[codex] Add plugin orchestration host APIs (#4114)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - The plugin system is the extension path for optional capabilities
that should not require core product changes for every integration.
> - Plugins need scoped host APIs for issue orchestration, documents,
wakeups, summaries, activity attribution, and isolated database state.
> - Without those host APIs, richer plugins either cannot coordinate
Paperclip work safely or need privileged core-side special cases.
> - This pull request adds the plugin orchestration host surface, scoped
route dispatch, a database namespace layer, and a smoke plugin that
exercises the contract.
> - The benefit is a broader plugin API that remains company-scoped,
auditable, and covered by tests.
## What Changed
- Added plugin orchestration host APIs for issue creation, document
access, wakeups, summaries, plugin-origin activity, and scoped API route
dispatch.
- Added plugin database namespace tables, schema exports, migration
checks, and idempotent replay coverage under migration
`0059_plugin_database_namespaces`.
- Added shared plugin route/API types and validators used by server and
SDK boundaries.
- Expanded plugin SDK types, protocol helpers, worker RPC host behavior,
and testing utilities for orchestration flows.
- Added the `plugin-orchestration-smoke-example` package to exercise
scoped routes, restricted database namespaces, issue orchestration,
documents, wakeups, summaries, and UI status surfaces.
- Kept the new orchestration smoke fixture out of the root pnpm
workspace importer so this PR preserves the repository policy of not
committing `pnpm-lock.yaml`.
- Updated plugin docs and database docs for the new orchestration and
database namespace surfaces.
- Rebased the branch onto `public-gh/master`, resolved conflicts, and
removed `pnpm-lock.yaml` from the final PR diff.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/db/src/client.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/plugin-database.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-orchestration-apis.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-scoped-api-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-sdk-orchestration-contract.test.ts`
- From `packages/plugins/examples/plugin-orchestration-smoke-example`:
`pnpm exec vitest run --config ./vitest.config.ts`
- `pnpm --dir
packages/plugins/examples/plugin-orchestration-smoke-example run
typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- PR CI on latest head `293fc67c`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`, and
`security/snyk` all passed.
## Risks
- Medium risk: this expands plugin host authority, so route auth,
company scoping, and plugin-origin activity attribution need careful
review.
- Medium risk: database namespace migration behavior must remain
idempotent for environments that may have seen earlier branch versions.
- Medium risk: the orchestration smoke fixture is intentionally excluded
from the root workspace importer to avoid a `pnpm-lock.yaml` PR diff;
direct fixture verification remains listed above.
- Low operational risk from the PR setup itself: the branch is rebased
onto current `master`, the migration is ordered after upstream
`0057`/`0058`, and `pnpm-lock.yaml` is not in the final diff.
> 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`.
Roadmap checked: this work aligns with the completed Plugin system
milestone and extends the plugin surface rather than duplicating an
unrelated planned core feature.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent in a tool-enabled CLI
environment. Exact hosted model build and context-window size are not
exposed by the runtime; reasoning/tool use were enabled for repository
inspection, editing, testing, git operations, and PR creation.
## 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 (N/A: no core UI screen change; example plugin UI contract
is covered by tests)
- [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>
2026-04-20 08:52:51 -05:00
|
|
|
import express from "express";
|
|
|
|
|
import request from "supertest";
|
|
|
|
|
import { beforeEach, describe, expect, it, vi } from "vitest";
|
|
|
|
|
import { pluginManifestV1Schema, type PaperclipPluginManifestV1 } from "@paperclipai/shared";
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const mockRegistry = vi.hoisted(() => ({
|
|
|
|
|
getById: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
getByKey: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const mockLifecycle = vi.hoisted(() => ({
|
|
|
|
|
load: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
upgrade: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const mockIssueService = vi.hoisted(() => ({
|
|
|
|
|
getById: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
assertCheckoutOwner: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../services/plugin-registry.js", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
pluginRegistryService: () => mockRegistry,
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../services/plugin-lifecycle.js", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
pluginLifecycleManager: () => mockLifecycle,
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../services/issues.js", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
issueService: () => mockIssueService,
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../services/activity-log.js", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
logActivity: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../services/live-events.js", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
publishGlobalLiveEvent: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
[codex] Add structured issue-thread interactions (#4244)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - Operators supervise that work through issues, comments, approvals,
and the board UI.
> - Some agent proposals need structured board/user decisions, not
hidden markdown conventions or heavyweight governed approvals.
> - Issue-thread interactions already provide a natural thread-native
surface for proposed tasks and questions.
> - This pull request extends that surface with request confirmations,
richer interaction cards, and agent/plugin/MCP helpers.
> - The benefit is that plan approvals and yes/no decisions become
explicit, auditable, and resumable without losing the single-issue
workflow.
## What Changed
- Added persisted issue-thread interactions for suggested tasks,
structured questions, and request confirmations.
- Added board UI cards for interaction review, selection, question
answers, and accept/reject confirmation flows.
- Added MCP and plugin SDK helpers for creating interaction cards from
agents/plugins.
- Updated agent wake instructions, onboarding assets, Paperclip skill
docs, and public docs to prefer structured confirmations for
issue-scoped decisions.
- Rebased the branch onto `public-gh/master` and renumbered branch
migrations to `0063` and `0064`; the idempotency migration uses `ADD
COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS` for old branch users.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD`
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts
packages/mcp-server/src/tools.test.ts
packages/shared/src/issue-thread-interactions.test.ts
ui/src/lib/issue-thread-interactions.test.ts
ui/src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueThreadInteractionCard.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interactions-service.test.ts
server/src/services/issue-thread-interactions.test.ts` -> 9 files / 79
tests passed
- `pnpm -r typecheck` -> passed, including `packages/db` migration
numbering check
## Risks
- Medium: this adds a new issue-thread interaction model across
db/shared/server/ui/plugin surfaces.
- Migration risk is reduced by placing this branch after current master
migrations (`0063`, `0064`) and making the idempotency column add
idempotent for users who applied the old branch numbering.
- UI interaction behavior is covered by component tests, but this PR
does not include browser screenshots.
> 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-class coding agent runtime. Exact model ID and
context window are not exposed in this Paperclip run; tool use and local
shell/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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] 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>
2026-04-21 20:15:11 -05:00
|
|
|
function registerModuleMocks() {
|
|
|
|
|
vi.doMock("../routes/authz.js", async () => vi.importActual("../routes/authz.js"));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.doMock("../services/plugin-registry.js", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
pluginRegistryService: () => mockRegistry,
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.doMock("../services/plugin-lifecycle.js", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
pluginLifecycleManager: () => mockLifecycle,
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.doMock("../services/issues.js", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
issueService: () => mockIssueService,
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.doMock("../services/activity-log.js", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
logActivity: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.doMock("../services/live-events.js", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
publishGlobalLiveEvent: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
[codex] Add plugin orchestration host APIs (#4114)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - The plugin system is the extension path for optional capabilities
that should not require core product changes for every integration.
> - Plugins need scoped host APIs for issue orchestration, documents,
wakeups, summaries, activity attribution, and isolated database state.
> - Without those host APIs, richer plugins either cannot coordinate
Paperclip work safely or need privileged core-side special cases.
> - This pull request adds the plugin orchestration host surface, scoped
route dispatch, a database namespace layer, and a smoke plugin that
exercises the contract.
> - The benefit is a broader plugin API that remains company-scoped,
auditable, and covered by tests.
## What Changed
- Added plugin orchestration host APIs for issue creation, document
access, wakeups, summaries, plugin-origin activity, and scoped API route
dispatch.
- Added plugin database namespace tables, schema exports, migration
checks, and idempotent replay coverage under migration
`0059_plugin_database_namespaces`.
- Added shared plugin route/API types and validators used by server and
SDK boundaries.
- Expanded plugin SDK types, protocol helpers, worker RPC host behavior,
and testing utilities for orchestration flows.
- Added the `plugin-orchestration-smoke-example` package to exercise
scoped routes, restricted database namespaces, issue orchestration,
documents, wakeups, summaries, and UI status surfaces.
- Kept the new orchestration smoke fixture out of the root pnpm
workspace importer so this PR preserves the repository policy of not
committing `pnpm-lock.yaml`.
- Updated plugin docs and database docs for the new orchestration and
database namespace surfaces.
- Rebased the branch onto `public-gh/master`, resolved conflicts, and
removed `pnpm-lock.yaml` from the final PR diff.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/db/src/client.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/plugin-database.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-orchestration-apis.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-scoped-api-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-sdk-orchestration-contract.test.ts`
- From `packages/plugins/examples/plugin-orchestration-smoke-example`:
`pnpm exec vitest run --config ./vitest.config.ts`
- `pnpm --dir
packages/plugins/examples/plugin-orchestration-smoke-example run
typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- PR CI on latest head `293fc67c`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`, and
`security/snyk` all passed.
