Commit Graph
3947 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandClaude Fable 5.2 52cdf76bf3 fix(ephemeral): start a volume-free server over harness backups a volume-free server left unsaved (#20990)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A hosted Paperclip server can run volume-free: its durable state is
in the database and object storage, and its local disk is replaced with
every deployment
> - At startup, a volume-free server runs a readiness gate that refuses
to start when it finds data that still needs migration off a volume
> - One of those findings is a harness backup that never reached durable
storage. A volume-free server that stops in the middle of a run always
leaves some
> - The gate then refuses every later start, the process exits, and the
host restarts it into the same refusal. The workspace stays down until a
person repairs it
> - This pull request lets a server start over such backups when its
filesystem carries the volume-free owner marker
> - The benefit is that a volume-free server recovers from an
interrupted run by itself

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20952 (the same crash loop for Runner controller files; this is
the next check in the same gate).

**What happened?**

A hosted volume-free workspace stopped while runs were in progress.
Every later start logged `Paperclip server failed to start` with
`Volume-free server data is not eligible:
native_harness_backups_require_migration`, and exited. The host
restarted the container and the server exited again. The workspace did
not serve any request for more than two hours.

**Expected behavior**

A volume-free server starts after an interrupted run. Restart recovery
handles the runs whose local harness backup was lost with the old
container.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Run a volume-free server (`PAPERCLIP_EPHEMERAL_SERVER=true`) with
native Runner tasks in progress.
2. Stop the server process before the harness backup of an active
session reaches durable storage.
3. Start the server again. It refuses to start with
`native_harness_backups_require_migration`.

**Paperclip version or commit**

`87fe4d979355232570428deba480b47e1812a26c` (contains #20952).

## What Changed

- `assertEphemeralServerData`: when the only reason is
`native_harness_backups_require_migration` and the filesystem carries
the volume-free owner marker (`volumeFreeControllerStateOwned`), the
gate removes that blocker, logs a warning, and lets the server start.
- A filesystem without the marker is refused as before. All other
blockers are unchanged.
- `readEphemeralServerDataEligibility` is unchanged, so the migration
and enrollment callers still see the blocker.
- Added `ephemeral-server-startup-run-state.test.ts`.

## Verification

- Red: with the change to `ephemeral-server-contract.ts` reverted,
`starts a volume-free server over harness backups a volume-free server
left unsaved` fails (1 failed, 2 passed).
- Green: `npx vitest run
src/__tests__/ephemeral-server-startup-run-state.test.ts
src/__tests__/ephemeral-server-data.test.ts` in `server/`: 2 files, 8
tests passed.
- Not run locally: the full suite. CI supplies that coverage.
- Not verified: a live volume-free start. The hosted workspace that
showed the failure will receive this change through the normal release.

## Risks

- A server on a marked volume-free filesystem now starts with unsaved
harness backups. Those backups were on a disk that no longer exists, so
the refusal protected nothing. The affected runs depend on restart
recovery.
- The marker is the only evidence that there is no volume. A filesystem
that still is a volume and does not carry the marker keeps the refusal.
- The gate does not repair or delete the stale lease stamps. The warning
repeats at each start until restart recovery settles those runs.

## Model Used

Claude Fable 5.2 (`claude-fable-5-2`), through Claude Code with tool use
and code execution.

## 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
- [ ] 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 Fable 5.2 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 20:02:27 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 5d1bb5192f fix(retry): carry the original wake to every re-queued run (#20989)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - A run serves one wake: a comment, an answer, an assignment, or a
one-shot task monitor check (`issue_monitor_due`).
> - When a run fails, Paperclip often starts a successor run by itself:
the bounded transient retry, the uncharged `interrupted_preparation`
re-queue, workspace or connection waits, missing-comment repair,
capacity retries and recovery successors. Each successor links to the
failed run through `retry_of_run_id`.
> - Most of these re-queues replace the wake reason with their own (for
example `transient_failure_retry`). The agent then does not know which
wake it must handle.
> - #20970 fixed this for the board Retry only. A no-fault chaos wave
showed the same loss on an automatic retry: the monitor run failed
before provider work, the automatic retry succeeded, and the agent did
not treat it as the monitor check. The monitor was already consumed, so
the task rested `in_progress` with nothing pending.
> - This pull request covers all re-queue paths at one shared point: the
continuation builder that every issue dispatch uses
(`buildExecutionContinuation`, called from `heartbeat/task-context.ts`).
It walks the re-queue chain to the first run that was not a re-queue and
records that run's wake reason as `trigger.retriedReason`. The wake
prompt already shows that field (#20970).
> - The benefit is that every successor of a failed run handles the same
wake as the run it replaces.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
No-fault restart-chaos wave on master `87fe4d9793`, volume-free mode
(`w-20261112T010036-s6801`, Claude, task t01, workload W2). The monitor
wake started run `78e27ef9`. It failed before provider work
(`native_predecessor_retirement_unproven`). The
`interrupted_preparation` re-queue (attempt 1/12) started run `0cd387a0`
on a fresh sandbox, and that run succeeded. The agent reported that no
board comment arrived and that the monitor wake was not visible. It
yielded `response_wake` again. The monitor was `triggered` with no
`nextCheckAt`. The issue rested `in_progress` with `canRetry=false`, no
live run, no wake and no monitor. The harness graded `R1
rested_not_done` and `R3 missing_retry`.

**Expected behavior**
A successor of a failed run tells the agent which wake it re-delivers. A
re-queued monitor check is handled as the monitor check.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Wake a native agent with `issue_monitor_due` on a task.
2. Make the run fail before provider work, for example when the previous
run's sandbox session cannot be retired.
3. Let the `interrupted_preparation` re-queue run.
4. Before this change, the successor's continuation trigger has the
re-queue reason only, and its prompt does not name the monitor check.

**Additional context**
Follow-up to #20970.

Refs #20970
Refs #20935
Refs #20863

## What Changed

- `server/src/services/execution-continuation.ts`: new
`requeuedWakeReason`.
- It starts at the current run's `retry_of_run_id` column. If that is
empty, it uses the context `retryOfRunId`, or the source run of a board
Retry.
- It follows the chain within the same company and issue, at most 32
links, until it finds a run with no re-queue link. It returns that run's
wake reason.
- A `trigger.retriedReason` already saved on a run in the chain is
reused.
- `trigger.retriedReason` is set only when the original reason differs
from the current reason and is not itself a Retry reason. A re-queue
that keeps the original wake reason (`preserveWakeContext`) is
unchanged.
- This one point covers every successor that links with
`retry_of_run_id`: bounded transient retries, `interrupted_preparation`
(#20863), workspace and AI-connection waits, missing-comment repair
(`run-lifecycle.ts`), native capacity retries, safe replacement, and the
board Retry.
- Tests:
- `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-native-predispatch-retry.test.ts`: the
assembled heartbeat service runs a monitor-due wake, a
predecessor-retirement failure before provider work, and the automatic
`interrupted_preparation` re-queue. It asserts the successor's saved
continuation and wake prompt.
- `server/src/services/execution-continuation.test.ts`: a two-link chain
of automatic re-queues, and a re-queue that keeps the original reason.

## Verification

- Red on master: `cd server && npx vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-native-predispatch-retry.test.ts -t "delivers
the monitor check"`. The successor's trigger had `sourceRunId` = the
failed monitor run, but no `retriedReason`.
- Green: `heartbeat-native-predispatch-retry.test.ts`,
`execution-continuation.test.ts` and `heartbeat/retries.test.ts` pass
(78 tests).
- `npx tsc --noEmit -p server` passes.
- Chaos: the existing no-fault W2 cell in volume-free mode reproduces
this when the monitor run fails before provider work. I did not rerun a
wave.

## Risks

- Low risk. The change adds one optional trigger field to more wakes. It
changes no admission, status or authority path.
- The walk costs at most one indexed primary-key read per chain link,
only for runs that are re-queues.
- The walk follows only same-company, same-issue runs. Old saved runs
work, because they already store `wakeReason` and the `retry_of_run_id`
column.
- The resting state "agent yielded `response_wake` after the monitor was
consumed" is still possible when an agent really waits. #20935 shows it
on the run projection as "Waiting for a reply". The ownership
reconciler's I7 check still counts it as `no_owner_no_wake`. This PR
does not change I7.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, used through Claude
Code with tool use (shell, file edits, local test execution).

## 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>
2026-11-11 19:52:21 -06:00
8818402e7a feat(inbox): route requests to people and record personal outcomes (#20959)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work.
> - The inbox collects requests that need a human decision.
> - Teams need to know who owns each request and who may act on it.
> - A shared close operation must differ from hiding a card for one
person.
> - This pull request adds personal routing and durable outcomes to the
existing attention service.
> - People can claim or transfer work and inspect what another person
did for them.
> - Domain permissions still decide who may resolve each request.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Server, shared contracts, and database. This is the routing foundation
for a stacked inbox UI change.

**Problem or motivation**

A company-wide attention feed does not give teams a clear personal
queue. Archive, withdrawal, transfer, and decisions by another person
need distinct scopes and records.

**Proposed solution**

Resolve a request audience from its addressee, task participants, and
configured owners. Provide personal, unassigned, company, all-assignee,
and archived views. Add claim, transfer, personal archive and snooze,
shared withdrawal, receipts, and personal history.

**Alternatives considered**

A single shared inbox leaves ownership and personal hiding ambiguous.
The service keeps one canonical request and projects its audience
instead of copying requests for each person.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends the existing Multiple Human Users and Agent Reviews and
Approvals capabilities in ROADMAP.md.

**Additional context**

Refs #19363 and #19520 for the current inbox navigation and confirmation
replacement rules. Refs #20268 for related actionable-request work. That
PR filters actionability; this stack adds audience routing and personal
outcomes.

This is part 1 of a two-PR stack. The inbox UI PR #20961 targets this
branch.

## What Changed

- Add nullable company and project decision owners and a company budget
owner.
- Add audience views and personal badge counts to the canonical
attention projections.
- Add claim, transfer, withdrawal, personal archive, snooze, and restore
operations with permission checks and activity records. Lock addressed
transfers to the current addressee or routing administrators, and
validate the recipient against canonical resolution policies.
- Add receipts and scoped history for work handled by another person.
- Keep closed-task requests and replaced confirmations out of current
cards.
- Add an idempotent migration and a concurrent receipt-history index.
- Update typed fixtures so the existing UI remains compatible with the
new contracts.

## Verification

- Server layered typechecking passes, including all three test-tree
partitions.
- Seven routing and interaction-resolution suites pass all 249 tests
against a dedicated external PostgreSQL test database on `4caecc21d8`.
Six new regressions failed before the repair; they cover takeover
followed by approval, legitimate delegation, excluded creators/review
requesters, and unauthorized claims.
- Prior focused verification covers private approval history and
receipts, transfer visibility, audience escalation, withdrawal
governance, hidden-card counts, per-recipient confirmation replacement,
and SDK source contracts.
- A synthetic three-person company passed 37 routing and lifecycle
acceptance checks. The UI stack adds browser acceptance for the shared
controls.
- The complete [GitHub Actions CI
matrix](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/43134997331)
passes on `4caecc21d891677323a7335f23b1a015cce24c13` (Linux/Node 24:
typecheck, build, general and serialized tests, Runner support, browser
shards, and aggregate gates). Greptile is 5/5 on that exact head with no
open findings. The fresh security scan passes after explicitly
rechecking the addressee-transfer repair.
- `pnpm verify` reports exit 2 because a CI-global script changed; full
CI supplies that broader coverage. Embedded PostgreSQL could not start
on this Mac because shared-memory slots were exhausted, so local
database checks use a separate external test database. Linux CI covers
the embedded setup.

## Risks

- Personal badge counts change to the viewer's assigned requests.
Accessible feed totals and task membership keep their existing scope.
- The migration adds nullable owner fields and a dismissal fingerprint.
Its index runs outside a transaction. The migration is classified and
rerunnable.
- Routing changes the addressee used by resolution authorization. The
current addressee or a routing administrator must authorize an addressed
transfer; the recipient must satisfy writer access, canonical resolver
exclusions, and task review policy under row locks.
- The shared validator export barrel crosses 1,000 lines because it
exports the new attention schemas. Schema implementation stays in the
dedicated attention validator module.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. Used repository tools, code execution, and
browser checks. This session does not expose a more specific runtime
model ID or its 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 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
Paperclip ticket id
- [x] I have run focused tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
(OpenAPI contracts and docs/api/attention.md)
- [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: Scott Tong <scott@scottsmbpm5max.lan>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-11-11 17:49:39 -08:00
TonioandPaperclip 9dfdeaad86 Refine agent workspaces and organization charts (#20973)
Refine agent details, identity editing, responsive controls, and organization charts with three card tiers, clearer save feedback, and stable filtering.

Guard instruction-file renames and root configuration updates in one transaction through the agent lifecycle integration, preserving conflict checks, rollback, and configuration history.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-11-12 01:23:59 +00:00
Nicky Leach 45170b0cac Reuse Runner plugin capability checks (#20987) 2026-11-11 17:21:07 -08:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 5cd5adfccc fix(native): link a person-owned agent blocker to the agent's open question whatever owner kind the model reports (#20969)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - #20931 lets a person's answer continue a task that its agent blocked
while it waited for that answer
> - That link is recorded only when the blocker's unblock descriptor is
bound to the board
> - Codex reports such a wait as `paperclip_block` with `owner: {"kind":
"user", "name": "Board"}` and scope `task_wide`. The evidence classifier
treats only `kind: "board"` (not a PRP owner kind) as board-owned, so
the arbiter binds this person-owned blocker to the reporting agent, and
no link is recorded
> - So every Codex W2Q task still loses the answer
(`issue_not_in_progress`) and needs Retry
> - This pull request classifies a `user` owner as a person
(board-bound) and records the link from the reported owner kind, not
from the spelling of the owner
> - The benefit is that the person's answer reaches the agent whatever
owner shape the model uses

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20931

**What happened?**
Restart-chaos wave w-20261111T230717-s5201 on master 9c56e546 (Daytona
warm, Codex, no fault): all 3 W2Q tasks (t01, t05, t09) failed. Each
continuation after the answer (runs 8864fa72, 814b2cd0, 757c1c8f) was
cancelled with `issue_not_in_progress (current status: blocked)`. Each
agent blocked with `owner: {"kind": "user", "name": "Board"}`, scope
`task_wide` (reason codes `missing_required_answer`,
`awaiting_codename_answer`). The decision was `task_wide_blocker_bound`
with the unblock owner `{agentId}`, so `questionsAwaitedByAgentBlock`
recorded no `awaitingInteractionIds`.

**What did you expect to happen?**
The answer continues the task, as it does for a board-bound blocker.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. A Codex agent asks a question; the person comments before answering.
2. The agent calls `paperclip_block` with a `user` owner and scope
`task_wide`.
3. The person answers. The continuation is cancelled with
`issue_not_in_progress`.

## What Changed

- `evidence-classifier.ts`: new `nativeBlockerOwnerKind` and an optional
`ownerKind` on the blocker assessment (`agent`, `user`, `system`,
`external`, legacy `board`, or `unspecified`). A `user` owner is now
board-owned, like `board`: a person resolves it, so it is not bound to
the reporting agent.
- `status-arbiter.ts`: both agent-reported blocker decisions
(`task_wide_blocker_bound`, `current_track_blocker_waiting`) carry
`blockerOwnerKind`.
- `blocked-question-answer.ts` and the status committer:
`questionsAwaitedByAgentBlock` records the agent's own pending,
undismissed questions when the reported owner is one a person resolves:
`user`, `external`, legacy `board`, or no recognized kind. `agent` and
`system` owners and dependency blocks
(`durable_dependency_blocker_bound`) stay excluded. A decision without
`blockerOwnerKind` keeps the previous board-bound rule. All other guards
are unchanged: asked by this agent, answered by a person, decision still
current, `statusVersion` match, guarded checkout.
- `doc/execution-semantics.md` describes the rule.

## Verification

- `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-blocked-question-answer.test.ts` now
builds the block decision with the real `classifyNativeEvidence` and
`arbitrateNativeStatus` from the exact Codex report shape, commits it
with `commitNativeStatusDecision`, and delivers the answer through
`heartbeat.wakeup`.
- Red on master (product hunks removed, test kept): `user` task-wide
fails because the unblock owner is `{ agentId }` instead of `board`;
`external` task-wide fails with `status: cancelled, errorCode:
issue_not_in_progress`.
- Green: 10/10. `user` task-wide, `external` task-wide and `user`
current-track are delivered. `agent` and `system` owners still cancel
with `issue_not_in_progress`, as do the earlier negative cases.
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/services/native-runtime/status-arbiter.test.ts
src/services/native-runtime/evidence-classifier.test.ts
src/services/native-runtime/historical-task-questions.test.ts
src/modules/run-dispatch`: 257 passed. `recovery-observability`,
`heartbeat-issue-liveness-escalation`, `native-completion-feedback`,
`paperclip-control-plane-port`: all passed.
- `cd server && pnpm exec tsc --noEmit -p tsconfig.json`: passes.
- Chaos: see the comment below.

## Risks

- A task-wide blocker that names a person (`user`) no longer binds its
unblock descriptor to the reporting agent and no longer wakes that agent
about its own blocker. The board owns it, as for a current-track
blocker.
- An `external` owner can now link to the agent's open question. If that
blocker was about something else, the answer resumes the agent and it
reports the blocker again.
- Upgrade: `ownerKind` and `blockerOwnerKind` are optional. A decision
built by an older release keeps the previous rule. No schema change.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), with tool use and code execution
in an agent harness.

## 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>
2026-11-11 18:50:00 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 dfd2a6efca fix(native): restart a follow-up the closing server cut before it attached, instead of reattaching to its predecessor's Runner (#20979)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Native runs on a remote sandbox keep a warm Runner between turns. A
follow-up run takes over its settled predecessor's provider session and
Runner.
> - When a deploy stops the server, a follow-up that is still preparing
fails with `local_runtime_api_listener_unavailable`. The executor saves
this failure as a same-run bootstrap retry (#20786). The saved failure
proves that the run did no provider work of its own.
> - After the restart, restart recovery saw a checkpoint and a provider
session, and chose `reattach_remote_runner`. But the checkpoint and the
Runner identity belong to the predecessor. The Runner identity check
then failed with `native_remote_recovery_lease_mismatch:
stage=runner_verification field=identity_run_id`. The run ended terminal
and the task needed Retry.
> - This pull request recognizes that durable shape in restart recovery
and restarts the run as a fresh bootstrap on its warm session. It does
not try to reattach to a Runner that belongs to a different run.
> - The pull request also stops the queue from claiming a queued run
after shutdown closed run admission during the queue scan.
> - The benefit is that a deploy during a follow-up's preparation no
longer ends the run terminal with a Retry.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20786, #20928, #20852, #20904

**What happened?**
In three Codex runs across two Daytona restart-chaos waves (warm
sandboxes, CR1 and K15 with overlap), a warm follow-up run
(`automation`, `retryOfRunId` = its predecessor) started 0–2 s before
its server got SIGTERM. Its bootstrap failed with
`local_runtime_api_listener_unavailable` and saved a `bootstrap_retry`
with `providerSessionEstablished: false`, `providerEventsExist: false`.
After the restart, `native.recovery.transition` chose
`reattach_remote_runner`. `verifyRemoteRunnerReattachment` then threw
`identity_run_id`, because the warm Runner's identity still named the
predecessor. The run ended with
`native_continuation_requires_reconciliation`. In every sandbox capture
the Runner was cleanly suspended, with no stderr.

**Expected behavior**
The run did no provider work and never wrote its own Runner identity.
The next server must restart it without a Retry.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Finish a remote warm native run, so that its provider session and
Runner identity are saved.
2. Start a follow-up run. Admission carries the predecessor's provider
session and Runner process identity into the follow-up.
3. Send SIGTERM while the follow-up prepares, so that it fails with
`local_runtime_api_listener_unavailable`.
4. Restart the server. Restart recovery chooses
`reattach_remote_runner`, and the run fails with `identity_run_id`.

## What Changed

- `native-restart-recovery.ts` (`claimNativeRestartRecoveries`): add the
`remoteFollowUpNeverAttached` proof. It is true only when all of these
are true:
- the run is a failed, settled `bootstrap_retry` whose original failure
is `local_runtime_api_listener_unavailable`, with
`providerSessionEstablished: false`, `providerEventsExist: false`, no
successor and no lease owner;
- the run is on a prepared remote sandbox workspace with the current
preparation fencing version, it is not a plugin task, and it has no
Runner controller checkpoint and no staged attachment of its own;
- its session checkpoint is only the carried admission checkpoint (no
cursor, turn, result, terminal or pending request), and a settled
earlier run of the same session saved that exact provider session;
- its Runner process identity is absent or is exactly the identity of a
settled predecessor;
- it has no provider event, no Runner-originated event, and no
`native.process_identity_recorded` event of its own.
With that proof, the run gets a `bootstrap_incomplete` claim with the
reason `remote_follow_up_never_attached`, and it passes the same
current-admission check as the other settled bootstrap retries.
- `verifyRemoteRunnerReattachment` is unchanged. It still refuses a
Runner that names a different run.
- `heartbeat/queue.ts` (`startNextQueuedRunForAgent`): check run
admission again before each claim. A run that a scan reaches after
shutdown closed admission stays queued for the next server.
- Tests:
- `native-runner-restart-recovery.integration.test.ts`: eight cases for
the staging shape. Three restart (inherited Runner identity; inherited
identity plus a Runner request; a Runner request with no identity). Five
stay held (own recorded Runner identity; a Runner-originated event; a
carried active turn; a provider session that no settled run saved; a
saved failure that established a provider session).
- `queue.test.ts`: a queued run stays queued and is not executed when
admission closes during the scan.

### How this relates to #20852 and #20904

- #20852 hands a preparing run to the next controller and persists
launch intents, so that preparation itself survives a deploy. It does
not change restart recovery classification for a settled
`bootstrap_retry`, and it does not touch the run-admission gate. This PR
covers runs that already failed and saved a `bootstrap_retry` (including
state that older releases saved), so the two are complementary.
- #20904 changes startup readiness for native-controller preservation
obligations. It does not touch either code path in this PR.

### Finding about the "draining server" admission

In both waves the follow-up was claimed before the process observed
shutdown. In CR1 (seed 9511) the run was created at 21:54:04.695Z and
started at 21:54:04.854Z; the server logged "shutdown signal received"
at 21:54:05 (the harness sent SIGTERM at 21:54:03.256Z, under load
average 10). In the K15 overlap (seed 9513) the runs started at
23:31:10.9Z and 23:31:11.5Z, and the old server got SIGTERM at
23:31:13Z. During the overlap the old server is fully live and has no
signal that a newer deploy serves traffic. So the existing admission
gate (`closeProcessRunAdmission`) was not bypassed. The only gap in the
gate was the check-then-claim window inside
`startNextQueuedRunForAgent`, which this PR closes. Holding work on a
superseded but not yet signaled server needs a new "superseded deploy"
signal; this PR does not add one.

## Verification

- Red on master (`23909077ad`): `node cli/node_modules/tsx/dist/cli.mjs
packages/db/src/test-postgres-command.ts -- node
node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/services/native-runtime/native-runner-restart-recovery.integration.test.ts
-t "closed the runtime listener before it attached"`: the three restart
cases failed with `"kind": "reattach_remote_runner"` (the staging
disposition); the five held cases passed.
- Red on master: `queue.test.ts -t "closes admission during the queue
scan"` failed (`expected [ { …(81) } ] to deeply equal []`).
- Green with the fix: both filters pass.
- `native-runner-restart-recovery`, `native-runner-restart-preparation`,
`native-startup-retry` and `native-controller-recovery` integration
files: 267 passed, 14 skipped.
- `queue.test.ts`: 89 passed.
- `cd server && pnpm typecheck`: passed.
- Chaos waves: see the PR comments for the reruns of seeds 9511 (CR1)
and 9513 (K15 overlap).

## Risks

- The new proof applies only to the closed-listener `bootstrap_retry`
that #20786 writes, on a remote sandbox, with a carried session that a
settled predecessor saved. Every other shape keeps its earlier
classification.
- A `bootstrap_incomplete` claim sends the run through the existing
bootstrap path, which verifies the prior owner of the session root
before it starts. The s9205 follow-ups already use this path with an
inherited Runner identity.
- Upgrade safety: no persisted shape changes. The proof reads only
fields that the current and recent releases write. A row saved without
these facts keeps the earlier verdict.
- No wait or file work is added before `turn.start`. The new queries run
only in restart recovery.
- The queue change only stops claiming after admission closed. Runs stay
queued for the next server, the same as the existing entry check.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, 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>
2026-11-11 18:36:45 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 66344b76ae fix(native): restart a bootstrap whose Runner exited before writing provider state on a resumed sandbox (#20972)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Native runs execute through a Runner (`paperclip-runnerd`) inside a
remote sandbox. A warm Daytona sandbox is reused by later runs.
> - When a Runner exits before `session.open`, the run does a bounded
same-run bootstrap retry. Durable evidence proves that no provider
session and no provider event exist.
> - The retry fails when the Runner wrote `runner-state.json` but exited
before it wrote its provider state. Host preparation then calls the
sandbox state "unavailable" and refuses with
`runner_harness_state_mismatch: resumed_unavailable`. The task needs
Retry.
> - This pull request reads the Runner state on its own when the full
check fails, but only for a proven bootstrap restart of the same run. A
non-suspended Runner state of this run is then the run's own interrupted
bootstrap, and the existing restart path moves it aside and claims a new
session root.
> - The benefit is that a Runner that exits before `session.open` on a
reused sandbox recovers without a person. Saved state, a verified backup
and every other mismatch keep their refusal.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
Restart-chaos wave `w-20261111T230537-s6402` (Claude through ACPX,
Daytona warm sandboxes, `--ephemeral-server`, K1/K2/K15 with
`--k15-fresh-home`, seed 6402) needed Retry on 4 of 6 tasks, with the
same signature after each restart kind. The first attempt of each run
reused the warm sandbox. Its Runner failed with
`runner_ingress_bind_conflict: failed to bind listener: Address already
in use` and exited with `lifecycle=connecting`. Recovery logged
"Restarting an incomplete native runner bootstrap on the same heartbeat
run". The second attempt reused the environment and failed with
`runner_harness_state_mismatch: resumed_unavailable`. The earlier wave
`w-20261111T212429-s6402` had one run with the same error code.

**Root cause**
`inspectRemoteHarnessState` in
`server/src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.ts` checks
the persistence directories, `runner-state.json` and the provider state
file in one shell test. A Runner that exits at bind time wrote
`runner-state.json` but no provider state, so the one test fails and the
result is `incompleteReason: "unavailable"` before the Runner state is
read. The restart path (`restartableBootstrapState`) accepts only
`not_suspended` and `provider_unopened`, so it is skipped.
`claimUntouchedRemoteSession` then cannot create the session root that
the first attempt created, and the resumed branch throws
`resumed_unavailable`. On a created lease the same state fell through
without a restart.

**Expected behavior**
A proven, interrupted bootstrap of the same run restarts on the same
sandbox. The run finishes without Retry.

**Steps to reproduce**
Run the s6402 cell above, or add `--runner-bind-fault` (this pull
request) to force the Runner exit on every run's first launch.

## What Changed

- `server/src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.ts`: when
the full harness check fails during host preparation,
`inspectOwnUnpreparedBootstrap` reads `runner-state.json` alone. It
returns `not_suspended` for this run only when all of these are true:
this run has a proven bootstrap restart (`bootstrap_incomplete` recovery
plus the stop proof), no failover backup exists, no archived rotation
snapshot is in use, and the Runner state names this run, this Runner
instance and this session with a lifecycle other than `suspended`.
Otherwise the result stays `unavailable`, as before. The existing
restart path then moves the session root aside (it is kept, not deleted)
and claims a new one.
- Chaos coverage: `--runner-bind-fault` in `tests/restart-chaos` gives
every server of the wave
`PAPERCLIP_TEST_RUNNER_BIND_FAULT=first_launch`. With `NODE_ENV=test`
only, the remote Runner launcher starts a short-lived listener on the
Runner's listen port before a Runner's first launch on that server, so
the Runner exits with a real `runner_ingress_bind_conflict`. Documented
in `tests/restart-chaos/README.md`.

## Verification

- Red on master: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.test.ts -t
"bootstraps only an untouched provider session"` failed 2 of the new
cells. Resumed lease: `Error: runner_harness_state_mismatch:
resumed_unavailable` (the staging error). Created lease: no restart
happened (`expected [] to have a length of 1 but got +0`).
- Green: the same cells pass. The negative cells keep
`resumed_unavailable`: no restart proof, a Runner state of another run,
a `suspended` Runner state with missing provider state, and a failover
backup present.
- `native-session-executor.test.ts`: 1406 of 1406 pass. A new test
proves the bind fault holds the listen port (a second bind gets
`EADDRINUSE`) and fires once per Runner instance.
- `tests/restart-chaos`: `runner-bind-fault.test.ts`,
`question-handoff.test.ts`, `shape-cells.test.ts` pass. Server and
harness `tsc --noEmit` pass.
- Chaos wave: see the comment below for the before/after counts.

## Risks

- The new read runs only for a proven bootstrap restart of the same run
with a failed full check, so the normal path has no extra command and no
wait before `turn.start`.
- A partly saved session (`suspended` Runner state without provider
state), a Runner state of another run and any failover backup keep
today's refusal. The moved-aside root is kept for inspection.
- A Runner that started under an older server and is restarted by this
version takes the same path, because it reads only files that older
Runners already write.
- The bind fault is test instrumentation. It is inert unless
`NODE_ENV=test` and the variable are both set.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, through Claude Code
with tool use (shell, file edit, test runs). Default context window,
extended reasoning on.

## 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

Related: #20928 (restart a Runner that exited before session.open),
#20874, #20863, #20953.

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 18:36:33 -06:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip 38501b1170 Add turn-scoped attachment downloads to native Runner (#20956)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - Native agents open input images with a file reader.
> - Plugin Runner tasks use an authenticated Runner connection.
> - Runner needs a way to fetch an authorized file from the tenant app.
> - The tenant grants access to the exact attachment for the active run.
> - Runner downloads and verifies it before it returns a local path.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #19740. Builds on the attachment authorization and command
transport added in #20939.

## What Changed

- Add the PRP v3 `runner.attachment.download` command for native
workspace providers.
- Issue short-lived grants for exact authorized wake and historical
attachments. Recheck the active run, source, size, and SHA-256 at the
tenant endpoint.
- Download current-wake inputs before provider dispatch. Download
historical files when the authorized chat reader asks for them. Preserve
SSH and sandbox command staging as a fallback.
- Run HTTPS transfers off the Runner control loop. Report completion
with one PRP event per transfer. Drop pending results on cancellation
and clear files at turn settlement, authority rotation, and restart.
- Grant restricted Codex sessions read-only access to the attachment
directory.

## Verification

- 69 targeted server attachment tests passed. They cover wake and
historical downloads, authorization failures, and command fallback.
- 22 focused historical attachment tests passed, including grant
redemption under a held database lock.
- Six focused Rust attachment tests passed, including a source-pinned
Codex sandbox check. The sandbox could read the staged file but could
not modify it or read adjacent Runner state.
- The real Runner transport test confirmed one durable command and one
completion event for a transfer. Restart-continuation tests confirmed
fresh attachment paths appear before dispatch.
- Server and Runner TypeScript checks, Rust formatting, and PRP
generated schema checks passed.
- Required GitHub CI passed on `7a33752bd7`. [CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/43122967837)
- Greptile scored the same revision 5/5 with no unresolved review
threads.
[Review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/20956#issuecomment-6808582134)

## Risks

- Saved provider and Runner identities keep their existing formats. A
previous Runner falls back to command staging where the target supports
it. A restart continuation refreshes temporary attachment paths before
dispatch.
- Plugin Runner tasks require a compatible Runner ROM and outbound HTTPS
access to the configured tenant origin.
- Live agent-computer qualification remains a release check.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository inspection, shell tools, and
local test execution. Exact variant and context window are unavailable
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: #123` /
`Closes #123` / `Refs #123` or (b) 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
- [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>
2026-11-11 16:28:02 -08:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 87fe4d9793 fix(workspaces): retry a workspace_finalize record write that loses a deadlock (#20971)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - When a run ends, Paperclip records a `workspace_finalize` workspace
operation. Dependent work reads that record to know if the workspace is
safe to use.
> - The record insert has foreign keys to `execution_workspaces`,
`companies`, `heartbeat_runs` and `issues`. Postgres takes a key-share
lock on each parent row, in trigger order: workspace, company, run,
issue.
> - The native finalizer and other writers lock the issue row and then
the run row (the order that #20819 documents). When such a transaction
holds the issue and then asks for the run, while the finalize insert
holds the run and waits for the issue, Postgres detects a deadlock and
aborts one side.
> - In restart-chaos wave `w-20261111T205259-s6301` (task t01, run
`e7129ec7`) the insert lost. The log says "failed to record
workspace_finalize=failed operation; dependents may remain gated". The
failed-finalize record was lost.
> - The insert's lock order comes from the foreign keys, so the code
cannot reorder it without a new explicit lock order that other writers
(for example the remote-workspace release path, workspace then run)
could invert again. A deadlock victim is safe to run again, because its
transaction rolled back completely.
> - This pull request retries the finalize record write on lock timeout,
deadlock and serialization failure (55P03, 40P01, 40001), with the same
bounded policy that #20850 added for the provider-pack admission write.
> - The benefit is that a short lock conflict can no longer delete the
record that releases dependent work.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
Run `e7129ec7` failed its native session recovery
(`runner_harness_state_mismatch: backup_without_reusable_lease`). The
failure path called `recordWorkspaceFinalize("failed")`. The insert into
`workspace_operations` failed with `PostgresError: deadlock detected`
(40P01). The server logged that dependents may remain gated. The run
then settled as failed with `native_session_interrupted`; the next
`finalizeNativeRun` call logged `native_finalization_missing` because
that run had no proposed result.

**Expected behavior**
A transient deadlock does not lose the finalize record. The write runs
again and the record is saved.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Transaction A: lock the issue row `FOR UPDATE`.
2. Start a `workspace_finalize` record for a run on that issue. Its
insert takes key-share on the workspace, company and run rows, then
waits for the issue.
3. Transaction A: lock the run row `FOR UPDATE`.
4. Postgres reports a deadlock. Before this change the insert is the
victim and the record is lost.

**Additional context**
The new test reproduces this with two real transactions on embedded
Postgres. It gives transaction A a longer `deadlock_timeout`, so the
insert is always the victim, as on the chaos run.

Refs #20850
Refs #20819

## What Changed

- New `server/src/services/transient-lock-contention.ts`:
`postgresErrorCode`, `isTransientLockContention` and
`retryTransientLockContention` (5 attempts, 100 ms × attempt backoff,
only 55P03, 40P01 and 40001).
- `workspaceOperationService.createRecorder().recordOperation` wraps its
`workspace_finalize` state writes (the running-row insert and the
terminal update) in that retry. Each attempt is a new transaction, or a
new savepoint when the service runs inside a caller's transaction.
- `native-provider-pack-admission.ts` uses the shared helper. Its
behavior and its exported `nativeProviderPackAdmissionFailureCode` name
do not change.
- New test in
`server/src/__tests__/workspace-operations-reconciliation.test.ts`: a
real two-transaction deadlock between an issue-then-run locker and the
finalize insert.

## Verification

- Red on master: `cd server && npx vitest run
src/__tests__/workspace-operations-reconciliation.test.ts -t "loses a
deadlock"` failed with `deadlock detected`, code `40P01`, on the same
`insert into "workspace_operations"` query as the chaos log.
- Green: the same test passes; I ran it 3 times. The full file and the
provider-pack admission tests pass (49 tests).
`native-result-commit-work.test.ts` passes.
- `npx tsc --noEmit -p server` passes.
- I stopped `pnpm verify` after it selected 2533 test files; required CI
supplies broad coverage.
- Chaos: no new cell. The existing W2 × K1 cell (Codex, Daytona warm)
reached this path when the restart fault broke native session recovery.
I did not rerun a wave; both wave slots were busy.

## Risks

- Low risk. Only the `workspace_finalize` state writes retry, and only
on the three contention codes. Other errors throw as before.
- A deadlock victim's transaction is fully rolled back, so the retried
insert (same operation id) and the retried update are idempotent.
- The worst added delay is about 1 s of backoff across 5 attempts, on
the failure path only.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, used through Claude
Code with tool use (shell, file edits, local test execution).

## 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>
2026-11-11 18:09:57 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 23909077ad fix(retry): re-deliver the failed run's wake when the board retries it (#20970)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - When a run fails, the board shows a Retry button. The Retry starts a
new run with the wake reason `task_retry`.
> - A failed run can serve a wake that happens once, for example a
scheduled task monitor check (`issue_monitor_due`). The monitor is
consumed when it fires.
> - The Retry run did not tell the agent which wake it retries. The
agent saw only `task_retry` and the earlier interruption.
> - In the restart-chaos harness, the agent followed its brief ("act
only on a board comment or a scheduled monitor check"), decided that the
Retry was not the monitor check, and changed nothing. The run succeeded,
but the task stayed `in_progress` with no run, no wake and no monitor.
The person clicked a Retry that worked mechanically but lost the work it
was for.
> - This pull request records the retried run's own wake reason on the
Retry's continuation trigger (`trigger.retriedReason`) and shows it in
the wake summary.
> - The benefit is that a Retry re-delivers the same wake that failed.
Dotta's rule: if a Retry button shows up, it still needs to work.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
Restart-chaos wave `w-20261111T230537-s6402` (Claude, Daytona warm,
volume-free server mode, restart fault K1), task t03 (workload W2). The
phase-2 monitor wake started run `60d821af`. That run failed with
`native_session_interrupted`. The board Retry was accepted (HTTP 202).
Retry run `a5a3958e` started 2 s later and succeeded. Its context had
`wakeReason: task_retry` and `executionContinuation.trigger = { reason:
"task_retry", sourceRunId: "60d821af…" }`, with no reference to
`issue_monitor_due`. The agent's summary: "This wake was a task_retry
resuming the previously interrupted run, not a new board comment or
scheduled monitor check, so per instructions I changed nothing." The
issue stayed `in_progress` with `executionRunId = null`, monitor status
`triggered` and no `nextCheckAt`. The harness graded
`R3:retry_did_not_complete` and U1 `no_owner_no_action 182s`.

**Expected behavior**
A Retry of a failed run re-delivers that run's wake. A Retry of a failed
monitor check is handled as that monitor check.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Give an agent a task that acts only on a scheduled monitor check.
2. Let the monitor fire, and make the monitor run fail (restart fault K1
during the run).
3. Click Retry on the task.
4. Before this change, the Retry run's prompt says only `reason:
task_retry`, and the agent does not do the monitor work.

**Additional context**
The same signature (`R3:retry_did_not_complete:W2C:K0`, Codex, monitor
rewake run `bac90594` failed `native_session_interrupted`, Retry run
`cfb24146` succeeded without the phase-2 marker) is in wave
`w-20261111T192658-s5201` task t06. That case was attributed to the
response-wake loop that #20935 fixed. Its shape matches this cause: the
Retry run served the monitor wake but did not do the monitor work. That
wave kept no database, so I could not read its run context directly.

Refs #20935

## What Changed

- `buildExecutionContinuation` adds `trigger.retriedReason` when the
current wake is a Retry (`task_retry` or `retry_failed_run`). The value
is the source run's own wake reason. A Retry of a Retry inherits the
first non-retry reason from the source run's saved continuation.
- `ExecutionContinuationEnvelope.trigger` gets the optional
`retriedReason` field.
- `renderPaperclipWakePrompt` adds `- retried wake: <reason> (this Retry
re-delivers the wake the failed run did not finish; handle it as that
wake)` to the wake summary for fresh and resumed sessions.
- New test in `server/src/services/execution-continuation.test.ts` on
embedded Postgres: a failed `issue_monitor_due` run, a Retry of it, a
Retry of that Retry, and a non-retry wake.

## Verification

- Red on master: `cd server && npx vitest run
src/services/execution-continuation.test.ts -t "carries the failed run"`
failed with `trigger` = `{ reason: "task_retry", sourceRunId }` and no
`retriedReason`.
- Green: the same file passes (45 tests).
- `tsc --noEmit` passes for `packages/shared`, `packages/adapter-utils`
and `server`.
- `pnpm verify` exits 2 (a shared type changed), so required CI supplies
broad coverage.
- Chaos: the existing cell W2 × K1 (Claude, Daytona warm) reproduces
this when the fault lands in the monitor rewake run. W2C (Codex) shows
the same shape. I did not rerun a wave for this PR.

## Risks

- Low risk. The change adds one optional field and one prompt line. It
changes no admission, lock, status or authority path.
- The field is computed only for Retry wakes. Other wakes are unchanged.
- Runs saved by an older version have no `retriedReason`. A Retry built
from them reads the source run's `wakeReason`, which older runs already
saved.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, used through Claude
Code with tool use (shell, file edits, local test execution).

## 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>
2026-11-11 18:04:19 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 2539004201 fix(ephemeral): start a restarted volume-free server over the Runner controller files it wrote itself (#20952)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Cloud servers run volume-free (`PAPERCLIP_EPHEMERAL_SERVER=true`).
Postgres and object storage hold the durable state. A startup gate
refuses legacy volume data that was not migrated.
> - The gate reads one family of data from disk: Runner controller files
under `runtime/paperclip-runner/durable-sessions/`. It treats a
controller file that the database does not prove as legacy data.
> - A volume-free server also writes these files during normal work. A
warm follow-up restores the previous run's checkpoint as a full
`durable.control-plane-state.v2` file. The file stays full until the new
controller registers its database checkpoint writer.
> - When the server crashes in that window and restarts on the same
filesystem, the gate finds its own file and refuses to start. Every
later start refuses the same way. This is a full outage that no Retry
can fix.
> - This pull request gives the gate a durable marker. A volume-free
server claims an empty state directory before any controller can write.
Files in a claimed directory belong to a volume-free server and do not
block startup.
> - The benefit is that a crash restart of a volume-free server starts
again. Genuine legacy data keeps its protection, and the refusal now
names the run, task and file.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
The first restart-chaos waves in volume-free server mode (harness flag
`--ephemeral-server`, #20930) found this outage. Wave
`w-20261111T212429-s6402` (Claude through ACPX, Daytona warm sandboxes)
did a fresh-home deploy and then a `kill -9` of that server. The
replacement server exited with `Volume-free server data is not eligible:
native_controllers_require_migration`. A second start at +608 s exited
the same way. The server stayed down.

**Root cause**
`hasLocalNativeControllerObligations` in
`server/src/services/native-runtime/native-controller-migration.ts`
scans every Runner session in the state directory. The kept instance
shows the cause. The session's newest run `4a4d7ca1` was `running`
(admitted 3 s before the kill). Its controller root held the full
`paperclip.runner.durable.control-plane-state.v2` file of its warm
predecessor `9c13b7f8`. A controller writes that full file when it opens
and replaces it with the `external-control-plane-state.v1` marker only
in `setCheckpointPersistence`. `preservedActiveCheckpoint` accepts only
the marker, so the gate returned `true`. A Codex wave with the same
fault sequence passed because no warm follow-up was in this window at
the kill. Claude W2 cells start a new warm follow-up every 15 to 35 s,
so the window is open much more often.

**Can staging hit it?**
Yes, with a restart that keeps the container. Railway documents that a
manual Restart "restarts the process within the deployment's container",
so the filesystem stays. Railway does not document whether an automatic
crash restart reuses the container. A redeploy makes a new container, so
it does not hit this.

**Expected behavior**
A volume-free server starts again after any restart. State that it wrote
itself is disposable, because the database checkpoint is the durable
record. Data that a volume-backed server wrote keeps its current
protection.

## What Changed

- Add
`server/src/services/native-runtime/volume-free-controller-state.ts`.
`claimVolumeFreeControllerState(true)` writes `.volume-free-owner.json`
atomically (temporary file, fsync, rename, directory fsync) when the
state directory is absent or empty. It returns `owned` for a directory
that has the marker and `unclaimed` for a directory with other files.
`claimVolumeFreeControllerState(false)` removes the marker.
- `server/src/index.ts` calls the claim right after the volume-free
configuration check. This is before any controller or recovery can
write. A server started without volume-free mode releases the claim,
because it may write files that exist only on its disk. An `unclaimed`
result logs a warning.
- `hasLocalNativeControllerObligations` ignores the marker entries. It
returns no obligation for a claimed directory. It now delegates to
`findLocalNativeControllerObligation`, which returns the run, task and
file (or `database_checkpoint`).
- `assertEphemeralServerData` adds that detail to the
`native_controllers_require_migration` refusal. The error says which run
and file the database does not prove and why startup refuses.
- Document the marker in `doc/DEVELOPING.md` ("Runner controller state
on a restarted volume-free server").

## Verification

- Red, before the gate reads the marker: `pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/services/native-runtime/native-controller-migration.integration.test.ts
-t volume_free_owner` failed with `AssertionError: expected true to be
false` at the first gate check. The fixture is a running warm run whose
root holds a full `durable.control-plane-state.v2` file, the same shape
as the incident.
- Green: the same test passes. It checks: claimed directory gives no
obligation; release gives the obligation back; a non-empty unclaimed
directory stays blocked; the refusal names the run; the controller file
is never changed or removed.
- `ephemeral-server-data.test.ts`, `ephemeral-server-contract.test.ts`
and all 57 cells of `native-controller-migration.integration.test.ts`
pass. Server `tsc --noEmit` passes.
- Probe on a copy of the kept instance database and the killed server's
state directory: the unmodified gate returned an obligation for run
`4a4d7ca1` (source file
`.../7dbf2d5c.../control-plane/control-plane-state.json`).
- Chaos: the s6402 shape (`--ephemeral-server --adapters claude
--workloads W2 --faults K1,K2,K15 --k15-fresh-home --seed 6402`) runs on
this branch merged with #20930. The result is added in a comment.

## Risks

- A filesystem that a volume-free server claimed and that a pre-marker,
volume-backed server then wrote is not detected. This needs a downgrade
and a mode change on one disk. A current server in volume mode removes
the marker, which closes the normal path.
- A volume-free server on a directory written before this change (no
marker) keeps today's refusal. A new deploy makes a new container, so
staging claims the empty directory on first start after this deploy.
- Other scanners of the state directory filter on the 64-hex session
pattern, so the marker file does not change them.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, through Claude Code
with tool use (shell, file edit, test runs). Default context window,
extended reasoning on.

## 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>
2026-11-11 17:59:57 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 aaf76a3ca6 fix(native): start the configured review stage when a native worker reports done (#20882)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Tasks can have an execution policy with a review stage that names an
independent human reviewer
> - The issue route starts that stage when the assignee moves the task
to done or in_review
> - Native runs do not use that route. The native finalizer writes the
task status through the issue service, which does not run the stage
transition
> - So a native worker that reports verified work as done closes the
task without the required review. A worker that reports needs_review
moves the task to in_review without the configured stage or its reviewer
> - This pull request makes the native completion path start the
configured review stage, as the route does
> - The benefit is that a configured independent review gates Done for
native workers too

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**

A task had an execution policy with one review stage for a human
reviewer. A native worker (OpenCode on the Paperclip runner) finished
the work and reported it. When the worker reported done with verified
evidence, the task became done and the review stage never started. When
the worker reported needs_review, the task became in_review with a
generic review card, `executionState` stayed null, and the configured
reviewer was not assigned. The chat eval `tasks.completion-with-gate`
timed out in setup because the task never reached the pending review
stage.

**Expected behavior**

Verified work on a task with a configured human review stage goes to
in_review with that stage pending, the stage reviewer assigned and the
worker kept as the return assignee. The task becomes done only after the
reviewer approves.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create a task assigned to a native agent with `executionPolicy.stages
= [{ type: "review", participants: [{ type: "user", userId: <reviewer>
}] }]`.
2. Let the agent finish the work and report done with verified evidence.
3. Read the task. Before this fix it is `done` and `executionState` is
null.

## What Changed

- `server/src/services/issue-execution-policy.ts`: add
`completionReviewStageEntry`. It applies the full policy transition that
the route applies for `status: "done"` and returns `starts` (with the
stage patch), `none` or `rejected`.
- `native-run-finalizer.ts`: a done decision on a task whose policy
starts a stage becomes in_review with reason
`execution_stage_review_required`. When the policy refuses the
transition, the decision is in_progress with reason
`execution_stage_transition_rejected` and a recovery note. It is never
done. Deliverable checks still run first.
- `status-decision-committer.ts`: for a stage-entry decision, apply the
stale-owner check, start the stage from the locked task in the same
status update (this also clears a monitor that the new assignee cannot
use), and wake an agent participant with `execution_review_requested` or
`execution_approval_requested`, as the route does. If the policy
changed, the saved decision is stale and finalization retries.
- `native-completion-feedback.ts`: on such a task, tell the worker to
report done so the configured stage requests the review. Reject
needs_review with no request or with any review request. Approval
requests keep their own path, because they can be governed action cards.
- New regression test `native-execution-policy-review-stage.test.ts`
(embedded Postgres, 6 tests).

## Verification

- `cd server && npx vitest run
src/services/native-runtime/native-execution-policy-review-stage.test.ts`
(6 tests): no stage (done), human stage (in_review, reviewer assigned,
monitor cleared), agent stage (in_review, reviewer woken), refused live
review cycle (in_progress, not done), and feedback including mixed and
approval requests. The stage tests fail without the finalizer change
(the task becomes done).
- Related suites pass: `historical-task-questions`,
`native-completion-feedback`, `native-run-finalizer-telemetry`,
`native-terminal-status-projection`, `status-arbiter`,
`task-monitor.integration`, `__tests__/issue-execution-policy` (247
tests).
- Server `tsc --noEmit` shows no errors in changed files. The local
worktree has unbuilt packages, so CI supplies the full typecheck.

## Risks

- The agent-reviewer wake is a system workflow wake, like the route's.
Unit tests prove the wake row. An end-to-end native agent review after
this wake is not yet exercised in a paid eval.
- A decision saved with a new reason and resumed by an older release
projects in_review or in_progress without the stage. The task does not
close, so the older release fails safe.
- Agents on tasks with a configured review stage now get a rejection
when they report needs_review with no request or with a review request.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), 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>
2026-11-11 17:43:58 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 827bd21017 fix(recovery): retry lost-lease preparations instead of holding them for reconciliation (#20936)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Run recovery restarts work that stops for infrastructure reasons,
and keeps saved files safe
> - A legacy Runner run can lose its controller lease while it prepares
the workspace, before any provider work starts (`controller_lease_lost`
with `executionRecovery: { kind: "bootstrap", providerWorkStarted: false
}`)
> - Such a run has no unsaved provider state, but recovery still blocked
the task: either a saved-files hold that ends in `source_unavailable`,
or an immediate "No live execution path" block after one failed
continuation retry
> - Recovery must work without a person, and a shown Retry must work
> - This pull request lets lost-lease preparations use the existing
interrupted-preparation settlement, and lets the bounded stranded-task
sweep retry a continuation that failed before provider work
> - The benefit is that these tasks retry automatically, and tasks that
an older release already blocked recover after deploy

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20924 (fixes the lease renewal starvation that caused the lost
leases; this PR fixes what recovery did afterwards).

**What happened?**
A staging burst of lost controller leases stopped many legacy Runner
runs while they prepared the workspace. No provider work started. Most
of the affected tasks then became blocked. One shape kept a saved-files
hold (`legacy_execution_requires_reconciliation`). Its file recovery
ended `exhausted` with `source_unavailable`, because the workspace had
already retired the prepared epoch back to the last save. The hold never
settled. The other shape was a continuation retry that also lost its
lease. The release path blocked the task at once with "No live execution
path", although `controller_lease_lost` is a transient cause with a
3-attempt budget in the stranded-task sweep.

**Expected behavior**
A run that fails before provider work starts retries automatically,
within a bounded budget. It never needs reconciliation. If the prepared
workspace is gone, the task continues from the last committed save.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start a legacy Runner run with a remote workspace.
2. Make the controller lose its lease while the run prepares (before
provider dispatch).
3. Let restore recovery record a saved-files hold, and let the workspace
retire the prepared epoch.
4. See that the hold stays `resolved/blocked` with `source_unavailable`,
and the task stays blocked.

**Paperclip version or commit**
master at c1edb9ec02.

**Agent adapter(s) involved**
Not adapter-specific (core bug). Seen with `paperclip_runner` (Daytona
sandbox).

## What Changed

- `server/src/services/cancelled-native-startup.ts`:
`isInterruptedNativePreparationCandidate` accepts a failed
`controller_lease_lost` run with the bootstrap certificate
(`providerWorkStarted: false`), the same as a certified `process_lost`
run. The error label alone still grants nothing. This lets the existing
`legacy_interrupted_preparation_hold` settlement, terminal-time proof,
status receipt, and `interrupted_preparation` retry lane apply to these
runs.
- `server/src/modules/wake-queue/*`: the release snapshot carries
`retryableBeforeProviderWork` (bootstrap certificate plus a
`transient_infra` continuation classification). When an automatic
continuation retry failed for such a cause, release returns `released`
instead of blocking. The stranded-task sweep then retries with its
existing backoff and 3-attempt cap, and blocks only after that budget is
spent. Non-retryable causes, uninvokable agents, and failures after
provider work still block at once.
- `doc/execution-semantics.md`: documents both rules.
- No migration. Holds saved by the running release are settled by the
existing ownership reconciler after deploy.

## Verification

- Red then green, in the staging shape (failed `controller_lease_lost`,
`renewal_deadline` lease-loss evidence, `restore_failed` with
`workspaceRestoreRecovery`, exhausted `verify_execution` with
`source_unavailable` / `use_alternative_strategy`, retired prepared
epoch):
- `src/__tests__/interrupted-preparation-hold-settle.test.ts`: before
the fix, both new cases fail (`settled: 0`). After the fix, the hold
settles as `false_positive`. With the status receipt, the task returns
to `in_progress` and one `interrupted_preparation` successor is queued.
For a hold saved by an older release without a receipt, the execution
gate clears and one Retry starts a run. A lost lease without the
no-provider-work certificate stays held.
- `src/modules/wake-queue/domain/policy.test.ts` and
`application/use-cases.test.ts`: before the policy change, the two new
release cases fail (the task is blocked). After it, a pre-provider
lease-loss retry failure is released to the sweep, and other failures
still block.
-
`src/modules/wake-queue/adapters/retryable-before-provider-work.test.ts`:
classification of the release snapshot fact.
- `pnpm verify` and server `tsc --noEmit` pass locally.

## Risks

- Lost-lease preparations now use the `interrupted_preparation` retry
lane. That lane is uncharged but bounded at 12 retries, and it does not
revive a chain whose failure budget is spent.
- A released continuation waits for the stranded-task sweep (30 s
reconstruction, plus backoff) instead of a direct requeue. The sweep's
budget bounds the chain.
- Settlement still needs every existing proof: the controller is gone or
settled, leases are released with stop receipts, there are no execution
events or native coordinator, and the prepared epoch is retired or the
files are repaired.

> 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

- Claude Opus 5.5 (claude-opus-5-5), Anthropic, in Claude Code with tool
use (shell, file edits, browser reads of staging with GET requests
only).

## 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>
2026-11-11 17:30:32 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 c45f54ee74 fix(native): stop or release unclosable idle warm Runners on environment delete, and say why a close failed (#20957)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Native runs keep a warm Runner in a Daytona sandbox between turns of
a task, so the next turn starts fast
> - Each idle warm Runner has an in-memory owner in the controller.
Deleting an environment closes these owners before it destroys the
sandboxes
> - In every warm chaos wave today, some owners never closed. The server
logged only `{"failed":2}`. Environment delete returned 409 forever, and
all sandboxes of the wave stayed `started` until their 60-minute TTL
> - On staging, that is leaked sandboxes (cost) and owners that block
the work after them
> - This pull request logs and reports the exact close error, stops an
unsettled idle Runner when its environment is deleted, and releases an
owner whose sandbox is already destroyed
> - The benefit is that environment delete finishes or names the exact
run and error, and every warm chaos wave now grades a clean shutdown

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
After warm Daytona chaos waves (W2, W2Q, W2C cells, `--faults K0`) on
Codex, Claude and OpenCode, the server logged `idle native session
cleanup failed before controller shutdown {"idleSessions":{"failed":2}}`
with no reason. `DELETE
/api/environments/:id?destroyReusableSandboxLeases=true` returned 409
"warm native runner did not shut down cleanly" on every retry. Eight
sandboxes per wave stayed `started`.

**Root cause.**
`closeIdleWarmNativeSessions`
(`server/src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.ts`)
dropped the close error (`catch {}`) and counted it. The owners that
failed are the W2Q owners. A W2Q task parks a question and is answered
by a later run on a fresh sandbox. With the reason logged, a wave shows
two causes for the same owner:

1. The owner's close cannot settle (`native_session_close_unrecoverable:
runner did not durably suspend before checkpoint`, the governed-wait
shape from #20844). Only a successor reset could force a stop
(`discardUnsettledSession`). An idle sweep or environment delete had no
forced stop.
2. The owner's sandbox lease was already destroyed by the
pending-cleanup sweep after the successor moved to a fresh sandbox
(#20863). Every close then fails with `Daytona sandbox lease <id> is no
longer active.`, because the stop RPC has no sandbox to reach. The owner
stays registered for ever.

The Runner close memoizes its rejection, so every later attempt fails at
once with the same error. This is not the "controller sequence must be
contiguous" exit (#20946): no close failure in these waves names a
sequence mismatch.

**Expected behavior**
An idle warm owner with no turn in flight never blocks environment
delete for ever. Every failed close names its run and its error.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run `tests/restart-chaos/main.ts --env daytona --daytona-warm
--adapters claude --workloads W2,W2Q,W2C --faults K0 --concurrency 8
--tasks 8`.
2. Read `<wave>/sandbox-sweep.json`: `environmentDeleteBlocked` is set
and the sandboxes are `started`.

## What Changed

- `closeIdleWarmNativeSessions` now returns `failures: [{ runId,
issueId, environmentId, providerLeaseId, reason }]`. The reason is the
close error with its code, its settlement record and its cause. It also
logs `idle warm native sessions did not close` with that list. The
idle-timeout close logs its error too.
- `closeWarmNativeSessionsForEnvironment` takes `forceStopUnsettled` and
`db`. The environment delete route sets both. When the graceful close
fails, Core retires the owner as #20844 does: one confirmed Launcher
`stop`, the credential snapshot, `complete`, then instruction
collection. A failed forced stop is added to the reason.
- When retirement still fails and the owner's sandbox lease has a
`destroyed` termination receipt, Core releases the owner. It does not
contact the sandbox. It logs `warm native session's sandbox was already
destroyed; released its owner` with the close error.
- The environment delete 409 now names each run and its reasons, and
`details.nativeRunnerSessions.failures` lists them.
- Idle timeout, controller restart and tenant sleep do not force a stop.
Their conversation can still be resumed, so they only log the reason.
- Chaos harness: new check `warm-shutdown.ts`, "no leaked sandboxes /
clean warm shutdown". Every warm wave (`--daytona-warm` or `--lifecycle
warm`) runs it. It fails the wave on a blocked delete, on a sandbox left
running after cleanup, or on a warm session that did not close at
environment delete or controller shutdown. It writes
`<wave>/warm-shutdown.json` and a section in `SUMMARY.md`.
- Docs: `doc/plugins/PLUGIN_RUNNER_EXECUTION.md` and the chaos README.

## Verification

- RED on master: `native-session-executor.test.ts -t "stops an idle warm
owner whose close cannot settle"` fails: `expected { closed: 0, busy: 0,
failed: 1 } to match object { closed: 0, failed: 1, failures: [...] }`
(a bare count, no reason). `environment-routes.test.ts -t "names the
warm runner session"` fails: the 409 does not name the run. On the first
fix commit, `-t "sandbox lease is gone"` fails: the lease state is never
read, and the owner stays.
- GREEN: those tests pass. The executor suite, environment routes, run
control, recovery, heartbeat process recovery, instance settings, the
idle-sleep, eviction, release-resume, restart-recovery and
warm-checkpoint integration suites pass (11 files, 2471 tests).
`tests/restart-chaos` unit test `warm-shutdown` passes. Server and
harness `tsc --noEmit` pass.
- Daytona warm waves (Claude, W2/W2Q/W2C, K0, 8 tasks). The runner image
`sha256:e04d9ce4…` matches 7e8901aa60, not current master, so each wave
ran this change cherry-picked onto 7e8901aa60:
- `w-20261111T210049-s6111` (first commit only): the close reason is now
logged: `close failed: Daytona sandbox lease 192606aa… is no longer
active.` The delete stayed 409 with that reason. The new check failed
the wave correctly.
- `w-20261111T222826-s6112` (all commits): two W2Q owners were released
with `sandbox was already destroyed`. The environment was deleted. 0
sandboxes left running. The warm-shutdown check passed. No 409 from a
warm session.
- Not verified: a wave where the graceful close fails and the forced
Launcher stop succeeds on a live sandbox (that path is covered by the
unit test). The wave's task failures (`T:first_run_succeeded`,
`R3:retry_needed`) are other open defects. They are also on master.

## Risks

- Environment delete now stops an idle Runner whose close did not
settle. The delete already has the operator's consent to destroy those
sandboxes. The workspace-export and restore-source guards on sandbox
destruction are unchanged. Instruction files are collected after the
confirmed stop, as in #20844.
- An owner is released without contact only when a lease for the same
company, environment and sandbox has a valid `destroyed` termination
receipt. A `stopped` receipt is not enough, because a stopped sandbox
can be resumed.
- `closeIdleWarmNativeSessions` results have a new `failures` field.
Callers that read only the counts are unchanged.
- No persisted state changes. Warm owners live only in controller
memory, so older saved state and mid-run deploys are not affected.
- The new harness check can fail a warm restart-fault wave that leaves a
warm session unclosed at controller shutdown. That is a real leaked
Runner.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, agentic coding with
tool use (shell, file edits, test runs, chaos waves) 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
- [ ] 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>
2026-11-11 17:12:21 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 9c56e5465c fix(native): keep the agent's own unanswered question open after a turn ends without a report (#20934)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - An agent can ask the person a question and wait for the answer.
Native task status comes from the server's status arbiter, not from
model prose
> - When a native turn ends without `paperclip_finish`, the Runner sends
a default report: `done`, objective satisfied, with the agent's final
message as the only evidence
> - A later comment from the person moves an open question into history
(#15392), so the question no longer gates completion
> - Together these close a task as `done` while the agent is still
waiting for its own answer and has produced nothing. No Retry appears
and nothing flags it
> - This pull request keeps such a task `in_review` on the agent's own
unanswered question when the only completion evidence is the agent's
final message
> - The benefit is that a "waiting for your answer" turn can no longer
become a silent false completion

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15392

**What happened?**
Restart-chaos wave on master 7e8901aa60, OpenCode task t06 (W2Q), no
fault injected. Run fec9530f asks a question (interaction c2d3b3f2); the
task goes `in_review`. A board comment says "include NOTE-238ef87a in
the brief; do not write the brief yet; I will answer shortly". Run
f6cbefa8 replies "I will not write the brief until the board's answer
arrives. Ending turn to await the codename answer." and ends its turn
without `paperclip_finish`. The Runner's default report
(`provider:opencode:agent-message` as the only evidence,
`reportedWorkDisposition: done`) is accepted, and the low-risk claim
policy sets the task `done`. The question is still unanswered and the
`brief` document does not exist.

**What did you expect to happen?**
The task keeps waiting for the answer. The answer continues the task,
and the agent writes the brief.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. An agent asks a question on its task.
2. The person posts a comment before answering.
3. The agent ends its turn without a completion report, saying it waits
for the answer.
4. The task is `done`; the question stays pending.

## What Changed

- New `server/src/services/native-runtime/own-question-wait.ts`:
- `reportsOnlyProviderMessage(result)`: true when every evidence
reference in the report is `provider:<provider>:agent-message` and the
report has no artifact and no verification. This is the shape of the
Runner's default report for a turn that ended without
`paperclip_finish`.
- `pendingOwnQuestionId(db, …)`: the agent's own pending, undismissed
ordinary question (`ask_user_questions`, not a governed tool, secret or
connection request) on the task.
- `finalizeNativeRun` (`native-run-finalizer.ts`): when the proposed
decision is `done`, the task is not an Agent Chat conversation, the
report cites only the agent's final message, and the agent's own
question is still pending, the decision becomes `in_review` with reason
`own_question_unanswered` and releases the checkout. The question stays
pending, so the person's answer continues the task through the existing
answer path.
- Dismissal (`POST /issues/:id/interactions/:interactionId/dismiss`,
`dismissInteraction`): new `enqueueOwnQuestionDismissalWake` runs inside
the dismissal transaction, only when the card moves from pending to
dismissed. When the task is `in_review` on an applied
`own_question_unanswered` decision of the assignee's run, the dismissed
card is the assignee's own question, and no other pending, undismissed
question of that agent remains, it saves a durable wake intent
(`issue_question_dismissed`, idempotency key per question) in the
existing native status wake outbox (`enqueueWake`, now exported). The
outbox dispatcher delivers and retries it, so the agent continues
without the answer. Dismissal of any other request keeps the no-wake
rule.
- `assignmentDenial` (`agent-interaction-delivery.ts`): an
`issue_question_dismissed` wake counts as a person's wake when its
`dismissedInteractionId` names the recipient's own question on that task
with a `dismissedByUserId`, so a recipient that refuses agent
assignments still receives it.
- `doc/execution-semantics.md` describes the exception to the
historical-question rule.

## Verification

- New case in
`server/src/services/native-runtime/historical-task-questions.test.ts`
("keeps the agent's own unanswered question open after an unreported
turn"), run through the real `PaperclipControlPlanePort.completeRun` and
`finalizeNativeRun` with a low-risk `agent_claim_policy` contract, as on
staging:
- Red on master (finalizer hunk removed, test kept): `unreported` fails,
`expected 'done' to be 'in_review'`.
- Green: `unreported` rests `in_review` with `own_question_unanswered`
and the question still pending. `unreported-dismissed`,
`unreported-answered` and `verified` (work-product evidence) still rest
`done`, so the #15392 behavior is unchanged.
- Dismissal after finalization (same test): the release check is null
while a second own question is open and returns the agent once both are
dismissed. A repeated dismissal saves no second intent; the saved intent
is a queued `issue_question_dismissed` outbox row. Delivery test
`delivers a dismissal wake only for a person's dismissal of the
recipient's question` (30 passed). Route test `saves the dismissal wake
intent in the dismissal transaction only when the card is dismissed`
(147 passed).
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/services/native-runtime/historical-task-questions.test.ts
src/services/native-runtime/native-run-finalizer`: all passed.
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/services/native-runtime/paperclip-control-plane-port.test.ts
src/services/native-runtime/status-arbiter.test.ts`: 119 passed.
- `cd server && pnpm exec tsc --noEmit -p tsconfig.json`: passes.
- Chaos, Daytona OpenCode, seed 6201, W2Q K0, 4 tasks (wave
w-20261111T211421-s6201, run from master 7e8901aa60 plus this change
because the pinned runner image must match runner sources): no false
completion. t02 and t04 PASS (in_review -> in_progress -> done after the
answer). t01 failed `R3:retry_needed` through the blocked path fixed
separately in #20931 (not in this build). t03 timed out because its
rewake OpenCode turn stayed active for 20 minutes without ending
(provider turn never finished; this change acts only at finalization,
which never ran). The unreported-done path did not occur in this sample,
so the red/green proof for this change is the integration test. Before:
wave w-20261111T200718-s6201 t06 closed done with the question
unanswered.

## Risks

- Low. Only a `done` decision whose report cites nothing but the agent's
final message changes, and only while the same agent's own ordinary
question is pending and undismissed. Explicit completion reports with
their own evidence keep the current rule. A person can still dismiss the
question to release it.
- An agent that really finished without `paperclip_finish` while its own
old question is open now rests `in_review` instead of `done`. The open
question is visible on the task; answering or dismissing it settles the
task.
- No schema change. A result saved by an older release is finalized by
the same rule because it reads only the saved report and interaction
rows.
- Related observation (not changed here): in 5 Claude/OpenCode W2/W2C
cells the agent wrote "the task remains in_progress as instructed" yet
the task became `done` (Claude t06, wave s6101). The run's
`paperclip_finish` input itself sent `reportedWorkDisposition: "done"`,
`objectiveSatisfied: true`, with the deferred phase listed as
`blocksCompletion: false`. The server did not map a yielded disposition
to done. That is model behavior on a contradictory report, a different
root from this change.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), with tool use and code execution
in an agent harness.

## 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>
2026-11-11 16:50:28 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 65ebd96bcf fix(chat): keep the person's brief as a document on a new case's primary task (#20954)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - With Cases enabled, a person can ask chat to open a case from a
brief and hand it to an agent
> - The case scenario expects the brief and a workflow document on the
primary task before work starts
> - In one run the CEO copied the brief's facts into case fields but
saved only the workflow document
> - The Cases chat guidance says nothing about where the person's brief
belongs
> - This pull request adds one guidance sentence: save the brief with
`initialDocuments` in the same case-handoff request
> - The benefit is that the assignee always has the person's source,
saved before its run begins

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**
In the chat eval `cases.create-case` (run 43107042937), the person
attached a customer bug brief and asked the CEO to open a case and have
Morgan investigate. The CEO created the case, its fields, the workflow
document and the kickoff. It did not save the brief on the primary task.
In an earlier run (43101125481) the CEO did save it, so the behavior
depends on the model's choice.

**Expected behavior**
The new primary task has the person's brief as a document, saved in the
request that creates it, before the assignee starts.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Enable Cases. Attach a brief in chat with the CEO.
2. Ask: "Open a case for this customer bug, record the facts from my
brief, and have Morgan investigate first."
3. Read the primary task's documents: in some runs only `workflow`
exists.

## What Changed

- `CASES_CHAT_DIRECTIVE` (rendered only while Cases is enabled): one
sentence. When the person opens a case from a brief, save the brief as a
document on the primary task with `initialDocuments` on `POST
/api/companies/{companyId}/case-handoffs`. Case fields do not replace
the brief.
- `case-history-api-discovery.test.ts`: a regression test for the new
guidance.

## Verification

- Red: the new test failed before the change. Green: `npx vitest run
src/__tests__/case-history-api-discovery.test.ts
src/__tests__/agent-conversations.test.ts` (67 passed).
- The route already accepts `initialDocuments` for a newly created
primary task (`packages/shared/src/case-handoffs.ts`).
- End-to-end: chat eval run linked in a comment below.

## Risks

- Low risk. The sentence renders only when Cases is enabled. No API or
permission changes.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), 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>
2026-11-11 16:47:12 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 6cfb1f3d87 fix(environments): resume a warm sandbox that its finished predecessor is still releasing (#20953)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A warm Paperclip Runner session keeps its Daytona sandbox between
runs. The next run of the same task resumes that sandbox through a
`reuse_by_environment` lease.
> - Acquisition only resumes a lease that is `released`, `retained`, or
held by the same run. A finished run releases its lease only after it
saves its instruction and workspace files, which takes several seconds.
> - A board wake that arrives in that window does not see the warm
lease. It creates a fresh sandbox. The session's durable backup cannot
be restored there, because its source lease is still held. The run fails
with `native_session_recovery_failed: runner_harness_state_mismatch:
backup_without_reusable_lease` and the task needs Retry, which starts a
new provider session.
> - This pull request makes acquisition wait, for a short bounded time,
for a lease that a recently finished predecessor is still releasing, and
then resume it.
> - The benefit is that the follow-up continues the same warm session in
the same sandbox, with no Retry, no restore and no lost provider
context.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
Restart-chaos wave `w-20261111T205259-s6301` (Codex, Daytona warm,
volume-free server, `--ephemeral-server` from #20930), task t01. The
board re-wake run `e7129ec7` started at 20:57:44. Its predecessor
`5cf8c306` reported `run.terminal` at 20:57:38 but saved its instruction
copy until 20:57:51, so its warm lease was still `active`. At 20:57:53
the new run recorded `startup reuse: environment (fresh)`. It then
failed with `runner_harness_state_mismatch:
backup_without_reusable_lease` (error code
`native_session_interrupted`). Recording the `workspace_finalize`
operation then failed with a Postgres deadlock, and the run settled
`native_finalization_missing`. Retry run `79aa18ec` worked with a fresh
provider session. The K1 restart in that wave was at 20:55:32 and is not
the cause: six warm runs after it reused the sandbox normally.

**Root cause**
`reusableLeaseCanBeResumed` in
`server/src/services/environment-runtime.ts` excludes an `active` lease
held by another run. That rule is correct for a running predecessor. For
a predecessor that has already ended, the `active` state is a short
release tail. The new run creates a sandbox, and
`retiredSourceAuthorizesNativeBackupRestore`
(`native-retired-backup-source.ts`) correctly refuses to restore the
backup from a source lease that is not yet `released` or `retained`
(`idleWarmSourceRetiresBackup`). The executor's last branch
(`native-session-executor.ts`, host preparation, created allocation)
then throws `backup_without_reusable_lease`.

**How often**
Seen in 2 of 361 retained wave result directories on this machine
(`s6301` today, `s5201` earlier). It needs a board wake within a few
seconds of the predecessor's terminal event, so it is timing dependent.

## What Changed

- `server/src/services/environment-runtime.ts`: add
`waitForSettlingReusableLease`. Before the plugin and built-in sandbox
paths select a reusable lease, acquisition polls (250 ms) for up to 20 s
while a matching `reuse_by_environment` lease is `active` under a
different run that is `succeeded`, `failed`, `cancelled` or `timed_out`
and finished in the last two minutes. It then continues with the normal
selection, which resumes the released lease.
- A running predecessor causes no wait (unchanged: the new run gets a
new sandbox). A predecessor that ended more than two minutes ago and
never released causes no wait.
- `server/src/__tests__/environment-runtime.test.ts`: two red/green
cases (succeeded and failed predecessor release the lease 400 ms after
the successor starts acquiring) and one case for an old unreleased lease
(no wait, new sandbox, old lease untouched).
- `doc/execution-semantics.md`: describe the wait next to the existing
warm-reuse rules.

## Verification

- Red on master: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/environment-runtime.test.ts -t predecessor` fails both
cases with `expected 'warm-2' to be 'warm-1'`: the successor created a
second sandbox instead of resuming the first.
- Green: the same command passes (3 tests).
`environment-runtime.test.ts`, `plugin-warm-tasks.integration.test.ts`
and `environment-run-orchestrator.test.ts` pass (288 tests). Server `tsc
--noEmit` passes.
- Not verified in a chaos wave. The window is a few seconds wide and
appeared in 2 of 361 waves, so one wave cannot show the change.

## Risks

- A successor can start up to 20 s later when its predecessor's release
is slow. Creating a sandbox and restoring a backup takes longer, and
failing needs a Retry. The two-minute bound keeps a stuck,
never-released lease from delaying every later run.
- If a caller held a lock that the predecessor's release needs, the wait
ends at 20 s and acquisition behaves as before.
- Compared with #20863 (fresh-sandbox fallback) and #20811 (unsaved
provider state marker): this change does not alter either. It reduces
how often a warm continuation reaches the fresh-sandbox branch. The
backup restore proof is unchanged, so an unproven backup still fails
closed with a working Retry.
- The `workspace_finalize` deadlock in the same run is a separate defect
and is not fixed here.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, through Claude Code
with tool use (shell, file edit, test runs). Default context window,
extended reasoning on.

## 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>
2026-11-11 16:40:58 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 e01ba16bfd fix(native): continue the interrupted turn after a relaunch that failed before its runner existed (#20944)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Native agent runs survive a server restart: recovery verifies the
old runner stopped, then resumes the same provider session and its
interrupted turn
> - Recovery is a chain of steps. When one step fails once, the next
attempt must still be allowed to finish the work
> - Here the first recovery step was correct, its runner spawn failed
once (EAGAIN), and the next attempt refused to continue the interrupted
turn. The run died and needed a manual Retry
> - This pull request lets the scheduled same-run resume prove that the
failed launch left nothing behind, and then continue the turn
> - The benefit is that a single failed spawn during recovery no longer
turns a recoverable lost turn into a terminal failure

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Restart-chaos wave `w-20261111T190113-s5303` (local, codex, A1, fault K1
with `--fail-recovery-step runnerd-start:1`) on master `683fd1e9a5`. Run
timeline:

1. K1 killed the server mid-turn. Recovery recorded
`native.local_process_stopped` for the dead runner and chose
`resume_dead_runner`.
2. That attempt wrote `native.process_start_requested`, then the spawn
failed with `spawn paperclip-runnerd EAGAIN`. The executor persisted a
scheduled same-run resume (`recoveryMode: exact_checkpoint_resume`,
`providerSessionEstablished: true`, `checkpointExists: true`,
`recoverable: true`).
3. The scheduled attempt resumed the session. The runner reported
`provider_turn_lost_on_restore` (recoverable). The run ended
`native_provider_terminal_failed` with "Automatic recovery stopped", and
the task needed Retry.

The same seed with K1 and no injected step passes.

Root cause: in `executePaperclipNativeSession`
(`native-session-executor.ts`), `resumeInterruptedTurn` is
`restartRecovery.kind === "resume_dead_runner" ||
scheduledResumeContinuation`. The second attempt is not a restart claim,
so it depends on `scheduledResumeContinuationAllowed`
(`scheduled-resume-continuation.ts`). That decision refused with
`local_stop_unverified`: `readNativeLocalProcessStop` reads the newest
launch event, and the newest one was the failed
`process_start_requested` with no process identity and no stop receipt.
The checkpoint evidence was correct; the stop evidence was the gap. The
refusal was not logged.

**Expected behavior**

When a launch fails before its runner exists, a scheduled same-run
resume proves on this host that no runner for the run exists and that
the launch wrote no runner state, records that stop, and continues the
interrupted turn. A live runner for the run still blocks it.

**Steps to reproduce**

`node cli/node_modules/tsx/dist/cli.mjs tests/restart-chaos/main.ts
--env local --adapters codex --workloads A1 --faults K1
--fail-recovery-step runnerd-start:1 --fault-after-seconds 10
--concurrency 1 --tasks 1 --seed 5303`

## What Changed

- `scheduled-resume-continuation.ts`: when the decision refuses only for
`local_stop_unverified` on a local target,
`scheduledResumeContinuationAllowed` calls the existing
`recordUnidentifiedLocalRunnerStop` (the same proof explicit
continuations use). It requires that the newest event is this host's
launch request, that no process carries `--run-id <runId>`, and that no
runner state for the run changed after the launch request. On success it
records `native.local_process_stopped` (`basis:
unidentified_runner_absent`) in the claim transaction and decides again.
All other checks (exact checkpoint, recoverable, session established,
checkpoint exists, no replacement, admitted attempt) still apply first.
- `native-session-executor.ts`: logs the refusal reason when a scheduled
`exact_checkpoint_resume` will not continue the interrupted turn.
- `native-scheduled-resume-continuation.integration.test.ts`: two cases.
A failed relaunch after a verified stop now continues the turn
(`resumeInterruptedTurn: true`, attempt 2). A failed relaunch while a
process with `--run-id <runId>` is alive still refuses. The fixture now
advances `nextEventSeq` after inserting events directly.
- `tests/restart-chaos/README.md`: records what the existing
`runnerd-start:1` cell found and what now passes.

## Verification

- RED on master: "continues the lost turn after a relaunch that failed
before its runner existed" fails with `expected [ false ] to deeply
equal [ true ]` (the runtime gets `resumeInterruptedTurn: false`, which
is the path that produced `provider_turn_lost_on_restore` →
`native_provider_terminal_failed`).
- GREEN: `scheduled-resume-continuation`,
`native-scheduled-resume-continuation.integration`,
`native-exact-resume-failure`, `native-restart-recovery`,
`native-runner-restart-recovery.integration`, `native-session-executor`,
`native-session-resumption`, `heartbeat-native-restart-suspension` pass
(1797 tests). `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passes.
- Chaos rerun of seed 5303 with `runnerd-start:1`: result is added in a
comment on this PR.

## Risks

- The proof is host-local: it only applies on the host that wrote the
launch request, the same as explicit continuations. Remote targets and
restart claims are unchanged.
- Old saved state: a run already stuck in a scheduled resume after a
failed spawn now continues on its next attempt instead of failing. That
is the intended recovery; the checkpoint and attempt limits still bound
it.
- Sibling recovery steps (`teardown`, `directory-lock`) are
Daytona-only. The saved waves that armed them (`s5311`, `s5312`) never
reached the step, so this PR does not change or prove them.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, via Claude Code with
tool use (shell, file edits, test runs).

## 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>
2026-11-11 16:36:17 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 d9d5958d09 fix(runner): reject an out-of-order controller command instead of exiting (#20946)
## Thinking Path

- Paperclip's controller and the sandbox Runner exchange numbered
commands; the Runner refuses a command whose number is not exactly one
past the last it processed.
- Staging's most common "Runner gone" failure was a follow-up controller
whose journal was behind the Runner. #20928 removed the cause on the
server (a warm follow-up now launches from the journal its retired
predecessor saved) and added a defence that reconciles a journal behind
only by the predecessor's settled close.
- The Runner still treated an out-of-order command as fatal:
`durable/state.rs` returned an error and the process exited. A
controller with a stale journal from any other cause (state saved by an
older release, a mid-run deploy) therefore lost the Runner process and
the run could only fail as "Runner gone"
(`runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`).
- This pull request makes the Runner refuse such a command with a
precise result instead of exiting, and makes the server rest that run
with a precise code and a Retry whose next run reconciles the journal
(the #20928 defence) before it opens the session.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

- Refs #20928 (the server-side root-cause fix and the journal
reconciliation this relies on)
- Refs #20907 (makes runnerd exit text visible in the run log)
- Duplicate search: searched PRs for "controller sequence contiguous",
"controller_sequence_mismatch" and "out-of-order command"; none changes
the Runner's handling.

## What Changed

- `runner-core/src/durable/state.rs`: a new command whose
`controllerSeq` is not `lastControllerCommandSeq + 1` (behind or a gap)
now yields `CommandDisposition::Reject` with `status: "rejected"` and `{
code: "controller_sequence_mismatch", message, expectedControllerSeq,
receivedControllerSeq }`. The command is not executed or journaled and
the last sequence is unchanged; the process keeps running. Replay of an
already-processed command and the compacted-history rejection are
unchanged.
- `native-session-executor.ts`: a failure carrying
`controller_sequence_mismatch` is classified as
`native_controller_journal_behind_runner`, a permanent (terminal)
failure with a Retry action that says no provider work began and that
Retry reconciles the journal from the saved checkpoint or stops with a
precise error.
- Tests:
- Rust `tests/durable_recovery.rs`: out-of-order (behind and gap)
commands are rejected with the precise code, the journal is unchanged,
and the next contiguous command executes. The existing
`command_gaps_and_identifier_reuse_fail_closed` unit test now asserts
the rejection instead of an error.
- Real runnerd `src/live/runnerd-stale-controller-journal.test.ts`: a
follow-up controller with a journal missing the predecessor's close now
gets `"code":"controller_sequence_mismatch"`, the Runner process stays
alive and its durable sequence is unchanged; with the current journal it
resumes.
  - Server: the classification and terminal disposition of the new code.

## Verification

- Red (master Runner): the Rust test panics on `expect("an out-of-order
command is not fatal")`; the real-runnerd test receives `runnerd exited
unexpectedly with code 1: paperclip-runnerd: controller sequence must be
contiguous: expected 6, received 4`.
- Green: `cargo test -p paperclip-runner-core --test durable_recovery`
(4 passed); `cargo test -p paperclip-runner-core` lib suite (the only
other failure, `task_memory::tests::monitor_bounds_notices`, is a timing
test that passes alone); `npx vitest run
src/live/runnerd-stale-controller-journal.test.ts` with a runnerd built
from this branch (2 passed); server `native-session-executor.test.ts`
focused tests (71 passed).
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner check:acpx-profiles`:
profiles match the release manifest. No ACPX profile, attestation, pin
or pack contract schema changed (`rules/acpx-profile-identity.mdc`): the
change is Runner source behaviour with an existing command-result shape,
so no profile version or `commandDigest` changes.

## Risks

- A controller that is *ahead* of the Runner (a gap) is now rejected
instead of fatal. Neither case executes the command; the Runner journal
is unchanged, so this is strictly safer than exiting.
- The rested run needs a Retry. Before this change the same run failed
after its retries as "Runner gone" with no precise cause.
- Runner source changes the Daytona image content ID; a new image is
needed for chaos waves on this revision.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), 1M-token context, tool
use (shell, file edits, tests) 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>
2026-11-11 16:14:31 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 2719145ae2 fix(chat): save a requested start order as a first-class blocker (#20947)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - People use chat to tell the CEO agent how work must be ordered
> - A person said "Do not start the website until the design is
approved"
> - The CEO only promised to hold the work. It did not save a blocker,
so nothing stopped the Website task
> - Chat guidance names blockers only when chat creates new tasks. It
says nothing about an order between existing tasks
> - This pull request adds one guidance line: save the order as a
blocker on the waiting task
> - The benefit is that Paperclip enforces the order and wakes the
assignee when the prerequisite is done

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**
In the chat eval `task-coordination.block-on-design` (run 43088288923),
the person asked the CEO to keep Website from starting until Design is
approved. The CEO read both tasks and replied "I'm holding both until
the design is actually approved". It saved no blocker. Website stayed
startable.

**Expected behavior**
The CEO adds Design to Website's `blockedByIssueIds`. Website cannot
start while Design is open. Its assignee wakes when Design is done.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Create Design and Website tasks in backlog. Assign Website to an
agent.
2. In chat with the CEO, say "Do not start the website until the design
is approved."
3. Read Website: `blockedBy` is empty in some runs, because the guidance
does not tell the agent to save the order.

## What Changed

- `AGENT_CHAT_DIRECTIVE`: one paragraph. When the person says an
existing task must not start until another is done or approved, add the
prerequisite to the waiting task's `blockedByIssueIds` with `PATCH
/api/issues/{id}`, and keep existing blockers. A comment or a promise
does not stop the work. Link both tasks.
- `agent-conversations.test.ts`: a regression test for the new guidance,
in the directive and in the rendered chat prompt.

## Verification

- Red: the new test failed before the guidance change.
- Green: `npx vitest run src/__tests__/agent-conversations.test.ts
src/__tests__/case-history-api-discovery.test.ts` (66 passed).
- Local scripted-human check (dev server, Playwright): with the blocker
saved, the Website task shows the Design row under "Blocked by", a Todo
click returns 200 without a Morgan run, Design done wakes Morgan with
`issue_blockers_resolved`, and the follow-up chat message sends.
- End-to-end: chat eval run linked in a comment below.

## Risks

- Low risk. The change adds about 470 characters to the chat prompt. It
changes no API or permission. The route and field already exist and
agents already use them.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), 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>
2026-11-11 16:12:19 -06:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 6a43890326 Fix image attachments in remote native workspaces (#20939)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - Native runs must receive the files that users attach to their
messages.
> - Remote wake preparation returned file metadata without readable
bytes.
> - The historical chat reader also rejected every remote target.
> - Command-backed sandboxes and SSH targets already provide a bound
command transport.
> - This pull request stages verified files through that transport and
clears them after the turn.
> - Agents can then open attached images with their normal image reader.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #19740. This change covers SSH and command-backed sandbox
execution, including Daytona. Plugin Runner tasks without a command
transport still need a separate versioned file-transfer contract. This
PR does not close that broader issue. The open attachment-recovery PR
#20778 concerns provider-session attachment journals, not input files.

**What happened?**

A user uploaded an image and sent it to an agent. The remote native run
received its filename and size, but no readable file. Wake preparation
reported `remote_workspace_staging_unsupported`. The historical read
fallback also refused remote execution.

**Expected behavior**

Copy the exact admitted attachment into the bound remote workspace. Let
the provider read the image. Preserve company, task, source-comment,
size, and hash checks. Clear temporary file contents when the turn ends.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Select a native agent on a command-backed sandbox or Linux SSH
environment.
2. Attach a PNG to its current task or in-app chat message.
3. Ask the agent to inspect it.
4. Check that wake preparation supplies a readable workspace-relative
image path.

## What Changed

- Add a remote staging owner with bounded commands, stdin transfer, hash
verification, opaque paths, and safe image extensions.
- Confine Linux filesystem operations through directory descriptors.
Refuse symlinks and replacement files during cleanup.
- Bind current wake files and authorized historical external-chat reads
to the selected lease transport.
- Join active writes during cancellation. Retain failed cleanup work
until scope close.
- Tell providers to open image files with an image-capable reader.
- Handle stdin stream errors in the shared SSH transport. Failed uploads
return failure instead of raising an unhandled EPIPE or reporting
success.
- Add database, transport, cancellation, integrity, cleanup,
executor-wiring, and Linux filesystem regressions. Document support and
limits.

## Verification

- Prepared an isolated source checkout with `node
scripts/agent-preflight.mjs --skip-rust-debug`.
- Focused suites: `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/native-runtime/remote-attachment-staging.test.ts
server/src/services/native-runtime/native-runner-file-handoff.test.ts
server/src/services/native-runtime/chat-attachment-read.test.ts` — 74
passed, 4 Linux-only tests skipped.
- Executor checks: `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.test.ts -t
'attachment staging to the remote|stages from the authenticated|verifies
frozen staged admission'` — 7 passed.
- Server typecheck: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`,
followed by the server layered check after the final changes.
- `git diff --check` passed. The local secret, PII, and
private-reference diff scan found no matches.
- `pnpm verify` returned exit 2 because the documentation change
requires broad CI. No full local suite is claimed.
- The four Linux filesystem tests were skipped locally because this
macOS host has no available Docker daemon. Linux CI executed all 17
remote-staging tests successfully, including those four confinement
tests: [server shard
10](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/43102035096/job/130796646266).
- SSH regression: the real pipe test reproduced two unhandled EPIPE
errors before the fix, plus false success when the peer exited with code
zero. The fixed SSH tests and existing argv tests pass (12 tests). The
remote-staging transport suite also passes (13 tests; 4 Linux tests
require CI).
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils typecheck` passed after the
SSH change.
- Final revision `1c5a9288b8d5f267ddeac84638ff6075dbbbf8ec`: all
applicable CI jobs passed, including typecheck, build, general and
serialized tests, Runner checks, canary dry run, and all eight browser
shards. [CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/43102035096).
Linux CI also passed all 6 native SSH tests: [server shard
5](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/43102035096/job/130796646349).
- Greptile reviewed that final revision at 5/5 with no remaining
findings. The review thread is resolved. GitHub reports the PR mergeable
with a clean merge state.
- No live model turn or deployed release is claimed.

## Risks

- Remote staging requires Linux, Node, and a command transport bound to
the selected lease. Plugin Runner tasks without that transport retain
their unavailable result.
- Each file uses bounded independent commands. Slow transports can delay
preparation or cleanup. File bytes stay out of command arguments and
provider-facing error messages.
- An abrupt controller or remote-host failure can bypass cleanup.
Ephemeral sandbox disposal remains the backstop. Retained files are
never blindly overwritten or deleted.
- Previous-release provider sessions and checkpoints retain their format
and identity. New turns receive newly staged input files. Existing
restart-admission checks still apply. No migration, runner-image change,
or account-credential transfer is required.

## Model Used

OpenAI `gpt-6.1-sol` through the Codex harness in T3 Code, with xhigh
reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and tests. No
subagents were used. The context-window size is not exposed by this
runtime.

## 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>
2026-11-11 14:12:09 -08:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 757a20d2f1 fix(runner): keep remote recovery and launch through a short plugin RPC stall (#20945)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A remote run starts `paperclip-runnerd` in a sandbox. The controller
reads and controls it through the environment plugin
(`environmentExecute`).
> - #20940 made a stalled supervision probe "unknown" while the Runner
stays connected. Other callers still turn the same plugin stall into a
terminal failure.
> - During restart reattachment, the saved-state read, the
identity-marker read and the process check share a 30-second budget. One
plugin RPC that stalls for 40 seconds uses all of it, so a short stall
fails a reattachment to a healthy Runner.
> - At launch, a stalled launch call or identity read fails the run with
`runner_process_termination_unconfirmed` or
`runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`, although the runner may be
healthy.
> - This pull request treats a plugin RPC timeout as "unknown" and
retries the read-only call within a bounded stall budget. A stalled
launch call is not repeated: the controller reads the launch nonce's
identity marker instead.
> - The benefit is that a short plugin stall during recovery or launch
no longer fails a healthy run. Every positive answer from the sandbox
keeps its meaning, and the bound still fails closed.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20940, #20909

**What happened?**
A plugin `environmentExecute` RPC stall of more than 40 seconds makes a
remote recovery read fail. Plugin RPCs time out at the requested timeout
plus a 30-second overhead, so a 10-second probe can take 40 seconds. The
reattachment read budget is 30 seconds. One stalled read therefore
failed reattachment with `probe_transport_failed` or `probe_timeout`. At
launch, a stalled launch call rejected the run with exit unconfirmed. A
stalled identity read (20-second wait, 2-second reads that can take 32
seconds) failed the run with
`runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`.

**Expected behavior**
A plugin RPC timeout is a stall of the plugin, not an answer from the
sandbox. Read-only recovery reads retry within a bound. A launch call
that stalls is not repeated. The launch nonce's marker decides whether
the one runner was launched. At the bound, the run fails closed and
Retry works.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start a remote (Daytona) run.
2. Restart the controller so that the run reattaches, or start a new
run.
3. While the controller reads the sandbox, stop the plugin worker for 45
seconds.
4. The reattachment or launch fails.

**Paperclip version or commit**
master at 48d23d1530.

## What Changed

- `remote-runner-recovery-probe.ts`: adds `isPluginRpcTimeout` (an
error, or its cause chain, with `PLUGIN_RPC_ERROR_CODES.TIMEOUT`). It
also adds a per-recovery `RemoteRunnerPluginStall` with a 3-minute
budget (`REMOTE_RUNNER_PLUGIN_STALL_BUDGET_MS`). The caller's recovery
deadline caps it. After the first plugin RPC timeout in a recovery, its
read-only probes use the stall deadline instead of the 30-second
deadline. Signals are never retried. Other transport failures keep the
30-second budget.
- `verifyRemoteRunnerReattachment` and `verifyRemoteRunnerOrSettledExit`
share one stall budget across the saved-state read, the identity-marker
read, the process check and the post-exit settled-state read
(`readRemoteRunnerState`).
- `waitForRemoteRunnerProcessIdentity`: a plugin RPC timeout extends the
20-second identity wait to the stall budget.
- Launch: a launch call that fails with a plugin RPC timeout is not
repeated. The controller goes on to the identity-marker wait for the
same nonce. A found marker adopts the one launched runner. A missing
marker uses the existing nonce cleanup, and the result stays unconfirmed
when the cleanup fails.
- `doc/execution-semantics.md` describes these rules.

## Verification

- Red on master: 7 new tests in
`server/src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.test.ts`
failed. Each one stalls a plugin RPC for 40 seconds with a
`JsonRpcCallError` `TIMEOUT`:
- reattachment through a stall in the saved-state, identity-marker and
process-check reads (the reattachment failed with the stall error);
  - the bound test (it settled before the stall budget);
  - the post-exit settled-state read (it failed with the stall error);
- launch-call and identity-read stalls (they failed with the stall error
or `runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`).
- Green: all 7 pass, and a control test proves that a non-stall
transport error keeps the 30-second bound.
`native-session-executor.test.ts` and
`remote-runner-recovery-probe.test.ts` pass (1400 tests). `tsc --noEmit`
passes for `server`.
- The tests also assert that one launch call happens, no cleanup or
signal runs on the success path, and the bound fails closed without exit
proof.

## Risks

- During a real plugin stall, recovery and launch can now wait up to 3
minutes instead of about 30 seconds before they fail closed. The longer
wait applies only after a plugin RPC timeout. A sandbox that answers, or
a non-timeout transport error, keeps the old timing.
- No wait is added before `turn.start` on the normal path.
- State saved by an older version is not changed.

> 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

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, through Claude Code
with tool use (shell, file edit, code search). Extended reasoning was
on.

## 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>
2026-11-11 16:04:13 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 612cc7e3e6 fix(heartbeat): renew every legacy controller lease in one shared statement (#20924)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A legacy run holds a durable controller lease while it prepares. The
server renews the lease every 10 seconds, and it stops the run if no
renewal succeeds within the 60 second lease.
> - Each run renewed in its own transaction on a private pool of two
connections. Each renewal used six round trips (begin, statement
timeout, transaction id, notify, update, commit) and woke live-run
recovery for that run.
> - When many runs prepare at the same time on a loaded database, the
renewals queue behind each other. The queue grows with the number of
runs, and every run loses its lease at about the same time.
> - A healthy server must not fail its own runs because it has many of
them.
> - This pull request renews all leases of one server process through
one shared queue. Requests that arrive while a renewal is in flight
share the next statement.
> - The benefit is that the renewal cost no longer grows with the number
of live runs, so a burst cannot starve the lease.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
On a staging server that did not restart, 22 runs failed with
`controller_lease_lost` in about 13 minutes. Every run was a legacy run
in the `preparing` stage with `providerWorkStarted: false`. Every loss
had cause `renewal_deadline`. The renewal had been pending 28 to 48
seconds (`renewalPendingMs`). The deadline callback ran on time
(`deadlineLateMs` 3 to 861 ms), so the event loop was not blocked. The
successful renewals before the loss had each taken 20 to 30 seconds,
because the deadline fired only 25 to 48 seconds after the last renewal
(`sinceRenewalMs`). About 30 runs were live in the process. The first
wave started when a user retried about 14 blocked tasks at once. The
automatic retries of the first wave then failed the same way, which made
the second wave. 12 of 16 affected tasks became blocked.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start about 30 legacy runs in one server process.
2. Make each renewal transaction slow (for example, a loaded database).
3. Wait one lease period.

**Expected behavior**
The leases stay owned. The renewal cost does not grow with the number of
runs.

**Actual behavior**
All runs fail with `controller_lease_lost` (`renewal_deadline`).

## What Changed

- `server/src/services/legacy-controller-lease.ts`: All controllers of
one process renew through one queue per database. One flush is in flight
at a time. Requests that arrive during a flush share the next flush, so
a renewal waits behind at most one other statement. A flush is one
transaction on the private lease pool: `statement_timeout` and one
statement that renews all requested rows.
- The statement locks the requested rows with `for update skip locked`.
A row that another transaction holds is reported busy, and only that run
retries after 250 ms. It does not stall the other runs in the batch. A
row that is not this boot's live legacy lease is reported rejected, as
before.
- Renewal no longer emits the `active-execution-recovery` notification.
A renewal only moves the deadline later. Recovery already has a deadline
at the earlier expiry and rereads the moved deadline then. This removes
one recovery pass, `pg_current_xact_id` and `pg_notify` per renewal.
- The lease contract does not change: 60 second lease, 10 second
renewal, boot-id fence, expired leases cannot renew, the local deadline
is measured from the attempt start, and the loss causes and timings are
the same.
- `doc/run-log-events.md`: Documents the shared renewal queue.

Upgrade story: no persisted shape changes. The row columns, lease length
and boot-id fence are the same. A lease held by the previous release has
a different boot id, so the new batch rejects it and leaves it
untouched. A test covers a previous-release lease in the same batch.

## Verification

- Red on `origin/master`, green with this change:
- `keeps thirty preparing controllers owned when every renewal takes
four seconds on a two-connection pool`: before, all 30 controllers lost
the lease with `renewal_deadline` (the staging shape). After, none lose
it.
- `renews fifteen concurrent controllers in one statement` (real
Postgres): before, 15 update statements. After, 1.
- `renews through one private statement without waking live-run
recovery`: before, the renewal woke `active-execution-recovery`. After,
it does not.
- `live-recovery-work.test.ts` `renews without waking recovery and
re-reads the moved controller deadline at the old one`: before, 2
recovery passes per renewal. After, none, and recovery still moves to
the new deadline at the old one.
- Safety cases: a row lock on one run does not delay another run; a
previous-release lease in the same batch stays untouched; a terminated
lease connection is retried; existing deadline, retry, rejection and
revocation tests pass.
- `npx vitest run src/services/legacy-controller-lease.test.ts
src/__tests__/live-recovery-work.test.ts`: 88 passed.
- `pnpm verify`: see the CI checks on this head.

## Risks

- Medium-low. All renewals of a process now share one statement. A
failed flush fails every request in it; each watcher retries
independently, as it did before.
- A busy row is retried every 250 ms until the lease deadline. Before,
the renewal waited on the row lock for up to the statement timeout. The
loss behavior is the same.
- Recovery wakes at the old lease expiry instead of after each renewal.
It finds the live lease and moves to the new expiry.
- Not in scope: the downstream workspace recovery that blocked tasks
after a lost lease (`legacy_execution_requires_reconciliation`,
`source_unavailable`).

> 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

- Claude Opus 5.5 (claude-opus-5-5), Anthropic, 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>
2026-11-11 15:57:20 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 228b0169be fix(dispatch): let the answer to the agent's own question continue the task it blocked on (#20931)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - An agent can ask the person a question (`request_human_input`) and
wait for the answer
> - A later comment from the person moves an open question into history
(#15392). The agent still needs the answer, so it reports a blocker and
the task becomes Blocked
> - The person then answers. Dispatch cancels the answer's continuation
with `issue_not_in_progress`, because only a dependency-blocked task may
take an answer while Blocked
> - The task rests Blocked with a failed run and a Retry. The answer is
lost until a person clicks Retry
> - This pull request lets the answer continue the task when the same
agent blocked it to wait for that answer, proven from durable records
> - The benefit is that the person's answer always reaches the agent
that asked, without a Retry

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15392, Refs #20872

**What happened?**
Restart-chaos waves with no fault injected fail every W2Q task on every
provider (Claude, OpenCode, Codex) with `R3:retry_needed`. For Claude
task t03 on master 7e8901aa60: run 5aeb9244 asks a question and the task
goes `in_review`. A board comment ("I will answer shortly; do not write
the brief yet") wakes run d728886f. That comment makes the question
historical, so `paperclip_finish` with a `response_wake` wait is
rejected ("without a pending wait condition"). The agent then calls
`paperclip_block`; the status decision `current_track_blocker_waiting`
sets the task Blocked. The board answers. Continuation run adbda5de is
cancelled: "resolved-interaction continuation issue is no longer
in_progress (current status: blocked)". The task rests blocked/failed
with Retry.

**What did you expect to happen?**
The answer continues the task. The agent writes the brief with the
answer and finishes.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. An agent asks a question on its task.
2. The person posts a comment before answering.
3. The agent reports a blocker while it waits for the answer.
4. The person answers the question.
5. The answer's continuation run is cancelled with
`issue_not_in_progress`.

## What Changed

- Status committer (`status-decision-committer.ts`): when it applies an
agent-reported, board-owned blocker (`current_track_blocker_waiting` or
`task_wide_blocker_bound`), it records the agent's own pending,
undismissed ordinary questions on the task as `awaitingInteractionIds`
in the decision JSON, in the same transaction under the issue lock
(`questionsAwaitedByAgentBlock`).
- New `agentBlockingQuestionState`
(`server/src/services/blocked-question-answer.ts`). It reads only
server-owned rows. It returns the verified `lastStatusDecisionId` and
`statusVersion` when: the answered interaction was created by this agent
on this task and resolved by a person; the task is Blocked and still
assigned to the agent; the task's `lastStatusDecisionId` is an applied
Blocked decision with one of the two reason codes, made by a run of the
same agent, whose `awaitingInteractionIds` contains this interaction;
and the task's `statusVersion` still equals that decision's
`projectedStatusVersion` (nothing changed the status since).
- `decideQueuedRunStaleness`
(`server/src/modules/run-dispatch/domain/policy.ts`): the Blocked
exemption for an answer continuation also accepts this fact
(`isAgentBlockingQuestionAnswer`). The postgres adapter loads it under
the issue lock.
- `heartbeat.ts` resolved-interaction checkout: for that answer,
`blocked` is an accepted expected status, and the verified state is
passed to `issues.checkout` as `blockedState`.
- `issues.checkout`: with `blockedState`, the guarded update accepts a
Blocked row only when `lastStatusDecisionId` and `statusVersion` still
match, so a person who re-blocks the task in between keeps the new
block. When the expected statuses include `blocked`, a checkout from
Blocked also clears `unblockDescriptor`, `blockedTransitionAt` and
`blockedOwnerNotifiedAt`, as an ordinary status change from Blocked
does.
- `doc/execution-semantics.md` describes the rule.

## Verification

- New integration test
`server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-blocked-question-answer.test.ts`
(embedded Postgres, real `commitNativeStatusDecision`): the agent's
blocker decision makes the task Blocked, the person answers, the answer
is delivered through `heartbeat.wakeup` with the same context shape as
staging.
- Red on master (product hunks removed, test kept): `delivers the answer
when the agent blocked the task to wait for it` fails with `status:
cancelled, errorCode: issue_not_in_progress`, the same code as the chaos
run.
- Green: 5/5 pass. The answer run succeeds, the adapter runs, and the
blocker fields are cleared. Negative cases still cancel with
`issue_not_in_progress`: a person re-blocked the task after the agent,
the question did not exist when the agent blocked, and the task is done.
A checkout with a stale verified state conflicts and keeps the person's
new blocker.
- `policy.test.ts`: new case for the fact (continue when set, cancel
when unset, reassignment, backlog/done/cancelled).
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run src/modules/run-dispatch
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`: 208 passed.
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-stale-queue-invalidation.test.ts
src/services/explicit-native-continuation.test.ts`: 656 passed.
- `cd server && pnpm exec tsc --noEmit -p tsconfig.json`: passes.
- Chaos, local, seed 5101, `--workloads W2Q --faults K0 --adapters
codex,claude --lifecycle warm`, on 722303e4a2 (first head): wave
w-20261111T204405-s5101, 6/6 PASS (3 Codex, 3 Claude). Every task went
in_review -> blocked -> in_progress -> done without Retry. Before: the
same local seed on master (w-20261111T190352-s5101) failed 3/3 Codex W2Q
cells with `R3:retry_needed`, and Daytona Claude wave
w-20261111T200553-s6101 failed 2/3 W2Q cells the same way.

## Risks

- Low to medium. Only a resolved interaction continuation on a Blocked
task changes behavior, and only when the durable linkage holds. If a
board-owned blocker about something else and the agent's own question
are open together, the answer resumes the agent; it then reports its
blocker again. The blocker report carries no interaction reference, so
the server cannot tell them apart; cancelling the answer instead loses
it. A person's Blocked status, a block from before the question,
dependency blocks, reassignment, done and cancelled keep the old cancel.
- State saved by an older release: no schema change and no migration. A
Blocked decision saved before this change has no
`awaitingInteractionIds`, so its answer keeps the old behavior (cancel,
Retry works).
- The checkout change only applies when a caller passes `blocked` as an
expected status.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), with tool use and code execution
in an agent harness.

## 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>
2026-11-11 15:54:33 -06:00
DottaandClaude Fable 5.2 b01959cb15 fix(recovery): release a handed-off run's saved-files hold for the person it handed the task to (#20941)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - An agent can hand its own task to a person for review. With #20884,
a native run that does this keeps running and finishes its turn.
> - A restart can land between that hand-off and the end of the same
turn. Restart recovery then settles the run as failed and keeps its
unsaved sandbox files, so no work is lost.
> - Automatic workspace recovery saves those files. But the
workspace-repair hold then stayed on the person's task, because the hold
only released for a newer agent owner.
> - This pull request releases that hold for the person who received the
task through the stopped run's own recorded hand-off, once the files are
saved.
> - The benefit is that the person's task rests in review with no stale
"Saved work recovered" hold, and the agent's files are still saved
first.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Follow-up to #20884 (merged). It was reviewed there as a known limit:
"Restart blocks the person's task". It uses the
`resultJson.humanSelfHandoff` record that #20884 added. Related: #19184,
which released the same hold for a newer agent owner.

**What happened?**

A native run handed its own task to a person, and a restart landed
before the run finished its turn. Restart recovery settled the run and
retained its files. After automatic recovery saved them, the task still
had a workspace-repair hold ("Saved work recovered. Send a message to
continue."). The person had nothing to do with that run's work, and
nothing released the hold.

**Expected behavior**

The hold protects the workspace until the files are saved. After that,
the task rests with the person and has no execution blocker.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. A native run records a hand-off to a person, and the task is now
`in_review` with that person.
2. A restart settles the run as failed, with its prepared remote
workspace retained.
3. Automatic workspace recovery completes.
4. Before this fix, `getExecutionBlocker` still returns the run's
workspace-repair hold.

## What Changed

- `server/src/services/execution-blocker.ts`:
`restoreHoldReleasedForCurrentOwnerPredicate` now also releases a
recovered file-preservation hold in one more case. The task must be
assigned to a person, and the stopped run's
`resultJson.humanSelfHandoff` must name that task and that person. The
existing proof is still required: the completed-recovery receipt bound
to the action, and a copyback rather than a snapshot-only save. Until
the files are saved, the hold stays.
- `server/src/services/workspace-recovery-admission.test.ts`: two
embedded-Postgres tests.
- The hold blocks the person's task before recovery and releases after
it.
  - A hand-off recorded for a different person keeps the hold.
- `doc/execution-semantics.md`: one sentence on the restart case.

## Verification

- Red: with the `execution-blocker.ts` change removed, `releases a
handed-off run's recovered files hold for the person it handed the task
to` fails. `getExecutionBlocker` still returns the hold after
`recoverRetainedWorkspace`.
- Green: `cd server && npx vitest run
src/services/workspace-recovery-admission.test.ts
src/__tests__/interrupted-preparation-hold-settle.test.ts
src/services/explicit-native-continuation.test.ts
src/services/native-runtime/native-human-self-handoff.test.ts`. All 617
tests pass. The server typecheck passes.
- Chaos: the H2 workload from #20884 covers the hand-off with a K1
restart after it. Locally the runs had no unsaved files, so no hold
appeared. This PR's case needs a remote sandbox with unsaved files. **No
Daytona wave was run.**

## Risks

- The release applies only when the stopped run's own record names the
current person and task, and only after the completed-recovery receipt.
Other holds, snapshot-only saves and unsafe archives are unchanged.
- No schema change. A run without the record behaves as before.
- This branch is rebased onto master after #20884 merged. The only
conflict was an adjacent import line.

> 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

- Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-opus-5-5`, through Claude Code
with tool use and code execution. The session does not expose the
context window or reasoning mode.

## 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 Fable 5.2 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 15:52:35 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 48d23d1530 fix(runner): keep a connected remote Runner through a stalled plugin supervision probe (#20940)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A remote run starts `paperclip-runnerd` in a sandbox. The controller
monitors the process with a health probe that goes through the
environment plugin (`environmentExecute`).
> - A stall of the Daytona plugin worker makes that probe RPC time out
after 40 seconds. The monitor treated the timeout as "process
supervision failed".
> - The transport then failed closed with
`runner_process_termination_unconfirmed`. The run ended
`notification_transport_failed`, `recoverable: false`, and the close
path suspended a healthy Runner. The task rested blocked with Retry.
> - Nothing was wrong with the sandbox, the Runner or the provider. The
Runner held its own authenticated connection to the controller during
the full stall.
> - This pull request makes a failed or timed-out probe "unknown". While
the Runner stays connected on its own channel, the monitor keeps the
same runner and turn and probes again, for a bounded time.
> - The benefit is that a short plugin stall no longer kills a healthy
run. The fail-closed cases stay the same.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20909 (chaos cell CR3, which reproduces this failure)

**What happened?**
A 45-second stall of the Daytona plugin worker killed a healthy run.
Chaos cell CR3 reproduced it 2 of 2 times (OpenCode and Claude,
Daytona). A staging run had the same failure with no deploy: a plugin
`environmentExecute` RPC stalled for more than 40 seconds. The run
failed with "Notification transport failed closed:
runner_process_termination_unconfirmed: runnerd process supervision
failed: RPC call \"environmentExecute\" timed out after 40000ms". The
close path then sent `runner.suspend`, and the healthy Runner suspended
and exited. The task rested blocked with Retry.

**Expected behavior**
A probe that times out or fails in transport is not proof that the
process stopped. While the Runner stays connected on its own channel,
the run continues. If supervision cannot come back within a bound, the
run rests with a working Retry. A probe that positively reports the
process gone still starts the existing recovery.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start a remote (Daytona) run with a T1 workload.
2. Send SIGSTOP to the server's Daytona plugin worker for 45 seconds,
then SIGCONT.
3. The run fails `notification_transport_failed` about 40 seconds into
the stall.

**Paperclip version or commit**
master at 7cd5558e41.

## What Changed

- `createRemoteRunnerProcessLauncher`
(`server/src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.ts`): when
the health probe throws (RPC timeout or transport error) and the Runner
holds an authenticated connection, the monitor waits one poll interval
and probes again. It does not reject the process completion. The unknown
period has a bound: the remote runner reconnect grace (7 minutes). When
the Runner is not connected, the monitor keeps the old behavior: it
rejects after the 30-second probe budget, without exit proof.
- Probe results that positively answer (exit 45 "process gone", or
identity and generation failures) keep their exact current handling.
- `RunnerProcessLaunchSpec`
(`packages/paperclip-runner/src/control-plane/durable-prp-control-plane.ts`)
has a new optional `isRunnerConnected` callback. `spawnRunner` passes it
to the process owner and keeps it on restart.
- The runnerd transport and the external runnerd driver supply
`isRunnerConnected` from the control plane's count of authenticated
Runner connections.
- `doc/execution-semantics.md` describes the unknown-probe rule and its
bound.

