Commit Graph
3 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandPaperclip cff331f6ca fix(evals): retain local controller cost origin (#17990)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - Its eval journals retain model costs and operating reservations
under one cap.
> - The operating policy records the controller's execution origin.
> - The schema currently accepts only GitHub-hosted and AWS Fleet
origins.
> - A local controller must therefore use an inaccurate label or fail
admission.
> - This PR adds the local origin and keeps the hosted-only schedule
gate.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #17986. No duplicate open PR or issue was found in the
operating-overhead/local search.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The Product E2E operating allowance and its retained journal policy.

**Current behavior**

At master `40c1ab36cd`, an unscheduled local controller cannot set
`runner: "local"`. The generic allowance validator rejects it. Local
qualification can use the same accounting controls but cannot record its
origin correctly.

**Proposed behavior**

Accept the local origin in the generic allowance. Keep all component,
price, cap, expiry, and receipt rules. The scheduled validator still
requires `github-hosted` and rejects a local allowance.

**Reason and benefit**

Local qualification can retain an accurate execution origin without
claiming that its reservations are billed GitHub charges.

## What Changed

- Add `local` to the operating allowance's runner type and validator.
- Exercise local journal creation, model admission, retained overhead,
restart, and reconciliation in the existing boundary test.
- Check that a local allowance fails Product scheduled admission.
- Pin new hosted Runner controller admission to `github-hosted`.
Preserve original labels when reading historical manifests; those reads
cannot authorize a new worker.
- Exercise the hosted-origin rejection and historical/local reads in
both source and copied portable runtimes.
- Document the local label and its accounting limits.

## Verification

- Before the fix: the new local persistence case and schedule-boundary
assertion failed; eight tests passed.
- Focused ledger, overhead, operations, and scheduled finalization
tests: 71 passed across five files.
- Controlled Runner source and portable tests: 86 passed. The new
hosted-origin regression failed before the fix.
- Full Product support suite at the first commit: 4,524 passed, three
skipped, and one retained embedded PostgreSQL bootstrap failure. The
same database failure was previously reproduced on a clean baseline.
- Separate Node test phase on the host: 137 passed.
- Actual Linux controller: database lifecycle tests pass. After
installing its missing `zip` utility, the full Product suite has 4,527
passes and one Copilot parent-version coverage failure. That same
failure reproduces on clean master `40c1ab36cd` with the same Linux
filesystem and dependencies (14 passes, one failure). Copilot files are
unchanged. The initial seven ZIP-related failures and the watcher
failure remain retained.
- The final fresh Linux semantic check passes: `GOMEMLIMIT=2GiB GOGC=50
GOMAXPROCS=1 node node_modules/typescript/bin/tsc --singleThreaded -p
tests/runner-e2e/tsconfig.json`. The parallel compiler OOM is retained.
No semantic checks were omitted.
- Both fresh reviews are 5/5, with the addressed thread resolved. Hosted
Build first failed during unchanged Pi setup prefetch with an operation
timeout. One job rerun recovered; the original failure remains retained.
All 58 latest-head checks are now acceptable.
- No paid model requests, sandbox creation, schedule changes, or
historical journal edits.

## Risks

- The caller supplies this origin. It must describe the actual
controller.
- `local` does not prove zero compute cost, provide a default allowance,
or release a hold.
- Both maintained hosted admission paths require the GitHub-hosted
controller origin. A previously accepted hosted policy with an AWS/local
label now fails new admission. Historical reads preserve the original
evidence.

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool use and code execution. The
exact serving model ID and context window 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>
2026-10-28 02:05:36 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip bf3ef12f3a fix(evals): qualify model spend separately from operating costs (#17928)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agent work and its budgets.
> - Product E2E campaigns must explain each model request and attempt.
> - The current completion gate also requires complete operating-cost
evidence.
> - Long-lived observability and storage charges can block a campaign
after its model receipts are complete.
> - An operator can now choose model-request readiness in a retained
allowance.
> - The report keeps full accounting, operating holds and model
readiness separate.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #17889, #17523, #17452.

**What happened?**
A hosted campaign could pass both product cases and retain complete
model receipts, yet fail readiness because operating charges were
unresolved.

**Expected behavior**
An explicit model-readiness policy permits complete model receipts to
qualify a run. Unknown operating charges stay visible and reserved.
Missing model receipts and budget violations still block qualification.

**Steps to reproduce**
Use a campaign with four unresolved operating reservations and one
completed model request. The regression checks readiness before and
after the final model receipt, then checks an operating overrun. The
default policy retains the original full-accounting gate.

## What Changed

- Add the explicit `accountingReadiness: "model_requests"` allowance
policy. Bind it into operating-bound configuration when present.
- Derive a model subtotal and receipt-coverage projection from the
retained journal. Show it beside full accounting and retained holds.
- Use the selected readiness policy in scheduled finalization. Keep
product, cleanup, feedback, trace and budget checks.
- Refresh two existing eval prerequisites found by the full unit suite:
the active Copilot image identity and the model-account catalog mapping.
- Document the policy and its limit: it does not certify a
full-lifecycle operating-cost ceiling.

## Verification

- Regression failed on the old implementation with `Invalid operating
overhead fields` and passed after the change.
- Focused accounting/operations/finalization checks: 54 tests passed
before the final policy assertions.
- Existing image/catalog failures reproduced, then their 12 checks
passed after the metadata repairs.
- Product E2E unit suite: 4,360 passed and 2 skipped, plus 137 Node
checks. Product E2E and workspace typechecks and workspace build passed.
- Review regressions: 35 focused accounting/finalization checks passed
on 4aeb8bd65c, including the optional-policy hash and the scheduled
consumer.
- Full local server tests encountered embedded PostgreSQL bootstrap
failures; retained output is not a passing full-suite claim. Hosted CI
remains required.
- Final head 4aeb8bd65c: all 57 check runs pass or are skipped, the
legacy security status passes, both reviews are 5/5 and no review
threads remain open.
- No paid campaign or schedule activation is claimed by this PR.

## Risks

The opt-in policy permits readiness while operating costs remain
unreconciled. The report retains full-accounting status and all holds.
The gateway still reserves requests inside the same total allowance.
This is an admission limit, not a vendor invoice guarantee. The omitted
policy keeps existing behavior. Old journals remain unchanged.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository inspection and
code execution. The exact serving model ID and context window are not
exposed to 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>
2026-10-27 15:10:26 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 3bd709df8b Operationalize Product E2E accounting, tracing, and scheduling (#17009)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agents and the work they perform.
> - Product E2E tests exercise real agents, tools, setup and cleanup.
> - Repeated runs need retained costs and traces, including failed
attempts.
> - A passing retry must not hide earlier spending or feedback.
> - Recurring work also needs admission limits, private reports and
failure detection.
> - This change supplies those controls while keeping paid activation
behind existing gates.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16996 and #17158. This is the consolidated landing of the reviewed
eval operations stack: #17019, #17024, #17025, #17027, #17030, #17033,
#17035, #17038, #17043, #17044, #17048, #17050, #17051, #17092, #17096,
#17100, #17107, #17109, #17112, #17115, #17117, #17121, #17123, #17127,
#17130, #17133, #17134, #17137, #17140, #17143, #17154. The repository
permits squash merges only. A local rehearsal showed that squashing each
slice into master causes repeated conflicts in dependent slices. This PR
preserves their commits and lands their combined implementation in one
reviewed integration. Superseded slices will close after this merge.

## What Changed

- Retain every attempt's cost receipt, including setup, failures,
interruptions and retries. Separate reported amounts, estimates, missing
costs and reserved capacity in reports and dashboards.
- Add bounded request admission, exact model pricecards, gateway error
accounting, cache policy and reconciliation evidence. Refuse unsupported
routes and requests that cannot fit the allowance.
- Integrate Braintrust gateway traces and OTLP correlation, with secret
filtering and experiment imports. Record phase timing, including setup,
feedback capture and cleanup.
- Collect complaint and suggestion evidence after each attempt,
including recovery after failures. Retain explicit review dispositions
independently from the product grade.
- Add gated daily and weekly selections, measured forecasts,
setup/readiness checks, wall-time limits and retained monitor
notifications. Include declared non-model overhead in admission while
reporting the existing subscription separately.
- Keep recurring history private, bound uploads and retention, and use
isolated archive environments. Keep public publication an explicit
operation. Report and publication jobs install only the committed
lockfile, with scripts disabled and isolated stores; stale pins fail
closed.
- Integrate current master, preserve its Product E2E journey billing and
privacy checks, and test that shared setup receipts do not double-count
estimated agent usage. Preserve upstream fixture repairs.

## Verification

- Complete integration baseline
`0649a5ce7544ab20825c2183d2f421157db49f24` includes master
`a3e1d915a7110a4e115b46396a3f79e6dfb4d05e` and every original stack head
as ancestors.
- On that integration baseline, `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit`: 4,012
Vitest tests passed, two skipped, across 193 files; all 137 Node
source-contract tests passed.
- Focused billing and Product E2E journey contract checks: 24 tests
passed. They cover estimates, unknown receipts, single-owner setup
costs, browser-only execution and private publication guards.
- Monitor and workflow wiring: all 96 Node tests passed. `node
scripts/check-token-gates.mjs`: all gates clean.
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck` passes after the standard Runner
TypeScript build refreshed local declarations. The first attempt
rejected the new master `runner_prepared_launch` union member because
this checkout retained an older generated declaration; the source union
already contained that member.
- Current head `492b0708a1c531a023d9ac10f0f3dc6383cc1754` removes
dependency re-resolution from archive-authorized reporting jobs after
the security scan flagged it. All 15 workflow-security tests pass after
updating the old two-install assertion.
- Hosted [CI run
39965460180](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39965460180)
passes on the current repaired head, including typecheck, build, general
tests, Runner checks, browser shards and canary dry run. Greptile is 5/5
on this exact head with no unresolved threads. The security scan passes
after the fixed lockfile-resolution thread was resolved.
- Paperclip Review returned a terminal neutral check but an incomplete
0-file assessment on the repaired head: its platform blocked both diff
responses as prompt-injection content. This is not a successful code
review. No bypass or fabricated pass was attempted; current-head
Greptile, security and hosted CI are independent gates.
- No paid test, reservation release or recurring-run activation
accompanies this landing. Live route qualification and invoice
reconciliation remain separate evidence.

<details>
<summary>Retained earlier validation failures</summary>

Earlier broad local runs had two 15-second test timeouts (CLI poll
cadence and Retry validation), one embedded-database setup timeout, and
later PostgreSQL semaphore exhaustion. The exact timed-out tests passed
separately without larger timeouts; the broad-run causes were not
established. Those local failures remain distinct from subsequent hosted
CI results. The independent #17158 fix records its Muse fixture
collision, its UUID correction and hosted verification. Local Muse
execution was also blocked by macOS embedded-PostgreSQL startup. No
historical failure is treated as a successful paid qualification.

</details>

## Risks

- Admission is a local control, not a provider invoice cap. Missing
provider receipts or resource charges retain unknown amounts and holds;
estimates do not become billed dollars.
- The bounded path admits only documented local suites and provider
routes. Ordinary legacy or separate Runner protocol campaigns have
different controls. Merging this code does not qualify additional
routes.
- Recurrence still needs the existing enable gates and current
qualification/allowance evidence. Archive permissions and resources must
match the documented private-environment contract.
- Legacy reports may lack complete attempt or phase evidence. Reports
preserve that limitation and do not infer zero usage from missing data.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools and code
execution. The exact deployment variant and context-window size are not
exposed by 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 (targeted checks;
full-suite host limitation disclosed above)
- [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>
2026-10-23 07:18:37 -07:00