Commit Graph
3 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandPaperclip 5842185e4f fix: surface native cleanup quarantine and add chat qualification evals (#13775)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and their work.
> - Agent Chat needs reliable native execution before native runners
become the onboarding default.
> - Existing stories covered idle reassignment and controller restart,
but not an executing worker handoff or worker process loss.
> - Status answer tests also need to reject stale claims and invented
facts.
> - This pull request adds six opt-in full-stack cells with independent
state assertions and retained evidence.
> - The probes exposed a misleading Retry across server projection and
recovery-banner paths; the fix reports the blocked recovery honestly.
> - The tests preserve failures without changing recovery policy,
production prompts, or onboarding defaults.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #13762. Related: #13765 (Retry targets the latest failed attempt),
#13753 (task context ownership), #13746 (native recovery work).

## What Changed

- Add active reassignment with saved draft and plan preservation,
old-worker cancellation, and successor completion checks.
- Preserve recovery-needed projection when native cleanup fails before
its coordinator exists, refuse a generic retry that would immediately
fail again, and replace the recovery banner's misleading Retry with
Inspect run.
- Add verified local worker process loss with a required successful
continuation; retain a failing qualification result when recovery is
unavailable, while independently verifying the UI/API refuse doomed
retries.
- Add two-turn factual answer checks for current blockers, stale claims,
inactive backlog work, and unknown facts. Retain prose for separate
semantic review.
- Add positive and negative oracle calibration and document fault
isolation, cleanup, billing, and qualification limits.

## Verification

- Eval TypeScript check passes.
- All 442 eval support tests pass locally. The 89 focused server tests
and server typecheck pass. Six recovery-banner UI tests and token gates
pass.
- Initial new-cell campaign:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35657128077. All
six results are retained; four failed on fixture-contract issues and two
exposed real worker cleanup quarantine.
- All 26 existing native onboarding cells:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35656761484 (26/26
passed on master 846336e5a, all cleanup passed).
- Intermediate handoff/fault campaign:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35657945095 (four
retained failures: two overly strict draft oracles, two real crash
quarantines).
- Final active handoff:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35659014397 (2/2
passed on cf6d4ae3a; both cleanup passed).
- Clarified answer-quality fixtures:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35658262695 (2/2
passed on 4a26f10be; both cleanup passed; all four answers semantically
reviewed).
- Quarantine guard regression campaign:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35659580100 (both
API requests correctly refused with 409/no second run, but exposed a
separate misleading Retry in the recovery banner and a fixture wait on a
non-admitted run).
- Final quarantine guard verification:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35661067305
(147e42f7e: both providers verify Inspect run/no Retry, HTTP 409, one
retained run, unchanged saved plan, and successful disposable cleanup.
Both evals intentionally remain red with
`worker_crash_recovery_unqualified`; no successful continuation exists).
The preceding campaign 35658772755 never ran provider cases because
GitHub artifact finalization returned HTTP 403.
- Full repository CI passes on 147e42f7e: typecheck, tests, build, and
browser gates. One unchanged local-service-supervisor readiness test
failed initially; its six-test file passed in isolation and the failed
shard passed on its single rerun. Latest-head rollup: 54 successful, 2
intentionally skipped, no failed or pending checks. Greptile is 5/5 with
zero unresolved findings.
- See tests/runner-e2e/QUALIFICATION-2026-09-21.md for retained attempts
and semantic review. Published reports:
[onboarding](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-35656761484-1/),
[handoff](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-35659014397-1/),
[grounded
answers](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-35658262695-1/),
[crash guards and unqualified
recovery](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-35661067305-1/).

## Risks

- Paid cells are explicit-only and local-only. The fault fixture signals
only the exact native run PID after checking its identity.
- Live worker-loss probes currently fail on cleanup quarantine for both
providers. The eval must remain red until there is a usable recovery,
even when preservation and refusal checks pass. Verified cleanup with a
fresh attempt versus exact-session resume remains a product decision.
- Structured facts alone do not qualify prose quality; semantic review
remains separate.
- Onboarding uses the existing runtime switch after the real wizard and
before provider execution. Native UI selection and public defaults
remain unchanged.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact served snapshot and context-window size are not
exposed in this session.

## 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>
2026-09-21 18:13:01 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 0103cb2292 test: use neutral references in chat hiring evals (#13752)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps people manage agents and their work.
> - The agent chat hiring eval checks delegation, saved output, and
worker reuse.
> - It asks a worker to include a unique reference in each document.
> - The open wording let the worker choose a credential-style label.
> - The existing redactor removed that reference and failed the
coordination check.
> - This PR specifies a neutral reference line while keeping the same
grading checks.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #13741.

**What happened?**

The Codex hiring eval saved a checklist with `Tracking token:
[REDACTED]`. The runner treats the chosen label as credential syntax.
The previous prompt only asked for the identifier and did not choose its
label. This tests a redaction boundary unrelated to hiring and reuse.

**Expected behavior**

The coordination fixture requests ordinary business content with a
neutral reference label. The grader still requires the exact identifier
in the saved output.

**Steps to reproduce**

Run `agent-chat-hardening.runner-codex.local.hire-delegate-reuse` with
the previous fixture. The retained failing attempt is in [campaign
35617045456](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35617045456).

## What Changed

- Request `Reference: ...` in the checklist and review documents.
- Increment the hardening suite definition to version 5 and record the
reference format.
- Document the fixture boundary. Production redaction and all grading
checks stay unchanged.

## Verification

- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit` passed: 424 tests in 37 files.
- The catalog lists exactly the Codex and Claude local hiring cells for
the selected case.
- [Live campaign
35620731321](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35620731321)
passed both selected local cells on `d8d7afe21`: native Codex
(`gpt-5.6-sol`) and Claude (`claude-sonnet-5`). Both passed on attempt
1, including cleanup. [Published eval
report](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-35620731321-1/).
- Inspected saved evidence: each provider preserved both exact reference
lines, used the same hired worker for checklist and review, and
completed the final status query. Definition version 5 and hash
`2c1c9f754c049c3e7cafd6c8d0a137e7ca06d546ce1e7b07ad5b7823f0f28db9`
distinguish these results from the prior prompt.
- [PR CI
35620741101](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35620741101):
full build, type checks, and test partitions passed. One unrelated
Telegram integration test initially failed because two random fixture
company IDs produced the same seven-character issue prefix. The failed
shard passed on one retry; no test code was changed. All latest-head
merge checks are green.
- Greptile reviewed `d8d7afe21` at 5/5 with no review threads.

## Risks

The live models can still fail the coordination workflow. This change
does not qualify or change credential-redaction policy. Earlier failed
attempts remain part of the evidence; the new fixture has a distinct
definition version.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with repository tools and code execution. The exact
deployment model ID and context window are not exposed in 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 (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>
2026-09-21 12:49:52 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 9d19f98b50 fix: harden native chat recovery and add coordination evals (#13741)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work.
> - Agent chat uses native runner sessions to plan, delegate, and track
that work.
> - A user can press Stop while the native session is still starting.
> - The server can acknowledge that Stop without dispatching it, then
let the session submit a turn.
> - This leaves chat recovery waiting for an execution that the user
expected to stop.
> - This PR waits for the startup handle, dispatches cancellation, and
prevents a late startup from submitting a turn.
> - New full-stack evals check the resulting records and outputs across
Claude and Codex.
> - Those evals also exposed missing ACPX readiness fields, unbounded
polling, and an old-run identity check that rejected valid warm
handoffs.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Stop during native startup could record an acknowledged cancellation
with `dispatched: false`. The provider could then begin work. A
subsequent `/new` stayed queued. A remote Claude follow-up also
exhausted the command journal while probing warm-session readiness: ACPX
never returned the readiness fields required by the shared transport.
Once readiness worked, attachment incorrectly compared the next run
descriptor against the old run ID. The 25 ms polling loop could issue
4,800 commands during its two-minute wait, beyond the 500-command bound.
The existing chat eval treated lifecycle logs as proof of an active
provider turn, so it did not distinguish startup cancellation from
active-turn cancellation.

**Expected behavior**

A Stop during startup must reach the pending session. A late session
must not submit a prompt after Stop. Recovery must retain control when
startup exceeds the bounded wait. Chat evals must check saved task
state, document contents, worker identity, account binding, and
duplicate effects.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Start a native Claude or Codex chat turn.
2. Press Stop after process startup is requested but before the provider
turn starts.
3. Send `/new`, then send a fresh message.
4. On the affected base, cancellation can be acknowledged without
dispatch and the reset stays queued.

**Paperclip version or commit**

The live Claude baseline reproduced this on `29d6b3509`. The branch also
includes master commit `0f5fafe16`.

Related work: #13678, #13686, #13693, #13291, #13738. A separate runner
reliability branch also contains a startup-wait fix. Its overlap must be
reconciled before merging; this branch additionally prevents prompt
submission after a late startup.

## What Changed

- Wait for a pending native startup before acknowledging a run-scoped
Stop. Preserve the existing recovery error when that wait expires.
- Keep a Stop guard on startup. Cancel a late handle before it can
submit a provider turn.
- Add regression tests for normal handle publication and publication
after the Stop deadline.
- Back off blocked warm-attachment probes. Keep the fast two-snapshot
barrier, fail closed, and record changed blockers.
- Add red/green tests for delayed readiness, persistent blockers,
alternating readiness, and readiness near the deadline.
- Publish ACPX readiness and blockers. Preserve the old authority’s
event acknowledgement barrier; only settled sessions can proceed to
attachment.
- Bind warm ACPX descriptors to the validated next authority while
retaining old-run event correlation until activation. Preserve session
identity and provider profile checks.
- Exercise two consecutive run rotations through a qualified fake
sidecar, verifying checkpointing, provider identity, pre-activation
rejection, and new-run work admission.
- Separate startup and active-turn cancellation checkpoints in the
browser eval.
- Add 18 explicit native chat eval cells: 12 local and 6 Daytona cells
across Claude and Codex.
- Cover hiring and reuse through managed AI accounts, source-based
review, current blocked-task status, request replay after a lost HTTP
acknowledgement, server restart continuity, and Stop/reset continuity.
- Use ordinary production agent instructions. Enable API tools only for
the two coordination cases that need them.
- Calibrate the matchers with invalid records and outputs. Require
remembered context after restart and a structured status snapshot that
distinguishes the current blocker from history and task status from
active execution. Compare the public issue mutation contract and
relationships during read-only reporting. Preserve before/after source
records in failed eval evidence.
- Fix the lost-ack browser harness and verify it against a real HTTP
server. Check the chat composer after restart instead of waiting for an
unrelated document lifecycle event.
- Document the scope and limits of each case.

## Verification

- The startup regression failed on the unfixed executor and passed after
the fix.
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit` passed: 424 tests in 37 files.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.test.ts`
passed: 385 tests.
- [Baseline live
campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35608208868):
Claude Stop reproduced the bug. Codex Stop and Claude hire/reuse passed.
Codex delegation was blocked by provider capacity.
- [Eval-only startup
campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35609479786):
both providers failed as expected. Both persisted `dispatched: false`
and left `/new` queued.
- [First fixed
campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35610533706)
on `c9e95797d`: 10/18 cells passed. Startup Stop passed for both
providers. Failed cases exposed eval harness defects and remote
continuity failures. All attempts remain available.
- [Original workflows and stronger memory
checks](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35611896649)
on `c04324fab`: 9/12 passed. Reassignment, local restart memory, and
startup Stop passed for both providers; Codex remote restart passed.
Claude remote restart exposed the missing readiness contract. Two Codex
planning cells hit provider capacity.
- [Unchanged-model
retry](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35613854548):
Codex planning and backlog creation both passed.
- [18-cell campaign with ACPX
readiness](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35614586963)
on `6a98ef743`: 16/18 passed, including all local/remote Stop and
committed-send cases. Claude remote continuity exposed the
next-authority check, now fixed. Codex hiring produced its checklist,
but the runner redacted the requested marker after it appeared as
“Tracking token: …”. That content-redaction policy is unchanged and
remains an explicit limitation.
- [Structured status
grading](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35614954725)
on `50448c228`: both providers passed on their first attempt, including
cleanup.
- [Complete read-only state
grading](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35616089011)
on `551e13892`: both providers passed.
- [Final ACPX handoff and hiring
retry](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35617045456)
on `cbd637587`: all three Claude Daytona cases passed (restart
continuity, active Stop/reset, and lost-ack replay). Codex hiring
reproduced the content-redaction failure: the saved checklist contained
`Tracking token: [REDACTED]` instead of the required business marker.
All four cases completed cleanup successfully. [Published
report](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-35617045456-1/).
The only subsequent commit adds the qualified-sidecar integration test;
production code is identical to this live proof.
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:browser-support` passed: 5 browser tests without
paid models.
- Runner TypeScript typecheck passed. All 5 warm-readiness tests pass;
two failed with the prior fixed-rate loop, and the late-readiness test
failed before the pacing correction.
- ACPX readiness and warm-identity regressions each failed before their
fixes. All 292 runner-core Rust library tests passed. The
qualified-sidecar integration test passes. Rust formatting is checked.
- Status-grader regressions for misleading historical mentions and
previously unchecked mutations each failed before tightening the oracle
and pass now.
- [Latest-head
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35617522307)
passed on `a4093c8f1`: full build, type checks, test partitions, browser
E2E, and native runner checks. Two unrelated tests initially failed
(Sentry fixture release attribution and local-service fixture
readiness); both passed locally together (35 passed, 5 optional SDK
tests skipped) and on the failed-job retry. No changes were made to
those tests.
- Greptile reviewed `a4093c8f1` at 5/5; both earlier findings are fixed
and all review threads are resolved.
- The paid live suite is not fully green: the reproducible
content-redaction case remains red. This is separate from the passing PR
merge checks. No production content-redaction, prompt, model, or
completion-policy change is included.
- Managed-account hiring and review cases explicitly enable API tools;
these do not qualify default new-user onboarding.

## Risks

- Stop can wait up to 30 seconds for startup, then use the existing
pending-recovery path. This does not prove that remote cleanup has
finished.
- Blocked warm readiness adds up to 750 ms between later probes with the
two-minute remote budget, or about 32 ms with the default five-second
budget. Ready sessions retain the short second barrier.
- Paid evals can fail because of provider capacity or agent decisions.
Each failure needs evidence-based classification.
- The HTTP request replay case checks comment idempotency and duplicate
effects. It does not prove replay safety for an ambiguous provider tool
call.
- The new suite is opt-in. It does not increase the default paid
campaign.
- No production prompts or model selection change. Review-handoff
behavior and content-redaction policy remain separate product decisions.
The latter can remove harmless business content that looks like
credential syntax; the failing attempt is retained.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with repository tools and code execution. The exact
deployment model ID and context window are not exposed in 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 (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>
2026-09-21 10:35:38 -05:00