Commit Graph
7585 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 afcf34c9da fix(evals): form repair-cost-recording's saved-usage debt and grade it by saved state (#20895)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The chat feature evals check that the chat agent helps a person with
real product state
> - The `budgets-costs.repair-cost-recording` case checks that the agent
sends the person to the saved-cost retry control and then reports the
true accounting result
> - The grader checked the agent's replies with keyword regular
expressions, and the scripted person gave the agent the harness's own
accounting readback
> - Keyword checks reject valid wording and accept wrong answers, so the
case did not measure the promise
> - The setup also never formed: the prerequisite run always settled, so
no "Ready to record" saved usage existed
> - This pull request forms that state with a temporary trigger on the
case-owned database (no product change), and replaces the two keyword
checks with checks of saved state, the agent's own product calls, and
rendered links
> - The benefit is a case that can run, and a grader that does not
depend on wording and that still fails the relevant broken behavior

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**
The case `budgets-costs.repair-cost-recording` graded the chat replies
with keyword regular expressions (`honest-post-retry-accounting-result`
and `guides-accounting-without-rerun`). The scripted follow-up message
also told the agent the harness's accounting result. Separately, the
setup never formed in paid runs: the prerequisite native run settles as
an unpriced cost event (`missing_price`), not as a `retryable`
saved-usage row. Accounting retries every 5 seconds, so a retryable row
only exists while accounting keeps failing.

**Expected behavior**
The grader accepts any wording. It requires that the guidance before the
retry links the Costs page, that the post-retry run reads saved cost
data before it answers, and that the agent does not write cost, budget
or accounting records or start work.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Read `gradeAccounting` in
`tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-domains/identity-accounting.ts` on
master.
2. Reword a valid reply (for example "Head to Costs and press the button
there; the work stays as it is.").
3. See that the keyword checks reject it.

Refs #20600

## What Changed

- New `tests/runner-e2e/chat-accounting-fault.ts`, following
`chat-archive-storage-fault.ts`: a temporary trigger on the case-owned
database refuses cost-event writes for the one prerequisite task. The
product's own accounting transaction rolls back, so the finished run
keeps its saved usage pending and the product's automatic retries keep
failing. Refused writes are counted in a rollback-proof sequence. It is
allowed only when this case is the single selected execution, and it
never writes product rows.
- Setup: the case creates the prerequisite task unassigned, arms the
trigger, assigns the task, and waits until Costs shows the genuine
`retryable` row. The trigger is closed on a setup failure and at
cleanup.
- Act: the trigger is dropped right before the person clicks "Retry cost
recording". Automatic recovery can record it first; the saved accounting
read afterwards classifies either result (an unpriced event still shows
in data quality, so it counts as unresolved).
- `chat-archive-storage-fault.ts`: export its owned-database resolver
for reuse (no behavior change).

- `identity-accounting.ts`: remove the reply keyword checks for the
repair case.
- Add `initial-guidance-links-saved-cost-retry`: a reply from before the
retry has a rendered link to the Costs page (`/<prefix>/activity/costs`
or the `/<prefix>/costs` redirect).
- Add `post-retry-reply-reads-saved-accounting`: the post-retry chat run
made a successful read of a company cost report, or of the cost summary
of the prerequisite task (bound by its redacted input digest).
- Add `no-agent-accounting-fabrication-or-rerun`: no successful
chat-agent call writes cost, finance, budget or accounting records or
starts run or task execution. A denied attempt is not a write.
- `observe` collects the chat agent's redacted `call_api` uses and
results (`leadApiCalls`).
- The scripted follow-up now reports only the toast that the page
showed. That toast says "Costs recorded." even when the usage still has
no price.
- Own `oracleVersion`
(`paperclip.chat-catalog.repair-cost-recording.structural.v3`) and
source files in code and in `chat-catalog-descriptors.json`.
- Calibration tests: reworded valid replies pass; a missing or late
Costs link, a run link only, a foreign link, no fresh read, a read in
the wrong run, a denied read, an unrelated read, another task's cost
summary, and agent cost or execution writes fail.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts
tests/runner-e2e/chat-accounting-fault.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/chat-archive-storage-fault.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-domains/identity-accounting.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-contract.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-consistency.test.ts`: all pass. The
embedded-Postgres test drives the product's `accountRunCost`,
`reconcileRunCosts`, data-quality report and board retry against the
trigger: only the faulted task's run stays `retryable`, other debt in
the company settles, and the retry records it once the trigger is
dropped.
- `npx tsc --noEmit -p tests/runner-e2e`: no errors in the changed
files.
- `node tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs <sha> --check`:
unchanged.
- Paid run still needed:
`chat-features.runner-opencode.local.budgets-costs.repair-cost-recording`.

## Risks

- Low risk. The change affects only this eval case.
- The new read check needs the chat agent to have company cost-read
access. Agents cannot read `costs/data-quality` (board only), so the
agent uses the cost reports or the task cost summary.
- The trigger runs DDL on the case-owned database only; the same
isolation checks as the archive storage fault apply, and it is dropped
before the retry and removed at cleanup.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), tool use and code
execution in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 18:29:54 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 a75d7df9c7 fix(evals): gate steering approval-delivery and steer-active on real product state (#20899)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The chat feature catalog runs real native agents to prove the chat
and task-steering promises.
> - Two steering cases failed in setup before they could measure the
product.
> - `steering.approval-delivery` waited for a worker run to stay running
while its question was pending. The product parks a native turn as soon
as a durable question is saved, so that state never occurs.
> - `steering.steer-active` waited for the queue to say steering is
"available". The OpenCode harness reports that it cannot steer, so the
queue says "unsupported".
> - This pull request gates each case on the real product state and
grades the behavior that state promises.
> - The benefit is that both cases now measure their user promise on the
evaluated profile, without faked runs or faked steering.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**
Both cases failed during setup on `runner-opencode`.
`steering.approval-delivery` stopped with "The actual question fixture
did not reach its running pending-input boundary": the worker's
`request_human_input` call parked its turn (run succeeded,
`reportedWorkDisposition: yielded`, continuation `response_wake` for the
question). `steering.steer-active` timed out waiting for
`steeringDisposition: "available"`; the OpenCode driver declares
`steering: false`, so the queue reports `"unsupported"` and the page
shows Interrupt instead of Steer.

**Expected behavior**
`steering.approval-delivery` should treat the saved yield and the
pending question as the pending-input state, queue ordinary comments and
the bound answer behind a real active worker turn, and prove one
continuation receives the answer. `steering.steer-active` should grade
same-turn steering when the harness can steer, and grade the honest
fallback when it cannot: the message stays visibly queued, nothing is
recorded as steered, and one normal turn consumes it.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Dispatch
`chat-features.runner-opencode.local.steering.approval-delivery` on
master.
2. See the setup stop after the worker run succeeds with a yielded
result.
3. Dispatch `chat-features.runner-opencode.local.steering.steer-active`
on master.
4. See setup time out while `GET /api/issues/:id/queued-comments`
reports `steeringDisposition: "unsupported"`.

## What Changed

- `runtime-approval-queue.ts`: gate the question on the parked turn
(`pendingInputYield`: succeeded, yielded, `response_wake` keyed to the
question). An ordinary human message then wakes a real second Morgan
turn that waits at the task gate. Ordinary comments and the bound answer
queue behind that turn. The run count goes from 3 to 4.
- `runtime-approval-queue.ts`: remove the reply keyword checks
(`acornNamingDirection` and the "I have answered" regex). Grade exactly
one saved answer path instead: the human response control, or an
attributed canonical response.
- `runtime-active-steering.ts`: accept either definitive capability.
Unsupported branch: no enabled Steer control, a visible Interrupt
control, a steer attempt with the person's session refused with `409
steering_unsupported`, no `issue.queued_comment_steered` activity, the
exact message still queued, and one continuation that consumes it and
registers a rendered blue `website.html`.
- `runtime-active-steering.ts`: remove the reply keyword checks and the
`/blue/` match on the delivery document. The rendered page proves the
color.
- Update calibration tests in both directions, the workspace setup test,
and the descriptors (`oracleVersion` bumps, `expectedRunCount` 4 for
approval-delivery). The scenario YAML is unchanged.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts
tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-domains/runtime-active-steering.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-domains/runtime-approval-queue.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-domains/runtime-approval-workspace.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-contract.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-consistency.test.ts`: 87 passed.
- `npx tsc --noEmit -p tests/runner-e2e`: no errors in the changed
files.
- `node tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs <HEAD> --check`:
unchanged.
- The live proof is a paid run of
`chat-features.runner-opencode.local.steering.approval-delivery` and
`chat-features.runner-opencode.local.steering.steer-active`.

## Risks

- approval-delivery now depends on a human message waking the worker
while its question is pending. The product does this
(`supersedeOnUserComment: false` keeps the card open, and comments wake
the assignee unless the task is done or cancelled). If the worker does
not run the gate on that turn, setup fails with a named label.
- steer-active on OpenCode now measures the honest unsupported fallback,
not same-turn delivery. A steering-capable profile still runs the
same-turn branch.
- Low risk to the product: only eval code changes.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), tool use and code
execution in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 18:28:44 -06:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip 38501b1170 Add turn-scoped attachment downloads to native Runner (#20956)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - Native agents open input images with a file reader.
> - Plugin Runner tasks use an authenticated Runner connection.
> - Runner needs a way to fetch an authorized file from the tenant app.
> - The tenant grants access to the exact attachment for the active run.
> - Runner downloads and verifies it before it returns a local path.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #19740. Builds on the attachment authorization and command
transport added in #20939.

## What Changed

- Add the PRP v3 `runner.attachment.download` command for native
workspace providers.
- Issue short-lived grants for exact authorized wake and historical
attachments. Recheck the active run, source, size, and SHA-256 at the
tenant endpoint.
- Download current-wake inputs before provider dispatch. Download
historical files when the authorized chat reader asks for them. Preserve
SSH and sandbox command staging as a fallback.
- Run HTTPS transfers off the Runner control loop. Report completion
with one PRP event per transfer. Drop pending results on cancellation
and clear files at turn settlement, authority rotation, and restart.
- Grant restricted Codex sessions read-only access to the attachment
directory.

## Verification

- 69 targeted server attachment tests passed. They cover wake and
historical downloads, authorization failures, and command fallback.
- 22 focused historical attachment tests passed, including grant
redemption under a held database lock.
- Six focused Rust attachment tests passed, including a source-pinned
Codex sandbox check. The sandbox could read the staged file but could
not modify it or read adjacent Runner state.
- The real Runner transport test confirmed one durable command and one
completion event for a transfer. Restart-continuation tests confirmed
fresh attachment paths appear before dispatch.
- Server and Runner TypeScript checks, Rust formatting, and PRP
generated schema checks passed.
- Required GitHub CI passed on `7a33752bd7`. [CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/43122967837)
- Greptile scored the same revision 5/5 with no unresolved review
threads.
[Review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/20956#issuecomment-6808582134)

## Risks

- Saved provider and Runner identities keep their existing formats. A
previous Runner falls back to command staging where the target supports
it. A restart continuation refreshes temporary attachment paths before
dispatch.
- Plugin Runner tasks require a compatible Runner ROM and outbound HTTPS
access to the configured tenant origin.
- Live agent-computer qualification remains a release check.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository inspection, shell tools, and
local test execution. Exact variant and context window are unavailable
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: #123` /
`Closes #123` / `Refs #123` or (b) 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
- [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>
2026-11-11 16:28:02 -08:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 ba5ba54439 fix(evals): name unmet completion-gate readiness fields and grade the gate read, not reply words (#20887)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The chat catalog eval `tasks.completion-with-gate` checks that the
CEO does not force Done while an independent human review is still
required
> - Its setup waits for a real Morgan implementation that awaits the
configured review stage
> - The setup timed out and did not say which state field was wrong
> - The retained evidence shows a product defect: the native completion
path never started the configured review stage (fixed in #20882)
> - This pull request makes the readiness timeout name each unmet field,
accepts valid product continuation runs, and replaces reply keyword
grading with a structural check
> - The benefit is that the eval measures the gate, and its setup
failures are self-explaining

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**

The eval failed with "Timed out waiting for Real prior Morgan
implementation awaiting independent review". Morgan uploaded
`website.html` and reported needs_review. The task became in_review
through a generic review card, but `executionState` stayed null, so the
poll (pending stage for Riley) never matched. The run finished at 229 s
of the 240 s setup window. The grader also matched reply words with
regular expressions.

**Expected behavior**

Setup reaches the configured review stage through supported product
paths. A timeout names each unmet field. The grader proves the outcome
from saved state and run receipts, not reply wording.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Dispatch
`chat-features.runner-opencode.local.tasks.completion-with-gate` on
master.
2. Read `server.log` and `snapshots/chat-final-run-ledger.json`:
`authoritativeDecision: in_review`, `finalizationReasonCode:
actionable_attention_pending`, no executionState.

## What Changed

- `internal-task-completion.ts`: `unmetPriorDeliveryReview` lists each
unmet readiness field. The poll uses it for `accept` and
`timeoutDetail`.
- Setup and grader accept one or more succeeded Morgan runs (a product
continuation is valid). Any failed, cancelled or timed-out worker run is
an unmet readiness condition, so setup stops before the paid CEO turn.
The delivery must come from one of these runs.
- The `truthful-outstanding-review` reply regex check is replaced by
`checked-actual-completion-gate`: the CEO's chat run read the task (`GET
/api/issues/{id}` or `get_task`, matched by record-bound receipt) and
replied. The saved pending stage, unchanged policy and absence of a
forced Done still prove the outcome.
- Run bound 2 → 3, setup window 240 s → 330 s, attempt 540 s → 660 s.
`oracleVersion` is `paperclip.chat-catalog.completion-with-gate.v2`. The
descriptor is updated.
- Cherry-picks both #20882 commits so the paid run exercises the product
fix.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts` on
`internal.test.ts`, `internal-comment-reference.test.ts`,
`internal-edit-ownership.test.ts`, `chat-catalog-contract.test.ts`,
`chat-catalog-consistency.test.ts` (184 tests) and 12 other suites that
reference the case (133 tests).
- Calibration: two reworded valid replies pass. A missing gate read, an
empty reply, a forced Done and a failed worker run fail. The retained
product state (in_review, no executionState) produces named unmet
fields.
- `node tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs <HEAD> --check`:
unchanged.
- `npx tsc --noEmit -p tests/runner-e2e`: no new errors in the changed
test files. The local worktree has unbuilt packages, so CI supplies the
full typecheck.

## Risks

- The reply's meaning is no longer machine-checked. A person must read
the reply in the paid run.
- The larger run bound and windows accept slower valid runs. Readiness
still fails on any failed worker run.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), tool use and code
execution in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 18:17:43 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 87fe4d9793 fix(workspaces): retry a workspace_finalize record write that loses a deadlock (#20971)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - When a run ends, Paperclip records a `workspace_finalize` workspace
operation. Dependent work reads that record to know if the workspace is
safe to use.
> - The record insert has foreign keys to `execution_workspaces`,
`companies`, `heartbeat_runs` and `issues`. Postgres takes a key-share
lock on each parent row, in trigger order: workspace, company, run,
issue.
> - The native finalizer and other writers lock the issue row and then
the run row (the order that #20819 documents). When such a transaction
holds the issue and then asks for the run, while the finalize insert
holds the run and waits for the issue, Postgres detects a deadlock and
aborts one side.
> - In restart-chaos wave `w-20261111T205259-s6301` (task t01, run
`e7129ec7`) the insert lost. The log says "failed to record
workspace_finalize=failed operation; dependents may remain gated". The
failed-finalize record was lost.
> - The insert's lock order comes from the foreign keys, so the code
cannot reorder it without a new explicit lock order that other writers
(for example the remote-workspace release path, workspace then run)
could invert again. A deadlock victim is safe to run again, because its
transaction rolled back completely.
> - This pull request retries the finalize record write on lock timeout,
deadlock and serialization failure (55P03, 40P01, 40001), with the same
bounded policy that #20850 added for the provider-pack admission write.
> - The benefit is that a short lock conflict can no longer delete the
record that releases dependent work.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
Run `e7129ec7` failed its native session recovery
(`runner_harness_state_mismatch: backup_without_reusable_lease`). The
failure path called `recordWorkspaceFinalize("failed")`. The insert into
`workspace_operations` failed with `PostgresError: deadlock detected`
(40P01). The server logged that dependents may remain gated. The run
then settled as failed with `native_session_interrupted`; the next
`finalizeNativeRun` call logged `native_finalization_missing` because
that run had no proposed result.

**Expected behavior**
A transient deadlock does not lose the finalize record. The write runs
again and the record is saved.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Transaction A: lock the issue row `FOR UPDATE`.
2. Start a `workspace_finalize` record for a run on that issue. Its
insert takes key-share on the workspace, company and run rows, then
waits for the issue.
3. Transaction A: lock the run row `FOR UPDATE`.
4. Postgres reports a deadlock. Before this change the insert is the
victim and the record is lost.

**Additional context**
The new test reproduces this with two real transactions on embedded
Postgres. It gives transaction A a longer `deadlock_timeout`, so the
insert is always the victim, as on the chaos run.

Refs #20850
Refs #20819

## What Changed

- New `server/src/services/transient-lock-contention.ts`:
`postgresErrorCode`, `isTransientLockContention` and
`retryTransientLockContention` (5 attempts, 100 ms × attempt backoff,
only 55P03, 40P01 and 40001).
- `workspaceOperationService.createRecorder().recordOperation` wraps its
`workspace_finalize` state writes (the running-row insert and the
terminal update) in that retry. Each attempt is a new transaction, or a
new savepoint when the service runs inside a caller's transaction.
- `native-provider-pack-admission.ts` uses the shared helper. Its
behavior and its exported `nativeProviderPackAdmissionFailureCode` name
do not change.
- New test in
`server/src/__tests__/workspace-operations-reconciliation.test.ts`: a
real two-transaction deadlock between an issue-then-run locker and the
finalize insert.

## Verification

- Red on master: `cd server && npx vitest run
src/__tests__/workspace-operations-reconciliation.test.ts -t "loses a
deadlock"` failed with `deadlock detected`, code `40P01`, on the same
`insert into "workspace_operations"` query as the chaos log.
- Green: the same test passes; I ran it 3 times. The full file and the
provider-pack admission tests pass (49 tests).
`native-result-commit-work.test.ts` passes.
- `npx tsc --noEmit -p server` passes.
- I stopped `pnpm verify` after it selected 2533 test files; required CI
supplies broad coverage.
- Chaos: no new cell. The existing W2 × K1 cell (Codex, Daytona warm)
reached this path when the restart fault broke native session recovery.
I did not rerun a wave; both wave slots were busy.

## Risks

- Low risk. Only the `workspace_finalize` state writes retry, and only
on the three contention codes. Other errors throw as before.
- A deadlock victim's transaction is fully rolled back, so the retried
insert (same operation id) and the retried update are idempotent.
- The worst added delay is about 1 s of backoff across 5 attempts, on
the failure path only.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, used through Claude
Code with tool use (shell, file edits, local test execution).

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 18:09:57 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 1880526603 fix(runner): never start an OpenCode session without its Paperclip tools (#20964)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Native OpenCode agents use Paperclip tools through a local MCP
bridge in the runner
> - OpenCode 1.18 connects each MCP server one time per process. It does
not retry
> - One failed `initialize` or `tools/list` at startup marks the
Paperclip server "failed" for the full session
> - The agent then works with only built-in tools. In one chat it told
the person "Switched the working design to blue", but no saved state
supported this claim
> - This pull request makes the runner confirm the Paperclip tools while
the session loads, reconnect them, restart OpenCode if necessary, and
fail the session by name if the tools stay unavailable
> - The benefit is that an OpenCode turn never starts without its
Paperclip tools, so the agent cannot silently claim actions that it
could not do

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20886, #20921.

**What happened**
In chat eval `steering.steer-active` (private paid run 43086418488, on a
commit with #20886 and without #20921), two of three OpenCode sessions
started without Paperclip tools. One was the CEO chat (fresh session).
One was the worker task after its saved session resumed in a new
OpenCode process. The CEO agent ran `opencode mcp list` and saw
`paperclip ✗ failed — Failed to get tools`. It then sent a request to
the bridge without the bearer token and got HTTP 401. That 401 came from
its own probe, not from OpenCode. The run still succeeded with the reply
"Switched the working design to blue …", because a plain chat reply
counts as the result.

**Expected behavior**
Every native OpenCode session starts with the Paperclip MCP tools. If
the tools cannot be loaded, the session fails with a named reason, and
the turn does not start without tools.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start OpenCode 1.18.34 with a remote MCP server whose first
`tools/list` request fails (for example, the server resets the socket
one time).
2. `GET /mcp` returns `{"paperclip":{"status":"failed","error":"Failed
to get tools"}}`. OpenCode keeps this status for the life of the
process.
3. `POST /mcp/paperclip/connect` returns `true`, and then `GET /mcp`
returns `connected` (about 8 ms). We measured this with the real 1.18.34
binary.

This is the same class as #20886: `Connection: close` made the one-shot
startup connect fail more often (about 9 of 25 sessions), and #20921
removed the trigger. Any other transient failure at startup still
produced a toolless session. This change removes the class.

## What Changed

- `opencode-server-driver.ts`: while a session opens (fresh, resumed or
recovered), the driver reads OpenCode's `GET /mcp`. If the `paperclip`
server is not `connected`, it calls `POST /mcp/paperclip/connect` up to
two times. If the server is still not connected, it throws
`paperclip_tools_unavailable`. The existing startup retry restarts
OpenCode for this error (three attempts in total). After that, the
session fails visibly.
- The check runs in parallel with session creation or resume. The added
work on a healthy start is one local HTTP request.
- `fake-opencode-server.mjs`: the fixture now serves `GET /mcp` and
`POST /mcp/paperclip/connect`. It connects to the real bridge with the
configured token, and it can simulate failed connects.
- New `paperclip-tools-startup.test.ts`: reconnect after one failed
connect, restart after a process stays failed, reconnect on a saved
session that resumes in a new process, and a named failure when the
tools never load. All four tests fail on master (master opens a toolless
session).

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run
src/drivers/opencode/paperclip-tools-startup.test.ts` (in
`packages/paperclip-runner`): 4 passed. Red on master: 4 failed.
- All OpenCode driver, proxy, live runnerd OpenCode and native-runtime
server suites that use the fixture: 29 files, 567 tests passed.
- `node --test scripts/contracts/contract-fingerprints.test.mjs`: 11
passed. `tsc --noEmit -p packages/paperclip-runner`: clean.
- Real OpenCode 1.18.34 probe (failure, then `connect`, then
`connected`) as in the steps above.
- Paid chat eval run 43117909094 on this change (steering.steer-active
and three other OpenCode chat cases). Result is in a comment on this PR.

## Risks

- Low. A healthy start adds one local `GET /mcp` request, in parallel
with session creation.
- If OpenCode cannot load the Paperclip tools after reconnects and
restarts, the session now fails with `paperclip_tools_unavailable`.
Before, it ran without tools. This is intended.
- No persisted run, session or pack state changes. A session saved by
the previous release resumes through the same open path and gets the
same check.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), agentic coding with
tool use (shell, file edits, 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
- [ ] 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>
2026-11-11 18:07:38 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 23909077ad fix(retry): re-deliver the failed run's wake when the board retries it (#20970)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - When a run fails, the board shows a Retry button. The Retry starts a
new run with the wake reason `task_retry`.
> - A failed run can serve a wake that happens once, for example a
scheduled task monitor check (`issue_monitor_due`). The monitor is
consumed when it fires.
> - The Retry run did not tell the agent which wake it retries. The
agent saw only `task_retry` and the earlier interruption.
> - In the restart-chaos harness, the agent followed its brief ("act
only on a board comment or a scheduled monitor check"), decided that the
Retry was not the monitor check, and changed nothing. The run succeeded,
but the task stayed `in_progress` with no run, no wake and no monitor.
The person clicked a Retry that worked mechanically but lost the work it
was for.
> - This pull request records the retried run's own wake reason on the
Retry's continuation trigger (`trigger.retriedReason`) and shows it in
the wake summary.
> - The benefit is that a Retry re-delivers the same wake that failed.
Dotta's rule: if a Retry button shows up, it still needs to work.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
Restart-chaos wave `w-20261111T230537-s6402` (Claude, Daytona warm,
volume-free server mode, restart fault K1), task t03 (workload W2). The
phase-2 monitor wake started run `60d821af`. That run failed with
`native_session_interrupted`. The board Retry was accepted (HTTP 202).
Retry run `a5a3958e` started 2 s later and succeeded. Its context had
`wakeReason: task_retry` and `executionContinuation.trigger = { reason:
"task_retry", sourceRunId: "60d821af…" }`, with no reference to
`issue_monitor_due`. The agent's summary: "This wake was a task_retry
resuming the previously interrupted run, not a new board comment or
scheduled monitor check, so per instructions I changed nothing." The
issue stayed `in_progress` with `executionRunId = null`, monitor status
`triggered` and no `nextCheckAt`. The harness graded
`R3:retry_did_not_complete` and U1 `no_owner_no_action 182s`.

**Expected behavior**
A Retry of a failed run re-delivers that run's wake. A Retry of a failed
monitor check is handled as that monitor check.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Give an agent a task that acts only on a scheduled monitor check.
2. Let the monitor fire, and make the monitor run fail (restart fault K1
during the run).
3. Click Retry on the task.
4. Before this change, the Retry run's prompt says only `reason:
task_retry`, and the agent does not do the monitor work.

**Additional context**
The same signature (`R3:retry_did_not_complete:W2C:K0`, Codex, monitor
rewake run `bac90594` failed `native_session_interrupted`, Retry run
`cfb24146` succeeded without the phase-2 marker) is in wave
`w-20261111T192658-s5201` task t06. That case was attributed to the
response-wake loop that #20935 fixed. Its shape matches this cause: the
Retry run served the monitor wake but did not do the monitor work. That
wave kept no database, so I could not read its run context directly.

Refs #20935

## What Changed

- `buildExecutionContinuation` adds `trigger.retriedReason` when the
current wake is a Retry (`task_retry` or `retry_failed_run`). The value
is the source run's own wake reason. A Retry of a Retry inherits the
first non-retry reason from the source run's saved continuation.
- `ExecutionContinuationEnvelope.trigger` gets the optional
`retriedReason` field.
- `renderPaperclipWakePrompt` adds `- retried wake: <reason> (this Retry
re-delivers the wake the failed run did not finish; handle it as that
wake)` to the wake summary for fresh and resumed sessions.
- New test in `server/src/services/execution-continuation.test.ts` on
embedded Postgres: a failed `issue_monitor_due` run, a Retry of it, a
Retry of that Retry, and a non-retry wake.

## Verification

- Red on master: `cd server && npx vitest run
src/services/execution-continuation.test.ts -t "carries the failed run"`
failed with `trigger` = `{ reason: "task_retry", sourceRunId }` and no
`retriedReason`.
- Green: the same file passes (45 tests).
- `tsc --noEmit` passes for `packages/shared`, `packages/adapter-utils`
and `server`.
- `pnpm verify` exits 2 (a shared type changed), so required CI supplies
broad coverage.
- Chaos: the existing cell W2 × K1 (Claude, Daytona warm) reproduces
this when the fault lands in the monitor rewake run. W2C (Codex) shows
the same shape. I did not rerun a wave for this PR.

## Risks

- Low risk. The change adds one optional field and one prompt line. It
changes no admission, lock, status or authority path.
- The field is computed only for Retry wakes. Other wakes are unchanged.
- Runs saved by an older version have no `retriedReason`. A Retry built
from them reads the source run's `wakeReason`, which older runs already
saved.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, used through Claude
Code with tool use (shell, file edits, local test execution).

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 18:04:19 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 2539004201 fix(ephemeral): start a restarted volume-free server over the Runner controller files it wrote itself (#20952)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Cloud servers run volume-free (`PAPERCLIP_EPHEMERAL_SERVER=true`).
Postgres and object storage hold the durable state. A startup gate
refuses legacy volume data that was not migrated.
> - The gate reads one family of data from disk: Runner controller files
under `runtime/paperclip-runner/durable-sessions/`. It treats a
controller file that the database does not prove as legacy data.
> - A volume-free server also writes these files during normal work. A
warm follow-up restores the previous run's checkpoint as a full
`durable.control-plane-state.v2` file. The file stays full until the new
controller registers its database checkpoint writer.
> - When the server crashes in that window and restarts on the same
filesystem, the gate finds its own file and refuses to start. Every
later start refuses the same way. This is a full outage that no Retry
can fix.
> - This pull request gives the gate a durable marker. A volume-free
server claims an empty state directory before any controller can write.
Files in a claimed directory belong to a volume-free server and do not
block startup.
> - The benefit is that a crash restart of a volume-free server starts
again. Genuine legacy data keeps its protection, and the refusal now
names the run, task and file.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
The first restart-chaos waves in volume-free server mode (harness flag
`--ephemeral-server`, #20930) found this outage. Wave
`w-20261111T212429-s6402` (Claude through ACPX, Daytona warm sandboxes)
did a fresh-home deploy and then a `kill -9` of that server. The
replacement server exited with `Volume-free server data is not eligible:
native_controllers_require_migration`. A second start at +608 s exited
the same way. The server stayed down.

**Root cause**
`hasLocalNativeControllerObligations` in
`server/src/services/native-runtime/native-controller-migration.ts`
scans every Runner session in the state directory. The kept instance
shows the cause. The session's newest run `4a4d7ca1` was `running`
(admitted 3 s before the kill). Its controller root held the full
`paperclip.runner.durable.control-plane-state.v2` file of its warm
predecessor `9c13b7f8`. A controller writes that full file when it opens
and replaces it with the `external-control-plane-state.v1` marker only
in `setCheckpointPersistence`. `preservedActiveCheckpoint` accepts only
the marker, so the gate returned `true`. A Codex wave with the same
fault sequence passed because no warm follow-up was in this window at
the kill. Claude W2 cells start a new warm follow-up every 15 to 35 s,
so the window is open much more often.

**Can staging hit it?**
Yes, with a restart that keeps the container. Railway documents that a
manual Restart "restarts the process within the deployment's container",
so the filesystem stays. Railway does not document whether an automatic
crash restart reuses the container. A redeploy makes a new container, so
it does not hit this.

**Expected behavior**
A volume-free server starts again after any restart. State that it wrote
itself is disposable, because the database checkpoint is the durable
record. Data that a volume-backed server wrote keeps its current
protection.

## What Changed

- Add
`server/src/services/native-runtime/volume-free-controller-state.ts`.
`claimVolumeFreeControllerState(true)` writes `.volume-free-owner.json`
atomically (temporary file, fsync, rename, directory fsync) when the
state directory is absent or empty. It returns `owned` for a directory
that has the marker and `unclaimed` for a directory with other files.
`claimVolumeFreeControllerState(false)` removes the marker.
- `server/src/index.ts` calls the claim right after the volume-free
configuration check. This is before any controller or recovery can
write. A server started without volume-free mode releases the claim,
because it may write files that exist only on its disk. An `unclaimed`
result logs a warning.
- `hasLocalNativeControllerObligations` ignores the marker entries. It
returns no obligation for a claimed directory. It now delegates to
`findLocalNativeControllerObligation`, which returns the run, task and
file (or `database_checkpoint`).
- `assertEphemeralServerData` adds that detail to the
`native_controllers_require_migration` refusal. The error says which run
and file the database does not prove and why startup refuses.
- Document the marker in `doc/DEVELOPING.md` ("Runner controller state
on a restarted volume-free server").

## Verification

- Red, before the gate reads the marker: `pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/services/native-runtime/native-controller-migration.integration.test.ts
-t volume_free_owner` failed with `AssertionError: expected true to be
false` at the first gate check. The fixture is a running warm run whose
root holds a full `durable.control-plane-state.v2` file, the same shape
as the incident.
- Green: the same test passes. It checks: claimed directory gives no
obligation; release gives the obligation back; a non-empty unclaimed
directory stays blocked; the refusal names the run; the controller file
is never changed or removed.
- `ephemeral-server-data.test.ts`, `ephemeral-server-contract.test.ts`
and all 57 cells of `native-controller-migration.integration.test.ts`
pass. Server `tsc --noEmit` passes.
- Probe on a copy of the kept instance database and the killed server's
state directory: the unmodified gate returned an obligation for run
`4a4d7ca1` (source file
`.../7dbf2d5c.../control-plane/control-plane-state.json`).
- Chaos: the s6402 shape (`--ephemeral-server --adapters claude
--workloads W2 --faults K1,K2,K15 --k15-fresh-home --seed 6402`) runs on
this branch merged with #20930. The result is added in a comment.

## Risks

- A filesystem that a volume-free server claimed and that a pre-marker,
volume-backed server then wrote is not detected. This needs a downgrade
and a mode change on one disk. A current server in volume mode removes
the marker, which closes the normal path.
- A volume-free server on a directory written before this change (no
marker) keeps today's refusal. A new deploy makes a new container, so
staging claims the empty directory on first start after this deploy.
- Other scanners of the state directory filter on the 64-hex session
pattern, so the marker file does not change them.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, through Claude Code
with tool use (shell, file edit, test runs). Default context window,
extended reasoning on.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 17:59:57 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 d1e4109df1 fix(runner): keep a connected adopted Runner through a failed liveness probe (#20965)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - After a controller restart, the controller adopts the remote Runner
that kept running in the sandbox. A monitor then checks the Runner's
liveness every 250 ms through the environment plugin.
> - #20940 and #20945 made a stalled plugin probe "unknown" for the
launched Runner's monitor, reattachment and launch. The adopted Runner's
monitor still failed the run on the first probe that failed without an
answer.
> - A short plugin stall after adoption therefore failed a healthy run
with `native_adopted_runner_identity_unverifiable`.
> - This pull request uses the evidence that is available: while the
adopted Runner holds its authenticated connection to the controller, a
liveness check that fails without an answer does not fail the run, for
at most the reconnect grace.
> - The benefit is that a healthy adopted Runner survives a short plugin
stall. A check that reports the process gone still fails the run at
once.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20940, #20945

**What happened?**
`#watchAdoptedRunner` in
`packages/paperclip-runner/src/live/runnerd-codex-transport.ts` called
`failTransport("native_adopted_runner_identity_unverifiable: runner
liveness could not be revalidated")` on the first `isAlive()` rejection.
For a remote adopted Runner, `isAlive()` is a plugin
`environmentExecute` RPC. A plugin stall makes it reject, even while the
Runner holds its authenticated connection and works normally.

**Expected behavior**
A rejection is not an answer. While the Runner holds its authenticated
connection, the monitor keeps checking. The bound is the reconnect
grace. A check that returns `false` (the process is gone) still fails
the run at once.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Adopt a remote Runner after a controller restart.
2. Stall the plugin worker, so that the liveness probe rejects.
3. Within 250 ms the run fails with
`native_adopted_runner_identity_unverifiable`.

**Paperclip version or commit**
master at ef755cecc6.

## What Changed

- `#watchAdoptedRunner`: on an `isAlive()` rejection, the monitor
records when verification was first lost. It does not fail the transport
while the control plane has an authenticated Runner connection and less
than `runnerReconnectGraceMs` has passed. A successful check resets the
clock.
- Unchanged: an `isAlive()` result of `false` fails the run at once. A
rejection with no Runner connection fails it as before. A transport with
no reconnect grace (local adoption) fails it as before. The close path
still uses `isAlive()` directly.
- `doc/execution-semantics.md` describes the rule.

## Verification

- Red on master: `npx vitest run
src/live/runnerd-codex-transport-adoption.test.ts -t "liveness probe
rejects while"` (in `packages/paperclip-runner/`). It failed with
`native_adopted_runner_identity_unverifiable: runner liveness could not
be revalidated`.
- Green: the test passes. The real adopted runnerd keeps its connection,
`isAlive()` rejects for 1.5 seconds (6 monitor ticks), the run still
answers `thread/read`, no signal is sent, and the runner is alive.
- `runnerd-codex-transport-adoption.test.ts` passes (24 tests),
including "retains authenticated adopted-runner ownership when a close
probe rejects". `tsc --noEmit` passes for `packages/paperclip-runner`.

## Risks

- A remote adopted Runner whose liveness cannot be verified, but which
stays connected, keeps running for up to 7 minutes before the run fails
closed. Its own authenticated connection is the evidence during that
time, and no exit is reported.
- The change touches `packages/paperclip-runner/src`, so it changes the
Daytona runner image content ID.

> 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

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, through Claude Code
with tool use (shell, file edit, code search). Extended reasoning was
on.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 17:49:13 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 aaf76a3ca6 fix(native): start the configured review stage when a native worker reports done (#20882)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Tasks can have an execution policy with a review stage that names an
independent human reviewer
> - The issue route starts that stage when the assignee moves the task
to done or in_review
> - Native runs do not use that route. The native finalizer writes the
task status through the issue service, which does not run the stage
transition
> - So a native worker that reports verified work as done closes the
task without the required review. A worker that reports needs_review
moves the task to in_review without the configured stage or its reviewer
> - This pull request makes the native completion path start the
configured review stage, as the route does
> - The benefit is that a configured independent review gates Done for
native workers too

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**

A task had an execution policy with one review stage for a human
reviewer. A native worker (OpenCode on the Paperclip runner) finished
the work and reported it. When the worker reported done with verified
evidence, the task became done and the review stage never started. When
the worker reported needs_review, the task became in_review with a
generic review card, `executionState` stayed null, and the configured
reviewer was not assigned. The chat eval `tasks.completion-with-gate`
timed out in setup because the task never reached the pending review
stage.

**Expected behavior**

Verified work on a task with a configured human review stage goes to
in_review with that stage pending, the stage reviewer assigned and the
worker kept as the return assignee. The task becomes done only after the
reviewer approves.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create a task assigned to a native agent with `executionPolicy.stages
= [{ type: "review", participants: [{ type: "user", userId: <reviewer>
}] }]`.
2. Let the agent finish the work and report done with verified evidence.
3. Read the task. Before this fix it is `done` and `executionState` is
null.

## What Changed

- `server/src/services/issue-execution-policy.ts`: add
`completionReviewStageEntry`. It applies the full policy transition that
the route applies for `status: "done"` and returns `starts` (with the
stage patch), `none` or `rejected`.
- `native-run-finalizer.ts`: a done decision on a task whose policy
starts a stage becomes in_review with reason
`execution_stage_review_required`. When the policy refuses the
transition, the decision is in_progress with reason
`execution_stage_transition_rejected` and a recovery note. It is never
done. Deliverable checks still run first.
- `status-decision-committer.ts`: for a stage-entry decision, apply the
stale-owner check, start the stage from the locked task in the same
status update (this also clears a monitor that the new assignee cannot
use), and wake an agent participant with `execution_review_requested` or
`execution_approval_requested`, as the route does. If the policy
changed, the saved decision is stale and finalization retries.
- `native-completion-feedback.ts`: on such a task, tell the worker to
report done so the configured stage requests the review. Reject
needs_review with no request or with any review request. Approval
requests keep their own path, because they can be governed action cards.
- New regression test `native-execution-policy-review-stage.test.ts`
(embedded Postgres, 6 tests).

## Verification

- `cd server && npx vitest run
src/services/native-runtime/native-execution-policy-review-stage.test.ts`
(6 tests): no stage (done), human stage (in_review, reviewer assigned,
monitor cleared), agent stage (in_review, reviewer woken), refused live
review cycle (in_progress, not done), and feedback including mixed and
approval requests. The stage tests fail without the finalizer change
(the task becomes done).
- Related suites pass: `historical-task-questions`,
`native-completion-feedback`, `native-run-finalizer-telemetry`,
`native-terminal-status-projection`, `status-arbiter`,
`task-monitor.integration`, `__tests__/issue-execution-policy` (247
tests).
- Server `tsc --noEmit` shows no errors in changed files. The local
worktree has unbuilt packages, so CI supplies the full typecheck.

## Risks

- The agent-reviewer wake is a system workflow wake, like the route's.
Unit tests prove the wake row. An end-to-end native agent review after
this wake is not yet exercised in a paid eval.
- A decision saved with a new reason and resumed by an older release
projects in_review or in_progress without the stage. The task does not
close, so the older release fails safe.
- Agents on tasks with a configured review stage now get a rejection
when they report needs_review with no request or with a review request.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), tool use and code
execution in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 17:43:58 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 827bd21017 fix(recovery): retry lost-lease preparations instead of holding them for reconciliation (#20936)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Run recovery restarts work that stops for infrastructure reasons,
and keeps saved files safe
> - A legacy Runner run can lose its controller lease while it prepares
the workspace, before any provider work starts (`controller_lease_lost`
with `executionRecovery: { kind: "bootstrap", providerWorkStarted: false
}`)
> - Such a run has no unsaved provider state, but recovery still blocked
the task: either a saved-files hold that ends in `source_unavailable`,
or an immediate "No live execution path" block after one failed
continuation retry
> - Recovery must work without a person, and a shown Retry must work
> - This pull request lets lost-lease preparations use the existing
interrupted-preparation settlement, and lets the bounded stranded-task
sweep retry a continuation that failed before provider work
> - The benefit is that these tasks retry automatically, and tasks that
an older release already blocked recover after deploy

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20924 (fixes the lease renewal starvation that caused the lost
leases; this PR fixes what recovery did afterwards).

**What happened?**
A staging burst of lost controller leases stopped many legacy Runner
runs while they prepared the workspace. No provider work started. Most
of the affected tasks then became blocked. One shape kept a saved-files
hold (`legacy_execution_requires_reconciliation`). Its file recovery
ended `exhausted` with `source_unavailable`, because the workspace had
already retired the prepared epoch back to the last save. The hold never
settled. The other shape was a continuation retry that also lost its
lease. The release path blocked the task at once with "No live execution
path", although `controller_lease_lost` is a transient cause with a
3-attempt budget in the stranded-task sweep.

**Expected behavior**
A run that fails before provider work starts retries automatically,
within a bounded budget. It never needs reconciliation. If the prepared
workspace is gone, the task continues from the last committed save.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start a legacy Runner run with a remote workspace.
2. Make the controller lose its lease while the run prepares (before
provider dispatch).
3. Let restore recovery record a saved-files hold, and let the workspace
retire the prepared epoch.
4. See that the hold stays `resolved/blocked` with `source_unavailable`,
and the task stays blocked.

**Paperclip version or commit**
master at c1edb9ec02.

**Agent adapter(s) involved**
Not adapter-specific (core bug). Seen with `paperclip_runner` (Daytona
sandbox).

## What Changed

- `server/src/services/cancelled-native-startup.ts`:
`isInterruptedNativePreparationCandidate` accepts a failed
`controller_lease_lost` run with the bootstrap certificate
(`providerWorkStarted: false`), the same as a certified `process_lost`
run. The error label alone still grants nothing. This lets the existing
`legacy_interrupted_preparation_hold` settlement, terminal-time proof,
status receipt, and `interrupted_preparation` retry lane apply to these
runs.
- `server/src/modules/wake-queue/*`: the release snapshot carries
`retryableBeforeProviderWork` (bootstrap certificate plus a
`transient_infra` continuation classification). When an automatic
continuation retry failed for such a cause, release returns `released`
instead of blocking. The stranded-task sweep then retries with its
existing backoff and 3-attempt cap, and blocks only after that budget is
spent. Non-retryable causes, uninvokable agents, and failures after
provider work still block at once.
- `doc/execution-semantics.md`: documents both rules.
- No migration. Holds saved by the running release are settled by the
existing ownership reconciler after deploy.

## Verification

- Red then green, in the staging shape (failed `controller_lease_lost`,
`renewal_deadline` lease-loss evidence, `restore_failed` with
`workspaceRestoreRecovery`, exhausted `verify_execution` with
`source_unavailable` / `use_alternative_strategy`, retired prepared
epoch):
- `src/__tests__/interrupted-preparation-hold-settle.test.ts`: before
the fix, both new cases fail (`settled: 0`). After the fix, the hold
settles as `false_positive`. With the status receipt, the task returns
to `in_progress` and one `interrupted_preparation` successor is queued.
For a hold saved by an older release without a receipt, the execution
gate clears and one Retry starts a run. A lost lease without the
no-provider-work certificate stays held.
- `src/modules/wake-queue/domain/policy.test.ts` and
`application/use-cases.test.ts`: before the policy change, the two new
release cases fail (the task is blocked). After it, a pre-provider
lease-loss retry failure is released to the sweep, and other failures
still block.
-
`src/modules/wake-queue/adapters/retryable-before-provider-work.test.ts`:
classification of the release snapshot fact.
- `pnpm verify` and server `tsc --noEmit` pass locally.

## Risks

- Lost-lease preparations now use the `interrupted_preparation` retry
lane. That lane is uncharged but bounded at 12 retries, and it does not
revive a chain whose failure budget is spent.
- A released continuation waits for the stranded-task sweep (30 s
reconstruction, plus backoff) instead of a direct requeue. The sweep's
budget bounds the chain.
- Settlement still needs every existing proof: the controller is gone or
settled, leases are released with stop receipts, there are no execution
events or native coordinator, and the prepared epoch is retired or the
files are repaired.

> 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

- Claude Opus 5.5 (claude-opus-5-5), Anthropic, in Claude Code with tool
use (shell, file edits, browser reads of staging with GET requests
only).

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
canary/v2026.1112.0-canary.0
2026-11-11 17:30:32 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 ba905c7254 fix(evals): name each team member's readiness and grade configure-team structurally (#20879)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The chat catalog eval `teams.configure-team` checks that chat gets
an installed team ready member by member
> - Its setup installs Product Engineering, removes the QA member's
account, and requires a real probe split: QA missing an account, the
senior coder ready
> - The QA probe returned a generic `opencode_hello_probe_failed` error,
so the setup stopped with "probes do not establish the required
missing-versus-ready account split"
> - The cause is a product classification gap: OpenRouter answers an
empty key with HTTP 401 "Missing Authentication header", which the
OpenCode probe did not treat as authentication (fixed in #20878,
cherry-picked here)
> - This pull request makes the setup blocker name each member's
observed readiness, and replaces reply keyword checks with structural
checks
> - The benefit is that the eval can reach the chat journey and grades
it without matching words

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20878

**What happened**
`teams.configure-team` failed in setup. The QA member's probe was `fail`
with `opencode_hello_probe_failed`. The senior coder passed. The setup
error did not say which member was in which state.

**Expected behavior**
The QA member's probe reports the missing-authentication check, so the
split forms and the chat journey runs. When the split does not form, the
setup error names each member's observed status and checks.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run `chat-features.runner-opencode.local.teams.configure-team` on
master.
2. Read `snapshots/chat-catalog-team-initial-probes.json`.
3. QA shows `fail` with `opencode_hello_probe_failed:error`; the setup
stops.

## What Changed

- Cherry-pick of #20878: the OpenCode probe classifies a provider 401 as
`opencode_hello_probe_auth_required`.
- The setup blocker now lists each member as `name (expected missing
account | expected ready | other member): status [non-info checks]`.
- Grader: remove the member-name substring check and the "team is ready"
regex. Identification is the rendered link to the missing member's own
page, which the case already required. The followup is graded by a
non-empty reply from its own succeeded run, not by the words
"ready/configured/verified/account". Fresh per-member probes, preserved
working configuration and revisions, and the attributed repair stay
unchanged.
- Calibration: reworded and non-English valid followups pass; missing
handoff, empty followup, and failed followup run fail. A setup test with
the recorded failure shape checks the new error text.
- `oracleVersion` bumped to `paperclip.chat-catalog.team-configure.v3`;
`parse.ts` added to `sourceFiles`.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts
tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-domains/external-team-configure.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-domains/external-team-configure-prerequisite.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/chat-runtime-profile.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-contract.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-consistency.test.ts` passes.
- `node tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs <HEAD> --check`
reports no change.
- `node --test
tests/runner-e2e/chat-full-catalog-testops-manifest.test.mjs` passes.
- The paid run
`chat-features.runner-opencode.local.teams.configure-team` is still to
run.

## Risks

- The removed "team is ready" regex failed open. A false whole-team
claim in the reply now needs human reading of the transcript. The
structural checks still reject a missing handoff, a missing repair, and
any member that fails its fresh probe.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), tool use and code
execution in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 17:26:01 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 b7446969d7 fix(evals): give choose-capable-target a saveable computer and grade it structurally (#20881)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The chat catalog evals check that agents answer real user questions
through the product.
> - The case `execution-environments.choose-capable-target` asks "Which
computer can run Morgan with Claude Code?" while environment reads are
board-only.
> - Its setup saved a built-in fake sandbox as the "unsupported"
computer. The product refuses to save fake sandboxes (since #4449), so
setup failed with 422 before any agent run, and the test API hid the
reason.
> - No computer that the product can save is advertised as unable to run
Claude Code, so the original contrast cannot be built through supported
APIs.
> - This pull request changes the contrast to advertised support versus
runtime health, grades the reply by structure instead of keywords, and
makes setup failures show the product's validation reason.
> - The benefit is that the case can measure its user promise, and a
future setup 422 says why.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**

In the full chat catalog run, setup failed with `POST
/api/companies/<id>/environments returned 422; body withheld`. A focused
server test shows the reason: "Built-in fake sandbox environments are
reserved for internal probes and cannot be saved." The fixture payload
was `driver: "sandbox", config: { provider: "fake" }`.

**Expected behavior**

Setup builds its computers only through supported APIs, the agent run
starts, and the grader checks the user promise without reply keywords. A
setup validation failure states the product's reason.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Run
`chat-features.runner-opencode.local.execution-environments.choose-capable-target`
on master.
2. Setup posts a fake sandbox environment and gets 422.
3. `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/environment-routes.test.ts -t "rejects persisted fake
sandbox environments"` shows the same rule.

## What Changed

- `runtime-capability-choice.ts`: setup saves an SSH computer on a
reserved `.invalid` host (no key, never probed) beside the local fixture
computer. Production capabilities advertise Claude Code on both. The
`enableEnvironments` experimental setting is still set only through
`PATCH /api/instance/settings/experimental` and restored in cleanup.
- Grader: removed the reply regex and keyword checks. New checks: agent
gets 403 on capabilities and probe; the reply renders a link to
`/<prefix>/company/settings/instance/environments` (or a target's edit
page); the reply has no board-only SSH settings (host, user, path);
targets (including status and metadata) and the worker are unchanged;
exactly one chat turn and no tasks. `verifyResult` clicks the rendered
link and checks that the page shows both computers and loads the same
capabilities.
- `execution-environments.yaml`: context changed from "one target
supports the harness and another does not" to support versus health,
with the reason. Recorded in `chat-full-catalog-testops-manifest.json`
`changedFields`, pinned in the manifest test, and the inventory digest
is updated.
- `oracleVersion` is now
`paperclip.chat-catalog.runtime-capability-choice.v2` in code and in
`chat-catalog-descriptors.json`; `sourceFiles` adds
`internal-support.ts`, `server/src/routes/authz.ts` and
`server/src/services/environment-config.ts`.
- `api.ts`: cookie-session 400/409/422 failures now include the
product's `error` message, at most 240 characters, with request string
values (8 or more characters), the session cookie and long token-like
strings redacted. `details` and all other statuses stay withheld.
- Includes a cherry-pick of #20880 (agent environment denials link the
environment settings page). Without it, the agent has no route to give.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts` on
`runtime-capability-choice.test.ts`, `runtime-computers.test.ts`,
`chat-catalog-contract.test.ts`, `chat-catalog-consistency.test.ts`,
`api-private-transport.test.ts`, `api.test.ts`,
`api-response-reading.test.ts`: 73 passed.
- Grader calibration: valid and reworded replies with the settings link
pass. Missing, unprefixed, wrong-prefix, cross-origin and wrong-page
links fail. Replies with the SSH host, user or path fail. Unsupported
capability, reachable host, 200 boundary, changed target or worker, an
extra run and a created task fail.
- `node --test
tests/runner-e2e/chat-full-catalog-testops-manifest.test.mjs`: 10
passed.
- `node tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs <HEAD> --check`:
unchanged.
- `npx tsc --noEmit -p tests/runner-e2e`: no errors in changed files.
- Paid run still needed:
`chat-features.runner-opencode.local.execution-environments.choose-capable-target`.

## Risks

- Premise change: the case no longer has a saved computer that is
advertised as unable to run Claude Code, because the product cannot save
one. The "avoid an incompatible target" clause stays in the expected
outcome, but no saved target exercises it.
- The reply's claims about health are not graded by words. A reviewer
must read the paid run's reply.
- The 400/409/422 reason can show product text that the test API hid
before. It is bounded and redacted.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), tool use and code
execution in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 17:25:51 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 c45f54ee74 fix(native): stop or release unclosable idle warm Runners on environment delete, and say why a close failed (#20957)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Native runs keep a warm Runner in a Daytona sandbox between turns of
a task, so the next turn starts fast
> - Each idle warm Runner has an in-memory owner in the controller.
Deleting an environment closes these owners before it destroys the
sandboxes
> - In every warm chaos wave today, some owners never closed. The server
logged only `{"failed":2}`. Environment delete returned 409 forever, and
all sandboxes of the wave stayed `started` until their 60-minute TTL
> - On staging, that is leaked sandboxes (cost) and owners that block
the work after them
> - This pull request logs and reports the exact close error, stops an
unsettled idle Runner when its environment is deleted, and releases an
owner whose sandbox is already destroyed
> - The benefit is that environment delete finishes or names the exact
run and error, and every warm chaos wave now grades a clean shutdown

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
After warm Daytona chaos waves (W2, W2Q, W2C cells, `--faults K0`) on
Codex, Claude and OpenCode, the server logged `idle native session
cleanup failed before controller shutdown {"idleSessions":{"failed":2}}`
with no reason. `DELETE
/api/environments/:id?destroyReusableSandboxLeases=true` returned 409
"warm native runner did not shut down cleanly" on every retry. Eight
sandboxes per wave stayed `started`.

**Root cause.**
`closeIdleWarmNativeSessions`
(`server/src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.ts`)
dropped the close error (`catch {}`) and counted it. The owners that
failed are the W2Q owners. A W2Q task parks a question and is answered
by a later run on a fresh sandbox. With the reason logged, a wave shows
two causes for the same owner:

1. The owner's close cannot settle (`native_session_close_unrecoverable:
runner did not durably suspend before checkpoint`, the governed-wait
shape from #20844). Only a successor reset could force a stop
(`discardUnsettledSession`). An idle sweep or environment delete had no
forced stop.
2. The owner's sandbox lease was already destroyed by the
pending-cleanup sweep after the successor moved to a fresh sandbox
(#20863). Every close then fails with `Daytona sandbox lease <id> is no
longer active.`, because the stop RPC has no sandbox to reach. The owner
stays registered for ever.

The Runner close memoizes its rejection, so every later attempt fails at
once with the same error. This is not the "controller sequence must be
contiguous" exit (#20946): no close failure in these waves names a
sequence mismatch.

**Expected behavior**
An idle warm owner with no turn in flight never blocks environment
delete for ever. Every failed close names its run and its error.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run `tests/restart-chaos/main.ts --env daytona --daytona-warm
--adapters claude --workloads W2,W2Q,W2C --faults K0 --concurrency 8
--tasks 8`.
2. Read `<wave>/sandbox-sweep.json`: `environmentDeleteBlocked` is set
and the sandboxes are `started`.

## What Changed

- `closeIdleWarmNativeSessions` now returns `failures: [{ runId,
issueId, environmentId, providerLeaseId, reason }]`. The reason is the
close error with its code, its settlement record and its cause. It also
logs `idle warm native sessions did not close` with that list. The
idle-timeout close logs its error too.
- `closeWarmNativeSessionsForEnvironment` takes `forceStopUnsettled` and
`db`. The environment delete route sets both. When the graceful close
fails, Core retires the owner as #20844 does: one confirmed Launcher
`stop`, the credential snapshot, `complete`, then instruction
collection. A failed forced stop is added to the reason.
- When retirement still fails and the owner's sandbox lease has a
`destroyed` termination receipt, Core releases the owner. It does not
contact the sandbox. It logs `warm native session's sandbox was already
destroyed; released its owner` with the close error.
- The environment delete 409 now names each run and its reasons, and
`details.nativeRunnerSessions.failures` lists them.
- Idle timeout, controller restart and tenant sleep do not force a stop.
Their conversation can still be resumed, so they only log the reason.
- Chaos harness: new check `warm-shutdown.ts`, "no leaked sandboxes /
clean warm shutdown". Every warm wave (`--daytona-warm` or `--lifecycle
warm`) runs it. It fails the wave on a blocked delete, on a sandbox left
running after cleanup, or on a warm session that did not close at
environment delete or controller shutdown. It writes
`<wave>/warm-shutdown.json` and a section in `SUMMARY.md`.
- Docs: `doc/plugins/PLUGIN_RUNNER_EXECUTION.md` and the chaos README.

## Verification

- RED on master: `native-session-executor.test.ts -t "stops an idle warm
owner whose close cannot settle"` fails: `expected { closed: 0, busy: 0,
failed: 1 } to match object { closed: 0, failed: 1, failures: [...] }`
(a bare count, no reason). `environment-routes.test.ts -t "names the
warm runner session"` fails: the 409 does not name the run. On the first
fix commit, `-t "sandbox lease is gone"` fails: the lease state is never
read, and the owner stays.
- GREEN: those tests pass. The executor suite, environment routes, run
control, recovery, heartbeat process recovery, instance settings, the
idle-sleep, eviction, release-resume, restart-recovery and
warm-checkpoint integration suites pass (11 files, 2471 tests).
`tests/restart-chaos` unit test `warm-shutdown` passes. Server and
harness `tsc --noEmit` pass.
- Daytona warm waves (Claude, W2/W2Q/W2C, K0, 8 tasks). The runner image
`sha256:e04d9ce4…` matches 7e8901aa60, not current master, so each wave
ran this change cherry-picked onto 7e8901aa60:
- `w-20261111T210049-s6111` (first commit only): the close reason is now
logged: `close failed: Daytona sandbox lease 192606aa… is no longer
active.` The delete stayed 409 with that reason. The new check failed
the wave correctly.
- `w-20261111T222826-s6112` (all commits): two W2Q owners were released
with `sandbox was already destroyed`. The environment was deleted. 0
sandboxes left running. The warm-shutdown check passed. No 409 from a
warm session.
- Not verified: a wave where the graceful close fails and the forced
Launcher stop succeeds on a live sandbox (that path is covered by the
unit test). The wave's task failures (`T:first_run_succeeded`,
`R3:retry_needed`) are other open defects. They are also on master.

## Risks

- Environment delete now stops an idle Runner whose close did not
settle. The delete already has the operator's consent to destroy those
sandboxes. The workspace-export and restore-source guards on sandbox
destruction are unchanged. Instruction files are collected after the
confirmed stop, as in #20844.
- An owner is released without contact only when a lease for the same
company, environment and sandbox has a valid `destroyed` termination
receipt. A `stopped` receipt is not enough, because a stopped sandbox
can be resumed.
- `closeIdleWarmNativeSessions` results have a new `failures` field.
Callers that read only the counts are unchanged.
- No persisted state changes. Warm owners live only in controller
memory, so older saved state and mid-run deploys are not affected.
- The new harness check can fail a warm restart-fault wave that leaves a
warm session unclosed at controller shutdown. That is a real leaked
Runner.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, agentic coding with
tool use (shell, file edits, test runs, chaos waves) in Claude Code.

## 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
- [ ] 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>
2026-11-11 17:12:21 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 068d814735 test(chaos): run waves in Cloud's volume-free server mode; make W2 phase 1 yield (#20930)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The restart chaos harness (`tests/restart-chaos/`) runs real agent
tasks against an isolated control plane and injects faults
> - Cloud servers run in the volume-free mode
(`PAPERCLIP_EPHEMERAL_SERVER=true`, durable agent files, run logs in
object storage)
> - The harness never set that mode, so every wave ran a different
server mode from staging. Paths that exist only in that mode were never
tested. One of them is the per-agent directory operation lock, so
`--fail-recovery-step directory-lock` could never reach its step with
any workload
> - The re-wake workloads W2 and W2C also lost coverage: an agent that
reported phase 1 with disposition `done` closed the task, and the
harness never sent the re-wake (four of eight Claude cells on
2026-11-11)
> - This pull request adds `--ephemeral-server` and makes the W2/W2C
brief ask for a `yielded` phase-1 report
> - The benefit is that chaos waves can run in staging's server mode and
the re-wake cells test the re-wake on every provider

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What is the problem?**
The restart chaos harness cannot run the control plane in the
volume-free mode that Cloud and staging use. The `directory-lock`
recovery step (`agent_directory.operation_lock.before_acquire`) is
reached only for disposable remote copies, which need
`PAPERCLIP_EPHEMERAL_SERVER=true`. W2 and W2C cells also stop before the
re-wake when the agent reports phase 1 as `done`.

**What is the expected behavior?**
A wave can opt in to the volume-free mode on Daytona, and every restart
of the wave keeps that mode. The W2 and W2C cells reach the re-wake.

**Steps to reproduce**
Run `--fail-recovery-step
agent_directory.operation_lock.before_acquire:1` on Daytona with any
workload: the check `recovery_step_failed_once` reports "never reached".
Run W2 on Claude: the first run ends with the task `done` and
`rewake_sent` is "never sent".

## What Changed

- `assertIsolatedServerEnvironment` (`tests/runner-e2e/harness-env.ts`)
takes `expected.generatedSecretsMasterKey`. It admits
`PAPERCLIP_SECRETS_MASTER_KEY` only when that parameter is set and
equals the value exactly. `PAPERCLIP_SECRETS_MASTER_KEY_FILE` stays
refused. The check runs over the final server environment.
- `--k15-fresh-home` implies `--ephemeral-server` and defaults
`--storage` to `s3`. A fresh instance home without the volume-free mode
loses the agents' instruction bundles, which staging keeps in Postgres
and object storage.
- `--ephemeral-server` (`config.ts`, `types.ts`, `main.ts`,
`supervisor.ts`, new `ephemeral-server.ts` with its unit test
`ephemeral-server.test.ts`): it needs `--storage s3` and `--env daytona`
and refuses K14. Every server of the wave gets
`PAPERCLIP_EPHEMERAL_SERVER`, `PAPERCLIP_DURABLE_AGENT_FILES`,
`PAPERCLIP_SHARED_UI_ASSETS`, the wave's Postgres as
`PAPERCLIP_DATABASE_LISTEN_URL`, one stable
`PAPERCLIP_SECRETS_MASTER_KEY` (also written to the config key file) and
`RUN_LOG_S3_*` in the wave's object store.
- `rewake.ts`: the W2/W2C phase-1 brief asks for `paperclip_finish` with
disposition `yielded` and a `response_wake` continuation.
- W2/W2C tasks are created in `backlog` with their assignee, and a board
comment starts phase 1 (`startComment` in `workloads.ts`, used by
`observer.ts`). A passive board wait needs a comment-started run;
without it the yield queues an immediate continuation and phase 1 wakes
itself. The start comment is posted once (saved-comment check plus a
stable `clientRequestId`), and the brief keeps phase 2 out of blocking
`remainingWork`.
- Volume-free mode drops the repository workloads (B1, B5, F1, R1) from
the default list and refuses them when listed: their fixture is a
`local_path` project source, which a volume-free server refuses.
- `README.md`: a section for the new flag and a note on the brief.
- `shape-cells.test.ts`: option parsing and refusals for the new flag.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/restart-chaos/vitest.config.ts
tests/restart-chaos/shape-cells.test.ts` passes (16 tests).
- `node scripts/typecheck-test-projects.mjs tests/restart-chaos` passes.
- Live proof wave (Daytona, Codex, W2, K1 and K15 with a fresh home,
`--storage s3 --ephemeral-server`): wave `w-20261111T205259-s6301` (2
tasks). The first server and both replacements (K15 with a fresh home,
then K1) started and reached ready in the volume-free mode. The server
process had `PAPERCLIP_EPHEMERAL_SERVER=true`,
`PAPERCLIP_DURABLE_AGENT_FILES=true` and `RUN_LOG_S3_BUCKET` set. Both
W2 tasks left phase 1 `in_progress` (yielded), received the re-wake and
ended `done`. The wave also found product faults (reported separately,
not fixed here): a re-wake after K1 failed with
`runner_harness_state_mismatch: backup_without_reusable_lease` and
needed Retry.
- `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts
tests/runner-e2e/support.test.ts` passes, including the new master-key
admission test (a matching wave key passes; an inherited key, a
mismatched key and `PAPERCLIP_SECRETS_MASTER_KEY_FILE` are refused).

## Risks

- Low risk. The flag is opt-in and the harness is test-only. The brief
change alters the W2/W2C prompt, so results from older W2/W2C seeds are
not directly comparable.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`) in Claude Code, with tool use and
code execution.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 17:12:14 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 ef755cecc6 fix(evals): grade case facts by the saved fact, bind case kickoffs to the CEO run, stop block-on-design on a missing blocker (#20948)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The chat eval catalog runs real chat journeys and grades saved
product state
> - Three cases failed in runs 43088288923 and 43101125481. In two of
them the product did the right thing
> - `cases.update-case-facts` used a word allow-list on a saved field.
`cases.create-case` read a field the product never fills for a new task
> - `task-coordination.block-on-design` timed out in the browser on a
missing row, which hid the real cause
> - This pull request grades what the user asked for, binds records by
structure, and stops with the real cause
> - The benefit is that each case fails only when the product fails, and
says why

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**
- `cases.update-case-facts`: the CEO saved `browser: "Mobile Safari only
(bug reproduces only on mobile Safari)"` and kept the other fields. The
grader allowed only the words "safari" and mobile qualifiers, so "bug
reproduces" failed the first phase. The earlier rewording of the
scripted follow-up was not the cause: it is sent only after this phase.
- `cases.create-case`: the CEO created the case, the `workflow` and
`customer_brief` documents and Morgan's kickoff in one run, before
Morgan started. The grader required the kickoff's `sourceRunId` to be a
CEO run. The product sets `sourceRunId` to the run that holds the task
being handed off, so it is always null when the kickoff creates the
task. The grade never passed, so the harness kept waiting. Morgan then
found no app to test, handed the case back to the CEO, and the extra CEO
run broke the run bound.
- `task-coordination.block-on-design`: the CEO saved no Design blocker.
The scripted human then waited 30 s for the "Blocked by" row and failed
with a locator timeout.

**Expected behavior**
Each case accepts every valid product behavior and rejects the failures
that matter. A failure names its cause.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Regrade the retained observation of run 43101125481 for
`cases.create-case` with the old grader: `real-first-morgan-kickoff` and
`required-documents-persist-before-investigation` fail although the
records are correct.
2. Call `corrected({ browser: "Mobile Safari only (bug reproduces only
on mobile Safari)" })` with the old grader: it returns false.
3. Run `task-coordination.block-on-design` when the CEO saves no
blocker: it fails on a UI locator instead of on the missing blocker.

## What Changed

- `cases.update-case-facts` (oracle v8): grade the saved correction
structurally, with no word lists. The browser fact differs from the
case's own setup value, and no field keeps the setup's stale literal
"not yet confirmed", in the saved case and in the reviewer's handoff
context. A person reads whether the wording says mobile Safari.
- `cases.create-case` (oracle case-create.v2): bind the kickoff and its
documents to the CEO chat run that was active when the kickoff was
saved, not to `sourceRunId`. Admit one CEO run on the primary task woken
by Morgan's own case handoff back to the CEO, and add a check that binds
it to that handoff. Run bound is now 2 to 3.
- Shared run policy (`chat-catalog-run-policy.ts`,
`chat-catalog-contract.ts`): new optional `maximumLeadCaseHandbackRuns`
for `source-settled-with-active-work`. The default is 0, so other cases
grade exactly as before. No other oracle version changes.
- `task-coordination.block-on-design` (oracle v9): after the first turn,
stop with "The CEO did not save Design as a blocker on Website" when the
edge is missing.
- Descriptors updated for the three cases.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts` on
`integrator-case-create`, `integrator-case-facts`, `runtime-dependency`,
`chat-catalog-run-policy`, `chat-catalog-readiness`,
`chat-catalog-failure-retirement`, `chat-catalog-consistency` and
`chat-ordinary-phase-callers` tests: all pass.
- Calibration in both directions:
- case facts: the retained values of runs 43088288923 and 43107042937
and four rewordings pass. The unchanged setup value, a kept stale
literal (in any field), empty facts and a first turn that left the value
unchanged fail.
- create-case: the retained run 43101125481 regrades to pass. Documents
from another run, a kickoff outside the CEO run, a kickoff by Morgan, a
handback with no handoff, a handback woken another way and two handbacks
fail.
- run policy: an undeclared handback, a lead run woken another way and a
second handback fail.
- `npx tsc --noEmit -p tests/runner-e2e`: no errors in changed files.
- `node tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs <HEAD> --check`:
unchanged.
- End-to-end: chat eval run linked in a comment below.

## Risks

- Low risk. Only eval code changes. The shared run-policy option is
opt-in, and its default keeps the old result.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), tool use and code
execution in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 16:59:53 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 9c56e5465c fix(native): keep the agent's own unanswered question open after a turn ends without a report (#20934)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - An agent can ask the person a question and wait for the answer.
Native task status comes from the server's status arbiter, not from
model prose
> - When a native turn ends without `paperclip_finish`, the Runner sends
a default report: `done`, objective satisfied, with the agent's final
message as the only evidence
> - A later comment from the person moves an open question into history
(#15392), so the question no longer gates completion
> - Together these close a task as `done` while the agent is still
waiting for its own answer and has produced nothing. No Retry appears
and nothing flags it
> - This pull request keeps such a task `in_review` on the agent's own
unanswered question when the only completion evidence is the agent's
final message
> - The benefit is that a "waiting for your answer" turn can no longer
become a silent false completion

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15392

**What happened?**
Restart-chaos wave on master 7e8901aa60, OpenCode task t06 (W2Q), no
fault injected. Run fec9530f asks a question (interaction c2d3b3f2); the
task goes `in_review`. A board comment says "include NOTE-238ef87a in
the brief; do not write the brief yet; I will answer shortly". Run
f6cbefa8 replies "I will not write the brief until the board's answer
arrives. Ending turn to await the codename answer." and ends its turn
without `paperclip_finish`. The Runner's default report
(`provider:opencode:agent-message` as the only evidence,
`reportedWorkDisposition: done`) is accepted, and the low-risk claim
policy sets the task `done`. The question is still unanswered and the
`brief` document does not exist.

**What did you expect to happen?**
The task keeps waiting for the answer. The answer continues the task,
and the agent writes the brief.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. An agent asks a question on its task.
2. The person posts a comment before answering.
3. The agent ends its turn without a completion report, saying it waits
for the answer.
4. The task is `done`; the question stays pending.

## What Changed

- New `server/src/services/native-runtime/own-question-wait.ts`:
- `reportsOnlyProviderMessage(result)`: true when every evidence
reference in the report is `provider:<provider>:agent-message` and the
report has no artifact and no verification. This is the shape of the
Runner's default report for a turn that ended without
`paperclip_finish`.
- `pendingOwnQuestionId(db, …)`: the agent's own pending, undismissed
ordinary question (`ask_user_questions`, not a governed tool, secret or
connection request) on the task.
- `finalizeNativeRun` (`native-run-finalizer.ts`): when the proposed
decision is `done`, the task is not an Agent Chat conversation, the
report cites only the agent's final message, and the agent's own
question is still pending, the decision becomes `in_review` with reason
`own_question_unanswered` and releases the checkout. The question stays
pending, so the person's answer continues the task through the existing
answer path.
- Dismissal (`POST /issues/:id/interactions/:interactionId/dismiss`,
`dismissInteraction`): new `enqueueOwnQuestionDismissalWake` runs inside
the dismissal transaction, only when the card moves from pending to
dismissed. When the task is `in_review` on an applied
`own_question_unanswered` decision of the assignee's run, the dismissed
card is the assignee's own question, and no other pending, undismissed
question of that agent remains, it saves a durable wake intent
(`issue_question_dismissed`, idempotency key per question) in the
existing native status wake outbox (`enqueueWake`, now exported). The
outbox dispatcher delivers and retries it, so the agent continues
without the answer. Dismissal of any other request keeps the no-wake
rule.
- `assignmentDenial` (`agent-interaction-delivery.ts`): an
`issue_question_dismissed` wake counts as a person's wake when its
`dismissedInteractionId` names the recipient's own question on that task
with a `dismissedByUserId`, so a recipient that refuses agent
assignments still receives it.
- `doc/execution-semantics.md` describes the exception to the
historical-question rule.

## Verification

- New case in
`server/src/services/native-runtime/historical-task-questions.test.ts`
("keeps the agent's own unanswered question open after an unreported
turn"), run through the real `PaperclipControlPlanePort.completeRun` and
`finalizeNativeRun` with a low-risk `agent_claim_policy` contract, as on
staging:
- Red on master (finalizer hunk removed, test kept): `unreported` fails,
`expected 'done' to be 'in_review'`.
- Green: `unreported` rests `in_review` with `own_question_unanswered`
and the question still pending. `unreported-dismissed`,
`unreported-answered` and `verified` (work-product evidence) still rest
`done`, so the #15392 behavior is unchanged.
- Dismissal after finalization (same test): the release check is null
while a second own question is open and returns the agent once both are
dismissed. A repeated dismissal saves no second intent; the saved intent
is a queued `issue_question_dismissed` outbox row. Delivery test
`delivers a dismissal wake only for a person's dismissal of the
recipient's question` (30 passed). Route test `saves the dismissal wake
intent in the dismissal transaction only when the card is dismissed`
(147 passed).
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/services/native-runtime/historical-task-questions.test.ts
src/services/native-runtime/native-run-finalizer`: all passed.
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/services/native-runtime/paperclip-control-plane-port.test.ts
src/services/native-runtime/status-arbiter.test.ts`: 119 passed.
- `cd server && pnpm exec tsc --noEmit -p tsconfig.json`: passes.
- Chaos, Daytona OpenCode, seed 6201, W2Q K0, 4 tasks (wave
w-20261111T211421-s6201, run from master 7e8901aa60 plus this change
because the pinned runner image must match runner sources): no false
completion. t02 and t04 PASS (in_review -> in_progress -> done after the
answer). t01 failed `R3:retry_needed` through the blocked path fixed
separately in #20931 (not in this build). t03 timed out because its
rewake OpenCode turn stayed active for 20 minutes without ending
(provider turn never finished; this change acts only at finalization,
which never ran). The unreported-done path did not occur in this sample,
so the red/green proof for this change is the integration test. Before:
wave w-20261111T200718-s6201 t06 closed done with the question
unanswered.

## Risks

- Low. Only a `done` decision whose report cites nothing but the agent's
final message changes, and only while the same agent's own ordinary
question is pending and undismissed. Explicit completion reports with
their own evidence keep the current rule. A person can still dismiss the
question to release it.
- An agent that really finished without `paperclip_finish` while its own
old question is open now rests `in_review` instead of `done`. The open
question is visible on the task; answering or dismissing it settles the
task.
- No schema change. A result saved by an older release is finalized by
the same rule because it reads only the saved report and interaction
rows.
- Related observation (not changed here): in 5 Claude/OpenCode W2/W2C
cells the agent wrote "the task remains in_progress as instructed" yet
the task became `done` (Claude t06, wave s6101). The run's
`paperclip_finish` input itself sent `reportedWorkDisposition: "done"`,
`objectiveSatisfied: true`, with the deferred phase listed as
`blocksCompletion: false`. The server did not map a yielded disposition
to done. That is model behavior on a contradictory report, a different
root from this change.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), with tool use and code execution
in an agent harness.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 16:50:28 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 65ebd96bcf fix(chat): keep the person's brief as a document on a new case's primary task (#20954)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - With Cases enabled, a person can ask chat to open a case from a
brief and hand it to an agent
> - The case scenario expects the brief and a workflow document on the
primary task before work starts
> - In one run the CEO copied the brief's facts into case fields but
saved only the workflow document
> - The Cases chat guidance says nothing about where the person's brief
belongs
> - This pull request adds one guidance sentence: save the brief with
`initialDocuments` in the same case-handoff request
> - The benefit is that the assignee always has the person's source,
saved before its run begins

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**
In the chat eval `cases.create-case` (run 43107042937), the person
attached a customer bug brief and asked the CEO to open a case and have
Morgan investigate. The CEO created the case, its fields, the workflow
document and the kickoff. It did not save the brief on the primary task.
In an earlier run (43101125481) the CEO did save it, so the behavior
depends on the model's choice.

**Expected behavior**
The new primary task has the person's brief as a document, saved in the
request that creates it, before the assignee starts.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Enable Cases. Attach a brief in chat with the CEO.
2. Ask: "Open a case for this customer bug, record the facts from my
brief, and have Morgan investigate first."
3. Read the primary task's documents: in some runs only `workflow`
exists.

## What Changed

- `CASES_CHAT_DIRECTIVE` (rendered only while Cases is enabled): one
sentence. When the person opens a case from a brief, save the brief as a
document on the primary task with `initialDocuments` on `POST
/api/companies/{companyId}/case-handoffs`. Case fields do not replace
the brief.
- `case-history-api-discovery.test.ts`: a regression test for the new
guidance.

## Verification

- Red: the new test failed before the change. Green: `npx vitest run
src/__tests__/case-history-api-discovery.test.ts
src/__tests__/agent-conversations.test.ts` (67 passed).
- The route already accepts `initialDocuments` for a newly created
primary task (`packages/shared/src/case-handoffs.ts`).
- End-to-end: chat eval run linked in a comment below.

## Risks

- Low risk. The sentence renders only when Cases is enabled. No API or
permission changes.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), tool use and code
execution in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 16:47:12 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 6cfb1f3d87 fix(environments): resume a warm sandbox that its finished predecessor is still releasing (#20953)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A warm Paperclip Runner session keeps its Daytona sandbox between
runs. The next run of the same task resumes that sandbox through a
`reuse_by_environment` lease.
> - Acquisition only resumes a lease that is `released`, `retained`, or
held by the same run. A finished run releases its lease only after it
saves its instruction and workspace files, which takes several seconds.
> - A board wake that arrives in that window does not see the warm
lease. It creates a fresh sandbox. The session's durable backup cannot
be restored there, because its source lease is still held. The run fails
with `native_session_recovery_failed: runner_harness_state_mismatch:
backup_without_reusable_lease` and the task needs Retry, which starts a
new provider session.
> - This pull request makes acquisition wait, for a short bounded time,
for a lease that a recently finished predecessor is still releasing, and
then resume it.
> - The benefit is that the follow-up continues the same warm session in
the same sandbox, with no Retry, no restore and no lost provider
context.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
Restart-chaos wave `w-20261111T205259-s6301` (Codex, Daytona warm,
volume-free server, `--ephemeral-server` from #20930), task t01. The
board re-wake run `e7129ec7` started at 20:57:44. Its predecessor
`5cf8c306` reported `run.terminal` at 20:57:38 but saved its instruction
copy until 20:57:51, so its warm lease was still `active`. At 20:57:53
the new run recorded `startup reuse: environment (fresh)`. It then
failed with `runner_harness_state_mismatch:
backup_without_reusable_lease` (error code
`native_session_interrupted`). Recording the `workspace_finalize`
operation then failed with a Postgres deadlock, and the run settled
`native_finalization_missing`. Retry run `79aa18ec` worked with a fresh
provider session. The K1 restart in that wave was at 20:55:32 and is not
the cause: six warm runs after it reused the sandbox normally.

**Root cause**
`reusableLeaseCanBeResumed` in
`server/src/services/environment-runtime.ts` excludes an `active` lease
held by another run. That rule is correct for a running predecessor. For
a predecessor that has already ended, the `active` state is a short
release tail. The new run creates a sandbox, and
`retiredSourceAuthorizesNativeBackupRestore`
(`native-retired-backup-source.ts`) correctly refuses to restore the
backup from a source lease that is not yet `released` or `retained`
(`idleWarmSourceRetiresBackup`). The executor's last branch
(`native-session-executor.ts`, host preparation, created allocation)
then throws `backup_without_reusable_lease`.

**How often**
Seen in 2 of 361 retained wave result directories on this machine
(`s6301` today, `s5201` earlier). It needs a board wake within a few
seconds of the predecessor's terminal event, so it is timing dependent.

## What Changed

- `server/src/services/environment-runtime.ts`: add
`waitForSettlingReusableLease`. Before the plugin and built-in sandbox
paths select a reusable lease, acquisition polls (250 ms) for up to 20 s
while a matching `reuse_by_environment` lease is `active` under a
different run that is `succeeded`, `failed`, `cancelled` or `timed_out`
and finished in the last two minutes. It then continues with the normal
selection, which resumes the released lease.
- A running predecessor causes no wait (unchanged: the new run gets a
new sandbox). A predecessor that ended more than two minutes ago and
never released causes no wait.
- `server/src/__tests__/environment-runtime.test.ts`: two red/green
cases (succeeded and failed predecessor release the lease 400 ms after
the successor starts acquiring) and one case for an old unreleased lease
(no wait, new sandbox, old lease untouched).
- `doc/execution-semantics.md`: describe the wait next to the existing
warm-reuse rules.

## Verification

- Red on master: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/environment-runtime.test.ts -t predecessor` fails both
cases with `expected 'warm-2' to be 'warm-1'`: the successor created a
second sandbox instead of resuming the first.
- Green: the same command passes (3 tests).
`environment-runtime.test.ts`, `plugin-warm-tasks.integration.test.ts`
and `environment-run-orchestrator.test.ts` pass (288 tests). Server `tsc
--noEmit` passes.
- Not verified in a chaos wave. The window is a few seconds wide and
appeared in 2 of 361 waves, so one wave cannot show the change.

## Risks

- A successor can start up to 20 s later when its predecessor's release
is slow. Creating a sandbox and restoring a backup takes longer, and
failing needs a Retry. The two-minute bound keeps a stuck,
never-released lease from delaying every later run.
- If a caller held a lock that the predecessor's release needs, the wait
ends at 20 s and acquisition behaves as before.
- Compared with #20863 (fresh-sandbox fallback) and #20811 (unsaved
provider state marker): this change does not alter either. It reduces
how often a warm continuation reaches the fresh-sandbox branch. The
backup restore proof is unchanged, so an unproven backup still fails
closed with a working Retry.
- The `workspace_finalize` deadlock in the same run is a separate defect
and is not fixed here.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, through Claude Code
with tool use (shell, file edit, test runs). Default context window,
extended reasoning on.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 16:40:58 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 e01ba16bfd fix(native): continue the interrupted turn after a relaunch that failed before its runner existed (#20944)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Native agent runs survive a server restart: recovery verifies the
old runner stopped, then resumes the same provider session and its
interrupted turn
> - Recovery is a chain of steps. When one step fails once, the next
attempt must still be allowed to finish the work
> - Here the first recovery step was correct, its runner spawn failed
once (EAGAIN), and the next attempt refused to continue the interrupted
turn. The run died and needed a manual Retry
> - This pull request lets the scheduled same-run resume prove that the
failed launch left nothing behind, and then continue the turn
> - The benefit is that a single failed spawn during recovery no longer
turns a recoverable lost turn into a terminal failure

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Restart-chaos wave `w-20261111T190113-s5303` (local, codex, A1, fault K1
with `--fail-recovery-step runnerd-start:1`) on master `683fd1e9a5`. Run
timeline:

1. K1 killed the server mid-turn. Recovery recorded
`native.local_process_stopped` for the dead runner and chose
`resume_dead_runner`.
2. That attempt wrote `native.process_start_requested`, then the spawn
failed with `spawn paperclip-runnerd EAGAIN`. The executor persisted a
scheduled same-run resume (`recoveryMode: exact_checkpoint_resume`,
`providerSessionEstablished: true`, `checkpointExists: true`,
`recoverable: true`).
3. The scheduled attempt resumed the session. The runner reported
`provider_turn_lost_on_restore` (recoverable). The run ended
`native_provider_terminal_failed` with "Automatic recovery stopped", and
the task needed Retry.

The same seed with K1 and no injected step passes.

Root cause: in `executePaperclipNativeSession`
(`native-session-executor.ts`), `resumeInterruptedTurn` is
`restartRecovery.kind === "resume_dead_runner" ||
scheduledResumeContinuation`. The second attempt is not a restart claim,
so it depends on `scheduledResumeContinuationAllowed`
(`scheduled-resume-continuation.ts`). That decision refused with
`local_stop_unverified`: `readNativeLocalProcessStop` reads the newest
launch event, and the newest one was the failed
`process_start_requested` with no process identity and no stop receipt.
The checkpoint evidence was correct; the stop evidence was the gap. The
refusal was not logged.

**Expected behavior**

When a launch fails before its runner exists, a scheduled same-run
resume proves on this host that no runner for the run exists and that
the launch wrote no runner state, records that stop, and continues the
interrupted turn. A live runner for the run still blocks it.

**Steps to reproduce**

`node cli/node_modules/tsx/dist/cli.mjs tests/restart-chaos/main.ts
--env local --adapters codex --workloads A1 --faults K1
--fail-recovery-step runnerd-start:1 --fault-after-seconds 10
--concurrency 1 --tasks 1 --seed 5303`

## What Changed

- `scheduled-resume-continuation.ts`: when the decision refuses only for
`local_stop_unverified` on a local target,
`scheduledResumeContinuationAllowed` calls the existing
`recordUnidentifiedLocalRunnerStop` (the same proof explicit
continuations use). It requires that the newest event is this host's
launch request, that no process carries `--run-id <runId>`, and that no
runner state for the run changed after the launch request. On success it
records `native.local_process_stopped` (`basis:
unidentified_runner_absent`) in the claim transaction and decides again.
All other checks (exact checkpoint, recoverable, session established,
checkpoint exists, no replacement, admitted attempt) still apply first.
- `native-session-executor.ts`: logs the refusal reason when a scheduled
`exact_checkpoint_resume` will not continue the interrupted turn.
- `native-scheduled-resume-continuation.integration.test.ts`: two cases.
A failed relaunch after a verified stop now continues the turn
(`resumeInterruptedTurn: true`, attempt 2). A failed relaunch while a
process with `--run-id <runId>` is alive still refuses. The fixture now
advances `nextEventSeq` after inserting events directly.
- `tests/restart-chaos/README.md`: records what the existing
`runnerd-start:1` cell found and what now passes.

## Verification

- RED on master: "continues the lost turn after a relaunch that failed
before its runner existed" fails with `expected [ false ] to deeply
equal [ true ]` (the runtime gets `resumeInterruptedTurn: false`, which
is the path that produced `provider_turn_lost_on_restore` →
`native_provider_terminal_failed`).
- GREEN: `scheduled-resume-continuation`,
`native-scheduled-resume-continuation.integration`,
`native-exact-resume-failure`, `native-restart-recovery`,
`native-runner-restart-recovery.integration`, `native-session-executor`,
`native-session-resumption`, `heartbeat-native-restart-suspension` pass
(1797 tests). `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passes.
- Chaos rerun of seed 5303 with `runnerd-start:1`: result is added in a
comment on this PR.

## Risks

- The proof is host-local: it only applies on the host that wrote the
launch request, the same as explicit continuations. Remote targets and
restart claims are unchanged.
- Old saved state: a run already stuck in a scheduled resume after a
failed spawn now continues on its next attempt instead of failing. That
is the intended recovery; the checkpoint and attempt limits still bound
it.
- Sibling recovery steps (`teardown`, `directory-lock`) are
Daytona-only. The saved waves that armed them (`s5311`, `s5312`) never
reached the step, so this PR does not change or prove them.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, via Claude Code with
tool use (shell, file edits, 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
- [ ] 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>
2026-11-11 16:36:17 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 d9d5958d09 fix(runner): reject an out-of-order controller command instead of exiting (#20946)
## Thinking Path

- Paperclip's controller and the sandbox Runner exchange numbered
commands; the Runner refuses a command whose number is not exactly one
past the last it processed.
- Staging's most common "Runner gone" failure was a follow-up controller
whose journal was behind the Runner. #20928 removed the cause on the
server (a warm follow-up now launches from the journal its retired
predecessor saved) and added a defence that reconciles a journal behind
only by the predecessor's settled close.
- The Runner still treated an out-of-order command as fatal:
`durable/state.rs` returned an error and the process exited. A
controller with a stale journal from any other cause (state saved by an
older release, a mid-run deploy) therefore lost the Runner process and
the run could only fail as "Runner gone"
(`runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`).
- This pull request makes the Runner refuse such a command with a
precise result instead of exiting, and makes the server rest that run
with a precise code and a Retry whose next run reconciles the journal
(the #20928 defence) before it opens the session.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

- Refs #20928 (the server-side root-cause fix and the journal
reconciliation this relies on)
- Refs #20907 (makes runnerd exit text visible in the run log)
- Duplicate search: searched PRs for "controller sequence contiguous",
"controller_sequence_mismatch" and "out-of-order command"; none changes
the Runner's handling.

## What Changed

- `runner-core/src/durable/state.rs`: a new command whose
`controllerSeq` is not `lastControllerCommandSeq + 1` (behind or a gap)
now yields `CommandDisposition::Reject` with `status: "rejected"` and `{
code: "controller_sequence_mismatch", message, expectedControllerSeq,
receivedControllerSeq }`. The command is not executed or journaled and
the last sequence is unchanged; the process keeps running. Replay of an
already-processed command and the compacted-history rejection are
unchanged.
- `native-session-executor.ts`: a failure carrying
`controller_sequence_mismatch` is classified as
`native_controller_journal_behind_runner`, a permanent (terminal)
failure with a Retry action that says no provider work began and that
Retry reconciles the journal from the saved checkpoint or stops with a
precise error.
- Tests:
- Rust `tests/durable_recovery.rs`: out-of-order (behind and gap)
commands are rejected with the precise code, the journal is unchanged,
and the next contiguous command executes. The existing
`command_gaps_and_identifier_reuse_fail_closed` unit test now asserts
the rejection instead of an error.
- Real runnerd `src/live/runnerd-stale-controller-journal.test.ts`: a
follow-up controller with a journal missing the predecessor's close now
gets `"code":"controller_sequence_mismatch"`, the Runner process stays
alive and its durable sequence is unchanged; with the current journal it
resumes.
  - Server: the classification and terminal disposition of the new code.

## Verification

- Red (master Runner): the Rust test panics on `expect("an out-of-order
command is not fatal")`; the real-runnerd test receives `runnerd exited
unexpectedly with code 1: paperclip-runnerd: controller sequence must be
contiguous: expected 6, received 4`.
- Green: `cargo test -p paperclip-runner-core --test durable_recovery`
(4 passed); `cargo test -p paperclip-runner-core` lib suite (the only
other failure, `task_memory::tests::monitor_bounds_notices`, is a timing
test that passes alone); `npx vitest run
src/live/runnerd-stale-controller-journal.test.ts` with a runnerd built
from this branch (2 passed); server `native-session-executor.test.ts`
focused tests (71 passed).
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner check:acpx-profiles`:
profiles match the release manifest. No ACPX profile, attestation, pin
or pack contract schema changed (`rules/acpx-profile-identity.mdc`): the
change is Runner source behaviour with an existing command-result shape,
so no profile version or `commandDigest` changes.

## Risks

- A controller that is *ahead* of the Runner (a gap) is now rejected
instead of fatal. Neither case executes the command; the Runner journal
is unchanged, so this is strictly safer than exiting.
- The rested run needs a Retry. Before this change the same run failed
after its retries as "Runner gone" with no precise cause.
- Runner source changes the Daytona image content ID; a new image is
needed for chaos waves on this revision.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), 1M-token context, tool
use (shell, file edits, tests) in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 16:14:31 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 2719145ae2 fix(chat): save a requested start order as a first-class blocker (#20947)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - People use chat to tell the CEO agent how work must be ordered
> - A person said "Do not start the website until the design is
approved"
> - The CEO only promised to hold the work. It did not save a blocker,
so nothing stopped the Website task
> - Chat guidance names blockers only when chat creates new tasks. It
says nothing about an order between existing tasks
> - This pull request adds one guidance line: save the order as a
blocker on the waiting task
> - The benefit is that Paperclip enforces the order and wakes the
assignee when the prerequisite is done

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**
In the chat eval `task-coordination.block-on-design` (run 43088288923),
the person asked the CEO to keep Website from starting until Design is
approved. The CEO read both tasks and replied "I'm holding both until
the design is actually approved". It saved no blocker. Website stayed
startable.

**Expected behavior**
The CEO adds Design to Website's `blockedByIssueIds`. Website cannot
start while Design is open. Its assignee wakes when Design is done.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Create Design and Website tasks in backlog. Assign Website to an
agent.
2. In chat with the CEO, say "Do not start the website until the design
is approved."
3. Read Website: `blockedBy` is empty in some runs, because the guidance
does not tell the agent to save the order.

## What Changed

- `AGENT_CHAT_DIRECTIVE`: one paragraph. When the person says an
existing task must not start until another is done or approved, add the
prerequisite to the waiting task's `blockedByIssueIds` with `PATCH
/api/issues/{id}`, and keep existing blockers. A comment or a promise
does not stop the work. Link both tasks.
- `agent-conversations.test.ts`: a regression test for the new guidance,
in the directive and in the rendered chat prompt.

## Verification

- Red: the new test failed before the guidance change.
- Green: `npx vitest run src/__tests__/agent-conversations.test.ts
src/__tests__/case-history-api-discovery.test.ts` (66 passed).
- Local scripted-human check (dev server, Playwright): with the blocker
saved, the Website task shows the Design row under "Blocked by", a Todo
click returns 200 without a Morgan run, Design done wakes Morgan with
`issue_blockers_resolved`, and the follow-up chat message sends.
- End-to-end: chat eval run linked in a comment below.

## Risks

- Low risk. The change adds about 470 characters to the chat prompt. It
changes no API or permission. The route and field already exist and
agents already use them.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), tool use and code
execution in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 16:12:19 -06:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 6a43890326 Fix image attachments in remote native workspaces (#20939)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - Native runs must receive the files that users attach to their
messages.
> - Remote wake preparation returned file metadata without readable
bytes.
> - The historical chat reader also rejected every remote target.
> - Command-backed sandboxes and SSH targets already provide a bound
command transport.
> - This pull request stages verified files through that transport and
clears them after the turn.
> - Agents can then open attached images with their normal image reader.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #19740. This change covers SSH and command-backed sandbox
execution, including Daytona. Plugin Runner tasks without a command
transport still need a separate versioned file-transfer contract. This
PR does not close that broader issue. The open attachment-recovery PR
#20778 concerns provider-session attachment journals, not input files.

**What happened?**

A user uploaded an image and sent it to an agent. The remote native run
received its filename and size, but no readable file. Wake preparation
reported `remote_workspace_staging_unsupported`. The historical read
fallback also refused remote execution.

**Expected behavior**

Copy the exact admitted attachment into the bound remote workspace. Let
the provider read the image. Preserve company, task, source-comment,
size, and hash checks. Clear temporary file contents when the turn ends.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Select a native agent on a command-backed sandbox or Linux SSH
environment.
2. Attach a PNG to its current task or in-app chat message.
3. Ask the agent to inspect it.
4. Check that wake preparation supplies a readable workspace-relative
image path.

## What Changed

- Add a remote staging owner with bounded commands, stdin transfer, hash
verification, opaque paths, and safe image extensions.
- Confine Linux filesystem operations through directory descriptors.
Refuse symlinks and replacement files during cleanup.
- Bind current wake files and authorized historical external-chat reads
to the selected lease transport.
- Join active writes during cancellation. Retain failed cleanup work
until scope close.
- Tell providers to open image files with an image-capable reader.
- Handle stdin stream errors in the shared SSH transport. Failed uploads
return failure instead of raising an unhandled EPIPE or reporting
success.
- Add database, transport, cancellation, integrity, cleanup,
executor-wiring, and Linux filesystem regressions. Document support and
limits.

## Verification

- Prepared an isolated source checkout with `node
scripts/agent-preflight.mjs --skip-rust-debug`.
- Focused suites: `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/native-runtime/remote-attachment-staging.test.ts
server/src/services/native-runtime/native-runner-file-handoff.test.ts
server/src/services/native-runtime/chat-attachment-read.test.ts` — 74
passed, 4 Linux-only tests skipped.
- Executor checks: `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.test.ts -t
'attachment staging to the remote|stages from the authenticated|verifies
frozen staged admission'` — 7 passed.
- Server typecheck: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`,
followed by the server layered check after the final changes.
- `git diff --check` passed. The local secret, PII, and
private-reference diff scan found no matches.
- `pnpm verify` returned exit 2 because the documentation change
requires broad CI. No full local suite is claimed.
- The four Linux filesystem tests were skipped locally because this
macOS host has no available Docker daemon. Linux CI executed all 17
remote-staging tests successfully, including those four confinement
tests: [server shard
10](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/43102035096/job/130796646266).
- SSH regression: the real pipe test reproduced two unhandled EPIPE
errors before the fix, plus false success when the peer exited with code
zero. The fixed SSH tests and existing argv tests pass (12 tests). The
remote-staging transport suite also passes (13 tests; 4 Linux tests
require CI).
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils typecheck` passed after the
SSH change.
- Final revision `1c5a9288b8d5f267ddeac84638ff6075dbbbf8ec`: all
applicable CI jobs passed, including typecheck, build, general and
serialized tests, Runner checks, canary dry run, and all eight browser
shards. [CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/43102035096).
Linux CI also passed all 6 native SSH tests: [server shard
5](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/43102035096/job/130796646349).
- Greptile reviewed that final revision at 5/5 with no remaining
findings. The review thread is resolved. GitHub reports the PR mergeable
with a clean merge state.
- No live model turn or deployed release is claimed.

## Risks

- Remote staging requires Linux, Node, and a command transport bound to
the selected lease. Plugin Runner tasks without that transport retain
their unavailable result.
- Each file uses bounded independent commands. Slow transports can delay
preparation or cleanup. File bytes stay out of command arguments and
provider-facing error messages.
- An abrupt controller or remote-host failure can bypass cleanup.
Ephemeral sandbox disposal remains the backstop. Retained files are
never blindly overwritten or deleted.
- Previous-release provider sessions and checkpoints retain their format
and identity. New turns receive newly staged input files. Existing
restart-admission checks still apply. No migration, runner-image change,
or account-credential transfer is required.

## Model Used

OpenAI `gpt-6.1-sol` through the Codex harness in T3 Code, with xhigh
reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and tests. No
subagents were used. The context-window size is not exposed by this
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 will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-11-11 14:12:09 -08:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 757a20d2f1 fix(runner): keep remote recovery and launch through a short plugin RPC stall (#20945)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A remote run starts `paperclip-runnerd` in a sandbox. The controller
reads and controls it through the environment plugin
(`environmentExecute`).
> - #20940 made a stalled supervision probe "unknown" while the Runner
stays connected. Other callers still turn the same plugin stall into a
terminal failure.
> - During restart reattachment, the saved-state read, the
identity-marker read and the process check share a 30-second budget. One
plugin RPC that stalls for 40 seconds uses all of it, so a short stall
fails a reattachment to a healthy Runner.
> - At launch, a stalled launch call or identity read fails the run with
`runner_process_termination_unconfirmed` or
`runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`, although the runner may be
healthy.
> - This pull request treats a plugin RPC timeout as "unknown" and
retries the read-only call within a bounded stall budget. A stalled
launch call is not repeated: the controller reads the launch nonce's
identity marker instead.
> - The benefit is that a short plugin stall during recovery or launch
no longer fails a healthy run. Every positive answer from the sandbox
keeps its meaning, and the bound still fails closed.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20940, #20909

**What happened?**
A plugin `environmentExecute` RPC stall of more than 40 seconds makes a
remote recovery read fail. Plugin RPCs time out at the requested timeout
plus a 30-second overhead, so a 10-second probe can take 40 seconds. The
reattachment read budget is 30 seconds. One stalled read therefore
failed reattachment with `probe_transport_failed` or `probe_timeout`. At
launch, a stalled launch call rejected the run with exit unconfirmed. A
stalled identity read (20-second wait, 2-second reads that can take 32
seconds) failed the run with
`runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`.

**Expected behavior**
A plugin RPC timeout is a stall of the plugin, not an answer from the
sandbox. Read-only recovery reads retry within a bound. A launch call
that stalls is not repeated. The launch nonce's marker decides whether
the one runner was launched. At the bound, the run fails closed and
Retry works.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start a remote (Daytona) run.
2. Restart the controller so that the run reattaches, or start a new
run.
3. While the controller reads the sandbox, stop the plugin worker for 45
seconds.
4. The reattachment or launch fails.

**Paperclip version or commit**
master at 48d23d1530.

## What Changed

- `remote-runner-recovery-probe.ts`: adds `isPluginRpcTimeout` (an
error, or its cause chain, with `PLUGIN_RPC_ERROR_CODES.TIMEOUT`). It
also adds a per-recovery `RemoteRunnerPluginStall` with a 3-minute
budget (`REMOTE_RUNNER_PLUGIN_STALL_BUDGET_MS`). The caller's recovery
deadline caps it. After the first plugin RPC timeout in a recovery, its
read-only probes use the stall deadline instead of the 30-second
deadline. Signals are never retried. Other transport failures keep the
30-second budget.
- `verifyRemoteRunnerReattachment` and `verifyRemoteRunnerOrSettledExit`
share one stall budget across the saved-state read, the identity-marker
read, the process check and the post-exit settled-state read
(`readRemoteRunnerState`).
- `waitForRemoteRunnerProcessIdentity`: a plugin RPC timeout extends the
20-second identity wait to the stall budget.
- Launch: a launch call that fails with a plugin RPC timeout is not
repeated. The controller goes on to the identity-marker wait for the
same nonce. A found marker adopts the one launched runner. A missing
marker uses the existing nonce cleanup, and the result stays unconfirmed
when the cleanup fails.
- `doc/execution-semantics.md` describes these rules.

## Verification

- Red on master: 7 new tests in
`server/src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.test.ts`
failed. Each one stalls a plugin RPC for 40 seconds with a
`JsonRpcCallError` `TIMEOUT`:
- reattachment through a stall in the saved-state, identity-marker and
process-check reads (the reattachment failed with the stall error);
  - the bound test (it settled before the stall budget);
  - the post-exit settled-state read (it failed with the stall error);
- launch-call and identity-read stalls (they failed with the stall error
or `runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`).
- Green: all 7 pass, and a control test proves that a non-stall
transport error keeps the 30-second bound.
`native-session-executor.test.ts` and
`remote-runner-recovery-probe.test.ts` pass (1400 tests). `tsc --noEmit`
passes for `server`.
- The tests also assert that one launch call happens, no cleanup or
signal runs on the success path, and the bound fails closed without exit
proof.

## Risks

- During a real plugin stall, recovery and launch can now wait up to 3
minutes instead of about 30 seconds before they fail closed. The longer
wait applies only after a plugin RPC timeout. A sandbox that answers, or
a non-timeout transport error, keeps the old timing.
- No wait is added before `turn.start` on the normal path.
- State saved by an older version is not changed.

> 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

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, through Claude Code
with tool use (shell, file edit, code search). Extended reasoning was
on.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 16:04:13 -06:00
5e2243f081 fix(ui): align sidebar avatars and navigation icons (#20926)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The left navigation mixes agent avatars, task status icons, and page
icons.
> - Agent avatars used 20px boxes. Task and page icons used 16px boxes.
> - The different widths moved agent labels 4px to the right of other
labels.
> - This pull request gives these icons the same 16px square slot.
> - Shared label positions make pinned and recent items easier to scan.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #19685, which added mixed agent and page pins. No duplicate
alignment PR was found.

**What happened?**

Agent avatars in pinned and recent navigation were wider than task and
page icons. Their labels started 4px farther to the right. Inline icon
layout also produced different box heights.

**Expected behavior**

Use the existing 16px task and page icon size for all leading navigation
icons. Center each icon in a square slot. Start the labels at the same
horizontal position.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Pin an agent conversation and a page such as Routines.
2. Open agent conversations and tasks so both appear in Recents.
3. Compare the icon boxes and label positions across the rows.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Base commit: `c5e6ab5ca813`.

**Deployment mode**

Local source checkout. This is a client layout issue.

## What Changed

- Use 16px agent avatars for pinned and recent conversation rows.
- Give `SidebarNavItem` a fixed 16px square icon slot with centered
contents and left-aligned text. The existing token scale supplies the
size.
- Add light and dark Storybook examples with mixed icons and long
labels. The browser assertions compare slot sizes, label positions, and
glyph bounds.
- Add a production `CoordinatorSidebar` regression test that compares
pinned and recent avatar dimensions with a task status icon.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/SidebarNavItem.test.tsx
ui/src/components/CoordinatorSidebar.test.tsx
ui/src/components/SidebarAgents.test.tsx` passes: 59 tests across three
files.
- Regression proof: the new production-avatar test fails with the
original 20px avatars (`expected 20 to be 16`) and passes with 16px
avatars. This addresses the initial review's test coverage gap.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passes.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` passes.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build` passes on the final source tree.
- `pnpm verify --base origin/master` returns exit 2 because the new
Storybook file needs broad CI coverage. The focused local tests run
separately. CI must supply the remaining coverage.
- Browser inspection on macOS checked all 13 mixed rows in light and
dark themes. Every icon slot measured 16 by 16 CSS pixels. Every label
started at the same position. Before and after captures use production
components with fixture data; they do not prove server persistence or
permissions.
- Review `sidebar-icon-alignment--dark` and
`sidebar-icon-alignment--light` in Storybook to inspect the mixed rows
and run their layout assertions.
- [Greptile
review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/20926#issuecomment-6806138954):
5/5 on `e779f4707e7826d577b23a2991f3f36755e954be`. The initial 4/5
review requested production Recents coverage. The added regression test
addresses that finding; the thread is resolved.
- CI queue recovery: the superseded first run was canceled. The next run
stalled before runner assignment; GitHub accepted force-cancel but left
it queued and refused the rerun request. The final empty commit requests
fresh CI without changing the source tree. Required CI is tracked in
[run
43095809539](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/43095809539).
Its jobs are still queued; CI completion is not yet claimed.
- External blocker: after more than 15 minutes, the fresh run still has
zero jobs. Other repository PR runs are also queued. A repository
Actions or runner administrator must restore dispatch before the
required typecheck, test, build, and E2E gates can report results. The
root cause of the dispatch delay is not established.

## Risks

- Low risk. The shared icon slot also affects other navigation rows.
Existing badge, rail, and expanded-state tests cover the shared
component.
- Agent avatars become smaller in pinned and recent navigation, as
requested. No data or API contracts change.

> 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. This change is a
scoped UI bug fix.

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex. The host does not expose the exact served
model snapshot or context window size. Used reasoning, code editing,
shell execution, and browser 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
- [ ] 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: Scott Tong <scott@scottsmbpm5max.lan>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-11-11 14:01:22 -08:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 612cc7e3e6 fix(heartbeat): renew every legacy controller lease in one shared statement (#20924)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A legacy run holds a durable controller lease while it prepares. The
server renews the lease every 10 seconds, and it stops the run if no
renewal succeeds within the 60 second lease.
> - Each run renewed in its own transaction on a private pool of two
connections. Each renewal used six round trips (begin, statement
timeout, transaction id, notify, update, commit) and woke live-run
recovery for that run.
> - When many runs prepare at the same time on a loaded database, the
renewals queue behind each other. The queue grows with the number of
runs, and every run loses its lease at about the same time.
> - A healthy server must not fail its own runs because it has many of
them.
> - This pull request renews all leases of one server process through
one shared queue. Requests that arrive while a renewal is in flight
share the next statement.
> - The benefit is that the renewal cost no longer grows with the number
of live runs, so a burst cannot starve the lease.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
On a staging server that did not restart, 22 runs failed with
`controller_lease_lost` in about 13 minutes. Every run was a legacy run
in the `preparing` stage with `providerWorkStarted: false`. Every loss
had cause `renewal_deadline`. The renewal had been pending 28 to 48
seconds (`renewalPendingMs`). The deadline callback ran on time
(`deadlineLateMs` 3 to 861 ms), so the event loop was not blocked. The
successful renewals before the loss had each taken 20 to 30 seconds,
because the deadline fired only 25 to 48 seconds after the last renewal
(`sinceRenewalMs`). About 30 runs were live in the process. The first
wave started when a user retried about 14 blocked tasks at once. The
automatic retries of the first wave then failed the same way, which made
the second wave. 12 of 16 affected tasks became blocked.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start about 30 legacy runs in one server process.
2. Make each renewal transaction slow (for example, a loaded database).
3. Wait one lease period.

**Expected behavior**
The leases stay owned. The renewal cost does not grow with the number of
runs.

**Actual behavior**
All runs fail with `controller_lease_lost` (`renewal_deadline`).

## What Changed

- `server/src/services/legacy-controller-lease.ts`: All controllers of
one process renew through one queue per database. One flush is in flight
at a time. Requests that arrive during a flush share the next flush, so
a renewal waits behind at most one other statement. A flush is one
transaction on the private lease pool: `statement_timeout` and one
statement that renews all requested rows.
- The statement locks the requested rows with `for update skip locked`.
A row that another transaction holds is reported busy, and only that run
retries after 250 ms. It does not stall the other runs in the batch. A
row that is not this boot's live legacy lease is reported rejected, as
before.
- Renewal no longer emits the `active-execution-recovery` notification.
A renewal only moves the deadline later. Recovery already has a deadline
at the earlier expiry and rereads the moved deadline then. This removes
one recovery pass, `pg_current_xact_id` and `pg_notify` per renewal.
- The lease contract does not change: 60 second lease, 10 second
renewal, boot-id fence, expired leases cannot renew, the local deadline
is measured from the attempt start, and the loss causes and timings are
the same.
- `doc/run-log-events.md`: Documents the shared renewal queue.

Upgrade story: no persisted shape changes. The row columns, lease length
and boot-id fence are the same. A lease held by the previous release has
a different boot id, so the new batch rejects it and leaves it
untouched. A test covers a previous-release lease in the same batch.

## Verification

- Red on `origin/master`, green with this change:
- `keeps thirty preparing controllers owned when every renewal takes
four seconds on a two-connection pool`: before, all 30 controllers lost
the lease with `renewal_deadline` (the staging shape). After, none lose
it.
- `renews fifteen concurrent controllers in one statement` (real
Postgres): before, 15 update statements. After, 1.
- `renews through one private statement without waking live-run
recovery`: before, the renewal woke `active-execution-recovery`. After,
it does not.
- `live-recovery-work.test.ts` `renews without waking recovery and
re-reads the moved controller deadline at the old one`: before, 2
recovery passes per renewal. After, none, and recovery still moves to
the new deadline at the old one.
- Safety cases: a row lock on one run does not delay another run; a
previous-release lease in the same batch stays untouched; a terminated
lease connection is retried; existing deadline, retry, rejection and
revocation tests pass.
- `npx vitest run src/services/legacy-controller-lease.test.ts
src/__tests__/live-recovery-work.test.ts`: 88 passed.
- `pnpm verify`: see the CI checks on this head.

## Risks

- Medium-low. All renewals of a process now share one statement. A
failed flush fails every request in it; each watcher retries
independently, as it did before.
- A busy row is retried every 250 ms until the lease deadline. Before,
the renewal waited on the row lock for up to the statement timeout. The
loss behavior is the same.
- Recovery wakes at the old lease expiry instead of after each renewal.
It finds the live lease and moves to the new expiry.
- Not in scope: the downstream workspace recovery that blocked tasks
after a lost lease (`legacy_execution_requires_reconciliation`,
`source_unavailable`).

> 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

- Claude Opus 5.5 (claude-opus-5-5), Anthropic, with tool use and code
execution in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 15:57:20 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 228b0169be fix(dispatch): let the answer to the agent's own question continue the task it blocked on (#20931)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - An agent can ask the person a question (`request_human_input`) and
wait for the answer
> - A later comment from the person moves an open question into history
(#15392). The agent still needs the answer, so it reports a blocker and
the task becomes Blocked
> - The person then answers. Dispatch cancels the answer's continuation
with `issue_not_in_progress`, because only a dependency-blocked task may
take an answer while Blocked
> - The task rests Blocked with a failed run and a Retry. The answer is
lost until a person clicks Retry
> - This pull request lets the answer continue the task when the same
agent blocked it to wait for that answer, proven from durable records
> - The benefit is that the person's answer always reaches the agent
that asked, without a Retry

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15392, Refs #20872

**What happened?**
Restart-chaos waves with no fault injected fail every W2Q task on every
provider (Claude, OpenCode, Codex) with `R3:retry_needed`. For Claude
task t03 on master 7e8901aa60: run 5aeb9244 asks a question and the task
goes `in_review`. A board comment ("I will answer shortly; do not write
the brief yet") wakes run d728886f. That comment makes the question
historical, so `paperclip_finish` with a `response_wake` wait is
rejected ("without a pending wait condition"). The agent then calls
`paperclip_block`; the status decision `current_track_blocker_waiting`
sets the task Blocked. The board answers. Continuation run adbda5de is
cancelled: "resolved-interaction continuation issue is no longer
in_progress (current status: blocked)". The task rests blocked/failed
with Retry.

**What did you expect to happen?**
The answer continues the task. The agent writes the brief with the
answer and finishes.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. An agent asks a question on its task.
2. The person posts a comment before answering.
3. The agent reports a blocker while it waits for the answer.
4. The person answers the question.
5. The answer's continuation run is cancelled with
`issue_not_in_progress`.

## What Changed

- Status committer (`status-decision-committer.ts`): when it applies an
agent-reported, board-owned blocker (`current_track_blocker_waiting` or
`task_wide_blocker_bound`), it records the agent's own pending,
undismissed ordinary questions on the task as `awaitingInteractionIds`
in the decision JSON, in the same transaction under the issue lock
(`questionsAwaitedByAgentBlock`).
- New `agentBlockingQuestionState`
(`server/src/services/blocked-question-answer.ts`). It reads only
server-owned rows. It returns the verified `lastStatusDecisionId` and
`statusVersion` when: the answered interaction was created by this agent
on this task and resolved by a person; the task is Blocked and still
assigned to the agent; the task's `lastStatusDecisionId` is an applied
Blocked decision with one of the two reason codes, made by a run of the
same agent, whose `awaitingInteractionIds` contains this interaction;
and the task's `statusVersion` still equals that decision's
`projectedStatusVersion` (nothing changed the status since).
- `decideQueuedRunStaleness`
(`server/src/modules/run-dispatch/domain/policy.ts`): the Blocked
exemption for an answer continuation also accepts this fact
(`isAgentBlockingQuestionAnswer`). The postgres adapter loads it under
the issue lock.
- `heartbeat.ts` resolved-interaction checkout: for that answer,
`blocked` is an accepted expected status, and the verified state is
passed to `issues.checkout` as `blockedState`.
- `issues.checkout`: with `blockedState`, the guarded update accepts a
Blocked row only when `lastStatusDecisionId` and `statusVersion` still
match, so a person who re-blocks the task in between keeps the new
block. When the expected statuses include `blocked`, a checkout from
Blocked also clears `unblockDescriptor`, `blockedTransitionAt` and
`blockedOwnerNotifiedAt`, as an ordinary status change from Blocked
does.
- `doc/execution-semantics.md` describes the rule.

## Verification

- New integration test
`server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-blocked-question-answer.test.ts`
(embedded Postgres, real `commitNativeStatusDecision`): the agent's
blocker decision makes the task Blocked, the person answers, the answer
is delivered through `heartbeat.wakeup` with the same context shape as
staging.
- Red on master (product hunks removed, test kept): `delivers the answer
when the agent blocked the task to wait for it` fails with `status:
cancelled, errorCode: issue_not_in_progress`, the same code as the chaos
run.
- Green: 5/5 pass. The answer run succeeds, the adapter runs, and the
blocker fields are cleared. Negative cases still cancel with
`issue_not_in_progress`: a person re-blocked the task after the agent,
the question did not exist when the agent blocked, and the task is done.
A checkout with a stale verified state conflicts and keeps the person's
new blocker.
- `policy.test.ts`: new case for the fact (continue when set, cancel
when unset, reassignment, backlog/done/cancelled).
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run src/modules/run-dispatch
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`: 208 passed.
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-stale-queue-invalidation.test.ts
src/services/explicit-native-continuation.test.ts`: 656 passed.
- `cd server && pnpm exec tsc --noEmit -p tsconfig.json`: passes.
- Chaos, local, seed 5101, `--workloads W2Q --faults K0 --adapters
codex,claude --lifecycle warm`, on 722303e4a2 (first head): wave
w-20261111T204405-s5101, 6/6 PASS (3 Codex, 3 Claude). Every task went
in_review -> blocked -> in_progress -> done without Retry. Before: the
same local seed on master (w-20261111T190352-s5101) failed 3/3 Codex W2Q
cells with `R3:retry_needed`, and Daytona Claude wave
w-20261111T200553-s6101 failed 2/3 W2Q cells the same way.

## Risks

- Low to medium. Only a resolved interaction continuation on a Blocked
task changes behavior, and only when the durable linkage holds. If a
board-owned blocker about something else and the agent's own question
are open together, the answer resumes the agent; it then reports its
blocker again. The blocker report carries no interaction reference, so
the server cannot tell them apart; cancelling the answer instead loses
it. A person's Blocked status, a block from before the question,
dependency blocks, reassignment, done and cancelled keep the old cancel.
- State saved by an older release: no schema change and no migration. A
Blocked decision saved before this change has no
`awaitingInteractionIds`, so its answer keeps the old behavior (cancel,
Retry works).
- The checkout change only applies when a caller passes `blocked` as an
expected status.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), with tool use and code execution
in an agent harness.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 15:54:33 -06:00
DottaandClaude Fable 5.2 b01959cb15 fix(recovery): release a handed-off run's saved-files hold for the person it handed the task to (#20941)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - An agent can hand its own task to a person for review. With #20884,
a native run that does this keeps running and finishes its turn.
> - A restart can land between that hand-off and the end of the same
turn. Restart recovery then settles the run as failed and keeps its
unsaved sandbox files, so no work is lost.
> - Automatic workspace recovery saves those files. But the
workspace-repair hold then stayed on the person's task, because the hold
only released for a newer agent owner.
> - This pull request releases that hold for the person who received the
task through the stopped run's own recorded hand-off, once the files are
saved.
> - The benefit is that the person's task rests in review with no stale
"Saved work recovered" hold, and the agent's files are still saved
first.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Follow-up to #20884 (merged). It was reviewed there as a known limit:
"Restart blocks the person's task". It uses the
`resultJson.humanSelfHandoff` record that #20884 added. Related: #19184,
which released the same hold for a newer agent owner.

**What happened?**

A native run handed its own task to a person, and a restart landed
before the run finished its turn. Restart recovery settled the run and
retained its files. After automatic recovery saved them, the task still
had a workspace-repair hold ("Saved work recovered. Send a message to
continue."). The person had nothing to do with that run's work, and
nothing released the hold.

**Expected behavior**

The hold protects the workspace until the files are saved. After that,
the task rests with the person and has no execution blocker.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. A native run records a hand-off to a person, and the task is now
`in_review` with that person.
2. A restart settles the run as failed, with its prepared remote
workspace retained.
3. Automatic workspace recovery completes.
4. Before this fix, `getExecutionBlocker` still returns the run's
workspace-repair hold.

## What Changed

- `server/src/services/execution-blocker.ts`:
`restoreHoldReleasedForCurrentOwnerPredicate` now also releases a
recovered file-preservation hold in one more case. The task must be
assigned to a person, and the stopped run's
`resultJson.humanSelfHandoff` must name that task and that person. The
existing proof is still required: the completed-recovery receipt bound
to the action, and a copyback rather than a snapshot-only save. Until
the files are saved, the hold stays.
- `server/src/services/workspace-recovery-admission.test.ts`: two
embedded-Postgres tests.
- The hold blocks the person's task before recovery and releases after
it.
  - A hand-off recorded for a different person keeps the hold.
- `doc/execution-semantics.md`: one sentence on the restart case.

## Verification

- Red: with the `execution-blocker.ts` change removed, `releases a
handed-off run's recovered files hold for the person it handed the task
to` fails. `getExecutionBlocker` still returns the hold after
`recoverRetainedWorkspace`.
- Green: `cd server && npx vitest run
src/services/workspace-recovery-admission.test.ts
src/__tests__/interrupted-preparation-hold-settle.test.ts
src/services/explicit-native-continuation.test.ts
src/services/native-runtime/native-human-self-handoff.test.ts`. All 617
tests pass. The server typecheck passes.
- Chaos: the H2 workload from #20884 covers the hand-off with a K1
restart after it. Locally the runs had no unsaved files, so no hold
appeared. This PR's case needs a remote sandbox with unsaved files. **No
Daytona wave was run.**

## Risks

- The release applies only when the stopped run's own record names the
current person and task, and only after the completed-recovery receipt.
Other holds, snapshot-only saves and unsafe archives are unchanged.
- No schema change. A run without the record behaves as before.
- This branch is rebased onto master after #20884 merged. The only
conflict was an adjacent import line.

> 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

- Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-opus-5-5`, through Claude Code
with tool use and code execution. The session does not expose the
context window or reasoning mode.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.2 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 15:52:35 -06:00
DottaandClaude 0bf3236bc8 test(restart-chaos): staging class R cells CR1-CR3 and sandbox capture on every Daytona wave (#20909)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The restart-chaos harness (`tests/restart-chaos/`) reproduces
staging failures before users meet them
> - Staging fails with `runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable` when
the remote Runner or its provider is gone after a deploy, a stall or a
re-wake, and nobody has seen the sandbox side
> - The harness had no cell for a provider-only death or a plugin RPC
stall, and its sandbox capture ran only on K15 waves
> - This pull request adds the staging class R cells CR1–CR3, and
captures the sandbox side on every Daytona wave
> - The benefit is that a wave that reproduces the refusal also keeps
the evidence of why the Runner or provider died

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What is the problem?**
The harness cannot answer why a remote runnerd or its provider dies. Its
capture ran only around K15 restarts. It recorded no process start
times, sockets or provider log files. It had no fault that kills only
the provider or stalls a plugin RPC.

**What should change?**
Add cells for each staging shape, and capture the sandbox before, during
and after each one, on every Daytona wave.

**Context**
Refs #20907 (keeps runnerd's stderr in the sandbox, and reports it on
failed recovery). Refs #20893 (W2 re-wake cells).

## What Changed

- `class-r.ts` (new) adds three faults, selected with `--faults`:
- **CR1:** a K15 redeploy with a held outage. `--cr1-hold-seconds`,
0–600, default 360.
- **CR2:** SIGKILL of only the provider process under the run's
`paperclip-runnerd`, inside its sandbox. Runnerd stays alive. By default
the controller stays up; `--cr2-hold-seconds` adds a K15 outage.
- **CR3:** SIGSTOP of the server's Daytona plugin worker.
`--cr3-stall-seconds`, 41–600, default 45.
  
  Each CR task must pass the `class_r_fault_applied` check.
- `daytona-runner-logs.ts` adds `CLASS_R_PROBE`. It reads process start
times and `wchan`, sockets, the runtime file listing, and the tails of
the Runner's and the provider's state and log files. It also adds
`executeInWaveSandboxes`, the fixed-script runner that CR2 uses.
- `main.ts` and `supervisor.ts`:
- every Daytona wave captures with the class R probe when a task rests
and at wave end;
- CR cells also capture before the fault, after the stop, before the
restart, and every 15 s for 180 s after ready;
  - `--sandbox-watch-seconds` captures on a clock for the whole wave.
- The README has a new "Staging class R cells" section.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/restart-chaos/vitest.config.ts`:
49 files, 600 tests pass, including the new `class-r.test.ts`. It covers
option parsing, planning, the kill command's quoting and its refusal of
anything but a run id, plugin worker selection, the watch schedule and
the applied check.
- `node scripts/typecheck-test-projects.mjs tests/restart-chaos` passes.
- Daytona waves run from this branch plus #20907. The results are in the
follow-up comment.

## Risks

- This change is limited to the harness. CR2 is its only in-sandbox
mutation: a SIGKILL of the provider, run by a fixed script only in
sandboxes labelled with the wave's company and environment. The script
never signals runnerd.
- More captures add Daytona toolbox calls on every Daytona wave. Each
capture has a 45 s deadline, and a failed capture is recorded and never
fails the wave.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), via Claude Code with tool use
(shell, file edits, test runs, Daytona waves).

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 15:50:59 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 48d23d1530 fix(runner): keep a connected remote Runner through a stalled plugin supervision probe (#20940)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A remote run starts `paperclip-runnerd` in a sandbox. The controller
monitors the process with a health probe that goes through the
environment plugin (`environmentExecute`).
> - A stall of the Daytona plugin worker makes that probe RPC time out
after 40 seconds. The monitor treated the timeout as "process
supervision failed".
> - The transport then failed closed with
`runner_process_termination_unconfirmed`. The run ended
`notification_transport_failed`, `recoverable: false`, and the close
path suspended a healthy Runner. The task rested blocked with Retry.
> - Nothing was wrong with the sandbox, the Runner or the provider. The
Runner held its own authenticated connection to the controller during
the full stall.
> - This pull request makes a failed or timed-out probe "unknown". While
the Runner stays connected on its own channel, the monitor keeps the
same runner and turn and probes again, for a bounded time.
> - The benefit is that a short plugin stall no longer kills a healthy
run. The fail-closed cases stay the same.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20909 (chaos cell CR3, which reproduces this failure)

**What happened?**
A 45-second stall of the Daytona plugin worker killed a healthy run.
Chaos cell CR3 reproduced it 2 of 2 times (OpenCode and Claude,
Daytona). A staging run had the same failure with no deploy: a plugin
`environmentExecute` RPC stalled for more than 40 seconds. The run
failed with "Notification transport failed closed:
runner_process_termination_unconfirmed: runnerd process supervision
failed: RPC call \"environmentExecute\" timed out after 40000ms". The
close path then sent `runner.suspend`, and the healthy Runner suspended
and exited. The task rested blocked with Retry.

**Expected behavior**
A probe that times out or fails in transport is not proof that the
process stopped. While the Runner stays connected on its own channel,
the run continues. If supervision cannot come back within a bound, the
run rests with a working Retry. A probe that positively reports the
process gone still starts the existing recovery.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start a remote (Daytona) run with a T1 workload.
2. Send SIGSTOP to the server's Daytona plugin worker for 45 seconds,
then SIGCONT.
3. The run fails `notification_transport_failed` about 40 seconds into
the stall.

**Paperclip version or commit**
master at 7cd5558e41.

## What Changed

- `createRemoteRunnerProcessLauncher`
(`server/src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.ts`): when
the health probe throws (RPC timeout or transport error) and the Runner
holds an authenticated connection, the monitor waits one poll interval
and probes again. It does not reject the process completion. The unknown
period has a bound: the remote runner reconnect grace (7 minutes). When
the Runner is not connected, the monitor keeps the old behavior: it
rejects after the 30-second probe budget, without exit proof.
- Probe results that positively answer (exit 45 "process gone", or
identity and generation failures) keep their exact current handling.
- `RunnerProcessLaunchSpec`
(`packages/paperclip-runner/src/control-plane/durable-prp-control-plane.ts`)
has a new optional `isRunnerConnected` callback. `spawnRunner` passes it
to the process owner and keeps it on restart.
- The runnerd transport and the external runnerd driver supply
`isRunnerConnected` from the control plane's count of authenticated
Runner connections.
- `doc/execution-semantics.md` describes the unknown-probe rule and its
bound.

## Verification

- Red, on master: `npx vitest run
src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.test.ts -t "plugin
RPC timeouts until"` (in `server/`). The completion rejected after the
first stalled probe with `{ stage: "process_verification", reason:
"probe_transport_failed" }`. The transport turns that into
`runner_process_termination_unconfirmed`, which is the staging error.
- Red, on master: `npx vitest run
src/live/runnerd-codex-transport.test.ts -t "live evidence of the
runner"` (in `packages/paperclip-runner/`). The launch spec had no
`isRunnerConnected` (`expected undefined to be true`).
- Green: both tests pass. New tests also prove:
- three 40-second plugin RPC timeouts with the Runner connected leave
the same runner supervised, and a later exit-45 probe still confirms
exit;
- with the Runner disconnected, the same timeout rejects without exit
proof (`probe_transport_failed`, `isExitConfirmed() === false`);
- with the Runner connected and probes that never answer, supervision
rejects without exit proof after the 7-minute bound.
- `server/src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.test.ts`,
`remote-runner-recovery-probe.test.ts`,
`packages/paperclip-runner/src/live/runnerd-codex-transport.test.ts`,
`src/control-plane/durable-prp-control-plane.test.ts` and
`src/drivers/external` pass locally.
- `tsc --noEmit` passes for `server` and `packages/paperclip-runner`.
- Chaos: CR3 results are in a follow-up comment on this PR.

## Risks

- While the Runner stays connected and the plugin cannot answer, the
controller waits up to 7 minutes before it fails closed. Before this
change it failed after about 40 seconds. During that time the Runner's
own connection is the liveness evidence, and the controller never
reports an exit.
- When the Runner is not connected, the timing is the same as before.
Sandbox loss still fails closed after the 30-second probe budget.
- The new spec field is optional. A process owner that does not read it
keeps the old behavior. State saved by an older version is not changed.
- No wait is added before `turn.start`.

> 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

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, through Claude Code
with tool use (shell, file edit, code search). Extended reasoning was
on.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 15:45:25 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 884a9e19ea fix(native): launch a warm follow-up from its predecessor's saved journal, and restart a Runner that exited before session.open (#20928)
## Thinking Path

- Paperclip runs agent work through a controller (server) and a runner
(`paperclip-runnerd`) that exchange numbered commands; the runner
refuses any command whose number is not exactly one past the last it
processed.
- Staging's most common failure is "Runner gone"
(`runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`,
`native.remote_runner_recovery_failed` with `process_not_running`,
`runnerLifecycle: ready`, `runnerSettled: false`). Chaos wave
`w-20261111T192658-s5201` (Daytona, warm, Codex, W2/W2Q/W2C re-wake
cells) captured it live: the new runner wrote `controller sequence must
be contiguous: expected 13, received 11` (and `expected 5, received 3`)
and exited 0.15 s after authenticating.
- In all three captured failures the follow-up run started 1–2 s before
the predecessor's warm session was closed (`transport_close_requested`
for the predecessor arrives after the follow-up's `run started`). The
close is issued by the follow-up's own admission.
- Admission first materializes the controller projection for the session
root. With an idle retained warm owner the root only holds the
external-persistence marker, so `restoreWarmRunnerdController` copies
that owner's saved checkpoint into the root. Later in the same
admission, `executePaperclipNativeSessionWithinScope` finds the owner
cannot be reused (configuration, process or GitHub access changed) and
retires it. Retirement sends `runner.drain` and `runner.suspend`; both
are saved to the owner's checkpoint before they are sent, but the root
still holds the projection taken before the close.
- The follow-up then opens its controller from that projection. Its
journal is two commands behind the runner's durable
`lastControllerCommandSeq`, so its first command repeats sequence 11;
the runner treats this as fatal and exits, and every later attempt only
reattaches to a process that is gone.
- So the saved controller journal was persisted correctly; it was not
selected: the projection is never refreshed after the retirement that
extends it.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

- Refs #20874 (the runner-exit proof this extends from a rejected
`session.open` to a Runner that exited before answering it)
- Refs #20907 (makes the runnerd exit text, including `controller
sequence must be contiguous`, visible in the run log; independent of
this fix)
- Refs #20853 (related: resumes a remote Runner that died at a settled
`ready` cut; this PR covers the unsettled `ready` state left by an exit
before `session.open`)
- Duplicate search: searched open and closed PRs for "controller
sequence contiguous", "runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable" and
"Runner gone"; none fixes the stale controller projection.

## What Changed

- `server/src/services/native-runtime/warm-controller-journal.ts` (new):
- `refreshRetiredWarmOwnerProjection` reloads the retired owner's
canonical checkpoint into the session root after retirement, only when
the root still projects that owner and the saved journal extends the
projected one. A diverged journal holds admission with
`native_runner_checkpoint_projection_held:retired_owner_journal_diverged`;
a projection changed underneath holds with `...:journal_changed`.
- `reconcileControllerJournalWithRunner` is the defence for state
already saved in the bad shape (old-saved/new-resumed, mid-run deploys).
When the remote runner state shows its journal ahead of the controller
projection and the runner's last command is a completed
`runner.suspend`, it reconciles only if every extra sequence is a
completed `command_close_drain_*`/`command_close_suspend_*` in the
runner's processed-command journal and the predecessor's canonical
checkpoint holds exactly those commands. Anything else refuses before
launch with
`native_controller_recovery_missing_evidence:controller_journal_behind_runner`
instead of guessing. A runner whose last command is not a completed
suspend is left to the existing live-adoption checks.
- Defence in depth for the server side of the same failure
(`native_session_recovery_failed: runnerd exited while waiting for
session.open`, then `runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable` on
every same-run retry): a Runner proven to have exited while this
attempt's opening command (`session.open`, or the recovery probe) was
still unanswered is a failed fresh start, not a live Runner to reattach.
- `runnerd-codex-transport.ts`: `runnerExitConfirmed()` (#20874's proof)
now also holds for a resumed session whose provider identity was
preloaded, when the attempt's opening command is still pending at the
proven exit.
- The Codex driver's recovery result, `HarnessDriverBackend` and
`native-session-runtime` carry that proof on the
`native_session_recovery_failed` error.
- The executor records `runnerExitedBeforeSessionOpen` on the settled
failure; restart recovery puts `exitedBeforeSessionOpen` on the
`reattach_remote_runner` claim; `verifyRemoteRunnerOrSettledExit` and
`verifyStagedRemoteRunner` then start a new Runner when the process is
gone and the saved Runner state has no pending terminal delivery,
provider cleanup or warm transition (any lifecycle other than an active
turn). Attempt budget and identity checks are unchanged.
- `native-session-executor.ts`: calls the refresh right after the
configuration-changed retirement of a warm owner, and the reconciliation
in `restoreRemoteSuspendedRunnerCheckpoint` with the runner state it
already reads (no added remote read, no wait before `turn.start`).
- Tests:
- `native-session-executor.test.ts`: new `changed-external-checkpoint`
scenario of "rotates an owned warm codex remote runner before checking
changed configuration" with a real `DurablePrpControlPlane`: the retired
owner's close saves drain/suspend, and the journal the follow-up
launches from must end with them.
- `warm-controller-journal.test.ts`: refresh, divergence hold, untouched
marker/other run, reconcile of a settled close, refusal when the
canonical journal cannot prove the close, refusal for any other extra
command, and no action for a live runner.
-
`packages/paperclip-runner/src/live/runnerd-stale-controller-journal.test.ts`:
real `paperclip-runnerd` + fake Codex. A follow-up controller on the
predecessor's suspended runner with a journal that lacks the close
commands reproduces `controller sequence must be contiguous` and loses
the runner; with the current journal it resumes.

## Verification

- Red for the added part: `verifyRemoteRunnerOrSettledExit` with the
staging state (process gone, lifecycle `ready`, unsettled outbox)
rejects with `runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable` without the
change; with `exitedBeforeSessionOpen` it resolves to a fresh start, and
stays fail-closed for a pending cleanup, terminal delivery, active turn
or exhausted budget. Without the propagation, the backend recovery
result lacks `runnerExitConfirmed`; the real-runnerd stale-journal test
asserts the transport's exit proof after the contiguity exit (`expected
false to be true` on the old transport).

- Red on master (executor unchanged, new scenario): `AssertionError:
expected [] to deeply equal [ 'runner.drain', 'runner.suspend' ]` — the
follow-up launched from the projection taken before the predecessor's
close.
- Green: `cd server && npx vitest run
src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.test.ts -t "rotates
an owned warm codex remote runner before checking changed
configuration"` (14 passed), `npx vitest run
src/services/native-runtime/warm-controller-journal.test.ts` (7 passed).
- Real runner: `cd packages/paperclip-runner && npx vitest run
src/live/runnerd-stale-controller-journal.test.ts` (stale journal →
`controller sequence must be contiguous`; current journal → resumes).
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`, `pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/paperclip-runner typecheck:typescript`; `pnpm verify`
selected broader verification (a new runner test file is outside the
resolved graphs), so broad coverage comes from required CI.

## Risks

- The refresh replaces the root projection only with a checkpoint whose
identity matches and whose journal extends the projection; otherwise it
holds admission with an existing
`native_runner_checkpoint_projection_held:*` code, which is safer than
launching a runner that will exit.
- The defence refuses launch when a runner is ahead by anything other
than a provable settled close. Before this change that launch always
ended in a runner exit and a failed run, so the refusal only changes the
error code and the moment of failure.
- This PR does not change the runner. The runner still exits on an
out-of-order new command; a follow-up runner PR will turn that into a
rejected command result.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), 1M-token context, tool
use (shell, file edits, tests) in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 15:41:03 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 edd00526e7 fix(native): park a response_wake with no admitted response instead of self-waking (#20935)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A native agent run ends with a structured result. The status arbiter
turns that result into an issue status and next actions.
> - A result can report `yielded` with `continuation.kind:
"response_wake"`. This means "wake me when somebody responds".
> - Only a direct Board comment gave this kind a passive wait. Every
other `response_wake` became an immediate `issue_status_changed` wake to
the same agent.
> - The agent woke, saw nothing new, reported `response_wake` again, and
woke again. Nothing bounded this loop. It spent provider budget and its
back-to-back runs caused other failures on warm sandboxes.
> - This pull request parks such a result as a visible wait, and puts
declared continuation wakes under the rewake throttle as a backstop.
> - The benefit is that an agent that waits for input stops and costs
nothing until a real response arrives.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Restart-chaos waves on master `683fd1e9a5` (no faults injected) showed
one task run 30 to 66 times, about 12 s apart. Example: wave
`w-20261111T190352-s5101`, task t02 (W2C), 65 runs in 13 minutes. Each
run reported `yielded` with `continuation.kind: "response_wake"` and the
summary "No changes made. This status-change wake does not trigger phase
2". Each run was woken by `issue_status_changed`, and each finalization
committed `live_continuation_registered` with an `enqueue_continuation`
effect of kind `response_wake`.

Root cause: `arbitrateNativeStatus()`
(`server/src/services/native-runtime/status-arbiter.ts`) only treats
`response_wake` as passive when `boardResponseWaitAuthorized` (from
`readNativeBoardResponseWaitSource`), external chat, or plan wait is
true. Otherwise it falls to the generic yielded branch, and
`status-decision-committer.ts` (`enqueue_continuation`) enqueues an
`issue_status_changed` wake to the same agent. `issue_status_changed` is
not in `THROTTLED_ISSUE_REWAKE_REASONS`, and the native committer writes
an `issue.updated` activity row with the run's id for every decision, so
the rewake throttle saw every native run as progress.

**Expected behavior**

A `response_wake` with no admitted response source parks the task. A
comment, an interaction answer or a status change by somebody else wakes
the agent. No path can loop without a bound.

**Steps to reproduce**

Run `tests/restart-chaos/main.ts --env local --adapters codex
--workloads W2,W2Q,W2C --concurrency 10 --tasks 10 --seed 5101
--lifecycle warm --triggers time`. W2/W2C tasks loop after phase 1.

## What Changed

- `status-arbiter.ts`: a `yielded` / `response_wake` result with no
admitted response source and no blocking remaining work now commits
`response_wake_waiting_for_input`, keeps the task `in_progress`, and has
no effects. Policy version is `phase6-v14`. Board, external chat, plan,
governance, dependency, pause and unfinished-work branches are unchanged
and still come first.
- `native-runtime/native-response-wake-wait.ts` (new) and
`recovery/service.ts`: recovery treats that applied decision as a
durable wait while it is the issue's latest decision, the issue is
`in_progress` with the same agent assignee, and no user comment arrived
after the run started. This applies to the stranded-work sweep and to
the paused-agent passive-wait check.
- `execution-projection.ts`: a committed run with this reason shows the
phase `waiting_for_answer`, label "Waiting for a reply", and a next
action that tells the user to comment or change the status. This shows
only while that decision is still the issue's latest decision and the
issue is `in_progress`; an older run shows "Completed".
- Backstop in `issue-rewake-throttle.ts` and `heartbeat/queue.ts`: an
`issue_status_changed` wake that carries a declared `continuationKind`
(the `enqueue_continuation` effect) is now a throttle candidate. The
native status committer's own `issue.updated` / status-decision activity
no longer counts as run progress or as new input. After two consecutive
successful runs with no issue-visible progress, such a wake waits for
the existing escalating cooldown (2 min, doubling, max 30 min). The
native status dispatcher (`dispatchNativeStatusWakeBatch`) does not drop
a throttled intent: it keeps the intent `queued`, reports the cooldown
deadline to the deferred-receipt worker, and dispatches it again when
the cooldown ends. Status wakes without a declared continuation (blocker
owner, notify owner, retry) are unchanged.
- Restart chaos: new enforced universal check U5 (`universal.ts`). A
task with more than 10 runs fails as `U5:run_budget_exceeded`
(`RESTART_CHAOS_U5_MAX_RUNS`). The README records the calibration.
- `doc/architecture/native-status-arbitration.md`: the decision table
and the wait rules.

## Verification

- RED on master (same reason as the waves):
`heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` "parks a native response_wake that
no response admitted…" fails with decision `reasonCode:
"live_continuation_registered"` and effect `{ kind:
"enqueue_continuation", continuationKind: "response_wake" }`.
`heartbeat-issue-rewake-throttle.test.ts` "throttles a
same_agent/response_wake/retry continuation…" fails 3/3 because the wake
is admitted.
- GREEN: the integration test finalizes the run, dispatches native
status wakes and runs the stranded-work sweep three times. It asserts
one run total, one wake request, no recovery action, the task
`in_progress`, and the projection "Waiting for a reply".
- `heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` "delays a no-progress native
continuation until the rewake cooldown…" finalizes a real `same_agent`
continuation after a no-progress run, dispatches twice (one throttle
receipt, intent stays `queued`, deadline equals `nextAllowedAt`), then
dispatches after the cooldown and gets the run. It fails when the
dispatcher drops the throttled intent.
- Focused suites pass: `heartbeat-process-recovery`,
`heartbeat-issue-rewake-throttle`, `status-arbiter`,
`native-status-arbiter-corpus`, `runtime-mode`, `execution-projection`,
`chat-run-milestone-work`, `heartbeat-dependency-scheduling`,
`heartbeat-run-summary` (904 tests), and all restart-chaos unit tests
(584 tests). `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passes.
- Universal audit over the 17 saved waves of 2026-11-11: U5 flags 12
tasks, all looping tasks (12 to 66 runs), and 0 tasks on all-pass waves.
- Chaos rerun of local warm seed 5101 (W2, W2Q, W2C): result is added in
a comment on this PR.

## Risks

- Behavioral shift: a model that reports `response_wake` to mean
"continue now" no longer gets an immediate run. The task waits visibly
for a reply. The runner prompt already describes `response_wake` as a
real response wait, and `same_agent` stays available for server-owned
continuations.
- The throttle now applies to native runs. A chain of declared
continuations with no issue-visible output (no comment, document, work
product or other activity) waits for the cooldown after the second such
run. `same_agent` continuations are server-owned (repository
preparation), so this affects only repeated no-output chains.
- Old saved state: decisions committed under `phase6-v13` keep their
recorded effects. A run that finalizes after deploy uses the new policy.
No migration.
- Budget hard-stop behavior is unchanged.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, via Claude Code with
tool use (shell, file edits, 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
- [ ] 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>
2026-11-11 15:40:44 -06:00
DottaandClaude 80b2369f26 fix(native): keep remote runnerd exit evidence and report it on failed recovery (#20907)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Native runs on Daytona start a detached `paperclip-runnerd` in the
sandbox, and the controller adopts it after a restart
> - On staging, recovery fails with
`runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable` when the Runner is gone,
but nobody can see why it exited
> - The launch script sends runnerd's stdout and stderr to `/dev/null`,
so only a panic or a graceful error reaches `runnerd.stderr.log`, and
the recovery event does not read that file
> - This pull request keeps runnerd's stderr in a bounded file in its
private diagnostics directory, and adds the exit reason to the
`native.remote_runner_recovery_failed` event
> - The benefit is that the reason a Runner exited shows in the run log
on staging without SSH, which the class R investigation needs

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
Staging runs fail with `runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`
after the remote Runner exits (`native.remote_runner_recovery_failed`
with `stage: process_verification`, `reason: process_not_running`). The
event does not say why the Runner exited.

**What did you expect?**
The run log names the Runner's exit reason: its durable
`recoverableFailure` and diagnostics, and what it wrote to stderr.

**Steps to reproduce**
Restart-chaos re-wake and stall cells reproduce the refusal. Each failed
run log shows only `runnerLifecycle` and `runnerSettled`.

Refs #20893

## What Changed

- `REMOTE_RUNNER_CHILD_LAUNCH_SCRIPT` sends runnerd's stderr to
`diagnostics/runnerd.process-stderr.log` (mode 0600, in the 0700
directory) instead of `/dev/null`.
  - At launch, a file above 1 MiB is rotated once to `.1`.
- While runnerd runs, a detached trimmer is a disk backstop. Past 8 MiB,
it keeps the last 1 MiB. It checks every 15 s and ends when runnerd
ends. It is double-forked with its own argv, so it is not a child of
runnerd and does not carry runnerd's arguments. runnerd's own exit
reason goes to `runnerd.stderr.log`, which is never trimmed.
- A symlink or non-file at that path keeps the old `/dev/null` behavior.
- Stdout is unchanged (`/dev/null`). Runnerd's PID is still the launch
shell's PID, so the identity marker and fingerprint are unchanged.
- `remote-runner-recovery-diagnostics.ts` has a read-only
`REMOTE_RUNNER_EXIT_EVIDENCE_SCRIPT`. It prints a 2 KiB tail of
`runnerd.stderr.log` and of `runnerd.process-stderr.log`. It reads the
session diagnostics directory first, then the shared runtime-root
directory used by external Runners (Dot, Muse, grok_bot). It never reads
through a symlink. Each file keeps its own share of the 4 KiB budget.
- When recovery's process verification finds `process_not_running`, the
diagnostic adds these fields:
- `runnerRecoverableFailure`: a code-shaped string from
`runner-state.json`;
- `runnerDiagnostics`: the last 4 entries, redacted, 500 characters
each;
  - `runnerExitEvidence`: the redacted file tails, 4 KiB at most.
  
  `native.remote_runner_recovery_failed` carries them.
- The live process monitor's exit report now puts the durable state
summary first, then the file tails. Before, it used one or the other.
- `run-failure-diagnostics.ts` is unchanged. It still copies only the
closed labels, so no free text reaches failure reports.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/native-runtime/remote-runner-launch-stderr.test.ts`:
the launch writer keeps stderr in the file, writes the identity marker
with the child's PID, appends across relaunches, rotates an oversized
file, trims a growing file while the child runs, and never writes
through a symlink.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/native-runtime/remote-runner-recovery-diagnostics.test.ts`:
the evidence script output is bounded and refuses symlinks. Redaction
and bounds hold, and the new fields survive the event payload.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.test.ts`
passes (1374 tests). One expectation was updated for the combined exit
report.
- `npx tsc --noEmit -p server/tsconfig.json` is clean.
- Older runner images: the script is server-side. It adds only `wc`,
`tr`, `tail`, `cat`, `mv`, `sleep` and `kill`. The script already needed
`node`, `date`, `chmod`, `mv` and `printf`, so any image that launched
runnerd before has these tools. The runner content ID is unchanged, so
the current Daytona image runs it unmodified. The restart-chaos waves
run on that image.

## Risks

- Low. A sandbox disk that is already full could make the stderr
redirect fail. `exec ... 2>>file` then fails, and the launch reports
`runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable` the same way a launch that
cannot write its identity marker does. The marker is written first, in
the same directory tree.
- Stderr content stays in the sandbox. Only a redacted 4 KiB tail goes
into the instance's own run log (run-log data path; not Telemetry and
not Observability).
- No wait is added before `turn.start`. The evidence read runs only on
the recovery failure path, with its own 10 s bound.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), via Claude Code with tool use
(shell, file edits, 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
- [ ] 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 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 15:31:04 -06:00
DottaandClaude Fable 5.2 b2779054d4 fix(issues): let a native run hand its own task to a person without cancelling itself (#20884)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - A task has one assignee. An agent often finishes its work by handing
its own task to a person for review.
> - The task update route stops the outgoing run before it saves a
reassignment.
> - Since #16082, a legacy run that hands its own task to a person is
exempt, so it finishes its turn. Native runs were not exempt.
> - On staging, a native run (ACPX Claude, 11.5 minutes of work) sent
`PATCH /api/issues/{id}` to hand its task to a person. The route
cancelled that run with `issue_reassigned`. The agent saw
`api_transport_failure`. The task moved to the person, but it kept a
stale execution blocker ("Saved work recovered. Send a message to
continue.").
> - The native runtime assumes a running run still owns its task. So
widening the exemption alone is not enough: the run then fails after its
result is accepted, and its finalizer can act on the person's task.
> - This pull request applies the exemption to native runs and makes the
native terminal fence, restart recovery and finalizer handle a run that
gave its task away.
> - The benefit is that an agent can hand its task to a person and
finish normally, with no blocker on the person's task.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16082 (legacy exemption). Related: #20541 (agent-to-agent self
handoff) and #18293 (agent key handoff). Those PRs cover other actors
and targets. This PR covers native runs that hand their task to a
person.

**What happened?**

A native agent run handed its own task to a person (`assigneeAgentId:
null`, `assigneeUserId`, status `in_review`) through its signed run
token. The route cancelled the run that sent the request
(`issue_reassigned`, "Cancelled before issue reassignment"). The
cancelled native run then went through workspace recovery. The person's
task kept an execution blocker with `restore_failed`.

**Expected behavior**

The run that hands its own task to a person keeps running and finishes
its turn. The task rests `in_review` with the person. No execution
blocker or recovery action stays on the task. The outgoing run cannot
change the task after the hand-off.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Run a native agent on its assigned task.
2. From that run, send `PATCH /api/issues/{id}` with `assigneeAgentId:
null`, a person's `assigneeUserId`, and status `in_review`.
3. Before this fix, the route cancels the run with `issue_reassigned`.

**Why the exemption was legacy-only**

#16082 limited the exemption to the run shape of its incident and kept a
verified stop for every other case. The new H2 chaos workload showed why
native needed more than the route change. With only the route widened:

1. The run's terminal fence `assertCurrentWakeCommentsRead` requires the
run to still own the task. It threw
`native_current_wake_comments_binding_changed` after the result was
accepted. The run then failed with `native_session_lease_lost`, and its
finalizer recorded `workspace_finalization_failed` as an agent-owned
recovery on the person's task.
2. A restart after the hand-off left the run `running`, because restart
recovery refused it with `issue_execution_lock_changed`.
3. The native finalizer only superseded a `done` decision. A
`needs_review` report moved the person's task back to `in_progress` and
queued a continuation for the outgoing agent.
4. The REST guard against the outgoing run's later mutations
(`issue_handed_off`) applied to legacy runs only.

## What Changed

- `server/src/routes/issues.ts`: the signed current-run human
self-handoff exemption now applies to native runs. All other checks
stay: exact run, agent, company and task, `agent_jwt` source, human
recipient. For a native run the route first records the hand-off on the
run (`resultJson.humanSelfHandoff`, new `native-human-self-handoff.ts`).
Board reassignment, agent keys, and handoffs to an agent or to nobody
still stop the outgoing run.
- `current-wake-comments.ts`: the terminal fence accepts a run whose
recorded hand-off matches the person who now owns the task. Without the
record (for example a board reassignment), or after a later
reassignment, it still refuses.
- `native-restart-recovery.ts`: after a restart, a handed-off run is not
resumed. It passes the execution-lock check and is then settled by the
existing ownership gate (`task_ownership_or_status_changed`) without
changing the person's task, instead of staying `running`.
- `status-arbiter.ts` and `native-run-finalizer.ts`:
`supersedeHandedOffDecision` keeps the person's task status and strips
retries, continuations, owner wakes, recoveries, blockers and reviewer
bindings, also from decisions that already preserve the status. Two
effects stay: a governed request's interaction, and the
workspace-finalization repair, so saved work is not lost. Review runs
are not affected.
- `server/src/run-task-ownership.ts` (renamed from
`legacy-run-task-ownership.ts`): `assertHandedOffRunTaskOwnership`
rejects later task mutations from the outgoing legacy or native run, in
the route and under the update transaction's locks.
- `tests/restart-chaos/`: new opt-in workload `H2`. The agent saves a
brief, then hands the task to its creator in review as its last step.
The oracle requires the task to rest `in_review` with the creator, every
run to settle without `issue_reassigned`, readable non-empty run
history, and no execution blocker or active recovery action.
- Docs: `doc/execution-semantics.md`, task feature map and agent access
map, chaos README.

## Verification

- Red on `origin/master` (same tests, master source): the route cancels
the native run (500, and 409
`runner_goal_reassignment_stop_unconfirmed`); the finalizer moves the
person's task to `in_progress` with a continuation for the outgoing
agent; a late `done` from the outgoing native run closes the person's
task.
- Red chaos wave on master's server (`--server-from` a master checkout,
`--adapters claude --workloads H2 --faults K1 --matrix`): 0/2 pass. Both
runs ended `cancelled` / `issue_reassigned`
(`T:handoff_did_not_cancel_run`).
- Green focused tests on this branch:
- `native-human-self-handoff.test.ts` (embedded Postgres): hand-off
through the real issue service; the run stays `running`; `done`,
`needs_review` and failed-turn reports leave the task `in_review` with
the person, with `getExecutionBlocker` null and no recovery action; the
terminal fence accepts only the recorded hand-off; a late change from
the outgoing run fails with `issue_handed_off`; pure policy cases.
- `issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts`: native and legacy
self-handoffs persist without `cancelRun`, and native records the
hand-off before the update. Board, agent key, other run, task, agent and
company still stop the run.
- Native runtime suite (restart recovery, wake comments, arbiter,
stale-owner completion), `issues-service`, `low-trust-red-team-routes`:
pass. Server and restart-chaos typecheck pass. `node
scripts/check-maps.mjs` passes.
- Green chaos waves on this branch (local, `--adapters claude
--workloads H2`):
- `--matrix --faults K1 --seed 4459`: 2/2 pass (K0 baseline and a K1
crossing).
- `--tasks 3 --faults K1 --fault-after-seconds 60` and
`--fault-after-seconds 100`: 3/3 pass each. In the first, all three
restarts landed after the hand-off while the runs were live; the runs
settled and the tasks stayed with the person.
- The final waves ran on the pre-rebase head `8a2a3b6a74`. The rebase
onto master only merged the chaos workload lists (`types.ts`,
`config.ts`, `journeys.ts`). No Daytona wave was run.

## Risks

- The outgoing native turn keeps running after the person owns the task.
Its native task tools already require the run to own the task, so they
refuse (`paperclip_runner_tool_binding_not_authorized`). Its REST
mutations are rejected with `issue_handed_off`.
- A restart after the hand-off settles the run as failed
(`native_restart_recovery_blocked`) instead of resuming it. The person's
task is not changed and needs no Retry.
- The finalizer rule covers any native run whose task belongs to a
person at finalization, not only a self-handoff. Before this change such
a run could still move the person's task and queue its own continuation.
- Saved state: `resultJson.humanSelfHandoff` is a new optional run key.
An older server ignores it, so a run handed off on the new server and
finished on an old one fails its fence as today. No schema change.
- No API shape change.

> 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

- Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-opus-5-5`, through Claude Code
with tool use and code execution. The session does not expose the
context window or reasoning mode.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.2 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 15:30:59 -06:00
Nicky LeachandClaude Opus 5.5 d7b04a8b6d refactor(runner): rename codex-runtime-adapter to acpx-runtime-adapter (#20938)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Paperclip Runner opens agent sessions through one ACPX runtime
adapter
> - The adapter began as the Codex ACPX adapter, so its file is
`codex-runtime-adapter.ts`
> - The adapter now opens sessions for every ACPX agent: Claude, Codex,
Pi, Cursor, Grok, Kimi, Copilot and Antigravity
> - The Codex name makes readers look for Claude and other agent
behavior in the wrong place
> - This pull request renames the module to `acpx-runtime-adapter.ts`
and changes no behavior
> - The benefit is a file name that tells readers what the module does

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No issue exists. Refs #20933, which adds Claude restore behavior to this
module.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The name of the shared ACPX runtime adapter module in Paperclip Runner.

**Subsystem affected**
Paperclip Runner, ACPX driver
(`packages/paperclip-runner/src/drivers/acpx/`).

**Current behavior**
The module that opens ACPX sessions for all agents is named
`codex-runtime-adapter.ts`. Its test file, which holds Claude, Pi, Grok,
Cursor and Copilot tests, is named `codex-runtime-adapter.test.ts`.

**Proposed behavior**
The module is `acpx-runtime-adapter.ts` and its test file is
`acpx-runtime-adapter.test.ts`. All imports, scripts and docs use the
new name.

**Reason and benefit**
The name matches the module's scope. Reviewers and contributors find
agent-specific session behavior faster.

**Breaking changes**
None. No exported name, behavior or contract changes.

## What Changed

- Rename `src/drivers/acpx/codex-runtime-adapter.ts` to
`src/drivers/acpx/acpx-runtime-adapter.ts`, and its test file in the
same way. Git records both as renames with no content change, except the
test file's import path.
- Update the imports in `acpx-runtime-sidecar.ts`,
`codex-acpx-driver.ts` and four test files.
- Update the `dist` import in `scripts/grok-native-smoke.mjs` and the
test file key in `scripts/vitest-lane-durations.json`.
- Update the links and file names in
`doc/RUNNER-INTEGRATION-PLAYBOOK.md`,
`doc/architecture/runner-cursor-capabilities.md` and
`doc/architecture/runner-rich-acp-capabilities.md`.
- Do not change the historical profile identity fixtures under
`packages/paperclip-runner/test/fixtures/`. They record the sources of
earlier releases with the old path, and tests check them by hash.

## Verification

- `npx tsc -p tsconfig.json --noEmit` in `packages/paperclip-runner`: no
errors in changed files. The only errors are in
`src/eval/workflow-harness.ts`, because
`@paperclipai/paperclip-eval-kernel` was not built in the local
worktree.
- `npx vitest run src/drivers/acpx
src/cli/acpx-runtime-sidecar.test.ts`: 93 files, 1859 passed, 9 skipped.
- `node --test scripts/contracts/contract-fingerprints.test.mjs`: 11
passed. The pack contract digest reads protocol schemas, the Rust crate
and the ACPX patch, not TypeScript sources, so the rename does not
change it.
- `node --check scripts/grok-native-smoke.mjs`, and
`scripts/vitest-lane-durations.json` parses.
- `git grep codex-runtime-adapter` finds the old name only in the
historical fixtures.
- Merge check with #20933: a local merge of that branch into this one
completed with no conflicts. Git applied #20933's changes to the renamed
files. The merged adapter tests passed (133 passed).

## Risks

- Low risk. The change renames files and updates references only.
- An open PR that edits the old file path must merge or rebase after
this PR. Git rename detection handled #20933 with no conflicts. A PR
that adds a new import of `./codex-runtime-adapter.js` fails typecheck
until it uses the new path.
- `openCodexAcpxRuntime` keeps its name. It is an alias of
`openQualifiedAcpxRuntime`, and this PR does not change exported names.
- `acpx-runtime-adapter.ts` and its test file were already longer than
1,000 lines. This PR does not add lines to them.

> 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

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, in Claude Code with
tool use (shell, file edits, local test runs). Extended reasoning was
on.

## 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>
canary/v2026.1111.0-canary.14
2026-11-11 21:29:25 +00:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 7cd5558e41 fix(authz): send agents denied a cost-recording route to the Costs page (#20922)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - When an agent is denied a board-only action, the denial names the
board page where a person can do it, and agents relay that link
> - Cost recording retry ("Retry cost recording") is board-only and
lives on the run's row on the Costs page
> - The denial for every `/companies/:id/costs` route named the Budgets
page instead
> - So an agent asked to fix a run's missing cost sent the person to
Budgets, where the control does not exist
> - This pull request maps cost routes to the Costs page and names that
page in the retry route's catalog entry
> - The benefit is that the person lands on the control the agent told
them to use

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**
In paid chat eval run 43086418488
(`budgets-costs.repair-cost-recording`), the CEO tried `POST
/api/companies/{companyId}/costs/retry-accounting`, got `403
board_access_required` whose remediation said `[Open
budgets](/<prefix>/activity/budgets)`, and told the person to use the
retry on Budgets. The retry control is on the Costs page.

**Expected behavior**
Board denials for cost routes name `[Open
costs](/<prefix>/activity/costs)`. Budget and budget-incident routes
still name Budgets.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. As an agent, call `POST
/api/companies/{companyId}/costs/retry-accounting`.
2. Read the 403 `remediation`.
3. It links `/<prefix>/activity/budgets`, a page with no cost retry
control.

## What Changed

- `server/src/routes/authz.ts`: `COMPANY_COSTS_PAGE`
(`/<prefix>/activity/costs`); `/companies/:id/costs/*` denials use it.
Budgets and budget incidents keep `COMPANY_BUDGETS_PAGE`.
- `server/src/routes/openapi.ts`: the retry route's description says a
board user retries with Retry cost recording on the run's row on the
Costs page.
- `board-access-denial.test.ts`: regression row for the retry route (red
before the change, green after).

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run src/__tests__/board-access-denial.test.ts
src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/agent-refusal-finality.test.ts
src/__tests__/cost-data-quality-routes.test.ts
src/services/native-runtime/runner-api.test.ts` (server): all pass. The
new row fails without the `authz.ts` change.
- End-to-end: the chat eval case `budgets-costs.repair-cost-recording`
grades that the agent's guidance links the Costs page; it will be rerun
after this merges.

## Risks

- Low. Only the link text and target in cost-route denials and one
catalog description change. Agents that previously relayed Budgets now
relay Costs.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), tool use and code
execution in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 14:54:36 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 c1edb9ec02 fix(native): keep an unreachable remote Runner alive when a failed run closes (#20923)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Native runs on a remote sandbox (Daytona) start a detached
`paperclip-runnerd`. After a recoverable failure, the server resumes the
same run and reattaches to that Runner
> - On staging, `runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable` was the
most frequent failure. The tasks stayed blocked until someone clicked
Retry
> - In 31 of the 34 failed runs the reattachment found the Runner gone
with an unsettled `ready` journal (`runnerSettled: false`). The Runner
was not lost by accident. The controller's own close stopped it with
`SIGKILL`: close could not prove suspension within its 10 s budget, so
it force-stopped the Runner in the middle of a turn
> - The server then scheduled a same-run reattachment that could never
succeed, because the close had just removed the Runner it needed
> - This pull request keeps an unreachable remote Runner alive when a
failed run closes. A Stop, a cancelled turn and a `stop_cleanup`
recovery still stop it
> - The benefit is that the same-run reattachment finds the live Runner.
The Runner then settles into a `suspended` journal, which the existing
relaunch path resumes. The task continues without Retry, and no provider
work is replayed

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20853, #20907

**What happened?**
Remote native runs failed with
`runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable` and error code
`native_continuation_requires_reconciliation`. The tasks were left
blocked. In the failed runs the first attempt failed with a recoverable
transport error, for example `provider_transport_failed: PRP command
turn.start timed out`, `native_session_interrupted` or a server restart.
The run log then showed `runner did not prove durable suspension before
checkpoint` and `runner shutdown failed: Error: Durable recovery runner
timed out.` The second string comes from `waitForProcess`, which sends
`SIGKILL` when its deadline passes. The same-run reattachment ran 20–60
s later and reported `process_verification` / `process_not_running` with
`runnerLifecycle: ready` and `runnerSettled: false`. Most of these runs
had done provider work before the failure (turns and tool calls), so the
automatic Retry correctly refused them (`provider_turn_unsettled`).

**What did you expect to happen?**
When a run fails for a reason that the server resumes on the same run,
the close does not destroy the Runner that the reattachment needs. The
reattachment adopts it, and the run continues without Retry and without
a repeated tool effect.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start a remote native run and let a turn start.
2. Make the Runner unreachable (a broken transport or a slow event
pump), so that the turn fails and the close cannot prove suspension
within its budget.
3. The close sends `SIGKILL` to the Runner. The same-run reattachment
then fails with `runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`, and the
task is blocked.

**Relation to open PRs**
- #20853 covers the 3 runs whose journal was a settled `ready` cut
(`runnerSettled: true`). This PR does not change that path.
- #20907 makes the Runner's exit reason visible. It does not change
recovery. This PR does not overlap with it.

## What Changed

- `runnerd-codex-transport.ts`: `close(reason, {
retainUnsettledRemoteRunner })` accepts a new option. When the option is
set, the Runner is remote (a process launcher or an adopted Runner), the
close is not a `stop_cleanup`, the Runner is still alive and suspension
is not proven, the close does not stop the Runner. It skips the
`waitForProcess` kill, the adopted-runner `SIGKILL` and `forceKill`. It
still releases the controller route, writes the unsettled checkpoint and
throws `NativeSessionCloseUnrecoverableError`, so the session stays
quarantined and is never reused. The settlement diagnostic records
`runnerRetained: true`, and a new diagnostic records `remote runner left
alive unsettled for same-run reattachment`.
- `HarnessNativeSession.close` asks for retention only when the session
was not explicitly cancelled. After `cancel()` (Stop), it asks for the
old behavior, so Stop still stops the Runner.
- `CodexHarnessSession.close` passes the option to the transport.
`HarnessSession.close` and `CodexAppServerTransport.close` accept the
optional field. Callers that do not set it keep the old behavior.
- Docs: `doc/execution-semantics.md` and `doc/run-log-events.md`
describe the rule and the `runnerRetained` field.

How the run continues: the reattaching controller adopts the live
Runner. The Runner then completes the `runner.drain` and
`runner.suspend` that the failed close queued, and exits with a settled
`suspended` journal. That attempt fails as
`native_runner_process_exited`, which the server resumes on the same
run. The next reattachment finds the process gone with a settled
`suspended` journal and relaunches the Runner over it (the existing path
from #19745). If the Runner was only slow, it suspends by itself and the
first reattachment relaunches.

## Verification

- Red, on `master` with only the tests added:
`runnerd-codex-transport-remote-retention.test.ts` fails 2 of 5
(`expected 'gone' to be 'alive'`): the close killed the Runner.
`harness-driver-backend.test.ts -t "retain an unsettled"` fails 2 of 2.
- Green with the fix: `cd packages/paperclip-runner && npx vitest run
src/live/runnerd-codex-transport-remote-retention.test.ts
src/backends/harness-driver-backend.test.ts`.
- The staging shape: a real `paperclip-runnerd` started through a
process launcher, a turn in progress, the Runner frozen with `SIGSTOP`
during close. The close throws `NativeSessionCloseUnrecoverableError`
with `runnerRetained: true`, the Runner stays alive, and its journal
stays `ready`.
- A second controller attaches through `adoptExistingRunner` (no
duplicate launch). The Runner settles into `lifecycle: suspended` with
an empty outbox and no pending terminal delivery, then exits.
- An explicit cancellation, a caller that does not ask for retention,
and a `stop_cleanup` close still stop the Runner.
- Also run: `src/backends`, `src/drivers/codex`,
`src/drivers/acpx/codex-acpx-driver.test.ts`,
`src/drivers/acpx/codex-runtime-adapter.test.ts`,
`src/native-session-runtime.test.ts` (1045 tests pass; 2 `spawnSync
ETIMEDOUT` under full-parallel load pass alone), and all of `src/live/`
(files that timed out under full-parallel load pass at
`--maxWorkers=2`).
- `npx tsc --noEmit -p packages/paperclip-runner/tsconfig.json` is
clean.
- `pnpm verify` selects a broad plan (exit 2) because
`doc/execution-semantics.md` is a global CI input. CI supplies that
coverage.
- Not run: a live Daytona run. The fix is in the controller library that
runs on the server, so it needs no new Runner image.

## Risks

- Medium. A failed close now leaves an unreachable remote Runner alive
instead of killing it. This is the same state a restart detach leaves
today, and the same-run reattachment or a Stop cleanup owns it.
- If the server does not resume the run on the same Runner, the Runner
stays alive until something reattaches or the sandbox is released.
Remote Runners have no reconnect deadline
(`runnerProcessReconnectGraceMs: null`). Before this change they were
killed. The close still quarantines the session, so it is never released
for reuse.
- Stop is unchanged: an explicit cancellation, `settleCancelledTurn` and
`stop_cleanup` close without retention, so they still stop the Runner.
- Previous-release story: this change adds and changes no persisted
state. State that an older release left (a killed Runner with an
unsettled `ready` journal) keeps its current handling: the named refusal
`runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable` and a working Retry. Tasks
already blocked on staging keep their Retry button. A deploy during a
run changes nothing, because the decision is made in the closing
process.
- No wait is added before `turn.start`. The change only affects the
failure path of close.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), via Claude Code with tool use
(shell, file edits, test runs, read-only staging API reads).

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 14:17:25 -06:00
DottaandClaude Fable 5.2 e8e548e856 feat(db): classify migrations for application under the running release (#20913)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - `packages/db` owns the schema and its migrations. There are 467
migrations, and several ship each day
> - A zero-downtime deploy starts the new release while the previous
release still serves the same database
> - Core does not say whether a migration is safe to apply under the
previous release. A deployer must treat each pending migration as a
reason to pause, or a person must review it
> - On stacks that may not pause, releases wait for hours
> - Core owns the schema, so Core must own this knowledge and publish it
as data
> - This pull request adds a conservative classifier, an in-file
override, the published result, and a guard for new migrations
> - The benefit is that a deployer can apply routine compatible
migrations automatically, and incompatible changes become visible at
review time

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Database migrations (`packages/db`), the cloud migrator artifact
(`scripts/cloud-migrator-artifacts.mjs`), and the pull-request policy
job.

**Problem or motivation**

Core has no machine-readable statement that a migration can be applied
while the previous release still reads and writes the database. A
deployer cannot tell an added nullable column from a dropped column. It
must pause for both, or refuse the release.

**Proposed solution**

Classify each migration as `online_compatible`, `requires_staging`, or
`unknown`. Publish the result in the migrator manifest. Fail a pull
request when a migration it adds is `unknown` and has no reviewed
override in the file.

**Alternatives considered**

- A hand-kept list in the deployer. It goes stale and it is not reviewed
with the SQL.
- A sibling JSON file in the artifact. It needs a workflow change, and
the attestation of `manifest.json` would not cover it.

**Roadmap alignment**

This is release infrastructure. It adds no product feature.

## What Changed

- `packages/db/src/migration-compatibility.ts`:
`classifyMigrationSql(sql)` returns `{ compatibility, classified,
reasons, override, overrideError }`. It parses statement by statement
(breakpoints, `;`, comments, string and dollar quoting, guarded `DO`
blocks). A statement that it does not recognize is `unknown`. A
migration takes the worst class of its statements.
- Lock and duration hazards have their own reason codes
(`lock_hazard_*`) and classify as `unknown`, not as compatible with a
warning.
- Override: `-- paperclip:migration-compat online_compatible:
<justification>` (or `requires_staging`) in the leading comment block of
the migration file. The justification is mandatory (10 characters or
more). A malformed, repeated, or misplaced directive is an error and
never improves the verdict.
- A table counts as new after a plain `CREATE TABLE`, or after `CREATE
TABLE IF NOT EXISTS` when no earlier migration created that table.
`classifyMigrationSequence` classifies migrations in apply order with
that knowledge.
- `packages/db/scripts/migration-compatibility.ts` (run with `pnpm exec
tsx` in `packages/db`): classify files, print the distribution, print
JSON, or run the guard (`--check`). No new package script.
- Published data: `manifest.json` of the cloud migrator artifact has a
new additive field `migrationCompatibility`. `version` stays `1`. No
existing field changes. The build reads the SQL from the packed
`db.tgz`, so the data describes what the migrator applies. `validate`
(publisher) and `verify` reject data that is malformed or does not match
the packed migrations. The workflow file does not change.
- Guard for new migrations:
`.github/scripts/check-pr-migration-order.mjs` (the existing "Validate
migration ordering against target branch" policy step) now also
classifies the migrations that the pull request adds. `check:migrations`
runs the same guard against the merge base with `origin/master`, so the
`@paperclipai/db` typecheck and build report it locally. `unknown`
without an override fails. `requires_staging` prints a notice and
passes. A new migration that uses `CONCURRENTLY` also fails when it is
not in `MIGRATIONS_WITH_TOP_LEVEL_STATEMENTS`
(`packages/db/src/client.ts`), because the migrator would run it inside
a transaction.
- `doc/DATABASE.md`: new section "Migration compatibility with the
running release" under "Schema change workflow".

Published shape:

```json
"migrationCompatibility": {
  "version": 1,
  "migrations": [
    {
      "idx": 468,
      "tag": "0468_busy_wendell_rand",
      "sqlSha256": "56a6e272…",
      "compatibility": "online_compatible",
      "classified": "online_compatible",
      "override": false,
      "reasons": [
        { "code": "add_column", "compatibility": "online_compatible", "message": "Adds a column that is nullable or has a constant default.", "statements": [1] }
      ]
    }
  ]
}
```

`sqlSha256` is the hash that the migrator records in the migration
history. `overrideJustification` is present only when `override` is
`true`. Entries are in apply order (journal `idx`, then file name; the
shipped journal repeats `idx` 178).

### Distribution over the existing migrations

No existing migration is rewritten or annotated.

| Class | All 467 | Newest 100 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| `online_compatible` | 228 (48.8%) | 67 |
| `requires_staging` | 114 (24.4%) | 12 |
| `unknown` | 125 (26.8%) | 21 |

Migrations per blocking reason (one migration can have several):

| Migrations | Class | Reason |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 74 | `requires_staging` | `create_unique_index_existing_table` |
| 70 | `unknown` | `lock_hazard_create_index` |
| 66 | `unknown` | `lock_hazard_validated_foreign_key` |
| 56 | `unknown` | `lock_hazard_data_backfill` |
| 54 | `unknown` | `drop_constraint` |
| 41 | `requires_staging` | `add_validated_check` |
| 33 | `unknown` | `drop_index` |
| 16 | `unknown` | `do_block_procedural` |
| 15 | `unknown` | `replace_function` |
| 13 | `unknown` | `create_trigger_existing_table` |
| 12 | `unknown` | `data_change_existing_table` |
| 10 | `unknown` | `drop_object`, `lock_hazard_set_not_null`,
`set_default` (each) |
| 8 | `requires_staging` | `drop_column` |

## Verification

- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db exec vitest run
src/migration-compatibility.test.ts`: 113 tests pass. They cover a
positive and a negative case for each rule, each reason code, the
override (missing, short, misplaced, and repeated justification are
rejected), unknown by default, the guard, the shipped migrations, the
`CONCURRENTLY` list, and the command line.
- `node --test scripts/cloud-migrator-artifacts.test.mjs
.github/scripts/tests/check-pr-migration-order.test.mjs`: 21 tests pass.
- Real bundle at the first commit of this branch: `preview-artifacts.mjs
pack`, then `cloud-migrator-artifacts.mjs build`, `validate`, and
`verify-install` pass. The manifest lists 467 migrations and is 312 KB.
This run found the repeated journal `idx`, which the second commit
handles.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db run check:migrations` passes. With
`--check --base HEAD~150` the guard fails on three `unknown` migrations
and prints notices for two `requires_staging` migrations.
- `pnpm verify` exits 2 because `.github/scripts/**` is a global CI
input. Required CI supplies the broad coverage.
- Not run: the publish job (it needs the master-only AWS role), and no
deployer reads the new field yet.

## Risks

- The manifest grows from about 1 KB to about 312 KB. A consumer that
rejects unknown manifest fields would fail. The verifier in this
repository ignores unknown fields; consumers outside this repository
were not inspected.
- From this merge, an open pull request that adds an `unknown` migration
fails the policy step and the `@paperclipai/db` typecheck until the
author rewrites the migration or adds the override. `drizzle-kit` emits
validated foreign keys and plain indexes for existing tables, so this is
common. The error text and `doc/DATABASE.md` give the fix.
- `ADD CONSTRAINT ... NOT VALID` classifies as `online_compatible`.
PostgreSQL still enforces it on new writes, so the author must make sure
that the previous release does not write rows that violate it.
- The classifier reads SQL only. It cannot see that new code writes
values that the previous release cannot read (for example a new enum
value). The `requires_staging` override exists for that case.
- `master` cannot fail the guard: the guard only judges migrations that
are not on the merge base.

## Model Used

- Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-fable-5-2`, in Claude Code with
tool use and code execution.

## 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 Fable 5.2 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 14:14:40 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 fc14f1ade2 fix(execution): keep resumed native runs alive past a stale finalization deadline (#20920)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The execution control reconciler bounds how long a run may spend
settling after its provider work ends
> - A run deadline from one attempt stayed on the run row after the run
was handed to a same-run resume or a restart claim
> - The reconciler then failed the resumed, live run with
`execution_finalization_deadline_exceeded` and told a person to inspect
the provider
> - This breaks two product rules: recovery must work without a person,
and users must not get operator instructions
> - This pull request makes a live native owner or a scheduled same-run
resume the owner of the run, and it replaces the operator text with
plain wording and Retry
> - The benefit is that runs that recover after a restart keep running,
and a genuine expiry shows plain words and one working Retry

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No public issue exists. This is the bug description, in the fields of
`.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml`.

**What happened?**

On a hosted deploy, 11 tasks became blocked with
`execution_finalization_deadline_exceeded` in two hours. Three runs had
the same sequence. The native session failed or the server restarted. A
same-run resume or a restart claim then took the run. The new controller
held a live native lease and prepared the run again. The reconciler then
found the earlier attempt's run deadline and failed the run. The
recorded original failure code was empty, so no real failure caused the
block. The run error told a person to inspect the failed run and verify
that its provider stopped.

**Expected behavior**

A run that a live controller owns, or that has a scheduled same-run
resume, continues. A deadline that really expires shows plain wording
and a working Retry. Users do not get operator instructions.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Save a running native run with an `executionControlDeadlineAt` in the
past.
2. Give its finalization row a live lease (a restart claim), or phase
`retryable_failure` with no lease (a scheduled resume).
3. Run `reconcileAbandonedExecutionControl`.
4. The run fails with `execution_finalization_deadline_exceeded`, and
its error tells a person to inspect the provider.

**Paperclip version or commit**

`master` at 6154b9485e.

**Deployment mode**

Hosted (cloud) instance with Daytona remote sandboxes.

**Agent adapter(s) involved**

Not adapter-specific (core bug). Seen with Codex and OpenCode native
runs.

## What Changed

- `execution-control-reconciliation.ts`: when a running native run has
no accepted result and its finalization owner holds a live lease or has
a scheduled same-run resume, the reconciler clears the stale run
deadline and does not fail the run.
- `execution-control-reconciliation.ts`: when the live owner's own
settlement deadline is due, the reconciler moves the deadline to the
lease expiry. It surfaces the failure only after that lease lapses.
- `execution-control-deadline.ts`: adds the cause constant and a plain
message. The reconciler writes this message to the run error, the run
next action, and the recovery action.
- `execution-blocker.ts`: a run saved by an earlier release with this
error code, and an active recovery action with this cause, show the
plain message. Retry stays available. No migration is needed.
- `doc/execution-semantics.md`: documents that a control deadline bounds
one attempt and not a later attempt of the same run.

## Verification

- Red before the fix (5 failures): `npx vitest run
src/services/execution-control-reconciliation.test.ts
src/services/execution-blocker-read.test.ts` in `server/`. The
resumed-run cases failed with `expected 1 to be +0` (the run was
surfaced as failed). The wording cases received the old operator text.
- Green after the fix: the same command passes, 46 of 46.
- Related files pass: `execution-control-work`, `task-retry`,
`workspace-recovery-warm-handoff`, `native-safe-replacement`,
`closed-native-receipt-accounting`, `execution-recovery-resolution`,
`workspace-recovery-admission`, `execution-projection`.
- `npx tsc --noEmit -p server/tsconfig.json` passes.
- `pnpm verify` selects a broad plan because
`doc/execution-semantics.md` changed. CI supplies that coverage.
- Previous-release story: in-flight rows with a stale run deadline and a
live owner continue after deploy. Rows that an earlier release already
failed show plain wording and Retry when read. No schema change.

## Risks

- A native owner that keeps renewing its lease while its settlement
hangs is not failed by this backstop until the lease lapses. The
executor stops lease renewal before it starts failure settlement, so the
wait is bounded by one lease period.
- A scheduled same-run resume now owns the run. Restart recovery
reschedules these resumes at boot. A coordinator deadline that is due
still surfaces the failure.
- Tasks that an earlier release already blocked keep their block. They
now show plain wording and Retry. Chat-bound tasks keep their existing
"send a message" continuation.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (claude-opus-5-5), Anthropic, with tool use and code
execution in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 14:13:56 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 64afd22d82 fix(runner): keep the OpenCode MCP bridge on keep-alive so OpenCode keeps its Paperclip tools (#20921)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Native OpenCode agents call Paperclip tools through a local MCP
bridge in the runner's OpenCode proxy
> - #20886 made the bridge send `Connection: close` on every response,
as hardening for one stalled parallel tool call that was never
reproduced
> - After #20886 merged, many native OpenCode runs started without any
Paperclip MCP tools
> - Agents then said the Paperclip tools were missing, worked only with
bash and file tools, and never called paperclip_finish
> - This pull request removes the `Connection: close` header and keeps
the delivery diagnostics from #20886
> - The benefit is that OpenCode agents get their Paperclip tools again,
and a recurrence of the original stall still shows in the run log

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20886.

**What happened**
In chat eval runs on CI, every OpenCode session before #20886 sent a
first model request of about 34k–36k input tokens (prompt plus the
Paperclip tool schemas). After #20886, about 9 of 25 sessions sent only
about 8k–15k tokens on the same prompts (for example 14,711 for
questions-and-approvals.necessary-question, 15,481 for
cases.cases-disabled, 14,096 for cases.update-case-facts). The prompt
envelope size did not change (about 32.7k characters). Those sessions
made no Paperclip MCP calls: zero tool-delivery records, no
paperclip_finish. The agents' own reasoning said "The paperclip tools
aren't in my toolset". Sessions on a commit without #20886 (8d2e34eac1)
all had the full size.

**Expected behavior**
Every native OpenCode session starts with the Paperclip MCP tools.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run several chat-features OpenCode cells on master after #20886.
2. Compare the first usage record of each run (inputTokens plus
cacheReadTokens) and the tool names in the run events.
3. See sessions with about 15k tokens and no paperclip_* tool calls.

## What Changed

- `mcp-bridge.ts`: removed `response.setHeader("Connection", "close")`.
The bridge uses Node's default keep-alive again, as before #20886.
- The per-call delivery diagnostics from #20886 stay, so a recurrence of
the stalled parallel call still shows socket reuse, idle time and
`written` in the run log.
- `mcp-bridge-delivery.test.ts`: the pooled-client test now asserts that
the bridge does not close connections, that a later call reuses a
socket, and that each call still gets a correct delivery record.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run` for mcp-bridge-delivery, mcp-bridge,
mcp-bridge-diagnostics, opencode-proxy-finish-diagnostics,
opencode-app-server-proxy and opencode-proxy-abandoned-tool-call tests:
45 passed.
- The exact mechanism inside OpenCode/Bun is not reproduced locally (a
macOS Bun client against a `Connection: close` server completed 300
MCP-shaped handshakes without error). The evidence is the before/after
correlation above. The next chat eval runs will show the first-request
token counts again.

## Risks

- The original five-minute stall (one occurrence, cause not proven) can
recur. The diagnostics from #20886 will then name the socket state.
- No persisted run, session or pack state changes.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), tool use and code
execution in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 14:10:56 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 c5e6ab5ca8 test(evals): retarget instance-settings from the removed Agent Chat toggle to the Cases experiment (#20897)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The chat catalog eval `instance-operations.instance-settings` checks
that a person who asks the chat agent to turn on an instance experiment
gets the supported operator path, and that the setting really works
> - The case asked "Enable Agent Chat on this instance." Agent Chat is
always on since #19360, and the catalog says so (#20169), so the agent
correctly answered "already on" and the scripted human could not find
the removed toggle
> - The premise is obsolete, so this pull request changes it explicitly
to the Cases experiment (`enableCases`), which still exists and has a
real route gate
> - It also replaces a reply-wording regex with structural checks
> - The benefit is that the case measures its original promise on
today's product

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**
In the full chat-catalog run, the case failed in the human journey: the
locator `getByRole('switch', { name: 'Toggle agent chat experimental
setting' })` found no element. The agent's reply ("Agent Chat is already
enabled ... there's no toggle to change") was correct for the current
product. The grader also used reply regexes
(`experimental|enableAgentChat`, `operator|admin|human|settings`, and a
negative "I have enabled" pattern).

**Expected behavior**
The case tests an instance experiment a person can still turn on. The
agent cannot change instance settings, does not change the setting, and
links Experimental settings. The person follows that rendered link,
turns the feature on, sees it persist, and the feature's page opens.
Grading reads saved state and rendered links, not wording.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run
`chat-features.runner-opencode.local.instance-operations.instance-settings`
on master.
2. See the agent answer that Agent Chat is always on.
3. See the human step time out on the missing Agent Chat switch.

Refs #19360, #20169. Product companion: #20894 (the denial and the
catalog name the Experimental settings page). It is cherry-picked here
so the paid run measures it.

## What Changed

- Premise change (explicit): query "Enable Agent Chat on this instance."
becomes "Turn on Cases for this instance."; context and expected outcome
follow. Recorded in the manifest `changedFields`, pinned in the manifest
test, inventory digest updated.
- Setup: refuses a hidden Cases setting, starts Cases off (cleanup
restores the target's value), and probes GET/PATCH experimental settings
with the agent's own key (403 `board_access_required`, setting
unchanged).
- Human journey: checks that Cases is still off after the agent's turn
and that `/<prefix>/cases` redirects to the dashboard. Then follows the
Experimental settings link that the reply rendered (no typed-URL
fallback), turns Cases on, checks it after reload, and opens the Cases
page.
- Grader: the `supported-human-path` regex check is replaced by
`agent-links-experimental-settings` (rendered link to the page, and the
person followed it). Saved-state checks cover the off route, the save,
persistence and the open Cases page.
- `oracleVersion` is now
`paperclip.chat-catalog.privileged.instance-settings.v2`. `sourceFiles`
follow the code.
- Calibration: the valid reply and a reworded reply pass. Each missing
state, a missing link, a wrong page, a foreign origin and a literal
`<prefix>` link fail.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts
tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-domains/privileged-companions.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-domains/privileged-budget.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-contract.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-consistency.test.ts`: 25 passed.
- `node --test
tests/runner-e2e/chat-full-catalog-testops-manifest.test.mjs`: 10
passed.
- `node tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs <HEAD> --check`:
unchanged.
- `npx tsc --noEmit -p tests/runner-e2e`: no errors in changed files.
- The paid end-to-end run is not done yet.

## Risks

- The case now depends on the Cases experiment. If Cases becomes always
on or is removed, the case needs another retarget.
- The agent can still say something wrong in prose. The grader cannot
detect a false "I turned it on" claim without wording checks, so a human
reads the reply. The saved state proves that the agent did not change
the setting.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), tool use and code
execution in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 14:02:01 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 34f71f7d57 fix(server): defer a run that meets a busy agent directory instead of failing it (#20829)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Each run of an agent with managed agent files gets a private copy of
the agent directory. Remote copies serialize their prepare, checkpoint,
collect, and release operations through one Postgres advisory lock per
agent, taken with `pg_try_advisory_xact_lock`
> - When the lock is busy, the operation fails at once with "Agent
directory operation is already active"
> - On staging, a deploy restarted the controller while three runs of
the same agent were active. When one run resumed, another run of that
agent was checkpointing its directory. The resume failed, used its last
attempt, and the task became blocked with "Retry or send a message"
> - A run must not fail because another run of the same agent is briefly
using the agent directory
> - This pull request keeps the fail-fast lock and, when it is busy
during preparation, puts the same native run back on the existing
same-run retry schedule a few seconds later
> - The benefit is that lock contention delays a run by seconds instead
of ending it as failed

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
A task's run failed with `native_continuation_requires_reconciliation`
and the error "Agent directory operation is already active". The task
was blocked and asked the user to retry. The same error ended at least
two other runs of the same agent within one day.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Use an agent with managed agent files in a remote sandbox.
2. Let one run of the agent checkpoint or collect its agent directory.
3. At the same time, let another run of the same agent prepare (for
example, a same-run resume after a controller restart).
4. The second run fails immediately with "Agent directory operation is
already active".

**Expected behavior**
The second run waits until the first operation is done, then continues.
It does not end as failed.

## What Changed

- `server/src/services/agent-directory-working-copies.ts`: The busy lock
now throws `AgentDirectoryOperationBusyError`, still a 409 with the same
message. Lock behavior is unchanged from `master`: a fail-fast
`pg_try_advisory_xact_lock` held for the life of the holder's
transaction.
- `server/src/services/heartbeat/agent-directory-busy.ts`:
`prepareWithAgentDirectoryDeferral` wraps only instruction preparation
and turns the busy error into `AgentDirectoryPreparationDeferral`
("Another run of this agent is still using its files"). A busy lock met
while collecting files after a turn is not wrapped and keeps its
existing path.
- **Before native admission** (a brand-new run, such as the first run of
a task): `server/src/services/heartbeat/retries.ts`
`finalizeAgentDirectoryBusyDeferral` cancels the run as an expected
control-plane wait (`providerWorkStarted: false`) and schedules an
`agent_directory_busy` retry 5–15 seconds later. The task keeps its
execution lock on the retry. The lane spends no failure retries
(`execution-recovery-attempt.ts`), its count is the retry run's
`scheduledRetryAttempt`, and it stops after 30 attempts.
`pre-dispatch-execution-evidence.ts` classifies this wait like the
existing workspace and AI-connection waits, so retry scheduling does not
ask for reconciliation.
- **A resumed native run**:
`server/src/services/native-runtime/native-controller-recovery.ts`
`deferNativeRunForBusyAgentDirectory` keeps the same run on the existing
same-run retry schedule without spending an attempt. It uses the same
guards as `deferNativeControllerRecovery`: it locks the task, requires
the task's execution run to be this run, requires the current lease
owner, and refuses after a Stop, a startup cancellation or a pending
native cancellation, so those settle normally. Its count is stored in
the run's `contextSnapshot`, which a resume claim does not clear, and it
stops after 30.
- `server/src/services/heartbeat.ts`: routes a preparation deferral to
the same-run path or, before admission, to the scheduled-retry path.
After the bound it follows the normal failure path with the plain
message.
- No schema or migration. Postgres releases a dead holder's advisory
lock with its session. The staging evidence showed a live holder
(another run's checkpoint), not a stale one.
- `doc/DEVELOPING.md`: Documented both paths and the bound.

Earlier revisions of this PR waited on the lock and added idle-session
expiry, keepalive, ownership fences, fenced remote removal and attempt
slots. This revision removes all of them.

### How the directory-wait retry keeps the original wake

The retry no longer replaces the wake. `scheduleBoundedRetryForRun`
takes `preserveWakeContext` for this wait: the retry keeps the original
`wakeReason`, `retryReason` and the whole wake context (interaction,
comment, continuation and admission fields), and its wake request keeps
the original reason. The wait is recorded separately as
`preparationWait: { kind: "agent_directory_busy", attempt, nextAttemptAt
}`, next to the carried `executionRetryAccounting`. Gates that key on
the wake reason therefore treat the retry exactly as they treated the
original wake.

| # | Site | Treatment for the directory wait | Why |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | `heartbeat/retries.ts` `scheduleBoundedRetryForRun` | Changed:
`preserveWakeContext` keeps the original wake context and reason and
adds `preparationWait` | Root cause: the retry overwrote the wake reason
|
| 2 | `run-dispatch/domain/wake-context.ts`
`isResolvedInteractionContinuationWakeContext` /
`PREPARATION_WAIT_RETRY_REASONS` | Special case removed | The original
wake context is kept, so the continuation is classified from it |
| 3 | `heartbeat/retries.ts` `interactionRunnerWait` | Special case
removed | The interaction fields are kept in the context |
| 4 | `run-dispatch/adapters/postgres.ts` scheduled-retry dependency
facts | Changed: a preparation-wait retry whose original wake was
admitted as a dependency-blocked interaction
(`dependencyBlockedInteraction`, recorded at wake time) is admitted the
same way | Without the wait the original wake would have run; this gate
is only met because of the wait |
| 5 | `run-dispatch/domain/wake-context.ts`
`isNonAssigneeWorkspaceBusyRetry` + `heartbeat/retries.ts`
`finalizeAgentDirectoryBusyDeferral` | Kept:
`preparationWaitDeferredWhileAssignee`, derived only from the recorded
admission authority | The scheduled-retry ownership gate has no
wake-reason path; the workspace and AI waits use the same recorded flag
|
| 6 | `heartbeat/retries.ts` explicit user continuation admission |
Kept: admits the `agent_directory_busy` scheduling reason | The
successor needs its own authorization receipt |
| 7 | `execution-recovery-attempt.ts` uncharged lane and
`agentDirectoryWaits` | Kept | Cap and accounting |
| 8 | `pre-dispatch-execution-evidence.ts` (`isPreDispatchResourceWait`,
`isAgentDirectoryPreparationWait`), used by
`legacy-execution-recovery.ts`, `cancelled-native-startup.ts`,
`explicit-native-continuation.ts` | Kept | Describe the cancelled
pre-provider parent run, not the retry's wake |
| 9 | `explicit-native-continuation.ts`
`undeliveredLegacyUserCommentIds`, `run-dispatch/adapters/postgres.ts`
`unstartedUserTurnOrigin` | Kept | The cancelled parent did not consume
the user's comment |
| 10 | `execution-projection.ts` label and saved accounting,
`task-interruption-presentation.ts`, UI toast and chat suppression |
Kept | Presentation of the wait |
| 11 | `run-dispatch/domain/policy.ts` AI-wait lock requirement;
AI-subscription lock recheck; AI wait detection
(`execution-configuration.ts`, `provider-limit-wait.ts`, `heartbeat.ts`,
`ai-connections.ts`, `ai-connection-runtime.ts`, `local-ai-login.ts`) |
Not applicable | AI-subscription specific |
| 12 | `workspace-busy-wait.ts`, `environment-selection.ts`,
`workspace-preparation.ts`, UI workspace-holder banners | Not applicable
| Workspace holder parking; the directory wait is a timed retry |
| 13 | `cancelled-native-startup.ts` paused workspace-retry repair;
`failureRetriesBefore*Wait` | Not applicable | Historical workspace and
AI records only; every directory wait saves its ledger |
| 14 | `failedRunRetryBudgetSpent`; storage-wait exhaustion escalation;
`status-relevance.ts` `isAdmissionWait` | Not applicable | A directory
wait never fails the run, stops at its own bound, and its run has
started |

## Verification

- Original wake kinds after a directory wait
(`heartbeat-agent-directory-busy.test.ts`, real heartbeat): an
assignment runs; a plain user comment on a dependency-blocked task is
answered with `dependencyBlockedInteraction`; an accepted interaction
continuation keeps its parked-task and reassignment gates; a user
message continuation runs with its comment; an accepted non-assignee
mention runs; and a reassignment during preparation does not let the
previous assignee restart. Each retry keeps the original `wakeReason`
and records `preparationWait`. With `preserveWakeContext` off, five of
these fail. Restart recovery keeps its attempt credit
(`native-runner-restart-recovery.integration.test.ts`).

- Non-assignee wake: an accepted mention for an agent other than the
assignee meets a busy directory; its retry records
`preparationWaitDeferredWhileAssignee: false`, survives promotion, runs
and succeeds once the directory is free. Without the shared clause in
`isNonAssigneeWorkspaceBusyRetry`, promotion cancels it.

- Interaction continuations: `heartbeat-agent-directory-busy.test.ts`
runs an accepted interaction continuation into a busy directory. The
retry keeps `mutation`, `interactionId`, `interactionKind` and
`interactionStatus` and is still classified as a continuation. If the
task is moved to todo, or reassigned, while the retry waits, the retry
does not run and the task stays parked or with its new owner. With the
old explicit storage/Runner lists, both cases fail.

- Red/green, new run:
`server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-agent-directory-busy.test.ts` runs a
real heartbeat for a new assignment whose first instruction preparation
meets a busy lock. Without the preparation wrapper, the run ends failed
(red). With it, the first run is cancelled as a wait, an
`agent_directory_busy` retry is scheduled with the task still locked to
it, the retry runs and succeeds, and no run of the task is failed
(green).
- Red/green, same-run: with the deferral as a no-op, the same-run
deferral tests failed (`expected false to be true`); they now pass.
- `native-controller-recovery.integration.test.ts` covers repeated
claim-and-defer cycles of a resumed run: each cycle keeps the attempt
count, cannot be claimed before the delay, stores the count on the run,
and the fourth deferral past a bound of 3 is refused. It also covers
Stop after the busy error, a foreign lease owner and a moved task (each
refused, nothing changed), a run before admission, and that a raw busy
error (as from collection) is never deferred.
- Focused suites: 232/232 passed (`agent-directory-working-copies`,
`instruction-working-copy`, `heartbeat-agent-directory-busy`,
`native-controller-recovery.integration`, `heartbeat-retry-scheduling`).
`tsc --noEmit` for `server` reports no errors in the changed files.
- Staging evidence (read-only): the failed run had a graceful restart at
07:25Z, then same-run resumes. Its third attempt failed at 07:31:08Z.
Another run of the same agent recorded a warm checkpoint receipt at
07:31:37Z. A second run of the same agent failed the same way at
07:59:46Z.

## Risks

- A deferred run waits 5 to 15 seconds per deferral, up to 30 times. If
the holder is still busy after that, the run fails as before with a
plain message.
- Before admission, deferral cancels the run and creates a retry run,
like the existing workspace-busy wait.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (claude-opus-5-5), Anthropic, with tool use and code
execution in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 13:56:45 -06:00
DottaandClaude Fable 5.2 a56b648602 fix(upgrade-readiness): report restartable runs and a handoff verdict that blocks only on lost work (#20910)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A deployer can replace the server while agent runs continue. Before
the swap, it reads the upgrade-readiness report of the old server
> - The version 1 report is ready only when every active run is
adoptable and no wake admission is in flight
> - On a busy instance, new runs arrive each minute. Some runs are
always in preparation, so the report is almost never ready and the
instance does not upgrade
> - A run in preparation has done no agent work. Restart recovery starts
it again. A swap loses nothing
> - This pull request adds a `handoff` object to the report. It
separates recoverable, restartable and blocking runs
> - The benefit is that a deployer can wait only for work that a swap
would lose

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20852 (reference only; this change does not depend on it and does
not use its version 2 shape).

**What happened?**

A busy instance had 16 running runs and 1 queued run. Fourteen had a
live process. Two or three native runs had not launched a process yet.
One was a legacy run. `upgradeReadiness.ready` needs `blockingRuns === 0
&& pendingWakes === 0` in one probe. That state almost never occurs, so
the deployer never swaps the server.

**Expected behavior**

The report tells the deployer which runs a swap would lose. Runs that
only wait for a launch, and wake admissions in flight, do not block a
graceful replacement.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Keep a steady flow of new runs on an instance.
2. Read `GET /api/instance/task-drain?upgradeReadiness=1` repeatedly.
3. See `ready: false` each time, because one or more runs are in
preparation or a wake admission is in flight.

## What Changed

- `summarizeUpgradeReadiness` returns an additive `handoff` object:
`version`, `ready`, `recoverableRuns`, `restartableRuns`,
`blockingRuns`, `pendingWakes`, `unsavedWakes`.
- `handoff.ready` is true when the instance is not draining, the census
is complete, and `handoff.blockingRuns` and `handoff.unsavedWakes` are
0. Saved pending wakes do not change it.
- The wake queue tracks each public wake admission until its wake
request and queued run commit. `unsavedWakes` is the count of admissions
before that commit. Without a valid count, every pending wake is
unsaved.
- The top-level version 1 fields keep their values and meaning. `ready`
and `blockingRuns` are unchanged, so a current consumer sees no looser
verdict.
- The census query marks a run `restartable` only with all of these:
`paperclip_runner` adapter; no process identity; no provider session
before or after; no checkpoint header; no dispatched runner task; no
execution-start event. It must also be a native run in the `observed`
phase with preparation fencing and an unsettled finalization record, or
a legacy run in the `preparing` stage under a recorded controller.
- All other runs without adoption evidence stay blocking. This includes
local adapters, legacy runs with a child process, follow-up runs that
carry a provider session, and runs the census could not observe.
- The OpenAPI description and `doc/testing-native-remote-continuity.md`
describe the new fields and their limits.

Why these classes are correct on master:

- Restartable native runs: restart recovery claims a run with no
checkpoint and no provider evidence as `bootstrap_incomplete` and
executes the same run again (`native-restart-recovery.ts`
`classifyNativeRunnerRecoveryEvidence`; `heartbeat/recovery.ts` executes
each claim). A graceful shutdown suspends the run and notifies recovery.
Existing tests: "recovers an unclaimed remote startup once without
requiring a provider checkpoint" and "recovers an unclaimed remote
startup that a graceful shutdown suspended during preparation".
- Restartable legacy runs: process-loss recovery retries a `preparing`
run with `providerWorkStarted: false`. Existing test: "continues a chain
whose preparations were killed twice and then interrupted again, without
a Retry".
- Pending wakes: the count is wake admissions in flight in the process,
not queue rows. A wake commits its wake request and its queued run in
one transaction. After the commit, the next server dispatches the queued
run at startup, so a saved wake does not block. Before the commit,
nothing is saved. Shutdown waits at most 30 seconds and then exits, so
an unsaved wake can be lost and blocks.

## Verification

- `cd server && npx vitest run
src/services/heartbeat/upgrade-readiness.test.ts
src/services/heartbeat/upgrade-readiness-post-result.test.ts`: 28
passed.
- Red/green: before the implementation, the 7 new tests failed (6
summary tests, 1 PostgreSQL census test). After it, all pass.
- Red/green for unsaved wakes: a test holds the agent row lock while a
wake admission waits. Without the fix, `handoff.ready` was true with no
saved wake. With the fix, it is false with `unsavedWakes: 1`, and the
wake saves after the lock releases.
- New cases: only recoverable runs; recoverable plus unlaunched runs
plus pending wakes (`handoff.ready` true, top-level `ready` false and
`blockingRuns` unchanged); a started run without recovery evidence; an
unobserved execution; draining; truncated census.
- The PostgreSQL test changes one fact at a time (process identity,
provider session, phase, fencing, checkpoint, adapter, each
execution-start event) and expects the run to become blocking.
- `cd server && npx vitest run src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/instance-settings-routes.test.ts`: 157 passed (187 with
the two readiness files).
- `cd server && npx tsc --noEmit`: passed.
- `pnpm verify` exited 2 (a documentation path is a global CI input).
Required CI supplies the broad coverage.
- Not run: a live server replacement. The classification relies on the
existing recovery tests named above.

## Risks

- Low risk for current consumers. The change is additive and the version
1 fields are unchanged.
- `handoff.ready` is an observation at one instant. A wake admission
that starts after the probe is unsaved until it commits.
- Restart recovery applies its own proofs and a bounded attempt budget
before it starts a restartable run again. The report is an observation,
not a guarantee for each run.
- The probe adds one indexed `not exists` on run events per running row,
inside the existing two-second statement timeout.

> 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 Fable 5.2 (`claude-fable-5-2`), with tool use and
code execution in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.2 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 13:55:47 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 fb695f7ae6 fix(secrets): let an approved binding fill a blank agent config value (#20908)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents can propose binding a company secret to another agent; a
person approves it with "Create binding" on a chat card
> - Approval refuses when the target config key already holds a
different value, so it never overwrites a working credential
> - An empty string or empty plain value also counted as "already
exists"
> - So an agent whose key was cleared could not be repaired through the
governed binding card: approval returned 409
> - This pull request treats a blank value like an unset key; non-empty
values still conflict
> - The benefit is that the supported binding approval repairs a member
with a blank credential

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20879

**What happened**
In the `teams.configure-team` chat eval, the CEO proposed binding the
company OpenRouter secret to the QA member as `env.OPENROUTER_API_KEY`.
QA's saved value was an empty string. Approving that proposal fails with
409 "Agent config path already exists: env.OPENROUTER_API_KEY".

**Expected behavior**
Approval fills a blank value (empty string or empty plain value) with
the secret reference. A non-empty value still blocks the approval.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Save an agent with `adapterConfig.env.TOKEN = ""`.
2. Have an agent propose a binding of a company secret to that agent as
`env.TOKEN`.
3. Approve the proposal as the board user.
4. The approval returns 409 and the binding is not created.

## What Changed

- `secret-proposals.ts`: `applyBindingApproval` treats `undefined`, `""`
and `{ type: "plain", value: "" }` as an unset key for both `env.<KEY>`
and other config paths.
- `secret-proposals-routes.test.ts`: regression tests for an empty
string and an empty plain value. The existing test that a non-empty
value conflicts still passes.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run src/__tests__/secret-proposals-routes.test.ts`
(in `server/`): 49 passed.
- Red check: without the service change, the two new tests fail.

## Risks

- Low risk. Only a blank value changes behavior. A blank value carries
no credential, so nothing working is replaced.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), tool use and code
execution in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 13:55:22 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 7e8901aa60 fix(recovery): let Retry and the person's answer continue a held task with a pending decision (#20872)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A native run on a remote sandbox can lose its Runner process.
Recovery then saves the sandbox files and puts an execution hold on the
task
> - The hold offers Retry. A person can also continue the task with a
new message
> - Many held tasks also have a pending decision: the question that a
parked turn asked, or an older connection request
> - Continuation admission refuses every continuation while a decision
is pending ("decision_pending"). The answer to that decision is not a
message, so admission defers it behind the hold ("execution_recovery")
> - So Retry waits for the answer and the answer waits for the hold. The
task shows a Retry that does nothing, and nothing continues it
> - This pull request lets a person's Retry pass an open question, and
lets the person's own answer continue the task through the hold
> - The benefit is that a task with a lost Runner and a pending decision
always has a control that works

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
On staging, the same-run retry of six remote native runs found the
Runner process gone (`process_not_running`, lifecycle `ready`). Each run
failed with `runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`. Saved-work
recovery then recovered the sandbox files, and the task showed "Saved
work recovered. Retry or send a message to continue." with `canRetry:
true`. Four of these tasks also had a pending decision: the question
that the parked turn asked, or an older pending connection request. For
those tasks, Retry is deferred with `decision_pending`, and an answer to
the decision is deferred with `execution_recovery`. No control continues
the task.

**What did you expect to happen?**
Retry starts one new run. The person's answer to the pending decision
also continues the task.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. A remote native run asks the user a question and parks the turn.
2. The Runner process exits. The same-run retry fails with
`runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable`.
3. Saved-work recovery recovers the files. The task offers Retry.
4. Click Retry: the Retry waits with "A pending approval or question
must be resolved before this message can start."
5. Answer the question: the answer waits with "Waiting for execution
recovery. Your message is saved."

Refs #20838, #20853

## What Changed

- `admitExplicitNativeContinuation`
(`server/src/services/explicit-native-continuation.ts`): a task Retry is
no longer held by a plain pending question (`ask_user_questions`) or
connection request (`connection_intent`). Any interaction with approval
semantics still holds Retry: a plan review (`issue_document` target), a
governed tool action, a secret proposal, a connection authorization, and
other confirmations. A pending approval still holds every continuation.
A new message supersedes a plain question, as on master, and waits for a
decision with approval semantics.
- `admitExplicitNativeContinuation`: the person's own resolution of an
interaction (`mutation: "interaction"`, answered/accepted/rejected,
resolved by the same user) is explicit user input. It continues the held
task like a new message: a fresh session, the hold resolved as
`explicitUserContinuation` with the `interactionId`, and
`issue.execution_recovery_settled` activity. It never replays the failed
run. Governed tool-action confirmations are excluded. The existing
`readQueuedInteractionResponse` reads the answer.
- `heartbeat/queue.ts`: both admission calls pass the wake payload to
the admission.
- `buildExecutionContinuation`
(`server/src/services/execution-continuation.ts`): dispatch rechecks the
user authorization. It accepted an interaction receipt only through a
saved interrupt queue, so the answered successor failed with
`continuation_user_authorization_missing`. It now also accepts the
person's own answer: the interaction named by the durable authorization
was resolved by that user and not by an agent, and the authorization
names this successor run. The check does not depend on the run's current
trigger, so a later answer that replaces the trigger cannot invalidate
it.
- New API-level test
`server/src/services/governed-wait-runner-loss.test.ts` with the two
staging shapes (a parked question from the failed run; an older
connection request on a monitor wake). It checks that Retry starts
exactly one run and leaves the decision pending, that the person's
answer starts exactly one run and settles the hold, and that an answer
resolved by a different user keeps the hold.
- `doc/execution-semantics.md`: describes the rule.

## Verification

- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/services/governed-wait-runner-loss.test.ts`: 5 passed. The answer
tests now also build the successor's continuation as dispatch does and
check that the agent receives the answer.
- Red for dispatch (first head, ac17aebe): both answer tests fail with
`continuation_user_authorization_missing`.
- Ponytail follow-ups: a two-answer test (the second answer waits behind
the successor; dispatch also holds with a replaced trigger) and 'keeps
Retry on hold while %s is pending' for four approval-bearing kinds. On
head 60beb773, 5 of these fail. Two more tests show that a new message
supersedes a plain question and waits for a plan review (both unchanged
from master). All 12 tests in the file pass now. The PR adds no code
comments; the rationale is in `doc/execution-semantics.md` and here.
- Continuation suites (execution-continuation,
execution-continuation-provenance, legacy-continuation-authority,
explicit-native-continuation, task-retry, governed-wait-runner-loss):
634 passed.
- Red on master (product hunks removed, test kept): 4 of 5 fail. Retry
tests: `successors: 0`, deferred `decision_pending`. Answer tests:
`successors: 0`, deferred `execution_recovery`. Every case asserts
`runError: "runner_remote_process_identity_unavailable"`.
- Related suites: explicit-native-continuation, task-retry,
workspace-recovery-admission, retry-workspace-continuity,
workspace-recovery-retry-copyback, workspace-recovery-fallback,
native-workspace-reconstruction, native-recovery-preparation-failure,
issue-thread-interactions-service. 957 of 959 passed. The 2 failures are
30 s `afterEach` hook timeouts in native-workspace-reconstruction; all
51 of its tests pass alone, and the same file on unchanged master shows
5 hook timeouts on this machine.
- `cd server && pnpm exec tsc --noEmit -p tsconfig.json`: passes.

## Risks

- Medium. A Retry can now start while a plain question or connection
request is pending; decisions with approval semantics still hold it. The
new run sees the open decision in its task context, and the decision's
answer still wakes the agent later. Approvals keep holding Retry, so
approval gates are unchanged.
- An answer now continues a held task in a fresh session. All other
admission gates still run: stop proof, saved-work recovery, workspace
repair, active execution, pause, budget and ownership. Only the user who
resolved the interaction can continue this way.
- This does not make recovery automatic. A task whose Runner was lost
still rests on the hold until a person clicks Retry or answers.
Automatic settlement of a parked governed wait is a separate change.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), with tool use and code execution
in an agent harness.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 13:42:36 -06:00
Nicky Leach 25f0957c24 Select the AI Connection sign-in computer automatically (#20906)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agents and their AI Connections.
> - Codex and Claude subscription sign-in can run on a company agent
computer.
> - Core stores the credential and uses connection permissions to
control access.
> - The Connections page asks the user to choose a computer just to host
sign-in.
> - This change lets Core choose an eligible computer when sign-in
starts.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20410 and #20417.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

OpenAI and Anthropic subscription sign-in from Connections with an agent
computer as the sign-in environment.

**Current behavior**

The user must choose a sign-in computer before the provider flow can
start.

**Proposed behavior**

Start sign-in from the provider form. Core chooses a computer in the
company and sign-in environment. The session stays bound to that
computer and reports when no eligible computer is available.

**Reason and benefit**

The saved credential and its permissions are independent of the computer
that hosts sign-in, so users can proceed without picking an agent.

## What Changed

- Select an eligible computer when a managed Codex or Claude login
starts without an explicit target. Prefer ready computers and skip
active login leases.
- Remove the picker and let the browser resume the existing session by
environment and connection intent. Continue to honor explicit agent
targets in agent settings. Remove the unused picker fallback from the
legacy form.
- Update the AI Connections guide, the plugin environment contract, and
the OpenAPI descriptions.

## Verification

- Passed server and UI typechecks.
- Passed 317 tests across the login environment, setup-token route,
device-login service, and two UI suites. The Postgres test covers
eligibility, inherited environments, explicit targeting, occupied
computers, and the no-computer response.
- Passed 45 OpenAPI route tests.
- Reran the affected UI suites on the final revision. All 230 tests
passed.
- UI tests cover starting from the provider form and resuming both
provider flows with a server-selected target.
-
[CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/43086849302)
and [Greptile
5/5](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/20906#issuecomment-6805135968)
passed on the final commit.
- Local verification used test transports. Live provider sign-in remains
to be checked in a Cloud composition that contains this change.

## Risks

- Two sign-ins that select a computer before either lease is recorded
can contend for the same computer. The existing provider admission guard
handles the conflict. A retry can select another computer once the lease
is visible.
- The computer selection uses existing lifecycle and lease data. Plugin
admission still validates the live computer.
- No schema migration or plugin protocol change is required.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with shell execution and local test tooling.

## 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
2026-11-11 11:42:31 -08:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 eb5ad4c920 fix(cases): say a Cases-disabled denial is final and name the Experimental setting (#20892)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Cases is an experimental feature; an instance admin turns it on in
Experimental settings
> - When Cases is off, every case and workflow route answers 403 "Cases
are disabled" with no other information
> - A chat agent asked to "open a customer case" could not tell whether
the denial was final or what to offer
> - In one eval run it created a project and a task in place of the
case; in another it spent most of its turn searching routes before it
replied
> - This pull request gives the denial a code and a final, actionable
remediation, like the board-only denial
> - The benefit is a fast, truthful reply that names the setting and
lets the person choose

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**
In the chat eval cases.cases-disabled ("Open a customer case for this
bug." with Cases off), the agent got 403 "Cases are disabled". In one
run it then created a project and a bug task without asking. In a later
run it searched many routes and instance settings for about 100 seconds
before it replied.

**Expected behavior**
The denial says that Cases is off, that the denial is final, where an
instance admin turns it on, and that the agent must not create a
substitute record before the person chooses. The agent replies at once
and offers the setting or an ordinary task.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Turn off Cases in Experimental settings.
2. As an agent, call GET /api/companies/{companyId}/cases.
3. See a bare 403 "Cases are disabled" with no code or remediation.

## What Changed

- Rebased on #20894, which already gave the case routes a
`cases_disabled` code, a final remediation and the hidden-settings
check. This PR moves that remediation into one helper used by every case
and workflow path, and adds: no substitute task or project before the
person chooses, and the offer of an ordinary task.
- New `casesDisabledError()` in `server/src/services/cases-disabled.ts`:
same 403 message, plus `code: "cases_disabled"` and a remediation. The
remediation says the denial is final, forbids a substitute task or
project before the person chooses, links `[Experimental
settings](/<prefix>/company/settings/instance/experimental)`, and offers
an ordinary task.
- Native tool results carry only the error message, so the native case
tools, workflow tools and runner tool authority inline the remediation
in the message (`casesDisabledError({ inlineRemediation: true })`).
- Case routes, workflow service, case handoffs, native case tools,
native workflow tools and the runner tool authority use the helper
instead of a bare `forbidden("Cases are disabled")`.
- Tests: `cases-routes.test.ts` checks the code and remediation;
`native-case-tools.integration.test.ts` checks the native message
carries the remediation (red on master, green here).

## Verification

- `npx vitest run src/__tests__/cases-routes.test.ts
src/services/case-handoffs.test.ts
src/services/native-runtime/native-case-tools.integration.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-case-handoff.test.ts` (166 passed).
- The cases.cases-disabled chat eval is rerun on a temporary branch;
results are recorded in the PR conversation.

## Risks

- Low risk. The status and message do not change. The error body adds
`code` and `remediation`.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), tool use and code
execution in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 13:36:08 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 6dc36700b1 fix(costs): mark unpriced usage in the agent, model and project cost reports (#20889)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Cost reports show what agents and projects spent
> - A run can have usage with no known price; Paperclip saves it with
costStatus "unpriced" and costCents 0
> - The summary and the provider, biller and user reports count those
events, but the agent, agent-model and project reports did not
> - An agent that read the by-agent-model report saw a native run at
costCents 0 and told the person it cost $0.00
> - This pull request adds unpricedEventCount to those three reports and
tells agents what it means
> - The benefit is that missing charges are reported as unpriced, not as
free

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**
In the chat eval budgets-costs.spend-breakdown, the person asked "How
much did Launch cost this week, broken down by agent?". The week
included a real native run whose usage had no known price (data-quality
reason missing_price). The agent read /costs/by-agent-model and
/costs/by-project. Both returned costCents 0 for that usage and no
unpriced count. The reply showed "1 native run ($0.00)" and gave the
total as complete.

**Expected behavior**
The reports say which rows include unpriced usage. The agent says that
usage is unpriced, marks the total incomplete, and links the record.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Record one priced and one unpriced metered cost event for an agent in
a project.
2. Call GET /api/companies/{companyId}/costs/by-agent, /by-agent-model
and /by-project.
3. See costCents counts only the priced event, and no field shows the
unpriced event.

## What Changed

- `costService.byAgent`, `byAgentModel` and `byProject` return
`unpricedEventCount` (same filter as the summary: unpriced and not
subscription_included).
- Shared types `CostByAgent`, `CostByAgentModel` and `CostByProject` add
`unpricedEventCount`.
- The OpenAPI catalog entries for the cost reports that count unpriced
usage now say that costCents counts priced usage only, that unpriced
usage must be reported as unpriced (never $0.00), and that
/costs/data-quality lists those runs.
- Tests: embedded-Postgres service test (red on master, green here) and
an OpenAPI description test. A UI test fixture adds the new field.

## Verification

- `npx vitest run src/__tests__/costs-service.test.ts` (19 passed). The
new test fails with the master service.
- `npx vitest run src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts
src/services/native-runtime/runner-api.test.ts` (2146 passed).
- `tsc --noEmit` for packages/shared and server.

## Risks

- Low risk. One added aggregate column per report and an added response
field. The UI does not read it yet.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), tool use and code
execution in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 13:36:03 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 77757a3a93 fix(evals): serve case-facts its own evidence; accept block-on-design's blocked-interaction reply (#20891)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The chat-feature eval catalog runs real chat journeys and grades the
saved product state
> - Two cases failed in eval run gha-43069861174 because of the eval,
not the product
> - `cases.update-case-facts` gave its investigator the wrong tool
content. `task-coordination.block-on-design` waited for a run count that
the product does not promise
> - A wrong fixture or a wrong wait hides real product results, so these
must be correct
> - This pull request gives the case-facts investigator the content its
case would really serve, and lets block-on-design accept the product's
bounded blocked-interaction reply
> - The benefit is that both cases test their real feature again, and
the checks still reject the failures that matter

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**
`cases.update-case-facts`: the shared Website Brief app served the
website prerequisite text ("record a short implementation note and
complete the task") to the case investigator. The investigator said that
the text did not match the case. It then asked the board for the missing
evidence. The task went to `in_review`, so the harness's later board
handoff got a correct 422 ("Resolve task mode, blockers, or review
before handing off").
`task-coordination.block-on-design`: the CEO saved the Design blocker
and also commented on the blocked Website task. The product woke Morgan
in its bounded blocked-interaction mode (`dependencyBlockedInteraction:
true`). Morgan only acknowledged the hold. The pre-approval wait
required exactly one run, so it timed out.

**Expected behavior**
Each fixture gives the agent the facts its own scenario has. Each wait
accepts every behavior that the product contract allows.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run `chat-features.runner-opencode.local.cases.update-case-facts`.
Morgan's continuation reads the website brief and asks the board for
evidence. The review handoff gets a 422.
2. Run
`chat-features.runner-opencode.local.task-coordination.block-on-design`.
The CEO comments on Website. Morgan gets a blocked-interaction run. The
first wait times out.

## What Changed

- `startRunBriefGate` takes an optional `briefText`. The default text
does not change for the other cases.
- `cases.update-case-facts` serves "no further reproduction evidence has
been received yet; the affected device is still unconfirmed" after
release (oracle v7).
- `task-coordination.block-on-design` (oracle v8):
- The pre-approval wait accepts Morgan runs only when the server stamped
them as blocked interactions on Website that name the Design blocker,
and they succeeded. Any other Morgan run, a failed run, or a second CEO
run rejects the wait at once.
- New check: before approval, Website has no documents and its status is
not `in_progress`, `in_review` or `done`.
- After approval, exactly one Morgan work run must still produce the
saved result.
- Calibration tests: the valid interaction passes. An unstamped run, a
wrong blocker, a wrong task, a failed run, a missing declared run, a
document saved before approval, and a second Morgan work run each fail.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts
--testTimeout=180000
tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-domains/runtime-dependency.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-domains/integrator-case-facts.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-contract.test.ts
tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-consistency.test.ts`: 34 passed.
- `npx tsc --noEmit -p tests/runner-e2e`: no errors in the changed
files.
- `node tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs <HEAD> --check`:
unchanged.
- A paid eval run of the three affected cases is in progress. The PR
comments will have its result.

## Risks

- Low risk. Only eval fixtures, waits and graders change. The other
cases that use `startRunBriefGate` keep the same text.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), extended thinking, tool
use and code execution in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 13:32:27 -06:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 951d1b0b1b fix(opencode): ask for the empty-response correction with reasoning off (#20890)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The Runner drives OpenCode turns for agents that use OpenCode
models, such as DeepSeek through OpenRouter
> - Sometimes the model ends a turn inside its reasoning. It reasons
that it will reply and call `paperclip_finish`, and then it stops with
no answer and no tool call
> - The driver sends one correction prompt. The correction used the same
reasoning variant, and in the failed runs the model stopped inside its
reasoning again
> - The run then failed with `opencode_empty_response`, and the person
saw "The OpenCode run failed before it completed."
> - This pull request sends the correction prompt with the no-reasoning
variant, so the final answer comes in the answer channel
> - The benefit is fewer failed chat replies, with no extra prompts and
no change to the normal turn

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened**
A chat reply failed with `opencode_empty_response` in eval run
gha-43069861174 (`agent-chat.conference-room`, OpenCode with
`openrouter/deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash-1017`). The first completion
and the one correction each held only a reasoning item (403 and 411
output tokens). Both reasoning items said the model would reply and call
`paperclip_finish`. No answer text and no tool call followed. In
retained eval evidence, 14 of 879 attempts needed this correction and 3
of those 14 failed. Each failed correction was another reasoning-only
completion.

**Expected behavior**
After an empty completion, the correction gets a final answer or a
completion report.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start an OpenCode turn with reasoning enabled on an OpenRouter model.
2. Let the provider return a completion that holds only reasoning.
3. See that the correction prompt uses `paperclip-default` (reasoning
on), so the model can end inside its reasoning again.

## What Changed

- `OpenCodeServerDriver` sends the empty-response correction with the
`paperclip-no-reasoning` variant. Normal turns keep their own reasoning
mode.
- `empty-response.test.ts` starts the `reply` and `empty-again` cases
with reasoning on. It checks that the first prompt uses
`paperclip-default` and the correction uses `paperclip-no-reasoning`.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run src/drivers/opencode/empty-response.test.ts
src/drivers/opencode/reasoning-mode.test.ts
src/drivers/opencode/interrupt-pending-tool-call.test.ts` (in
`packages/paperclip-runner`): 23 passed. Without the driver change, the
`reply` and `empty-again` cases fail (red/green).
- `node --test
tests/runner-e2e/native-completion-source-contract.test.mjs`: 29 passed.
- A paid eval run with this change and the related eval fixes is in
progress. The PR comments will have its result. One run cannot prove the
rate change, because the failure is rare.

## Risks

- Low risk. Only the correction prompt changes. A model with no
reasoning can give a shorter final answer, but the correction asks only
for the final answer and the completion report from work already done.
- Providers other than OpenRouter do not get a variant. Their behavior
does not change.

## Model Used

- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), extended thinking, tool
use and code execution in Claude Code.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 13:31:38 -06:00