PaperClipAI

Jannik/PaperClipAI

0 Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git synced 2026-10-14 08:26:46 +02:00

Commit Graph

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	5badea4798	Use the agent lifecycle contract for plugin setup and status (#15391 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Some plugins must prepare resources before an agent can work. > - Those resources must stop or be removed when the agent pauses or terminates. > - The agent lifecycle module now owns these steps and their durable completion. > - Plugins use its required callback contract instead of a separate readiness query. > - This PR documents that contract and shows its progress and retry action on the agent page. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #15631 Subsystem affected Required plugin lifecycle work and the agent detail page. Problem or motivation The lifecycle module exposes `onAgentLifecycle` and `agents.lifecycle.manage`, but the plugin authoring guide does not explain their use. The agent page displays legacy status. Setup therefore looks paused and offers Resume. Termination leaves the page before resource cleanup completes. Proposed solution Use the callback, admission guards, persisted state, and retry route supplied by the lifecycle module. Show pending phases and fixed host errors. Keep the detail page open during incomplete termination. Use lifecycle state for pause and resume controls. Alternatives considered A separate plugin readiness query would duplicate the module's state and admission rules. The final diff contains no readiness API, database commit hooks, or second admission check. ## What Changed - Document the manifest declaration, callback results, phase ordering, capability scope, retry behavior, and provider revision requirements. - Correct SDK comments for lifecycle, routing, and external object callbacks. - Show preparation, verification, pause, resume, termination, and cleanup progress from the existing agent fields. - Refresh pending steps every two seconds and other states every thirty seconds. Keep these reads separate from the agent record used by editable forms. Use the existing authorized retry route for failed steps. - Offer Pause during setup. Disable pause and resume while stop or cleanup is incomplete. Keep cleanup failures reachable on the detail page. Disable new work after termination starts. - Test required resource work across setup, pause, resume, and confirmed deletion. Test every worker callback phase, missing handlers, retry authorization, and UI behavior. ## Verification - Focused UI tests: 139 passed across lifecycle status, action buttons, API tests, and the configuration form. A regression preserves unsaved edits during an in-flight lifecycle refresh and a failed refresh. - Focused host and shared tests: 113 passed across lifecycle integration, retry authorization, plugin RPC, and manifest validation. The database suite used isolated local PostgreSQL 18 through a temporary loader outside the repository. - Module boundary tests: 11 passed. Module import/write checks and UI token gates passed. - Plugin SDK build, server direct TypeScript check, and UI TypeScript check passed. - `git diff --check` and an added-line secrets/private-reference scan passed. Fixtures use synthetic identities. - Full `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed using the existing local Rust toolchain. - Visually checked all six progress phases with the application components and styles. Captured preparation and cleanup failure screenshots from the production UI build with synthetic API data; artifacts are kept outside git. - Full local `pnpm test:run` was attempted and stopped after a native-runner failure reproduced in isolation: `native-session-resume.test.ts` / `archives a damaged prior epoch before completing guarded same-task replacement with real runnerd` returns a failed Codex fixture result instead of success. The native-runtime and runner trees are unchanged from the base. No full local test pass is claimed. - All latest-head CI checks passed, including test shards, verification, E2E, and the canary packaging check. Greptile reviewed commit `96473e03a` at 5/5 with no unresolved comments. ## Risks - Selected required plugins remain a dependency for lifecycle completion. The lifecycle module retains their requirements when a plugin is disabled or removed. - Plugins must make repeated provider operations safe and fence older revisions. Host revision checks do not cancel external requests. - Polling adds one agent-detail read every two seconds during pending work and every thirty seconds otherwise. - No schema change, private VM provider implementation, resource backfill, or deployment is included. No live provider test was run. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code editing, and command execution. The exact model revision and context window were not reported by the 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 linked existing issues or described the issue in-PR - [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal 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 - [x] I have considered and documented risks - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved comments - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-09 11:15:24 -07:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip	df66219780	fix(ui): retry the latest failed task attempt (#13765 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work done by AI agents. > - The task thread lets an operator retry a failed run. > - Legacy runs with transcript output did not get a failure marker. > - The thread could therefore offer Try again for an older failure. > - The server correctly reused that failure's existing retry, even when it had already failed. > - This change keeps the latest failure actionable and reports stopped retry responses to the operator. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What happened? Try again could return success without starting work. An initial setup failure had an empty transcript. Its later retry produced output and failed. Only the initial failure had a retry marker, so the button kept requesting the initial failure's already-failed successor. Expected behavior Try again targets the latest failed attempt. An already-stopped retry response shows an error and refreshes the task's run state. Steps to reproduce 1. Start a legacy adapter task that fails before producing transcript output. 2. Retry it. Let this attempt produce output and a final failure comment before it fails. 3. Click Try again in the task thread. 4. Before this fix, the click targets the original failure and replays the stopped successor. Paperclip version or commit Reproduced against `1483bb8bcf`; the regression is also present on the branch base `8813a50105`. Deployment mode Authenticated server with a legacy adapter. The bug is in the shared task UI and retry API client. Related: #11650 adds a different recovery-notice action. This change fixes failed-run markers and retry response handling. Searches found no duplicate of this failure case. ## What Changed - Render legacy failure markers even when the run has a transcript or final comment. - Keep later cancelled automatic retries from replacing the failed run's retry action. - Reject already-stopped retry responses in the API client so existing error feedback appears. - Refresh task run queries after both successful and failed retry requests. - Add regression coverage for failed and timed-out attempts, execution gates with output, and retry response states. ## Verification - Before the fix, the new regression tests failed: two selected the original failure, and four accepted a stopped successor as success. - Targeted task-thread, retry API, marker, and issue-page tests: 279 passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build`: passed. - `pnpm check:token-gates`: passed. - Full UI suite: 6,529 tests passed across 626 files. - [CI run 35650385023](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35650385023): all 53 checks passed, including full workspace build, typecheck, unit/integration suites, and browser tests. The redundant local full-workspace test run was stopped after CI passed; it is not counted as a completed local pass. - Greptile: 5/5 on `608ee58c99`, with no review threads or unresolved comments. The branch is mergeable. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` were attempted. Both stop at the Runner's Rust checks because this host has no `cargo`. The full workspace checks passed in CI. ## Risks Low risk. This changes UI presentation and response handling only. The server's exact-retry idempotency, authorization, execution ownership, and recovery gates remain in place. No schema changes or live task mutations. Existing documentation describes this retry action; the fix restores that behavior. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 (Codex), with reasoning, repository tools, 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 (targeted checks; full-workspace limits described above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (existing behavior restored; no documentation change needed) - [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>	2026-09-21 13:31:43 -07:00

Author

SHA1

Message

Date

Nicky LeachandPaperclip

5badea4798

Use the agent lifecycle contract for plugin setup and status (#15391 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Some plugins must prepare resources before an agent can work.
> - Those resources must stop or be removed when the agent pauses or
terminates.
> - The agent lifecycle module now owns these steps and their durable
completion.
> - Plugins use its required callback contract instead of a separate
readiness query.
> - This PR documents that contract and shows its progress and retry
action on the agent page.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #15631

**Subsystem affected**

Required plugin lifecycle work and the agent detail page.

**Problem or motivation**

The lifecycle module exposes `onAgentLifecycle` and
`agents.lifecycle.manage`, but the plugin authoring guide does not
explain their use. The agent page displays legacy status. Setup
therefore looks paused and offers Resume. Termination leaves the page
before resource cleanup completes.

**Proposed solution**

Use the callback, admission guards, persisted state, and retry route
supplied by the lifecycle module. Show pending phases and fixed host
errors. Keep the detail page open during incomplete termination. Use
lifecycle state for pause and resume controls.

**Alternatives considered**

A separate plugin readiness query would duplicate the module's state and
admission rules. The final diff contains no readiness API, database
commit hooks, or second admission check.

## What Changed

- Document the manifest declaration, callback results, phase ordering,
capability scope, retry behavior, and provider revision requirements.
- Correct SDK comments for lifecycle, routing, and external object
callbacks.
- Show preparation, verification, pause, resume, termination, and
cleanup progress from the existing agent fields.
- Refresh pending steps every two seconds and other states every thirty
seconds. Keep these reads separate from the agent record used by
editable forms. Use the existing authorized retry route for failed
steps.
- Offer Pause during setup. Disable pause and resume while stop or
cleanup is incomplete. Keep cleanup failures reachable on the detail
page. Disable new work after termination starts.
- Test required resource work across setup, pause, resume, and confirmed
deletion. Test every worker callback phase, missing handlers, retry
authorization, and UI behavior.

## Verification

- Focused UI tests: 139 passed across lifecycle status, action buttons,
API tests, and the configuration form. A regression preserves unsaved
edits during an in-flight lifecycle refresh and a failed refresh.
- Focused host and shared tests: 113 passed across lifecycle
integration, retry authorization, plugin RPC, and manifest validation.
The database suite used isolated local PostgreSQL 18 through a temporary
loader outside the repository.
- Module boundary tests: 11 passed. Module import/write checks and UI
token gates passed.
- Plugin SDK build, server direct TypeScript check, and UI TypeScript
check passed.
- `git diff --check` and an added-line secrets/private-reference scan
passed. Fixtures use synthetic identities.
- Full `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed using the existing
local Rust toolchain.
- Visually checked all six progress phases with the application
components and styles. Captured preparation and cleanup failure
screenshots from the production UI build with synthetic API data;
artifacts are kept outside git.
- Full local `pnpm test:run` was attempted and stopped after a
native-runner failure reproduced in isolation:
`native-session-resume.test.ts` / `archives a damaged prior epoch before
completing guarded same-task replacement with real runnerd` returns a
failed Codex fixture result instead of success. The native-runtime and
runner trees are unchanged from the base. No full local test pass is
claimed.
- All latest-head CI checks passed, including test shards, verification,
E2E, and the canary packaging check. Greptile reviewed commit
`96473e03a` at 5/5 with no unresolved comments.

## Risks

- Selected required plugins remain a dependency for lifecycle
completion. The lifecycle module retains their requirements when a
plugin is disabled or removed.
- Plugins must make repeated provider operations safe and fence older
revisions. Host revision checks do not cancel external requests.
- Polling adds one agent-detail read every two seconds during pending
work and every thirty seconds otherwise.
- No schema change, private VM provider implementation, resource
backfill, or deployment is included. No live provider test was run.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code
editing, and command execution. The exact model revision and context
window were not reported by the 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 linked existing issues or described the issue in-PR
- [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
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
- [x] I have considered and documented risks
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved comments
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>

2026-10-09 11:15:24 -07:00

Devin FoleyandPaperclip

df66219780

fix(ui): retry the latest failed task attempt (#13765 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages work done by AI agents.
> - The task thread lets an operator retry a failed run.
> - Legacy runs with transcript output did not get a failure marker.
> - The thread could therefore offer Try again for an older failure.
> - The server correctly reused that failure's existing retry, even when
it had already failed.
> - This change keeps the latest failure actionable and reports stopped
retry responses to the operator.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Try again could return success without starting work. An initial setup
failure had an empty transcript. Its later retry produced output and
failed. Only the initial failure had a retry marker, so the button kept
requesting the initial failure's already-failed successor.

**Expected behavior**

Try again targets the latest failed attempt. An already-stopped retry
response shows an error and refreshes the task's run state.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Start a legacy adapter task that fails before producing transcript
output.
2. Retry it. Let this attempt produce output and a final failure comment
before it fails.
3. Click Try again in the task thread.
4. Before this fix, the click targets the original failure and replays
the stopped successor.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced against `1483bb8bcf`; the regression is also present on the
branch base `8813a50105`.

**Deployment mode**

Authenticated server with a legacy adapter. The bug is in the shared
task UI and retry API client.

Related: #11650 adds a different recovery-notice action. This change
fixes failed-run markers and retry response handling. Searches found no
duplicate of this failure case.

## What Changed

- Render legacy failure markers even when the run has a transcript or
final comment.
- Keep later cancelled automatic retries from replacing the failed run's
retry action.
- Reject already-stopped retry responses in the API client so existing
error feedback appears.
- Refresh task run queries after both successful and failed retry
requests.
- Add regression coverage for failed and timed-out attempts, execution
gates with output, and retry response states.

## Verification

- Before the fix, the new regression tests failed: two selected the
original failure, and four accepted a stopped successor as success.
- Targeted task-thread, retry API, marker, and issue-page tests: 279
passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`: passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build`: passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates`: passed.
- Full UI suite: 6,529 tests passed across 626 files.
- [CI run
35650385023](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35650385023):
all 53 checks passed, including full workspace build, typecheck,
unit/integration suites, and browser tests. The redundant local
full-workspace test run was stopped after CI passed; it is not counted
as a completed local pass.
- Greptile: 5/5 on `608ee58c99`, with no review threads or unresolved
comments. The branch is mergeable.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` were attempted. Both stop at the
Runner's Rust checks because this host has no `cargo`. The full
workspace checks passed in CI.

## Risks

Low risk. This changes UI presentation and response handling only. The
server's exact-retry idempotency, authorization, execution ownership,
and recovery gates remain in place. No schema changes or live task
mutations. Existing documentation describes this retry action; the fix
restores that behavior.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 (Codex), with reasoning, repository tools, 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 (targeted checks;
full-workspace limits described above)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
(existing behavior restored; no documentation change needed)
- [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>

2026-09-21 13:31:43 -07:00