[codex] harden authenticated routes and issue editor reliability (#3741)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - The control plane depends on authenticated routes enforcing company
boundaries and role permissions correctly
> - This branch also touches the issue detail and markdown editing flows
operators use while handling advisory and triage work
> - Partial issue cache seeds and fragile rich-editor parsing could
leave important issue content missing or blank at the moment an operator
needed it
> - Blocked issues becoming actionable again should wake their assignee
automatically instead of silently staying idle
> - This pull request rebases the advisory follow-up branch onto current
`master`, hardens authenticated route authorization, and carries the
issue-detail/editor reliability fixes forward with regression tests
> - The benefit is tighter authz on sensitive routes plus more reliable
issue/advisory editing and wakeup behavior on top of the latest base
## What Changed
- Hardened authenticated route authorization across agent, activity,
approval, access, project, plugin, health, execution-workspace,
portability, and related server paths, with new cross-tenant and
runtime-authz regression coverage.
- Switched issue detail queries from `initialData` to placeholder-based
hydration so list/quicklook seeds still refetch full issue bodies.
- Normalized advisory-style HTML images before mounting the markdown
editor and strengthened fallback behavior when the rich editor silently
fails or rejects the content.
- Woke assigned agents when blocked issues move back to `todo`, with
route coverage for reopen and unblock transitions.
- Rebasing note: this branch now sits cleanly on top of the latest
`master` tip used for the PR base.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/lib/issueDetailQuery.test.tsx
ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx
server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/activity-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/agent-cross-tenant-authz-routes.test.ts`
- Confirmed `pnpm-lock.yaml` is not part of the PR diff.
- Rebased the branch onto current `public-gh/master` before publishing.
## Risks
- Broad authz tightening may expose existing flows that were relying on
permissive board or agent access and now need explicit grants.
- Markdown editor fallback changes could affect focus or rendering in
edge-case content that mixes HTML-like advisory markup with normal
markdown.
- This verification was intentionally scoped to touched regressions and
did not run the full repository suite.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent in the Codex CLI environment
with tool use for terminal, git, and GitHub operations. The exact
runtime model identifier is not exposed inside 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, it is behavior-only and does not
need before/after screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes, or no
documentation changes were needed for these internal fixes
- [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>
2026-04-15 08:41:15 -05:00
|
|
|
// @vitest-environment jsdom
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
import { act } from "react";
|
|
|
|
|
import { createRoot } from "react-dom/client";
|
|
|
|
|
import type { Issue } from "@paperclipai/shared";
|
|
|
|
|
import { QueryClient, QueryClientProvider, useQuery, useQueryClient } from "@tanstack/react-query";
|
|
|
|
|
import { afterEach, describe, expect, it, vi } from "vitest";
|
|
|
|
|
import { issuesApi } from "@/api/issues";
|
|
|
|
|
import { queryKeys } from "@/lib/queryKeys";
|
|
|
|
|
import { getIssueDetailQueryOptions } from "./issueDetailCache";
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("@/api/issues", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
issuesApi: {
|
|
|
|
|
get: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// eslint-disable-next-line @typescript-eslint/no-explicit-any
|
|
|
|
|
(globalThis as any).IS_REACT_ACT_ENVIRONMENT = true;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
function makeIssue(overrides: Partial<Issue> = {}): Issue {
|
|
|
|
|
