Commit Graph
3 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandPaperclip 513c03cb3e fix(e2e): configure supported rolling agents with warm policy (#18994)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Rolling tests must exercise the lifecycle they claim to cover.
> - The warm lane selected a warm environment.
> - Its profiles also set an explicit per-turn agent policy, which took
precedence.
> - The test then waited for a live workspace that per-turn cleanup had
correctly retired.
> - This pull request sets warm agent policy for providers admitted by
the production warm capability.
> - The matrix now checks effective lifecycle and preserves per-turn
coverage for every qualified native profile.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Builds on merged #18982 for the source controller dependency link. This
PR now targets master.

**What happened?**

The warm rolling fixture built a Codex agent with `lifecycleMode:
per_turn` and an environment with `runnerLifecycleMode: warm`. The
explicit agent policy won. The initial task completed, its disposable
workspace retired, and the fixture waited for a live file before it
reached deployment.

**Expected behavior**

Warm rolling, legacy migration, remote-file and controller-outage cells
must create actual warm agents. Only providers supported by the
production managed warm-session capability belong in that lane. All
qualified native profiles retain per-turn coverage.

**Steps to reproduce**

Build the old warm Codex cell's agent and environment and compare their
lifecycle policies. The new effective-policy regression fails on the old
catalog and passes on this branch. No duplicate exact-scope warm-fixture
PR was found.

## What Changed

- Share the production managed warm capability filter and explicit warm
agent policy across rolling, legacy migration, remote-file and
controller-outage suites.
- Check effective agent and environment policies and update matrix
coverage/counts.
- Read completed warm turns from the exact saved snapshot while
independently requiring the retained, bound workspace location.
- Keep both rolling lanes separate from the outage simulation and
exercise their assembled supervisor requests.
- Version the corrected definitions and keep every qualified native
profile in the per-turn lanes.

## Verification

- Baseline regression: failed against the unchanged catalog; retained
before the fix.
- Fixed catalog/controller selection: 39 checks passed.
- The first real warm-policy attempt completed and saved its workspace
but timed out because the file oracle demanded live content; retained
trace responses prove the API returned the correct saved snapshot with a
retained lease.
- A new regression fails on the previous reader and passes after
separating saved file source from retained versus released location.
Focused catalog, reader and rolling checks: 81 passed.
- The next warm attempt reached replacement and exposed a second fixture
defect: warm also selected a SIGKILL outage, which the supervisor
rejected alongside rolling mode. The failure remains retained; its four
owned sandboxes, temporary key and local bucket were deleted.
- An outage-selection regression failed before the fix; 57
outage/supervisor checks pass afterward, including assembled requests
for both rolling lanes. The fresh warm Codex run passed all 56 checks in
8.5 minutes: original run/session/runner/lease retained, authenticated
takeover, both predecessor homes removed, later native continuation and
saved file readback. Two replacement receipts recorded 742 ordinary
reads and 75 writes, all 75 read back, with zero HTTP probe failures. A
transient `native_workspace_sync_out_failed` phase recovered before
successful finalization and remains retained. This source-lane result
does not claim released-image or hosted Railway qualification.
- The invalid earlier attempt was interrupted before deployment. Its
four archived disposable sandboxes were deleted and verified absent; its
temporary key and local bucket were removed.
- Broad local typecheck reached stale shared database declarations in
this checkout's linked build dependencies. The fixture's own type error
was corrected; clean-head CI remains required. No full build is claimed
locally.
- An incidental report-catalog test selected by a substring filter
failed to generate its normalized output. That failure is retained
separately; the focused catalog/controller checks pass.

- Review follow-up: fixed the same policy conflict in the base
file-storage, legacy migration and controller-outage suites. The roster
now has 822 valid cells; unsupported warm combinations remain covered
per-turn. Updated the explicit supervisor-request control to use a
supported warm provider. Focused catalog, file-reader, migration,
rolling and supervisor checks pass (133 checks).
- Earlier full CI passed at dd5aa71 using the built-in GitHub-hosted
fallback after self-hosted runner shutdowns. That result does not
qualify this new head; fresh CI and review are required. The final head
now has a 5/5 review and passing full CI (run 41901807639, attempt 2).
Attempt 1 hit two unrelated port collisions: the unchanged managed Codex
credential lease test and CLI company-server startup on a busy requested
port. Both passed on one failed-job retry. Those failures remain
retained.

## Risks

This changes test setup and coverage. It does not change agent runtime
defaults or provider capabilities. Warm cells use the production
capability boundary, while every qualified native profile keeps its
per-turn cell.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, exact model ID `gpt-6.1-sol`, with reasoning, tool use and
code execution. The host does not expose 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 linked existing issues or described the issue in-PR
following the relevant issue 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 or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run the relevant tests locally; failures and limits are
retained 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 risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-11-04 14:40:45 -06:00
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>
2026-10-30 22:54:37 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 6987c2f20b test(upgrades): qualify controller replacement with immutable artifacts and phase evidence (#17455)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start -->
https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/105/changes/paperclip/105
<!-- entire-trail-link-end -->

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip needs evidence that an admitted execution survives a
main-server replacement.
> - Runner mechanics and server adoption belong to #17097 and #17439.
> - A healthy HTTP endpoint does not prove recovery of the original
execution.
> - Qualification must identify the serving artifact, natural ownership,
authenticated attachment and resumed processing separately.
> - It must also retain failed runs and measure normal-operation costs.
> - This PR extends the existing qualification machinery and acceptance
record.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Operators can assess upgrade continuity from phase evidence tied to
exact artifacts and profiles.

**Current behavior**

A same-artifact restart or synthetic executor pass cannot establish
different-artifact upgrade and rollback support. Idle SQL gates also do
not measure active-run capacity.

**Proposed behavior**

Use immutable A/B artifacts and strict phase receipts through the
existing supervisor. Preserve failed evidence and add measured
before/after workload costs.

Builds on merged #17097 and #17439. The base is now `master`. #17456
follows for review convenience. This PR lands qualification machinery
and the evidence record. The remaining hosted gates stay open for
deployment qualification; merging this machinery does not claim those
experiments passed.

## What Changed

- Extend the main-server supervisor and installed-artifact verification
for actual serving revisions, forward migrations and compatible
rollback.
- Distinguish HTTP readiness, natural ownership, authenticated
attachment, resumed processing and backlog settlement.
- Retain the original reconnect grace and execution identity checks.
Never substitute a new task or edited lease for continuity.
- Reuse real-harness and Daytona qualification paths, with exact profile
and artifact provenance.
- Bind current Copilot attestation inputs in the Daytona image
fingerprint.
- Keep one acceptance record, including both failed file-only stress
phases and the final passing bounded-pool comparison.

## Verification

After retargeting to master, all 158 focused qualification cases across
13 files pass, with E2E typecheck. The first 12-file batch has four
report-lock test failures and 133 passes. Master #17811 had committed
the exact already-approved output lock, while that fixture assumed HEAD
must be the uncorrected input. The fixture now checks both pinned forms,
executes the committed-lock path, and reconstructs the pinned input to
retain all rejection tests. The production helper, policy hashes, patch
and dependency resolution are unchanged. The corrected batch explicitly
includes both process-preservation suites; the prior 146-case receipt
has its own source and selection.

Current candidate `8f1d6ec02f` integrates master `09ad9adce2`, including
the merged server slice. Its diff contains only qualification code and
documentation. The [qualification
record](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/8f1d6ec02f5bf6c90e7b27da8156953cabd9a180/doc/plans/2026-10-22-hot-upgrade-qualification.md)
is the acceptance ledger and retains source-attributed failures and
hosted limits.

On the eighth integration, all 146 cases across 12 focused qualification
files pass, including report-lock preparation, workflow security and
workflow targeting. E2E typecheck passes. The earlier 118-case result
remains attributed to its prior source. The first sandbox invocation has
117 passes and one failure because process inspection was denied during
inert fixture cleanup. The permitted repeat passes all 118 and a
targeted process check finds no remaining fixture daemon. The earlier
96-case receipt remains source-attributed in the ledger. The latest two
review regressions first fail: an intermediate replacement can cite
another runner/session despite a valid final step, and malformed receipt
JSON aborts evidence packaging. Each replacement now binds
run/company/issue/runner/session, and corrupt receipts retain explicit
invalid metadata plus sanitized diagnostics while other logs and
receipts still package. These checks prove qualification machinery with
injected supervisor operations, configuration subprocesses and real
filesystem packaging. They do not qualify a hosted harness.

Three request-reader cases, 14 artifact/configuration/cache/history
cases, and three lost-partial-receipt cases fail before their respective
corrections. The final collector preserves sanitized startup, readiness
and recovery phase receipts through packaging and temporary-root
deletion. Earlier embedded-Postgres initialization, report-catalog
drift, CI scheduling/cleanup failures and fixture collisions remain
recorded with their corrections or limits. The previous Greptile service
error is retained as historical review evidence, not a current review
pass.

The record includes prior source `9bb9d3417e`'s actual Linux
contention/fairness successes and the ordinary-warm regression proof
from the server slice. The historical 300-session component campaign
passes four after phases and retains earlier burst failures. Those
component costs do not establish hosted capacity. The hosted API-only
pair has zero agents/viewers, fails both absolute latency gates and the
candidate memory gate, and does not complete the active-agent/viewer
matrix.

The strict ten-agent same-artifact restart remains attributed to its
original artifact. It does not qualify this updated stack. Actual
A→B/B→A, the normal drain-free Cloud rollout, and other hosted harnesses
remain open. No new provider turn, deployment or hosted qualification
was run during merge preparation.

Prior source `57d3767eac` jobs 122590643944, 122590643983 and
122590644161 ended after runner shutdown/cancellation without final
Vitest results. The shutdown cause is unproven. No retry was issued
before this source was superseded by the required server recovery fix.
These attempts remain failures/incomplete evidence. Fresh exact-head CI,
legacy status, completed Greptile 5/5, resolved feedback and normal
merge eligibility remain required.

## Risks

Different-artifact A→B/B→A, the normal drain-free Cloud rollout path,
other hosted harnesses and the complete concurrency/viewer matrix remain
open. Frozen branch builds are development-build evidence. This PR owns
qualification and evidence; production defects must be fixed in their
earlier owning slice.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools and code
execution. The runtime does not expose a more specific model 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
- [ ] 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>
2026-10-27 21:58:09 -05:00