## Risks
- Medium risk: this expands plugin host authority, so route auth,
company scoping, and plugin-origin activity attribution need careful
review.
- Medium risk: database namespace migration behavior must remain
idempotent for environments that may have seen earlier branch versions.
- Medium risk: the orchestration smoke fixture is intentionally excluded
from the root workspace importer to avoid a `pnpm-lock.yaml` PR diff;
direct fixture verification remains listed above.
- Low operational risk from the PR setup itself: the branch is rebased
onto current `master`, the migration is ordered after upstream
`0057`/`0058`, and `pnpm-lock.yaml` is not in the final diff.
> 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`.
Roadmap checked: this work aligns with the completed Plugin system
milestone and extends the plugin surface rather than duplicating an
unrelated planned core feature.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent in a tool-enabled CLI
environment. Exact hosted model build and context-window size are not
exposed by the runtime; reasoning/tool use were enabled for repository
inspection, editing, testing, git operations, and PR creation.
## 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 (N/A: no core UI screen change; example plugin UI contract
is covered by tests)
- [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>
2026-04-20 08:52:51 -05:00
|
|
|
function manifest(apiRoutes: NonNullable<PaperclipPluginManifestV1["apiRoutes"]>): PaperclipPluginManifestV1 {
|
|
|
|
|
return {
|
|
|
|
|
id: "paperclip.scoped-api-test",
|
|
|
|
|
apiVersion: 1,
|
|
|
|
|
version: "1.0.0",
|
|
|
|
|
displayName: "Scoped API Test",
|
|
|
|
|
description: "Test plugin for scoped API routes",
|
|
|
|
|
author: "Paperclip",
|
|
|
|
|
categories: ["automation"],
|
|
|
|
|
capabilities: ["api.routes.register"],
|
|
|
|
|
entrypoints: { worker: "dist/worker.js" },
|
|
|
|
|
apiRoutes,
|
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
async function createApp(input: {
|
|
|
|
|
actor: Record<string, unknown>;
|
|
|
|
|
plugin?: Record<string, unknown> | null;
|
|
|
|
|
workerRunning?: boolean;
|
|
|
|
|
workerResult?: unknown;
|
|
|
|
|
}) {
|
|
|
|
|
const [{ pluginRoutes }, { errorHandler }] = await Promise.all([
|
[codex] Add structured issue-thread interactions (#4244)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - Operators supervise that work through issues, comments, approvals,
and the board UI.
> - Some agent proposals need structured board/user decisions, not
hidden markdown conventions or heavyweight governed approvals.
> - Issue-thread interactions already provide a natural thread-native
surface for proposed tasks and questions.
> - This pull request extends that surface with request confirmations,
richer interaction cards, and agent/plugin/MCP helpers.
> - The benefit is that plan approvals and yes/no decisions become
explicit, auditable, and resumable without losing the single-issue
workflow.
## What Changed
- Added persisted issue-thread interactions for suggested tasks,
structured questions, and request confirmations.
- Added board UI cards for interaction review, selection, question
answers, and accept/reject confirmation flows.
- Added MCP and plugin SDK helpers for creating interaction cards from
agents/plugins.
- Updated agent wake instructions, onboarding assets, Paperclip skill
docs, and public docs to prefer structured confirmations for
issue-scoped decisions.
- Rebased the branch onto `public-gh/master` and renumbered branch
migrations to `0063` and `0064`; the idempotency migration uses `ADD
COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS` for old branch users.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD`
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts
packages/mcp-server/src/tools.test.ts
packages/shared/src/issue-thread-interactions.test.ts
ui/src/lib/issue-thread-interactions.test.ts
ui/src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueThreadInteractionCard.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interactions-service.test.ts
server/src/services/issue-thread-interactions.test.ts` -> 9 files / 79
tests passed
- `pnpm -r typecheck` -> passed, including `packages/db` migration
numbering check
## Risks
- Medium: this adds a new issue-thread interaction model across
db/shared/server/ui/plugin surfaces.
- Migration risk is reduced by placing this branch after current master
migrations (`0063`, `0064`) and making the idempotency column add
idempotent for users who applied the old branch numbering.
- UI interaction behavior is covered by component tests, but this PR
does not include browser screenshots.
> 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-class coding agent runtime. Exact model ID and
context window are not exposed in this Paperclip run; tool use and local
shell/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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] 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>
2026-04-21 20:15:11 -05:00
|
|
|
vi.importActual<typeof import("../routes/plugins.js")>("../routes/plugins.js"),
|
|
|
|
|
vi.importActual<typeof import("../middleware/index.js")>("../middleware/index.js"),
|
[codex] Add plugin orchestration host APIs (#4114)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - The plugin system is the extension path for optional capabilities
that should not require core product changes for every integration.
> - Plugins need scoped host APIs for issue orchestration, documents,
wakeups, summaries, activity attribution, and isolated database state.
> - Without those host APIs, richer plugins either cannot coordinate
Paperclip work safely or need privileged core-side special cases.
> - This pull request adds the plugin orchestration host surface, scoped
route dispatch, a database namespace layer, and a smoke plugin that
exercises the contract.
> - The benefit is a broader plugin API that remains company-scoped,
auditable, and covered by tests.
## What Changed
- Added plugin orchestration host APIs for issue creation, document
access, wakeups, summaries, plugin-origin activity, and scoped API route
dispatch.
- Added plugin database namespace tables, schema exports, migration
checks, and idempotent replay coverage under migration
`0059_plugin_database_namespaces`.
- Added shared plugin route/API types and validators used by server and
SDK boundaries.
- Expanded plugin SDK types, protocol helpers, worker RPC host behavior,
and testing utilities for orchestration flows.
- Added the `plugin-orchestration-smoke-example` package to exercise
scoped routes, restricted database namespaces, issue orchestration,
documents, wakeups, summaries, and UI status surfaces.
- Kept the new orchestration smoke fixture out of the root pnpm
workspace importer so this PR preserves the repository policy of not
committing `pnpm-lock.yaml`.
- Updated plugin docs and database docs for the new orchestration and
database namespace surfaces.
- Rebased the branch onto `public-gh/master`, resolved conflicts, and
removed `pnpm-lock.yaml` from the final PR diff.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/db/src/client.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/plugin-database.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-orchestration-apis.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-scoped-api-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-sdk-orchestration-contract.test.ts`
- From `packages/plugins/examples/plugin-orchestration-smoke-example`:
`pnpm exec vitest run --config ./vitest.config.ts`
- `pnpm --dir
packages/plugins/examples/plugin-orchestration-smoke-example run
typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- PR CI on latest head `293fc67c`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`, and
`security/snyk` all passed.
## Risks
- Medium risk: this expands plugin host authority, so route auth,
company scoping, and plugin-origin activity attribution need careful
review.
- Medium risk: database namespace migration behavior must remain
idempotent for environments that may have seen earlier branch versions.
- Medium risk: the orchestration smoke fixture is intentionally excluded
from the root workspace importer to avoid a `pnpm-lock.yaml` PR diff;
direct fixture verification remains listed above.
- Low operational risk from the PR setup itself: the branch is rebased
onto current `master`, the migration is ordered after upstream
`0057`/`0058`, and `pnpm-lock.yaml` is not in the final diff.
> 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`.
Roadmap checked: this work aligns with the completed Plugin system
milestone and extends the plugin surface rather than duplicating an
unrelated planned core feature.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent in a tool-enabled CLI
environment. Exact hosted model build and context-window size are not
exposed by the runtime; reasoning/tool use were enabled for repository
inspection, editing, testing, git operations, and PR creation.
## 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 (N/A: no core UI screen change; example plugin UI contract
is covered by tests)
- [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>
2026-04-20 08:52:51 -05:00
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const workerManager = {
|
|
|
|
|
isRunning: vi.fn().mockReturnValue(input.workerRunning ?? true),
|
|
|
|
|
call: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue(input.workerResult ?? { status: 200, body: { ok: true } }),
|
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mockRegistry.getById.mockResolvedValue(input.plugin ?? null);
|
|
|
|
|
mockRegistry.getByKey.mockResolvedValue(input.plugin ?? null);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const app = express();
|
|
|
|
|
app.use(express.json());
|
|
|
|
|
app.use((req, _res, next) => {
|
|
|
|
|
req.actor = input.actor as typeof req.actor;
|
|
|
|
|
next();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
app.use(
|
|
|
|
|
"/api",
|
|
|
|
|
pluginRoutes(
|
|
|
|
|
{} as never,
|
|
|
|
|
{ installPlugin: vi.fn() } as never,
|
|
|
|
|
undefined,
|
|
|
|
|
undefined,
|
|
|
|
|
undefined,
|
|
|
|
|
{ workerManager } as never,
|
|
|
|
|
),
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
app.use(errorHandler);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return { app, workerManager };
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
describe("plugin scoped API routes", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const pluginId = "11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111";
|
|
|
|
|
const companyId = "22222222-2222-4222-8222-222222222222";
|
|
|
|
|
const agentId = "33333333-3333-4333-8333-333333333333";
|
|
|
|
|
const runId = "44444444-4444-4444-8444-444444444444";
|
|
|
|
|
const issueId = "55555555-5555-4555-8555-555555555555";
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
beforeEach(() => {
|
[codex] Add structured issue-thread interactions (#4244)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - Operators supervise that work through issues, comments, approvals,
and the board UI.
> - Some agent proposals need structured board/user decisions, not
hidden markdown conventions or heavyweight governed approvals.
> - Issue-thread interactions already provide a natural thread-native
surface for proposed tasks and questions.
> - This pull request extends that surface with request confirmations,
richer interaction cards, and agent/plugin/MCP helpers.
> - The benefit is that plan approvals and yes/no decisions become
explicit, auditable, and resumable without losing the single-issue
workflow.
## What Changed
- Added persisted issue-thread interactions for suggested tasks,
structured questions, and request confirmations.
- Added board UI cards for interaction review, selection, question
answers, and accept/reject confirmation flows.
- Added MCP and plugin SDK helpers for creating interaction cards from
agents/plugins.
- Updated agent wake instructions, onboarding assets, Paperclip skill
docs, and public docs to prefer structured confirmations for
issue-scoped decisions.
- Rebased the branch onto `public-gh/master` and renumbered branch
migrations to `0063` and `0064`; the idempotency migration uses `ADD
COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS` for old branch users.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD`
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts
packages/mcp-server/src/tools.test.ts
packages/shared/src/issue-thread-interactions.test.ts
ui/src/lib/issue-thread-interactions.test.ts
ui/src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueThreadInteractionCard.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interactions-service.test.ts
server/src/services/issue-thread-interactions.test.ts` -> 9 files / 79
tests passed
- `pnpm -r typecheck` -> passed, including `packages/db` migration
numbering check
## Risks
- Medium: this adds a new issue-thread interaction model across
db/shared/server/ui/plugin surfaces.
- Migration risk is reduced by placing this branch after current master
migrations (`0063`, `0064`) and making the idempotency column add
idempotent for users who applied the old branch numbering.
- UI interaction behavior is covered by component tests, but this PR
does not include browser screenshots.
> 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-class coding agent runtime. Exact model ID and
context window are not exposed in this Paperclip run; tool use and local
shell/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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] 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>
2026-04-21 20:15:11 -05:00
|
|
|
vi.resetModules();
|
|
|
|
|
vi.doUnmock("../services/plugin-registry.js");
|
|
|
|
|
vi.doUnmock("../services/plugin-lifecycle.js");
|
|
|
|
|
vi.doUnmock("../services/issues.js");
|
|
|
|
|
vi.doUnmock("../services/activity-log.js");
|
|
|
|
|
vi.doUnmock("../services/live-events.js");
|
|
|
|
|
vi.doUnmock("../routes/plugins.js");
|
|
|
|
|
vi.doUnmock("../routes/authz.js");
|
|
|
|
|
vi.doUnmock("../middleware/index.js");
|
|
|
|
|
registerModuleMocks();
|
[codex] Add plugin orchestration host APIs (#4114)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - The plugin system is the extension path for optional capabilities
that should not require core product changes for every integration.
> - Plugins need scoped host APIs for issue orchestration, documents,
wakeups, summaries, activity attribution, and isolated database state.
> - Without those host APIs, richer plugins either cannot coordinate
Paperclip work safely or need privileged core-side special cases.
> - This pull request adds the plugin orchestration host surface, scoped
route dispatch, a database namespace layer, and a smoke plugin that
exercises the contract.
> - The benefit is a broader plugin API that remains company-scoped,
auditable, and covered by tests.
## What Changed
- Added plugin orchestration host APIs for issue creation, document
access, wakeups, summaries, plugin-origin activity, and scoped API route
dispatch.
- Added plugin database namespace tables, schema exports, migration
checks, and idempotent replay coverage under migration
`0059_plugin_database_namespaces`.
- Added shared plugin route/API types and validators used by server and
SDK boundaries.
- Expanded plugin SDK types, protocol helpers, worker RPC host behavior,
and testing utilities for orchestration flows.
- Added the `plugin-orchestration-smoke-example` package to exercise
scoped routes, restricted database namespaces, issue orchestration,
documents, wakeups, summaries, and UI status surfaces.
- Kept the new orchestration smoke fixture out of the root pnpm
workspace importer so this PR preserves the repository policy of not
committing `pnpm-lock.yaml`.
- Updated plugin docs and database docs for the new orchestration and
database namespace surfaces.
- Rebased the branch onto `public-gh/master`, resolved conflicts, and
removed `pnpm-lock.yaml` from the final PR diff.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/db/src/client.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/plugin-database.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-orchestration-apis.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-scoped-api-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-sdk-orchestration-contract.test.ts`
- From `packages/plugins/examples/plugin-orchestration-smoke-example`:
`pnpm exec vitest run --config ./vitest.config.ts`
- `pnpm --dir
packages/plugins/examples/plugin-orchestration-smoke-example run
typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- PR CI on latest head `293fc67c`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`, and
`security/snyk` all passed.
## Risks
- Medium risk: this expands plugin host authority, so route auth,
company scoping, and plugin-origin activity attribution need careful
review.
- Medium risk: database namespace migration behavior must remain
idempotent for environments that may have seen earlier branch versions.
- Medium risk: the orchestration smoke fixture is intentionally excluded
from the root workspace importer to avoid a `pnpm-lock.yaml` PR diff;
direct fixture verification remains listed above.
- Low operational risk from the PR setup itself: the branch is rebased
onto current `master`, the migration is ordered after upstream
`0057`/`0058`, and `pnpm-lock.yaml` is not in the final diff.
> 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`.
Roadmap checked: this work aligns with the completed Plugin system
milestone and extends the plugin surface rather than duplicating an
unrelated planned core feature.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent in a tool-enabled CLI
environment. Exact hosted model build and context-window size are not
exposed by the runtime; reasoning/tool use were enabled for repository
inspection, editing, testing, git operations, and PR creation.
## 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 (N/A: no core UI screen change; example plugin UI contract
is covered by tests)
- [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>
2026-04-20 08:52:51 -05:00
|
|
|
vi.resetAllMocks();
|
|
|
|
|
mockIssueService.getById.mockResolvedValue(null);
|
|
|
|
|
mockIssueService.assertCheckoutOwner.mockResolvedValue({
|
|
|
|
|
id: issueId,
|
|
|
|
|
status: "in_progress",
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeAgentId: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
checkoutRunId: runId,
|
|
|
|
|
adoptedFromRunId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("dispatches a board GET route with params, query, actor, and company context", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const apiRoutes = manifest([
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
routeKey: "summary.get",
|
|
|
|
|
method: "GET",
|
|
|
|
|
path: "/companies/:companySlug/summary",
|
|
|
|
|
auth: "board",
|
|
|
|
|
capability: "api.routes.register",
|
|
|
|
|
companyResolution: { from: "query", key: "companyId" },
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
const { app, workerManager } = await createApp({
|
|
|
|
|
actor: {
|
|
|
|
|
type: "board",
|
|
|
|
|
userId: "user-1",
|
|
|
|
|
source: "local_implicit",
|
|
|
|
|
isInstanceAdmin: true,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
plugin: {
|
|
|
|
|
id: pluginId,
|
|
|
|
|
pluginKey: apiRoutes.id,
|
|
|
|
|
status: "ready",
|
|
|
|
|
manifestJson: apiRoutes,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
workerResult: { status: 201, body: { handled: true } },
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const res = await request(app)
|
|
|
|
|
.get(`/api/plugins/${pluginId}/api/companies/acme/summary?companyId=${companyId}&view=compact`)
|
|
|
|
|
.set("Authorization", "Bearer should-not-forward");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(res.status).toBe(201);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(res.body).toEqual({ handled: true });
|
|
|
|
|
expect(workerManager.call).toHaveBeenCalledWith(pluginId, "handleApiRequest", expect.objectContaining({
|
|
|
|
|
routeKey: "summary.get",
|
|
|
|
|
method: "GET",
|
|
|
|
|
params: { companySlug: "acme" },
|
|
|
|
|
query: { companyId, view: "compact" },
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
actor: expect.objectContaining({ actorType: "user", actorId: "user-1" }),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
expect(workerManager.call.mock.calls[0]?.[2].headers.authorization).toBeUndefined();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("only forwards allowlisted response headers from plugin routes", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const apiRoutes = manifest([
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
routeKey: "summary.get",
|
|
|
|
|
method: "GET",
|
|
|
|
|
path: "/companies/:companySlug/summary",
|
|
|
|
|
auth: "board",
|
|
|
|
|
capability: "api.routes.register",
|
|
|
|
|
companyResolution: { from: "query", key: "companyId" },
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
const { app } = await createApp({
|
|
|
|
|
actor: {
|
|
|
|
|
type: "board",
|
|
|
|
|
userId: "user-1",
|
|
|
|
|
source: "local_implicit",
|
|
|
|
|
isInstanceAdmin: true,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
plugin: {
|
|
|
|
|
id: pluginId,
|
|
|
|
|
pluginKey: apiRoutes.id,
|
|
|
|
|
status: "ready",
|
|
|
|
|
manifestJson: apiRoutes,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
workerResult: {
|
|
|
|
|
status: 200,
|
|
|
|
|
body: { handled: true },
|
|
|
|
|
headers: {
|
|
|
|
|
"cache-control": "no-store",
|
|
|
|
|
"content-security-policy": "default-src 'none'",
|
|
|
|
|
location: "https://example.invalid",
|
|
|
|
|
"x-request-id": "plugin-request",
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const res = await request(app)
|
|
|
|
|
.get(`/api/plugins/${pluginId}/api/companies/acme/summary?companyId=${companyId}`);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(res.status).toBe(200);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(res.headers["cache-control"]).toBe("no-store");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(res.headers["x-request-id"]).toBe("plugin-request");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(res.headers["content-security-policy"]).toBeUndefined();
|
|
|
|
|
expect(res.headers.location).toBeUndefined();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("enforces agent checkout ownership before dispatching issue-scoped POST routes", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const apiRoutes = manifest([
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
routeKey: "issue.advance",
|
|
|
|
|
method: "POST",
|
|
|
|
|
path: "/issues/:issueId/advance",
|
|
|
|
|
auth: "agent",
|
|
|
|
|
capability: "api.routes.register",
|
|
|
|
|
checkoutPolicy: "required-for-agent-in-progress",
|
|
|
|
|
companyResolution: { from: "issue", param: "issueId" },
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
mockIssueService.getById.mockResolvedValue({
|
|
|
|
|
id: issueId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
status: "in_progress",
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeAgentId: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
const { app, workerManager } = await createApp({
|
|
|
|
|
actor: {
|
|
|
|
|
type: "agent",
|
|
|
|
|
agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
runId,
|
|
|
|
|
source: "agent_key",
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
plugin: {
|
|
|
|
|
id: pluginId,
|
|
|
|
|
pluginKey: apiRoutes.id,
|
|
|
|
|
status: "ready",
|
|
|
|
|
manifestJson: apiRoutes,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const res = await request(app)
|
|
|
|
|
.post(`/api/plugins/${pluginId}/api/issues/${issueId}/advance`)
|
|
|
|
|
.send({ step: "next" });
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(res.status).toBe(200);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(mockIssueService.assertCheckoutOwner).toHaveBeenCalledWith(issueId, agentId, runId);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(workerManager.call).toHaveBeenCalledWith(pluginId, "handleApiRequest", expect.objectContaining({
|
|
|
|
|
routeKey: "issue.advance",
|
|
|
|
|
params: { issueId },
|
|
|
|
|
body: { step: "next" },
|
|
|
|
|
actor: expect.objectContaining({ actorType: "agent", agentId, runId }),
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("rejects checkout-protected agent routes without a run id before worker dispatch", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const apiRoutes = manifest([
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
routeKey: "issue.advance",
|
|
|
|
|
method: "POST",
|
|
|
|
|
path: "/issues/:issueId/advance",
|
|
|
|
|
auth: "agent",
|
|
|
|
|
capability: "api.routes.register",
|
|
|
|
|
checkoutPolicy: "required-for-agent-in-progress",
|
|
|
|
|
companyResolution: { from: "issue", param: "issueId" },
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
mockIssueService.getById.mockResolvedValue({
|
|
|
|
|
id: issueId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
status: "in_progress",
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeAgentId: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
const { app, workerManager } = await createApp({
|
|
|
|
|
actor: {
|
|
|
|
|
type: "agent",
|
|
|
|
|
agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
source: "agent_key",
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
plugin: {
|
|
|
|
|
id: pluginId,
|
|
|
|
|
pluginKey: apiRoutes.id,
|
|
|
|
|
status: "ready",
|
|
|
|
|
manifestJson: apiRoutes,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const res = await request(app)
|
|
|
|
|
.post(`/api/plugins/${pluginId}/api/issues/${issueId}/advance`)
|
|
|
|
|
.send({});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(res.status).toBe(401);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(workerManager.call).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("rejects checkout-protected agent routes when the active checkout belongs to another run", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const apiRoutes = manifest([
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
routeKey: "issue.advance",
|
|
|
|
|
method: "POST",
|
|
|
|
|
path: "/issues/:issueId/advance",
|
|
|
|
|
auth: "agent",
|
|
|
|
|
capability: "api.routes.register",
|
|
|
|
|
checkoutPolicy: "always-for-agent",
|
|
|
|
|
companyResolution: { from: "issue", param: "issueId" },
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
mockIssueService.getById.mockResolvedValue({
|
|
|
|
|
id: issueId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
status: "in_progress",
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeAgentId: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
const conflict = new Error("Issue run ownership conflict") as Error & { status?: number };
|
|
|
|
|
conflict.status = 409;
|
|
|
|
|
mockIssueService.assertCheckoutOwner.mockRejectedValue(conflict);
|
|
|
|
|
const { app, workerManager } = await createApp({
|
|
|
|
|
actor: {
|
|
|
|
|
type: "agent",
|
|
|
|
|
agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
runId,
|
|
|
|
|
source: "agent_key",
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
plugin: {
|
|
|
|
|
id: pluginId,
|
|
|
|
|
pluginKey: apiRoutes.id,
|
|
|
|
|
status: "ready",
|
|
|
|
|
manifestJson: apiRoutes,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const res = await request(app)
|
|
|
|
|
.post(`/api/plugins/${pluginId}/api/issues/${issueId}/advance`)
|
|
|
|
|
.send({});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(res.status).toBe(409);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(workerManager.call).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("returns a clear error for disabled plugins without worker dispatch", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const apiRoutes = manifest([
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
routeKey: "summary.get",
|
|
|
|
|
method: "GET",
|
|
|
|
|
path: "/summary",
|
|
|
|
|
auth: "board",
|
|
|
|
|
capability: "api.routes.register",
|
|
|
|
|
companyResolution: { from: "query", key: "companyId" },
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
const { app, workerManager } = await createApp({
|
|
|
|
|
actor: {
|
|
|
|
|
type: "board",
|
|
|
|
|
userId: "user-1",
|
|
|
|
|
source: "local_implicit",
|
|
|
|
|
isInstanceAdmin: true,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
plugin: {
|
|
|
|
|
id: pluginId,
|
|
|
|
|
pluginKey: apiRoutes.id,
|
|
|
|
|
status: "disabled",
|
|
|
|
|
manifestJson: apiRoutes,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const res = await request(app)
|
|
|
|
|
.get(`/api/plugins/${pluginId}/api/summary?companyId=${companyId}`);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(res.status).toBe(503);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(res.body.error).toContain("disabled");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(workerManager.call).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("returns a clear error when a ready plugin has no running worker", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const apiRoutes = manifest([
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
routeKey: "summary.get",
|
|
|
|
|
method: "GET",
|
|
|
|
|
path: "/summary",
|
|
|
|
|
auth: "board",
|
|
|
|
|
capability: "api.routes.register",
|
|
|
|
|
companyResolution: { from: "query", key: "companyId" },
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
const { app, workerManager } = await createApp({
|
|
|
|
|
actor: {
|
|
|
|
|
type: "board",
|
|
|
|
|
userId: "user-1",
|
|
|
|
|
source: "local_implicit",
|
|
|
|
|
isInstanceAdmin: true,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
plugin: {
|
|
|
|
|
id: pluginId,
|
|
|
|
|
pluginKey: apiRoutes.id,
|
|
|
|
|
status: "ready",
|
|
|
|
|
manifestJson: apiRoutes,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
workerRunning: false,
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const res = await request(app)
|
|
|
|
|
.get(`/api/plugins/${pluginId}/api/summary?companyId=${companyId}`);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(res.status).toBe(503);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(res.body.error).toContain("worker is not running");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(workerManager.call).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("rejects manifest routes that try to claim core API paths", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const result = pluginManifestV1Schema.safeParse(manifest([
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
routeKey: "bad.shadow",
|
|
|
|
|
method: "POST",
|
|
|
|
|
path: "/api/issues/:issueId",
|
|
|
|
|
auth: "board",
|
|
|
|
|
capability: "api.routes.register",
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(result.success).toBe(false);
|
|
|
|
|
if (result.success) throw new Error("Expected manifest validation to fail");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(result.error.issues.map((issue) => issue.message).join("\n")).toContain(
|
|
|
|
|
"path must stay inside the plugin api namespace",
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|