| 文件 | 最后提交记录 | 最后更新时间 |
|---|---|---|
fix(claude): recognize ACP quota fallback errors (#13831) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The Claude adapter reports failures to the recovery system. > - Recovery must distinguish account quota from other provider limits. > - The Claude ACP bridge has a default message for an account with no quota. > - The current classifier misses that message and returns `acpx_turn_failed`. > - This pull request recognizes that exact typed message and uses the existing quota wait. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13651. This is a narrow follow-up to its typed quota classification. Related PRs #13549 and #10276 address broader quota classification and reset handling. This change covers the bridge's exact default quota message. **What happened?** A typed Claude ACP `limit` failure with the title `The Claude account has no available quota.` returns `acpx_turn_failed`. The recovery result has no quota label. **Expected behavior** Return `provider_quota`. Use the existing one-hour quota backoff when the provider gives no reset time. Keep context, turn, rate, and configured budget limits out of the quota path. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Use the local ACP fixture to return the exact title above with category `limit` and severity `error`. 2. Run the Claude adapter in oneshot or persistent mode. 3. Before this change, the new regression cases receive `acpx_turn_failed` instead of `provider_quota` on ACPX 0.12.0 and 0.13.1. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on `a959e4750`. Rebased onto current `master` before submission. **Deployment mode** Local source checkout with isolated ACP child-process fixtures. No live provider calls or customer-stack changes. ## What Changed - Recognize the exact Claude bridge quota fallback only for typed `limit` failures. - Add real-process regression cases for both pinned ACPX versions and both session modes. - Verify that unrelated categories, positive quota wording, and historical generic limit errors do not imply quota exhaustion. - Document the fallback and its existing recovery backoff. ## Verification - Red/green reproduction: all four new fallback cases failed before the classifier change and passed afterward. - 108 targeted tests passed across Claude ACP, quota, parser, and server recovery suites. - Claude adapter typecheck and build passed. - Real-process tests verify that provider text stays out of results and logs. - Full local `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. - The full local `pnpm test:run` attempt stopped after embedded PostgreSQL could not load a missing library symlink. The dependency setup was repaired in the worktree. The isolated database test then passed. The complete test suites passed in GitHub CI. - All 54 latest-head checks passed on `3d4d4e65386c5b6023ba34e6a2abcd94cff9a9bc`. Two optional Storybook jobs were skipped. - Greptile: 5/5, with no inline review threads or requested changes. ## Risks - Low risk. An exact match is required inside an existing typed `limit` failure. - If upstream changes this wording, this fallback can stop matching. Existing quota-message detection remains in place. - No schema, credential, or permission changes. Historical generic errors remain ambiguous and are not reclassified. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The session identifies the model family as GPT-6 but does not expose a more specific model ID or context-window size. Used reasoning, repository inspection, code editing, and terminal 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> | 6 天前 | |
Warn when routine webhook URLs may not be publicly reachable (#13684) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work. > - Routines can start that work when another app sends a webhook. > - Local and private URLs often cannot receive events from public services. > - HTTPS alone does not make a Tailscale address public. > - This pull request explains these limits during setup and editing. > - Users can still finish setup for senders on their own network. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13637. Webhook setup needs a clear warning when the generated URL appears local, private, or unencrypted. The warning must explain how to make the endpoint reachable without blocking private-network use. ## What Changed - Add a shared warning banner to the Connect, Check connection, and Edit webhook views. - Distinguish localhost, private network addresses and domains, HTTP, and Tailscale hostnames. - Explain the difference between Tailscale Serve and Funnel. Link to the Paperclip HTTPS guide. - Add five full-page Storybook examples, design guide examples, and documentation. - Add URL classification tests and a regression test that finishes setup despite the warning. ## Verification - Passed 41 focused URL and trigger-flow tests. - Passed workspace typecheck, workspace build, token gates, and Storybook build. - Browser-tested the Tailscale story through Check connection, Finish setup, and Edit webhook. The warning stays visible and does not block setup. - Open Product / Routines / Webhooks stories 11–15 to review the warning states. - All 54 PR checks passed, including the full test matrix and eight browser shards; two optional Storybook jobs were skipped by workflow policy. - The server supervisor readiness test timed out once in CI, then passed on rerun and locally (6 tests). - The duplicate local full-suite run was stopped after the complete CI matrix passed. - Greptile: 5/5 on the current commit, with no unresolved review comments. ## Risks - URL checks are hints. They do not test DNS, firewall rules, or actual reachability. - A Tailscale hostname can serve either private Serve traffic or public Funnel traffic. The warning explains this uncertainty and permits both. - No API, schema, authentication, or webhook delivery behavior changes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools, shell execution, and browser testing. The exact deployment model ID 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> | 10 天前 | |
Add issue controls and retry-now recovery (#5426) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Issue operators need clear controls for execution settings, model overrides, and recovery retries > - Existing issue properties hid useful adapter override state and did not expose a board-triggered retry for scheduled heartbeat recovery > - Scheduled retries also need to respect the same safety gates as normal execution instead of bypassing budget, review, pause, dependency, or terminal-state checks > - This pull request adds the issue property controls and retry-now surfaces together because they share the issue details/properties UI > - The benefit is that operators can inspect and adjust issue execution settings and safely trigger pending scheduled recovery without hidden control-plane behavior ## What Changed - Adds editable issue assignee model override controls in `IssueProperties`, with focused coverage. - Removes the stale workspace tasks link from issue properties. - Adds a scheduled retry `retry-now` backend path and shared response types. - Adds main-pane and properties-pane scheduled retry UI, backed by a shared `useRetryNowMutation` hook. - Adds suppression coverage for budget hard stops, review participant changes, subtree pause holds, unresolved blockers, terminal issues, and company scoping. - Updates the `IssueProperties` test harness with toast actions required by the retry-now hook. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssueScheduledRetryCard.test.tsx` — 31 passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-scheduled-retry-routes.test.ts` — exited 0, but this host skipped the embedded Postgres route tests with: `Postgres init script exited with code null. Please check the logs for extra info. The data directory might already exist.` - Pairwise merge check against the assigned-backlog PR branch completed without conflicts via `git merge --no-commit --no-ff` in a temporary worktree. ### Visual verification screenshots Storybook story: `Product/Issue Scheduled retry surfaces / ScheduledRetrySurfaces`.   ## Risks - Medium: this touches issue execution/retry behavior, so CI should run the embedded Postgres route tests on a host that can initialize Postgres. - Low-to-medium UI risk around duplicated retry-now entry points; both surfaces share one mutation hook to keep behavior consistent. > 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, GPT-5 model family (`gpt-5`), tool-enabled Paperclip heartbeat environment. Context window and internal reasoning mode are 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> | 4 个月前 | |
fix(onboarding): restore browser launch and gate canaries (#12667) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The onboarding command starts the local server and opens the first-run wizard. > - Interactive onboarding stopped opening the browser by default. > - Organization creation could also succeed in the API while the wizard stayed on the name step. > - The npm canary workflow did not prove that the published package could complete this path. > - This pull request repairs the startup and organization transitions and adds an exact-version canary smoke gate. > - The benefit is a quickstart that works for users and is tested after each canary publish. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #12557 covers a separate final-route onboarding handoff. **What happened?** Interactive `paperclipai onboard` runs did not open the onboarding page. The organization API request could succeed while a same-company context update caused the wizard to stay on the organization step. The canary release lane did not test the exact published npm package through this path. **Expected behavior** Interactive onboarding must open the browser once. A successful organization request must advance to the first-agent step when the surrounding context adopts the same organization. Each published canary must install in a clean environment and reach the model connection step. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run `npx paperclipai@canary onboard --data-dir "$(mktemp -d /tmp/paperclip-canary.XXXXXX)"` in an interactive terminal. 2. Enter an organization name while the company context refreshes from the create response. 3. Observe that the browser does not open or that the wizard can remain on the organization step after the API creates it. 4. Inspect the canary release lane and observe that no post-publish onboarding test runs against the exact npm version. **Paperclip version or commit** The issue reproduced with `2026.901.0-canary.8` and the source state before this pull request. **Deployment mode** Local trusted quickstart with embedded PostgreSQL. The install source can be npm or a source checkout. ## What Changed - Open the browser once for interactive foreground onboarding. - Preserve explicit browser opt-outs and restore the prior environment value after startup. - Accept a same-company context update after organization creation and reject a different-company takeover with an explicit error. - Export the exact canary version from the publish job. - Install and test that exact npm version in a clean Playwright smoke job through the "Connect a model" step. - Upload server logs, traces, screenshots, and the Playwright report when the canary smoke fails. - Document the interactive default and headless opt-outs. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run cli/src/__tests__/onboard.test.ts ui/src/components/OnboardingWizard.step.test.tsx --reporter=dot` passes with 37 tests. - `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs` passes with 9 tests. - `pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts tests/e2e/onboarding.spec.ts` passes with 2 tests. - `PAPERCLIPAI_VERSION=2026.901.0-canary.8 pnpm run test:canary-onboarding-smoke` passes against the published npm package. - `pnpm check:token-gates` passes. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passes. - `pnpm build` passes. - A fresh interactive source run opens the browser and reaches "Connect a model" after organization and agent naming. ## Risks - Low risk. Automatic browser opening only applies to interactive foreground onboarding. - `PAPERCLIP_NO_BROWSER=1` and `PAPERCLIP_OPEN_ON_LISTEN=false` keep headless runs silent. - A different organization context still blocks the pending create transition. - The canary package is immutable before the smoke runs. A smoke failure leaves the package published but makes the release workflow red. - This change does not modify REST APIs, database schemas, or shared data types. > 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 runtime does not expose the exact deployment snapshot or context-window size. The model used reasoning, browser automation, repository tools, shell commands, code editing, 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> | 28 天前 | |
Add routine support to recurring task portability Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> | 6 个月前 | |
feat: support default-hidden experimental settings (#13980) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source control plane for AI-agent companies. > - Operators can hide settings that their users must not change. > - The server shares the effective restrictions with the UI and settings API. > - An explicit list must change whenever a new experimental flag is added. > - This pull request adds a wildcard with named exceptions to the existing setting. > - Core applies the policy to its current catalog, so new flags stay hidden automatically. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #11823 introduced settings visibility. #13907 added workspace isolation visibility. I searched related PRs and issues and found no duplicate wildcard implementation. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Operator control of experimental setting visibility through `PAPERCLIP_HIDDEN_SETTINGS`. **Subsystem affected** Shared settings policy and its existing server health and mutation consumers. **Current behavior** Operators must name every hidden experimental toggle. A new Core flag can become visible until the operator updates that list. **Proposed behavior** `instance.experimental.*` hides current and future experimental toggles. Entries such as `!instance.experimental.enableEnvironments` leave named controls available. Explicit hidden keys and the hidden parent page take precedence over exceptions. **Reason and benefit** Operators can maintain a short list of allowed controls instead of a second copy of Core's full feature catalog. **Breaking changes** Existing explicit lists and unset configuration keep their behavior. The new syntax is opt-in. Older images ignore it, so operators must retain explicit restrictions until those images are upgraded. Visibility does not change feature values. ## What Changed - Expand the wildcard into concrete catalog keys in the shared parser. - Limit exceptions to known experimental controls and preserve explicit restrictions in either input order. - Test a synthetic future catalog addition, duplicate and invalid entries, API rejection, same-value echoes, and the effective health payload. - Document the syntax and the transition for deployments with mixed image versions. ## Verification - Targeted parser, future-catalog, health, and settings-route tests pass: 95 tests across four files. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passes, including Rust checks, with the installed Cargo directory on PATH. - `pnpm build` passes. - All current-head CI gates pass, including the full test shards, Rust, build, browser E2E, and canary dry run: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36083292578. One unchanged runtime-exposure cold-start test passed on its first retry. - The full local `pnpm test:run` did not pass on macOS/Node 25: the first server group reported 13,356 passed, 18 failed, and 99 skipped, with six failed files (including two failed suite setups). Failures were in unchanged runtime/company skill cache, chat/email connector fixtures, embedded-Postgres setup, and workspace cleanup tests. A standalone filesystem probe reproduced the read-only-directory rename permission failure. Missing connector fixture paths, database startup failures, and two integration assertions also occurred; the remaining local groups were not reached after this group failed. The corresponding CI lanes all pass. These local failures are not claimed as fixed by this PR. - Browser suites were not run because this changes the shared policy, not UI rendering or browser workflows. Health payload and route tests cover the shared UI/API contract. ## Risks A malformed exception remains hidden and is reported as unknown. Exceptions cannot override an explicit hidden toggle or parent page. Older images ignore wildcard syntax; keep their explicit list during a mixed-version rollout. No schema or feature-value changes are included. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact runtime 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> | 4 天前 | |
fix(ui): alphabetize experimental settings and hide empty groups (#13905) ## Thinking Path Paperclip operators use Experimental settings to find and manage optional controls. New cards have accumulated outside alphabetical order, and operator-hidden cards leave empty developer and legacy sections. Sort the displayed controls within their existing groups and remove groups with no visible controls. ## Related Issues **What existing behavior does this improve?** The Instance Settings → Experimental page. **Current behavior** Agent Chat follows Cases, MCP aggregators precedes External Objects, and hidden developer/legacy controls leave empty headings. The worktree execution card also ignores its operator visibility key. **Proposed behavior** Cards appear alphabetically by their displayed title within each section. Empty developer and legacy sections disappear. The worktree execution card follows the same operator visibility policy as other experimental controls. **Reason and benefit** Operators can scan the list predictably. Hosted installations show only the controls their operator permits, without empty sections or a worktree-only exception. No matching sorting PR was found in the duplicate search. This is a small improvement to an existing settings page and does not add a roadmap feature. ## What Changed - Reorder existing cards without changing their values or mutation handlers. - Hide empty developer/legacy sections and respect the hidden worktree-execution key. - Cover alphabetical ordering, conditional isolated-workspace controls, a restricted three-control policy, and partly visible sections. - Document sorting and operator visibility. ## Verification - `pnpm --dir ui exec vitest run src/pages/InstanceExperimentalSettings.test.tsx`: 45 tests passed. - `pnpm check:token-gates`: passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm build`: passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`: passed. - All PR CI checks passed on `88011049be`, including the chat integration shards, full typecheck, build, browser tests, and policy checks. Greptile is 5/5 with no review threads. - Local `pnpm test:run` reported eight failures in unchanged chat, company-skills, email-channel, and workspace exposure suites. Stopped the remaining local run after CI completed successfully. Isolated chat rechecks were skipped by the host database support gate and do not count as passes. All matching CI shards passed; the full local suite is not claimed as green. - Frozen installation is blocked on the base branch by existing overrides/patch configuration drift from the lockfile. Local validation uses `pnpm@9.15.4 install --no-frozen-lockfile`; the original lockfile and manifests are unchanged in this PR. - Diff reviewed for secrets, private references, and run artifacts. ## Risks Settings only change position or visibility. Existing values, managed locks, API contracts, and feature dependencies are unchanged. Each section keeps its own alphabetical list. Reverting this change restores the previous presentation. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 (Codex), with reasoning, repository tools, 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 described the issue in-PR following the enhancement template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket id - [x] I have run the relevant 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> | 5 天前 | |
fix: restore docs deleted in v0.2.3 release, add Paperclip branding - Restored docs/ directory that was accidentally deleted by `git add -A` in the v0.2.3 release script - Replaced generic "P" favicon with actual paperclip icon using brand primary color (#2563EB) - Added light/dark logo SVGs for Mintlify navbar (paperclip icon + wordmark) - Updated docs.json with logo configuration for dark/light mode - Fixed release.sh to stage only release-related files instead of `git add -A` to prevent sweeping unrelated changes into release commits Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com> | 6 个月前 | |
feat(issues): add issue documents and inline editing Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> | 6 个月前 | |
[codex] UI and dev ops quality-of-life (#6384) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip operators spend most of their time scanning the board, inbox, sidebar, and local dev status surfaces > - Small UI and dev-ops frictions make repeated operator workflows feel slower than they need to be > - The working branch contained several independent quality-of-life improvements mixed with larger cloud work > - Grouping these smaller UI/dev-ops changes together keeps review overhead reasonable without merging them into feature PRs > - This pull request collects the operator-facing QoL polish into one standalone branch > - The benefit is a cleaner board navigation and local dev recovery experience without depending on cloud upstream sync ## What Changed - Relaxed forced 44px touch targets for small inline widgets. - Fixed mobile mention menu scrolling and sidebar spacing on touch/mobile layouts. - Synced inbox hover state with j/k selection. - Moved plugin sidebar entries into the Work section. - Added manual dev-server restart action/banner behavior. - Logged plugin bridge 502 causes for better diagnosis. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk build` - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx ui/src/components/Sidebar.test.tsx ui/src/components/SidebarProjects.test.tsx ui/src/pages/Inbox.test.tsx ui/src/components/DevRestartBanner.test.tsx server/src/__tests__/dev-server-status.test.ts server/src/__tests__/health-dev-server-token.test.ts server/src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts` initially failed only because plugin SDK `dist` was not built in the fresh worktree. - Rerun after build: `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts` passed. - The remaining targeted UI/dev-server tests passed on the first post-install run. ## Visual Evidence - Sidebar layout and plugin Work section:  - Inbox/task row selection and hover-state surface:  - Dev restart banner desktop:  - Dev restart banner mobile:  ## Risks - Mostly UI/dev ergonomics with low data risk. - Sidebar and inbox changes touch frequently used navigation surfaces, so visual review on desktop/mobile is still useful. > 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-based coding agent with local shell/git/tool use. Exact hosted model ID and context-window size are not exposed by the local Paperclip adapter 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> | 4 个月前 | |
feat(ui): enable Grok in Cloud agent setup (#13791) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their execution settings. > - The new-agent flow selects an adapter before configuring credentials and a model. > - Cloud uses one adapter policy for the picker and direct setup links. > - That policy excludes Grok despite its existing adapter and xAI connection support. > - This change adds Grok to the Cloud policy. > - Cloud users can configure Grok with the existing subscription or API-key flow. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Agent creation on Cloud. **Current behavior** The Cloud picker offers Claude, Codex, and OpenCode. Direct Grok setup links also fail the shared adapter check. **Proposed behavior** Offer Grok alongside the existing choices. Use the existing xAI connection and managed sandbox setup. **Reason and benefit** Users can select an already-supported adapter through the Cloud creation flow. **Breaking changes** None. Loaded and enabled checks still apply. Other excluded adapters remain excluded. ## What Changed - Add `grok_local` to the shared Cloud creation policy. - Display four adapter choices in a 2×2 grid on desktop and mobile, and reuse the theme-aware provider mark on the connection step so Grok is visible in dark mode. - Verify picker navigation and both Grok authentication methods through sandbox setup, model testing, and agent creation. - Verify that probe and hire payloads carry the xAI connection binding without the entered API key. - Update the agent configuration specification. ## Verification - `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/NewAgentDialog.test.tsx src/pages/NewAgent.test.tsx src/components/new-agent/AgentProviderConnection.test.tsx` — 69 tests passed. - Chromium checks against the production components and built stylesheet — four cards occupy two rows and two columns at 1280px and 390px; the connection step loads and displays the white Grok logo in dark mode and the black logo in light mode. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build` — passed. - `pnpm check:token-gates` — passed. - `git diff origin/master...HEAD | gitleaks stdin --redact --no-banner` — no leaks found; manual diff review found no private identifiers or user data. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` — blocked at the existing runner package because `cargo` is not installed locally. - `pnpm test:run` — started locally, then stopped after the equivalent CI suites passed. - Initial [PR CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35681351752) passed, including full typecheck/build, general and serialized tests, Rust checks, and all eight browser-test shards. One unchanged Cursor test timed out on the first attempt; its five-test file passed locally and the failed CI shard passed on retry. - The [latest CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35683642812) passed build, typecheck, all general and serialized tests, Rust checks, and all eight browser-test shards. One unchanged local-service-supervisor test failed its HTTP readiness check on the first attempt; its six-test file passed locally, and the failed server shard passed on retry. - Live xAI login and model execution were not run; the setup tests mock provider calls. ## Risks Small UI policy change. The existing Grok adapter, authentication, and secret storage paths remain in use. No schema or control-plane change is required. Cloud must deploy a tenant-app release containing this change. Revert the policy entry to hide Grok from new-agent setup again. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 (Codex), with repository inspection, code editing, and shell-based 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> | 7 天前 | |
copy: unify user-facing "company" wording to "organization" (#12243) | 1 个月前 | |
fix(timeouts): raise sandbox wall-clock backstop to 4h and make acpx_local timeouts self-describing (#9232) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Agent runs execute through adapters (e.g. `acpx_local`), which can run locally, over SSH, or inside sandbox execution targets, each with a wall-clock execution timeout > - Sandbox-backed runs defaulted to a 30-minute wall-clock backstop (`DEFAULT_REMOTE_SANDBOX_ADAPTER_TIMEOUT_SEC = 1800`), which kills healthy long agent runs that are still making progress — long before the recovery watchdog's 4h critical threshold would even consider them stuck > - On top of that, `acpx_local` resolved its timeout directly from `adapterConfig.timeoutSec` instead of the shared execution-target resolver, and its timeout failures surfaced as a bare `Timed out after Ns` — giving operators no clue which timer fired or which knob raises it > - This pull request raises the sandbox backstop to 4h (aligned with the recovery watchdog), routes `acpx_local` through the shared timeout resolver, logs the effective timeout and its source at run start, and makes every timeout error message self-describing > - The benefit is that long-running sandbox agent runs no longer die at 30 minutes, and when a wall-clock timeout does fire, the run log states exactly which timer fired and how to configure it ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #4535 (related: wall-clock execution timeouts killing agent runs that are still making progress — that issue covers a different hardcoded 600s timer, but the operator pain is the same). No exact public issue exists for this one, so describing it in-PR: **Bug:** A long sandbox-backed `acpx_local` agent run was killed with a bare `Timed out after 1800s` even though the agent was actively working. - **What happened:** The run hit the 30-minute `DEFAULT_REMOTE_SANDBOX_ADAPTER_TIMEOUT_SEC` backstop. `acpx_local` never consulted the shared execution-target timeout resolution (it read `adapterConfig.timeoutSec` directly, default 0), so on sandbox targets the sandbox-provider default applied with no adapter-level say. The resulting error named neither the timer that fired nor the knob that controls it. - **Expected:** Healthy long runs should not be killed by a 30-minute wall-clock backstop when the recovery watchdog only treats runs as critically stuck after 4h of output silence; and any timeout error should say which timeout fired and how to raise it. - **Impact:** Long, legitimate agent runs in sandboxes fail mid-work; operators waste time reverse-engineering which of several timers produced "Timed out after Ns". ## What Changed - `packages/adapter-utils/src/execution-target.ts` - `DEFAULT_REMOTE_SANDBOX_ADAPTER_TIMEOUT_SEC` raised from `1_800` to `14_400` (4h), with a comment explaining it intentionally matches the recovery watchdog's `ACTIVE_RUN_OUTPUT_CRITICAL_THRESHOLD_MS` (4h) so the adapter backstop never fires before the watchdog path. Output-inactivity monitors remain the primary hang detectors. - New `resolveAdapterExecutionTargetTimeout(target, configuredTimeoutSec)` returns `{ timeoutSec, source }` where `source` is `configured` / `sandbox_default` / `unlimited`. The existing `resolveAdapterExecutionTargetTimeoutSec` is preserved as a thin wrapper, so current callers are unaffected. - New `formatAdapterExecutionTimeoutErrorMessage(resolution)` and `formatAdapterExecutionTimeoutStartLogLine(resolution)` produce self-describing messages that name the timer that fired and the `adapterConfig.timeoutSec` knob that controls it. - `packages/adapters/acpx-local/src/server/execute.ts` - `buildRuntime` now resolves the wall-clock timeout through the shared resolver: sandbox targets default to the 4h backstop, local/SSH keep the historical "0 = no adapter timeout", and a configured `adapterConfig.timeoutSec` always wins. - The executor logs the effective timeout and its source at run start (`[paperclip] Adapter execution timeout: …`), so a later timeout is diagnosable from the run log alone. - All three bare timeout messages (timer cancel reason, turn result `errorMessage`, catch-path `messageOverride`) now use the self-describing format. - `packages/adapters/acpx-local/src/index.ts` — the adapter configuration doc for `timeoutSec` states the sandbox default and that the output-inactivity monitor remains the primary hang detector. - Tests: `packages/adapter-utils/src/execution-target-sandbox.test.ts` and `packages/adapters/acpx-local/src/server/execute.test.ts` (see Verification). ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils typecheck` — passes - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-acpx-local typecheck` — passes - `npx vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/execution-target-sandbox.test.ts packages/adapters/acpx-local/src/server/execute.test.ts` — 2 files, 40 tests, all pass - New/updated test coverage: - sandbox default resolves to 4h (and the constant is asserted to be `4 * 60 * 60`) - `resolveAdapterExecutionTargetTimeout` reports `configured` / `sandbox_default` / `unlimited` sources with the correct precedence (configured > sandbox default; local/SSH stay unlimited) - exact wording of the self-describing error message and the start-of-run log line - `acpx_local` runtime picks up the sandbox default into `timeoutMs`, keeps the unlimited local default, honors configured-over-default precedence, emits the start-of-run log line, and surfaces the self-describing `errorMessage`/cancel reason when the wall-clock timer kills a turn ## Risks - **Behavioral shift:** sandbox-backed adapter runs that previously hit the 30-minute backstop now run up to 4h before the adapter kills them. Genuinely hung runs are still caught much earlier by the adapters' output-inactivity monitors and by the recovery watchdog; the wall-clock timer is a last-resort kill switch. Operators who relied on the 30-minute default can restore it explicitly via `adapterConfig.timeoutSec`. - **Error-message consumers:** any tooling that pattern-matched the exact `Timed out after Ns` string from `acpx_local` will see the new self-describing message instead. - No API or schema changes; `resolveAdapterExecutionTargetTimeoutSec` keeps its exact signature and behavior (modulo the raised sandbox default). > 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 - Claude (Anthropic) via Claude Code CLI — model ID `claude-fable-5`, extended thinking enabled, agentic tool use (file edits, shell, 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 - [ ] 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> | 2 个月前 | |
[codex] Add built-in agents and Reflection Coach bundle (#9206) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Operators need first-party agent capabilities for repeatable company work, not just manually created one-off agents. > - Built-in agents need to behave like normal company-scoped agents while preserving approval gates, permissions, budgets, and audit trails. > - Reflection and coaching work also needs bundled instructions, skill content, and a routine so the feature can be installed and reset predictably. > - The API, database, UI, portability, and tests all need to agree on the built-in lifecycle from not provisioned through setup, approval, ready, paused, and reset. > - This pull request adds built-in agent provisioning and the Reflection Coach bundle end-to-end. > - The benefit is a safer first-party path for Paperclip-managed agents without bypassing the same governance model used for operator-created agents. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue was found for this exact built-in agent and Reflection Coach bundle work. Problem/motivation: - Paperclip did not have a first-party built-in agent lifecycle for product-owned agents. - Bundled agent resources such as default instructions, skills, and routines needed managed ownership and reset semantics. - Approval-gated companies needed built-in setup to preserve requested adapter, budget, manager, and permission state through board approval. - The board UI needed clear built-in badges, setup affordances, readiness state, and bundle status without exposing secrets. Proposed solution: - Add a company-scoped built-in agent registry, provisioning/reset/reconcile/status APIs, and Reflection Coach bundled resources. - Track bundled managed resources in the database with idempotent migration behavior. - Reuse existing agent approval, authorization, budget, and activity-log paths instead of creating a bypass. - Add UI setup, badges, gates, bundle panels, and route coverage for built-in agents. Duplicate search: - Searched GitHub PRs for `built-in agents Reflection Coach repo:paperclipai/paperclip`; only this PR was returned. - Searched GitHub issues for the same query; no public issues were returned. ## What Changed - Added built-in agent definitions, lifecycle state derivation, provisioning, reset, reconcile, status, and routine-control routes. - Added the `built_in_managed_resources` migration and schema exports for bundled instructions, skill, and routine ownership. - Added the Reflection Coach built-in bundle with default instructions, skill catalog content, routine template, default permissions, and managed-resource drift handling. - Added approval-aware provisioning behavior that preserves requested adapter config, budgets, manager assignment, and built-in permissions through hire approval. - Added authorization and mutation gates for built-in agent and skill changes, including consented Reflection Coach change paths. - Added UI surfaces for built-in agent setup, roster/detail badges, readiness gates, bundle status, routine controls, and route filtering. - Added company import/export and validator coverage for built-in managed resources and low-trust/red-team presets. - Addressed Greptile follow-ups for pending approval reconciliation, consent-gate error propagation, config-read authorization fallback, approval-path manager preservation, and non-model adapter provisioning. ## Verification Local verification: - `git diff --check public/master..HEAD` passed. - `pnpm check:token-gates` passed with all gates clean. - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/ConfigureBuiltInAgentModal.test.tsx` passed: 1 file, 4 tests. - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/EntityRow.test.tsx ui/src/pages/Agents.test.tsx ui/src/components/BuiltInAgentGate.test.tsx ui/src/components/ConfigureBuiltInAgentModal.test.tsx ui/src/components/BuiltInBundlePanel.test.tsx ui/src/pages/InstanceExperimentalSettings.test.tsx ui/src/pages/Routines.test.tsx` passed: 7 files, 64 tests. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/built-in-agents.test.ts src/__tests__/authorization-service.test.ts src/__tests__/company-skills-routes.test.ts` passed: 3 files, 91 tests. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db check:migrations` passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed after the rebase; `pnpm --filter ui typecheck` passed after the final UI review fix. Remote verification on latest head `1c61f693a4ec881d739022b0e75a8ca8bf8c2cd8`: - Merge state: `CLEAN`. - Greptile: `5/5`, zero unresolved Greptile threads. - PR check rollup: all checks successful, neutral, or skipped as expected. - Passing gates include Build, Typecheck + Release Registry, all server shards, all workspace shards, all serialized server suites, e2e, Canary Dry Run, policy, review, verify, Socket, Superagent, and Snyk. ## Risks - This adds a new managed-resource table and migration; the migration uses idempotent create/add/index guards and passed migration safety checks. - Built-in agent provisioning touches approval and authorization paths; tests cover pending approval preservation, stale retry rejection, consent gates, and config-read fallback behavior. - Reflection Coach creates managed instructions, skill, and routine resources; drift/reset behavior is covered by service tests and redacted API responses. - Non-model adapter setup now provisions a `needs_setup` built-in row before command/endpoint fields are complete; this matches the server lifecycle and is covered by the setup modal regression test. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex coding agent based on GPT-5. Exact hosted model ID, context-window size, and reasoning-mode labels are not exposed in this runtime; tool use, shell execution, GitHub CLI/API access, and local code editing 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> | 2 个月前 | |
feat(onboarding): first task opens as a chat with a chief of staff (#13068) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Onboarding ends by handing a new user to their first agent on a seeded first task > - Today the wizard asks for a mission up front, the UI composes what the agent is told, and the agent starts running before the user says anything > - New users get a cold, ticket-shaped start, and nobody can edit the agent's brief or persona without a code change > - This pull request makes the first task a short chat: a four-step wizard, a chief-of-staff persona, a greeting plus a two-option opening card, server-owned markdown texts, and no run until the user answers > - It also gives question cards one consistent action row (Cancel / Skip / Next), makes agent hires idempotent within a run, and turns the Paperclip Runner flag on by default for self-hosted instances > - The benefit is a first run the user steers, with texts a board operator can edit as markdown ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists for this change. The feature request fields follow. Related PRs and issues: - Refs #11043 — an earlier draft of the first-task onboarding experience. This PR supersedes it. - Refs #11280 — a report about the onboarding first-task route test. This PR extends that test file. ### Subsystem affected Onboarding wizard, the seeded first task and its texts, task-chat question cards, agent hiring, and the instance experimental settings. ### Problem or motivation The onboarding wizard collects a mission through two extra steps and a questionnaire. The UI then composes the first agent's instructions and the first task description from those answers. The first task wakes the agent at once, so the agent runs and posts before the user types a word. Board operators cannot change the greeting, the brief, or the persona without editing TypeScript. Question cards in chat behave differently per adapter, and a single-select pick submits on click. A misread hire response could create a duplicate agent that the creating agent cannot remove. ### Proposed solution Reduce the wizard to four steps and stop the UI from authoring agent texts. Move the greeting, the brief, the chief-of-staff persona, and the opening question into markdown and JSON files that the server loads at runtime. Seed the persona onto the first agent through an explicit hire marker. Do not wake the first task until the user answers the opening card or types. Give every question card the same Cancel / Skip / Next actions. Add an experimental toggle that switches the single-task proposal between one confirmation card and a plan document with a checkbox card. Make agent hires idempotent within a run. ### Alternatives considered - Keep the mission questionnaire and feed it into the brief. Rejected: the agent asks better questions in chat, and the wizard gets shorter. - Keep the first task open-ended with a plain composer. Rejected: a two-option card gives the user a clear first move. - Derive the plan-document behaviour from the user's intent only. Rejected in favour of an explicit experimental toggle so operators can choose. - Key the "pick does not submit" behaviour off the presence of a submit label. Rejected: several adapters set a submit label on single-select cards, and their cards would change behaviour. ### Roadmap alignment `ROADMAP.md` lists no planned core work on onboarding or the first task. This change refines the existing flow and does not duplicate planned work. ## What Changed - Wizard: four steps (Name your organization, Create your first agent, Connect a model, Review). The front door and both mission steps are removed with their state and saved-progress keys. The UI no longer composes the first agent's instructions or the first task description. - Server-owned texts: the greeting, the brief with two proposal variants, the chief-of-staff persona, the opening question, and a README live in `server/src/onboarding-assets/first-task/` and load at runtime. The create route stores the assembled brief and ignores any client description. - Persona seed: an `onboardingFirstAgent` marker on the hire lets the server seed the chief-of-staff persona over the first agent's entry file. Board-authored hires only. The persona tells the agent the hire response shape and to list agents before it acts on an unclear result. - No auto-run: the first task does not queue an assignment wake. The stranded-assignment reconciler leaves it idle until a user comment or an answered card exists. - Opening card: the server seeds an `ask_user_questions` card right after the greeting with two options: "Interview me and propose a plan and an agent team to execute it." and "I have a task in mind" with free text. Answering wakes the agent. - Experimental toggle `enableFirstTaskPlanProposal` (default off): the single-task proposal is one confirmation card, or a plan document plus a checkbox card when on. - Question cards: every `ask_user_questions` card renders Cancel, Skip, and Next (the submit label on the last question). Skip hides on required questions. Picking an option no longer advances or submits by itself. - Wizard guards: the dashboard's agentless offer ignores a cached empty agent list while a refetch is in flight. The hire step adopts an agent that already carries the typed name instead of hiring "Name 2". - Agent hires are idempotent within a run: a retry of the identical request under the same run id returns the existing agent with `200` and `idempotent: true`. The fingerprint covers the whole validated request, so a corrected payload is a new hire. Lookup, create, and activity record run under one lock per company and run, so overlapping retries cannot both create. - The Paperclip Runner experimental flag defaults to on for self-hosted instances. Cloud keeps its declared default: a managed instance whose tenant row and managed overlay omit the flag resolves it to off. - Question cards: a send that finds an earlier required answer missing returns to that question with a message instead of failing silently. - The two onboarding e2e specs follow the new wizard: the front door and growth intake shots are gone, and the planning-mode spec dismisses the opening card before it reads the composer. - Docs: `docs/board-operator/editing-first-task-texts.md` explains how to edit the texts and the toggle. ## Verification Commands, run from the repo root: ``` pnpm -r --filter './packages/*' --filter '!@paperclipai/paperclip-runner' build pnpm --filter ./packages/shared typecheck pnpm --filter ./ui typecheck pnpm --filter ./server exec tsc --noEmit pnpm check:token-gates pnpm --filter ./ui exec vitest run OnboardingWizard onboarding QuestionForm InteractionCard ProtocolCard TaskChatComposer Dashboard feature PAPERCLIP_IN_WORKTREE=false pnpm --filter ./server exec vitest run onboarding-first-task heartbeat-process-recovery agent-hire-idempotency instance-settings agent-skills-routes issue-onboarding onboarding-greeting --testTimeout=90000 ``` Results on this branch: - Typecheck is clean for shared, ui, and server. - Token gates: 4 of 4 clean. - UI: 344 tests pass across 23 files. - Server: all suites pass. The first test in `agent-skills-routes` has its own 10 s cap and needs about 15 s on my laptop for the app cold start. It passes with a longer cap. This PR does not change that cap. Manual steps on a dev instance: 1. Open `/onboarding`. Confirm four steps: Name your organization, Create your first agent, Connect a model, Review. 2. Finish the wizard. Confirm the first task shows the chief-of-staff greeting and the opening card with two options. Confirm no run starts. 3. Pick "Interview me…". Confirm no run starts. Press Continue. Confirm a run starts and an interview card of 3–4 questions arrives. 4. On a fresh organization, pick "I have a task in mind", type a task, and press Continue. Confirm a proposal arrives as one confirmation card. 5. Turn on Settings → Experimental → "First task: propose with a plan document" and repeat step 4. Confirm a plan document and a checkbox card arrive. 6. Visit the dashboard after the hire. Confirm the wizard does not reopen and one agent exists. 7. Open any question card. Confirm Cancel returns the plain composer with the card still pending, Skip advances an optional question, and Next moves to the next question. Design reference with flow diagrams, chat mock-ups, and live captures: https://pages.paperclip.ing/first-task-flow/proposed/ ## Risks - `pnpm dev` now builds the runner daemon because the Paperclip Runner flag is on by default. Developers without a Rust toolchain must set `PAPERCLIP_RUNNER_BINARY` or turn the flag off. Self-hosted instances that never set the flag now let qualified agents use the runner. - The wizard drops the mission steps and their saved-progress keys. A user who is mid-wizard on an older build restarts at step 1 after an upgrade. Existing organizations are not touched. - The first task no longer runs on its own. A user who neither answers the card nor types sees no agent activity. This is intended. - The persona seed applies only to hires that carry the marker from the wizard. API hires are unchanged. - Hire idempotency is scoped to one run id and to the exact request. Retries across runs, or with a changed payload, still create a second agent. The lock is per server process, which matches how an instance serves its API. - Single-select question cards no longer submit on pick. Users of adapters that relied on that behaviour now press Next. - No database migrations. > 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 - Claude (Anthropic) through Claude Code. `claude-fable-5-1` with extended thinking, tool use, and code execution wrote most commits. `claude-opus-4-8` wrote the toggle, texts, wizard, and idempotency commits, as the `Co-Authored-By` trailers show. ## 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> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com> | 20 天前 | |
fix: restore docs deleted in v0.2.3 release, add Paperclip branding - Restored docs/ directory that was accidentally deleted by `git add -A` in the v0.2.3 release script - Replaced generic "P" favicon with actual paperclip icon using brand primary color (#2563EB) - Added light/dark logo SVGs for Mintlify navbar (paperclip icon + wordmark) - Updated docs.json with logo configuration for dark/light mode - Fixed release.sh to stage only release-related files instead of `git add -A` to prevent sweeping unrelated changes into release commits Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com> | 6 个月前 | |
fix(security): route paperclipai CLI guidance through safe npx form (CWE-78) (#11400) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Paperclip provides CLI commands and guidance for operators and agents > - The `pnpm paperclipai` script can pass argument values through a shell > - Shell re-parsing can execute command substitutions inside quoted values > - This pull request routes guidance through inert-argv `npx paperclipai` commands and adds regression coverage > - The benefit is safer operator guidance across documentation and runtime hints ## Linked Issues or Issue Description This pull request fixes a command-injection-class defect in Paperclip CLI guidance. **What happened?** The `pnpm paperclipai <sub> --flag "$VALUE"` form can re-parse argument values through a shell. A command substitution inside a quoted value can execute on the host. **Expected behavior** Paperclip guidance must pass CLI values as inert argument values. Host-derived values must not appear in copyable commands. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run a Paperclip guidance command that uses the `pnpm paperclipai` script. 2. Provide a quoted value that contains a command substitution. 3. Observe that the shell can evaluate the substitution before the CLI starts. 4. Compare the result with the `npx paperclipai` form. **Paperclip version or commit** `5670984b75d109950c968542a0111ebb6967f4da` **Deployment mode** All deployment modes that show or use the affected CLI guidance. **Installation method** Built from source and installed CLI guidance. **Agent adapter(s) involved** Not adapter-specific (core bug). **Database mode** Not database-related. **Access context** Both. **Additional context** The earlier merged PR [#11343](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/11343) used the unsafe `pnpm exec paperclipai` form. This fresh PR replaces that guidance with the safe `npx paperclipai` form. ## What Changed - Standardize documentation and runtime hints on `npx paperclipai`. - Remove the broken `pnpm exec paperclipai` guidance. - Use a static `<host>` placeholder in private-hostname guidance. - Add regression tests for unsafe forms, continued lines, static hosts, and offline guidance. ## Verification - `git diff --check origin/master...origin/fix/paperclipai-cli-npx-safe-invocation` passes. - The branch adds `server/src/__tests__/cli-invocation-safety.test.ts` and updates private-hostname tests. - CI must run the new tests, typecheck, lint, and build checks. - Local Vitest execution was not available because this worktree has no installed Vitest binary. ## Risks - The change affects operator and agent documentation text. - The runtime hints now show `<host>` instead of a request-derived host value. - No database schema or migration changes exist. - CI will detect any missed unsafe invocation or type error. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-5, exact model ID `gpt-5`, with tool use and code-review assistance. The model used repository inspection, Git operations, and PR preparation. ## 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] CI ran the test suites and they pass; local test execution was unavailable in this worktree - [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 addressed all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> | 1 个月前 | |
Add pipeline workflow primitives and operator UI (#7903) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The pipeline subsystem models repeatable work as items moving through stages, with agent automation, review gates, blockers, drift notices, and linked work. > - Operators need this to be usable as one coherent workflow surface, not just as backend primitives or disconnected route experiments. > - The branch now carries the pipeline data model, service/routes, CLI/tutorial path, aggregation feeds, operator UI, stage automation controls, liveness/retry handling, and follow-up polish that make the primitive reviewable end to end. > - This pull request is the single review target for that pipeline workflow primitive stack. > - The benefit is that reviewers can evaluate the full operator experience and server contract together against `master`. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists for this work. The underlying feature request is described inline. ### Problem or motivation Paperclip needs a first-class way to model multi-stage agent/company workflows where upstream items can spawn downstream work, request review, carry fields across pipelines, surface drift, retry automation, and show operators where work is blocked or active. Without a unified pipeline primitive, these workflows spread across ad hoc issues, routines, and comments, making the state hard to inspect or operate. ### Proposed solution Add the pipeline workflow primitive stack: database schema and migrations, shared validators/types, server services and REST routes, aggregation and liveness helpers, CLI/tutorial smoke support, and the React operator UI for pipeline lists, boards, item detail, review/learnings views, settings, stage automation, secrets, carry-over fields, and retry/recovery flows. ### Alternatives considered - Keep workflows as loosely linked issues and routines: rejected because operators need a single board/detail/settings surface for repeated workflow patterns. - Ship backend primitives first and defer UI: rejected for this branch because the operator experience is the main way to validate the primitive. - Add a narrower one-off content workflow: rejected because the same primitives are useful across future company processes. ## What Changed - Added and evolved pipeline schema, migrations, shared contracts, server services, REST routes, route tests, and CLI/tutorial smoke support. - Added pipeline aggregation, health/liveness, drift acknowledgment, blocker/carry-over, automation retry, stage automation environment, and permission recovery behavior. - Added the operator UI for pipeline index/board/item detail/settings/review/learnings flows, including stage secrets, automation controls, markdown/item descriptions, linked issue assets, liveness banners, and source automation metadata. - Refactored issue document frame rendering through the shared `DocumentFrameHeader` component to keep document controls consistent with the pipeline document surfaces. - Kept this PR as the single base-branch review target for the current pipeline branch. ## Verification Current branch refresh: - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/pipelines-service.test.ts` — 31 passed - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/pipelines-routes.test.ts` — 19 passed - `pnpm --filter ./server typecheck` — passed - `pnpm --filter ./ui typecheck` — passed - Verified Pipelines remains gated by `enablePipelines === true`: sidebar item is hidden unless the flag is enabled, direct pipeline routes redirect to `/dashboard` when disabled, and the Experimental settings UI still has no Pipelines toggle. - GitHub status checks on `df071c710646de625131064c3fb6588b5e97964a` — all complete with no failing conclusions, including Actions, Socket, Superagent/Security, and Greptile Review - Greptile summary on `df071c710646de625131064c3fb6588b5e97964a` — Confidence Score 5/5 - GitHub review-thread sweep — 0 unresolved Greptile threads Previously recorded during branch development: - Server pipeline service/route and aggregation tests - Shared validator tests - UI pipeline page/settings/item-detail/learnings/liveness tests - Pipeline tutorial smoke path ## Risks - High review surface: this is a large feature branch spanning database, shared contracts, server behavior, CLI/docs, and UI. - Migration ordering and schema compatibility need reviewer attention because this branch has been kept current across multiple `master` syncs. - GitHub still reports merge state `BLOCKED` because the PR is awaiting normal human review/branch-protection completion; all current status checks are green. - Branch-name checklist exception: this PR uses the pre-existing requested branch name, which predates the current public-branch naming rule. The PR title/body avoid internal issue references. > 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, with repository tool use, shell execution, git/GitHub CLI operations, and local verification commands. Earlier commits in this branch were assisted by Paperclip agents and other AI coding agents as recorded in commit authorship. ## 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 - [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> | 3 个月前 |
| 文件 | 最后提交记录 | 最后更新时间 |
|---|---|---|
| 6 天前 | ||
| 10 天前 | ||
| 4 个月前 | ||
| 28 天前 | ||
| 6 个月前 | ||
| 4 天前 | ||
| 5 天前 | ||
| 6 个月前 | ||
| 6 个月前 | ||
| 4 个月前 | ||
| 7 天前 | ||
| 1 个月前 | ||
| 2 个月前 | ||
| 2 个月前 | ||
| 20 天前 | ||
| 6 个月前 | ||
| 1 个月前 | ||
| 3 个月前 |
