2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
# Paperclip V1 Implementation Spec
Status: Implementation contract for first release (V1)
[codex] Refresh docs and agent skills (#4693)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane
> - Contributors and agents need docs and skills that match the current
V1 behavior
> - The source branch included documentation updates alongside
implementation work
> - Keeping docs and skill guidance separate makes the implementation PR
easier to review
> - This pull request refreshes the V1 docs and agent-operating guidance
without changing runtime behavior
> - The benefit is current contributor guidance that can merge
independently from code changes
## What Changed
- Refreshed V1 product, goal, implementation, database, and development
documentation.
- Updated the Paperclip heartbeat skill guidance and create-agent skill
references.
- Added the Paperclip plan-to-task conversion skill.
- Updated release changelog skill guidance.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` passed in the PR worktree
after the Greptile fix.
- Greptile Review passed on head `673317ed` with zero unresolved review
threads.
- GitHub PR checks passed on head `673317ed`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`,
and `security/snyk (cryppadotta)`.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk because this branch only changes docs and skill
guidance.
- Documentation may need follow-up wording adjustments if reviewers want
a different framing for V1 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, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub
workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness.
## 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>
2026-04-28 16:12:03 -05:00
Date: 2026-04-28
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
Audience: Product, engineering, and agent-integration authors
Source inputs: `GOAL.md` , `PRODUCT.md` , `SPEC.md` , `DATABASE.md` , current monorepo code
## 1. Document Role
`SPEC.md` remains the long-horizon product spec.
This document is the concrete, build-ready V1 contract.
When there is a conflict, `SPEC-implementation.md` controls V1 behavior.
## 2. V1 Outcomes
Paperclip V1 must provide a full control-plane loop for autonomous agents:
1. A human board creates a company and defines goals.
2. The board creates and manages agents in an org tree.
3. Agents receive and execute tasks via heartbeat invocations.
4. All work is tracked through tasks/comments with audit visibility.
5. Token/cost usage is reported and budget limits can stop work.
6. The board can intervene anywhere (pause agents/tasks, override decisions).
Success means one operator can run a small AI-native company end-to-end with clear visibility and control.
## 3. Explicit V1 Product Decisions
These decisions close open questions from `SPEC.md` for V1.
| Topic | V1 Decision |
|---|---|
| Tenancy | Single-tenant deployment, multi-company data model |
| Company model | Company is first-order; all business entities are company-scoped |
| Board | Single human board operator per deployment |
| Org graph | Strict tree (`reports_to` nullable root); no multi-manager reporting |
| Visibility | Full visibility to board and all agents in same company |
| Communication | Tasks + comments only (no separate chat system) |
| Task ownership | Single assignee; atomic checkout required for `in_progress` transition |
[codex] Add source-scoped recovery actions (#5599)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is a control plane for autonomous AI companies, where work
must end with a clear disposition rather than ambiguous agent liveness.
> - Recovery currently detects stalled or missing-next-step issues, but
source issue recovery can become split across child recovery issues,
blockers, and comments.
> - That makes it harder for operators and agents to see who owns
recovery and what exact action is needed on the original issue.
> - Source-scoped recovery actions give the original issue a first-class
active recovery state with owner, evidence, wake policy, and resolution
outcome.
> - This pull request adds the recovery-action data model, backend
reconciliation and resolution APIs, and board UI indicators/actions.
> - The benefit is clearer stalled-work recovery without losing source
issue context or relying on comments as the liveness path.
## What Changed
- Added the `issue_recovery_actions` schema, shared
types/constants/validators, and an idempotent
`0084_issue_recovery_actions` migration ordered after current `master`
migrations.
- Updated stranded/missing-disposition recovery to create source-scoped
recovery actions, wake the recovery owner on the source issue, and avoid
locking the source issue for recovery-action wakes.
- Added API support for reading active recovery actions on issue
detail/list surfaces and resolving them with restored, blocked,
cancelled, or false-positive outcomes.
- Require blocked recovery resolutions to have an unresolved first-class
blocker, and removed the UI shortcut that could mark recovery blocked
without a blocker selection path.
- Surfaced recovery indicators/actions in the issue UI, blocker notices,
active run panels, issue rows, and Storybook coverage.
- Updated docs and focused tests for recovery semantics, ownership,
races, stale comments, and UI behavior.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issue-recovery-actions.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueRecoveryActionCard.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssueBlockedNotice.test.tsx ui/src/api/issues.test.ts`
— 5 files, 72 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck` — passed, including
migration numbering check.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed.
- Follow-up verification after blocker-resolution guard: `pnpm exec
vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-recovery-actions.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueRecoveryActionCard.test.tsx
ui/src/api/issues.test.ts` — 3 files, 27 tests passed.
- Follow-up `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed.
- Follow-up `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed.
- UI states are available in
`ui/storybook/stories/source-issue-recovery.stories.tsx`; screenshot
capture helper is `scripts/screenshot-recovery-card.cjs`.
## Risks
- Medium: recovery behavior changes from child recovery issue ownership
toward source-scoped actions, so operators may see stalled-work state in
new places.
- Migration risk is mitigated by using the next migration slot after
`master` and making the table/constraints/index creation idempotent for
anyone who previously applied the old branch-local
`0082_dizzy_master_mold` migration.
- Existing child recovery issue paths are still guarded for
already-created recovery issues, but new source-scoped flows should be
watched in CI and Greptile review.
> 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, tool use enabled for shell, Git,
GitHub, and local test execution. Context window not exposed by the
runtime.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-05-12 09:37:15 -05:00
| Recovery | Liveness/watchdog recovery preserves explicit ownership: retry lost execution continuity where safe, otherwise open visible source-scoped recovery actions by default, use issue-backed recovery only for independent repair work, or require human escalation (see `doc/execution-semantics.md` ) |
[codex] Refresh docs and agent skills (#4693)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane
> - Contributors and agents need docs and skills that match the current
V1 behavior
> - The source branch included documentation updates alongside
implementation work
> - Keeping docs and skill guidance separate makes the implementation PR
easier to review
> - This pull request refreshes the V1 docs and agent-operating guidance
without changing runtime behavior
> - The benefit is current contributor guidance that can merge
independently from code changes
## What Changed
- Refreshed V1 product, goal, implementation, database, and development
documentation.
- Updated the Paperclip heartbeat skill guidance and create-agent skill
references.
- Added the Paperclip plan-to-task conversion skill.
- Updated release changelog skill guidance.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` passed in the PR worktree
after the Greptile fix.
- Greptile Review passed on head `673317ed` with zero unresolved review
threads.
- GitHub PR checks passed on head `673317ed`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`,
and `security/snyk (cryppadotta)`.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk because this branch only changes docs and skill
guidance.
- Documentation may need follow-up wording adjustments if reviewers want
a different framing for V1 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, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub
workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness.
## 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>
2026-04-28 16:12:03 -05:00
| Agent adapters | Built-in `process` , `http` , local CLI/session adapters, and OpenClaw gateway support; external adapters can also be loaded through the adapter plugin flow |
| Plugin framework | Local/self-hosted early plugin runtime is in scope; cloud marketplace and packaged public distribution remain out of scope |
2026-02-23 14:41:35 -06:00
| Auth | Mode-dependent human auth (`local_trusted` implicit board in current code; authenticated mode uses sessions), API keys for agents |
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
| Budget period | Monthly UTC calendar window |
| Budget enforcement | Soft alerts + hard limit auto-pause |
2026-02-23 14:41:35 -06:00
| Deployment modes | Canonical model is `local_trusted` + `authenticated` with `private/public` exposure policy (see `doc/DEPLOYMENT-MODES.md` ) |
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
## 4. Current Baseline (Repo Snapshot)
As of 2026-02-17, the repo already includes:
- Node + TypeScript backend with REST CRUD for `agents` , `projects` , `goals` , `issues` , `activity`
- React UI pages for dashboard/agents/projects/goals/issues lists
2026-02-18 11:45:43 -06:00
- PostgreSQL schema via Drizzle with embedded PostgreSQL fallback when `DATABASE_URL` is unset
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
V1 implementation extends this baseline into a company-centric, governance-aware control plane.
## 5. V1 Scope
## 5.1 In Scope
- Company lifecycle (create/list/get/update/archive)
- Goal hierarchy linked to company mission
- Agent lifecycle with org structure and adapter configuration
- Task lifecycle with parent/child hierarchy and comments
- Atomic task checkout and explicit task status transitions
- Board approvals for hires and CEO strategy proposal
- Heartbeat invocation, status tracking, and cancellation
- Cost event ingestion and rollups (agent/task/project/company)
- Budget settings and hard-stop enforcement
- Board web UI for dashboard, org chart, tasks, agents, approvals, costs
- Agent-facing API contract (task read/write, heartbeat report, cost report)
- Auditable activity log for all mutating actions
## 5.2 Out of Scope (V1)
[codex] Refresh docs and agent skills (#4693)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane
> - Contributors and agents need docs and skills that match the current
V1 behavior
> - The source branch included documentation updates alongside
implementation work
> - Keeping docs and skill guidance separate makes the implementation PR
easier to review
> - This pull request refreshes the V1 docs and agent-operating guidance
without changing runtime behavior
> - The benefit is current contributor guidance that can merge
independently from code changes
## What Changed
- Refreshed V1 product, goal, implementation, database, and development
documentation.
- Updated the Paperclip heartbeat skill guidance and create-agent skill
references.
- Added the Paperclip plan-to-task conversion skill.
- Updated release changelog skill guidance.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` passed in the PR worktree
after the Greptile fix.
- Greptile Review passed on head `673317ed` with zero unresolved review
threads.
- GitHub PR checks passed on head `673317ed`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`,
and `security/snyk (cryppadotta)`.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk because this branch only changes docs and skill
guidance.
- Documentation may need follow-up wording adjustments if reviewers want
a different framing for V1 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, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub
workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness.
## 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>
2026-04-28 16:12:03 -05:00
- Cloud-grade plugin marketplace/distribution beyond the local/self-hosted plugin runtime
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
- Revenue/expense accounting beyond model/token costs
- Knowledge base subsystem
- Public marketplace (ClipHub)
- Multi-board governance or role-based human permission granularity
- Automatic self-healing orchestration (auto-reassign/retry planners)
## 6. Architecture
## 6.1 Runtime Components
- `server/` : REST API, auth, orchestration services
- `ui/` : Board operator interface
2026-02-18 11:45:43 -06:00
- `packages/db/` : Drizzle schema, migrations, DB clients (Postgres)
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
- `packages/shared/` : Shared API types, validators, constants
## 6.2 Data Stores
- Primary: PostgreSQL
2026-02-20 07:10:58 -06:00
- Local default: embedded PostgreSQL at `~/.paperclip/instances/default/db`
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
- Optional local prod-like: Docker Postgres
- Optional hosted: Supabase/Postgres-compatible
2026-02-20 11:28:58 -06:00
- File/object storage:
- local default: `~/.paperclip/instances/default/data/storage` (`local_disk` )
- cloud: S3-compatible object storage (`s3` )
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
## 6.3 Background Processing
A lightweight scheduler/worker in the server process handles:
- heartbeat trigger checks
- stuck run detection
- budget threshold checks
Separate queue infrastructure is not required for V1.
## 7. Canonical Data Model (V1)
All core tables include `id` , `created_at` , `updated_at` unless noted.
## 7.0 Auth Tables
Human auth tables (`users` , `sessions` , and provider-specific auth artifacts) are managed by the selected auth library. This spec treats them as required dependencies and references `users.id` where user attribution is needed.
## 7.1 `companies`
- `id` uuid pk
- `name` text not null
- `description` text null
- `status` enum: `active | paused | archived`
[codex] Refresh docs and agent skills (#4693)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane
> - Contributors and agents need docs and skills that match the current
V1 behavior
> - The source branch included documentation updates alongside
implementation work
> - Keeping docs and skill guidance separate makes the implementation PR
easier to review
> - This pull request refreshes the V1 docs and agent-operating guidance
without changing runtime behavior
> - The benefit is current contributor guidance that can merge
independently from code changes
## What Changed
- Refreshed V1 product, goal, implementation, database, and development
documentation.
- Updated the Paperclip heartbeat skill guidance and create-agent skill
references.
- Added the Paperclip plan-to-task conversion skill.
- Updated release changelog skill guidance.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` passed in the PR worktree
after the Greptile fix.
- Greptile Review passed on head `673317ed` with zero unresolved review
threads.
- GitHub PR checks passed on head `673317ed`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`,
and `security/snyk (cryppadotta)`.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk because this branch only changes docs and skill
guidance.
- Documentation may need follow-up wording adjustments if reviewers want
a different framing for V1 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, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub
workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness.
## 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>
2026-04-28 16:12:03 -05:00
- `pause_reason` text null
- `paused_at` timestamptz null
- `issue_prefix` text not null
- `issue_counter` int not null
- `budget_monthly_cents` int not null default 0
- `spent_monthly_cents` int not null default 0
- `attachment_max_bytes` int not null
- `require_board_approval_for_new_agents` boolean not null default false
- feedback sharing consent fields
- branding fields such as `brand_color`
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
Invariant: every business record belongs to exactly one company.
## 7.2 `agents`
- `id` uuid pk
- `company_id` uuid fk `companies.id` not null
- `name` text not null
- `role` text not null
- `title` text null
[codex] Refresh docs and agent skills (#4693)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane
> - Contributors and agents need docs and skills that match the current
V1 behavior
> - The source branch included documentation updates alongside
implementation work
> - Keeping docs and skill guidance separate makes the implementation PR
easier to review
> - This pull request refreshes the V1 docs and agent-operating guidance
without changing runtime behavior
> - The benefit is current contributor guidance that can merge
independently from code changes
## What Changed
- Refreshed V1 product, goal, implementation, database, and development
documentation.
- Updated the Paperclip heartbeat skill guidance and create-agent skill
references.
- Added the Paperclip plan-to-task conversion skill.
- Updated release changelog skill guidance.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` passed in the PR worktree
after the Greptile fix.
- Greptile Review passed on head `673317ed` with zero unresolved review
threads.
- GitHub PR checks passed on head `673317ed`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`,
and `security/snyk (cryppadotta)`.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk because this branch only changes docs and skill
guidance.
- Documentation may need follow-up wording adjustments if reviewers want
a different framing for V1 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, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub
workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness.
## 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>
2026-04-28 16:12:03 -05:00
- `icon` text null
- `status` enum: `active | paused | idle | running | error | pending_approval | terminated`
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
- `reports_to` uuid fk `agents.id` null
- `capabilities` text null
[codex] Refresh docs and agent skills (#4693)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane
> - Contributors and agents need docs and skills that match the current
V1 behavior
> - The source branch included documentation updates alongside
implementation work
> - Keeping docs and skill guidance separate makes the implementation PR
easier to review
> - This pull request refreshes the V1 docs and agent-operating guidance
without changing runtime behavior
> - The benefit is current contributor guidance that can merge
independently from code changes
## What Changed
- Refreshed V1 product, goal, implementation, database, and development
documentation.
- Updated the Paperclip heartbeat skill guidance and create-agent skill
references.
- Added the Paperclip plan-to-task conversion skill.
- Updated release changelog skill guidance.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` passed in the PR worktree
after the Greptile fix.
- Greptile Review passed on head `673317ed` with zero unresolved review
threads.
- GitHub PR checks passed on head `673317ed`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`,
and `security/snyk (cryppadotta)`.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk because this branch only changes docs and skill
guidance.
- Documentation may need follow-up wording adjustments if reviewers want
a different framing for V1 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, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub
workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness.
## 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>
2026-04-28 16:12:03 -05:00
- `adapter_type` text; built-ins include `process` , `http` , `claude_local` , `codex_local` , `gemini_local` , `opencode_local` , `pi_local` , `cursor` , and `openclaw_gateway`
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
- `adapter_config` jsonb not null
Add cheap model profiles for local adapters (#4881)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is a control plane for autonomous AI companies, where
adapters are the boundary between the board, agents, and execution
runtimes.
> - Local adapters currently expose a primary runtime configuration, but
operators often need a cheaper model lane for routine or low-risk work.
> - That cheap lane has to stay adapter-owned: runtime profile settings
should not mutate the primary adapter config or bypass existing
auth/secret mediation.
> - Issue creation also needs an ergonomic way to request primary,
cheap, or custom model behavior for a selected assignee.
> - This pull request adds a first-class `cheap` model profile contract
across adapter capabilities, heartbeat config resolution, agent
configuration, and issue creation.
> - The benefit is cheaper task execution can be configured and
requested explicitly while preserving adapter boundaries, secret
handling, and audit visibility.
## What Changed
- Added adapter model-profile capability metadata and a `cheap` profile
contract for supported local adapters.
- Applied `runtimeConfig.modelProfiles.cheap.adapterConfig` during
heartbeat config resolution, including requested/applied/fallback run
metadata.
- Added agent configuration UI for cheap model profile settings without
writing those settings into primary `adapterConfig`.
- Added New Issue assignee model lane controls for Primary / Cheap /
Custom and request payload handling.
- Added run ledger profile badges and Storybook stories for the new
cheap-lane UI states.
- Added tests for validators, heartbeat model profile application,
permission/secret mediation, UI payload helpers, and run ledger
rendering.
- Added committed UI verification screenshots under
`docs/pr-screenshots/pap-2837/`.
- Addressed Greptile review feedback around cheap-profile defaults,
shared profile types, and fallback test data.
## Verification
Local:
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/adapter-registry.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/agent-permissions-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-model-profile.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueRunLedger.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/agent-config-patch.test.ts
ui/src/lib/issue-assignee-overrides.test.ts
ui/src/lib/new-agent-runtime-config.test.ts` — passed, 8 files / 103
tests.
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/lib/new-agent-runtime-config.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueRunLedger.test.tsx` — passed after
Greptile/rebase follow-up, 2 files / 17 tests.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed after
Greptile/rebase follow-up.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm build` — passed.
- `pnpm test:run` — did not complete successfully in this local
worktree: it stopped in pre-existing `@paperclipai/adapter-utils`
sandbox/SSH fixture suites outside this PR diff. Failures were 5s local
timeouts plus `git init -b` unsupported by this machine's Git 2.21.0.
The branch-specific targeted suites above passed.
- Branch was fetched/rebased onto `public-gh/master`; `git rev-list
--left-right --count public-gh/master...HEAD` reports `0 9`.
Remote PR checks on latest head
`e30bf399146451c86cee98ed528d51d33fa5af5a`:
- `policy` — passed.
- `verify` — passed.
- `e2e` — passed.
- `Greptile Review` — passed, confidence score 5/5; Greptile review
threads resolved.
- `security/snyk (cryppadotta)` — passed.
Screenshots:
- [New issue cheap lane
desktop](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/PAP-2837-plan-cheap-model-for-adapters-that-can-support-it/docs/pr-screenshots/pap-2837/newissue-cheap-desktop.png)
- [New issue custom lane
desktop](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/PAP-2837-plan-cheap-model-for-adapters-that-can-support-it/docs/pr-screenshots/pap-2837/newissue-custom-desktop.png)
- [New issue unsupported adapter
desktop](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/PAP-2837-plan-cheap-model-for-adapters-that-can-support-it/docs/pr-screenshots/pap-2837/newissue-unsupported-desktop.png)
- [Run ledger model profile badges
desktop](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/PAP-2837-plan-cheap-model-for-adapters-that-can-support-it/docs/pr-screenshots/pap-2837/runledger-profile-badges-desktop.png)
- Mobile variants are also in `docs/pr-screenshots/pap-2837/`.
## Risks
- Medium: heartbeat config mediation now merges runtime model profiles
into adapter configs, so adapter secret normalization and host-command
restrictions must keep covering nested config paths.
- Medium: the UI adds another issue creation choice; unsupported
adapters must keep hiding the cheap lane and preserve primary behavior.
- Low migration risk: no database migration is included.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex coding agent using GPT-5-class reasoning with repo tool use
and command execution. Exact served model/context window was not exposed
by the runtime.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [ ] 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>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-30 15:32:04 -05:00
- `runtime_config` jsonb not null default `{}` ; may include Paperclip runtime policy such as `modelProfiles.cheap.adapterConfig` for an optional low-cost model lane that does not change the primary adapter config
[codex] Refresh docs and agent skills (#4693)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane
> - Contributors and agents need docs and skills that match the current
V1 behavior
> - The source branch included documentation updates alongside
implementation work
> - Keeping docs and skill guidance separate makes the implementation PR
easier to review
> - This pull request refreshes the V1 docs and agent-operating guidance
without changing runtime behavior
> - The benefit is current contributor guidance that can merge
independently from code changes
## What Changed
- Refreshed V1 product, goal, implementation, database, and development
documentation.
- Updated the Paperclip heartbeat skill guidance and create-agent skill
references.
- Added the Paperclip plan-to-task conversion skill.
- Updated release changelog skill guidance.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` passed in the PR worktree
after the Greptile fix.
- Greptile Review passed on head `673317ed` with zero unresolved review
threads.
- GitHub PR checks passed on head `673317ed`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`,
and `security/snyk (cryppadotta)`.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk because this branch only changes docs and skill
guidance.
- Documentation may need follow-up wording adjustments if reviewers want
a different framing for V1 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, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub
workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness.
## 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>
2026-04-28 16:12:03 -05:00
- `default_environment_id` uuid fk `environments.id` null
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
- `context_mode` enum: `thin | fat` default `thin`
- `budget_monthly_cents` int not null default 0
- `spent_monthly_cents` int not null default 0
[codex] Refresh docs and agent skills (#4693)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane
> - Contributors and agents need docs and skills that match the current
V1 behavior
> - The source branch included documentation updates alongside
implementation work
> - Keeping docs and skill guidance separate makes the implementation PR
easier to review
> - This pull request refreshes the V1 docs and agent-operating guidance
without changing runtime behavior
> - The benefit is current contributor guidance that can merge
independently from code changes
## What Changed
- Refreshed V1 product, goal, implementation, database, and development
documentation.
- Updated the Paperclip heartbeat skill guidance and create-agent skill
references.
- Added the Paperclip plan-to-task conversion skill.
- Updated release changelog skill guidance.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` passed in the PR worktree
after the Greptile fix.
- Greptile Review passed on head `673317ed` with zero unresolved review
threads.
- GitHub PR checks passed on head `673317ed`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`,
and `security/snyk (cryppadotta)`.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk because this branch only changes docs and skill
guidance.
- Documentation may need follow-up wording adjustments if reviewers want
a different framing for V1 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, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub
workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness.
## 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>
2026-04-28 16:12:03 -05:00
- pause fields: `pause_reason` , `paused_at`
- `permissions` jsonb not null default `{}`
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
- `last_heartbeat_at` timestamptz null
[codex] Refresh docs and agent skills (#4693)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane
> - Contributors and agents need docs and skills that match the current
V1 behavior
> - The source branch included documentation updates alongside
implementation work
> - Keeping docs and skill guidance separate makes the implementation PR
easier to review
> - This pull request refreshes the V1 docs and agent-operating guidance
without changing runtime behavior
> - The benefit is current contributor guidance that can merge
independently from code changes
## What Changed
- Refreshed V1 product, goal, implementation, database, and development
documentation.
- Updated the Paperclip heartbeat skill guidance and create-agent skill
references.
- Added the Paperclip plan-to-task conversion skill.
- Updated release changelog skill guidance.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` passed in the PR worktree
after the Greptile fix.
- Greptile Review passed on head `673317ed` with zero unresolved review
threads.
- GitHub PR checks passed on head `673317ed`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`,
and `security/snyk (cryppadotta)`.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk because this branch only changes docs and skill
guidance.
- Documentation may need follow-up wording adjustments if reviewers want
a different framing for V1 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, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub
workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness.
## 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>
2026-04-28 16:12:03 -05:00
- `metadata` jsonb null
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
Invariants:
- agent and manager must be in same company
- no cycles in reporting tree
- `terminated` agents cannot be resumed
## 7.3 `agent_api_keys`
- `id` uuid pk
- `agent_id` uuid fk `agents.id` not null
- `company_id` uuid fk `companies.id` not null
- `name` text not null
- `key_hash` text not null
- `last_used_at` timestamptz null
- `revoked_at` timestamptz null
Invariant: plaintext key shown once at creation; only hash stored.
## 7.4 `goals`
- `id` uuid pk
- `company_id` uuid fk not null
- `title` text not null
- `description` text null
- `level` enum: `company | team | agent | task`
- `parent_id` uuid fk `goals.id` null
- `owner_agent_id` uuid fk `agents.id` null
- `status` enum: `planned | active | achieved | cancelled`
Invariant: at least one root `company` level goal per company.
## 7.5 `projects`
- `id` uuid pk
- `company_id` uuid fk not null
- `goal_id` uuid fk `goals.id` null
- `name` text not null
- `description` text null
- `status` enum: `backlog | planned | in_progress | completed | cancelled`
- `lead_agent_id` uuid fk `agents.id` null
- `target_date` date null
2026-04-06 09:34:15 -05:00
- `env` jsonb null (same secret-aware env binding format used by agent config)
Invariant:
- project env is merged into run environment for issues in that project and overrides conflicting agent env keys before Paperclip runtime-owned keys are injected
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
## 7.6 `issues` (core task entity)
- `id` uuid pk
- `company_id` uuid fk not null
- `project_id` uuid fk `projects.id` null
[codex] Refresh docs and agent skills (#4693)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane
> - Contributors and agents need docs and skills that match the current
V1 behavior
> - The source branch included documentation updates alongside
implementation work
> - Keeping docs and skill guidance separate makes the implementation PR
easier to review
> - This pull request refreshes the V1 docs and agent-operating guidance
without changing runtime behavior
> - The benefit is current contributor guidance that can merge
independently from code changes
## What Changed
- Refreshed V1 product, goal, implementation, database, and development
documentation.
- Updated the Paperclip heartbeat skill guidance and create-agent skill
references.
- Added the Paperclip plan-to-task conversion skill.
- Updated release changelog skill guidance.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` passed in the PR worktree
after the Greptile fix.
- Greptile Review passed on head `673317ed` with zero unresolved review
threads.
- GitHub PR checks passed on head `673317ed`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`,
and `security/snyk (cryppadotta)`.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk because this branch only changes docs and skill
guidance.
- Documentation may need follow-up wording adjustments if reviewers want
a different framing for V1 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, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub
workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness.
## 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>
2026-04-28 16:12:03 -05:00
- `project_workspace_id` uuid fk `project_workspaces.id` null
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
- `goal_id` uuid fk `goals.id` null
- `parent_id` uuid fk `issues.id` null
- `title` text not null
- `description` text null
- `status` enum: `backlog | todo | in_progress | in_review | done | blocked | cancelled`
- `priority` enum: `critical | high | medium | low`
- `assignee_agent_id` uuid fk `agents.id` null
[codex] Refresh docs and agent skills (#4693)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane
> - Contributors and agents need docs and skills that match the current
V1 behavior
> - The source branch included documentation updates alongside
implementation work
> - Keeping docs and skill guidance separate makes the implementation PR
easier to review
> - This pull request refreshes the V1 docs and agent-operating guidance
without changing runtime behavior
> - The benefit is current contributor guidance that can merge
independently from code changes
## What Changed
- Refreshed V1 product, goal, implementation, database, and development
documentation.
- Updated the Paperclip heartbeat skill guidance and create-agent skill
references.
- Added the Paperclip plan-to-task conversion skill.
- Updated release changelog skill guidance.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` passed in the PR worktree
after the Greptile fix.
- Greptile Review passed on head `673317ed` with zero unresolved review
threads.
- GitHub PR checks passed on head `673317ed`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`,
and `security/snyk (cryppadotta)`.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk because this branch only changes docs and skill
guidance.
- Documentation may need follow-up wording adjustments if reviewers want
a different framing for V1 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, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub
workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness.
## 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>
2026-04-28 16:12:03 -05:00
- `assignee_user_id` text null
- checkout/execution locks: `checkout_run_id` , `execution_run_id` , `execution_agent_name_key` , `execution_locked_at`
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
- `created_by_agent_id` uuid fk `agents.id` null
- `created_by_user_id` uuid fk `users.id` null
[codex] Refresh docs and agent skills (#4693)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane
> - Contributors and agents need docs and skills that match the current
V1 behavior
> - The source branch included documentation updates alongside
implementation work
> - Keeping docs and skill guidance separate makes the implementation PR
easier to review
> - This pull request refreshes the V1 docs and agent-operating guidance
without changing runtime behavior
> - The benefit is current contributor guidance that can merge
independently from code changes
## What Changed
- Refreshed V1 product, goal, implementation, database, and development
documentation.
- Updated the Paperclip heartbeat skill guidance and create-agent skill
references.
- Added the Paperclip plan-to-task conversion skill.
- Updated release changelog skill guidance.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` passed in the PR worktree
after the Greptile fix.
- Greptile Review passed on head `673317ed` with zero unresolved review
threads.
- GitHub PR checks passed on head `673317ed`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`,
and `security/snyk (cryppadotta)`.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk because this branch only changes docs and skill
guidance.
- Documentation may need follow-up wording adjustments if reviewers want
a different framing for V1 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, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub
workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness.
## 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>
2026-04-28 16:12:03 -05:00
- identifier fields: `issue_number` , `identifier`
- origin fields: `origin_kind` , `origin_id` , `origin_run_id` , `origin_fingerprint`
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
- `request_depth` int not null default 0
- `billing_code` text null
[codex] Refresh docs and agent skills (#4693)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane
> - Contributors and agents need docs and skills that match the current
V1 behavior
> - The source branch included documentation updates alongside
implementation work
> - Keeping docs and skill guidance separate makes the implementation PR
easier to review
> - This pull request refreshes the V1 docs and agent-operating guidance
without changing runtime behavior
> - The benefit is current contributor guidance that can merge
independently from code changes
## What Changed
- Refreshed V1 product, goal, implementation, database, and development
documentation.
- Updated the Paperclip heartbeat skill guidance and create-agent skill
references.
- Added the Paperclip plan-to-task conversion skill.
- Updated release changelog skill guidance.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` passed in the PR worktree
after the Greptile fix.
- Greptile Review passed on head `673317ed` with zero unresolved review
threads.
- GitHub PR checks passed on head `673317ed`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`,
and `security/snyk (cryppadotta)`.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk because this branch only changes docs and skill
guidance.
- Documentation may need follow-up wording adjustments if reviewers want
a different framing for V1 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, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub
workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness.
## 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>
2026-04-28 16:12:03 -05:00
- `assignee_adapter_overrides` jsonb null
- `execution_policy` jsonb null
- `execution_state` jsonb null
- execution workspace fields: `execution_workspace_id` , `execution_workspace_preference` , `execution_workspace_settings`
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
- `started_at` timestamptz null
- `completed_at` timestamptz null
- `cancelled_at` timestamptz null
[codex] Refresh docs and agent skills (#4693)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane
> - Contributors and agents need docs and skills that match the current
V1 behavior
> - The source branch included documentation updates alongside
implementation work
> - Keeping docs and skill guidance separate makes the implementation PR
easier to review
> - This pull request refreshes the V1 docs and agent-operating guidance
without changing runtime behavior
> - The benefit is current contributor guidance that can merge
independently from code changes
## What Changed
- Refreshed V1 product, goal, implementation, database, and development
documentation.
- Updated the Paperclip heartbeat skill guidance and create-agent skill
references.
- Added the Paperclip plan-to-task conversion skill.
- Updated release changelog skill guidance.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` passed in the PR worktree
after the Greptile fix.
- Greptile Review passed on head `673317ed` with zero unresolved review
threads.
- GitHub PR checks passed on head `673317ed`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`,
and `security/snyk (cryppadotta)`.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk because this branch only changes docs and skill
guidance.
- Documentation may need follow-up wording adjustments if reviewers want
a different framing for V1 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, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub
workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness.
## 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>
2026-04-28 16:12:03 -05:00
- `hidden_at` timestamptz null
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
Invariants:
- single assignee only
- task must trace to company goal chain via `goal_id` , `parent_id` , or project-goal linkage
- `in_progress` requires assignee
- terminal states: `done | cancelled`
## 7.7 `issue_comments`
- `id` uuid pk
- `company_id` uuid fk not null
- `issue_id` uuid fk `issues.id` not null
- `author_agent_id` uuid fk `agents.id` null
- `author_user_id` uuid fk `users.id` null
- `body` text not null
## 7.8 `heartbeat_runs`
- `id` uuid pk
- `company_id` uuid fk not null
- `agent_id` uuid fk not null
- `invocation_source` enum: `scheduler | manual | callback`
- `status` enum: `queued | running | succeeded | failed | cancelled | timed_out`
- `started_at` timestamptz null
- `finished_at` timestamptz null
- `error` text null
- `external_run_id` text null
- `context_snapshot` jsonb null
## 7.9 `cost_events`
- `id` uuid pk
- `company_id` uuid fk not null
- `agent_id` uuid fk `agents.id` not null
- `issue_id` uuid fk `issues.id` null
- `project_id` uuid fk `projects.id` null
- `goal_id` uuid fk `goals.id` null
- `billing_code` text null
- `provider` text not null
- `model` text not null
- `input_tokens` int not null default 0
- `output_tokens` int not null default 0
- `cost_cents` int not null
- `occurred_at` timestamptz not null
Invariant: each event must attach to agent and company; rollups are aggregation, never manually edited.
## 7.10 `approvals`
- `id` uuid pk
- `company_id` uuid fk not null
[codex] Refresh docs and agent skills (#4693)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane
> - Contributors and agents need docs and skills that match the current
V1 behavior
> - The source branch included documentation updates alongside
implementation work
> - Keeping docs and skill guidance separate makes the implementation PR
easier to review
> - This pull request refreshes the V1 docs and agent-operating guidance
without changing runtime behavior
> - The benefit is current contributor guidance that can merge
independently from code changes
## What Changed
- Refreshed V1 product, goal, implementation, database, and development
documentation.
- Updated the Paperclip heartbeat skill guidance and create-agent skill
references.
- Added the Paperclip plan-to-task conversion skill.
- Updated release changelog skill guidance.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` passed in the PR worktree
after the Greptile fix.
- Greptile Review passed on head `673317ed` with zero unresolved review
threads.
- GitHub PR checks passed on head `673317ed`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`,
and `security/snyk (cryppadotta)`.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk because this branch only changes docs and skill
guidance.
- Documentation may need follow-up wording adjustments if reviewers want
a different framing for V1 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, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub
workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness.
## 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>
2026-04-28 16:12:03 -05:00
- `type` enum: `hire_agent | approve_ceo_strategy | budget_override_required | request_board_approval`
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
- `requested_by_agent_id` uuid fk `agents.id` null
- `requested_by_user_id` uuid fk `users.id` null
[codex] Refresh docs and agent skills (#4693)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane
> - Contributors and agents need docs and skills that match the current
V1 behavior
> - The source branch included documentation updates alongside
implementation work
> - Keeping docs and skill guidance separate makes the implementation PR
easier to review
> - This pull request refreshes the V1 docs and agent-operating guidance
without changing runtime behavior
> - The benefit is current contributor guidance that can merge
independently from code changes
## What Changed
- Refreshed V1 product, goal, implementation, database, and development
documentation.
- Updated the Paperclip heartbeat skill guidance and create-agent skill
references.
- Added the Paperclip plan-to-task conversion skill.
- Updated release changelog skill guidance.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` passed in the PR worktree
after the Greptile fix.
- Greptile Review passed on head `673317ed` with zero unresolved review
threads.
- GitHub PR checks passed on head `673317ed`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`,
and `security/snyk (cryppadotta)`.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk because this branch only changes docs and skill
guidance.
- Documentation may need follow-up wording adjustments if reviewers want
a different framing for V1 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, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub
workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness.
## 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>
2026-04-28 16:12:03 -05:00
- `status` enum: `pending | revision_requested | approved | rejected | cancelled`
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
- `payload` jsonb not null
- `decision_note` text null
- `decided_by_user_id` uuid fk `users.id` null
- `decided_at` timestamptz null
## 7.11 `activity_log`
- `id` uuid pk
- `company_id` uuid fk not null
- `actor_type` enum: `agent | user | system`
- `actor_id` uuid/text not null
- `action` text not null
- `entity_type` text not null
- `entity_id` uuid/text not null
- `details` jsonb null
- `created_at` timestamptz not null default now()
2026-02-19 15:44:11 -06:00
## 7.12 `company_secrets` + `company_secret_versions`
- Secret values are not stored inline in `agents.adapter_config.env` .
- Agent env entries should use secret refs for sensitive values.
- `company_secrets` tracks identity/provider metadata per company.
- `company_secret_versions` stores encrypted/reference material per version.
- Default provider in local deployments: `local_encrypted` .
Operational policy:
- Config read APIs redact sensitive plain values.
- Activity and approval payloads must not persist raw sensitive values.
- Config revisions may include redacted placeholders; such revisions are non-restorable for redacted fields.
## 7.13 Required Indexes
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
- `agents(company_id, status)`
- `agents(company_id, reports_to)`
- `issues(company_id, status)`
- `issues(company_id, assignee_agent_id, status)`
- `issues(company_id, parent_id)`
- `issues(company_id, project_id)`
- `cost_events(company_id, occurred_at)`
- `cost_events(company_id, agent_id, occurred_at)`
- `heartbeat_runs(company_id, agent_id, started_at desc)`
- `approvals(company_id, status, type)`
- `activity_log(company_id, created_at desc)`
2026-02-20 11:28:58 -06:00
- `assets(company_id, created_at desc)`
- `assets(company_id, object_key)` unique
- `issue_attachments(company_id, issue_id)`
2026-02-19 15:44:11 -06:00
- `company_secrets(company_id, name)` unique
- `company_secret_versions(secret_id, version)` unique
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
2026-02-20 11:28:58 -06:00
## 7.14 `assets` + `issue_attachments`
- `assets` stores provider-backed object metadata (not inline bytes):
- `id` uuid pk
- `company_id` uuid fk not null
- `provider` enum/text (`local_disk | s3` )
- `object_key` text not null
- `content_type` text not null
- `byte_size` int not null
- `sha256` text not null
- `original_filename` text null
- `created_by_agent_id` uuid fk null
- `created_by_user_id` uuid/text fk null
- `issue_attachments` links assets to issues/comments:
- `id` uuid pk
- `company_id` uuid fk not null
- `issue_id` uuid fk not null
- `asset_id` uuid fk not null
- `issue_comment_id` uuid fk null
2026-03-13 21:30:48 -05:00
## 7.15 `documents` + `document_revisions` + `issue_documents`
- `documents` stores editable text-first documents:
- `id` uuid pk
- `company_id` uuid fk not null
- `title` text null
- `format` text not null (`markdown` )
- `latest_body` text not null
- `latest_revision_id` uuid null
- `latest_revision_number` int not null
- `created_by_agent_id` uuid fk null
- `created_by_user_id` uuid/text fk null
- `updated_by_agent_id` uuid fk null
- `updated_by_user_id` uuid/text fk null
- `document_revisions` stores append-only history:
- `id` uuid pk
- `company_id` uuid fk not null
- `document_id` uuid fk not null
- `revision_number` int not null
- `body` text not null
- `change_summary` text null
- `issue_documents` links documents to issues with a stable workflow key:
- `id` uuid pk
- `company_id` uuid fk not null
- `issue_id` uuid fk not null
- `document_id` uuid fk not null
- `key` text not null (`plan` , `design` , `notes` , etc.)
[codex] Refresh docs and agent skills (#4693)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane
> - Contributors and agents need docs and skills that match the current
V1 behavior
> - The source branch included documentation updates alongside
implementation work
> - Keeping docs and skill guidance separate makes the implementation PR
easier to review
> - This pull request refreshes the V1 docs and agent-operating guidance
without changing runtime behavior
> - The benefit is current contributor guidance that can merge
independently from code changes
## What Changed
- Refreshed V1 product, goal, implementation, database, and development
documentation.
- Updated the Paperclip heartbeat skill guidance and create-agent skill
references.
- Added the Paperclip plan-to-task conversion skill.
- Updated release changelog skill guidance.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` passed in the PR worktree
after the Greptile fix.
- Greptile Review passed on head `673317ed` with zero unresolved review
threads.
- GitHub PR checks passed on head `673317ed`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`,
and `security/snyk (cryppadotta)`.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk because this branch only changes docs and skill
guidance.
- Documentation may need follow-up wording adjustments if reviewers want
a different framing for V1 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, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub
workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness.
## 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>
2026-04-28 16:12:03 -05:00
## 7.16 Current Implementation Addenda
The current implementation includes additional V1-control-plane tables beyond the original February snapshot:
- Issue structure and review: `issue_relations` for blockers, `labels` /`issue_labels` , `issue_thread_interactions` , `issue_approvals` , `issue_execution_decisions` , `issue_work_products` , `issue_inbox_archives` , `issue_read_states` , and issue reference mention indexes.
- Execution and workspace control: `execution_workspaces` , `project_workspaces` , `workspace_runtime_services` , `workspace_operations` , `environments` , `environment_leases` , `agent_task_sessions` , `agent_runtime_state` , `agent_wakeup_requests` , heartbeat events, and watchdog decision tables.
- Plugins and routines: `plugins` , plugin config/state/entities/jobs/logs/webhooks, plugin database namespaces/migrations, plugin company settings, and `routines` .
- Access and operations: company memberships, instance roles, principal permission grants, invites, join requests, board API keys, CLI auth challenges, budget policies/incidents, feedback exports/votes, company skills, sidebar preferences, and company logos.
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
## 8. State Machines
## 8.1 Agent Status
Allowed transitions:
- `idle -> running`
- `running -> idle`
- `running -> error`
- `error -> idle`
- `idle -> paused`
- `running -> paused` (requires cancel flow)
- `paused -> idle`
- `* -> terminated` (board only, irreversible)
## 8.2 Issue Status
Allowed transitions:
- `backlog -> todo | cancelled`
- `todo -> in_progress | blocked | cancelled`
- `in_progress -> in_review | blocked | done | cancelled`
- `in_review -> in_progress | done | cancelled`
- `blocked -> todo | in_progress | cancelled`
- terminal: `done` , `cancelled`
Side effects:
- entering `in_progress` sets `started_at` if null
- entering `done` sets `completed_at`
- entering `cancelled` sets `cancelled_at`
2026-04-26 21:17:38 -05:00
V1 non-terminal liveness rule:
- agent-owned `todo` , `in_progress` , `in_review` , and `blocked` issues must have a live execution path, an explicit waiting path, or an explicit recovery path
[codex] Add source-scoped recovery actions (#5599)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is a control plane for autonomous AI companies, where work
must end with a clear disposition rather than ambiguous agent liveness.
> - Recovery currently detects stalled or missing-next-step issues, but
source issue recovery can become split across child recovery issues,
blockers, and comments.
> - That makes it harder for operators and agents to see who owns
recovery and what exact action is needed on the original issue.
> - Source-scoped recovery actions give the original issue a first-class
active recovery state with owner, evidence, wake policy, and resolution
outcome.
> - This pull request adds the recovery-action data model, backend
reconciliation and resolution APIs, and board UI indicators/actions.
> - The benefit is clearer stalled-work recovery without losing source
issue context or relying on comments as the liveness path.
## What Changed
- Added the `issue_recovery_actions` schema, shared
types/constants/validators, and an idempotent
`0084_issue_recovery_actions` migration ordered after current `master`
migrations.
- Updated stranded/missing-disposition recovery to create source-scoped
recovery actions, wake the recovery owner on the source issue, and avoid
locking the source issue for recovery-action wakes.
- Added API support for reading active recovery actions on issue
detail/list surfaces and resolving them with restored, blocked,
cancelled, or false-positive outcomes.
- Require blocked recovery resolutions to have an unresolved first-class
blocker, and removed the UI shortcut that could mark recovery blocked
without a blocker selection path.
- Surfaced recovery indicators/actions in the issue UI, blocker notices,
active run panels, issue rows, and Storybook coverage.
- Updated docs and focused tests for recovery semantics, ownership,
races, stale comments, and UI behavior.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issue-recovery-actions.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueRecoveryActionCard.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssueBlockedNotice.test.tsx ui/src/api/issues.test.ts`
— 5 files, 72 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck` — passed, including
migration numbering check.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed.
- Follow-up verification after blocker-resolution guard: `pnpm exec
vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-recovery-actions.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueRecoveryActionCard.test.tsx
ui/src/api/issues.test.ts` — 3 files, 27 tests passed.
- Follow-up `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed.
- Follow-up `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed.
- UI states are available in
`ui/storybook/stories/source-issue-recovery.stories.tsx`; screenshot
capture helper is `scripts/screenshot-recovery-card.cjs`.
## Risks
- Medium: recovery behavior changes from child recovery issue ownership
toward source-scoped actions, so operators may see stalled-work state in
new places.
- Migration risk is mitigated by using the next migration slot after
`master` and making the table/constraints/index creation idempotent for
anyone who previously applied the old branch-local
`0082_dizzy_master_mold` migration.
- Existing child recovery issue paths are still guarded for
already-created recovery issues, but new source-scoped flows should be
watched in CI and Greptile review.
> 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, tool use enabled for shell, Git,
GitHub, and local test execution. Context window not exposed by the
runtime.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-05-12 09:37:15 -05:00
- `in_review` is healthy only when a typed execution participant, pending issue-thread interaction or approval, user owner, active run, queued wake, or explicit recovery action owns the next action
2026-04-26 21:17:38 -05:00
- a blocked chain is covered only when each unresolved leaf issue is live or explicitly waiting
- when Paperclip cannot safely infer the next action, it surfaces the problem through visible blocked/recovery work instead of silently completing or reassigning work
[codex] Add source-scoped recovery actions (#5599)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is a control plane for autonomous AI companies, where work
must end with a clear disposition rather than ambiguous agent liveness.
> - Recovery currently detects stalled or missing-next-step issues, but
source issue recovery can become split across child recovery issues,
blockers, and comments.
> - That makes it harder for operators and agents to see who owns
recovery and what exact action is needed on the original issue.
> - Source-scoped recovery actions give the original issue a first-class
active recovery state with owner, evidence, wake policy, and resolution
outcome.
> - This pull request adds the recovery-action data model, backend
reconciliation and resolution APIs, and board UI indicators/actions.
> - The benefit is clearer stalled-work recovery without losing source
issue context or relying on comments as the liveness path.
## What Changed
- Added the `issue_recovery_actions` schema, shared
types/constants/validators, and an idempotent
`0084_issue_recovery_actions` migration ordered after current `master`
migrations.
- Updated stranded/missing-disposition recovery to create source-scoped
recovery actions, wake the recovery owner on the source issue, and avoid
locking the source issue for recovery-action wakes.
- Added API support for reading active recovery actions on issue
detail/list surfaces and resolving them with restored, blocked,
cancelled, or false-positive outcomes.
- Require blocked recovery resolutions to have an unresolved first-class
blocker, and removed the UI shortcut that could mark recovery blocked
without a blocker selection path.
- Surfaced recovery indicators/actions in the issue UI, blocker notices,
active run panels, issue rows, and Storybook coverage.
- Updated docs and focused tests for recovery semantics, ownership,
races, stale comments, and UI behavior.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issue-recovery-actions.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueRecoveryActionCard.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssueBlockedNotice.test.tsx ui/src/api/issues.test.ts`
— 5 files, 72 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck` — passed, including
migration numbering check.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed.
- Follow-up verification after blocker-resolution guard: `pnpm exec
vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-recovery-actions.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueRecoveryActionCard.test.tsx
ui/src/api/issues.test.ts` — 3 files, 27 tests passed.
- Follow-up `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed.
- Follow-up `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed.
- UI states are available in
`ui/storybook/stories/source-issue-recovery.stories.tsx`; screenshot
capture helper is `scripts/screenshot-recovery-card.cjs`.
## Risks
- Medium: recovery behavior changes from child recovery issue ownership
toward source-scoped actions, so operators may see stalled-work state in
new places.
- Migration risk is mitigated by using the next migration slot after
`master` and making the table/constraints/index creation idempotent for
anyone who previously applied the old branch-local
`0082_dizzy_master_mold` migration.
- Existing child recovery issue paths are still guarded for
already-created recovery issues, but new source-scoped flows should be
watched in CI and Greptile review.
> 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, tool use enabled for shell, Git,
GitHub, and local test execution. Context window not exposed by the
runtime.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-05-12 09:37:15 -05:00
- explicit recovery actions are the liveness primitive; source-scoped actions are the default form, issue-backed recovery is a fallback for independent repair work or safety boundaries, and comments alone are evidence rather than a healthy liveness path
2026-04-26 21:17:38 -05:00
Detailed ownership, execution, blocker, active-run watchdog, crash-recovery, and non-terminal liveness semantics are documented in `doc/execution-semantics.md` .
[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
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
## 8.3 Approval Status
- `pending -> approved | rejected | cancelled`
- terminal after decision
## 9. Auth and Permissions
## 9.1 Board Auth
- Session-based auth for human operator
- Board has full read/write across all companies in deployment
- Every board mutation writes to `activity_log`
## 9.2 Agent Auth
- Bearer API key mapped to one agent and company
- Agent key scope:
- read org/task/company context for own company
- read/write own assigned tasks and comments
- create tasks/comments for delegation
- report heartbeat status
- report cost events
- Agent cannot:
- bypass approval gates
- modify company-wide budgets directly
- mutate auth/keys
## 9.3 Permission Matrix (V1)
| Action | Board | Agent |
|---|---|---|
| Create company | yes | no |
| Hire/create agent | yes (direct) | request via approval |
| Pause/resume agent | yes | no |
| Create/update task | yes | yes |
| Force reassign task | yes | limited |
| Approve strategy/hire requests | yes | no |
| Report cost | yes | yes |
| Set company budget | yes | no |
| Set subordinate budget | yes | yes (manager subtree only) |
## 10. API Contract (REST)
All endpoints are under `/api` and return JSON.
## 10.1 Companies
- `GET /companies`
- `POST /companies`
- `GET /companies/:companyId`
- `PATCH /companies/:companyId`
2026-03-18 21:03:41 -05:00
- `PATCH /companies/:companyId/branding`
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
- `POST /companies/:companyId/archive`
## 10.2 Goals
- `GET /companies/:companyId/goals`
- `POST /companies/:companyId/goals`
- `GET /goals/:goalId`
- `PATCH /goals/:goalId`
- `DELETE /goals/:goalId` (soft delete optional, hard delete board-only)
## 10.3 Agents
- `GET /companies/:companyId/agents`
- `POST /companies/:companyId/agents`
- `GET /agents/:agentId`
- `PATCH /agents/:agentId`
- `POST /agents/:agentId/pause`
- `POST /agents/:agentId/resume`
- `POST /agents/:agentId/terminate`
- `POST /agents/:agentId/keys` (create API key)
- `POST /agents/:agentId/heartbeat/invoke`
## 10.4 Tasks (Issues)
- `GET /companies/:companyId/issues`
- `POST /companies/:companyId/issues`
- `GET /issues/:issueId`
- `PATCH /issues/:issueId`
2026-03-13 21:30:48 -05:00
- `GET /issues/:issueId/documents`
- `GET /issues/:issueId/documents/:key`
- `PUT /issues/:issueId/documents/:key`
- `GET /issues/:issueId/documents/:key/revisions`
- `DELETE /issues/:issueId/documents/:key`
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
- `POST /issues/:issueId/checkout`
- `POST /issues/:issueId/release`
[codex] Fix stale issue execution run locks (#4258)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is a control plane for AI-agent companies, so issue
checkout and execution ownership are core safety contracts.
> - The affected subsystem is the issue service and route layer that
gates agent writes by `checkoutRunId` and `executionRunId`.
> - PAP-1982 exposed a stale-lock failure mode where a terminal
heartbeat run could leave `executionRunId` pinned after checkout
ownership had moved or been cleared.
> - That stale execution lock could reject legitimate
PATCH/comment/release requests from the rightful assignee after a
harness restart.
> - This pull request centralizes terminal-run cleanup, applies it
before ownership-gated writes, and adds a board-only recovery endpoint
for operator intervention.
> - The benefit is that crashed or terminal runs no longer strand issues
behind stale execution locks, while live execution locks still block
conflicting writes.
## What Changed
- Added `issueService.clearExecutionRunIfTerminal()` to atomically lock
the issue/run rows and clear terminal or missing execution-run locks.
- Reused stale execution-lock cleanup from checkout,
`assertCheckoutOwner()`, and `release()`.
- Allowed the same assigned agent/current run to adopt an unowned
`in_progress` checkout after stale execution-lock cleanup.
- Updated release to clear `executionRunId`, `executionAgentNameKey`,
and `executionLockedAt`.
- Added board-only `POST /api/issues/:id/admin/force-release` with
company access checks, optional `clearAssignee=true`, and
`issue.admin_force_release` audit logging.
- Added embedded Postgres service tests and route integration tests for
stale-lock recovery, release behavior, and admin force-release
authorization/audit behavior.
- Documented the new force-release API in `doc/SPEC-implementation.md`.
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-stale-execution-lock-routes.test.ts` passed.
- `pnpm vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issue-stale-execution-lock-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/approval-routes-idempotency.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-telemetry-routes.test.ts` passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm build` passed.
- `git diff --check` passed.
- `pnpm lint` could not run because this repo has no `lint` command.
- Full `pnpm test:run` completed with 4 failures in existing route
suites: `approval-routes-idempotency.test.ts` (2),
`issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts` (1), and
`issue-telemetry-routes.test.ts` (1). Those same files pass when run
isolated and when run together with the new stale-lock route test, so
this appears to be a whole-suite ordering/mock-isolation issue outside
this patch path.
## Risks
- Medium: this changes ownership-gated write behavior. The new adoption
path is limited to the current run, the current assignee, `in_progress`
issues, and rows with no checkout owner after terminal-lock cleanup.
- Low: the admin force-release endpoint is board-only and
company-scoped, but misuse can intentionally clear a live lock. It
writes an audit event with prior lock IDs.
- No schema or migration changes.
> 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 (`gpt-5`), agentic coding with
terminal/tool use and local test execution.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have 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
2026-04-22 10:43:38 -05:00
- `POST /issues/:issueId/admin/force-release` (board-only lock recovery)
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
- `POST /issues/:issueId/comments`
- `GET /issues/:issueId/comments`
2026-02-20 11:28:58 -06:00
- `POST /companies/:companyId/issues/:issueId/attachments` (multipart upload)
- `GET /issues/:issueId/attachments`
- `GET /attachments/:attachmentId/content`
- `DELETE /attachments/:attachmentId`
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
### 10.4.1 Atomic Checkout Contract
`POST /issues/:issueId/checkout` request:
```json
{
"agentId": "uuid",
2026-04-04 11:20:29 -07:00
"expectedStatuses": ["todo", "backlog", "blocked", "in_review"]
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
}
```
Server behavior:
1. single SQL update with `WHERE id = ? AND status IN (?) AND (assignee_agent_id IS NULL OR assignee_agent_id = :agentId)`
2. if updated row count is 0, return `409` with current owner/status
3. successful checkout sets `assignee_agent_id` , `status = in_progress` , and `started_at`
[codex] Fix stale issue execution run locks (#4258)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is a control plane for AI-agent companies, so issue
checkout and execution ownership are core safety contracts.
> - The affected subsystem is the issue service and route layer that
gates agent writes by `checkoutRunId` and `executionRunId`.
> - PAP-1982 exposed a stale-lock failure mode where a terminal
heartbeat run could leave `executionRunId` pinned after checkout
ownership had moved or been cleared.
> - That stale execution lock could reject legitimate
PATCH/comment/release requests from the rightful assignee after a
harness restart.
> - This pull request centralizes terminal-run cleanup, applies it
before ownership-gated writes, and adds a board-only recovery endpoint
for operator intervention.
> - The benefit is that crashed or terminal runs no longer strand issues
behind stale execution locks, while live execution locks still block
conflicting writes.
## What Changed
- Added `issueService.clearExecutionRunIfTerminal()` to atomically lock
the issue/run rows and clear terminal or missing execution-run locks.
- Reused stale execution-lock cleanup from checkout,
`assertCheckoutOwner()`, and `release()`.
- Allowed the same assigned agent/current run to adopt an unowned
`in_progress` checkout after stale execution-lock cleanup.
- Updated release to clear `executionRunId`, `executionAgentNameKey`,
and `executionLockedAt`.
- Added board-only `POST /api/issues/:id/admin/force-release` with
company access checks, optional `clearAssignee=true`, and
`issue.admin_force_release` audit logging.
- Added embedded Postgres service tests and route integration tests for
stale-lock recovery, release behavior, and admin force-release
authorization/audit behavior.
- Documented the new force-release API in `doc/SPEC-implementation.md`.
