2 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Devin FoleyandPaperclip	06484b3c41	fix: preserve conversation retries through execution cleanup (#15463) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Recovery schedules bounded retries after a provider disconnects. > - A stopped run can still hold its environment lease while cleanup runs. > - Retrying before that lease is released cancels the new run before it starts and spends another retry. > - Restoring the task can also send the worker repair instructions from an already resolved recovery action. > - This pull request preserves the waiting retry and removes settled recovery instructions from later wakes. > - The task can continue after cleanup without an operator repairing the same incident again. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A legacy conversation run disconnected while it was doing ordinary work. Its environment cleanup took longer than the retry delay. Two retries were cancelled before dispatch with `execution_reconciliation_required`. Those cancellations exhausted the failure budget. After an operator restored the task, the wake still told the original worker to repair the runtime and hand the task back to itself. **Expected behavior** Cleanup waits preserve the pending attempt. The same retry can continue after ownership is released, subject to all current gates. Once a recovery action is resolved or cancelled, subsequent task wakes omit its repair instructions. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Fail a legacy conversation run while its environment lease remains in `pending_cleanup`. 2. Schedule a bounded retry and run promotion before cleanup releases that lease. 3. Repeat the scheduler sweep. Before this fix, retries promote and then cancel without starting. 4. Resolve a stranded-task recovery action and build the restored task wake with that action ID. Before this fix, the wake still includes the settled repair instructions. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced with database regressions against `ceabc3bc880` on master. Related: #15019 restores a skipped assignment handoff after lease release. #15235 filters stale handoff evidence in the recovery sweep. This change preserves an existing scheduled conversation retry and corrects restored wake content. It does not create a new handoff wake. ## What Changed - Keep an unstarted legacy conversation retry on the same durable row while prior execution ownership remains active. Recheck after 30 seconds without increasing retry accounting. - Return a queued retry to scheduled state if it encounters that hold at the claim gate. Retain its issue claim and publish the status change. - Record one local lifecycle diagnostic per blocking run. Remove that wait marker on promotion. - Include recovery action metadata only while the referenced action is active or escalated. - Return an explicit `waiting` response and the saved schedule when Retry now meets cleanup. Show the wait inline without a false success or disabled button. - Add database, rendered-prompt, route, and UI regressions. Document the execution and run-log contracts. ## Verification - Five cleanup and restored-wake regressions fail against the original production code. The Retry now route and UI regressions also fail before their correction. - Related retry, dispatch, stale-queue, and recovery suites: 321 tests pass across seven files. All ten focused cleanup/restored-wake cases pass after rebase. The final dispatch adjustment passes all 46 adapter tests. - Retry now routes and affected UI suites: all 46 tests pass. The tests cover repeated clicks, the saved schedule, unchanged accounting, promotion after release, and no false success or error state. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `pnpm build-storybook`, and `pnpm check:token-gates` pass. - Full local `pnpm test:run` was started and then stopped after the final commit passed all GitHub CI test shards. No complete local full-suite result is claimed; CI supplies the complete test result for the final commit. - Final head `6f1058a332c039e33c4f002b296d20a5554e760e`: all 55 GitHub checks are green or intentionally skipped. Apex review is 5/5 after two reviews, with no unresolved threads. The PR has no merge conflicts. ## Risks The wait applies only to unstarted legacy conversation retries. Native runs and non-conversation execution keep their existing recovery rules. Cleanup must actually release ownership before execution can resume. The wait does not fix a cleanup service that never finishes. Promotion and dispatch still enforce cancellation, reassignment, pause, budget, and reconciliation gates. No schema change is required. The Retry now response adds a `waiting` outcome; the shared contract and all three UI controls handle it. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex based on GPT-6, with repository analysis, tool use, and local code execution. The runtime does not expose the precise serving model ID or context window. ## 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 (focused suites; complete final-head test coverage in CI) - [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>	2026-10-07 11:15:49 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	772fc92619	Add issue controls and retry-now recovery (#5426) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Issue operators need clear controls for execution settings, model overrides, and recovery retries > - Existing issue properties hid useful adapter override state and did not expose a board-triggered retry for scheduled heartbeat recovery > - Scheduled retries also need to respect the same safety gates as normal execution instead of bypassing budget, review, pause, dependency, or terminal-state checks > - This pull request adds the issue property controls and retry-now surfaces together because they share the issue details/properties UI > - The benefit is that operators can inspect and adjust issue execution settings and safely trigger pending scheduled recovery without hidden control-plane behavior ## What Changed - Adds editable issue assignee model override controls in `IssueProperties`, with focused coverage. - Removes the stale workspace tasks link from issue properties. - Adds a scheduled retry `retry-now` backend path and shared response types. - Adds main-pane and properties-pane scheduled retry UI, backed by a shared `useRetryNowMutation` hook. - Adds suppression coverage for budget hard stops, review participant changes, subtree pause holds, unresolved blockers, terminal issues, and company scoping. - Updates the `IssueProperties` test harness with toast actions required by the retry-now hook. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssueScheduledRetryCard.test.tsx` — 31 passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-scheduled-retry-routes.test.ts` — exited 0, but this host skipped the embedded Postgres route tests with: `Postgres init script exited with code null. Please check the logs for extra info. The data directory might already exist.` - Pairwise merge check against the assigned-backlog PR branch completed without conflicts via `git merge --no-commit --no-ff` in a temporary worktree. ### Visual verification screenshots Storybook story: `Product/Issue Scheduled retry surfaces / ScheduledRetrySurfaces`.   ## Risks - Medium: this touches issue execution/retry behavior, so CI should run the embedded Postgres route tests on a host that can initialize Postgres. - Low-to-medium UI risk around duplicated retry-now entry points; both surfaces share one mutation hook to keep behavior consistent. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex coding agent, GPT-5 model family (`gpt-5`), tool-enabled Paperclip heartbeat environment. Context window and internal reasoning mode are not exposed 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-07 12:23:13 -05:00