Commit Graph
3 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
e6ec781a1a fix(e2e): verify review outcomes and preserve report measurements (#17556)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip's Product E2E journeys verify user outcomes in the real
app and GitHub.
> - The review journey must show the score and failed check for its
exact reviewed commit, then the visible task status before and after
reload.
> - GitHub includes a hidden “Re-run failed checks” menu item before the
visible check result.
> - The journey selected that hidden item and failed even after native
work and publication completed. A subsequent attempt exposed the same
first-text-match problem with Done in the task UI.
> - This change reads the selected check's status header and binds its
URL, score, and commit.
> - Browser fixtures retain this failure and reject plausible wrong
projections.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #17457, #17513, #17551.

**What happened?**

The bot completed its native run and task, then published its summary,
inline precision finding, and failed 2/5 check. The browser assertion
selected a hidden “Re-run failed checks” menu item before the visible
result, so the journey still failed. After that was corrected, the next
live attempt passed the check projection but selected hidden Done text
before the visible task status.

**Expected behavior**

Verify the actual selected GitHub check. A hidden menu item or a word in
the model's narrative cannot prove its conclusion.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Render a hidden “Re-run failed checks” item before a visible failed
check.
2. Use the old first text match for “failed”.
3. Observe the false visibility failure.

**Paperclip version or commit**

The base includes the journey changes from #17457 and #17513.

## What Changed

- Validate the check URL against the configured repository and select
its exact check-run ID.
- Require the expected score and full reviewed commit inside that check.
- Read failure status only from that check's header.
- Give each projection step its own phase so failures identify the
correct boundary.
- Stage the verified persisted screenshot as the standard report
final-state artifact, rejecting a passing report if it is absent.
- Preserve measured billing summaries during regeneration when raw run
usage is absent; newer raw usage takes precedence.
- Extend the catalog-wide history fixture to include the new journey
evidence contract.
- Read task completion from the visible Status property picker before
and after reload, with separate phase labels.
- Add eighteen isolated browser fixtures to the existing browser-support
suite and document both boundaries.

## Verification

- Reproduced the old selector failure in the live GitHub page and a
credential-free browser fixture before fixing it.
- All 60 browser-support cases pass, including eighteen focused
projection cases. They reject the wrong check status, score, commit,
page, and repository reference, plus hidden or unrelated Done text.
- All 163 focused billing, history, accounting, report, and journey
tests pass, as does runner E2E typechecking.
- A regression reproduced discarded saved token totals. Retained totals
now survive per-cell and campaign aggregation while missing dollar
prices stay unknown; fresh raw usage still overrides stale summaries.
- Diff and credential-value checks pass.
- The earlier failed attempts remain failed. A fresh complete QA journey
passed all 18 checkpoints and cleanup with a successful native run, a
below-threshold review and inline precision finding, the correctly
failed check, visible Done status, and reload persistence. The later
reference-validation commit changes only browser fixtures; the live
driver bytes are unchanged.
- A report regression reproduced the missing standard final-state
artifact. The packager now aliases only the hash-verified persisted
screenshot for passing results; missing final-state proof is rejected.
Presentation regeneration preserves the original live grade and
dispatches no provider work.

## Risks

This depends on GitHub's check-run header structure. A markup change
fails the journey instead of accepting narrative text as a result. The
product runtime and behavioral oracle stay unchanged. Usage-price
coverage remains a separate evidence dimension. A saved billing summary
is reused only when raw usage is absent, preserving the recorded
coverage and unknown prices.

The separate advisory Paperclip Review remains queued after its prior
assigned attempt timed out. Its normal Retry control rejected the
obsolete failed chat request as unsafe to retry. Required repository
gates `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e` pass, all 55 completed CI checks are
green, and final-head Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved findings. The
advisory queue is not represented as a completed assessment.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6. The exact runtime model ID and
context-window size are not exposed in this session. Used for code,
browser fixtures, and live evidence analysis.

## 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 <paperclip@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <bot@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-24 23:54:27 -07:00
a0e5166e97 Fix GitHub journey registration diagnostics and native retry cleanup (#17513)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages work performed by AI agents.
> - The Product E2E harness verifies a GitHub review-bot journey.
> - GitHub can return a registration page without the expected creation
control.
> - The journey could then wait for the full login allowance without
useful evidence.
> - A failed native run can also retain a retry after its terminal
status is visible.
> - This change records a safe registration boundary and uses the normal
Stop route for owned retries.
> - Operators can diagnose the setup failure and confirm cleanup without
changing the behavioral oracle.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #17457.

**What happened?**

The GitHub review journey waited at App registration with no useful
handoff evidence. Its cleanup also skipped failed native runs that still
owned a durable retry.

**Expected behavior**

The journey should report a bounded registration failure or
reauthentication boundary. Cleanup should Stop an owned native retry and
require its audited acknowledgement.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Run the configured GitHub review journey.
2. Return a GitHub registration page without the expected creation
button, or fail a native review run while its coordinator can retry.
3. Inspect the result and cleanup evidence.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Source built from current master. This extends the driver merged in
#17457.

## What Changed

- Bound the registration render wait to 30 seconds. Keep the separate
attended confirmation allowance.
- Retain GitHub origin, path, and control-presence flags. Retain
headings, button labels, and alerts only on known registration error
pages without authentication fields.
- Exclude query parameters, entered values, page bodies, grant payloads,
and authentication content from that diagnostic.
- Add an optional private authentication hook for ordinary GitHub access
reconfirmation. Detect passkey-first sudo at the manifest URL without
retaining its authentication content.
- Stop owned failed native retries through the existing run-only
cancellation route. Verify company, agent, task, and audit
acknowledgement.
- Use native Stop correlation only for native runs. Queued legacy or
unresolved runs use the ordinary cancel request. Stop scheduled retries
and wait for them to leave the live state set.
- Keep pending accounting debt intact. Add regression coverage and
journey documentation.

## Verification

- Focused journey and report suite: 58 tests passed.
- Runner E2E TypeScript check passed.
- `git diff --check` passed. Credential-value scan passed.
- Live fixture reproduced the missing creation control at the manifest
handoff. The new diagnostic retained its path and control-presence
flags. No model work started. Draft cleanup passed.
- All 58 current-head checks are terminal and green. Greptile scored the
exact head 5/5, with no unresolved review threads.

## Risks

GitHub pages that take more than 30 seconds to render the creation
control now fail early. Native cleanup fails closed if the server does
not provide the expected Stop acknowledgement. The live setup-to-Done
behavioral journey is still unqualified. These changes do not repair a
missing provider usage receipt or weaken its accounting gate.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6. Exact runtime model identifier and
context-window size are not exposed in this session. Used for code
execution, browser tooling, and regression analysis.

## 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>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <paperclip@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-24 21:39:21 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 6d46851920 test(e2e): add attended GitHub review bot journey (#17457)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agents and the work they perform.
> - Product E2E checks verify real user paths through those agents.
> - A recorded GitHub review-bot walkthrough had no repeatable
registered case.
> - App setup, automatic triggering, publication, and task completion
need separate evidence.
> - This pull request adds an explicit attended journey to the existing
catalog and report tools.
> - Reusable setup profiles and independent assertions preserve the same
outcome across compatible targets.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #17262. This case remains an explicit attended attached-target
flow. It does not replace the shared deployment-target or
paid-operations framework.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The Product E2E catalog can now select and retain evidence for GitHub
review-bot setup and its first automatic review.

**Current behavior**

Recorded walkthroughs cannot be rerun as a fixed registered case. A
published review alone can hide a failed run or unfinished task.

**Proposed behavior**

Create and install an owned App, save automatic new-PR settings, create
a defective PR, and require correlated review delivery, an inline
finding, a consistent check, a successful run, and a Done task. Retain
failures and confirm owned-resource cleanup.

**Reason and benefit**

The case makes a useful external integration reproducible without
treating setup, unit checks, or report rendering as proof of a completed
live journey.

## What Changed

- Add two explicit attended cells for an existing configured agent in
local or Daytona execution.
- Declare hosting, account, connection, and credential prerequisites
through private setup bindings.
- Add fixed browser controls, ownership checks, independent grading, and
cleanup.
- Package declared screenshots through the existing sanitizer, manifest,
validator, and dashboard.
- Reject operations-managed execution until budgeted routing is
qualified.
- Document hosted QA credential setup and evidence limits.

## Verification

- Focused catalog, oracle, report, connection, and ownership checks: 127
tests passed.
- Inherited-environment preflight regression failed against the previous
commit and passed after the fix. Actual-run environment verification
remains required.
- Harness TypeScript check and full workspace typecheck passed. Full
build passed. The local full-test attempt was interrupted after repeated
embedded PostgreSQL startup failures; its exit code of zero does not
establish a pass; Exact-head Linux CI passed the full test, typecheck,
build, Runner, serialized, browser, and canary gates on
`abbddeade848edefc8de75f11cc9008b2cd52764`.
- A real hosted attempt published a rated review and inline finding. It
failed when its native session timed out before the task reached Done.
Cleanup passed. Full live qualification remains open.
- Credential scan found no known credential values in the authored files
or retained report corpus.

## Risks

- The full case creates external test resources and uses the configured
provider. It requires an explicit selection and current task authority.
It is excluded from default and CI matrices.
- Time and run limits are not a hard dollar cap. Missing dollar cost
stays unknown. Fixture setup does not weaken budget policy.
- Fresh personal OAuth, unattended authentication, runtime skill-read
proof, and cross-host qualification are separate claims.
- The selected live fixture needs environment/lifecycle recovery before
it can adopt a longer provider deadline.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 family through Codex, with reasoning, code execution, and
browser tools. The exact deployment 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, including the available 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 enhancement
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
ticket ID
- [x] I have run focused tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation
- [x] I have considered and documented risks
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open findings
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-24 12:16:26 -07:00