d47b4da655d5769abd5d34fdbdd088716797a7f2
2 Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Alex
|
b18669452f |
Add Novita sandbox provider plugin (#7595)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Paperclip already separates agent adapters from execution environments, so agents can run locally, over SSH, or through sandbox providers. > - Sandbox provider plugins let Paperclip add new cloud runtimes without changing each agent adapter. > - Novita Agent Sandbox is a cloud runtime for AI agent workloads with isolated filesystems, command execution, templates, timeout controls, and pause/resume behavior. > - Paperclip currently has sandbox provider examples for Daytona and Cloudflare, but not Novita. > - This pull request adds a Novita sandbox provider plugin using the existing provider-plugin lifecycle. > - The benefit is that Paperclip users can run existing adapters such as Codex, Claude, Gemini, OpenCode, Cursor, or ACPX inside Novita Agent Sandbox environments. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Fixes #7596 ## What Changed - Added `packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/novita` as a standalone sandbox provider plugin package. - Registered provider key `novita` with `kind: "sandbox_provider"` and `environment.drivers.register` capability. - Implemented Novita environment lifecycle hooks: validate config, probe, acquire lease, resume lease, release lease, destroy lease, realize workspace, and execute commands. - Added config support for `apiKey`, `domain`, `template`, `requestedCwd`, `timeoutMs`, `requestTimeoutMs`, `secure`, `autoPause`, and `reuseLease`. - Added README documentation for setup, configuration, and lifecycle behavior. - Added tests for manifest shape, config parsing, safe shell command wrapping, stdin delimiter safety, and env-key validation. ## Verification From `packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/novita`: - `pnpm typecheck` - `pnpm test` The tests avoid live Novita API calls and cover the provider's static contract and command-wrapping behavior. Live end-to-end verification requires a Paperclip instance with the plugin installed and a Novita API key configured as either a Paperclip secret or `NOVITA_API_KEY` in the worker environment. ## Risks - This adds a new direct dependency on the Novita Sandbox JS SDK (`novita-sandbox`). Socket/Snyk should review the package as part of normal dependency checks. - The implementation relies on Novita SDK command execution semantics; live provider behavior should be verified with a real Novita sandbox before marking the plugin production-ready. - `reuseLease` maps Paperclip release behavior to Novita `betaPause()`. If pause is unavailable for a selected template, the plugin falls back to best-effort kill during release. - Low migration risk for existing users because this is a new standalone provider plugin and does not change existing adapters or built-in providers. > 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 GPT-5 Codex via Codex CLI, with repository file access, shell command execution, GitHub CLI/API usage, and local TypeScript/Vitest verification. Web and local documentation context were used for Novita Sandbox SDK/API behavior. ## 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 - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] 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> Co-authored-by: Devin Foley <devin@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
4ef969f084 |
Add E2B sandbox provider plugin (#4452)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Sandbox environments are part of that execution layer, and the recent core refactor moved provider-specific behavior to a generic plugin seam > - This pull request adds a dedicated `@paperclipai/plugin-e2b` package so E2B can live entirely outside core host code > - Because the feature is still unreleased, the plugin should model third-party packaging directly instead of carrying extra backward-compatibility complexity in core or the workspace lockfile > - This branch therefore makes the E2B provider a standalone publishable package, documents the package-local dev flow, and keeps the publish manifest/runtime dependency story correct > - The benefit is that E2B becomes a true plugin reference implementation that can be installed by package name without reopening core Paperclip code ## What Changed - Added `packages/plugins/paperclip-plugin-e2b` as the E2B sandbox provider plugin package - Implemented config validation, lease acquire/resume/release/destroy handlers, workspace realization, and command execution for E2B sandboxes - Excluded the E2B plugin package from the root workspace so the repo no longer needs `pnpm-lock.yaml` churn for its third-party dependency graph - Added package-local development/install support plus a prepack manifest generator so the published tarball still declares `@paperclipai/plugin-sdk` and `e2b` runtime dependencies - Addressed review feedback by fixing sandbox cleanup on acquire failures, rejecting blank templates, normalizing fractional `timeoutMs`, and always passing the configured template name to the E2B SDK - Updated focused Vitest coverage for config normalization, validation, acquire cleanup, command execution, and lease release behavior - Updated the Dockerfile deps stage to copy the E2B package manifest so the policy check stays in sync ## Verification - `cd packages/plugins/paperclip-plugin-e2b && pnpm install --ignore-workspace --no-lockfile` - `cd packages/plugins/paperclip-plugin-e2b && pnpm build` - `cd packages/plugins/paperclip-plugin-e2b && pnpm --ignore-workspace test` - `cd packages/plugins/paperclip-plugin-e2b && pnpm --ignore-workspace typecheck` - `cd packages/plugins/paperclip-plugin-e2b && npm pack --dry-run` ## Risks - The package now relies on a prepack manifest rewrite so the publish-time dependency list stays correct while the repo-local dev manifest stays workspace-light - The current repo snapshot is still unreleased, so the generated publish manifest points at the repo SDK version until the normal release flow rewrites versions before publish - Real-world E2B environments may still expose edge cases around lifecycle timing or sandbox metadata beyond the mocked unit coverage > 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 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, GitHub CLI, and local build/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 |