3 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5	05e3309740	fix(accounting): settle a failed usage capture as unpriced at the closure bound (#19857) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Every finished run settles its usage into the cost ledger. Until it settles, budget admission makes new company work wait > - When usage capture fails (`accountingCaptureFailed=true`), accounting skips the run forever. It is also not "recovering", so it counts in `waitingRunCount` > - So one failed capture holds new company work until the UTC budget month rolls over > - This pull request bounds that wait with the existing accounting closure timeout. It then settles the run's known usage as unpriced, with provenance that names the capture failure > - The benefit is that admission recovers by itself, while unknown spend stays visible and still counts under a blocking unpriced-usage policy ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Bug description** The Phase 0 ownership inventory (finding 3) found that runs with `accountingCaptureFailed=true` are excluded from accounting (`run-cost-accounting.ts` `actionableRunAccounting` and `accountRunCost`). They are also excluded from "recovering" in `budget-exposure.ts`, so they count as waiting until the month window rolls over. Nothing else releases them. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Finish a run whose usage capture failed (for example, a fence write failure or usage after a source handoff). 2. Wait any length of time and run `reconcileRunCosts`. 3. The run stays `costAccountingPending`, and `getInvocationBlock` keeps holding new company work. **Expected behavior** After a bounded wait, the run settles with its known usage marked unpriced, and held work resumes. A blocking unpriced-usage policy still treats the run as unknown spend. Refs #19846 ## What Changed - `run-cost-accounting.ts`: new `captureFailureBoundPassed`. It applies to a terminal capture-failed run whose native coordinator (if any) settled, after `ACCOUNTING_CLOSURE_TIMEOUT_MS`. This is the same bound used for missing closure evidence. - `actionableRunAccounting` selects these runs, and `readCostAccountingWork` schedules a wake at their bound. A past bound never schedules a wake, as before. - `accountRunCost`: a capture-failed run is never treated as pre-provider work. Before the bound it stays pending. After the bound it settles through the existing lost-receipt path as `receiptUnavailable` + `closureTimedOut`: known cost becomes a lower-bound estimate, otherwise the charge is unpriced, and the run gets `accountingClosureTimedOut: true`. - Provenance evidence and the `cost.accounting_closure_timed_out` activity say that the usage capture failed (`details.captureFailed: true`). - Tests: three new cases in `closed-native-receipt-accounting.test.ts`. `cost-data-quality.test.ts` now pins both sides of the bound for a board retry. ## Verification - `npx vitest run src/__tests__/closed-native-receipt-accounting.test.ts`: 54 passed. - `npx vitest run src/services/run-cost-accounting.test.ts src/__tests__/idle-accounting-work.test.ts src/__tests__/cost-data-quality.test.ts`: 40 passed. - Red before the fix: with the old `run-cost-accounting.ts`, all 3 new capture-failure cases fail. The run never settles, nothing schedules a wake, and work stays held. Green after. - Hard stop: "keeps a settled capture failure under the blocking unpriced-usage policy" shows that a blocking policy still blocks after settlement. Real observed spend (`budgetExposure`) counts toward the hard stop before and after. - Server `tsc --noEmit` shows no errors in the changed files. ## Risks - Behavior change: capture-failed runs no longer stay pending forever. The 2026-10-28 Cursor runner plan recorded "capture failures remain pending" as an interim rule. This PR keeps them pending through the closure bound and then settles them as unknown spend, never as free. A complete receipt that arrives later still reconciles through late-receipt handling. - A board retry of a capture-failed run past the bound now settles it. Before the bound it is still refused. - Previous-release story: no persisted shape changes. Existing capture-failed rows past the bound settle on the next reconcile pass. That can release work that was held, and under a blocking policy it records unknown spend that blocks. - No new waits or I/O before `turn.start`. This is background accounting only. ## Model Used - Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, used with tool use and code execution in Claude Code. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-11-07 12:01:56 -06:00
DottaandPaperclip	0eaabe5c0b	refactor(accounting): remove company serialization from paid settlement (#18917) ... Settle paid operations through operation-scoped transactions. Preserve exact ledger evidence and replay while moving aggregate budget decisions to durable deferred work. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-11-04 07:29:28 -06:00
3 people	1b4c803816	fix(costs): preserve usage attribution and explain unavailable run costs (#15948) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The cost ledger records usage and controls agent budgets. > - Some runs lose the selected model or API billing category before their usage reaches the ledger. > - The dashboard reports missing costs but does not identify the affected runs or the available actions. > - This pull request preserves usage attribution and adds a compact view of cost gaps grouped by agent. > - Operators can inspect runs, open agent settings, and record saved costs without starting new agent work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15634, #11938, #15879. This follows the merged subscription reporting in #15634. The older proposal in #11938 addresses part of ACP model attribution. This change also rejects conflicting models across a turn, fixes credential-backed billing capture, and explains cost gaps in the existing dashboard. The Pi receipt recovery work in #15879 covers a separate adapter recovery path. This PR preserves unresolved receipts and does not recover provider usage or reprice past entries. **What happened?** ACP results use the requested model even when the runtime selects a model. Native and OpenCode API runs can report unknown billing despite a matching API credential. The dashboard shows notices without links to the affected runs. These gaps make API and subscription totals harder to interpret. **Expected behavior** Record the model selected by the runtime. Identify API billing only from a matching credential. Keep costs unresolved when reliable usage or pricing is absent. Show the affected agents and runs. Offer an accounting retry only when saved evidence is ready. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run an ACP agent with its model left unset, or use a matching API credential with a native or OpenCode agent. 2. Inspect the recorded model and billing category for the run. 3. Open Costs Overview for a period with unpriced usage or terminal runs awaiting receipts. 4. Inspect the notice and try to find the affected run or the relevant agent settings. **Paperclip version or commit** Current master at `657e71584a0`. The patch is rebased on that commit. **Deployment mode** Self-hosted server and local development. The cost detail tests use a disposable PostgreSQL database. ## What Changed - Preserve the runtime-selected ACP model in checkpoints and final results. Conflicting models across one turn remain unpriced. - Share credential-backed API billing checks across native and OpenCode results. Keep unknown billing when the provider and credential do not match. - Add company-scoped cost detail and accounting retry endpoints. Board viewers can read details but cannot retry. Agents and foreign companies are denied. - Limit each detail category to 25 entries. Use one consistent database snapshot and sparse indexes matching the filters and sort order. Add the unknown-billing count to the existing summary query. - Replace the notice with an expandable count line. Group entries alphabetically by agent. Show the saved blob icon, link each name to configuration, and put run and retry links beside the date. - Preserve estimate and unavailable-price labels on Providers and Billers; keep retry confirmation after the resolved notice disappears. - Fetch details only while expanded. Retain the last loaded details after a refresh error. Retry saved accounting only; do not rerun the agent. - Add capture, database, authorization, UI, and Storybook coverage. Update the implementation contract and cost reporting guide. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed after rebase. - `pnpm build` and `pnpm build-storybook` passed after rebase. - `pnpm check:token-gates` and `git diff --check` passed. - 1,086 focused tests passed across 17 files. These cover ACP, native and OpenCode capture, PostgreSQL reports, route authorization, OpenAPI, Costs UI, and existing accounting regressions. - Desktop and mobile browser checks passed during UI review. They cover lazy expansion, alphabetical groups, loaded blob icons, configuration and run links, keyboard retry, and layout overflow. - `pnpm test:run` was attempted with command-scoped `init.defaultBranch=master` for Git fixtures. It was stopped after a native session recovery failure reproduced on unchanged base `657e71584a0` (`archives a damaged prior epoch before completing guarded same-task replacement with real runnerd`). An MCP upload case failed in the broad run but passed in isolation on both the base and PR branch. These local limitations do not affect the 1,086 passing focused tests. - Current-head CI is green, including all unit test lanes, serialized server suites, runner checks, typecheck, build, policy, and eight browser shards. Apex re-review is 5/5 on `56de60effdb`; all four original findings are addressed and every review thread is resolved. - PostgreSQL applies migration `0333` in the integration fixtures. EXPLAIN ANALYZE on the production detail statements uses the new sparse indexes behind 5,000 healthy records in each table. - Ten provider/biller card cases cover missing and estimated prices; the retry test covers row removal and notice unmount. A live Storybook browser check verifies the confirmation and updated count. - Run `pnpm storybook`. Open **Costs / Subscriptions / Cost Data Quality Details** to inspect the production page with representative fixtures. ## Risks - Model and billing metadata change for future runs. Estimates still require complete usage and a supported price. No past cost amount is rewritten. - A missing final receipt remains unresolved for budget checks. The display changes after fifteen minutes; that time limit never authorizes settlement. - Accounting retry is a write action. It retains the existing company checks, receipt fences, idempotency, and audit logging. - Detail reads are bounded and run only after expansion. They poll every 30 seconds while open. No provider probe or new summary query is added. - Migration `0333` adds two partial indexes; it changes no stored cost amounts or table columns. Index creation scans the existing tables and may briefly block writes during deployment. No lockfile or workflow change is included. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository inspection, code editing, browser checks, and test execution. The exact serving model ID, reasoning setting, and context window were 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: Codex <noreply@openai.com> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-11 22:48:29 -07:00