mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-30 05:16:50 +01:00
98795465ee64720aa283addfe9e956c246cf4a10
5
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
c1f6c3310a |
fix(runner): repair catalog runtime and grading boundaries (#13676)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages tasks across persistent agent sessions. > - The full Runner E2E catalog exposed failures in session restoration, tool validation, and test controls. > - These failures prevented valid work from resuming or made a valid interaction fail the test. > - Invalid completion reports also reached finalization before the provider received useful feedback. > - This pull request repairs those boundaries without changing production prompts or approval policy. > - Focused regressions and fresh paid cases verify each fix. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Follow-up to #13655. Stacked on the trusted worker prerequisite fix in #13674. **What happened?** Read-only skill uploads failed in resumed Daytona sandboxes. Invalid criterion IDs escaped tool validation. A progress event could park a run before its tool response settled. Partial question forms hid required answers. Two test assumptions rejected valid plan keys or failed to navigate an optional question page. **What did you expect to happen?** Resume identical skill bundles, give repairable feedback for malformed completion calls, preserve in-flight tool responses, show all required questions, and test the rendered workflow accurately. **Steps to reproduce** Inspect the failed cases in https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35417932353. Fresh campaigns: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35444497313 and https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35445327618. The later backup cleanup is tested in https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35446477285. Combined report: https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-e2e-operational-35444497313/investigation.html. ## What Changed - Compare immutable archives before reusing read-only Daytona bundles. Reject corrupted content and preserve unrelated files. - Validate exact criterion IDs before accepting completion. OpenCode returns a tool error instead of emitting a result that terminates runnerd. - Complete the activity item for rejected OpenCode calls. - Remove retired read-only harness backups without altering live files or following symlinks. A fresh paid rerun exposed this later checkpoint-cleanup failure. - Exclude progress messages from the governed-wait completion boundary. - Reject newly created question forms that omit questions or contradict their stored answer semantics. Keep historical rows readable. - Navigate all rendered question pages and recognize revision-bound descriptive plan keys in the continuation suite. ## Verification - Harness unit suite: 383 tests pass. Harness typecheck passes. - Native session executor and status corpus: 381 tests pass. - Shared question and interaction-service tests: 42 pass; native question bridge and executor: 360 pass. Daytona sync: 21 pass, including foreign-owner archives and corrupted immutable content. - OpenCode driver: 29 tests pass, including wrong, missing, and duplicate criterion IDs followed by a valid retry. - Repository typecheck and build pass. The later OpenCode activity fix also passes its package build. - The latest commit passes all 52 PR checks and Greptile 5/5. The backup-cleanup fix also passes 351 related local tests and server typecheck. Local full-suite coverage completed across runs. adapter-auth-signal-routes and pipelines-routes encountered transient socket resets; both pass on retry, and all remaining 24 serialized files pass. Paid reruns are complete: 27 of 29 unique cases pass using the latest recording per case. Both Daytona controller-restart cases still fail with runner_state_identity_mismatch; the report describes this remaining runtime issue. Eight affected cells need #13674 on master before their rerun. ## Risks Creation rejects inconsistent dual question representations but does not change historical records. Immutable bundle comparison must verify bytes before skipping extraction. Completion feedback must use the contract bound to the current run. Durable suspension and approval checks remain enforced. Production prompts are unchanged. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex, with repository inspection, code editing, and test execution. The exact API 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
|
43acbcc398 |
fix(runner): preserve sessions and complete question and approval continuations (#13655)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The native runner connects task state to provider sessions. > - Follow-up turns must retain provider memory and carry new user direction. > - Lost session IDs caused repeated context and extra input tokens. > - Native question answers and approval races could leave valid work blocked. > - This pull request repairs those paths and adds regression coverage. > - Agents can continue accepted work without repeating the conversation or losing the user's answer. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13574. That merged PR shortened continuation prompts and moved question instructions into tool documentation. This change preserves sessions and fixes failures exposed by broader testing. Related runtime work: #13408 and #13410. **What happened?** Native follow-up turns could lose the provider session ID. Completion guidance could replace the original task with its latest comment. Claude native questions could remain pending after the user answered. Approval during a running tool call could suspend the run before the tool response arrived. Onboarding and chat handoff instructions also caused repeated planning or missing plan documents. **Expected behavior** Reuse a valid provider session. Send only new events when that session already has the history. Preserve the task requirements and apply later user direction. Store the question answer and deliver it to the waiting run. Finish governed tool responses before suspending. Execute the accepted plan without asking for the same approval again. **Steps to reproduce** Run the continuation, local-session-integrity, first-task, and agent-chat suites with native Codex and Claude. Include provider-question-bridge, accept-while-running, and plan-handoff. **Paperclip version or commit** This branch is based on master |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
84fe89906d |
fix: complete native agent review handoffs (#13581)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Native execution uses durable runs, issue locks, wake requests, and typed tool authority > - A child can finish with a native agent review request while its original assignee stays responsible for the work > - The reviewer then needs a bounded execution path that can inspect the child, record one decision, and finish safely > - Before this change, assignee-only gates rejected the reviewer or left the parent waiting after the child review ended > - This pull request adds typed reviewer admission, scoped reviewer tools, durable wake and recovery handling, and parent continuation evidence > - The benefit is that native review handoffs complete without changing child ownership or granting broad mutation access ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #13314 Refs: #13574 **What happened?** A native child run could report `needs_review` for an agent reviewer. The reviewer wake then failed assignee and execution-lock checks. The child remained in review and the parent remained waiting. **Expected behavior** The named reviewer should receive one durable wake. The reviewer should inspect the child and resolve the exact review card. The child assignee should stay unchanged. The parent should receive the recorded review outcome after the child reaches its terminal state. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run a native task with a different named agent reviewer. 2. Keep the child assigned to its original worker. 3. Let the worker finish with a native completion review request. 4. Start the durable reviewer wake. 5. Resolve the review and finish the reviewer run. 6. Observe the child and parent state. **Paperclip version or commit** Base: `e926b1301`. PR head: `b31ad9ab8`. Live reviewer verification source: `eea171aae`. **Deployment mode** Built from source. **Installation method** Built from source (pnpm build). **Agent adapter(s) involved** Not adapter-specific (core bug). **Access context** Both. **Database mode** Embedded PostgreSQL in the isolated live test fixtures. ## What Changed - Add server-validated native review assignment facts. - Admit only the exact company, issue, source run, decision, revision, addressee, and resolver policy. - Give reviewer runs a narrow set of Paperclip read and resolve tools. File and shell access follow the configured agent and environment policy, so reviewers can run tests. - Separate server-owned reviewer instructions from untrusted persisted review data. Escape the data boundary; retain server-enforced authorization. - Keep the child assignee unchanged. Atomically claim the reviewer run, wake request, and issue execution lock. A competing lock prevents provider startup. - Require the exact running reviewer session and current issue lock to resolve its assigned card. Reject missing, unrelated, or terminal reviewer runs. - Add durable reviewer wake, lock, stale-card, and abandoned-run recovery handling. - Prevent duplicate native wake dispatches during deferred admission and recovery. - Carry accepted or rejected child review outcomes into parent task context and continuation evidence. - Add focused server, runner, and native protocol coverage. - Preserve upstream continuation rules. Add child review decisions as separate evidence, while keeping real human answers in their own field. - Return actionable completion validation feedback to both providers. Permit a corrected completion after rejection. Keep strict terminal acknowledgment validation. - Apply exclusive shared-workspace locks to sandbox environments. Local and SSH folders can run concurrently, including when old settings request serialization. - Repair test timing, native event parsing, and the review artifact assertion. Allow a valid reject, correct, and accept review sequence. Check the accepted card against its reviewer run and decision. Keep polling within the existing deadline when review acceptance precedes the parent wake projection; report a specific missing-continuation error at timeout. - Apply the ACPX pending-call limit to reserved finish/block calls, with capacity-release and cancellation tests. ## Verification - `pnpm build`: passed on `eea171aae`. - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed on `eea171aae`. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit`: 359 tests passed in 30 files on `b31ad9ab8`; runner E2E typecheck also passed. - `pnpm check:token-gates`: passed. - Focused DB review, reviewer authority, and prompt-boundary checks: 31 tests passed. They cover invalid reviewer runs, competing locks, atomic admission, duplicate claims, and valid resolution. - Heartbeat, workspace, and recovery checks: 30 tests passed. - ACPX sidecar suite: 27 tests passed. Moving the capacity guard back below reserved handling makes both new regression cases fail. - Four focused live continuation checks passed on their first attempt at `f15f55e0a`: answer updates scope (6/6 each on Codex and Claude) and question tool guidance (12/12 each). These cases do not use the reviewer prompt path changed afterward. - Fresh Codex and Claude review-handoff checks passed all 29 native checks each on their first attempt at `eea171aae`. Both runs received the expected fixed prompt and completed cleanup. Only the six selected live flows were tested; no full paid provider catalog run. - The final commit only extracts the existing test-harness timeout diagnostic into a shared helper and adds positive and negative coverage. Removing the accepted-review guard makes two regression assertions fail; restoring it passes all six timeout tests. Production runtime code, prompts, deadlines, and grading criteria are unchanged by this final commit. - Deadline regressions: a valid continuation delayed 20 seconds succeeds within its 30-second unit-test deadline; an absent wake returns a specific candidate-failure diagnostic at that same deadline. Both assertions failed before the fix. Production E2E deadlines remain unchanged. - Historical native failures remain recorded: Docker availability failures; a valid reject/correct/accept sequence that the first-card grader misread; and a test that rejected the gap between accepted child review and parent wake projection. No failed result was regraded. The latest tests use a protected reference to the pinned Docker image and the unchanged artifact oracle and time limits. - Full repository verification runs in GitHub CI. Local verification uses the focused suites above, full build, and full typecheck. An unchanged Codex shutdown timing test failed once in CI, passed in isolation, and its full shard passed on the final commit without changes to that test or its causal code path. The original failure is retained in the verification record. Greptile reviewed `b31ad9ab8` at 5/5 with no outstanding actionable findings. All review threads are resolved. All current-head CI gates passed, including the isolated native runner Docker build (55 successful checks; two skipped by the workflow). ## Risks - Reviewer admission depends on exact persisted decision and interaction bindings. A stale or changed card is rejected. - Paperclip control-plane tools are limited to inspection and review resolution. This is not a filesystem permission boundary; provider file and shell access retain the configured policy. - Deferred wake recovery changes dispatch receipt coalescing. A scheduler regression could delay a continuation if the receipt state is wrong. - Parent review outcomes are evidence for the model. They do not grant tool authority or change issue ownership. - This change does not address legacy lease-hold handoff behavior. > Roadmap review: native execution, review gates, and durable recovery are existing roadmap capabilities. This PR completes a narrow reliability path for those capabilities. ## Model Used OpenAI `gpt-6-astra` with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. OpenAI `gpt-5.6-luna` assisted with bounded implementation, review, and journal work. Context window size is not exposed by this session. Live test subjects use `gpt-5.6-sol` and `claude-sonnet-5`; they are not the PR authors. ## 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
|
f2c5e54dca |
fix(runner): preserve handoff work and publish requested files (#13355)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and their tasks. > - A task keeps its instructions, progress, and files when its assigned agent changes. > - The replacement runner lost the interrupted run's context and could overwrite an existing draft. > - A saved message also stayed attached to the former agent and could reopen the task after the replacement finished. > - File tasks could report Done with only a local path that the user could not open. > - This pull request transfers handoff context and saved messages, and makes requested files accessible through the existing attachment contract. > - Users can change agents and collect completed work without repeating instructions or confirming bookkeeping. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13338. Builds on merged #13354 for queue admission and #13353 for remote workspace retry. #10123 concerns restricted recovery-model escalation; this change instead covers ordinary native handoff and file completion. **What happened?** Codex wrote a draft before a user assigned the task to Claude. The replacement lacked continuation context and replaced the draft. A queued user message could later restart the former agent and reopen the completed task. Separately, a runner could finish a requested file but return only a machine-local path. Remote native runs had no bound file publication tool. **Expected behavior** The replacement reads and preserves existing work, receives saved messages once, and keeps each message's author. The former agent stays stopped. A requested file has a working attachment or accessible work product before Done. Text-only tasks do not require attachments. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Ask Codex to save three newsletter names and then wait. 2. Queue an instruction to keep those names and expand the draft. 3. Use Interrupt and assign to select Claude. 4. Verify the original names survive, the result has a working download, and only the source and replacement runs exist. 5. Ask either provider for a Markdown checklist and open the file from its completed response. ## What Changed - Carry the exact same-task interrupted run's summary, semantic receipts, and history into handoff context. Tell the replacement to inspect existing files before editing. - Adopt saved ordinary task comments into the successor's receipt under the task lock. Preserve authors and separate mention, chat, and interaction contracts. - Prevent a former-assignee comment wake from reopening a completed task or starting a stale execution. - Reject workspace-only, fabricated, and cross-task file completion references with actionable runner feedback. New file output also needs a matching current-run publication receipt and asset filename/size/hash, or an accessible work product registered by the current run. Prior output can remain context alongside a current file, or be verified and re-registered internally. Authorized chat attachment reuse retains its verified current-run clone receipt; older receipt shapes require an intact matching source. - Bind remote file reads to the active environment runner and reuse the existing attachment and work-product publication path. - Enforce workspace confinement, regular single-link files, stable identity, a 10 MiB limit, and exact size and SHA-256 checks. Rotate the native session fingerprint for the updated tool contract. - Contain rejected remote signals and protocol-failure cleanup, including logging failures. Preserve the original cleanup rejection for its owner; a rejected operation never supplies stop acknowledgement or cleanup proof. - Allow exactly one maximum-size base64 file through the native SSH command adapter, preserving a finite output cap. - Document handoff and accessible file completion rules. ## Verification - Each observed bug has a failing regression before its fix. Final post-rebase integration passed 732 tests across 13 files before the final receipt and signal guards; final affected results are below. - Publication provenance and compatibility: 8 provenance regressions and 2 compatibility regressions failed before their fixes; the final four affected suites pass 53 tests, including mixed old/new references and real authorized chat reuse. Controls cover old attachments and work products, filename/size/hash/origin mismatch, missing/wrong receipts, current-run publication, same-run durable proof, internally re-registering preserved bytes, and no-new-file follow-ups. - Remote signal rejection: the real Node subprocess previously exited 1 when the production launcher signalled a deleted sandbox. It now stays alive for both a failed signal and failed logging; all 349 executor tests pass. The failed signal still provides no termination proof. - Remote file reader and SSH command boundary: 33 tests passed, including real Linux descriptor reads and the actual SSH adapter subprocess output cap (network executable replaced by a deterministic fixture). Exact 10 MiB bytes pass, one byte beyond the encoded cap fails. - Live local Claude and Codex Stop journeys preserve the saved file, deliver queued instructions once, and reach Done with two total runs. The handoff journey preserves the original names and download with exactly two runs. Both local providers deliver exact checklist files without a completion confirmation. - Live combined Daytona verification passed: the original failed task's Retry reused its sandbox; a selected Git subfolder produced an exact downloadable file; warm and deliberately resumed Claude runs took about 33 seconds. Codex produced a 240-byte download in 33.1 seconds after 134 seconds of contention/backoff. Both cloud downloads retained exact bytes after the two owned sandboxes were deleted. - The sandbox-deletion retest identified a separate ignored promise in protocol-failure cleanup. Two real Node subprocess regressions failed under fatal unhandled-rejection policy before the fix; all 36 protocol, lifecycle, and integrity tests now pass. The original close promise still rejects to its owning runtime. The final live retest passed: a normal Claude Daytona task completed in 132.352 seconds, then its sandbox was deleted. Thirteen samples over 361 seconds confirmed the same controller stayed healthy, the task stayed Done with unchanged run IDs, and its attachment retained exact bytes. The post-deletion browser download passed with zero page errors; all five owned sandboxes are confirmed absent. - Full repository typecheck and build passed on final commit `de64d16f1`. Final-head Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved threads. [Final-head CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34736623758) passed: 32 successful checks and two conditional skips. The earlier mixed-source full local test invocation was deliberately stopped before rebase, so no pristine green full local aggregate is claimed. Its known failures passed in later affected suites. ## Risks - Handoff may adopt only ordinary comments from its validated former owner. Other delivery contracts must remain independent. - File verification fails closed if a remote file changes during reading. The runner must retry publication or explain a blocker. - The updated session fingerprint starts a fresh provider process where needed to install the new tool contract. - No schema migration or historical status reconciliation is included. ## Model Used OpenAI `gpt-6-astra` through Codex, with reasoning, code execution, browser testing, and tool use. The context-window size is not exposed in this task. ## 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
|
c9021c6721 |
fix: require explicit native completion reviews (#13314)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native runs report their outcome through paperclip_finish. > - The server previously turned incomplete reports into human approval requests. > - Those requests could block a later successful run, even when no person had requested review. > - This pull request creates review cards only for explicit attention requests and withdraws proven old fallback cards. > - Agents receive useful completion feedback, while explicit approval gates and task state protections remain in force. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #13266 removed reviews caused by policy upgrades. This change removes the separate completion fallback. **What happened?** An agent reported needs_review while waiting for checks without requesting a human decision. Paperclip created a generic Native completion review. A later successful report could not complete the task because that old card remained pending. **Expected behavior** Ordinary low-risk work completes after a valid done report, a successful run, and workspace finalization. Incomplete work stays with the agent. Explicit approval requests remain visible and must be resolved. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Complete a native run with needs_review and no attention requests. 2. Continue the task and submit a successful done report. 3. Observe that the old implementation leaves the task in review behind a generic confirmation card. ## What Changed - Require explicit attention requests to create native review cards. Route each request independently and preserve pending or declined decisions. - Withdraw only pending system cards with matching old decision, assessment, effect, contract, and prompt provenance. Preserve history and explicit or answered requests. - Reassess an affected current result without overwriting later task edits, runs, contracts, or workspace failures. - Return pending approval links and required actions through the completion tool. Reject contradictory done reports and empty review requests before accepting a result. - Allow one corrective continuation for incomplete results, then expose a recovery action. - Update status fixtures, database regressions, runner tests, and the completion contract documentation. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed after merging current master. - `pnpm build` passed after merging current master. - The combined branch passed 89 completion and Agent Chat tests. Other targeted tests passed: 170 external-chat and reconciliation tests; 50 runner-resume and control-plane tests; 13 arbiter tests; 7 chat delivery tests; 21 runner completion and runtime-context tests. - The full local test attempt exposed old review fixtures and a missing fake-provider binary. The fixtures are fixed and the helper is built. All affected suites pass in fresh reruns. The timing-sensitive Discord test also passed on rerun. - All latest-head CI checks passed, including build, typecheck, general and serialized tests, runner verification, browser tests, and canary dry run. Greptile is 5/5 with zero unresolved comments. ## Risks - Cleanup changes existing pending cards. It requires exact system provenance and only applies to low-risk agent-claim contracts. It does not delete history or dismiss explicit requests. - Status still commits after the turn and workspace finalization. Completion feedback reports current constraints and does not claim an early status commit. - Incomplete reports now request a bounded corrective run instead of an automatic approval. Repeated failures expose recovery. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with repository inspection, code execution, and test tools. The exact deployment identifier 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> |