2 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Dotta	af3023f1e3	fix(runner): repair paid provider startup paths (#12769) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents that perform work. > - Paperclip Runner connects durable task runs to local provider processes. > - The full-stack paid matrix exposed failures after the runner integrity repair. > - Verified JavaScript entrypoints lost their relative module graph when Linux executed them through descriptor paths. > - Returned provider startup errors also remained pending and became indeterminate after recovery. > - Sparse Codex tool lifecycle events lost the `write_document` identity before task transcript projection. > - This pull request repairs those three boundaries and makes the structured-question fixture deterministic. > - The benefit is repeatable provider startup, exact failure replay, and correct inline Plan placement. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #12721 and #12700. **What happened?** The paid runner matrix failed ACPX and OpenCode startup before provider session creation. The runner journal then replaced the original startup error with an indeterminate recovery result. Native Codex saved a Plan but rendered it only as a fallback card. A legacy Claude waiting reply could also echo the reserved terminal marker before the answer arrived. **Expected behavior** Verified JavaScript providers must start from immutable descriptor-backed artifacts. Returned startup failures must persist as terminal failed command results. Native tool lifecycle updates must preserve the `write_document` boundary. Pre-answer fixture output must not contain the reserved terminal marker. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run the local provider cells in the Runner Full-Stack E2E workflow. 2. Observe ACPX and OpenCode fail during `session.open` before provider execution. 3. Observe recovery report `execution_indeterminate` instead of the original startup error. 4. Run the native Codex Plan cell and observe the fallback Plan card after the tool activity row. 5. Run the legacy Claude structured-question resume cell and observe an early marker echo in waiting prose. **Paperclip version or commit** `0f9452101740835ce0b1488a204bf48acd5bafc3` **Deployment mode** Local development with the paid GitHub Actions acceptance workflow. ## What Changed - Bundle the ACPX sidecar and OpenCode proxy as self-contained Node ESM entrypoints before hashing and verified descriptor launch. - Anchor ACPX dynamic provider package resolution at a controller-derived provider-pack root and keep that root out of the provider child environment. - Persist executor-returned startup errors as redacted durable failed command results while retaining indeterminate recovery for true process death. - Coalesce sparse native tool items by stable ID so a late `write_document` name, input, and result reach the transcript boundary once. - Forbid the structured-question fixture from spelling or announcing its reserved terminal marker before the user answers. ## Verification - Rust and TypeScript regression tests cover durable failed replay, true crash ambiguity, bundle closure, package-root derivation, environment filtering, exact Codex tool lifecycle coalescing, and prompt determinism. - Local execution is intentionally limited to formatters and static diff checks. GitHub Actions will run tests, type checks, builds, and security checks. - After ordinary CI is green, scoped paid cells will validate one ACPX launch, one OpenCode launch, native Codex Plan projection, and legacy Claude structured resume before a complete matrix rerun. - Prior failing matrix: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33682434315 ## Risks - Bundling changes the bytes covered by provider launch hashes. Provider-pack generation already hashes the final built files. - ACPX still loads qualified provider packages dynamically. The controller supplies a normalized package root, while existing version, digest, path, and descriptor checks remain active. - Durable `failed` is terminal. Replays return the same redacted result and do not execute the provider effect twice. > 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 based on GPT-5 with agentic reasoning, repository inspection, code editing, Git, parallel subagents, and GitHub Actions coordination. The exact deployed snapshot and context-window size are not exposed to this task. ## 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 linked related public work or described the bug in this PR - [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket id - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass (intentionally deferred to GitHub Actions) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] No documentation change is required for this runtime repair - [x] I have considered and documented the 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	2026-09-04 07:58:44 -05:00
Dotta	560e7e48b5	feat(runner): add SDK and developer tooling (#12608) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The runner package already provides the production protocol and execution spine. > - Contributors still need stable SDK surfaces, deterministic test tools, and local inspection tools. > - Those surfaces share generated contracts and must change as one package boundary. > - This pull request adds the package-local SDK, labs, examples, and drift checks. > - The benefit is a reviewable developer platform that does not change application execution selection. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** `packages/paperclip-runner` — runner SDK, conformance tools, and developer tooling. **Problem or motivation** The production runner spine is present, but package consumers cannot build deterministic integrations, inspect sessions, or verify provider-neutral behavior through supported surfaces. **Proposed solution** Add browser, React, standalone, live-session, scenario, conformance, and evaluation surfaces. Add generated contract inventories and package-local verification scripts. Keep production application routing unchanged. **Alternatives considered** We considered splitting each generated catalog, SDK surface, and demo into separate pull requests. Those changes share exports, fixtures, and drift gates. Splitting them would create intermediate package states that do not build. **Roadmap alignment** No overlapping item appears in `ROADMAP.md`. This work extends the runner package that is already on `master`. ## What Changed - Add browser, React, standalone, live-session, and issue-thread SDK surfaces. - Add deterministic mock control-plane, scenario, conformance, replay, and evaluation tools. - Add bounded Codex, OpenCode, and ACPX development transports and fixtures. - Keep deferred managed-provider execution fail-closed. Persisted compatibility data remains readable. - Add generated capability inventories with their source files and drift checks. - Add examples, package documentation, browser checks, and clean-consumer checks. - Preserve the reviewed protocol bounds, replay compatibility aliases, process environment isolation, and semantic redaction limits. - Update the ACPX package patch that the existing workspace patch registry already tracks. - Do not change `pnpm-lock.yaml`, repository workflows, server runtime selection, or the application UI. ## Verification GitHub Actions is the verification authority for this pull request. The repository CI, package TypeScript and Rust checks, package tests, generated-output drift checks, browser checks, security scans, and Greptile review must pass on the exact head. Local test suites were not run because this series uses parallel GitHub Actions for verification. ## Risks This is a large greenfield package change. The main risks are public export drift, generated-output drift, and optional React consumer compatibility. Package boundary checks, clean-consumer checks, and browser tests cover those risks. Production adapter selection and server execution are outside this pull request. ## Stack 1. **This PR:** runner SDK and developer tooling. 2. [Codex production server integration](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12616). 3. [Provider-neutral task-thread UI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12617). ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, high-reasoning mode, with tool use and code 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the feature request template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id - [ ] 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 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	2026-08-31 21:33:11 -05:00