mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-24 10:13:11 +02:00
408ffba914984210782bd4dfd0bb1e8c5bce6258
5524
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Dotta
|
408ffba914 |
Merge branch 'codex/dependable-qualification-checkpoint' into codex/dependable-finalization-recovery
* codex/dependable-qualification-checkpoint: fix: carry server-owned workspace continuations through runner bridges |
||
|
Dotta
|
aa16d67221 |
Merge branch 'codex/dependable-question-journey' into codex/dependable-qualification-checkpoint
* codex/dependable-question-journey: fix: carry server-owned workspace continuations through runner bridges |
||
|
Dotta
|
b900e0da11 |
Merge branch 'codex/dependable-repository-conversion' into codex/dependable-question-journey
* codex/dependable-repository-conversion: fix: carry server-owned workspace continuations through runner bridges |
||
|
Dotta
|
a7593dcc67 |
Merge branch 'codex/plain-task-repository-admission' into codex/dependable-repository-conversion
* codex/plain-task-repository-admission: fix: carry server-owned workspace continuations through runner bridges |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
b852cdec59 |
fix: carry server-owned workspace continuations through runner bridges
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <paperclip@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
2b532d0c3e |
test: verify preserved results across finalization crashes
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
09a45d29bb |
Merge current journey candidate into the qualification checkpoint
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
c4e409d819 |
Merge repaired repository setup into the question journey candidate
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9456bbdf51 |
Merge the complete setup repair into repository qualification
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
941467168c |
fix: accept server-resolved workspace continuations in Codex
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9b924462b9 |
test: retain lifecycle state for repository journeys
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
be153175a5 |
test: open and inspect the delivered question result
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9dcccc9e46 |
fix: resume pending repository work with an empty work list
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
3d6d6d1bda |
test: preserve complete question identity across an answer
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
6df51567e7 |
Merge current master into the complete repository setup repair
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> * origin/master: fix(evals): classify latency from observation bounds (#16829) docs: define module ownership and shared change review (#17087) fix: stop idle MCP event polling (#17036) fix(recovery): let preservation owners reopen retained sources (#17053) perf(budgets): scope accounting and deliver enforcement asynchronously (#17046) # Conflicts: # tests/runner-e2e/README.md # tests/runner-e2e/installed-cli.test.ts |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9d322bfa21 |
test: verify necessary free-text questions through one real answer
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
3fc3af5a61 |
test: require every journey before daily qualification rotation
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
a6eaf005a2 |
Merge the verified task-source and conversion baseline repairs
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> * codex/dependable-repository-conversion: test: create conversion-compatible Claude baseline settings fix: preserve plain task sources through shared workspace reuse |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d942a5c874 |
test: create conversion-compatible Claude baseline settings
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8748c2b5df |
Merge retained task-source reuse repair
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> * codex/plain-task-repository-admission: fix: preserve plain task sources through shared workspace reuse |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
3568193a71 |
fix: preserve plain task sources through shared workspace reuse
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
53732c811b |
fix(evals): classify latency from observation bounds (#16829)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Product E2E probes measure when acknowledgements and replies become visible. > - A poll gives a time interval for an event. > - The first positive poll can occur after a target that the event could still meet. > - This pull request compares the full interval with a strict or inclusive target. > - Reports retain the raw observations and the original verdict when the timing verdict changes. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A historical acknowledgement was absent at 1901 ms and first present at 2427 ms. A report marked the 2000 ms target as failed. The interval crosses that target, so the available evidence cannot give a pass or fail verdict. **Expected behavior** Return pass when the full interval meets the target. Return fail when the full interval rules out the target. Return inconclusive for overlap, invalid evidence, or insufficient evidence. Respect strict and inclusive targets and open and closed endpoints. **Steps to reproduce** Run the deterministic timing tests. Use the acknowledgement interval `(1901, 2427] ms` with `<= 2000 ms`. Compare the late reply interval `(52965, 53334] ms` with `<= 30000 ms`. The first is inconclusive. The second fails. **Paperclip version or commit** The source includes master at `14afc12124017d4ec30d0f4bfd6892f8ce475d21`. Related PR: [#13710](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13710) changed chat latency and session reuse. This change corrects probe evidence and report verdicts. ## What Changed - Add a shared interval classifier with explicit endpoint and target operators. - Start observation before dispatch. Use a monotonic clock. Bound asynchronous reads by request start and completion. - Measure the first visible response separately from message creation and final settlement. Share browser reads with an optional acknowledgement probe. - Keep raw bounds, clock resolution, message metadata, failed reads, and original verdicts in retained report evidence. - Add deterministic coverage for threshold equality, missing data, edited messages, asynchronous reads, teardown, report correction, and a finite-domain oracle. - Bound observer shutdown to one second across pending and final reads. Retain timeout counts. Ignore late completions and start no more reads after shutdown. - Document the timing contract in the existing Product E2E guide. - Keep current startup reuse evidence after the master merge. Update four stale test expectations for qualified Copilot admission. Keep the explicit suite and provider restrictions. ## Verification - Current head: `c42e87e6d3b4b347e7cb176f56819c1d0abe106d`. - Passed: `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit` (3,287 Vitest tests and 128 native completion tests; two explicit skips). - Passed: `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`, `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `pnpm check:token-gates`, and `git diff origin/master --check`. - Passed: [exact-head CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39607140418), including both required checks (`ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`), all general and serialized test jobs, all eight browser shards, build, canary dry run, and the clean public npm-install smoke. - Greptile reviewed the complete current diff and returned [5/5 with no actionable issues](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16829#issuecomment-6266704814). All review threads are resolved. - The redundant local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after the exact-head CI test jobs passed. It did not produce a complete local verdict; the full repository test evidence is the CI run above. - The [earlier broad run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39249282597) failed on the old head. Its full test command timed out after 15 minutes. Five E2E support failures came from ambient `NODE_PATH` and a missing historical Git object. Current master supplies the closed-environment launcher and retained source fixture. The full support suite passes with these fixes. - After the current master merge, four stale Copilot assertions and the nested unit launcher failed. Copilot is now qualified. Those assertions now require no qualification override and retain the rejected suite/provider cases. The full documented unit command passes. - The first local typecheck after the merge used stale generated package declarations and failed. The typechecks pass after `pnpm build`. - These checks use synthetic timing evidence. They make no live provider calls and claim no new live latency measurement. ## Risks - The browser diagnostic depends on the existing message and receipt DOM markers. Controlled tests cover visibility, receipt separation, concurrent reads, and teardown. - Corrected timing verdicts can become inconclusive. The report keeps the original verdict and does not change the overall workflow grade. - This change adds no database migration or product surface. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 Codex. Model family: GPT-6. This session does not expose a more specific model ID or context window size. The agent used reasoning, shell tools, code inspection, and deterministic tests. The earlier implementation session did not retain its exact model ID. ## 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
2e7efc625b |
test: preserve reports while rejecting missing or duplicate proof
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9a8c50ca5d |
Merge the tested repository candidate into qualification reporting
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> * codex/dependable-repository-conversion: fix: validate actual task roots and unfinished response waits test: qualify conversion prerequisites before runner selection |
||
|
Dotta
|
65fd231271 |
Merge the measured workspace and completion repairs
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> * codex/plain-task-repository-admission: fix: validate actual task roots and unfinished response waits # Conflicts: # doc/plans/2026-10-20-dependable-everyday-work.md |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
91c026f169 |
fix: validate actual task roots and unfinished response waits
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
14afc12124 |
docs: define module ownership and shared change review (#17087)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Coding agents extend connectors and shared control-plane services. > - Provider details can leak into shared services during these changes. > - Moving code into a new file does not explain why shared behavior must change. > - This pull request adds module ownership and shared-change review rules. > - The rules help agents justify the change before implementation and review. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Issue type** Missing documentation. **Where is the issue?** Repository architecture rules and the connector authoring playbook. **What's wrong?** Subsystem rules describe some ownership boundaries. The repository lacks a general rule for deciding which behavior belongs in a feature module, what shared contracts must change, and how to review the resulting scope. An integration can therefore add provider-specific logic to shared code or bundle large platform changes into one connector PR. **Suggested fix** Add a repository-wide rule and load it in Greptile. Apply the rule during connector planning and PR preparation. Keep provider protocol behavior with its owner. Require a reason for shared changes and checks through affected consumers. Related public context: [Notebook connector PR #16984](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16984). This PR changes instructions only. ## What Changed - Add a concise module-boundary rule for ownership, narrow contracts, shared controls, delivery scope, and verification. - Register the rule as repository-wide Greptile context. - Add planning and PR review steps to the connector playbook. Keep tests and docs with their behavior. ## Verification - Passed rule frontmatter, Greptile registration, referenced-file, and playbook-link checks. - Passed `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD`. - Reviewed the rule against the relevant connector failure and allowed cases: small dispatch branches, one-consumer shared capabilities, and unrelated fixes. - Fresh Greptile and Paperclip reviews both scored commit `759572fe503e1b6dfa9527f53de6c326a2c3bff6` 5/5. No actionable findings or unresolved review threads remain. - Final current-commit GitHub checks: 55 successful, 1 neutral, and 2 skipped; no pending or failed checks. Both required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e` gates passed. - Initial CI attempt: the build and runtime boot smoke test passed. The spot runner received a shutdown signal during the clean public npm install check, canceling that step and failing the build job. [Interrupted job log](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39601811838/job/119228042468). Retried failed jobs once. Attempt 2 passed the complete build, runtime boot, and clean-install verification. The initial runner interruption remains recorded here. - Full local application checks are unavailable: this checkout has no workspace dependencies, and `pnpm -r typecheck` stopped during pnpm bootstrap because registry fetches failed and the requested pnpm version could not be verified. Local application tests and build were not run. GitHub checks must pass before merge. ## Risks - The rule could cause unnecessary abstractions or extra PRs if applied mechanically. It permits small dispatch branches and useful capabilities with one consumer. It rejects arbitrary file counts and unrelated restructuring. - Prose and metadata checks do not prove that future agents will follow the rule. Hosted review receives it when this branch is reviewed. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex: `gpt-6-astra` authored the guidance; `gpt-6.1-sol` prepared delivery. Both used reasoning, filesystem tools, and GitHub tooling. Context window size was not recorded in the available model settings. ## 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 (focused documentation and metadata validation; application checks unavailable as stated above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable (no runtime change; targeted structural checks cover the changed instructions) - [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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
16922a1832 |
test: qualify conversion prerequisites before runner selection
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
cb4b55dd58 |
test: reject inherited and untrusted qualification metadata
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
6b1837ece8 | test: retain full everyday-work qualification evidence | ||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
0cd0746d19 |
test: replay repository setup with recorded staging models
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
c6ee96a3df |
fix: stop idle MCP event polling (#17036)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - MCP task subscriptions and Dot mailboxes notify external clients when work changes. > - Their delivery workers queried SQL every two seconds, including when no work existed. > - Those queries prevent idle databases from becoming quiet across many hosted instances. > - Existing activity, mailbox, subscription, and delivery records already preserve the work. > - This pull request uses committed-write signals and saved retry deadlines to drive delivery. > - Idle subscriptions become quiet while startup, retry, drain, and shutdown recovery remain supported. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related sleep migrations: #15625, #17000, #17008. Searched open PRs and issues for MCP event sleep/polling work; no duplicate found. **What happened?** Each public MCP and Dot event service started a two-second interval. It checked settings, scanned subscriptions, created delivery receipts, cleaned expired records, and attempted delivery even without changes. **Expected behavior** An empty or subscribed-but-idle service produces no recurring SQL or network traffic. Committed events trigger prompt delivery. Only unfinished work retains a retry deadline. **Steps to reproduce** Configure a public MCP origin and start the server. Observe recurring settings queries with MCP disabled, or subscription/queue queries with it enabled. No incoming task changes are required. **Paperclip version or commit** Initially inspected master at `8b4ab65b1c3d863d282752e83307943720a5c85c`; rebased onto `c2daf906d9` after master advanced. The only conflict was overlapping imports in the heartbeat queue; both were preserved. ## What Changed - Register separate MCP and Dot workers with the existing delivery coordinator. Remove both unconditional intervals. - Notify from committed activity, comment, mailbox, subscription, and experimental-settings writes. Centralize comment insertion in one small helper so normal callers do not manage recovery state. - Preserve outer transaction ownership, uncertainty reconciliation, and requests deferred during drain or standby. - Restore delivery retry/abandoned-claim deadlines on startup. Scan subscriptions in pages of 20; drain full source and delivery batches without another external event. Scope subscription refreshes to their subscription or shared Dot binding, issue activity to its task, comment discovery to its company, and mailbox/assignment changes to their binding. Retry deadlines do not rescan unchanged sources. - Run expired-record cleanup opportunistically. Preserve on-use expiry checks and the existing one-time automatic Dot challenge behavior. - Add real PostgreSQL lifecycle coverage and guarded external test database options for existing MCP/Dot integrations. Document producers and the supported writer model. ## Verification - Final head `e54fb34485921016ef988f7df9cca173a9ebdfc8`: all CI checks passed (55 successful checks/statuses, one neutral review, two intentionally skipped Storybook checks). Mergeable with no unresolved review threads. Greptile: 5/5 on this exact commit; security scan passed. - All 284 affected tests passed in one local run after rebasing: 16 real-PostgreSQL lifecycle tests, 24 coordinator/scheduler/standby tests, 84 public MCP tests, 54 Dot runner tests, and 106 interaction-service tests. - Server TypeScript passed after refreshing generated Runner/plugin SDK dependencies from master. Full workspace typecheck and build passed before the rebase; final CI repeated typecheck and build successfully on the rebased head. - Coverage includes SQL/network quiet with configuration and history, committed writes, outer commit/rollback, drain/standby, retry restoration, reenable/unsubscribe, concurrent writes, shutdown, source/delivery/subscription batch boundaries, Dot challenges and reconnects, native broker fences, comment discovery, and company-isolated scans. - CI exposed an existing lock-order test whose insert proxy missed nested transactions and waited indefinitely. The fixture now observes nested inserts, preserves the lock assertion, and fails explicitly if interception is missed. The complete 106-test interaction suite and the formerly hanging CI shard pass. The warm-standby/settings test doubles were also updated for the new coordinator/transaction boundaries. - Earlier fixture failures (required timestamps, cleanup, external database selection, async waits) were corrected. One existing OAuth first-poll timing assertion and one E2E company-cleanup race passed on single reruns; the final full CI run passed without a rerun. No OAuth or company-deletion behavior was changed. - The local full `pnpm test:run` attempt could not initialize embedded PostgreSQL after five attempts. It was stopped; affected integrations were verified with separate disposable PostgreSQL 17 databases, and final CI supplied the full-suite result. Embedded-only local skips are not counted as passes. ## Risks - Notifications use one live server/database scope. Independent SQL writers and separate live replicas do not trigger these process-local workers. Startup recovers durable state; continuous multi-writer discovery needs a notification/ingress contract. - Idle physical cleanup waits for startup or another enabled sweep. Subscription and authorization expiry remain enforced on use. - Existing delivery claims, retry bounds, signatures, and receipt deduplication remain in place. No new tables or migrations. - Host sleep-safety checks remain conservative. MCP/Dot retry deadlines are not yet covered by Paperclip Cloud's scheduled-wake contract. This proves worker quiet, not deployed host suspension or fleet savings. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with reasoning, local code execution, and tool use. The runtime does not expose a more specific model version or context-window size. ## 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d20304da70 |
test: verify configured repositories after real runner conversion
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
ed5452863c |
style: keep combined setup rationale in review documentation
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
a7511226e8 |
fix: prepare nested repositories in declared plain task roots
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
ab067f59b0 |
style: keep repair rationale in the PR and plan
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
eaacadeba3 |
fix(recovery): let preservation owners reopen retained sources (#17053)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Recovery must save retained workspace files before ordinary execution can resume. > - The environment runtime blocks access to retained sources to prevent unsafe reuse or deletion. > - The recovery worker also used that ordinary resume path. > - The guard returned no lease, so recovery reported an invalid source binding before it could save files. > - This pull request gives the physical preservation owner a separate, source-bound resume path. > - Ordinary execution and destructive cleanup keep their existing guards. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16965. **What happened?** A retained workspace with a workspaceRestoreRecovery marker could not recover through the real environment runtime. The runtime returned null before calling the provider. Recovery classified this as source_binding_invalid. Earlier recovery fixtures replaced the runtime facade, so they did not exercise this guard. **Expected behavior** The verified preservation owner can reopen its exact stopped allocation to save files. Other callers remain blocked. Recovery preserves newer local files and does not start another agent or repeat a completed external action. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Seed a terminal source run with a retained sandbox, a recovery action, and the workspaceRestoreRecovery lease marker. 2. Give the source a verified stop receipt. 3. Call recoverRetainedWorkspace through environmentRuntimeService. 4. Before this change, the recovery action returns to blocked with source_binding_invalid. No files are copied. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on master at |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
30b753f614 |
perf(budgets): scope accounting and deliver enforcement asynchronously (#17046)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their paid work. > - Budgets must prevent new work and stop reported overruns. > - Cost settlement also ran serial lifecycle reconciliation for every eligible company agent. > - That made request latency grow with unrelated idle agents and delayed results on stop delivery. > - This change separates atomic admission and accounting from durable asynchronous enforcement. > - Scoped live usage detects overruns without writing provisional ledger charges. > - The result is constant query scope for ordinary settlement and recoverable stop delivery. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Settlement and budget checks entered company-wide lifecycle reconciliation. A company with 1,000 unrelated idle agents performed 1,001 accounting transactions for one ordinary cost evaluation. User requests could also wait for provider termination. Running usage checkpoints did not enforce reported monetary exposure. **Expected behavior** Keep the final reservation gate authoritative. Commit charges, scope blocks, and enforcement intent before returning. Deliver stop requests after commit. Read only applicable policies and execution scopes for ordinary charges. Stop long-running work when supported reported or priced usage establishes an overrun. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a disposable company with one company budget and idle agents. 2. Evaluate a charge below the budget with 0, 17, and 1,000 unrelated idle agents. 3. Compare query counts, company accounting transactions, and duration. 4. Use the controlled partial-usage and delayed-stop fixtures to check enforcement and request responsiveness. **Paperclip version or commit** The measured baseline is `6c9b87d0922f1ebfc43e8b0c36889ac5ba7b9837` from `master`. Related public work: Refs #16976, #2006, #3539, #13763, #14296, #16853, #13075. These cover the affected service charge, cancellation, and accounting paths. This change removes their shared reconciliation overhead. ## What Changed - Batch applicable policy exposure under the existing company accounting lock. Preserve exact fractional money and zero-reservation dispatch fences. - Commit a durable final budget dispatch claim before provider I/O. Retain a separate final issue/run ownership transaction through synchronous handoff, without holding the company accounting lock or awaiting provider work. Preserve native recovery lease checks and duplicate handoff fencing. Browser handoff rechecks current policy; it reuses a consumed rate slot only for the identical policy generation. - Separate ledger spend, live observed spend, and effective held capacity. Use the maximum of reservation and live observation for each unfinished operation. - Deliver budget cancellation through the existing coordinator. Revalidate generations and persist queued/running stop fences before external termination. Bound stop concurrency to four. - Apply agent holds only to the affected agent. Project budgets leave other projects running. Project real company transitions in bounded lifecycle batches. - Replace periodic broad reconciliation with durable pending work, startup repair, receipt replay, and concrete retry/window deadlines. Retain drain and idle-safety checks. - Enforce accepted cumulative usage checkpoints without provisional charges. Final accounting atomically replaces live exposure and settles reservations. - Add operator-gated budget spans, regression coverage, map updates, and a real-PostgreSQL comparison harness. No schema or first-party telemetry change. ## Verification - Full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` passes on the final ownership fix, rebased onto `bbcf5dfe98`. Production `pnpm build` passes on final head `4c5f4de8b1`. Map, module-boundary, token, and Storybook catalog checks pass. - Focused real-PostgreSQL coverage includes the 292-case rebased accounting/dispatch run, 63 browser cases, 52 run-control/cancellation cases, 42 policy-generation cases, 77 lifecycle/commentary cases, and the exact Muse confirmation regression. Native executor unit coverage passes all 768 cases. Final ownership coverage passes: 74 adapter/use-case cases, nine public regression cases, and the additional deleted-project race. These exercise competing ownership, budget changes and charges between phases, zero/nonzero duplicate claims, rollback, recovery contention, read-only capacity rechecks, and controlled HTTP startup after commit. Another 74 pure/startup/tracing cases pass. The complete CI matrix and both 5/5 reviews passed on `1ac9b58`; its external security scan identified a stale-owner handoff race. The final fix restores synchronous issue/run ownership fencing after the accounting transaction commits. Final head `8e84f55ce8` has fresh Greptile 5/5 with zero new comments, Paperclip review 5/5, and a passing security scan. The complete latest-head [CI matrix](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39535189808) passes, including budget, browser, Runner, build, and canary jobs. The unchanged Runner close fixture passed on its sole same-head job retry. - Broad local `pnpm test:run` invocations were stopped before required source updates (rebase and review fixes). They are not claimed as full passes. Final full-suite coverage comes from the complete latest-head CI matrix; local focused coverage and the incomplete broad invocations are reported separately. - Reproduce performance with `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsx ../scripts/benchmark-budget-enforcement.ts --baseline-ref=6c9b87d0922f1ebfc43e8b0c36889ac5ba7b9837`; repeat with `--reverse`. The harness uses disposable real PostgreSQL, 20 warm samples per variant/count, and records raw timings, SQL/lock counts, agent reads, unchanged agent state, and query plans. Final production-source measurement revision: `eff713a4f72c7f4b7a4002a701cb481d4bfccd95`; the extended harness is committed in `4c5f4de8b1`. | Unrelated idle agents | Baseline median / p95 | New median / p95 | Baseline SQL / locks | New SQL / locks | New agent reads | | --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | | 0 | 1.80 / 2.33 ms | 2.99 / 3.88 ms | 5 / 1 | 7 / 1 | 0 | | 17 | 15.53 / 19.55 ms | 2.24 / 2.60 ms | 90 / 18 | 7 / 1 | 0 | | 1,000 | 978.35 / 1,790.43 ms | 2.16 / 2.52 ms | 5,005 / 1,001 | 7 / 1 | 0 | - These measurements use local PostgreSQL 18.1 and Node 26.4.0 arm64. They isolate the cost-evaluation core and complete admission path, without hosted-region or provider latency. Prior-revision reversed-order controls also preserved the constant query counts; the final measurements above use the final production source. - Complete reserve → final ownership gate → immediate offline provider result is measured separately, with one responsible agent and one active operation at each unrelated-agent count. Admission p95 baseline/new: 0 agents **11.54 / 29.77 ms**; 17 agents **9.31 / 27.62 ms**; 1,000 agents **24.51 / 74.05 ms**. Baseline admission was already scoped; the stronger final fence adds bounded overhead. New counts stay constant at 53 Drizzle statements, three transactions, two company-accounting locks, and five agent-reading statements bound to the responsible agent. Zero unrelated-agent reads, exactly one provider callback per sample, and no leftover runs or holds. All admission scenarios stay below 250 ms. No external provider calls are included. - The partial-usage/delayed-termination fixture passed 20/20: receipt persistence p95 13 ms, receipt return to observed durable Stop fence p95 28 ms, complete receipt-start-to-fence p95 50 ms, unrelated database request p95 1 ms while termination was blocked. After releasing the controlled termination fixture, acknowledgement p95 was 14 ms. These are separately measured phases; fixture acknowledgement is not live-provider termination latency. - Models and provider deadlines are unchanged. No deployment, live inference, or staging acceptance is claimed. A quiet 30-minute follow-up waits for the merged revision on staging, then repeats classifier and controlled budget-stop acceptance in staging, recording hosted bookkeeping, queue delay, and actual provider acknowledgement separately. - Development failures retained: finalizer notification regressions (fixed; 27/27 affected cases passed), invalid browser admission fixture assumptions (fixed; browser coverage now passes 63/63), and first-head lifecycle/dispatch CI regressions (reproduced and repaired). A prior-head Cases E2E test hit its unchanged announcement-dismiss handler race while opening a filter; the same journey passed on `1ac9b58`. The external security review then found a stale-owner race between accounting commit and provider entry; final verification covers a competing run in that gap while retaining provider I/O outside the accounting lock. Early PostgreSQL startup attempts hit local semaphore pressure; serial reruns succeeded. The final-head Runner lane had one failure among 1,823 tests: the unchanged `timeout-attachment` fixture failed at its first process close after 6.28 seconds. The sole same-head job retry passed all 1,819 active tests (four skipped), including that fixture in 1.85 seconds. Three isolated local probes could not run correctly because the Rust fake-provider fixture binary was absent; cleanup masked the original startup failure. CI builds that fixture through its normal lane. These probes are inconclusive and are not counted as passes. ## Risks - This changes accounting, lifecycle, and cancellation ordering. Durable generations, source/sequence checks, ownership leases, and company locking remain required for correctness. - Provider stop acknowledgement can be slow or fail. Stop intent remains pending until existing termination proof succeeds; cancelled row status alone does not acknowledge delivery. - Mid-run limits depend on provider usage reports or supported price calculations. Providers that report only at completion cannot provide exact mid-call detection. - Signals are process-local wake hints for the supported single-active-writer model. Durable state and startup recovery remain authoritative. - There are no migrations, new queue tables, or cached balances. Repeat the classifier and controlled budget-stop acceptance after normal rollout. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, code execution, and parallel coding agents. The host does not expose the exact backend model revision or context-window size, so those values are not asserted. ## 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
84a613f66a |
fix: correct routine repository admission before accepting a blocker
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
f220914293 | fix: retain local-board responsibility during repository preparation | ||
|
Dotta
|
12b2a8eff9 | test: verify first-admission context and prepare source dependencies | ||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
de14edc606 |
test: exercise automatic repository continuation through a real task
Use production hire instructions and the existing paid browser harness. Compare delivered bytes with the actual checkout, require retained workspace and context, and reject timer or user-driven continuation. Keep current qualified provider admission free of ambient overrides and retain explicit pending-profile gate controls. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
dff63551fe |
fix: resume unfinished work after repository preparation (#17047)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip manages agents that perform work for a company.
> - Task repositories are prepared at normal run admission.
> - A running native task can stage a repository while its work remains
unfinished.
> - The controller did not offer that saved setup as a continuation.
> - The agent could add a timer or wait for a user restart.
> - This change uses the existing same-agent continuation and status
ledger.
> - The accepted explanation and proven conversation remain available
after setup.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #17045. That prerequisite has merged. This PR targets master.
**What happened?**
A projectless native task can request a repository for the next
admission. An unfinished task has no server-selected repository
continuation. An explicit same-agent continuation also loses chat
provenance.
**Expected behavior**
An unfinished standard task can yield and resume through the existing
admission queue. Its explanation and final result retain the authorized
conversation. A task that only stages a repository can complete without
another run.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start a native standard task in a task directory.
2. Request an authorized repository through prepare_repository.
3. Yield with unfinished work and no explicit continuation.
4. Observe that the former driver rejects the yield, although the
pending repository is saved.
## What Changed
- Offer a saved same-agent continuation for the current task's pending
repository.
- Accept that current server continuation in the shared provider driver.
- Resolve chat provenance through applied status decisions, delivered
effects, and admitted wakes.
- Preserve accepted setup explanations without repeating an owned
question card.
- Document optional reproduction details and configured repository
discovery.
- Extend database regressions and workspace access maps.
- Preserve Copilot profile v52 and bind the shared continuation source
in v53. Include the active identity in the QA image fingerprint.
## Verification
- Five focused server suites: 100 checks pass.
- Shared continuation driver: 12 checks pass.
- Server typecheck passes.
- Map contract and whitespace checks pass.
- Existing API and driver assertions fail on the former implementation.
- Real dispatcher and queue cohort: 43 checks pass. The original
reply-loss regression fails before the dispatch receipt fix.
- Continuation driver and installation identity cohort: 62 checks pass.
- Regenerated capability inventory and contract checks pass.
- Final response precedence cohort: 109 checks pass. The stale-comment
case fails on the former implementation.
- All required CI checks, build, and both source reviews pass on
canary/v2026.1021.0-canary.6
|
||
|
|
8b873e0112 |
fix(adapter-utils): skip the materialize lock for an already-current skill (#17061)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - A remote Claude ACP run stages the selected runtime skills into the sandbox. The host archives the materialized skills directory with tar and uploads it. > - Concurrent runs of one agent share that skills directory. The directory key is the selected skill set and its content. > - Each run calls `materializePaperclipSkillCopy` for each skill. The function always created and removed a sibling `<skill>.lock` directory, even when the copy was already current. > - The archive step lists the directory entries first and then gives the names to tar. When a concurrent run removed its lock between these two steps, tar failed with `Cannot stat` and the whole run failed as `adapter_failed`. > - This pull request checks the materialized fingerprint before it takes the lock. An up-to-date copy now leaves no transient entries in the shared directory. > - The benefit is that concurrent runs of one agent no longer fail each other's skill staging. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A remote `claude_local` run failed before the agent started. The skill staging step ran `tar -c ... -T entries.nul` on the shared runtime-skills directory. Tar stopped with `tar: <skill>.lock: Cannot stat: No such file or directory` and exit status 2. Another run of the same agent was materializing the same skills at the same time. **Expected behavior** A run that finds its skills already materialized does not change the shared skills directory. Concurrent runs can archive that directory safely. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Materialize a skill into a skills directory. 2. Call `materializePaperclipSkillCopy` again in a loop for the same skill. 3. At the same time, call `createTarballFromDirectory` on the skills directory in a loop. 4. Before this change, most archives fail with `Cannot stat` on `<skill>.lock`. **Agent adapter(s) involved** `claude_local` (ACP, remote sandbox). The function is shared, so `grok_local` and the Codex and Gemini ACP skill paths also benefit. ## What Changed - `packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.ts`: `materializePaperclipSkillCopy` hashes the source and checks the materialized sentinel before it takes the lock. When the copy is current, it returns without creating the lock directory or a temporary copy. The existing check inside the lock stays, so a copy that is missing or out of date still uses the lock as before. The source is hashed once per call, the same as before. - `packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts`: a new test holds a live lock from another owner, then materializes an already-current skill. The call must return at once and must not change the lock or the directory. ## Verification - `cd packages/adapter-utils && npx vitest run src/server-utils.test.ts`: 132 passed. - Red/green: without the fix, the new test times out because the call waits on the live lock. With the fix, it passes. - `npx vitest run src/acpx-engine/execute.test.ts -t skill`: 15 passed. - `npx tsc --noEmit -p tsconfig.json` in `packages/adapter-utils`: passes. - Real-dependency race check (a temporary script, not committed). The script used real files and the system tar. It ran `materializePaperclipSkillCopy` for 5 skills in a loop while `createTarballFromDirectory` archived the same directory for 8 seconds: - Before the fix: 1994 of 2307 archives failed with `tar: skill-1.lock: Cannot stat: No such file or directory`. - After the fix: 0 of 2021 archives failed. - Assumption under test: the sentinel check outside the lock is safe. The sentinel is written into the temporary copy before the atomic rename, so a matching sentinel means a complete copy. The lock never protected readers: the caller already reads `SKILL.md` after the lock is released. - Remaining limit: the first materialization of a new skill set still uses the lock. A concurrent archive of the same directory is unlikely then, because a run archives the directory only after it has materialized every skill in it. ## Risks - Low risk. The change only skips the lock when the result is already correct. A missing, damaged, or out-of-date copy uses the same locked path as before. - No change to the materialized layout, the sentinel format, or the lock format. > 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`) in Claude Code, with tool use (shell, file edits, test runs). The exact context-window size is 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 - [ ] 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: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>nightly/v2026.1021.0-nightly.0 canary/v2026.1021.0-canary.5 |
||
|
|
f3af9887ca |
fix(chat): keep each chat conversation in its own wake batch (#17054)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Chat channels let a linked user talk to an agent from Slack, GitHub and other platforms. Each external thread is a chat conversation that is bound to one issue. > - One issue can have many conversations. A GitHub pull request review makes one conversation for each inline finding thread. > - When replies arrive behind an active run, the wake queue merges them into one deferred wake. The merge did not look at the conversation. > - A reviewed chat run can attest only one conversation. A merged batch from two threads always failed attestation with `setup_failed` / `reviewed_chat_execution_binding_not_authorized`, so no reply got an answer. > - This pull request keeps each chat conversation in its own wake batch. The single-conversation attestation check stays the same. > - The benefit is that replies in different review threads each get their own attested run, one after the other. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16793 (related: chat origin during coalescing). No public issue exists, so the bug report follows. **What happened?** A linked user replied in three different inline review-finding threads of one pull request while the agent's review run was still active. The three wakes merged into one deferred wake. The promoted run failed in about 2 seconds with `setup_failed` / `reviewed_chat_execution_binding_not_authorized` and `providerWorkStarted=false`. None of the three replies got an answer. The failed-chat retry cannot recover this batch, because a retry source holds one conversation. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Bind two chat conversations (two GitHub finding threads) to one `in_review` issue. 2. Start a run for the assigned agent on that issue. 3. As the linked user, reply once in each thread. 4. Finish the active run. 5. See one promoted run that fails with `reviewed_chat_execution_binding_not_authorized`. **Expected behavior** Each thread gets its own run. Each run attests its one conversation and answers its reply. **Cause** `findExistingDeferredWake` matched on company, agent, issue and actor only. The active-run coalesce path had the same gap. `authorizeChatConversationForBoundRun` correctly denies a batch with more than one conversation. ## What Changed - `run-dispatch/domain/wake-context.ts`: add the `chatConversationId` wake-context key, a reader, and `wakeChatConversationsConflict`. A conflict means that both wakes have a conversation and the two conversations are different. - `issue-assignment-wakeup.ts` and `chat-channels/inbound/wakeups.ts`: stamp the conversation ID on each inbound chat wake. - `chat-channels/failed-run-retry.ts`: stamp the conversation ID on failed-chat retry wakes, so later replies do not merge into a retry from another conversation. - `wake-queue` admission: do not coalesce into an active run of another conversation. The deferred-wake lookup now matches only wakes of the same conversation or wakes without a conversation. - `heartbeat/queue.ts`: the same-scope queued or running coalesce target is skipped when the conversations conflict. - `doc/execution-semantics.md`: describe per-conversation chat wake batching. - Tests: an integration regression in the GitHub review block of `chat-channels.integration.test.ts`, and unit cases for the active-run branch in `wake-queue/application/use-cases.test.ts`. ## Verification - Red before the fix: `pnpm --dir server exec vitest run src/__tests__/chat-channels.integration.test.ts -t "replies in review finding threads"`. The main case fails with one run: `{ status: "failed", errorCode: "setup_failed", error: "reviewed_chat_execution_binding_not_authorized" }`. - Green after the fix, same command, 3 of 3 pass: - Replies in two finding threads give two successive runs. Each run succeeds, has `paperclipExternalChatExecutionBound: true`, and holds only its own comment and conversation. - Two replies in the same thread still give one run with both comments. - After the linked identity is revoked, each separated run is still denied (`setup_failed`) and the adapter does not execute. - `vitest run src/modules/wake-queue src/modules/run-dispatch`: all pass, with the new cases (different conversation, same conversation, run without a conversation, non-chat wake). - Related suites pass: `heartbeat-comment-wake-batching`, `durable-chat-wakeup`, `chat-failed-run-retry-boundary`, `issue-queued-comments-routes`, `heartbeat-stale-queue-invalidation`. - Full `chat-channels.integration.test.ts`: 823 passed, 1 timed out. The timed-out test (`GitHub terminal receipt composes pinned HTTP and durable source authority (held_token)`) passes alone with and without this change. The sandbox has a 4 GB memory cap. - Not run locally: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. The server `tsc` process was killed at the 4 GB sandbox memory cap. CI runs both. - Runtime dependency note: the deferred-wake lookup adds one JSONB predicate to the existing deferred-wake query. It reads the same rows. The query count does not change. The integration regression runs it against embedded Postgres. ## Risks - Low risk. No schema change and no migration. - Behavior change: chat replies from different conversations on one issue now run one after the other, not in one batch. Before this change, such a batch always failed, so no working flow becomes slower. - Wakes without a conversation (non-chat wakes, and wakes queued before this deploy) keep the old coalescing. A deferred wake from before the deploy has no conversation key, so one later reply can still merge into it. That window closes when the queue drains. - The check keeps the single-conversation attestation in `authorizeChatConversationForBoundRun`. Revoked identities are still denied. ## Model Used - Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), in Claude Code through the Paperclip agent harness. It used tool use (shell, file editing, test runs) and extended reasoning. ## 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: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>canary/v2026.1021.0-canary.4 |
||
|
Nicky Leach
|
65f59e339a | Extend native instance secrets to project lifecycle plugins (#17034) canary/v2026.1021.0-canary.3 | ||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
c2daf906d9 |
fix: preserve task continuation and question delivery (#17045)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip manages agent work and delivers its results.
> - One task can need several runs and a saved workspace.
> - A run can succeed while the task waits for its next run.
> - Chat fallback treated that success as completion and dropped useful
status.
> - Monitor runs also lost their conversation origin, and text-question
cards lost their prompt.
> - This change preserves the task outcome and exact delivery authority
across those boundaries.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
A Slack task requested a repository, yielded to a scheduled
continuation, and showed only a generic completion message. The next run
could not publish through the original conversation. A later text
question showed its title and Respond button without the question
context. Workspace recovery could commit the saved monitor result
without restoring its explanation.
**Expected behavior**
The original conversation shows the accepted continuation explanation,
receives the resumed result, and displays the full question when input
is needed. A successful provider run does not claim that unfinished work
is complete. Recovery delivers saved output once without another
provider result.
**Steps to reproduce**
Start an authorized chat task, prepare a repository for a later
admission, save a monitor wait, and let that monitor resume the task.
Repeat with workspace finalization interrupted and with a free-text
question. Inspect the originating conversation and the persisted output.
Related merged work: #16806 and #16975. The open monitor and recovery
changes found during duplicate search address different status and
liveness policies.
## What Changed
- Keep committed monitor summaries visible through the shared board and
chat response resolver. Preserve interaction ownership and comment
reuse.
- Recover a saved monitor explanation after finalization, with no
repeated provider result.
- Prove monitor publication origin from the admitted wake and matching
scheduling receipt. Match company, task, agent, requester, and schedule;
reject ambiguous sources.
- Include monitor continuations in the existing publication scan and use
the canonical task binding. Keep current transport authorization.
- Suppress completion fallback for yielded results. Explain missing
final output without claiming completion.
- Include question summaries, prompts, and help text in modal-backed
cards. Keep answered text private.
- Update execution semantics, capability maps, and the bounded
reliability plan.
## Verification
- Original source fails four composed PostgreSQL regressions: monitor
origin, yielded completion, question body, and saved-summary recovery.
The shared response resolver also fails before the repair.
- Repaired focused cohort: 148 tests pass across publication, question
privacy, scheduler, and native monitor suites. These use real disposable
PostgreSQL; they do not qualify live Slack.
- Full workspace typecheck and production build pass locally. Map checks
and whitespace checks pass.
- All CI gates pass at
canary/v2026.1021.0-canary.2
|
||
|
|
bbcf5dfe98 |
fix(heartbeat): renew legacy controller leases on a private pool (#17032)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - A legacy (non-native) agent run keeps a controller lease on its `heartbeat_runs` row. The server renews the lease every 10 seconds. If no renewal succeeds in 60 seconds, the watchdog stops the run with `renewal_deadline`. > - #16359 added timings to lease-loss reports. The first staging event with these timings shows `deadlineLateMs=0`, `renewalPendingMs=50000`, and 108 renewals in about 22.5 minutes, where about 135 are expected. Thus the event loop was not blocked. One renewal UPDATE was in flight for 50 seconds, and renewals were slow for a long time before the loss. > - The agent had exited with code 0. The run was in post-execution `sync_back`. Other runs on the same host completed. No code path held a lock on the run row across slow work. A later `instruction_save` UPDATE on the same row completed while the earlier renewal was still pending, so a row-lock wait does not explain the stall. > - postgres.js 3.4.9 sends a new query to a busy connection when no connection is idle (`handler` → `go(busy.shift(), query)` in `src/index.js`). The query waits behind the statement that is in flight on that connection. The renewal had no timeout, and the `pending` flag stopped all later renewals. Thus one slow unrelated statement on the shared pool can stop a healthy run. > - This pull request moves lease renewal to a small private pool, bounds each attempt with a statement timeout, and retries a timed-out attempt until the existing lease deadline. > - The benefit is that slow application queries on the shared pool can no longer cancel a healthy legacy run. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16359 (lease-loss timings that identified this cause) Refs #16358 (pre-dispatch lease loss becomes retryable; different path) Refs #16917 (open: keeps a clean adapter result after a lease lapsed; it does not prevent the loss) Refs #13389 (open: host sleep / late timers; different cause) **What happened?** A staging legacy `claude_local` run was cancelled with `Legacy controller lease lost (renewal_deadline)` after the agent exited with code 0. The timings show that the deadline timer ran on time, and one renewal UPDATE was pending for 50 seconds. **Expected behavior** A live controller keeps its lease. Slow unrelated database work does not cancel the run. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a database client with one pooled connection. 2. Start `select pg_sleep(5)` on that client. 3. Call `watchLegacyControllerLease(...).assertOwned()` with the same client. 4. Before this change, the renewal waits about 5 seconds behind `pg_sleep`. With a long enough slow statement, the lease deadline stops the run. ## What Changed - `packages/db`: Add `livenessDb(db)`. It gives each `createDb` client a private pool of at most 2 connections (`application_name=paperclip-controller-lease`). The pool is created on first use. Test doubles and transactions get the original client back. - `packages/db`: Add `closeLivenessDb(db, timeoutSeconds)`. The server calls it in `closeDatabaseClients`, so shutdown and failed startup end the private pool too. - `legacy-controller-lease.ts`: The watchdog renews in a transaction on the private pool. Each attempt sets a transaction-local `statement_timeout` of 10 seconds. A timed-out attempt (`57014`) is retried. After a successful retry, the local deadline is measured from that attempt's start, because that attempt's UPDATE wrote the fresh 60 second lease. The existing 60 second deadline, the abort race, and the `renewal_rejected` / `renewal_error` attribution do not change. `renewLegacyControllerLease` itself does not change, so the runtime-selection caller inside its own transaction is not affected. - Tests: a saturated shared pool no longer delays renewal; a renewal that times out on a locked run row retries and keeps the lease; the private pool is cached per client, has its own `application_name`, and closes; after a 45 second timed-out attempt and a successful retry, the next deadline is a full 60 seconds after the retry. The existing test doubles now model the transaction. - `docs/deploy/database.md`: Count the up to 2 extra connections per server process when you size `max_connections`. ## Verification - `cd server && npx vitest run src/services/legacy-controller-lease.test.ts`: 20 passed, on embedded Postgres. - Red/green: with the old `legacy-controller-lease.ts` and the new tests, the saturated-pool test fails with `expected 5018 to be less than 2000`. With the fix, it passes. - Red/green for the retry deadline: with the deadline measured from the first attempt, the retry-deadline test fails (`expected true to be false`) because the run is aborted 15 seconds after the retry. With the fix, it passes. - Mutation check: when the timeout retry is removed, the locked-row test fails with `canceling statement due to statement timeout`. - `npx vitest run src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts -t "lease|dispatch|controller|interaction"`: 43 passed. - `npx vitest run src/services/heartbeat/run-completion.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-orphaned-active-lease-sweep.test.ts`: 53 passed. - `npx vitest run src/__tests__/server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts`: passed. - `cd packages/db && npx vitest run src/work-signals.test.ts src/client-options.test.ts src/client-teardown-registry.test.ts`: 24 passed. `npx tsc --noEmit` for `packages/db` passed. - Not run locally: the full server `tsc` and the full server suite. The sandbox has a 4 GB memory limit, and `tsc` was killed (exit 137). CI is the gate for the server typecheck, the full tests, and the build. ## Risks - Each server process can open up to 2 more Postgres connections. Deployments that are at their `max_connections` limit must allow for them. The docs now say this. - A renewal attempt is now 4 statements (BEGIN, `set_config`, UPDATE, COMMIT) instead of 1. Each statement is a short primary-key operation on a dedicated connection. - If many runs wait on locked run rows at the same time, renewals for other runs can queue on the 2 private connections. The 10 second statement timeout limits each wait, which is less than the 60 second lease. - Behavior for a real lease loss does not change. A rejected renewal and a non-timeout error still stop the run at once, and the 60 second deadline still applies. ## Model Used - Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, used through Claude Code in agent mode with tool use (shell, file edit, and test execution). A read-only subagent helped with code search. ## 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: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
e5351b240a |
Verify native Runner setup through plugin tasks (#17029)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work for AI agents. > - An environment plugin can own a Runner task. > - The merged launch-preparation contract lets the execution owner build the provider configuration. > - Core still needs a task process owner and a setup test that uses that configuration. > - This PR connects the task API to the Runner process-owner contract. > - Operators can test a plugin environment before Core sends it task work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Runner, plugin SDK, and agent environment tests. **Problem or motivation** A task-only environment cannot use the shell-based setup path. Core must verify the Runner hello exchange and process cleanup through dedicated task operations. **Proposed solution** Add a lease-bound task driver and use it for a bounded setup probe. Keep heartbeat admission and task execution in #16978. This PR follows the merged launch-preparation contract in #16997. **Alternatives considered** A provider declaration alone cannot prove that Runner and the provider connect. A shell bridge would give the plugin an unnecessary command interface. ## What Changed - Pass structured Runner launch data to process owners. Support an external connection and explicit detach. - Add typed launch authentication checks and checkpoint operations. Check lease, run, project, and retained-task authority. - Connect launch preparation, PRP, termination proof, and credential handoff to the task driver. Reject local environment overrides during installed-account setup. Pass saved-account identity and credential home directly from Core. - Run a short-lived setup probe through the existing agent environment test API. Require a verified provider hello and cleanup. Keep saved Copilot account checks metadata-only through a dedicated task operation. - Update the Copilot source identity because the shared transport source changed. Keep provider behavior and the earlier identity fixture. ## Verification - CI passes on `f987adec7`: 55 successful checks and 5 expected skips. Standard Greptile and Apex are both 5/5 with no open findings. The branch merges cleanly with current master. - Repository typecheck and build pass after the rebase onto the workspace-provider contract. Server typecheck and build also pass after the final setup fix. - The 110 focused lease, SDK, setup, Copilot, and route cases pass after the rebase. All 14 setup cases pass after the final change. These include a real local Runner with a test provider. The saved-agent model-discovery case also passes. - Apex found that Core's relative workspace marker failed the driver path check, and non-Codex sessions omitted the observed model. Both failures were reproduced and fixed. The probe leaves physical workspace selection to plugin preparation. The transport reads each provider's observed model and exposes it to the driver. All 14 setup cases, 6 transport peer cases, and both existing real Runner/OpenCode cases pass. Runner build and server typecheck pass. - The coverage audit removed two redundant cases, repeated fixture code, and two extra real Runner launches. It kept authorization, credential selection, cancellation, lost replies, termination proof, checkpoint identity, and provider setup checks. - The Copilot source-identity check passes. The added-line secret and PII scan passes. The unmerged v52 attestation was regenerated after the shared transport fix. - CI on `13faeff02` caught one stale Copilot digest assertion after attestation regeneration. The literal now matches the candidate attestation, and all 49 installation cases pass. That CI lane otherwise passed 1,818 cases. - An earlier CI run hit an unchanged UI toast timing test. The separate fix is tracked in #16952. Current CI passes that shard. CI also caught a stale model-discovery assertion in this change; the assertion is fixed. - The local full-suite run was stopped when master changed. The final CI run supplies exact-head full-suite validation. No live Cloud or provider test was run. ## Risks - Native hello tests require a saved Core account or the installed account. Local environment overrides are unsupported for installed-account probes and fail before the provider runs. - A native task provider must declare launch preparation and authentication-check version 1. It must keep the checked configuration fixed through submission. Core rejects providers that cannot make this guarantee. - A lost task reply does not prove process termination. Core retains grants until the provider proves termination and Core saves required state. - This PR does not enable native heartbeat dispatch through plugin environments. Cloud deployment and live provider validation remain separate. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. Tool use includes code editing, local tests, and the GitHub CLI. ## 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 described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal issue details - [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 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> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
79b2bf78dd |
Create agent records when onboarding names are submitted (#17005)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Core onboarding selects an agent and connects its provider account. > - The current flow creates the agent record after authentication. > - Setup needs a stable agent identity as soon as the user submits its name. > - This PR saves a paused setup record on name submission and finishes the hire on that same record. > - The existing sandbox authentication and approval paths continue to apply. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Core agent lifecycle, shared validators, and onboarding UI. **Current behavior** Onboarding creates the database record at the final hire step. Earlier authentication and saved setup have no agent record. **Proposed behavior** Create a paused agent with a setup hold when the user submits its name. Do this before adapter selection or authentication. Update that same record after adapter selection. Reuse its ID on retries and saved setup. Finish that record through the existing hire path. **Reason and benefit** Give setup a stable identity without coupling this refactor to computer provisioning or a new execution backend. **Breaking changes** Incomplete setup now leaves an inactive agent record. Existing clients can still create and hire agents without the new optional fields. The sandbox authentication flow and API key support remain in place. **Additional context** Requested Core-only refactor. Related work: #15422 changes runner defaults. This PR preserves those choices. No duplicate early-record refactor was found in the issue and PR search. ## What Changed - Save the agent when the user submits its name in both onboarding entry points. Use a provisional adapter until the user chooses one. Reopen name-only drafts at adapter selection. - Add retry-safe setup creation and same-record hire completion. Keep approval checks at final hire. - Save and restore setup configuration in both onboarding entry points. Show Finish setup for paused setup agents. - Restrict setup changes to authorized board users. Block generic resume until setup finishes. - Add lifecycle, authorization, connection, and UI coverage. Update the specification and feature maps. ## Verification - Latest focused server run: 126 lifecycle and AI-connection tests passed after the Apex fixes. An earlier broader run passed 301 lifecycle, instruction, adapter-validation, and AI-connection tests. Earlier authentication, retry, cross-company, and direct-create regressions also passed. - Name-save verification: 336 tests across the wizard, naming dialog, New agent, action-button, and wizard-step suites passed. Coverage includes retry identity, repeated submission, closing during a save, saved-model restoration, and a disabled process adapter. - Shared, server, and UI TypeScript checks passed. The latest UI package check and direct server TypeScript check passed. The server package preparation command could not finish locally because Cargo is unavailable; full build preparation runs in CI. Map checks, token gates, and `git diff --check` passed; each pushed diff was scanned for credentials and PII. - All six onboarding browser tests passed together with installed Chrome against a fresh throwaway instance after the Apex fixes. They include numbered duplicate names, first-time Copilot without a connected account, and Grok’s saved model. They verify early persistence in both entry points, closing and reopening a name-only draft, same-record adapter selection, sandbox sign-in, login reload, and failed-connection gating. Provider responses are simulated; Core persistence is real. - Regression coverage includes incomplete Copilot creation versus final validation, Kimi settings through redacted responses, stale local drafts, company switches during creation, saved environments, and provider changes with personal/shared old bindings. - Apex found five name-only setup gaps: numbered names, early Copilot account validation, the Grok model default, same-name draft ownership, and provisional runner restoration. The fixes preserve server names, defer implicit account binding until hire, set Grok’s model, avoid name-based reuse of unfinished records, and restore Auto for pending adapter choices. UI, database, and browser regressions cover these cases. - Standard Greptile found a Grok provider mismatch in the new adapter save. The save now uses ACPX with the Grok profile. Both the 129-test dialog/setup run and a real-API browser regression passed after the fix. The first browser attempt stopped on an ambiguous empty-roster button selector; it now scopes the click to the toolbar. - Moving the save point exposed a saved-model reset and timing assumptions in the same-name and portal fixtures. The source choice now preserves the restored model, and tests cover same-name recovery without a second hire. - Initial CI exposed direct-create compatibility, concurrent setup effects, fixture assumptions, and a missing-fields assumption in the provider-validation guard. These were fixed and verified locally. Review findings were addressed with authorization, recovery, credential-persistence, and restored-configuration regressions. - The final desktop capture passed after host resource cleanup. A repeat first failed before Core started because macOS had exhausted shared-memory IDs. Standalone PostgreSQL initialization reproduced the same error. Releasing only unattached control segments from this task’s stopped test databases allowed the unchanged revision to pass. No Core or system setting changed. - Local database tests required port access outside the sandbox. Missing declared development dependencies were supplied outside the branch. No live provider sign-in was tested locally. - [Full monorepo CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39522434236) is green on `82b82fec189a172a885d4dd565ae2f4a18c73efc`. Standard Greptile scored 5/5 with zero new comments (check `118969424903`). The subsequent Apex review also scored 5/5 with zero new comments (check `118972866331`) on that same commit. All review threads are resolved. - The separate Superagent Security scan returned neutral/inconclusive because its pinned merge-base checkout failed or timed out. GitHub returned 404 for check and suite rerun requests. This is not a successful security scan; the CI workflow and other security checks passed. ## Risks - Users can leave inactive setup records behind, including after name submission alone. These records cannot run until hire completes. - Setup completion touches hiring and approval boundaries. Tests cover retries, company isolation, creator permissions, and approval snapshots. - An uncertain credential-save result retains its new secret reference for retry. A confirmed client rejection removes only credentials staged by that attempt. - No schema migration or VM provisioning change is required. Agent-computer integration is out of scope. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository search, code editing, and tool execution. The exact deployment 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] Apex Greptile is also 5/5 on the same commit as standard review and green CI - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |