mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-01 06:42:06 +01:00
7eea9d8214fec00dfde32bda7fcf9b20a428e330
4
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
efc2e6810e |
fix: show each task once in dashboard agent cards (#14847)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their tasks. > - The dashboard shows recent agent activity in compact cards. > - Those cards use run records, so two runs for one task can create duplicate task cards. > - An operator needs to see each task once when scanning the dashboard. > - This pull request selects one run per linked task before it applies the card limit. > - The live runs page still shows each run for run inspection. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** The dashboard showed the same task in two agent cards when that task had both an active run and a completed run. **Expected behavior** The dashboard should show a linked task at most once. It should keep the active run card when one is present. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start an agent run for a task that already has a completed run. 2. Open the company dashboard. 3. Observe two cards linked to the same task. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on the pre-change master at `8b4aa0692`. **Deployment mode** Local dev, built from source. The bug is in the core dashboard UI and does not depend on an agent adapter or database mode. ## What Changed - Select distinct linked tasks from capped active and recent run samples before applying the dashboard card limit. - Keep separate cards for runs without a linked task. - Preserve the dashboard's count of additional distinct cards behind the live-runs link. - Add UI and embedded Postgres regression tests for duplicate runs and document the dashboard rule. - Give the existing multi-request cross-tenant authorization test enough time on loaded CI runners. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/components/ActiveAgentsPanel.test.tsx` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/api/heartbeats.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/dashboard-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/agent-live-run-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/agent-cross-tenant-authz-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build` - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm build` - `pnpm check:token-gates` - Review the dashboard with an active and a completed run on the same task. Confirm that it shows one card. Open Live agent runs to inspect both run records. ## Risks - A very high volume of recent runs for one task can fill the capped sample and leave older tasks off the dashboard. The Live runs page remains available for full run inspection. - The dashboard may fetch up to 50 distinct run representatives to preserve its overflow count. The default run API response and persisted data are unchanged. > 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 - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The runtime does not expose the exact model ID or context window size to this task. The model used reasoning, tool calls, 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 - [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
|
555391fed7 |
fix: run restart recovery, workspace self-heal, quota-aware retries, failed-run metrics (#9183)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents run in heartbeat runs orchestrated by the server; run
lifecycle, retry scheduling, and the dashboard's run-activity metrics
are the subsystems involved
> - A spike in "failed" tasks traced to three causes: server restarts
killing in-flight runs and mislabeling them as failures, deterministic
workspace-validation loops when a worktree's branch diverged, and
provider quota/usage-limit errors being classified as generic transient
failures (putting agents into error state and polluting metrics)
> - Killed-then-recovered runs and quota waits are not product failures,
so both the runtime behavior and the reporting needed to distinguish
them
> - This pull request drains runs gracefully on shutdown with idempotent
restart retries, self-heals workspace branch mismatches, adds a
quota-aware failure class with reset-time retry, separates recovered
restart kills from true failures on the dashboard, and documents restart
hygiene for operators
> - The benefit is fewer spurious failures, automatic recovery instead
of manual repair, and dashboard metrics that reflect real failure rates
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists; describing the bug inline per the
bug-report template:
**What happened?**
In-flight heartbeat runs are marked `failed` when the server restarts,
even though a retry later succeeds. Worktrees whose checked-out branch
diverges from the issue branch fail workspace validation on every
subsequent run with no recovery path. Provider quota/usage-limit
responses are treated as generic transient upstream errors, putting
agents into an error state and retrying before the quota window resets.
The dashboard counts all of these as true failures, inflating failure
metrics.
**Expected behavior**
Graceful shutdown should interrupt (not fail) running runs and chain
exactly one recovery retry. Workspace validation should repair
recoverable branch mismatches automatically. Quota errors should get
their own error class with the retry scheduled at the provider reset
time and the agent left idle. The dashboard should report recovered
restart kills separately from true failures.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start a heartbeat run, then restart the server (SIGTERM) while it is
in flight — the run lands as `failed` with a process-loss error code
even when its retry succeeds
2. Check out an issue whose worktree branch has diverged (e.g. after a
force-moved branch) — every subsequent run fails
`workspace_validation_failed` deterministically
3. Drive an agent into a provider usage-limit window — the run fails as
a generic transient upstream error and the agent enters an error state
instead of idling until the reset time
**Paperclip version or commit**
master (base
|
||
|
Dotta
|
09d0678840 |
[codex] Harden heartbeat scheduling and runtime controls (#4223)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through issue checkout, heartbeat runs, routines, and auditable control-plane state > - The runtime path has to recover from lost local processes, transient adapter failures, blocked dependencies, and routine coalescing without stranding work > - The existing branch carried several reliability fixes across heartbeat scheduling, issue runtime controls, routine dispatch, and operator-facing run state > - These changes belong together because they share backend contracts, migrations, and runtime status semantics > - This pull request groups the control-plane/runtime slice so it can merge independently from board UI polish and adapter sandbox work > - The benefit is safer heartbeat recovery, clearer runtime controls, and more predictable recurring execution behavior ## What Changed - Adds bounded heartbeat retry scheduling, scheduled retry state, and Codex transient failure recovery handling. - Tightens heartbeat process recovery, blocker wake behavior, issue comment wake handling, routine dispatch coalescing, and activity/dashboard bounds. - Adds runtime-control MCP tools and Paperclip skill docs for issue workspace runtime management. - Adds migrations `0061_lively_thor_girl.sql` and `0062_routine_run_dispatch_fingerprint.sql`. - Surfaces retry state in run ledger/agent UI and keeps related shared types synchronized. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run src/tools.test.ts` from `packages/mcp-server` ## Risks - Medium risk: this touches heartbeat recovery and routine dispatch, which are central execution paths. - Migration order matters if split branches land out of order: merge this PR before branches that assume the new runtime/routine fields. - Runtime retry behavior should be watched in CI and in local operator smoke tests because it changes how transient failures are resumed. > 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 - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent runtime, shell/git tool use enabled. Exact hosted model build and context window are not exposed in this Paperclip heartbeat environment. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4357a3f352 |
[codex] Harden dashboard run activity charts (#4126)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip gives operators a live view of agent work across dashboards, transcripts, and run activity charts > - Those views consume live run updates and aggregate run activity from backend dashboard data > - Missing or partial run data could make charts brittle, and live transcript updates were heavier than needed > - Operators need dashboard data to stay stable even when recent run payloads are incomplete > - This pull request hardens dashboard run aggregation, guards chart rendering, and lightens live run update handling > - The benefit is a more reliable dashboard during active agent execution ## What Changed - Added dashboard run activity types and backend aggregation coverage. - Guarded activity chart rendering when run data is missing or partial. - Reduced live transcript update churn in active agent and run chat surfaces. - Fixed issue chat avatar alignment in the thread renderer. - Added focused dashboard, activity chart, and live transcript tests. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/dashboard-service.test.ts ui/src/components/ActivityCharts.test.tsx ui/src/components/transcript/useLiveRunTranscripts.test.tsx` - Result: 8 tests passed, 1 skipped. The embedded Postgres dashboard service test skipped on this host with the existing PGlite/Postgres init warning; UI chart and transcript tests passed. ## Risks - Medium-low risk: aggregation semantics changed, but the UI remains guarded around incomplete data. - The dashboard service test is host-skipped here, so CI should confirm the embedded database path. > 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 - OpenAI Codex coding agent based on GPT-5, tool-enabled local shell and GitHub workflow, exact runtime context window 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots, or documented why targeted component tests are sufficient here - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |