mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-01 23:43:16 +01:00
6a4c193906159c96eb9730bfbc209fa07ead3f7b
6
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
bacbab2bc1 |
test(testops): retain safe verification failure predicates (#18470)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Chat feature evaluations send their original results to TestOps. > - A final reader checks the stored case, run, source, status, and attachments. > - Two real chat cases passed, but the final reader returned a generic mismatch. > - Later server responses passed the same reader, so they do not explain the earlier failure. > - This change records the exact failed predicate without recording field values. > - The next failure can be diagnosed in its actual caller context. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #18462, #18394, and #18322. The current base includes the independent browser-fixture fix in #18409. **What happened?** The post-upload reader returned `chat_testops_upload_mismatch`. Its closed artifact had no phase or field detail. The original evaluation and TestOps case passed. Later responses from the same five endpoints passed the unchanged reader. Those later interactive responses do not prove what the protected API caller received at failure time. An earlier CI run also exposed a flat-text browser-fixture mismatch. Current master independently fixes that assertion in #18409. This branch adopts that complete upstream test; the final PR diff contains only the two diagnostic files. **Expected behavior** Keep every report-reader acceptance check. Report a fixed phase, failed predicate names, match booleans, and field type names. Do not record response values, credentials, unknown URLs, or traces. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Supply a missing case ID, a conflicting job ID, or a wrong export field to the reader. 2. Project the failure with `failureProjection`. 3. The parent returns only the generic error code. This change also identifies the failed check and distinguishes a missing field from a value of the wrong type. **Paperclip version or commit** The latest retained failure used |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
47f81e850b |
fix(testops): verify unexpanded result job runs (#18462)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Chat feature evaluations send their results to TestOps. > - The final reader checks the result against its current GitHub run. > - A real result omitted the nested job object and had no presentation links. > - The reader rejected that passed result after a successful upload. > - This change joins the embedded job-run ID to the separate job-run response. > - The reader keeps the source, case, status, and attachment checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #18394 and #18322. **What happened?** The native chat test and cleanup passed. TestOps stored a passed result and three attachments. The final read-only step failed with `chat_testops_upload_mismatch`. The result response had a job-run ID, launch ID, and current GitHub run URL. It did not include the nested job object. Its presentation links were empty. **Expected behavior** The reader must accept that response when the separate job-run response proves the exact job, launch, and current GitHub run. It must reject conflicting identity or source data. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Return a valid result with an unexpanded job run and empty links. 2. Return the matching full job run from the existing job-run endpoint. 3. Call `verifyChatUpload`. The old reader rejects the result. **Paperclip version or commit** Observed on |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d06c5e0eff |
fix(evals): preserve opaque TestOps parameters (#18394)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip verifies real agent work through Product E2E tests. > - The fixed Chat feature workflow uses TestOps to select and report one case. > - TestOps exposes job parameters as ID/value pairs. > - The schema does not establish that those IDs identify global environment variables. > - The reader used that unsupported relationship to infer parameter names. > - This pull request keeps IDs opaque, preserves the strict allowed values, and records closed read diagnostics. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #18322, #18375, #18385. **What happened?** A zero-model bootstrap returned HTTP 404 during context readback. The exact failed GET was not retained and remains unknown. Schema review also found no established relationship between job-parameter IDs and global environment-variable IDs, although the reader queried that namespace to label parameters. **Expected behavior** Read only the existing job-run, launch, and job records. Preserve the job's exact permitted ID/value vector without inventing parameter names. Record which fixed GET class failed, its positive resource ID, state, and available HTTP status without raw responses or URLs. **Steps to reproduce** Use the actual API helpers with a job-parameter ID that has no global environment-variable definition. The new pure controls reject an unexpected definition lookup and verify the opaque vector and diagnostics without a backend or model call. **Paperclip version or commit** This change starts from `8595efc20bda3ce20a9fbbf34a5d156a6fcf6d57` after #18385. **Deployment mode** GitHub Actions metadata setup in the protected TestOps reporting environment. ## What Changed - Remove the unsupported global environment-variable lookup from job-parameter handling. - Preserve an exact positive ID and `refs/heads/master` value. Use the fixed workflow's existing `evaluate` default. - Treat an operation parameter as such only when its ID matches the protected configured ID and its value is allowed. Keep rejecting empty, duplicate, conflicting, or unknown vectors before writes. - Project only an opaque ID with a fixed-default-ref kind and value, or an unresolved kind with the value withheld. - Add closed diagnostics for the existing job-run, launch, and job GETs. A successful call keeps HTTP status null because the API abstraction does not expose the status. - Sync one reporter-test assertion and document opaque IDs. Reporter runtime and workflow source are unchanged. ## Verification - Four new actual-helper controls fail on the parent. - `node --test tests/runner-e2e/chat-feature-testops-api.test.mjs tests/runner-e2e/testops-chat-reporter.test.mjs`: 58 affected pure/mock/FS controls pass on Node 26.4.0. - Three MJS syntax checks and `git diff --check` pass. TypeScript noEmit was not run for this MJS/documentation change. - Two intermediate exact-projection assertion failures were retained before the assertions were synced to the new diagnostic contract. - [Normal Node 24 CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41137009579) passes on exact head `3c256fb8f7559093c5fb063170e26c01b6e8a0a4`: 48 jobs passed and one skipped. Both required `ci / e2e` and `ci / verify` pass. - Greptile reviewed this exact head at 5/5 with no actionable findings or unresolved threads. At this verification cut, the optional Contributor trust check was still in progress; it is not an effective required status context. - No actual CLI, API, provider, model, app, database, build, install, or additional bootstrap was run to validate this change locally. ## Risks The original HTTP 404 route remains unknown. Removing an unsupported schema assumption does not prove that it caused that failure. The live job mapping and dispatch remain unqualified. The strict source, actor, selection, run-number, nonce, once-only send, private custody, case, model, grader, and clock checks are unchanged. Unknown metadata still stops. This PR adds no endpoint, workflow mode, permission, credential path, or passing result. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6.1 Sol (`gpt-6.1-sol`) with reasoning, code editing, tool use, and pure test review. The runtime does not expose the exact 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8595efc20b |
fix(evals): support official TestOps job metadata (#18385)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and verifies real work through Product E2E tests. > - The fixed Chat feature workflow uses TestOps to select and report one backlog case. > - Official registration exposes a workflow-query URL and a Branch parameter. > - The existing reader accepts only workflow-file or numeric URLs, and the admin launcher requires an operation parameter. > - These assumptions reject valid official metadata before the feature can run. > - This pull request supports the exact observed form while preserving source, selection, and once-only execution checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #18322, #18375. **What happened?** The second zero-model bootstrap stopped with a generic job-mismatch code. Ordinary TestOps UI inspection then showed an official workflow-query URL outside the accepted literals and a Branch-only job. The exact first failed predicate in that bootstrap remains unknown. **Expected behavior** Accept that exact fixed-workflow URL. Preserve the existing master Branch value when the job has no operation parameter. Keep rejecting foreign URLs, unknown parameters, wrong branches, and conflicting operation IDs before mutation. **Steps to reproduce** Pass the official query URL and Branch-only metadata through the existing bootstrap, selection, and admin-launch owners. The new pure controls exercise those actual helpers without a CLI, backend, or model call. **Paperclip version or commit** This change starts from `0e15c92073a09e50df99190a37f69a86286b989b` after #18375. **Deployment mode** GitHub Actions and the protected TestOps reporting environment. ## What Changed - Share one exact URL predicate across bootstrap, evaluation selection, and admin preparation. Add only the observed official workflow-query literal. - Support Branch-only, operation-only, and Branch-plus-operation jobs with strict definition IDs, names, values, and duplicate checks. - Preserve the exact master Branch value. Set an existing operation parameter to `evaluate`; otherwise use the fixed workflow's existing default. - Use the same checked parameter vector for job and plan writes and their readbacks. - Report distinct fixed bootstrap predicate codes without response values. - Document when the protected operation-parameter ID is required. - Align one existing Cloud-maintenance test with the inherited managed-Cloud S3 policy. Preserve the same-version local-storage proof in the parent, use valid synthetic Cloud settings in the child, and check the expected provider mismatch without S3 requests. Retain the no-seed and unchanged persisted-row assertions. ## Verification - URL controls: three failures on the parent; all pass with the correction. - Branch controls: two failures and one correct rejection on the predecessor; all pass with the correction. - `node --test tests/runner-e2e/chat-feature-testops-api.test.mjs`: 40 owning pure/mock controls pass on Node 26.4.0. - Two MJS syntax checks and `git diff --check` pass. TypeScript noEmit was not run for this MJS/documentation change. - The first [normal CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41131094974) failed only in the managed-skill Cloud fixture and its dependent verification gate: 46 jobs passed, two failed, and one skipped. The tested merge included a new upstream policy that rejects the test's local-disk Cloud configuration. The exact caught runtime exception remains unknown. - Three pure controls using the actual policy validator pass: the old invalid Cloud fixture rejects, the new synthetic S3 fixture admits, and an invalid master key rejects. An initial tsx wrapper IPC permission error executed zero controls and remains a separate setup failure. - The PostgreSQL/maintenance-child test was not run locally. On new-head AWS CI, `managed-skill-content.test.ts` passed all 17 tests in server shard 9. - [Normal CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41133876636) is green on exact head `b76d5dd40d7711f1b5f6b6316b1114c0aae02d57`: 48 jobs passed and one skipped. Both required `ci / e2e` and `ci / verify` pass. - Greptile reviewed this exact head at 5/5 with no actionable findings or unresolved review threads. - No actual CLI, backend, model, provider, app, database, build, or bootstrap was run to validate this correction locally. ## Risks The exact original bootstrap predicate is still unknown. This fixes a demonstrated metadata false negative and preserves the prior failed run. Actual backend parameter types and integration dispatch still need verification. Unknown metadata stops before the once marker and writes. This PR changes no workflow, credential, case, model, grader, clock, or private-evidence policy. It does not claim a passing feature result. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6.1 Sol (`gpt-6.1-sol`) with reasoning, code editing, tool use, and pure test review. The runtime does not expose the exact 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
a1845b3b64 |
fix(evals): capture TestOps registration after watch (#18375)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and verifies their work through Product E2E tests. > - The fixed Chat feature workflow prepares a TestOps case and plan before any model run. > - Its first zero-result bootstrap completed, but the watched child did not receive the generated job-run ID. > - The official watch log contained a job-run ID, so the missing child variable did not prove that registration was absent. > - This pull request reads official context after watch and validates the linked backend records. > - The workflow retains closed registration metadata and stops on unknown or foreign context. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #18322. **What happened?** The successful zero-result bootstrap retained `official_job_run_id_missing` from its watched child. It could not prove the backend job and workflow binding needed for the next setup step. **Expected behavior** After successful watch, read the generated context, validate its current GitHub run and fixed workflow, and retain only closed IDs and parameter metadata. **Steps to reproduce** Run the fixed workflow's `bootstrap` operation on master. Inspect its setup artifact after watch completes. No evaluation or synthetic passing result is needed. **Paperclip version or commit** The original bootstrap used merged #18322. This follow-up starts from `76fde891ccc29283b3f5c8dcdce089c5b3d937d1`. **Deployment mode** GitHub Actions metadata-only setup in the protected reporting environment. ## What Changed - Run an internal context reader after successful bootstrap watch in the same protected step. - Parse only numeric official job-run and launch IDs in memory. Do not log or save raw command output. - Validate current-run, project, launch, job, workflow, and bounded parameter metadata before writing an exclusive registration receipt. - Retain the two known registration receipt paths with the existing setup artifact. - Preserve the original inside-watch receipt, case reconciliation, provider isolation, and evaluation limits. ## Verification - `node --test tests/runner-e2e/chat-feature-testops-api.test.mjs tests/runner-e2e/testops-chat-reporter.test.mjs`: 48 pure/mock/FS controls pass (36 prior and 12 new). The actual local Node version was 26.4.0. Normal Node 24 CI remains required. - Four MJS syntax checks and `git diff --check` pass. No TypeScript noEmit claim is made for this MJS-only helper change. - Actionlint passes for the changed workflow. - Normal [GitHub Actions CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41123894542) passes on exact head `58396de10f0c49294b0bbc0f4709c29990d57d53`: 48 jobs succeeded and one skipped. Both required `ci / e2e` and `ci / verify` pass. - Greptile reviewed that exact head at 5/5 with no actionable findings or unresolved review threads. - No local CLI, provider, model, app, database, or build qualification was run. No replacement bootstrap or paid evaluation was dispatched. ## Risks The official context or backend DTO shape can differ from the supported format. The reader then stops with a closed failure receipt. Pure tests do not qualify the remote CLI or backend. The original zero-result bootstrap and its missing child-context observation remain part of the history. The case's actual outcome remains unmeasured. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6.1 Sol (`gpt-6.1-sol`) with reasoning, code editing, tool use, and pure test review. The runtime does not expose the exact 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9e1735ec17 |
test(evals): add a fixed TestOps AWS chat feature route (#18322)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and inspect their saved work. > - Chat feature evaluations test a real request against saved tasks, audit records, links and reload behavior. > - The current suite has Codex and OpenCode cells but no dedicated runnable DeepSeek 1017 backlog plan in TestOps. > - TestOps must select the real case before the workflow can access a model key. > - This PR adds one fixed, default-branch AWS route for native OpenCode and DeepSeek 1017. > - The route keeps original evidence private and sends only a verified result and approved screenshots to TestOps. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Product E2E evaluation definitions and GitHub Actions delivery. **Problem or motivation** A dedicated TestOps plan cannot run the existing backlog chat journey with native OpenCode. A result must prove saved work and cleanup rather than report that a model call completed. **Proposed solution** Add one OpenCode backlog cell and one fixed public workflow. TestOps selection validation runs in a token-isolated job before builds or inference. The workflow retains private originals and reports the bound outcome to the selected TestOps case. **Alternatives considered** A private-repository wrapper would need a new cross-repository GitHub write credential. The new route uses the existing TestOps GitHub integration instead. Existing manual candidate approval paths remain separate. **Roadmap alignment** This extends the existing feature evaluation infrastructure. It changes no production feature, global runtime default or model default. Current main #18319 supplies the v2 grader, delegation queue accounting and final screenshot capture; these improvements are preserved. Related product work: #16814 and #17126 concern backlog handling. This PR changes neither product implementation and does not claim those changes are required. ## What Changed - Add exactly one native OpenCode backlog cell with DeepSeek 1017 under the separate `runner-opencode-deepseek-1017` profile. Preserve all four existing Codex and production OpenCode cells and their models. - Add a default-branch-only workflow with fixed evaluation, zero-result registration and one plan-launch modes. Require GitHub actor checks and authenticated singleton selection before inference. - Add a separate shipped-main evidence authority. Reuse the existing strict private storage, scanners, inventories and scoped AWS sessions. - Bind sanitized results, generated JUnit and producer-approved screenshots to the exact source, run, attempt and case. Keep failed grades and cleanup failures failed. - Add TestOps API, CLI and result adapters with pure controls and normal unit-test wiring. Keep the reporting token out of the evaluated process. - Verify the current server case result and attachment metadata after upload, without masking an earlier failed upload or evaluation. - Apply only the existing reviewed lock correction, verify unchanged tracked dependency inputs and bind the lock receipt across the compiled-output handoff before frozen installation. - Bind the initial administrator launch to one approved workflow run number and live GitHub source/actor metadata before TestOps authentication. Use bounded REST case reconciliation and only the reviewed existing GitHub integration. - Make two existing CI tests observe their intended state deterministically: a fake clock for copy-feedback lifetime and a completed-pass barrier for retry-cancellation batches. Production behavior and the original assertions remain unchanged. The two test-only fixes are intentionally included because their observation boundaries blocked this delivery’s required normal CI. They preserve every original assertion and change no production behavior. The original failed runs remain recorded, and the exact causes of those observations remain unknown. ## Verification - 157 focused profile, catalog, oracle, filesystem admission, export, private-path and workflow controls passed on the current-main composition. The existing stock OpenCode models and the new exact DeepSeek 1017 selection are checked separately. - 44 API, CLI, filesystem and post-upload readback controls passed, including foreign selection, changed hashes, unsafe files, failed outcomes, expired readback and no-resend behavior. - The new exact private session and trace layout controls produced four genuine parent failures and pass with the selected-path extension. The frozen 244-case candidate approval registry remains unchanged. - The lock guard has seven filesystem controls plus seven existing canonical-owner controls. The unrestricted old workflow failed its actual policy calibration; the corrected frozen-install route passed. - Eval-owning TypeScript checks, workflow lint and Git whitespace checks passed. The separate UI test correction was checked with the focused jsdom unit suite. The server test barrier has pure wrapper and real scheduler controls; its DB-backed route was not run locally. No additional local typecheck/build was run for these test-only changes. - Full native builds, provider execution, app/database behavior and TestOps registration are reserved for GitHub Actions/AWS. They have not run locally. - The initial normal CI run failed the new-workflow policy allowlist and a heartbeat scheduling assertion. The policy fix has an actual parent red/current green control and rejects five unsafe route variants. Heartbeat source is unchanged and its failure cause remains unknown. The original run is retained. - The launch-fence actual caller fails against the published parent and passes the five own-run contradiction controls before authentication. - The prior `a5aa359d` normal CI completed successfully. The complete `f9e1f289` run passed all leaf jobs except an existing copy-feedback UI assertion, plus its dependent verification gate. The four owning UI files were unchanged from the earlier passing head and actual tested merge; the exact scheduling cause remains unknown. - The correction changes only that test to actual React `act` and a scoped fake clock. All eight component tests pass; early-hide and never-clear source variants each fail the intended lifetime assertion. Production clipboard/card behavior is unchanged. - The `2f27f3fc` run passed the corrected UI shard and every leaf job except the existing retry-cancellation intermediate-count assertion, plus its dependent verification gate. The seven relevant owners match the earlier passing run and historical source comparison; the exact CI scheduling cause remains unknown. - The test-only barrier observes a persisted completed worker pass before asserting the unchanged 20-item cap and two-company fairness, then releases it for the original 29-item drain and 180-second idle check. Two extracted-wrapper controls and three actual scheduler controls pass. The real DB-backed test awaits AWS qualification. - On `836e80ac`, both repaired test shards passed in AWS. The original attempt retained a separate E2E cleanup HTTP 500 from a PostgreSQL lock timeout and one runner shutdown. No production repair or precise contention/shutdown cause is claimed. - Exactly one targeted retry of E2E shard 3 and its aggregate gate passed in attempt 2; exactly one recovery of the interrupted server shard and its verification gate passed in attempt 3. Other passed jobs were carried forward. The final normal run is successful. No whole-workflow retry or evaluation/model retry was launched. - Both literal required checks (`ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`) are successful on the exact final source `836e80ac`. Greptile is 5/5 and no review threads remain open. Actual TestOps registration and the OpenCode/DeepSeek feature result remain unqualified until their separate executions. ## Risks - Actual zero-result registration, tenant API shapes and public-repository dispatch access must be checked before the first evaluation. Missing or ambiguous metadata stops the route. - The real OpenCode/DeepSeek backlog result and Allure outcome remain unqualified until that run. No passing result is seeded. - One human query, one accounted work run, 120-second turn, 420-second attempt, 300-second settled-state bound and zero retries remain unchanged. Setup usage is outside work accounting and stays unknown. - The reporting token was configured through the separately reviewed protected credential bootstrap. It is unavailable to AWS evaluation jobs. - Metadata reconciliation is capped at ten pages, 1,000 cases and four parallel detail reads. Missing or inconsistent metadata stops before inference. The initial administrator launch counter must be created once after registration; it does not restrict normal TestOps Run actions. - Existing manual workflows, historical evaluation grades and candidate approval records remain unchanged. The original CI failures are preserved; the test corrections do not establish retrospective causes. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6.1 Sol (`gpt-6.1-sol`) with reasoning and tool use. The runtime did not expose 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 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> |