## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The server refuses to boot when its database is not migrated, or
when an authenticated public deployment has no `DATABASE_URL`. These
refusals are deliberate and correct.
> - In managed cloud, a supervisor creates each stack, migrates its
fresh database, applies configuration, and restarts the app. The app
container often boots before those steps finish.
> - Each early boot hits one of the two refusals, exits, and captures
the refusal to Sentry. One fleet build batch produces hundreds of
identical expected events. Real errors get buried.
> - This pull request classifies exactly those two refusals as expected
transients when `PAPERCLIP_CLOUD_API_ORIGIN` marks a supervised
deployment, and skips only the Sentry capture for them.
> - The benefit is a clean error signal: expected provisioning noise
stops, and every real failure still reports.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
A managed-cloud stack boots its app container before the supervisor
migrates the empty database or finishes applying configuration. The
container refuses to start, crash-loops briefly, and converges after the
supervisor restarts it. Every refused boot sends an error event to
Sentry. A batch of new stacks produces hundreds of these expected
events.
**Expected behavior**
The refusal logs and exits nonzero, so the supervisor can act. Sentry
receives no event for an expected provisioning transient. Sentry still
receives events for real failures: schema drift, malformed
configuration, and every refusal outside managed cloud.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Set `PAPERCLIP_MIGRATION_AUTO_APPLY=false`,
`PAPERCLIP_MIGRATION_PROMPT=never`, `SENTRY_DSN`, and
`PAPERCLIP_CLOUD_API_ORIGIN`.
2. Point `DATABASE_URL` at an empty database and start the server.
3. The server refuses to start. Before this change it also captures the
refusal to Sentry on every boot.
**Deployment mode**
Authenticated public (managed cloud).
## What Changed
- New `server/src/startup-refusals.ts`: a `StartupRefusalError` class
for refusals whose remedy belongs to the deployment supervisor,
`migrationRefusalError()` to classify a pending-migrations refusal (zero
applied migrations = never migrated = supervised transient; any applied
history = drift = plain always-reported `Error`), and
`shouldReportStartupFailure()` for the capture decision.
- `server/src/index.ts`: the pending-migrations refusal uses the
classifier; the missing-`DATABASE_URL` refusal under the
authenticated-public contract becomes a `StartupRefusalError` (the
malformed-URL refusal stays a plain `Error`); the startup crash handler
consults `shouldReportStartupFailure()` before `captureException`.
Logging and the nonzero exit are unchanged.
- New `server/src/__tests__/startup-refusals.test.ts` covering the
classification and decision matrix, including the unchanged self-hosted
paths.
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run src/__tests__/startup-refusals.test.ts` — 7 passed.
- Review the decision matrix in the test file: refusals report when
`PAPERCLIP_CLOUD_API_ORIGIN` is absent or blank; non-refusal errors and
non-`Error` throwables always report; drift always reports.
## Risks
- Low risk. The change only skips a Sentry capture in one narrow,
marker-gated case. Boot behavior, logging, and the exit code do not
change.
- Self-hosted deployments do not set `PAPERCLIP_CLOUD_API_ORIGIN`, so
their reporting is unchanged, and the tests pin that.
- A supervised deployment with a genuinely stuck migration runner loses
per-boot Sentry events for that stack. The supervisor's own health
checks and monitoring own that signal, and the container logs still
carry the refusal.
## Model Used
Claude Fable 5 (claude-fable-5) via Claude Code, extended thinking with
tool use.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above (none found for startup Sentry suppression)
- [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
(module doc comment; no user-facing docs affected)
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
Accept and persist Cloud-signed canonical runtime identity before activation, then route absolute self-URLs through the durable runtime identity provider.
Co-Authored-By: Codex <codex@openai.com>
Bumps
[@aws-sdk/client-s3](https://github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/tree/HEAD/clients/client-s3)
from 3.1115.0 to 3.1120.0.
<details>
<summary>Release notes</summary>
<p><em>Sourced from <a
href="https://github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/releases">@aws-sdk/client-s3's
releases</a>.</em></p>
<blockquote>
<h2>v3.1120.0</h2>
<h4>3.1120.0(2026-08-27)</h4>
<h5>Documentation Changes</h5>
<ul>
<li><strong>client-opensearch:</strong> Updating SDK and CLI
documentation for AttachDataSource API. (<a
href="d696fe7602">d696fe76</a>)</li>
</ul>
<h5>New Features</h5>
<ul>
<li><strong>client-lambda-microvms:</strong> Added
InsufficientCapacityException to RunMicrovm for capacity-related
failures. Added lifecycle status field (AVAILABLE, DEPRECATED) to
ListManagedMicrovmImageVersions. Added ConflictException to
CreateMicrovmAuthToken and CreateMicrovmShellAuthToken for unregistered
MicroVMs. (<a
href="72a8ff8092">72a8ff80</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-codedeploy:</strong> Added a deploymentMode parameter
to CreateDeployment. Set it to RESTART to restart an EC2 and on-premises
fleet, using the last successful revision, honoring Deployment
Configuration. (<a
href="78d4f9640b">78d4f964</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-cloudwatch-logs:</strong> Added resultCount to
QueryStatistics in GetQueryResults. This field returns the total number
of output rows in the final result set, helping customers
programmatically determine whether a query produced results after all
operations including post-aggregation filters. (<a
href="0e4d242b71">0e4d242b</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-datazone:</strong> Add cascadeDelete to DeleteDomain.
When specified, DataZone recursively deletes all projects, environments,
subscriptions, and their underlying AWS resources before removing the
domain. Deletion progress is reported via deleteProgress and resource
failures via failureReasons on GetDomain. (<a
href="3a74dc4b94">3a74dc4b</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-rds:</strong> Adding support for the full snapshot
size, in bytes, of DB instance snapshots. (<a
href="ab2f66f5f5">ab2f66f5</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-ec2:</strong> EC2 allows AMI owners to define
compatible instance types on their AMIs, blocking RunInstances calls
automatically for launches on non-permitted instance types. (<a
href="311b3b26db">311b3b26</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-cognito-identity-provider:</strong> Adds the
AdminDeleteSoftwareToken API operation, enabling administrators to
remove a user's registered TOTP (software token) MFA configuration from
a user pool. (<a
href="f661bebc4d">f661bebc</a>)</li>
</ul>
<hr />
<p>For list of updated packages, view
<strong>updated-packages.md</strong> in
<strong>assets-3.1120.0.zip</strong></p>
<h2>v3.1119.0</h2>
<h4>3.1119.0(2026-08-26)</h4>
<h5>Chores</h5>
<ul>
<li><strong>codegen:</strong> smithy-aws-typescript-codegen 0.53.0 (<a
href="https://redirect.github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/pull/8276">#8276</a>)
(<a
href="dffb383bdc">dffb383b</a>)</li>
</ul>
<h5>New Features</h5>
<ul>
<li><strong>client-sagemaker:</strong> Amazon SageMaker AI now supports
ml.g7 instances for model optimization. You can now run model
optimization jobs on ml.g7 instances, in supported AWS Regions. (<a
href="6d5e106634">6d5e1066</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-devops-agent:</strong> AWS DevOps Agent now supports
trigger filter groups for Release Readiness Review, letting you control
when the capability auto-triggers based on webhook events and target
branches. (<a
href="bc3d53d550">bc3d53d5</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-license-manager-user-subscriptions:</strong> Released
support for License Expiry field in ListProductSubscriptions API (<a
href="454d7f7ffb">454d7f7f</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-ec2:</strong> Adds deleting state to possible VPC
States. (<a
href="43091d55b3">43091d55</a>)</li>
<li><strong>client-network-firewall:</strong> Adding new status enum for
Firewalls. (<a
href="4cb21cb3b8">4cb21cb3</a>)</li>
</ul>
<hr />
<p>For list of updated packages, view
<strong>updated-packages.md</strong> in
<strong>assets-3.1119.0.zip</strong></p>
<h2>v3.1118.0</h2>
<h4>3.1118.0(2026-08-25)</h4>
<h5>Documentation Changes</h5>
<ul>
<li><strong>client-marketplace-metering:</strong> Updated documentation
to clarify duplicate-billing prevention and BatchMeterUsage retry
guidance (<a
href="322310259e">32231025</a>)</li>
</ul>
<h5>New Features</h5>
<!-- raw HTML omitted -->
</blockquote>
<p>... (truncated)</p>
</details>
<details>
<summary>Changelog</summary>
<p><em>Sourced from <a
href="https://github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/blob/main/clients/client-s3/CHANGELOG.md">@aws-sdk/client-s3's
changelog</a>.</em></p>
<blockquote>
<h1><a
href="https://github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/compare/v3.1119.0...v3.1120.0">3.1120.0</a>
(2026-08-27)</h1>
<p><strong>Note:</strong> Version bump only for package
<code>@aws-sdk/client-s3</code></p>
<h1><a
href="https://github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/compare/v3.1118.0...v3.1119.0">3.1119.0</a>
(2026-08-26)</h1>
<p><strong>Note:</strong> Version bump only for package
<code>@aws-sdk/client-s3</code></p>
<h1><a
href="https://github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/compare/v3.1117.0...v3.1118.0">3.1118.0</a>
(2026-08-25)</h1>
<p><strong>Note:</strong> Version bump only for package
<code>@aws-sdk/client-s3</code></p>
<h1><a
href="https://github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/compare/v3.1116.0...v3.1117.0">3.1117.0</a>
(2026-08-24)</h1>
<p><strong>Note:</strong> Version bump only for package
<code>@aws-sdk/client-s3</code></p>
<h1><a
href="https://github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/compare/v3.1115.0...v3.1116.0">3.1116.0</a>
(2026-08-21)</h1>
<p><strong>Note:</strong> Version bump only for package
<code>@aws-sdk/client-s3</code></p>
</blockquote>
</details>
<details>
<summary>Commits</summary>
<ul>
<li><a
href="d6be6f8dd3"><code>d6be6f8</code></a>
Publish v3.1120.0</li>
<li><a
href="ba4e4498a7"><code>ba4e449</code></a>
Publish v3.1119.0</li>
<li><a
href="c65dd6533d"><code>c65dd65</code></a>
Publish v3.1118.0</li>
<li><a
href="78b069ac77"><code>78b069a</code></a>
Publish v3.1117.0</li>
<li><a
href="d760a00859"><code>d760a00</code></a>
Publish v3.1116.0</li>
<li><a
href="8369ada75d"><code>8369ada</code></a>
chore(codegen): update to sync with the latest smithy-ts (<a
href="https://github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/tree/HEAD/clients/client-s3/issues/8272">#8272</a>)</li>
<li>See full diff in <a
href="https://github.com/aws/aws-sdk-js-v3/commits/v3.1120.0/clients/client-s3">compare
view</a></li>
</ul>
</details>
<br />
Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>
Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Paperclip runs agent heartbeats and stores their run state in a
database
> - The direct-adapter native-isolation tests start heartbeat runs and
then clear database state
> - A terminal run status does not prove that its background database
work has stopped
> - The teardown can then deadlock with a live run during PostgreSQL
`TRUNCATE`
> - This pull request drains active runs before teardown and adds a
guard for queued or running runs
> - The benefit is stable test teardown without a production code change
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
This change fixes an intermittent test deadlock in the direct-adapter
native-isolation suite.
**What happened?**
The test teardown could run PostgreSQL `TRUNCATE` while a heartbeat
execution still held a write transaction. PostgreSQL then returned error
`40P01` during some test runs.
**Expected behavior**
The test teardown must wait until all heartbeat executions finish before
it clears the test database.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run
`server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-direct-adapter-native-isolation.test.ts`
repeatedly.
2. Run the suite against PostgreSQL-backed native isolation.
3. Observe intermittent deadlock error `40P01` during teardown.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Commit `57515726d3ef45a07df9b5ee2dfaf7d108556478`.
**Deployment mode**
Built from source with the native-isolation test suite.
**Agent adapter(s) involved**
Not adapter-specific. The test covers the direct adapter path.
**Database mode**
External PostgreSQL used by the native-isolation test suite.
**Additional context**
Related prior attempt:
[#12715](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12715). This pull
request starts from current `master` and does not depend on that pull
request.
## What Changed
- Drain active heartbeat run executions before `afterEach` runs
`TRUNCATE`.
- Assert that no heartbeat run remains `queued` or `running` before
teardown.
- Drain active executions before `afterAll` removes the temporary
database.
- Create one shared `heartbeatService` instance in `beforeAll` so the
drain tracks the test runs.
## Verification
- Run
`server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-direct-adapter-native-isolation.test.ts`
20 times. All 20 runs pass.
- Run the target suite with
`server/src/__tests__/native-run-finalizer.test.ts`. Both files pass
with 19 tests.
- Run `tsc --noEmit`. The branch adds no new error compared with
`master`.
- Run the pull request checks after GitHub starts them.
## Risks
Low risk. The change affects one test file and no production code. The
added drain can expose an incomplete test run before teardown, which is
the intended guard.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5. Exact runtime model ID: GPT-5. The context window is not
exposed to this agent. The model used tool calls 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 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>
## 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 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>
<!-- 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>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Paperclip reports server and browser errors through optional Sentry
monitoring
> - One environment variable sends both error types to one Sentry
project
> - Operators need separate control for browser and server error data
> - This pull request adds specific variables and keeps the existing
variable as a fallback
> - The benefit is separate monitoring without breaking current
deployments
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The Sentry configuration for server and browser monitoring uses one
environment variable.
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting (multiple of the above)
**Current behavior**
`SENTRY_DSN` supplies the server and browser clients. Both clients
therefore report to the same Sentry project.
**Proposed behavior**
`SENTRY_DSN_FRONTEND` supplies the browser client. `SENTRY_DSN_BACKEND`
supplies the server process. `SENTRY_DSN` remains a fallback for either
component.
**Reason and benefit**
Operators can send browser and server errors to separate Sentry
projects. Operators can also activate only one component.
**Breaking changes**
None. Existing deployments can continue to use `SENTRY_DSN`.
## What Changed
- Add `resolveSentryDsns(env)` and use it in the server and browser
configuration paths.
- Add precedence, empty-string, fallback, and route tests.
- Update the README, observability guide, and stale code comments.
- Log one warning when the server uses the legacy fallback without
exposing a DSN value.
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run --project server sentry-dsn` — 8 tests pass.
- `pnpm vitest run --project server auth-routes` — 21 tests pass.
- The earlier run of the three targeted suites passed 40 tests.
- `tsc --noEmit` passes for the files in this diff.
- All required GitHub Actions checks pass, including the full
continuous-integration suite.
## Risks
The main risk is an incorrect environment variable precedence rule. Unit
tests cover specific values, empty strings, and legacy fallback
behavior. The existing `SENTRY_DSN` path remains compatible.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex — GPT-5, current runtime, 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.
> - Agents can receive governed access to connected apps through the
runtime MCP gateway.
> - A connected app can become unavailable when its sign-in expires or
its health state needs attention.
> - The native runner treated that optional app state as a fatal runtime
setup error.
> - One unavailable app could therefore stop all unrelated agent work.
> - This pull request removes the fatal dependency and keeps the
available app assignment immutable.
> - The benefit is that an agent can continue its work while the stream
tells the user which app needs reconnection.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
An agent could not start a native run when one assigned app connection
was disabled, degraded, failed, or missing its secret. Runtime context
creation or MCP delivery threw an error before the agent could do
unrelated work.
**Expected behavior**
The run must continue without the unavailable app. Healthy assigned apps
must remain available. The stream must explain which app needs
reconnection. A changed assignment must not give a native run new access
after its immutable context is captured.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Assign an MCP app connection to a Paperclip Runner agent.
2. Set the connection to a state that needs attention, such as
`degraded`.
3. Start a task run for that agent.
4. Observe that native runtime setup fails before the agent starts.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduced from `ee2a19062`. The branch is rebased on `dda4dff64`.
**Deployment mode**
Local development from source with embedded Postgres.
No matching public issue or open pull request was found in the GitHub
search.
## What Changed
- Filter unavailable assigned app connections from the immutable native
runtime MCP snapshot.
- Keep healthy assigned connections and their tools in the snapshot.
- Replace the fatal native MCP availability check with an optional
stream warning callback.
- Withhold MCP delivery when the current assignment digest does not
match the captured native context.
- Prevent a warning delivery failure from stopping the agent run.
- Add regression tests for disabled, degraded, mixed healthy and
unavailable, and assignment-drift cases.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/native-runtime/runtime-context.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-runtime-mcp-servers.test.ts` passes with
8 tests.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passes.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passes.
- `pnpm build` passes.
- `pnpm test:run` was attempted. Unrelated workspace runtime and
port-exposure tests failed on this macOS host. The same files also
failed when run without the changed MCP tests. The changed MCP tests
remained green. Clean GitHub CI is the final full-suite check.
## Risks
- Low migration risk. This change has no schema or API contract
migration.
- An unavailable app is absent from the run MCP surface until it is
reconnected and a later run captures it again.
- Assignment drift fails closed. The agent keeps running, but the
changed gateway is not delivered.
- This pull request does not auto-block the issue before the agent
decides that the app is required. It emits reconnect guidance in the
stream. The existing connection-request interaction remains the path for
a required app.
> 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-5.6-sol`, with high reasoning, repository tools,
code execution, and browser automation. 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)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Managed worktrees can run a Paperclip development server for each
task
> - The managed runtime used the built UI when its service did not set
the UI development middleware option
> - This made new UI source changes require a manual build instead of a
hot reload
> - The runtime must supply the development default while it must keep
an explicit operator choice
> - This pull request enables the UI development middleware for new
managed Paperclip development services
> - The benefit is that UI edits appear in the managed worktree browser
without a manual build
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
A new managed Paperclip development worktree served the built UI by
default. An operator had to set `PAPERCLIP_UI_DEV_MIDDLEWARE=true`
before UI source changes could hot reload.
**Expected behavior**
New managed Paperclip development worktrees must enable the UI
development middleware by default. An explicit
`PAPERCLIP_UI_DEV_MIDDLEWARE=false` value must continue to disable it.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start a managed Paperclip development service without
`PAPERCLIP_UI_DEV_MIDDLEWARE`.
2. Open its UI.
3. Change a UI source file.
4. Observe that the browser does not receive the change until the UI is
built again.
**Paperclip version or commit**
This was reproduced on `317394456` from `master`.
**Deployment mode**
Local development with a managed worktree runtime.
## What Changed
- Set `PAPERCLIP_UI_DEV_MIDDLEWARE=true` for managed `paperclip-dev`
services when the service does not set a value.
- Keep explicit service values, including `false`.
- Add a regression test and document the default and the opt-out.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts -t "enables UI dev middleware by
default"`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- `pnpm test:run` completed with 5,397 passing tests. Four existing
runtime-port tests could not use ports `42000` and `52000` because a
live managed runtime owns those ports on this host. The new regression
test passed separately.
## Risks
- Risk is low. The change applies only to managed services named
`paperclip-dev`.
- A service can keep the built UI by setting
`PAPERCLIP_UI_DEV_MIDDLEWARE=false`.
- There is no database or API contract change.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, `gpt-5.6-sol`, hosted Codex context window, high
reasoning, tool use, code execution, and multi-file repository editing.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Paperclip Runner is an experimental execution adapter.
> - The adapter and its required sandbox ingress had separate settings.
> - A user could enable one setting and still have an unusable runner
configuration.
> - The runtime already makes one durable native or legacy decision for
each run.
> - This pull request uses that runtime decision for ingress
authorization.
> - The benefit is one clear opt-in with safe recovery for existing
native runs.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
This improves the experimental settings and transport authorization for
Paperclip Runner.
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting. This change affects the React settings UI, shared
settings contracts, adapter utilities, and server runtime selection.
**Current behavior**
Settings shows separate Paperclip Runner and Runner Preview Ingress
controls. A user can enable the runner but leave required sandbox
ingress disabled.
**Proposed behavior**
Settings shows only Paperclip Runner. Its native runtime decision also
authorizes provider WebSocket ingress when the execution target requires
it. A persisted native run keeps its recovery transport after the
setting is disabled.
**Reason and benefit**
Paperclip Runner is one experimental capability. One opt-in removes an
invalid partial configuration and makes the rollout boundary easier to
understand.
**Breaking changes**
The Runner Preview Ingress card is removed. The old
`enableRunnerPreviewIngress` key remains accepted in stored settings and
managed configuration, but it has no server runtime effect. The public
adapter-utils input remains compatible through a deprecated alias.
**Additional context**
Refs: #12638, #12641, #12656.
## What Changed
- Removed the separate Runner Preview Ingress card from Experimental
Settings.
- Made resolved native runtime selection authorize required provider
ingress.
- Preserved ingress recovery for persisted native runs after the rollout
flag is disabled.
- Kept the old settings key and adapter-utils input as deprecated
compatibility contracts.
- Added focused UI, runtime policy, transport, stored-settings, and
managed-config regression tests.
- Updated deployment documentation and feature descriptions.
## Verification
- GitHub Actions will run typecheck, tests, build, policy, and browser
shards.
- Focused tests cover the single settings control, runtime
authorization, fail-closed transport selection, the deprecated public
input, and old managed configuration.
- No local tests were run, per the maintainer request to use GitHub
Actions for verification.
- `git diff --check` passes.
## Risks
Low to moderate risk. The effective ingress gate changes from a separate
stored flag to the resolved native run decision. Fresh runs still
require `enableNativeRunner`. Persisted native runs remain recoverable.
Legacy adapters never receive ingress authorization.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, with reasoning, 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.
> - Agent adapters control how Paperclip starts and resumes an agent
runtime.
> - Paperclip Runner is an experimental Rust runtime and must stay
opt-in.
> - The server already rejected new runner selections when the flag was
off.
> - Some setup and onboarding views did not enforce the same boundary.
> - This pull request exposes the existing flag and applies it to every
new setup path.
> - The benefit is a safe rollout with unchanged legacy onboarding and
recoverable existing native runs.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
This improves experimental adapter selection in Settings, onboarding,
new-agent setup, invite setup, and company import.
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting: the React UI and the server onboarding seed service.
**Current behavior**
The server defaulted Paperclip Runner to off, but Settings did not
expose the flag. First-run onboarding could show the runner after
opt-in. A direct new-agent URL and some setup pickers could also reveal
native runner configuration before the availability check completed.
**Proposed behavior**
Settings has a default-off Paperclip Runner toggle. Explicit agent
configuration shows the runner only after the server reports that the
flag is enabled. First-run and invite onboarding always use legacy
adapters. Existing native agents and runs remain readable and
recoverable.
**Reason and benefit**
This keeps the experimental runtime out of normal onboarding. It also
gives administrators one clear opt-in before users can create a native
runner agent.
**Breaking changes**
None. Legacy adapter selection and execution stay unchanged. Existing
native records remain available.
## What Changed
- Added the Paperclip Runner opt-in to Experimental Settings.
- Refreshed adapter availability after the setting changes.
- Kept UI and server-seeded onboarding on legacy adapters.
- Made native runner choices fail closed in new-agent, invite, and
import setup.
- Preserved edit and recovery behavior for existing native agents and
runs.
- Added focused regression tests for flag-off and flag-on behavior.
## Verification
- GitHub Actions will run the repository test, typecheck, build, and
policy gates.
- Focused tests cover Settings, onboarding, agent creation, invite
setup, import setup, and server-seeded onboarding.
- No local test suite was run, per the maintainer request to use GitHub
Actions for verification.
- `git diff --check` passes.
## Risks
Low risk. The change narrows new adapter selection only. The server
remains the final enforcement point. Existing native records do not
depend on the current flag value for read or recovery behavior.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, with 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
- [ ] 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 currently enables only the Codex production path.
> - The package also contains dormant OpenCode and ACPX provider
boundaries.
> - Dormant boundaries must still fail safe before later activation
work.
> - Provider children must not inherit unrelated server secrets or host
homes.
> - Permission defaults must require interaction instead of broad
automatic approval.
> - This pull request hardens those boundaries without activating them.
> - The benefit is a safer base for later provider-specific runnerd
work.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
This improves the inactive OpenCode and ACPX provider boundary in
Paperclip Runner.
**Subsystem affected**
The adapter permission contract, Runner provider environment, and native
execution input builder.
**Current behavior**
Dormant OpenCode code can inherit the full server environment. Its
default permission mode allows operations. ACPX also defaults to broad
approval. The provider guard can accept inherited object property names.
**Proposed behavior**
Use exact provider identifiers. Use interactive defaults. Allow only
required OpenCode environment keys. Reject invalid proxy permission
modes.
**Reason and benefit**
This reduces accidental authority and secret exposure before future
provider activation.
**Breaking changes**
No production provider is activated. Codex runtime selection and Codex
credential-home discovery do not change. Dormant OpenCode and ACPX
callers that omit permission modes now receive safer defaults.
## What Changed
- Change dormant OpenCode and ACPX permission defaults to interactive
modes.
- Reject prototype property names as provider identifiers.
- Default dormant ACPX input to the qualified Codex agent profile.
- Add an explicit OpenCode runner environment allowlist.
- Exclude host homes, server credentials, database values, and Node
injection options.
- Add a fail-closed OpenCode proxy permission parser.
- Add focused tests for defaults, filtering, and invalid values.
## Verification
GitHub Actions must run:
- Adapter utility tests.
- Paperclip Runner tests, type checks, and build.
- Server native runtime tests.
- Repository test, type-check, build, policy, and security gates.
No local test command was run. The repository owner requested
GitHub-only verification.
## Risks
Future OpenCode credential providers must add required variables to the
allowlist through review. The safer defaults can pause dormant internal
scenarios that relied on implicit broad approval. Production Codex
behavior is unchanged.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with the GPT-5 agent model. The work used high reasoning,
repository inspection, tool use, and parallel security 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.
> - Administrators need bounded controls for experimental native
execution.
> - The lower stack adds remote Codex execution and the task workspace.
> - Operators need to configure Codex safely and inspect provider
traces.
> - Unsupported providers must not appear as runnable choices.
> - This pull request adds Codex-only administration and observability.
> - The benefit is a default-off operational surface for production
diagnosis.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12640.
Refs #12616.
Refs #12352.
**Subsystem affected**
Agent configuration, instance experimental settings, run ledger,
provider trace inspector, and administrator actions.
**Problem or motivation**
The native runner lacks one safe operator surface for Codex permissions,
lifecycle, raw trace capture, and run inspection. The integration branch
also contains provider choices that the production backend cannot
execute yet.
**Proposed solution**
Expose only the qualified Codex controls. Keep Paperclip Developer Mode
and runner preview ingress off by default. Gate raw trace actions by
administrator access and existing trace authorization.
**Alternatives considered**
Exposing unfinished providers would create configurations that fail at
runtime. Always-on tracing would increase sensitive data and storage
risk.
**Roadmap alignment**
This work supports governed Cloud and Sandbox agents and production
diagnostics.
## Stack
- Base PR: #12640.
- Lower PRs: #12639 and #12638.
- This PR contains only its 54-file administration and observability
delta.
- This is the final feature PR in the Codex production stack.
## What Changed
- Added Codex-only Paperclip Runner permission and lifecycle controls.
- Added bounded warm idle configuration.
- Kept the provider field fixed to Codex.
- Added administrator-only one-run raw trace requests.
- Added a persistent future-run raw trace toggle.
- Added trace status, metadata, ledger, and canonical runner inspection.
- Added JSON-RPC request-origin grouping and finalization lineage.
- Restored the stateful PRP transcript parser and focused projection
tests required by trace inspection.
- Added default-off Paperclip Developer Mode.
- Added Honeycomb run links for authorized developer mode.
- Disabled the legacy operational skill for `paperclip_runner`.
- Did not expose OpenCode, ACPX, Pi, Claude Managed, or AWS runner
choices.
- Did not change migrations, workflows, dependencies, or
`pnpm-lock.yaml`.
## Verification
- GitHub Actions will run UI tests, server tests, repository typecheck,
build, browser tests, security, and policy gates.
- Tests cover Codex configuration defaults and bounds, administrator
trace actions, persistent settings, ledger inspection, trace lineage,
and Honeycomb links.
- Existing server trace authorization and retention tests remain the
backend authority.
- Local tests were not run. The requested verification policy uses
GitHub Actions for this series.
- `git diff --check runner/task-workspace-experience...HEAD` passes.
- The delta contains 54 files.
## Risks
- Raw provider traces can contain sensitive provider data.
- Existing server authorization controls access, reveal, download,
retention, and deletion.
- The UI gates trace actions by administrator access and developer mode.
- All new instance settings remain off by default.
- Fresh Paperclip Runner configuration remains Codex-only.
- Direct adapters and legacy task behavior do not change in this PR.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5.6. The work used high-reasoning agent mode,
repository tools, GitHub tools, and parallel code-audit agents.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with Fixes: / Closes /
Refs OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue
template
- [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Paperclip Runner gives native runs a durable and governed execution
path.
> - The current native path runs on the control-plane host.
> - Remote environments need an authenticated execution-target contract.
> - The contract must not change direct adapters or enable new runtimes
by default.
> - This pull request adds the remote execution substrate and Daytona
ingress.
> - The benefit is a bounded base for later remote runner transport
work.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12616.
Refs #12352.
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting. This change touches runner transport, server
orchestration, plugin contracts, and shared settings.
**Problem or motivation**
Native execution cannot resolve an authenticated runner ingress through
a remote environment. The server also lacks one provider-neutral
contract for remote execution targets.
**Proposed solution**
Add a default-off runner preview ingress capability. Add
transport-neutral runner connectivity. Add remote execution target and
lifecycle handling. Add a Daytona ingress implementation with redacted
credentials.
**Alternatives considered**
A provider-specific server path would duplicate orchestration and
authorization. A public endpoint without an environment contract would
weaken the trust boundary.
**Roadmap alignment**
This work supports the Cloud and Sandbox agents milestone. It also
supports self-healing runs and governed tool access.
## What Changed
- Added execution-target traits for local, SSH, and sandbox
environments.
- Added plugin RPC contracts for runner ingress endpoints.
- Added authenticated Daytona preview ingress.
- Added transport-neutral PRP outbound connections.
- Added remote runner artifact verification and fail-closed provider
selection.
- Added bounded native session resume, cancellation, and lifecycle
recovery.
- Preserved Codex-only selection for fresh experimental runner starts.
- Preserved all direct adapter execution and finalization paths.
- Removed stale Pi provider-pack requirements that security review
rejected.
- Kept the rollout controls off by default.
- Did not change pnpm-lock.yaml, Cargo, database migrations, or GitHub
workflows.
## Verification
- GitHub Actions will run the repository test, typecheck, build,
security, and policy gates.
- Focused tests cover ingress validation, redaction, execution targets,
remote lifecycle, cancellation, resume, and legacy adapter selection.
- Local tests were not run. The requested verification policy uses
GitHub Actions for this series.
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` passes.
- The diff contains 52 files.
## Risks
- Remote execution crosses a trust boundary.
- The implementation validates target capabilities, artifact digests,
provider-pack pins, and connection metadata.
- The feature remains default-off.
- Fresh native selection remains Codex-only.
- Existing direct adapters remain on the legacy path.
- This PR does not yet make remote Codex runnable. The next PR adds the
Rust WSS and TLS transport.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5.6. The work used high-reasoning agent mode,
repository tools, GitHub tools, and parallel code-audit agents.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with Fixes: / Closes /
Refs OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue
template
- [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source control plane for teams of AI agents.
> - Agent runs currently use direct adapters and their established
finalization paths.
> - The new runner package needs one production integration before it
can execute a real provider through the server.
> - That integration must not change direct adapters or expose
unsupported providers.
> - The rollout must also preserve native runs that were already
recorded when the feature flag changes.
> - This pull request adds a default-off, Codex-only native execution
path and its authority boundary.
> - The benefit is a recoverable production vertical slice with explicit
compatibility guards.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting server orchestration and adapter selection.
**Problem or motivation**
The runner package exists, but the server cannot yet start and recover a
governed Codex run through it. A careless integration could also route
existing direct adapters into the native runtime or lose cancellation
and finalization state.
**Proposed solution**
Add a hidden `paperclip_runner` adapter for Codex. Keep it behind the
default-off instance flag. Bind native execution, resume, cancellation,
semantic tool authority, and finalization to the recorded company,
issue, run, and coordinator identities. Leave every direct adapter on
its existing path.
**Alternatives considered**
A multi-provider launch was rejected because only Codex has the complete
production bridge in this series. Replacing direct adapter execution was
rejected because the runner remains experimental.
**Roadmap alignment**
This work supports governed tool access, action attribution, and
self-healing runs. It keeps the integration narrow and default-off.
## What Changed
- Add the Codex-only native session executor and persisted resumption
path.
- Add run-scoped semantic tool projection, authorization, receipts, and
idempotency.
- Add audited native cancellation with durable issue and coordinator
binding.
- Add result fencing so a recorded result cannot reacquire the provider
and run twice.
- Reject fresh runner starts when the rollout flag is off while
preserving recorded native recovery.
- Keep direct adapters outside native status, cancellation, record
creation, and finalization.
- Add focused conformance, recovery, cancellation, status, portability,
and compatibility coverage.
## Verification
- GitHub Actions is the authoritative test environment for this large
stack.
- The PR policy and lightweight stack checks run while this is a middle
PR.
- The full required suite runs when this PR becomes the lowest unmerged
or top PR.
- Greptile will review this exact delta after the branch is pushed.
## Risks
- The main risk is routing a legacy adapter into native execution.
Runtime selection and heartbeat tests cover that boundary.
- The next risk is stale or cross-company cancellation. Durable binding
checks and transactional audit persistence cover it.
- The adapter remains hidden and default-off. Only Codex is admitted.
- There are no database migration, lockfile, or GitHub workflow changes
in this PR.
## Stack
1. [Runner package, SDK, and developer
tools](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12608)
2. This PR: Codex production server integration
3. [Provider-neutral task-thread
UI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12617)
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5, extended reasoning, repository tools, and
parallel review agents.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] 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 Apps system gives agents governed access to external services
> - The managed OAuth callback discovers provider tools before it
activates a grant
> - Fresh managed connections kept every discovered tool in quarantine
> - The Apps page also counted disabled tools as available actions
> - This pull request makes setup activation atomic and keeps later
catalog changes quarantined
> - The benefit is a usable catalog after consent without weakening
reauthorization safeguards
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
N/A — no public GitHub issue exists for this follow-up. Related merged
work:
[#12619](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12619) and
[paperclip-cloud
#319](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-cloud/pull/319).
**What happened?**
A fresh Paperclip-managed OAuth connection discovered the correct Google
Workspace tools, but it left every allowed tool in quarantine. The Apps
page then reported zero actions for write profiles and counted disabled
actions for read profiles.
**Expected behavior**
A fresh or revived managed connection must remain disabled until
Paperclip stores credentials, discovers the catalog, reviews the profile
allowlist, installs default policies, and activates the connection. A
later reauthorization must preserve user choices. A later catalog change
must quarantine new or changed tools.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Connect a managed Google Workspace write profile.
2. Complete provider consent and return through the instance callback.
3. Open the connection in Apps.
4. Observe that the connection is active but the allowed actions remain
quarantined.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Commit `c7ebc089c` from merged pull request #12619.
**Deployment mode**
Self-hosted local development through Tailscale HTTPS. The same callback
logic applies to Cloud-hosted instances.
**Installation method**
Built from source with pnpm.
**Agent adapter(s) involved**
Not adapter-specific. This change affects the core Apps and tool-access
paths.
## What Changed
- Kept fresh and revived managed connections in the draft state until
catalog finalization succeeds.
- Added a managed-draft refresh option that quarantines discovery
results without changing generic draft behavior.
- Activated reviewed profile tools, created bindings, and installed
ask-first policies in the existing finalization transaction.
- Preserved custom profiles, bindings, archived state, and policies
during ordinary reauthorization.
- Kept new or changed tools quarantined after activation and kept
out-of-profile tools disabled.
- Counted only active catalog entries as available actions in the Apps
page.
- Added retry, revival, reauthorization, policy, profile, and UI
regression coverage.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts` — passed, 208 tests.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/pages/apps/AppDetail.test.tsx` — passed, 52 tests.
- Server and UI typechecks passed.
- `pnpm build` — passed on the final tree.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — passed.
- `git diff --check` — passed.
- Browser walkthrough — passed for all 16 enabled Google Workspace
profiles through the staging Cloud broker and a self-hosted Tailscale
HTTPS instance. Every final connection became active and exposed at
least one allowed action.
- `pnpm test:run` — the changed suites passed. The shared live-QA
environment caused unrelated workspace-runtime concurrency and cleanup
failures, so hosted CI is the clean-environment authority for the full
suite.
## Risks
- The change affects managed OAuth only. Customer-owned OAuth setup
keeps its current behavior.
- A failed initial finalization now leaves a safe draft that the
callback can retry.
- An ordinary active reauthorization does not rebuild defaults, so
existing user policy remains intact.
- There are no database migrations and no public API 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, GPT-5.6, with reasoning, repository tools, browser
control, code execution, test execution, and parallel subagent review.
The effective context window was managed by the Codex task runtime.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and the changed suites 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 Apps system gives agents governed access to external services
> - The managed Google Workspace connector uses separate profiles for
each app and access level
> - Several app definitions and callback paths did not enforce the same
profile contract
> - The default method could also select a customer OAuth setup when a
managed read profile was available
> - This pull request aligns the profile contracts, setup guidance,
default selection, and activity attribution
> - The benefit is a consistent managed connection flow for every Google
Workspace app
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
N/A — no public GitHub issue exists for this follow-up. Related merged
work:
[#12600](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12600) and
[#12609](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12609).
This change follows the merged Paperclip Cloud managed OAuth broker
work. It does not add a new broker or provider client.
**What happened?**
The Google Workspace connection definitions could drift from the shared
connector profile registry. The callback activity always named Gmail.
Google Sheets did not show the Developer Preview requirement. The setup
flow could select a customer-owned write method when Cloud advertised
only a managed read profile. The tool-access service had no non-Gmail
managed callback test.
**Expected behavior**
Each managed Google Workspace profile must use its exact app slug, MCP
URL, scopes, ownership, risk tier, and write-tool policy. Callback
activity must name the correct app and profile. Every Google Workspace
card must show the same Developer Preview prerequisite. An available
managed method must be the default within the selected capability. The
customer-owned method must remain available as a fallback.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Advertise only the `gmail.read` managed profile.
2. Open the Gmail connection setup.
3. Observe that the customer-owned draft method becomes the default.
4. Complete a managed Google Drive callback.
5. Observe that the activity row names Gmail instead of Google Drive.
6. Open the Google Sheets setup.
7. Observe that it does not show the Google Developer Preview
prerequisite.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Current `master` at the start of this follow-up.
**Deployment mode**
Local development. The same connector definitions apply to Cloud-hosted
and self-hosted instances.
**Installation method**
Built from source with pnpm.
**Agent adapter(s) involved**
Not adapter-specific. This change affects the core Apps and tool-access
paths.
## What Changed
- Added one table-driven invariant for all 16 Google Workspace profiles.
- Verified each profile against its app slug, MCP URL, exact scopes,
capability, ownership, grant kind, risk tier, and write-tool allowlist.
- Kept the Google Chat write profile least-privilege because its only
enabled write tool is `send_message`.
- Added the Google Developer Preview prerequisite to Google Sheets.
- Preferred an available Paperclip-managed method before a
customer-owned method.
- Preserved explicit capability selection and the customer OAuth
fallback.
- Switched managed-profile availability from the anonymous global
capability document to the enrolled instance's signed status response,
so internal-pilot profiles cannot be enabled locally without an
authorized instance binding.
- Replaced the Gmail callback activity constant with the validated app
slug and connector profile.
- Added connector and route coverage for signed per-instance
capabilities, including inactive and malformed responses.
- Added a Google Drive callback test that covers the signed profile
request, personal vault refs, encrypted secret rows, catalog filtering,
and non-sensitive activity details.
## Verification
- `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed across all workspaces before the
signed-capability follow-up; final targeted shared and server typechecks
also passed after it.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/paperclip-cloud-connector.test.ts` — passed, 9
tests.
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/app-definitions.test.ts` —
passed, 19 tests.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts` — passed, 205 tests.
- `pnpm test:run` — incomplete after the general server group reported
five failures in `server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts`. The
failures are outside the changed files. The run was stopped before the
remaining serialized suites because the shared worktree was needed for a
follow-up edit.
- `pnpm build` — passed on the final tree.
- `git diff --check` — passed on the final tree.
The five full-suite failures were:
- `records teardown and cleanup operations when a recorder is provided`
- `does not accept an occupied allocated port when listener ownership is
unavailable`
- `backfills a pre-existing HTTP-only managed worktree runtime to
verified HTTPS in place`
- `re-adopts a live service whose shell command differs from the
surviving process argv`
- `reuses a registered legacy worktree that already has the branch
checked out`
## Risks
- The default setup method changes when at least one Paperclip-managed
method is available. Explicit read, write, or draft choices still stay
within the selected capability group.
- Managed method availability now depends on Paperclip Cloud's signed
enrolled-instance status. A Cloud outage or an inactive enrollment hides
managed methods while leaving customer-owned OAuth available.
- The callback activity schema gains a non-sensitive `profile` value. It
does not include tokens, account identifiers, emails, tenant
identifiers, or provider error text.
- The profile invariant is strict. A future Google scope or tool change
must update the shared registry and the matching app definition
together.
- There are no database migrations and no public API 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, GPT-5.6, with reasoning, repository tools, code
execution, and test execution. The effective context window was managed
by the Codex task runtime.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] 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 lets operators connect provider accounts for their agents.
> - Self-hosted instances can enroll with the Paperclip Cloud OAuth
broker.
> - A local identity can remain on disk when an operator changes the
broker from production to staging.
> - The old code combined the new target with the old identity and
produced a verification link that Cloud could not accept.
> - The final enrollment callback also returned to an unscoped Apps
path.
> - This pull request binds each identity to one broker target and
returns to the correct company route.
> - The benefit is a fail-closed enrollment flow that works across Cloud
targets and company-prefixed routes.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs: #12600
**What happened?**
A self-hosted instance with a saved connector identity could switch its
broker base URL and environment. Paperclip then used the saved identity
with the new target. The enrollment page received an unknown draft. A
successful callback also opened an unscoped Apps path, which the UI
treated as a company prefix.
**Expected behavior**
Paperclip must use one atomic identity and broker target. A target
change must never mix old keys with a new broker. A completed enrollment
must return to the initiating company's Connections page.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start a self-hosted Paperclip instance and create a pending connector
enrollment against the production broker.
2. Set the connector base URL and environment to staging.
3. Start enrollment again and open the returned verification URL.
4. Complete enrollment and inspect the final browser route.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`300a89ec1`
**Deployment mode**
Local dev (`pnpm dev`) through private HTTPS.
## What Changed
- Resolve the connector broker and environment as one target.
- Rotate a non-active identity when an administrator explicitly starts
enrollment for a different target.
- Reject active target changes and broker/environment mismatches.
- Treat managed environment identity fields as one atomic tuple.
- Require the Cloud verification URL to contain only the exact
enrollment identifier.
- Validate the configured target again before the instance redeems an
enrollment callback.
- Return successful enrollment callbacks to the company-prefixed
Connections page.
- Add regression tests for target isolation, managed identity
precedence, URL validation, and the return path.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/paperclip-cloud-connector-enrollment.test.ts
server/src/services/paperclip-cloud-connector.test.ts
server/src/routes/tool-access-connection-intent.test.ts` (31 tests
passed)
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- `git diff --check`
- Completed a staging Cloud enrollment from a local Paperclip instance
through private HTTPS.
- Confirmed the instance reports an active staging enrollment for its
exact HTTPS origin.
- Confirmed the company-prefixed Connections route renders the
enrollment success state.
- `pnpm test:run` also reached five unrelated macOS harness failures.
Two compare `/var` with `/private/var`. Three expect listener-fixture
failures that do not occur on this host. The same five failures
reproduce when the two workspace-runtime suites run alone.
## Risks
- Low risk. The change affects only Paperclip Cloud connector identity
selection and the enrollment return route.
- An active identity now fails closed when an operator changes its
broker target. The operator must restore the original target or perform
a new enrollment flow.
- Starting a new target replaces a non-active draft, so its previous
one-time approval link no longer works.
- This change does not alter provider tokens, grants, catalogs, or tool
calls.
> 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 Sol. The work used high-reasoning mode,
repository tools, code execution, browser automation, and parallel
review 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 the scoped 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
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The heartbeat runtime classifies adapter run failures, and the
recovery service uses that classification to decide between automatic
retry, a timed provider-quota wait, and a board escalation
> - The Claude CLI changed its subscription-limit stop message to
"You've hit your limit · resets 2:30am (UTC)", and no quota matcher
knows this qualifier-less wording
> - A limit-hit run therefore classifies as `adapter_failed` (or
`claude_auth_required`), recovery burns its continuation retries against
a hard limit, and the issue blocks with the opaque "No live execution
path" notice instead of waiting for the reset and retrying automatically
> - This pull request teaches the adapter and the recovery service the
new wording, and titles stranded-escalation notices from the classified
run error code so operators see the cause at a glance
> - The benefit is that usage-limit stops self-heal at the provider
reset time, and the notices that do post say "Error: usage limit
reached" or "Error: not logged in to Claude" instead of a generic title
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public issue exists; the underlying problem follows the bug template:
**What happened?**
On a staging deployment, an assigned `in_progress` issue hit the Claude
subscription usage limit. The run recorded the error `Claude run failed:
subtype=success: You've hit your limit · resets 2:30am (UTC)`. The
automatic continuation retry failed the same way in 34 seconds with
`errorCode: adapter_failed`. Terminal-run recovery then escalated: the
issue moved to `blocked` with the notice "No live execution path" and a
board-owned recovery action. The notice gave the operator no indication
that the cause was a usage limit with a known reset time.
**Expected behavior**
A usage-limit stop classifies as `provider_quota` with the reset clock
parsed into `retryNotBefore`. The recovery service takes its
provider-quota wait path: a system-owned recovery action that waits for
the reset time and retries the original assignee automatically. If an
escalation notice does post, its title names the classified cause.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run a `claude_local` agent on an issue until the Claude subscription
limit is hit, so the CLI result is "You've hit your limit · resets
\<time\> (UTC)".
2. Let terminal-run recovery retry the continuation.
3. Observe the issue block with the "No live execution path" notice
instead of a timed quota wait. `classifyAdapterFailureForRecovery`
returns `null` for the recorded error text; `CLAUDE_PROVIDER_QUOTA_RE`
and `PROVIDER_QUOTA_ERROR_RE` both fail to match it.
## What Changed
- `CLAUDE_PROVIDER_QUOTA_RE` and `CLAUDE_EXTRA_USAGE_RESET_RE`
(claude-local adapter) accept "you've hit your limit" with no qualifier,
alongside the existing "session"/"usage" wordings, so the run classifies
as `provider_quota` and the reset clock lands in `retryNotBefore`.
- `PROVIDER_QUOTA_ERROR_RE` and `isProviderQuotaRecovery` (recovery
service) accept the same wording, so runs recorded before the adapter
fix (errorCode `adapter_failed` with the limit text in the error) also
route to the quota wait.
- `parseProviderQuotaClockReset` parses the "resets 2:30am (UTC)" clock
shape alongside the existing "try again at" shape.
- `buildStrandedRecoveryEscalationNotice` titles the notice from the
source run's classified error code when one is mapped: `provider_quota`
→ "Error: usage limit reached", `claude_auth_required` → "Error: not
logged in to Claude", `acpx_auth_required` → "Error: agent login
required". The raw failure text stays withheld from the issue thread;
only the server-classified code is surfaced. Unmapped codes keep the
existing seed/cause titles.
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run
packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/parse.test.ts
server/src/services/recovery/provider-failure-classification.test.ts
server/src/services/recovery/stranded-notice.test.ts` — 72 tests pass,
including 5 new cases that use the exact new CLI message.
- `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-recovery-actions.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` — 189 tests
pass (no reroute regressions from the widened matchers).
- `tsc --noEmit` clean for `@paperclipai/adapter-claude-local` and
`@paperclipai/server`.
## Risks
- Low risk. The regex widenings are additive; every previously matched
wording still matches, and the existing negative test ("Workspace
storage capacity limit reached." stays unclassified) still passes.
- Behavioral shift, intended: an `adapter_failed` run whose error text
is the new limit wording now routes to the silent system-owned quota
wait instead of a board escalation. This matches how the older limit
wordings already behave.
- The notice title change only affects escalations whose source run
carries one of the three mapped error codes; all other notices render
exactly as before.
## Model Used
Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`, Claude Code CLI, extended thinking
with tool use).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs 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 runner package is useful only when the application can start,
observe, and recover a native Codex run safely.
> - Existing direct adapters must keep their current execution and
finalization paths.
> - The application boundary therefore needs additive persistence,
authorization, coordination, and recovery behind an explicit
experimental adapter.
> - This pull request adds that Codex-only boundary without activating
generalized providers, remote environments, or the later task/SDK
surfaces.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
Shared contracts, database persistence, adapter utilities, server
native-runtime services, and the experimental Paperclip Runner adapter.
**Problem or motivation**
The already-landed runner package has a qualified Codex path, but the
application needs durable native-run state, guarded runtime selection,
authenticated coordination, tool security, finalization, and recovery
before the experimental adapter can be exercised safely.
**Proposed solution**
Add a Codex-only `paperclip_runner` application path behind the existing
default-off native-runner setting. Bind native state and coordination to
company/run identity, preserve persisted-run recovery, and leave every
direct adapter on its existing legacy execution path.
**Alternatives considered**
The earlier stack boundary introduced a generalized executor and
remote-environment lifecycle here. That made this PR depend on
implementations in higher PRs and changed reusable sandbox behavior
globally. Those pieces are now deferred together to #12592.
**Roadmap alignment**
ROADMAP.md does not list a conflicting native-runner integration
project. This change adds the application boundary for the existing
Runner architecture.
## What Changed
- Added native run/result/finalization/provider-trace persistence,
shared validators, and idempotent migration/replay coverage.
- Added guarded Codex-only runtime selection, authenticated PRP
coordination, recovery, finalization, and interaction services.
- Added run/company-bound tool-gateway authorization, credential
redaction, SSRF protections, and replay-safe behavior.
- Added the explicit `paperclip_runner` adapter behind the default-off
rollout setting.
- Preserved legacy answered-question wake projection and direct-adapter
execution/finalization paths.
- Hardened cancellation so only owned in-memory child processes are
signaled; persisted recycled PIDs/process groups are never trusted.
- Retained the narrow Claude ACPX isolated-context security follow-up
discovered after #12590.
- Deferred the generalized executor, provider ingress, remote lifecycle,
SDK/lab/eval work, release-process changes, and lockfile.
## Verification
- Changed-file delta against `master`: 133 files.
- GitHub Actions is the authoritative verification environment for this
PR.
- Full CI, security, and Greptile review will run on this lowest
unmerged stack PR.
- Local tests/build/typecheck were not run because this checkout is
resource constrained.
- Static diff/reference checks pass, and `pnpm-lock.yaml` is unchanged.
## Risks
- This touches central heartbeat and agent-route code, so legacy
compatibility is the primary risk.
- Runtime selection remains Codex-only and explicit; direct Codex,
Claude, OpenCode, process, HTTP, and plugin adapters remain on their
existing paths.
- Fresh native starts fail closed while the rollout flag is off;
persisted native records remain readable and recoverable.
- Cancellation, company/run binding, tool calls, status decisions, and
completion writes are guarded or replay-safe.
