paperclip/server/src/__tests__/approval-routes-idempotency.test.ts

340 lines
10 KiB
TypeScript
Raw Normal View History

import express from "express";
import request from "supertest";
import { beforeEach, describe, expect, it, vi } from "vitest";
const mockApprovalService = vi.hoisted(() => ({
list: vi.fn(),
getById: vi.fn(),
create: vi.fn(),
approve: vi.fn(),
reject: vi.fn(),
requestRevision: vi.fn(),
resubmit: vi.fn(),
listComments: vi.fn(),
addComment: vi.fn(),
}));
const mockHeartbeatService = vi.hoisted(() => ({
wakeup: vi.fn(),
}));
const mockIssueApprovalService = vi.hoisted(() => ({
listIssuesForApproval: vi.fn(),
linkManyForApproval: vi.fn(),
}));
const mockSecretService = vi.hoisted(() => ({
normalizeHireApprovalPayloadForPersistence: vi.fn(),
}));
const mockLogActivity = vi.hoisted(() => vi.fn());
[codex] Harden execution reliability and heartbeat tooling (#3679) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Reliable execution depends on heartbeat routing, issue lifecycle semantics, telemetry, and a fast enough local verification loop to keep regressions visible > - The remaining commits on this branch were mostly server/runtime correctness fixes plus test and documentation follow-ups in that area > - Those changes are logically separate from the UI-focused issue-detail and workspace/navigation branches even when they touch overlapping issue APIs > - This pull request groups the execution reliability, heartbeat, telemetry, and tooling changes into one standalone branch > - The benefit is a focused review of the control-plane correctness work, including the follow-up fix that restored the implicit comment-reopen helpers after branch splitting ## What Changed - Hardened issue/heartbeat execution behavior, including self-review stage skipping, deferred mention wakes during active execution, stranded execution recovery, active-run scoping, assignee resolution, and blocked-to-todo wake resumption - Reduced noisy polling/logging overhead by trimming issue run payloads, compacting persisted run logs, silencing high-volume request logs, and capping heartbeat-run queries in dashboard/inbox surfaces - Expanded telemetry and status semantics with adapter/model fields on task completion plus clearer status guidance in docs/onboarding material - Updated test infrastructure and verification defaults with faster route-test module isolation, cheaper default `pnpm test`, e2e isolation from local state, and repo verification follow-ups - Included docs/release housekeeping from the branch and added a small follow-up commit restoring the implicit comment-reopen helpers that were dropped during branch reconstruction ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-telemetry-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/http-log-policy.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-run-log.test.ts server/src/__tests__/health.test.ts` - `server/src/__tests__/activity-service.test.ts`, `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts`, and `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` were attempted on this host but the embedded Postgres harness reported init-script/data-dir problems and skipped or failed to start, so they are noted as environment-limited ## Risks - Medium: this branch changes core issue/heartbeat routing and reopen/wakeup behavior, so regressions would affect agent execution flow rather than isolated UI polish - Because it also updates verification infrastructure, reviewers should pay attention to whether the new tests are asserting the right failure modes and not just reshaping harness behavior ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex coding agent (GPT-5-class runtime in Codex CLI; exact deployed model ID is not exposed in this environment), reasoning enabled, tool use and local code execution 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) - [ ] 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>
2026-04-14 13:34:52 -05:00
function registerModuleMocks() {
vi.doMock("../services/index.js", () => ({
approvalService: () => mockApprovalService,
heartbeatService: () => mockHeartbeatService,
issueApprovalService: () => mockIssueApprovalService,
logActivity: mockLogActivity,
secretService: () => mockSecretService,
}));
}
async function createApp(actorOverrides: Record<string, unknown> = {}) {
[codex] Harden execution reliability and heartbeat tooling (#3679) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Reliable execution depends on heartbeat routing, issue lifecycle semantics, telemetry, and a fast enough local verification loop to keep regressions visible > - The remaining commits on this branch were mostly server/runtime correctness fixes plus test and documentation follow-ups in that area > - Those changes are logically separate from the UI-focused issue-detail and workspace/navigation branches even when they touch overlapping issue APIs > - This pull request groups the execution reliability, heartbeat, telemetry, and tooling changes into one standalone branch > - The benefit is a focused review of the control-plane correctness work, including the follow-up fix that restored the implicit comment-reopen helpers after branch splitting ## What Changed - Hardened issue/heartbeat execution behavior, including self-review stage skipping, deferred mention wakes during active execution, stranded execution recovery, active-run scoping, assignee resolution, and blocked-to-todo wake resumption - Reduced noisy polling/logging overhead by trimming issue run payloads, compacting persisted run logs, silencing high-volume request logs, and capping heartbeat-run queries in dashboard/inbox surfaces - Expanded telemetry and status semantics with adapter/model fields on task completion plus clearer status guidance in docs/onboarding material - Updated test infrastructure and verification defaults with faster route-test module isolation, cheaper default `pnpm test`, e2e isolation from local state, and repo verification follow-ups - Included docs/release housekeeping from the branch and added a small follow-up commit restoring the implicit comment-reopen helpers that were dropped during branch reconstruction ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-telemetry-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/http-log-policy.