Commit Graph

5 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Devin Foley 04173b341d fix: resolve secret refs before sandbox draft probes (#8256)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the control plane operators use to manage agent
execution environments, including plugin-declared sandbox providers.
> - The failing user path here was `Test draft` for an unsaved sandbox
environment using a schema field marked `format: "secret-ref"`.
> - Saved environments already resolve secret refs before provider use,
but the unsaved probe path was forwarding the selected secret UUID
directly to the provider, which made Novita draft probes fail.
> - Fixing that safely required a probe-only secret resolution path with
explicit actor authorization and audit context, because an unsaved draft
has no persisted environment binding to authorize against.
> - Once that was fixed, CI and review surfaced follow-up hardening
work: preserve actor source through the draft-probe path, prevent late
heartbeat finalization from overwriting already-terminal runs, avoid
duplicate successful-run handoff wakes for comment-driven runs, make SSH
git ref updates tolerate concurrent managed-runtime restores, and keep
the skills catalog build from failing on transient GitHub errors for
pinned references.
> - The result is that Novita draft probes now behave like saved
environments, the new secret access path is constrained and audited, and
the PR is green end-to-end with Greptile at 5/5.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No matching public GitHub issue was found after searching open and
closed Paperclip issues for `novita`. Related PR search found
[#8255](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/8255), but it
addresses Novita/dev-SDK linking rather than this draft probe bug.

Bug summary:
- What happened?
When a board user configured a sandbox environment backed by a
schema-driven plugin provider such as Novita, selecting an existing
company secret for `apiKey` and clicking `Test draft` failed because the
probe received the secret UUID instead of the resolved secret value.
- Expected behavior
`Test draft` should resolve secret-ref fields before calling the
provider probe, just like the saved runtime path does.
- Steps to reproduce
  1. Open `Company Settings -> Environments`.
2. Create or edit a `Sandbox` environment using a provider with a
`format: "secret-ref"` field such as `Novita Agent Sandbox`.
  3. Select an existing company secret for `apiKey`.
  4. Click `Test draft`.
  5. Observe the probe failure before this patch.
- Paperclip version or commit
Reproduced on a local `master` dev checkout; fixed and verified on
branch commit `ed982d0c0`.
- Deployment mode
  Local dev (`pnpm dev`).
- Installation method
  Built from source (`pnpm dev` / `pnpm build`).
- Agent adapter(s) involved
Not adapter-specific in the core bug path; affects schema-driven sandbox
provider plugins such as Novita.
- Database mode
  Not database-related.
- Access context
  Board (human operator).
- Node.js version
  `v25.6.1`.
- Operating system
  `macOS 15.7.4`.
- Relevant logs or output
The user-visible failure was `Novita sandbox probe failed` during `Test
draft`.

## What Changed

- Resolved schema-marked secret-ref fields during unsaved sandbox
environment probes by adding a dedicated probe-time secret resolution
path in `environment-config.ts`.
- Passed `companyId` plus the full authenticated actor context into the
draft probe normalization route so secret resolution stays
company-scoped, authorized, and auditable.
- Hardened ephemeral secret resolution so unsaved probes require
`secrets:read`, preserve the original actor source (`local_implicit`,
`agent_jwt`, etc.), and emit usable audit metadata.
- Added a conditional heartbeat run-status update so late adapter
completions cannot overwrite runs that were already cancelled or
otherwise terminal.
- Skipped successful-run handoff synthesis for comment-driven wakes,
which removes the extra wake/run that was breaking
`heartbeat-comment-wake-batching`.
- Retried managed-runtime SSH git ref updates on concurrent ref-lock
races instead of failing the restore path.
- Reused the previous skills-catalog manifest entry when a pinned GitHub
reference fails with a recoverable transient error during CI catalog
generation.
- Added focused regression coverage for the draft probe, ephemeral
secret access, heartbeat handoff behavior, SSH ref-lock races, and
catalog fallback behavior.

## Verification

- `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/environment-routes.test.ts`
- `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts`
- `pnpm vitest run
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts`
- `pnpm vitest run
server/src/services/recovery/successful-run-handoff.test.ts`
- `pnpm vitest run
server/src/__tests__/openclaw-gateway-adapter.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/ssh-fixture.test.ts
-t "merges concurrent remote commits through the managed runtime restore
path"`
- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/skills-catalog/src/catalog-builder.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/skills-catalog build`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils build`
- `gh pr checks 8256`
- Manual/live validation: the same fix was cherry-picked into the
running local dev checkout and the user re-tested the Novita `Test
draft` flow successfully after the server restart.

## Risks

- Low risk: the Novita-specific user-facing fix is isolated to unsaved
sandbox draft probes for plugin schema fields marked `format:
"secret-ref"`.
- The new ephemeral secret resolution path is intentionally stricter
than the original broken behavior; regressions would most likely show up
as denied draft probes rather than accidental secret exposure.
- The heartbeat, SSH, and catalog changes are all defensive; if they
regress, they should affect test/CI orchestration paths rather than
persisted company data.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex Local (`codex_local` in Paperclip). The runtime does not
expose the exact backend model ID in agent metadata. GPT-5-class coding
model with shell/tool use, repository editing, test execution, GitHub
review handling, and issue-thread coordination.

## 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [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] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-06-18 07:48:09 -07:00
Dotta 778e775c35 Add secrets provider vaults and remote import (#5429)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip orchestrates AI-agent companies and needs secrets handling
to work across local development, hosted operators, and governed agent
execution.
> - The affected subsystem is the company-scoped secrets control plane:
database schema, server services/routes, CLI workflows, and the Secrets
settings UI.
> - The gap was that secrets were local-only and operators could not
manage provider vaults or import existing remote references without
exposing plaintext.
> - This branch adds provider vault configuration plus an AWS Secrets
Manager remote-import path while preserving company boundaries, binding
context, and audit trails.
> - I kept the PR to a single branch PR, removed unrelated
lockfile/package drift, rebased the full branch onto the current
`public-gh/master`, and addressed fresh Greptile findings.
> - The benefit is a reviewable implementation of provider-backed
secrets with focused tests covering provider selection, import
conflicts, deleted secret reuse, rotation guards, and AWS signing
behavior.

## What Changed

- Added provider vault support for company secrets, including provider
config storage, default vault handling, health checks, binding usage,
access events, and remote import preview/commit.
- Added an AWS Secrets Manager provider using SigV4 request signing,
bounded request timeouts, namespace guardrails, cached runtime
credential resolution, and external-reference linking without plaintext
reads.
- Added Secrets UI surfaces for vault management and remote import, plus
CLI/API documentation for setup and operations.
- Stabilized routine webhook secret binding paths and SSH
environment-driver fixture bindings discovered during verification.
- Addressed Greptile and CI findings: no lockfile/package drift,
monotonic migration metadata, disabled-vault default races, soft-deleted
secret hiding/recreate behavior, remove behavior with disabled vaults,
soft-deleted external-reference re-import, non-active rotation guards,
managed-secret soft deletion through PATCH, and per-call AWS SDK
credential client churn.
- Rebased this branch onto `public-gh/master` at `0e1a5828` and
force-pushed with lease to keep this as the single PR for the branch.

## Verification

- `git fetch public-gh master`
- `git rebase public-gh/master`
- `git diff --name-only public-gh/master...HEAD | grep
'^pnpm-lock\.yaml$' || true` confirmed `pnpm-lock.yaml` is not in the PR
diff.
- Confirmed migration ordering: master ends at `0081_optimal_dormammu`;
this PR adds `0082_dry_vision` and
`0083_company_secret_provider_configs`.
- Inspected migrations for repeat safety: new tables/indexes use `IF NOT
EXISTS`; foreign keys are guarded by `DO $$ ... IF NOT EXISTS`; column
additions use `ADD COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS`.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed before the Greptile follow-up commits.
- `pnpm test:run` ran the full stable Vitest path before the Greptile
follow-up commits; it completed with 3 timing-related failures under
parallel load: `codex-local-execute.test.ts`,
`cursor-local-execute.test.ts`, and `environment-service.test.ts`.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/codex-local-execute.test.ts
src/__tests__/cursor-local-execute.test.ts
src/__tests__/environment-service.test.ts` passed on targeted rerun
(`24/24`).
- `pnpm build` passed before the Greptile follow-up commits. Vite
reported existing chunk-size/dynamic-import warnings.
- After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server
exec vitest run src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` passed (`26/26`).
- After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server
exec vitest run src/__tests__/aws-secrets-manager-provider.test.ts
src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` passed (`39/39`).
- After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server
typecheck` passed.
- Captured Storybook screenshots from `ui/storybook-static` for visual
review.
- Latest PR checks on `5ca3a5cf`: `policy`, serialized server suites
1/4-4/4, `Canary Dry Run`, `e2e`, `security/snyk`, and `Greptile Review`
pass; aggregate `verify` is still registering the completed child
checks.
- Greptile review loop continued through the latest requested pass; all
Greptile review threads are resolved and the latest `Greptile Review`
check on `5ca3a5cf` passed with 0 comments added.

## Screenshots

Before: the provider-vault and remote-import surfaces did not exist on
`master`; these are after-state screenshots from the Storybook fixtures.

![Secrets
inventory](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-2339-secrets-make-a-plan/doc/pr/5429/secrets-inventory.png)

![Secret binding
picker](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-2339-secrets-make-a-plan/doc/pr/5429/secret-binding-picker.png)

![Environment editor with
secrets](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-2339-secrets-make-a-plan/doc/pr/5429/env-editor-with-secrets.png)

## Risks

- Migration risk: this adds new secret provider tables and extends
existing secret rows. The migrations were checked for monotonic ordering
and idempotent guards, but reviewers should still inspect upgrade
behavior carefully.
- Provider risk: AWS support uses direct SigV4 requests. Automated tests
cover signing, request timeouts, vault-config selection, namespace
guardrails, pending-version archival, sanitized provider errors, and
service-level cleanup paths. A real-vault AWS smoke test remains
deployment validation for an operator with AWS credentials rather than
an unverified merge blocker in this local branch.
- UI risk: the Secrets page and import dialog are large new surfaces;
screenshots are included above for reviewer inspection.
- Verification risk: the full local stable test command hit
parallel-load timing failures, although the exact failed files passed
when rerun directly.
- Operational risk: remote import intentionally avoids plaintext reads;
operators must understand that imported external references resolve at
runtime and may fail if AWS permissions change.

> 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 with local shell/tool use in the
Paperclip worktree. Exact context-window size was not exposed by the
runtime.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-09 18:22:17 -05:00
Devin Foley 5bd0f578fd Generalize sandbox provider core for plugin-only providers (#4449)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is a control plane, so optional execution providers should
sit at the plugin edge instead of hardcoding provider-specific behavior
into core shared/server/ui layers.
> - Sandbox environments are already first-class, and the fake provider
proves the built-in path; the remaining gap was that real providers
still leaked provider-specific config and runtime assumptions into core.
> - That coupling showed up in config normalization, secret persistence,
capabilities reporting, lease reconstruction, and the board UI form
fields.
> - As long as core knew about those provider-shaped details, shipping a
provider as a pure third-party plugin meant every new provider would
still require host changes.
> - This pull request generalizes the sandbox provider seam around
schema-driven plugin metadata and generic secret-ref handling.
> - The runtime and UI now consume provider metadata generically, so
core only special-cases the built-in fake provider while third-party
providers can live entirely in plugins.

## What Changed

- Added generic sandbox-provider capability metadata so plugin-backed
providers can expose `configSchema` through shared environment support
and the environments capabilities API.
- Reworked sandbox config normalization/persistence/runtime resolution
to handle schema-declared secret-ref fields generically, storing them as
Paperclip secrets and resolving them for probe/execute/release flows.
- Generalized plugin sandbox runtime handling so provider validation,
reusable-lease matching, lease reconstruction, and plugin worker calls
all operate on provider-agnostic config instead of provider-shaped
branches.
- Replaced hardcoded sandbox provider form fields in Company Settings
with schema-driven rendering and blocked agent environment selection
from the built-in fake provider.
- Added regression coverage for the generic seam across shared support
helpers plus environment config, probe, routes, runtime, and
sandbox-provider runtime tests.

## Verification

- `pnpm vitest --run packages/shared/src/environment-support.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/environment-config.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/environment-probe.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/environment-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/environment-runtime.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/sandbox-provider-runtime.test.ts`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`

## Risks

- Plugin sandbox providers now depend more heavily on accurate
`configSchema` declarations; incorrect schemas can misclassify
secret-bearing fields or omit required config.
- Reusable lease matching is now metadata-driven for plugin-backed
providers, so providers that fail to persist stable metadata may
reprovision instead of resuming an existing lease.
- The UI form is now fully schema-driven for plugin-backed sandbox
providers; provider manifests without good defaults or descriptions may
produce a rougher operator experience.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex via `codex_local`
- Model ID: `gpt-5.4`
- Reasoning effort: `high`
- Context window observed in runtime session metadata: `258400` tokens
- Capabilities used: terminal tool execution, git, and local code/test
inspection

## 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
2026-04-24 18:03:41 -07:00
Devin Foley 70679a3321 Add sandbox environment support (#4415)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - The environment/runtime layer decides where agent work executes and
how the control plane reaches those runtimes.
> - Today Paperclip can run locally and over SSH, but sandboxed
execution needs a first-class environment model instead of one-off
adapter behavior.
> - We also want sandbox providers to be pluggable so the core does not
hardcode every provider implementation.
> - This branch adds the Sandbox environment path, the provider
contract, and a deterministic fake provider plugin.
> - That required synchronized changes across shared contracts, plugin
SDK surfaces, server runtime orchestration, and the UI
environment/workspace flows.
> - The result is that sandbox execution becomes a core control-plane
capability while keeping provider implementations extensible and
testable.

## What Changed

- Added sandbox runtime support to the environment execution path,
including runtime URL discovery, sandbox execution targeting,
orchestration, and heartbeat integration.
- Added plugin-provider support for sandbox environments so providers
can be supplied via plugins instead of hardcoded server logic.
- Added the fake sandbox provider plugin with deterministic behavior
suitable for local and automated testing.
- Updated shared types, validators, plugin protocol definitions, and SDK
helpers to carry sandbox provider and workspace-runtime contracts across
package boundaries.
- Updated server routes and services so companies can create sandbox
environments, select them for work, and execute work through the sandbox
runtime path.
- Updated the UI environment and workspace surfaces to expose sandbox
environment configuration and selection.
- Added test coverage for sandbox runtime behavior, provider seams,
environment route guards, orchestration, and the fake provider plugin.

## Verification

- Ran locally before the final fixture-only scrub:
  - `pnpm -r typecheck`
  - `pnpm test:run`
  - `pnpm build`
- Ran locally after the final scrub amend:
  - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/runtime-api.test.ts`
- Reviewer spot checks:
  - create a sandbox environment backed by the fake provider plugin
  - run work through that environment
- confirm sandbox provider execution does not inherit host secrets
implicitly

## Risks

- This touches shared contracts, plugin SDK plumbing, server runtime
orchestration, and UI environment/workspace flows, so regressions would
likely show up as cross-layer mismatches rather than isolated type
errors.
- Runtime URL discovery and sandbox callback selection are sensitive to
host/bind configuration; if that logic is wrong, sandbox-backed
callbacks may fail even when execution succeeds.
- The fake provider plugin is intentionally deterministic and
test-oriented; future providers may expose capability gaps that this
branch does not yet cover.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex coding agent on a GPT-5-class backend in the
Paperclip/Codex harness. Exact backend model ID is not exposed
in-session. Tool-assisted workflow with shell execution, file editing,
git history inspection, and local test execution.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] 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
2026-04-24 12:15:53 -07:00
Devin Foley e4995bbb1c Add SSH environment support (#4358)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - The environments subsystem already models execution environments,
but before this branch there was no end-to-end SSH-backed runtime path
for agents to actually run work against a remote box
> - That meant agents could be configured around environment concepts
without a reliable way to execute adapter sessions remotely, sync
workspace state, and preserve run context across supported adapters
> - We also need environment selection to participate in normal
Paperclip control-plane behavior: agent defaults, project/issue
selection, route validation, and environment probing
> - Because this capability is still experimental, the UI surface should
be easy to hide and easy to remove later without undoing the underlying
implementation
> - This pull request adds SSH environment execution support across the
runtime, adapters, routes, schema, and tests, then puts the visible
environment-management UI behind an experimental flag
> - The benefit is that we can validate real SSH-backed agent execution
now while keeping the user-facing controls safely gated until the
feature is ready to come out of experimentation

## What Changed

- Added SSH-backed execution target support in the shared adapter
runtime, including remote workspace preparation, skill/runtime asset
sync, remote session handling, and workspace restore behavior after
runs.
- Added SSH execution coverage for supported local adapters, plus remote
execution tests across Claude, Codex, Cursor, Gemini, OpenCode, and Pi.
- Added environment selection and environment-management backend support
needed for SSH execution, including route/service work, validation,
probing, and agent default environment persistence.
- Added CLI support for SSH environment lab verification and updated
related docs/tests.
- Added the `enableEnvironments` experimental flag and gated the
environment UI behind it on company settings, agent configuration, and
project configuration surfaces.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/execute.remote.test.ts
packages/adapters/cursor-local/src/server/execute.remote.test.ts
packages/adapters/gemini-local/src/server/execute.remote.test.ts
packages/adapters/opencode-local/src/server/execute.remote.test.ts
packages/adapters/pi-local/src/server/execute.remote.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/environment-routes.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/instance-settings-routes.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/lib/new-agent-hire-payload.test.ts
ui/src/lib/new-agent-runtime-config.test.ts`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- Manual verification on a branch-local dev server:
  - enabled the experimental flag
  - created an SSH environment
  - created a Linux Claude agent using that environment
- confirmed a run executed on the Linux box and synced workspace changes
back

## Risks

- Medium: this touches runtime execution flow across multiple adapters,
so regressions would likely show up in remote session setup, workspace
sync, or environment selection precedence.
- The UI flag reduces exposure, but the underlying runtime and route
changes are still substantial and rely on migration correctness.
- The change set is broad across adapters, control-plane services,
migrations, and UI gating, so review should pay close attention to
environment-selection precedence and remote workspace lifecycle
behavior.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex via Paperclip's local Codex adapter, GPT-5-class coding
model with tool use and code execution in the local repo workspace. The
local adapter does not surface a more specific public model version
string in this branch workflow.

## 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
2026-04-23 19:15:22 -07:00