## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents collaborate through discovery, delegation, dependencies, and
governed approvals
> - These optional operations need stable contracts before any run may
discover them
> - The core action contracts are already isolated in the lower stack
> - This pull request adds the 13 collaboration and governance action
definitions
> - It does not grant claims or bind production services
> - The benefit is a reviewable contract layer for later run-scoped
authorization
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
packages/paperclip-runner protocol action contracts
**Problem or motivation**
Optional collaboration operations need one provider-neutral definition
for policy metadata, documentation, live and scenario schemas, and
canonical examples.
**Proposed solution**
Add one immutable module for each discovery, delegation, dependency, and
governance action. Add a collaboration aggregate and validate all
examples with JSON Schema.
**Alternatives considered**
These contracts could land with executable authorization. That would
make contract review depend on runtime policy and server service
bindings.
**Roadmap alignment**
This supports the existing experimental Paperclip Runner rollout. It
does not make any optional operation discoverable or invocable.
## What Changed
- Add 13 collaboration and governance action definitions.
- Add immutable policy, schema, documentation, and example data.
- Add a collaboration-only aggregate.
- Validate every action example against its declared schema.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:typescript`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner typecheck:typescript`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- The branch changes 15 files relative to its declared base.
## Risks
Low production risk. The declarations do not grant claims or contain
executable service bindings. Tests require optional placement, immutable
metadata, stable identities, and schema-valid examples.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, `gpt-5`, with agentic reasoning, tool use, and code
execution.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either linked an existing public issue or described the
issue in-PR
- [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [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
4eb32d7532