mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-01 15:35:12 +01:00
91fdf02e956f80c29595c34c196735cf5ccc6dc8
216
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
|
492d537340 |
fix(native): recover controllers across webserver replacement (#18343)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Native execution runs in a remote Runner while the webserver owns its controller. > - Encrypted PRP checkpoints and session snapshots already survive a webserver restart in Postgres. > - Ordinary warm and per-turn admission still needs local markers and supervisor metadata to find that state. > - Replacing the webserver with an empty native controller directory can therefore lose a usable retained session. > - This change adds bounded recovery metadata to the existing snapshot transaction and reconstructs local projections from the selected durable source. > - The benefit is native execution continuity across webserver replacement, with the existing ownership and agent lifecycle policies. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Native remote controller recovery and retained-session continuation during a webserver upgrade. **Subsystem affected** server/ — native runtime, checkpoint persistence, recovery scheduling and internal upgrade reporting. Product E2E qualification also changes. **Current behavior** Without both the local PRP marker and supervisor file, normal continuation can return before discovering the saved Postgres checkpoint. The snapshot already exists in Postgres, but its local reuse compatibility envelope cannot be reconstructed. **Proposed behavior** Select the existing durable source, validate its identity and ownership, restore its PRP state and supervisor projection, then use normal authenticated admission. Missing or inconsistent evidence holds recovery. It does not authorize fresh provider work. **Reason and benefit** A replacement webserver must recover active execution and later continue its retained session without the old server's native files. This is one component of deployment continuity. HTTP traffic switching, workspace storage migration and Railway rollout remain separate. **Breaking changes** No new public endpoint, schema migration or database pool. The private run-profile envelope is additive. Disk-independent rollback also requires a reader for the staged controller format and compact checkpoint part; the first production release containing these readers is the floor. Older file-backed sessions need an owner checkpoint or the bounded internal importer. **Additional context** Related foundations: #17401, #17916, #17254, #14621, #14622. The implementation contract and open acceptance gates are in [the dated plan](doc/plans/2026-10-30-native-controller-checkpoints.md). ## What Changed - Persist a versioned recovery envelope, at most 4 KiB, beside the redacted session snapshot in its existing transaction. Keep it out of public run projections. - Compare frozen admission separately from prepared attachment instructions during staged recovery, preserving exact template/identity/authority checks. - Bound the existing lazy checkpoint pool at three connections after measured two-slot burst backlog; keep request/renewal capacities and SQL operation counts unchanged. The tuning is a separate commit. - Discover and restore the exact selected retained source without local native markers. Preserve the 32-candidate window, progress barriers and current authority checks. - Fence snapshot and result writes. Acquire coordinator, issue and run locks in order and check expiry after lock waits. Combine snapshot ownership/read work into one statement. - Reuse existing recovery deadlines and drain/resume scheduling. Retained-owner waits preserve the original unstarted run and actual lease deadline. Stop, ownership and provider-progress fences precede deferral. Add bounded native evidence reporting, retained-source import and retention protection. - Admit a settled warm source with an authenticated idle goal-read suffix while retaining active-work and mixed-authority holds. - Permit lifecycle `turn.stop` checkpoints after accepted results under existing ownership fences. Claim the existing successor coordinator before retiring the old warm session, and stage shared attachments only after verified retirement. Preserve omitted isolated-home defaults and existing fresh skill-selection order during recovery without hiding real configuration changes. - Carry the exact durable six-field PRP binding during active recovery after a healthy warm handoff. Keep the Runner mismatch guard and preserve opaque attachment IDs. - Preserve an already verified active or idle warm process during remote preparation; revalidate its proof/liveness and retain later authenticated PRP attachment. Ordinary resumed leases retain suspension checks. - Drain retained source events under their original authority, reconcile immutable source accounting and block unknown source tool dispatch before target work. - Persist compact staged handoff intent through authenticated adoption and recover direct/listener command-loss windows without another Runner or duplicate attachment. - Rebuild suspended lifecycle receipts for resumed prepared tasks, and retry missing lifecycle reads after partial PRP materialization without overwriting contradictory evidence. - Add normal warm/per-turn diskless continuation coverage, real Postgres races and SQL-cost checks. Add a reproducible paired load workload. - Give only the explicit outage fixture a 15-minute provider idle window, with a red/green catalog regression preserving all production timing and lifecycle policies. - Publish the goal-less task-session pointer in the existing post-acceptance terminal checkpoint transaction, with current ownership, accepted-result, reset and newer-progress fences. Keep a private bound receipt so late completion cannot duplicate or resurrect publication. - Use a retained warm sandbox in the dedicated continuity fixture, and accept an exact output token followed by an explanation. Keep the strict identity oracle. - Extend the explicit Daytona cell to a five-minute active outage and another replacement after completion. Require retained provider identity, a new tool receipt and a useful follow-up result. Add an owned loopback Postgres E2E fixture for hosts that cannot start embedded Postgres. ## Verification **Merge recommendation — `fc68584ce6231a02e47ecd743f55b036ccea034f`: ready for the qualified native-controller component.** Full CI, fresh review, local application paths, controlled performance qualification and the strict live Linux/Daytona case pass. Independent resource cleanup is complete. Broader rollout, browser reconnection and the unexecuted transport/platform combinations remain integration gates. Integrated 484 passed full local recursive typecheck/build and ordinary active→completion→cache-loss→C component qualification. Fresh review then found a valid attached-wake failure: preparation appends attachment instructions before the verifier compares execution to the frozen admission. 9f4 fixes that by separately checking the pre-preparation admission and exact prepared execution. Both hashes are captured privately per admission; the full template, identity, configuration and authority checks remain. Its regression fails before the fix; 36 focused cases, 42 staged source/target cases and server typecheck pass afterward. The review thread is resolved. Exact-head full CI passes ([run 41168228822](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41168228822): 48 successful jobs, one intended skip); the complete `pnpm test:run` partitions are forced, with the five native suites in the Runner lane. This is not a claim that an unsharded local command passed. The fresh exact-head Greptile check succeeds with 5/5 and all six threads resolved. The original two-connection database comparison closes **steady PASS and burst FAIL**. Every relative CPU/WAL/request-p99 gate passes and all operations/ownership remain correct, but candidate arm 3 drains in 1,015.99 ms and baseline arm 4 in 1,059.67 ms against the unchanged 1,000 ms absolute gate. Those results remain failed. A separate 2→3→4→2 diagnostic reproduces drain times 1,051.57 / 956.79 / 882.02 / 1,065.72 ms: three is the smallest tested passing cap, and the repeated two-cap failure survives run-order/cache effects. Separately reviewable `fc68584ce6` changes the existing lazy checkpoint pool default to three connections. Request capacity stays ten and liveness two; idle release, shutdown fencing, transaction counts and pool count are unchanged. Thirteen DB lifecycle/cap tests and DB typecheck pass. Full recursive typecheck/build pass at exact |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
322fa6b65c |
fix(ui): restore task document authoring and add persistence journey (#18356)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work. > - Task documents keep versioned work beside each conversation. > - The default chat interface could read general documents but hid their editor. > - People also need unfinished edits to survive a tab switch or reload. > - This pull request restores the shared editor in Artifacts. > - A portable browser journey checks exact saved content and revision history. > - The benefit is a usable document flow with independent deployment checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A person using the default task interface could read a general task document but could not create or edit one. The existing editor was available in Classic mode. A pending create could also leave newer text as a new form after its editor unmounted, causing a conflict against the person's own successful creation. **Expected behavior** A person can create and edit general documents through Artifacts. Titles, bodies and revision history persist after reopening and reloading the task. Unfinished text survives tab switches. A successful create makes retained newer text an edit of that confirmed revision. Later writes from another actor still cause a conflict. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open an ordinary task in the default chat interface, then open Artifacts. 2. Try to create a general document. The previous interface has no authoring control. 3. With authoring restored, submit a new document, keep typing, and switch to Properties before the request finishes. 4. Reopen Artifacts. The previous draft path restores a new form despite the successful create. Related public work: #17598 adds document copy/download and #18157 adds image galleries. The selected actual merged parent is `f1d780838218f975064f38333946805e0ec103a5` from #18427. It includes the stable profile-entry ordering repair and the exact recovery-fixture prerequisite. The resulting PR diff contains 32 document and reporting files. ## What Changed - Reuse `IssueDocumentsSection` for general documents in default-chat Artifacts. Keep Classic authoring in its existing task body. Ordinary tasks, conversations and Coordinator mode share the same editor options and signed-in permission wrapper. - Preserve Plans, file-review documents, attachments, uploads and work products. Hide duplicate general-document cards. Use the same general-document key rules for visible rows, validation and refused writes. - Forward image uploads, mentions, references, author maps and feedback to both editor mounts. Keep empty mention/project values stable while queries load. - Back up unfinished forms within their signed-in account, task and editor scope. Preserve text entered before its key. Record a successful create on its matching retained newer buffer, including after unmount or an early reopen. Preserve newer title/body edits, real remote conflicts and matching cancellation cleanup. - Add the model-free `task-document-persistence` journey. Setup creates only an owned empty backlog task. The browser creates and edits the document; normal APIs independently check company, task, actor, exact content and both revision records. - Reopen the owned task through the explicit Backlog view, then reload it. Require exact UI readback and zero native runs. Add only the Doc registration, definition-hash inputs, report mapping and four closed checks to the shared harness. - Count explicit zero-run browser receipts after private journey metadata is removed for publication. Preserve missing billing evidence, positive usage and native/protocol accounting. - Update browser assertions for the restored inline editor while retaining exact download bytes, revision collisions, paused-state and no-run checks. Update the feature map, usage docs and shared editor stories. ## Verification - Latest focused checks use official Node 24.22.2: 568 journey, catalog, report, billing and attempt-accounting tests across 25 suites pass. All four admitted journeys remain registered. The seven relevant UI suites pass 529 tests, including the task-page container after the parent merge. Maps, token gates, the PR-scope diff check and the owned credential-pattern scan pass. The normal QA import preflight also passes with an empty environment and network access blocked. - Billing regression: before the repair, the explicit empty public receipt counted one run, and two positive-usage receipts were discarded by browser metadata. Those three cases fail before and pass after the repair. Two additional red regressions cover aggregate usage beside an empty run list. That ambiguous shape now keeps an unavailable receipt and a minimum count of one. Missing receipts retain unavailable billing, and native/protocol one-or-more run totals retain their measurements. - The previous fresh CI run failed its unchanged snapshot-only recovery fixture: one global sweep did not call its callback. The original failure remains recorded. An isolated PGlite probe with all canonical migrations exercises the real reconciler: it processes two earlier sources, then reaches the owned third source on the next sweep. It preserves source evidence, files and run IDs. This proves bounded pagination, not full native snapshot repair. - Local native recovery tests could not start PostgreSQL because the host semaphore limit was reached. That run executed zero cases. Canonical Linux CI later passed all 143 fixture cases, including the original snapshot-only case and the new competing-candidate control. The exact fixture repair is now inherited from #18427 and is absent from this PR diff. - The portable oracle rejects 19 stale, missing, foreign or incorrect outcomes. Result validation also rejects model/provider metadata and native runs for this case. - Five real Artifacts-to-Properties unmount regressions fail before the repair and pass after it. They cover both editor modes, reopening before and after completion, later typing, and a foreign revision that must still conflict. The edit-storage failure case also checks that Cancel clears the promoted fallback copy. - UI coverage includes default chat, Classic, conversations, Coordinator, Plan rendering, document-card deduplication, reserved keys, pending-query stability, permissions and rich editor options. - Earlier real browser checks passed five upload cases and two artifact-arrival cases. They retain exact CSV bytes, original/revised content, collision, paused-state and no-run assertions. Current-head normal CI runs the updated browser suites again. - The branch merges only the selected actual parent `f1d780838218f975064f38333946805e0ec103a5`. The merge has no conflicts or manual resolution. The SQL service and recovery fixture match that parent exactly. The own document editor, persistence flow, saved-state oracle and billing repair retain their previously qualified source blobs. Follow-up, clarification, question/resumption, screenshot helpers and the Steering map are byte-identical to the merged parent. Existing project/search/question/follow-up registrations remain present. - Required document source blobs remain exact: Doc UI `22e80663b053363e5f75e1432dd9043dc0e70243`, its unmount tests `16f3f4ed0dc9b11aaff129e06e6cf2bbf4522713`, readiness helper `800a747284db19b8484650b6759e8bd1f356839d`, and budget service `3a15d489f0aa55c22e8f7fe6a6bc6a0e14e5914e`. - Local typing is limited by borrowed declarations from another checkout. They omit current `skill_test` and sandbox creation-operation fields. No dependency declarations or repository config were changed. The authoritative clean CI Typecheck + Release Registry gate passes on exact head `2ffce29827ae170420d740940c1c069c7225a74c`. - Full monorepo typecheck, tests and build were not run locally. Borrowed build declarations from another checkout limit local typing. Authoritative [clean CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41171717008) passes on exact head `82d15946c5844d3ae41c6ade62fa224053f20a9a`: 55 successful checks, 3 skipped and 1 neutral, with zero pending or failed checks. Typecheck, build, Runner, server and browser lanes pass. Greptile gives that same head a fresh 5/5. All 15 review threads are resolved, with no further thread page. The PR is mergeable and clean. - Failure history remains recorded. The earlier recovery failure was repaired with a bounded, owned-source fixture. A later CI worker shut down after 2,375 Runner unit tests passed. Its one authorized narrow retry passed those tests and all five native integration suites. The separate AgentConfig browser failure was reproduced and fixed by the merged #18427 parent. These earlier passes do not replace current-head CI. - Final-source live qualification passed on exact harness and served application `82d15946c5844d3ae41c6ade62fa224053f20a9a`. QA run `41177696858` completed all four closed checks and all five phases with zero native runs. Cleanup passed; the durable manifest is complete with no pending evidence. The coordinator verified the original grade and manifest. - The [public qualification report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/evals-qa-smoke-41177696858-1/) records zero agent runs, empty run IDs and empty run usage. Pricing remains unavailable and billing remains incomplete; the report does not claim measured zero cost. - The earlier harness `36c8d9ddd76d0b7ddb28a9a6c674d9e538f6df88` pass against application `2ffce29827ae170420d740940c1c069c7225a74c` remains historical evidence. It is separate from the final-source measurement above. - The selected parent brings profile-entry ordering, proactive chat, a database migration, Runner updates, and task-page chat/read behavior. Its new task-page container is included in the final application measurement. The coordinator retains the original evidence and owns the primary merge and daily-plan admission. ## Risks Artifacts now mounts the existing shared editor. Its autosave, conflict, revision, annotation and server access contracts remain in place. Tests cover both interface modes, shared scopes, later remote writes and unavailable edit storage. Plans and generated file-review documents keep their existing flows. The PR adds no database schema or API change. The shared billing repair requires explicit captured empty run IDs and an unambiguous usage object containing only an empty run list for public browser-only receipts. Other fields beside an empty list keep conservative unavailable billing. Missing measurements remain unavailable. Contradicting positive usage remains counted. The inherited recovery fixture keeps the production sweep limit and its source, readback and no-agent-work assertions. The live journey must fail when authoring controls or saved outcomes are absent. It must not create the expected document through setup APIs or switch to another interface to pass. Final deployment verification must retain the actual app and harness revisions separately. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with tool use and code execution. The exact runtime model ID and context window 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8c9dd1e444 |
test(runner): qualify Kimi Code lifecycle and recovery (#18029)
Add the Kimi lifecycle and recovery qualification harness. Preserve original grades and cleanup evidence, strict native ownership audits, bounded startup and cleanup, and early rejection of unsupported local fault execution before credentials or resources. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
b866fa4bdc |
feat(runner): add pinned Kimi Code native runtime (#18028)
Add the pinned Kimi Code runtime, native instruction and model admission, scoped credentials, and pending-candidate recovery contracts. Retain current master release attestations and provider-pack compatibility. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
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> |
||
|
github-actions[bot]andlockfile-bot
|
4eaa435bf4 |
chore(lockfile): refresh pnpm-lock.yaml (#18414)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip uses a dependency lock for reproducible builds. > - Dependency changes on master need matching lock entries. > - Paid eval reports also pin a reviewed offline correction. > - Reports must install before paid model work starts. > - This automated PR keeps the lock and report proof together. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Dependency manifests on master changed after the last committed lock refresh. **Expected behavior** Frozen installs must match those manifests. Eval reports must retain matching offline lock proof. **Steps to reproduce** Run a frozen install before and after this lock refresh. ## What Changed - Refresh the dependency lock from the manifests on master. - Include the matching offline report correction and hashes. ## Verification - Pinned pnpm resolution completed with lifecycle scripts disabled. - The report proof refresh accepted the reviewed committed baseline. - The workflow rejected changes outside the lock and report proof files. ## Risks The lockfile bot merges this PR without CI or review when every added package version is at least 3 days old on npm. Otherwise the PR waits for a maintainer, and the daily refresh tries again. The bot merges only the exact commit this workflow generated from manifests already reviewed on master. Unknown report lock baselines remain blocked. This update changes no permissions or paid enable gates. ## Model Used None — generated by pnpm and the deterministic report-lock updater. ## Checklist - [x] Thinking path and problem description included - [x] Generated lock and matching report proof included - [x] Release-age gate decides between bot merge and maintainer review Co-authored-by: lockfile-bot <lockfile-bot@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
1353a232f2 |
test(e2e): add a portable active follow-up journey (#18345)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people direct agents while their work is active. > - Product E2E checks must prove that saved user input reaches the intended work. > - The existing active chat story depends on a file in a local agent workspace. > - That setup cannot qualify an attached deployment with remote agent execution. > - This change adds one shared active follow-up journey through the normal task UI and API. > - Independent native operation, saved input, final reply, and cleanup checks make the result inspectable across targets. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Product E2E coverage for a user follow-up sent while a native agent is working. **Current behavior** The classic chat story holds work open with a local file. The shared deployment-targeted harness has no active follow-up journey. A running heartbeat alone cannot prove that work was active when input arrived. **Proposed behavior** Run one bounded command through the real native provider. Observe its active execution before and after one follow-up is saved. Require one final reply with the late requirement, correct task and agent identity, an empty input queue, and visible readback after reload. Use the same story on managed and attached targets. ## What Changed - Add a shared `followup-while-running` journey with normal task creation and reply submission. - Require a bound native turn and pending shell execution at the input boundary. Retain a closed receipt with source identity and a row hash. - Accept one steered work run or one normal successor (1–2 native runs). Preserve every other journey's declared run contract. - Reuse the saved native final reply observer, run binding checks, usage collection, target lifecycle and private evidence path. - Accept canonical builtin/process execution events independent of provider tool display names; calibrate against real OpenCode, Codex and ACP mappers. Reject Paperclip semantic tool names across native wrappers/prefixes and unnamed or ambiguous builtin calls. - Recognize only the observed legacy PRP v1 builtin/bash/unknown/readOnly=false command shape and fail promptly when owned work finishes before a live boundary can be observed. - Ready the task page/composer before the observed command boundary, use a bounded 90-second command, and preserve active-after-persistence proof. - Add adversarial oracle and retained-result calibration. Register the journey, include its sources in the definition hash, and document its coverage. - Keep six real browser document-readiness checks and verify shared-deadline behavior with a deterministic clock/state test that rejects timeout-reset mutations. ## Verification Exact current head `e72e20ad111bd94728d38606015d1fdac3c92929` passed [full CI run 41142552195](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41142552195): all 49 workflow jobs reached accepted terminal results, including typecheck, build, every test lane and aggregate verify. All 59 reported checks are terminal: 55 success, three expected skips and one neutral 5/5 Paperclip review. Snyk passed. [Fresh Greptile review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18345#issuecomment-6528913235) explicitly names this exact head and gives 5/5. No review threads remain open. The PR is mergeable. These source gates do not establish a live QA pass at this head. Fresh protected QA at this exact source and the separately recorded deployed application/runtime remains required before primary merge and daily admission. Historical live QA staging **PASS** on qualified commit `af9e091b15b5e24b6b2cc1b424523430cc2ab024`: 6/6 checks, all five phases including cleanup, two native work runs, and the configured model/environment check passed. The [sanitized qualification report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/evals-qa-smoke-41122620146-1/) records that exact measurement. Final integration head `e72e20ad111bd94728d38606015d1fdac3c92929` merges exact actual squash `18b1637b6371a6a6adade857e2a73654ee626fef` from [#18254](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18254) into previous head `e54d64743964b1a19d165537bebbe62c50389a23`. The merge had no conflicts. All 18 files in this PR's change set, the complete 45-file shared journey directory, and six shared native/evidence helpers retain their exact previous-head Git blobs: 59 scoped files in total. The production clarification helper remains blob `800a747284db19b8484650b6759e8bd1f356839d`. Follow-up 1–2 runs, question 1–3 runs, older exact counts, owned native event checks, active-before/after persistence proof, cleanup/accounting and feature mappings remain unchanged. Source integration head `e55d74491f5bcd99c1455e9ace02bd7ad7319fae` integrates exact actual squash `8595efc20bda3ce20a9fbbf34a5d156a6fcf6d57` from [#18385](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18385). The merge had no conflicts. All 17 files in this PR's change set and six shared native/evidence helpers retain their exact Git blobs from previous head `162e341cda5b627639b486b4019a1675bb018ea2`. This preserves the follow-up and question readiness checks, feature mappings, six closed follow-up check IDs, immutable before/after active-operation proof, follow-up 1–2 runs, question 1–3 runs and older exact counts. Previously reviewed head `e54d64743964b1a19d165537bebbe62c50389a23` adds a separate test-only reliability repair on top of that source integration. It replaces one scheduler-sensitive browser case with a deterministic Vitest clock and locator-state model that calls the actual production helper. The six other real Chromium checks remain byte-for-byte unchanged and pass **6/6**. Focused unit suites pass **51/51**, including the deterministic deadline case. This is six browser checks plus focused unit coverage, not seven browser checks. The model makes the panel ready at 100 ms, the supplied answer ready at 600 ms, and full valid content ready at 1,300 ms. It requires rejection at the shared 1,000 ms deadline and records immutable rejection state before simulating a 10-second scheduler stall. Both restarted-timeout mutations fail: resetting all waits wrongly resolves at 1,300 ms; resetting matcher timeouts while keeping the final real deadline guard rejects only at 1,300 ms with valid content present. The genuine helper rejects at 1,000 ms with the answer still incomplete. The production helper is unchanged, Git blob `800a747284db19b8484650b6759e8bd1f356839d`. That two-file test-only patch changed no journey, application, run, accounting, model or runtime behavior. Its six-browser/51-unit results are prior-head evidence; the complete patch is unchanged in the new integration. The final source also retains the actual merged question-primary squash `d9354bbfc35ef74333e90e596ce21dc8e59149b9` from [#18346](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18346). Later commits `409117451da260a03fc28a3107c7808ecbe68f8f` and `ea3e7b1d1bed562351fcf4722c7175001b987b59` bound question document readiness to one campaign deadline and test that waits cannot restart it. Commit `162e341cda5b627639b486b4019a1675bb018ea2` adds question/follow-up report feature mappings and coverage. These files are unchanged by the final merge. The imported upstream source has real application changes: [#18334](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18334) makes managed skill content durable and extends native skill-test contracts; [#18350](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18350) requires managed Cloud shared storage and bootstrap prerequisites. #18385 updates TestOps job metadata and repairs their combined maintenance fixture. The new merge additionally imports [#18383](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18383) at `81ecaf0654fe79a2a2dbda6588f033e39ee610e4`, which bounds failed lifecycle verification; [#18357](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18357) at `45a3a92e6dc52d20923b9aa34a22fee2ec5443f9`, which persists sandbox-creation ownership and updates cleanup/adapter/plugin contracts; and #18254 at `18b1637b6371a6a6adade857e2a73654ee626fef`, which accepts a valid late Antigravity authorization URL while native authentication drains. This PR's diff against exact upstream `18b1637b6371a6a6adade857e2a73654ee626fef` contains only journey tests, report coverage and documentation. Harness source and deployed application/runtime identity are separate inputs. This source integration does not deploy the imported application changes or claim the QA target runs this application revision. This final SHA has not been measured by the historical run above: **fresh QA at this exact final head is required before primary merge**, followed by normal TestOps verification/admission. Fresh exact-head CI and review have passed as recorded above. The live measurement must record the actual separately deployed QA application/runtime identity. Seven whole-file blobs remain identical to the qualified SHA. All paths are relative to `tests/runner-e2e/`: | Journey/helper | Unchanged Git blob | | --- | --- | | `product-journeys/active-followup-evidence.ts` | `83a5d9fab52abb9849a40e83eca6b6a9c29bf587` | | `product-journeys/active-followup.test.ts` | `728160c610c18292d2cf06d4a87d25a8719f1734` | | `native-task-reply.ts` | `59d11f1a178dad9db3da8fa2342ff93643cb9922` | | `native-event-envelope.ts` | `305b0b456c59c511ee328e529ad574c0583075a0` | | `run-observations.ts` | `08c8ad184a821a7cd536926b3d7e3d1156a1e3da` | | `user-actions.ts` | `e9611348dc41e17899367dab2e3b36d3d1be9480` | | `stop-redirect-flow.ts` | `4580bd605a425bc72511e02d988492acbec8d60e` | The follow-up preservation comparison against historical `af9` has three explicit exceptions; no whole-file identity is claimed for them. The separately documented question readiness and report additions above also require final-source verification: 1. `product-journeys/agent-flows.ts` adds `question-answer-resume` to the `AgentJourney` type exclusion, alongside follow-up. Its remaining contents and runtime helper bodies are byte-for-byte unchanged. Qualified blob `a0afaa968c1d854476159fef21de7b6dd50a4a98`; final blob `0cc797c0ae594e7769338e63a80c4f67e29e4a54`. 2. The common run-count helper is centralized in `success-contract.ts` and re-exported by the catalog. It accepts follow-up **1–2**, clarification **1–3**, and each older paid journey's exact count. The follow-up catalog entry, maximum of two runs, six required checks, native dispatch, collection and retained-run contract remain byte-for-byte unchanged. The helper's text differs; its preserved count semantics are verified explicitly. 3. `product-journeys/active-followup-flow.ts` changes exactly one composer readiness assertion from Playwright's implicit five-second default to an explicit 30-second timeout, matching `submitTaskReply` for attached targets. Prompts, actions, native evidence, before/after persistence proof and grading otherwise compare byte-for-byte unchanged. Qualified blob `64392329198a1a4d9828e32834d4507e175216e6`; final blob `2746b5ba89e2af26b4097ba7897913186786ac5d`. This correction is why a fresh final-head QA run is required. - **310 focused tests passed at current final head `e72e20ad111bd94728d38606015d1fdac3c92929`**: 286 journey/evidence/catalog/report/shared-deadline tests in 14 files and 24 native authentication/real-child stream-order tests in two files. Both invocations used Node24 and one Vitest worker. The earlier `e55` integration also passed 365 focused tests, including 40 Cloud configuration and 40 TestOps metadata cases; those results remain prior-source evidence. - **157 explicit count assertions passed again at the current final head**, including both interactive ranges, older exact counts, invalid/fractional/non-number values and catalog/contract export identity. The maximum bounds and six closed follow-up check IDs also matched. - Maps and diff checks passed. The official QA runtime-import preflight passed on Node24 at the current final head without network access. It uses a dummy adapter and no credentials. It does not prove target connectivity, sign-in, model readiness or deployed application/runtime identity. Those require the normal protected QA run. No model/provider work or optional Runner release was dispatched. - Current local runtime dependencies use ignored isolated workspace-source views. No shared dependencies or compilers were changed. A previous local typecheck attempt hit stale reused Runner declarations. No full repository typecheck, test run or build was repeated locally; the successful exact-head full CI run above now supplies these gates. - CI on previous head `162e341cda5b627639b486b4019a1675bb018ea2` failed the Cloud/local maintenance fixture in [server shard 9](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41133716802/job/124331643100), plus dependent verify. The actual tested merge combined that head with master `198218bf554877fe3b7a83742eefb3b8f12392c6`. A Cloud child selected local-disk storage and hit the new shared-storage policy. This was a deterministic upstream fixture mismatch; no unchanged failed-job retry was used. - The actual #18385 repair configures a valid Cloud child, verifies local bytes independently, checks the expected provider mismatch and retains exact stored-config readback. Its own final head `b76d5dd40d7711f1b5f6b6316b1114c0aae02d57` passed 59 checks, including [server shard 9](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41133876636/job/124331450635). That prior result supports the repair; it does not replace this final head's fresh CI. Separate repair candidate #18392 and its source/evidence are retained as superseded history. - A local attempt to run the database fixture could not start PostgreSQL because the host exhausted macOS semaphores. A first setup attempt also failed package resolution before test execution. Skipped database cases and these setup failures are not passes. No kernel settings, shared processes or databases were changed. - The complete previous-head CI run [41138618869](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41138618869) finished with one underlying failure: [Runner Vitest shard 1](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41138618869/job/124347859445) expected native Antigravity login success but observed failure at `antigravity-auth.test.ts:101`. The lane had one failed test, 1,994 passing tests and eight skipped tests. Aggregate verify failed only because of this lane. All other 57 checks were accepted, including build, typecheck, all server/browser suites, Runner shard 2, Snyk and exact-head 5/5 reviews. No unchanged retry was requested. - The independently reviewed #18254 repair removes an invalid cross-pipe ordering assumption: a valid URL on stderr can arrive after the authenticate response on stdout during drain. Its real-child regression forces both orders. The current final source imports that actual squash; the 24 focused authentication cases pass here. Fresh full CI and exact-head review have now passed for this source, as recorded above. The earlier failed result is not relabeled. - The original live compatibility failure is retained: an older PRP v1 pack labeled builtin `bash` as operation `unknown`, causing the observer to miss the command and never send the follow-up. Its exact shape was reproduced red before repair. Generic unknown operations, semantic tools, wrappers, read-only work and foreign provenance remain rejected. The historical qualified pass used the repaired oracle; no failed result was relabeled. - Earlier CI on `6fad965d69` hit an unchanged heartbeat test's three-second adapter-call wait; its original failure and one narrow rerun remain recorded. The qualified SHA subsequently passed CI. An earlier report-catalog subprocess failure is retained. The final focused Node24 run now includes that suite and passes after the documented report feature mappings. ## Risks The fixture asks the native agent to run one bounded `sleep 90` command. The observer must see actual active native execution; a fast or noncompliant turn fails rather than passing from elapsed time. A completed result requires one or two bounded native work runs, source attribution, configured model/environment, and collection. Unknown provider prices stay unknown. This change does not alter production execution or grant new access. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning and code execution. The host does not expose an exact underlying model version 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 available 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; existing follow-up execution fixes do not provide this deployment-targeted test - [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the enhancement template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket or instance-derived details - [x] I have run the new focused tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation - [x] I have considered and documented risks - [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 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
|
0e15c92073 |
feat(skills): make managed content independent of web-server disk (#18334)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents use installed skills and exact version pins during execution. > - Managed skills still depended on mutable directories on the web server. > - A replacement server could lose acknowledged edits or remove an unassigned skill whose directory was absent. > - This pull request makes immutable versions the authority for managed content and installed repository reads. > - The server can rebuild delivery files from durable content after replacement. > - This establishes skills readiness for ephemeral web servers. General server draining and workspace recovery remain separate work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Skills services, shared contracts, database receipts, Skill Studio, and runtime delivery. **Problem or motivation** A fresh web server must discover, read, edit, and deliver protected installed skills using the same database, object storage, secrets, and supported application artifacts. It must not need its predecessor's files or process memory. **Proposed solution** Use `managed` ownership with a null source locator. Read installed content by immutable version. Prepare packages before a short publication transaction. Persist execution selections before materialization. Recover exact pinned runtime assets and reject deletion while active or recovering pins exist. **Alternatives considered** Reconstructing a mutable installed directory preserves the old source-of-truth ambiguity. Permanent dual writes create two competing authorities. This change uses one managed model after a bounded legacy conversion. **Roadmap alignment** This improves the existing Skills Manager, Studio, version history, and Cloud execution capabilities. The maintainer supplied the implementation contract. This does not add a separate skills product or deploy fleet changes. Related work: #18082 supplies immutable package storage. #17273 addresses edits outside the API for linked local skills; this PR keeps that source category separate. #2648 is a closed earlier ephemeral-filesystem proposal. ## What Changed - Add managed ownership and focused content publication and execution materialization modules. Keep the archive format and package storage tables. - Publish managed create, save, delete, fork, rename, restore, and catalog content with version checks. Add durable create receipts. Preserve file-save receipt responses. - Return file version identities. Keep Studio drafts after a conflict and provide an explicit reload action. A delayed reload cannot overwrite newer typing or navigation. - Persist exact runtime selections, including empty selections. Rebuild pinned assets and verify their admitted digests on a replacement server. - Preserve source access on forks and disconnected copies. Keep the existing workspace policy category for managed skills. - Add bounded conversion, eligibility, and independent verification phases. Load persisted Cloud configuration in the standalone CLI without seeding or changing it. Reject partial current versions against installed inventories; recover only complete saved content or the exact source. Document storage migration blockers and the compatible rollback floor. - Add separate-process PostgreSQL/S3 qualification and update domain, retention, policy, and UI regressions. - Pass the plugin worker manager into Studio execution, admit restricted `skill_test` mode through native Runner contracts, and preserve admitted scope across native and REST tools. Native tests cannot create ordinary tasks, browse company data, or use external tools. - Select the exact durable Studio revision even when unassigned or Beta skills is off. Persist Studio output and audit atomically with native task completion, preserving the result on replay. ## Verification - Final revision `13e8af480b88ba6fea5737bac4bd81104d604792` passed full CI: all 49 workflow jobs completed successfully ([run 41127396098](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41127396098)). This includes typecheck, test suites, Runner checks, browser checks and build. Greptile review 15 is 5/5 on that same revision, with zero unresolved threads. The PR is ready for review. - Local workspace typecheck and build passed after integrating master. Focused checks passed: 33 execution/completion cases, 52 Runner HTTP cases, 16 managed-content cases, 17 Studio cases, the new real-process CLI regression, map checks and UI token gates. The CLI regression proves inspection does not seed missing Cloud configuration. Server typecheck passed after that fix. - The independent-process PostgreSQL/S3 matrix passed through normal HTTP skill routes. It covers A → B → C replacement, lost commit responses, upload crashes, concurrent saves, binary contents and executable delivery. Metadata listing and warm selected delivery retain zero object downloads. Local timing measurements are recorded; they do not establish hosted latency. - Hosted A → B → C passed on the owned disposable test tenant with external Postgres, S3 and a real remote Paperclip Computer. Predecessor temporary homes were absent. C read and executed B's acknowledged managed save. New runs used repository v1 while v2 was installed. Hashes matched an independently checked exact upstream commit. - Compatible image rollback to `6518b323` passed. Studio retained the unassigned fork's C save. A fresh remote run executed the newer managed content and historical repository pin. The actual shell event confirmed expected hashes, stdout, exit 0 and mode 0555. - Runtime candidate `9200e3fcb4` deployed successfully ([Cloud run 41124147876](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-cloud/actions/runs/41124147876)). The final Studio test delivered only the unassigned fork's exact v3, executed its script and persisted a successful output snapshot. Independent command-event inspection confirmed all three hashes, stdout, exit 0 and mode 0555. All 14 installations were version-backed. Independent verification checked all 25 versions: 23 remote objects, two bundled database snapshots, zero blockers. - The deployed image is `9200e3fcb4`. Later master integration, the client-only delayed-reload draft guard and the CLI bootstrap have separate automated proof. The CLI bootstrap was also exercised against the tenant's stored configuration and storage through the same read-only services. This PR does not claim that the deployed image is the final PR revision. - Live Studio checks exposed worker wiring, admission, access scope, exact selection and completion-publication gaps. They are fixed. Failed attempts remain in the evidence. The full local suite exceeded 80 minutes under host contention and was stopped. Later combined/isolated local attempts also timed out; they are not counted as passes. Full CI covers the integrated suites. Earlier CI found an obsolete restart-scope fixture, which was corrected and passed all 52 HTTP cases. - Reproduction and migration: [`doc/skill-ephemeral-web-servers.md`](doc/skill-ephemeral-web-servers.md). Source revisions, deployments, versions, run IDs, hashes and failure history: [`doc/plans/2026-10-30-ephemeral-web-skills.md`](doc/plans/2026-10-30-ephemeral-web-skills.md). ## Risks - Legacy conversion requires stopped admission and retired filesystem-authoritative writers. Pre-conversion binaries are not supported rollback targets afterward. - Cloud readiness requires remote object storage. Local provider receipts and provider mismatches remain blockers until objects are copied and verified. - Linked local sources retain filesystem semantics and are outside the cloud guarantee. - Cold reads still fetch the existing archive format. Warm runtime preparation retains the verified-cache path. - Bundled reconciliation preserves an installed head. Existing release snapshots remain selectable. An older server must not replace a newer head with its shipped files. - No production volumes, fleet defaults, or general deployment coordination change in this PR. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser use. The exact backend model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. No subagents were used. ## 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
|
d9354bbfc3 |
Add a portable agent question and answer resumption journey (#18346)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip helps people manage agent work and keep human decisions
attached to tasks.
> - Product E2E journeys verify the browser, native agent, saved state,
and cleanup.
> - The classic suite already checks a choice question followed by a
text question.
> - Deployment-targeted journeys need the same behavior on an attached
instance.
> - Production questions can use provider input, the dedicated semantic
tool, or the authenticated native API fallback.
> - The basic journey must verify the original card and native
continuation for each supported path.
> - This pull request shares the scenario and browser actions, adds
strict API receipt evidence, and verifies the saved document after
reload.
> - Separate tool-documentation qualification and the original failed
measurements keep their existing scope and outcomes.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
It adds portable coverage for answering agent questions and resuming the
same task on an attached deployment.
**Current behavior**
The classic suite has the two-question scenario. The portable catalog
does not expose it. Its shared native-path grader recognizes provider
and dedicated semantic receipts, but rejects a valid completed native
API creation receipt.
**Proposed behavior**
Expose `question-answer-resume` as a deployment-targeted journey. Answer
one choice question and one text question in the browser. Require
server-owned creation evidence, unchanged forms, exact board answers,
bound continuation, an agent-authored task document, and readback after
reload.
**Reason and benefit**
The same story can qualify local and hosted targets through their normal
provider setup and cleanup. It catches lost answers, duplicate or
foreign work, premature output, and stale documents.
## What Changed
- Register the journey with a three-run maximum and positive model
allowance. Accept one to three attributed work runs at both collection
and retained-result boundaries.
- Share the existing two-question scenario, browser answer actions, and
behavioral grader. Keep separate tool-documentation grading unchanged.
- Recognize a completed native API creation receipt only when its HTTP
201 result retains the original pending card, exact
task/company/agent/source run, idempotency key, and full normalized
form. Require the receipt to remain unchanged after the answer and
through the final checkpoint. Missing, pending, foreign, or altered
proof still fails.
- Check signed-in board ownership, each native continuation, no
premature or extra output, document authorship, and the saved revision
after reload.
- Wait for the authenticated product region before screenshots. Recheck
origin and path after readiness. Bound readiness and capture by the
campaign deadline.
- Add closed stage-specific errors, catalog coverage, sanitized receipt
calibration, and documentation. Include the provider-form and
browser-question presentation helpers in the definition fingerprint.
## Verification
- Fresh QA staging qualification passed at
`7f7de8be286a436010a48af89aba1727b4451493`: all 11 required checks
passed, cleanup passed, and all three native runs used the configured QA
target and model. The [sanitized run
report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/evals-qa-smoke-41121966520-1/)
records the measured pass. This is one successful qualification, not a
reliability claim.
- Final integration head `ae0d9d289831c770a413658d3520fb1dc8ad60e3`
contains the one main merge through
`fd008979f5794fda3d5f54151d36acd31d0de140` and an exact cherry-pick of
the four-file qualified search fix
`4edd10804e2b42941aa2038e90c362c13a0b98dc` from #18370. Patch identity
matches. It preserves the project and search registrations and atomic
search readback. The question live qualification ran at the earlier SHA
above; the final integration head has separate local and CI
verification.
- Eighteen question journey, helper, and test file blobs are identical
between the qualified and integration SHAs. This includes clarification
flow and evidence, question grader and browser helper, the sanitized
receipt fixture, screenshot helper, provider-form helper, browser
question presentation, continuation scenario/readiness/flow, shared
agent validation, and user actions. The question run-count contract and
dispatch branch are also unchanged. Reviewers can compare those paths
directly between the two commits.
- All 622 selected Product E2E, catalog, question-resumption,
necessary-question, report, and readiness tests pass after the main
merge. After the exact search delta, all 145 narrow
question/search/project/contract tests and all nine real Chromium search
regressions pass. Map checks, combined credential-free preview, source
fingerprints, and the earlier workspace-link preflight pass. The local
TypeScript attempt reports stale Runner declaration errors for
`onAccountingEvent` in unchanged native-session code; fresh official CI
provides the clean-build type gate. The three search source/test blobs
match the qualified search merge, and the three project source blobs are
unchanged.
- An in-memory probe executes the actual launcher fingerprint
expression. Each project, search, and question implementation input
changes the digest. Separate red probes first reproduced the omitted
provider-form and browser presentation helpers; both pass after their
source inputs are added.
- The sanitized retained native API response-shape regression fails
before the grading correction and passes afterward. Negative controls
reject missing, pending, foreign, changed, spoofed, or wrongly bound
receipts, answers, continuation, model, environment, and document
evidence. All nine provider/semantic/API path combinations pass
calibration.
- The real local Chromium screenshot probe fails before the readiness
repair and passes afterward. Login redirects and sign-in pages at task
URLs remain excluded with no screenshot files.
- The two original attached failures remain retained: the first stopped
at early screenshot capture; the second stopped before answering at the
former API provenance gate. An earlier sandbox run also retained one
report subprocess failure; the full selected tests then passed with
local subprocess IPC access.
- The prior integration CI had an unchanged canary mock `EADDRINUSE`
failure. That history is retained; its documented retry is owned by the
coordinator. No application API, schema, production UI, model, runtime
policy, credential, or deployment configuration change is included.
Final integration head
|
||
|
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
|
4edd10804e |
fix(evals): batch task search result readback across renders (#18370)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and saved work.
> - Product journeys check user actions against saved state.
> - The task search journey compares the exact visible task identities.
> - A search can replace rows while the harness reads an old indexed
locator.
> - The attribute read can then time out after the correct results
appear.
> - This pull request reads the visible links together and preserves
strict result checks.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #18355.
**What happened?**
An attached Cloud attempt passed the task search journey. A later
attempt on the same harness and app revision failed at search-result
readback. Its owned screenshot showed the correct target and completed
control. Authentication, collection, and cleanup passed. The failure
remains recorded and the journey has not been admitted to the daily
plan.
The reader called `all()`, then awaited `isVisible()` and
`getAttribute()` for each indexed locator. When a search replaced the
old collection between those reads, the next attribute read waited for
an index that no longer existed.
**Expected behavior**
Read the matching visible links together. Compare the complete identity
set against the owned target and controls. A render transition must not
consume the whole poll deadline on a stale row index.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Render three task links in the task collection.
2. Let the reader observe the third link as visible.
3. Replace the collection with the two correct search matches before its
attribute read.
4. The old reader times out waiting for `nth(2)`, even though the two
correct rows are present.
## What Changed
- Read visible link attributes in one batch. Discard a detached snapshot
and retry within the existing poll deadline.
- Keep the exact identity comparison, duplicate detection, control
exclusion, saved-content checks, and zero-run checks.
- Add a real Chromium render-transition regression and invalid-result
cases. Extend the stateful flow test for a detached snapshot.
- Document the readback boundary. No app UI, target configuration, or
cleanup behavior changes.
## Verification
- Review follow-up: the existing journey wait helper is now exercised
with the real Playwright poll. Its first read evaluates the actual
reader callback on detached browser DOM nodes and returns no evidence.
The second read contains an extra owned control. Only the third, exact
pair succeeds. The test observes all three reads. The 30-second deadline
and grading behavior are unchanged.
- Rebased onto current master, including the merged project journey.
Credential-free discovery confirms exactly one `project-task-context`
and one `task-search-filter` entry.
- Latest rebased checks passed: all nine Chromium search regressions,
all 381 Product journey unit tests, runner typecheck, discovery, maps,
and diff checks. Exact head
|
||
|
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> |
||
|
Dotta
|
a4308b9791 |
test(e2e): add browser project and task context journey (#18353)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - People group tasks into projects and use those projects to keep work in context. > - Deployment journeys already test task creation and assignment. > - They do not yet prove that a new project and its task keep the same saved relationship after reload. > - This pull request adds an explicit browser journey for that gap. > - Independent API reads and visible task properties must agree on the exact records and selected settings. > - The journey uses no model runs. Each deployment must pass before a daily plan can include it. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The deployment-targeted Product E2E suite can now check project creation and task context through the production dialogs. **Current behavior** The suite covers standalone task creation and assignment. It does not prove that a newly created project contains the task selected in the composer, or that the relation survives reload. **Proposed behavior** Select `project-task-context`. Create a unique project and a self-assigned task with that project selected. Reopen the project, open its task, and reload. Require exact saved company, project, title, prompt, user assignment and standard work mode. Require no agent runs before or after reload. **Reason and benefit** The same journey can qualify different deployments. It catches lost project links and incorrect saved context without a model call or a separate QA-only test implementation. ## What Changed - Add the browser flow and an independent saved-state oracle with positive and negative cases. - Scope project and task navigation to unique links in the main content so sidebar links cannot bypass list coverage. - Bind reopened routes to saved project and task references. Verify the main project heading and visible task content instead of a hidden duplicate sidebar label. Keep browser failures as closed stage codes. - Register the journey, its closed success checks, and its source files in the definition hash. Default model-matrix selections stay unchanged. - Associate qualification-report coverage with project lifecycle, project task context and task creation. Reject retained browser-only passes containing run IDs, provider/model metadata or native/legacy execution. - Add `project` to the existing durable ownership resource contract. A target provider remains responsible for cleanup of its own project fixtures. - Update discovery expectations, the deployment journey guide and the projects feature map. ## Verification - Focused runner tests: 110 passed across the new oracle, discovery, journey contracts and existing report subprocess checks. The first sandboxed attempt blocked the existing report subprocess IPC socket; the same selection passed with local IPC enabled. - Late review regression checks: both report association and unexpected browser-only model work reproduced as failing tests before the fix. The final contract, saved-state oracle and report catalog selection passed all 72 tests. Runner typecheck passed again after these changes. - Browser readback: the old project-name selector failed in Chromium when a hidden sidebar label preceded the production project heading. All six browser regression cases now pass, including missing rows, wrong project/task destinations and a wrong project property. The fixture uses the production heading and task-row overlay conventions. Credential-free Node 24 imports pass. - Current-master integration: 208 focused catalog, project/search, campaign and reporting tests passed. All nine project/search browser regressions passed. Runner typecheck, map checks and Node 24 imports for both journeys passed. The combined catalog, dispatch, source hashes, success checks, browser-only guard and feature associations retain both selections. - The first deployment qualification created both owned records but failed during later readback with a generic browser code. Authentication, setup, collection and cleanup passed. That failed grade is retained. The corrected source subsequently passed a fresh attached QA campaign; the original failure remains preserved. - New oracle alone: 7 tests passed after the final catalog mapping change. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` — passed; structural checks only. - Credential-free `--suite product-journeys --list` — passed and lists this browser journey. - `node node_modules/typescript/bin/tsc -p tests/runner-e2e/tsconfig.json` — passed after building required plugin, runner and eval-kernel declarations. The initial fresh-checkout check failed because those declarations were not built. - All current-head CI gates passed, including repository typecheck, tests, build and browser checks. Greptile reviewed the exact head at 5/5 with no unresolved findings. Fresh attached QA passed at `f19557c9eebde14c2def37195d6b154c23eb9690`: [sanitized report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/evals-qa-smoke-41119722363-1/). All five independent checks and authentication, setup, journey, collection and cleanup passed; zero agent runs started. ## Risks - This adds an opt-in test and changes no production behavior or schema. UI control changes can fail the journey. - The target provider must support durable `project` ownership before it can run this case. Project cleanup must settle owned tasks, reject foreign linked tasks and archive the project while preserving history. - Source registration alone does not include the candidate in any saved daily plan. A fresh pass against that deployment is required first. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with code inspection and tool execution. The host does not expose the exact underlying model revision 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 (no duplicate journey found) - [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 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
a0e3ac62a7 |
test(evals): add reusable task search and filter journey (#18355)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and their work. > - The task list lets people find saved work and open its context. > - Product journeys can exercise the same task UI on local and Cloud targets. > - The shared suite lacks a search and status-filter journey with control tasks. > - This pull request adds that journey with exact task identity checks. > - The benefit is reusable evidence that search, filters, and task navigation work together. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Product E2E coverage for task search, status filters, and saved task navigation. **Current behavior** The shared journey suite covers task creation and assignment. It does not prove that a search excludes an unrelated task, that a status filter excludes a matching completed task, or that the selected task retains its saved content. **Proposed behavior** An explicit `task-search-filter` selection creates three owned tasks. It searches through the production task list, applies Backlog, and opens the exact target. It verifies reload and Back navigation, saved task fields, and zero agent runs for all three tasks. **Reason and benefit** The same journey can run against a managed local stack or an attached Cloud target. Independent assertions reject missing evidence and plausible wrong results. Deployment qualification and daily-plan admission remain separate gates. **Breaking changes** None. Existing journey selections keep their behavior. Related work: #16979 fixes status filtering before pagination. #15403 covers saved task views. This journey tests the existing search/filter interaction and does not add a new UI or saved-view feature. ## What Changed - Add a zero-run browser journey with one target and two owned controls. - Compare exact visible task identities after search, filtering, reload, and Back navigation. - Verify saved company, owner, title, description, status, and zero agent runs through the public API. - Register dispatch, source hashing, closed success checks, and browser reporting validation. - Add adversarial oracle tests and a campaign dispatch test. Document the selection and its feature-map scope. - Exercise the real browser flow with a stateful UI/API port across Coordinator, combined Tasks, and legacy shells. Inject missing ownership, wrong destinations, lost filters, changed saved context, and unexpected native work. - Use the combined Tasks shell's named Backlog view for reload persistence, as required by its existing view-preset contract. Preserve the successful polled result snapshot and link the case to feature coverage. ## Verification - First attached Cloud attempt failed during Backlog selection. Its cleanup passed and it started no model work. The original failed result is preserved; the corrected candidate passed a fresh attached campaign below. - Local Chromium reproduces the cause: the legacy StatusIcon and text label produce the accessible checkbox name `BacklogBacklog`, so the prior exact `Backlog` lookup finds no status control. - The selector now stays inside the Status group and accepts the explicit and duplicated names. Three real Chromium regressions pass, including a separate assignee called Backlog. - Latest focused journey checks: 130 passed. Runner typecheck and map checks passed. Unexpected browser/API failures retain only closed source-owned stage codes. Screenshot privacy guards and all exact identity, content, filter, and zero-run checks are unchanged. - Fresh attached Cloud qualification passed at `e3dfc0ae37e8ac74e9a07ca24421ea6c96f9bcfc`: [sanitized report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/evals-qa-smoke-41114233380-1/). All five independent search/filter/reload/reopen/no-agent checks and all five phases, including cleanup, passed. The browser journey started zero agent runs. - Runner typecheck passed: `node node_modules/typescript/bin/tsc -p tests/runner-e2e/tsconfig.json`. - Focused oracle, contract, and campaign tests passed: 101 unique tests. The campaign suite was rerun after its new dispatch test: 30 passed. - Direct browser-flow tests passed: 23 tests. These call the real `taskSearchFilter` function through a stateful UI/API port. They do not establish live browser or Cloud qualification. - Latest focused search, oracle, catalog, and report checks passed: 127 tests across five files. - Full runner Vitest completed with 5,204 passes, two skips, and three failures outside this change. Two local embedded PostgreSQL fixtures failed at bootstrap. The Pi controls test expects profile version 35 while the unchanged base declares 37. These failures remain recorded; the PR does not change those fixtures or pins. - The remaining Node support suite passed separately: 137 tests. The standard unit launcher stops before these tests after a Vitest failure. - Credential-free discovery passed: `node --import ./cli/node_modules/tsx/dist/loader.mjs tests/runner-e2e/launch.ts --suite product-journeys --list`. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed. `git diff --check` passed. - All 58 current-head check runs are green, the additional security status passed, Greptile reviewed this exact head at 5/5, and no review threads remain unresolved. Typecheck, test, build, browser CI, and fresh attached Cloud acceptance passed. Daily-plan admission follows merge. ## Risks - Task-list control labels and link structure can change. Such drift fails the journey and needs an update. - The journey creates three board-assigned tasks. It records ownership before creation and records each returned ID immediately. The existing target provider owns cleanup. - Local assertion tests do not prove that a deployed Cloud target passes. The target owner must record a fresh live pass before admission to a daily plan. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The host does not expose an exact model version or context limit. Used repository search, TypeScript tools, 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> |
||
|
github-actions[bot]andlockfile-bot
|
ade402c75f |
chore(lockfile): refresh pnpm-lock.yaml (#18360)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip uses a dependency lock for reproducible builds. > - Dependency changes on master need matching lock entries. > - Paid eval reports also pin a reviewed offline correction. > - Reports must install before paid model work starts. > - This automated PR keeps the lock and report proof together. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Dependency manifests on master changed after the last committed lock refresh. **Expected behavior** Frozen installs must match those manifests. Eval reports must retain matching offline lock proof. **Steps to reproduce** Run a frozen install before and after this lock refresh. ## What Changed - Refresh the dependency lock from the manifests on master. - Include the matching offline report correction and hashes. ## Verification - Pinned pnpm resolution completed with lifecycle scripts disabled. - The report proof refresh accepted the reviewed committed baseline. - The workflow rejected changes outside the lock and report proof files. ## Risks The lockfile bot merges this PR without CI or review when every added package version is at least 3 days old on npm. Otherwise the PR waits for a maintainer, and the daily refresh tries again. The bot merges only the exact commit this workflow generated from manifests already reviewed on master. Unknown report lock baselines remain blocked. This update changes no permissions or paid enable gates. ## Model Used None — generated by pnpm and the deterministic report-lock updater. ## Checklist - [x] Thinking path and problem description included - [x] Generated lock and matching report proof included - [x] Release-age gate decides between bot merge and maintainer review Co-authored-by: lockfile-bot <lockfile-bot@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandClaude Opus 5.5
|
abc270ee4c |
fix(runner): attest upstream releases and bind ACPX uniformly for every harness (#18325)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native ACPX runs admit a provider only when its saved profile and `commandDigest` match the current profile exactly. > - For Copilot, Grok and Pi, `commandDigest` hashed dozens of Paperclip source files. Claude, Codex, Cursor and Antigravity hash only their upstream release. > - Any change to a bound source therefore advanced these profiles. #18212 alone moved Copilot from v88 to v91 and Grok from v15 to v19. Each bump reset in-flight sessions and added immutable identity fixtures (about 160 on master). > - #18237 added the provider pack `contractDigest`, which now guards Runner source compatibility at the pack boundary. > - This pull request changes the Copilot, Grok and Pi digests to upstream release attestations, as the other providers already use. > - It also binds the shared ACPX layer the same way for every ACPX harness: the profile's `acpxVersion` and the pack `contractDigest`, which now covers the Runner's ACPX patch. > - The benefit is that Runner source changes no longer reset these sessions or need new profile versions and fixtures. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #18237, #18212, #17972. **What happened?** A Runner change that touched a bound source file changed the Copilot, Grok or Pi `commandDigest`. The author had to advance the profile version, regenerate an identity fixture and keep every old fixture. On deploy, saved sessions for that provider failed the exact admission check and started fresh. **Expected behavior** A provider's `commandDigest` changes only when its upstream release changes: an upstream version, a platform closure, the ACPX patch or the Grok launcher. Runner source compatibility is the job of the pack `contractDigest`. **Steps to reproduce** 1. On master, change a comment in `src/drivers/acpx/runtime-host.ts`. 2. Run `node packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/grok-profile-identity.mjs --check`. 3. The check fails. The Grok profile must advance, and the next deploy resets Grok sessions. ## What Changed - Add `packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/acpx-release-attestations.mjs`. It computes the release attestation for each provider: - Copilot and Pi: a canonical-JSON hash of the profile version, upstream package versions and the platform closure pins (Pi also binds its Node version). - Grok: the SHA-256 of `launcher.cjs`. Admission already hashes these bytes. - The attestation binds no Paperclip source, shared ACPX layer, absolute path, pack manifest digest or install layout. - Bind the shared ACPX layer once for every ACPX harness (Claude, Codex, Copilot, Cursor, Grok, Pi, Antigravity): - Add the Runner's ACPX patch (`patches/acpx@<runner acpx version>.patch`) to the pack `contractDigest`. A patch change now retires older image packs for every harness. Other packages' ACPX patches are not read. A build context without the Runner's patch fails. - Remove the ACPX patch hash from Cursor's release declaration (`cursor-contract.json`) and advance Cursor once to profile 17. Copilot, Pi and Cursor no longer bind ACPX in their own digests, like Claude, Codex, Grok and Antigravity. - Saved inputs for every harness already must match the current `acpxVersion`. - Claude and Codex digests do not change. - `generate-acpx-profiles.mjs` writes these digests to `acpx-profiles.json`. `check:acpx-profiles` refuses a stale digest. - Move the Copilot closure pins to `copilot-closure-pins.ts`, so that the generator can import them. `copilot-installation.ts` re-exports them. - Advance each profile once and then freeze it: Copilot 92, Grok 20, Pi 37. A version change at the switch keeps the rollout on the same path as every earlier profile bump. - Replace the historical version lists in `profile-compatibility.ts` with a range. Every revision from 1 through the current one decodes. Claude and Codex still decode revisions 1 through 5. Launch and recovery admission still require the exact current profile and digest. - Delete: - `scripts/copilot-profile-identity.mjs`, `scripts/grok-profile-identity.mjs` and its test - the Grok launcher source stamp - 159 Copilot, Grok and Pi identity fixtures, including three unreferenced `copilot-mainline-v*` fixtures. The Cursor fixtures stay. - Rewrite the affected tests as behaviour checks: - Each provider admits only the exact current profile. Every earlier version decodes and is refused at admission. - The last source-bound digests, and a changed digest at the current version, are refused by recovery and by the backend factory. - The Rust Pi descriptor test uses the generated profile instead of fixtures. - New `acpx-release-attestations.test.mjs`: a relocated copy of the inputs gives the same digests, each upstream input changes only its own providers, and the generator refreshes and checks the manifest. - Remove the fixture exceptions from `.dockerignore`. Add the attestation script and the generator to the Daytona image content inputs. - Update the Pi install probe and the Rust integration constant for the new Pi digest. - Update the docs to describe the current attestation model: `doc/grok-native-runner.md`, `doc/RUNNER-INTEGRATION-PLAYBOOK.md`, `doc/observability.md`, `packages/paperclip-runner/docs/durable-recovery.md`, and the Copilot, Pi and rich ACP architecture reports. Each report now opens with the current profile identity; earlier source-bound profiles remain as dated chronology. No doc references a deleted file. ## Verification - In `packages/paperclip-runner`: - `node --test scripts/acpx-release-attestations.test.mjs scripts/contracts/contract-fingerprints.test.mjs`: 19 tests pass, including a Runner ACPX patch edit that changes the contract digest, other patch edits (including `acpx@0.12.0` for `adapter-utils`) that do not, and a build context without the patch that fails. - `node scripts/generate-acpx-profiles.mjs --check` passes. - `vitest run src/drivers/acpx src/backends src/contracts`: 1647 tests pass, 9 skipped. - `tsc -p tsconfig.json --noEmit` passes. - From the repository root, `vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts tests/runner-e2e/daytona-image.test.ts`: 11 tests pass. - In `server`, the 8 test files that use ACPX profiles, pack digests or `contractDigest`: 1617 tests pass. - Not run locally: the Rust tests and `cargo fmt`, because this machine has no Rust toolchain. CI runs them. - Before this change, a synthetic upgrade check built two Runner revisions that differ only in shared source. A Claude checkpoint saved under the first revision rebinds under the second, and a changed Claude `commandDigest` starts fresh. This confirms that the provider JSON has no other build-dependent field. ## Risks - **One reset at rollout.** The Copilot, Grok, Pi and Cursor digests and versions change once. Saved sessions for these providers start fresh on their next run, as after any earlier profile bump. After this change, Runner source changes no longer cause this reset. - **Lost "source changed, so requalify" signal.** The old digest forced a new profile version when bound source changed. Nothing enforced requalification: Copilot was last qualified at v47. Pack-boundary contract changes are now caught by the pack `contractDigest`. - **Image packs are retired once for every provider.** Adding the ACPX patch changes the pack `contractDigest`, so the controller uploads its bundled pack (about 16 s per remote start) until images are refreshed. Claude and Codex sessions are not reset: their digests and versions do not change. - **Grok launcher and closure pins.** The Grok digest covers only the launcher bytes. Grok's runtime version is still checked separately at admission, as before. - **Grok digest equals early Grok profiles.** The launcher bytes have not changed since profile 1, so the new Grok digest equals the published profile 1 digest. The profile version still separates them: launch, recovery and the backend factory require profile 20. An image pack from that period has no `contractDigest`, so the pack gate refuses it. `remote-provider-pack-verification.test.ts` now covers this case. - **Docker context checks** run `generate-acpx-profiles.mjs --check`, which now imports `.ts` pin files through Node type stripping. `materialize-pi-distribution.mjs` already relies on this on Node 24. ## Model Used - Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`) in Claude Code, with tool use (shell, file edits, local 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 - [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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
1511c92965 |
fix(evals): account for superseded delegation wakes (#18319)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people ask agents to delegate work and return the result. > - The chat feature eval checks task creation, worker execution, saved output, and delivery to the source chat. > - A task can first belong to the CEO and then move to Morgan. > - Paperclip correctly cancels the old assignment wake before it starts. > - The eval treats that queue record as a failed provider run and stops before Morgan works. > - This change accounts for that record separately and preserves the complete outcome checks. > - The report also keeps partial check results when an attempt fails. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** The delegation journey stopped on an unstarted queue record with `issue_assignee_changed`. The CEO had created a task, assigned Morgan, saved the brief, and returned a task link. The test stopped before worker execution. Its report showed no individual checks even though the saved observation contained partial results. [Original public measurement](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/chat-progress-39e-112-latest-121-measurements-with-screenshots-40649033672/?view=case&case=chat-features.delegate-announcement). **Expected behavior** Keep the obsolete queue record and its events. Continue observing the intended worker. Pass only after three successful native work runs, a current Morgan-authored announcement, a completed task, automatic source-chat delivery, and browser readback. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Ask the CEO to have Morgan write and save a launch announcement, then return it to chat. 2. Create the task under the CEO, then assign Morgan before the queued CEO run starts. 3. Observe the cancelled old assignment. The previous eval aborts at that point. **Paperclip version or commit** Based on `6da112ab40d7b3cc0bcb79e08ddbb9b915a268a4` from `origin/master`. **Deployment mode** Disposable Product E2E fixtures. The live check uses the trusted default-branch workflow and AWS fleet. Related contribution: #17794 introduced these two journeys. The open-PR search found no separate fix for this queue-accounting defect. ## What Changed - Recognize only explicit dispatch-gate reassignment cancellations with a null start time and no native issue. Verify the company, prior CEO owner, and target task now assigned to Morgan before excluding that record from work-run counts. - Keep every queue record in the full observation and final ledger. Retain its events with an explicit reason for the absent provider log. - Let the feature flow own its complete saved-state and browser oracle. Return only actual work runs to the common provider checks. - Record saved-state checks on failures as well as successes. Capture the required `final-state.png` after the feature-specific browser readback. - Add two explicit local OpenCode cells alongside the two existing Codex subscription cells. Use the current production-qualified model. The earlier linked campaign used a different model, so this is a new measurement. - Advance the grader and suite versions. Keep the original request, output requirements, 120-second run cap, five-minute observation bound, budgets, and single-attempt policy. ## Verification - Red/green regressions cover queue accounting, missing-log collection, partial checks on evidence failure, and the required final screenshot. Flow tests invoke the actual polling callbacks: restoring the original callback reproduces both early-stop errors. Started cancellations still fail. - All 87 focused flow/grading/queue tests pass. Catalog/report checks and the 137 additional Node checks pass. Eval typechecking passes on final commit `0a6e11408c4470683417e6bf7965c73cec2a9a60`. - All current CI tests/builds pass. Greptile is 5/5 on the final commit, with no unresolved review threads. - The final commit adds only flow test coverage. Its registered definition digest equals live target `e4e0be875ee12c134fe8dd2ce15a88bfcbb100ef`: `ac6bba21d4b9cb86088be5d00df6442af90268186d6e94c9bea7d611d0488563`. - Replaying the original saved observation still fails for missing Morgan execution and delivery. Its stale queue record no longer counts as provider work. | Operation | Selected coverage | Observed result | | --- | --- | --- | | [41071710105](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41071710105), `b8dff816` | Backlog and delegation | Refused at the exact private-retention gate before fixtures or providers. Preserved without feature coverage. | | [41073708150](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41073708150), `39be9e45` | Backlog and delegation | Both passed their full product/browser oracles. Retained grades correctly fail missing `final-state.png`; the feature flow had saved the image under another name. Fixed in `e4e0be87`. Each original archive remains private and intact; later workflow concurrency superseded only the report aggregation. | | [41076854978](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41076854978), `e4e0be87` | Backlog and delegation | Backlog passed in 92.576 seconds, with a 47.388-second native run, complete required artifacts and passed cleanup. Delegation was interrupted by a runner-host shutdown at 15:19:23 UTC; all later evidence-upload steps were skipped. Its private archive is absent, so behavior, usage and cost remain unverified. | | [41080065077](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41080065077), `0a6e1140` | Delegation only | Passed on the final commit in 240.786 seconds. All 14 product checks plus browser readback passed; exact private identity, current worker output, Done state, correlated source-chat reply, required screenshot and cleanup verified. The three native runs took 42–60 seconds each. Passing control was not repeated. One-cell workflow and report enforcement passed. | The completed delegation in `41073708150` passed all 14 product checks plus browser readback in 222.593 seconds. Morgan saved the current two-sentence announcement, the task reached Done, and the CEO automatically delivered that saved text to the original chat. Its three successful native runs took 49.117, 40.060 and 39.107 seconds. The failed required screenshot remains a failed result in that measurement. All live operations use explicit IDs, concurrency one, no automatic retries, the unchanged 120-second per-run cap, and scoped private evidence retention bound to the exact workflow, target, original run, selector and launcher digest. These narrow measurements do not qualify the full catalog or establish repeated-run reliability. The broad local support suite passed 5,139 tests, with two skipped. Two database tests hit exhausted host semaphore capacity after the installed Postgres package's missing library symlinks were repaired. Their recheck reported `could not create semaphores: No space left on device`. No host IPC resources or kernel settings were changed. The corresponding full CI tests passed on a fresh host. ## Risks - A broad cancellation exception could hide failed work. This exception requires the dispatch gate's exact receipt, a null start time, the expected company and prior owner, and the actual reassigned task. Started and unproved cancellations still fail. Backlog creation permits no task wake. - New manual OpenCode cells can spend provider money only when explicitly selected. Default scheduled selection is unchanged. - This changes eval interpretation and evidence collection. It does not change product scheduling or task ownership. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with code execution and tool use. The exact model ID and context-window size are not exposed to 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 - [ ] 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
|
ac4f13d205 |
fix(e2e): report committed child blockers promptly (#18306)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Product E2E checks the ordinary onboarding conversation and its delivered work. > - A native run can finish successfully while its task remains blocked for a human. > - The onboarding journey kept waiting for such a child until the campaign deadline. > - This pull request reports the committed child blocker when no owned work remains pending. > - The journey still requires the same independent checks before it can pass. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** An approved child can stop with a committed current-track blocker owned by the board. Its native run succeeds, but the child task stays blocked. The onboarding journey reports a deadline failure instead of the observed child blocker. **Expected behavior** Report `onboarding_child_task_blocked` when the latest child run commits that blocker at the child's current status version. Keep waiting for parent dependencies and pending native or workspace recovery. **Steps to reproduce** Use the existing onboarding fixture with an approved blocked child. Give its latest native run a succeeded status, committed finalization, blocked work disposition, and the matching task status version. The old journey waits until its deadline. The new journey fails at that settled blocker without downloading or accepting any delivery. Related public context: #18298. Public issue and PR searches found no duplicate blocked-child harness fix. This change reports the failure boundary; it does not repair artifact delivery. ## What Changed - Check the owned child's board blocker after the existing run and recovery checks. - Require a unique latest producer, native committed results, and the current task status version. - Preserve parent dependency waits and all artifact, document, download, link, scope, and budget checks. - Add a behavioral regression and controls for active work, native recovery, workspace replacement, stale versions, newer producers, and agent-owned blockers. - Document the distinct failure code and the existing control-plane writers for its metadata. ## Verification - The new behavioral regression failed on the old code with `onboarding_first_task_deadline`; 147 controls passed. - The current head passed all 148 onboarding tests, including the valid agent-owner object control. - The initial implementation passed 305 tests across all 10 Product E2E files. The later update changes only writer links and the owner control; its 148 focused tests and harness typecheck also pass. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck` passed after building the isolated checkout's workspace declarations. - `git diff --check` passed. - All required CI checks passed on `1b3bd04d193fc98d0d9f2eb3b826a4ef4bdb6dea`, including full tests and build. They were not repeated locally. Greptile reviewed that exact head at 5/5. - The full Cloud journey remains unverified by these source and CI checks. This change does not claim that the underlying artifact delivery issue is fixed. ## Risks The early failure depends on the public task and run projections. Missing, stale, or ambiguous producer metadata keeps the existing bounded wait. A pending recovery or newer producer prevents the old blocker from ending the journey. No success requirement changes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, exact model ID `gpt-6.1-sol`, reasoning effort `ultra`. The model used source inspection, code editing, and local test tools. The runtime did not expose its context window size. Root supplied the model and effort metadata for this agent 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
0c70cedce9 |
Wait for the saved Studio file before editing a skill (#18305)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and use their saved work. > - Product E2E journeys check these user paths in classic and Cloud environments. > - The shared Skill Studio helper edits a skill created by an agent. > - Studio can mount the editor before its saved file finishes loading. > - Typing into that empty draft can replace or lose content when the file arrives. > - This change waits for the existing saved body before it starts the edit. > - Browser regressions check delayed loading and refusal to edit an unloaded file. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #18222 for the shared Product E2E journeys. No duplicate hydration fix was found. **What happened?** The shared Studio helper started typing as soon as the editor control was visible. A delayed file query could replace that draft. The helper could then lose the original content or fail to save its complete marker. **Expected behavior** The helper must load the original file before editing it. It must preserve that content, save the new marker, reload, and read the result from the task card. **Steps to reproduce** Run the controlled Studio browser fixture with a 1.5-second file load. The old helper saves the marker without the original `Verify checks.` body. With no file load, it still sends input events to the empty editor. ## What Changed - Wait for the original saved body before typing in the shared Studio helper. - Add browser checks for immediate load, delayed load, and an unavailable file. - Include these checks in the credential-free browser support suite. - Document the saved-file readiness requirement. ## Verification - Against the old helper, both new failure cases fail: the delayed case loses the original body, and the unloaded case sends 13 input events. - With the change, all three browser checks pass. They verify the saved original body and marker, reload, task-card readback, and zero input or save calls for an unloaded file. - `node node_modules/typescript/bin/tsc -p tests/runner-e2e/tsconfig.json --noEmit` passes. - `git diff --check` passes. Full repository CI passes in [41058312896](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41058312896), including typecheck, tests, build and all eight E2E shards. Greptile reviewed this exact head at 5/5 with no open threads. No live acceptance result is claimed by these controlled fixtures. ## Risks This adds a readiness assertion to an existing test helper. Both callers already use the same skill fixture and verify `Verify checks.` in the task card. An unavailable file now fails before an edit can occur. The change does not alter application behavior, model instructions, grading, or deadlines. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning and code execution. The host does not expose the exact underlying model version 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 described the issue in-PR following the bug template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket id - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation - [x] I have considered and documented risks - [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 reviewer comments before merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8f50704135 |
fix(e2e): wait for pending native recovery (#18298)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip manages agents and their work.
> - Native runs can retain a bounded automatic recovery on the same run.
> - Product E2E observes those runs before it checks the delivered work.
> - The onboarding journey treated every failed run as a final failure,
even when the server had saved its next recovery attempt.
> - This pull request waits only for the explicit agent-owned native
recovery projection.
> - The journey still requires successful execution and the same
independent delivery checks.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
The onboarding journey can stop after a native turn completes without
its semantic result. The server marks that attempt failed and saves a
same-run retry. The journey rejects the failed row before the saved
retry is due. This also affects a native child that follows a proven
workspace deferral.
**Expected behavior**
Observe the saved automatic recovery within the original campaign
deadline and run cap. A pending recovery cannot satisfy completion.
Ordinary failures and exhausted, terminal, or board-owned recovery must
still fail.
**Steps to reproduce**
Use the existing onboarding fixture with a native failed row whose
nativePhase is retryable_failure. Give it the server-owned
native_session_interrupted cause, an agent-owned retry_scheduled
projection, a valid retry time, and attempt 1 of 3. Transition that same
row through reconnecting and running to success. The old journey rejects
the first row.
Related public context: #18292. A search of related native-recovery PRs
found no duplicate harness fix.
## What Changed
- Observe the authenticated native recovery state in the existing
workspace-deferral module. Require matching nonempty cause strings and
every owner, phase, attempt, schedule, deadline, scope, and successor
guard.
- Apply it to the proposal wait, failed native rows, workspace successor
tails, and final settlement.
- Keep defensive rejection of known permanent, permission-declined, and
exhausted causes. Diagnostic cause strings are not a positive retry
policy.
- Add behavioral recovery, deadline, and rejection controls to the
existing workflow tests.
- Document that this wait preserves the original campaign and final
delivery requirements.
## Verification
- Baseline workflow regression: 4 expected premature failures with 90
controls passing. The final structural calibration rejected 20 valid
pending-recovery cases before the correction, with 120 controls passing.
- Final regression: 140/140 pass, including existing and new diagnostic
causes on direct and workspace-successor paths. Known terminal,
ambiguous, malformed, mismatched, and exhausted states still fail.
- Focused Product E2E compatibility: 297/297 pass across 10 files.
- pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck: pass after building the normal SDK and
Runner TypeScript dependencies.
- git diff --check: pass.
- Final source passed these checks before the reviewed commit.
- Full repository tests/build and live Cloud acceptance were not run
locally for this harness-only change. Required CI run 41049692194 passed
on
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8035f8b245 |
test: require saved onboarding approval cards (#18292)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Product E2E tests exercise real user workflows through the browser. > - The onboarding journey requires a human to accept one proposed child task. > - A live agent tried to create the child before it saved a proposal card. The product correctly rejected that action. > - The scripted request named the required result but did not name the proposal tool or require its saved receipt. > - This pull request makes that handoff explicit. It keeps the existing human approval and independent result checks. > - The benefit is a clearer scripted workflow without a change to product authority. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #18288 and #18266. **What happened?** The agent treated the opening task request as a step toward acceptance without first saving a proposal. It then stopped after child creation was denied. Its visible response referred to a pending proposal, but no proposal card existed. **Expected behavior** The agent saves a native confirmation card, checks its receipt, and waits for the human to accept it through the browser. It must not record its own approval. Only an accepted card authorizes the child task. **Steps to reproduce** Run the scripted Cloud onboarding journey. Give the canonical onboarding task its first task request. The observed agent skipped the saved proposal and tried to create the child. Model behavior varies, so this is a fixture guidance change rather than a deterministic product defect claim. **Paperclip version or commit** Fixture base: `7a7ade4b9360aaf8e1a2808bb2b1a752c080f564`. The serving product was Core `965184d2968f40b1183803529b88f288264c832f`. **Deployment mode** Testing Cloud workspace with native Codex. This pull request selects no product release or deployment. ## What Changed - Name the existing `request_human_input` confirmation or revision-bound checkbox contract and `wake_assignee` policy in the parent request. - Require a saved pending-card receipt. Require corrections when tool arguments are rejected. - Forbid self-approval. Require the actual accepted human card decision before child creation. - Document this scripted handoff. Keep the child brief, final download links, browser actions, and all grading assertions. ## Verification - Focused onboarding and Cloud journey tests: 79 passed. - Shared evidence, campaign, and contract tests: 66 passed. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`: passed after building the existing workspace type dependencies. - Credential-free preview under a network-deny guard: passed with zero external calls. Its preparation plan matches the base fixture. - `git diff --check`: passed. - No prompt-string test was added. Existing tests continue to enforce approval order, child scope, independent file checks, and real result links. - Full local repository build and database suites were not repeated for this fixture text change. Required PR CI must pass before merge. - The original live result remains unchanged. This local work does not prove that a later model run will comply. ## Risks - The model can still ignore the instructions. A new real campaign must prove the workflow. - More explicit guidance makes this a scripted product journey. It is not a model discovery benchmark. - There are no product runtime, schema, credential, model, budget, or approval-policy changes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, exact model `gpt-6.1-sol`, ultra reasoning effort. Parent runtime metadata confirmed this model. Context window size was not reported. Used source inspection, local code execution, and an independent agent review. ## 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
|
7a7ade4b93 |
test: require real onboarding result links (#18288)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people assign work to agents and use their saved results. > - The Cloud onboarding journey tests this handoff through a real parent and child task. > - The child can publish a correct file while the parent names that file without linking it. > - The existing journey correctly rejects that reply because the user cannot download the named result from it. > - This pull request makes the scripted parent request explicit about real Markdown links and returned attachment paths. > - The independent artifact and parent-link checks remain unchanged. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #18266 and #18258. **What happened?** A Cloud onboarding attempt produced a correct child artifact and saved document. The parent then named the child, document key, and filename in inline code. It omitted the attachment URL. The attempt failed with `onboarding_parent_result_links_missing`. **Expected behavior** The parent's final reply must link the saved child results. The file link must use the real published attachment reference. **Steps to reproduce** Run the existing explicit Cloud onboarding journey. A reply that only names the file must remain a failure, even when the child artifact is correct. **Paperclip version or commit** The branch starts from `965184d2968f40b1183803529b88f288264c832f`. ## What Changed - Ask the parent for real Markdown links in its final reply. Use the published attachment's returned content or download path. Do not invent IDs or URLs. - Add a filename-only reply to the existing negative oracle cases. - Document this scripted fixture requirement. ## Verification - Focused onboarding tests: 79 passed. - Shared task, campaign, and contract tests: 66 passed. - Existing artifact and native-completion Node checks: 137 passed. - `git diff --check`: passed. - Harness typecheck, `pnpm -r typecheck`, and `pnpm build`: passed after building the existing workspace dependencies. The initial missing-declaration and local-IPC setup failures remain recorded. - The full local database test suite was not rerun. Required repository CI runs the broader suites on Linux. - Required repository CI passed on the exact PR head. No paid model calls or Cloud operations were run for this patch. - [Initial CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41027635545/attempts/1) failed one unchanged retention timing test (3310 ms versus the strict 3000 ms bound). The unchanged case passed once on an isolated local Postgres17 fixture. One failed-jobs-only rerun passed in [attempt 2](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41027635545/attempts/2). The original failure remains visible. No timing threshold or retention source changed. - The previous live attempt stays failed. Local tests do not prove that a model follows the revised request. A new bounded live attempt must establish that result. ## Risks - The extra instruction can still be ignored by a model. The unchanged oracle will reject missing links. - This changes the fixture definition hash. Historical attempts retain their original source and result. - No product runtime, API, approval policy, model profile, budget, or cleanup behavior changes. ## Model Used OpenAI `gpt-6.1-sol`, ultra reasoning, with code execution and repository tools. Model metadata was confirmed in the parent task. The context window size is not exposed. ## 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
|
81ebe479e8 |
fix(evals): bind rendered Markdown replies to saved run evidence (#18264)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people assign work to AI agents and read saved results. > - Product journeys must prove that a result is visible and belongs to the completed run. > - The shared observer compares stored Markdown with browser text. > - A document link can render as an issue chip, so those strings differ. > - This PR keeps run and comment attribution, then compares full text and exact link destinations. > - The benefit is a valid browser result without a false timeout or a weaker provenance check. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #18248, #18255. **What happened?** The protected-action story completed both decisions and all four native turns. Its final explanation contained a document link. The browser rendered that link as an issue chip. The observer waited for raw Markdown to equal rendered text, so it could not accept the valid result. **Expected behavior** Accept complete matching content from the final run after reload. Keep the exact link destination, task anchor, author, run and durable final-message checks. Reject missing or changed content. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Save an attributed reply with bold text and a Markdown document link. 2. Render the link as an issue chip in the task bubble. 3. Run `readBoundTaskFinalReply`. The original observer times out. The new browser regression preserves that failure. ## What Changed - Add a UI-owned content projection using its existing Markdown renderer and GFM/issue-reference plugins. Keep DOM observation, attribution and destination checks in the task-reply observer. Keep source Markdown and observed text separately. - Read visible DOM text, link labels and destinations. Require the structured projection to match the actual visible text. Allow only recognized product chips to replace a link label. Ordinary links keep their source label. Reuse the production issue-reference and company-route helpers, plus the current task URL. Ordinary root-relative anchors keep their original path. Preserve exact marker checks and all run/comment/native-event attribution checks. - Check visible decline explanations and unread data in preserved native source text. - Add browser regressions and source/content tests. Reuse the UI’s existing `react-markdown` and `remark-gfm` dependencies. The final diff changes no package manifest or lockfile. - Match generated GFM checkbox states and reject changed states. Document supported content and fail-closed behavior. ## Verification - Original observer: the decorated-link browser regression fails at the final-reply predicate. - Fixed observer: all 21 browser regressions pass, without credentials or model calls. - Focused observer, decline, content and journey contract suites: 64 tests pass. - E2E and UI TypeScript checks pass. All UI token gates pass. The unchanged frozen install passes. - Full CI passed on the preceding |
||
|
Nicky LeachandClaude Opus 5.5
|
fa760dbce4 |
fix(runner): reuse image packs only with matching contract digest (#18237)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Remote native runs use a provider pack. The controller reuses a protected pack from the sandbox image when the pack is compatible. > - #17749 gates this reuse on a hand-maintained interface revision in `provider-pack-contract.json`. > - Later changes altered the runner/pack boundary (#17922, #18188), but nobody bumped the revision. A stale Claude or Codex image pack can still be reused across a sidecar contract change. This is the failure class of #17972. > - A manual revision has a "forgot to bump" failure mode. Source-byte hashes change on every refactor, so they are too brittle. > - This pull request declares the sidecar `session.open` contract in its JSON schema and computes a contract digest from the JSON contracts and Rust shapes. > - Image-pack reuse now requires an equal digest. > - The benefit is that an incidental change keeps image packs reusable, and a real contract change retires them automatically. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17749, #17972, #17922, #18188. **What happened?** The controller reused an image provider pack when `compatibility.acpx` and the selected agent's profile digest matched. For Claude and Codex, that profile digest binds only the upstream executable. The ACPX interface revision stayed at 1 after later sidecar contract changes. A pack built before those changes passed the reuse check. **Expected behavior** The controller reuses an image pack only when the pack uses the same runner/pack contracts as the controller's bundled pack. Comments, formatting and refactors do not change that result. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Build an image pack from a commit before a sidecar input change, such as a new `session.open` field. 2. Run a controller from a later commit that sends the new field, with the same interface revision and Claude version. 3. Before this fix, `verifyRemoteProviderPack` accepts the old image pack. ## What Changed - Declare the sidecar `session.open` parameter set as a closed `sessionOpenParams` definition in `acpx-sidecar.schema.json`. - `generate-acpx-sidecar-contract.mjs` now generates `GENERATED_ACPX_SIDECAR_OPEN_PARAMS` from it. - `parseOpenParams` uses the generated list instead of an inline `Set`. The accepted set is unchanged. - This is the surface of #17972. The schema is now its source of truth. - Declare the nested `session.open` contracts that the sidecar parses strictly: - `protocol/provider-schemas/runtime-context.schema.json` closes every runtime context object. `parseNativeRuntimeContext` uses the field lists that `scripts/generate-runtime-context-contract.mjs` generates from it. - The sidecar schema declares the closed `providerPolicy` object, and `parseProviderPolicy` uses its generated field list. - The accepted fields do not change. - Add `packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/contracts/contract-fingerprints.mjs`. It fingerprints these contracts: - the PRP and sidecar JSON schemas, with annotation text removed - the generated catalogs in `generated/` - the Rust serde shapes, `json!` payload keys, match literals and env keys in `runner-core/src`, without test-only modules - the reserved env key lists in `configured_environment.rs` - Read only the trees that every pack build context contains. Fail when a registered source is missing, so two build contexts cannot silently produce different digests. - Use only Node built-ins. The registry adds no dependency. - Write `contractDigest` as a top-level payload field in `build-provider-pack.mjs`. The manifest digest algorithm and the existing field layout do not change. - Require an equal `contractDigest` for image-pack reuse in `remote-provider-pack-verification.ts`. A pack without a digest is not reused. The controller uploads its bundled pack, as it does today for any incompatible pack. - Re-attest the source-hashed profiles, because this PR changes their bound sidecar sources: - Grok becomes profile 15 and now also binds the generated allowlist, so a Grok field change in the schema still invalidates the Grok identity. - Copilot becomes profile 88, and also binds the generated runtime context fields. - Earlier profiles stay decodable. - Add the registry script and `generated/` to the Daytona image content inputs. - Document the digest and the schema-first rule in `docker/daytona-runner/README.md` and `doc/DEVELOPING.md`. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/contracts/contract-fingerprints.test.mjs` (in `packages/paperclip-runner`): 4 tests pass. - These changes keep the digest: - schema description text - schema reformatting - renaming `parseOpenParams` - Rust comments, `#[serde(skip)]` fields and `#[cfg(test)]` modules - edits to the `#[path]` test module `tests/provider_api_validation.rs` - These changes alter the digest: - a new `session.open` schema field - a changed constraint on the `remainingWork[].description` property - a new reserved env key - a new sidecar env key - a new checkpoint field - A build context without a registered source fails. - `node --test test/acpx-sidecar-contract.test.mjs`: 13 tests pass. A new case rejects an unknown `session.open` parameter and accepts each declared parameter. - `node --test scripts/grok-profile-identity.test.mjs`: 4 tests pass. A change to the Grok field in the generated allowlist invalidates the Grok identity. - `generate-acpx-profiles.mjs --check`, `generate-acpx-sidecar-contract.mjs --check` and `generate-protocol-manifest.mjs --check` pass. - Runner vitest suites pass: 470 passed, 1 skipped. They cover the sidecar, sidecar input and protocol, Copilot and Pi installation, profile compatibility, native execution, recovery identity, the backend factory and the environment. - Server tests: pack verification, executor and artifact preparation pass (1,004 tests). - `tsc --noEmit` passes for `packages/paperclip-runner` and `server`. - `tests/runner-e2e/daytona-image.test.ts`: 10 of 11 tests pass. The failing test also fails on `master`. It expects a literal `profile-v19-identity.json` line in `.dockerignore`, which uses a `profile-v*` glob. - Not run locally: - A complete `build-provider-pack.mjs` run. The builder rejects the local Homebrew Node because it is not portable after relocation. - Rust tests and `acpx-controller-recovery.test.ts`, because `cargo` is not installed. - The full `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm test:run` and `pnpm build`. ## Risks - Only JSON contracts and Rust shapes are part of the digest. The remaining TypeScript-only definitions are the `paperclip_finish` and `paperclip_block` tool schemas in `completion-result.ts` and the TypeScript env key lists. They are not covered until they move into a schema. The nested `expectedIdentity` and `tools` values ignore unknown fields, so a change there cannot cause a startup rejection. - A change there can let a stale image pack be reused. The sidecar then rejects the input with its strict parser error. - Today, Claude and Codex image packs have no contract check at all. - The digest covers all registered contracts for the whole pack. A contract change for one provider kind also retires image packs for the other. Each replacement costs about 16 s per remote start until the image is refreshed. - Existing image packs have no digest. After deploy, the controller uploads its bundled pack until the image is rebuilt. - The Grok and Copilot re-attestations start fresh sessions for those agents once after deploy, as each profile bump does today. - The Daytona image content ID formula changes, so the next image build does not reuse a cached image. > 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`) through Claude Code in the desktop app, with repository tools, shell execution and research subagents. The session does not expose the 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 - [ ] 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
145214201d |
test: preserve the onboarding child brief at delegation (#18266)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Product E2E journeys check onboarding through the real app. > - The onboarding story asks a parent agent to delegate a file and document task. > - A parent can preserve the goal but omit the exact tool instructions from its child description. > - The child can then publish a note instead of the required JSON file and task document. > - This pull request asks the parent to copy the full child brief without changing it. > - The existing independent checks still decide whether the result passes. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #18258. Includes merged prerequisite #18270 for the existing retention scheduling failure found by required CI. **What happened?** The scripted onboarding request gave the parent an ordered tool recipe. It did not require the parent to keep that recipe in the child description. A delegated child could compute the result but publish a Markdown note and omit the Paperclip task document. **Expected behavior** The child receives the full approved brief. It must publish `connection-proof.json`, save its Paperclip task document with the returned file link, and report completion through the current contract. **Steps to reproduce** Run the explicit Cloud onboarding journey. Inspect the approved child description and its published result when the parent summarizes the request. **Paperclip version or commit** This change is based on public master `b3c2172d417ea6b783e0c796aaed4a91e1f9d381`. **Deployment mode** Scripted Product E2E against a live Cloud testing workspace. ## What Changed - Put the existing ordered instructions in one marked child brief. - Require the parent to copy that brief verbatim into `create_task.description`. - State the exact JSON filename and workspace-relative content reference for `register_deliverable`. - State that a Markdown workspace note does not replace the `write_document` step. - Document this scripted scope in the Product journey guide. ## Verification - Existing focused Product journey tests: 227 passed in 10 files. - Credential-free Product journey discovery passed through the direct tsx loader. - Source comparison confirms that all code after the opening reply is unchanged. The download, calculation, hash, provenance, document, parent-link, approval and run-limit checks retain their original behavior. - No prompt word-matching tests were added. This is an instruction-only change. - `pnpm build`, `pnpm -r typecheck`, and `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck` passed. - Full support Vitest check: 5,042 passed, 2 skipped, 2 failed. Both failures occur during embedded PostgreSQL startup in the controller database lifecycle fixtures. The log includes a missing bundled `libzstd.1.dylib`. The separate Node support checks passed all 137 tests. - `pnpm test:run` was attempted. It reached the general server suite and repeated embedded PostgreSQL startup failures. I stopped only this owned local test process group. The full local test command is incomplete. Required Linux CI remains the merge gate. - The first harness typecheck ran before workspace build outputs existed and reported missing workspace modules. It passed after the full build. The earlier failure remains recorded. - The initial CLI discovery wrapper hit a local tsx IPC permission error. The direct loader passed with the same source and arguments. - The original required CI run found an existing skill-retention page delay. Its unchanged test passed once against a dedicated local PostgreSQL fixture. Separate PR #18270 added a deterministic regression and fixed the scheduler. After that PR merged, this branch received one normal merge from master. Its diff remains two fixture files. The original failed CI run remains preserved. - After the branch refresh, all 70 onboarding first-task tests and 7 retention/deadline controls passed. Harness typecheck passed. Fresh required CI and review passed on head `608e266c6567c19981fd3f8a07305c785346753b`. - The refreshed CI run passed the retention shard but failed one unchanged Antigravity authentication fixture. The same Runner lane passed on the prior fixture head and the merged prerequisite. The exact test passed once locally. Source review identified a possible stdout/stderr ordering race, but the failed run did not retain its exact error subtype. The one approved retry of the failed CI job and its verification aggregate passed on unchanged source. The original failure remains preserved. This proves recovery, not its cause. - The live Cloud journey has not been rerun with this source. Historical failed attempts retain their original results. ## Risks - An agent can still fail to follow the brief. Existing independent assertions will reject the wrong file or missing task document. - The fixture definition changes. A later live attempt must record this new harness revision. - No application, model, effort, budget, cleanup or acceptance rule changes. ## Model Used - OpenAI `gpt-6.1-sol`, ultra reasoning effort, with repository tools and code execution. The parent verified this model ID from current runtime metadata. The context window size is not exposed. ## 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
|
b3c2172d41 |
fix(evals): verify native protected-action outcomes (#18255)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work assigned to agents. > - Product E2E stories ask for useful user-facing results. > - Classic runner and deployed QA reuse the same service approve/decline task prompts. > - The service returns a receipt marker that belongs in a saved briefing document. > - State that destination explicitly and ask for the document link when complete. > - The deployed decline path also needs the same durable final-reply proof as Plan and Stop. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #18222. Builds on the merged reply observer in #18248. **What happened?** The shared service tasks ask for titles and a “verification code” without specifying that the code belongs in the document or asking for its final link. A native QA attempt created its briefing but then repeatedly failed the completion tool’s array validation. Those invalid arguments remain a separate observed failure; the wording change does not establish their cause or relax validation. Source inspection also found that the declined-action oracle requires a projected comment even when the settled native thread renders a durable final message. **Expected behavior** Ask for page titles and the service receipt code in the saved briefing, then a document link. After a declined action, require the existing explanation-only fallback without another service call. **Steps to reproduce** Run the shared service-approve/service-decline stories through the classic runner or QA Product E2E adapter. ## What Changed - Clarify the natural-language task for both shared service stories: put page titles and service receipt code in the document and provide its link. - Use the reloaded run-bound final reply for QA service declines. Pass an explicit native receipt to the existing decline oracle; do not synthesize issue comments. Require the final native run to start after the saved decline and keep exact decision, truthful explanation, no unread marker, zero calls and unchanged connection checks. - Keep classic callers on their existing attributed-comment path. No internal tool instructions are added to the user prompt; ownership, service data and model/runtime limits stay strict. ## Verification - Decline regression observed RED: two cases reject a valid saved native explanation without projected comments. After the repair, 79 focused tests passed across native reply, decline guidance, agent evidence and journey contracts. A two-successful-run control rejects the earlier receipt and accepts the later one. Negatives cover stale/wrong run, wrong agent/task, missing final proof, summary/unsettled/hidden output, false explanations and unread service data. - Product E2E TypeScript and `git diff --check` passed. - Live protected-action qualification is required after merging this and the companion private service/cleanup fixes. The previous failed result remains failed; this is a bounded task-clarity experiment, not a claimed model or completion-schema repair. - Current-head Greptile and Paperclip reviews are 5/5 with zero open threads. CI initially failed the unrelated agent-chat-projects cleanup POST with a PostgreSQL lock timeout after its assertions completed. One bounded retry passed on unchanged source; all current-head gates passed at `64bc169e147290ed4dbaa18221e0268362ce81ee`. The original failing attempt and its logs remain available. The task-clarity change is still a bounded experiment; the observer repair addresses a demonstrated storage-assumption defect. ## Risks A clearer task can still fail with the selected model. All acceptance checks and completion input validation remain strict; a saved briefing alone cannot qualify the complete journey. Only test prompts and test evidence code change. Missing or contradictory native evidence fails closed. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed by this session. Used reasoning, source editing, shell execution and test inspection. ## 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
|
59b76777db |
test: clarify onboarding artifact completion instructions (#18258)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and inspect their work. > - Product E2E journeys test that work through normal browser and API controls. > - The Cloud onboarding journey asks one native child to publish a file and save a document. > - Its task request did not explain the completion report format or make each output step distinct. > - A live attempt published the file, then submitted an invalid finish report and declared a blocker. > - This change orders the scripted request and explains the existing completion contract. > - The agent must still produce the result and pass the same independent checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17940. Refs #18228. **What happened?** The scripted onboarding request left completion details implicit. A live child published its proof file, then submitted a finish payload without verification and with an invalid schema value. Its later blocked report also listed local paths as artifacts. This does not establish a Core validator defect. **Expected behavior** The request should explain the existing tool contract. The child must publish the file, save the document with its returned link, then submit a valid completion report. Argument correction must not replace artifact verification or bypass approval. **Steps to reproduce** Run the explicit Cloud onboarding Product E2E journey through its private target provider. Approve the proposed child through the UI. Inspect the native finish report and the independently checked attachment, document, and parent links. **Paperclip version or commit** The observed deployment used public Core `6a674716447e8fa268c5cdeb1db1020319368a77`. This fixture change starts from `a8e07500db68f187b19de83823eb7fabf1196021`. **Deployment mode** Cloud testing with the scripted Product E2E harness. ## What Changed - Order the child request: create files, publish the proof, save its document, then finish. - Require verification for actual checks and omit the optional schema field. - Explain receipt-derived references in evidence and file artifacts. Keep local input paths in verification details. - Document same-attempt argument correction and preserve historical failed results. ## Verification - Existing onboarding-first-task and artifact-evidence suites: 83 checks passed. - The maintained harness unit wrapper also passed 137 Node contract checks. - Independent source review found no contract, privacy, or oracle change. - Full `pnpm build` and `pnpm -r typecheck` passed at the preceding commit `c3900cf2`. The only later change names the filename required by the existing document assertion. - Current `d75180b4`: the 83 fixture/artifact checks, 137 contract checks, and `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck` passed again. - Credential-free `--list --suite product-journeys` passed. - The local full repository Vitest run at `c3900cf2` was stopped before the filename correction. It is incomplete and is not reported as a pass. Current-head CI passed: 54 successful checks and two optional Storybook skips. The separate advisory review is still running and is not reported as passed. Initial fresh-worktree dependency and sandbox IPC failures remain recorded. - No paid model, Cloud workspace, release, or deployment was run for this change. These checks establish harness compatibility, not a live model pass. The prior failed campaign remains failed. ## Risks The model may still submit an invalid report or fail another step. A fresh live journey is required to measure the instruction change. This PR changes fixture text and documentation only. It supplies no result, checksum, real attachment ID, or successful status. Models, limits, validators, and independent assertions stay the same. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, `gpt-6.1-sol`, ultra reasoning. The model identity comes from confirmed parent runtime metadata. Context window size is unavailable. Tools and code execution assisted the change and review. ## 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
|
2badf8a4a5 |
fix(evals): verify native QA replies on the reloaded task thread (#18248)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents that do work for users. > - Product E2E journeys check user outcomes on real deployments. > - Native task threads can render saved final replies from a settled run. > - The new QA Plan and Stop checks looked only for agent comments. > - Both flows reached the requested terminal state and showed the correct reply, but that storage assumption rejected them. > - This PR checks the reloaded visible reply and binds it to the final successful run. Explicit presentation decisions remain authoritative. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #18222 and #18244. **What happened?** The deployed Plan journey completed all three native runs, including revision and approval. Stop completed native cancellation, resource release and a new direction. Their final-answer checks failed because the comments endpoint did not contain the rendered native reply. The original failed grades remain unchanged. **Expected behavior** Require exactly one correct visible final answer after reload, attributed to the final successful owned run. Reject an earlier run, progress text, hidden content, duplicate answers or a cancelled run. If its selected completion comment is projected, require that comment and matching author/run/text. Otherwise require a single durable final assistant message and its settled native final-response anchor. **Steps to reproduce** Run the Plan or Stop journey on a native deployment whose task thread renders the settled run before a completion comment is projected. ## What Changed - Add a narrow reply observer over the existing task-thread hooks. It reloads the page and refreshes saved run/comment metadata while waiting. - Bind native replies to a validated durable final assistant event and the successful run's settled final-response anchor. Require the selected comment when projected; support pending or suppressed projection without accepting a summary fallback. Accept payload and item-normalized finals, rejecting contradictory fields. - Use the observer for Plan completion and Stop's new direction. Keep existing run counts, deployment binding, cancellation and artifact checks. - Add negative grading tests, include the helper in the definition hash, and document its evidence contract. Classic protocol comment matchers are unchanged. ## Verification - 63 focused tests passed across native reply evidence, agent evidence and journey contracts. - Product E2E TypeScript passed. The reply observer uses the remaining journey deadline and backs off polling. - Live Plan and Stop attempts exposed this grading failure. Their original outcomes remain failed; fresh qualification is required after merge. - Full current-head CI passed at `40840ed742977853630d733292461ad7003fc7fb`; Greptile and Paperclip Review both scored 5/5, with zero unresolved review threads. ## Risks The observer depends on existing task-thread test hooks and run anchors. Missing or changed hooks fail closed. It reads rendered user-facing text; a finish summary alone cannot satisfy it. Native event provenance, run ownership and exact reply equality are required. No backend, model, provider, budget or cancellation policy changes are included. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed by this session. Used reasoning, source editing, shell execution and test inspection. ## 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
|
8941db9ce6 |
fix(evals): accept editor escapes and cancel sensitive QA requests (#18244)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents that do work for users. > - Product E2E journeys check real browser actions and saved results. > - A rich editor can store plain underscores as escaped Markdown. > - The QA reply check treated that valid saved message as a failure. > - A private target adapter also needs to cancel credential-safe HTTP requests before cleanup. > - This PR fixes reply comparison and adds abort and timeout options to the existing sensitive transport. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #18222. **What happened?** The artifact revision and Stop journeys rejected the correct single user reply because its underscore was stored as `\_`. Sensitive connection setup also lacked a way to pass its lifecycle signal to the actual HTTP request. **Expected behavior** The check accepts the editor's underscore escape and still rejects changed, duplicate, missing, or foreign replies. A cancelled sensitive request closes before setup cleanup proceeds. **Steps to reproduce** Run an artifact revision with an underscore in the reply. For the transport case, abort a pending sensitive request or let its deadline expire. ## What Changed - Compare the fixture reply after undoing only underscore escaping. Keep exact text, count, and author checks. - Let `ConnectionApi.postSensitive` accept a bounded timeout and abort signal. Check cancellation again after cookie loading and before dispatch. - Test the retained reply failure and both cancellation paths with an actual loopback HTTP server. Document the adapter contract. ## Verification - Focused Product E2E tests: 30 passed across two files. - Product E2E TypeScript check passed. After rebase, a final check first found four diagnostics from stale runner/plugin SDK declarations; rebuilding those two workspace packages cleared all four, and the unchanged E2E check passed. - The first sandbox run failed because loopback `listen` returned `EPERM`. The unchanged HTTP tests passed with loopback permission. The test now reports listener errors directly. - Both independent reviewers found a possible pre-arrival deadline-test hang. The follow-up races arrival against request settlement and adds one second of deadline headroom. All 30 affected tests passed after that fix. - Full current-head CI passed in run 40982914525. Greptile and Paperclip Review both scored 5/5 at `f0526f5fbbf13de5ea43e868eb012069ca3d8907`; all review threads are resolved. Live QA requalification follows the merged public and private fixes; no live pass is claimed here. ## Risks The text normalization applies only to plain fixture replies and only removes underscore escapes. It does not remove arbitrary Markdown. Sensitive calls retain their existing 30-second default and closed error messages. API wrappers must forward the optional signal and await the actual request. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The serving model ID and context window are not exposed by this session. Used reasoning, code editing, shell execution, and test inspection. ## 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> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandClaude Opus 5.5
|
7d194e901f |
feat(ci): merge lockfile refresh PRs through a dedicated bot (#18238)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - CI owns `pnpm-lock.yaml`. Contributors do not commit it, so a poisoned lockfile cannot come in from a community PR. > - `refresh-lockfile.yml` regenerates the lockfile from the manifests on master and opens a PR. > - That PR waits on required checks and code owner review. A `GITHUB_TOKEN` push does not start the checks, so a maintainer must merge each PR by hand. > - The PR content comes only from manifests that maintainers already reviewed on master. A human review adds little. > - This pull request lets a dedicated GitHub App merge the refresh PR at once, without CI or review. > - A release-age gate holds the merge when the refresh adds a package version that is less than 3 days old on npm. > - The benefit is a lockfile loop that closes itself, without a bypass for any identity that other workflows can use. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #12115 (the same stuck-PR problem, fixed there by starting the checks). Refs #18219 (an example refresh PR that needed a manual approval and merge). **What happened?** Each lockfile refresh PR stays open until a code owner approves it and a maintainer merges it. The required checks `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e` also do not start, because the workflow pushes with `GITHUB_TOKEN`. **Expected behavior** The refresh PR merges with no human action and no CI run, unless it adds a package version that is too new to trust without review. **Steps to reproduce** Merge a manifest change to master. Look at the `chore/refresh-lockfile` PR that the workflow opens. It stays blocked. ## What Changed - `refresh-lockfile.yml` runs in a new `lockfile-refresh` environment. Only `master` can use this environment. - The workflow creates a token for a dedicated lockfile bot app after dependency resolution is complete. The token has only contents and pull request write access. - The workflow merges with `gh pr merge --squash --admin --match-head-commit <sha>`, not `--auto`. It merges only the commit that it pushed. - New `.github/scripts/check-lockfile-release-age.mjs` compares the base and refreshed lockfiles. It looks up the npm publish time of each added package version. The bot merges only when every version is at least 3 days old. A lookup error, a missing publish time, a non-registry version, or a resolution that is not a plain registry tarball also holds the merge. - When the gate holds the PR, the workflow posts or updates one report comment on the PR and does not merge. - A daily schedule runs the refresh again, so a held PR merges after its versions are old enough. - A held run uploads its lockfile as a `held-pnpm-lock` artifact. The artifact records the hash of the master lockfile it started from. The next master run resolves from it only while master still has that lockfile, so held versions stay while their manifests do not change, and a maintainer's lockfile correction replaces them. The workflow does not read the PR branch for this, because users with write access can push to it. - The generated PR body now describes the gate. - `tests/runner-e2e/OPERATIONS.md` now says that the bot can merge the report-lock correction without review, under the same gate. - New `lockfile-refresh-merge.test.mjs` pins the merge safeguards: the environment, the step order, the gate conditions, and `--match-head-commit`. - `doc/RELEASE-AUTOMATION-SETUP.md` §8.1 tells an admin how to create the app, the environment, and the ruleset bypass. It also tells why we do not use `github-actions` or `commitperclip` for the bypass. ## Verification - `node --test .github/scripts/tests/check-lockfile-release-age.test.mjs .github/scripts/tests/lockfile-refresh-*.test.mjs` passes (17/17). - I ran the gate against the real lockfile diff of #18219 and the live npm registry. With 3 days, all 7 added versions passed (`eligible=true`). With 60 days, it held all 7 `turbo` 2.11.10 versions (9.1 days old) and wrote the report. - The workflow YAML parses. actionlint did not run, because it is not installed locally and Docker was not available. - No live run yet. After the admin setup in §8.1, run the workflow with `workflow_dispatch` on master, or merge a manifest change. Then make sure that the bot opens and merges the refresh PR. ## Risks - **Setup order.** An org admin must do the steps in §8.1 before this PR merges. If not, the next refresh fails at the token step, and the PR stays open for a manual merge, as it does now. - **No CI on lockfile changes.** A bad resolution can land on master without a check. The next manifest PR or the canary release shows the problem. - **Release-age gate limits.** The gate stops only fast-detected attacks on new versions. A malicious version that stays undetected for more than 3 days still merges without review. Lockfile changes that add very new versions now wait for a maintainer or up to 3 days. - **Bypass scope.** The app bypasses the master ruleset only in pull request mode. It cannot push to master directly. Only the master-only `lockfile-refresh` environment holds its key. If the key leaks, the holder can merge any open PR past review. Rotate the key if you think it leaked. - **More master runs.** A merge by an app token starts push workflows on master. A merge by `GITHUB_TOKEN` does not. After each lockfile merge, the canary release runs, and the refresh workflow runs again with no change. ## Model Used - Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, in Claude Code with tool use (shell, file edit, GitHub CLI). ## 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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
ebed7f5237 |
test(evals): protect Antigravity setup and two-turn delivery (#18190)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and their work. > - A provider integration must work through ordinary agent setup and task controls. > - The recorded Antigravity walkthrough exposed setup, delivery, and continuation failures. > - A repeatable check must verify real work and retain failed attempts. > - This pull request converts all 47 recorded steps into one fixed Product E2E journey. > - Maintainers can rerun the case and inspect independent delivery, cleanup, and accounting evidence. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Builds on merged #18187, #18188, and #18189, and consumes the shared repairs from merged #18230 and the equivalent manual-policy declaration from #18222. Refs #18214 for the CI task wrapper. Refs #12503 and #14938 for related legacy adapter work. **Agent or provider** Google Antigravity native Runner with a saved managed Google subscription and the exact Low model. **Why this adapter is useful** A user must be able to add an agent, connect its account, and receive real task results across a follow-up. Picker visibility alone is insufficient. **How the agent is invoked** A fixed Playwright driver uses ordinary product controls. The agent runs through native ACP. Independent checks use public APIs, actual downloads, owned process observations, and native lifetime fences. ## What Changed - Register one explicit-only case: `antigravity-agent-journey.runner-antigravity.local.saved-subscription-two-turn`. - Map all 47 source steps and declare saved-account prerequisites, finite limits, and same-host macOS ARM64 scope. - Create an agent through the ordinary picker, connect the saved account, select Low, run Test, and wait for readiness. Save an instruction marker, deliver a file, and update it through an ordinary follow-up. - Require each run's visible completed file activity, exact downloaded bytes, committed Done result, same tagged conversation, distinct physical owner birth, released lease, and free native fences. Verify reload persistence. - Stop failed native runs that still own a retry. Replay an existing Stop with its durable request identity and wait for the matching audited acknowledgement. A terminal reservation without a native intent remains unconfirmed. - Keep private evidence in the existing result, report, dashboard, and accounting pipeline. Retain the paused QA agent and financial history while preserving the shared account and budget policies. - Journal only the ordinary wizard's future ID, target, name, intended harness and expected creator before forwarding its POST unchanged. Bind the response and interrupted recovery to exact identity reads; a pending 404 stays unconfirmed. - Serialize private resource snapshots through temporary-file fsync, atomic rename and directory fsync. Abort forwarding on storage failure and preserve legacy receipts. If later journal or diagnostic writes fail, retain the primary error, always close the browser, and attempt the ordinary failed report. - Add production-component browser controls and harden task-menu readiness, alias selection, scroll restoration, failure packaging, and one hermetic auth-test budget. - Wait for the existing GitHub recovery fixture to register its next deadline before asserting the original range; preserve its nested-transaction and zero-request checks. In the decision-expiry fixture, verify the exact saved expiry separately from the earlier global wake of another queue. ## Verification - Fresh registered acceptance passed on eval source `9060f3cd01b7c3445ecdf703d72e9cf30fe42b59` and merged serving product `61bd4ac6919c2309f766a25e62273b074cee3261`. It completed ordinary setup and two turns with native `.5` and `gemini-3.8-flash-low`. All 16 matchers, 14 checkpoints, and cleanup passed in **165,613 ms**. Actual downloads were **61 bytes** and **119 bytes**. Both turns passed their own run-bound browser activity checks and reload persistence. - Independent read-back confirms Done, a paused retained agent, the same connected saved default account, and no active owned run. Both accepted results have the same full tagged conversation and distinct primary process births. All 21 observed processes retired; both leases released and all three native fences were free after each turn. The selected `.5` checkpoints also showed equal agent/backend session IDs; this is an observed case requirement, not a generic ACP invariant. - Receipts report 339,273 input tokens, 7,224 output tokens, and 202,846 cached input tokens. Subscription prices are unavailable. Billing coverage remains incomplete, not free. - The normal report CLI passed. All 310 files from nine original attempts and two separate recoveries retained their hashes. The twelve current screenshots are byte-identical, and 194 local report links are contained and valid. The eight earlier reports were copied without regeneration. - Delivery source `1bf4fb04df04710b82844b3c9355767f46b5f68f` branches from `d3f2a60e795fc60d64c8b19d1eed4d48657d5492` and merges cleanly with current master `1d571de5f9f886d66e520800baec8fc2f67d0948`. All 41 prior `c8b332` authored file blobs remain identical; the 42nd path is the decision-expiry fixture contract correction. Creation ownership, the strict durable writer, and the ordinary successful workflow remain unchanged. Of 43 measured file blobs, 30 remain identical. The Antigravity oracle, artifact, billing and report gates and its suite-specific validation block remain unchanged. The actual retained agent matches its original creator; its original request `setupId` was not captured and is not reconstructed. - Later master changes include model-visible workspace guidance and rejected-terminal-report handling. Their bounded source assessment is separate: the first actual finish failed, then a same-turn replacement was accepted and committed. Later read-only results match both original native-result hashes, and the complete event catalogs have no `session.failed` event. Master #18228 also expands detection of explicit JSON file requests. The measured create/update-and-attach `.txt` task already required publication under both parsers; the publication validation gate itself is unchanged. Master #18240 changes remote workspace cache staging and adds an OpenCode index refresh. The selected local lane returns before those paths. Master #18213 adds optional numeric turn timing and trace boundaries. Its selected Antigravity model, text, IDs, result and retirement semantics remain unchanged in the bounded source review. Local diagnostic rows and awaits can change event ordinals and latency; the oracle checks relative semantic order. Collector coverage and latency improvement remain outside this proof. This does not claim that the whole current runtime is byte-identical to serving `61bd`, or relabel the measured result as a new run. - The adopted upstream cache controls passed 3/3 with pinned real Turbo. Forced work disables local and remote reads and writes; ordinary work reuses local results. The original genuine-pnpm/Turbo controls remain historical to `9060`'s earlier write-only policy. The duplicate cache patch is superseded by #18230. Its qualification-only pnpm addition is removed because the adopted upstream controls do not require it. - The E2E typecheck, map checks and 277-control replay are carried from the unchanged eval source paths. That replay passed, including the 183 Antigravity controls, catalog/connection checks and the separate product-journey validator. The carried creation controls include 91 config/recovery cases. The final launcher suite passed 19/19, including five real campaign finalization fault cases; the report suite passed 7/7. These final checks did not rerun the earlier 277-control group. The canonical production-component browser spec passed in 27.4 s under its unchanged 60 s limit before the replay. Four paused-composer cases and the product base's build/typecheck plus 376 focused regressions were verified earlier. - The shipped wizard and actual API client cover persistence before forwarding, lost response JSON, foreign/malformed requests, wrong response identity/creator and cleanup-error preservation. Real filesystem controls failed 5/5 before the writer repair and passed 5/5 afterward, preserving the old journal on partial-write, temporary-file sync and rename faults. Three persistent-sync campaign controls failed before the finalization repair and passed afterward. All five final campaign fault cases preserve the primary failure, cleanup failure, usage and failed report while attempting browser closure. The strict journal still blocks the next mutation. These are provider-free ownership controls; the Google task proof remains the original `9060` → `61bd` acceptance. - The decision restart check passed in the local 20-case fixture run. A current-source real-PostgreSQL rollback control reproduced the exact 90,000 ms earlier global wake: the old equality rejected it, while the exact durable expiry and new future-wake bound passed. The original 60 s open-state, exact-timestamp, continuation and quiet checks remain. The broader local run was **FAILED: 19 passed / 1 failed**, with a 15 s timeout and a 30 s cleanup timeout in an unchanged timestamp-pagination case. That case passed in canonical `c8b332` CI; the local timeout cause remains inconclusive. An extra local server typecheck failed against stale cached Runner declarations; it did not check this excluded test file. Both limits remain recorded for fresh canonical CI. - A broader local GitHub recovery group passed 21/22. Its unchanged pagination case observed an unexpected config request; the log does not establish the cause. That result remains retained, and fresh current-head CI is the final broader gate. - Exact delivery-head CI completed with 55 successes, two skips, and one optional neutral review. Required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`, build, typecheck, and Runner checks passed. Fresh Greptile is 5/5 with zero unresolved threads. Optional Paperclip is neutral 4/5; its carried recommendations are dispositioned against the public Stop contract and selected live identity evidence. Seven earlier converted attempts retain their failed grades and partial evidence. Historical Paid8 and its later read-only per-run UI observation remain separate from the fresh acceptance above. Unknown prices and the older partial startup accounting remain explicit. Full lineage and raw evidence remain private in the normal report bundle. ## Risks - This case requires an authorized saved personal default Google subscription and finite operator candidate admission. It does not test fresh OAuth or establish global qualification. - The physical observer supports a same-host loopback macOS ARM64 target. Cloud, Linux, and other models remain outside this case. - A known-cost stop cannot cap missing prices or in-flight subscription charges. Existing operator policies remain unchanged. - Raw account/native identities stay private. Missing retirement proof keeps resources retained. The selected cleanup mode does not test agent purge. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6). The host did not expose the exact model revision or context limit. The model used tools for code edits, tests, browser automation, and review. ## 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
|
d3f2a60e79 |
test(e2e): reuse core journeys across deployment targets (#18222)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and their work. > - Product E2E tests verify work through the browser and public APIs. > - The classic matrix already tests several common task stories. > - Its older stories depend on local fixture setup and workspace access. > - Deployment tests need the same story checks with a separate target adapter. > - This PR shares those checks and adds five explicit journey selections. > - A deployment pass still requires evidence from that deployment. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Product E2E journey reuse across managed instances and deployed Cloud instances. **Current behavior** The deployed-target catalog covers task creation, assignment, Ask, and fresh onboarding. Plan revision and Everyday stories run through the classic fixture driver. Several story steps assume a local workspace. **Proposed behavior** Add explicit Plan revision, artifact revision, protected-action approval and decline, Skill Studio, and Stop/redirect journeys. Share the main browser sequences and content checks with the classic driver. Let target adapters provide authentication, native agents, a reachable service fixture, and owned cleanup. **Reason and benefit** A local pass cannot verify the deployed application. Shared story code lets a deployed target exercise the same behavior without copying an entire test or starting a replacement server. **Breaking changes** No product API or default matrix selection changes. Passed deployment results must satisfy the declared story checks and work-run count. Unsupported target capabilities fail before a story runs. Related public work: #17262 and #18098. Upstream prerequisite: #18230. ## What Changed - Extract shared Plan, artifact download/oracle, protected service, Skill Studio, and Stop/redirect helpers. Keep classic callers on those helpers. - Add five explicit paid journey selections with owned-task observations and native company, agent, model, and environment checks. - Include classic prompts, delivery/decision code, and the decline grader in the source-definition hash. Keep classic transient-read retries and reject deployment binding failures immediately. Match cookie directory boundaries in sensitive fixture requests. - Require complete story checks and expected run receipts before retaining a passing result. Keep failed evidence and private downloads. - Add a secret-safe request method for deployment fixture credentials. Add the missing declaration for the existing manual evidence policy module so the E2E project can typecheck. - Document target responsibilities and promotion after a real deployment pass. This source catalog does not enroll candidates in a daily plan. ## Verification - E2E TypeScript check: passed, including the review follow-up. - Review follow-up: 30 tests passed across four files, covering transient Plan reads, immediate binding rejection, cookie-path scope, agent receipts, and artifact evidence. Stop now waits for a saved, still-active native turn before the browser click and retains its startup events. Counterexamples reject claimed-but-unstarted, already-completed, interrupted, and non-native work. Shared observation and API helpers also enter the definition fingerprint. Cancellation snapshots are captured before lease cleanup. A direct terminal-boundary assertion rejects native work after cancellation even if it is already in the first snapshot; five cleanup-window counterexamples are covered. The Stop-output regression first failed for both native `item.delta` and `item.completed`; the fixed check detects both while allowing accounting-only updates. A report-catalog test first failed because the sandbox denied the tsx child IPC pipe (`listen EPERM`); the unchanged test passed outside the sandbox. - Affected journey, catalog, API, service fixture, and delivery checks: 313 tests passed across 19 files. - Workspace build: passed after rebase. - Workspace typecheck: passed. The default repository run was attempted. Repeated embedded PostgreSQL startup failures prevented local database coverage; it was stopped without claiming a full pass. Linux CI must supply that coverage. - Broad E2E support run: 4,793 passed, 23 failed, 2 skipped. Failures include existing stale image/Pi assertions and process/startup timeouts under host load. The affected tests pass separately. This is not a claim that the broad suite is green. - Upstream CI prerequisites: this branch is rebased on the merged #18230 repair. The earlier conflicting Turbo flags no longer apply. The shell-hook fix is also supplied by that upstream change. Linux shell-hook investigation: 19 focused tests and adapter TypeScript passed. The exact staged-config sequence reproduced CI's 500 in a pinned Node 24 Linux container. Node's default stdin socket at shell level zero selects Bash remote-shell startup and reads `.bashrc` instead of `BASH_ENV`. Ignored stdin and a nested shell each produce 1000. The fixture now ignores stdin; the production hook and 1000 assertion are unchanged. See [Bash startup rules](https://www.gnu.org/software/bash/manual/html_node/Bash-Startup-Files). - GitHub CI on the earlier head passed most suites but failed two browser tests (a fixture cleanup lock timeout and a fixture run staying queued) plus the shell-hook assertion. The lock-timeout case received one retry, which was cancelled by a later source push and does not establish recovery. These failures remain part of the verification record. - Real Cloud qualification: the private target adapter is reviewed and merged. These candidates must pass there before daily-plan promotion. Current source review: Greptile 5/5 and Paperclip Review 5/5 on `a9df1d6e8d880710fce39b87e689e07e1c8e6edc`, with zero unresolved review threads. The full [GitHub CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40974946081) passed on that exact head, including both required aggregate checks. ## Risks Shared helper changes affect classic callers. The independent ZIP oracle and visible delivery requirements remain in place. Stop requires native acknowledgement, terminal event evidence, resource cleanup, and no later original-turn activity. The managed local target still lacks paid-agent fixtures and reports these journeys as unsupported. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, terminal use, and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed to 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> |
||
|
github-actions[bot]andlockfile-bot
|
1843d27e09 |
chore(lockfile): refresh pnpm-lock.yaml (#18219)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip uses a dependency lock for reproducible builds. > - Dependency changes on master need matching lock entries. > - Paid eval reports also pin a reviewed offline correction. > - Reports must install before paid model work starts. > - This automated PR keeps the lock and report proof together. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Dependency manifests on master changed after the last committed lock refresh. **Expected behavior** Frozen installs must match those manifests. Eval reports must retain matching offline lock proof. **Steps to reproduce** Run a frozen install before and after this lock refresh. ## What Changed - Refresh the dependency lock from the manifests on master. - Include the matching offline report correction and hashes. ## Verification - Pinned pnpm resolution completed with lifecycle scripts disabled. - The report proof refresh accepted the reviewed committed baseline. - Required PR checks and reviews must pass before merge. ## Risks Dependency changes require review. Unknown report lock baselines remain blocked. This update changes no permissions or paid enable gates. ## Model Used None — generated by pnpm and the deterministic report-lock updater. ## Checklist - [x] Thinking path and problem description included - [x] Generated lock and matching report proof included - [ ] Required CI checks and reviews pass Co-authored-by: lockfile-bot <lockfile-bot@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
99d27fd5e7 |
feat(evals): add a metadata overview for the chat catalog (#18194)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is a control plane for AI agents that do work. > - Its evaluation reports separate recorded results from source coverage. > - A case without a main baseline measurement can still have a candidate run. > - A normal campaign card treats an expected execution without a result as missing evidence. > - Catalog planning data must not create those cards or change a recorded grade. > - This change adds a typed metadata view to the existing Evals dashboard. > - Readers can compare main outcomes, candidate execution, allowances and source review separately. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The existing Evals dashboard can show a campaign's retained results. It cannot show the full chat catalog as metadata without synthetic result entries. **Current behavior** An unused initial, an unknown allowance and a completed candidate run can all lack a main baseline result. Showing them as missing campaign artifacts hides these differences. **Proposed behavior** Add one validated metadata view in the existing renderer. Show one row per frozen scenario, separate execution and main outcome columns, filters, and the public request and expected outcome from static YAML. Keep normal campaign cards unchanged. **Reason and benefit** Readers can see which cases ran, which have no main measurement, and which still need preparation. Source review and candidate outcomes cannot add baseline pass credit. **Breaking changes** None to existing campaign inputs or outputs. The new metadata mode uses its own strict schema and requires a new private output directory. No matching open or closed PR or issue was found in the duplicate search. ## What Changed - Add a strict display-only catalog schema with closed enums and fixed catalog scope. - Validate the 244 row identities against static YAML without importing executable case callbacks. - Show main results, recorded execution, allowances and source review in separate columns. - Add search and filters, passing examples, qualification notes and expandable public test descriptions. - Add one dated immutable snapshot link in the existing shared report navigation. This does not change history data or update an already-published page. - Add a private metadata preview command to the existing dashboard owner. Keep existing campaign generation on its current path. - Keep allowance certainty independent of measurements and allow an optional later candidate outcome alongside a main outcome, without changing main counters. - Add focused pure, JSDOM and file-loader checks. Document the metadata command. ## Verification - The owning `catalog-overview.test.ts` Vitest suite passes all fourteen tests under the focused source configuration. The valid-main/unknown-allowance and main-fail/later-candidate-pass controls fail against the old renderer and pass with this repair. The never-run/unknown-allowance control fails against |
||
|
github-actions[bot]andlockfile-bot
|
4a6f6a65eb |
chore(lockfile): refresh pnpm-lock.yaml (#18185)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip uses a dependency lock for reproducible builds. > - Dependency changes on master need matching lock entries. > - Paid eval reports also pin a reviewed offline correction. > - Reports must install before paid model work starts. > - This automated PR keeps the lock and report proof together. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Dependency manifests on master changed after the last committed lock refresh. **Expected behavior** Frozen installs must match those manifests. Eval reports must retain matching offline lock proof. **Steps to reproduce** Run a frozen install before and after this lock refresh. ## What Changed - Refresh the dependency lock from the manifests on master. - Include the matching offline report correction and hashes. ## Verification - Pinned pnpm resolution completed with lifecycle scripts disabled. - The report proof refresh accepted the reviewed committed baseline. - Required PR checks and reviews must pass before merge. ## Risks Dependency changes require review. Unknown report lock baselines remain blocked. This update changes no permissions or paid enable gates. ## Model Used None — generated by pnpm and the deterministic report-lock updater. ## Checklist - [x] Thinking path and problem description included - [x] Generated lock and matching report proof included - [ ] Required CI checks and reviews pass Co-authored-by: lockfile-bot <lockfile-bot@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
cd0c86e5e1 |
fix(evals): support private evidence for the frozen chat catalog (#18170)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Product E2E tests need to retain evidence from both successful and failed work. > - Manual private runs use the existing protected AWS evidence route. > - Its fixed eight-case registry blocks other scenarios in the frozen chat catalog. > - Failed Playwright cells also produce static trace files that need exact owner and content checks. > - This pull request admits the fixed catalog, keeps eight cells per run, and retains the existing report identities. > - Exact source and run approval still controls each private operation. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #18134, #17888. **What happened?** The manual private route accepts only its first eight execution IDs. It rejects other IDs from the frozen 244-scenario chat catalog before a run can start. The dotted `area.case` report identity also fails the retained report parser. A failed Playwright cell can produce canonical trace assets that the private evidence owner does not yet recognize. **Expected behavior** The trusted route must recognize exactly the frozen 244 OpenCode/local execution IDs. Each original run must still select at most eight cells and have exact protected approval. The evidence owners must retain complete scanned originals from the actual pinned report producer. Unknown carriers and credential contamination must still fail closed. **Steps to reproduce** Use a known frozen chat ID outside the first eight with the current manual classifier. The classifier rejects it. Parse a dotted chat execution ID with the current report parser. The parser rejects it. Generate a synthetic failed Node-only Playwright test and pass its actual trace/report tree through the private evidence owners. This change includes the narrow parser repair from the existing open #17888. It does not merge or close that PR. The related source work was checked for overlap before this branch was created. ## What Changed - Replace the small private registry with the exact frozen 244 execution IDs. Preserve the two existing undotted standalone task IDs. - Keep the private run limit at eight through classification, approval rows, cell binding and transfer sessions. Preserve nonprivate selector behavior. - Bind private cell report assets to the actual installed pinned producer, selected cell, canonical path and exact bytes before the existing scans and archive checks. Pass that verified owner into both real launcher packaging calls. - Exclude installed build staging from the private evidence walk. Retain the real standard-file cap and reject unknown nested carriers. - Add the existing dotted chat report grammar. Preserve other report families and legacy task IDs. - Use the existing public announcement dismissal control in one external-link/upload E2E test so a real announcement cannot cover its composer button. Preserve the open menu and existing timeout. - Document source compatibility and operator gates. No workflow, product, dependency, lockfile, case callback, query, clock or budget changes. ## Verification - 132 distinct focused controls are closed. The current affected owner suite passes 39 controls under a nondefault temporary directory. The other 93 unchanged controls retain their previous passes. The initial registry, map-order and test-tooling failures remain recorded. - Two actual launcher call-expression controls fail on the prior source because canonical trace files are dropped. Both pass after the private-owner wiring. These controls do not claim full launcher lifecycle or actual E2E qualification. - Temporary paths use the real operating-system temporary directory, including the handoff check. - The controls check all 244 IDs through real private routing, cell binding and original-run approval. They reject unknown IDs, aliases, wrong profiles, traversal, private duplicates and excess private cells. - The controls preserve actual nonprivate 33-ID and duplicate selector behavior. - A real synthetic Node-only failed Playwright test produces the report and automatic trace. The control uses actual package, seal, archive, receipt and restored validation paths with mock AWS transport only. - Owning TypeScript `--noEmit` check passes. No local product server, browser, model, database, SDK build or evaluation was run. - Prior-head CI run 40906120388 failed one E2E test because the real announcement footer intercepted its Add to composer click. The other 28 tests in that shard passed. The narrow fixture uses the existing UI dismissal pattern. The added handler passes an isolated noEmit check against the real Playwright Page type. An additional strict check of the whole browser test fails on five unchanged shared-fixture type errors; checking that unchanged shared file alone gives identical diagnostics. The initial shell exit was misreported and corrected in the validation record. Browser verification is deferred to the next normal CI run; no local browser or server was started. - Repository-wide local build and test commands were not run because this is a scoped source change. Normal required PR checks will provide the repository CI result. ## Risks A registry entry is not proof that a target or feature is ready. A future target must use the exact matching private helper and producer contract, retain any stronger target scanners, and produce fresh source fingerprints. Existing running jobs keep their pinned workflow and target sources. All original attempt limits, declared inputs, private storage checks, fatal scanners and exact administrator-controlled run approval remain in force. The new cell report contract accepts only canonical assets from the actual pinned Playwright installation. Other assets and layouts still fail closed. No private evidence or generated report is included in this PR. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool use and code execution. The runtime does not expose a finer model deployment ID 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
b81b870732 |
Add QA smoke journeys and OpenCode run traces (#18098)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Product E2E journeys verify saved application behavior across deployments. > - Task creation and questions need reusable smoke selections and exact run attribution. > - Operators also need to inspect the OpenCode execution behind a measured question. > - Company observability does not currently support native OpenCode. > - This change adds the journeys and a bounded projection of normalized OpenCode run events. > - The projection follows the configured capture policy and retains the current run identity across warm reuse. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related foundation: #17262. Related alternative: #17989 exports metadata from OpenCode's native OTLP stream. This change uses normalized run events to support the existing content switches and per-run linkage. It does not forward the native stream. The two PRs overlap in launch registration and must be reconciled before both land. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Reusable Product E2E smoke selections and company observability for native OpenCode. **Current behavior** The journey catalog lacks reusable task creation and attached-agent question checks. Native OpenCode is marked unsupported for company observability, so a successful destination connection test does not prove that agent traces will appear. **Proposed behavior** Add explicit task-create and ask-question selections. Verify saved state and exact company, issue, agent, model, environment and successful run attribution. Export normalized OpenCode turns, tools and usage to the configured OTLP destination. Honor each capture switch and redact known secrets. **Reason and benefit** CI can run a small measured smoke selection, retain its screenshots and checks, and link results to traces belonging to the same run. **Breaking changes** Existing selectors remain unchanged. OpenCode export is opt-in through existing company settings. Legacy OpenCode stays unsupported. ## What Changed - Add reusable task creation and question journeys, configured-agent capability, owned-fixture checkpoints and strict evidence validation. - Add an OpenCode-owned projection of normalized run events. No provider SDK or raw payload schema enters heartbeat coordination. - Extend the private launch union and reserved environment allowlist for native OpenCode. With export disabled, no receiver request runs. - Keep destination headers in the parent wrapper and out of the actual provider child environment and configuration. - Bound each turn to 64 tool and 64 usage entries, 8 KiB per text field and a 1 MiB request. Use a three-second request deadline, four concurrent exports, and no retries or idle worker. - Pass the rotated runner authority to each proxy turn. A retained process no longer attributes later turns to its original launch run. - Update settings copy, observability documentation and capability maps. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed after the implementation changes. - Adapter launch/redaction: 9 tests passed. Projection and actual proxy: 12 tests passed before the review fix; the expanded projection suite passed all 12 cases after the fix. The proxy test exercises two runs in one process against a real local HTTP receiver and a fake provider. - Full OpenCode driver/projection suite: 72 passed, one existing response_wake test timed out at five seconds. A focused check then passed both existing omitted-continuation cases and the new trace export case. The timeout cause remains unconfirmed. - Runner package TypeScript and Rust `cargo check` passed. Map and UI token checks passed. - Prior journey validation: 273 tests across 12 files and the journey TypeScript check passed. - Broad local `pnpm test:run` encountered native-runtime integration failures with repeated embedded PostgreSQL initialization failures and was stopped. All 16 failing cases passed in an isolated run outside the filesystem sandbox (961 unrelated cases unselected). The broad local run is not a clean acceptance result. A later focused database-backed chat/heartbeat run passed all six selected observability cases, including native OpenCode launch and successful allocation (1,809 unrelated cases were unselected). - All CI gates passed for `21085f880d8babc9efeb22d0623db99613d33093`, including packaged-runner, clean-install, browser and build checks: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40884658995 . Greptile reviewed the same commit at 5/5 with no unresolved findings. - Verified OTLP JSON acceptance and indexing with an explicitly synthetic transport marker. No live OpenCode model trace or deployed smoke acceptance is claimed yet. ## Risks Export is best effort. Abrupt termination, recovered in-flight turns without a new submitted event, limits or receiver failure can lose traces. Export failure does not change task success. The projection represents observed normalized events, not raw native model spans or hidden reasoning. Known-secret redaction is not an OS isolation boundary. UI changes can break journey locators. Deployment adapters retain credential, ownership and cleanup responsibility. Both the controller and native runner bundle must be updated before live qualification. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, code execution and browser tools. The exact serving model ID and context size are not exposed to 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 (targeted suites; broad local limitation documented above) - [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
|
018c4c9c9b |
Retain approved manual E2E evidence in private history (#18134)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and their work. > - The manual AWS E2E workflow records browser and model evidence. > - Public repository Actions artifacts are not a restricted evidence store. > - Some chat evidence needs the existing private-history store. > - A target flag must not grant archive access or enable a public fallback. > - This pull request binds restricted runs to protected exact-source approval and retains their standard evidence with trusted transfer code. > - Operators can retain complete evidence without changing scanner verdicts or scenario outcomes. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Manual AWS E2E evidence retention for exact reviewed chat-feature selections. **Subsystem affected** The runner E2E manual workflow, standard evidence handoff and private-history transfer. **Current behavior** Manual cell and merged evidence use Actions artifacts. In a public repository, repository readers can download those files. Scheduled private history does not authorize a manual target to use its role. **Proposed behavior** Classify sensitive selections in the trusted workflow. Require one protected original-run approval. Verify existing private storage before target setup or model secrets. Retain scanned standard originals and final packaged results through a workflow-pinned runtime. Deny public artifact and history fallback on failure. **Reason and benefit** Preserve inspectable standard evidence in restricted storage without treating a private bucket as permission to retain credentials. **Additional context** Related source work is separate: #18067 changes paid runner routing, #18100 changes scoped input delivery, and #17888 changes report catalog parsing. This pull request does not include or revert those changes. ## What Changed - Add a trusted manual classification and exact run, attempt, workflow, target, selection and launcher approval contract. - Add a protected manual private job. Prepare a second workflow-pinned checkout and isolated publication dependencies before archive credentials. - Seal standard originals and final result bytes with exact inventories. Reject credential contamination, unscanned carriers and changed files. - Use existing immutable private-history archives and transfer receipts for cells and merged reports. Keep the existing bounds. - Use per-cell exact-key read sessions and a separate report writer. Check every inline policy against the 2,048-character STS limit. - Scan and seal fresh generated report logs and files with the actual report-step credential roots before transfer. - Require a positive nonprivate route for Actions uploads and public history. Private failures have no public fallback. Preserve normal catalog semantics for nonprivate selections with more than 32 IDs or duplicate IDs. - Authenticate generated-report fonts and every reserved trace-viewer static asset against the exact trusted producer path and bytes, including HTML and JavaScript. Keep standard cell evidence and unknown carriers closed. - Document the first eight supported IDs, deployment gates and the operator trust boundary. ## Verification - 57 new pure, actual-helper and actual-workflow-shell controls pass. - 50 affected existing workflow, routing, target and private-history controls pass. The final committed workflow security controls also pass. - Targeted helper/test and actual launcher noEmit checks pass. - `actionlint -shellcheck= -pyflakes= .github/workflows/runner-full-stack-e2e.yml` passes. - Parent `2f46336d7` required CI is green. The server 11/12 shard first failed on database cleanup/test timing and passed one bounded recheck with unchanged source. The original failure remains recorded. - The preserved docs-only parent `d721c170f` had 59 terminal, nonblocking checks and fresh Greptile 5/5. Three later review comments exposed a genuine static-report asset failure and nonprivate selector regression; their parent counterexamples remain recorded. - The reviewed parent passes 76 focused controls across nine files. The final dependency preflight successor passes all six affected controls, including two new actual `prepare` subprocess controls, and targeted helper/test noEmit. Unchanged suites were not repeated. A synthetic Node-only Playwright HTML/blob/JUnit report and the real dashboard renderer/brand stager pass the actual sealer, strict archive and immutable receipt path; only AWS transport is synthetic. No browser or product setup runs in that test. - Default cell fonts/SVGs, unknown report files, forged paths, altered static bytes, recomputed inventory tampering and registered credential matches remain rejected. Eligibility and remaining-byte checks run before body reads in both sealer and transfer validator; both independent parent read-order failures are preserved. - The pre-credential target comparison also binds the new generated-report asset helper byte for byte. A genuine tampered-dependency parent failure is preserved. - Six additional actual sealer/validator controls expose the standard-extension trace-owner bypass on the parent. All 34 affected controls pass on its correction, including the real producer/archive/receipt test; targeted noEmit passes. Ordinary dynamic report HTML outside the reserved trace directory is unchanged. - Final head `43683c4e0` passes both required gates, `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`, in normal CI run `40849916302` attempt 1. All 59 rollup checks/statuses are terminal and nonblocking (55 success, two neutral, two skipped). - Fresh exact-head Greptile is 5/5; automated review is terminal and all technical threads are resolved. Human CODEOWNER approval remains a separate gate. Earlier source, genuine counterexamples and CI history remain preserved. - Full local build and live E2E were not run. This task prohibits local SDK/native/server builds and paid or AWS operations. Normal pull request CI must pass before merge readiness. - No existing artifact bodies, archives, media or provider reasoning were inspected. Synthetic owned fixtures prove the privacy boundaries. ## Risks - Deployment still needs the existing private bucket, role and protected environments. Both environments need the exact original-run approval variable. - Targets need the compatible handoff protocol and a separately reviewed exact launcher digest. Existing target branches do not become ready automatically. - Complete duplicated originals and packaged evidence can exceed existing archive limits. Such a transfer fails; files are not silently removed. - Required evidence omissions remain fatal to PASS. Safe failed evidence is retained with an explicit missing list and incomplete required-evidence verdict. Credential contamination still blocks all original uploads. Restricted storage does not waive PNG, HTML, blob or scanner checks. - This is operator-approved source execution. Target processes can inherit the job's OIDC request environment and may re-assume a role. Inline session attenuation is not isolation from malicious approved source. - Operator authorization must bind the actual exact source and original run. A proven administrator-controlled record may supply it without an environment reviewer UI. No new approval UI or environment change is required by this PR. - Required repository CODEOWNER review is still pending. Commented reviews and review requests are not approvals. This PR stays open and unmerged. - This PR does not deploy infrastructure, change IAM, dispatch workflows, publish report payloads, change grades or transfer prior scenario passes. ## Model Used OpenAI `gpt-6.1-sol` in Codex. Used code execution, source analysis and tool calls. The host does not expose the context window size. Independent peer review used the same model family in a separate agent. ## 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> |
||
|
github-actions[bot]andlockfile-bot
|
31b927e301 |
chore(lockfile): refresh pnpm-lock.yaml (#18097)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start --> https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/211/changes/paperclip/211 <!-- entire-trail-link-end --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip uses a dependency lock for reproducible builds. > - Dependency changes on master need matching lock entries. > - Paid eval reports also pin a reviewed offline correction. > - Reports must install before paid model work starts. > - This automated PR keeps the lock and report proof together. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Dependency manifests on master changed after the last committed lock refresh. **Expected behavior** Frozen installs must match those manifests. Eval reports must retain matching offline lock proof. **Steps to reproduce** Run a frozen install before and after this lock refresh. ## What Changed - Refresh the dependency lock from the manifests on master. - Include the matching offline report correction and hashes. ## Verification - Pinned pnpm resolution completed with lifecycle scripts disabled. - The report proof refresh accepted the reviewed committed baseline. - Required PR checks and reviews must pass before merge. ## Risks Dependency changes require review. Unknown report lock baselines remain blocked. This update changes no permissions or paid enable gates. ## Model Used None — generated by pnpm and the deterministic report-lock updater. ## Checklist - [x] Thinking path and problem description included - [x] Generated lock and matching report proof included - [ ] Required CI checks and reviews pass Co-authored-by: lockfile-bot <lockfile-bot@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
github-actions[bot]andlockfile-bot
|
efd65c1125 |
chore(lockfile): refresh pnpm-lock.yaml (#18059)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start --> https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/189/changes/paperclip/189 <!-- entire-trail-link-end --> Auto-generated lockfile refresh after dependencies changed on master. This PR only updates pnpm-lock.yaml. Co-authored-by: lockfile-bot <lockfile-bot@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
287b04d72f |
fix(evals): keep report dependency proof with lockfile refresh (#18063)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start --> https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/192/changes/paperclip/192 <!-- entire-trail-link-end --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and runs paid Product E2E evaluations. > - Paid work needs a report that can install its trusted dependencies. > - The report uses a reviewed offline lock correction. > - New UI dependencies can make that correction stale while its lock hash still matches. > - The lockfile bot must refresh the correction with its lock changes. > - This PR also checks manifest consistency offline before model admission. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Current master declares new CodeMirror and YAML UI dependencies. Its committed lock omits those UI importer entries. The existing report correction accepts that lock, but a frozen install then fails with `ERR_PNPM_OUTDATED_LOCKFILE`. This can waste completed paid work before the report fails. Refs #18059. That bot PR supplies the matching lock. This PR keeps the root lock bot-owned and supplies its exact offline report correction. The correction changes 21 importer lines and leaves all package records unchanged. **Expected behavior** The existing bot includes matching report proof in its dependency PR. Paid authorization rejects stale manifests before model work. Report installation still accepts only reviewed hashes and applies no registry resolution. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run a frozen pnpm 9.15.4 install on master at `7f10cc058568e3c1ac133cf24f3b4000cbdfca0e`. 2. Observe the missing UI importer entries. 3. Apply the reviewed correction in this PR. The frozen install passes. ## What Changed - Add an explicit refresh mode that derives the offline patch and hashes from a known committed lock and the bot's resolved lock. - Keep the existing unknown-lock, patch hash and output hash guards. - Include the proof files in the existing lockfile bot PR. New bot PRs use complete descriptions; existing descriptions stay intact. - Validate the frozen lock against current manifests offline before paid admission, using the existing pinned pnpm version. - Refresh the current correction and document this process. The root lockfile is not committed here. ## Verification - 24 focused report-lock and workflow-security tests pass. They cover offline replay, tampered input/patch/output rejection, real Git refresh, unknown-base refusal and unchanged proof. - A full frozen install passes after the reviewed correction, with lifecycle scripts disabled. - A fresh source archive validates offline with an empty package store. - A deliberate manifest change fails that same offline check with `ERR_PNPM_OUTDATED_LOCKFILE`. - Both workflow files parse as YAML. All 95 shell steps pass Bash syntax checks. - `git diff --check` passes. These checks make no model requests. - Full repository checks and fresh reviews must pass on the final PR head before merge. ## Risks - Dependency changes must still pass review. Refresh refuses an unknown committed baseline. - The bot now commits two additional proof files. Its write permissions and target branch stay unchanged. Existing PR descriptions are preserved. - The paid authorization job adds an offline manifest check. It runs no package lifecycle scripts. - No budget, provider credential, environment permission, schedule or paid enable gate changes. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning and code execution tools. The exact serving variant and context window 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 - [ ] 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
7f10cc0585 |
feat(evals): show full task conversations in E2E reports (#18055)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Product E2E tests verify tasks through the application and retain reports. > - A final screenshot cannot show the complete task conversation. > - Debugging a result requires the earlier requests, replies, and answers. > - This pull request captures task conversations before fixture cleanup and adds them to Test details. > - Reviewers can read each task thread without a running test instance. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The task evidence shown in Product E2E campaign reports. **Current behavior** Most task results show screenshots and checks. Screenshots show the final visible state. They omit earlier messages and long replies. Only the first-task suite has a conversation view. **Proposed behavior** Every standard runner attempt captures the saved conversation before cleanup. Test details show full task messages, requests, answers, and native agent progress. Related tasks have separate threads. Failed attempts also retain available history. Partial captures are labeled. **Reason and benefit** Readers can debug a task by reading its conversation. They do not need to reconstruct it from a screenshot or private run logs. GitHub searches found no duplicate PR or issue for this change. This is an improvement to test reporting and does not overlap a planned core feature in ROADMAP.md. **Breaking changes** None. The result adds an optional `taskChat` field. Old results still render. A result without a task has no chat section. Older reports need retained conversation evidence before they can gain this view. ## What Changed - Capture comments through all pages, task briefs, visible request copy, recorded answers, and native progress before fixture cleanup. - Include delegated tasks and standing chats. Preserve available history when a read fails. Report capture limits explicitly. - Add a closed, credential-redacted conversation format to normalized results. Exclude reasoning, raw tool payloads, and provider session metadata. - Render task conversations inside Test details. Retain them through report aggregation and dashboard regeneration. - Add capture, publication-format, regeneration, and browser tests. Update the evidence and security contracts. ## Verification - Report tests: `node node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts task-chat.test.ts first-task-report.test.ts report.test.ts history.test.ts` — 103 tests passed after review fixes. - Browser tests: `node node_modules/@playwright/test/cli.js test --config tests/runner-e2e/report-playwright.config.ts` — 6 tests passed after rebase. - Targeted TypeScript check of the new capture, renderer, validator, report, and browser-test files passed. - Tests cover a 1,105-message thread, a long final reply, event pagination, partial capture, company access, credential redaction, HTML escaping, and report regeneration. - Review regressions reproduced two failures before repair: the task-run API uses `runId`, and item reviews save verdicts in `result.items`. Capture now follows these contracts. Both regression tests pass. - Greptile reviewed commit `471236438e03e54cc4ad85de6653adf45835063c` at 5/5 with no new findings. The separate Paperclip review execution stopped without an assessment and ended neutral. Its cause is not established; this is not a completed Paperclip assessment. - Execution discovery passed for `core-compatibility.runner-codex.local.message-marker`. No paid provider run was started. - Full local commands were attempted. `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` stop because the DB package cannot find `tsx`. `pnpm test:run` stops because the general-server lane cannot find `vitest`. These package dependency links are absent in this checkout. - [Remote CI on the final commit](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40728689517) passed: typecheck and release registry, all general and serialized test shards, Runner static/Rust/Vitest checks, build, canary dry run, all eight browser E2E shards, and final verification. Security and contributor checks also passed. - Open a new task-based result and expand **Test details**. Read **Task chat** and expand each related task thread. Results without tasks keep their existing layout. ## Risks - Published reports now include fixture conversation text. Capture retains only reviewed display fields and redacts credentials. Fixture authors must keep this text suitable for public reports. - Long threads increase report size. Collection has a 30-second request-admission budget and page limits. It labels incomplete evidence and does not change the workflow grade. - Old reports cannot recover conversation text from screenshots. New attempts must retain the evidence. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6). The exact serving snapshot and context-window size are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, code execution, repository tools, and browser 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d8bd8fe9fb |
feat(evals): browse E2E suites across targets and models (#18027)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - E2E tests show whether people can complete real app and agent journeys. > - Operators need to choose a suite and inspect its evidence across deployments and models. > - The history page listed campaigns without a suite browser or clear coverage filters. > - QA smoke also appeared separate from the other retained E2E measurements. > - This pull request puts suites, deployment targets, and named selections in one history browser. > - The benefit is that a passing subset stays distinct from a full suite run, with direct links to evidence. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #18009 added clear per-test details and links to the tested application. This PR extends the shared E2E history browser. **What happened?** The public directory called full app testing “Product E2E Evals” and made users choose campaigns before they could find a suite. The history list could not filter independently by tested app, agent execution, model, or run selection. A recent passing subset could be mistaken for a full suite result. **Expected behavior** Browse current and retained suites in one E2E category. Keep QA smoke in normal campaign history. Show the latest matching run and latest full suite run. Preserve the recorded definition and denominator when filters change. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open the E2E history directory. 2. Find a suite, then compare a narrow passing run with a full run across execution environments and models. 3. Find the QA smoke measurement and open its retained screenshots. **Paperclip version or commit** The previous report UI was at `8279c99008`. This branch is rebased on current master. **Deployment mode** Static E2E history and campaign reports generated from retained measurements. ## What Changed - Call full-product testing “E2E tests.” Keep Runner protocol evals separate because they use a mock control plane. - Add a searchable suite sidebar that includes current suites and suites found only in retained history. - Add correlated suite, coverage, deployment target, execution, provider, model, profile, runtime, result, date, and named-selection filters. Keep filters in the URL for reload and back navigation. Sidebar suite links clear other filters; the Suite dropdown keeps deliberate intersections. Incompatible suite/preset URLs explain the empty selection and link to the suite runs. - Show latest matching and latest full run links. Distinguish full, subset, unfinished, and unknown coverage from the recorded suite definition and execution counts. Keep failed full runs visible. - Retain the tested application URL and runtime mode in new history records. Older records show “Not recorded.” Browser-only journeys do not gain an inferred agent or model. - Add an index-only refresh command that can import a reviewed public campaign once. It rejects private Cloud bundles and does not replace retained campaigns or upload evidence. - Keep existing report URLs, test IDs, commands, and measurement timestamps stable. Campaign links carry suite/profile/environment; target/model/provider/runtime remain history-level filters. - Add unit and synthetic browser regressions, including mobile navigation, long source refs, sidebar filter reset, and empty-selection repair. Inset dropdown carets in the shared report styles. Document direct Node entry points without adding package.json shortcuts. - Add a prominent Reset all filters button, blue active-filter borders and tint, and visible active counts for the main and advanced filters. Reset clears all 13 history filters, sidebar search, URL state, and the attention view. Campaign-page filters use the same active styling. ## Verification - Post-rebase focused Vitest: 127 tests passed across 10 files. The latest follow-up selection passed 100 tests across 9 files. E2E support TypeScript passed after both changes. - The synthetic Chromium journey covers full and subset coverage, unfinished selections, correlated filters, browser-only QA selection, URL/back/reload, and desktop and touch navigation. The expanded journey verifies 13 active history fields, the collapsed advanced-filter count, reset of every field and sidebar search, and active border color changes that revert after reset. It makes zero provider calls. - Hub Python tests: 7 passed. The browser harness also exits promptly when Chromium is unavailable; its HTTP server closes on launch failure. - Real history verification covered 419 campaigns and 59 suites. All 418 previous campaign records remained deeply equal after importing the reviewed QA campaign. Publication used the authoritative history ETag. Only mutable index/history/pointer files were written; immutable campaign bundles stayed unchanged. - A live browser walkthrough passed from the two-family eval hub through QA smoke, Basic app journeys, target filtering, the retained report, screenshot gallery, history, and the logo link. The QA URL was clickable and the image loaded. No browser JavaScript errors occurred. The original QA normalized results and all three PNG hashes remained unchanged. - Live [E2E history](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/?view=history), [core compatibility suite](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/?view=history&suite=core-compatibility), and [QA smoke runs](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/?view=history&preset=qa-smoke). - The live follow-up verified the incompatible Stock harness/QA-smoke URL, the repair link to 21 Stock harness campaigns, and sidebar navigation that clears preset/model filters. Dropdown carets were inspected in dark, light, and mobile views. No JavaScript errors occurred. - The final live follow-up verified reset of history controls, URL state, sidebar search, and the attention view, plus reload/back restoration and mobile touch reset. Active filter borders and tint were inspected in dark and light views. Campaign-page reset restored all three QA cases. All 419 history records and original QA measurement/evidence hashes stayed unchanged. - Full repository typecheck, test, build, and E2E CI gates passed on final head `1334cb79a5`. Both enforced aggregates, `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`, completed successfully. Fresh Greptile review scored that exact head 5/5 with no unresolved review threads. ## Risks - Historical metadata can be missing. Unknown targets and runtime details stay explicit instead of being inferred from a worker environment. - Full suite coverage follows the saved definition and selection. Filtering to one model does not redefine that denominator. The latest full-run shortcut can cross coverage selections and says so in its detail text. - This changes shared report presentation. It adds no application runtime or database changes. The browser harness and index refresh do not invoke models. - Public history publication must keep its existing conditional-write and retained-evidence boundaries. Private bundles, raw logs, credentials, and screenshots are not part of this PR. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, code execution, and browser tools. The exact backend model 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8fe5d5defc |
fix(evals): honor the shared feedback read deadline (#18026)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Product E2E evaluations must retain feedback from each paid attempt. > - The collector reads saved feedback and native tool events before teardown. > - A five-second request limit can stop a valid read before the shared read deadline. > - This pull request gives event reads the remaining shared read budget. > - The total deadline and reserved checkpoint time stay the same. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A paid Ask attempt passed the product grade but retained partial feedback invocation coverage. The collector recorded `events_read_failed`. Its event endpoint later returned HTTP 200. The retained timing is consistent with a request that exceeded the five-second request limit. This change fixes that deterministic failure path; it does not prove the cause of every historical partial read. **Expected behavior** A valid read that takes eight seconds can complete within the 30-second collection deadline. A stalled read must still time out and leave time to save the available feedback. No read or paid attempt is retried. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Return a terminal native run and an empty saved-feedback list. 2. Make the event read take eight seconds and respect the supplied request timeout. 3. Run `collectAttemptFeedback` with a 30-second deadline. 4. Before this fix, the read times out after five seconds and invocation coverage stays partial. Related accounting and reporting work: Refs #18010. ## What Changed - Use the remaining shared read budget for event API requests. Keep the five-second cap for other reads. - Add regressions for an eight-second event response, a stalled event response that preserves saved feedback, and a stalled early feedback read that still permits the event scan. - Document the read budget, reserved persistence time, and no-retry behavior. ## Verification - Red: the initial two regression tests fail before the fix. The other 42 feedback tests pass. The early-read starvation review regression then fails against the first implementation (44 pass), and passes after narrowing the change. - Green: 58 tests pass across feedback collection, interrupted recovery, process shutdown, and scheduled finalization. - Full Product support run: 4,609 pass, three skip, and the retained embedded PostgreSQL bootstrap test fails on this host. The log remains available. This is not a full local pass. - Local Product typecheck fails on installed workspace export mismatches outside the changed files. Hosted CI must check the exact commit with clean dependencies. No local full repository build pass is claimed. - Original paid grades, partial feedback receipts, and accounting journals remain unchanged. This repair makes zero provider calls. ## Risks - A stalled event read can consume the remaining read budget. Other endpoints keep their five-second cap. The shared deadline still reserves up to five seconds for the final checkpoint. - A slow event page can leave later runs uninspected. Those runs remain partial or unavailable. The change does not treat missing evidence as success. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning and code execution tools. The exact serving variant and context window 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 - [ ] 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8279c99008 |
fix(evals): clarify report details and link tested applications (#18009)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Product E2E reports help operators inspect real application journeys. > - A worker environment does not identify the application that a journey tested. > - Reports hid that URL and gave missing diagnostics too much space. > - Standalone reports also sent the logo link to a missing parent page. > - This pull request shows the recorded target and checks in the shared report. > - The benefit is a clear report with useful links and inspectable diagnostics. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A standalone Product E2E report had no application link in test details or the screenshot gallery. Its details showed several empty diagnostic sections before useful information. The logo could resolve to the page host root and return 404. Campaign notes added outside the report shell could overlap the fixed sidebar. **Expected behavior** Show the recorded application URL beside each test and screenshot. Put recorded checks before optional diagnostics. Keep campaign context inside the shared layout. Link the logo to the evaluations directory. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Render a retained campaign at a standalone page path without a history index. 2. Open a test with screenshot evidence and missing startup timing. 3. Inspect test details and gallery information, then click the report logo. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced in the report renderer at `39e811c9c5`. This branch applies the fix to current master. **Deployment mode** Static Product E2E HTML report generated from retained normalized results. ## What Changed - Add optional recorded `targetUrl` metadata and resolve existing Product E2E and provider-connection targets. Only HTTP and HTTPS links without embedded credentials are shown. - Show the target URL in test details and screenshot gallery information. - Put recorded checks and execution facts first. Keep raw usage, timing, and startup details under Diagnostics. Preserve missing metadata as unknown. - Keep campaign titles, descriptions, notes, and evidence links inside the shared report layout during retained-evidence regeneration. - Fix standalone navigation and let the brand lockup wrap at narrow sidebar widths. - Match report profiles by suite and recorded provider/model before falling back to an inferred profile. - Add report regressions and document the retained metadata contract. ## Verification - Focused report tests: 86 passed across 8 files on the isolated branch. Command: `node node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts report-target.test.ts report-navigation.test.ts report-catalog.test.ts first-task-report.test.ts report.test.ts dashboard-regenerate.test.ts`. - Browser verification covered dark desktop widths 1440 and 1000, light intermediate width 780, and dark mobile width 390. It covered the drawer, URL links, gallery keyboard navigation, focus return, and the logo destination. - The published retained report keeps all 3 original passing cases and 7 recorded checks. Its campaign and screenshot bytes remain unchanged. This presentation refresh made zero provider calls. - Full `pnpm build`, `pnpm -r typecheck`, and the eval TypeScript check passed after rebuilding the reused package dependencies. The first typecheck attempt had stale local dependency builds; those errors are resolved. - The local `pnpm test:run` attempt hit repeated embedded PostgreSQL bootstrap failures in server suites. I stopped that attempt and retained its log. It is not counted as a passing check. Current-head CI remains the full test gate. - Review follow-ups add provider/model and cross-suite profile regressions. Malformed campaign presentation metadata is rejected before any report or retained-result writes; ten malformed input cases verify that retained results stay unchanged. ## Risks - This changes presentation across Product E2E reports. Historical reports without a target show “Not recorded” rather than an inferred URL. - Unknown startup reuse data remains in raw metadata but no longer creates an empty table. - Standalone logo links open the shared public evaluations directory. Campaign history links still use a matching history index when present. - No application runtime, database, or measurement verdict changes are included. Private QA configuration and raw campaign evidence stay outside this PR. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, code execution, and browser tools. The exact backend model 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 - [ ] 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
|
3bd0d81c7b |
fix(e2e): follow proven workspace deferrals during onboarding (#18008)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Product E2E journeys verify the user outcome through the browser and scoped APIs. > - An onboarding child can wait while its parent owns their shared workspace. > - The server records that no provider work started and schedules a durable replacement. > - The journey rejected that expected wait, and feedback counted it as unknown legacy execution. > - This pull request follows the exact replacement and records the distinct no-provider evidence. > - The child must still finish through native execution and produce the independently checked download. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17940. **What happened?** The fresh-workspace journey failed with `onboarding_first_task_failed` when a child encountered shared-workspace contention. The cancelled admission had an explicit `workspace_wait` receipt with `providerWorkStarted: false`. Its linked replacement was still scheduled. The runtime had not been selected. The default `legacy` value did not represent a provider execution. **Expected behavior** Keep both rows and their run-limit cost. Follow only the unique replacement for the same company, agent, and issue. A pending replacement must not pass. Real failures and contradictory execution evidence must still fail. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a native onboarding parent and accept its child-task proposal. 2. Observe the child admission while the parent still holds their workspace. 3. Present the server's no-provider cancellation and its durable scheduled replacement to the journey and feedback collectors. ## What Changed - Add a shared predicate for the explicit no-provider workspace-deferral receipt. Reject runtime, process, output, usage, and cost evidence that contradicts it. - Follow exact, unique retry lineage during onboarding. Wait for active or scheduled replacements without repeating browser actions. Preserve the campaign deadline, run cap, native artifact attribution, and download oracle. - Retain per-run feedback inspection classifications: `native_events`, `provider_not_started`, or `incomplete`. Require exhaustive event reads. Keep pending work and uncertain execution partial. - Add causal regressions and document the evidence contract. Historical failed attempts keep their original grades. ## Verification - Red: the new journey regression failed with the observed `onboarding_first_task_failed` before the repair. The new feedback cases also failed before the repair. - Green: 70 journey tests and 74 feedback-family tests passed. The final affected journey/feedback gate passed 275 tests plus 137 Node checks. Five retry-lane reset cases failed before the review correction and passed after it. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck` passed after the retry-counter correction. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed before the final rebase. - The full local `pnpm test:run` and harness unit gate encountered embedded PostgreSQL startup failures. The harness gate passed 4,574 tests and failed its database-startup test. The final focused journey/feedback gate and all 137 Node checks passed. CI will provide independent full-suite results before merge. - Current-head CI passed 55 checks; two checks skipped and one was neutral. Greptile is 5/5, with zero unresolved review threads. - Live Cloud verification will use the reviewed harness and Operations revisions. This PR does not claim that a fresh Cloud campaign has passed. ## Risks A broad cancellation exemption could hide real failures. The exemption requires the server's explicit receipt, unresolved runtime selection, no contradictory execution evidence, and exact durable lineage. Missing successors remain pending until the existing deadline. A successful native child and valid downloaded bytes remain required. No server behavior, approval policy, or budget policy changes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, `gpt-6.1-sol`, with reasoning, source inspection, tool use, and code execution. The host does not expose its configured 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
|
e7ea2e2961 |
fix(evals): export grades for expanded qualification batches (#18010)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Product E2E campaigns retain each attempt and its independent grades. > - Braintrust receives product and cleanup grades for each retained attempt. > - A six-case qualification produces twelve scores. The export allowed only eight. > - Experiment creation succeeded, but grade insertion stopped before dispatch. > - This fix allows fourteen scores so the six- and seven-case batches retain every result. > - Operators can inspect failed and successful grades without running an agent again. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #17044 **What happened?** A retained six-case Product E2E campaign created its Braintrust experiment, then failed with `Experiment ingestion allowance exhausted`. Its twelve deterministic scores exceeded the eight-score cap. No insert request was sent. Agent results and model accounting remained saved. **Expected behavior** The bounded qualification batches must export both grades for every selected attempt. Failed grades must remain visible. **Steps to reproduce** Create an experiment through `openExperimentIngestion`. Insert six or seven events with `product_pass` and `cleanup_pass` scores. The old limit rejects the insert before it reaches the transport. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on master `cff331f6ca0a652b5e41641c68dfa5fa584c22ae`. **Deployment mode** Local Docker controller built from source. The failure is in the shared Product export path. ## What Changed - Raise the finite experiment score cap from eight to fourteen. Keep the three-request, 4 MiB and 60-second limits. - Add regressions for the six- and seven-case batches. Keep the failed product grade in each test batch. - Verify that the receipt collector accepts the old eight-score policy and the new fourteen-score policy. It rejects a fifteen-score policy. - Document the seven-attempt export ceiling. This change does not add agent calls or automatic retries. ## Verification - Before the fix: both new batch regressions failed with `Experiment ingestion allowance exhausted`. - After the fix: 67 tests pass across experiment ingestion, ingestion accounting, experiment projection and scheduled finalization. - Command: `node node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts tests/runner-e2e/experiment-ingestion.test.ts tests/runner-e2e/ingestion-usage.test.ts tests/runner-e2e/scheduled-finalization.test.ts tests/runner-e2e/braintrust-experiment.test.ts --configLoader runner --cache=false`. - `git diff --check` passes. All 58 current-head checks are acceptable, including typecheck, build and tests. Both reviews are 5/5, with no unresolved threads. - Live agent attempts will not be repeated to verify this reporting fix. Recovery uses the saved results and a separate bounded ingestion receipt. ## Risks - New exports can submit at most six more deterministic scores per experiment. These are saved grades, not model judge calls. - Larger campaigns still fail closed. Existing receipt files keep their original policies and traffic counts. - This fix does not resolve the plan-lifecycle behavior failures observed in the qualification. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, tool use and code execution. The exact serving variant 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> |