## 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.
> - Paperclip Runner needs repeatable evaluation contracts.
> - Evaluation code must stay separate from provider launch and
production orchestration.
> - Offline fixtures need stable compatibility, scoring, traceability,
and report rules.
> - Published Runner consumers need only the supported evaluation
contract surface.
> - This pull request adds offline evaluation tooling and a
workspace-private matrix kernel.
> - The benefit is deterministic evaluation without credentials or paid
provider calls.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #11297
This pull request extracts the offline evaluation unit from the earlier
aggregate Runner work.
## What Changed
- Add a workspace-private, provider-neutral evaluation matrix kernel.
- Add the public `@paperclipai/paperclip-runner/evals` compatibility and
native execution contracts.
- Add fail-closed runnerd artifact and protocol compatibility checks.
- Add deterministic workflow catalogs, scoring, traceability, and report
generation.
- Add sanitized Codex, OpenCode, and ACPX fixtures.
- Add package-boundary and clean-consumer checks.
- Add the eval package manifest to the Docker dependency stage.
- Add the generated protocol fixture digest without changing the
lockfile.
## Verification
GitHub Actions must run:
- Runner TypeScript and Rust type checks.
- Runner unit and protocol tests.
- Evaluation kernel tests.
- Workflow traceability checks.
- Clean-consumer and package-boundary checks.
- Repository test, type-check, build, policy, and security gates.
No local test command was run. The repository owner requested
GitHub-only verification.
## Risks
This is a large greenfield review surface with 51 files. The code does
not launch a live provider or load credentials. Package and protocol
drift fail closed. The workspace lockfile remains under the existing
CI-owned process.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with the GPT-5 agent model. The work used high reasoning,
repository inspection, tool use, and parallel code 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
- [ ] 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 runner package already provides the production protocol and
execution spine.
> - Contributors still need stable SDK surfaces, deterministic test
tools, and local inspection tools.
> - Those surfaces share generated contracts and must change as one
package boundary.
> - This pull request adds the package-local SDK, labs, examples, and
drift checks.
> - The benefit is a reviewable developer platform that does not change
application execution selection.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
`packages/paperclip-runner` — runner SDK, conformance tools, and
developer tooling.
**Problem or motivation**
The production runner spine is present, but package consumers cannot
build deterministic integrations, inspect sessions, or verify
provider-neutral behavior through supported surfaces.
**Proposed solution**
Add browser, React, standalone, live-session, scenario, conformance, and
evaluation surfaces. Add generated contract inventories and
package-local verification scripts. Keep production application routing
unchanged.
**Alternatives considered**
We considered splitting each generated catalog, SDK surface, and demo
into separate pull requests. Those changes share exports, fixtures, and
drift gates. Splitting them would create intermediate package states
that do not build.
**Roadmap alignment**
No overlapping item appears in `ROADMAP.md`. This work extends the
runner package that is already on `master`.
## What Changed
- Add browser, React, standalone, live-session, and issue-thread SDK
surfaces.
- Add deterministic mock control-plane, scenario, conformance, replay,
and evaluation tools.
- Add bounded Codex, OpenCode, and ACPX development transports and
fixtures.
- Keep deferred managed-provider execution fail-closed. Persisted
compatibility data remains readable.
- Add generated capability inventories with their source files and drift
checks.
- Add examples, package documentation, browser checks, and
clean-consumer checks.
- Preserve the reviewed protocol bounds, replay compatibility aliases,
process environment isolation, and semantic redaction limits.
- Update the ACPX package patch that the existing workspace patch
registry already tracks.
- Do not change `pnpm-lock.yaml`, repository workflows, server runtime
selection, or the application UI.
## Verification
GitHub Actions is the verification authority for this pull request. The
repository CI, package TypeScript and Rust checks, package tests,
generated-output drift checks, browser checks, security scans, and
Greptile review must pass on the exact head.
Local test suites were not run because this series uses parallel GitHub
Actions for verification.
## Risks
This is a large greenfield package change. The main risks are public
export drift, generated-output drift, and optional React consumer
compatibility. Package boundary checks, clean-consumer checks, and
browser tests cover those risks. Production adapter selection and server
execution are outside this pull request.
## Stack
1. **This PR:** runner SDK and developer tooling.
2. [Codex production server
integration](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12616).
3. [Provider-neutral task-thread
UI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12617).
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, high-reasoning mode, with tool use and code
execution.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the feature request
template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The Rust runner now admits ACPX sidecar frames only after transport,
scope, and payload validation
> - Valid payloads still contain provider-native runtime event shapes
> - Provider-native shapes must not cross the PRP boundary or diverge
from direct Codex task activity
> - This pull request maps the display-safe runtime subset into existing
provider-neutral event families
> - Stateful semantic-result, terminal, and reasoning-deduplication
behavior remains reserved for the later provider adapter
> - The benefit is a reviewable normalization boundary without selecting
ACPX in production
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12415
Refs #12414
## What Changed
- Normalize validated ACPX text, reasoning, plan, status, tool, notice,
and error updates into existing PRP activity families.
- Keep reasoning contents private while preserving a reasoning activity
boundary.
- Map plan entries, usage, review-mode status, and tool lifecycle into
bounded canonical payloads.
- Generate one shared ACPX sidecar event/classification contract for
TypeScript and Rust, with ASCII-only classification parity and bounded
kind/title fields.
- Preserve authoritative tool-call identity and classification even when
the aggregate native event exceeds the generic frame budget.
- Resolve display-only tool targets within the workspace under the
provider host's path semantics; reject raw, unmarked, absolute,
parent-traversing, URL-shaped, and unsafe drive-shaped values.
- Redact and digest retained tool output with the existing durable
policy.
- Ignore provider inventory status updates that have no user-facing
activity.
- Leave semantic results and `done` updates to the stateful adapter so
durable receipts and terminal events are not duplicated.
- Add cross-language and Rust coverage for every mapping family,
classifier parity, privacy, unsafe paths, redaction, bounded
titles/kinds, and oversized tool-call preservation.
- Document the normalization and display-path authorization boundary.
- Do not change dependencies, lockfiles, workflows, runnerd selection,
server behavior, UI, or migrations.
## Verification
- Replay base: `fe2ddfad2b5cb604b3244492257db0e6aec11d47` (`master`
after #12415 merged).
- Exact replay head: `b7f5588bf6e8e0f946ffa8869a3204c344808418`.
- Stable patch ID: `fda62c7c20afc5ef9c75d07f163a466db82efabd`, identical
to the prepared six-commit delta plus the focused oversized-tool-call
review fix.
- The exact delta is 14 files, 1,714 additions, and 60 deletions, all in
`packages/paperclip-runner`; it contains no lockfile, workflow, server,
UI, or migration change.
- Focused protocol-generation, TypeScript sidecar, Rust normalization,
package, repository, security, and Greptile checks: **PASSED** on the
replayed exact head. Full CI run `33361437835` completed 23/23 jobs
successfully, Greptile is exact-head 5/5, all security checks pass, and
no review threads remain unresolved.
- No local test result is claimed. GitHub Actions is the authoritative
verification environment for this replayed revision.
## Risks
- This code controls what provider activity is retained and displayed,
so malformed native values must not bypass the earlier decoder.
- The function contract requires an already scope-checked and
payload-validated runtime event; the future adapter must preserve that
order.
- Tool classification and identity are security-relevant authorization
inputs and remain explicit even when optional aggregate display data is
dropped for bounds.
- Repeated reasoning chunks require stateful suppression. This mapper
exposes a privacy-safe start boundary and the later adapter owns
per-turn deduplication.
- Semantic results and terminal authority intentionally produce no
activity here; the later adapter must commit them through the durable
operational paths.
- The package exports new generated and Rust normalization surfaces, but
no production path invokes them in this pull request.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex with GPT-5.6, agentic reasoning, tool use, and code
execution.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The runner maps provider questions to one versioned Paperclip
contract.
> - Codex and ACPX now perform that mapping through separate adapters.
> - Separate adapter tests do not prove that both paths preserve the
same user-visible form.
> - Fixture validation must also match production behavior for optional
answers and unsupported patterns.
> - This pull request adds shared fixtures, validation, and
cross-adapter conformance checks.
> - The benefit is a reusable question contract for later providers
without enabling a new runtime.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12408
This pull request builds on the Codex ACPX question bridge merged in
#12408. It adds fixture and generator checks for the existing Codex and
ACPX question adapters. It does not add another provider or production
execution path.
## What Changed
- Add a canonical ACPX form fixture and native response. Mark the
equivalent Codex fixture field as required.
- Add shared validation for question IDs, option IDs, answer modes,
required answers, text bounds, numeric bounds, and response shapes.
- Evaluate fixture-only regular expressions in a bounded child process.
Reject patterns that cannot finish safely.
- Validate ACPX fixtures against a manifest-side mirror of the
production form projection. Reject free-text ACPX patterns, but ignore
patterns on enumerated option fields.
- Accept explicit empty optional answers and omit them from the
projected ACPX response, which matches the production parser.
- Validate every question fixture during manifest generation and
regenerate the checked-in manifest.
- Add cross-adapter tests that compare user-visible presentation while
preserving provider-owned IDs and provider-specific response conversion.
- Add negative regressions for malformed forms, invalid responses,
unsafe patterns, special property names, and projection drift.
## Verification
- Replay base: `4fe3189f0256873a359d2d53c209076919fd1c3b` (`master`
after #12408 merged).
- Exact replay head: `0532e7dfbb5a246033ffeef55a0c0013fdab07f1`.
- Stable patch ID for the intended seven-file delta:
`28154d86b2c37e0e8d442419e26703584852f67e`.
- The intended pull request delta contains exactly these seven files:
- `packages/paperclip-runner/protocol/fixtures/questions/acpx.json`
- `packages/paperclip-runner/protocol/fixtures/questions/codex.json`
- `packages/paperclip-runner/protocol/manifest.json`
- `packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/generate-protocol-manifest.mjs`
- `packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/protocol-contract.mjs`
-
`packages/paperclip-runner/src/contracts/question-adapter-conformance.test.ts`
- `packages/paperclip-runner/test/protocol-contract.test.mjs`
- The intended combined delta is 1,211 additions and 20 deletions.
- This change does not add a dependency, lockfile update, migration,
workflow, server route, UI change, documentation file, or production
runtime change.
- GitHub Actions run `33352004952` passed the complete matrix on retry
at the unchanged exact head, including protocol/package verification,
build, typecheck/release-registry, general and serialized server suites,
canary, and all e2e shards.
- Superagent, Socket, Snyk, contributor-trust, policy, and PR-review
checks pass on the exact replay head.
- Greptile reviewed the exact replay head at 5/5 with no blocking
finding and zero unresolved review threads.
- No local test result is claimed. GitHub Actions is the authoritative
verification environment for the replayed revision.
## Risks
This change has low runtime risk because it changes fixtures, generator
validation, generated metadata, and tests only. Fixture pattern checks
run in a child process with a one-second timeout and a bounded output
buffer. The ACPX gate intentionally rejects free-text patterns because
the production adapter has no bounded expression engine. It
intentionally permits an explicit empty optional answer because
production omits that answer from the native response. A validation
mismatch can block manifest generation, but it cannot change server
selection, direct adapters, or task-page 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-5.6, extended reasoning, repository tool use, and
code execution.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip Runner now has a complete guarded Codex vertical slice.
> - The next provider series must not start by importing a provider
implementation or dependency bundle.
> - ACPX needs one bounded, versioned process boundary shared by
TypeScript and Rust.
> - A schema is the authority; checked-in generated inventories keep
both languages in lockstep.
> - Unknown versions, commands, event types, and properties must fail
closed.
> - This pull request therefore lands only the sidecar wire contract and
its drift gate.
> - No ACPX runtime, dependency, executable, package export, or
production selection is added.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
This is the first package-local unit in the post-Codex provider series.
**What happened?**
The integration branch contains an ACPX provider, but its TypeScript
sidecar and Rust client need a small shared authority before either
implementation can be reviewed safely. Importing the final integration
implementation directly would mix the protocol, runtime, third-party
dependencies, and production wiring.
**Expected behavior**
The schema defines every ACPX sidecar request, response, event, command,
event type, and protocol version. Generated TypeScript and Rust
inventories must drift-check against that schema. No runtime can select
or execute ACPX yet.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Change the protocol version, command inventory, or event inventory in
the schema.
2. Run the runner protocol type check without regenerating the language
inventories.
3. Observe the drift gate fail.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Stacked on `runner-server-semantic-codex` at `ebd7f9df7`.
## What Changed
- Add the internal ACPX sidecar v2 JSON Schema outside the public PRP v1
schema catalog.
- Generate one TypeScript inventory and one Rust inventory from that
schema.
- Add generate and check hooks to the existing runner protocol-type
workflow.
- Add fail-closed AJV tests for all three message families, version
drift, unknown commands, and extra properties.
- Keep the generated Rust module unregistered until the Rust ACPX
transport exists.
## Compatibility Boundary
- Codex remains the only production runner provider.
- `paperclip_runner` selection and the default-off rollout flag are
unchanged.
- No ACPX package, patch, lockfile, binary entry point, root export,
server file, UI file, workflow, or dependency is added.
- The schema is shipped with the existing `protocol` directory but is
not added to the public PRP manifest.
- Existing direct adapters continue through their current paths.
- Diff against the actual stacked base: 6 files.
## Verification
- Runner TypeScript typecheck and both generated-contract drift gates —
passed.
- Runner TypeScript tests — 37 files and 355 Vitest tests passed; 11
Node contract tests passed.
- Rust provider-bridge regression suite after restacking — 14/14 passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed for all applicable workspaces.
- `pnpm build` — passed, including runner binary, server, UI, and
workspace packages.
- `pnpm test:run` — attempted; the local host reproduced unrelated
workspace/Postgres and port-exposure failures in unchanged server
suites. The changed runner contract suites pass, and the repository's
serialized/sharded GitHub checks remain authoritative for those
host-sensitive suites.
- Prettier, rustfmt, generated-source drift checks, and `git diff
--check` — passed.
- `pnpm-lock.yaml` is unchanged.
## Risks
The main risk is allowing schema and generated language inventories to
diverge. Build and typecheck now fail on any drift. The sidecar
implementation and third-party ACPX packages are deliberately absent, so
this PR cannot alter runtime behavior or expand the production attack
surface.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5 and repository tool use.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs
- [x] I have described the issue and expected behavior in this PR
- [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal task
identifier
- [x] I have run the affected tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have documented the compatibility and security boundary
- [ ] All applicable GitHub Actions are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with every actionable comment resolved
- [x] I will address all review findings before requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Semantic tools cross a trust boundary between a provider and the
control plane
> - Durable runs need exact input, result, denial, duplicate, and
reconciliation receipts
> - Replay must reject unsupported required versions and mismatched
receipt pairs
> - This pull request adds the receipt builders and deterministic replay
fixtures
> - It keeps newer sequence and gap safety limits from the current stack
> - The benefit is auditable semantic activity before more providers use
it
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
packages/paperclip-runner
**Problem or motivation**
Semantic tool calls have basic authorization records, but durable replay
does not yet cover reconciled calls, denial redaction, duplicate
receipts, governance targets, or artifact references.
**Proposed solution**
Add bounded semantic receipt builders, a reconciled phase, strict pair
binding, fail-closed version checks, and generated replay oracles for
the important lifecycle cases.
**Alternatives considered**
The runner could store provider-native tool payloads. That would weaken
protocol portability and make redaction and retry behavior
provider-specific.
**Roadmap alignment**
This supports the existing experimental Paperclip Runner rollout. It
does not enable a production adapter.
## What Changed
- Add semantic input and result receipt builders.
- Add optional reconciliation receipts for pending calls.
- Reject unsupported semantic receipt versions.
- Validate receipt correlation, operation, idempotency, and digest
bindings.
- Add deterministic replay fixtures and generated golden outputs.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:typescript`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner typecheck:typescript`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- Replay golden and protocol manifest checks pass.
- The branch changes 27 files relative to its declared base.
## Risks
The main risk is accepting a receipt that belongs to another call or
replaying a duplicate as a new mutation. Binding checks compare
correlation, operation, idempotency, and content digest fields. Fixtures
cover denials, duplicates, governance chains, optional fields,
artifacts, and unsupported versions.
> 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 agentic 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 linked an existing public issue or described the
issue in-PR
- [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented 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
> - The runner already persists PRP events, but provider-native activity
needs one bounded, provider-neutral vocabulary before additional
providers can be added safely.
> - The protocol catalog must describe capabilities without enabling or
authorizing a provider.
> - Provider normalization must not require an ACPX runtime dependency
merely to compile the shared event layer.
> - This pull request adds the event contract and pure normalizers only;
provider transports and production selection remain unchanged.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
This is the first follow-up stacked on #12321. Codex, OpenCode, and ACP
runtimes expose different activity shapes. Without canonical
normalization, downstream task threads and traces would need
provider-specific branching and could retain unbounded or unsafe
payloads.
## What Changed
- Expand the PRP provider descriptor and canonical activity event
families.
- Add bounded Codex, OpenCode, and ACP event normalizers for plans,
tools, research, delegation, artifacts, review, safety, waits, and
notices.
- Preserve strict schema validation and regenerate the checked-in schema
bundle and manifest.
- Use a structural ACP event input so the provider-neutral layer does
not introduce or authorize an ACPX runtime dependency.
- Export the provider-event contract from the existing package root.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner typecheck:typescript`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:typescript` — 11
files and 88 tests passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- `git diff --check`
- The local full repository runner reached unrelated macOS
workspace-path fixture failures; the affected runner suites pass and the
repository CI shards are the handoff authority.
- Diff against the declared base: 8 files.
## Compatibility Boundary
- No provider transport, adapter, server route, feature flag, or runtime
selection changes.
- Catalog presence does not authorize discovery or execution.
- Existing Codex execution continues through its current path.
- No dependency, migration, workflow, or lockfile change.
## Risks
The main risk is accepting malformed or unbounded provider payloads.
Schema validation remains fail-closed, text/output fields are bounded
and redacted, unsafe paths and URLs are discarded, and representative
variants for every declared event family are covered by tests.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 family. The client does not expose the exact
deployment ID or context window. Agentic 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 described the issue in-PR following the relevant template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal task
identifier
- [x] I have run the affected local tests and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated the compatibility notes for this change
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open actionable comments
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The Paperclip Runner now has protocol, provider, tool, package,
persistence, and hidden server boundaries.
> - The server still cannot select that path for a real agent heartbeat.
> - A new runtime must not change any existing direct adapter.
> - An experimental runtime must fail closed when its rollout flag is
off.
> - This pull request adds one guarded Codex vertical slice through
runnerd.
> - The benefit is a production-built runner path that users cannot
start by default.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #11962
Refs #12111
Refs #12169
Refs #12176
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting. The change affects the runner package, server
orchestration, shared settings, and adapter configuration UI.
**Problem or motivation**
The hidden PRP coordinator cannot execute a real heartbeat. The
application also needs an explicit rollout boundary before it can expose
the experimental runner. Existing direct adapters must keep their
current execution and finalization behavior.
**Proposed solution**
Add `paperclip_runner` as a Codex-only adapter behind the default-off
`enableNativeRunner` instance flag. Select the native runtime only for
that adapter. Persist the run binding before runnerd starts. Wait for
the durable PRP result and terminal event. Resume the real Codex
provider thread on later heartbeats. Keep persisted native runs readable
and recoverable after the flag changes.
**Alternatives considered**
The server could route `codex_local` through runnerd. That option would
change an existing adapter and weaken rollback safety. The server could
expose all providers now. That option would add unreviewed provider
behavior. The build could depend on a prebuilt runner binary. That
option would make source builds architecture-dependent and difficult to
verify.
**Roadmap alignment**
This work supports the shipped enforced-outcomes, governed-tool, and
self-healing-run milestones. It does not add a new roadmap surface. It
is the guarded execution step after the merged hidden runner boundaries.
**Additional context**
This is the next replacement for the closed large runner pull request.
Task-thread presentation remains a separate follow-up so this change can
preserve the current direct-adapter UI.
## What Changed
- Add `paperclip_runner` as an explicit Codex-only adapter.
- Add the default-off `enableNativeRunner` instance flag.
- Reject fresh create, hire, import, switch, and execution requests
while the flag is off.
- Allow edits to persisted runner agents while the flag is off.
- Recover an already persisted native run even after the flag is
disabled.
- Keep every built-in direct adapter on its existing runtime path.
- Persist an immutable native run binding and revisioned completion
contract before runnerd starts.
- Execute server to PRP to runnerd to Codex to server through the hidden
coordinator.
- Validate the durable result against the terminal event and exact
completion criteria before finalization.
- Preserve the Codex provider thread ID and use `thread/resume` on the
next heartbeat.
- Strip unsupported Codex configuration fields from the experimental
adapter.
- Build a target-native release runner binary from source and vendor it
into the server distribution.
- Install Rust only in the Docker build stage. Do not add a workflow or
lockfile change.
- Stop the runner process group on completion, cancellation, and forced
shutdown.
## Verification
- Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner check:all`. All 69
TypeScript tests and 58 Rust tests pass. Protocol, conformance, replay,
formatting, and generated-file checks pass.
- Run the 12 focused adapter, settings, runtime-selection, coordinator,
direct-isolation, and real Codex integration test files. All 186 tests
pass.
- The real integration test uses PostgreSQL, HTTP, WebSocket, runnerd,
and a fake Codex app server. It proves one `thread/start` followed by
one `thread/resume`.
- Run `pnpm -r typecheck`.
- Run `pnpm build`.
- Run `pnpm check:token-gates`.
- Build the Docker `build` target from a clean context. Confirm that the
server distribution contains an executable `paperclip-runnerd` built
with Debian Rust 1.85.
- Start the server through the source-mode tsx entry point with the
package `dist` directory absent. Confirm the vendor shim resolves source
exports and the server boots.
- Run `pnpm test:run` twice. On this macOS host, 405 files pass and 1
file skips. Eight untouched workspace and loopback tests fail because
macOS resolves `/tmp` and `/var` through `/private` and because
PID-derived test ports exceed 65535. Linux CI must pass the full suite.
- Confirm that the diff contains 52 files. Confirm that it contains no
`.github` or `pnpm-lock.yaml` change.
## Risks
- The feature flag is off by default. A fresh native start fails with a
stable error while the flag is off.
- A persisted native run remains recoverable after the flag changes.
This prevents rollout changes from corrupting recorded work.
- Only local Codex execution is accepted. Other providers and remote
work modes fail closed.
- Existing direct adapters do not start runnerd, create native rows, use
native status arbitration, or enter native finalization.
- The runner receives its one-use bootstrap ticket through the child
environment. The server does not put the ticket in command arguments or
logs.
- The server validates the company, task, agent, run, runner, session,
completion contract, result, and terminal binding before it accepts
completion.
- The build compiles a target-native Rust binary. Cross-platform release
packaging remains a later concern. Source builds and Docker builds
compile for their current target.
- Docker needs enough build memory for the existing server TypeScript
compile. The Docker build stage sets a 4 GB V8 heap limit.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex with GPT-5. The exact deployment ID and context-window
size are not exposed. The model used agentic reasoning, repository
tools, code execution, and test execution.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and 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 applicable 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 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 now has a durable PRP transport and a Codex
provider bridge.
> - Codex must use stable, provider-neutral action contracts before
Paperclip can grant run-scoped tool access.
> - A catalog must describe actions without granting permission to
discover or invoke them.
> - Generated inventory must stay synchronized with its TypeScript
source.
> - This pull request adds the canonical Codex-spine semantic action
catalog inside the runner package.
> - The benefit is a small review unit for schemas and inventory before
authorization and dispatch land.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting. This pull request extends private runner infrastructure
in `packages/paperclip-runner`.
**Problem or motivation**
The Codex provider bridge has no canonical description of the Paperclip
actions that a later authorization layer can project into a run.
Independent operation lists can drift in names, claims, task modes,
effects, and input bounds.
**Proposed solution**
Add one immutable v1 catalog for the first 27 Codex-spine actions. Give
each action a stable identifier, placement, effect, required claims,
supported task modes, and JSON Schema input and output contracts.
Generate a deterministic JSON inventory from that source and fail
package checks on drift.
**Alternatives considered**
The combined runner branch contains larger live and scenario catalogs
with authorization, bindings, labs, and other providers. That change is
too large for this review unit. A generic API escape hatch would also
bypass the operation-level boundary, so this catalog excludes it.
**Roadmap alignment**
This work supports the governed tool access direction in `ROADMAP.md`.
It does not add a tool gateway, application binding, server endpoint, or
production authorization decision.
**Additional context**
Refs #12111 and #11962. Pull request #12111 was squash-merged first.
This branch starts at the resulting `master` commit. Its delta is 10
files.
## What Changed
- Added 27 versioned, provider-neutral semantic action declarations for
the Codex spine.
- Added bounded JSON Schema input contracts and normalized operation
receipt output contracts.
- Added placement, effect, claim, mode, and role metadata.
- Added a deeply frozen public catalog and an operation lookup helper.
- Added a deterministic checked-in JSON inventory and generation
commands.
- Added a byte-for-byte drift gate to the package build.
- Added AJV schema compilation, mutation-bound, forged-field,
immutability, inventory, and non-executable-boundary tests.
- Exported only the catalog types and declarations from the existing
package root.
- Documented that catalog membership does not grant discovery,
authorization, dispatch, or application binding.
- Kept server code, UI code, other providers, scenario-only actions,
labs, generic API access, authorization, dispatch, and receipts
processing out of this pull request.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner check:all` passes.
- TypeScript protocol tests pass: 8 Node tests and 49 Vitest tests.
- All package Rust tests and conformance and replay parity checks pass.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner
check:semantic-action-catalog` passes.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passes.
- `pnpm build` passes.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passes.
- Prettier and `git diff --check` pass for the changed source and
documentation files.
- The generated catalog matches its source byte for byte.
- The secret scan is clean.
- The delta against `master` is 10 files. `pnpm-lock.yaml` is unchanged.
- `pnpm test:run` completed locally with 4,692 passing tests, 19 skipped
tests, and 24 failures in 8 unchanged server test files. The failures
reproduce the established local macOS path-alias, listener, and
workspace-runtime baseline. No changed-file test failed. Linux CI
remains the repository handoff authority.
- The full Linux PR workflow passes, including the aggregate `verify`
gate.
- Snyk, Socket, Superagent security, and supply-chain checks pass.
- Greptile is 5/5 with no actionable comments, recommendations, or
follow-ups.
- Storybook visual regression skipped by design because this pull
request changes no UI file.
- Browser and migration tests are not applicable because this pull
request changes no server, UI, database, or migration file.
## Risks
Production behavior is unchanged because no consumer projects this
catalog into a provider run. The main risks are contract drift,
unbounded mutation input, forged scope fields, accidental executable
authority, and generated inventory drift. Closed input schemas, explicit
bounds, a frozen catalog, tests, and the byte drift gate cover these
risks. The later authorization layer must still bind every action to the
active run and company before discovery or invocation.
I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This change is private contract infrastructure
for the governed tool access direction. It does not duplicate a shipped
or public product surface.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5 was used. The exact serving model ID and context
size were not exposed. The model used high reasoning, repository tools,
GitHub tools, and local code execution.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Paperclip Runner needs one typed interpretation of the
language-neutral PRP contract.
> - The JSON Schemas and fixtures now exist, but TypeScript consumers
cannot validate or replay them yet.
> - A deterministic reducer must define how duplicate delivery and
source gaps affect the projected session.
> - Result and question contracts must also validate untrusted provider
and user input before later runtime code uses it.
> - This pull request adds those TypeScript contracts and replay oracles
without adding a process, provider, endpoint, or production behavior.
> - The benefit is a reviewable and testable TypeScript foundation for
the local runner and transport pull requests.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
This change affects the private `@paperclipai/paperclip-runner` package.
It does not change an existing server or adapter execution path.
**Problem or motivation**
The PRP v1 schemas do not yet provide TypeScript types, runtime
validators, normalized result handling, or a deterministic session
projection. Later Rust, transport, provider, and server work needs one
tested TypeScript oracle instead of separate interpretations.
**Proposed solution**
Generate a checked-in TypeScript schema bundle from the PRP v1 sources.
Add derived types, AJV validation, result and question validation,
deterministic replay, a reducer, and generated golden snapshots. Export
only these implemented root-package surfaces.
**Alternatives considered**
The combined runner branch adds the TypeScript contracts together with
Rust, providers, semantic authorization, SDKs, labs, and server
behavior. That delta is too large for normal review. Handwritten
duplicate protocol types would also create a drift risk.
**Roadmap alignment**
This work supports the governed tool and control-plane direction in
`ROADMAP.md`. It does not enable a new production adapter or endpoint.
**Additional context**
Refs #12087 and #11962. This pull request was prepared on #12087, then
rebased onto its squash merge before opening. The current delta against
`master` is 37 files.
## What Changed
- Added JSON-Schema-derived PRP v1 types and AJV runtime validation.
- Added fail-closed required-version checks and cross-envelope binding
checks.
- Added provider-neutral completion-result and structured-question
contracts.
- Added normalization for accepted legacy provider result aliases before
strict validation.
- Added a deterministic session reducer for replay, duplicate delivery,
source gaps, requests, items, results, and terminal state.
- Added generated replay snapshots and compact parity summaries for six
accepted fixtures.
- Added schema-bundle, manifest, and replay-golden drift gates.
- Added only the root package export. Deferred testing, SDK, evaluation,
lab, provider, and browser entry points remain unavailable.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test` passed with 8
protocol tests and 44 TypeScript tests.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner check:replay-goldens`
passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm build` passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passed.
- `git diff --check` passed.
- The delta against its declared base is 37 files.
- `pnpm test:run` was executed locally. The package tests pass, while
the macOS repository run retains the unchanged local-environment
failures documented on #12087. The complete Linux CI matrix must pass on
this commit.
- A scoped scan found no secret-like values, internal references, or
deferred-provider file names.
- Greptile found an unbounded sequence-gap allocation. Commit `4a405c17`
caps detailed missing IDs at 256, records the full missing count and
truncation state, and rejects sequence values above the exact JavaScript
integer range. The focused tests, workspace typecheck, build, and token
gates pass after this fix.
## Risks
Low production risk. The package remains private. This change adds no
process, network endpoint, provider bridge, server integration, database
change, or execution selection. The main risk is protocol interpretation
drift. Generated schema and replay gates detect that drift. Browser and
CSP-specific validator packaging remains deferred to its later package
boundary.
I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This change defines contracts for planned
control-plane work and does not add overlapping product behavior.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5 was used. The exact serving model ID and context
size were not exposed. The model used high reasoning, repository tools,
GitHub tools, and local code execution.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Paperclip Runner needs a language-neutral contract between the
server and the runner process.
> - A shared contract must exist before TypeScript, Rust, transport, or
provider implementations can depend on it.
> - Required protocol versions must fail closed, while safe optional
fields must remain compatible.
> - The contract also needs deterministic fixtures and a drift gate for
later cross-language work.
> - This pull request adds that contract without adding runtime
behavior.
> - The benefit is a small, reviewable source of truth for the next
implementation pull requests.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting. This pull request adds a private package contract for
later server, TypeScript, and Rust work.
**Problem or motivation**
Paperclip Runner does not have a small language-neutral protocol
boundary on `master`. A runtime implementation without this boundary can
drift between languages, accept unsupported required versions, or
silently change canonical fixtures.
**Proposed solution**
Add PRP v1 JSON Schemas, accepted and rejected fixtures, a Codex
structured-question fixture, and a generated SHA-256 manifest. Run
compatibility and manifest checks during the package build. Keep the
package private and export nothing in this pull request.
**Alternatives considered**
The combined runner branch contains schemas together with providers,
SDKs, labs, and server behavior. That change is too large for normal
review. Generating TypeScript validators in this pull request would also
cross into the next review unit.
**Roadmap alignment**
This contract supports the governed tool and control-plane direction in
`ROADMAP.md`. It does not enable a new production adapter or endpoint.
**Additional context**
Refs #12084 and #11962. This pull request was reviewed as a stack on
#12084, then rebased and retargeted to `master` after #12084 merged. The
current delta is 38 files.
## What Changed
- Added 20 PRP v1 JSON Schemas with stable identifiers and resolved
references, including explicit cross-language conformance input and
output schemas.
- Added canonical replay, cross-language, and Codex question fixtures.
- Added accepted cases for additive optional fields and a rejected case
for an unsupported required protocol version.
- Added a deterministic manifest with SHA-256 digests for every schema
and fixture.
- Added package-local schema-instance, schema-reference, compatibility,
question-ID, conformance-pair, and drift checks.
- Added a private workspace package with no public exports and no
production runtime behavior.
- Added the package manifest to the Docker dependency-stage inventory
required for every workspace package. This does not copy or build runner
runtime code into the production image.
- Kept the provider descriptor and question fixture Codex-only. No
deferred provider package or dependency is present.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` passed with Node 24.19.0 and pnpm
9.15.4. No lockfile change is committed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner check:protocol` passed
with 8 tests.
- The committed AJV 2020-12 gate accepted every canonical v1 replay,
question, and cross-language conformance fixture. It rejected the
required v2 fixture, a replay fixture with a missing required command
ID, and conformance output with a missing session ID.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm build` passed and ran the protocol manifest drift check.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passed.
- `node ./scripts/check-docker-deps-stage.mjs` passed.
- `git diff --check` passed.
- The delta against its declared base is 38 files.
- `pnpm test:run` completed with 4,687 passing tests, 19 skipped tests,
and 29 failures across 9 unchanged server files. The failures reproduce
macOS path aliases, local listener probes, workspace-runtime
assumptions, and one connection-retry timeout. No changed-file test
failed. Linux CI must pass before this pull request is ready.
- `pnpm check:tokens` reports existing personal-name references outside
this pull request. A scoped scan of `packages/paperclip-runner` found no
secret-like values, internal references, or deferred-provider names.
- PR #12084 was squash-merged, and this branch was rebased onto that
merge and retargeted to `master`. The first master-base policy run
correctly caught the missing Docker dependency-stage manifest copy;
commit `4fa1ea7c` fixes that gate, and the complete Linux matrix is
green.
- Serialized server shard 1 initially hit an unchanged heartbeat
test-harness timeout and a later assertion in the same file. Its
isolated rerun passed in 3m57s. All other shards passed on their first
attempt.
- Greptile reviewed the final commit at 5/5 with no blocking failure.
Both earlier actionable validation threads are resolved, and no review
thread remains open.
## Risks
Low production risk. The package is private and has no exports, server
adapter, endpoint, or process. AJV is a package-only development
dependency that the server workspace already uses. The main risk is
contract churn before the TypeScript and Rust consumers land. The
generated manifest and compatibility fixtures make that churn explicit.
I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This change defines a contract for planned
control-plane work and does not add overlapping product behavior.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5 was used. The exact serving model ID and context
size were not exposed. The model used high reasoning, repository tools,
GitHub tools, and local code execution.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Dotta