mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-31 22:24:16 +01:00
b3d2d08305014151e1eca3b295ea588666ce0b92
197
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
b3d2d08305 |
Preserve generated GFM checkbox states in reply evidence
Recognize read-only task-list controls from the existing UI renderer and match their visible checked state. Keep raw HTML rejected and add positive and changed-state source/browser regressions. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
023f78c8b9 |
Reuse the UI Markdown renderer without new dependencies
Keep Markdown projection with its UI owner and let journey evidence consume normalized content. Reuse existing react-markdown and remark-gfm packages; remove the root dependency additions and retain all observer, browser and source checks. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
b9a2571b35 |
Cover supported GFM strikethrough reply content
Add the optional positive formatting case requested by review without changing observer behavior. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
980fad261c |
Use the UI accessible-company list for reply parsing
Match the CompanyContext scope rather than the instance-admin directory when determining which issue prefixes the browser links. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
6df66df9d9 |
Match production auto-links and require preserved reply source
Use the existing GFM and issue-reference plugins with the viewer company prefixes. Keep source Markdown mandatory in native receipts and cover bare URLs, known issue keys, foreign plain keys and changed destinations. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
6eba7fffb4 |
Match renderer link routing and keep browser callbacks self-contained
Prefix only parsed issue references, preserve ordinary root-relative anchors, and avoid tsx name helpers inside the serialized DOM callback. Verify with the exact QA Node24/tsx path and positive/negative browser cases. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
7aa94ff745 |
Preserve ordinary link labels and production route semantics
Restrict renamed labels to existing product chips. Reuse the company routing helper and current task URL, with browser regressions for prefixes, fragments and wrong task/company targets. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
97048b0153 |
Bind content projections to the observed reply text
Retain each visible link label so the source content projection cannot attest to different text. Keep decorated-label support with exact destinations and negative coverage. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
6677515cf3 |
Fix rendered Markdown reply evidence in product journeys
Match full visible content and exact link destinations while retaining source Markdown and native run attribution. Preserve the original browser regression and strengthen decline source checks. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
b3c2172d41 |
fix(evals): verify native protected-action outcomes (#18255)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work assigned to agents. > - Product E2E stories ask for useful user-facing results. > - Classic runner and deployed QA reuse the same service approve/decline task prompts. > - The service returns a receipt marker that belongs in a saved briefing document. > - State that destination explicitly and ask for the document link when complete. > - The deployed decline path also needs the same durable final-reply proof as Plan and Stop. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #18222. Builds on the merged reply observer in #18248. **What happened?** The shared service tasks ask for titles and a “verification code” without specifying that the code belongs in the document or asking for its final link. A native QA attempt created its briefing but then repeatedly failed the completion tool’s array validation. Those invalid arguments remain a separate observed failure; the wording change does not establish their cause or relax validation. Source inspection also found that the declined-action oracle requires a projected comment even when the settled native thread renders a durable final message. **Expected behavior** Ask for page titles and the service receipt code in the saved briefing, then a document link. After a declined action, require the existing explanation-only fallback without another service call. **Steps to reproduce** Run the shared service-approve/service-decline stories through the classic runner or QA Product E2E adapter. ## What Changed - Clarify the natural-language task for both shared service stories: put page titles and service receipt code in the document and provide its link. - Use the reloaded run-bound final reply for QA service declines. Pass an explicit native receipt to the existing decline oracle; do not synthesize issue comments. Require the final native run to start after the saved decline and keep exact decision, truthful explanation, no unread marker, zero calls and unchanged connection checks. - Keep classic callers on their existing attributed-comment path. No internal tool instructions are added to the user prompt; ownership, service data and model/runtime limits stay strict. ## Verification - Decline regression observed RED: two cases reject a valid saved native explanation without projected comments. After the repair, 79 focused tests passed across native reply, decline guidance, agent evidence and journey contracts. A two-successful-run control rejects the earlier receipt and accepts the later one. Negatives cover stale/wrong run, wrong agent/task, missing final proof, summary/unsettled/hidden output, false explanations and unread service data. - Product E2E TypeScript and `git diff --check` passed. - Live protected-action qualification is required after merging this and the companion private service/cleanup fixes. The previous failed result remains failed; this is a bounded task-clarity experiment, not a claimed model or completion-schema repair. - Current-head Greptile and Paperclip reviews are 5/5 with zero open threads. CI initially failed the unrelated agent-chat-projects cleanup POST with a PostgreSQL lock timeout after its assertions completed. One bounded retry passed on unchanged source; all current-head gates passed at `64bc169e147290ed4dbaa18221e0268362ce81ee`. The original failing attempt and its logs remain available. The task-clarity change is still a bounded experiment; the observer repair addresses a demonstrated storage-assumption defect. ## Risks A clearer task can still fail with the selected model. All acceptance checks and completion input validation remain strict; a saved briefing alone cannot qualify the complete journey. Only test prompts and test evidence code change. Missing or contradictory native evidence fails closed. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed by this session. Used reasoning, source editing, shell execution and test 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
|
59b76777db |
test: clarify onboarding artifact completion instructions (#18258)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and inspect their work. > - Product E2E journeys test that work through normal browser and API controls. > - The Cloud onboarding journey asks one native child to publish a file and save a document. > - Its task request did not explain the completion report format or make each output step distinct. > - A live attempt published the file, then submitted an invalid finish report and declared a blocker. > - This change orders the scripted request and explains the existing completion contract. > - The agent must still produce the result and pass the same independent checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17940. Refs #18228. **What happened?** The scripted onboarding request left completion details implicit. A live child published its proof file, then submitted a finish payload without verification and with an invalid schema value. Its later blocked report also listed local paths as artifacts. This does not establish a Core validator defect. **Expected behavior** The request should explain the existing tool contract. The child must publish the file, save the document with its returned link, then submit a valid completion report. Argument correction must not replace artifact verification or bypass approval. **Steps to reproduce** Run the explicit Cloud onboarding Product E2E journey through its private target provider. Approve the proposed child through the UI. Inspect the native finish report and the independently checked attachment, document, and parent links. **Paperclip version or commit** The observed deployment used public Core `6a674716447e8fa268c5cdeb1db1020319368a77`. This fixture change starts from `a8e07500db68f187b19de83823eb7fabf1196021`. **Deployment mode** Cloud testing with the scripted Product E2E harness. ## What Changed - Order the child request: create files, publish the proof, save its document, then finish. - Require verification for actual checks and omit the optional schema field. - Explain receipt-derived references in evidence and file artifacts. Keep local input paths in verification details. - Document same-attempt argument correction and preserve historical failed results. ## Verification - Existing onboarding-first-task and artifact-evidence suites: 83 checks passed. - The maintained harness unit wrapper also passed 137 Node contract checks. - Independent source review found no contract, privacy, or oracle change. - Full `pnpm build` and `pnpm -r typecheck` passed at the preceding commit `c3900cf2`. The only later change names the filename required by the existing document assertion. - Current `d75180b4`: the 83 fixture/artifact checks, 137 contract checks, and `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck` passed again. - Credential-free `--list --suite product-journeys` passed. - The local full repository Vitest run at `c3900cf2` was stopped before the filename correction. It is incomplete and is not reported as a pass. Current-head CI passed: 54 successful checks and two optional Storybook skips. The separate advisory review is still running and is not reported as passed. Initial fresh-worktree dependency and sandbox IPC failures remain recorded. - No paid model, Cloud workspace, release, or deployment was run for this change. These checks establish harness compatibility, not a live model pass. The prior failed campaign remains failed. ## Risks The model may still submit an invalid report or fail another step. A fresh live journey is required to measure the instruction change. This PR changes fixture text and documentation only. It supplies no result, checksum, real attachment ID, or successful status. Models, limits, validators, and independent assertions stay the same. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, `gpt-6.1-sol`, ultra reasoning. The model identity comes from confirmed parent runtime metadata. Context window size is unavailable. Tools and code execution assisted the change and review. ## 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
|
2badf8a4a5 |
fix(evals): verify native QA replies on the reloaded task thread (#18248)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents that do work for users. > - Product E2E journeys check user outcomes on real deployments. > - Native task threads can render saved final replies from a settled run. > - The new QA Plan and Stop checks looked only for agent comments. > - Both flows reached the requested terminal state and showed the correct reply, but that storage assumption rejected them. > - This PR checks the reloaded visible reply and binds it to the final successful run. Explicit presentation decisions remain authoritative. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #18222 and #18244. **What happened?** The deployed Plan journey completed all three native runs, including revision and approval. Stop completed native cancellation, resource release and a new direction. Their final-answer checks failed because the comments endpoint did not contain the rendered native reply. The original failed grades remain unchanged. **Expected behavior** Require exactly one correct visible final answer after reload, attributed to the final successful owned run. Reject an earlier run, progress text, hidden content, duplicate answers or a cancelled run. If its selected completion comment is projected, require that comment and matching author/run/text. Otherwise require a single durable final assistant message and its settled native final-response anchor. **Steps to reproduce** Run the Plan or Stop journey on a native deployment whose task thread renders the settled run before a completion comment is projected. ## What Changed - Add a narrow reply observer over the existing task-thread hooks. It reloads the page and refreshes saved run/comment metadata while waiting. - Bind native replies to a validated durable final assistant event and the successful run's settled final-response anchor. Require the selected comment when projected; support pending or suppressed projection without accepting a summary fallback. Accept payload and item-normalized finals, rejecting contradictory fields. - Use the observer for Plan completion and Stop's new direction. Keep existing run counts, deployment binding, cancellation and artifact checks. - Add negative grading tests, include the helper in the definition hash, and document its evidence contract. Classic protocol comment matchers are unchanged. ## Verification - 63 focused tests passed across native reply evidence, agent evidence and journey contracts. - Product E2E TypeScript passed. The reply observer uses the remaining journey deadline and backs off polling. - Live Plan and Stop attempts exposed this grading failure. Their original outcomes remain failed; fresh qualification is required after merge. - Full current-head CI passed at `40840ed742977853630d733292461ad7003fc7fb`; Greptile and Paperclip Review both scored 5/5, with zero unresolved review threads. ## Risks The observer depends on existing task-thread test hooks and run anchors. Missing or changed hooks fail closed. It reads rendered user-facing text; a finish summary alone cannot satisfy it. Native event provenance, run ownership and exact reply equality are required. No backend, model, provider, budget or cancellation policy changes are included. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed by this session. Used reasoning, source editing, shell execution and test 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
|
8941db9ce6 |
fix(evals): accept editor escapes and cancel sensitive QA requests (#18244)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents that do work for users. > - Product E2E journeys check real browser actions and saved results. > - A rich editor can store plain underscores as escaped Markdown. > - The QA reply check treated that valid saved message as a failure. > - A private target adapter also needs to cancel credential-safe HTTP requests before cleanup. > - This PR fixes reply comparison and adds abort and timeout options to the existing sensitive transport. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #18222. **What happened?** The artifact revision and Stop journeys rejected the correct single user reply because its underscore was stored as `\_`. Sensitive connection setup also lacked a way to pass its lifecycle signal to the actual HTTP request. **Expected behavior** The check accepts the editor's underscore escape and still rejects changed, duplicate, missing, or foreign replies. A cancelled sensitive request closes before setup cleanup proceeds. **Steps to reproduce** Run an artifact revision with an underscore in the reply. For the transport case, abort a pending sensitive request or let its deadline expire. ## What Changed - Compare the fixture reply after undoing only underscore escaping. Keep exact text, count, and author checks. - Let `ConnectionApi.postSensitive` accept a bounded timeout and abort signal. Check cancellation again after cookie loading and before dispatch. - Test the retained reply failure and both cancellation paths with an actual loopback HTTP server. Document the adapter contract. ## Verification - Focused Product E2E tests: 30 passed across two files. - Product E2E TypeScript check passed. After rebase, a final check first found four diagnostics from stale runner/plugin SDK declarations; rebuilding those two workspace packages cleared all four, and the unchanged E2E check passed. - The first sandbox run failed because loopback `listen` returned `EPERM`. The unchanged HTTP tests passed with loopback permission. The test now reports listener errors directly. - Both independent reviewers found a possible pre-arrival deadline-test hang. The follow-up races arrival against request settlement and adds one second of deadline headroom. All 30 affected tests passed after that fix. - Full current-head CI passed in run 40982914525. Greptile and Paperclip Review both scored 5/5 at `f0526f5fbbf13de5ea43e868eb012069ca3d8907`; all review threads are resolved. Live QA requalification follows the merged public and private fixes; no live pass is claimed here. ## Risks The text normalization applies only to plain fixture replies and only removes underscore escapes. It does not remove arbitrary Markdown. Sensitive calls retain their existing 30-second default and closed error messages. API wrappers must forward the optional signal and await the actual request. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The serving model ID and context window are not exposed by this session. Used reasoning, code editing, shell execution, and test 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> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandClaude Opus 5.5
|
7d194e901f |
feat(ci): merge lockfile refresh PRs through a dedicated bot (#18238)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - CI owns `pnpm-lock.yaml`. Contributors do not commit it, so a poisoned lockfile cannot come in from a community PR. > - `refresh-lockfile.yml` regenerates the lockfile from the manifests on master and opens a PR. > - That PR waits on required checks and code owner review. A `GITHUB_TOKEN` push does not start the checks, so a maintainer must merge each PR by hand. > - The PR content comes only from manifests that maintainers already reviewed on master. A human review adds little. > - This pull request lets a dedicated GitHub App merge the refresh PR at once, without CI or review. > - A release-age gate holds the merge when the refresh adds a package version that is less than 3 days old on npm. > - The benefit is a lockfile loop that closes itself, without a bypass for any identity that other workflows can use. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #12115 (the same stuck-PR problem, fixed there by starting the checks). Refs #18219 (an example refresh PR that needed a manual approval and merge). **What happened?** Each lockfile refresh PR stays open until a code owner approves it and a maintainer merges it. The required checks `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e` also do not start, because the workflow pushes with `GITHUB_TOKEN`. **Expected behavior** The refresh PR merges with no human action and no CI run, unless it adds a package version that is too new to trust without review. **Steps to reproduce** Merge a manifest change to master. Look at the `chore/refresh-lockfile` PR that the workflow opens. It stays blocked. ## What Changed - `refresh-lockfile.yml` runs in a new `lockfile-refresh` environment. Only `master` can use this environment. - The workflow creates a token for a dedicated lockfile bot app after dependency resolution is complete. The token has only contents and pull request write access. - The workflow merges with `gh pr merge --squash --admin --match-head-commit <sha>`, not `--auto`. It merges only the commit that it pushed. - New `.github/scripts/check-lockfile-release-age.mjs` compares the base and refreshed lockfiles. It looks up the npm publish time of each added package version. The bot merges only when every version is at least 3 days old. A lookup error, a missing publish time, a non-registry version, or a resolution that is not a plain registry tarball also holds the merge. - When the gate holds the PR, the workflow posts or updates one report comment on the PR and does not merge. - A daily schedule runs the refresh again, so a held PR merges after its versions are old enough. - A held run uploads its lockfile as a `held-pnpm-lock` artifact. The artifact records the hash of the master lockfile it started from. The next master run resolves from it only while master still has that lockfile, so held versions stay while their manifests do not change, and a maintainer's lockfile correction replaces them. The workflow does not read the PR branch for this, because users with write access can push to it. - The generated PR body now describes the gate. - `tests/runner-e2e/OPERATIONS.md` now says that the bot can merge the report-lock correction without review, under the same gate. - New `lockfile-refresh-merge.test.mjs` pins the merge safeguards: the environment, the step order, the gate conditions, and `--match-head-commit`. - `doc/RELEASE-AUTOMATION-SETUP.md` §8.1 tells an admin how to create the app, the environment, and the ruleset bypass. It also tells why we do not use `github-actions` or `commitperclip` for the bypass. ## Verification - `node --test .github/scripts/tests/check-lockfile-release-age.test.mjs .github/scripts/tests/lockfile-refresh-*.test.mjs` passes (17/17). - I ran the gate against the real lockfile diff of #18219 and the live npm registry. With 3 days, all 7 added versions passed (`eligible=true`). With 60 days, it held all 7 `turbo` 2.11.10 versions (9.1 days old) and wrote the report. - The workflow YAML parses. actionlint did not run, because it is not installed locally and Docker was not available. - No live run yet. After the admin setup in §8.1, run the workflow with `workflow_dispatch` on master, or merge a manifest change. Then make sure that the bot opens and merges the refresh PR. ## Risks - **Setup order.** An org admin must do the steps in §8.1 before this PR merges. If not, the next refresh fails at the token step, and the PR stays open for a manual merge, as it does now. - **No CI on lockfile changes.** A bad resolution can land on master without a check. The next manifest PR or the canary release shows the problem. - **Release-age gate limits.** The gate stops only fast-detected attacks on new versions. A malicious version that stays undetected for more than 3 days still merges without review. Lockfile changes that add very new versions now wait for a maintainer or up to 3 days. - **Bypass scope.** The app bypasses the master ruleset only in pull request mode. It cannot push to master directly. Only the master-only `lockfile-refresh` environment holds its key. If the key leaks, the holder can merge any open PR past review. Rotate the key if you think it leaked. - **More master runs.** A merge by an app token starts push workflows on master. A merge by `GITHUB_TOKEN` does not. After each lockfile merge, the canary release runs, and the refresh workflow runs again with no change. ## Model Used - Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, in Claude Code with tool use (shell, file edit, GitHub CLI). ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
ebed7f5237 |
test(evals): protect Antigravity setup and two-turn delivery (#18190)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and their work. > - A provider integration must work through ordinary agent setup and task controls. > - The recorded Antigravity walkthrough exposed setup, delivery, and continuation failures. > - A repeatable check must verify real work and retain failed attempts. > - This pull request converts all 47 recorded steps into one fixed Product E2E journey. > - Maintainers can rerun the case and inspect independent delivery, cleanup, and accounting evidence. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Builds on merged #18187, #18188, and #18189, and consumes the shared repairs from merged #18230 and the equivalent manual-policy declaration from #18222. Refs #18214 for the CI task wrapper. Refs #12503 and #14938 for related legacy adapter work. **Agent or provider** Google Antigravity native Runner with a saved managed Google subscription and the exact Low model. **Why this adapter is useful** A user must be able to add an agent, connect its account, and receive real task results across a follow-up. Picker visibility alone is insufficient. **How the agent is invoked** A fixed Playwright driver uses ordinary product controls. The agent runs through native ACP. Independent checks use public APIs, actual downloads, owned process observations, and native lifetime fences. ## What Changed - Register one explicit-only case: `antigravity-agent-journey.runner-antigravity.local.saved-subscription-two-turn`. - Map all 47 source steps and declare saved-account prerequisites, finite limits, and same-host macOS ARM64 scope. - Create an agent through the ordinary picker, connect the saved account, select Low, run Test, and wait for readiness. Save an instruction marker, deliver a file, and update it through an ordinary follow-up. - Require each run's visible completed file activity, exact downloaded bytes, committed Done result, same tagged conversation, distinct physical owner birth, released lease, and free native fences. Verify reload persistence. - Stop failed native runs that still own a retry. Replay an existing Stop with its durable request identity and wait for the matching audited acknowledgement. A terminal reservation without a native intent remains unconfirmed. - Keep private evidence in the existing result, report, dashboard, and accounting pipeline. Retain the paused QA agent and financial history while preserving the shared account and budget policies. - Journal only the ordinary wizard's future ID, target, name, intended harness and expected creator before forwarding its POST unchanged. Bind the response and interrupted recovery to exact identity reads; a pending 404 stays unconfirmed. - Serialize private resource snapshots through temporary-file fsync, atomic rename and directory fsync. Abort forwarding on storage failure and preserve legacy receipts. If later journal or diagnostic writes fail, retain the primary error, always close the browser, and attempt the ordinary failed report. - Add production-component browser controls and harden task-menu readiness, alias selection, scroll restoration, failure packaging, and one hermetic auth-test budget. - Wait for the existing GitHub recovery fixture to register its next deadline before asserting the original range; preserve its nested-transaction and zero-request checks. In the decision-expiry fixture, verify the exact saved expiry separately from the earlier global wake of another queue. ## Verification - Fresh registered acceptance passed on eval source `9060f3cd01b7c3445ecdf703d72e9cf30fe42b59` and merged serving product `61bd4ac6919c2309f766a25e62273b074cee3261`. It completed ordinary setup and two turns with native `.5` and `gemini-3.8-flash-low`. All 16 matchers, 14 checkpoints, and cleanup passed in **165,613 ms**. Actual downloads were **61 bytes** and **119 bytes**. Both turns passed their own run-bound browser activity checks and reload persistence. - Independent read-back confirms Done, a paused retained agent, the same connected saved default account, and no active owned run. Both accepted results have the same full tagged conversation and distinct primary process births. All 21 observed processes retired; both leases released and all three native fences were free after each turn. The selected `.5` checkpoints also showed equal agent/backend session IDs; this is an observed case requirement, not a generic ACP invariant. - Receipts report 339,273 input tokens, 7,224 output tokens, and 202,846 cached input tokens. Subscription prices are unavailable. Billing coverage remains incomplete, not free. - The normal report CLI passed. All 310 files from nine original attempts and two separate recoveries retained their hashes. The twelve current screenshots are byte-identical, and 194 local report links are contained and valid. The eight earlier reports were copied without regeneration. - Delivery source `1bf4fb04df04710b82844b3c9355767f46b5f68f` branches from `d3f2a60e795fc60d64c8b19d1eed4d48657d5492` and merges cleanly with current master `1d571de5f9f886d66e520800baec8fc2f67d0948`. All 41 prior `c8b332` authored file blobs remain identical; the 42nd path is the decision-expiry fixture contract correction. Creation ownership, the strict durable writer, and the ordinary successful workflow remain unchanged. Of 43 measured file blobs, 30 remain identical. The Antigravity oracle, artifact, billing and report gates and its suite-specific validation block remain unchanged. The actual retained agent matches its original creator; its original request `setupId` was not captured and is not reconstructed. - Later master changes include model-visible workspace guidance and rejected-terminal-report handling. Their bounded source assessment is separate: the first actual finish failed, then a same-turn replacement was accepted and committed. Later read-only results match both original native-result hashes, and the complete event catalogs have no `session.failed` event. Master #18228 also expands detection of explicit JSON file requests. The measured create/update-and-attach `.txt` task already required publication under both parsers; the publication validation gate itself is unchanged. Master #18240 changes remote workspace cache staging and adds an OpenCode index refresh. The selected local lane returns before those paths. Master #18213 adds optional numeric turn timing and trace boundaries. Its selected Antigravity model, text, IDs, result and retirement semantics remain unchanged in the bounded source review. Local diagnostic rows and awaits can change event ordinals and latency; the oracle checks relative semantic order. Collector coverage and latency improvement remain outside this proof. This does not claim that the whole current runtime is byte-identical to serving `61bd`, or relabel the measured result as a new run. - The adopted upstream cache controls passed 3/3 with pinned real Turbo. Forced work disables local and remote reads and writes; ordinary work reuses local results. The original genuine-pnpm/Turbo controls remain historical to `9060`'s earlier write-only policy. The duplicate cache patch is superseded by #18230. Its qualification-only pnpm addition is removed because the adopted upstream controls do not require it. - The E2E typecheck, map checks and 277-control replay are carried from the unchanged eval source paths. That replay passed, including the 183 Antigravity controls, catalog/connection checks and the separate product-journey validator. The carried creation controls include 91 config/recovery cases. The final launcher suite passed 19/19, including five real campaign finalization fault cases; the report suite passed 7/7. These final checks did not rerun the earlier 277-control group. The canonical production-component browser spec passed in 27.4 s under its unchanged 60 s limit before the replay. Four paused-composer cases and the product base's build/typecheck plus 376 focused regressions were verified earlier. - The shipped wizard and actual API client cover persistence before forwarding, lost response JSON, foreign/malformed requests, wrong response identity/creator and cleanup-error preservation. Real filesystem controls failed 5/5 before the writer repair and passed 5/5 afterward, preserving the old journal on partial-write, temporary-file sync and rename faults. Three persistent-sync campaign controls failed before the finalization repair and passed afterward. All five final campaign fault cases preserve the primary failure, cleanup failure, usage and failed report while attempting browser closure. The strict journal still blocks the next mutation. These are provider-free ownership controls; the Google task proof remains the original `9060` → `61bd` acceptance. - The decision restart check passed in the local 20-case fixture run. A current-source real-PostgreSQL rollback control reproduced the exact 90,000 ms earlier global wake: the old equality rejected it, while the exact durable expiry and new future-wake bound passed. The original 60 s open-state, exact-timestamp, continuation and quiet checks remain. The broader local run was **FAILED: 19 passed / 1 failed**, with a 15 s timeout and a 30 s cleanup timeout in an unchanged timestamp-pagination case. That case passed in canonical `c8b332` CI; the local timeout cause remains inconclusive. An extra local server typecheck failed against stale cached Runner declarations; it did not check this excluded test file. Both limits remain recorded for fresh canonical CI. - A broader local GitHub recovery group passed 21/22. Its unchanged pagination case observed an unexpected config request; the log does not establish the cause. That result remains retained, and fresh current-head CI is the final broader gate. - Exact delivery-head CI completed with 55 successes, two skips, and one optional neutral review. Required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`, build, typecheck, and Runner checks passed. Fresh Greptile is 5/5 with zero unresolved threads. Optional Paperclip is neutral 4/5; its carried recommendations are dispositioned against the public Stop contract and selected live identity evidence. Seven earlier converted attempts retain their failed grades and partial evidence. Historical Paid8 and its later read-only per-run UI observation remain separate from the fresh acceptance above. Unknown prices and the older partial startup accounting remain explicit. Full lineage and raw evidence remain private in the normal report bundle. ## Risks - This case requires an authorized saved personal default Google subscription and finite operator candidate admission. It does not test fresh OAuth or establish global qualification. - The physical observer supports a same-host loopback macOS ARM64 target. Cloud, Linux, and other models remain outside this case. - A known-cost stop cannot cap missing prices or in-flight subscription charges. Existing operator policies remain unchanged. - Raw account/native identities stay private. Missing retirement proof keeps resources retained. The selected cleanup mode does not test agent purge. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6). The host did not expose the exact model revision or context limit. The model used tools for code edits, tests, browser automation, and review. ## 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
|
d3f2a60e79 |
test(e2e): reuse core journeys across deployment targets (#18222)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and their work. > - Product E2E tests verify work through the browser and public APIs. > - The classic matrix already tests several common task stories. > - Its older stories depend on local fixture setup and workspace access. > - Deployment tests need the same story checks with a separate target adapter. > - This PR shares those checks and adds five explicit journey selections. > - A deployment pass still requires evidence from that deployment. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Product E2E journey reuse across managed instances and deployed Cloud instances. **Current behavior** The deployed-target catalog covers task creation, assignment, Ask, and fresh onboarding. Plan revision and Everyday stories run through the classic fixture driver. Several story steps assume a local workspace. **Proposed behavior** Add explicit Plan revision, artifact revision, protected-action approval and decline, Skill Studio, and Stop/redirect journeys. Share the main browser sequences and content checks with the classic driver. Let target adapters provide authentication, native agents, a reachable service fixture, and owned cleanup. **Reason and benefit** A local pass cannot verify the deployed application. Shared story code lets a deployed target exercise the same behavior without copying an entire test or starting a replacement server. **Breaking changes** No product API or default matrix selection changes. Passed deployment results must satisfy the declared story checks and work-run count. Unsupported target capabilities fail before a story runs. Related public work: #17262 and #18098. Upstream prerequisite: #18230. ## What Changed - Extract shared Plan, artifact download/oracle, protected service, Skill Studio, and Stop/redirect helpers. Keep classic callers on those helpers. - Add five explicit paid journey selections with owned-task observations and native company, agent, model, and environment checks. - Include classic prompts, delivery/decision code, and the decline grader in the source-definition hash. Keep classic transient-read retries and reject deployment binding failures immediately. Match cookie directory boundaries in sensitive fixture requests. - Require complete story checks and expected run receipts before retaining a passing result. Keep failed evidence and private downloads. - Add a secret-safe request method for deployment fixture credentials. Add the missing declaration for the existing manual evidence policy module so the E2E project can typecheck. - Document target responsibilities and promotion after a real deployment pass. This source catalog does not enroll candidates in a daily plan. ## Verification - E2E TypeScript check: passed, including the review follow-up. - Review follow-up: 30 tests passed across four files, covering transient Plan reads, immediate binding rejection, cookie-path scope, agent receipts, and artifact evidence. Stop now waits for a saved, still-active native turn before the browser click and retains its startup events. Counterexamples reject claimed-but-unstarted, already-completed, interrupted, and non-native work. Shared observation and API helpers also enter the definition fingerprint. Cancellation snapshots are captured before lease cleanup. A direct terminal-boundary assertion rejects native work after cancellation even if it is already in the first snapshot; five cleanup-window counterexamples are covered. The Stop-output regression first failed for both native `item.delta` and `item.completed`; the fixed check detects both while allowing accounting-only updates. A report-catalog test first failed because the sandbox denied the tsx child IPC pipe (`listen EPERM`); the unchanged test passed outside the sandbox. - Affected journey, catalog, API, service fixture, and delivery checks: 313 tests passed across 19 files. - Workspace build: passed after rebase. - Workspace typecheck: passed. The default repository run was attempted. Repeated embedded PostgreSQL startup failures prevented local database coverage; it was stopped without claiming a full pass. Linux CI must supply that coverage. - Broad E2E support run: 4,793 passed, 23 failed, 2 skipped. Failures include existing stale image/Pi assertions and process/startup timeouts under host load. The affected tests pass separately. This is not a claim that the broad suite is green. - Upstream CI prerequisites: this branch is rebased on the merged #18230 repair. The earlier conflicting Turbo flags no longer apply. The shell-hook fix is also supplied by that upstream change. Linux shell-hook investigation: 19 focused tests and adapter TypeScript passed. The exact staged-config sequence reproduced CI's 500 in a pinned Node 24 Linux container. Node's default stdin socket at shell level zero selects Bash remote-shell startup and reads `.bashrc` instead of `BASH_ENV`. Ignored stdin and a nested shell each produce 1000. The fixture now ignores stdin; the production hook and 1000 assertion are unchanged. See [Bash startup rules](https://www.gnu.org/software/bash/manual/html_node/Bash-Startup-Files). - GitHub CI on the earlier head passed most suites but failed two browser tests (a fixture cleanup lock timeout and a fixture run staying queued) plus the shell-hook assertion. The lock-timeout case received one retry, which was cancelled by a later source push and does not establish recovery. These failures remain part of the verification record. - Real Cloud qualification: the private target adapter is reviewed and merged. These candidates must pass there before daily-plan promotion. Current source review: Greptile 5/5 and Paperclip Review 5/5 on `a9df1d6e8d880710fce39b87e689e07e1c8e6edc`, with zero unresolved review threads. The full [GitHub CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40974946081) passed on that exact head, including both required aggregate checks. ## Risks Shared helper changes affect classic callers. The independent ZIP oracle and visible delivery requirements remain in place. Stop requires native acknowledgement, terminal event evidence, resource cleanup, and no later original-turn activity. The managed local target still lacks paid-agent fixtures and reports these journeys as unsupported. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, terminal use, and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context window 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> |
||
|
github-actions[bot]andlockfile-bot
|
1843d27e09 |
chore(lockfile): refresh pnpm-lock.yaml (#18219)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip uses a dependency lock for reproducible builds. > - Dependency changes on master need matching lock entries. > - Paid eval reports also pin a reviewed offline correction. > - Reports must install before paid model work starts. > - This automated PR keeps the lock and report proof together. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Dependency manifests on master changed after the last committed lock refresh. **Expected behavior** Frozen installs must match those manifests. Eval reports must retain matching offline lock proof. **Steps to reproduce** Run a frozen install before and after this lock refresh. ## What Changed - Refresh the dependency lock from the manifests on master. - Include the matching offline report correction and hashes. ## Verification - Pinned pnpm resolution completed with lifecycle scripts disabled. - The report proof refresh accepted the reviewed committed baseline. - Required PR checks and reviews must pass before merge. ## Risks Dependency changes require review. Unknown report lock baselines remain blocked. This update changes no permissions or paid enable gates. ## Model Used None — generated by pnpm and the deterministic report-lock updater. ## Checklist - [x] Thinking path and problem description included - [x] Generated lock and matching report proof included - [ ] Required CI checks and reviews pass Co-authored-by: lockfile-bot <lockfile-bot@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
99d27fd5e7 |
