## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents often run against managed workspace runtime services,
including reusable Paperclip dev servers
> - A running process and an open root URL are not enough to prove the
Paperclip API is actually ready
> - If the API health endpoint is still failing, agents can reuse a
service that looks alive but cannot safely serve the board or API
clients
> - This pull request makes Paperclip dev runtime readiness probe the
resolved `/api/health` endpoint
> - The benefit is that runtime service reuse waits for the same health
signal operators and agents depend on
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No matching public GitHub issue was found. Public duplicate search found
no open PR for "workspace runtime health readiness".
Bug report:
### What happened?
A managed Paperclip dev runtime service could satisfy HTTP readiness at
the exposed base URL even when the Paperclip health endpoint was
returning an unhealthy status.
### Expected behavior
Paperclip dev runtime services should not be considered ready until
their health endpoint succeeds.
### Steps to reproduce
1. Start a workspace runtime service named `paperclip-dev` whose base
URL responds successfully.
2. Make that same service return HTTP 503 from `/api/health`.
3. Ask Paperclip to ensure the runtime service for a run.
4. Observe that the service can be reused even though the API health
endpoint is not ready.
### Paperclip version or commit
Current `origin/master` before this PR.
### Deployment mode
Local workspace runtime service management.
## What Changed
- Resolve Paperclip dev runtime readiness checks to the service health
URL before polling.
- Surface readiness errors with the actual health URL that failed.
- Add a regression test that fails when `/api/health` returns HTTP 503
even if the service process is running.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts`
— 81 tests passed.
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` — passed.
## Risks
- Low to medium risk. This tightens readiness for Paperclip dev runtime
services, so a service that previously looked ready while unhealthy will
now fail fast instead of being reused.
> 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 coding agent based on GPT-5, tool-enabled shell workflow.
Exact hosted model variant and context window were not exposed by the
runtime.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and 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>
7cf0d3ebb0