const now = new Date("2026-04-13T20:00:00.000Z");
|
|
|
|
|
return {
|
|
|
|
|
id: "issue-1",
|
|
|
|
|
companyId: "company-1",
|
|
|
|
|
projectId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
projectWorkspaceId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
goalId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
parentId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Issue title",
|
|
|
|
|
description: null,
|
|
|
|
|
status: "todo",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "medium",
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeAgentId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeUserId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
checkoutRunId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
executionRunId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
executionAgentNameKey: null,
|
|
|
|
|
executionLockedAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
createdByAgentId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
createdByUserId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
issueNumber: 1442,
|
|
|
|
|
identifier: "PAP-1442",
|
|
|
|
|
requestDepth: 0,
|
|
|
|
|
billingCode: null,
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeAdapterOverrides: null,
|
|
|
|
|
executionWorkspaceId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
executionWorkspacePreference: null,
|
|
|
|
|
executionWorkspaceSettings: null,
|
|
|
|
|
startedAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
completedAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
cancelledAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
hiddenAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: now,
|
|
|
|
|
updatedAt: now,
|
|
|
|
|
...overrides,
|
Add planning mode for issue work (#5353)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is a control plane for autonomous AI companies.
> - Issues are the core unit of work, and issue comments are how board
users and agents coordinate execution.
> - Some issue conversations need to produce plans and approvals instead
of immediate implementation work.
> - The existing issue contract did not distinguish standard execution
comments from planning-oriented issue work.
> - This pull request adds an issue work-mode contract and board UI
affordances for standard vs planning mode.
> - The benefit is that planning-mode issues can be created, displayed,
discussed, and carried through agent heartbeat context without losing
the normal issue workflow.
## What Changed
- Added `standard` / `planning` issue work-mode contracts across DB,
shared validators/types, server issue flows, plugin protocol, and
adapter heartbeat payloads.
- Added an idempotent `0081_optimal_dormammu` migration for
`issues.work_mode`, ordered after current `public-gh/master` migrations.
- Updated heartbeat/context summaries and issue-thread interaction
behavior so planning work mode is preserved when creating suggested
follow-up issues.
- Added UI support for planning-mode issue creation, issue rows, detail
composer styling, and composer work-mode toggles.
- Added focused server/shared/UI tests plus a Playwright visual
verification spec for planning-mode surfaces.
- Rebased the branch onto current `public-gh/master` and added durable
planning-mode screenshots under `doc/assets/pap-3368/`.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db run check:migrations`
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/shared
packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-context-summary.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interactions-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issues-goal-context-routes.test.ts --pool=forks
--poolOptions.forks.isolate=true`
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui
ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssueRow.test.tsx ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/adapter-utils
packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts`
- `PAPERCLIP_E2E_SKIP_LLM=true npx playwright test --config
tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts
tests/e2e/planning-mode-visual-verification.spec.ts`
## Screenshots
Desktop planning detail:

Desktop planning row:

Desktop staged standard toggle:

Mobile planning detail:

Mobile planning row:

## Risks
- Medium migration risk: this adds a non-null issue column. The
migration uses `ADD COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS` so installations that applied
an older branch-local migration number can still apply the final
numbered migration safely.
- Medium contract risk: issue payloads, plugin payloads, and adapter
heartbeat payloads now include work mode; compatibility is handled by
defaulting missing values to `standard`.
- UI risk is moderate because composer controls changed; focused
component tests and visual e2e coverage exercise standard vs planning
display and toggle behavior.
> 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 coding agent in a local Paperclip worktree, with
shell/tool use. Exact context-window size is not exposed in this
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>
2026-05-06 07:01:28 -05:00
|
|
|
workMode: overrides.workMode ?? "standard",
|
[codex] harden authenticated routes and issue editor reliability (#3741)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - The control plane depends on authenticated routes enforcing company
boundaries and role permissions correctly
> - This branch also touches the issue detail and markdown editing flows
operators use while handling advisory and triage work
> - Partial issue cache seeds and fragile rich-editor parsing could
leave important issue content missing or blank at the moment an operator
needed it
> - Blocked issues becoming actionable again should wake their assignee
automatically instead of silently staying idle
> - This pull request rebases the advisory follow-up branch onto current
`master`, hardens authenticated route authorization, and carries the
issue-detail/editor reliability fixes forward with regression tests
> - The benefit is tighter authz on sensitive routes plus more reliable
issue/advisory editing and wakeup behavior on top of the latest base
## What Changed
- Hardened authenticated route authorization across agent, activity,
approval, access, project, plugin, health, execution-workspace,
portability, and related server paths, with new cross-tenant and
runtime-authz regression coverage.
- Switched issue detail queries from `initialData` to placeholder-based
hydration so list/quicklook seeds still refetch full issue bodies.
- Normalized advisory-style HTML images before mounting the markdown
editor and strengthened fallback behavior when the rich editor silently
fails or rejects the content.
- Woke assigned agents when blocked issues move back to `todo`, with
route coverage for reopen and unblock transitions.
- Rebasing note: this branch now sits cleanly on top of the latest
`master` tip used for the PR base.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/lib/issueDetailQuery.test.tsx
ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx
server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/activity-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/agent-cross-tenant-authz-routes.test.ts`
- Confirmed `pnpm-lock.yaml` is not part of the PR diff.
- Rebased the branch onto current `public-gh/master` before publishing.
## Risks
- Broad authz tightening may expose existing flows that were relying on
permissive board or agent access and now need explicit grants.
- Markdown editor fallback changes could affect focus or rendering in
edge-case content that mixes HTML-like advisory markup with normal
markdown.
- This verification was intentionally scoped to touched regressions and
did not run the full repository suite.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent in the Codex CLI environment
with tool use for terminal, git, and GitHub operations. The exact
runtime model identifier is not exposed inside 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, it is behavior-only and does not
need before/after screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes, or no
documentation changes were needed for these internal fixes
- [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>
2026-04-15 08:41:15 -05:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
function IssueDetailQueryHarness({
|
|
|
|
|
issueRef,
|
|
|
|
|
placeholderIssue,
|
|
|
|
|
}: {
|
|
|
|
|
issueRef: string;
|
|
|
|
|
placeholderIssue?: Pick<Issue, "id" | "identifier"> | null;
|
|
|
|
|
}) {
|
|
|
|
|
const queryClient = useQueryClient();
|
|
|
|
|
const query = useQuery({
|
|
|
|
|
...getIssueDetailQueryOptions(queryClient, issueRef, { placeholderIssue }),
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return <div>{query.data?.description ?? "EMPTY"}</div>;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
async function flush() {
|
|
|
|
|
// Multiple act cycles to allow React Query to process the async queryFn
|
|
|
|
|
for (let i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
await new Promise((r) => setTimeout(r, 0));
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
describe("getIssueDetailQueryOptions", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
afterEach(() => {
|
|
|
|
|
vi.clearAllMocks();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("treats cached issue data as placeholder and still fetches full detail", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const container = document.createElement("div");
|
|
|
|
|
document.body.appendChild(container);
|
|
|
|
|
const root = createRoot(container);
|
|
|
|
|
const queryClient = new QueryClient({
|
|
|
|
|
defaultOptions: {
|
|
|
|
|
queries: {
|
|
|
|
|
retry: false,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
const partialIssue = makeIssue({ description: null });
|
|
|
|
|
const fullIssue = makeIssue({ description: "GitHub Security Advisory body" });
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
queryClient.setQueryData(queryKeys.issues.detail("issue-1"), partialIssue);
|
|
|
|
|
queryClient.setQueryData(queryKeys.issues.detail("PAP-1442"), partialIssue);
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mocked(issuesApi.get).mockResolvedValue(fullIssue);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
root.render(
|
|
|
|
|
<QueryClientProvider client={queryClient}>
|
|
|
|
|
<IssueDetailQueryHarness
|
|
|
|
|
issueRef="PAP-1442"
|
|
|
|
|
placeholderIssue={{ id: partialIssue.id, identifier: partialIssue.identifier }}
|
|
|
|
|
/>
|
|
|
|
|
</QueryClientProvider>,
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await flush();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(issuesApi.get).toHaveBeenCalledWith("PAP-1442");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(container.textContent).toContain("GitHub Security Advisory body");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
root.unmount();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
queryClient.clear();
|
|
|
|
|
container.remove();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|