## Verification

- Red, on master: `npx vitest run
src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.test.ts -t "plugin
RPC timeouts until"` (in `server/`). The completion rejected after the
first stalled probe with `{ stage: "process_verification", reason:
"probe_transport_failed" }`. The transport turns that into
`runner_process_termination_unconfirmed`, which is the staging error.
- Red, on master: `npx vitest run
src/live/runnerd-codex-transport.test.ts -t "live evidence of the
runner"` (in `packages/paperclip-runner/`). The launch spec had no
`isRunnerConnected` (`expected undefined to be true`).
- Green: both tests pass. New tests also prove:
- three 40-second plugin RPC timeouts with the Runner connected leave
the same runner supervised, and a later exit-45 probe still confirms
exit;
- with the Runner disconnected, the same timeout rejects without exit
proof (`probe_transport_failed`, `isExitConfirmed() === false`);
- with the Runner connected and probes that never answer, supervision
rejects without exit proof after the 7-minute bound.
- `server/src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.test.ts`,
`remote-runner-recovery-probe.test.ts`,
`packages/paperclip-runner/src/live/runnerd-codex-transport.test.ts`,
`src/control-plane/durable-prp-control-plane.test.ts` and
`src/drivers/external` pass locally.
- `tsc --noEmit` passes for `server` and `packages/paperclip-runner`.
- Chaos: CR3 results are in a follow-up comment on this PR.

## Risks

- While the Runner stays connected and the plugin cannot answer, the
controller waits up to 7 minutes before it fails closed. Before this
change it failed after about 40 seconds. During that time the Runner's
own connection is the liveness evidence, and the controller never
reports an exit.
- When the Runner is not connected, the timing is the same as before.
Sandbox loss still fails closed after the 30-second probe budget.
- The new spec field is optional. A process owner that does not read it
keeps the old behavior. State saved by an older version is not changed.
- No wait is added before `turn.start`.

> 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

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, through Claude Code
with tool use (shell, file edit, code search). Extended reasoning was
on.

## 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>
2026-11-11 15:45:25 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 884a9e19ea fix(native): launch a warm follow-up from its predecessor's saved journal, and restart a Runner that exited before session.open (#20928)
## Thinking Path

- Paperclip runs agent work through a controller (server) and a runner
(`paperclip-runnerd`) that exchange numbered commands; the runner
refuses any command whose number is not exactly one past the last it
processed.
- Staging's most common failure is "Runner gone"
(`runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`,
`native.remote_runner_recovery_failed` with `process_not_running`,
`runnerLifecycle: ready`, `runnerSettled: false`). Chaos wave
`w-20261111T192658-s5201` (Daytona, warm, Codex, W2/W2Q/W2C re-wake
cells) captured it live: the new runner wrote `controller sequence must
be contiguous: expected 13, received 11` (and `expected 5, received 3`)
and exited 0.15 s after authenticating.
- In all three captured failures the follow-up run started 1–2 s before
the predecessor's warm session was closed (`transport_close_requested`
for the predecessor arrives after the follow-up's `run started`). The
close is issued by the follow-up's own admission.
- Admission first materializes the controller projection for the session
root. With an idle retained warm owner the root only holds the
external-persistence marker, so `restoreWarmRunnerdController` copies
that owner's saved checkpoint into the root. Later in the same
admission, `executePaperclipNativeSessionWithinScope` finds the owner
cannot be reused (configuration, process or GitHub access changed) and
retires it. Retirement sends `runner.drain` and `runner.suspend`; both
are saved to the owner's checkpoint before they are sent, but the root
still holds the projection taken before the close.
- The follow-up then opens its controller from that projection. Its
journal is two commands behind the runner's durable
`lastControllerCommandSeq`, so its first command repeats sequence 11;
the runner treats this as fatal and exits, and every later attempt only
reattaches to a process that is gone.
- So the saved controller journal was persisted correctly; it was not
selected: the projection is never refreshed after the retirement that
extends it.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

- Refs #20874 (the runner-exit proof this extends from a rejected
`session.open` to a Runner that exited before answering it)
- Refs #20907 (makes the runnerd exit text, including `controller
sequence must be contiguous`, visible in the run log; independent of
this fix)
- Refs #20853 (related: resumes a remote Runner that died at a settled
`ready` cut; this PR covers the unsettled `ready` state left by an exit
before `session.open`)
- Duplicate search: searched open and closed PRs for "controller
sequence contiguous", "runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable" and
"Runner gone"; none fixes the stale controller projection.

## What Changed

- `server/src/services/native-runtime/warm-controller-journal.ts` (new):
- `refreshRetiredWarmOwnerProjection` reloads the retired owner's
canonical checkpoint into the session root after retirement, only when
the root still projects that owner and the saved journal extends the
projected one. A diverged journal holds admission with
`native_runner_checkpoint_projection_held:retired_owner_journal_diverged`;
a projection changed underneath holds with `...:journal_changed`.
- `reconcileControllerJournalWithRunner` is the defence for state
already saved in the bad shape (old-saved/new-resumed, mid-run deploys).
When the remote runner state shows its journal ahead of the controller
projection and the runner's last command is a completed
`runner.suspend`, it reconciles only if every extra sequence is a
completed `command_close_drain_*`/`command_close_suspend_*` in the
runner's processed-command journal and the predecessor's canonical
checkpoint holds exactly those commands. Anything else refuses before
launch with
`native_controller_recovery_missing_evidence:controller_journal_behind_runner`
instead of guessing. A runner whose last command is not a completed
suspend is left to the existing live-adoption checks.
- Defence in depth for the server side of the same failure
(`native_session_recovery_failed: runnerd exited while waiting for
session.open`, then `runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable` on
every same-run retry): a Runner proven to have exited while this
attempt's opening command (`session.open`, or the recovery probe) was
still unanswered is a failed fresh start, not a live Runner to reattach.
- `runnerd-codex-transport.ts`: `runnerExitConfirmed()` (#20874's proof)
now also holds for a resumed session whose provider identity was
preloaded, when the attempt's opening command is still pending at the
proven exit.
- The Codex driver's recovery result, `HarnessDriverBackend` and
`native-session-runtime` carry that proof on the
`native_session_recovery_failed` error.
- The executor records `runnerExitedBeforeSessionOpen` on the settled
failure; restart recovery puts `exitedBeforeSessionOpen` on the
`reattach_remote_runner` claim; `verifyRemoteRunnerOrSettledExit` and
`verifyStagedRemoteRunner` then start a new Runner when the process is
gone and the saved Runner state has no pending terminal delivery,
provider cleanup or warm transition (any lifecycle other than an active
turn). Attempt budget and identity checks are unchanged.
- `native-session-executor.ts`: calls the refresh right after the
configuration-changed retirement of a warm owner, and the reconciliation
in `restoreRemoteSuspendedRunnerCheckpoint` with the runner state it
already reads (no added remote read, no wait before `turn.start`).
- Tests:
- `native-session-executor.test.ts`: new `changed-external-checkpoint`
scenario of "rotates an owned warm codex remote runner before checking
changed configuration" with a real `DurablePrpControlPlane`: the retired
owner's close saves drain/suspend, and the journal the follow-up
launches from must end with them.
- `warm-controller-journal.test.ts`: refresh, divergence hold, untouched
marker/other run, reconcile of a settled close, refusal when the
canonical journal cannot prove the close, refusal for any other extra
command, and no action for a live runner.
-
`packages/paperclip-runner/src/live/runnerd-stale-controller-journal.test.ts`:
real `paperclip-runnerd` + fake Codex. A follow-up controller on the
predecessor's suspended runner with a journal that lacks the close
commands reproduces `controller sequence must be contiguous` and loses
the runner; with the current journal it resumes.

## Verification

- Red for the added part: `verifyRemoteRunnerOrSettledExit` with the
staging state (process gone, lifecycle `ready`, unsettled outbox)
rejects with `runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable` without the
change; with `exitedBeforeSessionOpen` it resolves to a fresh start, and
stays fail-closed for a pending cleanup, terminal delivery, active turn
or exhausted budget. Without the propagation, the backend recovery
result lacks `runnerExitConfirmed`; the real-runnerd stale-journal test
asserts the transport's exit proof after the contiguity exit (`expected
false to be true` on the old transport).

- Red on master (executor unchanged, new scenario): `AssertionError:
expected [] to deeply equal [ 'runner.drain', 'runner.suspend' ]` — the
follow-up launched from the projection taken before the predecessor's
close.
- Green: `cd server && npx vitest run
src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.test.ts -t "rotates
an owned warm codex remote runner before checking changed
configuration"` (14 passed), `npx vitest run
src/services/native-runtime/warm-controller-journal.test.ts` (7 passed).
- Real runner: `cd packages/paperclip-runner && npx vitest run
src/live/runnerd-stale-controller-journal.test.ts` (stale journal →
`controller sequence must be contiguous`; current journal → resumes).
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`, `pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/paperclip-runner typecheck:typescript`; `pnpm verify`
selected broader verification (a new runner test file is outside the
resolved graphs), so broad coverage comes from required CI.

## Risks

- The refresh replaces the root projection only with a checkpoint whose
identity matches and whose journal extends the projection; otherwise it
holds admission with an existing
`native_runner_checkpoint_projection_held:*` code, which is safer than
launching a runner that will exit.
- The defence refuses launch when a runner is ahead by anything other
than a provable settled close. Before this change that launch always
ended in a runner exit and a failed run, so the refusal only changes the
error code and the moment of failure.
- This PR does not change the runner. The runner still exits on an
out-of-order new command; a follow-up runner PR will turn that into a
rejected command result.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), 1M-token context, tool
use (shell, file edits, tests) 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>
2026-11-11 15:41:03 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 edd00526e7 fix(native): park a response_wake with no admitted response instead of self-waking (#20935)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A native agent run ends with a structured result. The status arbiter
turns that result into an issue status and next actions.
> - A result can report `yielded` with `continuation.kind:
"response_wake"`. This means "wake me when somebody responds".
> - Only a direct Board comment gave this kind a passive wait. Every
other `response_wake` became an immediate `issue_status_changed` wake to
the same agent.
> - The agent woke, saw nothing new, reported `response_wake` again, and
woke again. Nothing bounded this loop. It spent provider budget and its
back-to-back runs caused other failures on warm sandboxes.
> - This pull request parks such a result as a visible wait, and puts
declared continuation wakes under the rewake throttle as a backstop.
> - The benefit is that an agent that waits for input stops and costs
nothing until a real response arrives.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Restart-chaos waves on master `683fd1e9a5` (no faults injected) showed
one task run 30 to 66 times, about 12 s apart. Example: wave
`w-20261111T190352-s5101`, task t02 (W2C), 65 runs in 13 minutes. Each
run reported `yielded` with `continuation.kind: "response_wake"` and the
summary "No changes made. This status-change wake does not trigger phase
2". Each run was woken by `issue_status_changed`, and each finalization
committed `live_continuation_registered` with an `enqueue_continuation`
effect of kind `response_wake`.

Root cause: `arbitrateNativeStatus()`
(`server/src/services/native-runtime/status-arbiter.ts`) only treats
`response_wake` as passive when `boardResponseWaitAuthorized` (from
`readNativeBoardResponseWaitSource`), external chat, or plan wait is
true. Otherwise it falls to the generic yielded branch, and
`status-decision-committer.ts` (`enqueue_continuation`) enqueues an
`issue_status_changed` wake to the same agent. `issue_status_changed` is
not in `THROTTLED_ISSUE_REWAKE_REASONS`, and the native committer writes
an `issue.updated` activity row with the run's id for every decision, so
the rewake throttle saw every native run as progress.

**Expected behavior**

A `response_wake` with no admitted response source parks the task. A
comment, an interaction answer or a status change by somebody else wakes
the agent. No path can loop without a bound.

**Steps to reproduce**

Run `tests/restart-chaos/main.ts --env local --adapters codex
--workloads W2,W2Q,W2C --concurrency 10 --tasks 10 --seed 5101
--lifecycle warm --triggers time`. W2/W2C tasks loop after phase 1.

## What Changed

- `status-arbiter.ts`: a `yielded` / `response_wake` result with no
admitted response source and no blocking remaining work now commits
`response_wake_waiting_for_input`, keeps the task `in_progress`, and has
no effects. Policy version is `phase6-v14`. Board, external chat, plan,
governance, dependency, pause and unfinished-work branches are unchanged
and still come first.
- `native-runtime/native-response-wake-wait.ts` (new) and
`recovery/service.ts`: recovery treats that applied decision as a
durable wait while it is the issue's latest decision, the issue is
`in_progress` with the same agent assignee, and no user comment arrived
after the run started. This applies to the stranded-work sweep and to
the paused-agent passive-wait check.
- `execution-projection.ts`: a committed run with this reason shows the
phase `waiting_for_answer`, label "Waiting for a reply", and a next
action that tells the user to comment or change the status. This shows
only while that decision is still the issue's latest decision and the
issue is `in_progress`; an older run shows "Completed".
- Backstop in `issue-rewake-throttle.ts` and `heartbeat/queue.ts`: an
`issue_status_changed` wake that carries a declared `continuationKind`
(the `enqueue_continuation` effect) is now a throttle candidate. The
native status committer's own `issue.updated` / status-decision activity
no longer counts as run progress or as new input. After two consecutive
successful runs with no issue-visible progress, such a wake waits for
the existing escalating cooldown (2 min, doubling, max 30 min). The
native status dispatcher (`dispatchNativeStatusWakeBatch`) does not drop
a throttled intent: it keeps the intent `queued`, reports the cooldown
deadline to the deferred-receipt worker, and dispatches it again when
the cooldown ends. Status wakes without a declared continuation (blocker
owner, notify owner, retry) are unchanged.
- Restart chaos: new enforced universal check U5 (`universal.ts`). A
task with more than 10 runs fails as `U5:run_budget_exceeded`
(`RESTART_CHAOS_U5_MAX_RUNS`). The README records the calibration.
- `doc/architecture/native-status-arbitration.md`: the decision table
and the wait rules.

## Verification

- RED on master (same reason as the waves):
`heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` "parks a native response_wake that
no response admitted…" fails with decision `reasonCode:
"live_continuation_registered"` and effect `{ kind:
"enqueue_continuation", continuationKind: "response_wake" }`.
`heartbeat-issue-rewake-throttle.test.ts` "throttles a
same_agent/response_wake/retry continuation…" fails 3/3 because the wake
is admitted.
- GREEN: the integration test finalizes the run, dispatches native
status wakes and runs the stranded-work sweep three times. It asserts
one run total, one wake request, no recovery action, the task
`in_progress`, and the projection "Waiting for a reply".
- `heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` "delays a no-progress native
continuation until the rewake cooldown…" finalizes a real `same_agent`
continuation after a no-progress run, dispatches twice (one throttle
receipt, intent stays `queued`, deadline equals `nextAllowedAt`), then
dispatches after the cooldown and gets the run. It fails when the
dispatcher drops the throttled intent.
- Focused suites pass: `heartbeat-process-recovery`,
`heartbeat-issue-rewake-throttle`, `status-arbiter`,
`native-status-arbiter-corpus`, `runtime-mode`, `execution-projection`,
`chat-run-milestone-work`, `heartbeat-dependency-scheduling`,
`heartbeat-run-summary` (904 tests), and all restart-chaos unit tests
(584 tests). `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passes.
- Universal audit over the 17 saved waves of 2026-11-11: U5 flags 12
tasks, all looping tasks (12 to 66 runs), and 0 tasks on all-pass waves.
- Chaos rerun of local warm seed 5101 (W2, W2Q, W2C): result is added in
a comment on this PR.

## Risks

- Behavioral shift: a model that reports `response_wake` to mean
"continue now" no longer gets an immediate run. The task waits visibly
for a reply. The runner prompt already describes `response_wake` as a
real response wait, and `same_agent` stays available for server-owned
continuations.
- The throttle now applies to native runs. A chain of declared
continuations with no issue-visible output (no comment, document, work
product or other activity) waits for the cooldown after the second such
run. `same_agent` continuations are server-owned (repository
preparation), so this affects only repeated no-output chains.
- Old saved state: decisions committed under `phase6-v13` keep their
recorded effects. A run that finalizes after deploy uses the new policy.
No migration.
- Budget hard-stop behavior is unchanged.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, via Claude Code with
tool use (shell, file edits, test runs).

## 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>
2026-11-11 15:40:44 -06:00
DottaandClaude 80b2369f26 fix(native): keep remote runnerd exit evidence and report it on failed recovery (#20907)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Native runs on Daytona start a detached `paperclip-runnerd` in the
sandbox, and the controller adopts it after a restart
> - On staging, recovery fails with
`runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable` when the Runner is gone,
but nobody can see why it exited
> - The launch script sends runnerd's stdout and stderr to `/dev/null`,
so only a panic or a graceful error reaches `runnerd.stderr.log`, and
the recovery event does not read that file
> - This pull request keeps runnerd's stderr in a bounded file in its
private diagnostics directory, and adds the exit reason to the
`native.remote_runner_recovery_failed` event
> - The benefit is that the reason a Runner exited shows in the run log
on staging without SSH, which the class R investigation needs

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
Staging runs fail with `runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`
after the remote Runner exits (`native.remote_runner_recovery_failed`
with `stage: process_verification`, `reason: process_not_running`). The
event does not say why the Runner exited.

**What did you expect?**
The run log names the Runner's exit reason: its durable
`recoverableFailure` and diagnostics, and what it wrote to stderr.

**Steps to reproduce**
Restart-chaos re-wake and stall cells reproduce the refusal. Each failed
run log shows only `runnerLifecycle` and `runnerSettled`.

Refs #20893

## What Changed

- `REMOTE_RUNNER_CHILD_LAUNCH_SCRIPT` sends runnerd's stderr to
`diagnostics/runnerd.process-stderr.log` (mode 0600, in the 0700
directory) instead of `/dev/null`.
  - At launch, a file above 1 MiB is rotated once to `.1`.
- While runnerd runs, a detached trimmer is a disk backstop. Past 8 MiB,
it keeps the last 1 MiB. It checks every 15 s and ends when runnerd
ends. It is double-forked with its own argv, so it is not a child of
runnerd and does not carry runnerd's arguments. runnerd's own exit
reason goes to `runnerd.stderr.log`, which is never trimmed.
- A symlink or non-file at that path keeps the old `/dev/null` behavior.
- Stdout is unchanged (`/dev/null`). Runnerd's PID is still the launch
shell's PID, so the identity marker and fingerprint are unchanged.
- `remote-runner-recovery-diagnostics.ts` has a read-only
`REMOTE_RUNNER_EXIT_EVIDENCE_SCRIPT`. It prints a 2 KiB tail of
`runnerd.stderr.log` and of `runnerd.process-stderr.log`. It reads the
session diagnostics directory first, then the shared runtime-root
directory used by external Runners (Dot, Muse, grok_bot). It never reads
through a symlink. Each file keeps its own share of the 4 KiB budget.
- When recovery's process verification finds `process_not_running`, the
diagnostic adds these fields:
- `runnerRecoverableFailure`: a code-shaped string from
`runner-state.json`;
- `runnerDiagnostics`: the last 4 entries, redacted, 500 characters
each;
  - `runnerExitEvidence`: the redacted file tails, 4 KiB at most.
  
  `native.remote_runner_recovery_failed` carries them.
- The live process monitor's exit report now puts the durable state
summary first, then the file tails. Before, it used one or the other.
- `run-failure-diagnostics.ts` is unchanged. It still copies only the
closed labels, so no free text reaches failure reports.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/native-runtime/remote-runner-launch-stderr.test.ts`:
the launch writer keeps stderr in the file, writes the identity marker
with the child's PID, appends across relaunches, rotates an oversized
file, trims a growing file while the child runs, and never writes
through a symlink.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/native-runtime/remote-runner-recovery-diagnostics.test.ts`:
the evidence script output is bounded and refuses symlinks. Redaction
and bounds hold, and the new fields survive the event payload.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.test.ts`
passes (1374 tests). One expectation was updated for the combined exit
report.
- `npx tsc --noEmit -p server/tsconfig.json` is clean.
- Older runner images: the script is server-side. It adds only `wc`,
`tr`, `tail`, `cat`, `mv`, `sleep` and `kill`. The script already needed
`node`, `date`, `chmod`, `mv` and `printf`, so any image that launched
runnerd before has these tools. The runner content ID is unchanged, so
the current Daytona image runs it unmodified. The restart-chaos waves
run on that image.

## Risks

- Low. A sandbox disk that is already full could make the stderr
redirect fail. `exec ... 2>>file` then fails, and the launch reports
`runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable` the same way a launch that
cannot write its identity marker does. The marker is written first, in
the same directory tree.
- Stderr content stays in the sandbox. Only a redacted 4 KiB tail goes
into the instance's own run log (run-log data path; not Telemetry and
not Observability).
- No wait is added before `turn.start`. The evidence read runs only on
the recovery failure path, with its own 10 s bound.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), via Claude Code with tool use
(shell, file edits, test runs).

## 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 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 15:31:04 -06:00
DottaandClaude Fable 5.2 b2779054d4 fix(issues): let a native run hand its own task to a person without cancelling itself (#20884)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - A task has one assignee. An agent often finishes its work by handing
its own task to a person for review.
> - The task update route stops the outgoing run before it saves a
reassignment.
> - Since #16082, a legacy run that hands its own task to a person is
exempt, so it finishes its turn. Native runs were not exempt.
> - On staging, a native run (ACPX Claude, 11.5 minutes of work) sent
`PATCH /api/issues/{id}` to hand its task to a person. The route
cancelled that run with `issue_reassigned`. The agent saw
`api_transport_failure`. The task moved to the person, but it kept a
stale execution blocker ("Saved work recovered. Send a message to
continue.").
> - The native runtime assumes a running run still owns its task. So
widening the exemption alone is not enough: the run then fails after its
result is accepted, and its finalizer can act on the person's task.
> - This pull request applies the exemption to native runs and makes the
native terminal fence, restart recovery and finalizer handle a run that
gave its task away.
> - The benefit is that an agent can hand its task to a person and
finish normally, with no blocker on the person's task.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16082 (legacy exemption). Related: #20541 (agent-to-agent self
handoff) and #18293 (agent key handoff). Those PRs cover other actors
and targets. This PR covers native runs that hand their task to a
person.

**What happened?**

A native agent run handed its own task to a person (`assigneeAgentId:
null`, `assigneeUserId`, status `in_review`) through its signed run
token. The route cancelled the run that sent the request
(`issue_reassigned`, "Cancelled before issue reassignment"). The
cancelled native run then went through workspace recovery. The person's
task kept an execution blocker with `restore_failed`.

**Expected behavior**

The run that hands its own task to a person keeps running and finishes
its turn. The task rests `in_review` with the person. No execution
blocker or recovery action stays on the task. The outgoing run cannot
change the task after the hand-off.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Run a native agent on its assigned task.
2. From that run, send `PATCH /api/issues/{id}` with `assigneeAgentId:
null`, a person's `assigneeUserId`, and status `in_review`.
3. Before this fix, the route cancels the run with `issue_reassigned`.

**Why the exemption was legacy-only**

#16082 limited the exemption to the run shape of its incident and kept a
verified stop for every other case. The new H2 chaos workload showed why
native needed more than the route change. With only the route widened:

1. The run's terminal fence `assertCurrentWakeCommentsRead` requires the
run to still own the task. It threw
`native_current_wake_comments_binding_changed` after the result was
accepted. The run then failed with `native_session_lease_lost`, and its
finalizer recorded `workspace_finalization_failed` as an agent-owned
recovery on the person's task.
2. A restart after the hand-off left the run `running`, because restart
recovery refused it with `issue_execution_lock_changed`.
3. The native finalizer only superseded a `done` decision. A
`needs_review` report moved the person's task back to `in_progress` and
queued a continuation for the outgoing agent.
4. The REST guard against the outgoing run's later mutations
(`issue_handed_off`) applied to legacy runs only.

## What Changed

- `server/src/routes/issues.ts`: the signed current-run human
self-handoff exemption now applies to native runs. All other checks
stay: exact run, agent, company and task, `agent_jwt` source, human
recipient. For a native run the route first records the hand-off on the
run (`resultJson.humanSelfHandoff`, new `native-human-self-handoff.ts`).
Board reassignment, agent keys, and handoffs to an agent or to nobody
still stop the outgoing run.
- `current-wake-comments.ts`: the terminal fence accepts a run whose
recorded hand-off matches the person who now owns the task. Without the
record (for example a board reassignment), or after a later
reassignment, it still refuses.
- `native-restart-recovery.ts`: after a restart, a handed-off run is not
resumed. It passes the execution-lock check and is then settled by the
existing ownership gate (`task_ownership_or_status_changed`) without
changing the person's task, instead of staying `running`.
- `status-arbiter.ts` and `native-run-finalizer.ts`:
`supersedeHandedOffDecision` keeps the person's task status and strips
retries, continuations, owner wakes, recoveries, blockers and reviewer
bindings, also from decisions that already preserve the status. Two
effects stay: a governed request's interaction, and the
workspace-finalization repair, so saved work is not lost. Review runs
are not affected.
- `server/src/run-task-ownership.ts` (renamed from
`legacy-run-task-ownership.ts`): `assertHandedOffRunTaskOwnership`
rejects later task mutations from the outgoing legacy or native run, in
the route and under the update transaction's locks.
- `tests/restart-chaos/`: new opt-in workload `H2`. The agent saves a
brief, then hands the task to its creator in review as its last step.
The oracle requires the task to rest `in_review` with the creator, every
run to settle without `issue_reassigned`, readable non-empty run
history, and no execution blocker or active recovery action.
- Docs: `doc/execution-semantics.md`, task feature map and agent access
map, chaos README.

## Verification

- Red on `origin/master` (same tests, master source): the route cancels
the native run (500, and 409
`runner_goal_reassignment_stop_unconfirmed`); the finalizer moves the
person's task to `in_progress` with a continuation for the outgoing
agent; a late `done` from the outgoing native run closes the person's
task.
- Red chaos wave on master's server (`--server-from` a master checkout,
`--adapters claude --workloads H2 --faults K1 --matrix`): 0/2 pass. Both
runs ended `cancelled` / `issue_reassigned`
(`T:handoff_did_not_cancel_run`).
- Green focused tests on this branch:
- `native-human-self-handoff.test.ts` (embedded Postgres): hand-off
through the real issue service; the run stays `running`; `done`,
`needs_review` and failed-turn reports leave the task `in_review` with
the person, with `getExecutionBlocker` null and no recovery action; the
terminal fence accepts only the recorded hand-off; a late change from
the outgoing run fails with `issue_handed_off`; pure policy cases.
- `issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts`: native and legacy
self-handoffs persist without `cancelRun`, and native records the
hand-off before the update. Board, agent key, other run, task, agent and
company still stop the run.
- Native runtime suite (restart recovery, wake comments, arbiter,
stale-owner completion), `issues-service`, `low-trust-red-team-routes`:
pass. Server and restart-chaos typecheck pass. `node
scripts/check-maps.mjs` passes.
- Green chaos waves on this branch (local, `--adapters claude
--workloads H2`):
- `--matrix --faults K1 --seed 4459`: 2/2 pass (K0 baseline and a K1
crossing).
- `--tasks 3 --faults K1 --fault-after-seconds 60` and
`--fault-after-seconds 100`: 3/3 pass each. In the first, all three
restarts landed after the hand-off while the runs were live; the runs
settled and the tasks stayed with the person.
- The final waves ran on the pre-rebase head `8a2a3b6a74`. The rebase
onto master only merged the chaos workload lists (`types.ts`,
`config.ts`, `journeys.ts`). No Daytona wave was run.

## Risks

- The outgoing native turn keeps running after the person owns the task.
Its native task tools already require the run to own the task, so they
refuse (`paperclip_runner_tool_binding_not_authorized`). Its REST
mutations are rejected with `issue_handed_off`.
- A restart after the hand-off settles the run as failed
(`native_restart_recovery_blocked`) instead of resuming it. The person's
task is not changed and needs no Retry.
- The finalizer rule covers any native run whose task belongs to a
person at finalization, not only a self-handoff. Before this change such
a run could still move the person's task and queue its own continuation.
- Saved state: `resultJson.humanSelfHandoff` is a new optional run key.
An older server ignores it, so a run handed off on the new server and
finished on an old one fails its fence as today. No schema change.
- No API shape change.

> 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

- Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-opus-5-5`, through Claude Code
with tool use and code execution. The session does not expose the
context window or reasoning mode.

## 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 Fable 5.2 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 15:30:59 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 7cd5558e41 fix(authz): send agents denied a cost-recording route to the Costs page (#20922)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - When an agent is denied a board-only action, the denial names the
board page where a person can do it, and agents relay that link
> - Cost recording retry ("Retry cost recording") is board-only and
lives on the run's row on the Costs page
> - The denial for every `/companies/:id/costs` route named the Budgets
page instead
> - So an agent asked to fix a run's missing cost sent the person to
Budgets, where the control does not exist
> - This pull request maps cost routes to the Costs page and names that
page in the retry route's catalog entry
> - The benefit is that the person lands on the control the agent told
them to use

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**
In paid chat eval run 43086418488
(`budgets-costs.repair-cost-recording`), the CEO tried `POST
/api/companies/{companyId}/costs/retry-accounting`, got `403
board_access_required` whose remediation said `[Open
budgets](/<prefix>/activity/budgets)`, and told the person to use the
retry on Budgets. The retry control is on the Costs page.

**Expected behavior**
Board denials for cost routes name `[Open
costs](/<prefix>/activity/costs)`. Budget and budget-incident routes
still name Budgets.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. As an agent, call `POST
/api/companies/{companyId}/costs/retry-accounting`.
2. Read the 403 `remediation`.
3. It links `/<prefix>/activity/budgets`, a page with no cost retry
control.

## What Changed

- `server/src/routes/authz.ts`: `COMPANY_COSTS_PAGE`
(`/<prefix>/activity/costs`); `/companies/:id/costs/*` denials use it.
Budgets and budget incidents keep `COMPANY_BUDGETS_PAGE`.
- `server/src/routes/openapi.ts`: the retry route's description says a
board user retries with Retry cost recording on the run's row on the
Costs page.
- `board-access-denial.test.ts`: regression row for the retry route (red
before the change, green after).

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run src/__tests__/board-access-denial.test.ts
src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/agent-refusal-finality.test.ts
src/__tests__/cost-data-quality-routes.test.ts
src/services/native-runtime/runner-api.test.ts` (server): all pass. The
new row fails without the `authz.ts` change.
- End-to-end: the chat eval case `budgets-costs.repair-cost-recording`
grades that the agent's guidance links the Costs page; it will be rerun
after this merges.

## Risks

- Low. Only the link text and target in cost-route denials and one
catalog description change. Agents that previously relayed Budgets now
relay Costs.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), 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>
2026-11-11 14:54:36 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 fc14f1ade2 fix(execution): keep resumed native runs alive past a stale finalization deadline (#20920)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The execution control reconciler bounds how long a run may spend
settling after its provider work ends
> - A run deadline from one attempt stayed on the run row after the run
was handed to a same-run resume or a restart claim
> - The reconciler then failed the resumed, live run with
`execution_finalization_deadline_exceeded` and told a person to inspect
the provider
> - This breaks two product rules: recovery must work without a person,
and users must not get operator instructions
> - This pull request makes a live native owner or a scheduled same-run
resume the owner of the run, and it replaces the operator text with
plain wording and Retry
> - The benefit is that runs that recover after a restart keep running,
and a genuine expiry shows plain words and one working Retry

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No public issue exists. This is the bug description, in the fields of
`.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml`.

**What happened?**

On a hosted deploy, 11 tasks became blocked with
`execution_finalization_deadline_exceeded` in two hours. Three runs had
the same sequence. The native session failed or the server restarted. A
same-run resume or a restart claim then took the run. The new controller
held a live native lease and prepared the run again. The reconciler then
found the earlier attempt's run deadline and failed the run. The
recorded original failure code was empty, so no real failure caused the
block. The run error told a person to inspect the failed run and verify
that its provider stopped.

**Expected behavior**

A run that a live controller owns, or that has a scheduled same-run
resume, continues. A deadline that really expires shows plain wording
and a working Retry. Users do not get operator instructions.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Save a running native run with an `executionControlDeadlineAt` in the
past.
2. Give its finalization row a live lease (a restart claim), or phase
`retryable_failure` with no lease (a scheduled resume).
3. Run `reconcileAbandonedExecutionControl`.
4. The run fails with `execution_finalization_deadline_exceeded`, and
its error tells a person to inspect the provider.

**Paperclip version or commit**

`master` at 6154b9485e.

**Deployment mode**

Hosted (cloud) instance with Daytona remote sandboxes.

**Agent adapter(s) involved**

Not adapter-specific (core bug). Seen with Codex and OpenCode native
runs.

## What Changed

- `execution-control-reconciliation.ts`: when a running native run has
no accepted result and its finalization owner holds a live lease or has
a scheduled same-run resume, the reconciler clears the stale run
deadline and does not fail the run.
- `execution-control-reconciliation.ts`: when the live owner's own
settlement deadline is due, the reconciler moves the deadline to the
lease expiry. It surfaces the failure only after that lease lapses.
- `execution-control-deadline.ts`: adds the cause constant and a plain
message. The reconciler writes this message to the run error, the run
next action, and the recovery action.
- `execution-blocker.ts`: a run saved by an earlier release with this
error code, and an active recovery action with this cause, show the
plain message. Retry stays available. No migration is needed.
- `doc/execution-semantics.md`: documents that a control deadline bounds
one attempt and not a later attempt of the same run.

## Verification

- Red before the fix (5 failures): `npx vitest run
src/services/execution-control-reconciliation.test.ts
src/services/execution-blocker-read.test.ts` in `server/`. The
resumed-run cases failed with `expected 1 to be +0` (the run was
surfaced as failed). The wording cases received the old operator text.
- Green after the fix: the same command passes, 46 of 46.
- Related files pass: `execution-control-work`, `task-retry`,
`workspace-recovery-warm-handoff`, `native-safe-replacement`,
`closed-native-receipt-accounting`, `execution-recovery-resolution`,
`workspace-recovery-admission`, `execution-projection`.
- `npx tsc --noEmit -p server/tsconfig.json` passes.
- `pnpm verify` selects a broad plan because
`doc/execution-semantics.md` changed. CI supplies that coverage.
- Previous-release story: in-flight rows with a stale run deadline and a
live owner continue after deploy. Rows that an earlier release already
failed show plain wording and Retry when read. No schema change.

## Risks

- A native owner that keeps renewing its lease while its settlement
hangs is not failed by this backstop until the lease lapses. The
executor stops lease renewal before it starts failure settlement, so the
wait is bounded by one lease period.
- A scheduled same-run resume now owns the run. Restart recovery
reschedules these resumes at boot. A coordinator deadline that is due
still surfaces the failure.
- Tasks that an earlier release already blocked keep their block. They
now show plain wording and Retry. Chat-bound tasks keep their existing
"send a message" continuation.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (claude-opus-5-5), Anthropic, 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>
2026-11-11 14:13:56 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 34f71f7d57 fix(server): defer a run that meets a busy agent directory instead of failing it (#20829)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Each run of an agent with managed agent files gets a private copy of
the agent directory. Remote copies serialize their prepare, checkpoint,
collect, and release operations through one Postgres advisory lock per
agent, taken with `pg_try_advisory_xact_lock`
> - When the lock is busy, the operation fails at once with "Agent
directory operation is already active"
> - On staging, a deploy restarted the controller while three runs of
the same agent were active. When one run resumed, another run of that
agent was checkpointing its directory. The resume failed, used its last
attempt, and the task became blocked with "Retry or send a message"
> - A run must not fail because another run of the same agent is briefly
using the agent directory
> - This pull request keeps the fail-fast lock and, when it is busy
during preparation, puts the same native run back on the existing
same-run retry schedule a few seconds later
> - The benefit is that lock contention delays a run by seconds instead
of ending it as failed

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
A task's run failed with `native_continuation_requires_reconciliation`
and the error "Agent directory operation is already active". The task
was blocked and asked the user to retry. The same error ended at least
two other runs of the same agent within one day.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Use an agent with managed agent files in a remote sandbox.
2. Let one run of the agent checkpoint or collect its agent directory.
3. At the same time, let another run of the same agent prepare (for
example, a same-run resume after a controller restart).
4. The second run fails immediately with "Agent directory operation is
already active".

**Expected behavior**
The second run waits until the first operation is done, then continues.
It does not end as failed.

## What Changed

- `server/src/services/agent-directory-working-copies.ts`: The busy lock
now throws `AgentDirectoryOperationBusyError`, still a 409 with the same
message. Lock behavior is unchanged from `master`: a fail-fast
`pg_try_advisory_xact_lock` held for the life of the holder's
transaction.
- `server/src/services/heartbeat/agent-directory-busy.ts`:
`prepareWithAgentDirectoryDeferral` wraps only instruction preparation
and turns the busy error into `AgentDirectoryPreparationDeferral`
("Another run of this agent is still using its files"). A busy lock met
while collecting files after a turn is not wrapped and keeps its
existing path.
- **Before native admission** (a brand-new run, such as the first run of
a task): `server/src/services/heartbeat/retries.ts`
`finalizeAgentDirectoryBusyDeferral` cancels the run as an expected
control-plane wait (`providerWorkStarted: false`) and schedules an
`agent_directory_busy` retry 5–15 seconds later. The task keeps its
execution lock on the retry. The lane spends no failure retries
(`execution-recovery-attempt.ts`), its count is the retry run's
`scheduledRetryAttempt`, and it stops after 30 attempts.
`pre-dispatch-execution-evidence.ts` classifies this wait like the
existing workspace and AI-connection waits, so retry scheduling does not
ask for reconciliation.
- **A resumed native run**:
`server/src/services/native-runtime/native-controller-recovery.ts`
`deferNativeRunForBusyAgentDirectory` keeps the same run on the existing
same-run retry schedule without spending an attempt. It uses the same
guards as `deferNativeControllerRecovery`: it locks the task, requires
the task's execution run to be this run, requires the current lease
owner, and refuses after a Stop, a startup cancellation or a pending
native cancellation, so those settle normally. Its count is stored in
the run's `contextSnapshot`, which a resume claim does not clear, and it
stops after 30.
- `server/src/services/heartbeat.ts`: routes a preparation deferral to
the same-run path or, before admission, to the scheduled-retry path.
After the bound it follows the normal failure path with the plain
message.
- No schema or migration. Postgres releases a dead holder's advisory
lock with its session. The staging evidence showed a live holder
(another run's checkpoint), not a stale one.
- `doc/DEVELOPING.md`: Documented both paths and the bound.

Earlier revisions of this PR waited on the lock and added idle-session
expiry, keepalive, ownership fences, fenced remote removal and attempt
slots. This revision removes all of them.

### How the directory-wait retry keeps the original wake

The retry no longer replaces the wake. `scheduleBoundedRetryForRun`
takes `preserveWakeContext` for this wait: the retry keeps the original
`wakeReason`, `retryReason` and the whole wake context (interaction,
comment, continuation and admission fields), and its wake request keeps
the original reason. The wait is recorded separately as
`preparationWait: { kind: "agent_directory_busy", attempt, nextAttemptAt
}`, next to the carried `executionRetryAccounting`. Gates that key on
the wake reason therefore treat the retry exactly as they treated the
original wake.

| # | Site | Treatment for the directory wait | Why |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | `heartbeat/retries.ts` `scheduleBoundedRetryForRun` | Changed:
`preserveWakeContext` keeps the original wake context and reason and
adds `preparationWait` | Root cause: the retry overwrote the wake reason
|
| 2 | `run-dispatch/domain/wake-context.ts`
`isResolvedInteractionContinuationWakeContext` /
`PREPARATION_WAIT_RETRY_REASONS` | Special case removed | The original
wake context is kept, so the continuation is classified from it |
| 3 | `heartbeat/retries.ts` `interactionRunnerWait` | Special case
removed | The interaction fields are kept in the context |
| 4 | `run-dispatch/adapters/postgres.ts` scheduled-retry dependency
facts | Changed: a preparation-wait retry whose original wake was
admitted as a dependency-blocked interaction
(`dependencyBlockedInteraction`, recorded at wake time) is admitted the
same way | Without the wait the original wake would have run; this gate
is only met because of the wait |
| 5 | `run-dispatch/domain/wake-context.ts`
`isNonAssigneeWorkspaceBusyRetry` + `heartbeat/retries.ts`
`finalizeAgentDirectoryBusyDeferral` | Kept:
`preparationWaitDeferredWhileAssignee`, derived only from the recorded
admission authority | The scheduled-retry ownership gate has no
wake-reason path; the workspace and AI waits use the same recorded flag
|
| 6 | `heartbeat/retries.ts` explicit user continuation admission |
Kept: admits the `agent_directory_busy` scheduling reason | The
successor needs its own authorization receipt |
| 7 | `execution-recovery-attempt.ts` uncharged lane and
`agentDirectoryWaits` | Kept | Cap and accounting |
| 8 | `pre-dispatch-execution-evidence.ts` (`isPreDispatchResourceWait`,
`isAgentDirectoryPreparationWait`), used by
`legacy-execution-recovery.ts`, `cancelled-native-startup.ts`,
`explicit-native-continuation.ts` | Kept | Describe the cancelled
pre-provider parent run, not the retry's wake |
| 9 | `explicit-native-continuation.ts`
`undeliveredLegacyUserCommentIds`, `run-dispatch/adapters/postgres.ts`
`unstartedUserTurnOrigin` | Kept | The cancelled parent did not consume
the user's comment |
| 10 | `execution-projection.ts` label and saved accounting,
`task-interruption-presentation.ts`, UI toast and chat suppression |
Kept | Presentation of the wait |
| 11 | `run-dispatch/domain/policy.ts` AI-wait lock requirement;
AI-subscription lock recheck; AI wait detection
(`execution-configuration.ts`, `provider-limit-wait.ts`, `heartbeat.ts`,
`ai-connections.ts`, `ai-connection-runtime.ts`, `local-ai-login.ts`) |
Not applicable | AI-subscription specific |
| 12 | `workspace-busy-wait.ts`, `environment-selection.ts`,
`workspace-preparation.ts`, UI workspace-holder banners | Not applicable
| Workspace holder parking; the directory wait is a timed retry |
| 13 | `cancelled-native-startup.ts` paused workspace-retry repair;
`failureRetriesBefore*Wait` | Not applicable | Historical workspace and
AI records only; every directory wait saves its ledger |
| 14 | `failedRunRetryBudgetSpent`; storage-wait exhaustion escalation;
`status-relevance.ts` `isAdmissionWait` | Not applicable | A directory
wait never fails the run, stops at its own bound, and its run has
started |

## Verification

- Original wake kinds after a directory wait
(`heartbeat-agent-directory-busy.test.ts`, real heartbeat): an
assignment runs; a plain user comment on a dependency-blocked task is
answered with `dependencyBlockedInteraction`; an accepted interaction
continuation keeps its parked-task and reassignment gates; a user
message continuation runs with its comment; an accepted non-assignee
mention runs; and a reassignment during preparation does not let the
previous assignee restart. Each retry keeps the original `wakeReason`
and records `preparationWait`. With `preserveWakeContext` off, five of
these fail. Restart recovery keeps its attempt credit
(`native-runner-restart-recovery.integration.test.ts`).

- Non-assignee wake: an accepted mention for an agent other than the
assignee meets a busy directory; its retry records
`preparationWaitDeferredWhileAssignee: false`, survives promotion, runs
and succeeds once the directory is free. Without the shared clause in
`isNonAssigneeWorkspaceBusyRetry`, promotion cancels it.

- Interaction continuations: `heartbeat-agent-directory-busy.test.ts`
runs an accepted interaction continuation into a busy directory. The
retry keeps `mutation`, `interactionId`, `interactionKind` and
`interactionStatus` and is still classified as a continuation. If the
task is moved to todo, or reassigned, while the retry waits, the retry
does not run and the task stays parked or with its new owner. With the
old explicit storage/Runner lists, both cases fail.

- Red/green, new run:
`server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-agent-directory-busy.test.ts` runs a
real heartbeat for a new assignment whose first instruction preparation
meets a busy lock. Without the preparation wrapper, the run ends failed
(red). With it, the first run is cancelled as a wait, an
`agent_directory_busy` retry is scheduled with the task still locked to
it, the retry runs and succeeds, and no run of the task is failed
(green).
- Red/green, same-run: with the deferral as a no-op, the same-run
deferral tests failed (`expected false to be true`); they now pass.
- `native-controller-recovery.integration.test.ts` covers repeated
claim-and-defer cycles of a resumed run: each cycle keeps the attempt
count, cannot be claimed before the delay, stores the count on the run,
and the fourth deferral past a bound of 3 is refused. It also covers
Stop after the busy error, a foreign lease owner and a moved task (each
refused, nothing changed), a run before admission, and that a raw busy
error (as from collection) is never deferred.
- Focused suites: 232/232 passed (`agent-directory-working-copies`,
`instruction-working-copy`, `heartbeat-agent-directory-busy`,
`native-controller-recovery.integration`, `heartbeat-retry-scheduling`).
`tsc --noEmit` for `server` reports no errors in the changed files.
- Staging evidence (read-only): the failed run had a graceful restart at
07:25Z, then same-run resumes. Its third attempt failed at 07:31:08Z.
Another run of the same agent recorded a warm checkpoint receipt at
07:31:37Z. A second run of the same agent failed the same way at
07:59:46Z.

## Risks

- A deferred run waits 5 to 15 seconds per deferral, up to 30 times. If
the holder is still busy after that, the run fails as before with a
plain message.
- Before admission, deferral cancels the run and creates a retry run,
like the existing workspace-busy wait.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (claude-opus-5-5), Anthropic, 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>
2026-11-11 13:56:45 -06:00
DottaandClaude Fable 5.2 a56b648602 fix(upgrade-readiness): report restartable runs and a handoff verdict that blocks only on lost work (#20910)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A deployer can replace the server while agent runs continue. Before
the swap, it reads the upgrade-readiness report of the old server
> - The version 1 report is ready only when every active run is
adoptable and no wake admission is in flight
> - On a busy instance, new runs arrive each minute. Some runs are
always in preparation, so the report is almost never ready and the
instance does not upgrade
> - A run in preparation has done no agent work. Restart recovery starts
it again. A swap loses nothing
> - This pull request adds a `handoff` object to the report. It
separates recoverable, restartable and blocking runs
> - The benefit is that a deployer can wait only for work that a swap
would lose

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20852 (reference only; this change does not depend on it and does
not use its version 2 shape).

**What happened?**

A busy instance had 16 running runs and 1 queued run. Fourteen had a
live process. Two or three native runs had not launched a process yet.
One was a legacy run. `upgradeReadiness.ready` needs `blockingRuns === 0
&& pendingWakes === 0` in one probe. That state almost never occurs, so
the deployer never swaps the server.

**Expected behavior**

The report tells the deployer which runs a swap would lose. Runs that
only wait for a launch, and wake admissions in flight, do not block a
graceful replacement.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Keep a steady flow of new runs on an instance.
2. Read `GET /api/instance/task-drain?upgradeReadiness=1` repeatedly.
3. See `ready: false` each time, because one or more runs are in
preparation or a wake admission is in flight.

## What Changed

- `summarizeUpgradeReadiness` returns an additive `handoff` object:
`version`, `ready`, `recoverableRuns`, `restartableRuns`,
`blockingRuns`, `pendingWakes`, `unsavedWakes`.
- `handoff.ready` is true when the instance is not draining, the census
is complete, and `handoff.blockingRuns` and `handoff.unsavedWakes` are
0. Saved pending wakes do not change it.
- The wake queue tracks each public wake admission until its wake
request and queued run commit. `unsavedWakes` is the count of admissions
before that commit. Without a valid count, every pending wake is
unsaved.
- The top-level version 1 fields keep their values and meaning. `ready`
and `blockingRuns` are unchanged, so a current consumer sees no looser
verdict.
- The census query marks a run `restartable` only with all of these:
`paperclip_runner` adapter; no process identity; no provider session
before or after; no checkpoint header; no dispatched runner task; no
execution-start event. It must also be a native run in the `observed`
phase with preparation fencing and an unsettled finalization record, or
a legacy run in the `preparing` stage under a recorded controller.
- All other runs without adoption evidence stay blocking. This includes
local adapters, legacy runs with a child process, follow-up runs that
carry a provider session, and runs the census could not observe.
- The OpenAPI description and `doc/testing-native-remote-continuity.md`
describe the new fields and their limits.

Why these classes are correct on master:

- Restartable native runs: restart recovery claims a run with no
checkpoint and no provider evidence as `bootstrap_incomplete` and
executes the same run again (`native-restart-recovery.ts`
`classifyNativeRunnerRecoveryEvidence`; `heartbeat/recovery.ts` executes
each claim). A graceful shutdown suspends the run and notifies recovery.
Existing tests: "recovers an unclaimed remote startup once without
requiring a provider checkpoint" and "recovers an unclaimed remote
startup that a graceful shutdown suspended during preparation".
- Restartable legacy runs: process-loss recovery retries a `preparing`
run with `providerWorkStarted: false`. Existing test: "continues a chain
whose preparations were killed twice and then interrupted again, without
a Retry".
- Pending wakes: the count is wake admissions in flight in the process,
not queue rows. A wake commits its wake request and its queued run in
one transaction. After the commit, the next server dispatches the queued
run at startup, so a saved wake does not block. Before the commit,
nothing is saved. Shutdown waits at most 30 seconds and then exits, so
an unsaved wake can be lost and blocks.

## Verification

- `cd server && npx vitest run
src/services/heartbeat/upgrade-readiness.test.ts
src/services/heartbeat/upgrade-readiness-post-result.test.ts`: 28
passed.
- Red/green: before the implementation, the 7 new tests failed (6
summary tests, 1 PostgreSQL census test). After it, all pass.
- Red/green for unsaved wakes: a test holds the agent row lock while a
wake admission waits. Without the fix, `handoff.ready` was true with no
saved wake. With the fix, it is false with `unsavedWakes: 1`, and the
wake saves after the lock releases.
- New cases: only recoverable runs; recoverable plus unlaunched runs
plus pending wakes (`handoff.ready` true, top-level `ready` false and
`blockingRuns` unchanged); a started run without recovery evidence; an
unobserved execution; draining; truncated census.
- The PostgreSQL test changes one fact at a time (process identity,
provider session, phase, fencing, checkpoint, adapter, each
execution-start event) and expects the run to become blocking.
- `cd server && npx vitest run src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/instance-settings-routes.test.ts`: 157 passed (187 with
the two readiness files).
- `cd server && npx tsc --noEmit`: passed.
- `pnpm verify` exited 2 (a documentation path is a global CI input).
Required CI supplies the broad coverage.
- Not run: a live server replacement. The classification relies on the
existing recovery tests named above.

## Risks

- Low risk for current consumers. The change is additive and the version
1 fields are unchanged.
- `handoff.ready` is an observation at one instant. A wake admission
that starts after the probe is unsaved until it commits.
- Restart recovery applies its own proofs and a bounded attempt budget
before it starts a restartable run again. The report is an observation,
not a guarantee for each run.
- The probe adds one indexed `not exists` on run events per running row,
inside the existing two-second statement timeout.

> 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 Fable 5.2 (`claude-fable-5-2`), 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 Fable 5.2 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 13:55:47 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 fb695f7ae6 fix(secrets): let an approved binding fill a blank agent config value (#20908)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents can propose binding a company secret to another agent; a
person approves it with "Create binding" on a chat card
> - Approval refuses when the target config key already holds a
different value, so it never overwrites a working credential
> - An empty string or empty plain value also counted as "already
exists"
> - So an agent whose key was cleared could not be repaired through the
governed binding card: approval returned 409
> - This pull request treats a blank value like an unset key; non-empty
values still conflict
> - The benefit is that the supported binding approval repairs a member
with a blank credential

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20879

**What happened**
In the `teams.configure-team` chat eval, the CEO proposed binding the
company OpenRouter secret to the QA member as `env.OPENROUTER_API_KEY`.
QA's saved value was an empty string. Approving that proposal fails with
409 "Agent config path already exists: env.OPENROUTER_API_KEY".

**Expected behavior**
Approval fills a blank value (empty string or empty plain value) with
the secret reference. A non-empty value still blocks the approval.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Save an agent with `adapterConfig.env.TOKEN = ""`.
2. Have an agent propose a binding of a company secret to that agent as
`env.TOKEN`.
3. Approve the proposal as the board user.
4. The approval returns 409 and the binding is not created.

## What Changed

- `secret-proposals.ts`: `applyBindingApproval` treats `undefined`, `""`
and `{ type: "plain", value: "" }` as an unset key for both `env.<KEY>`
and other config paths.
- `secret-proposals-routes.test.ts`: regression tests for an empty
string and an empty plain value. The existing test that a non-empty
value conflicts still passes.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run src/__tests__/secret-proposals-routes.test.ts`
(in `server/`): 49 passed.
- Red check: without the service change, the two new tests fail.

## Risks

- Low risk. Only a blank value changes behavior. A blank value carries
no credential, so nothing working is replaced.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), 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>
2026-11-11 13:55:22 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 7e8901aa60 fix(recovery): let Retry and the person's answer continue a held task with a pending decision (#20872)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A native run on a remote sandbox can lose its Runner process.
Recovery then saves the sandbox files and puts an execution hold on the
task
> - The hold offers Retry. A person can also continue the task with a
new message
> - Many held tasks also have a pending decision: the question that a
parked turn asked, or an older connection request
> - Continuation admission refuses every continuation while a decision
is pending ("decision_pending"). The answer to that decision is not a
message, so admission defers it behind the hold ("execution_recovery")
> - So Retry waits for the answer and the answer waits for the hold. The
task shows a Retry that does nothing, and nothing continues it
> - This pull request lets a person's Retry pass an open question, and
lets the person's own answer continue the task through the hold
> - The benefit is that a task with a lost Runner and a pending decision
always has a control that works

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
On staging, the same-run retry of six remote native runs found the
Runner process gone (`process_not_running`, lifecycle `ready`). Each run
failed with `runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`. Saved-work
recovery then recovered the sandbox files, and the task showed "Saved
work recovered. Retry or send a message to continue." with `canRetry:
true`. Four of these tasks also had a pending decision: the question
that the parked turn asked, or an older pending connection request. For
those tasks, Retry is deferred with `decision_pending`, and an answer to
the decision is deferred with `execution_recovery`. No control continues
the task.

**What did you expect to happen?**
Retry starts one new run. The person's answer to the pending decision
also continues the task.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. A remote native run asks the user a question and parks the turn.
2. The Runner process exits. The same-run retry fails with
`runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`.
3. Saved-work recovery recovers the files. The task offers Retry.
4. Click Retry: the Retry waits with "A pending approval or question
must be resolved before this message can start."
5. Answer the question: the answer waits with "Waiting for execution
recovery. Your message is saved."

Refs #20838, #20853

## What Changed

- `admitExplicitNativeContinuation`
(`server/src/services/explicit-native-continuation.ts`): a task Retry is
no longer held by a plain pending question (`ask_user_questions`) or
connection request (`connection_intent`). Any interaction with approval
semantics still holds Retry: a plan review (`issue_document` target), a
governed tool action, a secret proposal, a connection authorization, and
other confirmations. A pending approval still holds every continuation.
A new message supersedes a plain question, as on master, and waits for a
decision with approval semantics.
- `admitExplicitNativeContinuation`: the person's own resolution of an
interaction (`mutation: "interaction"`, answered/accepted/rejected,
resolved by the same user) is explicit user input. It continues the held
task like a new message: a fresh session, the hold resolved as
`explicitUserContinuation` with the `interactionId`, and
`issue.execution_recovery_settled` activity. It never replays the failed
run. Governed tool-action confirmations are excluded. The existing
`readQueuedInteractionResponse` reads the answer.
- `heartbeat/queue.ts`: both admission calls pass the wake payload to
the admission.
- `buildExecutionContinuation`
(`server/src/services/execution-continuation.ts`): dispatch rechecks the
user authorization. It accepted an interaction receipt only through a
saved interrupt queue, so the answered successor failed with
`continuation_user_authorization_missing`. It now also accepts the
person's own answer: the interaction named by the durable authorization
was resolved by that user and not by an agent, and the authorization
names this successor run. The check does not depend on the run's current
trigger, so a later answer that replaces the trigger cannot invalidate
it.
- New API-level test
`server/src/services/governed-wait-runner-loss.test.ts` with the two
staging shapes (a parked question from the failed run; an older
connection request on a monitor wake). It checks that Retry starts
exactly one run and leaves the decision pending, that the person's
answer starts exactly one run and settles the hold, and that an answer
resolved by a different user keeps the hold.
- `doc/execution-semantics.md`: describes the rule.

## Verification

- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/services/governed-wait-runner-loss.test.ts`: 5 passed. The answer
tests now also build the successor's continuation as dispatch does and
check that the agent receives the answer.
- Red for dispatch (first head, ac17aebe): both answer tests fail with
`continuation_user_authorization_missing`.
- Ponytail follow-ups: a two-answer test (the second answer waits behind
the successor; dispatch also holds with a replaced trigger) and 'keeps
Retry on hold while %s is pending' for four approval-bearing kinds. On
head 60beb773, 5 of these fail. Two more tests show that a new message
supersedes a plain question and waits for a plan review (both unchanged
from master). All 12 tests in the file pass now. The PR adds no code
comments; the rationale is in `doc/execution-semantics.md` and here.
- Continuation suites (execution-continuation,
execution-continuation-provenance, legacy-continuation-authority,
explicit-native-continuation, task-retry, governed-wait-runner-loss):
634 passed.
- Red on master (product hunks removed, test kept): 4 of 5 fail. Retry
tests: `successors: 0`, deferred `decision_pending`. Answer tests:
`successors: 0`, deferred `execution_recovery`. Every case asserts
`runError: "runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable"`.
- Related suites: explicit-native-continuation, task-retry,
workspace-recovery-admission, retry-workspace-continuity,
workspace-recovery-retry-copyback, workspace-recovery-fallback,
native-workspace-reconstruction, native-recovery-preparation-failure,
issue-thread-interactions-service. 957 of 959 passed. The 2 failures are
30 s `afterEach` hook timeouts in native-workspace-reconstruction; all
51 of its tests pass alone, and the same file on unchanged master shows
5 hook timeouts on this machine.
- `cd server && pnpm exec tsc --noEmit -p tsconfig.json`: passes.

## Risks

- Medium. A Retry can now start while a plain question or connection
request is pending; decisions with approval semantics still hold it. The
new run sees the open decision in its task context, and the decision's
answer still wakes the agent later. Approvals keep holding Retry, so
approval gates are unchanged.
- An answer now continues a held task in a fresh session. All other
admission gates still run: stop proof, saved-work recovery, workspace
repair, active execution, pause, budget and ownership. Only the user who
resolved the interaction can continue this way.
- This does not make recovery automatic. A task whose Runner was lost
still rests on the hold until a person clicks Retry or answers.
Automatic settlement of a parked governed wait is a separate change.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), with tool use and code execution
in an agent harness.

## 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>
2026-11-11 13:42:36 -06:00
Nicky Leach 25f0957c24 Select the AI Connection sign-in computer automatically (#20906)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agents and their AI Connections.
> - Codex and Claude subscription sign-in can run on a company agent
computer.
> - Core stores the credential and uses connection permissions to
control access.
> - The Connections page asks the user to choose a computer just to host
sign-in.
> - This change lets Core choose an eligible computer when sign-in
starts.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20410 and #20417.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

OpenAI and Anthropic subscription sign-in from Connections with an agent
computer as the sign-in environment.

**Current behavior**

The user must choose a sign-in computer before the provider flow can
start.

**Proposed behavior**

Start sign-in from the provider form. Core chooses a computer in the
company and sign-in environment. The session stays bound to that
computer and reports when no eligible computer is available.

**Reason and benefit**

The saved credential and its permissions are independent of the computer
that hosts sign-in, so users can proceed without picking an agent.

## What Changed

- Select an eligible computer when a managed Codex or Claude login
starts without an explicit target. Prefer ready computers and skip
active login leases.
- Remove the picker and let the browser resume the existing session by
environment and connection intent. Continue to honor explicit agent
targets in agent settings. Remove the unused picker fallback from the
legacy form.
- Update the AI Connections guide, the plugin environment contract, and
the OpenAPI descriptions.

## Verification

- Passed server and UI typechecks.
- Passed 317 tests across the login environment, setup-token route,
device-login service, and two UI suites. The Postgres test covers
eligibility, inherited environments, explicit targeting, occupied
computers, and the no-computer response.
- Passed 45 OpenAPI route tests.
- Reran the affected UI suites on the final revision. All 230 tests
passed.
- UI tests cover starting from the provider form and resuming both
provider flows with a server-selected target.
-
[CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/43086849302)
and [Greptile
5/5](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/20906#issuecomment-6805135968)
passed on the final commit.
- Local verification used test transports. Live provider sign-in remains
to be checked in a Cloud composition that contains this change.

## Risks

- Two sign-ins that select a computer before either lease is recorded
can contend for the same computer. The existing provider admission guard
handles the conflict. A retry can select another computer once the lease
is visible.
- The computer selection uses existing lifecycle and lease data. Plugin
admission still validates the live computer.
- No schema migration or plugin protocol change is required.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with shell execution and local test tooling.

## 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
2026-11-11 11:42:31 -08:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 eb5ad4c920 fix(cases): say a Cases-disabled denial is final and name the Experimental setting (#20892)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Cases is an experimental feature; an instance admin turns it on in
Experimental settings
> - When Cases is off, every case and workflow route answers 403 "Cases
are disabled" with no other information
> - A chat agent asked to "open a customer case" could not tell whether
the denial was final or what to offer
> - In one eval run it created a project and a task in place of the
case; in another it spent most of its turn searching routes before it
replied
> - This pull request gives the denial a code and a final, actionable
remediation, like the board-only denial
> - The benefit is a fast, truthful reply that names the setting and
lets the person choose

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**
In the chat eval cases.cases-disabled ("Open a customer case for this
bug." with Cases off), the agent got 403 "Cases are disabled". In one
run it then created a project and a bug task without asking. In a later
run it searched many routes and instance settings for about 100 seconds
before it replied.

**Expected behavior**
The denial says that Cases is off, that the denial is final, where an
instance admin turns it on, and that the agent must not create a
substitute record before the person chooses. The agent replies at once
and offers the setting or an ordinary task.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Turn off Cases in Experimental settings.
2. As an agent, call GET /api/companies/{companyId}/cases.
3. See a bare 403 "Cases are disabled" with no code or remediation.

## What Changed

- Rebased on #20894, which already gave the case routes a
`cases_disabled` code, a final remediation and the hidden-settings
check. This PR moves that remediation into one helper used by every case
and workflow path, and adds: no substitute task or project before the
person chooses, and the offer of an ordinary task.
- New `casesDisabledError()` in `server/src/services/cases-disabled.ts`:
same 403 message, plus `code: "cases_disabled"` and a remediation. The
remediation says the denial is final, forbids a substitute task or
project before the person chooses, links `[Experimental
settings](/<prefix>/company/settings/instance/experimental)`, and offers
an ordinary task.
- Native tool results carry only the error message, so the native case
tools, workflow tools and runner tool authority inline the remediation
in the message (`casesDisabledError({ inlineRemediation: true })`).
- Case routes, workflow service, case handoffs, native case tools,
native workflow tools and the runner tool authority use the helper
instead of a bare `forbidden("Cases are disabled")`.
- Tests: `cases-routes.test.ts` checks the code and remediation;
`native-case-tools.integration.test.ts` checks the native message
carries the remediation (red on master, green here).

## Verification

- `npx vitest run src/__tests__/cases-routes.test.ts
src/services/case-handoffs.test.ts
src/services/native-runtime/native-case-tools.integration.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-case-handoff.test.ts` (166 passed).
- The cases.cases-disabled chat eval is rerun on a temporary branch;
results are recorded in the PR conversation.

## Risks

- Low risk. The status and message do not change. The error body adds
`code` and `remediation`.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), 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>
2026-11-11 13:36:08 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 6dc36700b1 fix(costs): mark unpriced usage in the agent, model and project cost reports (#20889)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Cost reports show what agents and projects spent
> - A run can have usage with no known price; Paperclip saves it with
costStatus "unpriced" and costCents 0
> - The summary and the provider, biller and user reports count those
events, but the agent, agent-model and project reports did not
> - An agent that read the by-agent-model report saw a native run at
costCents 0 and told the person it cost $0.00
> - This pull request adds unpricedEventCount to those three reports and
tells agents what it means
> - The benefit is that missing charges are reported as unpriced, not as
free

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**
In the chat eval budgets-costs.spend-breakdown, the person asked "How
much did Launch cost this week, broken down by agent?". The week
included a real native run whose usage had no known price (data-quality
reason missing_price). The agent read /costs/by-agent-model and
/costs/by-project. Both returned costCents 0 for that usage and no
unpriced count. The reply showed "1 native run ($0.00)" and gave the
total as complete.

**Expected behavior**
The reports say which rows include unpriced usage. The agent says that
usage is unpriced, marks the total incomplete, and links the record.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Record one priced and one unpriced metered cost event for an agent in
a project.
2. Call GET /api/companies/{companyId}/costs/by-agent, /by-agent-model
and /by-project.
3. See costCents counts only the priced event, and no field shows the
unpriced event.

## What Changed

- `costService.byAgent`, `byAgentModel` and `byProject` return
`unpricedEventCount` (same filter as the summary: unpriced and not
subscription_included).
- Shared types `CostByAgent`, `CostByAgentModel` and `CostByProject` add
`unpricedEventCount`.
- The OpenAPI catalog entries for the cost reports that count unpriced
usage now say that costCents counts priced usage only, that unpriced
usage must be reported as unpriced (never $0.00), and that
/costs/data-quality lists those runs.
- Tests: embedded-Postgres service test (red on master, green here) and
an OpenAPI description test. A UI test fixture adds the new field.

## Verification

- `npx vitest run src/__tests__/costs-service.test.ts` (19 passed). The
new test fails with the master service.
- `npx vitest run src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts
src/services/native-runtime/runner-api.test.ts` (2146 passed).
- `tsc --noEmit` for packages/shared and server.

## Risks

- Low risk. One added aggregate column per report and an added response
field. The UI does not read it yet.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), 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>
2026-11-11 13:36:03 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 6154b9485e fix(authz): name the Experimental settings page when an agent is denied an instance experiment (#20894)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - People ask chat agents to turn on instance experiments, such as
Cases
> - Agents cannot read or change experimental instance settings, which
is correct
> - The denial they get names no page, so the agent cannot tell the
person where to act
> - The case API gate ("Cases are disabled") also names no page
> - This pull request makes both denials, and the API catalog entry,
name the Experimental settings page
> - The benefit is that the agent replies with a usable link instead of
a vague "ask an admin"

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**
An agent that asks for `GET` or `PATCH
/api/instance/settings/experimental` gets the generic board-only denial.
That denial says "Link a page only if you already know its route; do not
search for one." The case API, while Cases is off, returns only "Cases
are disabled". The agent has no route to give the person.

**Expected behavior**
The denial is final and names the page where an instance admin turns the
feature on: `[Open Experimental
settings](/<prefix>/company/settings/instance/experimental)`. If the
operator hides that page, the denial does not link it.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Use an agent API key.
2. Send `PATCH /api/instance/settings/experimental` with
`{"enableCases": true}`.
3. See a 403 with a remediation that names no page.
4. With Cases off, send `GET /api/companies/<id>/cases` with the agent
key.
5. See a 403 "Cases are disabled" with no remediation.

Refs the chat eval `instance-operations.instance-settings` (retargeted
from the removed Agent Chat toggle to Cases).

## What Changed

- `server/src/routes/authz.ts`: the board-only denial map links
Experimental settings for `/instance/settings/experimental`. It does not
link it when `instance.experimental` is hidden.
- `server/src/routes/cases.ts`: the Cases gate keeps the "Cases are
disabled" message. It adds `code: cases_disabled` and a final
remediation that names the same page (same hidden-page guard).
- `server/src/routes/openapi.ts`: the GET and PATCH catalog entries for
experimental settings name the page. They say that agent credentials
cannot read or change these settings. They give Cases (`enableCases`) as
an example.
- Regression tests in `board-access-denial.test.ts`,
`cases-routes.test.ts` and `openapi-routes.test.ts`.

## Verification

- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/board-access-denial.test.ts
src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/cases-routes.test.ts`: 107 passed.
- Red check: with the three source files reverted, 4 new assertions fail
(GET and PATCH denial links, the catalog entry, the Cases gate).
- `src/services/native-runtime/runner-api.test.ts` and
`src/__tests__/instance-settings-routes.test.ts`: pass.

## Risks

- Low risk. Only error bodies and catalog text change. Status codes and
the "Cases are disabled" message stay the same.
- The catalog text is static, so it names the page even when an operator
hides it. The denials check the hidden setting.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), 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>
2026-11-11 13:14:42 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 a589b74fbf fix(chat): name goal links, missing-name questions and component reference pages in chat guidance (#20888)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - People talk to their agents in chat, and the chat guidance tells the
agent how Paperclip works
> - Chat evals showed three gaps in that guidance
> - The agent explained a task's purpose from titles only, because the
guidance gives no goal link and no instruction to read goal descriptions
> - The agent built a full landing page with an invented product name,
because the chat guidance has no rule to ask for a missing name first
> - The agent posted a real question card or drew a text mock when the
person asked to see a card, because the guidance names the design guide
and ux-lab pages only in general
> - This pull request adds three short rules to the chat guidance
> - The benefit is grounded purpose answers with links, one necessary
question instead of placeholder work, and links to the real reference
pages

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**
In chat evals (OpenCode runner, DeepSeek flash): (1) "Why are we doing
this website task?" got an answer from titles only, with no goal links
and without the parent goal's stated reason. (2) "Build a landing page
for my new product." produced a full site named with a placeholder; the
agent never asked for the product name. (3) "Show me the standard
question card" made the agent post a real question card. "Show me how
chat looks when a tool request is denied" made the agent draw a text
mock and probe real tool requests.

**Expected behavior**
(1) The agent reads the task, project, goal and parent goals, gives the
reason that the goal descriptions state, and links each record. (2) The
agent asks one free-text question for the missing name and uses the
answer in the brief. (3) The agent links the design guide question card
or the denial ux-lab page and says they are synthetic presentation
fixtures.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run the chat evals goals.explain-purpose,
questions-and-approvals.necessary-question,
developer-labs.component-reference and
developer-labs.interaction-fixture on master.
2. Read the reply and tool events of each run.

## What Changed

- Chat guidance: goal link format `/<prefix>/goals/<goalId>`, and a rule
to explain a task's purpose from its saved goal chain (GET
/api/goals/{id}, follow parentId), link every record, and say so when
the task has no goal.
- Chat guidance: ask for a missing name (for example the product name on
a landing page) with `request_human_input` (`questions`, one required
free-text question) before building or delegating; never use a
placeholder name.
- Chat guidance: when the person asks to see a component or chat state,
link the design guide (question card states) or the named `/ux-lab/...`
pages instead of creating a real card or a mock, and say they are
synthetic fixtures.
- Tests: new red/green tests in `agent-conversations.test.ts`; they also
check that the named UI routes exist in `ui/src/App.tsx`.

## Verification

- `npx vitest run src/__tests__/agent-conversations.test.ts` (62
passed); the new tests fail on master because the text is absent.
- `npx vitest run` for heartbeat-context-summary,
heartbeat-chat-task-link, board-access-denial, task-markdown,
current-wake-comments and heartbeat-list tests (119 passed).
- The affected chat evals are rerun on a temporary branch; results are
recorded in the PR conversation.

## Risks

- Low risk. Guidance text only. The chat directive grows by about 1.6
KB.
- The missing-name rule is narrow (a name the work must carry). It must
not cause extra questions for clear requests.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), 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>
2026-11-11 13:12:52 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 c02de922af fix(chat): deliver the person's time zone to chat agents (#20898)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - People talk to agents in chat, and agents create routines and other
scheduled work from that chat
> - Paperclip does not record the person's time zone, so a chat agent
cannot read "every weekday at nine" or "today" in the person's zone
> - The agent then saves schedules in UTC, and the person gets the work
at the wrong hour
> - This pull request saves the browser time zone with the person's
personal preferences and gives it to chat agents in the task prompt
> - The benefit is that schedules and dates from chat match the person's
local time

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**
A person in America/Chicago wrote in chat: "Every weekday at nine in the
morning, summarize Launch for me." The agent saved the routine schedule
`0 9 * * 1-5` with the UTC time zone. It replied that it used UTC
because the person's time zone is not recorded.

**Expected behavior**
The agent knows the person's time zone. It saves one enabled `0 9 * *
1-5` schedule with the time zone America/Chicago. Its reply names the
zone.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open the board in a browser with the time zone America/Chicago.
2. Open a chat with an agent.
3. Send "Every weekday at nine in the morning, summarize Launch for me."
4. Look at the routine trigger that the agent creates. Its time zone is
UTC.

## What Changed

- Database: add the nullable `time_zone` column to
`user_workspace_preferences` (migration `0468`). This is an
instance-wide personal preference by user, as AGENTS.md section 5
permits.
- Shared: `WorkspacePreference` has `timeZone`.
`updateWorkspacePreferenceSchema` accepts an optional IANA `timeZone`
(max 64 characters, checked with `Intl.DateTimeFormat`).
`coordinatorWorkspaceEnabled` is now optional. The request must contain
at least one field.
- Server: the preference service returns `timeZone` and updates only the
fields in the request. The activity log entry stays the same. The
OpenAPI entry uses the shared schema.
- UI: a new `useBrowserTimeZoneSync` hook in `Layout` saves the browser
time zone one time when it is different from the saved zone. It is
silent and best-effort. It uses the selected company as the audit
context.
- Prompt: for a conversation (any adapter), the task context reads the
chat owner's saved zone. Recovery keeps the zone that the first turn
admitted. The chat block adds one line only when the zone is known:
`The person's time zone is America/Chicago (from their browser). Read
times and dates they give, such as "nine in the morning" or "today", in
that zone, and save schedules such as routine triggers with that
timezone; say the zone when you report a schedule.`

## Verification

- `cd server && npx vitest run
src/__tests__/workspace-preferences.test.ts
src/__tests__/workspace-preferences-routes.test.ts
src/services/heartbeat/task-markdown.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-task-context.test.ts
src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts
src/services/native-runtime/runner-api.test.ts`
- `cd ui && npx vitest run src/hooks/useBrowserTimeZoneSync.test.tsx
src/hooks/useCoordinatorWorkspaceEnabled.test.tsx
src/components/Layout.test.tsx`
- Red/green: without the task-context and task-markdown changes, the two
new prompt tests fail. With the changes, they pass.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` is clean. `tsc --noEmit` passes for
`packages/shared` and `packages/db`.
- Manual: open the board in a browser with a non-UTC zone. Then ask a
chat agent to create a weekday routine at nine in the morning. The
trigger uses the browser zone.

## Risks

- Low risk. The migration adds one nullable column.
- The PUT body is now more flexible: `coordinatorWorkspaceEnabled` is
optional. An empty body still gets a 400 response.
- The prompt grows by one line only for conversations with a known zone.
- The saved zone changes when the person uses a browser in a different
zone. The latest browser wins.

> 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`), 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>
2026-11-11 13:11:57 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 683fd1e9a5 test(restart-chaos): cells for staging's no-restart failures (re-wake, Nth recovery step, long turn, K15 without volume) (#20893)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The restart-chaos harness (`tests/restart-chaos/`) tests that agent
work survives control-plane faults
> - In one 8-hour staging window, 20 of 25 failed runs happened with no
restart at all, so the harness did not see them
> - The harness had blind spots: one short task per agent, no wake right
after a successful run, no fault in a later recovery step, short turns,
and a redeploy that always keeps its instance home
> - This pull request adds cells for those shapes, so the harness
reproduces these failure classes on master
> - The benefit is that fixes for these classes can be proven red and
green with the harness, without staging

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
On staging, an agent ran 10–13 tasks at once on reused sandboxes. 30–60
s after a long run succeeded, an ordinary wake (a comment or an issue
monitor) started the next run of the same task. That run or its recovery
failed before any provider work, with errors such as
`runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`, `Controller journal drain
timed out` and `journal_tool_input_unanswered`. Other failures happened
in a later recovery step (a held agent-directory lock, a missing runtime
asset after a deploy without a volume).

**Expected behavior**
The chaos harness can reproduce each of these shapes on demand, and
grades them: no failed attempt, every task `done`, and no task left
blocked without a working Retry.

**Steps to reproduce**
See the commands in the README sections "Re-wake after success", "Fail
the Nth recovery step", "Long turn" and "Redeploy without a volume, with
overlap".

Related: #20844 (session fault SR1). W2C is the configuration change
after a successful run; SR1 is the same change while a question is
parked. This PR does not add or change `session-faults.ts`.

## What Changed

- New workloads W2, W2Q, W2C (`rewake.ts`): phase 1 ends with the task
left open; the harness, as the board, wakes the same task the seeded
0–60 s after its run settled. W2 uses a comment or a board-scheduled
issue monitor (by nonce). W2Q parks on an unanswered
`request_human_input` question and is woken by a comment before the
answer. W2C changes the agent's `adapterConfig.idleTimeoutMs` before the
wake. Oracle: phase 1 succeeded, the wake was served by a run that
succeeded, `no_failed_attempt`, `done`, markers.
- `--faults K0`: cells with no fault, for workloads whose shape is the
fault.
- `--fail-recovery-step <step>[:<nth>]` (`recovery-step-faults.ts`):
when the wave's first restart fault starts its replacement, the harness
arms one crash point in a new fail mode; the nth hit throws the error of
the real step, once. Steps: `runnerd-start` (`spawn paperclip-runnerd
EAGAIN`), `teardown` (provider destroy did not finish), `directory-lock`
(`Agent directory operation is already active`). Crossed tasks get
`recovery_step_failed_once` and `no_failed_attempt`.
- Crash points (`packages/shared/src/crash-points.ts`): fail mode in the
control file (`<token> <name>:<nth> fail [pid=<n>]`), with an optional
call-site error; `pid=` binds the line to one server process. The
harness arms the step for the replacement only and disarms it once its
receipt lands. New point
`agent_directory.operation_lock.before_acquire`. The teardown point
moved into its `try`, so fail mode behaves like a failed provider
destroy; kill mode is unchanged. All points stay disarmed under
`NODE_ENV=production`. The runner package's own crash-point copy is not
changed (runner image content ID unchanged).
- `--long-turn-minutes <n>` (`long-turn.ts`, 15–60, opt-in): every
task's first turn runs rounds of real tool work for n minutes before its
workload. Checks `long_turn_rounds` and `long_turn_run_observed`.
- K15 `--k15-fresh-home` (Daytona) and `--k15-overlap-seconds
<min>-<max>` (`redeploy.ts`, `supervisor.ts`, `edge-proxy.ts`): each
deploy generation gets a new, empty instance home and no volume
variables; the next generation boots beside the old one behind an edge
proxy on the wave's port, takes traffic once ready, and the old one gets
SIGTERM after the overlap.
- `tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.json`: refreshed pins for
the changed shared crash-point files.
- README: one section per new cell, with what it covers.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/restart-chaos/vitest.config.ts`
(48 files, 581 tests after rebasing on master, includes the new
`shape-cells.test.ts`).
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/crash-points.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/crash-point-call-sites.test.ts` (fail mode, call
sites).
- `node scripts/typecheck-test-projects.mjs tests/restart-chaos`.
- Chaos waves on master `1d67e309e0` server code (Daytona image
`ghcr.io/paperclipai/paperclip-daytona-runner@sha256:99fc2671fc320816407f63cffd3acbd27471621febcd26494fe25bb5d7c5dd77`,
content ID `1836c515…`), all RED unless noted:

| Cell | Wave | Result on master | Staging class |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| W2/W2Q/W2C, 10 tasks on one Codex agent, `--daytona-warm`, K0 |
`w-20261111T163206-s5201` | 9/10 fail. 3 tasks (W2 t02, W2C t03, t06):
first fault `native_runner_process_exited`, same-run reattach,
`native.remote_runner_recovery_failed` with `stage:
process_verification`, `reason: process_not_running`, `runnerLifecycle:
ready`, `runnerSettled: false`, terminal
`runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`, "Workspace repair
required". 3 tasks (t04, t08, t10): `native_restart_recovery_blocked`
(`native_retry_source_superseded`) while its successor ran (R4
`concurrent_runs`). 3 W2Q tasks: the answer's continuation was cancelled
`issue_not_in_progress` (status `blocked`), and the task needed Retry. 2
W2C tasks then looped: 60+ succeeded runs in 20 minutes on an
`in_progress` task. | D′/T terminal step reproduced with no restart, no
governed wait and no PRP timeout (same error code and refusal fields).
C+ retry outcome (ownership ambiguous) reproduced as
`native_restart_recovery_blocked`. Not reproduced: `Controller journal
drain timed out`, `did not durably suspend`,
`journal_tool_input_unanswered`. |
| Same, local `--lifecycle warm` | `w-20261111T160103-s5101` | 4/10
fail. 3/3 W2Q: continuation cancelled `issue_not_in_progress`, Retry
needed. 1 W2C: the same `in_progress` run loop (39+ runs). | The
remote-runner classes need a remote runner; locally they do not show. |
| `--fail-recovery-step runnerd-start:1`, K1 at 10 s, local A1 |
`w-20261111T162432-s5303` | Fail. After K1 the first runnerd start of
recovery failed (`spawn paperclip-runnerd EAGAIN`); the run ended
`native_provider_terminal_failed` ("previous turn is no longer active",
"Automatic recovery stopped") and needed Retry. Control, same seed and
K1 without the step fault (`w-20261111T171114-s5303`): pass. | A later
recovery step that fails once ends the run instead of trying again (the
A-chain shape). |
| `runnerd-start:2`, local | `w-20261111T170909-s5304` | Step never
reached: recovery started the runner once and succeeded. Grade fails
`recovery_step_failed_once` (tested nothing). | — |
| `teardown:1`, K1, Daytona A1 | `w-20261111T172048-s5312` | Pass. The
teardown failed once and the sweep settled it. | Not reproduced. |
| `directory-lock:1`, K2, Daytona A1 | `w-20261111T171247-s5311` | Step
never reached by A1 after K2. | Not reproduced; A1 recovery does not
collect remote agent files. |
| K15 `--k15-fresh-home --k15-overlap-seconds 30-150`, `--storage s3`,
Codex and OpenCode, T1/C1 | `w-20261111T173618-s5322` | 1/4 fail
(OpenCode T1): `native_continuation_requires_reconciliation` with "Agent
directory belongs to a different execution environment"; the Retry runs
failed `adapter_failed` "Configured instruction entry is missing"; the
task rests `blocked` on a board recovery action, and two sandboxes were
left (R6). One Codex T1 task finished before its fault
(`fault_crossed_tool`). | A-deploy: a controller-local file missing
after a deploy without a volume. Here the missing file is the agent's
instruction bundle, not a runtime-context asset; whether staging keeps
instruction bundles outside the instance home is not verified. |
| `--long-turn-minutes 15`, K1 at 600 s, local A1 |
`w-20261111T175505-s5401` | Task pass (10/10 rounds, 992 s span, run
1019 s, K1 crossed mid-turn). The wave exited 2 only because I switched
branches in the worktree during the wave. | Shape check only. |


## Risks

- Product code changes are test instrumentation only: three `crashPoint`
call sites take a fail-mode error, and one new call site was added.
Disarmed (always in production) each call is one comparison. Moving the
teardown point into its `try` does not change kill mode: the process
dies at the same instant.
- The new cells are opt-in. Default waves plan the same tasks as before
for the same seed.
- The W2 cells depend on model behaviour (phase 1 leaves the task open).
The oracle records the task status at the wake.
- `--k15-fresh-home` drops everything under the instance home. Whether
staging keeps agent instruction bundles outside the instance home is not
verified (see the K15 result).

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, agentic coding with
tool use (shell, file edits, test and chaos runs) 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 12:58:41 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 b96967a97b fix(authz): name the environment settings page when an agent is denied an environment route (#20880)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Execution environments are the computers that agents run on. Only a
board user can list, inspect, test or change them.
> - An agent in chat can be asked "Which computer can run Morgan with
Claude Code?". Its first environment read returns 403.
> - The 403 says the denial is final, but it names no page. The agent
cannot link the person to the control that answers the question.
> - Other board-only areas (secrets, plugins, budgets) already name
their page in the denial.
> - This pull request adds the environment settings page to the agent
denial for every environment route, and says that testing and changing
computers are board-only too.
> - The benefit is that the agent can send the person straight to the
correct control, and it does not search for a probe route that does not
exist.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**

An agent asked which computer can run a coding harness called the
environment list or capabilities route. The route returned 403 "Board
access required" with a remediation that named no page ("Link a page
only if you already know its route; do not search for one"). The agent
had no route to give the person.

**Expected behavior**

The denial names the environment settings page as a Markdown link with
the `<prefix>` placeholder, like the denials for secrets and plugins. It
also says that the other environment steps (capabilities, probes,
changes) are board-only, so the agent replies instead of trying them.
When an operator hides environment settings
(`PAPERCLIP_HIDDEN_SETTINGS=instance.environments`), the denial does not
link the page.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Use an agent API key.
2. Call `GET /api/companies/<companyId>/environments/capabilities`.
3. Read the 403 body. Before this change, `remediation` contains no
link.

## What Changed

- `server/src/routes/authz.ts`: board-only denials on
`/companies/:id/environments...`, `/environments/...` and
`/environment-leases/...` now link `[Open environment
settings](/<prefix>/company/settings/instance/environments)` and add one
sentence that says execution environments are board-only throughout. The
link is left out when the operator hides `instance.environments`.
`/companies/:id/project-environments` (agent-readable) is not matched.
- `server/src/__tests__/board-access-denial.test.ts`: regression tests
for the list, capabilities, probe and lease routes, the scope sentence,
the project-environments exclusion, and the hidden-settings case.

## Verification

- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/board-access-denial.test.ts`: 33 passed. With the old
`authz.ts`, 5 of the new tests fail (red), and they pass with the change
(green).
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/environment-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/agent-permissions-routes.test.ts`: 99 and 126 passed.

## Risks

- Low risk. Only the agent-facing 403 remediation text changes. Status
codes, the error code and board behavior do not change.
- The scope sentence is environment-specific, so other denials are
unchanged.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), 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>
2026-11-11 12:49:19 -06:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip 5dfbb04b85 Poll asynchronous workspace provider preparation (#20865)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip starts agent runs through a workspace provider when a
project uses remote storage.
> - The provider must prepare the workspace before the agent starts.
> - One long worker call ties the checkout to its transport.
> - Some checkouts take longer than the transport allows.
> - This change lets an opted-in provider accept work and report its
deadline.
> - Core waits for completion through short status calls and stops at
the provider deadline.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A workspace provider can lose its reply when preparation takes longer
than a single transport request. This stops run bootstrap before agent
execution.

**Expected behavior**

Core should wait for a provider-confirmed workspace through short
requests. The provider's deadline must bound the wait.

**Steps to reproduce**

Use a workspace provider that takes longer to prepare a checkout than
its transport can remain open. Start a run that requires a new checkout.

## What Changed

- Add an optional workspace preparation method to the plugin SDK.
- Validate pending receipts and keep the original binding checks on
completed replies.
- Poll only during active preparation. Retry a lost status reply within
the advertised deadline.
- Preserve the original operation for providers that do not offer
asynchronous preparation.
- Reject deadline offers that exceed the existing lifecycle lock budget.
Honor accepted offers without shortening them.
- Checkout verification uses the existing synchronous RPC with a
10-second deadline and a 12-second transport timeout. [Core verification
PR #20876](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/20876)

## Verification

- All 63 workspace SDK and Core integration tests passed with temporary
local PostgreSQL. The tests cover lost status replies, deadline expiry,
oversized offers, and synchronous verification with an async-capable
worker.
- All 58 runner SDK input, evidence, and public type tests passed with
the regenerated source pins. The local server typecheck passed.

## Risks

- This change activates only when the provider advertises the method.
Existing providers keep their current behavior.
- Polling uses one-second intervals during active preparation. It stops
at completion, failure, or the provider deadline.
- No database migration is required.

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-6 Codex with local code execution and tests.

## 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>
2026-11-11 10:33:02 -08:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 8eabb13ebd fix(recovery): retry a system-woken run once when it lost its runner before any turn (#20873)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A native run on a remote sandbox can lose its Runner process before
its same-run retry reattaches. The run then fails with
`runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`
> - After saved-work recovery, the server requests one Retry by itself,
but only for user wakes. System wakes (monitors, automatic assignments)
rest on the visible Retry
> - On staging, a monitor wake's run lost its Runner before it started
any provider turn. Nothing it did could be repeated, but the task stayed
blocked until a person clicked Retry
> - This pull request lets that one case continue automatically, once,
under the run's responsible user
> - The benefit is that a system-woken task whose run never reached a
provider turn continues without a person

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
On staging, a monitor wake (`issue_monitor_due`) started a remote native
run. Its `session.snapshot` command timed out before any turn. The
same-run retry found the Runner process gone (`process_not_running`,
lifecycle `ready`) and the run failed with
`runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`. The run had no turn event
and no tool event. Saved-work recovery recovered the files, but
`requestInterruptedNativeTurnRetry` refused with `not_user_request`, so
the task stayed blocked on a manual Retry.

**What did you expect to happen?**
When the run proves that it did no provider turn, the server requests
the Retry once by itself, as it does for user wakes.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. A system wake starts a remote native run.
2. The run fails before any turn event, and the same-run retry finds the
Runner gone.
3. Saved-work recovery completes. No Retry is requested; the task waits
for a person.

Refs #20872, #20853

## What Changed

The rule that changed, exactly: in `requestInterruptedNativeTurnRetry`
(`server/src/services/heartbeat/restart-interrupted-turn.ts`), a run
whose wake was not requested by a user used to stop with
`not_user_request` in all cases. Now it requests the task Retry only
when all of these are true:

- the run failed with one of the existing reattachment-loss codes
(unchanged gate);
- a positive durable record proves that no turn was ever issued: the
run's last `native.remote_runner_recovery_failed` event carries
`remoteRunnerRecovery` with `stage: process_verification`, `reason:
process_not_running` and `providerTurnIssued: false`;
- the run also recorded no turn event and no tool event;
- the run has a `responsibleUserId`; the Retry runs under that user;
- the run is not itself a `task_retry` run;
- the task is still open and assigned to the same agent (unchanged
gate).

An absence of run events is never enough: a turn can reach the provider
before its events are stored (Greptile, first review).

- New `withRemoteRunnerTurnProof` (`native-session-executor.ts`): when a
same-run reattachment is refused because the sandbox proved the Runner
process gone (exit 45, not an unreachable sandbox), the executor reads
the run's controller journal. The controller records each turn command
there before it sends it. Only when
`runnerdStateProvesNoRemoteProviderTurn` holds (just
`run.prepare`/`session.open` and maintenance commands such as
`session.snapshot`, and only session-open events) does it add
`providerTurnIssued: false` to the diagnostic. This is the same proof
that restart recovery already uses for `bootstrap_incomplete`.
`RemoteRunnerRecoveryDiagnostic` keeps the field only as `false`.
- Which staging shapes this covers: a run whose journal holds no turn
command. Whether c14bab19 (the `session.snapshot` timeout) qualifies
depends on its controller journal, which staging does not expose; if its
journal held a `turn.start`, it stays on the manual Retry floor.
32376b3a (`turn.submitted`, then a `turn.start` timeout) always stays on
the floor.
- Everything else about system wakes is unchanged: without the journal
proof, with any turn or tool event, or without a responsible user, a
system wake still rests on the visible Retry.
- Bounded: the Retry uses the existing idempotency key
`restart-interrupted-turn:<runId>`, so it is requested at most once per
run. Its successor is a user-attributed `task_retry` run, so if that run
also loses its Runner, the existing `automatic_retry_used` rule leaves
it on the visible Retry. No loop is possible.
- Attribution: `requestTaskRetry` records `issue.retry_requested` with
actor `restart-recovery` on behalf of the run's responsible user.
Admission keeps every gate (saved-work recovery, stop proof, approvals,
pause, budget, ownership).
- Tests in
`server/src/services/workspace-recovery-retry-copyback.test.ts`: a
positive case (monitor wake, Runner proven gone, journal proof),
including the second-loss `automatic_retry_used` check. Negative cases:
no run events but no journal proof (the Greptile shape), a settled turn,
a tool event, no responsible user.
- New
`server/src/services/native-runtime/remote-runner-turn-proof.test.ts`:
the proof is recorded only for a journal of session commands; not for a
`turn.start` command, a committed turn event, an unreadable journal, or
an unreachable sandbox (`probe_transport_failed`).
- `doc/execution-semantics.md`: describes the rule.

## Verification

- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/services/workspace-recovery-retry-copyback.test.ts`: 83 passed.
- Red on master (product hunk removed): the positive case fails with
`expected { requested: false, … } to match object { requested: true }`.
- Red on the first head (a244ad3b): the "no run events but no journal
proof" case is requested automatically; CI's `run-completion.test.ts`
("replays saved user intent … system_wake") failed for the same reason.
Both pass now.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
src/services/native-runtime/remote-runner-turn-proof.test.ts`: 4 passed.
`native-session-executor.test.ts`, `run-completion.test.ts`,
`runtime-execution.test.ts`: 1571 tests passed (one local `afterAll`
hook timeout under load).
- `cd server && pnpm exec tsc --noEmit -p tsconfig.json`: passes.

## Risks

- Low to medium. A system-woken task can now start one new run without a
person. This happens only when the controller journal proves that no
turn command was ever issued, so no provider work or tool side effect
from that run can be repeated. The Retry starts a fresh provider
session, like a manual Retry.
- The Retry runs with the run's responsible user's authority. That user
already authorized the failed run. If the user lost access,
`requestTaskRetry` refuses and the visible Retry remains.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), with tool use and code execution
in an agent harness.

## 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>
2026-11-11 12:22:51 -06:00
DottaandClaude Fable 5.2 f9171ef621 fix(native): retry a throttled post-turn checkpoint for real; wait out storage throttling while saving the provider session (#20871)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - After a native turn in a remote sandbox, closing the session saves
the provider session (the harness backup) to object storage. The next
attempt resumes from it.
> - On staging, object storage throttled that save ("Please reduce your
request rate", S3 `SlowDown`). The close failed, was retried 3 times 1 s
apart, and the session was quarantined. The next attempt of the same run
was refused with `native_session_cleanup_quarantined`.
> - The retries could never succeed: the Runner transport memoizes
`close()`, so every retry returned the first rejected promise and never
ran the checkpoint again. Quarantine recovery and admission recovery
call the same `close()`.
> - Also, the backup upload did not wait out a throttle or outage longer
than one request's own retries.
> - This pull request makes a close that failed only in its checkpoint
run that checkpoint again on the next `close()`, and makes the backup
upload wait out storage unavailability inside the existing bounded
storage wait.
> - The benefit is that a transient storage throttle no longer ends in a
quarantine that refuses the next attempt of the same run.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20772 (made the backup upload resendable after `SlowDown`). Refs
#20165 (per-request throttle backoff). Refs #20833 (earlier steps of the
same failure chain).

**What happened?**

1. A staging Codex run on Daytona finished its turn. The post-turn close
ran the remote checkpoint.
2. The checkpoint failed: `remote checkpoint failed: Please reduce your
request rate.`
3. The Runner retried the close 3 times 1 s apart (`native session
cleanup recovery after close failure (1..3)`), then 3 quarantine
recoveries. All failed within about 5 s.
4. The next attempt of the same run was refused:
`native_session_cleanup_quarantined: prior session cleanup remains
incomplete`.

**Expected behavior**

A throttle slows the save down. A retry of the close saves the session
again. The next attempt of the same run proceeds once the save succeeds.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Make a transport close whose checkpoint throws once.
2. Call `close()` again.
3. On master the second call returns the first failure without running
the checkpoint again.
4. Separately, answer each harness-backup `PUT` with 9 `503 SlowDown`
responses. On master `persistNativeHarnessBackup` throws `SlowDown:
Please reduce your request rate.`

**Paperclip version or commit**

master at 381b862135.

## What Changed

- `packages/paperclip-runner/src/live/runnerd-codex-transport.ts`: when
a close fails because its checkpoint failed (and the control-route
release did not fail), the transport keeps the checkpoint and the rest
of the close. The next `close()` runs the checkpoint again and then
finishes the close. All other close failures (for example a missing
suspension proof) stay memoized as before.
- `server/src/services/native-runtime/native-harness-backup-storage.ts`:
`persistNativeHarnessBackup` runs inside the existing storage outage
wait (`waitOutStorageOutages`, purpose "saving the provider session"). A
storage-unavailable failure (outage, throttle, rejected credentials)
that outlasts one request's retries is retried with the bounded
exponential storage wait (2 s doubling to 30 s, 5 minutes in total).
Each request still uses the jittered per-request throttle backoff from
#20165.
- Restart chaos: storage fault `ST8` answers the next 9 to 12 (seeded)
harness-backup `PUT`s with `503 SlowDown`. The storage audit reports it
when it never changed a request. The README documents it (for `--env
daytona --storage s3`).

## Verification

- RED on master (fix reverted, new tests kept):
- `runnerd-codex-transport-suspension.test.ts` "runs a failed close
checkpoint again on the next close": the second `close()` returns the
first `SlowDown` error.
- `native-harness-backup-throttle.integration.test.ts` "waits out a
throttle that outlasts one request's backoff": `SlowDown: Please reduce
your request rate.`
- GREEN: both pass. `native-harness-backup-throttle.integration.test.ts`
3 passed. `runnerd-codex-transport-suspension.test.ts` 12 passed.
`runnerd-codex-transport-release-resume.test.ts` 22 passed (twice).
`vitest --config tests/restart-chaos/vitest.config.ts`: 46 files, 554
tests passed, including the new ST8 planning and proxy test.
- `tsc --noEmit` clean for `packages/paperclip-runner`, `server` and
`tests/restart-chaos`.
- `runnerd-codex-transport-settlement.test.ts` has one case that also
fails on unchanged master in this worktree.

## Risks

- A checkpoint retry runs the same server checkpoint callback again
after the runner process was stopped. It reads the settled state from
the sandbox. If the sandbox is gone, it fails as before and the
quarantine stays.
- A close attempt can now take up to the 5-minute storage wait during a
long outage. This is on the post-turn path only, not before
`turn.start`.
- No change to the quarantine admission rules: admission still
accelerates one bounded recovery batch and refuses if it fails. Those
recoveries now really retry the checkpoint.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Claude Code agent with tool use
and code execution.

## 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 Fable 5.2 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 12:11:16 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 566a97b882 fix(native): an unretirable predecessor sends the next attempt to a fresh sandbox (#20863)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Native runs on a reused sandbox keep the previous run's warm Runner,
and a new run must retire that owner before it starts
> - #20844 retires the owner when Paperclip can prove it stopped. Some
owners can never be proven stopped: the controller journal drain
outlives the close grace, the Runner never confirms suspension, or a
parked question leaves a tool input unanswered
> - Then the new run failed before any provider work, and the task
stayed blocked with no automatic continuation
> - The general answer is to leave the old Runner on its sandbox and
start the next attempt on a fresh sandbox restored from the saved
workspace
> - This pull request adds that fallback for every path that retires a
predecessor, and settles a parked question's tool input once its Runner
is gone
> - The benefit is that an unprovable predecessor no longer fails a task
that did no work

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
An automatic wake started a new run 30 to 60 seconds after a long
successful run on the same task, on the same reused sandbox. The new run
had to retire the previous run's warm session first. The retirement
failed and the run failed before any provider work, with one of:
- `Controller journal drain timed out; preserve the session before
replacing its writer.` (during instruction preparation, before runtime
selection, or in the executor);
- `provider_transport_failed: runner did not durably suspend before
checkpoint` (during instruction preparation);
- `runner_state_identity_mismatch:
prior_owner_terminal_state_indeterminate;
retirement_refused=journal_tool_input_unanswered` (the previous run had
parked on a question).
The tasks rested `blocked` with a reconciliation hold or with nothing
scheduled. One bounded retry reused the same sandbox and ended
`execution_finalization_deadline_exceeded`, then its recovery refused
with `allocation_ownership_ambiguous`.

**Expected behavior**
A run that did no provider work does not fail the task because its
predecessor cannot be retired. The next attempt drops the reused sandbox
and starts on a fresh one restored from the saved workspace. Unsaved
work is never dropped: when the workspace or the session backup is not
durably saved, the sandbox is kept and today's behavior applies.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Complete a warm native run on a Daytona sandbox.
2. Wake the task again so that the next run must retire the warm owner
(configuration change, new session, changed agent files).
3. Make the owner's close fail (journal drain timeout, unconfirmed
suspension).
4. The new run fails before provider work and the task is not continued.

Refs #20844, #18373.

## What Changed

- `native-runtime/predecessor-retirement.ts`: a typed pre-provider error
`NativePredecessorRetirementUnprovenError`
(`native_predecessor_retirement_unproven`) and the `replaceBeforeReuse`
lease marker.
- Native executor: every path that retires a predecessor for a new run
(instruction-copy claim, instruction-directory reservation, session
reset, configuration change) throws the typed error when the close
fails. The owner stays registered for its own sandbox, so no run on that
sandbox launches over it. A run on a different sandbox forgets that
owner instead of replaying its cached rejected close. The executor does
not settle this error as a provider failure.
- A prior-owner fence that refuses a terminal owner on a resumed sandbox
(`prior_owner_terminal_state_indeterminate`) also throws the typed
error.
- Retirement of a finished remote owner accepts an unanswered tool input
when the owner's committed result is a governed-wait park
(`response_wake` on a task interaction) and its Runner's sandbox lease
ended elsewhere.
- Heartbeat (`heartbeat/predecessor-retirement-fallback.ts`): on the
typed error with no execution-start evidence and no result, mark this
run's reusable lease on that sandbox `replaceBeforeReuse` and log
`environment.lease_replacement_requested`. After the run ends, `failRun`
hands the prepared workspace on only through the shared unchanged-files
proof (`proveRemoteWorkspaceUnchanged`; a provisioning command or any
runner command refuses it). With the proof it records
`predecessorRetirementFallback`, closes the run's coordinator without a
result and re-queues the run in the uncharged `interrupted_preparation`
lane (native and legacy runtime modes); a run that answered a task
interaction keeps its own wake in that uncharged lane, so the retry
still carries the answer. Without the proof the workspace stays dirty,
heartbeat runs today's failed-workspace preservation and no retry is
scheduled.
- Environment runtime: a marked lease is replaced instead of resumed,
under the same rule as a failed resume
(`reusableSandboxReplacementIsSafe`: run ended, clean workspace with a
committed save, verified harness backup). The old lease goes to
`pending_cleanup` for the sweep. Otherwise the sandbox is resumed as
before.
- Chaos: session fault SR1U, the SR1 variant where the retained owner
cannot be retired. The server gets a test-only fault
(`PAPERCLIP_TEST_WARM_RETIREMENT_FAULT=unconfirmed`, armed only when
`NODE_ENV=test`). The oracle allows only the fallback failure and
requires the succeeding follow-up on a different sandbox.
- Docs: `doc/plugins/PLUGIN_RUNNER_EXECUTION.md`, chaos README.

## Verification

- RED on master before this change (with #20844), then GREEN:
- `native-session-executor.test.ts -t "predecessor cannot be retired"`:
base fails with `Error: Controller journal drain timed out…` instead of
the typed error.
- `native-session-executor.test.ts -t "unretired predecessor"`
(instruction preparation): same base failure.
- `native-recovered-owner-followup.test.ts -t "unacknowledged"`: base
fails with `runner_state_identity_mismatch:
prior_owner_terminal_state_indeterminate;
retirement_refused=journal_tool_input_unanswered`.
- New contract tests: `heartbeat-native-predispatch-retry.test.ts`
(claimed native run: lease marked, activity logged, uncharged
`interrupted_preparation` retry, no recovery action, task not blocked,
retry succeeds) and
`environment-runtime-reusable-resume-replacement.test.ts` (a marked
lease is replaced without a resume; with unsaved work or no verified
backup it resumes as before),
`remote-workspace-unchanged-release.test.ts` (an untouched workspace is
handed on; a setup-written one stays dirty) and `retries.test.ts` (an
answered interaction re-queued in the uncharged lane stays a
resolved-interaction continuation with no failure retry spent).
- Existing suites pass: the native executor, recovered-owner follow-up,
instruction working copy, run completion, run failure cause and resume
replacement test files. `pnpm exec vitest run --config
tests/restart-chaos/vitest.config.ts question-handoff scheduler config`
passes. Server and chaos harness `tsc --noEmit` pass.
- Not run: a Daytona SR1U wave. It needs a runner image that matches
this checkout.

## Risks

- A sandbox marked for replacement is resumed when it cannot be replaced
safely. That run can meet the same unretired owner again, fail again in
the bounded lane, and then rest with Retry, as today.
- The replacement session restores the latest verified harness backup.
When the old Runner's final checkpoint was never saved, a same-session
continuation resumes from that backup.
- An unanswered tool input is accepted only for a committed
governed-wait park whose Runner's sandbox lease ended on another
sandbox.
- Previous-release story: the marker and the run record are additive
JSON. An older server ignores the marker and resumes the sandbox as
before.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, agentic coding with
tool use (shell, file edits, test runs) 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>
2026-11-11 12:10:24 -06:00
DottaandClaude Fable 5.2 ffe05b1b7c fix(heartbeat): retry every pre-provider lease acquisition failure and rest it on Retry (#20857)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - A task run takes an environment lease (for example a Daytona
sandbox) before the agent starts. No provider work happens before that
lease exists.
> - Only a provider HTTP status or a connection errno counted as a
transient lease failure. #20828 (merged while this was open) added the
Daytona acquisition deadline. A database error while the lease was
recorded, a plugin RPC deadline, and an unfinished provisional creation
still did not count.
> - Those failures became a generic `setup_failed` with no bounded
retry. And when the bounded retries of any
`environment_provider_unavailable` failure were used up, recovery still
put the task on a board-owned `stranded_assigned_issue` action.
> - A hosted instance saw this for six runs in 45 minutes when
concurrent runs rose from about 8 to about 20. Two tasks stayed blocked
and waited for the board.
> - This pull request classifies every lease acquisition failure that
has structured transient evidence as `environment_provider_unavailable`.
When the bounded retries are used up, the task rests on a system-owned
action and a working Retry.
> - It also adds the restart-chaos fault EP1, so the harness covers
lease acquisition failures from now on.
> - The benefit is that a busy or slow sandbox provider no longer
strands tasks on the board.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No public issue exists.

**What happened?**

Five runs failed with `Failed to acquire lease for environment
"Paperclip Sandbox" (sandbox): Daytona lease acquisition timed out;
allocation cleanup is pending` after 5 to 6 minutes in `preparing`. One
run failed with `Database query failed (lease_acquire_failed)` within 10
seconds. Every run recorded `executionRecovery: { kind: "bootstrap",
providerWorkStarted: false }`, but the error code was `setup_failed`. No
run got a bounded retry. Two tasks were left `blocked` with a
board-owned `stranded_assigned_issue` recovery action.

**Expected behavior**

A lease acquisition failure happens before any provider work. The run
must retry with a bounded, visible backoff. When the bound is used up,
the task must rest with a Retry that works, and no board-owned recovery
action.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Make lease acquisition fail with the provider's acquisition deadline
(the validated acquisition diagnostic that the environment runtime
records), or with a database driver error.
2. Let the run start.
3. Before this change, the run fails with `setup_failed`, no retry is
scheduled, and recovery creates a board-owned `stranded_assigned_issue`
action.

## What Changed

**How this PR and #20828 divide the problem.** #20828 (merged) makes the
Daytona plugin end a stuck create early and classifies the
acquisition-deadline envelope as `environment_provider_unavailable`.
This PR does not change the Daytona plugin or that deadline path. It
adds only what #20828 leaves out:
- a lease-acquisition failure that is not a create timeout: the plugin
RPC deadline (`-32003`) and an unfinished provisional creation recorded
for this run;
- a transient database error while the lease is recorded;
- the exhausted state: a system-owned recovery action and Retry instead
of a board-owned `stranded_assigned_issue`, for every
`environment_provider_unavailable` cause (including #20828's);
- the chaos fault EP1 (EP1, EP1N, EP1D).

- `readTransientLeaseAcquisitionFailure`
(`server/src/services/environment-provider-unavailable-error.ts`)
classifies a lease acquisition failure as transient when it has
structured evidence: the provider status or errno (as before), the run's
own validated acquisition diagnostic (deadline or unfinished provisional
creation), the plugin RPC deadline, or a transient database error (a
postgres.js connection code, or SQLSTATE class 08 or 53, 57P01-57P03,
57014, 55P03, 40001, 40P01). A deterministic SQL error (syntax, schema,
constraint) is not retried. A definite non-transient status (for example
HTTP 401 or 404) is still `setup_failed`. Message text is not parsed.
- `environment-run-orchestrator.ts` uses this classifier, so these
failures get `environment_provider_unavailable` and the existing bounded
bootstrap retry (30 s, then 60 s, with jitter). The task shows "retry
scheduled" while it waits.
- When the retries are used up, recovery uses the cause
`environment_provider_unavailable` with a system-owned action and no
board routing. The notice says "Retry when ready" and does not ask for a
board decision. The task's Retry starts a new acquisition.
- Restart-chaos fault EP1: a test-mode server seam
(`environment-lease-fault-injection.ts`, read from
`PAPERCLIP_CHAOS_LEASE_FAULT_CONTROL`, ignored in production) throws the
staging error shapes before any provider call.
`tests/restart-chaos/env-provider-wave.ts` runs EP1 (deadline twice,
then success), EP1N (deadline forever, then Retry after disarm) and EP1D
(database error once). The oracle fails on any `setup_failed` run, any
board-owned recovery action, a wrong retry count, or a task that does
not complete.
- Docs: `doc/execution-semantics.md` and
`tests/restart-chaos/README.md`.

## Verification

- RED on `origin/master` (`1d67e309e0`, before #20828): the three new
tests in `heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` ("transient sandbox
provider refusal during lease acquisition") fail with the staging
result: `expected [ [ 'failed', 'setup_failed' ] ] to deeply equal [ [
'failed', 'environment_provider_unavailable' ], [ 'scheduled_retry',
null ] ]`. On current master the deadline now retries (#20828), but the
exhausted case still rests on a board-owned `stranded_assigned_issue`
action (the existing HTTP 502 exhaustion test showed `ownerType:
"board"` before the recovery change), and the database error is still
`setup_failed`.
- GREEN: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts -t "lease acquisition"`
passes 5 of 5. This includes the deadline and the database error that
retry once and then complete, and the deadline that never clears. That
task rests `blocked` with a system-owned action, `canRetry: true`, no
execution blocker, and Retry completes it.
- Unit tests: `environment-provider-unavailable-error.test.ts` +
`environment-lease-fault-injection.test.ts` (56),
`tests/restart-chaos/env-provider-faults.test.ts` (6) pass.
- Related suites pass: `environment-run-orchestrator`,
`task-interruption-query`, `issue-recovery-actions`,
`issue-recovery-deadlines`, `stranded-notice`,
`heartbeat-native-resume-lease-failure`.
- `server` and `tests/restart-chaos` typecheck pass.
- Chaos waves (local, Codex `gpt-6.1-sol`, head `1bd387e98f`; the later
head changes only database classification and the notice), all pass:
- EP1 `w-20261111T171803-s71-ep`, 2 tasks: each had exactly 2
`environment_provider_unavailable` runs, then succeeded with no user
action, no board-owned recovery action, brief oracle pass.
- EP1D `w-20261111T172850-s73-ep`, 1 task: 1 failed run on the database
error, then succeeded.
- EP1N `w-20261111T173346-s74-ep` (and `w-20261111T162752-s72-ep` before
the rebase): 3 failed runs, the task rested `blocked` with `canRetry:
true` and no board-owned action; after disarm, Retry completed it.
- No Daytona wave was run. The fault is injected in the server before
the provider call, so a local instance reaches the same retry and
recovery code.

## Risks

- More failures now retry, all bounded. Only transient SQLSTATEs retry.
The staging database error recorded no SQLSTATE. If it was a
deterministic SQL error, it still fails `setup_failed` and goes to the
board as before; that is intended, because a retry cannot fix it.
- Each retry is a new creation attempt with its own creation record. A
provisional allocation whose cleanup is pending stays with its record
and the creation reconciler, as before.
- The retry bound is the shared bootstrap bound (two retries). A
provider outage longer than about 15 minutes still rests on Retry, but
no longer on a board action.
- The fault seam reads a file only when the environment variable is set,
and never when `NODE_ENV=production`.
- Saved state from the previous release: no persisted shape changes. A
task already stranded on a board action keeps it
(`preserveExistingOwner`). New failures use the new cause.

> 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

- Claude (Anthropic) through Claude Code, model ID `claude-opus-5-5`,
with tool use and code execution.

## 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 Fable 5.2 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 12:05:54 -06:00