mirror of
https://github.com/alkimake/paperclip.git
synced 2026-06-15 10:30:37 +09:00
Harden control-plane safety and issue identifiers (#5292)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip relies on issue identifiers, execution policies, and agent heartbeat rules to keep autonomous work auditable. > - Safety checks need to reject ambiguous agent handoffs, and identifier parsing needs to support Cloud tenant prefixes. > - Agent instructions also need to make final-disposition rules explicit so work does not stall in vague states. > - This pull request isolates backend correctness and governance hardening from the UI and recovery-system-notice branches. > - The benefit is safer in-review transitions, better identifier compatibility, and clearer agent operating contracts. ## What Changed - Fixed run-aware confirmation ordering and interrupted-run state cleanup. - Added Cloud tenant identity bootstrap and alphanumeric issue identifier support across shared parsing and server routes. - Guarded agent-authored `in_review` updates unless a real review path exists. - Tightened heartbeat disposition instructions in adapter utilities/default AGENTS/Paperclip skill. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/issue-references.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-identifier-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-execution-policy-routes.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts` initially had the first execution-policy test hit Vitest's 5s timeout under the parallel bundle while the rest passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-execution-policy-routes.test.ts --testTimeout=20000` passed with 10/10 tests. - Follow-up: `pnpm run typecheck:build-gaps` passed. - Follow-up: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` passed. - Follow-up: `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts server/src/__tests__/costs-service.test.ts` passed. - Follow-up: `pnpm vitest run ui/src/context/LiveUpdatesProvider.test.ts ui/src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts ui/src/lib/issue-reference.test.ts ui/src/lib/issue-timeline-events.test.ts` passed. ## Risks - Medium control-plane risk: in-review update validation changes agent behavior. The error message is explicit and tests cover allowed review paths. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-5 Codex via Paperclip `codex_local` adapter, with shell/git/GitHub CLI tool use. ## 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>
This commit is contained in:
Dotta
GitHub
parent
a1b30c9f35
commit
68f69975a4
17 changed files with 875 additions and 90 deletions
|
|
@ -330,11 +330,24 @@ describe("LiveUpdatesProvider issue invalidation", () => {
|
|||
executionAgentNameKey: "codexcoder",
|
||||
executionLockedAt: new Date("2026-04-08T21:00:00.000Z"),
|
||||
}],
|
||||
[JSON.stringify(queryKeys.issues.detail("issue-1")), {
|
||||
id: "issue-1",
|
||||
identifier: "PAP-759",
|
||||
assigneeAgentId: "agent-1",
|
||||
executionRunId: "run-1",
|
||||
executionAgentNameKey: "codexcoder",
|
||||
executionLockedAt: new Date("2026-04-08T21:00:00.000Z"),
|
||||
}],
|
||||
[JSON.stringify(queryKeys.issues.activeRun("PAP-759")), {
|
||||
id: "run-1",
|
||||
}],
|
||||
[JSON.stringify(queryKeys.issues.activeRun("issue-1")), {
|
||||
id: "run-1",
|
||||
}],
|
||||
[JSON.stringify(queryKeys.issues.liveRuns("PAP-759")), [{ id: "run-1" }]],
|
||||
[JSON.stringify(queryKeys.issues.liveRuns("issue-1")), [{ id: "run-1" }]],
|
||||
[JSON.stringify(queryKeys.issues.runs("PAP-759")), [{ runId: "run-1" }]],
|
||||
[JSON.stringify(queryKeys.issues.runs("issue-1")), [{ runId: "run-1" }]],
|
||||
]);
|
||||
const queryClient = {
|
||||
invalidateQueries: (input: unknown) => {