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-stale-execution-lock-routes.test.ts` passed.
- `pnpm vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issue-stale-execution-lock-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/approval-routes-idempotency.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-telemetry-routes.test.ts` passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm build` passed.
- `git diff --check` passed.
- `pnpm lint` could not run because this repo has no `lint` command.
- Full `pnpm test:run` completed with 4 failures in existing route
suites: `approval-routes-idempotency.test.ts` (2),
`issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts` (1), and
`issue-telemetry-routes.test.ts` (1). Those same files pass when run
isolated and when run together with the new stale-lock route test, so
this appears to be a whole-suite ordering/mock-isolation issue outside
this patch path.
## Risks
- Medium: this changes ownership-gated write behavior. The new adoption
path is limited to the current run, the current assignee, `in_progress`
issues, and rows with no checkout owner after terminal-lock cleanup.
- Low: the admin force-release endpoint is board-only and
company-scoped, but misuse can intentionally clear a live lock. It
writes an audit event with prior lock IDs.
- No schema or migration changes.
> 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 (`gpt-5`), agentic coding with
terminal/tool use and local test execution.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have 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
2026-04-22 10:43:38 -05:00
`POST /issues/:issueId/admin/force-release` is an operator recovery endpoint for stale harness locks. It requires board access to the issue company, clears checkout and execution run lock fields, and may clear the agent assignee when `clearAssignee=true` is passed. The route must write an `issue.admin_force_release` activity log entry containing the previous checkout and execution run IDs.
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
## 10.5 Projects
- `GET /companies/:companyId/projects`
- `POST /companies/:companyId/projects`
- `GET /projects/:projectId`
- `PATCH /projects/:projectId`
## 10.6 Approvals
- `GET /companies/:companyId/approvals?status=pending`
- `POST /companies/:companyId/approvals`
- `POST /approvals/:approvalId/approve`
- `POST /approvals/:approvalId/reject`
## 10.7 Cost and Budgets
- `POST /companies/:companyId/cost-events`
- `GET /companies/:companyId/costs/summary`
- `GET /companies/:companyId/costs/by-agent`
- `GET /companies/:companyId/costs/by-project`
- `PATCH /companies/:companyId/budgets`
- `PATCH /agents/:agentId/budgets`
## 10.8 Activity and Dashboard
- `GET /companies/:companyId/activity`
- `GET /companies/:companyId/dashboard`
Dashboard payload must include:
- active/running/paused/error agent counts
- open/in-progress/blocked/done issue counts
- month-to-date spend and budget utilization
- pending approvals count
## 10.9 Error Semantics
- `400` validation error
- `401` unauthenticated
- `403` unauthorized
- `404` not found
- `409` state conflict (checkout conflict, invalid transition)
- `422` semantic rule violation
- `500` server error
[codex] Refresh docs and agent skills (#4693)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane
> - Contributors and agents need docs and skills that match the current
V1 behavior
> - The source branch included documentation updates alongside
implementation work
> - Keeping docs and skill guidance separate makes the implementation PR
easier to review
> - This pull request refreshes the V1 docs and agent-operating guidance
without changing runtime behavior
> - The benefit is current contributor guidance that can merge
independently from code changes
## What Changed
- Refreshed V1 product, goal, implementation, database, and development
documentation.
- Updated the Paperclip heartbeat skill guidance and create-agent skill
references.
- Added the Paperclip plan-to-task conversion skill.
- Updated release changelog skill guidance.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` passed in the PR worktree
after the Greptile fix.
- Greptile Review passed on head `673317ed` with zero unresolved review
threads.
- GitHub PR checks passed on head `673317ed`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`,
and `security/snyk (cryppadotta)`.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk because this branch only changes docs and skill
guidance.
- Documentation may need follow-up wording adjustments if reviewers want
a different framing for V1 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, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub
workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness.
## 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>
2026-04-28 16:12:03 -05:00
## 10.10 Current Implementation API Addenda
The current app also exposes V1-supporting surfaces for:
- issue thread interactions (`suggest_tasks` , `ask_user_questions` , `request_confirmation` )
- issue approvals, issue references/search, labels, read state, inbox/archive state, and work products
- execution workspaces, project workspaces, workspace runtime services, and workspace operations
- routines and scheduled/API/webhook triggers
- plugin installation, configuration, state, jobs, logs, webhooks, and plugin database namespace migration
- company import/export preview/apply, feedback export/vote routes, instance backup/config routes, invites, join requests, memberships, and permission grants
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
## 11. Heartbeat and Adapter Contract
## 11.1 Adapter Interface
```ts
interface AgentAdapter {
invoke(agent: Agent, context: InvocationContext): Promise< InvokeResult > ;
status(run: HeartbeatRun): Promise< RunStatus > ;
cancel(run: HeartbeatRun): Promise< void > ;
}
```
## 11.2 Process Adapter
Config shape:
```json
{
"command": "string",
"args": ["string"],
"cwd": "string",
"env": {"KEY": "VALUE"},
"timeoutSec": 900,
"graceSec": 15
}
```
Behavior:
- spawn child process
- stream stdout/stderr to run logs
- mark run status on exit code/timeout
- cancel sends SIGTERM then SIGKILL after grace
## 11.3 HTTP Adapter
Config shape:
```json
{
"url": "https://...",
"method": "POST",
"headers": {"Authorization": "Bearer ..."},
"timeoutMs": 15000,
"payloadTemplate": {"agentId": "{{agent.id}}", "runId": "{{run.id}}"}
}
```
Behavior:
- invoke by outbound HTTP request
- 2xx means accepted
- non-2xx marks failed invocation
- optional callback endpoint allows asynchronous completion updates
## 11.4 Context Delivery
- `thin` : send IDs and pointers only; agent fetches context via API
- `fat` : include current assignments, goal summary, budget snapshot, and recent comments
## 11.5 Scheduler Rules
Per-agent schedule fields in `adapter_config` :
- `enabled` boolean
- `intervalSec` integer (minimum 30)
2026-05-01 10:42:56 -05:00
- `maxConcurrentRuns` integer; new agents default to `20` ; scheduler clamps configured values to `1..50`
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
Scheduler must skip invocation when:
- agent is paused/terminated
- an existing run is active
- hard budget limit has been hit
## 12. Governance and Approval Flows
## 12.1 Hiring
1. Agent or board creates `approval(type=hire_agent, status=pending, payload=agent draft)` .
2. Board approves or rejects.
3. On approval, server creates agent row and initial API key (optional).
4. Decision is logged in `activity_log` .
Board can bypass request flow and create agents directly via UI; direct create is still logged as a governance action.
## 12.2 CEO Strategy Approval
1. CEO posts strategy proposal as `approval(type=approve_ceo_strategy)` .
2. Board reviews payload (plan text, initial structure, high-level tasks).
3. Approval unlocks execution state for CEO-created delegated work.
Before first strategy approval, CEO may only draft tasks, not transition them to active execution states.
## 12.3 Board Override
Board can at any time:
- pause/resume/terminate any agent
- reassign or cancel any task
- edit budgets and limits
- approve/reject/cancel pending approvals
## 13. Cost and Budget System
## 13.1 Budget Layers
- company monthly budget
- agent monthly budget
- optional project budget (if configured)
## 13.2 Enforcement Rules
- soft alert default threshold: 80%
- hard limit: at 100%, trigger:
- set agent status to `paused`
- block new checkout/invocation for that agent
- emit high-priority activity event
Board may override by raising budget or explicitly resuming agent.
## 13.3 Cost Event Ingestion
`POST /companies/:companyId/cost-events` body:
```json
{
"agentId": "uuid",
"issueId": "uuid",
"provider": "openai",
"model": "gpt-5",
"inputTokens": 1234,
"outputTokens": 567,
"costCents": 89,
"occurredAt": "2026-02-17T20:25:00Z",
"billingCode": "optional"
}
```
Validation:
- non-negative token counts
- `costCents >= 0`
- company ownership checks for all linked entities
## 13.4 Rollups
Read-time aggregate queries are acceptable for V1.
Materialized rollups can be added later if query latency exceeds targets.
## 14. UI Requirements (Board App)
V1 UI routes:
- `/` dashboard
- `/companies` company list/create
- `/companies/:id/org` org chart and agent status
- `/companies/:id/tasks` task list/kanban
- `/companies/:id/agents/:agentId` agent detail
- `/companies/:id/costs` cost and budget dashboard
- `/companies/:id/approvals` pending/history approvals
- `/companies/:id/activity` audit/event stream
Required UX behaviors:
- global company selector
- quick actions: pause/resume agent, create task, approve/reject request
- conflict toasts on atomic checkout failure
- no silent background failures; every failed run visible in UI
## 15. Operational Requirements
## 15.1 Environment
- Node 20+
- `DATABASE_URL` optional
[codex] Refresh docs and agent skills (#4693)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane
> - Contributors and agents need docs and skills that match the current
V1 behavior
> - The source branch included documentation updates alongside
implementation work
> - Keeping docs and skill guidance separate makes the implementation PR
easier to review
> - This pull request refreshes the V1 docs and agent-operating guidance
without changing runtime behavior
> - The benefit is current contributor guidance that can merge
independently from code changes
## What Changed
- Refreshed V1 product, goal, implementation, database, and development
documentation.
- Updated the Paperclip heartbeat skill guidance and create-agent skill
references.
- Added the Paperclip plan-to-task conversion skill.
- Updated release changelog skill guidance.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` passed in the PR worktree
after the Greptile fix.
- Greptile Review passed on head `673317ed` with zero unresolved review
threads.
- GitHub PR checks passed on head `673317ed`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`,
and `security/snyk (cryppadotta)`.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk because this branch only changes docs and skill
guidance.
