mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-21 16:27:18 +02:00
550e959934df71ef9d4e28fa6eb6656804d411a1
6
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
5a9e6b6315 |
fix(grok): avoid false file recovery after Stop (#16427)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and their work. > - Grok Bot uses a managed Runner and a fixed external work session. > - Its admitted contract gives it no access to Paperclip workspace files. > - The Runner still has a sync descriptor to support durable recovery. > - Cancellation treated that descriptor as proof that files needed repair. > - This pull request uses the admitted access contract while preserving ownership settlement. > - Users get the correct recovery action after Stop, with native file safeguards intact. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16219 and #16422. The duplicate search found no open Grok workspace correction. **What happened?** A real Grok Stop test cancelled its run, fenced its assignment, denied a stale progress update and cleaned up the sandbox. Paperclip also created a file-repair hold. The recovery panel told the user to recover workspace files, although the admitted external contract has workspace access set to none. **Expected behavior** Keep the stopped session fenced and require inspection before new work. Keep failed-run ownership settlement. Do not invent a file export obligation for a session that cannot access the workspace. Native sessions with writable or unknown workspace access must keep their file safeguards. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Connect a Grok Bot and assign a task. 2. Let it accept the task and save a Paperclip checkpoint document. 3. Use Stop while it is working. 4. Inspect the task recovery panel. It asks for file repair after sandbox cleanup succeeds. **Paperclip version or commit** Observed on Core |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
57fa6b358d |
fix(observability): separate workspace finalization and copyback spans (#16428)
Give native workspace finalization its own span name. Keep copyback and commit as separate child measurements, with an exported-span regression that preserves the workspace operation result. Validation: 40 runtime/tracing tests and server typecheck passed locally. Final-head CI, E2E and security checks passed. Apex review: 5/5, zero findings and no unresolved threads. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
79c34058cd |
fix(native): retain unexported workspaces after execution failure (#16397)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native agents can edit files in a remote sandbox before they submit a result. > - A process identity or startup failure can end the run before file export. > - Cleanup can then delete the sandbox and its unpublished files. > - This pull request retains the exact source and records a file repair action before cleanup. > - Operators can recover the files without replaying the failed turn or changing the task owner. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A native remote process had completed local edits when process identity recovery failed. The run still had a prepared workspace reference and no accepted result. Cleanup deleted the source sandbox. No file recovery card appeared. A restarted run can hit the same path during setup, before the native executor starts. **Expected behavior** Retain the exact unexported source. Show the existing file recovery card. Require source stop and file recovery evidence. Keep task ownership, status, and external action reconciliation separate from file repair. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run a native agent in a remote ephemeral workspace and make unpublished edits. 2. Fail process identity recovery before result acceptance or file export. 3. Allow failure handling and lease cleanup to run. 4. Before this change, cleanup can destroy the source without a file repair action. Refs: #16341 for related process identity diagnostics. Refs: #16349 for startup ownership fencing. This change addresses file retention after failure. ## What Changed - Record source retention and a file recovery action in the terminal native failure transaction. - Cover restarted preparation failures before the terminal setup writer and cleanup run. - Require the exact company, run, lease, provider allocation, and workspace binding. Require the exact live recovery claim to settle an owned preparation failure. Refuse stale or competing claims. - Reuse the existing stop-only cleanup and file-only reconciliation path. Leave accepted results and scheduled same-run recovery on their existing paths. - Document the retention rule and add database and runtime boundary regressions. ## Verification - All 1,242 tests passed across the full heartbeat recovery suite, native executor, native source retention, runtime teardown, run completion, and legacy file recovery. - The integrated missing-descriptor regression fails before the inner-handler fix and passes after it. The runtime retention and owned restart regressions also reproduce their prior failures. - The tests cover exact source identity, current and stale claims, atomic rollback, cancellation, idempotence, and file-only repair on a completed task. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed on the final code. - `pnpm build` passed on the final code. - Full repository CI passed on `3945eb2ba5c228c5d4992da02b765dcf2e634cb8`: 54 successful checks and two skipped Storybook checks. - Apex scored 5/5 on that exact commit. Both earlier findings are fixed and all review threads are resolved. - The unsharded local `pnpm test:run` is still in progress. It is not counted as a local full-suite pass; complete suite coverage is verified in CI. ## Risks - Failed runs can retain a sandbox that needs operator cleanup after file recovery. This uses the existing retention policy and recovery controls. - This does not recover files from allocations that were already deleted. - No schema migration, UI change, or telemetry change is required. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. Tool use, code execution, and reasoning assisted this change. The environment identifies the model as GPT-6; it does not expose a more specific serving snapshot or context window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
|
cafa25029c |
fix(native-runtime): recover unclaimed remote startup (#16349)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The native runtime preserves task execution across server restarts. > - Remote workspace preparation can finish before the executor claims its first provider attempt. > - The recovery classifier required a provider checkpoint even when the durable coordinator proved that execution had never started. > - A deployment during this interval therefore left safe startup work on a permanent recovery hold. > - This pull request admits that narrow startup state to the existing same-run bootstrap path. Existing execution and ownership checks remain in force. > - The original preparation yields when recovery owns the coordinator. It cannot fail or clean up the recovered run. > - Tasks can continue after this interruption without an operator retry or a duplicate provider turn. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A server deployment interrupted a prepared remote workspace before the native executor's first claim. The coordinator had attempt zero, controller generation zero, and no owner, process, provider event, or checkpoint. Restart classification returned `ambiguous_remote_recovery_evidence` and blocked the task. **Expected behavior** The server should recognize this durable never-claimed state and continue the original run through normal execution admission. A prior claim, uncertain ownership, or contradictory execution evidence must retain the recovery hold. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Prepare a remote workspace for a native run. 2. Stop the controller before the executor commits its first claim. 3. Restart the controller and classify the running native task. 4. Observe that the old classifier blocks it because no provider checkpoint exists. Related: #16341 preserves remote recovery failure reasons. #16344 strengthens remote restart qualification. Neither changes admission for an untouched remote startup. ## What Changed - Require a server-owned fencing version written only with fresh native identities. Older unmarked preparations stay held during rolling upgrades; caller profile data cannot add that marker to an existing run. - Leave the current server's active preparation with its existing execution. - Yield through the controller-detachment path when a different execution owns the coordinator lease. Lease expiry does not grant takeover authority. - Preserve run-scoped gateway tokens during detachment so stale preparation cannot revoke the recovered worker's tools. - Admit a valid prepared remote workspace only when the locked coordinator proves attempt and controller generation zero, no owner, and no prior session or execution evidence. - Check launch receipts and provider source events before granting bootstrap recovery. - Keep the original run and session. Preserve atomic recovery claims, executor durable-state checks, and normal admission gates. - Add real PostgreSQL regression tests for competing controllers and seven contradictory evidence cases. - Update recovery documentation, the run-log reason, and both capability maps. ## Verification - The competing-controller regressions failed before the ownership fix and pass for both live and expired foreign leases. - On the final revision, 77 runtime-selection, restart recovery, real PostgreSQL, and heartbeat boundary tests pass with no skips, including all local runner process fixtures. The full native executor file passes all 698 tests. - Another 91 live-run route tests pass locally. An earlier CI timeout in that unrelated file passed on retry; the complete final-head CI passed without that failure. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `git diff --check`: passed locally. The map check verifies structure only. - Local `pnpm test:run` did not finish: an early attempt had build-related collection failures, and later full-suite execution was stopped after complete CI passed. Targeted suites passed after build preparation. This is not a local full-suite pass. - The complete [PR workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38669996667) passed on `2baffb3652bfeb4705a30ca3706fbda6c3d72aa4`, including all test shards, build/typecheck, runner verification, and browser E2E. All 55 applicable review/security/CI checks succeeded; two Storybook checks were skipped. - [Greptile Apex](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16349#issuecomment-6180848957): 5/5 on the same final head, with no unresolved findings. - No live remote provider restart is claimed by the database regression. ## Risks - A bare executor can no longer take a foreign coordinator lease after expiry. A verified recovery claim must transfer authority first. - Existing preparations without the server-owned fencing marker retain their recovery hold during rolling upgrades. - Incorrect admission could duplicate provider work. This path requires a positive durable never-claimed receipt, rejects contradictory launch evidence, and keeps the executor's existing durable-root verification. - Previously claimed or incomplete remote recovery evidence remains blocked. This change does not clear historical terminal holds. - No schema, API, dependency, or UI changes. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, code execution, and browser inspection. The exact serving snapshot ID and context window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Devin Foley <devin@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
f329b24ee1 |
feat: give tasks durable project-optional workspaces (#15749)
Give tasks durable company-scoped workspace bindings independent of project assignment, channel defaults and authorized repository preparation. Reuse verified input seeds and sparse output recovery while preserving trust, privacy and controller provisioning boundaries.
Full CI and E2E, Superagent, legacy checks and Greptile Apex 5/5 passed on reviewed head
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
1fb3f9746e |
refactor(heartbeat): extract prepared runtime execution (#15803)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Heartbeat prepares, dispatches, and completes each agent run. > - After the runtime-selection extraction, the main service still had 7,295 lines. > - Provider dispatch and workspace finalization formed one large block with shared cleanup rules. > - This pull request moves that block into a typed runtime-execution module. > - The service now has 6,417 lines. Readers can follow admission and outer cleanup without reading the provider execution details. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Follow-up to #15746. I searched open heartbeat PRs and issues. I found no competing runtime-execution extraction. **What existing behavior does this improve?** The organization and test coverage of native and legacy heartbeat execution. **Current behavior** The heartbeat service contains a 912-line block for provider dispatch, usage capture, workspace finalization, and instruction cleanup. **Proposed behavior** Move that block to `server/src/services/heartbeat/runtime-execution.ts`. Keep the atomic dispatch gate, admission, terminal run status, and outer lease cleanup in the service. Preserve run behavior. **Reason and benefit** This gives runtime execution a named boundary and direct tests. It removes 878 lines from the main service in one bounded change. **Breaking changes** None intended. There are no schema, API, or policy changes. ## What Changed - Add `executeHeartbeatRuntime` for prepared native and legacy execution, usage capture, workspace finalization, and gateway/instruction cleanup. - Return an explicit dispatch result. Update outer ownership state through immediate callbacks, including before exceptions. Read instruction state through live getters. - Move the two internal recovery error classes with their existing behavior. The caller imports the same classes for `instanceof` checks. - Add 15 database-backed execution tests. Keep the existing heartbeat regression suites. - Repair the native Stop acceptance fixture: installed Codex now takes precedence over `PATH`. A test-only loader pins the fake provider. An isolated home and dummy key keep readiness offline. Add four loader tests. - Document the module boundary and fixture setup. ## Verification - Passed: eight focused heartbeat suites (483 distinct tests, including 15 new execution tests). The boundary suite passed again after adding the failed-restore retention case from review. - Passed: `node --test tests/e2e/fixtures/composer-stop-codex-loader.test.mjs` (four tests). - Passed: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. - Passed: AST comparison of all 912 moved lines after the explicit boundary substitutions. SQL template text, recovery class bodies, public exports, and the rest of the executor match the baseline. - Passed: browser Stop journeys for legacy process and native Paperclip Runner (two tests). The native fixture log proves provider `turn/start` before Stop and `turn/interrupt` after Stop. - Passed: all three ACP continuation browser journeys (same-session queued input, no replay of an interrupted write, and a new direction after composer Stop). Five relevant browser journeys passed in total. - Passed: the full CI test groups, including all server, chat, workspace, serialized-server, runner, and browser shards. - Local full-suite limitation: `pnpm test:run` first hit the macOS shared-memory segment limit while starting embedded PostgreSQL. After releasing only this task’s unused acceptance-server segments, the retry progressed without reported failures. I stopped that duplicate run after the full CI test groups passed. - Passed: all 56 PR checks/statuses on `8694c116e8d43ed8ac11bc4c58623ea3af34a675`. Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved review threads. ## Risks - Cleanup depends on state written before an error. The module reports dispatch, retention, and recovery ownership immediately. Tests cover early returns and exceptional cleanup. - Instruction callbacks can replace saved metadata during execution. Live getters preserve those changes. - Native acceptance uses a real server, database, browser, and Rust runner with a deterministic provider. It does not verify a live provider service. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning and repository/tool access. The exact serving model ID and context-window limit were not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |