mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-22 00:30:19 +02:00
b11010b0d4f757aabaf12fa6bcf02620f82470ae
68
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
b11010b0d4 |
Simplify failure banners and show only the latest error (#16982)
Remove dashed failure dividers and show only the latest adjacent run or recovery error. Preserve permitted retries, pending state and unrelated notice boundaries. Add production-component Storybook examples and browser regression coverage. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
505e1a5582 |
feat(cases): add persistent workflows with same-task agent handoffs (#16959)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - An agent workflow needs persistent facts and a safe way to transfer work. > - Creating a task for each phase splits the objective, discussion, workspace, and review policy. > - A case can retain the facts while one primary task moves between agents. > - Transfers must survive process failure and preserve private access, budgets, and completion gates. > - This pull request adds durable case handoffs, native case tools, and read-only case pages. > - Prompts describe the workflow. Existing task controls decide when work can run and finish. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Problem or motivation** Prompt-driven agent teams need a persistent record that can move through triage, implementation, verification, and correction. Ordinary reassignment does not provide a durable instruction, safe release barrier, or recoverable delivery receipt for an agent handing off its own running task. **Proposed solution** Extend standalone cases with one primary task, a descriptive phase, retained access sources, and a handoff ledger. Apply assignments after source execution and workspace settlement. Deliver each transfer through the existing durable wake queue. Provide `create_case`, `read_case`, `update_case`, and `handoff_case` in the native runner. Creation requires kickoff and explicit workflow text. An explicit handoff to `done` closes the case when normal task completion is accepted. **Alternatives considered** Do not add a workflow engine, filesystem queue, configured state graph, or one task per phase. The workflow document combines transition prose with an optional Mermaid `stateDiagram-v2` map. The server does not execute the diagram. The Pipelines experiment removed on master stays removed. **Roadmap alignment** This extends Agent Reviews and Approvals, Enforced Outcomes, Bounded Run Recovery, and Activity Log attribution. Existing approval, review, budget, privacy, workspace, and responsible-user rules remain authoritative. Related work: [ordinary handoff wake recovery](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15019). This feature adds a separate persisted case-handoff receipt and release barrier. ## What Changed - Add case routing fields, retained access sources, durable handoff history, delivery leases, and replay-safe migrations. - Keep the same primary task across agent phases. Preserve each returning agent's own session and the task's workspace. - Fence outgoing mutations, wait for provider and workspace release, and recover delivery without duplicate task comments or runs. Recheck current assignment permissions as the original caller before applying a delayed transfer. Scope a run Stop to that run’s own handoff intents, so repeated old Stop requests preserve newer work. Cancelling terminal intent without a source run also requires fenced current task ownership, including native retries and preparation with an old checkout. For Cloud callers, revalidate current stack membership with an uncached Cloud RPC and derive owner elevation from the current managed setting. - Keep case reads, documents, assets, Audit, and live events inside retained task/project permissions. - Add native case creation/read/update/handoff tools. Store required workflow text and initial documents on the first task. Page oversized case facts and referenced document bodies through the dedicated tool with bounded UTF-8 JSON, current routing versions, snapshot conflicts, and current source authorization on every page. - Add read-only case lists and detail pages, task-style list controls, compact dotted field tables, linked handoff tasks, and case filters in Audit. - Add native/legacy integration tests, migration/restart tests, browser coverage, and bounded live receipt fixtures. Extend the trusted sandbox condition to cover the new subscription fixture profile. - Hide obsolete paused-agent warnings on completed or cancelled task threads. - Synchronize the company-switch settings test with React effects after a CI failure. Preserve its security assertions and production remount behavior. ## Verification The branch directly includes master `9ef434fe79`. The required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e` gates pass on head `765fccd67c`. [Current-head CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39464348614) passes typecheck, build, tests, and all eight browser shards. Security checks pass. [Greptile gives this exact head 5/5](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16959#issuecomment-6291156549), with no unresolved review threads. The optional Paperclip Review check remains queued because its assigned agent is paused. It is not a required branch check. No check result was overridden. Local workspace typecheck and build pass after the master merge, along with database migration checks, token gates, map checks, Storybook catalog checks, and the Copilot profile identity check. Standard builds refresh Runner vendor output. Focused checks pass 2,008 API/paging/context tests and 7 strict case protocol tests. The final commit changes one test fixture only; its ten tests, UI typecheck, and token gates pass. No production source changed in that commit. On current head `765fccd67c`, all **194 critical workflow tests** executed and passed with no skipped tests in those files: - 38 Stop/ownership tests, including board completion intent, native retries, stale Stop, and preparation with an old checkout. - 2 actual legacy process/HTTP handoff tests, including scratch failure, a closed-stdio child that continues writing, and recovery through a fresh worker after the process group stops. - 5 migration tests, including SQL column metadata, preserved null authority context, and all six prior-numbering receipts. - 3 process-settlement and 5 scratch tests. - 88 handoff-service, 18 heartbeat handoff, and 21 native case-tool integration tests. - 7 bounded case/document-read projection tests and 7 strict protocol-contract tests. The current CI checkout was `fed65d49`, merging `765fccd67c` into master `9ef434fe79`. Its new document regressions reconstruct exact Unicode/escaped bodies and revisions through real native authority and authenticated HTTP with generic API tools disabled. They cover case-owned, primary-task, and linked-task documents; routing on every page; stale document snapshots; access loss and unlinking; unrelated/foreign/private sources; system documents; and quarantined content. Active-task document tools retain their existing behavior. These are current-head test results from the first CI attempt; the browser-only retry did not rerun these suites. The full `64fdd3403f` CI failed one separate settings test: after a company switch, it observed an unsettled API-key draft. The production component and test were unchanged from prior green source. Production switches remount both keyed settings layers; the test directly reused an unkeyed view and used a timer tick instead of waiting for React effects. The final commit replaces that fixture synchronization with React `act`. The exact secret-clearing assertions and all timeouts remain unchanged. The original assertion failure remains recorded; no unchanged retry was used. The narrow unchanged baseline and fixed fixture each pass 10 tests. The upstream result-paging merge preserves case capture namespaces and current asset privacy. Its API integration suite executed 39 of 41 tests successfully, with two skipped; the optional assigned-result PRP integration test was skipped. Neither skipped suite is counted in the 194 critical tests or as live provider proof. All 361 upstream migration entries and SQL bodies remain unchanged. Six case migrations follow master as 0363–0368 with identical SQL hashes. Official Drizzle generators produced the combined metadata and five retained snapshots. Generation reports no schema changes, and the snapshot drift test passes. The earlier `ce361ae5d0` CI passed on attempt 1, including its then-current 179 critical tests. Fresh review later identified unusable document references with generic API tools disabled; the bounded document reads and ten additional authenticated HTTP tests address that finding. The full local `pnpm test:run` attempt was cancelled after this Mac exhausted PostgreSQL semaphore capacity; it is **not** counted as a pass. Later database attempts also stopped before assertions or skipped, including one sandbox socket denial. Two original stale-Stop regressions did reproduce the bug against the old source. A REST serialization assertion passed after two preserved database-startup failures. No test timeout was increased. All 194 assertions listed above executed and passed in current-head CI. The complete 385-file, 3,963-test UI shard also passed after the fixture repair. A configured-provider receipt workflow passed 13 backend checks across triage → implementation → verification → correction → done, using one task and four work runs. The saved receipt is revision 2 with total 6 USD; case and task both closed. The original canonical attempt remains failed because its browser assertion confused the terminal destination with completed-task tooltips. The corrected full browser verifier passed on the same retained database and original runs, with no additional provider calls. The last clean-build browser readback is on `6a86c54a53`; later changes affect recovery, authorization, bounded reads, and settlement. Accounted work cost is a $1.010574 rate-card estimate; provider billing and setup-probe usage are unavailable. Copilot profile 49 passed the unchanged seven-fixture private protocol pack (46/46 checks, no retries) and the product file-edit canary after master's completion-replay change. All 60 bound implementation hashes remain unchanged on the current source. Historical profile-47/48 identities and results remain intact. See the [profile-49 compatibility record](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/codex/persistent-case-handoffs/doc/plans/2026-10-20-copilot-completion-recovery-compatibility-v49.json). This is bounded compatibility evidence, not a fresh full matrix, installed-package product test, or Daytona rollout. Preserved CI failures and retries: - On `20662930ac`, Slack managed setup failed a five-second success assertion after reload. Its test/application path was unchanged from a prior green head. One unchanged-source retry passed all 25 tests in that shard; no source or timeout changed. - On `9402b4f17a`, two CI workers received shutdown signals at 15:24:19 UTC. Neither log had an assertion failure before interruption. One unchanged-source retry of each passed all Runner static checks and all 32 tests in browser shard 6; both aggregates passed. The next head, `7b4374edaf`, passed all CI without retries. - On `295f289b5a`, serialized shard 9 timed out during its first device-login test, then the next test found an active login lease. Direct login/test paths were unchanged from a prior green head. Cold import plus a timed-out async body using the next test's mutable actor/store is the supported fixture-race explanation; no request trace proves that sequence. The original failure remains recorded. One unchanged-source retry passed all 294 tests in 19 files, including all 41 device-login tests. No login source or timeout changed. The subsequent `ce361ae5d0` CI passed without retries. - On `64fdd3403f`, one company-switch settings assertion observed an unsettled draft. The final test-only commit uses React `act` without changing assertions, timeouts, or production code. On `765fccd67c`, all ten settings tests and the complete 385-file, 3,963-test UI shard passed. - On `765fccd67c`, browser shard 3 completed the split-handoff assertions, then cleanup received HTTP 500 from run cancellation after a one-second PostgreSQL row-lock timeout. The extra chat run was reporting completed work while teardown began. Cleanup stopped before restoring a global experiment flag, causing a later assertion to fail. Relevant production and test paths are unchanged from an earlier green commit. Stop's lock order is consistent, and no nested self-lock was found; the exact PostgreSQL blocker was not recorded. One unchanged-shard retry passed. The original failure, trace, and downstream flag failure remain recorded. No Stop implementation, cleanup assertion, or timeout changed. The retry supports intermittent cleanup contention; it does not identify the original blocking transaction. ## Risks - Local process transfers require host-owned PID/group absence. Missing or uncertain termination evidence keeps delivery pending, independently of scratch setup. - Handoff admission and task cancellation share execution ownership. New regression tests cover temporary holds, late source writes, and uncertain provider termination. - Retained private sources use an intersection of existing permissions. This intentionally fails closed when a source is missing or an existing task cannot preserve that boundary. - Migrations add tables and indexes. They preserve master history and can replay over prior feature installs. Migration 0368 adds nullable internal authorization provenance with no default or authority backfill. Historical transfers still awaiting release without this context fail closed; an operator must cancel them and request a new handoff. - Delayed Cloud handoffs depend on the current Cloud membership RPC. An unavailable, ambiguous, expired, or mismatched response holds the handoff for retry; it does not reuse cached authority or grant access. - Bounded reads reload and reauthorize the selected projection per page. Underlying work grows with the data size and number of pages. Changed data or routing requires restarting from offset zero without the old snapshot. - Phase names and workflow diagrams remain advisory. They do not satisfy review or approval gates. - This is a large, cross-cutting PR. The maintainer requested one PR for the whole feature; the commits separate data, runtime, UI, and qualification work. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with tool use, code execution, and delegated code review. The exact deployment model ID and context-window size were not exposed in the session. Live fixture agents used the explicitly configured provider model recorded in their test evidence. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8ee851a0d8 |
fix(ui): keep runner turns stable through startup and completion (#16989)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task chat shows each agent turn from message submission through completion. > - Run admission can publish adapter metadata before native runtime metadata. > - The UI changed layouts during that gap and removed the agent identity. > - Completion reports can also arrive before the provider writes its final reply. > - The event reader treated those reports as final replies and then replaced them. > - This pull request keeps the runner layout stable and delays report fallbacks until the final history fetch completes. > - Readers see one provider reply, while report-only runs keep a useful answer. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Sending a task message briefly replaced the runner avatar, name, and Thinking row with a generic Working row. At completion, a full report summary appeared as the answer. A shorter provider reply then replaced it while streaming. **Expected behavior** Keep the runner identity and header spacing stable during admission. Stream the provider's final reply once. Use a report summary as a fallback only after the run ends and its final history fetch completes without a provider reply. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Send a message to a native Paperclip Runner agent. 2. Observe the initial run record before native runtime metadata arrives. 3. Let the agent call its completion tool before writing its final response. 4. Observe the report summary, final response stream, and saved reply handoff. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced from source at `6b804bfeba`. The event-reader behavior was also present in earlier revisions. **Deployment mode** Self-hosted server. Local component tests and browser fixtures reproduce the UI transitions. Related work: Refs #12617, which added native runner turns to task chat. The duplicate search found no open PR for this specific defect. ## What Changed - Keep Paperclip Runner turns in the runner layout while runtime metadata resolves. Use the same header spacing for queued and running states. - Keep structured reports as report entries. Do not create synthetic provider final messages from them. - Track successful event fetches for each run status. Permit a terminal report fallback after the final fetch, or when the transcript contains its terminal receipt. - Preserve report-only answers and saved reply deduplication. - Add desktop and mobile regressions for streamed replies, late final events, report-only runs, pagination, and fetch failures. Delay missing-answer notices until terminal history is ready. Document the presentation rules in `DESIGN.md`. ## Verification - Passed all 8,750 UI tests across 769 files. This includes 456 focused tests for the thread, runner turn, native projection, native transcript hook, transcript adapter, and boundary fixtures. - The six completion regressions fail against the old native event reader and pass with the fix. Three empty-history regressions fail before the review fix and pass afterward. The startup regressions also fail against the old layout condition. - Passed UI TypeScript checking with `node node_modules/typescript/bin/tsc -b ui/tsconfig.json`. - Passed the UI production build with `cd ui && node node_modules/vite/bin/vite.js build`. - Passed `pnpm check:token-gates`, `git diff --check`, and the Storybook catalog generator. - Browser check: mounted the production turn with native event snapshots at desktop and 390-pixel mobile widths. The report stayed hidden while running. The actual reply stayed unchanged at completion. The report-only fallback appeared after completion. The identity row kept the same position and size. No browser errors or horizontal overflow occurred. The temporary fixture was removed. - Passed `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. Initial attempts failed with `COPILOT_INSTALLATION_INVALID`. Reinstalling the generated Copilot assets resolved that local packaging failure without source changes. - The full repository test run was attempted locally and stopped after repeated embedded PostgreSQL bootstrap failures in server suites. The complete UI suite passes independently. In CI, serialized shard 5/9 had one 15-second timeout in the unchanged `agent-live-run-routes.test.ts` history-limit case; its other 387 tests passed. All five history-limit variants pass locally. The single CI job retry passed. The original timeout cause is not established. ## Risks - Report-only answers appear later because the UI waits for terminal history. Failed event fetches keep that fallback pending until a retry succeeds; provider replies remain visible. - Historical replies and accepted response-wake behavior retain their existing resolution rules. The focused tests cover these paths. - The change does not alter provider execution, completion authority, database schema, or run timing. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, code 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 - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
bc091f0a21 |
fix(recovery): recover retained workspaces before saved messages (#16906)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - A stopped run can leave useful files in its original sandbox. > - The server keeps that sandbox when it cannot confirm file copyback. > - The task can then save new user input but offers no safe way to recover the files. > - A retry of the old agent turn can repeat work that already finished. > - This pull request recovers files through the existing workspace owner and delivers only saved human input. > - The user can recover a task without certifying infrastructure facts or losing completed work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16883 and #16835 for publication receipts and verified process termination. Related: #16478 clears stale holds after copyback already succeeded. This change performs the missing export and records its proof. #16901 manages the main GitHub response comment and does not perform workspace repair. **What happened?** A failed run retained its workspace. A later user message stayed saved behind a file-repair hold. The task asked the user to verify process termination and file recovery but offered no repair control. Sending a message could show an optimistic Working state and move the task to Todo before admission succeeded. **Expected behavior** The harness should recover the original files when it can prove ownership and termination. It should preserve newer edits and completed operations. Only waiting user input may start another turn. Missing evidence must keep the source held with a specific explanation. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Interrupt a sandbox run before workspace finalization succeeds. 2. Retain its exact allocation and save a user follow-up. 3. Observe the file-repair hold and missing end-user repair path. ## What Changed - Add source-bound background recovery for native and legacy runs. An accepted native result is not required. - Share the physical copyback lock and durable owner. Resume only the exact stopped allocation, export files, verify persistence and obtain a fresh stop receipt. - Persist retry limits and idempotent requests on the existing recovery record. Limit each server to two background exports. Add an indexed candidate scan and a separate cleanup obligation. - Add a task-editor recovery endpoint. Deny agents and viewers. Reject caller-supplied stop or repair claims. - Deliver waiting human input once through ordinary admission. Preserve pause, approval, budget and assignment gates. Require historical conversational-adapter evidence for legacy-to-Runner continuation. - Include exact GitHub publication receipts in continuation context. Preserve unknown effects and the original failed run. - Show observed recovery progress, a transient-failure retry action and specific service blockers. Keep saved messages visible. Suppress false startup feedback and implicit Todo promotion behind a file hold. Hide unavailable workspace links. - Update execution semantics, capability maps and production-component stories. ## Verification - Red: the original read model failed the new recovery-progress assertion; the other 23 checks in that file passed. - Passed: recovery regressions with 28 cases with real PostgreSQL, files, tar and Git operations. Lifecycle provider calls are controlled test boundaries. Coverage includes native/legacy export, concurrent owners, rollback after export, interrupted archive export with a new database connection, lost replies, historical discovery, durable retry limits, separate cleanup and saved-input delivery. The actual candidate query uses its partial index with 3,000 unrelated history rows. A first automatic repair can bind verified old-controller stop proof without an accepted native result. Review also reproduced and fixed export-only continuation and cleanup lost after a committed repair. Cleanup remains discoverable without waiting input and after task reconciliation. - Passed: two GitHub integration cases verify that continuation context carries the existing publication receipt and does not write another response. Company and task boundaries are checked. - Passed: 293 continuation, workspace-sync, platform-receipt and OpenAPI checks. After file repair, actual dispatch retains pause, cancellation, approval, real budget-policy and assignment gates. - Passed: 174 route checks, including editor admission, agent/viewer denial and rejection of fabricated repair claims. - Passed: 351 task detail, workspace properties and comment-reopen checks after updating the new read boundaries and asynchronous workspace-link expectations. Two new route cases keep held tasks Blocked when a comment is saved. - Passed: 265 task-thread and recovery-notice checks. The broader continuation suite also passed; its new legacy migration case first exposed a gap that the focused recovery suite now covers. - Passed after rebase: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. The later master merge adds an unrelated permission migration; recovery migration generation and safety checks passed after the merge. - Passed: token gates, module boundaries, map structure and migration checks. The recovery index is migration 0360 after current master. - Browser: inspected the production recovery component and its retry-to-queued transition with fixture data. The first dev dependency load failed; a reload after optimization resolved it. This is UI evidence, not a live provider recovery claim. - Every test shard passed on final commit `bbbc09efb4`. The older local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after the complete CI test matrix passed. Local full typecheck and production build passed. The first CI build compiled and booted, then lost its runner during the clean public npm-install check. An isolated retry passed the build, production boot and clean public npm-install verification. - Greptile reviewed final commit `bbbc09efb4` at 5/5. All review threads are resolved. - The change is not deployed. Hosted recovery remains unverified until the served revision includes this change. ## Risks - Recovery crosses process, provider and persistence boundaries. Missing or mismatched ownership, stop, descriptor or file evidence keeps the hold. It never selects a replacement allocation or silently starts over. - File recovery does not certify external action outcomes or authorize replay. New input still uses normal execution admission. - Historical sources without sufficient durable evidence can remain blocked. Destructive reconstruction stays separate. - The index migration is idempotent. It changes no task data. Snapshot pruning follows repository policy. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, `gpt-6.1-sol`, with code execution and browser tools. `gpt-6-astra` assisted earlier investigation. The runtime does not expose the context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [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> |
||
|
|
7b9334cd10 |
Draft: Build agent-ready design proposal system (#16875)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work. > - People need consistent UI patterns to review and control that work. > - The current board uses related layouts and controls with different spacing, type, and behavior. > - That drift makes it hard for a designer or an agent to build a new page from a reliable reference. > - Storybook can show the shared patterns and the states they need to support. > - This pull request adds design proposals, a local sandbox, and reusable UI controls so people can compare the patterns in context. > - The benefit is a clearer design system that agents can use to build consistent UI. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** `ui/` — React board UI and Storybook. **Problem or motivation** Board pages repeat visual and interaction decisions. Storybook did not provide a complete reference for task views, conversation states, typography, toolbars, tabs, and light/dark colors. People could not compare a proposed pattern with the running board in one place. **Proposed solution** Add a staged Design Proposals catalog with foundations, components, layouts, and page specimens. Add an opt-in sandbox. Reuse production components where possible. Include synthetic conversation states and shared controls so reviewers can compare and refine them. **Alternatives considered** Separate static mockups would not show keyboard behavior, responsive layout, or real component states. Rebuilding each page only in Storybook would allow the reference to drift from the board. **Roadmap alignment** This improves existing board UI and Skills Manager surfaces. It does not add a new control-plane capability. ## What Changed - Added dark and light color references, typography and conversation specimens, and component stories for buttons, tabs, toolbars, sidebar, popovers, activity, and task lists. - Added a local design sandbox with synthetic task conversation playback and representative states. - Shared collection toolbars and navigation patterns across task, agent, project, routine, skill, connector, and artifact pages. - Added the streamlined Skills tabs and a My Skills collection that uses the shared skill cards. - Restored saved-thread access during synthetic playback, kept connector searchbox semantics, and updated reproduction checks after moving trial stories. - Documented the proposed patterns and added focused UI, catalog, and browser checks. ## Verification - `pnpm check:token-gates`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --check` passed. - Full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed after merging master. After the review fixes, focused UI typecheck, `pnpm build-storybook`, 23 Skills Sources tests, and all 15 Storybook typography browser tests passed. - Focused task-thread and system-notice suites passed: 251 tests. Connector Browse passed 84 tests; the connector, attachment, recovery, and Storybook flyout browser journeys passed locally. - A local full Vitest run hit one intermittent chat-channels integration failure; that test passed in isolation. GitHub CI [39347996059](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39347996059) passed on the exact latest commit: 55 successful checks and two skipped draft-only Storybook jobs. - Greptile reviewed the exact latest commit at 5/5 with no new comments or open review threads. GitHub reports the branch as cleanly mergeable. ## Risks - This PR changes 206 files and exceeds the repository's 100-file review target. Review by commit and consider a scoped split before merge. - Design Proposals are staged references. Fixture interactions do not prove API behavior, permissions, or provider execution. - UI changes to shared controls may affect pages outside the proposal sandbox. Focused browser checks and the full CI matrix passed. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact runtime model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. The model used reasoning, code execution, browser inspection, and local tests. Earlier branch commits were also AI-assisted in this Codex conversation. ## 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 available in this session) - [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 where applicable - [x] I have either linked existing issues or described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket id - [x] I have run focused 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 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: Scott Tong <scott@scotts-mbp-m5-max.local> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
87d9386ae6 |
fix(ui): retain first-chat uploads through task creation (#16896)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agent Chat lets a person attach files before the first message. > - The first upload creates the saved chat task while the upload is still pending. > - Initial history loading used that new task ID to reset the open composer. > - Resetting the composer discarded its pending upload even when the server saved the file. > - This pull request uses the conversation's stable draft key for its history readiness. > - The benefit is a first message that retains its selected files and their saved references. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** The first file upload in a new Agent Chat saved on the server but disappeared from the composer. The initial history change in #16878 can unmount the active composer when an empty chat receives its task ID. The pending upload belongs to that unmounted composer, so the new composer has no selected file. **Expected behavior** The same conversation keeps its active composer and pending file while the task is created. Sending the message binds the saved attachment once. Initial history loading for an existing conversation and ordinary task still waits before mounting its composer. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open Agent Chat for an agent with no saved conversation. 2. Attach a text file before sending a message. 3. Let chat creation finish while the upload is pending. 4. Observe that the file chip disappears, although the attachment POST returns 201. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced by a deterministic real-composer regression on master |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4d92589799 |
perf(ui): defer hidden task rendering until history is ready (#16878)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - People open a task to read saved work and reply. > - The conversation waits for its initial data so messages do not move after reveal. > - The hidden conversation and editor still render while those reads are pending. > - Profiling showed a useful cold-load gain when that hidden rendering was delayed. > - Prepare ordinary task content after its initial data is ready. Keep the existing preparation path for comment links. > - Keep the skeleton, measured reveal, timeout, and mounted conversation during refresh. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Follow-up to #16862 and #16849. Related task-layout work: #14758. Searches found no overlapping open rendering change. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Opening a task mounts hidden message rows and the rich editor while supporting reads are still pending. These trees can render again as data arrives before the user can see or use them. **Subsystem affected** UI task conversation startup and its browser acceptance suite. **Proposed behavior** Keep the existing skeleton and outer layout containers. Prepare the hidden conversation and composer when initial history is ready, then use the existing measured reveal. Keep content mounted after reveal. Hash navigation retains eager preparation so older comment targets can be positioned before reveal. The existing 15-second timeout still reveals available history and the composer. ## What Changed - Gate concealed history and composer children with the existing history readiness, revealed-task latch, timeout, and scroll-navigation hash. - Keep data queries, shell geometry, scroll ownership, and the reveal frame unchanged. - Update unit coverage for deferred content, comment-link preparation, task changes, history timeout, and mounted editor identity during refresh. - Add a real browser journey that holds a background task read, retains the same editor and draft, reloads the saved draft, sends one reply, and checks the persisted comment independently. - Document the loading and draft acceptance paths. ## Verification - Repository-wide `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed locally. Token gates and all 231 task-thread unit cases passed. - Seven regression cases failed against the old rendering behavior before the source change. - All 14 loading and layout browser cases passed again against the final production UI and API build at `15c360aa63e01ad9318aaf7865c07d1ee0d36968`. Coverage includes delayed initial data, reading anchors, media growth, composer sizing, older history, cold comment links, desktop/mobile same-task links and Back, rapid switching, reduced motion, failed reads and retry, stalled history, plan reuse, and cached-task profiling. - The new draft journey retained the same editor during a blocked background task refresh, restored the draft after reload, and persisted exactly one reply. - Final performance comparison used current master `249ab47d41834f174ddd5e9523dc07fa8ebd8e4c` and implementation `15c360aa63e01ad9318aaf7865c07d1ee0d36968` against the same local 160-message Markdown conversation and API process. Conditions: 50 ms network latency, 9 Mbps down/1.5 Mbps up, 4x CPU slowdown, fresh browsers, five alternating pairs per scenario, no CPU profiler, and no concurrent local build/test work. Warm task navigation improved in all five pairs: median paired saving **405 ms**; variant medians **1,787 → 1,456 ms**. Cold results were mixed: paired saving **−89 ms** (slower), despite variant medians **3,188 → 3,021 ms**. There is no consistent cold-load gain established by this comparison. - Earlier prototype comparisons showed paired cold savings of 259–283 ms. Those gains did not consistently reproduce in the final comparison. These are bounded local measurements and do not establish deployed staging latency. - The first prototype delayed comment-link preparation too and failed the older-comment anchor check by 240.5 px. The narrowed implementation keeps hash navigation on the existing eager path. That case and the full suite now pass. The original failure trace is retained locally. - A visual browser walkthrough read the saved conversation and plan, restored a draft after reload, sent it once, reloaded again, and independently checked that exactly one reply was saved. - Greptile reviewed this exact commit at 5/5, with no actionable findings or inline comments. - The duplicate local `pnpm test:run` attempt was interrupted while the same suites were completing in sharded CI so local performance could be measured on an idle host. It is not counted as a local full-suite pass. - All current-head [CI jobs passed](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39296740548), including the server, workspace, Runner, serialized, browser, typecheck, build, canary, and final verification gates. The first run failed one native-process supervision test (`preserves a real listening process and its marker when a health RPC times out`). Its unchanged shard and dependent gate passed on retry. The specific test also passed locally. No source change was made for that transient failure. ## Risks Delaying preparation can change initial scroll geometry. Hash navigation keeps the existing preparation path because it needs the target present before positioning. The revealed-task latch keeps refreshes from removing history or the editor. The existing timeout still makes saved content and the composer accessible when reads stall. No API, database, permission, or provider changes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser verification. A more precise runtime model identifier and context-window size are unavailable. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
896f3c7f3b |
Add personal Muse operator setup and composer controls (#16450)
Add Muse invitation, connection readiness and scoped operator controls.
