## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agent runs execute inside sandbox environments. Sandbox provider
plugins (Daytona, Modal, exe.dev, and others) declare a JSON-Schema
`configSchema`. The Environment configuration form renders from that
schema.
> - The sizing and image fields open empty. Users must guess working
values. The Modal form cannot submit at all until the user types an app
name and an image by hand.
> - The form renderer already pre-fills every field that declares a
JSON-Schema `default`. The manifests do not use this mechanism for
sizing or image fields.
> - This pull request adds optional `default` values to the Daytona,
Modal, and exe.dev manifest schemas.
> - The benefit is a form that opens with known-good values. Users can
create a working environment without provider research.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Current behavior**
The Environment configuration form opens with empty sizing and image
fields for the Daytona, Modal, and exe.dev sandbox providers. Users must
find working values in provider documentation. Modal declares `appName`
and `image` as required with no default, so the form blocks submission
until the user invents both values.
**Proposed behavior**
The provider manifests declare JSON-Schema `default` values. The
existing form renderer pre-fills them:
- Daytona: CPU `4`, memory `4` GiB, disk `10` GiB, image
`daytonaio/sandbox:0.8.0`
- exe.dev: CPU `4`, memory `4GB`, disk `20GB`
- Modal: app name `paperclip`, image `node:22`
Secret-ref fields (API keys, tokens) get no defaults on purpose. The
form persists a raw string in a secret-ref field as a company secret on
save. A placeholder default would become a stored secret with a bogus
value. Each plugin test suite now guards this invariant.
**Reason and benefit**
New users can create a working sandbox environment without guessing. The
defaults stay optional: users can clear or change every value, and the
schema marks no new field as required. The Modal image default `node:22`
satisfies the sandbox runtime contract in `SANDBOX-REQUIREMENTS.md`
(`node`, `sh`, and `tar` on PATH).
**Subsystem affected**
Sandbox provider plugins (`packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/*`):
environment driver `configSchema` manifests.
**Breaking changes**
None. Defaults only seed the create-mode form. Saved environments keep
their stored config. E2B, Novita, Cloudflare, and Kubernetes manifests
do not change: E2B and Novita already default to their base templates,
and the Cloudflare bridge and Kubernetes cluster fields have no sensible
universal value.
## What Changed
- Add `default` values for `cpu`, `memory`, `disk`, and `image` in the
Daytona manifest. Trim the memory description to match.
- Add `default` values for `cpu`, `memory`, and `disk` in the exe.dev
manifest.
- Add `default` values for `appName` and `image` in the Modal manifest.
Extend the image description with the runtime-contract rationale.
- Add manifest tests in all three plugins: defaults match expected
values, defaults satisfy their own schema constraints, and no secret-ref
field declares a default.
- Bump plugin versions: daytona and modal `0.1.0` → `0.1.1`, exe-dev
`0.1.1` → `0.1.2`.
## Verification
- Run `pnpm test` in `packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/daytona`,
`.../modal`, and `.../exe-dev`. The new `* manifest form defaults`
suites pass.
- Run `./node_modules/.bin/tsc --noEmit` in each of the three packages.
Typecheck passes.
- Manual: rebuild the plugins (`pnpm build` in each package), let the
plugin dev-watcher refresh the manifest, then open Environments → New
environment. The Daytona form shows CPU 4, Memory 4, Disk 10, and image
`daytonaio/sandbox:0.8.0`. The Modal form shows `paperclip` and
`node:22`. The API key fields stay empty.
- Verified live on a local instance: the served `configSchema` in the
plugin registry carries the new defaults, and existing environments are
unchanged.
## Risks
- Low risk. The change touches only manifest schema metadata and tests.
No runtime code path changes.
- New environments created with untouched forms now request 4 CPU / 4
GiB / 10 GiB from Daytona instead of provider minimums. This can raise
cost per sandbox for users who previously saved empty fields.
- The Daytona image default pins `daytonaio/sandbox:0.8.0`. The default
needs a manual bump when Daytona ships new sandbox images.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- Claude Fable 5 (Anthropic, model ID `claude-fable-5`), via the Claude
Code CLI, with extended thinking and tool use.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [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
> - Sandbox-provider plugins (cloudflare, daytona, e2b, exe-dev,
kubernetes, modal, novita) and `plugin-workspace-diff` are published as
standalone npm packages, but during local dev they need the in-repo
`@paperclipai/plugin-sdk` symlinked in
> - Each of these plugins shipped a `postinstall` lifecycle script that
traversed *out* of its own package directory (`node
../../../../scripts/link-plugin-dev-sdk.mjs`) to do that linking
> - The publishable manifest is built by a `prepack` whitelist that
drops the `scripts` field, so npm consumers don't see the postinstall
today — but that safety property depends entirely on `prepack` running
on every publish. A publish that skips lifecycle scripts would ship a
tarball whose postinstall escapes its package directory at consumer
install time
> - This pull request removes the escape-the-package-dir lifecycle
script from every plugin source manifest and moves the dev linking to a
single root-level postinstall that iterates the excluded plugin
directories itself
> - The benefit is that plugin tarballs can no longer carry an
install-time script that reaches outside their own directory, regardless
of whether `prepack` runs
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
This is a follow-up hardening change flagged during review of the Novita
sandbox provider PR (#7595).
**Problem (security):** Excluded plugin packages each carried
`"postinstall": "node ../../../../scripts/link-plugin-dev-sdk.mjs"`. The
relative path traverses outside the package root. Today the published
manifest is sanitized by a `prepack` whitelist that drops `scripts`, so
consumers are unaffected in the normal publish path. The risk is that
this is a defense-in-depth gap: if a publish ever skips lifecycle
scripts (e.g. `npm publish --ignore-scripts` is *not* used, or a tool
publishes the raw manifest), the tarball would ship a postinstall that
runs out-of-tree code at the consumer's install time.
## What Changed
- Added a single root `package.json` `postinstall`: `node
scripts/link-plugin-dev-sdk.mjs`.
- Rewrote `scripts/link-plugin-dev-sdk.mjs` to iterate the excluded
plugin directories itself (`packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/*` + the
orchestration smoke example) instead of relying on each plugin to invoke
it from its own cwd. Preserves both prior behaviors: leave a real
installed SDK dir alone, and skip when already correctly symlinked
(idempotent).
- Removed `scripts.postinstall` from all 7 sandbox-provider plugins
(cloudflare, daytona, e2b, exe-dev, kubernetes, modal, novita).
- Removed `scripts.postinstall` from `plugin-workspace-diff` (a pnpm
workspace member — pnpm already links the SDK, so the script was a no-op
there).
## Verification
- `node scripts/link-plugin-dev-sdk.mjs` from repo root: links the SDK
into the excluded plugins and reports skipped (already-linked) dirs;
re-running is idempotent.
- `grep -r "link-plugin-dev-sdk" packages/plugins/*/package.json
packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/*/package.json` returns no matches —
no plugin source manifest references the linker any longer.
- All affected `package.json` files re-validated as parseable JSON.
## Risks
Low risk. Dev-only tooling: the linker only runs at the repo root during
local install and only touches `node_modules/@paperclipai/plugin-sdk`
symlinks inside excluded plugin dirs. No change to published plugin
behavior or runtime code. Worst case if the root postinstall failed to
run, local dev of an excluded plugin would not find the SDK symlink —
easily re-run manually.
## Model Used
Claude Opus (claude-opus-4-8), extended reasoning, with tool use / code
execution in an agentic coding harness.
## 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 OR (b) described the
issue in-PR following the relevant issue template
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable (added
`scripts/link-plugin-dev-sdk.test.js`, wired into
`test:release-registry`)
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots (N/A — no UI change)
- [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (N/A)
- [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 orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - Test infrastructure across server, ui, packages/* runs on Vitest
> - Dependabot opened a narrow bump (3.2.4 → 3.2.6), but the wider
workspace is on 3.2.4 and the major-version bridge to v4 needs a
coordinated change set across configs and tests
> - Staying on 3.x indefinitely leaves us behind on Vitest 4 (perf,
pool, and config improvements) and forces repeated patch-only dependabot
churn
> - This pull request upgrades Vitest to 4.1.8 across the workspace,
updates `server/vitest.config.ts` and `scripts/run-vitest-stable.mjs`
for the new API, and adjusts two UI tests for the new assertion
semantics
> - The benefit is a single, coherent Vitest 4 upgrade that supersedes
#7570 and gets us on the supported major line
## What Changed
- Bump `vitest` from `3.2.4` to `4.1.8` across root, `server`, `ui`, and
all `packages/*` (including plugin examples and sandbox providers)
- Update `server/vitest.config.ts` for Vitest 4 config surface
- Update `scripts/run-vitest-stable.mjs` to match the new runner
behavior
- Adjust `ui/src/components/CommentThread.test.tsx` and
`ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx` for Vitest 4 matcher/timing
semantics
- Refresh `pnpm-lock.yaml`
## Verification
- `pnpm install` resolves cleanly with the new lockfile
- `pnpm -w -r test` (server, ui, packages) runs under Vitest 4.1.8
## Risks
- Major-version Vitest bump: behavioral changes in pools, fake timers,
and matcher strictness can surface flake. Test config and the two UI
tests were updated to match v4 semantics; broader test runs should be
watched on CI before merge.
- Supersedes dependabot PR #7570 (3.2.4 → 3.2.6); that PR should be
closed.
## Model Used
- Claude (Anthropic) — `claude-opus-4-7`, extended thinking, tool use
enabled
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [ ] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Closes#7570
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through company-scoped
control-plane workflows and extensible runtime integrations.
> - Sandbox providers are part of that extension surface because they
let agents execute isolated work without baking each provider into the
core server.
> - Modal already offers managed sandboxes with filesystem, process,
timeout, and networking controls that map onto Paperclip's sandbox
provider contract.
> - The repo did not have a Modal provider plugin, so teams wanting
Modal-backed sandboxes had no first-party integration path.
> - This pull request adds a standalone
`packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/modal` plugin that implements the
provider contract, worker entrypoint, docs, and tests.
> - The benefit is that Modal can now be installed as a provider plugin
without expanding the core control-plane surface area.
## What Changed
- Added a new `packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/modal` package with
the plugin manifest, worker entrypoint, and exported plugin surface.
- Implemented Modal-backed sandbox lifecycle support for creation,
command execution, file operations, networking options, termination, and
metadata translation.
- Added focused Vitest coverage for config validation, env handling,
lifecycle flows, networking behavior, and error mapping.
- Documented installation, configuration, and usage requirements in the
plugin README.
- Removed misleading `MODAL_TOKEN_*` fallback behavior so authentication
relies on supported Modal credentials only.
## Verification
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm test:run`
- `pnpm build`
- `cd packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/modal && pnpm test`
## Risks
- Low to medium risk: this is isolated to a new plugin package, but
runtime behavior still depends on live Modal account credentials and
service-side sandbox semantics.
- Modal's current docs target a newer Node baseline than the repo
default, so the first live install should confirm credential loading and
sandbox startup behavior in a real Modal workspace.
- No UI or schema changes are included in this PR.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex via Paperclip `codex_local` agent (GPT-5-class Codex
coding model; exact backend model ID is not exposed by the runtime),
with tool use, shell execution, and code-editing capabilities 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Devin Foley