- Documentation may need follow-up wording adjustments if reviewers want
a different framing for V1 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, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub
workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness.
## 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>
2026-04-28 16:12:03 -05:00
- if unset, auto-use embedded PostgreSQL under `~/.paperclip/instances/default/db`
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
## 15.2 Migrations
- Drizzle migrations are source of truth
[codex] Refresh docs and agent skills (#4693)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane
> - Contributors and agents need docs and skills that match the current
V1 behavior
> - The source branch included documentation updates alongside
implementation work
> - Keeping docs and skill guidance separate makes the implementation PR
easier to review
> - This pull request refreshes the V1 docs and agent-operating guidance
without changing runtime behavior
> - The benefit is current contributor guidance that can merge
independently from code changes
## What Changed
- Refreshed V1 product, goal, implementation, database, and development
documentation.
- Updated the Paperclip heartbeat skill guidance and create-agent skill
references.
- Added the Paperclip plan-to-task conversion skill.
- Updated release changelog skill guidance.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` passed in the PR worktree
after the Greptile fix.
- Greptile Review passed on head `673317ed` with zero unresolved review
threads.
- GitHub PR checks passed on head `673317ed`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`,
and `security/snyk (cryppadotta)`.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk because this branch only changes docs and skill
guidance.
- Documentation may need follow-up wording adjustments if reviewers want
a different framing for V1 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, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub
workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness.
## 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>
2026-04-28 16:12:03 -05:00
- local/dev startup applies pending migrations automatically where supported
- `pnpm db:migrate` applies pending migrations manually
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
- no destructive migration in-place for V1 upgrade path
## 15.3 Logging and Audit
- structured logs (JSON in production)
- request ID per API call
- every mutation writes `activity_log`
## 15.4 Reliability Targets
- API p95 latency under 250 ms for standard CRUD at 1k tasks/company
- heartbeat invoke acknowledgement under 2 s for process adapter
- no lost approval decisions (transactional writes)
## 16. Security Requirements
- store only hashed agent API keys
- redact secrets in logs (`adapter_config` , auth headers, env vars)
- CSRF protection for board session endpoints
- rate limit auth and key-management endpoints
- strict company boundary checks on every entity fetch/mutation
## 17. Testing Strategy
## 17.1 Unit Tests
- state transition guards (agent, issue, approval)
- budget enforcement rules
- adapter invocation/cancel semantics
## 17.2 Integration Tests
- atomic checkout conflict behavior
- approval-to-agent creation flow
- cost ingestion and rollup correctness
- pause while run is active (graceful cancel then force kill)
## 17.3 End-to-End Tests
- board creates company -> hires CEO -> approves strategy -> CEO receives work
- agent reports cost -> budget threshold reached -> auto-pause occurs
- task delegation across teams with request depth increment
## 17.4 Regression Suite Minimum
A release candidate is blocked unless these pass:
1. auth boundary tests
2. checkout race test
3. hard budget stop test
4. agent pause/resume test
5. dashboard summary consistency test
## 18. Delivery Plan
[codex] Refresh docs and agent skills (#4693)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane
> - Contributors and agents need docs and skills that match the current
V1 behavior
> - The source branch included documentation updates alongside
implementation work
> - Keeping docs and skill guidance separate makes the implementation PR
easier to review
> - This pull request refreshes the V1 docs and agent-operating guidance
without changing runtime behavior
> - The benefit is current contributor guidance that can merge
independently from code changes
## What Changed
- Refreshed V1 product, goal, implementation, database, and development
documentation.
- Updated the Paperclip heartbeat skill guidance and create-agent skill
references.
- Added the Paperclip plan-to-task conversion skill.
- Updated release changelog skill guidance.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` passed in the PR worktree
after the Greptile fix.
- Greptile Review passed on head `673317ed` with zero unresolved review
threads.
- GitHub PR checks passed on head `673317ed`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`,
and `security/snyk (cryppadotta)`.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk because this branch only changes docs and skill
guidance.
- Documentation may need follow-up wording adjustments if reviewers want
a different framing for V1 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, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub
workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness.
## 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>
2026-04-28 16:12:03 -05:00
Current implementation note: the milestones below describe the original V1 sequencing. Several systems originally framed as future work have since shipped or advanced materially, including issue documents/interactions, blockers, routines, execution workspaces, import/export portability, authenticated deployment modes, multi-user basics, and the local/self-hosted plugin runtime.
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
## Milestone 1: Company Core and Auth
- add `companies` and company scoping to existing entities
- add board session auth and agent API keys
- migrate existing API routes to company-aware paths
## Milestone 2: Task and Governance Semantics
- implement atomic checkout endpoint
- implement issue comments and lifecycle guards
- implement approvals table and hire/strategy workflows
## Milestone 3: Heartbeat and Adapter Runtime
- implement adapter interface
- ship `process` adapter with cancel semantics
- ship `http` adapter with timeout/error handling
- persist heartbeat runs and statuses
## Milestone 4: Cost and Budget Controls
- implement cost events ingestion
- implement monthly rollups and dashboards
- enforce hard limit auto-pause
## Milestone 5: Board UI Completion
- add company selector and org chart view
- add approvals and cost pages
## Milestone 6: Hardening and Release
- full integration/e2e suite
- seed/demo company templates for local testing
- release checklist and docs update
## 19. Acceptance Criteria (Release Gate)
V1 is complete only when all criteria are true:
1. A board user can create multiple companies and switch between them.
2. A company can run at least one active heartbeat-enabled agent.
3. Task checkout is conflict-safe with `409` on concurrent claims.
4. Agents can update tasks/comments and report costs with API keys only.
5. Board can approve/reject hire and CEO strategy requests in UI.
6. Budget hard limit auto-pauses an agent and prevents new invocations.
7. Dashboard shows accurate counts/spend from live DB data.
8. Every mutation is auditable in activity log.
2026-02-18 11:45:43 -06:00
9. App runs with embedded PostgreSQL by default and with external Postgres via `DATABASE_URL` .
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
## 20. Post-V1 Backlog (Explicitly Deferred)
[codex] Refresh docs and agent skills (#4693)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane
> - Contributors and agents need docs and skills that match the current
V1 behavior
> - The source branch included documentation updates alongside
implementation work
> - Keeping docs and skill guidance separate makes the implementation PR
easier to review
> - This pull request refreshes the V1 docs and agent-operating guidance
without changing runtime behavior
> - The benefit is current contributor guidance that can merge
independently from code changes
## What Changed
- Refreshed V1 product, goal, implementation, database, and development
documentation.
- Updated the Paperclip heartbeat skill guidance and create-agent skill
references.
- Added the Paperclip plan-to-task conversion skill.
- Updated release changelog skill guidance.
## Verification
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` passed in the PR worktree
after the Greptile fix.
- Greptile Review passed on head `673317ed` with zero unresolved review
threads.
- GitHub PR checks passed on head `673317ed`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`,
and `security/snyk (cryppadotta)`.
## Risks
- Low runtime risk because this branch only changes docs and skill
guidance.
- Documentation may need follow-up wording adjustments if reviewers want
a different framing for V1 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, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub
workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness.
## 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>
2026-04-28 16:12:03 -05:00
- cloud-grade plugin marketplace/distribution
2026-02-17 09:07:15 -06:00
- richer workflow-state customization per team
- milestones/labels/dependency graph depth beyond V1 minimum
- realtime transport optimization (SSE/WebSockets)
- public template marketplace integration (ClipHub)
2026-03-02 16:44:10 -06:00
## 21. Company Portability Package (V1 Addendum)
V1 supports company import/export using a portable package contract:
2026-03-14 09:46:16 -05:00
- markdown-first package rooted at `COMPANY.md`
- implicit folder discovery by convention
- `.paperclip.yaml` sidecar for Paperclip-specific fidelity
- canonical base package is vendor-neutral and aligned with `docs/companies/companies-spec.md`
- common conventions:
- `agents/<slug>/AGENTS.md`
- `teams/<slug>/TEAM.md`
- `projects/<slug>/PROJECT.md`
- `projects/<slug>/tasks/<slug>/TASK.md`
- `tasks/<slug>/TASK.md`
- `skills/<slug>/SKILL.md`
2026-03-02 16:44:10 -06:00
Export/import behavior in V1:
2026-03-14 09:46:16 -05:00
- export emits a clean vendor-neutral markdown package plus `.paperclip.yaml`
- projects and starter tasks are opt-in export content rather than default package content
2026-03-23 11:14:01 -05:00
- recurring `TASK.md` entries use `recurring: true` in the base package and Paperclip routine fidelity in `.paperclip.yaml`
- Paperclip imports recurring task packages as routines instead of downgrading them to one-time issues
- export strips environment-specific paths (`cwd` , local instruction file paths, inline prompt duplication) while preserving portable project repo/workspace metadata such as `repoUrl` , refs, and workspace-policy references keyed in `.paperclip.yaml`
2026-03-14 09:46:16 -05:00
- export never includes secret values; env inputs are reported as portable declarations instead
2026-03-02 16:44:10 -06:00
- import supports target modes:
- create a new company
- import into an existing company
2026-03-23 11:14:01 -05:00
- import recreates exported project workspaces and remaps portable workspace keys back to target-local workspace ids
2026-03-23 16:55:16 -05:00
- import forces imported agent timer heartbeats off so packages never start scheduled runs implicitly
2026-03-02 16:44:10 -06:00
- import supports collision strategies: `rename` , `skip` , `replace`
- import supports preview (dry-run) before apply
2026-03-14 09:46:16 -05:00
- GitHub imports warn on unpinned refs instead of blocking