> 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.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5.6, with repository tools, code execution, and
parallel agent 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 linked existing issues or described the issue in-PR
following the relevant issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass — GitHub Actions is
authoritative for this resource-constrained checkout
- [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 and security gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open actionable findings
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before merge
## Stack
- Position: 3 of 5 overall; lowest of 3 currently unmerged
- Base: `master`
- Previous:
[#12590](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12590), qualified
Claude ACPX runtime — merged
- Next: [#12592](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12592),
generalized Codex executor, task experience, and developer SDKs
---------
Co-authored-by: Dev Agent <dev@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip lets operators give governed tools to AI agents.
> - Connected Apps already support provider OAuth and personal
connection grants.
> - Some providers require one stable callback and do not support
dynamic client registration.
> - Self-hosted Paperclip instances can run at private or changeable
origins.
> - Paperclip Cloud can provide the stable callback while each instance
keeps its durable provider credentials.
> - This pull request adds the instance side of that managed OAuth
protocol and keeps customer-created clients available.
> - The benefit is a safe path to one-click Workspace connections for
hosted and enrolled self-hosted instances.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting. This change updates the server, Apps UI, shared app
definitions, and connection documentation.
**Problem or motivation**
Some OAuth providers require a pre-registered callback and
provider-owned client. An arbitrary self-hosted Paperclip origin cannot
use that client callback directly. Paperclip ID must also stay limited
to product identity instead of resource authorization.
**Proposed solution**
Use the existing Paperclip Cloud application as the fixed callback
broker. Enroll each instance to an exact origin and separate Ed25519 and
X25519 keys. Bind every request and sealed envelope to the instance,
environment, user, company, provider, profile, and exact scope set.
Store durable provider credentials only in the originating instance
vault.
**Alternatives considered**
Customer-created OAuth clients remain available as the independent
fallback. A generic redirect relay was rejected because it would allow
caller-selected destinations and scopes. Paperclip ID was rejected as
the broker because it is the identity boundary. A new service was
rejected because the existing Cloud application already owns customer
login and the public callback origin.
**Roadmap alignment**
This work extends the shipped MCP Tool Gateway and Apps milestone. It
also supports the Connected Apps and Cloud deployments roadmap items.
Companion Cloud implementation:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-cloud/pull/312
The duplicate search found no related open Paperclip PR or issue.
## What Changed
- Add a `paperclip_cloud_connector` client with signed requests, exact
profile and scope bindings, and X25519-sealed credential handling.
- Add explicit self-hosted enrollment with owner-only instance key
storage and exact HTTPS origins.
- Route managed Google Workspace setup through Paperclip Cloud and
preserve customer-created OAuth clients.
- Keep broker claims retryable until the local vault transaction
commits.
- Keep managed Google per-profile removal local-only to avoid
client-wide provider revocation.
- Add setup status to the Connections page and retain the Paperclip ID
names as compatibility aliases.
- Document the trust boundaries, enrollment, callback, refresh, removal,
and rollout flows.
## Verification
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared exec vitest run
src/app-definitions.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/services/paperclip-cloud-connector.test.ts
src/services/paperclip-cloud-connector-enrollment.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts -t 'brokered Gmail
OAuth|brokered OAuth state'`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/pages/apps/Connections.test.tsx`
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `pnpm build`
- The full stable test runner also reproduced existing macOS workspace,
skill-discovery, and listener fixture failures outside the changed
paths. GitHub Linux CI is the authoritative full-suite result.
## Risks
- The managed flow depends on
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-cloud/pull/312. Real provider
profiles stay disabled until Cloud deploys that protocol and the
provider approves the managed client.
- A Cloud outage blocks new authorization and refresh. Existing access
tokens continue to work until expiry.
- Managed Google profile removal only deletes the local grant. This
avoids invalidating the user's other profiles that share the managed
Google client.
- Legacy `paperclip_id_connector` records require a reconnect after
their current access tokens expire. Old Paperclip ID keys and refresh
tokens are not sent to Paperclip Cloud.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5.6 (Codex). Agentic coding, tool use, code execution, and
subagents were enabled. The context-window size is not exposed in this
session.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Paperclip Runner provides a durable execution boundary for supported
providers.
> - The current production runtime supports Codex but cannot execute
OpenCode sessions.
> - OpenCode needs a qualified transport, strict input mapping, and
normalized events.
> - This pull request adds the OpenCode runtime as one isolated provider
unit.
> - The benefit is a reviewable provider expansion that does not weaken
the existing Codex path.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting: packages/paperclip-runner and the Codex-local adapter
configuration contract.
**Problem or motivation**
Paperclip Runner has provider-neutral contracts, but the production
backend factory cannot start a qualified OpenCode session. This blocks
OpenCode from using the durable runner path.
**Proposed solution**
Add the qualified OpenCode app-server proxy, driver, MCP bridge,
backend, fixtures, and factory wiring. Keep existing Codex behavior
unchanged.
**Alternatives considered**
Keeping OpenCode only on the direct adapter path would avoid this
runtime work, but it would not provide durable runner recovery or
normalized provider events.
**Roadmap alignment**
ROADMAP.md does not list a conflicting provider-runtime project. This
change extends the existing Paperclip Runner architecture.
## What Changed
- Added the qualified OpenCode app-server proxy and input queue.
- Added collaboration-mode and provider-event normalization.
- Added the OpenCode MCP bridge and native session backend.
- Added strict fixtures and focused unit coverage.
- Added only the package exports and adapter configuration required by
this runtime.
- Kept deferred SDK, lab, eval, and public package surfaces out of this
change.
## Verification
- GitHub Actions is the authoritative verification environment for this
PR.
- Run the package type checks and focused OpenCode tests in CI.
- Run repository typecheck, test, build, security, and policy gates
through the stack-aware workflow.
- Local tests were not run because this checkout is resource
constrained.
## Risks
- OpenCode protocol changes could affect event normalization or
recovery.
- The driver fails closed on malformed input and unsupported runtime
behavior.
- Existing Codex selection remains unchanged unless the stored provider
is OpenCode.
> 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.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5.6, with repository tools, code execution, and
parallel agent 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 linked existing issues or described the issue in-PR
following the relevant issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass — GitHub Actions is
authoritative for this resource-constrained checkout
- [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
## Stack
- Position: 1 of 4
- Base: master
- Next: additional qualified provider runtimes
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app that people use to manage AI agents
for work.
> - The npm release includes the Paperclip server and a vendored runner.
> - The vendored runner imports ACPX when it starts a Codex agent.
> - The server package did not include the ACPX version that the runner
needs.
> - A fresh canary install therefore stopped with `ERR_MODULE_NOT_FOUND`
after onboarding.
> - This pull request bundles the patched ACPX runtime with the server
package.
> - The benefit is that a fresh npm install can load the vendored
runner.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public issue exists for this bug. A GitHub search found no duplicate
or related pull request.
**What happened?**
A fresh `npx paperclipai@canary onboard` command completed onboarding.
The server then failed to start. Node could not resolve `acpx` from the
vendored Paperclip runner.
**Expected behavior**
The server should start after onboarding from a fresh npm cache and a
temporary data directory.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run `npx paperclipai@canary onboard --data-dir "$(mktemp -d
/tmp/paperclip-canary.XXXXXX)"`.
2. Select Quickstart.
3. Start Paperclip.
4. Observe `ERR_MODULE_NOT_FOUND` for `acpx`.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`paperclipai@2026.831.0-canary.6`
**Deployment mode**
Other: local trusted Quickstart through `npx`.
**Installation method**
npm through `npx`.
**Agent adapter(s) involved**
Codex.
**Database mode**
Embedded PGlite.
**Access context**
Board operator during onboarding.
**Node.js version**
Node.js 26.4.0.
**Operating system**
macOS.
**Relevant logs or output**
```shell
Cannot find package 'acpx' imported from .../node_modules/@paperclipai/server/dist/vendor/paperclip-runner/drivers/acpx/codex-runtime-adapter.js
```
**Relevant config (if applicable)**
No custom configuration was required.
**Additional context**
The published adapter utilities contain a nested `acpx@0.12.0`. Node
cannot resolve that nested package from the sibling vendored runner.
Installing `acpx@0.13.1` at the clean package root makes the failing
runner import succeed.
**Privacy checklist**
The log excerpt contains no user path, token, company name, or other
private value.
## What Changed
- Added `acpx@0.13.1` as a bundled server runtime dependency.
- Added a version-specific patch check for the ACPX versions used by the
server and adapter utilities.
- Added release-package coverage for the server ACPX bundle.
## Verification
- `pnpm test:release-registry` passed 98 tests.
- `node --test scripts/acpx-patch-packaging.test.mjs` passed 12 tests.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/server-package-build-script.test.ts` passed 4
tests.
- `node --test scripts/release-package-map.test.mjs` passed 12 tests.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed.
- A clean extracted server tarball contained the patched `acpx@0.13.1`
runtime.
- The previously failing vendored runner module imported from that clean
tarball.
- The repository-wide test suite was stopped before completion at the
maintainer's request because it takes too long for this urgent packaging
fix.
## Risks
- Risk is low.
- The server tarball grows because it now contains ACPX and its
production dependencies.
- The release stager now uses a version-specific marker to verify the
ACPX patch.
> 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-sol`.
- The model used reasoning mode, tool use, and code execution.
- The context window size was not disclosed.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The hidden native coordinator already computes a run-scoped semantic
tool projection.
> - The durable Codex backend now accepts and enforces that projection.
> - The server did not include the projection in its `run.prepare`
command.
> - Codex therefore received no production semantic tools even when the
server authorized them.
> - This pull request adds the deterministic wire projection and sends
it to runnerd.
> - The benefit is one fail-closed authorization catalog from the server
through Codex.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12384
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
This improves the existing flagged Paperclip Runner Codex path.
**Current behavior**
The server creates a run-scoped list of authorized read tools. It does
not pass that list to runnerd, so the production Codex session starts
with no tools.
**Proposed behavior**
The server maps the authorized definitions to the versioned runner
contract. It computes a cross-language catalog digest. It includes that
immutable contract in `run.prepare`.
**Reason and benefit**
Runnerd and the server now enforce the same catalog identity. Unknown,
duplicate, changed, or malformed tool contracts fail before Codex can
use them.
**Breaking changes**
None. Direct adapters are unchanged. A native run with an empty server
projection still starts with no dynamic tools.
## What Changed
- Add a deterministic semantic-definition to runner-authorization
projection.
- Match the Rust canonical digest with a shared test vector.
- Include the server coordinator projection in the native Codex
`run.prepare` command.
- Extend the native Codex vertical slice to require and execute a
semantic tool.
- Verify the production prepare payload in a host-independent server
test.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:typescript` (354
tests pass)
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/services/native-runtime/native-codex-runner.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- The embedded-Postgres vertical slice is present for CI. This local
host reports that embedded Postgres is unavailable, so Vitest skips that
host-dependent test locally.
- Confirmed that the PR changes 7 files against
`runner-codex-durable-tools`.
- Confirmed that `pnpm-lock.yaml` is unchanged.
## Risks
The main risk is a catalog digest mismatch between TypeScript and Rust.
Both implementations use canonical JSON. They share the same fixed
digest vector. Runnerd also recomputes the digest and rejects a
mismatch.
The rollout flag and the existing native runtime selection rules remain
unchanged.
## 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 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 experimental Paperclip Runner can execute a guarded Codex run
and persist provider-neutral events.
> - The task page still reads direct-adapter transcripts and cannot
present those native events.
> - Structured runner questions must also use the existing task
interaction experience.
> - Runtime selection must use the persisted run mode, not an adapter
name or a current feature flag.
> - This pull request projects native events and questions into the
existing task thread.
> - Direct adapters keep their existing transcript, composer,
interaction, and finalization paths.
> - The benefit is a complete native Codex task thread without a
behavior change for existing adapters.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12202. This pull request replaces that stale implementation on
current `master`.
**What happened?**
The server persists native runner events and structured input requests.
The task page only consumes direct-adapter transcripts. A native run
therefore cannot present a complete transcript, usage, or question flow
through the normal task experience.
**Expected behavior**
Native runs project persisted provider-neutral events into the existing
task thread. Native structured questions use the existing interaction
card. Direct adapters retain their current behavior.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Enable the experimental runner.
2. Start a native Codex run that emits progress, usage, a structured
question, and a final reply.
3. Open the task page.
4. Observe that the direct-adapter transcript path cannot project the
native event records.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`master` at `67f9867bc`.
## What Changed
- Add the canonical structured-question validator and shared contract
exports.
- Materialize native input requests as existing task interactions.
- Validate native answers and deliver them through the durable
question-response receipt.
- Resume the original PRP request with an idempotent `request.resolve`
command.
- Project native messages, tool activity, cumulative usage, and final
replies into the existing transcript model.
- Propagate persisted `runtimeMode` to the task page and select native
handling only for `runtimeMode: "native"`.
- Expire pending interactions through the shared issue service on every
terminal transition, including decisions, stalled reviews, tree control,
and pipeline retry cleanup.
- Queue native run cancellation while a transaction is open and execute
it only after the owning transaction commits.
- Keep nonterminal and non-runner issue paths on their existing service
call shapes and behavior.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed, including the
Rust runner release build and protocol/catalog drift gates.
- Focused native-thread and lifecycle suites — 18 files and 481 tests
passed during review.
- `issue-execution-policy-routes.test.ts` — 19/19 passed after the final
transactional-queue expectation update.
- `issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts` — 87/87 passed in the
final isolated compatibility rerun.
- GitHub Actions — policy, build, canary, typecheck/release registry, 5
serialized server shards, 8 general-test shards, 3 browser shards, and
both aggregate gates passed on `7793f3193`.
- Security — Snyk, Socket Project Report, Socket PR Alerts, and
Superagent passed.
- Greptile — 5/5 on `7793f3193`; all actionable review threads resolved.
- `git diff --check` — passed.
- Diff against `master`: 44 files.
## Compatibility Boundary
- Native transcript polling only runs when the persisted run reports
`runtimeMode: "native"`.
- Missing or legacy runtime modes continue through
`useLiveRunTranscripts`.
- Legacy questions keep the existing optional free-text choice.
- Native closed select sets can suppress that legacy fallback.
- Terminal cleanup uses the same issue service for native and legacy
interactions; only a bound native question schedules a native run
cancellation.
- Native cancellation happens after transaction commit, so failed or
rolled-back writes do not cancel a still-valid run.
- The durable delivery service checks the original native request before
it considers a continuation run.
- This pull request adds no migration, dependency, workflow, manifest,
or lockfile change.
## Risks
The main risk is routing a direct-adapter task through native handling
or changing terminal issue behavior. The implementation selects the
native path only from persisted runtime facts, retains the existing
nonterminal call shape, and schedules native cancellation only for a
validated bound native question after commit. Focused and
repository-wide tests cover both paths. Native requests remain bound to
the company, issue, run, and agent; answers are validated, durable, and
idempotent across reconnects.
## 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 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 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 P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I addressed 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-drain service controls when task execution can start and
stop.
> - The service had compensation paths for states that its validators or
recovery process already handle.
> - These paths added rollback state and a stuck-claim marker without
improving normal drain behavior.
> - This pull request removes the unreachable TTL clamp, audit rollback,
generation counter, and double-fault marker.
> - The result keeps input validation, audit ordering, atomic release,
and orphan recovery.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The task-drain service and its routes manage drain state, audit rows,
and execution locks.
**Subsystem affected**
server/ — REST API and orchestration services.
**Current behavior**
The service clamps a validated TTL value. The routes mutate drain state
before audit writes and then restore state after a failed write. Claim
release also tracks a second durable-write failure with an in-memory
marker.
**Proposed behavior**
The validator remains the single TTL policy. The routes write audit rows
before they mutate drain state. Claim release logs a failed write and
lets the orphan reaper release the issue lock.
**Reason and benefit**
The removed paths cannot handle a valid API request that reaches them.
The rollback can lose the original start time. The marker can keep a
drain non-quiescent until process restart. The simpler flow keeps state
consistent and uses the existing recovery path.
**Breaking changes**
None to the public API. A failed claim release keeps the issue lock
until the next orphan-reaper cycle.
## What Changed
- Remove the service-layer TTL clamp because the shared validator
rejects values above the limit.
- Write task-drain audit rows before drain mutation and remove the
rollback helpers.
- Remove the rollback generation counter and its unused state.
- Remove double-fault stuck-claim tracking and keep the atomic release
path.
- State that the quiescent flag describes work in this process.
- Keep the orphan reaper as the recovery path after a failed claim
release.
## Verification
- Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server test
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-task-drain-admission-release.test.ts`.
- Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server test
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-task-drain.test.ts`.
- Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server test
server/src/__tests__/instance-settings-routes.test.ts`.
- Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server test
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-scheduling-suppression.test.ts`.
- Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server test
server/src/__tests__/execution-lock-orphan-cleanup.test.ts`.
- The five affected test files pass with 70 tests.
- Confirm the full pull request checks pass before merge.
## Risks
The issue lock remains held until the orphan reaper runs after a failed
claim release. This uses the existing recovery path for interrupted
runs. The change does not alter the public API or database schema.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, 400K context window, 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.
> - Apps give those agents governed access to external tools.
> - Provider catalogs must match each provider's current protocol and
credential contract.
> - Postman method labels and API-key placement were outdated.
> - Shopify now offers a UCP commerce endpoint that needs a managed
agent-profile argument.
> - This pull request updates both providers and documents the complete
connection-authoring workflow.
> - The benefit is accurate setup, safer runtime defaults, and a
repeatable provider review process.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #11965
This is stack 10 of 11. It depends on stack 9 and preserves the final
catalog work recovered from #11965.
Related: #5904 covers Shopify skill routing. This pull request covers
the Apps connection contract instead.
## What Changed
- Update Postman hosted MCP methods, capability choices, default
selection, and bearer-token placement.
- Add Shopify UCP commerce and Storefront compatibility methods with
public-store prerequisites.
- Inject the reviewed Shopify UCP agent profile at runtime and remove
that managed field from user input schemas.
- Classify Shopify checkout completion and cancellation as destructive
actions.
- Expand the connection authoring runbook from provider research through
verification and pull request handoff.
- Add focused shared, server, and UI coverage.
- Make the approved-execution waiter phase-aware so slow preparation
cannot consume the provider execution timeout and grace period.
- Settle legacy pre-execute-on-approve requests and invocations as
failed, clear their stale idempotency key, and allow a fresh governed
approval instead of leaving work stuck in `executing`.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/app-definitions.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts
ui/src/pages/apps/AppsConnect.test.tsx -t
"Postman|Shopify|normalizeConnectionMethodConfig|classifyRisk"` (16
passed)
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/approved-execution-wait.test.ts` (4 passed)
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/tool-gateway.test.ts -t
"enforces policy, approvals, retries, rate limits, and company
boundaries for connected remote MCP calls"` (1 passed)
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/tool-gateway-service.test.ts` (21 passed; includes
legacy approval settlement and fresh-approval recovery)
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
## Risks
- Shopify UCP calls now include a Paperclip-managed agent profile that
overrides caller input at the same path.
- Postman EU credentials now use the hosted MCP server's bearer-token
contract instead of the general REST API header.
- The catalog generator and checked-in definitions change together to
prevent regeneration drift.
- Approved execution preparation has an explicit two-minute bound;
provider execution retains its own 65-second timeout and persistence
grace starting from durable provider start.
- Legacy approvals created before execute-on-approve are intentionally
terminalized and must be requested again under the current signed
contract.
> I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This provider update does not duplicate
planned core work. The related open Shopify PR addresses skill routing,
not Apps connections.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The runtime exact model ID and context window were
not exposed. The model 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 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.
> - Connection intents need secure provider implementations to complete
setup.
> - Some providers use managed OAuth or external credential brokers.
> - Those tokens must stay out of durable Paperclip state and fail
closed when refresh fails.
> - This pull request adds managed connector backends and the required
storage contract.
> - The benefit is safer provider setup with governed credential
lifecycles.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #11965
This is stack 8 of 11. It depends on stack 7 and replaces another
reviewable part of #11965.
## What Changed
- Add managed Google Workspace and external connector backends.
- Add Vercel Connect support without storing provider bearer tokens.
- Add replay-safe migration 0232 and its generated snapshot.
- Fail closed and clear stale token bindings when organization OAuth
refresh needs reauthorization.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts`
- Result: 194 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db check:migrations`
- `pnpm build`
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/services/remote-url-credentials.test.ts` (5 passed, including
URL userinfo vault extraction)
## Risks
- Broker metadata errors can block provider setup.
- OAuth refresh failure disables the shared organization connection
until reauthorization.
- Migration 0232 is generated, ordered after 0231, and safe to replay.
> I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This stack continues the existing app
connection work from #11965 and does not duplicate another planned item.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The runtime model ID and context window were not
exposed. The model 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 linked the public source pull request with `Refs #`
- [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
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agents need a governed way to request app connections during issue
work.
> - The catalog now describes the available providers and setup methods.
> - A request must become a durable, company-scoped intent before an
operator acts on it.
> - This pull request adds that intent runtime across server, agent,
CLI, and shared contracts.
> - The benefit is a safe bridge from agent need to operator-approved
setup.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #11965
This is stack 7 of 11. It depends on stack 6 and replaces another
reviewable part of #11965.
## What Changed
- Add connection intent types, validation, service logic, and routes.
- Add agent runtime tools and CLI support for connection requests.
- Add issue-thread interaction support for connection intents.
- Add runtime, route, adapter, and contract tests.
- Hold the final resolved-continuation row lock through asynchronous
adapter preparation until an actual process spawn, so parking or
reassignment cannot cross that boundary.
- Report Hermes Gateway's first remote run request through the shared
dispatch hook so the resolved-intent lock is released at the true
dispatch boundary.
- Revalidate the addressed user's live non-viewer membership and
connection-management authority for every intent mutation, including
OAuth completion.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts`
- Result: 176 tests passed.
- `pnpm build`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-stale-queue-invalidation.test.ts` (32 passed;
includes non-process dispatch lock-release coverage)
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/connection-intents-service.test.ts -t
"addressed-user mutation"` (1 passed)
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts -t "binds OAuth
callback completion to the initiating board session"` (1 passed)
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/hermes-paperclip-adapter test --
src/gateway/server/execute.test.ts` (23 passed; includes dispatch-hook
ordering and exactly-once coverage)
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/hermes-paperclip-adapter typecheck`
## Risks
- A malformed intent could create an unusable operator request.
- Validators and company checks reject invalid or cross-company
requests.
- The final continuation gate holds the issue row lock through adapter
preparation until process or remote dispatch; later operator changes use
the normal active-run interruption path.
- The change does not add a database migration.
> I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This stack continues the existing app
connection work from #11965 and does not duplicate another planned item.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The runtime model ID and context window were not
exposed. The model 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 linked the public source pull request with `Refs #`
- [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 open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - A useful app store needs accurate and selectable provider
definitions.
> - Local brand assets now cover the expanded provider set.
> - Provider methods differ in transport, authentication, ownership, and
required scope.
> - This pull request expands the catalog and encodes those provider
contracts.
> - The benefit is a larger self-serve store with explicit setup
choices.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #11965
This is stack 6 of 11. It depends on stack 5 and replaces another
reviewable part of #11965.
## What Changed
- Add and update provider definitions for the self-serve catalog.
- Add Google Workspace connection methods and capability profiles.
- Add catalog generation, ingestion, URL matching, and contract tests.
- Update legacy key tests to use a provider that still uses header
credentials.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts`
- Result: 164 tests passed.
- `pnpm build`
## Risks
- An incorrect provider definition can offer the wrong setup method.
- Contract tests verify transport, authentication, and provider URL
behavior.
- The change does not add a database migration.
> I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This stack continues the existing app
connection work from #11965 and does not duplicate another planned item.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The runtime model ID and context window were not
exposed. The model 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 `Refs #` or (b)
described the issue in this pull request
- [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 open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - App connections need both direct providers and managed provider
hubs.
> - The grant layer now defines safe credential ownership.
> - Composio needs parent and child connection lifecycle rules, and
Gmail needs governed setup.
> - This pull request adds both connector families on the grant
foundation.
> - The benefit is broader app access without weakening credential
isolation.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #11965
This is stack 4 of 11. It depends on stack 3 and replaces another
reviewable part of #11965.
## What Changed
- Add Composio parent and child connection support.
- Add Gmail connection setup and governance.
- Preserve credential paths and remove duplicate binding declarations.
- Cascade Composio pause and restore actions to child connections.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts`
- Result: 164 tests passed.
- `pnpm build`
## Risks
- Parent lifecycle changes can affect every Composio child.
- The service restores only children whose provider accounts remain
active.
- Credential binding paths are normalized before secret resolution.
> I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This stack continues the existing app
connection work from #11965 and does not duplicate another planned item.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The runtime model ID and context window were not
exposed. The model 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
- [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 open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - External tools need explicit identity and access boundaries.
> - Shared connection credentials cannot represent every user-scoped use
case.
> - Grants must stay company-scoped and support safe delegation.
> - This pull request adds connection grants, identity rules, and their
database contract.
> - The benefit is durable control over which identity an agent may use.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #11965
This is stack 3 of 11. It depends on stack 2 and replaces another
reviewable part of #11965.
## What Changed
- Add company and user connection grants.
- Add delegated identity and membership rules.
- Synchronize database, shared, server, and UI contracts.
- Register the grant-member replacement route in the OpenAPI surface in
the same layer that mounts it.
- Add migration 0231 with replay-safe guards and coverage.
## Verification
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts` (5 passed)
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db check:migrations`
- `pnpm build`
## Risks
- Incorrect grant selection could expose the wrong credential scope.
- The service enforces company and subject boundaries before credential
use.
- Migration 0231 is generated, ordered after 0230, and safe to replay.
> I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This stack continues the existing app
connection work from #11965 and does not duplicate another planned item.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The runtime model ID and context window were not
exposed. The model 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 linked a public issue or pull request with `Refs #`
- [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 open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - App connections must work in both the operator UI and agent tool
gateway.
> - The first stack layer adds secure remote connections.
> - Operators still need clear setup, test, and recovery states.
> - This pull request adds the gateway behavior and the workspace
connection experience.
> - The benefit is a connection flow that is easier to understand and
recover.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #11965
This is stack 2 of 11. It depends on stack 1 and replaces another
reviewable part of #11965.
## What Changed
- Improve remote tool gateway connection behavior.
- Add clearer app setup, test, and recovery states.
- Add focused server and UI tests for the new paths.
- Keep the diff isolated from later identity and catalog work.
- Stabilize DNS-pinned remote HTTP protocol fixtures and the
managed-runtime public-origin fixture for this independently tested
layer.
## Verification
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts` (150 passed)
- `pnpm test:run`
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `pnpm build`
## Risks
- Gateway errors now surface through new user-facing states.
- A stale connection can require a new setup attempt.
- The change does not add a database migration.
- The injected HTTP transport and public URL are test-only fixtures;
production DNS pinning and runtime behavior are unchanged.
> I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This stack continues the existing app
connection work from #11965 and does not duplicate another planned item.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The runtime model ID and context window were not
exposed. The model 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
- [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 open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Apps give those agents governed access to external tools.
> - Remote MCP setup needs secure endpoint validation and durable
credentials.
> - PostHog needs both browser sign-in and personal API key setup paths.
> - This pull request adds the shared remote MCP foundation and the
PostHog definition.
> - The benefit is a secure and reusable base for later app connection
work.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #11965
This is stack 1 of 11. It replaces the first reviewable part of #11965.
## What Changed
- Add guarded remote MCP setup and credential handling.
- Add PostHog OAuth and API key connection methods.
- Add focused server, shared contract, and UI coverage.
- Keep the migration replay-safe and idempotent.
- Give the late-close security regression the same 10-second CI headroom
as the adjacent real-timer handshake test.
- Synchronize fake-timer handshake tests at the exact ensure-session
boundary so real filesystem setup cannot race the fake deadline.
- Drive PTY overflow coverage only after listener registration so
scheduling cannot reorder the test fixture.
## Verification
- pnpm exec vitest run
packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/execute.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-worker-manager.test.ts (220 passed; affected
cases also passed five focused stress repetitions)
- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/execute.test.ts -t "never leaks a
sandbox-provided value from a late close rejection into logs or the
result"` (1 passed)
- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/execute.test.ts -t "never
promotes a late ensureSession resolution|closes a late-resolving real
handle exactly once"` (2 passed)
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db check:migrations`
- `pnpm build`
## Risks
- Remote endpoint validation can reject configurations that previously
passed without checks.
- OAuth configuration errors can block setup until the operator corrects
the provider settings.
- The migration uses guarded statements so repeated execution is safe.
- The test-only synchronization changes do not affect runtime behavior;
they remove filesystem/fake-clock and listener-registration races
observed under parallel CI load.
> I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This stack continues the existing app
connection work from #11965 and does not duplicate another planned item.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The runtime model ID and context window were not
exposed. The model 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 and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The server admits agent work through heartbeat scheduling and
execution paths
> - Operators need to stop new work before maintenance or a graceful
shutdown
> - A process restart alone does not provide a reusable admission
control primitive
> - This pull request adds an instance API that holds new task admission
and reports process quiescence
> - The benefit is a small, auditable control that lets operators wait
for active work without a restart
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Problem or motivation**
Operators cannot hold new task admission without restarting the
Paperclip process. A restart can interrupt maintenance flows and does
not provide a status signal for active work.
**Proposed solution**
Add `GET /instance/task-drain`, `POST /instance/task-drain`, and `DELETE
/instance/task-drain`. The server keeps the drain state in process
memory, applies it to every scheduling suppression path, supports an
optional TTL up to 24 hours, and reports active wake and run counts.
**Alternatives considered**
A timer would clear the drain after its TTL, but it could keep the
Node.js event loop open during shutdown. A database row would add
storage and query work for process-local state. The implementation uses
lazy expiry and process memory instead.
**Roadmap alignment**
The change supports the roadmap goal for enforced outcomes and safe
recovery actions. It does not duplicate a listed roadmap item.
**Additional context**
This is a server and shared-package change. It adds no user interface
and no database migration.
## What Changed
- Add process-local task-drain state with lazy TTL expiry.
- Add task-drain admission suppression to the shared heartbeat resolver.
- Add instance routes to read, start, and stop a task drain.
- Add validation for positive TTL values and the shared 24-hour maximum.
- Add activity records for drain mutations and tests for status, access
control, validation, and suppression.
## Verification
- Run `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-task-drain.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/instance-settings-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-scheduling-suppression.test.ts`.
- Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared exec tsc --noEmit`.
- Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsc --noEmit` and compare
its known pre-existing errors with the base commit.
- Confirm that pull request CI reaches a terminal green state.
## Risks
The drain state exists only in process memory, so a restart clears it.
This behavior matches the process-local design. A drain without a TTL
remains active until an operator calls the delete route. The status
route reads in-memory activity sets and does not query stale database
rows.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, extended reasoning with tool use and code
execution. The exact runtime context window is not exposed by the
execution environment.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
dependabot[bot]
Devin Foley
Dotta
Nicky Leach
scotttong
Michael Nguyen
