2 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	f65991a5f1	refactor(server): move scheduled-retry and queued-run dispatch into a run-dispatch module (#12920) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The server heartbeat service dispatches scheduled retries and queued runs. > - The service kept policy decisions and database writes in one large file. > - This layout made policy branches harder to test and transaction boundaries harder to inspect. > - This pull request moves the policy rules and database transactions into a run-dispatch module. > - The benefit is a smaller service, pure policy tests, and clear transaction ownership. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The server heartbeat service promotes scheduled retries and cancels stale queued runs. **Subsystem affected** server/ — REST API and orchestration services. **Current behavior** The heartbeat service contains the policy rules and the database writes for these dispatch paths. **Proposed behavior** A run-dispatch module owns pure policy functions and semantic database transactions. The public service contracts stay unchanged. **Reason and benefit** The new layout separates branch rules from database effects. It makes each policy branch easier to test and keeps each operation’s row writes in one transaction. **Breaking changes** None. The public service contracts stay unchanged. ## What Changed - Move scheduled-retry promotion and queued-run staleness rules into pure functions. - Add table-driven unit tests for each policy branch. - Move promotion and cancellation writes into semantic transactions. - Keep row locking, company isolation, and post-commit effects unchanged. ## Verification - `node scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs` passes. - `tsc --noEmit` from `server/` reports no errors. - The focused server test command passes 228 tests in six files. - Full pull request CI passes. - Greptile reports 5/5, and all review threads are resolved. ## Risks The main risk concerns changed transaction boundaries in scheduled-retry promotion and queued-run cancellation. The focused tests retain coverage for locking, transactionality, company isolation, and transport contracts. The public service contracts do not change. ## Model Used Codex, GPT-5, with code execution and tool use. The context window is not provided by the runtime. ## 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 have addressed all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-09-08 11:00:55 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	184b014c25	feat(telemetry): add the agent.task_run event and emit it at every terminal run transition (#12809) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Paperclip records agent run outcomes through telemetry and run lifecycle services > - Terminal run transitions need one consistent event for outcome analysis > - The current paths do not report every terminal transition through one event > - This pull request adds the agent.task_run event and emits it at each terminal transition > - The benefit is complete run outcome data without exposing raw task identifiers ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Paperclip telemetry reports agent activity, but it does not report every terminal task run through one event. **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting (multiple of the above): packages/shared telemetry and server run lifecycle services. **Current behavior** Several run paths write a terminal status without a matching agent.task_run telemetry event. **Proposed behavior** Each terminal run transition emits one agent.task_run event. The event records the terminal state and uses the existing pseudonym helper for the optional task identifier. **Reason and benefit** Complete terminal-run data helps operators measure agent outcomes. The pseudonym helper prevents the raw task identifier from leaving the installation. **Breaking changes** None. The change adds an event and keeps existing event behavior compatible. ## What Changed - Add the agent.task_run telemetry contract and client helper. - Reuse the existing pseudonym helper for the task identifier. The helper hashes the identifier with a per-installation salt and returns 16 hexadecimal characters. The raw identifier never leaves the installation. Existing identifiers do not move. - Emit one event from each legacy, native, recovery, and issue terminal transition. - Keep emissions outside database transactions and make delivery best-effort. - Add regression tests for event shape, hashing, terminal transitions, and emission failures. - Document the event and its privacy rule in the telemetry data contract. ## Verification - `npx tsc --noEmit` in `server/` passes at the submitted commit. - The pull-request CI suite must pass. CI is the authority because local Vitest has a known dependency artifact. - The added regression tests cover event output shape, per-installation hash divergence, raw identifier handoff, omitted identifiers, and non-throwing emits. ## Risks - A missed terminal path could reduce event coverage. - Telemetry delivery remains best-effort and cannot change run finalization. - The pseudonym helper uses installation-specific state, so identifiers differ between installations. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, tool use and code execution. Context window details were not provided. ## 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 have addressed all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-09-04 08:21:32 -07:00