Apply the production patch from PR #13042 to the existing EC2 application revision without unrelated master changes.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip lets people share agents while keeping GitHub access
personal.
> - Each managed Git or GitHub operation selects an eligible connection
grant.
> - Connecting the same GitHub account twice creates two grants.
> - The old resolver counted grants and rejected them as competing
identities.
> - Managed commands then ran anonymously and reported a misleading
login failure.
> - This change compares GitHub account IDs and selects one eligible
grant for the same account.
> - The benefit is reliable access after reconnecting, with clear
diagnostics for real failures.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #13005.
**What happened?**
Two active connections owned by one Paperclip user pointed to the same
GitHub account. Managed Git refused both as ambiguous. The agent could
not push, although the account was connected and had repository access.
**Expected behavior**
Multiple grants for the same GitHub account resolve to one eligible
authorization. Different accounts remain ambiguous. Unavailable access
explains its cause without blocking unrelated work.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Connect the same GitHub account twice for one Paperclip user and
allow the shared agent through both connection audiences.
2. Start an instruction as that user.
3. Run managed gh or git push. Before this fix, no credential is
provided.
## What Changed
- Compare stable GitHub account IDs when more than one eligible grant
exists. Never deduplicate by login alone.
- Prefer an available grant, then the newest authorization with a stable
ID tie-breaker. Refresh and webhook timestamps do not change the
selection.
- Keep the selected credential and connection policy together. Do not
combine permissions or fall back from a dedicated account to a personal
account.
- Print the redacted unavailable reason in managed command output.
Unrelated local operations still work anonymously.
- Add database and executable launcher regressions, and document
selection behavior.
## Verification
- Final `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed.
- Fourteen operation credential integration tests passed, covering
duplicate personal/dedicated grants, incomplete credentials, distinct
accounts with the same login, missing identity metadata, revocation,
membership, connection audiences, and A → B → A steering. Existing Git
credential and gateway suites and both executable launcher tests also
passed.
- The local broad test run encountered three embedded-Postgres lifecycle
timeouts and stale modules from edits made during that run. A fresh
process rerun of all four affected suites passed all 35 tests. The full
Node 24 CI test matrix passed on the final commit.
- CI passed all 31 checks on `797973b30beb16ba5fa69ed281835e1ab812b449`
(Storybook visual regression was correctly skipped). An unrelated
Company Settings UI test failed once; the focused local reproduction and
rerun of its CI shard both passed without code changes.
- Fresh Greptile review of the final commit: 5/5, with no open findings.
Security checks passed.
- Live acceptance passed with both duplicate connections enabled:
managed `gh api user` returned the expected account, managed `git push`
succeeded, and the agent created #13023 and pushed its review fixes. No
host login or credential changes were used.
- Applied the final source/compiled patch to the affected instance with
backups, after confirming no runs were active. Restarted service health
and the final resolver selection were verified. The patch is an overlay
on the existing deployment; this PR supplies the upstream fix.
## Risks
The resolver selects one authorization for an already permitted GitHub
account. It does not combine repository permissions across connections.
If the selected authorization has narrower access, that operation can
still be denied by GitHub. Different provider account IDs and unknown
duplicate identities continue to fail closed. No schema, host
credential, or connection permission changes are included.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex assisted implementation and verification with
shell, database, and browser tools. The exact model variant and
context-window size are 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.
> - Several people can send instructions to the same agent and task.
> - A fixed GitHub token in the provider process can keep the first
person's access after another person's message is accepted.
> - Task ownership cannot select credentials for each accepted
instruction or preserve the identity of an operation already in
progress.
> - This pull request records ordered execution identity contexts and
resolves credentials when managed Git, gh, or GitHub tools start.
> - The benefit is automatic personal GitHub access for shared agents,
with durable continuation rules and no teammate credential fallback.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting: orchestration, connection grants, database, runtime
adapters, native runners, and run details.
**Problem or motivation**
A shared agent must use the person whose instructions it has accepted. A
queued message must retain its author. A retry or approval without new
instructions must retain the originating identity. GitHub must remain
optional for ordinary work.
**Proposed solution**
Persist execution identity separately from task ownership. Give new
processes a run-scoped broker capability and token-free managed
launchers. Capture identity at operation start. Keep an explicit
dedicated-agent grant as an override. Show redacted diagnostics in run
details.
**Alternatives considered**
Per-task ownership, fixed provider tokens, and mutable repository author
configuration do not handle accepted steering or concurrent operations.
A manual account-selection action would add unnecessary setup to each
turn.
**Roadmap alignment**
This completes the existing Multiple Human Users, MCP Tool Gateway &
Apps, Secrets Manager, and Self-healing Runs capabilities. The
implementation follows the maintainer-approved plan.
Related work: Refs #12843, Refs #12907. Existing proposals #4618 and
#8945 cover per-agent or per-worktree author configuration. This change
instead follows the accepted human instruction across runtime types.
Refs #11831 for governed personal connection delegation; this change
preserves connection audience checks and does not use standing
delegation as a personal credential fallback.
## What Changed
- Add durable, ordered identity contexts and active run references.
Preserve message authors through consolidation, steering, retries,
delegation, approvals, routines, and restart.
- Add an authenticated operation-time GitHub credential broker and
local/remote managed git and gh launchers. Keep personal tokens out of
the long-lived provider process.
- Resolve GitHub gateway and server-side Git operations through the same
responsible-person or dedicated-grant selection rules.
- Make absent and unavailable GitHub credentials non-blocking at generic
startup. Clear host and prior-person credentials. Keep anonymous Git
access where supported.
- Add run-detail identity history and the dedicated-account warning.
Keep task ownership and queue-versus-steer decisions unchanged.
- Preserve personal OAuth declarations through connection edits. Retain
exact selected grants in the gateway.
- Fix continuation races found during real acceptance: verify a warm
owner before credential rotation, and wait for bounded durable runner
suspension before the next run starts.
- Make migrations replay-safe. Retain identity through agent/run
deletion, remove it with its company, and clean terminal launcher
directories before releasing execution environments. Document
coordinated release and rollback.
## Verification
- Full workspace typecheck, build, and token gates passed. The complete
local suite passed in its normal test groups: 17,120 passing tests,
including all 143 serialized server suites. After integrating the newly
merged runner API work, full local typecheck and build passed again,
along with 890 focused integration tests. All 31 checks on the
integrated revision passed, including build, browser E2E, release
registry, canary dry run, typecheck, security and all test suites.
Greptile is 5/5 with all review threads resolved.
- Current focused checks passed: 142 native executor tests, 67 runtime
lifecycle tests, 9 durable identity tests, 75 credential/routine tests,
19 low-trust/resumption tests, and the executable migration replay test.
- Authenticated browser acceptance with two Paperclip users and two
GitHub accounts on one shared native agent passed. Real commits and
pushes followed A → B accepted steering → queued A continuation in the
same saved conversation. GitHub commit author and committer identities
matched all three operations. Both runs succeeded and task ownership
stayed unchanged.
- Real GitHub MCP calls switched from A to B after accepted steering. A
delegated subtask retained its originating identity across a server
restart.
- Disabling B's GitHub connection left ordinary work successful. Managed
gh was unauthenticated and the provider had no inherited GH_TOKEN or
GITHUB_TOKEN.
- The browser displayed run-detail diagnostics and the exact
dedicated-account warning. A final controller-restart check followed by
another-person continuation retained the conversation, selected the
correct GitHub login and Git author, and removed each terminal launcher
directory.
- Company-lifetime migration and all five previously failing CI suites
passed locally (167 tests). Same-token gateway A → B → A and six
broker/launcher boundary tests passed.
- Remote callback, launcher, sandbox, and runtime contract tests passed.
Both native and legacy Codex completed actual Daytona executions on the
integrated revision ([campaign
results](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34155056509)).
The remote package-manager shim staging regression also passed locally.
## Risks
- Deploy the migrations, server broker, launchers, and runner artifacts
together. Existing processes finish with their original contract. New
managed processes need the broker endpoint for GitHub operations.
- Finish or stop new managed executions before rolling application code
back. Keep the additive schema and identity history during rollback.
- Scripts that require a persistent raw GH_TOKEN must use managed git,
gh, or GitHub gateway tools. Run capabilities authorize code executing
within that run to acquire its current identity; this is not
hostile-code isolation within one execution principal. Managed commands
prevent automatic credential carryover; arbitrary code deliberately
copying a credential is outside that boundary.
- Uncertain steering acknowledgement deliberately holds new credential
acquisition until reconciliation. Already-started operations retain
their captured identity.
- GitHub private access and provider outages can still fail the specific
operation that needs them. Dedicated grant failure does not fall back to
personal access.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex assisted implementation, review, shell
execution, and browser acceptance. The exact model variant and
context-window size are not exposed in this session. Tool use included
TypeScript and Rust tests, database integration tests, GitHub CLI, and
authenticated browser control.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - The new runner gives agents dedicated tools for common tasks.
> - Some API operations and parameters have no dedicated tool.
> - Agents need a controlled way to find and use those operations.
> - This pull request adds API search and calls through the real server
routes.
> - Existing tools remain the preferred path. The new tools are disabled
by default.
> - Paired tests measure correctness, tool choice, cost and time.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
Paperclip Runner contracts, production tool authority and the server API
catalog.
**Problem or motivation**
The runner cannot use much of the API described by the old Paperclip
skill. A generic HTTP client would also let agents bypass runner control
rules.
**Proposed solution**
Add `search_api` and `call_api`. Resolve calls from the mounted API
catalog. Use server-held, run-bound credentials. Preserve route checks
and runner lifecycle rules. Keep the tools disabled until an operator
enables selected companies.
**Alternatives considered**
A dedicated tool for every endpoint would add a large initial prompt. An
unrestricted HTTP tool would weaken authorization and replay controls.
**Roadmap alignment**
This extends the native runner tooling. The repository owner requested
this design and implementation. The roadmap and related open PRs were
checked. No duplicate API escape-hatch PR was found.
## What Changed
- Register two compact fallback tools in canonical contracts and
provider projections.
- Build deterministic API discovery from OpenAPI, mounted experimental
routes and the old skill reference.
- Execute bounded JSON, text, file and download requests through
authenticated HTTP routes.
- Recheck active runs, company access and work modes. Block runner
lifecycle, scheduling, credential and approval bypasses. Keep routine
annotation collaboration available.
- Retain mutation receipts. Report uncertain outcomes without blindly
repeating writes.
- Add a company rollout gate and a durable eval worker with complete
cost accounting checks.
- Record child-task creation in the activity log with the agent and run.
- Add contract, authorization, file, replay and real runnerd/PRP/HTTP
tests.
- Document rollout gates and paid coverage limits. The companion eval
repository retains immutable attempts and reports.
## Verification
- Final app commit `da58370524c3626a744eec20164397c5fb6ba9ef`: all 32
checks passed; the unrelated Storybook visual check was skipped.
Greptile 5/5; no unresolved review threads.
- Full Linux build and recursive typecheck passed. Repository tests were
run by project and serialized shard; all 143 serialized server suites
passed.
- Runner TypeScript: 1,599 passed, two skipped. Rust release: 451
passing test reports. Conformance and replay parity passed. The required
API check passed 837 tests, including runnerd → PRP → authority → real
HTTP.
- Bindings cannot enable API tools without the explicit deployment flag.
Unit and real-authority tests prove the default-off boundary.
- The standalone API check builds and stages its own binary. It passed
after existing staged and debug binaries were removed from the test
container.
- UI and CLI tests passed. Initial environment failures (missing jq,
Docker overlay file identity, and parallel linker memory pressure) and
focused passing reruns are retained. The macOS full runner suite has
platform-specific failures; Linux is the qualified full-check platform.
- Eval harness: 27 tests passed; existing CI discovery ran 86 tests with
two unrelated skips. Credential export rejection is tested against the
actual report command.
- Luna and OpenRouter Sonnet each passed 60 common-workflow runs: ten
workflows, three repetitions per arm, zero unnecessary API fallback.
