Commit Graph
3 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 9c18cf61da fix(runner): keep discarded OpenCode token deltas from delaying tool calls (#20209)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Native OpenCode runs use a TypeScript app-server proxy between
OpenCode and runnerd
> - runnerd reads the proxy's frames in order, only after the controller
acknowledges earlier events
> - For each frame, runnerd rewrites its whole durable provider state
with fsync, including every tool result that the turn retains
> - The proxy sent one `item/delta` frame for each reasoning or
tool-output token, and runnerd discards `item/delta`
> - A Paperclip tool call request therefore waited behind hundreds of
discarded frames, and the wait grew with each tool result in the turn
> - This pull request stops the proxy from sending the token deltas that
runnerd does not consume
> - The benefit is that tool calls reach runnerd without that queue, so
agent turns finish faster

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**

In the chat eval `plugins.configure-plugin` (runner-opencode,
deepseek-v4.1-flash, GitHub Actions run 42574640038),
`paperclip_search_api` calls in one turn slowed from about 1.4 s to 9-15
s each. The server handled every call in 50-250 ms (`tool.execution`
spans). For one `call_api` call, 6.3 s passed between the server's 403
and the next agent activity. Time to first token was about 4.4 s.

The run events show the cause. Events that OpenCode streams reach
runnerd in bursts. In one burst, the usage events for three different
model requests arrived within 0.5 s, which no model can do. Each burst
ends with the next tool call request. 143 of 203 recorded
runner-opencode runs that we checked show such bursts, and 108 show a
gap of 8 s or more. Many chat eval cases that time out use this runner.

The mechanism:

1. OpenCode streams reasoning one token at a time. The proxy forwarded
each token as its own `item/delta` frame.
2. runnerd reads proxy frames in order and only after the controller
acknowledges earlier events. For each frame it calls `save_state`. That
serializes the whole provider state, with the tool results retained in
the turn, and fsyncs it.
3. runnerd's Codex facade has no mapping for `item/delta`, so it
discards the frame after the save.
4. A tool call request is one more frame in the same ordered stream. It
waits until runnerd works through every earlier delta frame. The wait is
about (reasoning tokens) x (save cost), and the save cost grows with
each retained tool result.

**Expected behavior**

A Paperclip tool call reaches runnerd soon after OpenCode makes it. Its
delay does not grow with the reasoning length or with the number of
earlier tool calls in the turn.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Run a native OpenCode chat turn with a reasoning model that makes
many sequential Paperclip tool calls, for example `search_api`.
2. Compare each tool's `item.completed` tool_result time with the
`tool.execution.completed` time and with the next `item.started`
tool_use time in the run events.
3. See that the gap grows during the turn, and that events for several
model requests arrive within less than one second.
4. For a local model of the mechanism: run the pinned OpenCode binary
with a controlled OpenAI-compatible provider that streams 300 reasoning
tokens before each tool call. Pass the driver events through the proxy's
mapping and batching into a reader that consumes one frame at a time
with a save cost that grows by 4 ms per completed tool result. Before
this change, 8 sequential calls waited 1.7, 3.1, 4.2, 5.4, 6.7, 7.9, 9.2
and 10.5 s behind 142-261 queued frames. After this change, they waited
64-93 ms behind 0 frames.

## What Changed

- `shouldForwardOpenCodeProxyItem` now takes the event type and payload.
For `item.delta`, it forwards only assistant text (`agentMessage` or
`text`), which runnerd maps to `item/agentMessage/delta`.
- The proxy keeps reasoning and tool-output token deltas. Completed
reasoning and tool items still go to runnerd as `item/completed`. Tool
progress still goes as `item/updated`.
- New regression test: a step with 1,000 streamed reasoning and
tool-output tokens puts the same number of frames before the tool call
request as a step with 1 token, and no `item/delta` frame is written.
- New test: assistant text deltas are still forwarded. Completed
reasoning items are still forwarded.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run src/cli/opencode-proxy-events.test.ts
src/cli/opencode-proxy-output.test.ts` in `packages/paperclip-runner`:
15 passed.
- Red/green: with the predicate change reverted, the two new tests fail.
With the change, they pass.
- `tsc --noEmit -p tsconfig.test.json` in `packages/paperclip-runner`
has no errors in the changed files. Local errors exist only in
`src/eval/workflow-harness.ts`, which needs a built
`@paperclipai/paperclip-eval-kernel`.
- Local before/after measurement with the real pinned OpenCode binary
(`opencode-ai@1.18.34`), described in Steps to reproduce, step 4.
- Not run locally: the suites that need the `paperclip-runnerd` debug
binary or the bundled provider entrypoints
(`runnerd-opencode-streaming-tools`, `runnerd-codex-transport`,
`opencode-proxy-thread-read`). They fail the same way on the unchanged
base in this worktree because those build outputs are missing. CI covers
them.

## Risks

- Low risk. The changed frames were discarded by runnerd. No persisted
state shape changes, so no previous-release story is needed.
- If runnerd later maps a reasoning delta method, the proxy must forward
it with batching, as it does for assistant text. The test names this
boundary.
- This change does not change the per-frame durable save in runnerd.
Mapped frames (assistant text, tool items) still pay it. A runnerd
change that skips the save when a notification changes no state would
protect other proxies too. That is a separate change.

> 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

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), used through Claude
Code with tool use (shell, file edits, local benchmarks).

## 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: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-09 02:23:44 -06:00
Dotta 0f94521017 fix(runner): restore local session and task integrity (#12721)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the control plane for agents that perform work.
> - Paperclip Runner connects durable provider sessions to individual
task runs through PRP.
> - Provider continuity and per-run authority are different lifetimes.
> - The existing implementation mixed those lifetimes and lost event
metadata between provider frames, runnerd, persistence, API
sanitization, and the task thread.
> - That caused failed continuation, missing progress and Plans,
duplicate replies, hidden failures, and unsafe recovery.
> - This repair gives every heartbeat fresh authority, preserves
qualified provider-session continuity, and restores one lossless
presentation path without changing direct adapters.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A second native heartbeat could reuse tickets, leases, command receipts,
sequence state, and run identity from the first heartbeat. Provider
phase and item identity could be lost before the UI read them. Redaction
could corrupt protocol discriminators while still missing malformed
credential tails. The task thread could fold progress into the final
response, hide failures, or show more than one final answer. Native
Codex also exposed approval modes that do not yet have a durable
approval bridge.

**Expected behavior**

Each heartbeat uses a new PRP authority epoch. Codex and OpenCode
preserve exact qualified provider sessions; ACPX emits an explicit
continuity event when its qualified process-replacement policy is used.
Every accepted provider event is presented, classified as internal, or
surfaced as unsupported. The task page shows chronological progress,
reasoning summaries, activity, Plans, interactions, terminal failures,
and exactly one final reply. Direct adapters retain their existing path.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Enable the unified experimental Paperclip Runner setting.
2. Create a local native Codex, OpenCode, ACPX Claude, or ACPX Codex
agent.
3. Run response, Plan, structured-question/resume, restart,
cancellation, and failure scenarios.
4. Reload the task while active, waiting, failed, and settled.
5. On the old implementation, observe stale run authority, missing
classifications, incomplete output, or duplicated/folded replies.

**Paperclip version or commit**

The repair is based directly on `master` at
`87d05e194b643810d16d20612115acd01d735d43`.

**Deployment mode**

Local development with the embedded database.

Related work: Refs #12616, #12646, #12666, #12685, and #12700.

## What Changed

- Rotates PRP control-plane, outbox, ticket, lease, command, receipt,
and sequence authority for each heartbeat while carrying forward only a
validated provider-session identity.
- Reads `control-plane-state.json`, validates both durable schemas and
lifecycle values, resumes coherent current runs, archives qualified
settled authority, and quarantines malformed or mismatched scoped state
without moving ambiguous live legacy state.
- Preserves Codex provider phase and stable item identities so
commentary remains progress and only `final_answer` becomes final.
- Adds raw OpenCode HTTP/SSE boundary coverage and canonical reasoning
lifecycle mapping.
- Makes ACPX normalization lossless for visible reasoning, tool
lifecycle metadata, stable bounded identities, Plan revisions,
structured requests, failures, and qualified process replacement. Only
the compatible terminal assistant message is promoted as final.
- Applies schema-aware redaction before generic JWT-shaped detection and
scans every diagnostic string leaf. Malformed raw/escaped quoted
credential tails are redacted in both server and durable Rust state.
- Restores snapshot-style chronological task presentation, expandable
tool activity, inline Plan cards, visible waiting/resume/cancel/failure
states, and exactly one final answer.
- Makes `never` the only qualified native Codex permission mode and
rejects unsupported persisted native modes with remediation. OpenCode
and ACPX policies remain intact.
- Keeps the unified experimental Runner setting as the only enablement
flag. Onboarding and direct Codex, Claude, and OpenCode stay on their
legacy execution/finalization paths.
- Adds cross-language goldens, authority/recovery/fault coverage, exact
response/count assertions, and native plus legacy acceptance scenarios.

## Verification

- Pull-request GitHub Actions run Rust formatting/tests, TypeScript
checks, server/UI tests, builds, protocol drift checks, browser E2E, and
security scans.
- A separate workflow-only validation ref is pinned directly on this PR
head and runs the 35-cell paid local matrix: three core scenarios plus
structured-question resume and restart/resume for native Codex, native
OpenCode, ACPX Claude, ACPX Codex, and direct Codex/Claude/OpenCode.
Run: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33682434315
- Acceptance requires exact single visible replies, monotonic sequences,
matching envelope discriminators, one semantic terminal, one run
terminal, no unresolved interaction, no duplicate mutation, no secret
leakage, provider continuity, and zero native rows for direct adapters.
- Per maintainer direction, tests are running in GitHub Actions rather
than on the slower local host. Only formatters and static diff checks
were run locally.

## Risks

- Recovery from old or partial filesystem state is sensitive. The repair
fails closed, preserves active or unverifiable authority, and
quarantines only state whose scoped ownership is safe to move.
- Provider event formats can change. Closed validators and boundary
goldens turn new or malformed events into visible diagnostics instead of
silent drops.
- Shared task presentation could affect direct adapters. Runtime-fact
gating plus the direct-adapter matrix protect the existing path.
- Managed and remote providers are not qualified here. Shared code
continues to compile and fail safely, but live qualification is
deferred.

> 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. The exact deployed snapshot and
context-window size are not exposed to this task. It used agentic
reasoning, repository inspection, code editing, Git, parallel subagents,
and GitHub Actions.

## 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 and contains no internal
Paperclip 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] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] The paid local-provider matrix is 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
2026-09-02 16:11:26 -05:00
Dotta 2e5a24e177 feat(runner): add qualified OpenCode runtime (#12588)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Paperclip Runner provides a durable execution boundary for supported
providers.
> - The current production runtime supports Codex but cannot execute
OpenCode sessions.
> - OpenCode needs a qualified transport, strict input mapping, and
normalized events.
> - This pull request adds the OpenCode runtime as one isolated provider
unit.
> - The benefit is a reviewable provider expansion that does not weaken
the existing Codex path.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Cross-cutting: packages/paperclip-runner and the Codex-local adapter
configuration contract.

**Problem or motivation**

Paperclip Runner has provider-neutral contracts, but the production
backend factory cannot start a qualified OpenCode session. This blocks
OpenCode from using the durable runner path.

**Proposed solution**

Add the qualified OpenCode app-server proxy, driver, MCP bridge,
backend, fixtures, and factory wiring. Keep existing Codex behavior
unchanged.

**Alternatives considered**

Keeping OpenCode only on the direct adapter path would avoid this
runtime work, but it would not provide durable runner recovery or
normalized provider events.

**Roadmap alignment**

ROADMAP.md does not list a conflicting provider-runtime project. This
change extends the existing Paperclip Runner architecture.

## What Changed

- Added the qualified OpenCode app-server proxy and input queue.
- Added collaboration-mode and provider-event normalization.
- Added the OpenCode MCP bridge and native session backend.
- Added strict fixtures and focused unit coverage.
- Added only the package exports and adapter configuration required by
this runtime.
- Kept deferred SDK, lab, eval, and public package surfaces out of this
change.

## Verification

- GitHub Actions is the authoritative verification environment for this
PR.
- Run the package type checks and focused OpenCode tests in CI.
- Run repository typecheck, test, build, security, and policy gates
through the stack-aware workflow.
- Local tests were not run because this checkout is resource
constrained.

## Risks

- OpenCode protocol changes could affect event normalization or
recovery.
- The driver fails closed on malformed input and unsupported runtime
behavior.
- Existing Codex selection remains unchanged unless the stored provider
is OpenCode.

> 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.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-5.6, with repository tools, code execution, and
parallel agent review.

## 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 existing issues or described the issue in-PR
following the relevant issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal or 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 — GitHub Actions is
authoritative for this resource-constrained checkout
- [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

## Stack

- Position: 1 of 4
- Base: master
- Next: additional qualified provider runtimes
2026-08-31 10:43:34 -05:00