* origin/master:
fix(onboarding): preserve draft through company refetch (#12735)
feat(codex-local): give each Codex account its own home and path secret (#12709)
feat(claude-local): add Claude Fable 5.1 support (#12730)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Onboarding creates an organization in the browser.
> - The browser keeps onboarding drafts for the same origin.
> - A new data directory does not clear that browser data.
> - The organization create request refreshes the company list.
> - The old gate unmounted the live wizard during that refresh.
> - This pull request keeps the wizard mounted after its first draft
check.
> - The customer can continue to the agent step after the organization
is created.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No matching public issue was found. Related earlier fix: Refs #12667.
**What happened?**
A local canary install could create an organization through the API and
then return the browser to an empty organization-name screen.
**Expected behavior**
The wizard must continue to the agent step after it creates the
organization.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Keep a Paperclip onboarding draft in the browser.
2. Run npx paperclipai@canary onboard with a new data directory.
3. Open /onboarding.
4. Enter an organization name and select Continue.
**Paperclip version or commit**
2026.902.0-canary.7. The fix is based on current master.
**Deployment mode**
Local trusted mode through the Paperclip CLI.
**Install method**
npx package install.
**Agent adapter(s) involved**
Not adapter-specific.
**Database mode**
Embedded PostgreSQL.
## What Changed
- Keep the onboarding wizard mounted after its first successful draft
ownership check.
- Keep a failed ownership check retryable, so a later verified fetch
restores the saved draft.
- Add component, source E2E, and published-canary coverage for the
retained-draft refetch case.
## Verification
- Confirmed that the new canary scenario fails against
2026.902.0-canary.7 before this fix.
- pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/OnboardingWizard.test.tsx
- PAPERCLIP_E2E_PORT=3245 pnpm exec playwright test --config
tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts tests/e2e/onboarding.spec.ts
--reporter=line
- pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck
- pnpm check:token-gates
## Risks
Low risk. The initial ownership check still waits for a fresh company
list. A later successful retry can restore a retained draft. Later
background refetches preserve live wizard state.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. Reasoning, tool use, code editing, terminal
execution, and browser testing were used. The execution environment does
not expose a context-window size.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used with version and capability
details
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the bug issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the control plane for companies that use AI agents for
work
> - Local adapters connect Paperclip agents to provider command line
tools
> - The Codex adapter stores login data in a shared company home
> - A shared home cannot keep credentials for more than one Codex
account
> - This pull request gives each account a safe home and a matching
company secret
> - The benefit is that one company can use multiple Codex accounts at
the same time
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Problem or motivation**
A company can hold only one Codex subscription credential because device
login uses one shared home. A second account cannot log in without
replacing or conflicting with the first credential.
**Proposed solution**
This change validates the vendor account identifier, stores each
credential in its own home, and creates a company secret that points to
that home. Repeat login calls return success when the matching secret
already exists.
**Roadmap alignment**
The change supports the roadmap goal for centrally managed secrets with
scoped access and audited resolution.
**Additional context**
The security review returned approve with no blocking finding. The
branch adds shared account-handle validation and tests for device login
and the Codex local adapter.
## What Changed
- Add strict allowlist validation for Codex account handles.
- Store each Codex account credential in a separate home under the Codex
cache root.
- Verify that the resolved account home stays inside the cache root.
- Create the `CODEX_HOME_<handle>` company secret for each account.
- Keep repeat and concurrent login calls safe and idempotent.
- Add shared helper and route, adapter, and validation tests.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-codex-local test` passes with 343
tests.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server test
src/__tests__/agent-device-login-routes.test.ts` passes with 25 tests.
- The adapter suite passes with 23 tests.
- The shared package and Codex adapter typechecks pass.
- Continuous integration must pass on every check before merge.
## Risks
The account handle becomes part of a directory path and secret name. The
strict allowlist and root containment check reduce path traversal risk.
Existing single-account homes remain unchanged unless a new device login
creates an account-specific home.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5 (exact runtime model ID: gpt-5), with tool use and code
execution. The runtime context window is not exposed in this run.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (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
- [ ] 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 Claude local adapter lets operators select a Claude model for an
agent.
> - Claude Fable 5.1 was absent from the adapter model lists.
> - The adapter runtime also used a Claude Code build that rejected
Fable 5.1.
> - This pull request adds the direct Anthropic ID and the AWS Bedrock
inference profile ID.
> - It also updates the Claude ACP runtime and keeps the Paperclip usage
and isolation patches.
> - The benefit is that operators can select and run Claude Fable 5.1
through the Claude adapter.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #8810. That issue covers related model ID handling. This change
does not change provider-prefixed model IDs.
**Agent or provider**
Claude Code through the built-in `claude_local` adapter. The requested
model is Claude Fable 5.1.
**Why this adapter is useful**
Operators can use Fable 5.1 without entering an undocumented model ID.
The configured model also reaches both supported Claude execution lanes.
**How the agent is invoked**
The CLI lane sends `--model claude-fable-5-1`. The ACP lane sends
`ANTHROPIC_MODEL=claude-fable-5-1` to
`@agentclientprotocol/claude-agent-acp`.
**Are you willing to implement it?**
Yes. This pull request includes the implementation and tests.
**Additional context**
Claude Code 2.1.232 rejected Fable 5.1 and required version 2.1.251 or
newer. ACP package 0.73.0 includes Claude Code 2.1.257. The update keeps
Paperclip's usage metadata and isolated-context behavior.
## What Changed
- Added `claude-fable-5-1` to the direct Claude fallback list.
- Added `us.anthropic.claude-fable-5-1` to the AWS Bedrock list.
- Kept the existing default model at the first position in each list.
- Updated the Claude ACP dependency from 0.70 to 0.73.
- Carried the Paperclip usage and isolated-context changes into the 0.73
patch.
- Added a Claude Code 2.1.251 minimum-version preflight for Fable 5.1
when using the standard `claude` executable, surfaced in both adapter
Test and execution. Explicit custom wrappers retain their existing
compatibility contract.
- Kept local adapter Tests from executing caller-selected binaries: when
runtime `PATH` selects a different Claude executable than the trusted
probe, the Test warns and defers the authoritative version check to
execution instead of approving or rejecting the alternate installation.
- Added tests for model listing, discovery deduplication, Bedrock
filtering, model pass-through in both execution lanes, old-CLI rejection
before launch, custom-wrapper compatibility, and local runtime-PATH
mismatch handling.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-claude-local typecheck`
- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/execute.remote.test.ts
packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/test.remote.test.ts
packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/test.probe.test.ts
packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/acp.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/adapter-models.test.ts` (72 tests passed)
- `node --test scripts/acpx-patch-packaging.test.mjs` (13 tests passed)
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- A local Paperclip agent run completed with `usageJson.model` set to
`claude-fable-5-1` through ACP 0.73.0 and its bundled Claude Code
2.1.257.
- `pnpm test:run` completed 5,638 passing tests and 24 skipped tests. It
also found 24 failures in unrelated workspace-runtime,
path-canonicalization, and runtime-exposure tests on macOS with Node 26.
These failures do not touch this diff. Clean pull request CI is the
final full-suite gate.
## Risks
- The ACP dependency update can change Claude runtime behavior outside
model selection. Focused ACP tests, the full typecheck, the production
build, and a real local Fable run reduce this risk.
- The 0.73 patch must stay aligned with the installed ACP version.
Dependency-resolution CI verifies the manifest and patch pair.
- Fable 5.1 adds a short `claude --version` preflight to standard
CLI-lane Tests and runs. The result is intentionally not cached so an
in-place Claude Code upgrade takes effect without restarting Paperclip.
Explicit custom wrappers are not version-probed because their output and
compatibility contract can differ from the standard executable.
- Local Tests preserve the existing deny-by-default probe boundary and
do not execute a binary selected by caller-controlled `PATH`. A
mismatched runtime binary produces an explicit warning without blocking
an otherwise valid setup; execution independently validates the actual
runtime-selected CLI before launch.
- The AWS Bedrock identifier differs from earlier IDs because Fable 5.1
has no `-v1` suffix. The model-list test locks this exact value.
- There is no schema change or migration.
> 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: OpenAI. Model: GPT-5 Codex. The host did not expose a more
specific model ID or context-window size. Capabilities used: agentic
reasoning, repository editing, shell execution, web research, and local
runtime 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 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>
Takes the four tenant onboarding steps to the design, and makes the model
choice explicit.
**Nothing is preselected on the connect step.** It arrived with a source
already chosen, which made the row read as a confirmation rather than a
question and let a customer pass the step having touched none of it. The
step now opens unanswered and cannot advance until a source is selected in
the visible row.
Two defects fell out of that, both found by Greptile in review:
- A saved draft can name an adapter the row does not show — one the registry
dropped, or one in the advanced list. The gate asked `sourcePicked`, which
only means "a draft named something", so Next stayed live on a step that
had visibly asked nothing and would hire against the hidden name. It now
asks `sourceSelected`, read off the visible row, and the snap that replaces
an unofferable adapter clears the pick rather than presenting its
replacement as chosen.
- Cmd+Enter bypassed that gate entirely, because the condition was written
out twice and drifted. Both paths now ask one predicate.
Also: selection is a fill rather than a border; the input canvas opens only
for a chosen source; the close control is gone from every step (nothing
downstream of the connect step works until a model is connected); the arc
draws to the design's 424px column with a filled 44px name field; the CTA
reads "Next" through the arc and "Get started" at the end; the login spinner
reads "Preparing..."; the OAuth panels number their fields and show the URL
above the code.
Storybook: the arc stories waited for a button named "Connect" and had been
silently rendering the wrong step since the CTA was renamed. They now wait on
the destination heading. Three e2e specs had the same fault and now select a
source before advancing.
One test was removed rather than replaced — `hydrates again when the same
company comes back through onboarding` drove the close control, and three
substitutes each passed against a wizard with the behaviour deleted. The
reason is recorded where it stood.
Known and not fixed here: SidebarCompanyMenu opens the wizard at step 1 for
"create a new organization", and with no exit an existing user who changes
their mind is trapped.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The Apps subsystem gives humans and agents governed access to
external tools.
> - The current connection flow hides Apps behind an experimental gate
and repeats setup text.
> - Google sharing choices and generic MCP permissions do not use one
consistent opening model.
> - Self-hosted installs also need a safe default origin for managed
OAuth without a manual config file.
> - This pull request makes Apps available, simplifies connection setup,
and applies one governed permissions model.
> - The benefit is a shorter connection flow that works on a clean
self-hosted install.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
This improves the Apps connection setup flow, managed Google connection
flow, generic MCP connection flow, navigation, and runtime origin
discovery.
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting. This changes `ui/`, `server/`, `packages/shared/`,
connector documentation, and browser tests.
**Current behavior**
Apps require an experimental switch. Setup pages repeat titles and
explanatory copy. Connection names require manual input. Google
credential sharing does not always offer both personal and organization
access. Generic MCP providers do not start with the same permission
choices. Managed OAuth needs a public URL setting even when the request
already has a safe HTTPS origin.
**Proposed behavior**
Apps are available by default. Setup asks only for required permissions
and sharing choices. Paperclip creates conflict-free connection names.
Google apps and generic MCP providers use the same human and agent
access model. Managed OAuth derives a validated same-origin HTTPS URL
when no explicit public URL is set.
**Reason and benefit**
A clean self-hosted install can connect a managed Google app without
hidden setup. Humans can share a service account with their
organization. The shorter flow reduces duplicated choices and setup
errors.
**Breaking changes**
The Apps experimental switch is removed. Existing connection APIs remain
compatible. New connections can receive a numeric suffix when a name
already exists.
No duplicate or related public issue was found.
## What Changed
- Removed the Apps experimental gate and the breadcrumb that leaves the
Apps section.
- Simplified all connection setup pages and moved optional provider
requirements into one small link.
- Added consistent human and agent access choices for Google apps,
Zapier, and generic MCP connections.
- Added organization sharing to Google Workspace credentials while
keeping personal access available.
- Generated connection names automatically and resolved name conflicts
with numeric suffixes.
- Derived a validated public HTTPS origin from the request for
config-free managed OAuth.
- Updated connector contracts, tests, browser coverage, and authoring
documentation.
## Verification
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/generic-mcp-connection.test.ts` (273 passed)
- Targeted UI/service regression suite (308 passed)
- Six targeted Playwright connection journeys on a fresh onboarding
instance (6 passed)
- Fresh-install browser proof through Tailscale HTTPS: enrolled with
Paperclip Cloud, connected managed Google Drive, and completed a real
read operation.
- [Exact-head CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33669760711):
all 23 matrix jobs passed, including build, typecheck, server,
serialized, canary, and all browser shards.
- Greptile 5/5 on `0ae2a859f269984ee950d0af231a5b09a06f3dfd`, with no
unresolved review threads.
## Risks
Apps are now visible to all operators. The removed experimental flag no
longer hides unfinished app definitions. Managed Google availability
still depends on the Cloud profile rollout and active instance
enrollment. Automatic conflict handling changes only the display name of
a newly conflicting connection.
> I checked [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md). MCP Tool Gateway and Apps are
shipped. Connected Apps is planned, and this change improves the
existing shipped connection flow.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, with reasoning, browser control, tool use, and code
execution.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The runner subsystem executes agent work across local and managed
provider backends.
> - The lower pull requests restore the task runtime, provider backends,
and managed-provider control plane.
> - The restored system needs repeatable full-stack checks before it can
ship safely.
> - Paid live checks also need clear access, cost, and secret controls.
> - This pull request adds acceptance, live evaluation, chaos, and
release gates for the restored runner stack.
> - The benefit is measurable runner parity with safer release
decisions.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting. This change covers runner tests, release workflows,
server contracts, and evaluation tools.
**Problem or motivation**
The runner stack did not have one complete acceptance surface for native
Codex, ACPX, Claude Managed, and AWS AgentCore. Release checks could
miss provider drift, task-view regressions, cost-policy errors, and
destructive cleanup errors.
**Proposed solution**
Add a 57-cell full-stack catalog, a Daytona image, and opt-in paid
workflows. Add live evaluation, chaos, cost-limit, redaction, and
release contract checks. Add AWS AgentCore infrastructure and guarded
provisioning tools. Keep the native runner experimental flag off by
default.
**Alternatives considered**
We considered manual smoke tests only. They do not give repeatable
evidence and they do not protect release branches. We also considered
one large pull request. The stacked pull requests keep each review below
the Greptile file limit.
**Roadmap alignment**
This work supports the shipped Cloud / Sandbox agents milestone and the
shipped Agent evals & feedback milestone in `ROADMAP.md`.
Related stack:
- #12699 adds managed provider backends and lifecycle support.
- #12691 adds qualified OpenCode and ACPX provider backends.
- #12685 restores task runtime rendering and steering.
## What Changed
- Add the runner full-stack harness with 57 catalog cells and 60 unit
tests.
- Add a Daytona runner image with digest-pinned base images and
base-aware image-content checks.
- Add guarded live evaluation and chaos workflows with a fixed
40-execution matrix; live and full-stack paid schedules now run only on
Sundays or by manual dispatch.
- Add in-flight reported-usage cost stops, post-turn cost caps,
exact-threshold failure classification, secret redaction, retry
classification, and actor authorization.
- Reattach stream and hard-budget listeners before restart-recovery
continuations so restored paid sessions cannot bypass in-flight
interruption.
- Preserve OpenCode usage and cost across tool-loop messages and turns
while exposing an explicit current-run delta to durable accounting.
- Keep PNG/WebM evidence in access-controlled artifacts only, reject
SVG, and publish only pruned inert structured per-attempt evidence.
- Add AWS AgentCore infrastructure, provisioning checks, and smoke
tools; reject unsafe model identifiers, require exact stack ownership
markers, and make failed-stack replacement explicit.
- Add evaluation-session contracts and capability reports.
- Add release workflow checks for immutable action pins, frozen
dependency installs, exact weekly cron shape, paid-run guards,
provider-secret isolation, and chaos test paths.
- Reauthorize the original and triggering numeric actor IDs as the first
step of every provider-secret job, including partial reruns, before
checkout or provider access.
- Give each full-stack matrix cell only its matching provider
credential, expose Daytona only to Daytona cells, and disable shared
dependency caches anywhere paid credentials or OIDC write access are
present.
- Protect the legacy manual E2E workflow with the same default-branch,
allowlist, environment, and per-job authorization boundary.
- Rotate live-eval candidates by week and retain 120 days of compatible
history so the seven-week trend window remains viable.
- Restore the root runner-acceptance commands and reconcile reported
snapshots,
raw receipts, and terminal usage without double counting or losing late
usage.
- Mark ACPX token deltas exact only when every budget field is present,
keep
cumulative cost/request authority separate, reject non-USD cost
labeling,
and include thought tokens in output-token budgets.
- Keep `enableNativeRunner` off by default. The acceptance harness
enables it only in its isolated test instance.
## Verification
Passed locally:
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner typecheck`
- `pnpm test:runner-acceptance:typecheck`
- `pnpm test:runner-acceptance` (19 tests)
- focused OpenCode proxy, driver, runnerd transport, live-session, and
turn-stream tests (106 tests)
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner exec vitest run
src/live/clean-room-server.test.ts` (22 tests)
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit` (62 tests)
- `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner
test:runner-workflow-evals` (22 tests)
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- `node --test
packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/aws-agentcore-provisioning.test.mjs`
(6 tests)
- `git diff --check`
- `cargo test --manifest-path
packages/paperclip-runner/runner/Cargo.toml -p paperclip-runner-core
--lib --locked` (161 tests)
- focused ACPX provider-event tests (10 tests)
- The rebased PR changes 92 files. `pnpm-lock.yaml` is unchanged.
I did not run paid live provider jobs or provision AWS resources. Those
checks need credentials and can create cost.
## Risks
The paid workflows can create provider cost. They require an allowlisted
original and triggering actor, the protected `runner-e2e-paid`
environment, explicit opt-in variables, and cost limits. The four
provider credentials exist only in that master-only environment, which
requires allowlisted reviewer approval and disables administrator
bypass; repository and organization Actions scopes contain no copies.
Provider usage arrives after a billable request, so the live guard
cannot prevent one request from crossing a threshold. It interrupts
immediately on the first reported threshold hit and permits no
continuation.
Visual evidence can contain secrets rendered as pixels. PNG/WebM remain
only in access-controlled workflow artifacts; SVG and per-attempt XML
are excluded, and S3/Pages receive a pruned structured dashboard.
The AWS scripts can create cloud resources. They use explicit commands,
least-privilege roles, KMS encryption, saved nonsecret metadata, and
explicit teardown.
This pull request does not enable the experimental native runner for
existing instances.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5. The model used extended reasoning, tool use,
code execution, and parallel subagents.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The task properties pane lets an operator change the settings for
one task.
> - The pane did not let an operator select the execution workspace for
the next run.
> - The existing workspace card had selection rules that another control
could copy by mistake.
> - This pull request adds one shared selection module and one compact
property picker.
> - The picker keeps the current workspace active until the next run.
> - The benefit is a clear workspace choice in the task properties pane
without an API change.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
ui/ — React + Vite board UI
**Problem or motivation**
An operator cannot set the execution workspace from the new task
properties pane. The existing task workspace card also owns selection
rules that a second control could copy and change over time.
**Proposed solution**
Add a compact workspace property picker. Put the shared selection and
update rules in one UI module. Show the picker only when isolated
workspaces and the project workspace policy are enabled.
**Alternatives considered**
The existing workspace card could remain the only control. This would
leave the new task interface incomplete. The picker could also copy the
card logic, but that would create two sources of truth.
**Roadmap alignment**
This is a small UI improvement for existing workspace controls. It does
not duplicate a planned item in `ROADMAP.md`.
Related workspace work: Refs #12682. That pull request changes runner
recovery and other workspace controls. It does not add this task
property picker.
## What Changed
- Added shared helpers for the current workspace selection and its issue
update payload.
- Updated the existing workspace card to use the shared helpers without
changing its project-default behavior.
- Added a gated workspace property picker with mode and workspace search
steps.
- Added unit and component tests for visibility, selection payloads,
search, and workspace reuse.
- Rebased onto the upstream native-run teardown fix so CI drains
background heartbeat writes before PostgreSQL cleanup.
## Verification
- `NODE_ENV=test pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/lib/issue-workspace-selection.test.ts
src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx
src/components/RoutineRunVariablesDialog.test.tsx` — 74 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm build` — passed.
- `NODE_ENV=test pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/services/native-runtime/native-question-bridge.test.ts` — 8 tests
passed on the rebased head. The upstream teardown drain prevents the
prior PostgreSQL cleanup deadlock.
## Risks
- Low risk. This is a gated UI-only change.
- A wrong selection payload could change the next workspace mode. Exact
payload tests cover every mode.
- The old card must keep its existing project-default payload. A
shared-helper test covers that payload.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex with GPT-5. The exact serving revision and context window
are not exposed. The agent used reasoning, tool use, and code execution.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (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 release pipeline keeps a canonical stable note at
`releases/vX.md` on master for every published stable.
> - Stable `2026.831.1` was a hotfix cut from a branch off
`v2026.831.0`, with its notes committed into the source tree.
> - In that path the workflow resolves notes in `source_tree` mode and
skips `canonicalize_stable_notes`, which is the job that normally copies
the note to master.
> - As a result `releases/v2026.831.1.md` exists on the tag but never
landed on master, so the stable-notes history has a gap.
> - This pull request adds the canonical copy of that note to master.
> - The benefit is a complete, consistent stable-notes history for
readers and for the release tooling.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No separate issue. Describing the gap in-PR with the docs template
fields:
**Issue type**
Documentation gap in the release-notes history on master.
**Where is the issue?**
`releases/` on the master branch — the file `releases/v2026.831.1.md` is
missing, although the stable `2026.831.1` release has already published.
**What's wrong?**
The `2026.831.1` patch was published from a hotfix branch whose notes
lived in the source tree (`source_tree` notes mode). That mode skips
`canonicalize_stable_notes`, the job that copies a stable's note onto
master. So every other stable has a `releases/vX.md` on master, but
`2026.831.1` does not.
**Suggested fix**
Add the canonical `releases/v2026.831.1.md` to master, identical to the
copy published with the tag.
## What Changed
- Add `releases/v2026.831.1.md` to master, copied verbatim from the
published `v2026.831.1` tag.
## Verification
- `diff` of the added file against `git show
v2026.831.1:releases/v2026.831.1.md` is empty (identical to the shipped
note).
- Docs-only change: no code, tests, or build outputs are affected.
## Risks
- Low risk. The change adds one Markdown file and touches no code,
schema, or configuration.
## Model Used
- Claude (Anthropic), model id `claude-fable-5` (Claude Fable 5), used
with tool use, shell commands, and file editing.
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The Paperclip Runner provides durable, provider-neutral agent
execution.
> - The current stack supports qualified local providers but omits the
managed provider paths from the integration branch.
> - Claude Managed Agents and AWS AgentCore need explicit profile
qualification, durable recovery, usage accounting, and cleanup controls.
> - This pull request adds those managed backends as the third part of
the Runner parity stack.
> - The benefit is managed execution without weakening the default-off
Runner rollout gate.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting: Runner, server orchestration, database profiles, CLI, and
adapter configuration UI.
**Problem or motivation**
The current Runner stack cannot select or execute the managed Claude
Agents API or AWS Bedrock AgentCore Harness backends. It also lacks
qualified profile storage and recovery checks for those remote
resources.
**Proposed solution**
Add qualified managed and remote profiles, API and CLI management, exact
provider selection, durable lifecycle handling, cumulative usage
accounting, bounded cleanup, and retention acknowledgement. Keep
`enableNativeRunner` default-off.
**Alternatives considered**
A direct copy of the old integration branch was rejected because its
provider contracts, model values, credential flow, and migration history
no longer match the current base. A single large parity pull request was
also rejected because stacked review keeps each subsystem bounded.
**Roadmap alignment**
This continues the existing Runner architecture and rollout work. It
does not introduce a separate execution system.
**Additional context**
This pull request is based on the merged #12691 and #12685 stack. It
also closes the delayed security-review findings reported on #12691 by
binding qualified ACPX and OpenCode launch artifacts to the bytes
actually executed. A GitHub search for managed agent, AgentCore, and
Claude managed work found no duplicate public issue or pull request.
## What Changed
- Add Claude Managed Agents and AWS AgentCore provider executors to
runnerd.
- Add qualified managed and remote profile storage, routes, OpenAPI
contracts, CLI commands, and migration 0237.
- Validate profile ownership, enabled state, exact qualified revision,
model, agent version, and secret binding before persistence and
recovery.
- Persist durable provider session and owned skill state for
restart-safe cleanup.
- Reconcile uncertain create responses and delete remote sessions before
owned skills.
- Track cumulative provider usage and enforce positive session spend
caps.
- Recover interrupted AgentCore usage at the next turn boundary by
charging the prior invocation ceiling exactly once; keep the session
gated until an explicit monotonic budget raise.
- Isolate AgentCore AWS configuration from host profiles and
credential-process/SSO configuration while preserving workload identity.
- Require OpenCode 1.18.17 and fixed build-owned provider-pack artifact
paths; remove the ambient executable override.
- Snapshot and content-verify ACPX and OpenCode commands, scripts, and
provider executables before launch. Linux executes sealed inherited
descriptors; macOS uses authenticated private snapshots with retry-safe
rematerialization at the spawn boundary.
- Persist canonical ACPX and OpenCode launch-profile digests, reject
drift across fresh recovery, and make recovery failures sticky.
- Close and journal unsafe ACPX active-turn recovery before any provider
bootstrap or reconnect.
- Add managed provider fields to the Runner configuration UI and
permission projection.
- Preserve the default-off `enableNativeRunner` experimental flag.
## Verification
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- Focused managed server, database, CLI, Runner TypeScript, Rust,
Claude, AgentCore, ACPX, OpenCode, process-supervisor, and
durable-recovery tests passed.
- `cargo test -p paperclip-runner-core --lib --locked` (160 tests)
- `cargo check --workspace --all-targets --locked`
- Native Codex integration tests passed (60 tests); native provider
tests passed (7 tests); server native-runtime tests passed (87 tests).
- Verified-launch replacement, nested-spawn retry, exact-version,
profile-drift, sticky-failure, and no-bootstrap active-recovery tests
passed.
- `git diff --check`
- The PR changes 91 files. `pnpm-lock.yaml` is unchanged. The Rust
workspace lockfile adds the approved `rustix` dependency used for safe
descriptor handling while `#![forbid(unsafe_code)]` remains enabled.
## Risks
- The provider APIs can change while they are in beta. Exact
qualification and fail-closed recovery checks limit drift.
- Remote cleanup can fail after a partial create. Durable ownership
inventories and retry-safe deletion preserve recovery state.
- Migration 0237 adds profile tables. The generated migration and
snapshot pass the repository migration checks.
- Managed execution can incur provider cost. Positive default spend caps
and explicit retention acknowledgement limit accidental use.
- An interrupted AgentCore invocation without final metadata is
conservatively charged to its active session ceiling. This can overstate
cost, but cannot undercount it; later work requires an explicit budget
increase.
- Linux qualified launches use sealed memory descriptors. macOS lacks
executable-descriptor APIs, so the runner uses owner-only private
snapshots and minimizes linked-path lifetime; hostile same-UID processes
remain outside the documented local-host trust boundary.
- The global Runner feature remains default-off.
> 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 tool use, code execution, and subagent review.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Paperclip Runner is the experimental native runtime for governed
agent work.
> - The runtime contracts already describe Codex, OpenCode, and ACPX
providers.
> - The merged control plane still rejected OpenCode and ACPX for new
runner agents.
> - Runnerd also selected only the Codex provider implementation.
> - This pull request activates the qualified OpenCode and ACPX paths
from the form to runnerd.
> - The benefit is one durable runner path with provider-specific
permissions and recovery.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12685
**Subsystem affected**
This change affects the runner package, server orchestration, adapter
configuration, and UI configuration.
**Problem or motivation**
Paperclip Runner stores provider contracts for OpenCode and ACPX. New
agents cannot select those providers. Runnerd cannot execute those
stored provider descriptors. The UI also shows only Codex.
**Proposed solution**
Accept the qualified OpenCode 1.18.17 profile and the fixed ACPX Claude
and Codex profiles. Route them through runnerd. Keep provider selection,
model selection, permissions, credentials, events, and recovery inside
closed provider-specific boundaries.
**Alternatives considered**
One option was to keep the contracts dormant. That option leaves stored
configuration and runtime behavior out of sync. Another option was to
enable every ACPX agent. That option is not safe because Pi does not yet
have the same verified launch path.
**Roadmap alignment**
This change supports the completed cloud and sandbox agent milestone. It
also supports self-healing runs and governed agent execution. It does
not add a new roadmap surface.
## What Changed
- Add one server profile resolver for Codex, OpenCode, and qualified
ACPX descriptors.
- Keep `adapterConfig` as the provider and permission authority for
fresh runs.
- Add Paperclip Runner provider, ACPX agent, and provider-specific
permission controls to the UI.
- Reset the model to a compatible qualified value when the provider
changes.
- Route Codex, OpenCode, and ACPX through the durable runnerd provider
selector.
- Add a durable ACPX executor with bounded state, recovery, events, tool
receipts, and identity checks.
- Remove Codex labels from OpenCode events, results, evidence, and
recovery diagnostics.
- Pass only provider-specific credential names to child processes.
- Keep ACPX Pi unavailable and reject it before process launch.
- Keep the existing Paperclip Runner experimental flag unchanged.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/paperclip-runner/src/backends/native-backend-factory.test.ts
packages/paperclip-runner/src/live/runnerd-codex-transport.test.ts
packages/adapters/codex-local/src/ui/build-config.test.ts
ui/src/adapters/codex-local/config-fields.test.tsx
server/src/__tests__/adapter-registry.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/adapter-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/agent-adapter-validation-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts
server/src/services/native-runtime/runtime-mode.test.ts
server/src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.test.ts
server/src/services/heartbeat-runner-provider-config.test.ts`
- The focused TypeScript, server, and UI suites passed 274 tests.
- `cargo test -p paperclip-runner-core --test native_provider_backend`
- The executable native provider integration suite passed 4 tests.
- `cargo test -p paperclip-runner-core --lib`
- The Rust unit suite passed 91 tests.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `pnpm build`
- `git diff --check codex/runner-parity-task-runtime...HEAD`
## Risks
- This changes provider process selection and durable recovery. The
experimental flag still gates every fresh Paperclip Runner run.
- OpenCode requires a model in `provider/model` form and stays pinned to
version 1.18.17.
- ACPX accepts only exact Claude and Codex profile versions and models.
Pi stays unavailable.
- ACPX steering stays unavailable and reports that limit through the
driver capabilities.
- Child processes receive explicit environment allowlists. They do not
inherit the full server environment.
- This pull request has no database migration.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, with tool use, code execution, and subagent review.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [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 task view shows a running agent and lets an operator guide that
agent.
> - The merged runner stack lost parts of the accepted task experience.
> - Native event errors could hide current reasoning from the operator.
> - Queued message steering had no server route on `master`.
> - This pull request restores the task-runtime behavior and keeps the
runner experimental gate.
> - The benefit is a visible and steerable native run with durable
fallback behavior.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
The task view could stop showing current runner reasoning. The steering
action also failed because the server route was absent. Runner
instruction files were not declared as supported.
**Expected behavior**
The task view must show current provider activity. It must use the live
log when durable native events are empty or unavailable. The operator
must be able to steer a queued message into the active native turn.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Enable the Paperclip Runner experimental setting.
2. Start a native runner task.
3. Open the task view while the run emits reasoning.
4. Queue a message and select the steering action.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The regression reproduces on `24a674f8858060e77ea1beb50689d26473e91431`.
**Additional context**
Related closed work: Refs #12592.
## What Changed
- Restored the queued-comment steering route for active native sessions.
- Added durable and queue-bound steering acknowledgements for safe
retries.
- Restored runner instruction bundle support.
- Added live-log fallback when native events are empty or unavailable.
- Restored the compact live reasoning ticker in the task view.
- Added a visible temporary-unavailable state when both activity sources
fail.
- Kept the unified Paperclip Runner experimental gate unchanged.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `pnpm build`
- Seven focused test files passed with 140 tests.
- The final steering regression file passed with 12 tests.
- The broad local test run reached unrelated workspace, port, and shared
database failures. The changed-area tests remained green.
## Risks
- The steering route changes queue and run records in one transaction.
Tests cover stale targets, unavailable sessions, lost responses, and
wrong-queue acknowledgements.
- Native events remain the primary transcript source. The live log is
used only when event data is absent or its poll fails.
- The experimental gate still hides and rejects the runner when the
setting is off.
> 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 tool use, code execution, and subagent review.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [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 — no
documentation change is required for this regression repair
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Paperclip runs agents through provider-specific adapters in local
and remote environments
> - A remote Grok run can refresh its credential inside its sandbox
> - The host copy can become stale when teardown discards that refreshed
credential
> - This pull request copies the refreshed credential back through a
locked, fail-closed teardown path
> - The benefit is that later Grok runs can use the refreshed host
credential without another login
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs: #12618
**Agent or provider**
Grok local adapter.
**Why this adapter is useful**
A remote Grok run can refresh its access token during a run. Copying the
refreshed credential back to the host keeps later runs ready to use.
**How the agent is invoked**
Paperclip invokes the Grok local adapter through its remote subscription
run path. The adapter stages the company Grok home as a sandbox asset.
The change adds a copy-out step on the teardown path.
## What Changed
- `grok-auth-merge-decision.cjs` adds a host predicate in its own
process. It compares the whole `<issuer>::<uuid>` identity key of the
two files. It reads `expires_at` as an ISO-8601 string, an epoch-seconds
number, or an epoch-milliseconds number. It exits 10 to use the source,
20 to keep the destination, 21 when the expiry shape is unreadable, and
22 when the source expiry sits more than 400 days after the host clock.
It fails closed in every unclear case: an unusable side, a different
identity, an absent expiry, a tie, an unreadable expiry, and an
implausible expiry all keep the destination.
- `grok-auth-merge-decision.ts` adds a wrapper that runs the predicate
and maps the exit code to a typed result.
- `grok-auth-copyback.ts` adds `copyBackGrokAuth({ hostHomeDir,
readSandboxAuth, log, env })`. It locks on `hostHomeDir` with
`withDirectoryMergeLock`, stages the sandbox bytes into a private `0600`
temporary file, runs the predicate, and installs the file with an atomic
rename in the same directory. It keeps no backup of the displaced
credential. It leaves no temporary file on the success path, the keep
path, or an error path. On an error it logs the `errno` code only, then
re-throws.
- `execute.ts` adds a `restore` callback to the Grok `home` asset. The
callback takes the destination from
`resolveManagedGrokHomeDir(process.env, agent.companyId)`, never from
`env.GROK_HOME`. A copy-out failure does not fail the run.
- `package.json` updates the `build` script to copy
`grok-auth-merge-decision.cjs` into `dist/server/`, because `tsc` does
not copy a `.cjs` file.
**The credential shape this predicate reads**
A redacted sample of a real vendor credential answered four structural
questions. The answers hold no credential bytes, no account identifier,
no file path, and no timestamp value.
1. `expires_at` is present.
2. `expires_at` sits inside the value object, under the
`<issuer>::<uuid>` key. It is not a top-level field.
3. `expires_at` is an ISO-8601 string. It carries UTC time with a
trailing `Z` and six fractional-second digits.
4. A normal run rewrites `auth.json`. The value object carries a
`refresh_token` next to `expires_at`, so the client refreshes the access
token and rewrites the file.
## Verification
- [x] `pnpm vitest run packages/adapters/grok-local` — 114 tests in 12
files pass.
- [x] `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-grok-local typecheck` — clean.
- [x] `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-grok-local build` — succeeds,
and `dist/server/grok-auth-merge-decision.cjs` exists after the build.
- [x] Continuous integration is green on every check.
## Risks
The predicate keeps the host credential when identity, expiry, file
access, or freshness data is unclear. The copy-out path can log an error
and leave the run successful when it cannot install the refreshed
credential. The atomic rename and directory lock protect the host file
from partial writes and concurrent copy-out actions.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5, current deployment. The exact runtime version and context
window are not exposed to this agent. The model used tool calls and code
inspection.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (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 release process drafts stable notes under a beta-keyed path
during the soak and renames them to the versioned path after the stable
ships
> - Stable v2026.831.0 published, but its release run failed at the tag
push (workflows-permission error), so the automated canonicalize job
never ran
> - The canonical layout requires the notes at `releases/v2026.831.0.md`
> - This pull request performs the rename the skipped job would have
pushed
> - The benefit is that the repository returns to the canonical
release-notes layout
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Issue type**
Missing content
**Where is the issue?**
`releases/` — the stable notes for v2026.831.0 still live at the
beta-keyed path `releases/beta/v2026.828.0-beta.0.md`.
**What's wrong?**
The stable release run failed at the tag push, so the
`canonicalize_stable_notes` job was skipped and the rename branch was
never pushed. The published GitHub Release points at content that should
live at `releases/v2026.831.0.md`.
**Suggested fix**
`git mv releases/beta/v2026.828.0-beta.0.md releases/v2026.831.0.md`,
exactly as the workflow's canonicalize job does.
## What Changed
- Renamed `releases/beta/v2026.828.0-beta.0.md` to
`releases/v2026.831.0.md` (pure rename, no content changes)
## Verification
- `git show --stat` reports a 100% rename with no content delta
- The file matches the published GitHub Release body for v2026.831.0
## Risks
- Low risk: a pure file rename restoring the canonical layout.
## Model Used
- Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-fable-5` (Claude Fable 5),
extended thinking enabled, 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 (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
> - A cloud customer meets it as one walk that crosses two applications:
Cloud names the organization, then hands off to the tenant for the
agent, the model and the review
> - The tenant's progress strip counted only its own three steps, so the
count restarted at the crossing — four dots on the naming screen, then
three beginning again at one
> - The strip that spans the whole walk already existed and simply was
not chosen on that path, which made the walk read as two products rather
than one
> - This pull request picks the four-step strip when the run came from
Cloud, so the count runs 1, 2, 3, 4 straight through
> - The benefit is that the hand-off stops announcing itself
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The onboarding progress strip on a cloud tenant. It restarted its count
at the hand-off from Cloud, so a customer went from "1 of 4" to "1 of 3"
mid-walk.
**Subsystem affected**
Tenant onboarding wizard — `ui/src/components/OnboardingWizard.tsx`.
**Current behavior**
`showsAgentArcStepper` is `isAgentArcStep && entryStep >= 3`. Every run
entering on the agent step gets the three-step strip, including a cloud
tenant whose organization was named one screen earlier in Cloud.
**Proposed behavior**
A cloud tenant gets the four-step strip, positioned 2, 3 and 4. A
self-hosted run entering on the same step keeps three.
**Reason and benefit**
The count describes the walk the customer is on rather than the half of
it this application happens to render.
**Breaking changes**
None. No API or schema change; the self-hosted path is unchanged.
## What Changed
- Adds `enteredFromCloud`, read from `enableManagedSandboxOnly` — the
cloud-tenant shape the connect step already resolves its login
environment through.
- Excludes that case from `showsAgentArcStepper`, so it falls to the
existing four-step strip. `ONBOARDING_STEP_LABELS` and
`onboardingStepPositionFor` already produce 2, 3 and 4; neither needed
changing.
- Widens the experimental-settings query from step 4 to steps 3–5, so
the strip can read it on every step of the arc.
- Adds tests for both strip lengths.
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run src/components src/adapters storybook` in `ui/` —
2309 tests pass.
- `pnpm typecheck` in `ui/` — clean.
- Storybook, `Onboarding/Agent arc`: its fixture is cloud-shaped, so the
three steps now announce "Step 2 of 4", "Step 3 of 4" and "Step 4 of 4"
with four dots.
- The two new tests fail without the change — the cloud case reports
`expected 'Step 1 of 3' to be 'Step 2 of 4'`.
## Risks
- **The two runs entering on the agent step are genuinely different, and
only one signal separates them.** A cloud tenant walked a naming screen
in Cloud; a self-hosted company with no agents walked nothing before
this. Getting it backwards would either restart the count or credit a
step nobody walked. Both directions are now tested, which they were not
before — the suite covered `agentArcStepFor` but nothing asserted which
strip renders.
- `enableManagedSandboxOnly` is being read as a proxy for "came from
Cloud". It is the same signal the connect step already trusts for its
environment, so this does not introduce a new dependency, but it is
inference rather than a fact passed at the hand-off. If the step count
ever needs to vary, Cloud should seed the position explicitly instead.
- The widened query means the value can be unresolved on first paint,
and the strip briefly renders three dots before settling to four. The
query key is shared and usually already cached, so this is rare rather
than routine — worth watching on staging, and the fix if it shows is to
hold the strip until the value resolves.
- Cosmetic only. Nothing here changes which steps run, what they
collect, or where the walk goes.
## Model Used
Claude Opus 5 (`claude-opus-5`), via Claude Code with extended thinking,
tool use, and browser-driven verification of the rendered strip.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
<!-- This pull request uses ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical English. -->
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The issue thread controls plan review and agent work modes.
> - A user can accept a full plan or confirm a smaller checkbox action.
> - Only full plan acceptance must start automatic agent work.
> - The current transition did not check the interaction kind.
> - This pull request limits the transition to an accepted plan
confirmation.
> - The benefit is a safe and clear start of agent work after plan
approval.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
An accepted confirmation that targeted a plan could change an issue from
planning mode to standard mode. This included a checkbox confirmation. A
checkbox action is not approval of the full plan.
**Expected behavior**
Only acceptance of a current full-plan confirmation starts automatic
agent work. Other interaction kinds and rejected confirmations keep the
current work mode.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Put an issue in planning mode.
2. Create a checkbox confirmation that targets the current plan
revision.
3. Accept the checkbox confirmation.
4. Observe that the issue enters standard mode before this fix.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The problem was present on `master` before this change.
**Deployment mode**
The problem is in the core server logic and is not deployment-specific.
## What Changed
- Require a full `request_confirmation` interaction before plan
acceptance starts automatic work.
- Add service tests for acceptance, rejection, stale interaction kinds,
and unchanged standard-mode behavior.
- Check the route activity log for the planning-to-standard mode change.
- Document the plan acceptance transition in the V1 contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interactions-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts` passes 140
tests.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passes.
- `pnpm build` passes.
- `pnpm test:run` was also started. Unrelated workspace-runtime tests
failed because fixed local runtime ports were occupied or offset on the
shared host. The same failures reproduce alone. The changed test files
pass alone.
## Risks
- Risk is low. The change adds one interaction-kind guard to the
existing transition.
- A full accepted plan confirmation still changes planning mode to
standard mode and an eligible review issue to todo in one transaction.
- Checkbox confirmations, questions, rejection, and standard-mode issues
keep their previous 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 with GPT-5, reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The
runtime does not expose the exact model suffix or context window.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip manages agents that use different model providers and
adapters.
> - Paperclip must keep agent execution rules clear and predictable.
> - The cheap-model profile added a second execution mode across
adapters, task recovery, APIs, and the UI.
> - That mode increased configuration and recovery complexity.
> - This pull request removes the cheap-model profile as a product
feature.
> - The benefit is one model-selection path for normal work and recovery
work.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
This change simplifies model selection across agent configuration, task
execution, recovery, and adapter capabilities.
**Current behavior**
Paperclip exposes cheap-model profiles in adapter metadata, agent
runtime configuration, task overrides, recovery rules, APIs, and the
board UI. Recovery work can select a different model profile from the
agent's configured model.
**Proposed behavior**
Paperclip uses the agent's configured model for normal work and recovery
work. Status-only recovery stays limited to coordination work. The API
rejects legacy model-profile configuration. A migration removes stored
model-profile values from existing agent, issue, and historical revision
records.
**Reason and benefit**
One model path reduces configuration, API, UI, and recovery complexity.
It also prevents status recovery from becoming a separate product-level
model-routing feature.
**Breaking changes**
This change removes model-profile fields and adapter capability
metadata. Existing stored model-profile values are removed by an
idempotent migration. The validators reject new legacy profile values
with clear errors.
## What Changed
- Removed model-profile types, adapter capabilities, API fields, and
model selection logic.
- Removed cheap-model controls from agent and task UI surfaces.
- Kept status-only recovery limited to coordination context while normal
continuations use the configured agent model.
- Added an idempotent migration that removes stored model-profile values
from agents, issues, and configuration revisions without changing issue
update timestamps.
- Updated tests and product documentation for the single-model behavior.
## Verification
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passes.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passes.
- `pnpm build` passes.
- `pnpm test:run` completed with 5,607 passing tests and 8
environment-sensitive failures in unrelated fixed-port and
database-deadlock suites. The same failures repeated in an isolated
rerun. CI is the final clean-room result.
## Risks
- This is an intentional breaking change for clients that send
model-profile fields.
- The migration changes legacy agent, issue, and configuration-revision
JSON. It is idempotent and preserves unrelated fields and issue update
timestamps.
- The change is cross-cutting because the removed feature existed in
adapters, shared contracts, the server, plugins, and the UI.
> 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`. Reasoning and tool use were enabled. The
runtime 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)
- [ ] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app that people use to manage AI agents
for work.
> - Instance settings control optional product features and developer
tools.
> - The experimental settings page mixed active experiments, internal
tools, and old recovery controls.
> - Some workspace links also used the selected company instead of the
workspace owner.
> - These problems made settings hard to scan and could send users to
the wrong company route.
> - This pull request removes old controls, groups developer settings,
and resolves workspace links from workspace data.
> - The benefit is a smaller settings surface and correct workspace
navigation.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
This improves the instance experimental settings page, task watchdog
controls, dependency wake recovery, and execution workspace routes.
**Current behavior**
The settings page shows old recovery controls and mixes product
experiments with internal developer settings. Task watchdogs require an
extra feature flag. Some direct workspace links use the current company
prefix instead of the company that owns the workspace.
**Proposed behavior**
Remove the old task recovery experiment and its unused API surface. Make
task watchdog controls available without the removed flag. Put worktree
execution and managed environment controls in the developer section.
Resolve direct workspace links from the workspace owner and reject a
company prefix that does not own the workspace.
**Reason and benefit**
The smaller settings page is easier to understand. The server keeps only
the dependency wake backstop that it still uses. Workspace links open
under the correct company route.
**Breaking changes**
This removes the experimental issue graph recovery preview and run
endpoints. It also removes the task watchdog feature flag. Task watchdog
data and dependency wake behavior remain available.
## What Changed
- Removed the old task watchdog and issue graph recovery feature flags.
- Removed the old issue graph recovery preview, run controls, API
contracts, and unused recovery implementation.
- Kept resolved dependency wakes as the scheduler backstop.
- Grouped product experiments and Paperclip developer settings on the
instance settings page.
- Made task watchdog controls available without an extra experimental
flag.
- Added owner-aware redirects and company checks for execution workspace
routes.
- Hid the false stopped-state badge while a workspace has no active
runtime state.
- Updated focused server and UI tests for the new behavior.
## Verification
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- `pnpm test:run` completed with 5,620 passing tests and four failures
in unchanged workspace runtime port tests. The same four failures repeat
when the two files run alone.
- The complete GitHub CI matrix passed, including all server, serialized
server, build, canary, and end-to-end jobs.
## Risks
- Clients that call the removed experimental recovery endpoints must
stop calling them.
- The route checks depend on workspace detail access. An unknown or
cross-company workspace returns the global not-found page.
- There are no database migrations, lockfile changes, workflow changes,
or design image changes.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5. The exact deployment ID and context window are
not exposed. Reasoning, tool use, and code 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>
Dotta
Dotta
Nicky Leach
Michael Nguyen
Tonio
Devin Foley