|
||||
|
|
@ -377,6 +390,9 @@ describe("LiveUpdatesProvider issue invalidation", () => {
|
|||
expect(invalidations).toContainEqual({
|
||||
queryKey: queryKeys.issues.activeRun("PAP-759"),
|
||||
});
|
||||
expect(invalidations).toContainEqual({
|
||||
queryKey: queryKeys.issues.activeRun("issue-1"),
|
||||
});
|
||||
expect(cache.get(JSON.stringify(queryKeys.issues.activeRun("PAP-759")))).toBeNull();
|
||||
expect(cache.get(JSON.stringify(queryKeys.issues.liveRuns("PAP-759")))).toEqual([]);
|
||||
expect(cache.get(JSON.stringify(queryKeys.issues.detail("PAP-759")))).toMatchObject({
|
||||
|
|
@ -384,6 +400,13 @@ describe("LiveUpdatesProvider issue invalidation", () => {
|
|||
executionAgentNameKey: null,
|
||||
executionLockedAt: null,
|
||||
});
|
||||
expect(cache.get(JSON.stringify(queryKeys.issues.activeRun("issue-1")))).toBeNull();
|
||||
expect(cache.get(JSON.stringify(queryKeys.issues.liveRuns("issue-1")))).toEqual([]);
|
||||
expect(cache.get(JSON.stringify(queryKeys.issues.detail("issue-1")))).toMatchObject({
|
||||
executionRunId: null,
|
||||
executionAgentNameKey: null,
|
||||
executionLockedAt: null,
|
||||
});
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
it("ignores run status events for other issues", () => {
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -279,25 +279,29 @@ function invalidateVisibleIssueRunQueries(
|
|||
|
||||
const status = readString(payload.status);
|
||||
if (runId && status && TERMINAL_RUN_STATUSES.has(status)) {
|
||||
queryClient.setQueryData(
|
||||
queryKeys.issues.liveRuns(context.routeIssueRef),
|
||||
(current: LiveRunForIssue[] | undefined) => removeLiveRunById(current, runId),
|
||||
);
|
||||
queryClient.setQueryData(
|
||||
queryKeys.issues.activeRun(context.routeIssueRef),
|
||||
(current: ActiveRunForIssue | null | undefined) => (current?.id === runId ? null : current),
|
||||
);
|
||||
queryClient.setQueryData(
|
||||
queryKeys.issues.detail(context.routeIssueRef),
|
||||
(current: Issue | undefined) => clearIssueExecutionRun(current, runId),
|
||||
);
|
||||
for (const issueRef of context.issueRefs) {
|
||||
queryClient.setQueryData(
|
||||
queryKeys.issues.liveRuns(issueRef),
|
||||
(current: LiveRunForIssue[] | undefined) => removeLiveRunById(current, runId),
|
||||
);
|
||||
queryClient.setQueryData(
|
||||
queryKeys.issues.activeRun(issueRef),
|
||||
(current: ActiveRunForIssue | null | undefined) => (current?.id === runId ? null : current),
|
||||
);
|
||||
queryClient.setQueryData(
|
||||
queryKeys.issues.detail(issueRef),
|
||||
(current: Issue | undefined) => clearIssueExecutionRun(current, runId),
|
||||
);
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
queryClient.invalidateQueries({ queryKey: queryKeys.issues.detail(context.routeIssueRef) });
|
||||
queryClient.invalidateQueries({ queryKey: queryKeys.issues.activity(context.routeIssueRef) });
|
||||
queryClient.invalidateQueries({ queryKey: queryKeys.issues.runs(context.routeIssueRef) });
|
||||
queryClient.invalidateQueries({ queryKey: queryKeys.issues.liveRuns(context.routeIssueRef) });
|
||||
queryClient.invalidateQueries({ queryKey: queryKeys.issues.activeRun(context.routeIssueRef) });
|
||||
for (const issueRef of context.issueRefs) {
|
||||
queryClient.invalidateQueries({ queryKey: queryKeys.issues.detail(issueRef) });
|
||||
queryClient.invalidateQueries({ queryKey: queryKeys.issues.activity(issueRef) });
|
||||
queryClient.invalidateQueries({ queryKey: queryKeys.issues.runs(issueRef) });
|
||||
queryClient.invalidateQueries({ queryKey: queryKeys.issues.liveRuns(issueRef) });
|
||||
queryClient.invalidateQueries({ queryKey: queryKeys.issues.activeRun(issueRef) });
|
||||
}
|
||||
return true;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue