mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-26 10:26:26 +01:00
100477e8876f51add368554643e073a2d1c1becf
3
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
8de28c12e4 |
test(server): prove execution span overlap with explicit barriers (#16712)
Prove overlapping execution spans with per-run promise barriers, live recording checks, and exported span identity matching. Preserve the existing run ownership, parent, ingress-link, count, and test-budget assertions. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
|
25b16e65fc |
fix(observability): detail workspace and connector preparation (#16454)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The server prepares a repository, sandbox workspace, and connector access before an agent can reply. > - Existing traces measure large preparation phases but leave important work inside those phases unclear. > - Repository source materialization and Browser Use discovery can do more work than their callers suggest. > - New detail must preserve access checks, run ownership, and the existing work order. > - This pull request adds fixed OpenTelemetry spans inside those operations. > - Operators can use one deployed trace to select the next performance fix. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #16419, #16425, #16428. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Startup traces for server workspace preparation, native sandbox synchronization, and connector assignment resolution. **Current behavior** Workspace and connector aggregate spans can take many seconds. The trace does not separate private source cloning, seed reuse, archive work, progress persistence, or each connector resolver. Browser Use resource selection builds the full authorized tool catalog. The configuration and native backend can each resolve connector assignments. **Proposed behavior** Show the awaited work as fixed child spans. Separate discovery queue wait from catalog construction. Preserve the initiating run context when another run releases a scheduler slot. Add no new lifecycle event writes for workspace detail callbacks. **Reason and benefit** Operators need evidence about the hosted critical path before another performance change. These spans distinguish filesystem work, provider transfer, authorization, transaction entry, locks, and reporting overhead. **Breaking changes** None. Authorization, query order, transaction ownership, synchronization, existing progress events, and task results retain their contracts. The change adds opt-in Observability spans under the existing OTLP endpoint gate. ## What Changed - Trace private source directory setup, Git credentials, clone, requested ref, source identity, and checkout publication. - Trace sandbox source capture, seed cache/replay, shallow clone and archive, overlay copy/archive, verification, upload, warm stamps, and descriptor persistence. - Separate existing awaited progress reporting from useful workspace work. Keep new detail callbacks trace-only. - Trace each connector resolver and Browser Use catalog/grant work. Split discovery queueing, descriptor sources, and policy evaluation. - Trace Slack authority, credential reads, catalog synchronization, transaction entry/settlement, and advisory locks. - Update the real filesystem staging trace expectations and the Honeycomb investigation guide. - Add a real scheduler regression for a queued job released by another run. Assert run ownership, parent spans, and exactly one completed queue span. ## Verification - Passed: server and adapter-utils TypeScript checks (`pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsc --noEmit` and `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils exec tsc --noEmit`). - Passed: 252 checks across 9 focused files. These cover real filesystem staging, native workspace synchronization, trace ownership, endpoint gating, and workspace preparation. - Passed after review: 26 trace-context, tracing-failure, and discovery-scheduler checks across 3 files (these overlap the first run). The new queued-discovery regression fails when context binding is removed and passes after restoration. An initial submillisecond timestamp assertion was replaced with explicit span-completion order to avoid SDK clock precision assumptions. - Passed on implementation commit `0e68968a4bd61001893d833f281f12bb110edbe1`: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. The later commit updates only an engine test expectation. - The first CI workspace lane found an old engine trace-tree expectation. It expected the earlier span set. The updated assertion now checks the new detail spans, their parents, and single completion. Its targeted executor check passes. - The full test suite, build, release registry, and end-to-end gates pass in CI on final head `40e37d89ef679109d60a96bb5731a0616efeaa43`: 55 passing checks and 2 optional Storybook skips. The full suite was not duplicated locally after the focused run. - Greptile reviewed the final head at 5/5. No unresolved review threads remain. - After deployment, filter Honeycomb by the hashed run ID and verify `service.version`. Inspect `heartbeat.prepare.workspace`, `runtime_selection.workspace_sync`, and the connector assignment parents. The guide in `doc/observability.md` explains each new family and the nested intervals. - No hosted run has used this new instrumentation yet. Local checks cannot establish hosted latency improvement. ## Risks - Tracing adds spans when an operator configures an OTLP endpoint. Detail remains capped at 16 spans per phase per execution attempt. - Parent and child durations overlap. The documentation explains how to avoid counting them twice. - A discovery job can start in another run's scheduler continuation. The bound callback preserves the initiating async context. - New spans export fixed names and the existing hashed run ID. They add no paths, repository URLs, connector resource IDs, credentials, tool schemas, or exception text. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact served model ID 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> |
||
|
|
cccde7122b |
Trace execution preparation and durable response persistence (#16419)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The server prepares an execution environment before it starts an agent. > - Operators need to distinguish preparation, provider wait, and response persistence. > - Existing preparation phases start separate traces, and the native session trace ends before the final response is saved. > - This pull request adds an execution-attempt trace and detailed spans at the existing work boundaries. > - The benefit is a measurable startup and settlement path without changing execution policy. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Operator-configured OpenTelemetry tracing for agent preparation, startup, and durable response storage. **Subsystem affected** Server orchestration, native Runner startup, and the Honeycomb run link. **Current behavior** Preparation phases start independent roots. Workspace lock waits, authorization groups, runtime asset work, provider-pack fallback, and the gap after provider completion are hard to attribute. **Proposed behavior** Use a server-owned async context for each execution attempt. Parent nested work to that attempt. Link the separately sampled native session because its ingress and queue history can begin earlier. Record transaction entry, lock waits, grouped authorization, asset preparation, artifact fallback, copyback, and response commit. **Reason and benefit** Operators can identify expensive work from recorded boundaries instead of inferring the cause from elapsed time. Nested and concurrent durations remain visible and must not be added together. **Breaking changes** No API or execution-policy change. New Observability span names and closed count attributes are documented. The existing local run-performance schema also records the additional provider-pack and harness measurements. Refs: #16178, #16205, #16330. ## What Changed - Add `task.execution_attempt` with same-run async ownership, independent root sampling, and native-session links. - Measure workspace transaction entry and settlement, advisory and row waits, source scans, reader groups, notifications, and writes. - Measure runtime selection and each concurrent instructions, skills, and MCP branch. Separate manifest, cache, materialization, and verification work. - Measure provider-pack discovery, verified reuse or upload, final verification, and remote harness state checks. - Measure workspace settlement, accounting, liveness, response authorization, comment commit, and publication enqueue. - Preserve the silent endpoint-off path, including when another library has registered a tracer. Bound repeated detail spans to 16 per name per attempt. - Extend the Honeycomb run link and document the actual coverage and remaining gaps. ## Verification - After resolving the conflict with retained-reader batching on `b98cdaea531c8447637cd4dcc19c61b3f5f41844`, all 61 targeted query, authorization, workspace-preparation and trace-boundary tests passed. The server typecheck passed. Reader tests still bound query count, avoid loading retained run payloads and enforce fresh project grants on every publication attempt. - Before that base integration, the tracing/exporter group passed 855 tests with 2 optional-SDK skips across 10 files and no inherited OTLP endpoint. It covers real PostgreSQL waits/rollback, durable response commit, assembled heartbeat preparation, concurrent parentage, sampling and tracer failure isolation. Native workspace/history tests passed 23 cases. These results remain supporting evidence for the unchanged tracing paths. - Full workspace typecheck and build passed during implementation. Full sharded CI, release validation, E2E and Apex 5/5 passed on prior head `8cebad80f3856dbcff6f3a6d5d34880ff77a20f2`. Fresh CI, security and Apex review are required on the current head before merge. - `pnpm check:token-gates` passed. No styles changed. - Earlier CI runs exposed exact-source-expression assertions changed by wrappers, missing run hashes on transaction-boundary spans, and sampling fixtures without an enabled endpoint. The fixes preserve the calls, add the declared hash and span cap, and enable tracing explicitly in the sampling fixtures. Focused repairs passed; the full prior-head CI passed after those repairs. Earlier failed run: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38729131366. - The full local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after the base advanced during that process. Its mixed-version results are not final-head evidence. A full local-suite pass is not claimed. - The old-head Superagent scan stalled at 35%. The current head has a fresh scan; no security pass is inferred from the old pending result. - No deployed Honeycomb acceptance is claimed by this code change. ## Risks - Enabled tracing creates more spans. Repeated detail spans are bounded, and inventories use group spans. - The attempt and native session remain linked traces. Historical queue time can precede the attempt, and nested intervals overlap. - A committed comment proves durable server storage. Publication enqueue and realtime dispatch do not prove external delivery or browser paint. - New custom attributes use only the existing run hash and validated file/byte counts. No SQL, paths, permissions, content, or exception text is added. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The serving model ID and context window size are not exposed in this session. The agent used reasoning, tools, code editing, 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 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |