2 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
3 people	4611d6e95a	fix(restore): retry sandbox copy-back before holding the task for repair (#15920) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Legacy sandbox runs copy the agent's workspace files back to the host when the run settles. > - When this copy-back fails one time, the server keeps the sandbox and puts a board-owned repair hold on the task. > - The hold blocks new messages. Only an operator API runbook can clear it. The board shows that runbook text, so users do not know what to do. > - Many copy-back failures are transient: a dropped transfer, a provider error, or a merge lock that another restore holds. > - This pull request retries those failures automatically while the run still has its merge baseline and before any host file changes. > - The benefit is that most failures repair themselves, and the remaining holds explain the situation in plain language. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #14590 (related: no-replay recovery holds) **What happened?** A legacy sandbox run finished its work, but one workspace copy-back attempt failed. The task then showed "Recovery needed" with operator-only steps ("verify its exact stop receipt … record workspaceRepairEvidence"). Messages from the user stayed saved and were not delivered. **What did you expect?** Paperclip retries a transient copy-back failure automatically. If a repair is still necessary, the task says clearly what happened and who must act. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run an agent in a legacy sandbox environment. 2. Make the workspace copy-back fail one time, for example with a dropped transfer or a held merge lock. 3. Open the task. It is blocked behind a repair hold, and new messages wait. **Additional context** Separately, distinct live events can render toasts with the same title and body (for example, two runs of the same agent that both succeed). The toast list showed both, and the desktop app forwards each one as a notification. ## What Changed - `packages/adapter-utils/src/sandbox-managed-runtime.ts`: retry the workspace copy-back up to three times in total, with a 2 s and then a 5 s backoff. A retry occurs only when the failure is `restore_failed` or `restore_lock_timeout` and no host workspace file was written. The merge now marks the first host write in `beforeApply`, which runs under the merge lock before any write. - Unsafe archives, permission failures, and failures after the merge started writing are never retried. Each retry uses a new temp directory and a new imported Git ref. - New optional `workspaceRestoreRetryDelaysMs` input, so tests can shorten the backoff. Nested repository restores receive the same value. - `ui/src/components/ExecutionBlockerNotice.tsx`: for a workspace repair hold, the notice now says what happened in plain language. The stored operator runbook text moves under "Technical details". - `ui/src/context/ToastContext.tsx`: also dedupe toasts on their visible tone, title, and body inside the existing 3.5 s window. - `doc/workspace-restore-locks.md`: document the automatic retry. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils exec vitest run src/sandbox-managed-runtime.test.ts src/workspace-restore` (218 tests pass). New tests cover: - a retry after a dropped transfer, - a retry after a merge-lock timeout, - a stop after three attempts, - no retry for an unsafe archive, a permission failure, or a failure after the merge started writing. - The existing step-diagnostic test now uses failures that persist across retries. It still expects one diagnostic per failed step. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/context/ToastContext.test.tsx src/components/ExecutionBlockerNotice.test.tsx src/context/LiveUpdatesProvider` (120 tests pass). - `tsc --noEmit` for adapter-utils passes. `node scripts/check-token-gates.mjs` is clean. - Not fully run: the full adapter-utils suite has two failures in `github-launcher*.test.ts`. They read the managed GitHub credentials of the local sandbox environment and do not touch restore code. UI `tsc -b` reports five errors in `PluginOrganizationSwitcher.tsx`, which is not changed here, because the plugin SDK is not built in a fresh install. ## Risks - A copy-back that fails before the merge can take about 7 s longer before it reports a failure. Lock timeouts can take up to about 97 s in total (three 30 s lock waits plus backoff). Settlement already waits for the copy-back. - The retry logic depends on `beforeApply` running before the first host write in `mergeDirectoryWithBaseline`. That is true today, and a comment marks it. - A Git bundle import before the merge can leave unreferenced Git objects after a retry. They are harmless, and the existing ref cleanup still runs on each attempt. - Content-based toast dedupe can hide a second toast with identical text inside 3.5 s. That is the intended behavior. ## Model Used - Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`, Anthropic) in the Claude Agent SDK, with tool use (shell, file edit, code search) and a subagent for code exploration. ## 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 - [ ] 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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip Agent <agent@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-10-11 21:44:11 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	7f893ac4ec	[codex] Harden execution reliability and heartbeat tooling (#3679) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Reliable execution depends on heartbeat routing, issue lifecycle semantics, telemetry, and a fast enough local verification loop to keep regressions visible > - The remaining commits on this branch were mostly server/runtime correctness fixes plus test and documentation follow-ups in that area > - Those changes are logically separate from the UI-focused issue-detail and workspace/navigation branches even when they touch overlapping issue APIs > - This pull request groups the execution reliability, heartbeat, telemetry, and tooling changes into one standalone branch > - The benefit is a focused review of the control-plane correctness work, including the follow-up fix that restored the implicit comment-reopen helpers after branch splitting ## What Changed - Hardened issue/heartbeat execution behavior, including self-review stage skipping, deferred mention wakes during active execution, stranded execution recovery, active-run scoping, assignee resolution, and blocked-to-todo wake resumption - Reduced noisy polling/logging overhead by trimming issue run payloads, compacting persisted run logs, silencing high-volume request logs, and capping heartbeat-run queries in dashboard/inbox surfaces - Expanded telemetry and status semantics with adapter/model fields on task completion plus clearer status guidance in docs/onboarding material - Updated test infrastructure and verification defaults with faster route-test module isolation, cheaper default `pnpm test`, e2e isolation from local state, and repo verification follow-ups - Included docs/release housekeeping from the branch and added a small follow-up commit restoring the implicit comment-reopen helpers that were dropped during branch reconstruction ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-telemetry-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/http-log-policy.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-run-log.test.ts server/src/__tests__/health.test.ts` - `server/src/__tests__/activity-service.test.ts`, `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts`, and `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` were attempted on this host but the embedded Postgres harness reported init-script/data-dir problems and skipped or failed to start, so they are noted as environment-limited ## Risks - Medium: this branch changes core issue/heartbeat routing and reopen/wakeup behavior, so regressions would affect agent execution flow rather than isolated UI polish - Because it also updates verification infrastructure, reviewers should pay attention to whether the new tests are asserting the right failure modes and not just reshaping harness behavior ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex coding agent (GPT-5-class runtime in Codex CLI; exact deployed model ID is not exposed in this environment), reasoning enabled, tool use and local code execution enabled ## 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) - [ ] 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-04-14 13:34:52 -05:00