fix(runner): restore task monitors and durable timed waits (#15446)

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their task execution.
> - Agents need a durable way to return to work after a delayed check.
> - The issue monitor scheduler already provides a one-shot wake for an
assignee.
> - Native runners reject generic execution-policy writes and had no
bound monitor tool.
> - Scheduling alone is insufficient because native completion also
needs to accept a timed wait.
> - This pull request adds an authorized monitor tool and connects it to
completion and the existing scheduler.
> - An agent can now schedule its next check, end the run, and resume on
the same task.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A native runner could not set its own task monitor. `call_api` correctly
rejected execution-policy writes, while `schedule_wake` had no
production binding. `paperclip_finish` also rejected monitor waits.

**Expected behavior**

A standard native run can set a one-shot monitor on its current task or
another accessible task assigned to the same agent. After a confirmed
schedule on the current task, it can yield. The scheduler later delivers
`issue_monitor_due`.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Start a standard native task.
2. Ask the agent to check the task again later and end its current run.
3. Inspect available tools and try the generic issue execution-policy
update.
4. Observe the missing native tool and the lifecycle-write denial.

Related PRs: #14680 concerns monitor notes in the shared wake prompt.
#11919 changes attempt-limit scope. This PR adds native scheduling and
completion authority and retains the existing cumulative attempt bounds.
It does not depend on either PR.

## What Changed

- Add provider-neutral `set_task_monitor` with a default current-task
target, future timestamp, required notes, existing bounds, and explicit
clearing.
- Check company, task visibility, ownership, runtime permissions, work
mode, and active-run authority. Preserve review-only restrictions.
Reject the reserved server-owned quota-recovery name before saving or
accepting a native wait.
- Commit the monitor, audit event, and retry receipt together. Retry
receipts survive a successor run without re-arming cleared or consumed
timers.
- Permit `paperclip_finish` to yield to a persisted monitor. Recheck
ownership and the schedule when committing final disposition. Release
execution without an immediate continuation.
- Preserve due monitors during native execution. Fence wake admission
and consumption against replacement, clearing, reassignment, and
completion. Preserve unrelated review policy.
- Expose scheduled and consumed monitor instructions in task context.
Update provider schemas, Rust validation, generated contracts, and
execution documentation.
- Add an opt-in live Codex smoke script with isolated data and explicit
run/session/runner/process evidence.

## Verification

- Repository `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed after rebase.
Server typecheck passed again after review fixes. All CI test shards
pass on `3def77b1b`, including runner TypeScript/Rust, server,
serialized server, workspace, and browser tests. All CI gates are green,
including the canary dry run. Greptile is 5/5 on the same commit with
zero unresolved threads.
- The local monolithic `pnpm test:run`, started before the rebase, was
interrupted after current-head CI test coverage passed. It is not
counted as a standalone full-suite pass; the focused local regression
suites passed.
- Targeted server tests cover scheduling, replacement, clearing, policy
preservation, cumulative bounds, cross-run retries, permissions,
provider-neutral discovery, review restrictions, completion authority,
and scheduler/finalizer races.
- Runner contract/catalog/semantic tests and Rust terminal-tool tests
cover the new operation and monitor completion.
- Live Codex test passed twice (latest live run on `e0bcd63e6`) in a
temporary database and workspace, with a 300,000 ms warm window. First
run `67bd7709-c089-4d4a-9d2b-0d6b618a34b0` yielded at
`2026-10-07T13:15:03.274Z`. Second run
`97c323f9-595a-4cc5-a007-db5a2fbb937c` started at `13:15:30.952Z`,
received `issue_monitor_due`, and completed the same task. Exactly one
monitor wake was recorded.
- Both live runs used native session
`7b1dd753-1c9b-4e7a-b22f-a125dbc3748c`, runner
`e90d9a1b-3502-4ee3-b15e-edc024c555d4`, provider session
`01a11680-6d01-70c0-9a55-db7246ed66c3`, and PID `64218` with the same
process start time. This proves warm reuse for that local Codex test,
not only successful scheduling.
- Reproduce the paid live test with `node --import
./server/node_modules/tsx/dist/loader.mjs
server/scripts/smoke-native-task-monitor.ts --run`, with the installed
Codex binary on `PATH` and a valid local login.

## Risks

- The scheduler now defers monitor dispatch while the task has an active
native run. A stuck run still depends on the existing recovery
lifecycle.
- Idempotency uses the existing run ledger; no table or migration is
added.
- Other providers share the tested tool and completion contracts. Only
Codex received a live model test.
- Existing `call_api` lifecycle restrictions remain enforced. Monitor
waits do not bypass task blockers, reviews, or approvals.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with tool use, code execution, and
TypeScript/Rust editing. The session does not expose the exact deployed
model ID or context-window size.

## 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 not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] 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>

server/src/services/native-runtime/native-completion-feedback.ts

@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
+import { eligibleIssueMonitorWait } from "../issue-monitors.js";
 import { activeIssueInteractionCondition, ordinaryQuestionCondition } from "../issue-question-context.js";
 import { publishedTaskDocuments, validateNativeDeliverableEvidence } from "./native-deliverable-feedback.js";
 import { findAutomaticCompletionReviews } from "./automatic-completion-reviews.js";
@@ -64,6 +65,7 @@ export async function nativeCompletionFeedback(
   if (!issue) throw new Error("Completion task no longer exists.");
   const reviewContext = readNativeReviewAssignmentContext(run.contextSnapshot);
   if (reviewContext) {
+    if (result.continuation?.kind === "monitor") throw new Error("Review-only runs cannot yield to a task monitor; resolve the assigned review or report its blocker.");
     const review = await getNativeReviewAssignment(db, {
       companyId: run.companyId, issueId: issue.id, agentId: run.agentId,
       contextSnapshot: reviewContext, allowResolvedByRunId: run.id,
@@ -96,6 +98,12 @@ export async function nativeCompletionFeedback(
     }
 
   }
+  if (result.reportedWorkDisposition === "yielded" && result.continuation?.kind === "monitor") {
+    if (issue.workMode !== "standard" || issue.executionRunId !== run.id ||
+        !eligibleIssueMonitorWait(issue, run.agentId)) {
+      throw new Error("A monitor wait requires a persisted, eligible monitor on this task. Call set_task_monitor for the current task, confirm its schedule, then report yielded with continuation.kind monitor.");
+    }
+  }
   const signals = normalizePrpResultSignals(result);
   if (
     result.reportedWorkDisposition === "done" &&
@@ -215,6 +223,9 @@ export async function nativeCompletionFeedback(
   if (readiness.unresolvedBlockerCount > 0) {
     return `Completion report accepted; this task still has unresolved dependencies. Explain the blockers on [this task](/issues/${issue.identifier ?? issue.id}); do not say the task is done.`;
   }
+  if (result.reportedWorkDisposition === "yielded" && result.continuation?.kind === "monitor") {
+    return `Monitor wait accepted. The task remains active and Paperclip will wake its assignee at or after ${issue.monitorNextCheckAt!.toISOString()} with issue_monitor_due. End this turn; do not poll or mark the task done.`;
+  }
   if (
     !isConversation(issue) &&
     result.reportedWorkDisposition === "yielded" &&