Keep connection state tied to the current company, person, agent and binding. Surface failed reads and invalidate stale cleanup observations; require current authority and exact readback. Preserve Dot/Grok setup, source-trust limits and existing design tokens.
Carry actual merged backend
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
3dffd2197d |
test: consolidate owner fixtures and retain real regression proof (#16047)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Tests protect sandbox execution, run recovery, credentials and the board UI. > - Several owner suites repeat the same setup and prove the same result more than once. > - These copies add maintenance work and can hide weak assertions. > - Each cut needs a retained test that proves every distinct contract. > - This pull request consolidates repeated setup and removes twelve redundant executions. > - It also replaces two weak assertions with checks of real outputs. > - The benefit is 2,831 fewer test lines with clearer regression proof. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The maintenance and regression strength of the existing Vitest owner suites. **Subsystem affected** Sandbox adapter utilities, server heartbeat recovery and environment capabilities, and the board UI. **Current behavior** Tests copy database rows, query builders, render calls and runtime inputs. Some cases repeat an existing contract. One token test omits a real bridge credential. A PostHog host comparison can compare absent controls. **Proposed behavior** Use small local helpers with fresh values and the same action order. Keep each distinct contract in an owner test. Check real bridge credentials and fixed PostHog method states. Carry the exact persisted first-run success assertion into the stronger cancellation keeper. **Reason and benefit** The ten test files shrink by 2,831 net lines. Twelve redundant executions retire. All other case tables, inputs, security boundaries, timeouts and cleanup rules remain. **Breaking changes** None. This round changes tests and audit evidence only. **Additional context** Refs: #15978, the merged first cleanup. Refs: #16022, the merged prior cleanup. Its squash merge is `dabb8c5daf430a1987af611e2e7ca4c7b23ef7d4`. Related open work: #14634 repairs feedback fixture completion; #14477 supplies explicit sandbox fixture tools; #14198 changes cleanup retry behavior in another heartbeat file. This audit preserves those separate action and cleanup contracts. It does not apply their changes. This PR was first stacked on `codex/test-audit-followup`. After #16022 was squash merged, only the two Round 6 commits were replayed onto merged master `dabb8c5daf430a1987af611e2e7ca4c7b23ef7d4`. The original stack head is preserved in a local snapshot branch. The current diff contains only ten test files and two evidence files. No merge is requested. ## What Changed - Consolidate repeated setup in three sandbox adapter suites. Remove seven redundant executions and retain the real protocol, cleanup and scratch-file checks. Save 875 lines. - Consolidate heartbeat database fixtures and read queries. Retain exact wake cancellation, total run count and the actual first-run success receipt. Remove one duplicate execution. Save 1,372 lines. - Remove two repeated rejected-capability cases. Carry the absent snapshot assertion into the retained runner case. Save 22 lines. - Consolidate UI fixtures and render calls. Remove two repeated connection cases. Replace the weak PostHog comparison with fixed method and required-key checks in both real hosts. Save 562 lines. - Record audit scope, decision and expansion counts, all twelve keeper mappings and deliberate mutation results in the [audit report](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/codex/test-audit-round-six-delivery/doc/plans/2026-10-12-test-audit-round6.md) and [controls evidence](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/codex/test-audit-round-six-delivery/doc/plans/2026-10-12-test-audit-round6-controls.json). ## Verification Source baseline: `a090035cafb29c06f6fca2dbe43561ad866b7c1b`. All ten original test programs are byte-identical at the stacked base `58c5c4aa241c85f4665a3159c192888bbb2a5cfa`. - Baseline: 1,841/1,841 cases passed in the main thirty-file owner/sibling run. Another 219/219 cases passed in nine extra files. - Preservation: all four proposal packages passed independent review. Whole-program helper expansion retains ordered inputs, callbacks, awaits, queries, fresh allocations and hooks outside the declared assertion migrations and repairs. - Candidate: all 2,048 cases passed across 39 complete owner/sibling files. The main run passed 1,831 cases. The extra run passed 217 cases. Both runs had zero failures and zero skips. - PostHog control: the repaired positive case passed. The original weak case passed with authentication choices removed. The repaired case failed at its fixed OAuth aria-checked assertion under the same mutation. - Eight accepted mutations failed at their intended assertions. They cover bridge-token exclusion, fallback cleanup, READY bytes, real scratch-file preservation, exact wake cancellation, the persisted first-run success receipt, rejected capability snapshots and reachable PostHog method controls. Two original weak cases passed with the same defects. All production source bytes were restored. - Rejected control: changing run status before legacy release timed out before wake cancellation. This result is not counted as assertion proof. Its replacement changed only the persisted receipt after real drain in the existing transaction. It failed at the direct fixed succeeded-row assertion. - No new code comments or 1,000-line threshold crossings were introduced. No production, schema, lockfile or workflow changes are included. On the exact final test sources, later committed as `d8de9422f0703d4508a9dc880b67a07f13e0f110`, `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm check:token-gates` and `pnpm build` passed. The required full `pnpm test:run` completed with **exit 1** after **52.14 minutes** on clean, immutable `d8de9422f0703d4508a9dc880b67a07f13e0f110`. HEAD and tracked sources remained unchanged. The first general-server group ran 889 files: **882 passed, one failed and six skipped**. Its 18,032 cases were **17,925 passed, two failed and 105 skipped**. The only failing file was `server/src/__tests__/remove-test-home.test.ts`. On macOS, the read-only runtime bundle and symlink cleanup cases returned `ENOTEMPTY`. The permission-error case expects `EACCES` or `EPERM`. Four reported failure entries cover these two cases, including their cleanup errors. The test and helper are byte-identical to previous master `4b766b872993045a2e787404f0475503683e5ded` and audit master `e364b92c82`. The default wrapper stopped after that group failed. **Later local groups did not run.** The earlier public-MCP, HTTP log redaction and workspace snapshot failures did not recur. The 39 focused owner/sibling files and all 48 remote CI jobs completed independently. This result is an unresolved macOS cleanup limitation, not full local success. No test, skip, retry, timeout or cleanup rule was changed to hide it. The three adapter files received a whitespace tidy after focused execution. Full runtime AST and string/template/regex byte equality link those tested sources to the final sources. All 134 adapter helper calls were checked again. Replayed code commit `3d3defd2a60595a623045d9e2c6c586f4acb3452` has the exact final test bytes. Evidence commit `e868e6645ce0d598d756d3458f0b3d71afd6db4a` adds the report and controls JSON, with one historical ancestry clarification. All ten accepted test hashes and all seven production-owner source guards match. No package, lockfile, workspace, TypeScript, Rust or Vitest dependency manifest changed since the audit snapshot. The [original stack CI workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38312876910) passed all 48 jobs on head `c171d6c0d603d22bb997c1f9a9bdcd5bcc5d22aa`. Those results are historical stack proof. The [fresh master-context CI workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38318223856) completed successfully with **all 48 jobs passed** on current head `e868e6645ce0d598d756d3458f0b3d71afd6db4a`. Its tested merge commit was `41292af60c6eb60d477637d23822bb17b08dc07e`, combining workflow base `88bf4c6c1d222f818faa56257efe79207c892a6c` with that head. The delivery commits remain based on pinned master `dabb8c5daf430a1987af611e2e7ca4c7b23ef7d4`. Both required master checks, `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`, passed. Two separate optional Storybook checks were skipped by their scope gate. [Fresh Greptile review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16047#issuecomment-6133323165) gives the current head **5/5**, with no findings, inline comments or unresolved review threads. The [current-head commitperclip review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38318223666) also completed successfully. This PR remains open and draft; no merge is requested. The local macOS failure above remains unresolved. ## Risks - A helper could share a value or capture the wrong binding. Independent expansion and lexical binding checks guard the actual helper calls. - A retired case could contain a distinct assertion. Each cut has an exact keeper map and carried observations. - A mutation could fail before the intended assertion. Controls reject timeouts and earlier failures. The rejected receipt mutation remains in the evidence. - The delivery ancestry changed after the parent squash merge. Exact source hashes preserve the audited tests and producer receipts. Fresh CI and review passed in the current master context; the broad local run remains evidence from its immutable audit snapshot. - The complete local default failed in two unchanged macOS cleanup cases. Later local groups were not run. This limitation remains visible even though focused checks and remote CI passed. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, assisted with this work. The exact served model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. It used repository tools, code execution, AST analysis and parallel audit agents. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
db2f00947b |
fix(runner): include Claude ACP in the server package (#15912)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The server ships a copy of Paperclip Runner for native agent execution. > - The Claude ACP bridge is a runner dependency, but it was absent from the server package. > - The runner resolves this bridge dynamically, so the import-based packaging check missed it. > - A Claude session then failed before startup and showed a generic connection error. > - This pull request ships the qualified bridge and reports a missing runtime with repair steps. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A server install with the vendored runner could not load `@agentclientprotocol/claude-agent-acp/package.json`. The runtime test suggested checking the model or provider connection. The task reported an interrupted runner session. **Expected behavior** The server package includes its qualified Claude ACP runtime. A missing bundled runtime reports an installation error and explains how to repair it. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Use a server install with the vendored runner and no Claude ACP bridge. 2. Select the Paperclip Runner ACP harness and the Claude provider. 3. Run the runtime test or open a session. 4. Observe a missing-module failure before Claude starts. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on `e733bddc45`. This branch is based on current master. **Deployment mode** Self-hosted server built from source. Related: #15224 upgrades the Claude bridge. This PR fixes its omission from the server package and keeps the current qualified version. A future bridge upgrade must update the server pin too. ## What Changed - Add Claude ACP `0.73.0` to the server dependencies and bundled dependencies. - Pin the qualified Claude SDK and bridge dependencies in the npm bundle producer graph. Publish its native packages as consumer optional dependencies instead of shipping the producer executable. - Bind source-built vendored runners to the shared pnpm dependency store while retaining the server manifest as the provider authority. Keep published npm and self-rooted deployment roots unchanged. - Include dynamically resolved Claude and Codex bridges in the vendor dependency check. - Preserve the missing-package category through the sidecar, Rust transport, and native session executor. Stop automatic retries for this installation failure. - Show **Runtime missing** in the runtime test and task thread. Explain the reinstall or rebuild, server restart, and runtime test steps. - Add regression tests and document the repair procedure. ## Verification - Red/green comparison with the production sidecar: the same missing-package setup returns a raw require-stack error on the original code and an actionable, non-retryable missing-runtime error on this branch. - The rebuilt server's vendored Claude installation probe passes using the source-server authority selected by the launcher, without starting a provider or making a model request. - Focused server verification: 830 tests passed. Runner installation and sidecar error tests: 83 passed, with 6 platform-specific skips. Packaging tests: 28 passed. Rust transport tests: 7 passed. - Source/deployment authority tests: 3 passed. Red/green packaging tests include a Linux-produced Claude SDK bundle, actual npm pack, and closed executable admission on Linux x64 and macOS ARM64/x64. - Full UI suite: 8,113 tests passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on the rebased branch. - Full current-head CI passed, including all general and serialized test lanes, Runner Rust/Vitest verification, typecheck, build, and all eight e2e shards. Greptile reviewed `d6a2741834ff922956560f2f689382827bbaf9e0` at 5/5 with no unresolved threads. - Local full-suite limitation: an earlier parallel attempt hit Postgres startup failures and timeouts; the affected server tests and a database fixture passed in isolation. The subsequent serial `pnpm test:run` was stopped while still running after complete CI passed. Focused local tests, full UI tests, typecheck, and build completed as listed above. - Token gates and `git diff --check` passed. ## Risks - Bundling the Claude bridge increases the server package size. The producer graph retains the qualified SDK version and existing isolation patch. Native platform declarations move to the published server manifest, while the runtime keeps its exact version, declared-slot, no-follow, and executable digest checks. - The new failure category is permanent. Operators must repair the server installation before they retry the task. - Existing failed runs retain their recorded error. The clearer message applies to new runtime tests and runs. - No database schema or migration changes. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The system reports the model family; the exact deployment ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, browser inspection, 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
417db14e7d |
fix: show credential access errors in task chat (#15741)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents use AI connections to run tasks for a responsible user. > - A connection can deny access when its owner has not shared it with that user. > - The task conversation hides this cause behind a collapsed failure marker. > - People need to see which connection blocked the agent and how to fix it. > - This pull request shows an expanded access error in the task conversation. > - The error names the agent and connection, and links to the agent's AI settings. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A task could fail because its responsible user could not use the agent's AI connection. The user saw a temporary error toast and a collapsed task failure. The task did not clearly explain the access problem. **Expected behavior** The task should show a visible error that names the agent, the connection, and the person who lacks access. For example: "Codie is configured to use Dotta's API Key, but you don't have access to that credential." It should offer a link to change the AI connection. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Configure an agent with a personal AI connection. 2. Start a task for a user who cannot use that connection. 3. Open the task after the run fails. 4. Check that the access error stays visible and links to AI settings. Refs #15714. That change classifies expected connection-sharing denials. This change makes the same failure clear in task chat. ## What Changed - Keep the connection display name in private error metadata when a sharing check denies access. - Store a private grant reference for the name visibility check. Use one rule for task summaries and full run responses. Show the name to the affected user and the connection sharing audience. Other task readers see a generic label. Strip grant IDs from public run responses. - Show an expanded error card for native and legacy task runs. Use "you" only when the viewer is the responsible user. - Link to AI settings and the failed run. Preserve names on resumed native runs. Hide the old error after a newer successful attempt. - Add full task-page Storybook examples, focused tests, and design guidance. ## Verification - Passed 249 focused tests for task chat, error text, private error metadata, and the real database run summary. These include resumed native runs and viewer access rules. - Passed all UI token gates on the rebased branch. - Checked the production task page in Storybook. Verified the viewer's error, another user's error, mobile layout, and a newer successful attempt. - Passed `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` in a clean checkout with Node 24 and the pinned pnpm version. Passed the final server typecheck after the response filter changes. - Passed the real database route regression for the connection owner, affected user, and another task reader. Passed the registered secret redaction tests. - The local route checks needed `--testTimeout 60000` for cold imports. A broader local route run hit cold-import timeouts and an old fixture assertion that is now fixed. The duplicate local `pnpm test:run` aggregate was stopped to free resources. The full suite passed in CI with the normal timeouts. - Passed the full [final-commit CI workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37996148342), including all server, UI, runner, browser, typecheck, build, and canary packaging gates. All 54 executed checks passed; two Storybook jobs were skipped. Greptile reviewed the final commit at 5/5 with no remaining findings, and every review thread is resolved. - Review the Storybook group `Task / Credential access` for the notice and full task-page examples. ## Risks - Only the allowed connection display name enters the compact run summary. Credential secrets, grant IDs, and arbitrary error details do not enter it. - Existing runs can lack the connection name. They show a clear fallback message. - The notice uses the existing task-run relevance rules. A newer attempt or a completed task hides the old failure. - No schema migration or API permission change is required. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool execution and browser verification. The exact serving variant and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
b6b3cb3761 |
Fix unavailable workspace branches with an inline repair and retry (#15726)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Isolated workspaces must resolve a starting Git ref before an agent starts. > - A task can explicitly select a branch that the repository does not have. > - The current recovery notice calls this a missing secret and offers no branch repair. > - This pull request explains the branch failure and adds a task-scoped repair action. > - Operators can correct the branch and request a guarded retry from the task thread. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: Refs #11892 added unresolved-ref recovery. Refs #15719 added bounded failure diagnostics. This change uses that recovery path and adds its operator repair UI. **What happened?** A task that selects `main` in a repository with only `master` stops before the adapter starts. The task shows a missing-secret message and a generic retry. Repeating the run cannot fix the stored branch setting. **Expected behavior** Explain that the starting ref could not be resolved. Offer a verified repository default, or let the operator enter a branch. Save only the task's starting branch and retry its recorded owner through the existing admission gates. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create an isolated-workspace task in a repository with `master` and no `main`. 2. Set the task's base ref to `main` and assign an agent. 3. Wait for the configuration failure. 4. Use the inline branch repair and confirm the agent completes in a worktree based on `master`. ## What Changed - Replace the missing-secret diagnosis for unresolved workspace refs. Keep uncertain fetch/access failures described as uncertain. - Read the remote's advertised default branch with the existing Git credentials and a bounded timeout. Do not guess or silently change the branch. - Add an atomic branch repair to the existing recovery resolution endpoint. Check company access, board runtime permission, incident identity, current owner, task/project state, dependencies, interactions, approvals, budget, and active execution before requesting a retry. - Preserve the effective inherited workspace setup when saving the task branch override, and attach one repair notice per failed run even when the incident is reused. - Bind the shared repair card to the exact recovery notice and failed run in both task-thread renderers. Validate branch syntax and prevent duplicate submissions. - Add Storybook examples, regression tests, and a documented local acceptance fixture with a real Git repository and process adapter. ## Verification - Red/green regressions cover the repair endpoint and preservation of inherited agent setup. The regression failed before each fix and passed afterward. - Focused integration suite: 162 tests passed; task-thread/card suite: 230 passed. After review refinements, all 13 repair-route tests, 10 card tests, 77 recovery-action tests, and the repeated-failure heartbeat regression passed locally. - Real browser acceptance passed for suggested-branch and custom-entry repairs. Invalid syntax left the task blocked. Both valid repairs ran the authenticated worker in a real isolated worktree and reached Done; reload preserved the result. - Repeated failures reused the recovery incident and retained an actionable notice on the latest run. The inherited-setup journey verified the provisioned file, agent branch template, worktree parent directory, and actual Git commit before completing. [Before/after screenshots](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15726#issuecomment-6088734666). - Full local typecheck and build passed; server typecheck passed again after review fixes. Token gates passed. - The monolithic local Vitest run was stopped after resource-contention timeouts and stale assertions. Targeted regressions were rerun; the full CI matrix passed on final revision `26c543ff490bec29ddc77a49ee532c7f84fb96dc`. One signoff E2E worker-cancellation failure passed on a rerun without code changes. The two opt-in Storybook workflow jobs were skipped; the Storybook journey was checked manually. - Repeat the live journey with `tests/e2e/workspace-base-ref/README.md`. Storybook examples use simulated callbacks and are not the live acceptance proof. ## Risks - Default-branch discovery can add up to 10 seconds to an unresolved-ref failure. Lookup failure leaves manual entry available. - A valid branch name can still be absent or inaccessible. The retried workspace preparation remains authoritative and can block again with new evidence. - Retry remains subject to normal admission gates. The repair changes only the task override; it does not alter project or agent defaults. - No database migration or new dependency. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool execution, repository analysis, and browser testing. The exact serving variant and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
57e977be72 |
feat: integrate Pi 1.0 into the experimental Runner (#14921)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - The experimental Runner owns provider processes and durable sessions. > - Pi needs working task execution and human controls. > - The five-PR stack must preserve changes already on master. > - Each layer now carries the complete integrated source for a safe sequential fallback. > - This PR belongs to native GitHub stack #15602, ending at #14956. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #14436, #14631, #14743 and #14956. Ship Pi 1.0 through the experimental Paperclip Runner. The five PRs are #14921, #14922, #14923, #14924 and #14956. The user authorized the complete merge after checks pass. Existing `pi_local` execution is unchanged. Accounting and wider provider/platform qualification remain deferred. ## What Changed - Recover missing final replies after workspace finalization changes owners, using accepted-turn evidence without rerunning work or granting external-chat publication. - Preserve the admitted Pi instruction root across warm runs, while retaining changed-root rejection. - Give Pi a bounded 15-second default shutdown grace so stop, drain acknowledgement and durable suspension can complete. Explicit deadlines and other providers retain their existing behavior. - Integrate the Pi 1.0 runtime and master contracts. - Use Pi profile 22. Preserve explicit caller-selected models and exact native thinking levels. Keep Pi's wrapper, helper, extension and question/control behavior unchanged from the qualified profile-19 runtime. - Preserve master's Dot lifecycle and consent fields, configured task environment, status guards and current Codex/Claude dependency versions. Cursor stays qualified. Copilot stays pending; profile 17 binds the changed shared protocol validation sources. - Exclude general AWS IAM credentials from Pi static/custom provider bindings and selected task projections; preserve the provider-scoped Bedrock bearer key. Profile 21 is retained as historical provenance. Rust and cloud install probes use the current declaration. - Patch bundled brace-expansion 5.0.9 to the exact official 5.0.12 payload. Pin the patch and complete runtime closures. Include the patch in normal installed setup tooling. Keep the upstream Pi shrinkwrap as provenance and permit only this exact security correction. - Include current attestation files in the Docker build context. Keep the repository lockfile unchanged from master. CI and private image builds resolve manifest changes before their frozen installation. ## Verification - Full local `pnpm -r typecheck` passes, including Runner Rust, server and UI. Focused integration checks pass: 194 Runner admission/environment tests, 63 profile/credential tests with one expected skip, 152 Dot/UI configuration tests, and Pi transcript/notice tests. - Full local `pnpm build` passes on the final source. - Fresh final-source checks pass: all 698 Rust workspace tests (32 binaries), 156 credential/profile/controller tests with one expected skip, Runner TypeScript typecheck, and 20 package/setup/sandbox tests. - The profile-21 Pi materializer passes on the native host with the official pinned Node 24.21.0 and its npm. It verifies all 150 locked packages, the patched dependency and the exact closure. Setup/package bundle tests and UI token gates pass. - The old hashes were reproduced for all three supported targets before calculating the patched graph. New closure hashes are darwin-arm64 `282022db10150c6632b3444df421342e7d534bdf5d5fb1097a2e79d0625a2bcf`, darwin-x64 `64e251e19009f755c0b04f73ce2138246faab71a961b0f13d75ebfcc34bef12e`, and linux-x64 `713b1fdff42fb56a1518bdc084f181d70bee8ebadc3e4b1d76321ed9108c8410`. Independent native platform execution is separate from graph identity reproduction. - Historical cloud qualification remains unchanged: all seven core cases pass on shipping source `10dc43c9ec65d88c2f782d62afb296d09494f215`, harness `1a4408a48cfb5a1f094a311141c257c92cd7a893`, image `sha256:5b3a775b383591bda1b0c1889e509acc70ce7f37c53f09733c81d59037f02280`, and accepted Sonnet 4.6/low fixture. All 215 canonical files and all seven cleanup checks pass independent verification. These are profile-19 results and are not relabeled as fresh profile-22 runs. - Current Pi digest: `sha256:e92078bee3c23bec4100aa589013a44613d054cd686826534025d8019e9f39a9`. [The readiness plan](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/codex/pi-production-readiness/doc/plans/2026-10-02-pi-production-readiness.md) preserves campaign and failed-attempt provenance. - Merge only after every PR's current-head CI and fresh review pass. Linux CI covers the full suites, build and browser tests. The local embedded Postgres API-authority suite cannot start on this macOS/Node 26 host, so Linux CI must confirm that suite. ### Fresh profile-22 core qualification — 2026-10-08 All seven accepted core cases pass canonically on Pi profile 22, with `openrouter/anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6` and native-confirmed low thinking. This model is a fixture; production accepts the caller's explicit Pi provider/model. Runtime/install source: `3241a992f2a7703e59e97ed0fd3e5d6405de4401`. Frozen accepted harness: `1a4408a48cfb5a1f094a311141c257c92cd7a893`. Immutable cloud image: `ghcr.io/paperclipai/paperclip-daytona-runner@sha256:506f22db7edd78f37c0c40bec1cc084af1850455026dbf467194bfbb8fcef141`. Pi digest: `sha256:e92078bee3c23bec4100aa589013a44613d054cd686826534025d8019e9f39a9`. [Hosted Linux image and clean-install verification](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37868328023) passes, including all 20 source-bound archives, normal CLI/Pi setup, companion import and the production pack reader. This exact installation source includes the latest master integration and the corrected Pi warm instruction-root fence. Full local typecheck/build and current-head hosted CI verify the final stack. All 13 focused real-root regressions pass. The full local executor suite passed 662 tests; 15 database tests could not start the Mac embedded PostgreSQL service. Hosted Linux CI passes the full required verification and E2E checks. These fresh results keep their own source identity; profile-19 results remain historical. | Core path | Canonical campaign | Retained archive SHA-256 | | --- | --- | --- | | File edit, validation, download and Done | `pi-core22-replyfix-0-1791511228` | 23 files; `a473e8603a3dd4737863291f8d3d1e392391f0b16d433c3e0e0e9d8baf7a97b0` | | Pending question and controller restart | `pi-core22-replyfix-1-1791511376` | 33 files; `6b829c4eb74e1f32a89c692a4ae7130dbfc1c6d3cf13915effe2103d9e242c8e` | | Three-turn session/process/workspace continuity | `pi-core22-replyfix-2-1791511587` | 23 files; `7a87021f8f9a3fdd3c58bb4467f8d82c635e3ea4795d6e75f144d9aa14818df8` | | Four typed questions and browser reconnects | `pi-core22-replyfix-3-1791511881` | 42 files; `9e31755252be1f4f9cb0626c984c142d4d1ae5f5bee3a7af08444db8d12c280a` | | Plan approval and completion | `pi-core22-replyfix-4-1791512031` | 22 files; `a0383ce1aab38e7b5a25ce0e9dd3bebea5c037ebd96ae6b29dae19015da2ae2c` | | Same-turn steering and permission denial | `pi-core22-replyfix-5-1791512261` | 39 files; `c929b8c7070f0b66aedc17e65ca46e6beab1e363926ac9f7e2a75fb250f05949` | | Stop during pending permission | `pi-core22-replyfix-6-1791512390` | 33 files; `7f0a58ae0f4d5bfc76149435f4e322537089c5bd16e7ffe9b5ad71f10a621a07` | All 215 canonical files (28714587 bytes) are independently hash-verified. All seven cleanup grades pass, with no owned runtime process or temporary root after each case. Automatic retries are zero. The owned cloud host stopped normally after retention. The prior profile-22 warm attempt remains failed and separately retained: archive SHA-256 `1e54eba5ec72b50cee1534b23d1d1d4f21a090006b8a64501ba70db972abfde5`. Its original canonical classification is preserved. Diagnosis reproduced a product bug comparing an agent-files root against an unset checkpoint-only field. The fix stores the admitted physical root separately from the adopted per-run collection capability. The real-root regression fails before the fix and passes afterward, including rejection of a changed physical root. Fixture, grader, model and all seven accepted case IDs are unchanged; this fresh campaign tests final-reply publication after file registration first. The intermediate restart attempt also remains failed and retained: archive SHA-256 `5dcaefdf1d17cf4cd54fd4cf810f45e736667392339b8ce7caf08bb4e225277f`. Its original canonical classification is preserved. Pi resumed, wrote the verified answer and completed its task; exact runner suspension was proven, but idle stop consumed about 5.2s and left under 3s for the drain acknowledgement. The Pi-only default shutdown grace is now 15s, preserving a full 5s drain round trip and a finite suspension reserve. Explicit caller deadlines, other provider defaults, literal drain receipts and exact suspension identity checks remain unchanged. The timing regression fails before this correction and passes afterward; all 18 focused settlement tests and Runner typecheck pass. The final-source file attempt is also preserved as failed (`candidate_failure`), archive SHA-256 `db6767b6773ea618997927ac77bdb005a5ac81492c7b9c0ffbc900449f829bc9`. Native edit, validation, exact downloadable artifact and Done/succeeded all passed, and the exact final reply was durably recorded. A workspace recovery owner completed before the live heartbeat reached presentation, leaving that reply absent from task chat. Recovery now materializes only a completed final reply from the accepted turn of an ordinary internal Done task, preserving issue/run/contract binding, suppression, external-chat authorization and same-run deduplication. The database regression covers the generated file-preparation receipt, suppression, unapproved external continuation and replay. Server typecheck and all 49 response-selection tests pass; hosted Linux verifies the database regression because embedded PostgreSQL cannot start on this Mac. The delayed-final-answer database regression passes on [the final root-source Linux server shard](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37868262553/job/113628594152), alongside 1,108 passing tests. The first root Runner shard had one unchanged durable-resume test exceed its 5-second timeout; the identical top-source shard and the isolated exact test passed. One rerun of that failed job and its required aggregate passed without source or test changes. The original failed job log and the single-rerun receipt remain retained. ### October 9 merge verification Current merge head: `5a8fe63512a7166aaef5cf50065a25008aa8b44b`. All current-head checks pass, including `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`; exact-head Greptile review is 5/5 with no unresolved threads. Current master conflicts are resolved. The user authorized the maintainer override of the code-owner review gate after these checks. The seven retained live core cases remain bound to source `3241a992f2a7703e59e97ed0fd3e5d6405de4401` and its recorded cloud image. ## Risks - The security correction changes the dependency closure and profile identity. Old sessions must reopen on the new profile. Exact identities and credential bindings fail closed. - The runner remains experimental and requires explicit selection. Legacy Pi Local is unchanged. Caller model IDs pass through; the E2E model is a fixture. - Accounting and the broad platform/provider matrix remain deferred. This merge does not publish a release or deploy a service. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex assisted with reasoning, repository inspection, editing and tool use. The exact serving ID and context window are not exposed in this session. Final live qualification uses Pi 1.0.0 with `openrouter/anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6` and native-confirmed low thinking. ## 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 #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
2ca0d26a99 |
fix(connections): recover missing personal AI credentials in chat (#15376)
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9b3fe260ba |
fix(tasks): surface Codex ChatGPT model rejection (#15299)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native Runner runs report provider errors and can also save a structured failure result. > - Codex rejects a model that the user's ChatGPT account cannot use. > - Master now diagnoses this rejection, but the task's compact run data omits its message. The thread can still call it a generic run failure. > - Users need the account restriction and a clear step to repair the model selection. > - This pull request shows the existing diagnosis as “Model unavailable” on the task. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Codex returns HTTP 400 with `invalid_request_error` and the message `The 'gpt-6.1-sol' model is not supported when using Codex with a ChatGPT account.` Master now stores an actionable diagnosis for this rejection. The task thread still labels it “Run failed” and does not receive its error text in compact run data. **Expected behavior** Show the account restriction on the task and in the run error. Tell the user to choose a supported model or clear the task's model override before retrying. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Use a Native Runner Codex agent signed in with a ChatGPT account. 2. Select a model that produces the rejection above and start a task. 3. Let the runner save its generic failed result. Inspect the task's failure marker and recovery notice. **Additional context** Refs: #15304. That merged PR diagnoses the provider failure and preserves worker and review recovery rules. This PR adds its task-facing message and guidance without changing that diagnosis or those rules. Refs: #13134. That PR improves model discovery for ChatGPT accounts. This PR exposes the rejection when a configured model still fails at execution time. ## What Changed - Return a bounded model rejection message in compact issue-run data. - Show “Model unavailable” and model-change guidance in the task thread and recovery notice. - Add database and UI regression tests, including both the original rejection text and master's fixed diagnosis. Document the new failure message. ## Verification - Focused merged-branch validation: 279 tests passed across activity service, native provider failure observation and PostgreSQL integration, TaskChatThread, and ExecutionBlockerNotice. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `pnpm check:token-gates` passed on the merged source tree. - Greptile reviewed conflict-resolution commit `1db39c4e636a92e2e76ba224b71c6f1e2f556c81` at 5/5 with no findings or inline comments. - All 55 check runs completed without failure on that commit. The two optional Storybook jobs were skipped. The legacy Snyk status passed. The branch has no merge conflicts. - UI regression assertion: the task's failure marker says “Model unavailable” and retains the account restriction. It no longer says that this failure happened after a final response. ## Risks - Provider recognition and recovery are owned by the existing master implementation. This PR exposes only bounded error text for failed runs with `native_provider_model_rejected`. - Historical runs with the generic `adapter_failed` code are not reclassified. No stored run is rewritten. - Existing retry and reconciliation gates remain in place. No schema migration or model configuration change is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, code execution, and browser inspection. The exact deployment model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
81cd03b3b5 |
test(ui): keep initial reasoning with the saved reply (#15107)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work. > - The issue thread shows saved replies and agent run history. > - History that appears after the reply can move the page. > - Master now waits for initial run history before it shows the thread in #15228. > - This pull request checks that reasoning and the saved reply appear together in the first visible frame. > - The test protects that behavior from a later change. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public issue tracks this report. This is a bug regression test. **What happened?** The issue thread showed a saved answer before its reasoning and tool history loaded. The later history moved the page. **Expected behavior** The first visible thread contains the initial reasoning and the saved reply in order. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open an issue with an agent run and a saved reply. 2. Delay initial run-history hydration. 3. Observe the saved reply before its reasoning appears. Related work: #15228 now contains the reveal gate. This PR adds a direct regression assertion for that gate. #14667 takes a different loading approach and remains open. ## What Changed - Add a saved agent reply to the initial-history test. - Assert that the native run's reasoning appears before that reply when the thread becomes visible. - Assert that the thread stays inert until history is ready. ## Verification - `vitest run ui/src/components/TaskChatThread.test.tsx ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx` passed: 353 tests. - `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` passed. - GitHub CI checks are in progress for the rebased head. ## Risks - Low risk. This PR changes only a test. - The production fix is already in #15228. This PR must not restore the older code from the previous branch head. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex CLI assisted with tool use and code execution. The exact model ID and context window were not exposed to this agent session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My remote branch name describes the change 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 (no user-facing documentation changed) - [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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
7498705642 |
fix(ui): stabilize mobile task reading and document navigation (#15228)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - People read tasks and send instructions from phones as well as desktop browsers. > - The mobile footer let page text show through its labels, and small text fields made Safari zoom on focus. > - Small scroll changes made the footer switch direction, and its changing page padding moved the conversation. > - Task pages also showed comments before question cards and run history arrived, so the composer and reading position moved again. > - Document links also used native navigation, which reset the reading position or reloaded a task through its UUID URL. Desktop tabs were crowded in the mobile drawer. > - This pull request keeps navigation steady, opens documents in the mounted task, and gives mobile readers a full-height panel with a vertical tab selector. > - The benefit is a stable task view and smoother scrolling on mobile. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** The mobile footer was translucent. Safari zoomed when a person focused a small text field. The footer switched abruptly while scrolling. A large task could show saved comments, then move the page again when a question card or run history arrived. In a local test with delayed responses, a late question moved the mobile composer by about 374 pixels. Opening a plan from the feed could reset the view or reload the task through a UUID link. The mobile document drawer left part of the feed exposed above small desktop tab controls. **Expected behavior** The footer has an opaque surface and moves smoothly after deliberate scrolling. Text fields do not cause automatic focus zoom. A task shows its initial conversation and composer together at the final scroll position. Background refreshes keep the existing conversation visible. Document links open in the mounted task with its existing cache and reading position. Mobile documents fill the viewport, show a clear close button, and offer a vertical list of open tabs. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open a task with many long comments and a pending question in iOS Safari. 2. Delay its interactions, activity, and runs responses by different amounts. 3. Reload the page and watch the conversation and composer move as each response arrives. 4. Scroll down and back up, including small direction changes and edge bounce. 5. Focus the task composer, search field, and new-task title and description. 6. Open a plan or another task document from the feed, including a link that uses the task UUID. Close the panel and check the reading position. 7. Open several documents on a phone. Switch tabs and close both active and inactive tabs. **Paperclip version or commit** Developed from `1c07b5903` and rebased onto `59015846a`. **Deployment mode** Built from source. Tested in an isolated local test drive with iOS 26.5 Simulator Safari and Chrome. A temporary local proxy delayed independent responses for the layout test. Related work found in the duplicate search: - Refs #14727. It made saved replies appear before supporting history. This PR keeps its parallel requests and narrows the tradeoff in favor of a stable first layout. - Refs #14667. This open PR takes a different approach with per-run placeholders and retries. This PR fixes the observed question/composer movement and mobile navigation behavior. - Refs #13095 and #13597. These earlier fixes added task scroll anchors and skipped transcript waits for scheduled retries. - Refs #6550. Earlier mobile board polish. - Refs #9467. This related open PR changes list and generic tab reflow. The task-pane selector uses a separate component. ## What Changed - Give the mobile footer an opaque semantic surface. - Set a base-size floor for editable text on touch devices to prevent Safari focus zoom. Preserve larger title text. - Share mobile scroll tracking between both layouts. Accumulate scroll distance, ignore edge bounce and changed document bounds, and update once per frame. - Use shared motion tokens for the footer and composer. Keep page padding stable and honor reduced motion. - Wait for the initial question cards, attachments, work products, activity, runtime selection, plan, and relevant transcript history before the first reveal. Skip scheduled retries and older runs outside the initial comment window. - Bound the first reveal to 15 seconds. A stalled supporting request leaves saved conversation and the composer accessible with an explicit loading notice. - Keep concealed mobile history from stretching the document. Keep the composer mounted but concealed until the same reveal. Keep both visible during later refreshes. - Route first and repeated same-task document clicks in place. Recognize UUID and identifier links. Preserve the thread history entry and feed position. Keep modifier clicks, downloads, external links, and classic document behavior. - Give the mobile task panel the full viewport and safe-area padding. Use a visible X and 44-pixel touch controls. Replace the horizontal tab strip with a vertical selector that wraps titles and supports keyboard focus. - Add four interactive Storybook states for a few tabs, long names, many tabs, and the last tab. Reuse the production selector and tab controller. - Add navigation and tab regressions, update first-reveal regressions, and document the behavior in `DESIGN.md`. ## Verification - 392 tests passed across the seven focused task-loading, scroll, mobile-navigation, layout, and composer suites. After review fixes, all 339 tests across the four affected suites passed, including stalled-loading fallback on mobile and desktop and the motion-token catalog. - All 442 focused document, tab, task-thread, and scroll tests pass. The final click-propagation cleanup also passes all 136 task-detail tests. UI typecheck, UI production build, and `pnpm check:token-gates` passed. - All four cases in `artifact-tab-arrival.spec.ts` and `text-attachment-tabs.spec.ts` pass locally, covering desktop and mobile selection, composer focus, document rendering, and downloads of the original bytes. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build-storybook` passed. Open the mobile tab stories under `Prototypes/Task detail/Mobile tabs`. - A local diagnostic proxy measured cached plan content at about 250 ms after the first click. The HTML load count and task request count did not change. Feed scroll stayed at the same position. First, repeated, and UUID document links were tested at phone and desktop widths. Task-reference links close their preview before the document reader opens. - In Chrome at desktop and phone widths, the delayed-response task showed one complete reveal. The late question no longer moved an already visible composer. - In iOS Simulator Safari, verified the large-task reload, opaque footer, navigation hide/reveal, and search/new-task/composer focus without automatic zoom. - Full workspace typecheck and build passed. The updated UI also passes typecheck, production build, and token gates. - All 54 checks pass on the final commit `bf5c9914e61833e7cc8794a69d72cf8c7057b952` (two additional checks are intentionally skipped). Greptile reviewed that commit at 5/5, and all review threads are resolved. - Full local `pnpm test:run` was attempted but stopped after server-fixture failures. Embedded PostgreSQL startup failure reproduced in an isolated native-interaction fixture after five startup attempts. The broad run also reported a rapid Slack callback ordering test failure. These server paths are unchanged by this PR, and their CI shards pass on the latest head. The full local suite is not claimed as passing. - A localhost proxy stalled the activity response for 30 seconds. Chrome revealed the available conversation after the 15-second deadline at both desktop and phone widths, kept the composer accessible, and cleared the loading notice when the response arrived. ## Risks Slow initial history requests can delay the first conversation reveal by up to 15 seconds. If that deadline expires, late data can change the available conversation while a loading notice remains visible. The reveal waits only for runs in the initial comment window, and later refreshes do not conceal an existing conversation. The larger editable text can change line wrapping on phones. Mobile navigation and composer motion use shared tokens and respect reduced-motion settings. Mobile tab selection changes the control layout. Document links retain URL history while sharing the task reading position; other tasks and external links keep their normal navigation behavior. I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This is a fix for existing UI behavior. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 in Codex. The runtime does not expose a more specific model ID or context-window size. The agent used reasoning, code editing, terminal tools, and Chrome and iOS Simulator testing. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
59015846ae |
fix(chat): keep dismissed task questions in the feed (#15229)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents ask users questions in task chats and Agent Chat. > - Agent Chat keeps unanswered questions as compact entries in the feed. > - Regular task chats still show a pending composer badge after dismissal. > - A page reload can also open a dismissed question form again. > - This pull request applies the same feed behavior to both chat types and saves dismissal per person and task. > - Users can continue the chat and return to the original question later. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Dismissing a question in a regular task chat leaves a pending composer badge. The question can return after a page reload. The earlier feed behavior only applied to Agent Chat. **Expected behavior** A dismissed question stays in the feed. Its form and pending badge leave the composer. Reload preserves dismissal. Opening the feed entry restores the original question and draft answer. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open a regular task chat with a pending question. 2. Select an option, then dismiss the form. 3. Reload the page. Check that the composer stays clear. 4. Open the question in the feed. Check that the draft is restored. 5. Submit the answer. Check that the answered receipt appears. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on master at `a386a599983519eb1d399f8b770bfccdb2a74762`. **Deployment mode** Browser UI in local and authenticated instances. This change does not depend on the agent adapter. Related work: Refs #14613, which added the Agent Chat feed behavior. Refs #9141, which validates real answers on the server. Refs #11434, which tracks comment-driven changes to interaction state. This PR changes question presentation only. ## What Changed - Show compact unanswered question entries in regular task chats. - Exclude durable questions from composer pending counts and navigation. - Save dismissal in local storage per person and task. Merge the latest saved IDs so dismissals from another tab survive reload. A new question can still open its form. - Keep the original question pending and answerable. Keep approval and permission controls. - Run the question-history regressions in both chat modes. Add reload, new-question, user/task scope, and stale-tab coverage. - Share the real-component Storybook fixture. Add a regular task test drive and an interactive dismissal/answer scenario. - Update the planning-mode browser test to check a dismissed question in the feed after reload and on mobile. - Update the design rules, implementation spec, and preview instructions. ## Verification - 329 focused thread, composer, and interaction-card tests pass. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passes. The UI typecheck also passes after the review fix. - `pnpm build` passes for the full repository. - UI build, Storybook build, and token gates pass. The UI build and token gates were rerun after the review fix. - Greptile gives final commit `98f71f221` a 5/5 score. The current-head check passes, and there are no unresolved review threads. - All 56 current-head checks are terminal: 54 pass and two conditional Storybook jobs skip. The CI run includes the full test shards, build, typecheck, browser tests, aggregate verification gate, and package canary. - The stale-tab regression fails in both chat modes before the review fix and passes after it. - `pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts tests/e2e/planning-mode-visual-verification.spec.ts` passes against a throwaway local server. It checks dismissal, reload, task navigation, and desktop/mobile planning controls. - The duplicate local `pnpm test:run` attempt was stopped after the full CI test suites passed. It did not complete locally. - Manual browser test: select Green, dismiss, reload, reopen, submit the saved answer, and inspect the answered receipt. Also send a new message while the unanswered question remains in the feed. The test drive uses real UI components with fixture response callbacks. - To repeat the browser test, run `pnpm storybook`. Open **Chat & Comments → Task Chat Unanswered Questions → Test Drive**. ## Risks - Dismissal is a browser-local preference. It does not sync to another browser or device. Clearing local storage removes it. - When local storage is unavailable, dismissal lasts for the mounted thread only. - Unanswered questions can accumulate in the feed. They stay pending until answered or resolved through the existing API. - No database migration, API change, or change to approval permissions. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, `gpt-6.1-sol`, with xhigh reasoning, repository editing, code execution, and browser control. The context-window size is not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
cc67d4e1d8 |
fix: preserve steering and recover stopped task conversations (#15015)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - A task conversation must let a user guide a running agent and resume stopped work. > - The active run owns its input protocol, even when the user changes the next model or effort. > - Queue delivery waits for a provider receipt, which must be able to persist during the request. > - A stopped startup also needs a clear user action that passes normal task admission. > - This pull request fixes steering delivery, makes queue actions immediate, and restores explicit continuation. > - The benefit is a responsive conversation that can recover without losing saved input. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A queued message could change from Steer to Interrupt while a native run prepared. A steer request could wait on its own database lock and fail to deliver. A stopped startup could then leave the conversation without a working Retry or message continuation. Interrupt also waited for the server and showed a toast. **Expected behavior** The active run keeps its input protocol. Steer delivers input to that run. Steer and Interrupt clear the submitted queue rows and show the input in the conversation immediately. Failed delivery restores the latest queue with an inline error. An eligible stopped run offers Retry, and authenticated user input can start a fresh turn through normal task admission. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a task with a native Paperclip Runner. 2. Change the selected model or effort while that run prepares. 3. Queue a message and press Steer. 4. Observe the provider receipt and queue state during the request. 5. Stop a startup before its provider process begins, then try Retry or send a new message. 6. Repeat queued delivery with a legacy runner and press Interrupt. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on the parent of this branch, `59c07ede7`. **Deployment mode** Authenticated private deployment. The fixes also cover local task conversations. Related work: Refs #12834, Refs #13354, Refs #13275. The open refactor in #13160 moves the same queue route; it does not fix the receipt lock or stopped-run continuation addressed here. ## What Changed - Select queue behavior from the active run's immutable dispatch and runtime resolution. - Leave the run row unlocked during provider acknowledgement, then lock and read it before merging the receipt. - Retain queued input if the target run stops during that wait. Keep inline delivery errors visible after empty queue updates. - Permit exact Retry and authenticated continuation after verified native startup cancellation. Preserve pause, approval, budget, ownership, and process-stop gates. - Carry undelivered native queue input into a fresh turn once the old execution is confirmed stopped. - Show Steer and Interrupt input in the conversation and clear submitted composer rows immediately. Restore the latest queue inline on failure. Remove delivery toasts. - Keep optimistic delivery stable across stale polls, empty queues, and paginated history. Preserve classic Interrupt error handling. - Document recovery and optimistic delivery behavior. Add regression tests across server, shared queue projection, and UI boundaries. ## Verification - Red-green regression tests reproduced the queue protocol, receipt lock, stopped-startup continuation, and optimistic delivery failures. - The focused server route, continuation, queue, and runner boundary suites passed during implementation. - The queue-route suite passes with 78 tests. The three complete conversation UI suites pass with 347 tests. - UI typecheck, production build, and `pnpm check:token-gates` pass. - Workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. The local monolithic `pnpm test:run` is still running; remote CI verifies the complete suite on the latest commit. - All CI gates pass on `bd9031ad56abfcde13d13a13488c1b9217c2fd3a`, including the full test shards, runner verification, browser E2E, typecheck, release registry, and canary dry run. - Greptile reports 5/5 for that commit. Both review threads are resolved. ## Risks This changes queue display and explicit continuation admission. The UI must restore rejected delivery without losing other-session edits. The server must preserve concurrent provider result updates and must not resume a process whose stop is uncertain. Focused tests cover these boundaries. This change has no database migration. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, an agent based on GPT-6. The exact runtime model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, repository tools, code 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 - [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> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
4b2bd6563d |
fix(chat): hide obsolete execution status and system notices (#14874)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people oversee agent work through task conversations. > - Conversations should show failures and waits that still affect the task. > - Old run errors and recovery notices remained visible after later work or task completion. > - These messages looked current even when no action remained. > - This change hides obsolete execution status while preserving the responses and activity. > - The full diagnostic record stays available in run history. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Task chat kept showing “Run failed”, “Stopped”, and “Waiting to resume” after the execution had been superseded or the task had finished. Stored system notices also remained in the conversation. Completed tasks disabled Retry but kept the error message. **Expected behavior** Hide system status that no longer applies. Keep the latest unresolved failure, active recovery holds, and useful recovery actions visible. Preserve messages, files, questions, session boundaries, and inspectable activity. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Let a task run fail, then record a pre-start recovery wait. 2. Complete a later attempt or mark the task done. 3. Open the task conversation. Before this change, the old error and wait remain visible. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced in component tests against `0f9e9be408`. **Deployment mode** Task chat in local or hosted deployments; both legacy adapters and the native runner. Related: #14857 and #14869 address execution recovery. This PR addresses the remaining conversation presentation. Searched GitHub for historical chat status, historical errors, and “Waiting to resume”; no duplicate PR found. ## What Changed - Determine status relevance from task state, attempt order, successor evidence, and recovery state. Time alone does not hide errors. - Hide obsolete run markers and stored execution notices. Require run or recovery provenance, so unrelated system updates such as child-task blockers remain visible. Keep errors from the latest failed attempt actionable. - Keep unresolved execution holds visible. A refused pre-start retry does not replace a real attempt, and another agent’s work does not resolve a run-specific error. - Show historical activity without Worked/Stopped labels. Keep historical failures out of the current turn’s summary. - Anchor activity to visible comments so removing a notice cannot remove the response or activity with it. - Document the presentation rules and cover both runner modes and both task presentation modes. ## Verification - 334 focused component and status-policy tests passed across four files, including the child-task relay regressions. - `pnpm build` passed. The UI build also passed after the final presentation changes. - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui`: 667 files and 7,157 tests passed. Subsequent focused tests cover the final activity-anchor, live-successor, and notice-provenance changes. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. UI typecheck and build passed again after the review fix. - `pnpm test:run` completed its general-server phase with 14,716 tests passed, 17 failed, and 87 skipped; it stopped before later phases. The failures occurred in four unchanged server suites: chat channels, email channels, company skills, and runtime skill cache. A targeted rerun reproduced missing bundled skill paths and `EACCES` during cache-directory rename on macOS. All Linux CI suites pass for the final commit, including these server suites. - Design token gates and diff checks pass. - All 53 checks pass on commit `7af9753859`; two optional Storybook checks are skipped. [Final CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36931968751) includes build, full typecheck, all server and workspace test shards, all eight end-to-end shards, runner verification, and the canary dry run. - Greptile scores the final commit at 5/5. No review threads remain unresolved. The branch is current with `master` and has no merge conflicts. ## Risks This changes presentation only. It does not change execution, recovery, stored comments, or run history. The main risk is hiding a current diagnostic too early. Tests cover active holds, refused retries, different agents, missing timestamps and provenance, live successors, preserved responses, and the current retry target. The base branch has a dependency override/lockfile mismatch. Local installation used the same resolution fallback as CI, then restored the tracked lockfile. No dependency changes are included. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6). The exact runtime model identifier and context window are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and regression tests. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass — changed-code tests pass; unrelated full-suite failures are documented above - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
3c561642b4 |
fix(chat): resolve approvals and preserve unanswered questions (#14613)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents ask for decisions and optional details through cards in chat. > - A clear approval in a message can leave the matching card pending. > - An unanswered question can also block an unrelated later reply. > - Decisions need a saved source message, while optional questions need to remain answerable in history. > - This pull request records conversational decisions and lets users move on from questions and answer them later. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Native Claude and Codex could act on approval in chat while the original approval card stayed pending. Pending question forms stayed above the composer, were absent from history, and could suppress later chat replies. A late native question answer could wait for a finished run to reconnect. **Expected behavior** The active agent records a clear approval or refusal against the exact card and user message. Ambiguous replies do not grant consent. Users can send another message without answering a question. The question remains pending in history and can be reopened and answered later. The saved answer reaches the agent. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Ask an agent to propose work with a confirmation card, then approve it in chat. 2. Check that the original card records that approval before work starts. 3. Ask an interactive question, send an unrelated message, and reload. 4. Open the unanswered question from history and submit an answer. Related work: #14408 added completion delivery. #14607 tests completion reporting turns. Neither records conversational answers on approval cards. ## What Changed - Add a confirmation endpoint backed by a user comment, with schema validation, OpenAPI discovery, and native Plan-mode access. Ask mode remains read-only. - Check company, active run, actor, current session, message provenance, revision, and resolver policy. Save the decision and audit in one transaction. Retries do not repeat effects. Emit resolution telemetry after commit. - Give fresh and resumed chat turns the actual pending confirmation identities. Teach agents to save clear conversational decisions before acting and to clarify ambiguity. - Keep unanswered Agent Chat questions as compact history entries. A newer user message closes the old form. Question cards never contribute to composer pending counts or navigation, including after dismissing a fresh form. The history card is the sole reminder; clicking it restores that exact form and draft. - Preserve Agent Chat questions when later messages or questions arrive. Historical ordinary inputs no longer gate later chat replies. Current-run requests, task execution, and governed approvals keep their gates. Remove the special acknowledgement-publication proof helpers that this rule replaces. - Route answers to finished native runs through durable fresh-wake delivery, with existing idempotency and source-question context. Settle late replies against contiguous completed conversation turns and freeze their history replay; failed, unhandled, and newly arriving messages remain actionable. - Add real-component Storybook scenarios, database and UI regressions, and a three-turn native Claude/Codex E2E case. Capture distinct, UI-ready screenshots and report the individual assertions. ## Verification - Focused decision/publication/UI regressions after merging master: 288 passed; subsequent UI draft, failed-send, and conversation checks: 199 passed. - Native question and durable delivery regressions: 106 passed, including all four terminal run states and exactly-once late delivery. Seven targeted regressions fail against the original implementation and pass with the fix. - Latest conversation/decision/native-delivery regressions after the master merge: 121 passed. Covers completed progress, missing or failed intervening turns, new messages during a late reply, stale sessions, and frozen retry/replay boundaries. Four new assertions fail before the ordering fix. - E2E support suite after the master merge: 792 passed. Negative controls reject expired cards, wrong questions/answers, stale or missing replies, unrelated clarification forms, and unexpected tasks. - The embedded-browser walkthrough caught one additional defect: dismissing a fresh question still showed a composer badge. Both Cancel and close-button regressions failed before the fix. The fix at `65f2ade12` passes 170 chat-thread tests and 792 E2E support tests. After merging master, 232 chat-thread/confirmation tests, server/UI typechecks, and token gates pass. The preview and two-provider live E2E pass at `e5512a206`; Greptile is 5/5 with zero unresolved threads at that commit. All 55 checks are now successful at `e5512a206` (four conditional checks skipped), including the aggregate verification gate and clean-install canary test. The first attempt was interrupted by simultaneous CI worker shutdowns; one failed-job rerun passed without code changes. - [Published Storybook](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/storybook/branches/codex~2Fchat-approval-resolution/?path=/story/chat-comments-agent-chat-unanswered-questions--moved-on): nine real-component scenarios. Manually exercised move on, reopen, preserve draft, answer later, answer one of multiple questions, and a custom mobile answer in the embedded browser. Retested fresh Cancel and close-button dismissal in the updated build, then reopened and submitted the preserved Green selection and inspected its answered receipt. Static preview has no live model/backend; its callbacks are fixture responses. - [First live campaign](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-36714504406-1/) reproduced the late-answer completion-state defect on both providers despite correct saved answers and acknowledgements. It also exposed a valid imperative clarification rejected by the old oracle. Both issues are fixed with regression controls; this failing run is retained as evidence. - [Four-cell qualification](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-36717804064-1/) passed 4/4 at `2bf8a1009`: unanswered-question return and ambiguous confirmation, each on native Claude and Codex. Inspected saved state, source-message decisions, visible cards, and agent replies. Both late-answer chats settled to waiting; no unrequested tasks were created. [Final branch rerun](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-36719666238-1/) passed 2/2 at `142630720`: the same unanswered-question journey after merging master, plus an additional screenshot and browser assertion for the actual late-answer acknowledgement. - [Composer-reminder E2E](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-36727006818-1/) passed 2/2 at `5b62c52d9`: native Claude and Codex, three turns each, with explicit no-badge assertions before and after reload. Inspected saved pending/answered state, both screenshots with a clear composer, and actual Blue acknowledgements; all five behavioral matchers passed per provider and neither created tasks. Cost coverage is partial; this is bounded workflow qualification. - [Fresh-dismissal E2E](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-36742773318-1/) passed 2/2 at `e5512a206`: native Claude and Codex, including fresh Cancel, clear composer, reopen, unrelated message, reload, late Blue answer, and actual agent acknowledgement. All five behavioral matchers pass per provider. Inspected the fresh-dismissal screenshots and saved pending/answered identity; neither created tasks. Cost coverage is partial (4/6 runs). - Prior evidence remains available in [the earlier campaign](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-36642252725-1/). Its early loading screenshot and overwritten final capture prompted the UI-ready, distinct screenshot fixes. ## Risks - The model interprets intent. The server verifies permission and provenance; it does not infer consent from text. Ambiguous and unrelated replies are not approvals. - Historical questions can accumulate. They remain visible, pending, and answerable; no automatic answer or expiry is invented. - The change to completion gates is scoped to Agent Chat and ordinary historical inputs. Current-turn and governed approvals retain their existing controls. - Live qualification is limited to the selected stories. Broader native onboarding finalization remains separate work. - No database migration. Telemetry adds no fields or values; the contract and README document the commit boundary. Privacy review was requested on the PR. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser-test orchestration. The exact model ID and context-window size are not exposed to this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
0e5830887b |
perf: reveal task content sooner and parallelize issue reads (#14727)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work. > - A task page must show saved replies quickly so a person can read the work. > - The title could appear while the conversation waited for unrelated metadata and transcripts. > - Thread requests also waited for enriched task details, while the server read several independent fields in sequence. > - This change shows saved content as soon as it is ready, starts thread reads earlier, and runs independent server reads together. > - Native event history takes priority over legacy log fallback, and mentioned tasks load on intent. > - Content-free timing spans make the remaining server delays visible without recording task content. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Task titles and properties appeared quickly, but saved conversation content stayed hidden for several more seconds while metadata and run transcripts loaded. **Expected behavior** Saved replies and the task description should be readable without waiting for supporting history. Returning to a cached task should show content within a frame or two. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open a task with saved comments and completed runs. 2. Delay the task activity and runs responses by five seconds in the browser. 3. Observe whether saved content remains hidden until those responses finish. 4. Navigate away and return to the task to check cached navigation. **Paperclip version or commit** The change was developed from `1b48e73e0` and rebased onto `44736c9c7`. **Deployment mode** Built from source, tested in an authenticated staging deployment and with local response replay. Related: #14667 overlaps the transcript reveal behavior and adds separate retry UX. This PR also changes navigation prefetch, parent metadata gates, native log fallback, server read scheduling, and timing spans. #12647 proposes a separate SQL predicate optimization in the runs service. #13597 and #13095 are earlier loading fixes. ## What Changed - Start activity and runs when the task page mounts, alongside task details and comments, using the route reference for shared query keys. Hover/focus prefetch does not start full history reads. - Reveal saved comments and descriptions while metadata and transcripts load. Preserve strict waits for linked-comment navigation and tasks with only runtime content. - For settled native runs, fetch legacy logs only when event history is empty or fails. Preserve live-log subscriptions for queued and running native runs. Fetch mentioned-task details on hover or focus. - Run independent issue-detail enrichment and run metadata reads in parallel while preserving recovery dependencies. - Add `Server-Timing` phases and opt-in OpenTelemetry spans, plus regression tests and observability documentation. ## Verification - **313 tests passed** across the initial seven focused component, cache, timing, and scroll suites. After review fixes, **313 tests passed** across five task-page, cache, prefetch, and live-transcript suites (`pnpm exec vitest run` with `--maxWorkers=1`; these sets overlap). - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed locally before the final UI-only review fixes. UI typecheck/build and `pnpm check:token-gates` passed after those fixes. The final commit also passes full typecheck and build in CI. - The full local Vitest run was attempted. Several unrelated embedded PostgreSQL fixtures failed to start, and parallel test workers hit timeouts. Focused reruns passed. A later local full-suite rerun was stopped after the complete CI suite passed; it is not claimed as a local full-suite pass. - Final commit `d1e147145`: **54 checks passed, 2 skipped**, including all server/workspace test shards, all eight browser E2E shards, full build/typecheck, Runner checks, release registry, and canary clean-install verification. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36734642034). Greptile **5/5** after two reviews; both findings fixed and all review threads resolved. No merge conflicts. - Live browser tests on an existing task with two saved replies: median full reload to visible content fell from **1.92 s** (3 samples) to **1.40 s** (5 samples). Cached return fell from **421 ms** (1 sample) to **29 ms** (3 samples). These are observed samples, not a performance guarantee. - With activity and runs delayed by five seconds, saved content appeared in **1.38 s** on desktop and **1.33 s** on mobile. The inspected comment did not move when metadata arrived. Verified history expansion, task properties, pending-input navigation, dashboard return, and mobile layout. - A separate local replay with fixed responses reduced visible-content time from **5.12 s** to **2.15 s**. This isolates frontend behavior and is not a live-server benchmark. ## Risks Progressive history can change the thread after first paint. Existing anchor behavior is retained and covered by tests and delayed-response browser checks. Query aliases must stay aligned for invalidation. Parallel reads can increase short bursts of database work; dependent recovery operations remain ordered. Full reloads still depend on network and task-detail latency. No schema or authorization change. OpenTelemetry remains disabled without an operator endpoint. The added spans use a closed set of phase names and carry no task IDs, task content, or exception text. I checked `ROADMAP.md`; this is a performance fix within the existing task page. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 in Codex. The runtime does not expose a more specific model ID or context-window size. The agent used reasoning, code editing, terminal tools, and Chrome performance profiling. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d72389bee2 |
feat: add Browser Use Cloud connector and live task browsers (#14627)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The Apps gateway gives agents governed access to external tools. > - Browser Use Cloud can run browser work, but a tool result alone does not let a person watch or take over. > - A task needs a durable browser session, a visible viewer, and recorded costs. > - This pull request adds a Browser Use Cloud v4 connection and interactive browser tabs on tasks. > - People can follow the work, interact with the page, and retain the browser after the agent finishes. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Problem or motivation** Agents need governed access to Browser Use Cloud. People need to see and interact with the same browser from the task. A browser must remain available after a run finishes and appear at the correct point in the task feed. **Proposed solution** Add a native REST connection for the v4 API. Bind each session to its company, task, agent, and credential grant. Open its interactive viewer in the task side panel. Record provider costs as financial events. Use `browser-use-cloud` as the app and connector key. Keep its skill with the connector and deliver it only with authorized connection tools. **Alternatives considered** A v3 MCP connection would expose tools without the v4 lifecycle integration. An external viewer link would leave the task. A fixed viewer size would prevent pages from responding to changes in the task pane. **Roadmap alignment** This extends the governed Apps gateway and Connected Apps roadmap. It uses the existing task, grant, secret, approval, and financial records. The work was requested by the maintainer. A search found no duplicate Browser Use connector PR or issue. ## What Changed - Add the Browser Use Cloud app, brand asset, API-key connection, and profile settings under the `browser-use-cloud` key. - Bundle the `browser-use-cloud` skill with the connector. Keep it out of global `skills/` discovery. Deliver it only with authorized task/run connection tools. Remove retired connector skill keys from runtime overlays and preserve unrelated browser skills. - Expose seven v4 tools through the governed gateway and deliver them to native and CLI agents. - Persist sessions, browsers, runs, event and recovery cursors, shutdown leases, and cumulative cost accounting. Recover uncertain paid starts without replaying them. - Enforce task ownership, credential grants, approvals, revoked access, and budget limits. - Add interactive task browser tabs and compact chronological feed entries. Retain the viewer across tab switches and keep visible idle browsers open. - Add debounced automatic viewport fitting, standard size presets, and a viewer ownership lease. - Add lifecycle, authorization, accounting, viewport, UI, and Storybook coverage. - Add an idempotent database migration after the current master migration. Preserve deployed migration hashes. Migrate pre-release Cloud connection and financial keys without replacing grants, credentials, or browser history. - Document provider behavior, live acceptance results, and the lack of documented passkey forwarding. ## Verification - Full workspace typecheck and production build pass on the updated branch. - Token gates, brand asset validation, module boundaries, and migration ordering pass. - Cloud tests verify global skill exclusion, authorized task/run delivery, unassigned agents, disabled connections, revocation, adapter isolation, and secret exclusion. The existing AgentMail connector assignment test also passes. - Migration replay runs twice against existing browser work and financial records. It preserves the records and avoids duplicate costs. - The focused provider, app catalog, OpenAPI, connection gateway, and migration regression suites pass. Recovery coverage includes lost replies, process crashes, provider rejection, and browser arrival acknowledgement. - All 54 checks pass on `2974b5f03641ad0cea3c941d8c02579316fa8c92`, including the full test matrix, browser E2E shards, build, typecheck, security, and release canary. Two optional Storybook jobs are skipped. - Greptile is 5/5 on the same commit, with zero unresolved review threads. The corrected review uses the actual master-to-head diff. - The local `pnpm test:run` started and was stopped after the full CI matrix passed. It did not complete locally; the full-suite result above comes from CI. - Earlier live acceptance used an isolated company with a capped provider credential. The agent opened paperclip.ing, the embedded viewer accepted navigation, and the same browser stayed available after completion and tab switches. - The local Storybook build passes. Stories cover the panel, footer, feed entries, settings, lifecycle failures, and viewport modes with an offline viewer fixture. ## Risks - Browser Use charges for hosted work. Provider caps and local budget checks reduce exposure; reported costs can arrive after work completes. - Viewer and CDP URLs grant access to the browser. The server validates and restricts them. They are excluded from agent results and durable event data. - Runtime resizing of v4 agent browsers uses a provider option confirmed by live testing but absent from its published agent schema. Resizing during a click may invalidate coordinates. Fixed presets remain available. - Viewport ownership is process-local and resets on restart. The lifecycle and accounting records remain in the database. - The original intermittent embedded-viewer stall has not been fully diagnosed. A bounded reconnect and active-session recovery cover the observed failure paths. - Live tests did not cover every revocation, approval, rate-limit, or restart case. Deterministic integration tests cover those paths. Passkey forwarding is not claimed. - Unknown create outcomes keep the credential available for cleanup. Run-list absence cannot prove a paid POST was rejected, so recovery stays pending until it can identify provider work. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. Used reasoning, repository search, code execution, browser interaction, and test tools. The exact serving model ID and context-window size were not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
24beb00575 |
feat(runner): add rich ACP transport and durable interaction foundation (#14430)
Add shared rich ACP transport, durable questions and permissions, verified provider packaging, and bounded activity and plan presentation. Keep Cursor, Copilot, and Pi pending their separate provider qualification. Persist interaction settlement before publication, fence failed writes until fresh recovery, and preserve owned-process cleanup. Incorporate reviewed mainline integration with extended harness coverage. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
96bf004a79 |
fix: use persisted state for lifecycle continuation and retry budgets (#13888)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Its control plane decides when a task can continue, wait, stop, or complete. > - Legacy continuation could change when an agent changed its wording without changing task state. > - Shared attempt counts also let repair and infrastructure retries affect each other's limits. > - This pull request uses persisted state and separate, bounded allowances for these decisions. > - If automatic repair stops, the task explains what happened and offers a guarded retry. > - Paired tests and real-provider evaluations verify that Stop, approvals, ownership, and spending limits remain authoritative. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related work: Refs #13761, Refs #11126, Refs #13610. These cover obsolete continuation dispatch and retry storms. Open and closed issues and PRs were searched for related lifecycle, continuation, and retry work. **What happened?** Legacy continuation depended on English wording and progress heuristics. Repair, failure retry, and productive continuation could consume shared counts. When bounded repair stopped, the task showed a technical recovery message without a clear next action. **Expected behavior** Persisted disposition and owned execution paths determine the next action. Missing disposition prompts bounded agent repair. Explicit work mode determines planning mode. Narrative changes and raw activity counts cannot replenish allowances. An exhausted repair shows a readable notice. An explicit retry checks current controls and preserves the assigned agent. **Steps to reproduce** Run `pnpm test:lifecycle-baseline`. The paired probes keep structured state constant while varying completion, planning, blocker, and progress prose. Run the explicit `lifecycle-baseline` and `continuation-accounting` Product E2E suites for real-provider coverage. In Storybook, open **Design previews / Recovery notice** to inspect the production component's normal, pending, acknowledged, unavailable, failure, and mobile states. ## What Changed - Hide the image attachment button, icon, and drop/paste hint in answer composers. Image paste and drop support remains available. - Merge current master and retain both browser regression sets. Use a production-stamped service worker in the offline recovery browser fixture. - Share one state-based legacy continuation decision across immediate, delayed, and recovered dispatch. Bind bounded repairs to their source run and episode. - Remove title and description wording from work-mode authority. Agents can still write requested plans in execution mode. - Persist separate failure-retry and productive-continuation counters. Disposition repair and resource waits cannot consume or reset those allowances. - Validate delayed repair identity, then recheck current gates before provider dispatch. Fence native startup cancellation. - Show **Agent needs attention**, a plain-language explanation, **Retry agent**, and expandable details in both task interfaces. Report request progress, acknowledgement, and errors inline. - Store typed recovery notice metadata. Recognize older active notices only through exact stored action and run IDs. Notice text never grants retry authority. - Use the existing recovery-action endpoint for retry. Recheck current action, status, owner, agent availability, dependencies, active runs, pending questions and confirmations, approvals, pause controls, and budget. Duplicate requests do not wake twice. - Add component, page, route, database, contract, and Storybook coverage. Keep the scenario inventory and executable evals here. Historical reports and snapshots live in the [commit-pinned paperclip-evals archive](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-evals/blob/ce3e5afcd4a1184650f586a2b5b8be5874c66c8b/experiments/2026-09-lifecycle-authority/README.md). - Preserve unsaved project fields while the same project URL changes to its canonical alias. Do not reuse data across projects or companies. This separate fix addresses the repeated repository-editor browser failure without changing the browser test. - Keep the development service worker from intercepting Vite module reloads. Update the connection-intent browser fixture to record progress and completion through the agent API. ## Verification Merge preparation on September 25, commit `c1e8e4b7ddd9fbc4913ed55ce21b8e12906c2f97`: - Merged master `bd2030932` and resolved the browser test-list conflict by keeping both sets of regressions. - Deterministic lifecycle baseline: 1,090/1,090 assertions passed; no failures, skips, or missing selected evidence. Unit 423, runner 184, database integration 397, grading 86. - Browser support: 17/17 passed. The offline recovery test first failed with an unstamped development worker, then passed with the production stamp. Its assertions are unchanged. - Focused interaction UI and offline fallback tests: 19/19 passed. Verified the custom-answer composer in Storybook: no attachment controls or hint; entering an answer enables Next. - Recursive typecheck, production build, token gates, and diff checks passed. The worktree is clean. No new real-provider campaign was run. - Current CI and review: [Current PR CI passed](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36166011243): 55 successful checks and two optional Storybook skips. Greptile scored this exact commit 5/5. Hiding the question attachment controls is an intentional UI change; paste/drop remains available. Earlier recovery UI verification, commit `21be0fec0e90e86b6d662b8ee4831847cd041cdb`: - Recursive typecheck, production build, token gates, and diff checks passed. - Focused UI coverage: 338 tests passed across six suites (336 before the interaction guard, with the two affected suites rerun at 149 passed after it). Covers both task interfaces, the real page mutation, pending/error acknowledgement, stale state, and unavailable controls. - Recovery database integration: 352 tests passed before the interaction guard. The complete recovery-action and mutation-route suites passed 181 tests after it. The two new pending question/confirmation regressions failed before the fix and passed afterward, including resolved-interaction controls. Shared validator suite: 31 passed. E2E catalog suites: 34 passed. - Browser inspection passed for light/dark themes, mobile layout, expandable details, pending retry, acknowledgement, failure, and disabled retry. Storybook renders the production component; its request is simulated. - The broad local run hit two chat callback-order wait failures and was stopped after all CI unit/database/runner shards passed. Both local failures passed when rerun without the competing full-suite process. - CI exposed a repeated project-repository draft-loss race during canonical redirects. A new unit regression failed before the fix; all nine project-page tests now pass, including controls for other projects and companies. Both unchanged repository browser tests passed against a fresh local server. UI typecheck, production UI build, and token gates passed after this fix. - [Earlier PR CI passed](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36072486798) on `21be0fec0e90e86b6d662b8ee4831847cd041cdb`: 55 successful checks, two optional Storybook skips, and no failed or pending checks. The repository browser shard passed with the production fix. Greptile is 5/5 on this exact commit with no unresolved review threads. The PR is mergeable. Historical, source-qualified lifecycle evidence: - Lifecycle baseline: 1,074 assertions. Native session coverage: 447 tests. Product E2E support: 515 tests. Browser support: 11 tests. Full earlier verification is retained in the archive. - [Real-provider campaign: 8/8 passed, zero retries](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-35881382080-1/index.html), source `e88d210417280140b44a36449027290adcb1aeaa`. Evidence and cleanup checks passed. This includes deliberately exhausted repair cases that correctly remain blocked; it does not mean every task finished Done. This campaign predates the recovery UI change. - Archive migration verified all 16 original JSON files byte-for-byte and all 24 checksum entries. App tests do not need private archive access. [Archive PR #27](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-evals/pull/27) is merged. ## Risks - Agents that omit durable disposition receive at most two repair attempts by default. Prose-only completion exposes missing state rather than silently changing scheduling. - A retry is an explicit board action. The server rechecks current controls. A successful response confirms the task returned to To do; it does not claim that the provider has already started. - Existing notice metadata remains valid. Only older active notices with matching structured evidence receive the new UI. Historical notices without that evidence keep their existing rendering. No schema migration is required. - Old run records require conservative retry accounting. Tests cover old counters, alternating retry lanes, restarts, and exhausted repairs. - Historical snapshots require private `paperclip-evals` access. The app index retains public campaign links. Live campaigns qualify specific sources and scenarios; no new real-provider campaign has run for the recovery UI commit. > This fixes existing lifecycle and recovery behavior and does not duplicate planned core work. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex assisted implementation, reasoning, code execution, and review. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed in this task. Historical real-provider evaluations used Codex model `gpt-5.6-sol`, separately from the implementation assistant. ## 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 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> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
bd6caf51bb |
fix: preserve restore failure results and stop unsafe retries (#14035)
Preserve agent output and earlier execution errors when workspace restore fails. Report the restore phase and confirmed saved-plan links. Require verified repair before retrying unsafe archives, while preserving approval states and the retry budget. Verified with full CI, 506 focused regression tests, and Greptile 5/5 with all review threads resolved. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
74a9730acb |
fix: continue native agent chats after worker loss (#13813)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agent Chat uses native workers to run Claude and Codex conversations. > - A worker crash leaves a cleanup hold because its provider did not acknowledge suspension. > - A new user message must not reuse that unverified session or repeat old tool calls. > - The existing continuation path can preserve history and start a fresh session, but local cleanup ownership remained held. > - This pull request verifies the stopped local owners and releases only their cleanup hold for a new user turn. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13775. **What happened?** After a native worker crashed, both providers retained cleanup quarantine. A saved plan survived, but the conversation could not produce another answer. **Expected behavior** Once the old worker and provider process groups have stopped, a new user message can continue in a fresh session with the saved work and prior action history. **Steps to reproduce** Run the opt-in `agent-chat-qualification` suite with case `worker-crash-retry` on native Codex and native Claude. The fixture saves a plan, kills the exact worker through a Linux pidfd, releases a local read-only brief, and sends a new message. ## What Changed - Verify the exact local worker stop receipt, provider identity receipts, released leases, and retained state before retiring a native cleanup hold. - Recheck process liveness and state before admission. Keep the old run and durable session files intact. - Use the existing explicit conversation continuation path. Generic Retry remains blocked for cleanup quarantine, including on the old failed-run marker after a successful continuation. - Extend the live oracle to require a successful fresh session, correct predecessor context, unchanged plan, one original message, and one answer containing a reference introduced after the crash. - Add physical-proof and database-backed admission tests. Document the precise qualification scope. ## Verification - Live Product E2E: **2/2 passed**, **2/2 cleanup passed**, with real native `gpt-5.6-sol` and `claude-sonnet-5`, Chromium, server, database, and public APIs. - Core recovery proof source: `3592b04c2bc76e23795fcdf964720e38a409dc4d`. Suite definition version 8: `9867367994d81a0c726956d91f2c7fddab6417a12f41b5cef3f7e62f3be417da`. - [Core recovery campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35741746990) · [Public evidence report](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-35741746990-1/). - Both cells verify the real crash boundary, blocked generic Retry, unchanged saved plan, one original prompt, one fresh successor with predecessor context, and one run-attributed answer containing the post-crash reference. Billing coverage is partial because the crashed runs did not report complete usage; missing cost is not zero cost. - [Master baseline](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35737364443): both providers stopped at quarantine, with cleanup passing. - [Follow-up baseline without the fix](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35738638866): Codex produced a complete red result. Claude reached the same error, but its artifact upload was canceled. - [Complete Claude baseline with the same version-8 definition](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35740555177): red at cleanup quarantine, cleanup passed, source `6479a90c5754044356b39a9278b9a3e92ce8e55e`. - Earlier candidate attempts remain retained: [first](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35738449214) passed Codex and found a Claude fixture wait race; [second](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35740408065) exposed the normalized session-open receipt mismatch. Both corrections are in the final source. - Targeted server suites: 570 passed before the final two additional receipt regression cases. The physical-proof suite, including those cases, passed 46/46. Eval oracle and catalog: 40 passed. Server and Product E2E typechecks passed. - **All 54 PR checks passed on final head `db6f775df`**, including repository typecheck, build, tests, browser shards, and canary dry run. The canary job required one retry after its runner received a shutdown signal. On the earlier core proof head, two timing-sensitive tests passed in isolation and on a single CI retry. - Final UI regression checks: 5 passed; UI typecheck and token gates passed. Updated eval oracle/catalog: 40 passed; eval typecheck passed. - Final version-9 two-provider campaign: **2/2 passed, 2/2 cleanup passed**, including the browser assertion that the quarantined historical run never regains Try again. [Final campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35747416013), source `db6f775dfff405e1514ec02fedb0450d42c7dad2`, definition hash `bf5abf1cc45cb6dad4e082fbf818b8fa0f4d8c282776a7e98762b22919eadab7`. [Final public evidence report](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-35747416013-1/). Final screenshots and retained state inspected for both providers; cost coverage remains partial. ## Risks - Missing or conflicting stop evidence keeps the conversation blocked. This change does not kill an unverified process. - This qualifies new user input after local worker loss. It does not enable automatic replay, exact-session recovery, remote crash recovery, or native onboarding defaults. - Old action outcomes remain part of the continuation. A process exit is not proof that an action did not happen. - No schema migration or production prompt change. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The runtime does not expose a more specific model identifier or context-window size. Used reasoning, repository inspection, code editing, shell tools, and 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 - [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> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
df66219780 |
fix(ui): retry the latest failed task attempt (#13765)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work done by AI agents. > - The task thread lets an operator retry a failed run. > - Legacy runs with transcript output did not get a failure marker. > - The thread could therefore offer Try again for an older failure. > - The server correctly reused that failure's existing retry, even when it had already failed. > - This change keeps the latest failure actionable and reports stopped retry responses to the operator. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Try again could return success without starting work. An initial setup failure had an empty transcript. Its later retry produced output and failed. Only the initial failure had a retry marker, so the button kept requesting the initial failure's already-failed successor. **Expected behavior** Try again targets the latest failed attempt. An already-stopped retry response shows an error and refreshes the task's run state. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a legacy adapter task that fails before producing transcript output. 2. Retry it. Let this attempt produce output and a final failure comment before it fails. 3. Click Try again in the task thread. 4. Before this fix, the click targets the original failure and replays the stopped successor. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced against `1483bb8bcf`; the regression is also present on the branch base `8813a50105`. **Deployment mode** Authenticated server with a legacy adapter. The bug is in the shared task UI and retry API client. Related: #11650 adds a different recovery-notice action. This change fixes failed-run markers and retry response handling. Searches found no duplicate of this failure case. ## What Changed - Render legacy failure markers even when the run has a transcript or final comment. - Keep later cancelled automatic retries from replacing the failed run's retry action. - Reject already-stopped retry responses in the API client so existing error feedback appears. - Refresh task run queries after both successful and failed retry requests. - Add regression coverage for failed and timed-out attempts, execution gates with output, and retry response states. ## Verification - Before the fix, the new regression tests failed: two selected the original failure, and four accepted a stopped successor as success. - Targeted task-thread, retry API, marker, and issue-page tests: 279 passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build`: passed. - `pnpm check:token-gates`: passed. - Full UI suite: 6,529 tests passed across 626 files. - [CI run 35650385023](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35650385023): all 53 checks passed, including full workspace build, typecheck, unit/integration suites, and browser tests. The redundant local full-workspace test run was stopped after CI passed; it is not counted as a completed local pass. - Greptile: 5/5 on `608ee58c99`, with no review threads or unresolved comments. The branch is mergeable. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` were attempted. Both stop at the Runner's Rust checks because this host has no `cargo`. The full workspace checks passed in CI. ## Risks Low risk. This changes UI presentation and response handling only. The server's exact-retry idempotency, authorization, execution ownership, and recovery gates remain in place. No schema changes or live task mutations. Existing documentation describes this retry action; the fix restores that behavior. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 (Codex), with reasoning, repository tools, 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 (targeted checks; full-workspace limits described above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (existing behavior restored; no documentation change needed) - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
43acbcc398 |
fix(runner): preserve sessions and complete question and approval continuations (#13655)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The native runner connects task state to provider sessions. > - Follow-up turns must retain provider memory and carry new user direction. > - Lost session IDs caused repeated context and extra input tokens. > - Native question answers and approval races could leave valid work blocked. > - This pull request repairs those paths and adds regression coverage. > - Agents can continue accepted work without repeating the conversation or losing the user's answer. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13574. That merged PR shortened continuation prompts and moved question instructions into tool documentation. This change preserves sessions and fixes failures exposed by broader testing. Related runtime work: #13408 and #13410. **What happened?** Native follow-up turns could lose the provider session ID. Completion guidance could replace the original task with its latest comment. Claude native questions could remain pending after the user answered. Approval during a running tool call could suspend the run before the tool response arrived. Onboarding and chat handoff instructions also caused repeated planning or missing plan documents. **Expected behavior** Reuse a valid provider session. Send only new events when that session already has the history. Preserve the task requirements and apply later user direction. Store the question answer and deliver it to the waiting run. Finish governed tool responses before suspending. Execute the accepted plan without asking for the same approval again. **Steps to reproduce** Run the continuation, local-session-integrity, first-task, and agent-chat suites with native Codex and Claude. Include provider-question-bridge, accept-while-running, and plan-handoff. **Paperclip version or commit** This branch is based on master |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
45586170e1 |
fix(ui): reveal task history while retries wait to start (#13597)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and inspect their work. > - Task conversations combine comments with run transcripts. > - The first reveal waits for the relevant history to load. > - Scheduled retries have not started, so the log reader does not hydrate them. > - Waiting for those retries keeps the whole conversation hidden after its header loads. > - This change reveals available history while a retry waits to start. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A task header loads, but the conversation stays behind the loading overlay while a linked run has `scheduled_retry` status. The readiness check expects that run in `hydratedRunIds`, although the log reader does not read its log. A retry delay can therefore become a task-loading delay. **Expected behavior** Show existing comments and transcripts once their data is ready. A retry that has not started must not block the conversation. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open a task with existing comments and a linked run waiting in `scheduled_retry`. 2. Let the comments and other run transcripts finish loading. 3. Observe that the header loads but the conversation stays hidden until the retry changes status. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on master at `3f1d897a7` with regression tests. **Deployment mode** Web UI, built from source. This is a client readiness bug. Searched public issues and PRs for scheduled retries, conversation loading, and history loading. No duplicate found. Related: #10255 changes the server response for active runs with no log; it does not address this scheduled-retry readiness gate. This focused bug fix does not add a roadmap feature. ## What Changed - Exclude `scheduled_retry` runs from the initial task-history readiness gate. - Extend transcript mocks to expose per-run hydration state. - Add six regression cases across legacy and native runs. Existing history loads during retry waits, while unhydrated running and completed runs still block the first reveal. - Document the exception in a code comment. No user command or configuration changes need documentation. ## Verification - All six new cases fail before the production fix. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/components/TaskChatThread.test.tsx src/components/transcript/useLiveRunTranscripts.test.tsx src/components/transcript/useNativeRunTranscripts.test.tsx`: 164 passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build`: passed. - `pnpm check:token-gates` and `git diff --check`: passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`: attempted; both stop in the native runner package because the local machine has no Rust `cargo` executable. UI checks pass separately. - `pnpm test:run`: started locally, then stopped before completion after full CI passed on the same commit. The local full-suite result is incomplete. - CI on `46daa8b06`: all 53 checks passed; two optional Storybook jobs were skipped. This includes the full test matrix, build, typecheck, native runner checks, browser tests, and canary dry run. - Greptile: 5/5 on `46daa8b06`, with no review threads or actionable findings. The branch has no merge conflicts with master. ## Risks Low risk. The exception applies only to runs waiting in `scheduled_retry`. Running and completed runs retain their existing readiness checks. Retry scheduling, transcript fetching, and server behavior stay the same. No migration is needed. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and test tools. The exact backend revision and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9cfa7fd2d1 |
fix(ui): share compact live and saved activity across runners (#13421)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and inspect their work. > - Task threads show live activity and saved transcripts from several runners. > - Legacy runs used a separate activity renderer that expanded tool cards as commands arrived. > - A compact live row makes ongoing work easier to follow. > - This PR shares the native runner activity group across live and saved legacy turns. > - Both paths now use the same labels, icon gutter, animation, and history controls. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: Refs #13255, which introduced rolling native-runner activity groups. **What happened?** During a legacy CLI run, each new command added an expanded tool card under an activity heading. The original legacy parity story rendered a completed turn, so it did not exercise this live path. **Expected behavior** Show one current activity line per commentary group. Roll that line forward when a new activity starts. Keep tool icons aligned on the left, use friendly labels, and show history only when expanded. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a task with the Codex local adapter using the CLI engine. 2. Ask it to read two files in separate tool calls and run a test command. 3. Watch the activity feed while the run is active, then expand its history. **Paperclip version or commit** The live behavior was reproduced on bdee5ebb21b2d09280e49c88bc329435da1b07c8. This update includes both live and saved rendering fixes. **Deployment mode** Built from source with the local test-drive command and a real Codex CLI agent. ## What Changed - Use `TaskChatRunnerActivityGroup` for both saved legacy phases and `TaskChatLiveTail`. - Align the legacy Working spinner with the shared activity icon gutter. - Cover streamed reasoning updates, successive commands, image labels, hidden details, and explicit history expansion in tests. - Feed raw legacy transcript events through the real adapter and live renderer in Storybook. Add live, expanded, narrow, light, and completed stories with the final reply preserved. ## Verification - Passed 195 targeted tests covering the live tail, status pill, shared activity group, native turn, and full task thread. - Passed UI typechecking, token gates, UI build, and Storybook build before submission. - Observed a real Codex CLI run while it read separate files and ran tests. The current activity stayed at one 32-pixel row without an accumulated tool list; the spinner and activity icon centers aligned. - Compared native and legacy Storybooks: identical rolling animation, fixed height, persistent expansion, truncated long labels, and correct light and completed states. - Full repository `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed after replaying the branch on current master, including the Rust runner. The full `pnpm test:run` suite is still running. ## Risks - Legacy activity now starts collapsed. Users can expand each group and each row to inspect the same transcript details. - Live runtime request cards must retain their timeline positions. Existing task-thread and native-runner regression tests cover this boundary. - No API, database, or transcript format changes. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex for the live-path fix, tests, and browser verification. Capabilities used: reasoning, tool use, local code execution, and image inspection. The exact deployment ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. - The original saved-turn change recorded OpenAI Codex with GPT-5.6; its exact variant and context size were not recorded. ## 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: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
f4cdc7b231 |
fix: recover transient workspace bootstrap scans (#13481)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The control plane prepares task workspaces before it starts an agent. > - Workspace preparation reads Git state so it can preserve edits and exclude private files. > - A failed scan was treated as a non-Git folder and lost its actual failure code. > - The resulting generic setup failure could not recover, even when the cause was temporary. > - This pull request keeps the cause and uses the existing bounded retry schedule before provider startup. > - Tasks can recover without human intervention, while permanent failures and exhausted retries stop with useful guidance. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A Git scan error during managed repository preparation became `Configured repository folder is not a Git checkout`, followed by generic `setup_failed`. The agent never started. Generic recovery could not distinguish a temporary timeout from a bad workspace configuration. **Expected behavior** Keep the closed scan error code. Retry temporary timeouts and queue saturation under the existing shared budget. Preserve edits, exclusions, ownership, and pause gates. Stop permanent failures and exhausted retries with a specific explanation. Do not replay historical generic setup failures. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Configure a task project with a local Git source that must be copied into its managed repositories. 2. Make the ignored-file scan exceed its timeout before the agent starts. 3. Before this fix, the snapshot returns null and the run ends as non-retryable `setup_failed`. 4. Use the disposable browser fixture in `tests/e2e/workspace-bootstrap/README.md` to inject real timeouts and test the full recovery path. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced against `4510bf7c9e2fcbeb043445850928b5dcb79908ca`. **Deployment mode** Built from source. The defect is in core workspace setup, not a specific model provider. Related work: Refs #13442 (managed repository preparation), Refs #11572 (bounded Git scheduler), Refs #12997 (separate adapter startup retry work), Refs #13469 (separate terminal-workspace scan performance work). ## What Changed - Return the non-Git fallback only for repository discovery. Propagate failed scans of a confirmed repository. - Replace full ignored status output with an ignored-only directory listing. Preserve NUL-delimited paths and exclusions. - Preserve typed, sanitized scan errors through workspace preparation and persist pre-provider failure details. - Retry only timeouts and queue saturation, using the existing durable two-retry budget and issue gates. Prevent generic recovery from adding another budget. - Show workspace-specific failure copy and actionable exhausted-recovery notices. - Add red-green unit tests, real-database restart and retry-boundary tests, and opt-in browser acceptance fixtures with real Git subprocess timeouts. - Document the recovery contract and browser verification procedure. ## Verification - Red: injected scan failures returned null instead of rejecting; setup lost the timeout code; task-thread and recovery notices had generic copy. - Green: 119 focused adapter/backend tests, 20 recovery-boundary tests, and 136 task-thread tests. - `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed. - `pnpm build` — passed on the final production code. - `pnpm check:token-gates` — passed. - The initial local `pnpm test:run` overlapped source edits and was interrupted after two late-added assertions saw pre-fix behavior; it is not counted as a green full run. A fresh final-head run passed all 229 tests across the six affected adapter/backend/UI suites. The clean latest-head CI full test matrix passed: all five general-server shards, all five serialized-server shards, and all three general-workspace shards. - Latest-head CI also passed all three browser shards and their aggregate gate, typecheck and release registry, build, runner verification, canary dry run, policy, Docker context integrity, and security gates. Greptile: 5/5, with the review thread resolved. - Browser: created a task in a disposable instance. A real Git timeout scheduled recovery, the next run completed through the run-scoped API without manual Retry, and Done survived reload. The deterministic process worker checked preserved source edits and excluded private files; no model calls were made. - `WORKSPACE_BOOTSTRAP_TEST_URL=<disposable-instance-url> pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/e2e/workspace-bootstrap/playwright.config.ts` — 2 passed (3.6 minutes). The persistent case made exactly three failed attempts, never started the worker, showed the cause-specific notice, stayed stopped for another scheduler tick, and retained Blocked after reload. - Extra red-green coverage: 50 recovery tests passed after fixing an exhausted-bootstrap classification that incorrectly implied unknown provider actions. Missing or uncertain evidence still retains the safety hold. - Verified the documented Git executable override during repository seeding. ## Risks - A confirmed repository scan failure now fails closed instead of falling back to directory sync. This prevents unfiltered copying but makes previously hidden errors visible. - Temporary host problems can create up to two additional setup attempts, 30 seconds apart. Permanent scan errors do not auto-retry. Generic recovery cannot reset this budget. - The durable retry path still enforces ownership, pause, and work eligibility. Integration tests cover restart, duplicate promotion, pause, exhaustion, and non-retryable categories. - No schema migration, new runtime setting, new retry budget, production deployment, or historical task replay. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent, with reasoning, repository tools, shell execution, and browser testing. The exact deployment model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
78ce96a48b |
fix(runner): restore native Claude context and read permissions (#13422)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The native runner supplies each agent with instructions, assigned skills, and tools. > - Native Claude lost its skill snapshot before provider launch. It also changed exact model IDs to aliases. > - The read permission mode denied ordinary Paperclip reads because this runner has no interactive approval handler. > - This pull request restores the missing context and permits only assigned tools that Paperclip defines as reads. > - Other requests that need approval stop with a clear action for the operator. They do not retry automatically. > - Agents can complete read tasks. Users can see why a restricted task stopped. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Native Claude could not find assigned skills. The ACP layer could replace an exact model ID with an alias and then fail identity verification. The default `approve-reads` mode denied Paperclip read tools. A denied write showed a generic transport failure. The tool descriptions also called live operations “mock” operations. The completion prompt said to call a completion tool once, although the protocol can reject a claim and require a corrected call. **Expected behavior** Load assigned skills before launch. Keep the selected model ID. Allow assigned Paperclip reads. Stop an operation that needs approval with clear instructions when no approval handler exists. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Configure a native Paperclip Runner agent with ACPX Claude and an exact model ID. 2. Assign a skill and ask the agent to use it. 3. Select the read permission mode and ask the agent to read task context and list documents. 4. Ask the agent to write a document. Check the task state and recovery message. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced from `d351e08deee1b49d3467a950d1a3f01131943441`. **Deployment mode** Local native runner with real Claude, Rust runnerd, the Paperclip server, and embedded PostgreSQL. Related: #13196 fixed remote skill staging in the legacy `claude_local` adapter. The native runner uses a separate path, which this pull request fixes. ## What Changed - Carry the runtime context through Rust and the ACPX sidecar. Load assigned Claude skills after the provider lifetime lease is held. Refresh the files on each open. - Write the exact requested model ID into the isolated Claude settings. - Grant exact MCP permissions for the intersection of assigned tools and Paperclip's read catalog. Provider hints cannot grant access. Existing task-control permissions stay in place. - Stop requests that need an unavailable approval handler. Preserve the typed error through the server. Show “Approval required” on the task and require operator action without automatic retry. - Label the setting “Allow Paperclip reads.” Remove “mock” from live tool descriptions and regenerate the contracts. - Change one completion-prompt sentence to require one accepted result. Add regression tests and update the runner documentation. ## Verification - Red/green regression tests cover read admission, unavailable approval handling, server recovery, and the task error message. - A real Claude read trial failed before the fix and completed after it: [red trace](https://www.braintrust.dev/app/Paperclip/object?object_type=project_logs&object_id=fda74078-b00d-495a-90d3-ea1be019d71b&id=95e6a326e24437f1), [green trace](https://www.braintrust.dev/app/Paperclip/object?object_type=project_logs&object_id=fda74078-b00d-495a-90d3-ea1be019d71b&id=85a1f347db5604d1). - Full browser tests used real Claude and the production tool authority. Reads completed. A write stopped with “Approval required.” No document was created and no automatic retry was scheduled. All nine checks passed: [events and screenshots](https://www.braintrust.dev/app/Paperclip/object?object_type=project_logs&object_id=fda74078-b00d-495a-90d3-ea1be019d71b&id=1c4ff10be0d779cc). - A separate full browser test assigned a skill, invoked it, and completed with a marker absent from the task prompt: [skill evidence](https://www.braintrust.dev/app/Paperclip/object?object_type=project_logs&object_id=fda74078-b00d-495a-90d3-ea1be019d71b&id=ba5fbcb29a60be52). - Post-rebase checks passed: 128 targeted runner tests, 46 Rust tests, 27 sidecar/protocol contract tests, `pnpm -r typecheck`, and `pnpm build`. The server/UI red-green checks and `pnpm check:token-gates` also passed. The full suite passed in CI, including all general and serialized test shards, all three browser shards, and runner `check:all`. The duplicate unsharded local full-suite run was stopped after CI passed. Braintrust links require project access. The traces contain provider/runner events and app outcomes. They do not contain raw model HTTP requests. ## Risks - `approve-reads` now allows assigned Paperclip reads. Other operations that need approval stop the turn. Users must review the operation and change permissions before retrying. - The Claude settings depend on the pinned ACP and SDK behavior. Automated tests and real Claude trials cover this boundary. - The native Codex path is unchanged. The ACPX Codex fallback shares the clearer approval failure handling. - Local execution was tested end to end. Remote execution was not run. This change has no database migration. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The agent used reasoning, code execution, and browser tools. The exact deployment ID and context-window size were not exposed in the session. Live acceptance tests used `claude-sonnet-5`. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
6809314a3f |
fix: recover sandbox workspace setup and retries (#13353)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their tasks. > - Sandbox tasks need a workspace and a provider session before work can start. > - A selected Git subfolder is a valid workspace, but it is not a repository fetch source. > - A resumed sandbox must keep one resource identity when the provider fills in its region. > - Workspace reuse does not prove that a provider session has started. > - A recorded continuation must not leave an old failure blocking Retry for a newer attempt. > - This pull request fixes those setup and recovery boundaries while preserving ownership checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A Daytona task failed before provider startup when its project folder was inside a parent Git repository. After the folder was repaired, Retry resumed the same sandbox and verified its workspace sentinel, but workspace preparation reported that the lease was no longer active. A later attempt could fail because the resumed workspace had no provider checkpoint. The old run also kept a recovery projection after the server recorded its explicit successor, hiding Retry for the new failure. **Expected behavior** Sync the selected folder without importing parent files or history. Keep the existing sandbox identity stable. Allow a new provider session only with proof that its exact session has never started. Let the current failed attempt retain Retry once the old recovery has a recorded successor. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Select a subfolder of a Git repository as a project workspace and start a Daytona task. 2. Leave the target region unset. Release its reusable sandbox after setup fails, then resume and realize the workspace. 3. Retry a provider setup that failed before any session directory or checkpoint was created. 4. Record an explicit successor for a native failure, fail that successor during setup, and inspect Retry in the task thread. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced against `8d1f0c20a` with new failing regressions before each production fix. **Deployment mode** Local controller with a Daytona environment. Automated tests use deterministic provider fixtures and real filesystem operations. Related: #13338, #13163, #13264, #13349. The open work-folder stack in #13264 includes a broader fresh-session authority change. This patch addresses the independently reproduced startup failure with existing durable bootstrap proof and atomic directory creation. It does not include the work-folder migration or credential changes from that stack. ## What Changed - Classify only the selected Git repository root as a fetch source. Sync subfolders as directories and preserve their enclosing Git ignore rules on upload and restore. Recognize the shared scheduler’s completed non-repository result so ordinary folders still sync; timeout, cancellation, and output-limit failures remain closed. - Remove the placement target from Daytona account cache identity. Keep API endpoint, credential digest, company, environment, driver, and sandbox ID boundaries. - Preserve closed-lease admission until a sentinel-verified resume reopens that same resource. - Show the already-recorded explicit successor of a resolved recovery. Keep the old failure evidence and unresolved holds. No historical status writes occur. - Permit a resumed workspace to create a new session directory only with matching durable identity, zero connections and events, untouched bootstrap commands, no backup, and an absent remote session. Claim the directory atomically. Existing, partial, or ambiguous state still blocks startup. ## Verification - Final head `c43c7403f`: [CI completed successfully](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34733846820/attempts/2), with 32 successful checks and 2 conditional skips. This includes every server, UI, package, serialized-route, browser, native-runner, typecheck, and build gate. Greptile reviewed the same head at [5/5 with no unresolved findings](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13353#issuecomment-5650270168). - New regressions failed before each of the four production fixes. Git/archive/restore suites: 148 passed. The scheduler-wrapped non-Git regression also failed before its fix; 135 affected Git/sync/Codex tests then passed. - Daytona plugin: 230 passed, 6 opt-in live tests skipped. Native executor, projection, and TaskChatThread: 494 passed, including existing/partial state, wrong identity, prior connections or turns, backups, unavailable proof, and unresolved recovery controls. - Local full-repository typecheck, build, and token gates passed on the final head. Local CLI: 485 passed. Complete single-worker package rerun: 3,224 passed, 19 skipped. - Local verification is an aggregate with recorded retries, not one pristine green invocation: the general-server run began on `e721a920a` and finished with 12,002 passed, 3 failed, 70 skipped. Its real Codex scheduler failure is fixed above; the socket and workspace-runtime timeout failures passed unchanged in focused reruns. Both Inbox failures passed unchanged in the full 27-test Inbox file; database/shared-package failures passed in the single-worker package rerun. The supplemental local serialized-route rerun remains in progress; all five corresponding final-head CI lanes passed. - The first final-head CI attempt hit a Daytona fixture-readiness race and a signoff-browser heartbeat receipt timeout. One supported unchanged failed-job rerun passed both and the aggregate gates. Live combined user-journey verification is tracked in the related follow-up; this PR's provider tests use deterministic fixtures and real filesystem checks. ## Risks - A selected subfolder uses directory sync and does not carry parent Git history. Its ignored files stay local. - The target region remains a creation setting and part of workspace reuse policy; it does not split the account identity of an existing sandbox. - Incomplete or conflicting provider state still fails closed. This change does not erase a session, infer completed work, bypass a user decision, or replay uncertain actions. - A later remote setup failure can leave a claimed partial session directory. It remains blocked rather than being overwritten. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools, and code execution. The exact hosted model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this task. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
422287eecd |
fix: preserve runner recovery, warm sessions, and task outcomes (#13338)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The native runner connects task messages, provider execution, and task outcomes. > - First-time user tests exposed gaps in recovery, completion permissions, message delivery, and Stop behavior. > - These gaps left usable output hidden, completed work waiting for bookkeeping, or safe work unable to continue. > - This pull request fixes the shared lifecycle and receipt paths while preserving process ownership and action checks. > - Users can continue work with accurate task state and durable messages. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A stopped local Codex execution could remain blocked even after its processes had stopped and its complete transcript proved that no external action needed replay. Claude under Conservative permissions could fail to call task completion tools. Recovery could reuse an assistant item ID and overwrite prior output. A delivered comment could remain marked uncertain after navigation. Stop could look like Pause or a new recovery incident. Workspace contention could look like cancellation. A direct reply reopening Done could enter a clarification loop. **Expected behavior** Recover automatically only with verified termination and complete action receipts. Preserve answers and messages. Keep task completion available under Conservative permissions without broad tool access. Show crashes as Blocked, actual human decisions as In Review, and ordinary workspace contention as waiting. Stop the current response and allow a new direction. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create ordinary response tasks with local Codex and Claude Code, then send follow-up messages through the task composer. 2. Interrupt a disposable local Codex runner during text-only work. Verify automatic continuation and retained output. 3. Stop a response, send a new request, answer a clarification, and reopen completed work with another message. 4. Navigate or reload while a comment submission is pending. Confirm the exact persisted request receipt settles it without removing newer draft text. 5. Run two tasks in a shared Daytona workspace. Confirm waiting does not appear as failure. **Paperclip version or commit** Initial acceptance baseline: `c9021c6721f91e2c74bd9fee9d3fd41c999d17b7`. Current integration base: `6cef9743c`. Both operator-interruption and workspace-waiting guards are preserved; native restart and legacy permission rules remain documented. **Deployment mode** An isolated source-built test-drive instance, with real local Codex and Claude Code providers and disposable Daytona environments. Related work: #13314, #13316, #13327, #13344, #13239, #13254, #13163. This PR addresses additional failures from ordinary task journeys, including controller restart handoff and repeated warm sandbox setup. Historical task status reconciliation is excluded. ## What Changed - Persist runner ownership immediately at spawn and resume an explicitly adopted runner even when the controller crashed before the first driver checkpoint. Detach the controller safely across graceful restarts, including session startup. Prevent an old finalizer from suspending or signaling an adopted runner. Checkpoint idle warm sessions before shutdown. Preserve the same run and queued follow-up messages. - Scope saved legacy queue successor checks to the queue owner while preserving ordinary task locks, operator identity, assignment gates, and exactly-once delivery. - Preserve managed Codex credential files when an old session is detached for restart; normal owned cleanup still copies refreshed auth back and removes the scoped copy. - Reuse the bound warm shared sandbox and fully verify an existing staged provider pack before using it. This avoids repeated uploads when the pack is already valid. - Add a narrow local Codex replacement path with stopped-process proof, a closed transcript inventory, exact completion receipts, and fresh-session lineage. Preserve no-replay holds when evidence is incomplete. Recovery may clear only the same run's recorded Blocked status version; manual re-blocking and dependency changes invalidate that receipt, while queued comments do not. Later blocks stop scheduled, queued, and final dispatch; queued/final checks re-read dependencies even when the task status stays In Progress. - Permit only task delivery and human-input tools through the isolated Claude runner's exact task bridge. - Scope assistant item identity to the provider turn and ignore only authority-free Codex skill-change notifications during startup. - Reconcile composer submissions by client request ID across response loss, navigation, and reload. Retain text typed during delivery. - Keep acknowledged run-only Stop neutral and show workspace contention as waiting. Project exhausted native failures as Blocked. - Restore the guarded task-page retry action for failed legacy runs, including the server-supported explicit new-attempt path for stopped conversation adapters. Preserve native/process recovery holds and avoid promising Retry while a decision or execution gate hides it. - Refresh delivered artifacts and handle direct user replies that reopen completed work without a clarification loop. - Check the embedded PostgreSQL PID, data directory, and actual port before connecting or migrating. - Document accepted behavior and add focused regressions at lifecycle, route, transcript, and UI boundaries. ## Verification - Final head `fece606ac2` passes the complete GitHub CI matrix: **34 green checks, two expected Storybook skips, no failures or pending checks**, including `ci / verify`, `ci / e2e`, full runner verification, typecheck, build, every server/workspace shard, and all browser shards. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34727183287). Greptile is **5/5 with no open findings**. The final two commits only refine test fixtures; both affected suites pass 24/24 locally and in CI, with server typecheck green. - Complete local Vitest coverage uses the canonical groups/shards: all 635 general server suites, all 145 serialized suites, and all workspace packages. The aggregate began on `0a8001c18` while the final queue fix arrived: 23,903 passed, five failed, 87 skipped. The five port/socket/timing failures passed unchanged in follow-ups (60 tests in the exposure/file suites and 412 tests covering the serialized failures and unrun tails). The final queue/operator-identity suites separately passed 52/52. This is aggregate coverage plus explicit reruns, not a pristine single-command final-head run. - After integration with current master, queue/operator-identity/continuation suites passed 162/162 and affected UI suites passed 140/140. ACP Stop/continuation and legacy task/Inbox/message browser suites passed 9/9, including both task recovery Retry and thread Try again, automatic saved-message delivery, exactly one new run, Done, and retained output after reload. The default process Stop/Pause/Resume browser case passed (the native-provider case is opt-in and skipped by default). The complete Board attachment/receipt browser suite passed 11/11 on a disposable instance, covering both composers, exact receipts after lost responses, no replay, bound attachments, and newer drafts after reload. - Blocking-intent regressions cover pre-existing Blocked, a mismatched run/cause, an explicit manual re-block, changed dependencies, a queued comment after failure, and a block arriving between scheduling and provider dispatch. The negative cases reproduced before the fix. All 478 affected executor/recovery/dispatch tests passed; both database suites ran separately after availability-probe skips in the first combined command. The final late-dependency check passed all 143 affected recovery/dispatch tests (zero skips) after two new negative cases reproduced the bug. - Focused runtime regressions cover awaited runner ownership publication, authenticated adoption before the first checkpoint, old-finalizer detachment, idle and busy warm-session shutdown, rejected checkpoint propagation, provider-pack verification, and managed-Codex credential preservation. Four managed credential detachment cases reproduced the bug before the fix; normal owned cleanup still succeeds exactly once. - Live local Claude: SIGKILL 2.6 seconds into startup recovered the same run automatically in 53 seconds, then a normal follow-up completed in 24 seconds. SIGTERM 2.5 seconds into startup preserved the same run (54 seconds) and its queued follow-up (21 seconds). Answers remained visible and the task reached Done. - Live Claude Daytona: a warm follow-up retained its sandbox and fell from 121 seconds to 44 seconds. A separate cold turn took 127 seconds; after controller shutdown and checkpointing, its follow-up completed in 33 seconds with the same sandbox, workspace, native session, and runner. Both answers remained visible and the task was Done. - Other live journeys covered task completion and follow-up with local and Daytona Codex, local Codex crash recovery, Stop then new direction, clarification response, live artifact refresh, and shared-workspace waiting. - Validation limits: the opt-in native composer Stop/Pause→subtree Resume fixture exposes terminal/result ordering and subtree-cancellation attribution bugs that can leave a child task blocked; that new finding is assigned to a separate follow-up and is not claimed fixed here. Default CI skips this optional native-provider fixture. Managed-Codex credential handoff and the queue-agent integration use automated regression evidence. Cold custom provider-pack uploads still add startup latency. ## Risks - Automatic replacement remains deliberately narrow: local Codex, verified stopped identities, unchanged retained state, and a complete text/completion-only turn. Unknown actions, partial history, or changed ownership remain blocked. - Claude completion permission handling changes an upstream package patch. The exact isolated task bridge must remain pinned; unrelated tools keep their existing permissions. - New task failure projection changes user-visible status. No historical status backfill or database migration is included. - This is a broad lifecycle fix across server and UI. Live proof covers graceful local Claude restart during startup and idle Claude Daytona session recovery across controller shutdown. Live abrupt SIGKILL during local Claude startup also recovered the same run. Unknown ownership or missing action evidence still blocks reuse. Cold custom provider-pack uploads still add startup latency; this change avoids unnecessary repeat uploads. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 (Codex), with reasoning, code execution, browser automation, and tool use. The exact hosted model ID and context window are not exposed in this task. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
df984cbc2c |
fix: dispatch queued legacy messages with operator identity and task permissions (#13315)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task conversations save messages that arrive during an active turn. > - Legacy adapters deliver these messages in a later turn. > - A run can stop before the saved queue is delivered. > - The Interrupt button previously required an active run, so it could not release this queue. > - This pull request lets a board operator send the saved queue after the run stops and retries queues missed during finalization. > - Manual dispatch must use the clicking operator and must not require permission to create agents. > - The task can continue without a duplicate message or a second execution owner. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A legacy task retained a queued message after its run stopped. Interrupt was disabled because the queue had no active target. Finalization and deferred message admission can also leave a queue without a successor. **Expected behavior** Interrupt sends the saved messages when no runner is active. Messages that arrive during normal completion are delivered automatically. An uncertain previous execution still requires proof that its process or sandbox stopped. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Queue a user message during a legacy conversation turn. 2. Let the turn stop or simulate a server restart before queue promotion. 3. Open the task with a deferred queue and no active run. 4. Try Interrupt. Before this change, the button is disabled. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced against `8f40b4ad4`. **Deployment mode** Legacy conversation adapter. The same persisted queue state is covered with an isolated PostgreSQL fixture. Related public work: #13275 adds active legacy interruption. #13291 addresses automatic sandbox conversation recovery. This change handles explicit saved-queue delivery and late queue promotion. ## What Changed - Accept a null Interrupt target while retaining queue identity, revision, company, and assignee checks. - Save the operator's request on the existing queue. Reuse normal admission after verified stop, including older messages, different authors, and queues whose original wake came from the system. - Strip interruption authority from caller-supplied wake payloads. Only the board queue route can persist that authority. - Retry durable interruption requests after restart and deferred queues after legacy cleanup. - Let an explicit Interrupt retry cleanup for its stopped run, including old ephemeral leases that recorded success without a provider stop receipt. Preserve retained resources, other lease owners, and the automatic retry limit. - Preserve the server's waiting explanation when normalizing and combining queue entries. - Revalidate the consumed board queue receipt at dispatch so a different message author does not cause setup failure. - Use the Interrupt user's execution identity for the new run. Preserve original message authors. Validate the receipt independently at startup and inherit the resulting identity on retry. - Persist authenticated board authority for ordinary manual wakes too. Adopting someone else's queued messages cannot switch a manual run to that author's permissions. Strip caller-supplied authority markers and retain private conversation ownership checks. - Keep the clicking user when a manual wake is merged into an older deferred receipt. Update its requester and payload in the same transaction. - Use the same current-queue/revision API on task details and pipeline conversations; show Interrupt after a legacy target stops. - Keep manual wakes out of active runs, including unscoped agent wakes. They receive their own execution identity; a matching receipt requester is not sufficient because an exact retry can retain a different originating identity. - Authorize both existing-agent wake endpoints with `agent:wake`, available to active non-viewer company members. Keep `agents:create` for hiring. Validate the stored task and current assignee before an exact task retry. - Reject viewer Interrupt requests before saving intent or stopping execution. Keep external chat retry authorization and per-action agent/user permission checks. - Preserve edits and discards until dispatch. Prevent another queue promotion when the same agent already has a successor. Keep independent reviewer recovery available. - Suppress cancelled/failed run toasts for intentional operator interruption. Keep ordinary runtime error notices. - Add UI, route, admission, restart, successor ownership, and toast regression tests. Document the behavior. - Reuse the existing socket reservation helper for both credential-quorum test cases after CI exposed an ambient-port collision. This changes test preparation only; production credential staging is still called exactly once. ## Verification - Failing regression tests reproduced the message-author identity bug and an operator's `agents:create` rejection before the fixes. - All 316 focused tests pass across eight route, queue, identity, authorization, continuation, and responsible-user suites, including the 44-test rerun of queue admission and actual startup after the final manual-wake restriction. Regressions reproduce cross-user merging both with and without a task, and same-requester receipt ambiguity. The cross-company existence guard also passes both tests. - Startup integration tests reach adapter execution under the clicking operator and retain that identity through follow-up. Coverage includes mixed authors, adopted queues, system-origin queues, restarts, forged or stale receipts, viewers, suspended memberships, changed assignees, private conversations, and caller-supplied authority markers. - The earlier queue/cleanup/UI regression suite passed 402 tests. The final review corrections pass another 180 tests across queue admission/persistence, real heartbeat startup, UI API, conversation rendering, and pipeline suites. Regression tests reproduced both review findings before correction. The final head has a 5/5 review with no unresolved threads. Full CI passes on `c2002979c`, including every general and serialized server shard, all browser shards, Paperclip Runner verification, typecheck, build, canary dry run, and the aggregate gates. - Full `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and UI token gates pass after the final application changes. CI identified an outdated task-page API mock after the shared helper extraction; the fixture now exercises the real helper, and all 131 task-page/API tests pass. The final application build passes with the additional manual-wake restriction. - CI exposed a pre-existing port collision in the Codex credential-quorum fixture. It reproduced locally; both listener cases now use the existing bounded reservation helper. All 41 credential tests pass on rerun. One intervening local run hit a separate ambient bind collision in the two-occupied-port case. - The full local `pnpm test:run` attempt was stopped after host contention caused focused-suite timeouts. The affected focused tests passed on rerun. An expiring trace fixture and a missing private-conversation state were corrected. The successful full CI run is the complete-suite verification. - Hosted Interrupt previously cleared the original queue and produced exactly one successor with neutral interruption feedback. It exposed the dispatch authorization defect. Retry on that earlier build was rejected for missing `agents:create` before creating another run. - Deployed the final application build (`38257f391`) to the scoped hosted instance and verified readiness. The latest PR commit changes only the credential test fixture; application code matches that deployment. A live Retry by the same operator without `agents:create` created one successor attributed to that operator, passing the former dispatch permission gate. Startup then stopped at `configuration_incomplete` because that operator has not configured their required personal Claude Code OAuth secret; the post-deployment run page confirms the operator identity and no provider work started, and the My secrets UI still shows the token as not set. Provider execution remains unverified pending that credential. No permission grants or credentials were changed. ## Risks Queue admission and finalization can race. The task lock, durable queue receipt, current comment IDs, and successor guard prevent duplicate dispatch. Process and lease stop checks, task pauses, approvals, ownership, and budgets remain in force. The API change only allows null on legacy Interrupt; native steering still requires an active run. No schema migration is required. Active non-viewer board members can now invoke existing agents without agent-creation permission. Agent self-invocation rules, raw provider-trace admin access, task retry scope, external chat authorization, and action-specific user/agent permissions remain enforced. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The session does not expose an exact backend model ID or context-window size. Used reasoning, repository search, code execution, tests, and browser tools. ## 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 #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
ab15aff390 |
feat: add experimental persistent agent chat (#13284)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Conversations must use the same tasks, controls, and execution history. > - Users need an ongoing chat with an agent without managing task properties. > - Agents should clarify and plan work, then hand execution to assigned project tasks. > - This pull request combines the reviewed Agent Chat stack for one squash merge. > - The benefit is persistent conversation with normal task governance and shared UI. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Task lifecycle, agent runtime tools, shared task UI, and browser/paid runner tests. **Problem or motivation** Users need one persistent conversation with each agent. A separate chat store or renderer would duplicate task behavior and bypass existing controls. **Proposed solution** Use a task-backed chat per company, user, and agent. Reuse the task composer and transcript. Clarify and plan in chat, then create assigned project tasks with the relevant plan. Keep Agent Chat behind its own disabled-by-default experimental setting. **Roadmap alignment** This implements the task-backed direction in [CEO Chat](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/master/ROADMAP.md#-ceo-chat). Related proposals: #2504 and #9693. Related request: #7981. The maintainer requested one squash merge of the complete stack. Consolidates the reviewed runtime [#13281](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13281), backend [#13282](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13282), and UI [#13283](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13283) layers with this PR's E2E coverage. All four layers passed CI and received Greptile 5/5 before consolidation. This PR targets master and includes the complete feature. ## What Changed - Add personal canonical chat tasks with ordinary company visibility, immutable identity, idempotent first sends, and an idle waiting state. - Process `/new` in queue order. Preserve history, release a chat pause, and fence old provider context and delayed writes. - Keep chat lifecycle rules across recovery, finalization, assignment, task lists, and rollups. - Support research and plan revision in chat. Hand plans to ordinary assigned project tasks before execution starts. Reject new chat subtasks. - Add repository-aware project creation and discovery tools, including multiple repository IDs and GitHub URLs, authorization, idempotency, and durable project-created cards. - Reuse task UI components for chat, with starred/recent agent navigation and a separate `enableAgentChat` experimental flag. - Add deterministic browser tests and 24 paid chat cells across four Codex/Claude profiles, with validated reports and screenshots. - Integrate current master recovery, controller lease, queued-message, and task UI changes. Gate chat interruption and deferred promotion on ownership/feature policy. Guarantee lease renewal and active controls are stopped even if teardown fails. - Preserve master's migration 0273 and generate chat migration 0274 with idempotent replay for development databases. ## Verification - Prior exact heads of all four PRs passed Linux CI, including build, typecheck, general/serialized tests, and browser E2E. Each had Greptile 5/5 and no unresolved findings. - Integrated local verification passed: full repository typecheck and production build, Storybook build, token gates, 340 focused UI tests, all 20 deterministic chat browser tests, two migration replay tests, 88 focused chat/queue/native/controller tests, and provider/session regressions including real lease expiry. These include the three lifecycle regressions for the final admission/teardown fixes; server typecheck also passes. Current head `1268eda16cc2af892055917e7292f068820be135` has Greptile 5/5 with no unresolved findings and passing security scans. All final-head CI gates passed: build, full Runner verification, typecheck/release registry, canary, all general/serialized test shards, and all browser E2E shards ([CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34696739927)). Local PostgreSQL startup contention required serialized retries; skipped fixtures do not count as passing coverage. - The earlier paid campaign passed all 24 chat cells and retained 32 screenshots: [report](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-34648511170-1/index.html?report=agent-chat#suite-agent-chat). It tested `abacbdfd2f660709ec37312cdb758284c8399d04`; it is prior evidence, not a paid run of this integrated head. - Manual check: enable Agent Chat in Experimental settings, open an agent, clarify and revise a plan, then hand off to an assigned project task. Stop a reply, send `/new`, and verify fresh context with retained history. Disable the setting and verify agent shortcuts/new chat turns are blocked. ## Risks - Queue/session integration can affect retries and delayed writes. Tests cover ownership, cancellation, reset boundaries, idle recovery, and ordinary task behavior. - Migration 0274 adds conversation fields and constraints. Replay is idempotent and preserves existing development chat history. - This combines the previously reviewed stack at the maintainer's request. Agent Chat remains off by default and is separate from Conference Room. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 Astra (`gpt-6-astra`), with reasoning, code execution, browser tools, and parallel review. The exact context-window size is not exposed in this session. Codex and Claude also ran as test subjects in the linked paid campaign. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
586b5ec828 |
fix(ui): improve mobile task spacing (#13304)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work. > - The task detail view is the main place for task conversation. > - The mobile view used too much horizontal space for gutters and controls. > - The status control and identifier also reduced the title width. > - This pull request gives the title its own mobile row and reduces mobile padding. > - The benefit is a clearer task view with more space for useful content. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The mobile task detail header, conversation list, and message composer. **Current behavior** The title shares one row with status and identifier controls. The conversation and composer also use larger mobile gutters than needed. **Proposed behavior** The title uses the full mobile width. Status and metadata use the next row. The conversation and composer use smaller mobile gutters. **Reason and benefit** Long titles have more readable line lengths. The reduced padding gives task content more room on small screens. **Breaking changes** None. ## What Changed - Put the task title on a full-width mobile row. - Move the mobile status and metadata below the title. - Reduce the mobile conversation and composer padding. - Update the composer dock class test. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/TaskChatThread.test.tsx ui/src/components/task-chat/TaskChatComposer.test.tsx ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx --reporter=dot` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build` - `pnpm check:token-gates` - `git diff --check` ## Risks - Low risk. The layout changes apply only at the mobile breakpoint. - Desktop spacing stays unchanged. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5.6, with reasoning and tool use. ## 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) - [ ] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
eb9f954bae |
fix(ui): stabilize steered chat activity presentation (#13246)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The task chat shows live agent work and user steering. > - Steered messages showed a second timestamp that did not match normal chat messages. > - Folded live work also changed height as new commands arrived. > - Status carets and dots did not use the same vertical alignment. > - This pull request gives these states one stable presentation. > - The benefit is a task chat that is easier to read while an agent works. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Steered chat messages showed a separate queued or steered timestamp. Folded live activity could grow and shrink. Some carets and status dots did not align vertically. **Expected behavior** Steered messages use the normal timestamp. Folded live activity shows one latest line until the user opens it. Carets and dots use the same vertical center. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open a task chat with a running agent. 2. Steer the chat and inspect the message timestamp. 3. Keep live activity folded while new commands arrive. 4. Compare the caret with the status dot in the Reconnecting state. **Paperclip version or commit** Current `master` before this change. **Deployment mode** Local development mode. ## What Changed - Use the normal timestamp for steered chat messages. - Keep folded live activity to one line and replace it with the latest activity. - Keep the full activity timeline available after explicit expansion. - Vertically align carets and status dots, including Reconnecting. - Add focused component tests and Storybook review states. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/components/task-chat/TaskChatRunnerTurn.test.tsx src/components/task-chat/TaskChatStatusPill.test.tsx src/components/task-chat/task-chat-adapter.test.ts` (63 tests passed) - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `pnpm check:token-gates` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build-storybook` ## Risks - Low risk. The change is limited to task chat presentation and its tests. - A live activity item can replace the folded text. The expanded timeline keeps the full history. > This fix does not overlap with planned work in `ROADMAP.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex. The runtime did not expose the exact model ID or context window. The agent used reasoning, 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
ce09ea40b0 |
feat(ui): show one rolling runner activity per commentary group (#13255)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task chat shows commentary and runner activity as work proceeds. > - The expanded activity list uses multiple text lines and an indented rail. > - The folded view can repeat reasoning and the current tool in separate places. > - This pull request shows one rolling activity between commentary messages. > - Users can open a group to follow its full history and inspect each item. > - The benefit is a compact feed with aligned icons and stable row height. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The runner activity groups in task chat, during live work and in saved history. **Current behavior** Activity is spread across a group summary, a reasoning ticker, and a current-tool row. Expanded rows have different alignment and can span several lines. **Proposed behavior** Keep one latest activity per commentary group. Roll new activities upward. Keep each expanded history row on one line. Use neutral failure text without an X icon. Keep the full details available by opening an individual row. **Additional context** Refs: #13246. That open PR covers related folded activity, steering timestamps, and status alignment. This change implements the separately reviewed activity-group design, including animated replacement, single-line expanded history, and neutral failures. It does not change steering timestamps or status pills. ## What Changed - Add a shared runner activity group with persistent expansion and reduced-motion support. - Use the group in the production runner turn and remove duplicate narration and current-tool rows. - Preserve commentary, plan cards, request receipts, and final-response placement. - Keep tool output, reasoning, research sources, file previews, and failure details accessible. - Render the production turn in desktop and mobile animated Storybook fixtures. - Add tests for animation identity, failure visibility, expansion persistence, and timeline order. - Validate resource link schemes and omit disclosure controls for items with no details. ## Verification - Focused activity, runner turn, protocol detail, and task-thread tests pass: 161 tests. - `pnpm check:token-gates` passes. - Browser checks confirm a 32-pixel compact row, centered icons, and one-line expanded rows. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. The final UI build also passes. - Two real native Codex runs completed in an isolated local instance. Each run created the expected file, performed separate delayed tool calls, reported a deliberate missing-file failure, recovered, and finished the task. - Browser verification confirmed that the open three-row activity group remained expanded after the second run moved into saved history. Saved error output remained accessible without red styling or an X. - The complete UI suite passes: 581 files and 5,979 tests. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build-storybook` passes for the final production fixtures. - Greptile rates the latest commit 5/5, with zero new comments and no unresolved review threads. The security scan passes. - All repository test shards pass in CI. The duplicate local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after CI completed the full test coverage. The CI build failed twice because the worker ran out of disk space compiling the Rust runner tests (`No space left on device`, error 28). The build and its aggregate verify gate remain blocked by CI capacity. GitHub squash auto-merge is enabled and will wait for required checks to pass. ## Risks - This changes presentation and disclosure behavior. Users open a group to see earlier activity. - Animation uses stable item IDs. A provider that replaces IDs can trigger another transition. - No API, database, or runner protocol contracts change. > Reviewed `ROADMAP.md`. This improves an existing task-chat surface. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, code execution, and browser testing. The runtime does not expose a more specific model version or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [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: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
eb640ec129 |
fix(execution): keep blocked wakes waiting without repeated runs (#13236)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Wake admission decides when a task can create an execution run. > - Recovery can prohibit replay while the previous execution needs review. > - Dependency reconciliation kept creating runs before dispatch rejected that same hold. > - Each rejected run added another startup notice without doing useful work. > - This change checks the hold during admission and records repeated automatic waits once. > - Tasks keep their messages and can resume when the current gates permit execution. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related changes: Refs #13173 (stale completed-task continuations). Refs #12651 (dependency waits during recovery). **What happened?** A blocked task with completed dependencies can remain under a durable execution reconciliation hold. Each scheduler pass created a queued run. Dispatch then cancelled it before the adapter started. The skipped wake did not satisfy dependency wake deduplication, so this repeated and filled the conversation with “Couldn't start” notices. **Expected behavior** A known execution hold creates a waiting diagnostic without a run. Repeated automatic observations share that diagnostic. Clearing the hold permits a new wake only after the other gates pass. New comments remain available for the next eligible execution. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Assign a blocked task with a completed blocker. 2. Give the task an active reconciliation action, or a resolved action whose automatic recovery evidence still prohibits replay. 3. Run dependency reconciliation repeatedly. 4. Observe repeated cancelled pre-start runs on the base branch. This branch creates no runs while held and admits work after the effective hold clears. ## What Changed - Check effective execution holds under the issue admission lock before inserting runs. Keep the final dispatch check for races. - Share automatic wait diagnostics across producers, wake keys, and service restarts. Apply the helper to reconciliation, dependencies, pause holds, availability, budgets, and disabled heartbeats. - Preserve ordinary comment and interaction receipts during execution holds. Prevent release from draining them while replay is blocked. Keep external-chat receipt authorization intact. - Group empty pre-start reconciliation cancellations into a neutral waiting notice. Keep started runs and the full run history. - Document the waiting contract and add database-backed, UI, and browser regressions. - Stabilize two existing verification tests: allow the asynchronous chat lease transition a bounded five-second wait, and accept either legitimate damaged-session refusal while retaining exact archive-evidence assertions. ## Verification Passed targeted tests: - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-issue-liveness-escalation.test.ts server/src/modules/wake-queue/adapters/postgres.test.ts` — 28 tests. - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/TaskChatThread.test.tsx` — covered in the initial combined test run; UI suite passed. - Run-dispatch adapter tests passed in the combined gate regression run. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/durable-chat-wakeup.test.ts` — 41 tests, including held receipt replay, promotion, and revoked access. - `PAPERCLIP_E2E_PORT=3294 pnpm test:e2e tests/e2e/acp-stop-continuation.spec.ts` — all 3 browser scenarios pass. Repeated held messages create no additional runs or provider prompts and do not replay writes. - `pnpm check:token-gates` - `pnpm check:module-boundaries` - `git diff --check` `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. The full local `pnpm test:run` invocation did not finish green: it encountered exhausted local PostgreSQL shared-memory slots, a missing fresh-worktree runner test binary, and tests loaded across in-flight edits. The affected chat/database suites passed on rerun (81 tests), and the targeted lifecycle/recovery verification passed (3 tests). After building the runner test binary, the full native session suite also passed (37 tests). Final-head [CI run 34621288475](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34621288475) passed on `8659618b0ed2b98df002a28f4c1bd97321b0db04`, including all server/workspace test shards, all three browser shards, runner verification, typecheck, build, release dry run, and the aggregate verification gates. All 31 reported checks passed; the two conditional Storybook checks were skipped as intended. Greptile reviewed that exact commit at 5/5 with no unresolved review threads. ## Risks The wait record is diagnostic only. It must never count as a delivered wake or bypass a current gate. Tests cover repeated and concurrent admission, resolved no-replay evidence, a remaining dependency after hold clearance, deferred comments, and release gating. Explicit user requests and authorized chat receipts do not share automatic diagnostics. No migration or historical data deletion is required. Existing provider retry budgets remain unchanged. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The runtime does not expose the exact hosted snapshot ID or context-window size. Used repository inspection, code editing, command execution, tests, and review tools. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
52811c6ce6 |
fix(tasks): require resume before sending to paused tasks (#13232)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task execution controls let board users pause a task or its subtree. > - The composer still accepted messages while a pause hold was active. > - A paused task must require an explicit resume before the user can send another message. > - This pull request replaces the composer with an amber pause card and checks board comment writes on the server. > - The user keeps their draft and resumes through the existing task controls. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13104. Refs #13119. **What existing behavior does this improve?** The task composer and existing task/subtree pause controls. **Current behavior** A paused task can still receive a board message. The pause notice sits outside the composer, which leaves the send action available. **Proposed behavior** Show an amber takeover in both task chat and the classic composer. Preserve the draft. Require the user to resume the task or the ancestor subtree before sending. Reject board comment writes through either supported write route while the pause hold is active. **Breaking changes** Board comment writes to a paused task now return HTTP 409. Agent run reports remain supported during a pause. There is no schema migration. ## What Changed - Add a shared amber composer takeover with task, subtree, saved draft, pending, and error states. - Use effective ancestor pause state in both composer interfaces. Refresh it after pause events, task updates, and rejected sends. - Preserve draft text and attachments. Hide editor, send, queued edit, and pending question controls while paused. - Check active pause holds before board comment writes can mutate tasks, store comments, or wake agents. - Connect the approved Storybook examples to the production component and update the design and behavior docs. - Add browser coverage for both composers, draft persistence, resume, inherited holds, and rejected writes. Update ACP continuation coverage for the explicit resume requirement. ## Verification - Passed: `pnpm -r typecheck`. - Passed: `pnpm build`. - Passed: `pnpm build-storybook`. - Passed: `pnpm check:token-gates` and `git diff --check`. - Passed: focused UI tests (398 tests) and server route tests (127 tests). - Passed: `pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts tests/e2e/paused-composer.spec.ts tests/e2e/acp-stop-continuation.spec.ts` (5 tests). - Passed: manual browser walkthrough in a disposable local instance. Pause with a draft, refresh while paused, resume, send, and reopen. The draft returned, and one message persisted. The amber card and resume dialog were readable with no clipping. - Full local `pnpm test:run` did not pass: the general-server stage recorded 9,072 passing tests, 6 database setup failures from macOS shared-memory exhaustion, and 4 failed tests. This stopped the script before its later groups. Latest-head CI runs those groups independently. - Local follow-up: the Git file-resource load test passed on rerun (4 tests); native finalization migration passed after clearing the abandoned browser-test database allocation. Building the native debug fixtures fixed the missing fake provider. The remaining native-session recovery assertion also reproduces on untouched base commit `87b3e5fc6` (36 pass, 1 fail on both base and PR). It expects a settled-session error but receives a semantic-input-digest error. - The final UI build, UI typecheck, token gates, both thread suites (182 tests), and all five browser tests passed after the queued-action review fix. All 31 latest-head CI checks passed, including all server, workspace, browser, build, release, and security gates. Two optional Storybook jobs were skipped by workflow policy. Greptile reviewed `32d8fb5f5` at 5/5 with no open findings. - Review the Paused Composer and Tasks / Execution Controls stories. Pause a task with a draft, verify the amber card, resume, and verify the draft can be sent once. ## Risks - Clients that used board comments to continue paused work must resume first. The response is an explicit HTTP 409. - Pause state can change while a page is open. Live updates refresh the composer, and the server rejects stale sends before their side effects. - Resume keeps the existing dialog and optional agent wake behavior. Agent reports from interrupted runs remain allowed. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, assisted with design, implementation, code execution, and browser verification. The exact runtime model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. The agent used reasoning and tool calls. ## 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 the relevant tests locally and they pass; the full local-suite limits are documented above - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d10cbde815 |
fix(recovery): reject stale productive continuation wakes (#13173)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agent work through tasks and runs. > - Recovery continues assigned work when no live execution path remains. > - A recovery sweep can read an in-progress task before its run completes. > - The sweep can then observe the successful run after completion has changed the task status. > - This pull request checks current status and assignment under the existing enqueue lock. > - A stale continuation leaves a skipped wake receipt and creates no run. > - Task chat also omits an empty continuation cancelled before it started because its task had become terminal. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related public work: #10779 and #8419. Those older open changes address terminal disposition across other recovery paths. This change uses the existing scheduler guard for productive successful-run continuation and adds real database lock contention coverage. **What happened?** Recovery could combine an old in-progress task snapshot with a newer successful run. It queued an automatic continuation after the task was done. Dispatch cancelled that run before it started, but task chat displayed “Couldn't start” below the successful answer. This can happen after the native runner's finish result has already been accepted. It does not require a missing comment. **Expected behavior** Productive continuation must remain eligible when enqueueing acquires the task lock. Completion, cancellation, reassignment, or a move away from in-progress must prevent creation of the run. Actual execution stops must remain visible. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Let recovery select an assigned in-progress task whose latest run succeeded with productive progress. 2. Hold the task row lock in another transaction and change the task to done. 3. Let recovery attempt to enqueue while that transaction holds the lock. 4. Commit completion. Before this fix, recovery creates a redundant run from the stale snapshot. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced against master at `4042eb1c4` with deterministic integration tests. **Deployment mode** Built from source with PostgreSQL. The bug is in core recovery and is not adapter-specific. ## What Changed - Pass the existing status-and-assignee guard for productive terminal continuation recovery. - Preserve a skipped wake receipt with the expected and actual task state, without creating a run. - Test actual PostgreSQL lock contention for native and legacy completion, cancellation, backlog, review, blocked state, and reassignment. - Omit empty redundant pre-start cancellations from native and legacy task chat. Preserve stop markers for runs that started. - Document recovery eligibility at enqueue time. ## Verification - All seven new race cases failed before the guard was connected. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. - `pnpm build` passed. - `pnpm check:token-gates` passed. - Task chat suite: 98 tests passed. - Recovery integration suites: 290 tests passed, including 31 stale-queue tests. - Full CI verification passed on `7ea71f04d`: all 31 active checks succeeded, including all test shards, browser tests, build, typecheck, and canary release dry run. Storybook visual regression was skipped by its path filter. - Greptile reviewed this commit at 5/5 with no review threads. - The local `pnpm test:run` aggregate reported a setup failure in the unchanged `tool-access-service.test.ts` suite. Its isolated rerun passed all 231 tests without edits. The duplicate aggregate was stopped after the complete CI matrix passed; it is not counted as a successful local full-suite run. ## Risks Low risk. The backend guard applies only to productive successful-run recovery. It requires the task to remain in-progress with the same agent. Other wake sources keep their current policy. The UI change only suppresses empty redundant cancellations; run records remain available. No schema change or migration is required. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code edits, and local test execution. The exact deployment snapshot and context window are not exposed by this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
889947c238 |
feat: add experimental native chat connectors (#13038)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - People also ask agents for work in their existing chat tools. > - Each external conversation needs one task and a current authorized source. > - Retries, Stop, and provider failures must not duplicate work or expose private data. > - The first chat PR establishes the opt-in provider and data contracts. > - This PR adds experimental channel integration and its durable control plane. > - Users can request work from connected channels and inspect delivery in Paperclip. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13100 and #13092. This is the second of exactly two chat PRs. Foundation #13100 is merged and changed 143 files. Runner prerequisite #13092 is also merged. This PR changes 400 files against master, below the 500-file review limit. It contains no wireframe images or HTML galleries. ## What Changed - Add native Slack, GitHub, Microsoft Teams, Telegram, and Discord chat connections. Keep chat disabled unless the operator enables experimental chat connectors. Preserve the production GitHub tool connection and its normal setup path. - Bind each provider bot identity to one immutable Paperclip agent. Bind each admitted external conversation to one task. Paperclip owns tasks, runs, permissions, and audit records. - Add durable admission, per-conversation queues, questions, task controls, progress, final replies, images, files, and delivery receipts. Board comments remain internal unless explicitly sent to the channel. - Check current identity, provider reach, resource access, credentials, runtime generation, and exact source before provider effects. Keep private responses private. Never send raw reasoning, private logs, credentials, or tool arguments. - Hold uncertain sends for explicit audited resolution. Make Board Send-to-channel atomic and idempotent. Keep reconnect and setup credentials in Paperclip secret storage. - Preserve current native-runner authority across retries, lost acknowledgements, and recovery. Keep immutable input and completion contracts separate from newer user input. Receipt reconciliation cannot launch a provider. - Reconcile chat close/new ordering and provider-effect lock order. Audit resource access changes in the same transaction. Submit only the selected resource from each UI toggle so stale pages cannot undo unrelated access changes. - Drain Codex stdout before certifying process exit. Bound the drain with the existing shutdown grace. Preserve observed terminal authority without treating an undrained process as successful or reusable. - Incorporate master `018ca5da` with its ACP Stop, mobile task layout, runner packaging, and official lock changes. Preserve dedicated chat-answer continuations in both directions when ordinary queued comments are adopted after Stop. - Fence late adapter readiness behind an earlier Stop for the same run. Preserve verified cleanup for registered adapters. Handle single Stop, agent pause, duplicate Stops, and failure release without creating a false cancellation receipt. - Incorporate master's `6dd48cad4` wake-queue extraction. Preserve exact failed-chat retry authorization and lineage, retired question-source suppression, and the block on generic recovery that would discard the admitted source. Fresh deferred input retains its separate promotion path. - Incorporate master `2a05b5ed3` and its queue-admission extraction, simplified transaction ports, and separate runner CI job. Preserve exact durable receipts, actor separation, and dedicated-answer isolation through the new module. A failed receipt insert rolls back the accompanying deferred-wake merge. ## Verification Current head: `afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a`, incorporating master `2a05b5ed3457ea33efd6895520447d1d97fe98d8`. The conflicts are resolved. This successor fixes two test-harness boundaries exposed by CI: per-case route-module preparation and actual durable-save completion before intentional runner termination. Production code and all existing test/turn deadlines are unchanged. [Exact-head Greptile review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13038#issuecomment-5587250594) is **5/5**, completed September 10 at 13:20:55 UTC, with no actionable findings or open review threads. [Fresh exact-head CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34481724341) passes **all 24 jobs**, including Build and both required aggregates. Normal exact-head guarded merge was attempted and rejected by the remaining branch approval policy: CODEOWNER review is required and no human approval is present. Normal **squash auto-merge is enabled** as of September 10 at 13:36:26 UTC. Requested CODEOWNERS have been notified; no approval bypass or self-approval was used. Earlier-head results below remain historical evidence, not qualification of this successor. - Final exact-head Linux evidence: 995/995 chat integration cases; 36/36 agent-skills routes; 35/35 runner live-session cases, including real process kill/resume; 1948 runner Vitest cases with three existing benchmark/platform guards; 870/870 API-authority cases; and 104 browser cases with four existing optional skips. Rust, conformance/replay, full repository build, typecheck, canary, all server/workspace shards, and both required aggregates pass with normal CI concurrency. Earlier failed attempts remain recorded below. - Latest test-only qualification: 141/141 route/permissions/authentication cases pass in separate cold forks, with plain server types and independent review clear. The real-runner suite passes 35/35, with plain runner types and independent review clear. A controlled premature-save acknowledgement fails as expected; matching ownership/effect/process evidence, rejected saves, real turn outcome, test abort, and pre-kill liveness are covered. No local reproduction of the original CI scheduling failure is claimed. The preceding [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34479680858) passes 21/24 jobs, including all 995 Linux chat cases and browser aggregate (104 passed, four existing optional skips); only Build, the skills serialized shard, and the required verification aggregate fail. Its exact-head Greptile review was 5/5. Both failed job logs are retained. - Final fixture qualification: all eight focused Discord cases and all 995 chat integration cases pass. The exact modal statement/PID is observed before taking the real connection lock; the test then proves its actual blocking relationship before mutation. Original SQL execution, provider behavior, negative assertions, and 1s/15s timeouts remain unchanged. Independent review is clear and test/production hashes remain frozen. The preceding [CI attempt](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34477184777) passed 22 jobs, including Build/runner, typecheck, canary, all other test shards, and browser aggregate (104 passed, four existing optional skips); the two fixture failures and failed verification aggregate remain recorded, not relabeled as a pass. - Current queue-module composition: 308/308 recovery/batching/queue/Stop tests; 995/995 full chat integration; 89/89 module tests, including real PostgreSQL receipt-insert rollback; 24/24 workflow/module-boundary tests; plain server and UI types. All four actual local process/ACP browser paths pass in 1.4 minutes. Fresh databases, no skips or retries, stable reviewed source hashes. The initial boundary failure is retained; its no-op service wrapper was removed without changing recovery context or weakening the check. An exploratory standalone test-directory typecheck fails because its new upstream transformation config is not a standalone typechecking project; standard CI/build does not invoke it, and no configuration was weakened to suppress those diagnostics. - The preceding head `e02a63d462ce5d47433b0aeb632bb6fd20aab1ba` passed [all 24 CI jobs](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34436462958) and exact-head Greptile review at 5/5. Required CODEOWNER review prevented its normal merge before master advanced again. - Final extracted-module composition: 307/307 recovery, batching, queue and Stop-control tests; 995/995 full chat integration; 49/49 module tests including eight PostgreSQL adapter cases; and 19/19 issue-update tests. Plain server types pass. All four actual local process/ACP browser paths pass in 1.3 minutes. Fresh databases, no skips or retries in these cohorts, frozen source hashes, and independent review clear. - The preceding head `3e4e1c1c` passes [all PR CI jobs](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34415826820), including Build and required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`. Both the original Rust failure and the previously load-sensitive lineage fixture pass with unchanged Linux concurrency. Master advanced afterward and required this reconciliation. - Final master composition: 448/448 focused UI tests, 186/186 adapter tests, 24/24 queue/control tests, and 11/11 packaging tests. Plain UI, server, shared, and adapter types pass. Token gates and diff checks pass. Independent server and UI reviews are clear. - Stop-registration regression: both real-service cases fail against exact `a95` source and pass with the fix. The full corrected recovery/control suite passes 265/265. Duplicate-owner and failed-Stop controls also pass. Plain server types pass. The readiness barrier prevents provider startup without adding an acknowledgment to an already terminal run. - Final qualification strengthens terminal-field equality and repeats both affected cases successfully on a fresh database. All four actual local process/ACP browser paths pass again in 1.3 minutes, without skips or retries. The final screenshot shows Cancelled, a paused subtree, retained input, and no error toast. - Two new actual-service regressions fail before the merge fix. They prove that queued-comment adoption could consume a dedicated chat answer or add unrelated input to that answer. The fixed four-case cohort passes, including ordinary upstream continuation and adapter Stop controls. Full recovery passes 257/257. All four actual local process/ACP Stop browser flows pass in 1.4 minutes, without skips or retries, on a fresh database. - The unchanged runner artifact was qualified with 171/171 transport tests, 870/870 API-authority tests, conformance 1/1, and replay 11/11. Six controlled reader tests prove the exit/drain repair. Its local serial Rust workspace passed 546 top-level cases plus two invoked helpers; the later passing Linux CI supplies default-concurrency evidence. - Prior exact-source full chat integration passes 995/995. Settings regressions cover concurrent stale pages, 501 destinations, pending state, rejected updates, and explicit retry. These deterministic tests do not prove live provider behavior. - Retained failed attempts and their causes are in the [qualification log](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a/doc/plans/chat-adapters/2026-09-08-chat-queue-and-webhook-repair.md). The first merge adapter run timed out while macOS slept for 290 seconds. Its unchanged repeat passed with a temporary sleep guard. No assertion, deadline, or CI gate was weakened. Review commands include `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts src/__tests__/issue-queued-comments-routes.test.ts` and `pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts tests/e2e/acp-stop-continuation.spec.ts`. Database suites require fresh disposable databases. See the [browser runbook](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a/doc/plans/chat-adapters/2026-09-04-chat-adapters-browser-e2e-runbook.md) for provider setup and separate live acceptance steps. ## Risks - This remains experimental. Deterministic tests and bounded live evidence do not establish every provider feature, tenant, permission layout, or media shape. Teams work-tenant qualification is still open. - Failed and uncertain provider effects remain visible and can require operator action. A transport receipt does not prove recipient visibility. - Native controller and runner artifacts must remain compatible. Preserve lease ownership, terminal authority, source binding, and quarantine during future changes. - Access and audit rows commit together, but activity notifications remain best-effort. This is not a new durable event outbox. - The PR operation does not deploy a live server, replace its runner, or change provider permissions. Remaining live qualification is documented in the [temporary handoff](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a/doc/plans/chat-adapters/2026-09-08-open-qualification-followups.md). ## Model Used OpenAI Codex assisted with implementation, tool execution, testing, and review. The work records `gpt-6-astra` assistance. The environment does not report a context-window size. No private reasoning traces are included. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
018ca5daaf |
fix: verify ACP Stop and preserve safe continuation (#13119)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task controls coordinate provider execution and queued user messages. > - Stop could finish before an embedded ACP provider stopped its tools. > - A later request could be held for reconciliation without a clear task response. > - A restored provider could also retain the stopped run's API credential. > - This pull request verifies provider termination and preserves safe session continuation. > - Operators can continue known-safe work and see why uncertain work cannot start. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Stop could leave an embedded ACP provider running. A queued follow-up followed by “go” could fail before it reached the provider. Task chat could show a generic missing-response message. Even a restored session could use the previous run's credential and fail its task update. **Expected behavior** Stop waits for confirmed provider termination. A later explicit wake continues the same compatible session only when recorded actions have known outcomes. It carries pending comments and the current run's environment. Uncertain actions retain a visible reconciliation hold. Composer Stop preserves the existing pause rule: conversation can continue while paused, but task work requires Resume. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start an embedded ACP task. 2. Send a second request while the provider is running. 3. Interrupt the run, then send “go”. Also test composer Stop followed by Resume work. 4. Check that the request is delivered once and that the provider can complete the task through the current run's API credential. 5. Repeat with an unfinished write. Confirm that the write stops and that further execution stays blocked with a visible reason. **Paperclip version or commit** Built from source on master at `3bc60dd8b` plus this branch. **Deployment mode** Local source build with an isolated embedded PostgreSQL instance. Refs #11183. Refs #12552. Those changes address recovery after operator cancellation. This change also covers embedded ACP termination, session proof, pending-comment delivery, and task feedback. ## What Changed - Propagate Stop into embedded ACP and wait for bounded adapter cleanup and provider exit. Retain the actual ChildProcess object for forced termination on all platforms; never signal a recycled numeric PID. - Preserve interrupted checkpoints only for acknowledged, local, persistent sessions with settled reads or no tools. Keep writes, incomplete actions, and forced termination blocked. - Restore the same compatible provider session with the current run's environment. Reject fresh-session fallback for an interrupted checkpoint. - Adopt pending comments on the next explicit wake. Stop alone does not dispatch them. - Share the execution-blocker rule across dispatch, Resume, and task detail. Show Stopped or Couldn't start with the recorded reason. Resolve the stopped agent for the run link, including reviewer runs. - Keep execution reconciliation holds intact when generic recovery sees queued comments or healthy child tasks. - Add process, service, component, and browser regression coverage. Fix disposable database cleanup and React test settling exposed by the full suite. ## Verification - Passed `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `pnpm check:token-gates`. - Passed all three `acp-stop-continuation.spec.ts` browser journeys. They use an actual ACP child process and require task completion through the agent API. - Passed 165 adapter execution, operator-stop, and child-process control tests, 17 queued-comment route tests, and 65 tests in the two adjusted UI suites. Earlier focused recovery, heartbeat, and task-control tests also passed. - Manually used the browser to queue a request, Stop, send “go” while paused, and Resume. The same session answered once and moved the task to Done with the current run's credential. - Manually interrupted an unfinished write. Its file size stayed fixed for five seconds. “Go” showed the reconciliation reason and did not start another provider prompt. - Separate live Claude ACP smoke checks confirmed that Stop ended a disposable local write and that a no-tool interruption could resume the exact provider session. The browser fixture does not call Drive or another external app. - Passed all 5,615 UI tests and 3,090 other workspace tests. The CLI and general server groups pass with targeted retries: two transient server failures passed together on retry, and two embedded-database startup failures passed after removing abandoned shared-memory segments from this task's completed browser fixtures. All 144 serialized server suites completed, with 2,189 tests passing after two transient HTTP socket failures passed on retry. - Passed all 135 heartbeat process/recovery tests, including a deterministic regression that failed before the recovery-sweep fix. - Passed 18 dispatch integration tests, including stopped-reviewer links, company boundaries, and malformed run IDs. - Greptile is 5/5 on `7dd170d83`, with zero unresolved review threads. The security scan and all required CI gates pass for the same commit. ## Risks - Safe continuation depends on complete tool reporting and a restorable local provider session. Unknown outcomes remain blocked and require reconciliation. - Provider cleanup can take time. A timeout does not grant replay permission. - The change adds optional adapter context fields and an optional issue projection. It does not change the database schema or require a migration. - Test cleanup truncates company data only in a disposable test database. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6, running as Codex with repository tools, code execution, and browser interaction. The runtime does not expose a more specific model deployment ID or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [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> |
||
|
scotttong
|
2d45f42e47 | fix(ui): refine mobile task surfaces (#13122) | ||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8cfd30fb07 |
feat(ui): add composer Stop and simplify task controls (#13104)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The task composer is where operators direct running agents. > - Operators need to stop work without leaving the conversation. > - Existing pause controls already hold task trees and interrupt both runner types. > - This pull request connects the composer to those controls and removes repeated feedback. > - Operators can pause work quickly and still queue messages while agents run. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Task pause, resume, and cancellation in the task page and composer. **Current behavior** The empty composer cannot stop a running task. Task controls require extra confirmation and reason text. Pause can show several notifications for the task already on screen. **Proposed behavior** Show Stop while this task runs and the composer is empty. Text or attachments switch it to Send. Stop and the menu use the same manual pause hold. Parent pauses include descendants. Keep task cancellation in the menu with a compact confirmation. Show one quiet pause row and gray cancelled-run details. **Reason and benefit** Operators can interrupt execution with one click. Drafts and queued messages keep their existing behavior. The UI waits for actual termination, including native cancellation acknowledgment. **Breaking changes** No endpoint, schema, or task-status change. Pause no longer asks for confirmation or a reason. Resume now honors the existing wake-agents option. Task notifications are suppressed for the task and subtree currently in view. Related UI work: #8228 changes navigation and composer shortcuts. This PR covers execution controls. No duplicate Stop-button PR was found. The change improves existing controls and does not duplicate a roadmap milestone. ## What Changed - Add Stop, pending feedback, duplicate-click protection, and inline errors to the composer. - Share the pause mutation across the composer, active-run controls, and menu. - Poll affected runs after a pause request. Require native cancellation acknowledgment. - Remove pause confirmation and shared reason fields. Reduce cancel confirmation to its task count and actions. - Honor wake-agents for executable tasks only. Preserve the pause when recovery review is needed; show partial wake failures inline. - Preserve explicit legacy reconciliation decisions while their continuation waits for dispatch. - Suppress notifications for visible task trees. Use quiet pause and cancellation feedback. - Add interactive stories using production controls and native/legacy end-to-end tests. ## Verification - User reviewed the running feature and revised Storybooks in the browser. - Rebased focused checks passed: 295 original targeted tests, 161 updated route/page/notification/status tests, and 26 recovery integration tests. - Both isolated runner journeys pass on the final revision (1.7 minutes). Coverage includes queueing, parent and child interruption, persisted holds, no automatic continuation, reconciled resume, cancellation, terminal exclusions, and no Stop toast. - Native coverage uses real runnerd with a deterministic provider fixture. Legacy coverage checks actual process termination. Live hosted-provider execution was not tested. - Repository typecheck and build, Storybook build, and token gates passed after rebase. The final server typecheck/build also passed. - The broad local run completed its general-server stage with 7,219 passing tests, 48 skipped, and two failures from cached pre-fix source and a stale native provider fixture. Both failed tests pass in fresh final-head reruns after rebuilding the fixture; the script did not continue to its later local stages. CI runs all test groups on the final revision. - Final revision: all 31 applicable CI checks passed; Storybook visual regression was skipped by its workflow conditions. Greptile: 5/5, zero unresolved comments. - Review `Tasks / Execution Controls` in Storybook. Type and clear a draft, stop a run, expand cancellation details, and test the menu on desktop and mobile. ## Risks - Stop pauses descendants for a parent task. This is the existing pause contract. - A held task can remain active if interruption fails. The UI shows an error instead of claiming termination. - Resume can start multiple assignees when wake-agents is selected. Backlog, blocked, and terminal tasks stay excluded. Existing execution reconciliation remains mandatory where required; Resume never invents action-outcome evidence. - Notification suppression uses the visible task and cached subtree. Notifications for unrelated work remain enabled. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The exact runtime snapshot and context-window limit are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, tool calls, code 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 - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
cd4c4ed205 |
fix(ui): stabilize task loading and live feeds (#13095)
Coordinate initial conversation reveal, preserve message identity and reading anchors during live updates, and bound transcript reads with recoverable retries. Cover desktop/mobile navigation and rich task loading with actual-route browser tests. Verified all Linux CI gates, 5,575 local UI tests, eight layout browser scenarios, and recorded native Codex walkthroughs. Greptile: 5/5; all review findings resolved. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
7ed122911b |
Add end-to-end session goals to Paperclip Runner
Add capability-aware slash-goal controls, durable provider goal state, PRP v2 negotiation, autonomous goal execution, and safe local session recovery. Integrate with current master, preserve provider session identity, and verify the browser goal/chat/replacement/clear workflow and unsupported-agent rejection. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
e095b84dab |
feat(connections): connect services from native task feeds (#13058)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Agents use connections to reach external services. > - A fresh native task can have no service tools installed. > - The agent needs a way to discover services and ask the responsible person for access. > - This pull request brings the existing connection-intent flow into native task execution. > - The person can connect from the task, and the agent can continue with updated tools. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Native runner tool authority, connection intents, task interactions, and shared connection setup. **Problem or motivation** A task that needs an unconnected service cannot finish its work. Leaving the task to configure access also loses context. A resolved request must survive a restart and resume the correct agent once. **Proposed solution** Expose connection discovery and access requests as server-owned native tools. Render a durable task card and use the shared setup dialog. Persist outcome delivery and start a fresh provider session after access is ready. **Alternatives considered** Sending the person to the Connections page adds navigation and does not solve continuation. Polling for authorization consumes runs and can create duplicate requests. **Roadmap alignment** This extends the existing connection-intent runtime and setup experience. It reuses the shared access model and the native runner. Related: #12345, #12347. The service-slug fix in #12906 is related but separate. Companion evaluation PR: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-evals/pull/21. ## What Changed - Expose `connections_search` and `connection_request` with server-bound company, task, agent, and responsible user. Preserve the legacy entry points. - Discover catalog services and authorized custom connections. Check installation, identity, health, and executable permissions before reporting ready. - Keep pending cards through ordinary messages. Reuse requests and retire stale ownership. Put Connect at the right of Not now. - Reuse the shared setup flow in a task dialog. Keep access additive and default to the requesting agent. Recover from cancelled or blocked OAuth windows with a new-tab fallback. - Persist outcome delivery with an idempotent wake key. Resume in a fresh session and recheck ownership before dispatch. - Add native browser fixtures, offline Storybook states, server contracts, and evaluation fixtures. Update guidance and documentation. ## Verification - `pnpm build`: passed after replaying the change on current master. - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm check:token-gates`: passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build-storybook`: passed. - New continuation-policy regression cases: 16 passed. - Docker-backed PostgreSQL regressions passed for requester-only OAuth access, assignment-only expiry, terminal expiry, and credential-free setup metadata. - Shared setup and task-card UI tests: 121 passed, including configured MCP reconnect URL recovery and preserving user edits across refetch. - Storybook browser checks: all 119 passed on the latest reconnect fix. - `pnpm test:run`: 4,734 tests passed in the first server group, but embedded PostgreSQL startup failures and resulting cleanup errors prevented a complete local pass. All Linux CI lanes passed on the latest reviewed commit. One external-object route test returned an unexplained 500 on the first run; it passed twice locally and the failed shard passed on retry without code changes. - Earlier feature-checkout evidence: three deterministic native browser journeys passed, including restart delivery and an actual fixture tool result. Legacy scripted coverage also passed. All 59 added stories were inspected in light and dark themes. - Live Notion testing recorded successful provider reads. The manual test used a local-trusted instance. It does not prove authenticated/cloud deployment or every provider journey. - Native browser rerun reached the embedded PostgreSQL startup limit before bootstrap, so the latest checkout’s full native browser journey remains unverified. Both OAuth page/task regression cases passed against isolated Docker-backed PostgreSQL 17. They verify no premature task access, requester-only completion, additive retries, and reconnect preservation. - Applied both new migrations twice to isolated PostgreSQL 17. Foreign keys remained intact, duplicate active delivery keys were rejected, and failed delivery records did not block retries. Reviewer path: start a fresh test drive, enable the native runner, use an agent that can perform work directly, and ask it to summarize a Notion page. Connect from the card, then verify the resumed provider call and source-linked answer. The default test-drive CEO is instructed to delegate, so it can introduce an unrelated hiring step. ## Risks - Two additive migrations create durable deliveries and a partial unique wake index. They are idempotent. The wake index can require a maintenance window on large tables because migrations run in a transaction. - OAuth and continuation cross asynchronous boundaries. Tests cover ownership changes, retries, additive access, and restart delivery; live provider behavior still varies. - The latest requester-scope fix has not yet been exercised through live OAuth. GitHub, API-key, authenticated-user, and all recovery journeys are not claimed as verified. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6-based Codex assisted with implementation, tests, and review using tools and code execution. The runtime does not expose the exact model version, context window, or reasoning setting. Live evaluation used `gpt-5.6-luna`; manual native testing used `gpt-5.6-sol`. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used and disclosed unavailable runtime details - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this extends existing connection work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the feature issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket id - [ ] I have run all required tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation - [x] I have considered and documented risks - [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> |