- Sonnet passed 11 selected capability/contract cases after fixes.
Gemini passed three smoke cases. DeepSeek exceeded the 120-second limit
and remains unqualified.
- Luna's two cost flags received focused follow-up. The original flags
and a later n=1 latency flag remain visible. Sonnet had no cost or
latency increase above 20%.
- The catalog contains 785 entries; 58 were exercised across all stages.
Most operation probes remain unrun and some need additional fixtures.
Authored probes do not establish successful coverage.
- Total conservative accounted cost: $9.875960. Active paid-campaign
time: 88.16/90 minutes. No missing accounting. Later security and
harness fixes have provider-free verification; no paid validation is
claimed for those revisions.
- Inspect the [qualification
report](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-evals/blob/codex/seach-call-api-tools/evals/runner-api-tools/reports/2026-09-07-production/READINESS.md)
and [verification
record](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-evals/blob/codex/seach-call-api-tools/evals/runner-api-tools/reports/2026-09-07-production/verification.json).
## Risks
- This is a broad authenticated API surface. Keep the default-off gate
until an operator selects initial rollout companies.
- Paid coverage is incomplete. Small regression samples do not prove all
workflows are unchanged.
- A timeout or server failure can follow a committed mutation. The
result reports an unknown outcome and requires state inspection.
- The new definitions add prompt tokens. The report retains cost flags
and cache variation.
- No database migration is required.
- Repository rules require code-owner approval before merge. Technical
CI and automated review are complete.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex based on GPT-6 assisted with code, tests and review. The
exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed in this
session. It used reasoning, tool calls and code execution.
Eval models: `gpt-5.6-luna` with low reasoning,
`openrouter/anthropic/claude-sonnet-5`,
`openrouter/google/gemini-3.8-flash`, and
`openrouter/deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731`. Attempts retain runtime
versions, model identity, usage and source provenance.
## 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 Runner needs its runtime preinstalled for fast sandbox
startup.
- Native and local adapters should launch one current CLI installation
per provider.
- An older global copy can shadow that installation, and exact native
compatibility pins must match it.
- Update the qualified releases and binary digests, expose shared CLI
entrypoints from the provider pack, and prefer the image-owned bin
directory.
- Keep dependency installation in the image build; task startup only
discovers, links, and verifies artifacts.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
Remote native startup rejected a stale global Codex, while CLI-only
images lacked runnerd entirely.
**Expected behavior**
An image-baked runtime starts without uploading binaries or installing
packages. All adapters share the same current provider CLI.
**Steps to reproduce**
Start a native remote task with the old global Codex and the updated
runtime available only under `/opt/paperclip-runner/bin`.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Discovery behavior at `54a99d884`.
**Deployment mode**
Docker with a remote sandbox.
## What Changed
- Prefer `/opt/paperclip-runner/bin`, then the user's local bin
directory, then PATH. Existing metadata and version validation remains
in force.
- Qualify Codex 0.153.4, OpenCode 1.18.29, and Claude SDK 0.3.263 / CLI
2.1.263. Update binary digests, TypeScript/Rust checks, registry
defaults, and the displayed OpenCode version together.
- Share Codex and Claude's native executable with the ACP bridges
through exact dependency overrides. Preserve the separately qualified
ACP bridge implementations and their security patches.
- Expose shared provider-pack CLI launchers; fail the pack build if
Codex ACP resolves a separate Codex installation. Update the eval
image's other agent CLIs to current stable releases and remove duplicate
global provider installs.
- Document the single-current-CLI policy in source comments and
development guidance. Latest stable releases are resolved at
review/build preparation and pinned; task startup never auto-updates.
## Verification
- Native-session and adapter-registry suites: 158 tests passed.
- Provider suites: 88 tests passed, 7 Linux-only checks skipped on
macOS. One existing macOS temporary-path alias assertion passed when
rerun with canonical `TMPDIR=/private/tmp`.
- Package-contract and OpenCode materialization tests: 11 passed.
- Full typecheck, build, and token gates passed. Rust
native-provider/recovery tests: 19 passed.
- Broad local suite: 5,974 passed, 23 failed, 41 skipped. Failures are
in unchanged macOS workspace/path/port and connection suites; focused
runtime tests pass. All latest-head Linux PR checks passed, including
the full test shards, typecheck, build, runner verification, browser
suites, and canary dry run.
- The standalone fleet image built with one current provider CLI each
and passed native Codex/Claude binary-integrity checks. A disposable
Daytona sandbox reported ready in 798 ms; its baked runner completed an
API-key `gpt-5.6-luna` turn in 2,430 ms and returned the expected marker
with a usage receipt. No runtime artifacts were uploaded or installed.
- The normal shared `codex exec` entrypoint also completed an API-key
`gpt-5.6-luna` turn in 2,321 ms.
- Both image builds verify the complete generated lockfile against a
reviewed SHA-256 before package installation or lifecycle execution.
Root lockfile changes remain CI-owned. Merge and rollout remain on hold
for operator review.
## Risks
- Updating provider CLIs changes their behavior for all adapters;
version probes and live native smoke testing are required before image
promotion.
- The image-owned directory takes precedence. Its entries must launch
the same shared CLI as the global PATH, not a private older/newer copy.
- Application qualification pins and the deployed image must move
together. No startup fallback installation is added.
- No schema or authentication-policy changes.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-6 (Codex). The session does not expose a more specific model
ID or context-window size. Used reasoning, repository inspection, code
execution, and browser 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 open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - GitHub connections give agents access to approved repositories.
> - One GitHub identity can use installations across several
organizations.
> - The permissions page linked to one installation and showed an
unfiltered list.
> - Users could not easily find another organization or inspect a large
selection.
> - This change adds account filtering, search, and access configuration
links.
> - Users can inspect repository access in one compact view.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12993. Related repository-catalog work in #11228 and #11234 was
checked. This change only improves the existing GitHub connection
permissions page.
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The GitHub connection permissions page and its repository display
metadata.
**Current behavior**
The page links directly to an existing installation. The repository list
has no account filter, search, height limit, or private-repository
marker. Refresh access occupies a separate section.
**Proposed behavior**
Show all authorized repositories by default. Filter by account or
organization and search by name. Open GitHub's account chooser to
configure access across organizations. Show GitHub icons and
private-repository locks. Keep refresh beside configuration and limit
the visible list to about ten rows.
**Reason and benefit**
Users can find repositories across organizations and configure missing
access without creating another GitHub identity. Large repository lists
no longer fill the page.
**Breaking changes**
None. Repository display metadata gains an optional private flag. Older
snapshots remain valid and gain the flag after access refresh. No SQL
migration is required.
## What Changed
- Add an All accounts view, account filter, search, and empty states.
- Link both configuration controls to GitHub's app account chooser.
- Place an accessible refresh icon beside the configuration button.
- Keep the repository heading and list in one section.
- Add GitHub icons and private-repository locks.
- Cap the scrollable list at ten rows using a design token.
- Persist GitHub's private flag only when the provider returns a
boolean.
- Recover missing legacy app configuration from GitHub installation
metadata.
- Update tests and the GitHub connection runbook.
## Verification
- Focused tests passed: 54 permissions-page tests and four GitHub
metadata tests.
- UI and server typechecks passed before submission. Token gates passed.
- Browser checks verified account filtering, search, empty results, and
the configuration destination.
- The live list contained 40 repositories. Its final height was 272
pixels, which fits ten single-line rows with gaps. Scrolling retained
all rows.
- A live access refresh populated 30 private-repository lock icons from
GitHub metadata.
- Full workspace typecheck and build passed. The broad local suite
stopped in the general-server group with 18 failed files. Failures
include macOS temporary-path handling and embedded PostgreSQL startup.
That run also overlapped the legacy fix and retained a stale GitHub
module; the final focused run passed all 58 tests. Clean-runner CI is
tracked separately.
- Latest-head review is 5/5 with the legacy chooser finding resolved.
All CI checks passed on commit
`0ff2b63f348f5c87d8b7df6e43388f60f5d872d9`, including build, typecheck,
all test shards, browser tests, and canary dry run.
## Risks
- Older repository snapshots lack visibility metadata until refreshed.
Unknown visibility does not display a lock.
- The account filter lists authorized installation owners. Users add
other organizations through GitHub's chooser.
- Filtering changes only the displayed list. GitHub remains
authoritative for repository access.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-6 (`gpt-6-astra`) via Codex. Reasoning, code execution, and
browser tools were used. The exact context window size was 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 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.
> - GitHub connections give agents an account with selected repository
access.
> - Fresh local instances enroll with production Paperclip Cloud.
> - Enrollment could finish while the GitHub OAuth profile remained
disabled.
> - Setup then switched to a personal access token form without
explanation.
> - This change preserves sign-in intent and shows the connected account
and repositories.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Related: #12907, #12943, #12947. Existing open GitHub connection work
was checked. No duplicate was found.
**What happened?**
After Cloud enrollment, a fresh test-drive asked for a GitHub key.
Production did not advertise the managed GitHub profile. Staging did.
The permissions page also omitted the authenticated username and
repository names.
**Expected behavior**
Continue with GitHub OAuth when available. Explain unavailable sign-in
and allow retry otherwise. Show the GitHub username and complete
accessible repository list.
**Steps to reproduce**
Start a fresh test-drive. Choose GitHub and complete instance enrollment
while the Cloud GitHub profile is disabled. Open an existing GitHub
connection's permissions page.
## What Changed
- Preserve managed sign-in intent when the gallery omits its profile.
- Refresh the selected gallery entry on retry without resetting the
audience.
- Fetch all pages of GitHub installations and repositories.
- Store only repository IDs, full names, and installation IDs in grant
metadata.
- Show the GitHub username, repository list, management link, and
refresh action.
- Discard the repository snapshot after newer installation lifecycle
events. Preserve snapshots verified after delayed events.
- Lock and re-read grant metadata when applying installation events or
saving refreshed access. Patch only webhook fields for other events.
Reject snapshots if access changed during the external fetch, using
unique access revisions even when timestamps collide.
- Show repository installation recovery for managed OAuth even when the
app also offers an advanced PAT method.
- Update tests and the GitHub connection runbook. No SQL migration is
required.
## Verification
- Local typecheck, build, and token gates passed. All latest-head CI
gates passed, including the complete test matrix and browser suites.
Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved findings.
- All 382 focused setup, permissions, metadata, service, and webhook
tests passed across final runs. One socket-hang-up test passed on rerun
with the full service suite. Final service, metadata, and webhook checks
passed all 230 tests.
- The broad local suite was stopped after failures. Seven
workspace-runtime exposure and control-conflict failures reproduce on
base commit `54a99d884`. The broad run also overlapped local iteration;
final focused tests and clean-checkout CI are tracked separately.
- Browser: a fresh production-backed instance completed enrollment,
retried after profile enablement, reached GitHub consent, recovered from
a missing installation, and completed OAuth.
- Browser: the permissions page showed the authenticated username and
the selected private test repository. A real `get_me` call returned the
same account. Reading the selected repository passed; reading an
unselected private repository failed with 404.
- Browser: a second fresh instance completed enrollment and OAuth
without a PAT form or unavailable state. Its username and repository
list survived reload and refresh. A real get_me call on the final code
returned the displayed account.
## Risks
- Repository names are now stored in company-scoped grant metadata and
shown with that credential. They are display data, not authorization
data.
- Large selections require more GitHub API calls. A failed later page
rejects the refresh rather than reporting a partial list.
- Older grants and webhook-invalidated snapshots require Refresh access
to load the list.
- Cloud profile enablement is separate deployment configuration. This PR
does not change OAuth scopes or GitHub App permissions.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-6 (`gpt-6-astra`) via Codex. Reasoning, code execution, and
browser tools were used. The exact context window size was 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 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 runs AI agents through qualified provider backends.
> - The direct live eval workflow builds one immutable Runner runtime
for every matrix cell.
> - The workflow reinstalled the packed Runner with npm.
> - That install discarded pnpm patches and selected provider
dependencies outside the qualified lock.
> - The first pnpm deployment model also placed its virtual-store marker
at the wrong level; a real deployment keeps `.pnpm` beside the scoped
Runner package.
> - AgentCore enforced the current context-aware harness but the direct
eval CLI did not supply the production v3 runtime context that harness
requires.
> - This pull request preserves the qualified dependency graph, resolves
the real deployment layout, and makes direct evals exercise the
production runtime-context contract.
> - The benefit is that live eval cells reach their provider turn with
the same artifacts and context contract that Paperclip qualified.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs: #12931
**What happened?**
The full direct live eval campaign failed every ACPX cell during
`session.open`. The portable runtime had an incorrect dependency root.
Its npm install also discarded the qualified ACP server patches.
AgentCore cells first failed because Runner enforced
`aws-agentcore-harness-v1` while the provisioned stack and eval profile
use `aws-agentcore-harness-context-v2`; after aligning that revision,
the direct eval CLI still omitted the required v3 runtime context.
**Expected behavior**
The direct eval runtime must preserve the frozen pnpm dependency graph
and patched provider bytes. Runner, server validation, OpenAPI, and the
deployed AgentCore stack must use one qualification revision. Direct
eval attempts must supply the same immutable native runtime-context
contract as production.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Dispatch `Runner Direct Live Protocol Evals` from `master`.
2. Select an ACPX Claude, ACPX Codex, or AgentCore roster.
3. Observe a pre-turn provider bootstrap failure.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`d96452db059338b329b458ba8fe359fef72f1363`
**Deployment mode**
GitHub Actions on the RunsOn Linux x64 fleet.
## What Changed
- Build the reusable direct-eval runtime with `pnpm deploy --prod`.
- Resolve ACPX dependencies from the actual scoped-package layout of a
self-contained pnpm deployment.
- Align AgentCore configuration and qualification checks on
`aws-agentcore-harness-context-v2`.
- Materialize a minimal immutable v3 runtime context for each isolated
direct eval attempt.
- Add workflow, package-authority, runtime-context, Rust, and server
regression coverage.
- Document the qualified packaging, runtime-context, and AgentCore
revision contracts.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner exec vitest run
src/live/runnerd-codex-transport.test.ts` (70 tests)
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner exec vitest run
src/cli/eval-session-contract.test.ts` (14 tests)
- Focused Runner contract tests (36 tests)
- Focused server profile tests (47 tests)
- Focused Rust managed-provider and native-selector tests (19 tests)
- `node --test
packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/runner-protocol-eval-workflow-security.test.mjs`
- `actionlint .github/workflows/runner-protocol-live-evals.yml`
- A local `pnpm deploy --prod` produced both qualified ACP server
digests.
- A Linux reproduction of the first follow-up smoke identified the real
deployment root and the missing AgentCore runtime context.
## Risks
The AgentCore revision change rejects profiles that still use the
obsolete v1 value. This is intentional because the provisioned
context-aware harness and current eval profile use v2. Direct eval
prompts now receive the same fixed runtime-context preamble as
production, so behavior scores may move; that is the intended
qualification surface. The workflow package layout changes, but tests
assert the new entrypoint and dependency root. This change does not
modify the browser full-stack E2E workflow.
> 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. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5.6. The context-window size is not exposed in
this session. The model used extended reasoning, repository tools, code
execution, Docker-based Linux reproduction, and GitHub Actions
diagnostics.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (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 (for example, `docs/...` or
`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
> - Daytona preserves a stopped sandbox filesystem, but deleting or
replacing a sandbox removes its only remote copy.
> - Warm reuse therefore improves latency but cannot be Paperclip's
durability boundary.
> - The host execution workspace must remain authoritative after every
successful turn, while same-run recovery must avoid overwriting
unexported remote work.
> - Result proposal, workspace export/merge, and terminal completion
need a durable, replayable ordering so a crash never starts a duplicate
provider turn.
> - A paid browser acceptance suite must exercise both legacy Codex and
Runner Codex for three real turns on one continuously warm Daytona
sandbox.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12901.
Runner Codex did not previously export successful Daytona workspace
changes back to the authoritative host workspace. That made warm reuse
depend on Daytona's remote filesystem and left deleted/replacement
sandboxes without a reliable reconstruction path. The existing paid
fixture also lacked a focused three-turn continuity case for both Codex
adapters.
## What Changed
- Persist versioned, atomic native workspace-sync descriptors and
durable seeds in `PAPERCLIP_HOME`, without credentials or a database
migration.
- Classify fresh, warm, replacement, and same-run-recovery workspace
preparation explicitly; ambiguous lease/root/digest evidence fails
closed.
- Finalize native workspace export/merge after semantic result proposal
and before run completion, with idempotent replay that never submits a
second provider turn.
- Surface legacy Codex workspace restoration failures instead of masking
them, while preserving an earlier provider error when both fail.
- Keep healthy reusable Daytona leases warm for legacy and native
adapters, stamp finalized workspace generations, and retain existing
cleanup behavior for per-turn or unhealthy leases.
- Preserve Runner Codex's provider process/session across warm turns,
including bounded post-terminal tail draining and exact authority
rotation.
- Add the exact paid `daytona-warm-continuity` matrix:
- `legacy-codex × daytona × warm-three-turn`
- `runner-codex × daytona × warm-three-turn`
- Drive all three turns through the browser, verify ordered file
continuity and stable lease/workspace/runtime identities, capture
per-turn timings, and delete the sandbox immediately after assertions.
- Document `pnpm test:e2e:runner -- --suite daytona-warm-continuity`; no
package script was added.
## Verification
- `pnpm typecheck` — passed, including migration safety (no migration
added)
- Focused server/runner Vitest coverage — 144 passed
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit` — 114 passed
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck` — passed
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:codex` — 66 passed,
1 helper ignored
- `native-session-executor.test.ts` — 139 passed, including safe
fail-closed cleanup after remote runner identity capture failure
- Paid local browser acceptance, exact post-rebase Linux/amd64 runner
binary:
- Runner Codex — passed in 1.7m; 3 runs; lease outcomes `created,
resumed, resumed`; 10/10 matchers; cleanup passed
- Legacy Codex — passed in 2.7m; 3 runs; lease outcomes `created,
resumed, resumed`; 10/10 matchers; cleanup passed
- [Protected paid GitHub Actions
campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34026735033)
against `7da42a91b95fa7fb2df126668ef7e37afb3b2b9d` — passed 2/2:
- Runner Codex — 3 runs; lease outcomes `created, resumed, resumed`;
evidence and cleanup passed
- Legacy Codex — 3 runs; lease outcomes `created, resumed, resumed`;
evidence and cleanup passed
- Merge/enforcement, S3 history, and Pages publication jobs passed
- Paid result artifacts were scanned for both provider credentials;
neither secret was present.
- Current PR checks — 31 passed, 1 expected Storybook skip; Greptile
5/5; Superagent security scan passed
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` — passed
- Confirmed no `package.json`, lockfile, migration, or SQL changes.
## Risks
- Workspace synchronization now sits on the terminal-success path, so a
remote export failure deliberately prevents false success. Retryable
state retains its lease/seed; loss of the only unexported remote copy
fails closed.
- Warm provider reuse has strict identity and quiescence checks.
Mismatched or ambiguous evidence blocks reuse rather than risking
concurrent provider work.
- The paid suite incurs Daytona and Codex cost only in the existing
protected scheduled/manual workflow and explicitly destroys its sandbox
after each cell.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5 agentic reasoning, repository inspection, real
browser E2E execution, Rust/TypeScript test execution, and GitHub
Actions diagnostics.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either linked an existing issue or described the issue
in-PR
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [x] My branch name contains no internal ticket id
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have documented the dedicated suite invocation without adding a
package script
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green on the current revision
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
on the current revision
- [x] I will address all reviewer comments before requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Managed GitHub connections resolve a responsible user's or dedicated
agent's identity into an audited, run-scoped credential projection.
> - An enrolled instance could retain a hidden managed setup method
after Cloud stopped advertising it, producing a blank, disabled setup
step.
> - Native runner processes also dropped the resolved GitHub projection
before the provider shell, so `gh` and Git could not use the selected
identity in Daytona.
> - Daytona already provides the outer isolation boundary. Applying
Codex's inner Linux sandbox there both duplicated containment and failed
because nested user namespaces are unavailable.
> - This change repairs setup fallback, carries only the bounded GitHub
projection across each runner boundary, and allows only a
controller-selected managed sandbox transport to act as the outer
sandbox.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
An enrolled self-hosted instance could show a blank GitHub setup step
when its managed profile was unavailable. Separately, a native Codex run
in Daytona could resolve a managed GitHub connection on the Paperclip
host but lose it before the provider shell. Once projected, Codex's
nested sandbox failed before commands could run because Daytona does not
expose the user-namespace operation used by the inner sandbox.
**Expected behavior**
Setup must select an advertised customer method when the managed method
is unavailable. A Daytona run must receive the exact managed GitHub
identity selected for that run, support `gh` and HTTPS Git, and rely on
Daytona as its outer sandbox without weakening local or SSH execution.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Enroll a self-hosted instance while Cloud does not advertise the
managed GitHub profile and open GitHub setup.
2. Observe the blank second step and disabled action.
3. Configure a native Codex agent with a Daytona environment and a
responsible-user GitHub grant.
4. Run `gh api user` or HTTPS Git from the agent shell.
5. Observe missing GitHub environment projection or nested-sandbox
startup failure.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The setup bug reproduces on `1dceee9a4`; the runner proof was developed
from the same branch and verified at the latest head below.
**Deployment mode**
Self-hosted Paperclip enrolled with Paperclip Cloud, using the Daytona
sandbox-provider plugin and native Paperclip runner.
## What Changed
- Wait for connector enrollment hydration, retain a hidden managed
method only while enrollment is needed, and otherwise select an
advertised customer fallback.
- Add a single bounded GitHub credential-environment projection for
`GH_TOKEN`, `GITHUB_TOKEN`, the process-only Git helper token, GitHub
commit identity, and at most 32 controller-generated Git config entries.
- Forward that projection through the durable controller, Codex
app-server transport, and Rust provider child without placing token
values in arguments or config.
- Allow Codex shell inheritance only for the exact projected GitHub keys
and enable provider network access only when the managed credential
exists.
- Derive outer-sandbox authority exclusively from a managed `sandbox`
transport; strip the same flag from configured, host, local, and SSH
environments.
- Define a named external-sandbox permission profile that Codex resolves
to `dangerFullAccess` for default-mode Daytona turns while plan mode
remains read-only.
- Add regression tests for setup fallback, credential projection,
local/SSH/sandbox authority separation, provider forwarding, and
permission-profile selection.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/pages/apps/AppsConnect.test.tsx` — 96
passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/drivers/codex/codex-security-config.test.ts
src/drivers/codex/app-server-transport.test.ts
src/control-plane/durable-prp-control-plane.test.ts` from
`packages/paperclip-runner` — 31 passed.
- Focused native-session executor tests — 3 passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed.
- `cargo test --manifest-path
packages/paperclip-runner/runner/Cargo.toml --locked -p
paperclip-runner-core --lib` — 194 passed.
- Real Codex app-server configuration probe accepted
`paperclip-runner-external-sandbox` and reported
`sandbox.type=\"dangerFullAccess\"` while using the named profile.
- [Signed Daytona image
workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33995270328)
built commit `86571f7997e7100e47bd131aac1f1e773112a0ce`; the isolated
environment was pinned to
`sha256:ecef21105f8de382d75787e59439d936be239b77ae74a31c8ed3a17cde39b023`.
- Live isolated Daytona proof passed: the three projected token
variables were non-empty and equal; the host-scoped Git credential
helper returned the same token without printing it; `gh api user`
resolved `cryppadotta`; authenticated `git ls-remote
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git HEAD` returned
`1dceee9a4e75b13456760bb54c752deb2dba1d79`; no repository mutation
occurred.
- The persisted 28,476-byte run log contains no GitHub token shape,
bearer header, credential-bearing URL, or private-key marker.
- Latest-head pull-request CI and reviews provide the remaining
full-suite gate.
## Risks
- This deliberately gives shell Git and `gh` access to the run's
resolved GitHub identity. It is the audited class-3 behavior required by
the GitHub connection design and is outside per-tool Ask-first controls.
- The credential source is the trusted broker projection, which
overwrites configured environment values. The helper is scoped to HTTPS
`github.com`, revalidates protocol and host, and never places its token
in command arguments, URLs, or files.
- Managed Daytona sandboxes become the containment boundary for
default-mode provider commands. Local and SSH targets retain the inner
Codex workspace sandbox, and plan mode remains read-only everywhere.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, with reasoning, browser control, shell access,
and code execution. The product did not expose the context-window size.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip manages AI agent work and the execution state for each
task.
> - Remote agents run in sandbox environments such as Daytona.
> - Daytona keeps files while a sandbox is stopped, but deletion removes
those files.
> - Runner Codex did not copy successful remote workspace changes back
to the host workspace.
> - A warm sandbox could therefore hide data loss until Daytona replaced
or deleted the sandbox.
> - This pull request makes the host workspace durable after every
successful turn and keeps verified reusable sandboxes warm.
> - The benefit is reliable multi-turn work across warm reuse, restart,
stop, and sandbox replacement.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
A successful native Codex turn in Daytona could leave workspace changes
only in the remote sandbox. A later warm turn appeared to work because
it reused that filesystem. A replacement sandbox could start from stale
host data and lose the successful changes.
**Expected behavior**
Paperclip must merge each successful remote turn into the authoritative
host workspace before it completes the run. A verified warm lease may
reuse its remote files. A replacement lease must reconstruct the exact
durable workspace seed.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run Codex in a reusable Daytona environment.
2. Write a file during one successful turn.
3. Replace the Daytona sandbox before the next turn.
4. Observe that the next turn can start without the prior file on the
unpatched code.
Related remote workspace foundation: #10070.
## What Changed
- Added explicit `host_current`, `durable_seed`, and `adopt_remote`
workspace preparation modes.
- Added atomic, versioned native workspace descriptors and seed archives
under `PAPERCLIP_HOME`.
- Added real native sandbox export and three-way host merge before
terminal result completion.
- Added workspace-only recovery after a proposed result. Recovery does
not submit another provider turn or consume the provider retry budget.
- Added fail-closed handling when a sandbox with unexported changes is
gone.
- Kept healthy reusable Daytona sandboxes started for legacy Codex and
Runner Codex.
- Kept the Runner Codex process and provider session across verified
warm turns.
- Added the paid `daytona-warm-continuity` browser suite. It contains
exactly the legacy Codex and Runner Codex cells. Each cell performs
three measured turns.
- Documented `pnpm test:e2e:runner -- --suite daytona-warm-continuity`.
No package script was added.
- Added no database migration. The metadata format is backward
compatible and idempotent.
## Verification
- `pnpm typecheck`
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit` — 114 passed
- Native workspace, finalizer, session, and environment tests — 232
passed
- Daytona provider tests — 150 passed
- Workspace staging and merge tests — 98 passed
- Runner transport tests — 63 passed
- Legacy Codex restore tests — 5 passed
- Rust format and compile checks pass through root typecheck
- The paid Daytona suite was not run locally because the required
Daytona, OpenAI, and immutable image credentials are not present.
## Risks
- The main risk is an incorrect workspace identity or merge after a
crash. Durable descriptors bind the run, workspace, lease, provider
lease, local root, remote root, and baseline digest. Ambiguous evidence
fails closed.
- The host merge may conflict with concurrent host edits. The existing
three-way merge and exclusion rules handle this case and surface
failures.
- A deleted sandbox cannot recover unexported bytes. Paperclip now
blocks with `workspace_sync_out_unrecoverable` instead of reporting
success or rerunning the provider.
- There is no database migration. Descriptor writes and recovery are
atomic and idempotent.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-5. The run used agentic reasoning, repository
inspection, code execution, test execution, Git, and GitHub CLI tools.
## 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.
> - Agent authentication uses server sessions, plugin workers, and
browser login panels.
> - A page reload loses an active login session, and one worker permits
only one login terminal.
> - These limits cause lost work and prevent two owners from logging in
through one worker.
> - This pull request lets the browser resume active sessions and lets
workers serve concurrent login terminals.
> - The benefit is reliable login recovery with a bounded process-wide
route limit.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
It improves agent credential login recovery and concurrent login
terminal handling.
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting (multiple of the above).
**Current behavior**
A page reload loses the active login session. A shared plugin worker
rejects a second login terminal.
**Proposed behavior**
The browser reads and resumes the owner's active session. A worker
supports multiple login terminal routes under a process-wide ceiling.
**Reason and benefit**
Owners keep login progress after a reload. Two owners can log in through
one worker without removing the route limit.
**Breaking changes**
None. The change adds owner-scoped read routes and changes login
terminal concurrency.
## What Changed
- Replace the single worker login route with maps keyed by host route
and worker session identifiers.
- Add a process-wide login route ceiling and release each reserved slot
on every exit path.
- Add owner-scoped active-session reads with consistent negative
responses and private cache control.
- Keep the device-login prompt while the session has an active public
status.
- Add a durable setup-token cancel fallback for a lost in-memory
session.
- Resume active sessions when the agent configuration or onboarding
panel mounts.
- Remove routine unmount cancellation and keep explicit Cancel behavior.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclip/server test` — server route, service, and
plugin-worker-manager suites.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclip/plugin-sdk test` — worker RPC host suite.
- `cd ui && npx vitest run
src/components/AgentConfigForm.render.test.tsx
src/components/OnboardingWizard.test.tsx`.
- `cd ui && npx tsc -b`.
- `tests/e2e/onboarding.spec.ts` — reload during login.
- CI must pass on this pull request.
## Risks
The change affects agent authentication and the sandbox-to-host
boundary. Route cleanup must release every reserved slot. Owner checks
must prevent cross-owner session access. Tests cover route cleanup,
owner scope, reload recovery, and concurrent worker routes.
## Model Used
Codex, OpenAI GPT-5, tool use and code review support. The
implementation author owns the exact model details for the code changes.
## 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 with the relevant issue-template
fields
- [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
- [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 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 recovery service monitors active runs and applies
watchdog decisions
> - The watchdog rules and database operations lived in one large
recovery service
> - This structure made the rules harder to test and made company
scoping harder to inspect
> - This pull request moves the watchdog into domain, application, and
adapter layers
> - The benefit is a smaller recovery service, pure policy tests, and
clear company-scoped ports
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The active-run output watchdog that detects silence, suppression, and
terminal evidence.
**Current behavior**
The recovery service contains the watchdog policy, use cases, database
operations, and process control in one file.
**Proposed behavior**
A feature module separates pure policy, use cases and ports, and
Postgres and process adapters. The recovery service delegates its public
watchdog methods to this module.
**Reason and benefit**
The separation makes policy decisions easy to test. Company identifiers
on every reader and writer port make tenant scope clear. Smaller service
methods reduce change risk.
**Breaking changes**
None. The recovery service keeps its public methods and call sites.
Related public watchdog work includes
[#7043](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/7043) and
[#7770](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/7770).
## What Changed
- Add the `server/src/modules/active-run-watchdog/` feature module with
domain, application, and adapter layers.
- Move watchdog policy, use cases, Postgres access, and local process
control into the module.
- Keep the recovery service public methods and delegate them to the
module.
- Add 53 pure module test cases and retain 8 Postgres integration cases.
- Add company scoping and transaction rollback coverage.
## Verification
- Run `vitest run --config vitest.config.ts src/modules` and confirm 3
files and 53 cases pass.
- Run `vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-active-run-output-watchdog.test.ts` and confirm
1 file and 8 cases pass.
- Run the full server suite in pull request CI.
- Compare the type-check result with a fresh baseline on the same
checkout.
## Risks
The main risk is a behavior change in recovery decisions during the move
across layers. The pure policy tests cover the moved rules. The
integration tests cover database behavior, company scope, and
transaction rollback. Pull request CI runs the full server suite.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, runtime-managed context window, tool use, code
execution, and repository review support.
## 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] 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.
> - Connections give agents access to external services with a selected
credential identity.
> - A removed connection keeps its database row so Paperclip can retain
its history.
> - A fresh GitHub setup can select a different identity from the
removed connection.
> - The retained row incorrectly kept its old credential policy after
that new selection.
> - The GitHub callback then could not save the new grant and returned
the user to setup.
> - This pull request applies the explicit identity selection when
Paperclip revives an archived row.
> - The benefit is a successful GitHub reconnect after the user changes
from a dedicated agent account to a personal account.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
After a user removed a dedicated-agent GitHub connection, a fresh setup
with “My GitHub account” returned to the setup page with `oauth=failed`.
The Cloud claim succeeded, but the local connection still used the old
`per_agent` policy.
**Expected behavior**
A fresh setup must apply the explicit identity choice. An interrupted
draft or an explicit reconnect must keep its existing identity.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Connect GitHub with a dedicated agent identity.
2. Remove the connection.
3. Start a fresh GitHub connection with “My GitHub account.”
4. Complete GitHub OAuth.
5. Observe that Paperclip returns to the setup page instead of the
permissions page.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`342c01fee`
**Deployment mode**
Local dev (`pnpm dev`) with embedded Postgres and the staging managed
connector.
**Additional context**
This follows the GitHub access UI change in #12893.
## What Changed
- Apply an explicit Access identity when a fresh gallery setup revives
an archived connection row.
- Preserve the identity for interrupted drafts and explicit reconnects.
- Do not carry credential material across an identity change.
- Apply the omitted organization default during a fresh archived-row
recovery.
- Restore the prior grants and credential policy transactionally if a
revived setup rolls back.
- Disable the connection and surface a specific failure if that
restoration cannot complete.
- Preserve newer concurrent grant changes with a row lock and optimistic
version check.
- Preserve newer concurrent connection identity/configuration changes
with a locked state fingerprint.
- Add regressions for dedicated-to-personal OAuth, organization-default
recovery, rollback, rollback failure, and concurrent grant/connection
changes.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts` — 222 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed.
- Browser proof on an isolated local instance: dedicated connection
removed, personal setup selected, staging GitHub OAuth completed,
permissions page opened, connection reported active and healthy,
personal grant active, old agent grant revoked.
## Risks
- Low migration risk. This change has no schema migration.
- The behavior changes only when a fresh setup explicitly selects an
identity for an archived connection row.
- Existing draft resume and explicit reconnect behavior stays unchanged.
- Connection-manager checks still protect changes to a retained
credential identity.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, with reasoning, browser control, 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
> - Managed connections let agents use provider credentials without
exposing those credentials to the control plane UI
> - A self-hosted instance must first establish a trusted credential
destination with Paperclip Cloud
> - The GitHub connection flow repeated that trust decision before
provider consent
> - The local setup route also lost step 2 after enrollment and could
display the PAT identity defaults before enrollment
> - This pull request makes enrollment a one-time instance decision and
sends later provider starts directly to provider consent
> - The benefit is a shorter flow with one clear Paperclip approval and
no required service restart
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12843.
Companion Cloud change:
[paperclipai/paperclip-cloud#391](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-cloud/pull/391).
## What Changed
- Made `stage=setup` authoritative during initial route hydration and
enrollment return.
- Added a contained one-time enrollment screen with provider-specific
copy.
- Accepted a provider `authorizationUrl` from Paperclip Cloud only when
it matches the exact GitHub or Google OAuth endpoint.
- Preferred the direct provider URL while retaining the legacy
confirmation URL fallback.
- Preserved the company-bound identity and agent-access draft across the
full-page enrollment callback, including cold company-context hydration.
- Kept GitHub defaulted to “My GitHub account” and “Any agent,”
including before Cloud advertises the managed method.
- Updated GitHub identity and agent-access copy for responsible-person
and dedicated-agent behavior.
- Labeled the provider action “Continue to GitHub.”
- Added parser, routing, cold-hydration, access-restoration, visibility,
fallback, defaults, and copy tests.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/paperclip-cloud-connector.test.ts
ui/src/pages/apps/AppsConnect.test.tsx` (114 tests passed)
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- Live browser proof used a new data directory on `127.0.0.1:3117` and
the exact Cloud PR revision on staging.
- The fresh flow selected “My GitHub account” and “Any agent,” showed
one enrollment approval, returned to local step 2, and connected GitHub
without a second Paperclip confirmation or login.
- The connected screen showed one selected repository, a long-lived
token, installation metadata, a successful access refresh, and healthy
webhook delivery.
- Gmail on the same instance went directly to Google consent without
another Paperclip approval.
- Restarting the same data directory preserved enrollment. A second new
data directory required exactly one new approval.
- A final fresh-data-dir rerun selected a dedicated GitHub identity for
Ada before enrollment, approved the instance once, returned to step 2,
retained Ada after a Back check, connected directly through GitHub, and
finished with “Used only by Ada,” one selected repository, and a
long-lived token.
- Port 3100 remained untouched throughout the proof.
## Risks
- The new Cloud field is additive and restricted to the exact GitHub and
Google OAuth origins and paths, with no embedded credentials or URL
fragment.
- An older Cloud response still works through `confirmationUrl`.
- A self-hosted instance still requires one signed Cloud enrollment.
Managed Cloud instances do not render the enrollment screen.
- Provider authentication and consent remain mandatory after instance
enrollment.
- No schema migration is included in this pull request.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, `gpt-5.6-sol`, extended reasoning, tool use, code
execution, browser control, and multi-file repository editing. The
context window size was not provided.
## 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 manages AI agents and their work.
> - The runner executes agent turns on local and remote providers.
> - A remote per-turn session must save its state before Paperclip
releases its sandbox.
> - The session runtime returned after 100 milliseconds while the remote
checkpoint still ran.
> - The next turn also checked the local state path instead of the
verified remote backup.
> - This pull request waits for the bounded remote close and accepts
only a verified suspended backup.
> - The benefit is reliable multi-turn execution without weaker identity
checks.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
A successful remote agent turn released its sandbox before the runner
saved the verified continuation backup. The next turn failed with
`runner_state_identity_mismatch`.
**Expected behavior**
Paperclip must finish the bounded remote checkpoint before it releases
the sandbox. A later turn must validate and restore the digest-matched
suspended backup.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run a native ACPX Claude Plan test in a non-reusable Daytona sandbox.
2. Reject the first plan to start a second turn.
3. Observe that the second turn fails before provider execution.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The failure reproduced at `13775a90b078ff64872f50961ea1b83d575e7bc6`.
**Deployment mode**
GitHub Actions with a Daytona sandbox.
## What Changed
- Wait for the internally bounded remote runner close and checkpoint
before the host returns.
- Preserve the existing short cleanup bound for other providers.
- Validate remote continuation lifecycle from a complete digest-verified
backup when local runner state is absent.
- Keep corrupt, non-suspended, mismatched, and unverified state
fail-closed.
- Make native Plan completion and accepted-Plan wake prompts
deterministic.
## Verification
- A prior 45-cell local campaign passed 44 cells. The only failure was
the OpenCode Plan prompt variance fixed here.
- A focused OpenCode local Plan rerun passed.
- ACPX Claude Daytona message and question cells passed.
- Focused regressions cover delayed checkpoint close and verified remote
backup lifecycle.
- GitHub Build and the focused ACPX Claude Daytona Plan cell will
validate this exact head.
## Risks
Remote runnerd sessions now wait for their internally bounded
close/checkpoint path before returning; generic provider cleanup retains
the existing 100 millisecond bound. Durable run success still cannot be
reversed. The environment release guard still blocks sandbox destruction
when no verified backup stamp exists.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5.6, extended reasoning, with code execution and
GitHub Actions 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 and contains no internal task
id
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open findings
- [ ] 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 source control access for repository work
> - A shared token cannot preserve the responsible person's identity or
an agent's dedicated identity
> - GitHub App tokens also need durable refresh, repository access
checks, and webhook delivery
> - Paperclip already has managed connections, encrypted grants, run
secret leases, and merge-confirmation behavior
> - This pull request extends those systems with GitHub identities
instead of adding a parallel credential system
> - The benefit is durable GitHub access with explicit identity,
repository, runtime, and webhook boundaries
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue describes this connection change. This
description follows the feature request template.
**Subsystem affected**
Connected Apps, connection grants, secret resolution, native Git runtime
setup, webhook processing, and the Apps UI.
**Problem or motivation**
Users need to connect GitHub once and let agents use the correct GitHub
identity. A run should use a dedicated agent account when one exists.
Otherwise, it should use the responsible person's account. The
connection must survive token expiry, repository access changes, and
temporary instance downtime.
**Proposed solution**
Add user-owned and agent-owned GitHub grants to the existing connection
model. Resolve one identity for MCP, Git, `gh`, health checks, and
webhook bindings. Store provider tokens in the existing encrypted secret
system. Refresh expiring token pairs under the existing lease and
compare-and-swap path. Register signed Cloud webhook bindings and
process normalized pull request and installation events through a
durable local inbox.
**Alternatives considered**
An organization-wide GitHub token would lose person and agent
attribution. Environment variables alone would bypass the managed
connection and grant model. A new GitHub-only credential store would
duplicate the existing secret and access systems. GitHub App
installation tokens and private-key custody remain outside this first
version.
**Roadmap alignment**
This change implements the Connected Apps direction. It also extends the
shipped MCP Tool Gateway, per-agent secret access, and
action-attribution systems. It does not add a repository catalog. The
open repository catalog work in
[#11234](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/11234) is related
and complementary.
## What Changed
- Added agent-owned connection grants and a per-agent credential policy
with company and subject constraints.
- Added a managed GitHub App method while keeping the personal access
token method as an advanced fallback.
- Added durable access-token and refresh-token handling with proactive
rotation and one automatic recovery after a provider `401`.
- Added GitHub identity and installation summaries without storing
repository-name lists.
- Added signed Cloud webhook binding, event lease, acknowledgement,
local idempotency, pull request merge processing, and installation
access handling.
- Added one identity resolver for MCP, native Git, `gh`, checkout,
health checks, and webhook bindings.
- Added a class-3 run projection for `GH_TOKEN`, `GITHUB_TOKEN`, a
`github.com`-only credential helper, SSH-to-HTTPS rewrite, and GitHub
noreply commit attribution.
- Added personal and dedicated-agent setup choices plus identity,
repository, continuity, and webhook status in the Apps UI.
- Added schema migrations, tests, and connection documentation.
## Verification
- The current head is fully green in GitHub CI, including build,
typecheck, all serialized/general server shards, all browser shards,
policy, canary dry run, review, and security checks.
- Live staging proof completed with a non-expiring GitHub App user
token, selected-repository installation, repository add/remove refresh,
managed MCP, native `gh`, HTTPS clone/push/delete, GitHub noreply commit
attribution, signed merged-PR webhook acceptance, durable
Cloud-to-instance delivery, and installation-access event processing.
Temporary branches and temporary repository access were removed
afterward.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed before and after the rebase onto
`origin/master`.
- `pnpm build` passed.
- The focused connector suite passed 285 tests after the rebase.
- The full stable suite passed 5,790 tests and failed 22 tests across 8
general server files. The failures reproduced as shared-runner
environment issues. They included `/tmp` versus `/private/tmp`, closed
database connections, and invalid high ephemeral ports. The focused
connection tests pass in isolation.
## Risks
- Migrations add agent grant subjects and a durable connection-event
inbox. Migration numbering and safety checks pass.
- A raw GitHub user token enters the agent process for Git and `gh`.
Per-tool Ask-first controls cannot limit those shell operations. The UI
warns users about this boundary.
- GitHub App user tokens can be non-expiring. Paperclip performs a
continuity check every 30 days, but provider revocation still requires a
reconnect.
- The webhook path accepts only signed and bounded payloads. It stores a
minimal normalized record and no raw provider payload.
- GitHub repository permissions remain authoritative. Removed access can
make a cached repository count temporarily stale, but runtime access
fails immediately.
> 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`, extended reasoning, tool use, code
execution, browser control, and multi-file repository editing. The
context window size was not provided.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Paperclip Runner owns durable provider sessions and streams their
work to the control plane.
> - Pull request #12845 added native restart recovery for live and dead
local runners.
> - A real browser test found three live-adoption gaps after that pull
request merged.
> - Lazy runner process ownership was not always stored before restart.
> - The old controller did not release its PRP authority without closing
the provider turn.
> - Reconnect events could arrive before the active provider turn was
restored.
> - This pull request closes those gaps and proves the same turn
completes after a UI hot restart.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12845
Related search results: #12646 covers indeterminate command results
after a runner restart. It does not cover controller adoption or
active-turn rebinding. No open duplicate pull request was found.
## What Changed
- Store lazy runnerd process ownership after provider session creation,
read, and resume.
- Detach native PRP controller authority during coordinated hot
shutdown. Keep the live provider turn running.
- Restore the exact checkpointed provider session when bounded PRP
identity events have been compacted.
- Restore the active provider turn before reconnect events are replayed.
This prevents `turn_binding_mismatch`.
- Keep exact live ownership by the current controller out of generic
orphan recovery.
- Add driver, transport, and server regression tests for these paths.
## Verification
- Ran 12 Codex driver lifecycle tests.
- Ran 53 runnerd transport tests.
- Ran 143 recovery and orphan-reaper server tests.
- Ran all 8 real-process restart recovery scenarios.
- Ran all 96 existing runner E2E unit tests.
- Ran runner TypeScript typecheck.
- Ran server TypeScript typecheck.
- Ran the migration replay test and migration safety checks.
- Tested the board UI on an isolated local instance. A real local
Codex-backed turn entered a 120-second terminal wait. The UI `Restart
now` action replaced the server and kept the same runner PID, process
start time, run ID, native session ID, runner ID, provider session ID,
and active turn. The original turn then completed.
- Confirmed one heartbeat run, no retry row, one result, one
proposed-result event, one terminal event, no protocol errors, no active
recovery state, and no surviving runner or provider process.
## Risks
- A live runner can continue provider work while no server owns the
control route. Recovery fails closed when the process fingerprint or
durable identity is ambiguous.
- Provider identity can be restored from the database only for an exact
verified adoption claim. An authenticated live `session.snapshot`
validates that identity before the driver can resume.
- The new detach path applies only to native sessions that expose
restart detachment. Other adapters keep their existing shutdown
behavior.
- This follow-up does not change the database migration or
`package.json`. The migration in #12845 remains replay-safe through `ADD
COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS` and its embedded-Postgres idempotence test. The
dedicated real-process command remains in `doc/DEVELOPING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex based on GPT-5. The exact serving build and
context-window size are not exposed. The run used extended reasoning,
repository tools, shell execution, and in-app browser automation.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The Paperclip Runner keeps durable run and provider state outside
one server process.
> - A server restart can leave that runner alive or can interrupt it
after a provider checkpoint.
> - The old startup path used handoff intent and PID evidence, but it
did not reconstruct native ownership.
> - That gap could block the issue, create a replacement run, or start
duplicate provider work.
> - This pull request adds durable same-run recovery for coordinated and
uncoordinated restarts.
> - The benefit is exact recovery of the run, runner, session, provider,
steering, and finalization state.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #9628. That pull request added earlier local-adapter hot-restart
work. This change adds native PRP authority reconstruction and same-run
provider resume.
Refs #10935. That pull request handles missing hot-restart snapshots.
This change also supports hard restarts with no snapshot.
Refs #11624. That pull request prevents unsafe retry after an adopted
legacy process exits. This change reconciles native terminal evidence
before provider recovery.
Refs #12070. That pull request improves process liveness checks. This
change also binds recovery to a process-start fingerprint and fails
closed on ambiguity.
**What happened?**
The server could record hot-restart intent, but startup did not rebuild
native runner ownership. A live runner could not re-register its PRP
authority. A dead runner could not resume the exact native and provider
session on the same heartbeat run. Generic recovery could then block the
issue or create replacement work.
**Expected behavior**
A live native runner must reconnect with the same PID and logical
identities. A dead runner must resume the same durable session and
heartbeat run with only a new operating-system PID. A proposed or
terminal result must finalize once before any provider turn starts.
Ambiguous process or session evidence must stay blocked without a signal
or duplicate spawn.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start a Paperclip Runner heartbeat and wait for an active provider
turn.
2. Restart only the Paperclip server, with or without a hot-restart
marker.
3. Observe that the old startup path does not reconstruct the native
control-plane authority.
4. Kill both the server and runner after a provider checkpoint.
5. Observe that the old path cannot resume the exact native session on
the original heartbeat run.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The defect was reproduced from commit
`1991f31fd53e7f7794d5c2e4b93be384ade2b41d`. This branch is rebased onto
the current `master`.
**Deployment mode**
Local development and self-hosted server deployments that use the local
Paperclip Runner.
## What Changed
- Added correlated hot-restart requests and version-compatible native
handoff fields.
- Added controller boot identity, process-start identity, controller
generation, recovery state, request id, and bounded history to the
native finalization ledger.
- Added transactional recovery claims for live-runner reattach,
dead-runner resume, and incomplete bootstrap.
- Added fail-closed ownership takeover rules and process identity
validation.
- Added live runner adoption to the local runner transport without a
duplicate spawn.
- Added same-run provider checkpoint resume and legacy retry-row
compatibility.
- Reconciled proposed and terminal results before runner or provider
recovery.
- Bound the HTTP and PRP listener before startup recovery and delayed
scheduling and generic reapers until classification completes.
- Added restart-aware health diagnostics, run-log recovery transitions,
durable runner diagnostics, and bounded shutdown finalizer draining.
- Moved restart-survivable diagnostics into runner-owned, pre-redacted
bounded writes; raw stdout and stderr are never persisted.
- Added process-start fencing for controller, runner, and provider PIDs;
startup classifies every candidate without an implicit cap.
- Added crash-recoverable, contention-safe development restart-request
coordination and failed-startup listener cleanup.
- Added a credential-free real-process restart suite for eight restart,
scale, and identity scenarios.
- Documented native restart operation, persistence, diagnostics, and
verification.
## Verification
- The documented native restart commands passed. They ran eight
real-process/database recovery scenarios and the live runner adoption
transport test.
- Native executor tests passed: 111 tests.
- Heartbeat recovery tests passed: 124 tests.
- Hot restart, health, and shutdown tests passed: 52 tests.
- The broader affected server suite passed: 350 tests.
- Focused native recovery and startup tests passed: 49 tests.
- Runner transport and control-plane tests passed: 63 tests.
- Runner-owned diagnostic tests passed for write-time bounding,
credential redaction, private file modes, and raw stream
non-persistence.
- Development restart coordination tests passed: 11 tests.
- Database migration checks and the partial-application/replay
regression test passed.
- Server, database, and Paperclip Runner typechecks passed.
- `git diff --check` passed.
- Full Paperclip PR CI passed, including build, canary, all five general
server shards, all five serialized server shards, all three browser E2E
shards, workspace suites, and release-registry verification.
- Greptile completed at 5/5 with no outstanding findings,
recommendations, follow-ups, or open review threads.
## Risks
- Moderate risk. This changes startup ordering and ownership transfer
for active native runs.
- The migration adds nullable columns and does not rewrite existing
rows.
- Recovery fails closed when process or durable session identity is
incomplete or contradictory.
- The first implementation supports the local Paperclip Runner. Remote
targets keep their existing behavior.
- The real-process suite covers cleanup and asserts that no runner or
provider process survives each test.
> 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 runtime did not expose a more specific
model revision or context-window size. Repository editing, shell
execution, database tests, and real-process test 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
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The issue detail page shows a live agent run and accepts follow-up
instructions.
> - A follow-up must stay in a stable queue until the user sends,
reorders, or removes it.
> - Native runners can receive a steering event in the active run.
> - Legacy runners must interrupt the active run and start a follow-up
run.
> - The current UI moved comments between the queue and the transcript
and could show duplicate text or ambiguous chronology.
> - This pull request makes the queue projection durable, keeps each
message in one clear place, and labels when queued input was actually
steered or delivered.
> - The benefit is predictable steering with stable ordering, no
duplicate messages, and visible causal timing.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #11374.
Refs #12591.
**What happened?**
During an active run, a new follow-up could first appear as a transcript
bubble and then move into the steering queue. After a steer or remove
action, it could appear again. Progress text could also repeat the final
response text. Once consumed, a queued bubble displayed only its
original submission time even though it moved to its later causal slot,
and a native run split by steering looked like two unrelated runs.
**Expected behavior**
An active-run follow-up must appear in the queue immediately. A native
steer must move it once into the active run. A legacy interrupt must
move it once into the follow-up run. A removed item must stay removed.
Progress text that is identical to the final response must appear once.
Consumed follow-ups must show both queue and steer/delivery times, and
post-steer native segments must identify themselves as continuations of
the same run.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start a long-running task.
2. Send two or more follow-up messages while the agent is active.
3. Reorder the messages and remove one message.
4. Send the first queued message as steering.
5. Observe the queue and transcript during and after both runs.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The problem reproduced on commit `da1e40302`.
**Deployment mode**
Local development with the embedded database.
## What Changed
- Project queued comments into the steering well for native and legacy
live runners.
- Send native steering to the active run and use interrupt-and-follow-up
for legacy runners.
- Keep optimistic queue order stable across refreshes and roll back
failed actions.
- Remove discarded comments from the transcript cache and keep them
removed when the queue becomes empty.
- Collapse only the final progress occurrence matching the durable
response, including across steered transcript segments.
- Show `Queued … · Steered …` for same-run input and `Queued … ·
Delivered …` for successor-run input at their causal positions.
- Label settled and live post-steer segments `Continued after steering`
and time them from the steer boundary.
- Add regression tests for queue display, steering, fallback interrupt,
reorder, remove, rollback, duplicate text, causal timestamps, and
live/settled continuation headers.
## Verification
- Ran the final focused steering/chronology UI suite with 233 passing
tests.
- Ran the activity-service regression suite with 5 passing tests.
- Ran the broader queue-focused UI suite with 298 passing tests before
the final chronology refinement.
- Ran `pnpm -r typecheck` successfully.
- Ran `pnpm build` successfully.
- Ran `pnpm check:token-gates` successfully.
- Tested native steering in a real browser with a 90-second baseline
wait and a three-second steering correction.
- Confirmed that the old final response did not appear before the
steered response.
- Tested three queued messages in a real browser.
- Confirmed that reorder changed delivery order and that the removed
message was never sent or shown again.
- Tested a legacy runner in a real browser.
- Confirmed that it used the interrupt fallback and showed the follow-up
once.
- Reloaded a saved mixed-steer/successor-run thread and confirmed the
causal timestamps and continuation header render in the correct
positions.
- The complete macOS suite reaches five unrelated platform assertions in
workspace-runtime tests. Two compare `/var` with `/private/var`. Three
require Linux `/proc` listener data. GitHub Actions provides the
authoritative Linux run.
## Risks
- Low risk. The change is limited to issue-chat queue projection and
transcript presentation.
- The server run-history API adds only a read-only `contextIssueId`
projection; the database schema does not change.
- Optimistic actions restore the prior UI state when a request fails.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex with GPT-5, extended reasoning, browser automation, shell
tools, 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
> - Paperclip records agent run outcomes through telemetry and run
lifecycle services
> - Terminal run transitions need one consistent event for outcome
analysis
> - The current paths do not report every terminal transition through
one event
> - This pull request adds the agent.task_run event and emits it at each
terminal transition
> - The benefit is complete run outcome data without exposing raw task
identifiers
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
Paperclip telemetry reports agent activity, but it does not report every
terminal task run through one event.
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting (multiple of the above): packages/shared telemetry and
server run lifecycle services.
**Current behavior**
Several run paths write a terminal status without a matching
agent.task_run telemetry event.
**Proposed behavior**
Each terminal run transition emits one agent.task_run event. The event
records the terminal state and uses the existing pseudonym helper for
the optional task identifier.
**Reason and benefit**
Complete terminal-run data helps operators measure agent outcomes. The
pseudonym helper prevents the raw task identifier from leaving the
installation.
**Breaking changes**
None. The change adds an event and keeps existing event behavior
compatible.
## What Changed
- Add the agent.task_run telemetry contract and client helper.
- Reuse the existing pseudonym helper for the task identifier. The
helper hashes the identifier with a per-installation salt and returns 16
hexadecimal characters. The raw identifier never leaves the
installation. Existing identifiers do not move.
- Emit one event from each legacy, native, recovery, and issue terminal
transition.
- Keep emissions outside database transactions and make delivery
best-effort.
- Add regression tests for event shape, hashing, terminal transitions,
and emission failures.
- Document the event and its privacy rule in the telemetry data
contract.
## Verification
- `npx tsc --noEmit` in `server/` passes at the submitted commit.
- The pull-request CI suite must pass. CI is the authority because local
Vitest has a known dependency artifact.
- The added regression tests cover event output shape, per-installation
hash divergence, raw identifier handoff, omitted identifiers, and
non-throwing emits.
## Risks
- A missed terminal path could reduce event coverage.
- Telemetry delivery remains best-effort and cannot change run
finalization.
- The pseudonym helper uses installation-specific state, so identifiers
differ between installations.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, tool use and code execution. Context window details
were not provided.
## 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 have addressed all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip manages AI agents that perform work.
> - Paperclip Runner connects durable task runs to local provider
processes.
> - The full-stack paid matrix exposed failures after the runner
integrity repair.
> - Verified JavaScript entrypoints lost their relative module graph
when Linux executed them through descriptor paths.
> - Returned provider startup errors also remained pending and became
indeterminate after recovery.
> - Sparse Codex tool lifecycle events lost the `write_document`
identity before task transcript projection.
> - This pull request repairs those three boundaries and makes the
structured-question fixture deterministic.
> - The benefit is repeatable provider startup, exact failure replay,
and correct inline Plan placement.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12721 and #12700.
**What happened?**
The paid runner matrix failed ACPX and OpenCode startup before provider
session creation. The runner journal then replaced the original startup
error with an indeterminate recovery result. Native Codex saved a Plan
but rendered it only as a fallback card. A legacy Claude waiting reply
could also echo the reserved terminal marker before the answer arrived.
**Expected behavior**
Verified JavaScript providers must start from immutable
descriptor-backed artifacts. Returned startup failures must persist as
terminal failed command results. Native tool lifecycle updates must
preserve the `write_document` boundary. Pre-answer fixture output must
not contain the reserved terminal marker.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run the local provider cells in the Runner Full-Stack E2E workflow.
2. Observe ACPX and OpenCode fail during `session.open` before provider
execution.
3. Observe recovery report `execution_indeterminate` instead of the
original startup error.
4. Run the native Codex Plan cell and observe the fallback Plan card
after the tool activity row.
5. Run the legacy Claude structured-question resume cell and observe an
early marker echo in waiting prose.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`0f9452101740835ce0b1488a204bf48acd5bafc3`
**Deployment mode**
Local development with the paid GitHub Actions acceptance workflow.
## What Changed
- Bundle the ACPX sidecar and OpenCode proxy as self-contained Node ESM
entrypoints before hashing and verified descriptor launch.
- Anchor ACPX dynamic provider package resolution at a
controller-derived provider-pack root and keep that root out of the
provider child environment.
- Persist executor-returned startup errors as redacted durable failed
command results while retaining indeterminate recovery for true process
death.
- Coalesce sparse native tool items by stable ID so a late
`write_document` name, input, and result reach the transcript boundary
once.
- Forbid the structured-question fixture from spelling or announcing its
reserved terminal marker before the user answers.
## Verification
- Rust and TypeScript regression tests cover durable failed replay, true
crash ambiguity, bundle closure, package-root derivation, environment
filtering, exact Codex tool lifecycle coalescing, and prompt
determinism.
- Local execution is intentionally limited to formatters and static diff
checks. GitHub Actions will run tests, type checks, builds, and security
checks.
- After ordinary CI is green, scoped paid cells will validate one ACPX
launch, one OpenCode launch, native Codex Plan projection, and legacy
Claude structured resume before a complete matrix rerun.
- Prior failing matrix:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33682434315
## Risks
- Bundling changes the bytes covered by provider launch hashes.
Provider-pack generation already hashes the final built files.
- ACPX still loads qualified provider packages dynamically. The
controller supplies a normalized package root, while existing version,
digest, path, and descriptor checks remain active.
- Durable `failed` is terminal. Replays return the same redacted result
and do not execute the provider effect twice.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex based on GPT-5 with agentic reasoning, repository
inspection, code editing, Git, parallel subagents, and GitHub Actions
coordination. The exact deployed snapshot and context-window size are
not exposed to this task.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either linked related public work or described the bug in
this PR
- [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
ticket id
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass (intentionally deferred to
GitHub Actions)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] No documentation change is required for this runtime repair
- [x] I have considered and documented the risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agent permissions control which agents can create or hire other
agents (`canCreateAgents`)
> - Today only CEO-role agents get this permission by default; every
other agent starts without it
> - Teams that want agents to delegate and build out their own teams
must flip the toggle on each hire, and most operators want delegation to
work out of the box
> - This pull request makes `canCreateAgents` default to enabled for new
standard-trust agents, while low-trust agents keep a disabled default
> - The benefit is that agent teams can grow without per-agent
permission toggling, while low-trust containment and checkout protection
stay intact
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Related (not fixed by this PR): #8064 also decouples an authority from
`agents:create`.
**Subsystem affected**
Server agent permissions (`server/src/services/agent-permissions.ts`),
authorization (`server/src/services/authorization.ts`), the shared
`agentPermissionsSchema` validator, and the UI trust-preset helper.
**Problem or motivation**
New agents cannot hire other agents unless an operator enables
`canCreateAgents` on each one. Only CEO-role agents get the permission
by default. This blocks delegation-by-default workflows. Operators must
toggle the permission for every hire.
**Proposed solution**
Default `canCreateAgents` to `true` for newly created agents. Apply and
persist the default at creation only. Stored rows without an explicit
value stay fail-closed at read and enforcement time. Keep the default at
`false` when the agent's permissions record marks it low-trust (the
`low_trust_review` preset or a trust boundary). Explicit values always
win. Decouple `tasks:manage_active_checkouts` from `canCreateAgents` so
the default-on flag does not let a peer agent write over another agent's
checked-out issue.
**Alternatives considered**
Granting the default only at the route layer would leave stored rows and
enforcement out of sync. Keeping the checkout authority coupled to
`canCreateAgents` would void the active-checkout write protection once
the flag is default-on. A per-company setting adds configuration surface
without a clear need; explicit per-agent overrides already exist.
**Roadmap alignment**
Governance and trust-preset work already separates standard-trust from
low-trust agents. This change follows that line: capability by default
for standard trust, containment by default for low trust.
## What Changed
- `normalizeAgentPermissions` now takes a `create`/`stored` context.
Creation writes get the new default: enabled unless
`permissionsImplyLowTrust()` detects the low-trust review preset or a
trust boundary. Stored rows without an explicit value normalize to
disabled (fail-closed). The role parameter is gone.
- `agentPermissionsSchema` no longer injects `canCreateAgents: false`
when the field is omitted. The server-side default applies instead.
- `authorization.ts` normalizes raw agent rows for `agents:create`, so
enforcement matches what the API reports for legacy rows.
- `tasks:manage_active_checkouts` no longer rides on `canCreateAgents`.
CEO role, explicit grants, and the manager chain remain the paths.
- `agents:create` is denied outright inside any resolved low-trust
execution context (agent, project, issue, or run policy). The default-on
flag can never reach the legacy creator allow there.
- The UI trust-preset helper sets `canCreateAgents: false` when an agent
is switched to the low-trust preset, instead of carrying the old value
forward.
- `doc/CLI.md` describes the new default for `teams install`.
- Tests pin the default matrix (standard, low-trust, explicit overrides)
on the server and in the UI helper.
## Verification
- `cd server && npx vitest run
src/__tests__/agent-permissions-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/agent-permissions-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/low-trust-red-team-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/authorization-service.test.ts` — 143 tests pass.
- Broader sweep: 18 suites that touch `canCreateAgents` (hire,
pending-approval, teams catalog, portability, built-in agents,
plugin-managed agents) pass locally.
- `cd ui && npx vitest run src/lib/trust-policy-ui.test.ts
src/components/TrustPresetSection.test.tsx src/pages/NewAgent.test.tsx
src/pages/Agents.test.tsx` — passes.
- Typecheck is clean for the changed files in `packages/shared`,
`server`, and `ui`.
## Risks
- Behavioral shift: agents created after this change persist
`canCreateAgents: true` unless low-trust. Pre-existing agents keep their
stored value. Legacy or malformed permission records without an explicit
value stay fail-closed at read and enforcement time; they never gain the
authority retroactively.
- Low-trust runs can no longer create agents at all, even when the agent
carries an explicit `canCreateAgents: true`. Before this change, that
combination could hire. The red-team suite and a new authorization test
pin the denial.
- Narrowing: a non-CEO agent with `canCreateAgents: true` loses implicit
`tasks:manage_active_checkouts`. The manager chain and explicit grants
still provide it. This narrowing is deliberate; without it, the
default-on flag would let any peer bypass active-checkout write
protection.
- No migrations. No API shape changes. Low-trust defaults are covered by
the red-team regression suite.
## Model Used
- Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), Anthropic — via Claude Code CLI
with extended thinking and tool use (code search, editing, local test
execution).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and 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 recovery subsystem watches assigned issues and re-wakes an agent
whose run ended without finishing the work
> - Intake can hide a duplicate issue by setting `hiddenAt` while
leaving its status and assignee in place
> - The stranded-issue query and the terminal-run cleanup both ignore
`hiddenAt`, so a hidden issue is re-woken on every cycle
> - Nothing on the board shows the hidden issue, so the repeated wakes
have no visible cause
> - This pull request adds a hidden-issue guard to both predicates and a
test for each
> - The benefit is that hiding an issue stops recovery work on it, with
no other change in behavior for visible issues
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
When intake marks an issue as a duplicate it sets `hiddenAt` but leaves
the status at `todo` or `in_progress` with the agent still assigned. The
stranded-issue recovery timer selects that issue on every tick and
queues an `issue_continuation_needed` wake for it. The agent's run on
the hidden issue fails or is cancelled, the terminal-run cleanup queues
immediate recovery for the same issue, and the cycle repeats
indefinitely. Hidden issues are invisible on the board, so nothing a
person can see explains the wakes.
**Expected behavior**
A hidden issue is never a recovery candidate. Stranded-issue
reconciliation skips it, and a failed, timed-out or cancelled run on it
releases the issue without queuing a continuation.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Assign an issue to an agent and leave it `in_progress`.
2. Hide the issue (set `hiddenAt`, for example by marking it a duplicate
through intake) without changing its status or assignee.
3. Let a run on that issue fail, or wait for the stranded-issue recovery
timer.
4. Observe a new `issue_continuation_needed` heartbeat run queued for
the hidden issue on every cycle.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduced on `master` when this PR was opened (May 2026). The two
predicates are unchanged on current `master`; this branch is rebased
onto it.
**Deployment mode**
Not deployment-specific: both guards are in the server's recovery and
heartbeat services and apply in every mode.
## What Changed
- `server/src/services/recovery/service.ts`: `isNull(issues.hiddenAt)`
added to the `reconcileStrandedAssignedIssues` candidate query, so
hidden issues never enter the stranded set.
- `server/src/services/heartbeat.ts`: `!issue.hiddenAt` added to
`issueNeedsImmediateRecovery`, so terminal-run cleanup releases a hidden
issue instead of queuing a continuation.
- `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts`: one test
per guard. A failed run on a hidden issue queues no recovery run, and a
hidden stranded issue is left out of reconciliation.
## Verification
- `heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` covers both guards; CI runs it
against embedded Postgres.
## Risks
Low. Both changes narrow an existing predicate to exclude rows that
already carry `hiddenAt`; visible issues take exactly the path they take
today. A hidden issue that genuinely needs recovery would have to be
unhidden first, which matches how hidden issues behave everywhere else
in the board.
## Model Used
The original two-line fix was authored by @im0xMagnus. The rebase onto
current `master`, the two regression tests, and this description were
produced with Claude (claude-fable-5-1, extended thinking, tool use)
driven by a Paperclip maintainer through Prospector's triage flow.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Andrew Aymeloglu <aaymeloglu@gmail.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the control plane for companies that use AI agents.
> - Apps give humans and agents controlled access to external services.
> - The existing app detail flow split permissions, tests, setup, and
activity across separate pages.
> - The split made access rules harder to understand and made reconnect
work hard to find.
> - New write actions also defaulted to Ask first, which did not match
the intended connection policy.
> - This pull request combines permission control and action testing,
removes the setup page, and moves connection activity into Audit.
> - The benefit is one clear place to configure, test, reconnect, and
review each app.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The installed app Permissions, Test, Setup, and Activity views.
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting. This change updates the React UI, shared app defaults,
server permission behavior, tests, smoke scripts, and connection
documentation.
**Current behavior**
App access and action testing use separate pages. The app detail view
also links to a setup page after installation. Connection activity uses
a separate tab. New write actions default to Ask first.
**Proposed behavior**
Permissions uses the connection access language from the initial flow.
It includes searchable Read and Write sections, a three-state permission
control, and a Test dialog for each action. Reconnect appears below a
Needs attention header on Permissions and Review. Old Setup and Test
links redirect to Permissions. Old Activity links redirect to the
filtered company Audit feed. New write actions default to Allowed.
**Reason and benefit**
A person can understand and test app access without moving between
several pages. Reconnect work stays visible where the person reviews the
connection. Audit events use one consistent feed and filter model. New
connections have the intended default policy.
**Breaking changes**
The Setup, Test, and app Activity tabs are removed. Existing deep links
redirect to their replacement pages. Existing saved action permissions
do not change. Only defaults for new write actions change.
**Additional context**
This builds on the managed app connection work in #12728. A search found
no duplicate open pull request or issue.
## What Changed
- Combined action testing with Permissions.
- Added searchable Read and Write action groups.
- Added Off, Ask first, and Allowed controls with tooltips.
- Added an action Test dialog with agent selection, arguments, and
formatted results.
- Removed the installed-app Setup and Activity tabs.
- Added reconnect guidance to Permissions and Review when a connection
needs attention.
- Routed connection activity into the company Audit feed and preserved
the Apps & tools filter in streamlined Audit.
- Moved connection removal to the Connectors-page management menu.
- Made new write actions default to Allowed across connection creation
paths.
- Updated regression tests, browser suites, smoke scripts, and
connection documentation.
## Verification
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/app-definitions.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/generic-mcp-connection.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts
ui/src/components/AppConnectionSidebar.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/apps/AppDetail.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/apps/AppNotConnected.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/apps/AppsConnect.test.tsx ui/src/pages/apps/Browse.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/apps/Connections.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/apps/composio-services.test.ts
ui/src/pages/audit/AuditFeed.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/tools/PasteConfigTab.test.tsx` (517 tests passed)
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/pages/apps/app-detail/TestPanel.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/audit/AuditHub.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/audit/AuditFeed.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/apps/AppDetail.test.tsx ui/src/pages/apps/Browse.test.tsx`
(96 tests passed)
- Targeted Playwright verification for connection removal, rename on
Permissions, inline action testing, and Smoke Lab Audit evidence (5
flows passed)
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- `pnpm test:run` completed with 5,755 passing tests and 20 unrelated
macOS harness failures. The failures use `/tmp` versus `/private/tmp`,
invalid ports above 65535, and workspace fixtures outside this change.
## Risks
- Low migration risk. This change has no database migration.
- Old app-detail URLs depend on redirect compatibility.
- New connections grant write actions by default. Finalization remains
configure-authorized and audited, Ask first and Off remain available per
action, and existing connections keep their saved policy.
> 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, exact model ID `gpt-5`. The client does not expose the
context-window size. The model used reasoning, repository tools, code
execution, and browser 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 an open-source app for managing AI agents
> - The issue history subsystem stores comments per issue, with
cursor-based pagination via the `after` query parameter
> - `GET /issues/:id/comments?after=<commentId>` looks up the anchor
comment by UUID to get its created_at timestamp
> - When agents store an incorrect or truncated comment ID (e.g.
`670427ab` instead of `670427ab-e0ae-4a54-959e-2b13a2e33d14`), Postgres
throws `invalid input syntax for type uuid` before the anchor-not-found
guard can execute
> - This surfaces as an unhandled 500 and causes agents to fail when
doing incremental comment reads on any issue
> - This pull request adds a UUID validation guard in `listComments`
using the already-imported `isUuidLike` helper
> - The benefit is that invalid cursors get a clean empty-array response
instead of a 500, matching what already happens when a valid UUID simply
isn't found
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #2612 (a different 500 on the same `after=` cursor path, fixed
earlier; this PR covers the malformed-cursor case that remains).
**What happened?**
`GET /issues/:id/comments?after=<value>` returns a 500 when `after` is
not a UUID. The route trims the query value and passes it straight to
the anchor lookup, so Postgres raises `invalid input syntax for type
uuid: "670427ab"` before the anchor-not-found guard can run. Any agent
that stored a truncated or malformed comment ID as its pagination cursor
gets stuck in a 500 loop on that issue.
**Expected behavior**
A cursor that cannot name a comment behaves like a cursor that names a
missing comment: the endpoint returns `[]`.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Pick any issue id on a running instance.
2. Call `GET /api/issues/<issue-id>/comments?after=670427ab` (8 hex
characters instead of a full UUID).
3. Observe a 500 with `PostgresError: invalid input syntax for type
uuid: "670427ab"`, where a full-but-unknown UUID such as
`00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000` returns `[]`.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`master` at the time this PR was opened (June 2026). The `listComments`
anchor lookup in `server/src/services/issues.ts` is unchanged on current
`master`, so the failure still reproduces there.
**Deployment mode**
Local dev (`pnpm dev`). Not deployment-specific: the failure is in the
server's comment-listing service, so it reproduces in every mode.
## What Changed
- `server/src/services/issues.ts` — added `if
(!isUuidLike(afterCommentId)) return [];` guard in `listComments` before
the DB anchor lookup, using the already-imported `isUuidLike` helper
## Verification
```bash
# Start the dev server
pnpm dev
# Pass a truncated UUID — should return [] instead of 500
curl -s "http://localhost:3100/api/issues/<any-valid-issue-id>/comments?after=670427ab"
# Expected: []
# Pass a valid full UUID that doesn't exist — should also return []
curl -s "http://localhost:3100/api/issues/<any-valid-issue-id>/comments?after=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000"
# Expected: []
# Pass a valid full UUID that exists — should return comments after that cursor
curl -s "http://localhost:3100/api/issues/<any-valid-issue-id>/comments?after=<real-comment-uuid>"
# Expected: array of comments
```
## Risks
Low risk. The change only adds an early-return guard for values that are
provably invalid UUIDs. The code path for valid UUIDs is unchanged. The
existing behavior for anchor-not-found (returning `[]`) is preserved for
invalid UUIDs, which is the correct semantic (cursor not found → no
comments after it).
## Model Used
Claude Sonnet 4.6 (`claude-sonnet-4-6`) via Paperclip CTO agent, tool
use + code execution mode, 200K 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
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [ ] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip CTO <cto@paperclip.ai>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Andrew Aymeloglu <aaymeloglu@gmail.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Apps let people give agents governed access to external providers
> - Paperclip Cloud brokers shared provider authorization for managed
stacks
> - The managed flow sent the browser through a confirmation page after
the tenant had already prepared sign-in
> - A lost confirmation response could also show an expired-session
error before the provider page opened
> - This pull request adds an opaque handoff contract and one shared
tenant coordinator
> - The benefit is a direct and recoverable transition from Paperclip to
every Cloud-brokered provider
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
A managed Paperclip Cloud connection opened the Cloud confirmation
route. A response-loss race could show an expired-session error while
the authorization still continued.
**Expected behavior**
The current Paperclip loading state must stay visible while the tenant
exchanges an opaque session. The browser must then open the provider
directly. Self-hosted and direct OAuth must keep their existing
behavior.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open Apps on a Paperclip Cloud stack.
2. Start a managed provider connection.
3. Select Continue to sign in.
4. Observe that the browser visits the Cloud confirmation route before
it reaches the provider.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`b872cd3d1b404bdaff70af493a2973ceb7e5d6ec`
**Deployment mode**
Paperclip Cloud hosted stack.
No related open issue or pull request was found in the repository
search.
## What Changed
- Add a backward-compatible opaque Cloud handoff to the shared OAuth
start contract.
- Validate the Cloud descriptor on the server and expose no
browser-selected endpoint.
- Exchange managed handoffs through one fixed same-origin route in every
Apps OAuth launcher.
- Keep dialog popups reserved before asynchronous work and retain the
tenant loading state.
- Add recent-login resume storage, bounded retry behavior, terminal
tenant errors, tests, and Storybook states.
## Verification
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- Focused connector and UI suites: 184 passed and 202 skipped.
- `pnpm build`
- `pnpm build-storybook`
- The full local suite reached one unrelated macOS path-alias failure.
The untouched test expected `/var/...` and received the equivalent
`/private/var/...`. The same test reproduces in isolation.
## Risks
- A malformed managed descriptor now fails closed in Paperclip instead
of opening a URL.
- A legacy Cloud deployment can omit the descriptor. Paperclip then uses
the existing validated confirmation URL.
- Direct provider OAuth and self-hosted flows do not receive a handoff
and remain unchanged.
- Rollback is a normal revert of this commit because the contract is
optional and backward compatible.
> 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, reasoning mode, tool use, code execution,
and browser 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
- [ ] 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
> - Projects can link to goals, through the `goalIds` list or the legacy
`goalId` field. The project service writes those links on create and
update.
> - The service never checked the goal ids. A nonexistent id died at the
`projects.goal_id` foreign key as an opaque 500, and the caller got no
actionable feedback — observed live on 2026-09-03, where one caller
retried the same bad id four times.
> - The foreign key also only proves a goal exists, not who owns it. A
goal id from another company linked silently on a multi-company
instance.
> - This pull request asserts every resolved goal id exists under the
caller's company before any write, and rejects with a 422 that names the
unknown ids.
> - The benefit is a clear, actionable client error instead of a 500,
and no cross-company goal links.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
`POST /companies/:companyId/projects` with a `goalIds` entry that does
not exist fails with an internal error: `insert or update on table
"projects" violates foreign key constraint
"projects_goal_id_goals_id_fk"`. The caller sees a 500 and retries. A
goal id that exists but belongs to a different company is accepted and
linked.
**Expected behavior**
The request fails fast with a 422 that names the unknown goal id(s).
Goals from other companies are rejected the same way. Valid links behave
exactly as before.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Create a company and no goals.
2. `POST /companies/:companyId/projects` with `{ "name": "Rocket",
"goalIds": ["<any-uuid>"] }`.
3. Before this change: 500 from the foreign key. After: 422 naming the
id.
**Deployment mode**
Any; observed on an authenticated public deployment.
## What Changed
- `assertGoalsBelongToCompany` in the project service: one query for the
resolved ids scoped to the company; unknown ids produce `unprocessable`
(422) with the ids in the message and details
- called on create (before the project row insert, so no partial writes)
and on update (scoped to the existing project's company); both `goalIds`
and the legacy `goalId` field flow through the same resolution
- new embedded-Postgres test file: valid link, nonexistent id on create
with no partial insert, legacy field, another company's goal on create,
and a foreign-goal update that leaves existing links unchanged
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run src/__tests__/project-goal-validation.test.ts` — 5
passed
- adjacent suites (`project-icon-persistence`,
`project-shortname-resolution`, `issue-goal-fallback`,
`project-goal-telemetry-routes`, `heartbeat-referenced-projects`,
`projects-list-archived-routes`) — 35 passed
## Risks
- Low risk. One extra indexed select per create/update that carries goal
ids. Requests that previously 500ed now 422; requests that silently
linked a foreign goal now fail — both are corrections, not regressions.
- Existing rows with foreign links (written before this check) are
untouched; only new writes validate.
## 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 goal-id validation)
- [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 (doc
comments; no user-facing docs affected)
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The server controls secrets, host files, outbound requests, and
workspace commands
> - A red-team review found cases where restricted callers could cross
these trust boundaries
> - These cases could expose credentials or let untrusted input reach
privileged resources
> - This pull request applies least-privilege checks at each affected
server boundary
> - The benefit is safer agent execution without changing the
private-instance bootstrap contract
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
Several server paths used authorization, redaction, or content-delivery
rules that were too broad. Restricted agent keys could obtain
company-level operational data. Some adapter and instruction paths could
reach server-owned network or file resources without the required owner
approval.
**Expected behavior**
Paperclip must redact credential values, enforce restricted-key scopes,
guard outbound network access, prevent same-origin script execution, and
reserve host-level file and command controls for authorized operators.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Configure an authenticated development instance at the parent commit.
2. Exercise the affected APIs with a restricted agent key or a
non-instance-admin company user.
3. Observe that the parent commit returns privileged data or accepts a
privileged operation.
4. Repeat on this branch and observe a redacted response, a safe
download, or an HTTP 403 response.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The findings reproduce from commit `39898ab22` and are fixed by this
pull request.
**Deployment mode**
Authenticated self-hosted server and local development modes.
**Installation method**
Built from source with pnpm.
## What Changed
- Redact generic secret `value` and `token` fields recursively in
structured logs.
- Classify exact and separator-suffixed `KEY` environment names as
secrets in company exports.
- Limit restricted self-identity responses and protect company run, log,
and secret catalog APIs.
- Route HTTP adapter requests through DNS-pinned SSRF protection with
exact private-origin allowlisting.
- Download HTML, SVG, and other script-capable assets with `nosniff` and
a sandbox CSP.
- Require instance-admin access for external instruction roots and
exports that read them.
- Block agent-authenticated host command persistence across supported
workspace runtime shapes.
- Apply the central runtime-management decision before workspace command
controls.
- Keep the documented first-user instance-admin claim contract
unchanged.
- Add regression tests and server-owner configuration documentation.
## Verification
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passes.
- The Node 24 remediation suite passes with 365 tests. It skips 25
environment-gated tests.
- `pnpm build` passes under Node 24.
- `git diff --check` passes.
- The full local runner reaches known macOS-only general-server harness
failures before the serialized route lane. The Linux PR matrix is the
authoritative full-suite gate.
## Risks
- Restricted agent keys now receive HTTP 403 responses from company-wide
run, log, and secret catalog endpoints.
- Script-capable assets now download instead of rendering inline.
- External instruction roots now require instance-admin access.
- Private HTTP adapter endpoints now require an exact origin in
`PAPERCLIP_HTTP_ADAPTER_PRIVATE_ENDPOINT_ALLOWLIST`.
- Public HTTP adapter endpoints remain enabled. Redirects and metadata
or link-local targets remain blocked.
- No database migration is required.
> 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. The exact serving snapshot and context-window size
are not exposed. The model used tool-enabled reasoning, repository
access, code execution, and test execution.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and 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>
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>
## 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 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
> - 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.
> - 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
Dotta
Dotta
Nicky Leach
Devin Foley
Magnus
Maxxsong7
scotttong
