2026-04-20 16:03:57 -05:00
|
|
|
import { randomUUID } from "node:crypto";
|
|
|
|
|
import { and, eq, sql } from "drizzle-orm";
|
|
|
|
|
import { afterAll, afterEach, beforeAll, describe, expect, it, vi } from "vitest";
|
|
|
|
|
import {
|
|
|
|
|
activityLog,
|
|
|
|
|
agents,
|
|
|
|
|
agentRuntimeState,
|
|
|
|
|
agentWakeupRequests,
|
|
|
|
|
companySkills,
|
|
|
|
|
companies,
|
|
|
|
|
createDb,
|
|
|
|
|
documentRevisions,
|
|
|
|
|
documents,
|
|
|
|
|
heartbeatRunEvents,
|
|
|
|
|
heartbeatRuns,
|
|
|
|
|
issueComments,
|
|
|
|
|
issueDocuments,
|
|
|
|
|
issueRelations,
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside this session).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [ ] 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
issueTreeHolds,
|
2026-04-20 16:03:57 -05:00
|
|
|
issues,
|
|
|
|
|
} from "@paperclipai/db";
|
|
|
|
|
import {
|
|
|
|
|
getEmbeddedPostgresTestSupport,
|
|
|
|
|
startEmbeddedPostgresTestDatabase,
|
|
|
|
|
} from "./helpers/embedded-postgres.js";
|
|
|
|
|
import { heartbeatService } from "../services/heartbeat.ts";
|
|
|
|
|
import { runningProcesses } from "../adapters/index.ts";
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const mockAdapterExecute = vi.hoisted(() =>
|
|
|
|
|
vi.fn(async () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
exitCode: 0,
|
|
|
|
|
signal: null,
|
|
|
|
|
timedOut: false,
|
|
|
|
|
errorMessage: null,
|
|
|
|
|
summary: "Dependency-aware heartbeat test run.",
|
|
|
|
|
provider: "test",
|
|
|
|
|
model: "test-model",
|
|
|
|
|
})),
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../adapters/index.ts", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const actual = await vi.importActual<typeof import("../adapters/index.ts")>("../adapters/index.ts");
|
|
|
|
|
return {
|
|
|
|
|
...actual,
|
|
|
|
|
getServerAdapter: vi.fn(() => ({
|
|
|
|
|
supportsLocalAgentJwt: false,
|
|
|
|
|
execute: mockAdapterExecute,
|
|
|
|
|
})),
|
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const embeddedPostgresSupport = await getEmbeddedPostgresTestSupport();
|
|
|
|
|
const describeEmbeddedPostgres = embeddedPostgresSupport.supported ? describe : describe.skip;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (!embeddedPostgresSupport.supported) {
|
|
|
|
|
console.warn(
|
|
|
|
|
`Skipping embedded Postgres heartbeat dependency scheduling tests on this host: ${embeddedPostgresSupport.reason ?? "unsupported environment"}`,
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
async function ensureIssueRelationsTable(db: ReturnType<typeof createDb>) {
|
|
|
|
|
await db.execute(sql.raw(`
|
|
|
|
|
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS "issue_relations" (
|
|
|
|
|
"id" uuid PRIMARY KEY DEFAULT gen_random_uuid(),
|
|
|
|
|
"company_id" uuid NOT NULL,
|
|
|
|
|
"issue_id" uuid NOT NULL,
|
|
|
|
|
"related_issue_id" uuid NOT NULL,
|
|
|
|
|
"type" text NOT NULL,
|
|
|
|
|
"created_by_agent_id" uuid,
|
|
|
|
|
"created_by_user_id" text,
|
|
|
|
|
"created_at" timestamptz NOT NULL DEFAULT now(),
|
|
|
|
|
"updated_at" timestamptz NOT NULL DEFAULT now()
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
`));
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
async function waitForCondition(fn: () => Promise<boolean>, timeoutMs = 3_000) {
|
|
|
|
|
const deadline = Date.now() + timeoutMs;
|
|
|
|
|
while (Date.now() < deadline) {
|
|
|
|
|
if (await fn()) return true;
|
|
|
|
|
await new Promise((resolve) => setTimeout(resolve, 50));
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
return fn();
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
describeEmbeddedPostgres("heartbeat dependency-aware queued run selection", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
let db!: ReturnType<typeof createDb>;
|
|
|
|
|
let heartbeat!: ReturnType<typeof heartbeatService>;
|
|
|
|
|
let tempDb: Awaited<ReturnType<typeof startEmbeddedPostgresTestDatabase>> | null = null;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
beforeAll(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
tempDb = await startEmbeddedPostgresTestDatabase("paperclip-heartbeat-dependency-scheduling-");
|
|
|
|
|
db = createDb(tempDb.connectionString);
|
|
|
|
|
heartbeat = heartbeatService(db);
|
|
|
|
|
await ensureIssueRelationsTable(db);
|
|
|
|
|
}, 20_000);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
afterEach(async () => {
|
[codex] Harden recovery issue handling (#4600)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - The control plane must recover stranded agent work without creating
new operational loops
> - Stranded recovery issues can themselves fail, and exposing raw retry
errors in comments can leak sensitive adapter details
> - New local companies also should not force a hire-approval gate
unless operators enable that policy
> - This pull request hardens recovery issue handling, redacts retry
failure details in issue copy, preserves `maxConcurrentRuns: 1`, and
flips new-hire approval to an opt-in default
> - The benefit is safer automatic recovery and smoother default company
setup without hidden migration conflicts
## What Changed
- Added migration `0071_default_hire_approval_off` and updated company
schema/import/export/docs so hire approvals default off and serialize
only when enabled.
- Added migration `0072_large_sandman` with a partial unique index
preventing duplicate active stranded recovery issues for the same source
issue.
- Blocked failed `stranded_issue_recovery` issues in place instead of
creating nested recovery issues.
- Redacted latest retry failure details from recovery issue comments
while still linking reviewers to run evidence.
- Allowed `maxConcurrentRuns: 1` to be honored by heartbeat concurrency
normalization.
- Added focused regression coverage for recovery recursion, redaction,
migration ordering, and concurrency behavior.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db run check:migrations`
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/recovery-classifiers.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts --pool=forks
--poolOptions.forks.isolate=true`
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/agent-permissions-routes.test.ts --pool=forks
--poolOptions.forks.isolate=true`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts --pool=forks
--poolOptions.forks.isolate=true` exits 0, but this host skipped the
embedded Postgres tests with the existing init guard.
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts
--pool=forks --poolOptions.forks.isolate=true` exits 0, but this host
skipped the embedded Postgres tests with the existing init guard.
## Risks
- Migration risk is low but this PR intentionally owns both new
migrations to avoid separate PR migration-journal conflicts.
- Recovery comments now require operators to inspect linked run evidence
for details instead of reading raw errors inline.
- The hire approval default changes behavior for newly created/imported
companies only; existing persisted company settings are not changed
except by the SQL default for future rows.
> 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, reasoning mode active. Context window not exposed in this
environment.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have 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>
2026-04-27 15:02:47 -05:00
|
|
|
mockAdapterExecute.mockReset();
|
|
|
|
|
mockAdapterExecute.mockImplementation(async () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
exitCode: 0,
|
|
|
|
|
signal: null,
|
|
|
|
|
timedOut: false,
|
|
|
|
|
errorMessage: null,
|
|
|
|
|
summary: "Dependency-aware heartbeat test run.",
|
|
|
|
|
provider: "test",
|
|
|
|
|
model: "test-model",
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
2026-04-20 16:03:57 -05:00
|
|
|
runningProcesses.clear();
|
|
|
|
|
let idlePolls = 0;
|
|
|
|
|
for (let attempt = 0; attempt < 100; attempt += 1) {
|
|
|
|
|
const runs = await db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({ status: heartbeatRuns.status })
|
|
|
|
|
.from(heartbeatRuns);
|
|
|
|
|
const hasActiveRun = runs.some((run) => run.status === "queued" || run.status === "running");
|
|
|
|
|
if (!hasActiveRun) {
|
|
|
|
|
idlePolls += 1;
|
|
|
|
|
if (idlePolls >= 3) break;
|
|
|
|
|
} else {
|
|
|
|
|
idlePolls = 0;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
await new Promise((resolve) => setTimeout(resolve, 50));
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
await new Promise((resolve) => setTimeout(resolve, 50));
|
|
|
|
|
await db.delete(activityLog);
|
|
|
|
|
await db.delete(companySkills);
|
|
|
|
|
await db.delete(issueComments);
|
|
|
|
|
await db.delete(issueDocuments);
|
|
|
|
|
await db.delete(documentRevisions);
|
|
|
|
|
await db.delete(documents);
|
|
|
|
|
await db.delete(issueRelations);
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside this session).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [ ] 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
await db.delete(issueTreeHolds);
|
2026-04-20 16:03:57 -05:00
|
|
|
await db.delete(issues);
|
|
|
|
|
await db.delete(heartbeatRunEvents);
|
[codex] Harden create-agent skill governance (#4422)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - Hiring agents is a governance-sensitive workflow because it grants
roles, adapter config, skills, and execution capability
> - The create-agent skill needs explicit templates and review guidance
so hires are auditable and not over-permissioned
> - Skill sync also needs to recognize bundled Paperclip skills
consistently for Codex local agents
> - This pull request expands create-agent role templates, adds a
security-engineer template, and documents capability/secret-handling
review requirements
> - The benefit is safer, more repeatable agent creation with clearer
approval payloads and less permission sprawl
## What Changed
- Expanded `paperclip-create-agent` guidance for template selection,
adjacent-template drafting, and role-specific review bars.
- Added a Security Engineer agent template and collaboration/safety
sections for Coder, QA, and UX Designer templates.
- Hardened draft-review guidance around desired skills, external-system
access, secrets, and confidential advisory handling.
- Updated LLM agent-configuration guidance to point hiring workflows at
the create-agent skill.
- Added tests for bundled skill sync, create-agent skill injection, hire
approval payloads, and LLM route guidance.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/agent-skills-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/codex-local-skill-injection.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/codex-local-skill-sync.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/llms-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/paperclip-skill-utils.test.ts --config
server/vitest.config.ts` passed: 5 files, 23 tests.
- `git diff --check public-gh/master..pap-2228-create-agent-governance
-- . ':(exclude)ui/storybook-static'` passed.
- Confirmed this PR does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml`.
## Risks
- Low-to-medium risk: this primarily changes skills/docs and tests, but
it affects future hiring guidance and approval expectations.
- Reviewers should check whether the new Security Engineer template is
too broad for default company installs.
- No database migrations.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex coding agent based on GPT-5, with shell, git, Paperclip
API, and GitHub CLI tool use in the local Paperclip workspace.
## 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
Note: screenshot checklist item is not applicable; this PR changes
skills, docs, and server tests.
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-04-24 14:15:28 -05:00
|
|
|
await db.delete(activityLog);
|
2026-04-20 16:03:57 -05:00
|
|
|
await db.delete(heartbeatRuns);
|
|
|
|
|
await db.delete(agentWakeupRequests);
|
|
|
|
|
await db.delete(agentRuntimeState);
|
|
|
|
|
await db.delete(agents);
|
|
|
|
|
await db.delete(companies);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
afterAll(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
await tempDb?.cleanup();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
[codex] Harden heartbeat scheduling and runtime controls (#4223)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through issue checkout, heartbeat
runs, routines, and auditable control-plane state
> - The runtime path has to recover from lost local processes, transient
adapter failures, blocked dependencies, and routine coalescing without
stranding work
> - The existing branch carried several reliability fixes across
heartbeat scheduling, issue runtime controls, routine dispatch, and
operator-facing run state
> - These changes belong together because they share backend contracts,
migrations, and runtime status semantics
> - This pull request groups the control-plane/runtime slice so it can
merge independently from board UI polish and adapter sandbox work
> - The benefit is safer heartbeat recovery, clearer runtime controls,
and more predictable recurring execution behavior
## What Changed
- Adds bounded heartbeat retry scheduling, scheduled retry state, and
Codex transient failure recovery handling.
- Tightens heartbeat process recovery, blocker wake behavior, issue
comment wake handling, routine dispatch coalescing, and
activity/dashboard bounds.
- Adds runtime-control MCP tools and Paperclip skill docs for issue
workspace runtime management.
- Adds migrations `0061_lively_thor_girl.sql` and
`0062_routine_run_dispatch_fingerprint.sql`.
- Surfaces retry state in run ledger/agent UI and keeps related shared
types synchronized.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/tools.test.ts` from `packages/mcp-server`
## Risks
- Medium risk: this touches heartbeat recovery and routine dispatch,
which are central execution paths.
- Migration order matters if split branches land out of order: merge
this PR before branches that assume the new runtime/routine fields.
- Runtime retry behavior should be watched in CI and in local operator
smoke tests because it changes how transient failures are resumed.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent runtime, shell/git tool use
enabled. Exact hosted model build and context window are not exposed in
this Paperclip heartbeat environment.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
2026-04-21 12:24:11 -05:00
|
|
|
it("keeps blocked descendants idle until their blockers resolve", async () => {
|
2026-04-20 16:03:57 -05:00
|
|
|
const companyId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const agentId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const blockerId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const blockedIssueId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const readyIssueId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(companies).values({
|
|
|
|
|
id: companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
name: "Paperclip",
|
|
|
|
|
issuePrefix: `T${companyId.replace(/-/g, "").slice(0, 6).toUpperCase()}`,
|
|
|
|
|
requireBoardApprovalForNewAgents: false,
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(agents).values({
|
|
|
|
|
id: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
name: "CodexCoder",
|
|
|
|
|
role: "engineer",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "active",
|
|
|
|
|
adapterType: "codex_local",
|
|
|
|
|
adapterConfig: {},
|
|
|
|
|
runtimeConfig: {
|
|
|
|
|
heartbeat: {
|
|
|
|
|
wakeOnDemand: true,
|
|
|
|
|
maxConcurrentRuns: 1,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
permissions: {},
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(issues).values([
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: blockerId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Mission 0",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "todo",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "high",
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: blockedIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Mission 2",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "todo",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "medium",
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeAgentId: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: readyIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Mission 1",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "todo",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "critical",
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeAgentId: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(issueRelations).values({
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
issueId: blockerId,
|
|
|
|
|
relatedIssueId: blockedIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
type: "blocks",
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const blockedWake = await heartbeat.wakeup(agentId, {
|
|
|
|
|
source: "assignment",
|
|
|
|
|
triggerDetail: "system",
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "issue_assigned",
|
|
|
|
|
payload: { issueId: blockedIssueId },
|
|
|
|
|
contextSnapshot: { issueId: blockedIssueId, wakeReason: "issue_assigned" },
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
[codex] Harden heartbeat scheduling and runtime controls (#4223)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through issue checkout, heartbeat
runs, routines, and auditable control-plane state
> - The runtime path has to recover from lost local processes, transient
adapter failures, blocked dependencies, and routine coalescing without
stranding work
> - The existing branch carried several reliability fixes across
heartbeat scheduling, issue runtime controls, routine dispatch, and
operator-facing run state
> - These changes belong together because they share backend contracts,
migrations, and runtime status semantics
> - This pull request groups the control-plane/runtime slice so it can
merge independently from board UI polish and adapter sandbox work
> - The benefit is safer heartbeat recovery, clearer runtime controls,
and more predictable recurring execution behavior
## What Changed
- Adds bounded heartbeat retry scheduling, scheduled retry state, and
Codex transient failure recovery handling.
- Tightens heartbeat process recovery, blocker wake behavior, issue
comment wake handling, routine dispatch coalescing, and
activity/dashboard bounds.
- Adds runtime-control MCP tools and Paperclip skill docs for issue
workspace runtime management.
- Adds migrations `0061_lively_thor_girl.sql` and
`0062_routine_run_dispatch_fingerprint.sql`.
- Surfaces retry state in run ledger/agent UI and keeps related shared
types synchronized.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/tools.test.ts` from `packages/mcp-server`
## Risks
- Medium risk: this touches heartbeat recovery and routine dispatch,
which are central execution paths.
- Migration order matters if split branches land out of order: merge
this PR before branches that assume the new runtime/routine fields.
- Runtime retry behavior should be watched in CI and in local operator
smoke tests because it changes how transient failures are resumed.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent runtime, shell/git tool use
enabled. Exact hosted model build and context window are not exposed in
this Paperclip heartbeat environment.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
2026-04-21 12:24:11 -05:00
|
|
|
expect(blockedWake).toBeNull();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const blockedWakeRequest = await waitForCondition(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const wakeup = await db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({
|
|
|
|
|
status: agentWakeupRequests.status,
|
|
|
|
|
reason: agentWakeupRequests.reason,
|
|
|
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
|
.from(agentWakeupRequests)
|
|
|
|
|
.where(
|
|
|
|
|
and(
|
|
|
|
|
eq(agentWakeupRequests.agentId, agentId),
|
|
|
|
|
sql`${agentWakeupRequests.payload} ->> 'issueId' = ${blockedIssueId}`,
|
|
|
|
|
),
|
|
|
|
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
.orderBy(agentWakeupRequests.requestedAt)
|
|
|
|
|
.then((rows) => rows[0] ?? null);
|
|
|
|
|
return Boolean(
|
|
|
|
|
wakeup &&
|
|
|
|
|
wakeup.status === "skipped" &&
|
|
|
|
|
wakeup.reason === "issue_dependencies_blocked",
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
expect(blockedWakeRequest).toBe(true);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const blockedRunsBeforeResolution = await db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({ count: sql<number>`count(*)::int` })
|
|
|
|
|
.from(heartbeatRuns)
|
|
|
|
|
.where(sql`${heartbeatRuns.contextSnapshot} ->> 'issueId' = ${blockedIssueId}`)
|
|
|
|
|
.then((rows) => rows[0]?.count ?? 0);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(blockedRunsBeforeResolution).toBe(0);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const interactionWake = await heartbeat.wakeup(agentId, {
|
|
|
|
|
source: "automation",
|
|
|
|
|
triggerDetail: "system",
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "issue_commented",
|
|
|
|
|
payload: { issueId: blockedIssueId, commentId: randomUUID() },
|
|
|
|
|
contextSnapshot: {
|
|
|
|
|
issueId: blockedIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
wakeReason: "issue_commented",
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
expect(interactionWake).not.toBeNull();
|
2026-04-20 16:03:57 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await waitForCondition(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const run = await db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({ status: heartbeatRuns.status })
|
|
|
|
|
.from(heartbeatRuns)
|
[codex] Harden heartbeat scheduling and runtime controls (#4223)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through issue checkout, heartbeat
runs, routines, and auditable control-plane state
> - The runtime path has to recover from lost local processes, transient
adapter failures, blocked dependencies, and routine coalescing without
stranding work
> - The existing branch carried several reliability fixes across
heartbeat scheduling, issue runtime controls, routine dispatch, and
operator-facing run state
> - These changes belong together because they share backend contracts,
migrations, and runtime status semantics
> - This pull request groups the control-plane/runtime slice so it can
merge independently from board UI polish and adapter sandbox work
> - The benefit is safer heartbeat recovery, clearer runtime controls,
and more predictable recurring execution behavior
## What Changed
- Adds bounded heartbeat retry scheduling, scheduled retry state, and
Codex transient failure recovery handling.
- Tightens heartbeat process recovery, blocker wake behavior, issue
comment wake handling, routine dispatch coalescing, and
activity/dashboard bounds.
- Adds runtime-control MCP tools and Paperclip skill docs for issue
workspace runtime management.
- Adds migrations `0061_lively_thor_girl.sql` and
`0062_routine_run_dispatch_fingerprint.sql`.
- Surfaces retry state in run ledger/agent UI and keeps related shared
types synchronized.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/tools.test.ts` from `packages/mcp-server`
## Risks
- Medium risk: this touches heartbeat recovery and routine dispatch,
which are central execution paths.
- Migration order matters if split branches land out of order: merge
this PR before branches that assume the new runtime/routine fields.
- Runtime retry behavior should be watched in CI and in local operator
smoke tests because it changes how transient failures are resumed.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent runtime, shell/git tool use
enabled. Exact hosted model build and context window are not exposed in
this Paperclip heartbeat environment.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
2026-04-21 12:24:11 -05:00
|
|
|
.where(eq(heartbeatRuns.id, interactionWake!.id))
|
2026-04-20 16:03:57 -05:00
|
|
|
.then((rows) => rows[0] ?? null);
|
[codex] Harden heartbeat scheduling and runtime controls (#4223)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through issue checkout, heartbeat
runs, routines, and auditable control-plane state
> - The runtime path has to recover from lost local processes, transient
adapter failures, blocked dependencies, and routine coalescing without
stranding work
> - The existing branch carried several reliability fixes across
heartbeat scheduling, issue runtime controls, routine dispatch, and
operator-facing run state
> - These changes belong together because they share backend contracts,
migrations, and runtime status semantics
> - This pull request groups the control-plane/runtime slice so it can
merge independently from board UI polish and adapter sandbox work
> - The benefit is safer heartbeat recovery, clearer runtime controls,
and more predictable recurring execution behavior
## What Changed
- Adds bounded heartbeat retry scheduling, scheduled retry state, and
Codex transient failure recovery handling.
- Tightens heartbeat process recovery, blocker wake behavior, issue
comment wake handling, routine dispatch coalescing, and
activity/dashboard bounds.
- Adds runtime-control MCP tools and Paperclip skill docs for issue
workspace runtime management.
- Adds migrations `0061_lively_thor_girl.sql` and
`0062_routine_run_dispatch_fingerprint.sql`.
- Surfaces retry state in run ledger/agent UI and keeps related shared
types synchronized.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/tools.test.ts` from `packages/mcp-server`
## Risks
- Medium risk: this touches heartbeat recovery and routine dispatch,
which are central execution paths.
- Migration order matters if split branches land out of order: merge
this PR before branches that assume the new runtime/routine fields.
- Runtime retry behavior should be watched in CI and in local operator
smoke tests because it changes how transient failures are resumed.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent runtime, shell/git tool use
enabled. Exact hosted model build and context window are not exposed in
this Paperclip heartbeat environment.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
2026-04-21 12:24:11 -05:00
|
|
|
return run?.status === "succeeded";
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const interactionRun = await db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({
|
|
|
|
|
status: heartbeatRuns.status,
|
|
|
|
|
contextSnapshot: heartbeatRuns.contextSnapshot,
|
|
|
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
|
.from(heartbeatRuns)
|
|
|
|
|
.where(eq(heartbeatRuns.id, interactionWake!.id))
|
|
|
|
|
.then((rows) => rows[0] ?? null);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(interactionRun?.status).toBe("succeeded");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(interactionRun?.contextSnapshot).toMatchObject({
|
|
|
|
|
dependencyBlockedInteraction: true,
|
|
|
|
|
unresolvedBlockerIssueIds: [blockerId],
|
2026-04-20 16:03:57 -05:00
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const readyWake = await heartbeat.wakeup(agentId, {
|
|
|
|
|
source: "assignment",
|
|
|
|
|
triggerDetail: "system",
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "issue_assigned",
|
|
|
|
|
payload: { issueId: readyIssueId },
|
|
|
|
|
contextSnapshot: { issueId: readyIssueId, wakeReason: "issue_assigned" },
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
expect(readyWake).not.toBeNull();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await waitForCondition(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const run = await db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({ status: heartbeatRuns.status })
|
|
|
|
|
.from(heartbeatRuns)
|
|
|
|
|
.where(eq(heartbeatRuns.id, readyWake!.id))
|
|
|
|
|
.then((rows) => rows[0] ?? null);
|
|
|
|
|
return run?.status === "succeeded";
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
[codex] Harden heartbeat scheduling and runtime controls (#4223)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through issue checkout, heartbeat
runs, routines, and auditable control-plane state
> - The runtime path has to recover from lost local processes, transient
adapter failures, blocked dependencies, and routine coalescing without
stranding work
> - The existing branch carried several reliability fixes across
heartbeat scheduling, issue runtime controls, routine dispatch, and
operator-facing run state
> - These changes belong together because they share backend contracts,
migrations, and runtime status semantics
> - This pull request groups the control-plane/runtime slice so it can
merge independently from board UI polish and adapter sandbox work
> - The benefit is safer heartbeat recovery, clearer runtime controls,
and more predictable recurring execution behavior
## What Changed
- Adds bounded heartbeat retry scheduling, scheduled retry state, and
Codex transient failure recovery handling.
- Tightens heartbeat process recovery, blocker wake behavior, issue
comment wake handling, routine dispatch coalescing, and
activity/dashboard bounds.
- Adds runtime-control MCP tools and Paperclip skill docs for issue
workspace runtime management.
- Adds migrations `0061_lively_thor_girl.sql` and
`0062_routine_run_dispatch_fingerprint.sql`.
- Surfaces retry state in run ledger/agent UI and keeps related shared
types synchronized.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/tools.test.ts` from `packages/mcp-server`
## Risks
- Medium risk: this touches heartbeat recovery and routine dispatch,
which are central execution paths.
- Migration order matters if split branches land out of order: merge
this PR before branches that assume the new runtime/routine fields.
- Runtime retry behavior should be watched in CI and in local operator
smoke tests because it changes how transient failures are resumed.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent runtime, shell/git tool use
enabled. Exact hosted model build and context window are not exposed in
this Paperclip heartbeat environment.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
2026-04-21 12:24:11 -05:00
|
|
|
const readyRun = await db
|
|
|
|
|
.select()
|
|
|
|
|
.from(heartbeatRuns)
|
|
|
|
|
.where(eq(heartbeatRuns.id, readyWake!.id))
|
|
|
|
|
.then((rows) => rows[0] ?? null);
|
2026-04-20 16:03:57 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(readyRun?.status).toBe("succeeded");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await db
|
|
|
|
|
.update(issues)
|
|
|
|
|
.set({ status: "done", updatedAt: new Date() })
|
|
|
|
|
.where(eq(issues.id, blockerId));
|
|
|
|
|
|
[codex] Harden heartbeat scheduling and runtime controls (#4223)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through issue checkout, heartbeat
runs, routines, and auditable control-plane state
> - The runtime path has to recover from lost local processes, transient
adapter failures, blocked dependencies, and routine coalescing without
stranding work
> - The existing branch carried several reliability fixes across
heartbeat scheduling, issue runtime controls, routine dispatch, and
operator-facing run state
> - These changes belong together because they share backend contracts,
migrations, and runtime status semantics
> - This pull request groups the control-plane/runtime slice so it can
merge independently from board UI polish and adapter sandbox work
> - The benefit is safer heartbeat recovery, clearer runtime controls,
and more predictable recurring execution behavior
## What Changed
- Adds bounded heartbeat retry scheduling, scheduled retry state, and
Codex transient failure recovery handling.
- Tightens heartbeat process recovery, blocker wake behavior, issue
comment wake handling, routine dispatch coalescing, and
activity/dashboard bounds.
- Adds runtime-control MCP tools and Paperclip skill docs for issue
workspace runtime management.
- Adds migrations `0061_lively_thor_girl.sql` and
`0062_routine_run_dispatch_fingerprint.sql`.
- Surfaces retry state in run ledger/agent UI and keeps related shared
types synchronized.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/tools.test.ts` from `packages/mcp-server`
## Risks
- Medium risk: this touches heartbeat recovery and routine dispatch,
which are central execution paths.
- Migration order matters if split branches land out of order: merge
this PR before branches that assume the new runtime/routine fields.
- Runtime retry behavior should be watched in CI and in local operator
smoke tests because it changes how transient failures are resumed.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent runtime, shell/git tool use
enabled. Exact hosted model build and context window are not exposed in
this Paperclip heartbeat environment.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
2026-04-21 12:24:11 -05:00
|
|
|
const promotedWake = await heartbeat.wakeup(agentId, {
|
2026-04-20 16:03:57 -05:00
|
|
|
source: "automation",
|
|
|
|
|
triggerDetail: "system",
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "issue_blockers_resolved",
|
|
|
|
|
payload: { issueId: blockedIssueId, resolvedBlockerIssueId: blockerId },
|
|
|
|
|
contextSnapshot: {
|
|
|
|
|
issueId: blockedIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
wakeReason: "issue_blockers_resolved",
|
|
|
|
|
resolvedBlockerIssueId: blockerId,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
[codex] Harden heartbeat scheduling and runtime controls (#4223)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through issue checkout, heartbeat
runs, routines, and auditable control-plane state
> - The runtime path has to recover from lost local processes, transient
adapter failures, blocked dependencies, and routine coalescing without
stranding work
> - The existing branch carried several reliability fixes across
heartbeat scheduling, issue runtime controls, routine dispatch, and
operator-facing run state
> - These changes belong together because they share backend contracts,
migrations, and runtime status semantics
> - This pull request groups the control-plane/runtime slice so it can
merge independently from board UI polish and adapter sandbox work
> - The benefit is safer heartbeat recovery, clearer runtime controls,
and more predictable recurring execution behavior
## What Changed
- Adds bounded heartbeat retry scheduling, scheduled retry state, and
Codex transient failure recovery handling.
- Tightens heartbeat process recovery, blocker wake behavior, issue
comment wake handling, routine dispatch coalescing, and
activity/dashboard bounds.
- Adds runtime-control MCP tools and Paperclip skill docs for issue
workspace runtime management.
- Adds migrations `0061_lively_thor_girl.sql` and
`0062_routine_run_dispatch_fingerprint.sql`.
- Surfaces retry state in run ledger/agent UI and keeps related shared
types synchronized.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/tools.test.ts` from `packages/mcp-server`
## Risks
- Medium risk: this touches heartbeat recovery and routine dispatch,
which are central execution paths.
- Migration order matters if split branches land out of order: merge
this PR before branches that assume the new runtime/routine fields.
- Runtime retry behavior should be watched in CI and in local operator
smoke tests because it changes how transient failures are resumed.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent runtime, shell/git tool use
enabled. Exact hosted model build and context window are not exposed in
this Paperclip heartbeat environment.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
2026-04-21 12:24:11 -05:00
|
|
|
expect(promotedWake).not.toBeNull();
|
2026-04-20 16:03:57 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await waitForCondition(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const run = await db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({ status: heartbeatRuns.status })
|
|
|
|
|
.from(heartbeatRuns)
|
[codex] Harden heartbeat scheduling and runtime controls (#4223)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through issue checkout, heartbeat
runs, routines, and auditable control-plane state
> - The runtime path has to recover from lost local processes, transient
adapter failures, blocked dependencies, and routine coalescing without
stranding work
> - The existing branch carried several reliability fixes across
heartbeat scheduling, issue runtime controls, routine dispatch, and
operator-facing run state
> - These changes belong together because they share backend contracts,
migrations, and runtime status semantics
> - This pull request groups the control-plane/runtime slice so it can
merge independently from board UI polish and adapter sandbox work
> - The benefit is safer heartbeat recovery, clearer runtime controls,
and more predictable recurring execution behavior
## What Changed
- Adds bounded heartbeat retry scheduling, scheduled retry state, and
Codex transient failure recovery handling.
- Tightens heartbeat process recovery, blocker wake behavior, issue
comment wake handling, routine dispatch coalescing, and
activity/dashboard bounds.
- Adds runtime-control MCP tools and Paperclip skill docs for issue
workspace runtime management.
- Adds migrations `0061_lively_thor_girl.sql` and
`0062_routine_run_dispatch_fingerprint.sql`.
- Surfaces retry state in run ledger/agent UI and keeps related shared
types synchronized.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/tools.test.ts` from `packages/mcp-server`
## Risks
- Medium risk: this touches heartbeat recovery and routine dispatch,
which are central execution paths.
- Migration order matters if split branches land out of order: merge
this PR before branches that assume the new runtime/routine fields.
- Runtime retry behavior should be watched in CI and in local operator
smoke tests because it changes how transient failures are resumed.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent runtime, shell/git tool use
enabled. Exact hosted model build and context window are not exposed in
this Paperclip heartbeat environment.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
2026-04-21 12:24:11 -05:00
|
|
|
.where(eq(heartbeatRuns.id, promotedWake!.id))
|
2026-04-20 16:03:57 -05:00
|
|
|
.then((rows) => rows[0] ?? null);
|
|
|
|
|
return run?.status === "succeeded";
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const promotedBlockedRun = await db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({
|
|
|
|
|
id: heartbeatRuns.id,
|
|
|
|
|
status: heartbeatRuns.status,
|
|
|
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
|
.from(heartbeatRuns)
|
[codex] Harden heartbeat scheduling and runtime controls (#4223)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through issue checkout, heartbeat
runs, routines, and auditable control-plane state
> - The runtime path has to recover from lost local processes, transient
adapter failures, blocked dependencies, and routine coalescing without
stranding work
> - The existing branch carried several reliability fixes across
heartbeat scheduling, issue runtime controls, routine dispatch, and
operator-facing run state
> - These changes belong together because they share backend contracts,
migrations, and runtime status semantics
> - This pull request groups the control-plane/runtime slice so it can
merge independently from board UI polish and adapter sandbox work
> - The benefit is safer heartbeat recovery, clearer runtime controls,
and more predictable recurring execution behavior
## What Changed
- Adds bounded heartbeat retry scheduling, scheduled retry state, and
Codex transient failure recovery handling.
- Tightens heartbeat process recovery, blocker wake behavior, issue
comment wake handling, routine dispatch coalescing, and
activity/dashboard bounds.
- Adds runtime-control MCP tools and Paperclip skill docs for issue
workspace runtime management.
- Adds migrations `0061_lively_thor_girl.sql` and
`0062_routine_run_dispatch_fingerprint.sql`.
- Surfaces retry state in run ledger/agent UI and keeps related shared
types synchronized.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/tools.test.ts` from `packages/mcp-server`
## Risks
- Medium risk: this touches heartbeat recovery and routine dispatch,
which are central execution paths.
- Migration order matters if split branches land out of order: merge
this PR before branches that assume the new runtime/routine fields.
- Runtime retry behavior should be watched in CI and in local operator
smoke tests because it changes how transient failures are resumed.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent runtime, shell/git tool use
enabled. Exact hosted model build and context window are not exposed in
this Paperclip heartbeat environment.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
2026-04-21 12:24:11 -05:00
|
|
|
.where(eq(heartbeatRuns.id, promotedWake!.id))
|
2026-04-20 16:03:57 -05:00
|
|
|
.then((rows) => rows[0] ?? null);
|
|
|
|
|
const blockedWakeRequestCount = await db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({ count: sql<number>`count(*)::int` })
|
|
|
|
|
.from(agentWakeupRequests)
|
|
|
|
|
.where(
|
|
|
|
|
and(
|
|
|
|
|
eq(agentWakeupRequests.agentId, agentId),
|
|
|
|
|
sql`${agentWakeupRequests.payload} ->> 'issueId' = ${blockedIssueId}`,
|
|
|
|
|
),
|
|
|
|
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
.then((rows) => rows[0]?.count ?? 0);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(promotedBlockedRun?.status).toBe("succeeded");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(blockedWakeRequestCount).toBeGreaterThanOrEqual(2);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside this session).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [ ] 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
|
[codex] Harden recovery issue handling (#4600)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - The control plane must recover stranded agent work without creating
new operational loops
> - Stranded recovery issues can themselves fail, and exposing raw retry
errors in comments can leak sensitive adapter details
> - New local companies also should not force a hire-approval gate
unless operators enable that policy
> - This pull request hardens recovery issue handling, redacts retry
failure details in issue copy, preserves `maxConcurrentRuns: 1`, and
flips new-hire approval to an opt-in default
> - The benefit is safer automatic recovery and smoother default company
setup without hidden migration conflicts
## What Changed
- Added migration `0071_default_hire_approval_off` and updated company
schema/import/export/docs so hire approvals default off and serialize
only when enabled.
- Added migration `0072_large_sandman` with a partial unique index
preventing duplicate active stranded recovery issues for the same source
issue.
- Blocked failed `stranded_issue_recovery` issues in place instead of
creating nested recovery issues.
- Redacted latest retry failure details from recovery issue comments
while still linking reviewers to run evidence.
- Allowed `maxConcurrentRuns: 1` to be honored by heartbeat concurrency
normalization.
- Added focused regression coverage for recovery recursion, redaction,
migration ordering, and concurrency behavior.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db run check:migrations`
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/recovery-classifiers.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts --pool=forks
--poolOptions.forks.isolate=true`
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/agent-permissions-routes.test.ts --pool=forks
--poolOptions.forks.isolate=true`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts --pool=forks
--poolOptions.forks.isolate=true` exits 0, but this host skipped the
embedded Postgres tests with the existing init guard.
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts
--pool=forks --poolOptions.forks.isolate=true` exits 0, but this host
skipped the embedded Postgres tests with the existing init guard.
## Risks
- Migration risk is low but this PR intentionally owns both new
migrations to avoid separate PR migration-journal conflicts.
- Recovery comments now require operators to inspect linked run evidence
for details instead of reading raw errors inline.
- The hire approval default changes behavior for newly created/imported
companies only; existing persisted company settings are not changed
except by the SQL default for future rows.
> 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, reasoning mode active. Context window not exposed in this
environment.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have 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>
2026-04-27 15:02:47 -05:00
|
|
|
it("honors maxConcurrentRuns 1 by leaving a second assignment wake queued", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const companyId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const agentId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const firstIssueId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const secondIssueId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
let finishFirstRun!: () => void;
|
|
|
|
|
const firstRunFinished = new Promise<void>((resolve) => {
|
|
|
|
|
finishFirstRun = resolve;
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mockAdapterExecute.mockImplementationOnce(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
await firstRunFinished;
|
|
|
|
|
return {
|
|
|
|
|
exitCode: 0,
|
|
|
|
|
signal: null,
|
|
|
|
|
timedOut: false,
|
|
|
|
|
errorMessage: null,
|
|
|
|
|
summary: "First assignment run completed.",
|
|
|
|
|
provider: "test",
|
|
|
|
|
model: "test-model",
|
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(companies).values({
|
|
|
|
|
id: companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
name: "Paperclip",
|
|
|
|
|
issuePrefix: `T${companyId.replace(/-/g, "").slice(0, 6).toUpperCase()}`,
|
|
|
|
|
requireBoardApprovalForNewAgents: false,
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(agents).values({
|
|
|
|
|
id: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
name: "CodexCoder",
|
|
|
|
|
role: "engineer",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "active",
|
|
|
|
|
adapterType: "codex_local",
|
|
|
|
|
adapterConfig: {},
|
|
|
|
|
runtimeConfig: {
|
|
|
|
|
heartbeat: {
|
|
|
|
|
wakeOnDemand: true,
|
|
|
|
|
maxConcurrentRuns: 1,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
permissions: {},
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(issues).values([
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: firstIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "First assignment",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "todo",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "high",
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeAgentId: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: secondIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Second assignment",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "todo",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "high",
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeAgentId: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
try {
|
|
|
|
|
const firstWake = await heartbeat.wakeup(agentId, {
|
|
|
|
|
source: "assignment",
|
|
|
|
|
triggerDetail: "system",
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "issue_assigned",
|
|
|
|
|
payload: { issueId: firstIssueId },
|
|
|
|
|
contextSnapshot: { issueId: firstIssueId, wakeReason: "issue_assigned" },
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
expect(firstWake).not.toBeNull();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const firstRunStarted = await waitForCondition(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const run = await db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({ status: heartbeatRuns.status })
|
|
|
|
|
.from(heartbeatRuns)
|
|
|
|
|
.where(eq(heartbeatRuns.id, firstWake!.id))
|
|
|
|
|
.then((rows) => rows[0] ?? null);
|
|
|
|
|
return run?.status === "running";
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
expect(firstRunStarted).toBe(true);
|
|
|
|
|
const firstAdapterStarted = await waitForCondition(async () => mockAdapterExecute.mock.calls.length === 1);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(firstAdapterStarted).toBe(true);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const secondWake = await heartbeat.wakeup(agentId, {
|
|
|
|
|
source: "assignment",
|
|
|
|
|
triggerDetail: "system",
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "issue_assigned",
|
|
|
|
|
payload: { issueId: secondIssueId },
|
|
|
|
|
contextSnapshot: { issueId: secondIssueId, wakeReason: "issue_assigned" },
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
expect(secondWake).not.toBeNull();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const secondRunWhileFirstRunning = await db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({ status: heartbeatRuns.status })
|
|
|
|
|
.from(heartbeatRuns)
|
|
|
|
|
.where(eq(heartbeatRuns.id, secondWake!.id))
|
|
|
|
|
.then((rows) => rows[0] ?? null);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(secondRunWhileFirstRunning?.status).toBe("queued");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(mockAdapterExecute).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(1);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
finishFirstRun();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const secondRunSucceeded = await waitForCondition(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const run = await db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({ status: heartbeatRuns.status })
|
|
|
|
|
.from(heartbeatRuns)
|
|
|
|
|
.where(eq(heartbeatRuns.id, secondWake!.id))
|
|
|
|
|
.then((rows) => rows[0] ?? null);
|
|
|
|
|
return run?.status === "succeeded";
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
expect(secondRunSucceeded).toBe(true);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(mockAdapterExecute).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(2);
|
|
|
|
|
} finally {
|
|
|
|
|
finishFirstRun();
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-04-24 15:50:32 -05:00
|
|
|
it("cancels stale queued runs when issue blockers are still unresolved", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const companyId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const agentId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const blockerId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const blockedIssueId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const readyIssueId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const blockedWakeupRequestId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const readyWakeupRequestId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const blockedRunId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const readyRunId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(companies).values({
|
|
|
|
|
id: companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
name: "Paperclip",
|
|
|
|
|
issuePrefix: `T${companyId.replace(/-/g, "").slice(0, 6).toUpperCase()}`,
|
|
|
|
|
requireBoardApprovalForNewAgents: false,
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(agents).values({
|
|
|
|
|
id: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
name: "QAChecker",
|
|
|
|
|
role: "qa",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "active",
|
|
|
|
|
adapterType: "codex_local",
|
|
|
|
|
adapterConfig: {},
|
|
|
|
|
runtimeConfig: {
|
|
|
|
|
heartbeat: {
|
|
|
|
|
wakeOnDemand: true,
|
|
|
|
|
maxConcurrentRuns: 2,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
permissions: {},
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(issues).values([
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: blockerId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Security review",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "blocked",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "high",
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: blockedIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "QA validation",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "blocked",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "medium",
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeAgentId: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: readyIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Ready QA task",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "todo",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "low",
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeAgentId: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(issueRelations).values({
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
issueId: blockerId,
|
|
|
|
|
relatedIssueId: blockedIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
type: "blocks",
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(agentWakeupRequests).values([
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: blockedWakeupRequestId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
source: "automation",
|
|
|
|
|
triggerDetail: "system",
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "transient_failure_retry",
|
|
|
|
|
payload: { issueId: blockedIssueId },
|
|
|
|
|
status: "queued",
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: readyWakeupRequestId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
source: "assignment",
|
|
|
|
|
triggerDetail: "system",
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "issue_assigned",
|
|
|
|
|
payload: { issueId: readyIssueId },
|
|
|
|
|
status: "queued",
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(heartbeatRuns).values([
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: blockedRunId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
invocationSource: "automation",
|
|
|
|
|
triggerDetail: "system",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "queued",
|
|
|
|
|
wakeupRequestId: blockedWakeupRequestId,
|
|
|
|
|
contextSnapshot: {
|
|
|
|
|
issueId: blockedIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
wakeReason: "transient_failure_retry",
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: readyRunId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
invocationSource: "assignment",
|
|
|
|
|
triggerDetail: "system",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "queued",
|
|
|
|
|
wakeupRequestId: readyWakeupRequestId,
|
|
|
|
|
contextSnapshot: {
|
|
|
|
|
issueId: readyIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
wakeReason: "issue_assigned",
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
await db
|
|
|
|
|
.update(agentWakeupRequests)
|
|
|
|
|
.set({ runId: blockedRunId })
|
|
|
|
|
.where(eq(agentWakeupRequests.id, blockedWakeupRequestId));
|
|
|
|
|
await db
|
|
|
|
|
.update(agentWakeupRequests)
|
|
|
|
|
.set({ runId: readyRunId })
|
|
|
|
|
.where(eq(agentWakeupRequests.id, readyWakeupRequestId));
|
|
|
|
|
await db
|
|
|
|
|
.update(issues)
|
|
|
|
|
.set({
|
|
|
|
|
executionRunId: blockedRunId,
|
|
|
|
|
executionAgentNameKey: "qa-checker",
|
|
|
|
|
executionLockedAt: new Date(),
|
|
|
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
|
.where(eq(issues.id, blockedIssueId));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await heartbeat.resumeQueuedRuns();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await waitForCondition(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const run = await db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({ status: heartbeatRuns.status })
|
|
|
|
|
.from(heartbeatRuns)
|
|
|
|
|
.where(eq(heartbeatRuns.id, readyRunId))
|
|
|
|
|
.then((rows) => rows[0] ?? null);
|
|
|
|
|
return run?.status === "succeeded";
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const [blockedRun, blockedWakeup, blockedIssue, readyRun] = await Promise.all([
|
|
|
|
|
db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({
|
|
|
|
|
status: heartbeatRuns.status,
|
|
|
|
|
errorCode: heartbeatRuns.errorCode,
|
|
|
|
|
finishedAt: heartbeatRuns.finishedAt,
|
|
|
|
|
resultJson: heartbeatRuns.resultJson,
|
|
|
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
|
.from(heartbeatRuns)
|
|
|
|
|
.where(eq(heartbeatRuns.id, blockedRunId))
|
|
|
|
|
.then((rows) => rows[0] ?? null),
|
|
|
|
|
db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({
|
|
|
|
|
status: agentWakeupRequests.status,
|
|
|
|
|
error: agentWakeupRequests.error,
|
|
|
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
|
.from(agentWakeupRequests)
|
|
|
|
|
.where(eq(agentWakeupRequests.id, blockedWakeupRequestId))
|
|
|
|
|
.then((rows) => rows[0] ?? null),
|
|
|
|
|
db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({
|
|
|
|
|
executionRunId: issues.executionRunId,
|
|
|
|
|
executionAgentNameKey: issues.executionAgentNameKey,
|
|
|
|
|
executionLockedAt: issues.executionLockedAt,
|
|
|
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
|
.from(issues)
|
|
|
|
|
.where(eq(issues.id, blockedIssueId))
|
|
|
|
|
.then((rows) => rows[0] ?? null),
|
|
|
|
|
db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({ status: heartbeatRuns.status })
|
|
|
|
|
.from(heartbeatRuns)
|
|
|
|
|
.where(eq(heartbeatRuns.id, readyRunId))
|
|
|
|
|
.then((rows) => rows[0] ?? null),
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(blockedRun?.status).toBe("cancelled");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(blockedRun?.errorCode).toBe("issue_dependencies_blocked");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(blockedRun?.finishedAt).toBeTruthy();
|
|
|
|
|
expect(blockedRun?.resultJson).toMatchObject({ stopReason: "issue_dependencies_blocked" });
|
|
|
|
|
expect(blockedWakeup?.status).toBe("skipped");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(blockedWakeup?.error).toContain("dependencies are still blocked");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(blockedIssue).toMatchObject({
|
|
|
|
|
executionRunId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
executionAgentNameKey: null,
|
|
|
|
|
executionLockedAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
expect(readyRun?.status).toBe("succeeded");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(mockAdapterExecute).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(1);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside this session).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [ ] 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
it("suppresses normal wakeups while allowing comment interaction wakes under a pause hold", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const companyId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const agentId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const rootIssueId = randomUUID();
|
[codex] Split backend control-plane QoL slice (#4700)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the control plane for autonomous AI companies, so
backend task ownership, recovery, review visibility, and company-scoped
limits need to stay enforceable without UI-only coupling.
> - Closed PR #4692 bundled those backend changes with UI workflow,
docs, skills, workflow, and lockfile churn.
> - PAP-2694 asks for a clean backend/control-plane slice from that
closed branch.
> - This branch starts from current `master` and mines only the `cli`,
`packages/db`, `packages/shared`, and `server` contracts/tests needed
for the backend behavior.
> - It explicitly excludes UI workflow/performance work,
`.github/workflows/pr.yml`, `pnpm-lock.yaml`, docs, skills,
package-script, adapter UI build-config, and perf fixture script
changes; the only UI files are fixture/test updates required by the
tightened shared `Company` contract.
> - The benefit is a smaller reviewable PR that preserves the
control-plane fixes while staying under Greptile s 100-file review
limit.
## What Changed
- Added company-scoped attachment-size limits through DB
schema/migrations, shared company portability contracts, CLI
import/export coverage, and server attachment upload enforcement.
- Added productivity review service/API behavior for no-comment streak,
long-active, and high-churn review issues, including request-depth
clamping and issue summary exposure.
- Hardened issue ownership and recovery/control-plane paths: peer-agent
mutation denial, issue tree pause/resume behavior, stranded recovery
origins, and related activity/test coverage.
- Preserved related backend contract updates for routine timestamp
variables and managed agent instruction bundles because they live in
shared/server contracts from the source branch.
- Addressed Greptile feedback by making `Company.attachmentMaxBytes`
non-optional, simplifying review request-depth clamping, fixing the
migration final newline, and enforcing the process-level attachment cap
as the final ceiling for uploads.
- Added minimal company fixtures needed for repo-wide typecheck/build
and kept the PR to 66 changed files with forbidden/non-slice paths
excluded.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `git diff --check origin/master..HEAD`
- `git diff --name-only origin/master..HEAD | wc -l` -> 66 files
- `git diff --name-only origin/master..HEAD -- .github/workflows/pr.yml
pnpm-lock.yaml package.json doc skills .agents scripts
packages/adapters` -> no output
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts
packages/shared/src/routine-variables.test.ts
packages/shared/src/adapter-types.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` -> 12 files, 147 tests
passed
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-delete.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts` -> 3 files, 18
tests passed
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts` -> 1 file, 6 tests
passed
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server
typecheck && pnpm --filter paperclipai typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/ui build`
## Risks
- Includes migrations `0073_shiny_salo.sql` and
`0074_striped_genesis.sql`; merge ordering matters if another PR adds
migrations first.
- This is intentionally backend-only apart from fixture/test updates
forced by shared type correctness; UI affordances from PR #4692 are not
present here and should land in separate UI slices.
- The worktree install emitted plugin SDK bin-link warnings for unbuilt
plugin packages, but the targeted tests and package typechecks completed
successfully.
> 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 16:46:45 -05:00
|
|
|
const issueChain = Array.from({ length: 17 }, () => randomUUID());
|
|
|
|
|
const deepDescendantIssueId = issueChain.at(-1)!;
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside this session).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [ ] 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(companies).values({
|
|
|
|
|
id: companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
name: "Paperclip",
|
|
|
|
|
issuePrefix: `T${companyId.replace(/-/g, "").slice(0, 6).toUpperCase()}`,
|
|
|
|
|
requireBoardApprovalForNewAgents: false,
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(agents).values({
|
|
|
|
|
id: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
name: "SecurityEngineer",
|
|
|
|
|
role: "engineer",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "active",
|
|
|
|
|
adapterType: "codex_local",
|
|
|
|
|
adapterConfig: {},
|
|
|
|
|
runtimeConfig: {
|
|
|
|
|
heartbeat: {
|
|
|
|
|
wakeOnDemand: true,
|
|
|
|
|
maxConcurrentRuns: 1,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
permissions: {},
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(issues).values([
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Paused root",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "todo",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "medium",
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeAgentId: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
[codex] Split backend control-plane QoL slice (#4700)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the control plane for autonomous AI companies, so
backend task ownership, recovery, review visibility, and company-scoped
limits need to stay enforceable without UI-only coupling.
> - Closed PR #4692 bundled those backend changes with UI workflow,
docs, skills, workflow, and lockfile churn.
> - PAP-2694 asks for a clean backend/control-plane slice from that
closed branch.
> - This branch starts from current `master` and mines only the `cli`,
`packages/db`, `packages/shared`, and `server` contracts/tests needed
for the backend behavior.
> - It explicitly excludes UI workflow/performance work,
`.github/workflows/pr.yml`, `pnpm-lock.yaml`, docs, skills,
package-script, adapter UI build-config, and perf fixture script
changes; the only UI files are fixture/test updates required by the
tightened shared `Company` contract.
> - The benefit is a smaller reviewable PR that preserves the
control-plane fixes while staying under Greptile s 100-file review
limit.
## What Changed
- Added company-scoped attachment-size limits through DB
schema/migrations, shared company portability contracts, CLI
import/export coverage, and server attachment upload enforcement.
- Added productivity review service/API behavior for no-comment streak,
long-active, and high-churn review issues, including request-depth
clamping and issue summary exposure.
- Hardened issue ownership and recovery/control-plane paths: peer-agent
mutation denial, issue tree pause/resume behavior, stranded recovery
origins, and related activity/test coverage.
- Preserved related backend contract updates for routine timestamp
variables and managed agent instruction bundles because they live in
shared/server contracts from the source branch.
- Addressed Greptile feedback by making `Company.attachmentMaxBytes`
non-optional, simplifying review request-depth clamping, fixing the
migration final newline, and enforcing the process-level attachment cap
as the final ceiling for uploads.
- Added minimal company fixtures needed for repo-wide typecheck/build
and kept the PR to 66 changed files with forbidden/non-slice paths
excluded.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `git diff --check origin/master..HEAD`
- `git diff --name-only origin/master..HEAD | wc -l` -> 66 files
- `git diff --name-only origin/master..HEAD -- .github/workflows/pr.yml
pnpm-lock.yaml package.json doc skills .agents scripts
packages/adapters` -> no output
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts
packages/shared/src/routine-variables.test.ts
packages/shared/src/adapter-types.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` -> 12 files, 147 tests
passed
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-delete.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts` -> 3 files, 18
tests passed
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts` -> 1 file, 6 tests
passed
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server
typecheck && pnpm --filter paperclipai typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/ui build`
## Risks
- Includes migrations `0073_shiny_salo.sql` and
`0074_striped_genesis.sql`; merge ordering matters if another PR adds
migrations first.
- This is intentionally backend-only apart from fixture/test updates
forced by shared type correctness; UI affordances from PR #4692 are not
present here and should land in separate UI slices.
- The worktree install emitted plugin SDK bin-link warnings for unbuilt
plugin packages, but the targeted tests and package typechecks completed
successfully.
> 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 16:46:45 -05:00
|
|
|
...issueChain.map((issueId, index) => ({
|
|
|
|
|
id: issueId,
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside this session).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [ ] 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
companyId,
|
[codex] Split backend control-plane QoL slice (#4700)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the control plane for autonomous AI companies, so
backend task ownership, recovery, review visibility, and company-scoped
limits need to stay enforceable without UI-only coupling.
> - Closed PR #4692 bundled those backend changes with UI workflow,
docs, skills, workflow, and lockfile churn.
> - PAP-2694 asks for a clean backend/control-plane slice from that
closed branch.
> - This branch starts from current `master` and mines only the `cli`,
`packages/db`, `packages/shared`, and `server` contracts/tests needed
for the backend behavior.
> - It explicitly excludes UI workflow/performance work,
`.github/workflows/pr.yml`, `pnpm-lock.yaml`, docs, skills,
package-script, adapter UI build-config, and perf fixture script
changes; the only UI files are fixture/test updates required by the
tightened shared `Company` contract.
> - The benefit is a smaller reviewable PR that preserves the
control-plane fixes while staying under Greptile s 100-file review
limit.
## What Changed
- Added company-scoped attachment-size limits through DB
schema/migrations, shared company portability contracts, CLI
import/export coverage, and server attachment upload enforcement.
- Added productivity review service/API behavior for no-comment streak,
long-active, and high-churn review issues, including request-depth
clamping and issue summary exposure.
- Hardened issue ownership and recovery/control-plane paths: peer-agent
mutation denial, issue tree pause/resume behavior, stranded recovery
origins, and related activity/test coverage.
- Preserved related backend contract updates for routine timestamp
variables and managed agent instruction bundles because they live in
shared/server contracts from the source branch.
- Addressed Greptile feedback by making `Company.attachmentMaxBytes`
non-optional, simplifying review request-depth clamping, fixing the
migration final newline, and enforcing the process-level attachment cap
as the final ceiling for uploads.
- Added minimal company fixtures needed for repo-wide typecheck/build
and kept the PR to 66 changed files with forbidden/non-slice paths
excluded.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `git diff --check origin/master..HEAD`
- `git diff --name-only origin/master..HEAD | wc -l` -> 66 files
- `git diff --name-only origin/master..HEAD -- .github/workflows/pr.yml
pnpm-lock.yaml package.json doc skills .agents scripts
packages/adapters` -> no output
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts
packages/shared/src/routine-variables.test.ts
packages/shared/src/adapter-types.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` -> 12 files, 147 tests
passed
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-delete.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts` -> 3 files, 18
tests passed
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts` -> 1 file, 6 tests
passed
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server
typecheck && pnpm --filter paperclipai typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/ui build`
## Risks
- Includes migrations `0073_shiny_salo.sql` and
`0074_striped_genesis.sql`; merge ordering matters if another PR adds
migrations first.
- This is intentionally backend-only apart from fixture/test updates
forced by shared type correctness; UI affordances from PR #4692 are not
present here and should land in separate UI slices.
- The worktree install emitted plugin SDK bin-link warnings for unbuilt
plugin packages, but the targeted tests and package typechecks completed
successfully.
> 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 16:46:45 -05:00
|
|
|
parentId: index === 0 ? rootIssueId : issueChain[index - 1],
|
|
|
|
|
title: `Paused desc ${index + 1}`,
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside this session).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [ ] 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
status: "todo",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "medium",
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeAgentId: agentId,
|
[codex] Split backend control-plane QoL slice (#4700)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the control plane for autonomous AI companies, so
backend task ownership, recovery, review visibility, and company-scoped
limits need to stay enforceable without UI-only coupling.
> - Closed PR #4692 bundled those backend changes with UI workflow,
docs, skills, workflow, and lockfile churn.
> - PAP-2694 asks for a clean backend/control-plane slice from that
closed branch.
> - This branch starts from current `master` and mines only the `cli`,
`packages/db`, `packages/shared`, and `server` contracts/tests needed
for the backend behavior.
> - It explicitly excludes UI workflow/performance work,
`.github/workflows/pr.yml`, `pnpm-lock.yaml`, docs, skills,
package-script, adapter UI build-config, and perf fixture script
changes; the only UI files are fixture/test updates required by the
tightened shared `Company` contract.
> - The benefit is a smaller reviewable PR that preserves the
control-plane fixes while staying under Greptile s 100-file review
limit.
## What Changed
- Added company-scoped attachment-size limits through DB
schema/migrations, shared company portability contracts, CLI
import/export coverage, and server attachment upload enforcement.
- Added productivity review service/API behavior for no-comment streak,
long-active, and high-churn review issues, including request-depth
clamping and issue summary exposure.
- Hardened issue ownership and recovery/control-plane paths: peer-agent
mutation denial, issue tree pause/resume behavior, stranded recovery
origins, and related activity/test coverage.
- Preserved related backend contract updates for routine timestamp
variables and managed agent instruction bundles because they live in
shared/server contracts from the source branch.
- Addressed Greptile feedback by making `Company.attachmentMaxBytes`
non-optional, simplifying review request-depth clamping, fixing the
migration final newline, and enforcing the process-level attachment cap
as the final ceiling for uploads.
- Added minimal company fixtures needed for repo-wide typecheck/build
and kept the PR to 66 changed files with forbidden/non-slice paths
excluded.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `git diff --check origin/master..HEAD`
- `git diff --name-only origin/master..HEAD | wc -l` -> 66 files
- `git diff --name-only origin/master..HEAD -- .github/workflows/pr.yml
pnpm-lock.yaml package.json doc skills .agents scripts
packages/adapters` -> no output
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts
packages/shared/src/routine-variables.test.ts
packages/shared/src/adapter-types.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` -> 12 files, 147 tests
passed
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-delete.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts` -> 3 files, 18
tests passed
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts` -> 1 file, 6 tests
passed
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server
typecheck && pnpm --filter paperclipai typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/ui build`
## Risks
- Includes migrations `0073_shiny_salo.sql` and
`0074_striped_genesis.sql`; merge ordering matters if another PR adds
migrations first.
- This is intentionally backend-only apart from fixture/test updates
forced by shared type correctness; UI affordances from PR #4692 are not
present here and should land in separate UI slices.
- The worktree install emitted plugin SDK bin-link warnings for unbuilt
plugin packages, but the targeted tests and package typechecks completed
successfully.
> 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 16:46:45 -05:00
|
|
|
})),
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside this session).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [ ] 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
const [hold] = await db
|
|
|
|
|
.insert(issueTreeHolds)
|
|
|
|
|
.values({
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
mode: "pause",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "active",
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "security test hold",
|
|
|
|
|
releasePolicy: { strategy: "manual" },
|
|
|
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
|
.returning();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const blockedWake = await heartbeat.wakeup(agentId, {
|
|
|
|
|
source: "automation",
|
|
|
|
|
triggerDetail: "system",
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "issue_blockers_resolved",
|
[codex] Split backend control-plane QoL slice (#4700)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the control plane for autonomous AI companies, so
backend task ownership, recovery, review visibility, and company-scoped
limits need to stay enforceable without UI-only coupling.
> - Closed PR #4692 bundled those backend changes with UI workflow,
docs, skills, workflow, and lockfile churn.
> - PAP-2694 asks for a clean backend/control-plane slice from that
closed branch.
> - This branch starts from current `master` and mines only the `cli`,
`packages/db`, `packages/shared`, and `server` contracts/tests needed
for the backend behavior.
> - It explicitly excludes UI workflow/performance work,
`.github/workflows/pr.yml`, `pnpm-lock.yaml`, docs, skills,
package-script, adapter UI build-config, and perf fixture script
changes; the only UI files are fixture/test updates required by the
tightened shared `Company` contract.
> - The benefit is a smaller reviewable PR that preserves the
control-plane fixes while staying under Greptile s 100-file review
limit.
## What Changed
- Added company-scoped attachment-size limits through DB
schema/migrations, shared company portability contracts, CLI
import/export coverage, and server attachment upload enforcement.
- Added productivity review service/API behavior for no-comment streak,
long-active, and high-churn review issues, including request-depth
clamping and issue summary exposure.
- Hardened issue ownership and recovery/control-plane paths: peer-agent
mutation denial, issue tree pause/resume behavior, stranded recovery
origins, and related activity/test coverage.
- Preserved related backend contract updates for routine timestamp
variables and managed agent instruction bundles because they live in
shared/server contracts from the source branch.
- Addressed Greptile feedback by making `Company.attachmentMaxBytes`
non-optional, simplifying review request-depth clamping, fixing the
migration final newline, and enforcing the process-level attachment cap
as the final ceiling for uploads.
- Added minimal company fixtures needed for repo-wide typecheck/build
and kept the PR to 66 changed files with forbidden/non-slice paths
excluded.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `git diff --check origin/master..HEAD`
- `git diff --name-only origin/master..HEAD | wc -l` -> 66 files
- `git diff --name-only origin/master..HEAD -- .github/workflows/pr.yml
pnpm-lock.yaml package.json doc skills .agents scripts
packages/adapters` -> no output
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts
packages/shared/src/routine-variables.test.ts
packages/shared/src/adapter-types.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` -> 12 files, 147 tests
passed
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-delete.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts` -> 3 files, 18
tests passed
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts` -> 1 file, 6 tests
passed
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server
typecheck && pnpm --filter paperclipai typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/ui build`
## Risks
- Includes migrations `0073_shiny_salo.sql` and
`0074_striped_genesis.sql`; merge ordering matters if another PR adds
migrations first.
- This is intentionally backend-only apart from fixture/test updates
forced by shared type correctness; UI affordances from PR #4692 are not
present here and should land in separate UI slices.
- The worktree install emitted plugin SDK bin-link warnings for unbuilt
plugin packages, but the targeted tests and package typechecks completed
successfully.
> 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 16:46:45 -05:00
|
|
|
payload: { issueId: deepDescendantIssueId },
|
|
|
|
|
contextSnapshot: { issueId: deepDescendantIssueId, wakeReason: "issue_blockers_resolved" },
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside this session).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [ ] 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(blockedWake).toBeNull();
|
|
|
|
|
const skippedWake = await db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({
|
|
|
|
|
status: agentWakeupRequests.status,
|
|
|
|
|
reason: agentWakeupRequests.reason,
|
|
|
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
|
.from(agentWakeupRequests)
|
[codex] Split backend control-plane QoL slice (#4700)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the control plane for autonomous AI companies, so
backend task ownership, recovery, review visibility, and company-scoped
limits need to stay enforceable without UI-only coupling.
> - Closed PR #4692 bundled those backend changes with UI workflow,
docs, skills, workflow, and lockfile churn.
> - PAP-2694 asks for a clean backend/control-plane slice from that
closed branch.
> - This branch starts from current `master` and mines only the `cli`,
`packages/db`, `packages/shared`, and `server` contracts/tests needed
for the backend behavior.
> - It explicitly excludes UI workflow/performance work,
`.github/workflows/pr.yml`, `pnpm-lock.yaml`, docs, skills,
package-script, adapter UI build-config, and perf fixture script
changes; the only UI files are fixture/test updates required by the
tightened shared `Company` contract.
> - The benefit is a smaller reviewable PR that preserves the
control-plane fixes while staying under Greptile s 100-file review
limit.
## What Changed
- Added company-scoped attachment-size limits through DB
schema/migrations, shared company portability contracts, CLI
import/export coverage, and server attachment upload enforcement.
- Added productivity review service/API behavior for no-comment streak,
long-active, and high-churn review issues, including request-depth
clamping and issue summary exposure.
- Hardened issue ownership and recovery/control-plane paths: peer-agent
mutation denial, issue tree pause/resume behavior, stranded recovery
origins, and related activity/test coverage.
- Preserved related backend contract updates for routine timestamp
variables and managed agent instruction bundles because they live in
shared/server contracts from the source branch.
- Addressed Greptile feedback by making `Company.attachmentMaxBytes`
non-optional, simplifying review request-depth clamping, fixing the
migration final newline, and enforcing the process-level attachment cap
as the final ceiling for uploads.
- Added minimal company fixtures needed for repo-wide typecheck/build
and kept the PR to 66 changed files with forbidden/non-slice paths
excluded.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `git diff --check origin/master..HEAD`
- `git diff --name-only origin/master..HEAD | wc -l` -> 66 files
- `git diff --name-only origin/master..HEAD -- .github/workflows/pr.yml
pnpm-lock.yaml package.json doc skills .agents scripts
packages/adapters` -> no output
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts
packages/shared/src/routine-variables.test.ts
packages/shared/src/adapter-types.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` -> 12 files, 147 tests
passed
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-delete.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts` -> 3 files, 18
tests passed
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts` -> 1 file, 6 tests
passed
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server
typecheck && pnpm --filter paperclipai typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/ui build`
## Risks
- Includes migrations `0073_shiny_salo.sql` and
`0074_striped_genesis.sql`; merge ordering matters if another PR adds
migrations first.
- This is intentionally backend-only apart from fixture/test updates
forced by shared type correctness; UI affordances from PR #4692 are not
present here and should land in separate UI slices.
- The worktree install emitted plugin SDK bin-link warnings for unbuilt
plugin packages, but the targeted tests and package typechecks completed
successfully.
> 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 16:46:45 -05:00
|
|
|
.where(sql`${agentWakeupRequests.payload} ->> 'issueId' = ${deepDescendantIssueId}`)
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside this session).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [ ] 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
.then((rows) => rows[0] ?? null);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(skippedWake).toMatchObject({ status: "skipped", reason: "issue_tree_hold_active" });
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-04-24 15:50:32 -05:00
|
|
|
const childCommentId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(issueComments).values({
|
|
|
|
|
id: childCommentId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
[codex] Split backend control-plane QoL slice (#4700)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the control plane for autonomous AI companies, so
backend task ownership, recovery, review visibility, and company-scoped
limits need to stay enforceable without UI-only coupling.
> - Closed PR #4692 bundled those backend changes with UI workflow,
docs, skills, workflow, and lockfile churn.
> - PAP-2694 asks for a clean backend/control-plane slice from that
closed branch.
> - This branch starts from current `master` and mines only the `cli`,
`packages/db`, `packages/shared`, and `server` contracts/tests needed
for the backend behavior.
> - It explicitly excludes UI workflow/performance work,
`.github/workflows/pr.yml`, `pnpm-lock.yaml`, docs, skills,
package-script, adapter UI build-config, and perf fixture script
changes; the only UI files are fixture/test updates required by the
tightened shared `Company` contract.
> - The benefit is a smaller reviewable PR that preserves the
control-plane fixes while staying under Greptile s 100-file review
limit.
## What Changed
- Added company-scoped attachment-size limits through DB
schema/migrations, shared company portability contracts, CLI
import/export coverage, and server attachment upload enforcement.
- Added productivity review service/API behavior for no-comment streak,
long-active, and high-churn review issues, including request-depth
clamping and issue summary exposure.
- Hardened issue ownership and recovery/control-plane paths: peer-agent
mutation denial, issue tree pause/resume behavior, stranded recovery
origins, and related activity/test coverage.
- Preserved related backend contract updates for routine timestamp
variables and managed agent instruction bundles because they live in
shared/server contracts from the source branch.
- Addressed Greptile feedback by making `Company.attachmentMaxBytes`
non-optional, simplifying review request-depth clamping, fixing the
migration final newline, and enforcing the process-level attachment cap
as the final ceiling for uploads.
- Added minimal company fixtures needed for repo-wide typecheck/build
and kept the PR to 66 changed files with forbidden/non-slice paths
excluded.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `git diff --check origin/master..HEAD`
- `git diff --name-only origin/master..HEAD | wc -l` -> 66 files
- `git diff --name-only origin/master..HEAD -- .github/workflows/pr.yml
pnpm-lock.yaml package.json doc skills .agents scripts
packages/adapters` -> no output
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts
packages/shared/src/routine-variables.test.ts
packages/shared/src/adapter-types.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` -> 12 files, 147 tests
passed
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-delete.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts` -> 3 files, 18
tests passed
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts` -> 1 file, 6 tests
passed
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server
typecheck && pnpm --filter paperclipai typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/ui build`
## Risks
- Includes migrations `0073_shiny_salo.sql` and
`0074_striped_genesis.sql`; merge ordering matters if another PR adds
migrations first.
- This is intentionally backend-only apart from fixture/test updates
forced by shared type correctness; UI affordances from PR #4692 are not
present here and should land in separate UI slices.
- The worktree install emitted plugin SDK bin-link warnings for unbuilt
plugin packages, but the targeted tests and package typechecks completed
successfully.
> 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 16:46:45 -05:00
|
|
|
issueId: deepDescendantIssueId,
|
2026-04-24 15:50:32 -05:00
|
|
|
authorUserId: "board-user",
|
|
|
|
|
body: "Please respond while this hold is active.",
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const forgedChildCommentWake = await heartbeat.wakeup(agentId, {
|
|
|
|
|
source: "on_demand",
|
|
|
|
|
triggerDetail: "manual",
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "issue_commented",
|
[codex] Split backend control-plane QoL slice (#4700)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the control plane for autonomous AI companies, so
backend task ownership, recovery, review visibility, and company-scoped
limits need to stay enforceable without UI-only coupling.
> - Closed PR #4692 bundled those backend changes with UI workflow,
docs, skills, workflow, and lockfile churn.
> - PAP-2694 asks for a clean backend/control-plane slice from that
closed branch.
> - This branch starts from current `master` and mines only the `cli`,
`packages/db`, `packages/shared`, and `server` contracts/tests needed
for the backend behavior.
> - It explicitly excludes UI workflow/performance work,
`.github/workflows/pr.yml`, `pnpm-lock.yaml`, docs, skills,
package-script, adapter UI build-config, and perf fixture script
changes; the only UI files are fixture/test updates required by the
tightened shared `Company` contract.
> - The benefit is a smaller reviewable PR that preserves the
control-plane fixes while staying under Greptile s 100-file review
limit.
## What Changed
- Added company-scoped attachment-size limits through DB
schema/migrations, shared company portability contracts, CLI
import/export coverage, and server attachment upload enforcement.
- Added productivity review service/API behavior for no-comment streak,
long-active, and high-churn review issues, including request-depth
clamping and issue summary exposure.
- Hardened issue ownership and recovery/control-plane paths: peer-agent
mutation denial, issue tree pause/resume behavior, stranded recovery
origins, and related activity/test coverage.
- Preserved related backend contract updates for routine timestamp
variables and managed agent instruction bundles because they live in
shared/server contracts from the source branch.
- Addressed Greptile feedback by making `Company.attachmentMaxBytes`
non-optional, simplifying review request-depth clamping, fixing the
migration final newline, and enforcing the process-level attachment cap
as the final ceiling for uploads.
- Added minimal company fixtures needed for repo-wide typecheck/build
and kept the PR to 66 changed files with forbidden/non-slice paths
excluded.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `git diff --check origin/master..HEAD`
- `git diff --name-only origin/master..HEAD | wc -l` -> 66 files
- `git diff --name-only origin/master..HEAD -- .github/workflows/pr.yml
pnpm-lock.yaml package.json doc skills .agents scripts
packages/adapters` -> no output
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts
packages/shared/src/routine-variables.test.ts
packages/shared/src/adapter-types.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` -> 12 files, 147 tests
passed
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-delete.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts` -> 3 files, 18
tests passed
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts` -> 1 file, 6 tests
passed
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server
typecheck && pnpm --filter paperclipai typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/ui build`
## Risks
- Includes migrations `0073_shiny_salo.sql` and
`0074_striped_genesis.sql`; merge ordering matters if another PR adds
migrations first.
- This is intentionally backend-only apart from fixture/test updates
forced by shared type correctness; UI affordances from PR #4692 are not
present here and should land in separate UI slices.
- The worktree install emitted plugin SDK bin-link warnings for unbuilt
plugin packages, but the targeted tests and package typechecks completed
successfully.
> 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 16:46:45 -05:00
|
|
|
payload: { issueId: deepDescendantIssueId, commentId: childCommentId },
|
2026-04-24 15:50:32 -05:00
|
|
|
requestedByActorType: "agent",
|
|
|
|
|
requestedByActorId: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
expect(forgedChildCommentWake).toBeNull();
|
|
|
|
|
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside this session).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [ ] 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
const childCommentWake = await heartbeat.wakeup(agentId, {
|
|
|
|
|
source: "automation",
|
|
|
|
|
triggerDetail: "system",
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "issue_commented",
|
[codex] Split backend control-plane QoL slice (#4700)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the control plane for autonomous AI companies, so
backend task ownership, recovery, review visibility, and company-scoped
limits need to stay enforceable without UI-only coupling.
> - Closed PR #4692 bundled those backend changes with UI workflow,
docs, skills, workflow, and lockfile churn.
> - PAP-2694 asks for a clean backend/control-plane slice from that
closed branch.
> - This branch starts from current `master` and mines only the `cli`,
`packages/db`, `packages/shared`, and `server` contracts/tests needed
for the backend behavior.
> - It explicitly excludes UI workflow/performance work,
`.github/workflows/pr.yml`, `pnpm-lock.yaml`, docs, skills,
package-script, adapter UI build-config, and perf fixture script
changes; the only UI files are fixture/test updates required by the
tightened shared `Company` contract.
> - The benefit is a smaller reviewable PR that preserves the
control-plane fixes while staying under Greptile s 100-file review
limit.
## What Changed
- Added company-scoped attachment-size limits through DB
schema/migrations, shared company portability contracts, CLI
import/export coverage, and server attachment upload enforcement.
- Added productivity review service/API behavior for no-comment streak,
long-active, and high-churn review issues, including request-depth
clamping and issue summary exposure.
- Hardened issue ownership and recovery/control-plane paths: peer-agent
mutation denial, issue tree pause/resume behavior, stranded recovery
origins, and related activity/test coverage.
- Preserved related backend contract updates for routine timestamp
variables and managed agent instruction bundles because they live in
shared/server contracts from the source branch.
- Addressed Greptile feedback by making `Company.attachmentMaxBytes`
non-optional, simplifying review request-depth clamping, fixing the
migration final newline, and enforcing the process-level attachment cap
as the final ceiling for uploads.
- Added minimal company fixtures needed for repo-wide typecheck/build
and kept the PR to 66 changed files with forbidden/non-slice paths
excluded.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `git diff --check origin/master..HEAD`
- `git diff --name-only origin/master..HEAD | wc -l` -> 66 files
- `git diff --name-only origin/master..HEAD -- .github/workflows/pr.yml
pnpm-lock.yaml package.json doc skills .agents scripts
packages/adapters` -> no output
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts
packages/shared/src/routine-variables.test.ts
packages/shared/src/adapter-types.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` -> 12 files, 147 tests
passed
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-delete.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts` -> 3 files, 18
tests passed
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts` -> 1 file, 6 tests
passed
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server
typecheck && pnpm --filter paperclipai typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/ui build`
## Risks
- Includes migrations `0073_shiny_salo.sql` and
`0074_striped_genesis.sql`; merge ordering matters if another PR adds
migrations first.
- This is intentionally backend-only apart from fixture/test updates
forced by shared type correctness; UI affordances from PR #4692 are not
present here and should land in separate UI slices.
- The worktree install emitted plugin SDK bin-link warnings for unbuilt
plugin packages, but the targeted tests and package typechecks completed
successfully.
> 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 16:46:45 -05:00
|
|
|
payload: { issueId: deepDescendantIssueId, commentId: childCommentId },
|
2026-04-24 15:50:32 -05:00
|
|
|
requestedByActorType: "user",
|
|
|
|
|
requestedByActorId: "board-user",
|
|
|
|
|
contextSnapshot: {
|
[codex] Split backend control-plane QoL slice (#4700)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the control plane for autonomous AI companies, so
backend task ownership, recovery, review visibility, and company-scoped
limits need to stay enforceable without UI-only coupling.
> - Closed PR #4692 bundled those backend changes with UI workflow,
docs, skills, workflow, and lockfile churn.
> - PAP-2694 asks for a clean backend/control-plane slice from that
closed branch.
> - This branch starts from current `master` and mines only the `cli`,
`packages/db`, `packages/shared`, and `server` contracts/tests needed
for the backend behavior.
> - It explicitly excludes UI workflow/performance work,
`.github/workflows/pr.yml`, `pnpm-lock.yaml`, docs, skills,
package-script, adapter UI build-config, and perf fixture script
changes; the only UI files are fixture/test updates required by the
tightened shared `Company` contract.
> - The benefit is a smaller reviewable PR that preserves the
control-plane fixes while staying under Greptile s 100-file review
limit.
## What Changed
- Added company-scoped attachment-size limits through DB
schema/migrations, shared company portability contracts, CLI
import/export coverage, and server attachment upload enforcement.
- Added productivity review service/API behavior for no-comment streak,
long-active, and high-churn review issues, including request-depth
clamping and issue summary exposure.
- Hardened issue ownership and recovery/control-plane paths: peer-agent
mutation denial, issue tree pause/resume behavior, stranded recovery
origins, and related activity/test coverage.
- Preserved related backend contract updates for routine timestamp
variables and managed agent instruction bundles because they live in
shared/server contracts from the source branch.
- Addressed Greptile feedback by making `Company.attachmentMaxBytes`
non-optional, simplifying review request-depth clamping, fixing the
migration final newline, and enforcing the process-level attachment cap
as the final ceiling for uploads.
- Added minimal company fixtures needed for repo-wide typecheck/build
and kept the PR to 66 changed files with forbidden/non-slice paths
excluded.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `git diff --check origin/master..HEAD`
- `git diff --name-only origin/master..HEAD | wc -l` -> 66 files
- `git diff --name-only origin/master..HEAD -- .github/workflows/pr.yml
pnpm-lock.yaml package.json doc skills .agents scripts
packages/adapters` -> no output
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts
packages/shared/src/routine-variables.test.ts
packages/shared/src/adapter-types.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` -> 12 files, 147 tests
passed
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-delete.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts` -> 3 files, 18
tests passed
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts` -> 1 file, 6 tests
passed
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server
typecheck && pnpm --filter paperclipai typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/ui build`
## Risks
- Includes migrations `0073_shiny_salo.sql` and
`0074_striped_genesis.sql`; merge ordering matters if another PR adds
migrations first.
- This is intentionally backend-only apart from fixture/test updates
forced by shared type correctness; UI affordances from PR #4692 are not
present here and should land in separate UI slices.
- The worktree install emitted plugin SDK bin-link warnings for unbuilt
plugin packages, but the targeted tests and package typechecks completed
successfully.
> 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 16:46:45 -05:00
|
|
|
issueId: deepDescendantIssueId,
|
2026-04-24 15:50:32 -05:00
|
|
|
commentId: childCommentId,
|
|
|
|
|
wakeCommentId: childCommentId,
|
|
|
|
|
wakeReason: "issue_commented",
|
|
|
|
|
source: "issue.comment",
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside this session).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [ ] 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(childCommentWake).not.toBeNull();
|
|
|
|
|
const childRun = await db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({ contextSnapshot: heartbeatRuns.contextSnapshot })
|
|
|
|
|
.from(heartbeatRuns)
|
|
|
|
|
.where(eq(heartbeatRuns.id, childCommentWake!.id))
|
|
|
|
|
.then((rows) => rows[0] ?? null);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(childRun?.contextSnapshot).toMatchObject({
|
|
|
|
|
treeHoldInteraction: true,
|
|
|
|
|
activeTreeHold: {
|
|
|
|
|
holdId: hold.id,
|
|
|
|
|
rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
mode: "pause",
|
|
|
|
|
interaction: true,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("allows comment interaction wakes when a legacy hold has a full_pause note", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const companyId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const agentId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const rootIssueId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(companies).values({
|
|
|
|
|
id: companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
name: "Paperclip",
|
|
|
|
|
issuePrefix: `T${companyId.replace(/-/g, "").slice(0, 6).toUpperCase()}`,
|
|
|
|
|
requireBoardApprovalForNewAgents: false,
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(agents).values({
|
|
|
|
|
id: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
name: "SecurityEngineer",
|
|
|
|
|
role: "engineer",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "active",
|
|
|
|
|
adapterType: "codex_local",
|
|
|
|
|
adapterConfig: {},
|
|
|
|
|
runtimeConfig: {
|
|
|
|
|
heartbeat: {
|
|
|
|
|
wakeOnDemand: true,
|
|
|
|
|
maxConcurrentRuns: 1,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
permissions: {},
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(issues).values({
|
|
|
|
|
id: rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Paused root",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "todo",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "medium",
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeAgentId: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(issueTreeHolds).values({
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
mode: "pause",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "active",
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "full pause",
|
|
|
|
|
releasePolicy: { strategy: "manual", note: "full_pause" },
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-04-24 15:50:32 -05:00
|
|
|
const rootCommentId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(issueComments).values({
|
|
|
|
|
id: rootCommentId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
issueId: rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
authorUserId: "board-user",
|
|
|
|
|
body: "Please respond while this hold is active.",
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside this session).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [ ] 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
const rootCommentWake = await heartbeat.wakeup(agentId, {
|
|
|
|
|
source: "automation",
|
|
|
|
|
triggerDetail: "system",
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "issue_commented",
|
2026-04-24 15:50:32 -05:00
|
|
|
payload: { issueId: rootIssueId, commentId: rootCommentId },
|
|
|
|
|
requestedByActorType: "user",
|
|
|
|
|
requestedByActorId: "board-user",
|
|
|
|
|
contextSnapshot: {
|
|
|
|
|
issueId: rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
commentId: rootCommentId,
|
|
|
|
|
wakeCommentId: rootCommentId,
|
|
|
|
|
wakeReason: "issue_commented",
|
|
|
|
|
source: "issue.comment",
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside this session).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [ ] 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(rootCommentWake).not.toBeNull();
|
|
|
|
|
const rootRun = await db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({ contextSnapshot: heartbeatRuns.contextSnapshot })
|
|
|
|
|
.from(heartbeatRuns)
|
|
|
|
|
.where(eq(heartbeatRuns.id, rootCommentWake!.id))
|
|
|
|
|
.then((rows) => rows[0] ?? null);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(rootRun?.contextSnapshot).toMatchObject({
|
|
|
|
|
treeHoldInteraction: true,
|
|
|
|
|
activeTreeHold: {
|
|
|
|
|
rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
mode: "pause",
|
|
|
|
|
interaction: true,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
2026-04-20 16:03:57 -05:00
|
|
|
});
|