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-run-log.test.ts server/src/__tests__/health.test.ts` - `server/src/__tests__/activity-service.test.ts`, `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts`, and `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` were attempted on this host but the embedded Postgres harness reported init-script/data-dir problems and skipped or failed to start, so they are noted as environment-limited ## Risks - Medium: this branch changes core issue/heartbeat routing and reopen/wakeup behavior, so regressions would affect agent execution flow rather than isolated UI polish - Because it also updates verification infrastructure, reviewers should pay attention to whether the new tests are asserting the right failure modes and not just reshaping harness behavior ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex coding agent (GPT-5-class runtime in Codex CLI; exact deployed model ID is not exposed in this environment), reasoning enabled, tool use and local code execution 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) - [ ] 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>
2026-04-14 13:34:52 -05:00
const [{ errorHandler }, { approvalRoutes }] = 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
import("../middleware/index.js"),
import("../routes/approvals.js"),
]);
const app = express();
app.use(express.json());
app.use((req, _res, next) => {
(req as any).actor = {
type: "board",
userId: "user-1",
companyIds: ["company-1"],
source: "session",
isInstanceAdmin: false,
fix(authz): scope import, approvals, activity, and heartbeat routes (#3315) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents and company-scoped control-plane actions for zero-human companies. > - This change touches the server authz boundary around company portability, approvals, activity, and heartbeat-run operations. > - The vulnerability was that board-authenticated callers could cross company boundaries or create new companies through import paths without the same authorization checks enforced elsewhere. > - Once that gap existed, an attacker could chain it into higher-impact behavior through agent execution paths. > - The fix needed to harden every confirmed authorization gap in the reported chain, not just the first route that exposed it. > - This pull request adds the missing instance-admin and company-access checks and adds regression tests for each affected route. > - The benefit is that cross-company actions and new-company import flows now follow the same control-plane authorization rules as the rest of the product. ## What Changed - Required instance-admin access for `new_company` import preview/apply flows in `server/src/routes/companies.ts`. - Required company access before approval decision routes in `server/src/routes/approvals.ts`. - Required company access for activity creation and heartbeat-run issue listing in `server/src/routes/activity.ts`. - Required company access before heartbeat cancellation in `server/src/routes/agents.ts`. - Added regression coverage in the corresponding server route tests. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/company-portability-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/approval-routes-idempotency.test.ts src/__tests__/activity-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/agent-permissions-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - Prior verification on the original security patch branch also included `pnpm build`. ## Risks - Low code risk: the change is narrow and only adds missing authorization gates to existing routes. - Operational risk: the advisory is already public, so this PR should be merged quickly to minimize the public unpatched window. - Residual product risk remains around open signup / bootstrap defaults, which was intentionally left out of this patch because the current first-user onboarding flow depends on it. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-5 Codex coding agent with tool use and local code execution in the Codex CLI environment. ## 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 - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] 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: Forgotten <forgottenrunes@protonmail.com>
2026-04-10 11:55:27 -05:00
...actorOverrides,
};
next();
});
app.use("/api", approvalRoutes({} as any));
app.use(errorHandler);
return app;
}
async function createAgentApp() {
[codex] Harden execution reliability and heartbeat tooling (#3679) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Reliable execution depends on heartbeat routing, issue lifecycle semantics, telemetry, and a fast enough local verification loop to keep regressions visible > - The remaining commits on this branch were mostly server/runtime correctness fixes plus test and documentation follow-ups in that area > - Those changes are logically separate from the UI-focused issue-detail and workspace/navigation branches even when they touch overlapping issue APIs > - This pull request groups the execution reliability, heartbeat, telemetry, and tooling changes into one standalone branch > - The benefit is a focused review of the control-plane correctness work, including the follow-up fix that restored the implicit comment-reopen helpers after branch splitting ## What Changed - Hardened issue/heartbeat execution behavior, including self-review stage skipping, deferred mention wakes during active execution, stranded execution recovery, active-run scoping, assignee resolution, and blocked-to-todo wake resumption - Reduced noisy polling/logging overhead by trimming issue run payloads, compacting persisted run logs, silencing high-volume request logs, and capping heartbeat-run queries in dashboard/inbox surfaces - Expanded telemetry and status semantics with adapter/model fields on task completion plus clearer status guidance in docs/onboarding material - Updated test infrastructure and verification defaults with faster route-test module isolation, cheaper default `pnpm test`, e2e isolation from local state, and repo verification follow-ups - Included docs/release housekeeping from the branch and added a small follow-up commit restoring the implicit comment-reopen helpers that were dropped during branch reconstruction ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-telemetry-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/http-log-policy.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-run-log.test.ts server/src/__tests__/health.test.ts` - `server/src/__tests__/activity-service.test.ts`, `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts`, and `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` were attempted on this host but the embedded Postgres harness reported init-script/data-dir problems and skipped or failed to start, so they are noted as environment-limited ## Risks - Medium: this branch changes core issue/heartbeat routing and reopen/wakeup behavior, so regressions would affect agent execution flow rather than isolated UI polish - Because it also updates verification infrastructure, reviewers should pay attention to whether the new tests are asserting the right failure modes and not just reshaping harness behavior ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex coding agent (GPT-5-class runtime in Codex CLI; exact deployed model ID is not exposed in this environment), reasoning enabled, tool use and local code execution 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) - [ ] 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>
2026-04-14 13:34:52 -05:00
const [{ errorHandler }, { approvalRoutes }] = 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
import("../middleware/index.js"),
import("../routes/approvals.js"),
]);
const app = express();
app.use(express.json());
app.use((req, _res, next) => {
(req as any).actor = {
type: "agent",
agentId: "agent-1",
companyId: "company-1",
source: "api_key",
isInstanceAdmin: false,
};
next();
});
app.use("/api", approvalRoutes({} as any));
app.use(errorHandler);
return app;
}
describe("approval routes idempotent retries", () => {
beforeEach(() => {
vi.resetModules();
[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.doUnmock("../services/index.js");
[codex] Harden execution reliability and heartbeat tooling (#3679) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Reliable execution depends on heartbeat routing, issue lifecycle semantics, telemetry, and a fast enough local verification loop to keep regressions visible > - The remaining commits on this branch were mostly server/runtime correctness fixes plus test and documentation follow-ups in that area > - Those changes are logically separate from the UI-focused issue-detail and workspace/navigation branches even when they touch overlapping issue APIs > - This pull request groups the execution reliability, heartbeat, telemetry, and tooling changes into one standalone branch > - The benefit is a focused review of the control-plane correctness work, including the follow-up fix that restored the implicit comment-reopen helpers after branch splitting ## What Changed - Hardened issue/heartbeat execution behavior, including self-review stage skipping, deferred mention wakes during active execution, stranded execution recovery, active-run scoping, assignee resolution, and blocked-to-todo wake resumption - Reduced noisy polling/logging overhead by trimming issue run payloads, compacting persisted run logs, silencing high-volume request logs, and capping heartbeat-run queries in dashboard/inbox surfaces - Expanded telemetry and status semantics with adapter/model fields on task completion plus clearer status guidance in docs/onboarding material - Updated test infrastructure and verification defaults with faster route-test module isolation, cheaper default `pnpm test`, e2e isolation from local state, and repo verification follow-ups - Included docs/release housekeeping from the branch and added a small follow-up commit restoring the implicit comment-reopen helpers that were dropped during branch reconstruction ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-telemetry-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/http-log-policy.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-run-log.test.ts server/src/__tests__/health.test.ts` - `server/src/__tests__/activity-service.test.ts`, `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts`, and `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` were attempted on this host but the embedded Postgres harness reported init-script/data-dir problems and skipped or failed to start, so they are noted as environment-limited ## Risks - Medium: this branch changes core issue/heartbeat routing and reopen/wakeup behavior, so regressions would affect agent execution flow rather than isolated UI polish - Because it also updates verification infrastructure, reviewers should pay attention to whether the new tests are asserting the right failure modes and not just reshaping harness behavior ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex coding agent (GPT-5-class runtime in Codex CLI; exact deployed model ID is not exposed in this environment), reasoning enabled, tool use and local code execution 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) - [ ] 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>
2026-04-14 13:34:52 -05:00
vi.doUnmock("../routes/approvals.js");
[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.doUnmock("../routes/authz.js");
[codex] Harden execution reliability and heartbeat tooling (#3679) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Reliable execution depends on heartbeat routing, issue lifecycle semantics, telemetry, and a fast enough local verification loop to keep regressions visible > - The remaining commits on this branch were mostly server/runtime correctness fixes plus test and documentation follow-ups in that area > - Those changes are logically separate from the UI-focused issue-detail and workspace/navigation branches even when they touch overlapping issue APIs > - This pull request groups the execution reliability, heartbeat, telemetry, and tooling changes into one standalone branch > - The benefit is a focused review of the control-plane correctness work, including the follow-up fix that restored the implicit comment-reopen helpers after branch splitting ## What Changed - Hardened issue/heartbeat execution behavior, including self-review stage skipping, deferred mention wakes during active execution, stranded execution recovery, active-run scoping, assignee resolution, and blocked-to-todo wake resumption - Reduced noisy polling/logging overhead by trimming issue run payloads, compacting persisted run logs, silencing high-volume request logs, and capping heartbeat-run queries in dashboard/inbox surfaces - Expanded telemetry and status semantics with adapter/model fields on task completion plus clearer status guidance in docs/onboarding material - Updated test infrastructure and verification defaults with faster route-test module isolation, cheaper default `pnpm test`, e2e isolation from local state, and repo verification follow-ups - Included docs/release housekeeping from the branch and added a small follow-up commit restoring the implicit comment-reopen helpers that were dropped during branch reconstruction ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-telemetry-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/http-log-policy.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-run-log.test.ts server/src/__tests__/health.test.ts` - `server/src/__tests__/activity-service.test.ts`, `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts`, and `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` were attempted on this host but the embedded Postgres harness reported init-script/data-dir problems and skipped or failed to start, so they are noted as environment-limited ## Risks - Medium: this branch changes core issue/heartbeat routing and reopen/wakeup behavior, so regressions would affect agent execution flow rather than isolated UI polish - Because it also updates verification infrastructure, reviewers should pay attention to whether the new tests are asserting the right failure modes and not just reshaping harness behavior ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex coding agent (GPT-5-class runtime in Codex CLI; exact deployed model ID is not exposed in this environment), reasoning enabled, tool use and local code execution 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) - [ ] 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>
2026-04-14 13:34:52 -05:00
vi.doUnmock("../middleware/index.js");
registerModuleMocks();
vi.resetAllMocks();
[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
mockApprovalService.list.mockReset();
mockApprovalService.getById.mockReset();
mockApprovalService.create.mockReset();
mockApprovalService.approve.mockReset();
mockApprovalService.reject.mockReset();
mockApprovalService.requestRevision.mockReset();
mockApprovalService.resubmit.mockReset();
mockApprovalService.listComments.mockReset();
mockApprovalService.addComment.mockReset();
mockHeartbeatService.wakeup.mockReset();
mockIssueApprovalService.listIssuesForApproval.mockReset();
mockIssueApprovalService.linkManyForApproval.mockReset();
mockSecretService.normalizeHireApprovalPayloadForPersistence.mockReset();
mockLogActivity.mockReset();
mockHeartbeatService.wakeup.mockResolvedValue({ id: "wake-1" });
mockIssueApprovalService.listIssuesForApproval.mockResolvedValue([{ id: "issue-1" }]);
mockLogActivity.mockResolvedValue(undefined);
});
it("does not emit duplicate approval side effects when approve is already resolved", async () => {
fix(authz): scope import, approvals, activity, and heartbeat routes (#3315) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents and company-scoped control-plane actions for zero-human companies. > - This change touches the server authz boundary around company portability, approvals, activity, and heartbeat-run operations. > - The vulnerability was that board-authenticated callers could cross company boundaries or create new companies through import paths without the same authorization checks enforced elsewhere. > - Once that gap existed, an attacker could chain it into higher-impact behavior through agent execution paths. > - The fix needed to harden every confirmed authorization gap in the reported chain, not just the first route that exposed it. > - This pull request adds the missing instance-admin and company-access checks and adds regression tests for each affected route. > - The benefit is that cross-company actions and new-company import flows now follow the same control-plane authorization rules as the rest of the product. ## What Changed - Required instance-admin access for `new_company` import preview/apply flows in `server/src/routes/companies.ts`. - Required company access before approval decision routes in `server/src/routes/approvals.ts`. - Required company access for activity creation and heartbeat-run issue listing in `server/src/routes/activity.ts`. - Required company access before heartbeat cancellation in `server/src/routes/agents.ts`. - Added regression coverage in the corresponding server route tests. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/company-portability-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/approval-routes-idempotency.test.ts src/__tests__/activity-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/agent-permissions-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - Prior verification on the original security patch branch also included `pnpm build`. ## Risks - Low code risk: the change is narrow and only adds missing authorization gates to existing routes. - Operational risk: the advisory is already public, so this PR should be merged quickly to minimize the public unpatched window. - Residual product risk remains around open signup / bootstrap defaults, which was intentionally left out of this patch because the current first-user onboarding flow depends on it. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-5 Codex coding agent with tool use and local code execution in the Codex CLI environment. ## 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 - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] 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: Forgotten <forgottenrunes@protonmail.com>
2026-04-10 11:55:27 -05:00
mockApprovalService.getById.mockResolvedValue({
id: "approval-1",
companyId: "company-1",
type: "hire_agent",
status: "approved",
payload: {},
requestedByAgentId: "agent-1",
});
mockApprovalService.approve.mockResolvedValue({
approval: {
id: "approval-1",
companyId: "company-1",
type: "hire_agent",
status: "approved",
payload: {},
requestedByAgentId: "agent-1",
},
applied: false,
});
const res = await request(await createApp())
.post("/api/approvals/approval-1/approve")
.send({});
expect(res.status).toBe(200);
expect(mockIssueApprovalService.listIssuesForApproval).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
expect(mockHeartbeatService.wakeup).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
expect(mockLogActivity).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
});
it("does not emit duplicate rejection logs when reject is already resolved", async () => {
fix(authz): scope import, approvals, activity, and heartbeat routes (#3315) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents and company-scoped control-plane actions for zero-human companies. > - This change touches the server authz boundary around company portability, approvals, activity, and heartbeat-run operations. > - The vulnerability was that board-authenticated callers could cross company boundaries or create new companies through import paths without the same authorization checks enforced elsewhere. > - Once that gap existed, an attacker could chain it into higher-impact behavior through agent execution paths. > - The fix needed to harden every confirmed authorization gap in the reported chain, not just the first route that exposed it. > - This pull request adds the missing instance-admin and company-access checks and adds regression tests for each affected route. > - The benefit is that cross-company actions and new-company import flows now follow the same control-plane authorization rules as the rest of the product. ## What Changed - Required instance-admin access for `new_company` import preview/apply flows in `server/src/routes/companies.ts`. - Required company access before approval decision routes in `server/src/routes/approvals.ts`. - Required company access for activity creation and heartbeat-run issue listing in `server/src/routes/activity.ts`. - Required company access before heartbeat cancellation in `server/src/routes/agents.ts`. - Added regression coverage in the corresponding server route tests. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/company-portability-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/approval-routes-idempotency.test.ts src/__tests__/activity-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/agent-permissions-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - Prior verification on the original security patch branch also included `pnpm build`. ## Risks - Low code risk: the change is narrow and only adds missing authorization gates to existing routes. - Operational risk: the advisory is already public, so this PR should be merged quickly to minimize the public unpatched window. - Residual product risk remains around open signup / bootstrap defaults, which was intentionally left out of this patch because the current first-user onboarding flow depends on it. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-5 Codex coding agent with tool use and local code execution in the Codex CLI environment. ## 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 - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] 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: Forgotten <forgottenrunes@protonmail.com>
2026-04-10 11:55:27 -05:00
mockApprovalService.getById.mockResolvedValue({
id: "approval-1",
companyId: "company-1",
type: "hire_agent",
status: "rejected",
payload: {},
});
mockApprovalService.reject.mockResolvedValue({
approval: {
id: "approval-1",
companyId: "company-1",
type: "hire_agent",
status: "rejected",
payload: {},
},
applied: false,
});
const res = await request(await createApp())
.post("/api/approvals/approval-1/reject")
.send({});
expect(res.status).toBe(200);
expect(mockLogActivity).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
});
fix(authz): scope import, approvals, activity, and heartbeat routes (#3315) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents and company-scoped control-plane actions for zero-human companies. > - This change touches the server authz boundary around company portability, approvals, activity, and heartbeat-run operations. > - The vulnerability was that board-authenticated callers could cross company boundaries or create new companies through import paths without the same authorization checks enforced elsewhere. > - Once that gap existed, an attacker could chain it into higher-impact behavior through agent execution paths. > - The fix needed to harden every confirmed authorization gap in the reported chain, not just the first route that exposed it. > - This pull request adds the missing instance-admin and company-access checks and adds regression tests for each affected route. > - The benefit is that cross-company actions and new-company import flows now follow the same control-plane authorization rules as the rest of the product. ## What Changed - Required instance-admin access for `new_company` import preview/apply flows in `server/src/routes/companies.ts`. - Required company access before approval decision routes in `server/src/routes/approvals.ts`. - Required company access for activity creation and heartbeat-run issue listing in `server/src/routes/activity.ts`. - Required company access before heartbeat cancellation in `server/src/routes/agents.ts`. - Added regression coverage in the corresponding server route tests. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/company-portability-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/approval-routes-idempotency.test.ts src/__tests__/activity-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/agent-permissions-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - Prior verification on the original security patch branch also included `pnpm build`. ## Risks - Low code risk: the change is narrow and only adds missing authorization gates to existing routes. - Operational risk: the advisory is already public, so this PR should be merged quickly to minimize the public unpatched window. - Residual product risk remains around open signup / bootstrap defaults, which was intentionally left out of this patch because the current first-user onboarding flow depends on it. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-5 Codex coding agent with tool use and local code execution in the Codex CLI environment. ## 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 - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] 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: Forgotten <forgottenrunes@protonmail.com>
2026-04-10 11:55:27 -05:00
it("rejects approval decisions for companies outside the caller scope", async () => {
mockApprovalService.getById.mockResolvedValue({
id: "approval-2",
companyId: "company-2",
type: "hire_agent",
status: "pending",
payload: {},
});
const res = await request(await createApp())
fix(authz): scope import, approvals, activity, and heartbeat routes (#3315) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents and company-scoped control-plane actions for zero-human companies. > - This change touches the server authz boundary around company portability, approvals, activity, and heartbeat-run operations. > - The vulnerability was that board-authenticated callers could cross company boundaries or create new companies through import paths without the same authorization checks enforced elsewhere. > - Once that gap existed, an attacker could chain it into higher-impact behavior through agent execution paths. > - The fix needed to harden every confirmed authorization gap in the reported chain, not just the first route that exposed it. > - This pull request adds the missing instance-admin and company-access checks and adds regression tests for each affected route. > - The benefit is that cross-company actions and new-company import flows now follow the same control-plane authorization rules as the rest of the product. ## What Changed - Required instance-admin access for `new_company` import preview/apply flows in `server/src/routes/companies.ts`. - Required company access before approval decision routes in `server/src/routes/approvals.ts`. - Required company access for activity creation and heartbeat-run issue listing in `server/src/routes/activity.ts`. - Required company access before heartbeat cancellation in `server/src/routes/agents.ts`. - Added regression coverage in the corresponding server route tests. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/company-portability-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/approval-routes-idempotency.test.ts src/__tests__/activity-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/agent-permissions-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - Prior verification on the original security patch branch also included `pnpm build`. ## Risks - Low code risk: the change is narrow and only adds missing authorization gates to existing routes. - Operational risk: the advisory is already public, so this PR should be merged quickly to minimize the public unpatched window. - Residual product risk remains around open signup / bootstrap defaults, which was intentionally left out of this patch because the current first-user onboarding flow depends on it. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-5 Codex coding agent with tool use and local code execution in the Codex CLI environment. ## 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 - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] 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: Forgotten <forgottenrunes@protonmail.com>
2026-04-10 11:55:27 -05:00
.post("/api/approvals/approval-2/approve")
.send({});
expect(res.status).toBe(403);
expect(mockApprovalService.approve).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
});
it("rejects approval revision requests for companies outside the caller scope", async () => {
mockApprovalService.getById.mockResolvedValue({
id: "approval-3",
companyId: "company-2",
type: "hire_agent",
status: "pending",
payload: {},
});
const res = await request(await createApp())
fix(authz): scope import, approvals, activity, and heartbeat routes (#3315) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents and company-scoped control-plane actions for zero-human companies. > - This change touches the server authz boundary around company portability, approvals, activity, and heartbeat-run operations. > - The vulnerability was that board-authenticated callers could cross company boundaries or create new companies through import paths without the same authorization checks enforced elsewhere. > - Once that gap existed, an attacker could chain it into higher-impact behavior through agent execution paths. > - The fix needed to harden every confirmed authorization gap in the reported chain, not just the first route that exposed it. > - This pull request adds the missing instance-admin and company-access checks and adds regression tests for each affected route. > - The benefit is that cross-company actions and new-company import flows now follow the same control-plane authorization rules as the rest of the product. ## What Changed - Required instance-admin access for `new_company` import preview/apply flows in `server/src/routes/companies.ts`. - Required company access before approval decision routes in `server/src/routes/approvals.ts`. - Required company access for activity creation and heartbeat-run issue listing in `server/src/routes/activity.ts`. - Required company access before heartbeat cancellation in `server/src/routes/agents.ts`. - Added regression coverage in the corresponding server route tests. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/company-portability-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/approval-routes-idempotency.test.ts src/__tests__/activity-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/agent-permissions-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - Prior verification on the original security patch branch also included `pnpm build`. ## Risks - Low code risk: the change is narrow and only adds missing authorization gates to existing routes. - Operational risk: the advisory is already public, so this PR should be merged quickly to minimize the public unpatched window. - Residual product risk remains around open signup / bootstrap defaults, which was intentionally left out of this patch because the current first-user onboarding flow depends on it. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-5 Codex coding agent with tool use and local code execution in the Codex CLI environment. ## 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 - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] 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: Forgotten <forgottenrunes@protonmail.com>
2026-04-10 11:55:27 -05:00
.post("/api/approvals/approval-3/request-revision")
.send({ decisionNote: "Need changes" });
expect(res.status).toBe(403);
expect(mockApprovalService.requestRevision).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
});
[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
it("derives approval attribution from the authenticated actor on approve", async () => {
mockApprovalService.getById.mockResolvedValue({
id: "approval-4",
companyId: "company-1",
type: "hire_agent",
status: "pending",
payload: {},
requestedByAgentId: null,
});
mockApprovalService.approve.mockResolvedValue({
approval: {
id: "approval-4",
companyId: "company-1",
type: "hire_agent",
status: "approved",
payload: {},
requestedByAgentId: null,
},
applied: true,
});
const res = await request(await createApp())
.post("/api/approvals/approval-4/approve")
.send({ decidedByUserId: "forged-user", decisionNote: "ship it" });
expect(res.status).toBe(200);
expect(mockApprovalService.approve).toHaveBeenCalledWith("approval-4", "user-1", "ship it");
});
it("derives approval attribution from the authenticated actor on reject", async () => {
mockApprovalService.getById.mockResolvedValue({
id: "approval-5",
companyId: "company-1",
type: "hire_agent",
status: "pending",
payload: {},
});
mockApprovalService.reject.mockResolvedValue({
approval: {
id: "approval-5",
companyId: "company-1",
type: "hire_agent",
status: "rejected",
payload: {},
},
applied: true,
});
const res = await request(await createApp())
.post("/api/approvals/approval-5/reject")
.send({ decidedByUserId: "forged-user", decisionNote: "not now" });
expect(res.status).toBe(200);
expect(mockApprovalService.reject).toHaveBeenCalledWith("approval-5", "user-1", "not now");
});
it("derives approval attribution from the authenticated actor on request revision", async () => {
mockApprovalService.getById.mockResolvedValue({
id: "approval-6",
companyId: "company-1",
type: "hire_agent",
status: "pending",
payload: {},
});
mockApprovalService.requestRevision.mockResolvedValue({
id: "approval-6",
companyId: "company-1",
type: "hire_agent",
status: "revision_requested",
payload: {},
});
const res = await request(await createApp())
.post("/api/approvals/approval-6/request-revision")
.send({ decidedByUserId: "forged-user", decisionNote: "Need changes" });
expect(res.status).toBe(200);
expect(mockApprovalService.requestRevision).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
"approval-6",
"user-1",
"Need changes",
);
});
it("lets agents create generic issue-linked board approval requests", async () => {
mockApprovalService.create.mockResolvedValue({
id: "approval-1",
companyId: "company-1",
type: "request_board_approval",
requestedByAgentId: "agent-1",
requestedByUserId: null,
status: "pending",
payload: { title: "Approve hosting spend" },
decisionNote: null,
decidedByUserId: null,
decidedAt: null,
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-06T00:00:00.000Z"),
updatedAt: new Date("2026-04-06T00:00:00.000Z"),
});
const res = await request(await createAgentApp())
.post("/api/companies/company-1/approvals")
.send({
type: "request_board_approval",
issueIds: ["00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000001"],
payload: { title: "Approve hosting spend" },
});
[codex] Harden execution reliability and heartbeat tooling (#3679) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Reliable execution depends on heartbeat routing, issue lifecycle semantics, telemetry, and a fast enough local verification loop to keep regressions visible > - The remaining commits on this branch were mostly server/runtime correctness fixes plus test and documentation follow-ups in that area > - Those changes are logically separate from the UI-focused issue-detail and workspace/navigation branches even when they touch overlapping issue APIs > - This pull request groups the execution reliability, heartbeat, telemetry, and tooling changes into one standalone branch > - The benefit is a focused review of the control-plane correctness work, including the follow-up fix that restored the implicit comment-reopen helpers after branch splitting ## What Changed - Hardened issue/heartbeat execution behavior, including self-review stage skipping, deferred mention wakes during active execution, stranded execution recovery, active-run scoping, assignee resolution, and blocked-to-todo wake resumption - Reduced noisy polling/logging overhead by trimming issue run payloads, compacting persisted run logs, silencing high-volume request logs, and capping heartbeat-run queries in dashboard/inbox surfaces - Expanded telemetry and status semantics with adapter/model fields on task completion plus clearer status guidance in docs/onboarding material - Updated test infrastructure and verification defaults with faster route-test module isolation, cheaper default `pnpm test`, e2e isolation from local state, and repo verification follow-ups - Included docs/release housekeeping from the branch and added a small follow-up commit restoring the implicit comment-reopen helpers that were dropped during branch reconstruction ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-telemetry-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/http-log-policy.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-run-log.test.ts server/src/__tests__/health.test.ts` - `server/src/__tests__/activity-service.test.ts`, `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts`, and `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` were attempted on this host but the embedded Postgres harness reported init-script/data-dir problems and skipped or failed to start, so they are noted as environment-limited ## Risks - Medium: this branch changes core issue/heartbeat routing and reopen/wakeup behavior, so regressions would affect agent execution flow rather than isolated UI polish - Because it also updates verification infrastructure, reviewers should pay attention to whether the new tests are asserting the right failure modes and not just reshaping harness behavior ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex coding agent (GPT-5-class runtime in Codex CLI; exact deployed model ID is not exposed in this environment), reasoning enabled, tool use and local code execution 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) - [ ] 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>
2026-04-14 13:34:52 -05:00
expect([200, 201], JSON.stringify(res.body)).toContain(res.status);
[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
expect(res.body).toMatchObject({
companyId: "company-1",
type: "request_board_approval",
requestedByAgentId: "agent-1",
requestedByUserId: null,
status: "pending",
});
expect(mockSecretService.normalizeHireApprovalPayloadForPersistence).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
expect(mockIssueApprovalService.linkManyForApproval).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
"approval-1",
["00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000001"],
{ agentId: "agent-1", userId: null },
);
expect(mockLogActivity).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
expect.anything(),
expect.objectContaining({
companyId: "company-1",
actorType: "agent",
actorId: "agent-1",
action: "approval.created",
}),
);
});
});