forked from farhoodlabs/paperclip
38c185fb8b
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies by keeping task ownership, approvals, and operator control inside one control plane. > - Agent permissions and plugin-hosted company settings sit on the boundary between autonomy and governance. > - V1 needs scoped task assignment rules, plugin extension points, and clearer company access surfaces without weakening company boundaries. > - The branch builds the core authorization service, plugin SDK/host APIs, and UI simplifications needed to support those controls. > - Paperclip EE plugin surfaces were intentionally moved out of this core PR per review direction, so this PR now carries only the public core/plugin infrastructure work. > - The latest updates preserve the PAP-9937 branch changes that belong in this PR, remove the `design/` artifacts, and exclude the experimental `plugin-briefs` package. > - Greptile feedback was applied through the authorization/audit paths and the final cleanup commit was re-reviewed at 5/5 with no unresolved Greptile threads. > - The benefit is safer assignment control with extension hooks for richer permission products while preserving simple defaults for normal operators. ## What Changed - Added scoped task-assignment authorization decisions and routed issue/agent assignment mutations through the authorization service. - Added plugin SDK and host APIs for company settings slots, authorization policy/grant management, assignment previews, and bridge invocation scope propagation. - Simplified core company access UI and moved advanced controls behind plugin-provided settings surfaces. - Added retry-now affordances for blocked issue next-step notices. - Added protected-assignment enforcement for persisted agent/project/issue policies, including explicit-grant fallback behavior. - Added incremental principal-access compatibility backfill for active agent memberships and role-default human permission grants. - Added the Markdown code block wrap action fix from the latest branch changes. - Removed `design/` artifacts from the PR and removed `packages/plugins/plugin-briefs` from the final diff. - Addressed Greptile feedback for plugin actor sanitization, legacy membership handling, audit pagination, unknown grant-scope metadata, and startup test mocks. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/access-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts` -> 2 files passed, 54 tests passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts server/src/__tests__/access-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts` -> 3 files passed, 62 tests passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/authorization-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/plugin-access-authorization-host-services.test.ts server/src/__tests__/server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts` -> 3 files passed, 28 tests passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` -> passed. - `git diff --check` -> passed. - `node ./scripts/check-docker-deps-stage.mjs` -> passed. - `CI=true pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts` -> passed with no lockfile update. - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.interaction.test.tsx` -> 1 test passed. - `git ls-files design packages/plugins/plugin-briefs | wc -l` -> 0. - GitHub CI on `40cd83b53` -> all checks passed, merge state `CLEAN`. - Greptile on `40cd83b53` -> 5/5, 102 files reviewed, 0 comments/annotations added, 0 unresolved review threads. - Confirmed the PR diff contains no `design/`, `packages/plugins/plugin-briefs`, `pnpm-lock.yaml`, or `.github/workflows` changes. ## Risks - Medium: task assignment authorization paths are behaviorally stricter for protected/private policy data, so existing plugin-authored policies may block assignment until explicit grants or approval flows are configured. - Medium: plugin-host authorization APIs expand the surface area available to trusted plugins and need careful review for company scoping. - Low: startup now performs a principal-access compatibility backfill, but the migration and runtime backfill use conflict-tolerant inserts. > 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 workflow with shell, git, and GitHub CLI access. ## 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>
101 lines
2.1 KiB
JavaScript
101 lines
2.1 KiB
JavaScript
const readline = require("node:readline");
|
|
|
|
let nextRequestId = 1;
|
|
const pendingNested = new Map();
|
|
|
|
function send(message) {
|
|
process.stdout.write(`${JSON.stringify(message)}\n`);
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
function sendNestedHostRequest(originalRequest, invocationId) {
|
|
const nestedId = `nested-${nextRequestId++}`;
|
|
const params = originalRequest.params?.params ?? {};
|
|
const mode = params.mode;
|
|
const requestedCompanyId = params.requestedCompanyId;
|
|
const nestedRequest = {
|
|
jsonrpc: "2.0",
|
|
id: nestedId,
|
|
method: "companies.get",
|
|
params: {
|
|
companyId: requestedCompanyId,
|
|
},
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
if (mode === "echo") {
|
|
nestedRequest.paperclipInvocationId = invocationId;
|
|
} else if (mode === "unknown") {
|
|
nestedRequest.paperclipInvocationId = "unknown-invocation";
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
pendingNested.set(nestedId, originalRequest.id);
|
|
send(nestedRequest);
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
const rl = readline.createInterface({
|
|
input: process.stdin,
|
|
crlfDelay: Infinity,
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
rl.on("line", (line) => {
|
|
if (!line.trim()) return;
|
|
const message = JSON.parse(line);
|
|
|
|
if (message.id && pendingNested.has(message.id)) {
|
|
const originalId = pendingNested.get(message.id);
|
|
pendingNested.delete(message.id);
|
|
if (message.error) {
|
|
send({
|
|
jsonrpc: "2.0",
|
|
id: originalId,
|
|
error: message.error,
|
|
});
|
|
return;
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
send({
|
|
jsonrpc: "2.0",
|
|
id: originalId,
|
|
result: message.result,
|
|
});
|
|
return;
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
const method = message && typeof message.method === "string" ? message.method : null;
|
|
|
|
if (method === "initialize") {
|
|
send({
|
|
jsonrpc: "2.0",
|
|
id: message.id,
|
|
result: {
|
|
ok: true,
|
|
supportedMethods: ["getData"],
|
|
},
|
|
});
|
|
return;
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if (method === "getData") {
|
|
sendNestedHostRequest(message, message.paperclipInvocation?.id);
|
|
return;
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if (method === "shutdown") {
|
|
send({
|
|
jsonrpc: "2.0",
|
|
id: message.id,
|
|
result: {},
|
|
});
|
|
setImmediate(() => process.exit(0));
|
|
return;
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
send({
|
|
jsonrpc: "2.0",
|
|
id: message.id,
|
|
error: {
|
|
code: -32601,
|
|
message: `Unhandled method: ${method}`,
|
|
},
|
|
});
|
|
});
|