
COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS` and its embedded-Postgres idempotence test. The
dedicated real-process command remains in `doc/DEVELOPING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex based on GPT-5. The exact serving build and
context-window size are not exposed. The run used extended reasoning,
repository tools, shell execution, and in-app browser automation.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip manages AI agents that perform work.
> - Paperclip Runner connects durable task runs to local provider
processes.
> - The full-stack paid matrix exposed failures after the runner
integrity repair.
> - Verified JavaScript entrypoints lost their relative module graph
when Linux executed them through descriptor paths.
> - Returned provider startup errors also remained pending and became
indeterminate after recovery.
> - Sparse Codex tool lifecycle events lost the `write_document`
identity before task transcript projection.
> - This pull request repairs those three boundaries and makes the
structured-question fixture deterministic.
> - The benefit is repeatable provider startup, exact failure replay,
and correct inline Plan placement.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12721 and #12700.
**What happened?**
The paid runner matrix failed ACPX and OpenCode startup before provider
session creation. The runner journal then replaced the original startup
error with an indeterminate recovery result. Native Codex saved a Plan
but rendered it only as a fallback card. A legacy Claude waiting reply
could also echo the reserved terminal marker before the answer arrived.
**Expected behavior**
Verified JavaScript providers must start from immutable
descriptor-backed artifacts. Returned startup failures must persist as
terminal failed command results. Native tool lifecycle updates must
preserve the `write_document` boundary. Pre-answer fixture output must
not contain the reserved terminal marker.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run the local provider cells in the Runner Full-Stack E2E workflow.
2. Observe ACPX and OpenCode fail during `session.open` before provider
execution.
3. Observe recovery report `execution_indeterminate` instead of the
original startup error.
4. Run the native Codex Plan cell and observe the fallback Plan card
after the tool activity row.
5. Run the legacy Claude structured-question resume cell and observe an
early marker echo in waiting prose.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`0f9452101740835ce0b1488a204bf48acd5bafc3`
**Deployment mode**
Local development with the paid GitHub Actions acceptance workflow.
## What Changed
- Bundle the ACPX sidecar and OpenCode proxy as self-contained Node ESM
entrypoints before hashing and verified descriptor launch.
- Anchor ACPX dynamic provider package resolution at a
controller-derived provider-pack root and keep that root out of the
provider child environment.
- Persist executor-returned startup errors as redacted durable failed
command results while retaining indeterminate recovery for true process
death.
- Coalesce sparse native tool items by stable ID so a late
`write_document` name, input, and result reach the transcript boundary
once.
- Forbid the structured-question fixture from spelling or announcing its
reserved terminal marker before the user answers.
## Verification
- Rust and TypeScript regression tests cover durable failed replay, true
crash ambiguity, bundle closure, package-root derivation, environment
filtering, exact Codex tool lifecycle coalescing, and prompt
determinism.
- Local execution is intentionally limited to formatters and static diff
checks. GitHub Actions will run tests, type checks, builds, and security
checks.
- After ordinary CI is green, scoped paid cells will validate one ACPX
launch, one OpenCode launch, native Codex Plan projection, and legacy
Claude structured resume before a complete matrix rerun.
- Prior failing matrix:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33682434315
## Risks
- Bundling changes the bytes covered by provider launch hashes.
Provider-pack generation already hashes the final built files.
- ACPX still loads qualified provider packages dynamically. The
controller supplies a normalized package root, while existing version,
digest, path, and descriptor checks remain active.
- Durable `failed` is terminal. Replays return the same redacted result
and do not execute the provider effect twice.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex based on GPT-5 with agentic reasoning, repository
inspection, code editing, Git, parallel subagents, and GitHub Actions
coordination. The exact deployed snapshot and context-window size are
not exposed to this task.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either linked related public work or described the bug in
this PR
- [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
ticket id
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass (intentionally deferred to
GitHub Actions)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] No documentation change is required for this runtime repair
- [x] I have considered and documented the risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Paperclip uses local adapters to connect agent sessions to the
control plane
> - The Codex adapter emits turn events from response and notification
channels
> - A terminal notification can arrive before the turn/start response
> - This pull request gates the terminal event on turn.accepted
> - The result keeps the event order stable for consumers and tests
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Paperclip uses local adapters to connect agent sessions to the
control plane
> - The Codex adapter emits turn events from response and notification
channels
> - A terminal notification can arrive before the turn/start response
> - This pull request gates the terminal event on turn.accepted
> - The result keeps the event order stable for consumers and tests
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
The Codex harness session emitted `turn.accepted` only after the
`turn/start` response resolved. A terminal notification could arrive
before that response and reach consumers first.
**Expected behavior**
The Codex driver must emit `turn.accepted` before any terminal event for
the same turn.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start a Codex harness session.
2. Keep the `turn/start` response pending.
3. Send `turn/started` and `turn/completed` notifications.
4. Observe the event order.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`afbcd28dae9e51108738c4258929b95ca359186c`
**Deployment mode**
Built from source with the Codex driver test harness.
**Agent adapter(s) involved**
Codex.
## What Changed
- Add session state that tracks a pending `turn/start` operation.
- Resolve the state when `turn/start` succeeds or fails.
- Wait for that state before the terminal notification handler emits its
event.
- Add a regression test that delivers a terminal notification while
`turn/start` remains pending.
## Verification
- The regression test failed 5 of 5 times before this change and passed
5 of 5 times after it.
- The Codex driver suite passed 189 of 189 tests.
- The affected live transport test file passed 46 of 46 tests on 10
consecutive runs.
- The TypeScript check exited with status 0.
- Continuous integration must pass before merge.
## Risks
The change affects only Codex turn event ordering. It adds no sleep,
retry, or timeout. The main risk is a provider path that does not settle
`turn/start`; existing provider response handling still controls
completion.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5. The exact deployment identifier is not exposed in this
environment. Tool use and code execution assisted this change.
## 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 control plane for agents that perform work.
> - Paperclip Runner connects durable provider sessions to individual
task runs through PRP.
> - Provider continuity and per-run authority are different lifetimes.
> - The existing implementation mixed those lifetimes and lost event
metadata between provider frames, runnerd, persistence, API
sanitization, and the task thread.
> - That caused failed continuation, missing progress and Plans,
duplicate replies, hidden failures, and unsafe recovery.
> - This repair gives every heartbeat fresh authority, preserves
qualified provider-session continuity, and restores one lossless
presentation path without changing direct adapters.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
A second native heartbeat could reuse tickets, leases, command receipts,
sequence state, and run identity from the first heartbeat. Provider
phase and item identity could be lost before the UI read them. Redaction
could corrupt protocol discriminators while still missing malformed
credential tails. The task thread could fold progress into the final
response, hide failures, or show more than one final answer. Native
Codex also exposed approval modes that do not yet have a durable
approval bridge.
**Expected behavior**
Each heartbeat uses a new PRP authority epoch. Codex and OpenCode
preserve exact qualified provider sessions; ACPX emits an explicit
continuity event when its qualified process-replacement policy is used.
Every accepted provider event is presented, classified as internal, or
surfaced as unsupported. The task page shows chronological progress,
reasoning summaries, activity, Plans, interactions, terminal failures,
and exactly one final reply. Direct adapters retain their existing path.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Enable the unified experimental Paperclip Runner setting.
2. Create a local native Codex, OpenCode, ACPX Claude, or ACPX Codex
agent.
3. Run response, Plan, structured-question/resume, restart,
cancellation, and failure scenarios.
4. Reload the task while active, waiting, failed, and settled.
5. On the old implementation, observe stale run authority, missing
classifications, incomplete output, or duplicated/folded replies.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The repair is based directly on `master` at
`87d05e194b643810d16d20612115acd01d735d43`.
**Deployment mode**
Local development with the embedded database.
Related work: Refs #12616, #12646, #12666, #12685, and #12700.
## What Changed
- Rotates PRP control-plane, outbox, ticket, lease, command, receipt,
and sequence authority for each heartbeat while carrying forward only a
validated provider-session identity.
- Reads `control-plane-state.json`, validates both durable schemas and
lifecycle values, resumes coherent current runs, archives qualified
settled authority, and quarantines malformed or mismatched scoped state
without moving ambiguous live legacy state.
- Preserves Codex provider phase and stable item identities so
commentary remains progress and only `final_answer` becomes final.
- Adds raw OpenCode HTTP/SSE boundary coverage and canonical reasoning
lifecycle mapping.
- Makes ACPX normalization lossless for visible reasoning, tool
lifecycle metadata, stable bounded identities, Plan revisions,
structured requests, failures, and qualified process replacement. Only
the compatible terminal assistant message is promoted as final.
- Applies schema-aware redaction before generic JWT-shaped detection and
scans every diagnostic string leaf. Malformed raw/escaped quoted
credential tails are redacted in both server and durable Rust state.
- Restores snapshot-style chronological task presentation, expandable
tool activity, inline Plan cards, visible waiting/resume/cancel/failure
states, and exactly one final answer.
- Makes `never` the only qualified native Codex permission mode and
rejects unsupported persisted native modes with remediation. OpenCode
and ACPX policies remain intact.
- Keeps the unified experimental Runner setting as the only enablement
flag. Onboarding and direct Codex, Claude, and OpenCode stay on their
legacy execution/finalization paths.
- Adds cross-language goldens, authority/recovery/fault coverage, exact
response/count assertions, and native plus legacy acceptance scenarios.
## Verification
- Pull-request GitHub Actions run Rust formatting/tests, TypeScript
checks, server/UI tests, builds, protocol drift checks, browser E2E, and
security scans.
- A separate workflow-only validation ref is pinned directly on this PR
head and runs the 35-cell paid local matrix: three core scenarios plus
structured-question resume and restart/resume for native Codex, native
OpenCode, ACPX Claude, ACPX Codex, and direct Codex/Claude/OpenCode.
Run: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33682434315
- Acceptance requires exact single visible replies, monotonic sequences,
matching envelope discriminators, one semantic terminal, one run
terminal, no unresolved interaction, no duplicate mutation, no secret
leakage, provider continuity, and zero native rows for direct adapters.
- Per maintainer direction, tests are running in GitHub Actions rather
than on the slower local host. Only formatters and static diff checks
were run locally.
## Risks
- Recovery from old or partial filesystem state is sensitive. The repair
fails closed, preserves active or unverifiable authority, and
quarantines only state whose scoped ownership is safe to move.
- Provider event formats can change. Closed validators and boundary
goldens turn new or malformed events into visible diagnostics instead of
silent drops.
- Shared task presentation could affect direct adapters. Runtime-fact
gating plus the direct-adapter matrix protect the existing path.
- Managed and remote providers are not qualified here. Shared code
continues to compile and fail safely, but live qualification is
deferred.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex based on GPT-5. The exact deployed snapshot and
context-window size are not exposed to this task. It used agentic
reasoning, repository inspection, code editing, Git, parallel subagents,
and GitHub Actions.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass (intentionally deferred to
GitHub Actions)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] The paid local-provider matrix is green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the control plane for AI-agent companies.
> - Agent outputs must remain visible after a run and easy to inspect
from a task.
> - The thread and artifact inventory need one consistent rich-card
vocabulary.
> - Run uploads also need durable artifact registration and
producing-run context.
> - Reviewers need deterministic examples for each rich-card kind and
state.
> - This pull request adds the shared presentation, registration,
inventory, and Storybook review coverage.
> - The benefit is a complete output path that reviewers can inspect
without seeded data.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
This change improves work-product presentation in task threads and the
task Artifacts tab.
**Subsystem affected**
The change affects shared work-product contracts, the runner diff path,
server attachment and work-product services, GitHub metadata refresh,
the React board UI, and Storybook.
**Current behavior**
The thread used generic cards. Some files uploaded by a run existed only
as message attachments. The Artifacts tab showed a flat list without run
context or filters. Storybook showed only one resting card per kind.
**Proposed behavior**
The thread uses rich cards for supported work-product types. Each
run-produced file registers one attachment-backed artifact work product.
The Artifacts tab groups outputs by run and supports filters. Storybook
shows every kind and requested state, PR lifecycle states, stats
variants, truncation, mobile layout, and message-tail media.
**Reason and benefit**
Users can identify outputs quickly. Reviewers can inspect all card
permutations without creating task data.
**Breaking changes**
None. The metadata fields and automatic artifact registration are
additive. Existing attachments and work products keep their current
behavior.
## What Changed
- Added a shared rich work-product card with kind-specific content and a
compact inventory variant.
- Added pull-request and commit diff metadata plus bounded GitHub state
refresh.
- Added media strips and typed file chips to message-tail attachments.
- Registered each run-produced attachment as an artifact work product in
the same server transaction.
- Grouped task artifacts by run with agent and timestamp headings.
- Added type and run filters, image thumbnails, compact cards, and a
company Artifacts link.
- Added a Storybook kind-by-state matrix with stats variants for all
eight visual kinds.
- Added PR open, draft, merged, and closed examples, long-title
truncation, an exact 375-pixel viewport, and message-tail overflow
coverage.
- Closed reconciled runtime work products when the linked runtime stops
or disappears, so the card shows `Stopped` instead of `Unhealthy`.
### Screenshots
Before: one resting card per kind.
After: the kind and state matrix.
After: message-tail media at 375 pixels.
[Open the Storybook evidence
viewer](https://pages.paperclip.ing/rich-work-product-storybook-20260902/).
The earlier artifact inventory comparison remains available in the
[artifact inventory
viewer](https://pages.paperclip.ing/rich-artifacts-inventory-proof-20260902/).
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passed.
- `pnpm build-storybook` passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/work-product-runtime-reconciliation.test.ts` passed
with 5 tests.
- Chromium visual checks passed at desktop and 375-pixel widths.
- All 30 latest-head GitHub checks passed. One unrelated annotation test
was flaky and passed on its single retry.
- Greptile passed at 5/5 with zero unresolved threads.
## Risks
- Low risk. The Storybook change adds review fixtures only. The runtime
fix changes read-time reconciliation without database writes.
- The matrix is intentionally large so every permutation stays visible
in one review surface.
> I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This work does not duplicate planned core
work.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex with GPT-5 and GPT-5.6-sol across this pull request.
Reasoning, tool use, and code execution were enabled. The context-window
size is not exposed.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My public branch name describes the change and contains no
internal task id
- [x] I have run tests locally and the changed-path tests pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Administrators need bounded controls for experimental native
execution.
> - The lower stack adds remote Codex execution and the task workspace.
> - Operators need to configure Codex safely and inspect provider
traces.
> - Unsupported providers must not appear as runnable choices.
> - This pull request adds Codex-only administration and observability.
> - The benefit is a default-off operational surface for production
diagnosis.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12640.
Refs #12616.
Refs #12352.
**Subsystem affected**
Agent configuration, instance experimental settings, run ledger,
provider trace inspector, and administrator actions.
**Problem or motivation**
The native runner lacks one safe operator surface for Codex permissions,
lifecycle, raw trace capture, and run inspection. The integration branch
also contains provider choices that the production backend cannot
execute yet.
**Proposed solution**
Expose only the qualified Codex controls. Keep Paperclip Developer Mode
and runner preview ingress off by default. Gate raw trace actions by
administrator access and existing trace authorization.
**Alternatives considered**
Exposing unfinished providers would create configurations that fail at
runtime. Always-on tracing would increase sensitive data and storage
risk.
**Roadmap alignment**
This work supports governed Cloud and Sandbox agents and production
diagnostics.
## Stack
- Base PR: #12640.
- Lower PRs: #12639 and #12638.
- This PR contains only its 54-file administration and observability
delta.
- This is the final feature PR in the Codex production stack.
## What Changed
- Added Codex-only Paperclip Runner permission and lifecycle controls.
- Added bounded warm idle configuration.
- Kept the provider field fixed to Codex.
- Added administrator-only one-run raw trace requests.
- Added a persistent future-run raw trace toggle.
- Added trace status, metadata, ledger, and canonical runner inspection.
- Added JSON-RPC request-origin grouping and finalization lineage.
- Restored the stateful PRP transcript parser and focused projection
tests required by trace inspection.
- Added default-off Paperclip Developer Mode.
- Added Honeycomb run links for authorized developer mode.
- Disabled the legacy operational skill for `paperclip_runner`.
- Did not expose OpenCode, ACPX, Pi, Claude Managed, or AWS runner
choices.
- Did not change migrations, workflows, dependencies, or
`pnpm-lock.yaml`.
## Verification
- GitHub Actions will run UI tests, server tests, repository typecheck,
build, browser tests, security, and policy gates.
- Tests cover Codex configuration defaults and bounds, administrator
trace actions, persistent settings, ledger inspection, trace lineage,
and Honeycomb links.
- Existing server trace authorization and retention tests remain the
backend authority.
- Local tests were not run. The requested verification policy uses
GitHub Actions for this series.
- `git diff --check runner/task-workspace-experience...HEAD` passes.
- The delta contains 54 files.
## Risks
- Raw provider traces can contain sensitive provider data.
- Existing server authorization controls access, reveal, download,
retention, and deletion.
- The UI gates trace actions by administrator access and developer mode.
- All new instance settings remain off by default.
- Fresh Paperclip Runner configuration remains Codex-only.
- Direct adapters and legacy task behavior do not change in this PR.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5.6. The work used high-reasoning agent mode,
repository tools, GitHub tools, and parallel code-audit 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 or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The runner package already provides the production protocol and
execution spine.
> - Contributors still need stable SDK surfaces, deterministic test
tools, and local inspection tools.
> - Those surfaces share generated contracts and must change as one
package boundary.
> - This pull request adds the package-local SDK, labs, examples, and
drift checks.
> - The benefit is a reviewable developer platform that does not change
application execution selection.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
`packages/paperclip-runner` — runner SDK, conformance tools, and
developer tooling.
**Problem or motivation**
The production runner spine is present, but package consumers cannot
build deterministic integrations, inspect sessions, or verify
provider-neutral behavior through supported surfaces.
**Proposed solution**
Add browser, React, standalone, live-session, scenario, conformance, and
evaluation surfaces. Add generated contract inventories and
package-local verification scripts. Keep production application routing
unchanged.
**Alternatives considered**
We considered splitting each generated catalog, SDK surface, and demo
into separate pull requests. Those changes share exports, fixtures, and
drift gates. Splitting them would create intermediate package states
that do not build.
**Roadmap alignment**
No overlapping item appears in `ROADMAP.md`. This work extends the
runner package that is already on `master`.
## What Changed
- Add browser, React, standalone, live-session, and issue-thread SDK
surfaces.
- Add deterministic mock control-plane, scenario, conformance, replay,
and evaluation tools.
- Add bounded Codex, OpenCode, and ACPX development transports and
fixtures.
- Keep deferred managed-provider execution fail-closed. Persisted
compatibility data remains readable.
- Add generated capability inventories with their source files and drift
checks.
- Add examples, package documentation, browser checks, and
clean-consumer checks.
- Preserve the reviewed protocol bounds, replay compatibility aliases,
process environment isolation, and semantic redaction limits.
- Update the ACPX package patch that the existing workspace patch
registry already tracks.
- Do not change `pnpm-lock.yaml`, repository workflows, server runtime
selection, or the application UI.
## Verification
GitHub Actions is the verification authority for this pull request. The
repository CI, package TypeScript and Rust checks, package tests,
generated-output drift checks, browser checks, security scans, and
Greptile review must pass on the exact head.
Local test suites were not run because this series uses parallel GitHub
Actions for verification.
## Risks
This is a large greenfield package change. The main risks are public
export drift, generated-output drift, and optional React consumer
compatibility. Package boundary checks, clean-consumer checks, and
browser tests cover those risks. Production adapter selection and server
execution are outside this pull request.
## Stack
1. **This PR:** runner SDK and developer tooling.
2. [Codex production server
integration](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12616).
3. [Provider-neutral task-thread
UI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12617).
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, high-reasoning mode, with tool use and code
execution.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the feature request
template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The package now has bounded Codex transport, security, question,
diff, value, and thread helpers
> - Those isolated boundaries can now be composed into one provider
session lifecycle
> - The driver must preserve controller-owned identity, results,
terminals, and recovery invariants
> - Unsupported or mismatched provider traffic must fail closed without
weakening legacy adapters
> - This pull request adds only the Codex app-server driver and its
package-local tests
> - It does not expose or enable the Paperclip Runner adapter
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
`packages/paperclip-runner` Codex app-server session driver.
**Problem or motivation**
The runner needs a production-shaped Codex session implementation that
turns provider facts into canonical PRP events while keeping task
identity, semantic completion, runtime input, and recovery under
controller authority.
**Proposed solution**
Compose the previously reviewed transport and normalization boundaries
into a Codex-only harness driver with session open/resume, turns,
streaming events, semantic tools, structured questions, goals, lineage,
usage, cancellation, reconciliation, and deterministic persisted
snapshots.
**Alternatives considered**
Keeping the full implementation in one initial transport pull request
would obscure the trust boundaries. Adding the deferred ACPX or OpenCode
paths here would also broaden the provider scope beyond the Codex-first
series.
**Roadmap alignment**
This implements the Codex provider slice inside the package. It does not
enable the runner adapter or change any existing direct adapter path.
## What Changed
- Added the Codex app-server harness driver and session lifecycle.
- Added controller-bound semantic completion and terminal handling.
- Added runtime requests, structured questions, goals, lineage, usage,
steering, interruption, and recovery.
- Added workspace diff and file-reference projection.
- Connected bounded/redacted provider data and notification identity
checks.
- Kept deferred provider identities and replacement behavior out of the
Codex-only driver.
- Added 62 focused driver cases covering lifecycle, security, recovery,
and protocol failures.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:typescript` (34
files, 337 tests)
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- The focused Codex driver suite has 62 passing cases.
## Risks
The main risks are accepting provider events from the wrong session,
duplicating terminal facts, retaining unsafe provider data, or resuming
a different session. Tests cover pre-turn, cross-thread, stale-turn,
post-terminal, duplicate-result, cancellation, transport loss, provider
identity, workspace, redaction, structured input, and recovery cases.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5.6 and repository tool use.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (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
> - Codex thread state arrives as provider-specific goals, lineage,
notifications, and workspace paths
> - That data must be normalized before the full driver can retain or
project it
> - Notifications also need run and thread binding so unrelated provider
traffic is ignored
> - This pull request adds pure normalization helpers before the full
driver
> - A later pull request will use these helpers for the Codex session
lifecycle
> - The benefit is a small, independently tested trust boundary for
thread state
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
`packages/paperclip-runner` Codex thread-state normalization.
**Problem or motivation**
Provider thread data can contain unsupported goal shapes, unrelated
notifications, unsafe workspace paths, or unbounded response values.
Passing it through directly would weaken run isolation and durable-data
bounds.
**Proposed solution**
Normalize goals and lineage into stable runner shapes, accept
notifications only when their run and thread identities match, constrain
workspace references to the assigned root, and retain only bounded safe
provider responses.
**Alternatives considered**
Keeping these rules embedded in the full driver would make the trust
boundary harder to review and test independently.
**Roadmap alignment**
This supports the Codex-first experimental runner. It does not enable
the runner adapter.
## What Changed
- Added normalized Codex thread goals and lineage.
- Added run- and thread-bound notification filtering.
- Added safe workspace-relative path and stat projection.
- Added bounded provider-response retention.
- Added focused normalization and isolation tests.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:typescript`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- The focused thread-normalization test has 3 passing cases.
## Risks
The main risk is retaining data from the wrong provider thread or
accepting an unsafe workspace reference. Tests cover identity binding,
path normalization, response bounds, goal parsing, and lineage
projection.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5.6 and repository tool use.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (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
> - Provider data crosses workspace, event, trace, and tool-result
boundaries
> - Codex payloads can contain large or protected values
> - The runner also needs to reject unsafe working directories
> - This pull request adds pure boundary helpers before the full driver
> - A later pull request will use these helpers for Codex event handling
> - The benefit is bounded and redacted provider data with focused tests
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
`packages/paperclip-runner` Codex value and workspace boundaries.
**Problem or motivation**
Raw provider payloads can exceed durable limits or contain credentials.
An invalid working directory can expose host state or escape the
assigned workspace.
**Proposed solution**
Validate the workspace against host and assignment roots. Bound retained
values by depth, count, string length, and byte size. Redact protected
keys and diagnostic credentials.
**Alternatives considered**
Keeping these checks inside the driver would make them harder to review
and reuse at every provider-data boundary.
**Roadmap alignment**
This supports the Codex-first experimental runner. It does not enable
the runner adapter.
## What Changed
- Added assigned-workspace validation.
- Added host home and Codex home overlap checks.
- Added retained payload bounds.
- Added recursive protected-value redaction.
- Added semantic completion tool disposition checks.
- Added focused security and bounds tests.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:typescript`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- The focused boundary test has 3 passing cases.
## Risks
The main risk is accepting an unsafe workspace or retaining sensitive
provider data. Tests cover root escape, host overlap, size limits,
credential redaction, and completion-tool separation.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5.6 and repository tool use.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (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
> - Existing adapters already use provider-neutral structured questions
> - Codex emits several provider-specific input and elicitation forms
> - Malformed native forms must fail closed instead of degrading to an
opaque prompt
> - This pull request adds the Codex question adapter without adding the
full driver
> - A later pull request will connect it to provider request handling
> - The benefit is a small compatibility boundary that preserves legacy
question behavior
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
`packages/paperclip-runner` Codex structured input handling.
**Problem or motivation**
Codex user-input and MCP elicitation requests use different shapes. The
runner needs one canonical question set and must map validated answers
back to the correct provider response.
**Proposed solution**
Normalize native forms into `paperclip.question_set.v1`. Preserve
optional answers, select modes, validation bounds, and stable IDs. Map
canonical responses back only after validation.
**Alternatives considered**
Passing provider-native forms through PRP would couple the app to Codex
and would not preserve the existing provider-neutral question boundary.
**Roadmap alignment**
This supports the Codex-first experimental runner and existing
structured-question compatibility. It does not enable the runner
adapter.
## What Changed
- Added request-kind detection for approval, input, and elicitation
requests.
- Added requestUserInput normalization.
- Added JSON Schema elicitation normalization.
- Added canonical runtime request payloads.
- Added response mapping for Codex answers and MCP elicitation content.
- Added malformed-form and multi-question tests.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:typescript`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- The focused question adapter test has 3 passing cases.
## Risks
The main risk is changing question semantics. Tests verify optional
answers, single and multi select modes, text validation, duplicate IDs,
numeric elicitation, and canonical response mapping.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5.6 and repository tool use.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (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
> - Codex executes commands inside the runner workspace
> - The provider process must not inherit host credentials or broad file
access
> - Planning mode also needs a read-only workspace boundary
> - This pull request defines the isolated launch and thread
configuration
> - A later pull request will use it from the Codex driver
> - The benefit is an independently reviewed security boundary
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
`packages/paperclip-runner` Codex launch security.
**Problem or motivation**
A provider process can inherit host paths, environment secrets, network
access, or write permissions unless the runner constructs a closed
configuration.
**Proposed solution**
Build explicit app-server arguments and thread parameters. Deny host
roots and network access, allow only a small environment list, and use a
read-only profile for plan mode.
**Alternatives considered**
Relying on ambient Codex defaults would make runner safety depend on
each host installation.
**Roadmap alignment**
This supports the Codex-first experimental runner. It does not enable
the runner adapter.
## What Changed
- Added deny-by-default filesystem rules.
- Added separate execution and planning permission profiles.
- Added network denial.
- Added an explicit environment allowlist.
- Disabled host apps, plugins, memories, multi-agent behavior, and image
generation.
- Added security configuration tests.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:typescript`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- The focused security configuration test has 3 passing cases.
## Risks
The risk is an overly broad provider launch. Tests verify denied host
roots, read-only context roots, workspace permissions, network denial,
and secret exclusion.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5.6 and repository tool use.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (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
> - Runner events need provider-neutral workspace change facts
> - Codex reports one complete unified diff snapshot per turn
> - Provider diff text can be large and can contain unsafe paths
> - This pull request adds only the bounded pure parser
> - A later pull request will connect it to the Codex driver
> - The benefit is an independently tested workspace boundary
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
`packages/paperclip-runner` Codex event normalization.
**Problem or motivation**
Codex turn diffs need stable file operations and statistics. Raw diff
input must not escape the workspace or grow without bounds.
**Proposed solution**
Parse complete unified diff snapshots into normalized file records.
Bound file count and retained text, reject unsafe paths, and represent
binary changes without text.
**Alternatives considered**
Parsing diffs inside the main driver would make provider lifecycle
review larger and harder to test in isolation.
**Roadmap alignment**
This supports the Codex-first experimental runner. It does not enable an
adapter.
## What Changed
- Added create, modify, delete, rename, mode-change, and binary parsing.
- Added workspace-relative path validation.
- Added file-count and per-file text bounds.
- Added focused rename, binary, hostile path, and size tests.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:typescript`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- The focused parser test has 2 passing cases.
## Risks
Low risk. This is a pure parser with no file-system access and no
production caller yet.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5.6 and repository tool use.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The first production runner provider is Codex
> - Codex app-server communicates with JSON-RPC over a child process
> - The process boundary needs explicit resource, environment, and
diagnostic limits
> - This pull request adds only the bounded transport layer
> - A later pull request will add the Codex event-mapping driver
> - The benefit is a small reviewable process boundary before provider
behavior is added
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
`packages/paperclip-runner` Codex transport.
**Problem or motivation**
The runner needs a safe way to start and communicate with Codex
app-server. Unbounded lines, queued notifications, pending requests, and
inherited credentials would make that boundary unsafe.
**Proposed solution**
Add a JSON-RPC process transport with explicit byte and count limits,
sanitized environment construction, process-group metadata,
server-request handling, redacted diagnostics, and deterministic
closure.
**Alternatives considered**
Adding transport and the full Codex driver in one change would create a
much larger review surface. This pull request isolates the child-process
boundary.
**Roadmap alignment**
This supports the Codex-first experimental runner. It does not enable
the runner adapter.
## What Changed
- Added bounded JSON-RPC request and notification queues.
- Added malformed-message and oversized-line fail-closed behavior.
- Added sanitized Codex environment construction.
- Added process-group tracking and deterministic shutdown.
- Added redacted diagnostics and server-request replies.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:typescript`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- The focused transport test has 6 passing cases.
## Risks
The main risk is child-process cleanup. Tests cover closure, pending
request rejection, queue bounds, process metadata, and malformed input.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5.6 and repository tool use.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Dotta
Dotta
Nicky Leach
