Commit Graph
4 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 b4cc2d30d2 fix(e2e): grade only started runs and bound the clarification readback (#19335)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Product E2E journeys grade agent work in the QA staging smoke plan
> - On the current QA deployment, two journeys failed after the product
had already done the requested work
> - protected-actions counted a wake that the control plane retired
before it started as a bound run, and failed its runtime binding check
> - question-answer-resume waited for its saved document in a view that
no longer exists. The wait lasted 27 minutes, until the case deadline,
and starved the run queue
> - This pull request grades only runs that started provider work, and
reads the document where the UI now shows it, with a bounded wait
> - The benefit is that both journeys measure the product, and a UI
readback failure costs about two minutes instead of a whole worker

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
- protected-actions: the task succeeded with two runs. A third
automation wake for the same agent and task was cancelled before it
started, with the reason "Agent cannot start work while completed runs
await accounting". Its `startedAt` was null, its
`resultJson.cancellation` had `source: "control_plane"` and `expected:
true`, and its `executionRecovery.providerWorkStarted` was false. That
run has no runtime binding, so `validateAgentTaskState` failed with
`agent_run_binding_mismatch`.
- question-answer-resume: the agent saved the requested document and the
task was done by 19:32. The journey then navigated to `#document-<key>`
and waited until 19:59 for an element that never appeared. With the task
chat shell and Artifacts V1, documents render in the properties pane's
Artifacts tab. The run reported `journey_operation_failed` and
`evidence_collection_timeout`, and the 60-minute job ended before four
other cases could run.

**Expected behavior**
- A wake retired before admission is kept as evidence but is not graded
as provider work.
- The saved document is read in its current view, and a UI readback
failure ends quickly.

**Steps to reproduce**
QA staging smoke launch 3074 on app cb8df178c8. The stack-side run
records are described above.

**Paperclip version or commit**
master at 03eb49053f.

## What Changed

- `agent-flows.ts`: add `retiredBeforeProviderStart(run)`. The run must
have status `cancelled` and `startedAt === null`, a control-plane
cancellation with `expected: true`, and
`executionRecovery.providerWorkStarted === false`.
`validateAgentTaskState` still checks such a run's company, agent and
task binding and counts it toward the run limit, then skips the runtime
checks.
- `clarification-flow.ts`: after reload, open the Artifacts tab with the
existing `openDocumentAuthoring` helper before reading the document.
task-dependency-resume uses the same path and passes on this deployment.
The UI readback is capped at 2 minutes after the API returned the saved
document. Agent work time is not changed.
- `agent-evidence.test.ts`: the retired wake is accepted. Nine variants
still fail: a started run, a missing `startedAt`, a failed status, an
unexpected cancellation, an operator source, `providerWorkStarted:
true`, missing recovery evidence, another agent, and another task. The
run limit still applies.

## Verification

- `npx vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts
tests/runner-e2e/product-journeys`: 46 files passed.
- Negative control: without the skip, the new test fails.
- `clarification-readback.spec.ts` (browser support): 6 tests passed.
- `tsc -p tests/runner-e2e/tsconfig.json` shows no errors in the changed
files.
- Not verified live yet. QA uses the pinned harness, so the pin must
move to a commit that contains this change.

## Risks

- The exclusion is narrow, and every field it requires is positive
evidence that the wake did no work. Any started or unexpected extra run
still fails.
- The readback cap is stricter, not looser. It applies only after the
API has confirmed the document. Agent work and answer timing still use
the existing deadlines.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, via Claude Code with
tool use (shell, browser, code editing). Extended reasoning was used.

## 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>
2026-11-05 14:39:18 -06:00
Dotta 3937215a05 Qualify explicit native written references in the basic question journey (#18459)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Basic task journeys must prove that people can answer an agent and
receive saved work.
> - The question journey asks for a choice, then a typed reference, then
a saved note.
> - A native choice card can offer a real written-answer control as well
as predefined options.
> - The old observer rejected that form before a person could type the
reference.
> - This pull request accepts that explicit native control and keeps
exact answer and work evidence.
> - The separate text-only and named-tool qualifications keep their
stricter contracts.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #18346 and #18456. The integration inherits the reviewed fixture
prerequisite #18387 and Agent Chat recovery #18465 through their actual
merged parent. The producer fix in #18456 is separate from this basic
journey contract correction. Public duplicate PR and issue searches
found no other correction for this form equivalence.

**What happened?**
The basic question journey requires the reference card to have
`answerMode: text`. It rejects a native single-select card even when its
canonical form explicitly enables a written answer. This makes the
observer test a widget shape in addition to the requested behavior.

**Expected behavior**
The person must make a real choice and type the complete reference. A
native card with an explicit written-answer control can satisfy the
second step. Selecting a predefined option cannot satisfy it. The agent
must resume the bound work and save both actual answers in its own task
document. The document must survive reload.

**Steps to reproduce**
Use the focused recording and real QuestionForm browser test in this PR.
Keep the reference as a single-select native question with one
predefined option and `customAnswer.enabled: true`. The previous grader
rejects `question-resume.forms`. The previous browser helper rejects
`single_select` before it uses the written-answer control.

**Paperclip version / commit**
Original source base `f2db909393de124caf6a5380a52d4e0e1d621661`. Current
integration `a417fd827347ed6f7998774a9de6aee70b76d867` merges exactly
`12b0cc630471ee151ec5bc8e41a34f09236d6723` into reviewed question source
`faec4ce6d775a34d303d200987e4e84d6dc26caf`. The scheduled failure on
`82d15946c5844d3ae41c6ade62fa224053f20a9a` remains a failure. Its saved
card had no canonical written-answer capability and would still fail
this change. The retained normalized events do not prove whether the
original provider flag was omitted or false.

**Deployment mode**
Attached native task journeys, including QA Cloud. This PR changes the
observer and grader. It does not change the app, provider prompt, model,
budget, timeouts, cleanup, or runtime deployment.

## What Changed

- Accept one provider-bound single-select reference card with explicit
canonical custom answers and valid, distinct options. Keep pure-text
reference support.
- Make the browser select the actual written-answer control and fill the
real rich input. Opt in only for the basic question journey.
- Keep the exact no-option typed response, immutable card, board actor,
native request and continuation, saved agent document, reload, model,
environment, checkpoints, and existing one-to-three-run checks.
- Reject missing or disabled custom capability, inferred legacy
capability, malformed or extra questions, foreign native identities,
changed cards, substituted options, and wrong or missing reference text.
- Add a real production QuestionForm and TaskChatRichInput Chromium
probe. It first selects a predefined option, then proves the helper
clears it and submits only the exact custom text.
- Document the contract correction and preserve the historical failed
attempt and its separate cleanup outcome. Keep necessary-question and
named-tool documentation qualification unchanged.

## Verification

- Before the observer change, the focused grader regression failed only
the new valid-written-reference case; the other 108 cases passed.
- Before the browser helper change, real Chromium passed the text
control and four rejection controls but failed the valid native
written-answer control at the old pure-text assertion.
- Initial focused Runner E2E unit selection at `af07f4de`: **256 passed
across 9 files**. This includes question/resumption, clarification
evidence/flow/collection/deadline, necessary question, documentation,
contracts, and report catalog tests.
- Initial real Chromium selection at `af07f4de`: **12 passed**. Six new
production QuestionForm/control checks and all six existing
document-readiness checks pass. No form or rich-input component is
mocked.
- Historical test-only head `faec4ce6d775a34d303d200987e4e84d6dc26caf`
adds a direct canonical-absent legacy `freeText` grader negative and
renders the actual legacy presentation in the browser. All four
production helper blobs remain identical to the reviewed head. A
temporary legacy inference mutant makes the new negative fail. After
restoring production source, **179 focused unit tests and all 6 real
QuestionForm checks pass**. The six document-readiness specs and their
helper are unchanged.
- Original [CI run
41205748589](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41205748589)
failed the staged-listen Runner handoff test; that failure is preserved
and was not retried. Its Runner source closure was identical to an
earlier passing canonical lane. The symptom also recurred on other heads
and is tracked independently; no infrastructure attribution or live pass
is claimed.
- Current integration `a417fd827347ed6f7998774a9de6aee70b76d867`
preserves **all 12 question files byte-for-byte** from faec. Every other
tracked path is identical to exact merged parent
`12b0cc630471ee151ec5bc8e41a34f09236d6723`, which contains actual
prerequisite `baf651c8d0122efc93f3ef03e891919eeb666215`. There is no
manual conflict resolution or additional production edit.
- On that integrated head: **257 focused Vitest tests across 9 files,
206 required Node source/reporter tests, and 12 real Chromium tests
pass**. Map/module-boundary checks and catalog discovery pass. The
actual `--preview` command passes with a synthetic question target and
an intentionally unavailable adapter; it performs no credential read,
adapter loading, provisioning or model call. It retains maxRuns3, a
600000ms campaign bound and zero retries.
- Exact-head [CI run
41210806950](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41210806950)
passes, including official typecheck, build, all eight browser shards,
both Runner Vitest lanes and aggregate verify. All 59 current PR
contexts are terminal with no failures. Fresh [Greptile
summary](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18459#issuecomment-6543878408)
explicitly reviews `a417fd827347ed6f7998774a9de6aee70b76d867` at 5/5
with no findings; its exact-head check succeeds and all threads are
resolved. No fresh deployed journey pass is claimed yet.
- Catalog discovery lists the existing question journey. Map checks and
module-boundary checks pass. Diff checks pass.
- `tsc -p tests/runner-e2e/tsconfig.json` was attempted. The fresh
integrated checkout still lacks compiled Runner, plugin SDK, and adapter
declarations. The attempted local check reports 344 diagnostic lines
from dependency/type closure and zero diagnostics in all 12
question-owned paths. Official exact-head CI establishes the full
typecheck/build gates. Full repository build, typecheck, and test suites
were not repeated locally for this observer change.
- The first broad local report selection lacked the CLI loader and then
hit sandbox IPC restrictions. Locked dependency installation and an
authorized local IPC run resolved those setup errors; the full selected
256 tests pass. The initial localhost probe also needed the normal
local-listen permission.
- No fresh QA pass is claimed. The coordinator must qualify the final
reviewed runtime and harness together. Prior failed results remain
preserved.

## Risks

The basic journey accepts one additional form with explicit native
provenance. It still rejects the original closed card without a
written-answer capability. The separate producer default fix must reach
the selected remote provider pack before it can affect a deployed run.
Local browser and grader tests do not prove that artifact served or that
a model completed the live journey. Existing cleanup and physical-stop
obligations remain separate.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, source inspection, browser
testing, and code execution. The host does not expose the exact
underlying 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 available version and
capability details
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
related work above
- [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the bug template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
ticket or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run the selected tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation
- [x] I have considered and documented risks
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
2026-10-31 13:16:40 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 1353a232f2 test(e2e): add a portable active follow-up journey (#18345)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip lets people direct agents while their work is active.
> - Product E2E checks must prove that saved user input reaches the
intended work.
> - The existing active chat story depends on a file in a local agent
workspace.
> - That setup cannot qualify an attached deployment with remote agent
execution.
> - This change adds one shared active follow-up journey through the
normal task UI and API.
> - Independent native operation, saved input, final reply, and cleanup
checks make the result inspectable across targets.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Product E2E coverage for a user follow-up sent while a native agent is
working.

**Current behavior**

The classic chat story holds work open with a local file. The shared
deployment-targeted harness has no active follow-up journey. A running
heartbeat alone cannot prove that work was active when input arrived.

**Proposed behavior**

Run one bounded command through the real native provider. Observe its
active execution before and after one follow-up is saved. Require one
final reply with the late requirement, correct task and agent identity,
an empty input queue, and visible readback after reload. Use the same
story on managed and attached targets.

## What Changed

- Add a shared `followup-while-running` journey with normal task
creation and reply submission.
- Require a bound native turn and pending shell execution at the input
boundary. Retain a closed receipt with source identity and a row hash.
- Accept one steered work run or one normal successor (1–2 native runs).
Preserve every other journey's declared run contract.
- Reuse the saved native final reply observer, run binding checks, usage
collection, target lifecycle and private evidence path.
- Accept canonical builtin/process execution events independent of
provider tool display names; calibrate against real OpenCode, Codex and
ACP mappers. Reject Paperclip semantic tool names across native
wrappers/prefixes and unnamed or ambiguous builtin calls.
- Recognize only the observed legacy PRP v1
builtin/bash/unknown/readOnly=false command shape and fail promptly when
owned work finishes before a live boundary can be observed.
- Ready the task page/composer before the observed command boundary, use
a bounded 90-second command, and preserve active-after-persistence
proof.
- Add adversarial oracle and retained-result calibration. Register the
journey, include its sources in the definition hash, and document its
coverage.
- Keep six real browser document-readiness checks and verify
shared-deadline behavior with a deterministic clock/state test that
rejects timeout-reset mutations.

## Verification

Exact current head `e72e20ad111bd94728d38606015d1fdac3c92929` passed
[full CI run
41142552195](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41142552195):
all 49 workflow jobs reached accepted terminal results, including
typecheck, build, every test lane and aggregate verify. All 59 reported
checks are terminal: 55 success, three expected skips and one neutral
5/5 Paperclip review. Snyk passed. [Fresh Greptile
review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18345#issuecomment-6528913235)
explicitly names this exact head and gives 5/5. No review threads remain
open. The PR is mergeable.

These source gates do not establish a live QA pass at this head. Fresh
protected QA at this exact source and the separately recorded deployed
application/runtime remains required before primary merge and daily
admission.

Historical live QA staging **PASS** on qualified commit
`af9e091b15b5e24b6b2cc1b424523430cc2ab024`: 6/6 checks, all five phases
including cleanup, two native work runs, and the configured
model/environment check passed. The [sanitized qualification
report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/evals-qa-smoke-41122620146-1/)
records that exact measurement.

Final integration head `e72e20ad111bd94728d38606015d1fdac3c92929` merges
exact actual squash `18b1637b6371a6a6adade857e2a73654ee626fef` from
[#18254](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18254) into
previous head `e54d64743964b1a19d165537bebbe62c50389a23`. The merge had
no conflicts. All 18 files in this PR's change set, the complete 45-file
shared journey directory, and six shared native/evidence helpers retain
their exact previous-head Git blobs: 59 scoped files in total. The
production clarification helper remains blob
`800a747284db19b8484650b6759e8bd1f356839d`. Follow-up 1–2 runs, question
1–3 runs, older exact counts, owned native event checks,
active-before/after persistence proof, cleanup/accounting and feature
mappings remain unchanged.

Source integration head `e55d74491f5bcd99c1455e9ace02bd7ad7319fae`
integrates exact actual squash
`8595efc20bda3ce20a9fbbf34a5d156a6fcf6d57` from
[#18385](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18385). The merge
had no conflicts. All 17 files in this PR's change set and six shared
native/evidence helpers retain their exact Git blobs from previous head
`162e341cda5b627639b486b4019a1675bb018ea2`. This preserves the follow-up
and question readiness checks, feature mappings, six closed follow-up
check IDs, immutable before/after active-operation proof, follow-up 1–2
runs, question 1–3 runs and older exact counts.

Previously reviewed head `e54d64743964b1a19d165537bebbe62c50389a23` adds
a separate test-only reliability repair on top of that source
integration. It replaces one scheduler-sensitive browser case with a
deterministic Vitest clock and locator-state model that calls the actual
production helper. The six other real Chromium checks remain
byte-for-byte unchanged and pass **6/6**. Focused unit suites pass
**51/51**, including the deterministic deadline case. This is six
browser checks plus focused unit coverage, not seven browser checks.

The model makes the panel ready at 100 ms, the supplied answer ready at
600 ms, and full valid content ready at 1,300 ms. It requires rejection
at the shared 1,000 ms deadline and records immutable rejection state
before simulating a 10-second scheduler stall. Both restarted-timeout
mutations fail: resetting all waits wrongly resolves at 1,300 ms;
resetting matcher timeouts while keeping the final real deadline guard
rejects only at 1,300 ms with valid content present. The genuine helper
rejects at 1,000 ms with the answer still incomplete. The production
helper is unchanged, Git blob
`800a747284db19b8484650b6759e8bd1f356839d`. That two-file test-only
patch changed no journey, application, run, accounting, model or runtime
behavior. Its six-browser/51-unit results are prior-head evidence; the
complete patch is unchanged in the new integration.

The final source also retains the actual merged question-primary squash
`d9354bbfc35ef74333e90e596ce21dc8e59149b9` from
[#18346](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18346). Later
commits `409117451da260a03fc28a3107c7808ecbe68f8f` and
`ea3e7b1d1bed562351fcf4722c7175001b987b59` bound question document
readiness to one campaign deadline and test that waits cannot restart
it. Commit `162e341cda5b627639b486b4019a1675bb018ea2` adds
question/follow-up report feature mappings and coverage. These files are
unchanged by the final merge.

The imported upstream source has real application changes:
[#18334](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18334) makes
managed skill content durable and extends native skill-test contracts;
[#18350](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18350) requires
managed Cloud shared storage and bootstrap prerequisites. #18385 updates
TestOps job metadata and repairs their combined maintenance fixture. The
new merge additionally imports
[#18383](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18383) at
`81ecaf0654fe79a2a2dbda6588f033e39ee610e4`, which bounds failed
lifecycle verification;
[#18357](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18357) at
`45a3a92e6dc52d20923b9aa34a22fee2ec5443f9`, which persists
sandbox-creation ownership and updates cleanup/adapter/plugin contracts;
and #18254 at `18b1637b6371a6a6adade857e2a73654ee626fef`, which accepts
a valid late Antigravity authorization URL while native authentication
drains. This PR's diff against exact upstream
`18b1637b6371a6a6adade857e2a73654ee626fef` contains only journey tests,
report coverage and documentation. Harness source and deployed
application/runtime identity are separate inputs. This source
integration does not deploy the imported application changes or claim
the QA target runs this application revision.

This final SHA has not been measured by the historical run above:
**fresh QA at this exact final head is required before primary merge**,
followed by normal TestOps verification/admission. Fresh exact-head CI
and review have passed as recorded above. The live measurement must
record the actual separately deployed QA application/runtime identity.

Seven whole-file blobs remain identical to the qualified SHA. All paths
are relative to `tests/runner-e2e/`:

| Journey/helper | Unchanged Git blob |
| --- | --- |
| `product-journeys/active-followup-evidence.ts` |
`83a5d9fab52abb9849a40e83eca6b6a9c29bf587` |
| `product-journeys/active-followup.test.ts` |
`728160c610c18292d2cf06d4a87d25a8719f1734` |
| `native-task-reply.ts` | `59d11f1a178dad9db3da8fa2342ff93643cb9922` |
| `native-event-envelope.ts` |
`305b0b456c59c511ee328e529ad574c0583075a0` |
| `run-observations.ts` | `08c8ad184a821a7cd536926b3d7e3d1156a1e3da` |
| `user-actions.ts` | `e9611348dc41e17899367dab2e3b36d3d1be9480` |
| `stop-redirect-flow.ts` | `4580bd605a425bc72511e02d988492acbec8d60e` |

The follow-up preservation comparison against historical `af9` has three
explicit exceptions; no whole-file identity is claimed for them. The
separately documented question readiness and report additions above also
require final-source verification:

1. `product-journeys/agent-flows.ts` adds `question-answer-resume` to
the `AgentJourney` type exclusion, alongside follow-up. Its remaining
contents and runtime helper bodies are byte-for-byte unchanged.
Qualified blob `a0afaa968c1d854476159fef21de7b6dd50a4a98`; final blob
`0cc797c0ae594e7769338e63a80c4f67e29e4a54`.
2. The common run-count helper is centralized in `success-contract.ts`
and re-exported by the catalog. It accepts follow-up **1–2**,
clarification **1–3**, and each older paid journey's exact count. The
follow-up catalog entry, maximum of two runs, six required checks,
native dispatch, collection and retained-run contract remain
byte-for-byte unchanged. The helper's text differs; its preserved count
semantics are verified explicitly.
3. `product-journeys/active-followup-flow.ts` changes exactly one
composer readiness assertion from Playwright's implicit five-second
default to an explicit 30-second timeout, matching `submitTaskReply` for
attached targets. Prompts, actions, native evidence, before/after
persistence proof and grading otherwise compare byte-for-byte unchanged.
Qualified blob `64392329198a1a4d9828e32834d4507e175216e6`; final blob
`2746b5ba89e2af26b4097ba7897913186786ac5d`. This correction is why a
fresh final-head QA run is required.

- **310 focused tests passed at current final head
`e72e20ad111bd94728d38606015d1fdac3c92929`**: 286
journey/evidence/catalog/report/shared-deadline tests in 14 files and 24
native authentication/real-child stream-order tests in two files. Both
invocations used Node24 and one Vitest worker. The earlier `e55`
integration also passed 365 focused tests, including 40 Cloud
configuration and 40 TestOps metadata cases; those results remain
prior-source evidence.
- **157 explicit count assertions passed again at the current final
head**, including both interactive ranges, older exact counts,
invalid/fractional/non-number values and catalog/contract export
identity. The maximum bounds and six closed follow-up check IDs also
matched.
- Maps and diff checks passed. The official QA runtime-import preflight
passed on Node24 at the current final head without network access. It
uses a dummy adapter and no credentials. It does not prove target
connectivity, sign-in, model readiness or deployed application/runtime
identity. Those require the normal protected QA run. No model/provider
work or optional Runner release was dispatched.
- Current local runtime dependencies use ignored isolated
workspace-source views. No shared dependencies or compilers were
changed. A previous local typecheck attempt hit stale reused Runner
declarations. No full repository typecheck, test run or build was
repeated locally; the successful exact-head full CI run above now
supplies these gates.
- CI on previous head `162e341cda5b627639b486b4019a1675bb018ea2` failed
the Cloud/local maintenance fixture in [server shard
9](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41133716802/job/124331643100),
plus dependent verify. The actual tested merge combined that head with
master `198218bf554877fe3b7a83742eefb3b8f12392c6`. A Cloud child
selected local-disk storage and hit the new shared-storage policy. This
was a deterministic upstream fixture mismatch; no unchanged failed-job
retry was used.
- The actual #18385 repair configures a valid Cloud child, verifies
local bytes independently, checks the expected provider mismatch and
retains exact stored-config readback. Its own final head
`b76d5dd40d7711f1b5f6b6316b1114c0aae02d57` passed 59 checks, including
[server shard
9](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41133876636/job/124331450635).
That prior result supports the repair; it does not replace this final
head's fresh CI. Separate repair candidate #18392 and its
source/evidence are retained as superseded history.
- A local attempt to run the database fixture could not start PostgreSQL
because the host exhausted macOS semaphores. A first setup attempt also
failed package resolution before test execution. Skipped database cases
and these setup failures are not passes. No kernel settings, shared
processes or databases were changed.
- The complete previous-head CI run
[41138618869](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41138618869)
finished with one underlying failure: [Runner Vitest shard
1](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41138618869/job/124347859445)
expected native Antigravity login success but observed failure at
`antigravity-auth.test.ts:101`. The lane had one failed test, 1,994
passing tests and eight skipped tests. Aggregate verify failed only
because of this lane. All other 57 checks were accepted, including
build, typecheck, all server/browser suites, Runner shard 2, Snyk and
exact-head 5/5 reviews. No unchanged retry was requested.
- The independently reviewed #18254 repair removes an invalid cross-pipe
ordering assumption: a valid URL on stderr can arrive after the
authenticate response on stdout during drain. Its real-child regression
forces both orders. The current final source imports that actual squash;
the 24 focused authentication cases pass here. Fresh full CI and
exact-head review have now passed for this source, as recorded above.
The earlier failed result is not relabeled.
- The original live compatibility failure is retained: an older PRP v1
pack labeled builtin `bash` as operation `unknown`, causing the observer
to miss the command and never send the follow-up. Its exact shape was
reproduced red before repair. Generic unknown operations, semantic
tools, wrappers, read-only work and foreign provenance remain rejected.
The historical qualified pass used the repaired oracle; no failed result
was relabeled.
- Earlier CI on `6fad965d69` hit an unchanged heartbeat test's
three-second adapter-call wait; its original failure and one narrow
rerun remain recorded. The qualified SHA subsequently passed CI. An
earlier report-catalog subprocess failure is retained. The final focused
Node24 run now includes that suite and passes after the documented
report feature mappings.

## Risks

The fixture asks the native agent to run one bounded `sleep 90` command.
The observer must see actual active native execution; a fast or
noncompliant turn fails rather than passing from elapsed time. A
completed result requires one or two bounded native work runs, source
attribution, configured model/environment, and collection. Unknown
provider prices stay unknown. This change does not alter production
execution or grant new access.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning and code execution. The host
does not expose an exact underlying 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 available version and
capability details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs; existing
follow-up execution fixes do not provide this deployment-targeted test
- [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the enhancement
template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
ticket or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run the new focused tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation
- [x] I have considered and documented risks
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-30 18:37:17 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip d9354bbfc3 Add a portable agent question and answer resumption journey (#18346)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps people manage agent work and keep human decisions
attached to tasks.
> - Product E2E journeys verify the browser, native agent, saved state,
and cleanup.
> - The classic suite already checks a choice question followed by a
text question.
> - Deployment-targeted journeys need the same behavior on an attached
instance.
> - Production questions can use provider input, the dedicated semantic
tool, or the authenticated native API fallback.
> - The basic journey must verify the original card and native
continuation for each supported path.
> - This pull request shares the scenario and browser actions, adds
strict API receipt evidence, and verifies the saved document after
reload.
> - Separate tool-documentation qualification and the original failed
measurements keep their existing scope and outcomes.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

It adds portable coverage for answering agent questions and resuming the
same task on an attached deployment.

**Current behavior**

The classic suite has the two-question scenario. The portable catalog
does not expose it. Its shared native-path grader recognizes provider
and dedicated semantic receipts, but rejects a valid completed native
API creation receipt.

**Proposed behavior**

Expose `question-answer-resume` as a deployment-targeted journey. Answer
one choice question and one text question in the browser. Require
server-owned creation evidence, unchanged forms, exact board answers,
bound continuation, an agent-authored task document, and readback after
reload.

**Reason and benefit**

The same story can qualify local and hosted targets through their normal
provider setup and cleanup. It catches lost answers, duplicate or
foreign work, premature output, and stale documents.

## What Changed

- Register the journey with a three-run maximum and positive model
allowance. Accept one to three attributed work runs at both collection
and retained-result boundaries.
- Share the existing two-question scenario, browser answer actions, and
behavioral grader. Keep separate tool-documentation grading unchanged.
- Recognize a completed native API creation receipt only when its HTTP
201 result retains the original pending card, exact
task/company/agent/source run, idempotency key, and full normalized
form. Require the receipt to remain unchanged after the answer and
through the final checkpoint. Missing, pending, foreign, or altered
proof still fails.
- Check signed-in board ownership, each native continuation, no
premature or extra output, document authorship, and the saved revision
after reload.
- Wait for the authenticated product region before screenshots. Recheck
origin and path after readiness. Bound readiness and capture by the
campaign deadline.
- Add closed stage-specific errors, catalog coverage, sanitized receipt
calibration, and documentation. Include the provider-form and
browser-question presentation helpers in the definition fingerprint.

## Verification

- Fresh QA staging qualification passed at
`7f7de8be286a436010a48af89aba1727b4451493`: all 11 required checks
passed, cleanup passed, and all three native runs used the configured QA
target and model. The [sanitized run
report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/evals-qa-smoke-41121966520-1/)
records the measured pass. This is one successful qualification, not a
reliability claim.
- Final integration head `ae0d9d289831c770a413658d3520fb1dc8ad60e3`
contains the one main merge through
`fd008979f5794fda3d5f54151d36acd31d0de140` and an exact cherry-pick of
the four-file qualified search fix
`4edd10804e2b42941aa2038e90c362c13a0b98dc` from #18370. Patch identity
matches. It preserves the project and search registrations and atomic
search readback. The question live qualification ran at the earlier SHA
above; the final integration head has separate local and CI
verification.
- Eighteen question journey, helper, and test file blobs are identical
between the qualified and integration SHAs. This includes clarification
flow and evidence, question grader and browser helper, the sanitized
receipt fixture, screenshot helper, provider-form helper, browser
question presentation, continuation scenario/readiness/flow, shared
agent validation, and user actions. The question run-count contract and
dispatch branch are also unchanged. Reviewers can compare those paths
directly between the two commits.
- All 622 selected Product E2E, catalog, question-resumption,
necessary-question, report, and readiness tests pass after the main
merge. After the exact search delta, all 145 narrow
question/search/project/contract tests and all nine real Chromium search
regressions pass. Map checks, combined credential-free preview, source
fingerprints, and the earlier workspace-link preflight pass. The local
TypeScript attempt reports stale Runner declaration errors for
`onAccountingEvent` in unchanged native-session code; fresh official CI
provides the clean-build type gate. The three search source/test blobs
match the qualified search merge, and the three project source blobs are
unchanged.
- An in-memory probe executes the actual launcher fingerprint
expression. Each project, search, and question implementation input
changes the digest. Separate red probes first reproduced the omitted
provider-form and browser presentation helpers; both pass after their
source inputs are added.
- The sanitized retained native API response-shape regression fails
before the grading correction and passes afterward. Negative controls
reject missing, pending, foreign, changed, spoofed, or wrongly bound
receipts, answers, continuation, model, environment, and document
evidence. All nine provider/semantic/API path combinations pass
calibration.
- The real local Chromium screenshot probe fails before the readiness
repair and passes afterward. Login redirects and sign-in pages at task
URLs remain excluded with no screenshot files.
- The two original attached failures remain retained: the first stopped
at early screenshot capture; the second stopped before answering at the
former API provenance gate. An earlier sandbox run also retained one
report subprocess failure; the full selected tests then passed with
local subprocess IPC access.
- The prior integration CI had an unchanged canary mock `EADDRINUSE`
failure. That history is retained; its documented retry is owned by the
coordinator. No application API, schema, production UI, model, runtime
policy, credential, or deployment configuration change is included.
Final integration head ae0d9d2898 passed
all 58 CI checks, the external Snyk status, and fresh Greptile 5/5 with
no unresolved findings. This clean CI includes the official TypeScript
and build gates. Recurring selection follows merge and a separate normal
TestOps job verification.

## Risks

An API result must prove native creation; form shape and run count
cannot establish it. The grader checks the server receipt, exact scope,
unchanged card and receipt, real board answers, and bound native
continuation. The shared answer helper still serves classic journeys.
The screenshot wait affects attached journeys and remains limited to the
authenticated product region and campaign deadline. One live QA pass
establishes the measured journey outcome at the qualified SHA. It does
not establish reliability across models or deployments. The integration
SHA preserves its journey and helper blobs, while shared registry
changes receive fresh CI and review.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, source inspection, and code
execution. The host does not expose the exact underlying 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>
2026-10-30 16:18:21 -05:00