## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The board selects a company before it loads that company's inbox and
tasks.
> - Instance administrators can list companies where they have no
membership.
> - The board treated that directory as a list of companies the user
could enter.
> - This pull request gives navigation a list based on the existing
company access check.
> - Users can select their companies without landing on an inbox that
rejects their access.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Fixes#6090. Refs #4855 for the related account-recovery case; this PR
does not grant company membership.
**What happened?**
An instance administrator can select a company where they have no
membership. Its inbox then shows “User does not have access to this
company.” Company directory visibility and access to company contents
use different rules.
**Expected behavior**
Company navigation should show only companies the current user can
enter. A stored selection for an inaccessible company should fall back
to an accessible company. A direct link to an inaccessible company
should use the existing unavailable-company page.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Create Company A and Company B with separate owners.
2. Sign in as an instance administrator who belongs only to Company A.
3. Select Company B through a stored selection or a link with its
prefix.
4. Observe that the board accepts the company selection, but
company-scoped requests return 403.
Related: #10524 lets cloud users enter additional companies where they
hold memberships. This fix preserves that access and excludes companies
where they have no membership.
## What Changed
- Added `scope=accessible` to `GET /api/companies`, using the existing
`hasCompanyAccess` predicate.
- Changed the board navigation list to request that scope. Instance
Access uses a separate unscoped, account-keyed directory so
administrators can manage all companies. Membership edits refresh
navigation.
- Reject empty, unknown, and repeated scope values with 400. Directory
loading errors offer a retry before access controls are shown.
- Added route tests for cloud, session, board-key, local trusted,
non-member, and agent access.
- Added client and component tests for navigation/admin request
isolation, grants outside the navigation list, self-membership refresh,
directory failure recovery, and forbidden administration.
- Updated the API guide and OpenAPI document.
## Verification
- Latest commit: 36 focused UI tests passed. The broader UI shard passed
all 281 files / 2,533 tests after correcting an asynchronous test
assertion.
- Server authorization and OpenAPI regression suites: 31 tests passed.
- UI typecheck and `pnpm check:token-gates`: passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`: passed after review fixes.
- Full local test runner: exercised the supported shards. Several
unrelated suites hit embedded PostgreSQL startup failures or startup
timeouts under local load. The UI regression issue found in the broad
run was corrected and its full UI shard passed. These local limitations
are not reported as a green full-suite result.
- [GitHub
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34233416473):
all checks green on `4e1698cd4` — all server and workspace test shards,
all browser end-to-end shards, typecheck/release registry, build, canary
dry run, policy, and Docker context integrity. Security checks also
passed.
- Greptile: 5/5 on the latest commit; both initial findings addressed
and all review threads resolved.
## Risks
- The UI now excludes companies visible only through instance
administrator status. Company membership continues to control access to
contents.
- Additional companies with active memberships remain available.
- The client and server changes must ship together. An older server
ignores the new query parameter and retains the previous behavior.
- No database migration or permission grant changes.
## Model Used
- OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection,
code editing, and test execution. The exact served model identifier and
context window 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>
be6bb768b1