feat(evals): add a metadata overview for the chat catalog (#18194)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is a control plane for AI agents that do work. > - Its evaluation reports separate recorded results from source coverage. > - A case without a main baseline measurement can still have a candidate run. > - A normal campaign card treats an expected execution without a result as missing evidence. > - Catalog planning data must not create those cards or change a recorded grade. > - This change adds a typed metadata view to the existing Evals dashboard. > - Readers can compare main outcomes, candidate execution, allowances and source review separately. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The existing Evals dashboard can show a campaign's retained results. It cannot show the full chat catalog as metadata without synthetic result entries. **Current behavior** An unused initial, an unknown allowance and a completed candidate run can all lack a main baseline result. Showing them as missing campaign artifacts hides these differences. **Proposed behavior** Add one validated metadata view in the existing renderer. Show one row per frozen scenario, separate execution and main outcome columns, filters, and the public request and expected outcome from static YAML. Keep normal campaign cards unchanged. **Reason and benefit** Readers can see which cases ran, which have no main measurement, and which still need preparation. Source review and candidate outcomes cannot add baseline pass credit. **Breaking changes** None to existing campaign inputs or outputs. The new metadata mode uses its own strict schema and requires a new private output directory. No matching open or closed PR or issue was found in the duplicate search. ## What Changed - Add a strict display-only catalog schema with closed enums and fixed catalog scope. - Validate the 244 row identities against static YAML without importing executable case callbacks. - Show main results, recorded execution, allowances and source review in separate columns. - Add search and filters, passing examples, qualification notes and expandable public test descriptions. - Add one dated immutable snapshot link in the existing shared report navigation. This does not change history data or update an already-published page. - Add a private metadata preview command to the existing dashboard owner. Keep existing campaign generation on its current path. - Keep allowance certainty independent of measurements and allow an optional later candidate outcome alongside a main outcome, without changing main counters. - Add focused pure, JSDOM and file-loader checks. Document the metadata command. ## Verification - The owning `catalog-overview.test.ts` Vitest suite passes all fourteen tests under the focused source configuration. The valid-main/unknown-allowance and main-fail/later-candidate-pass controls fail against the old renderer and pass with this repair. The never-run/unknown-allowance control fails against |
||
|
github-actions[bot]andlockfile-bot
|
4a6f6a65eb |
chore(lockfile): refresh pnpm-lock.yaml (#18185)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip uses a dependency lock for reproducible builds. > - Dependency changes on master need matching lock entries. > - Paid eval reports also pin a reviewed offline correction. > - Reports must install before paid model work starts. > - This automated PR keeps the lock and report proof together. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Dependency manifests on master changed after the last committed lock refresh. **Expected behavior** Frozen installs must match those manifests. Eval reports must retain matching offline lock proof. **Steps to reproduce** Run a frozen install before and after this lock refresh. ## What Changed - Refresh the dependency lock from the manifests on master. - Include the matching offline report correction and hashes. ## Verification - Pinned pnpm resolution completed with lifecycle scripts disabled. - The report proof refresh accepted the reviewed committed baseline. - Required PR checks and reviews must pass before merge. ## Risks Dependency changes require review. Unknown report lock baselines remain blocked. This update changes no permissions or paid enable gates. ## Model Used None — generated by pnpm and the deterministic report-lock updater. ## Checklist - [x] Thinking path and problem description included - [x] Generated lock and matching report proof included - [ ] Required CI checks and reviews pass Co-authored-by: lockfile-bot <lockfile-bot@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
cd0c86e5e1 |
fix(evals): support private evidence for the frozen chat catalog (#18170)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Product E2E tests need to retain evidence from both successful and failed work. > - Manual private runs use the existing protected AWS evidence route. > - Its fixed eight-case registry blocks other scenarios in the frozen chat catalog. > - Failed Playwright cells also produce static trace files that need exact owner and content checks. > - This pull request admits the fixed catalog, keeps eight cells per run, and retains the existing report identities. > - Exact source and run approval still controls each private operation. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #18134, #17888. **What happened?** The manual private route accepts only its first eight execution IDs. It rejects other IDs from the frozen 244-scenario chat catalog before a run can start. The dotted `area.case` report identity also fails the retained report parser. A failed Playwright cell can produce canonical trace assets that the private evidence owner does not yet recognize. **Expected behavior** The trusted route must recognize exactly the frozen 244 OpenCode/local execution IDs. Each original run must still select at most eight cells and have exact protected approval. The evidence owners must retain complete scanned originals from the actual pinned report producer. Unknown carriers and credential contamination must still fail closed. **Steps to reproduce** Use a known frozen chat ID outside the first eight with the current manual classifier. The classifier rejects it. Parse a dotted chat execution ID with the current report parser. The parser rejects it. Generate a synthetic failed Node-only Playwright test and pass its actual trace/report tree through the private evidence owners. This change includes the narrow parser repair from the existing open #17888. It does not merge or close that PR. The related source work was checked for overlap before this branch was created. ## What Changed - Replace the small private registry with the exact frozen 244 execution IDs. Preserve the two existing undotted standalone task IDs. - Keep the private run limit at eight through classification, approval rows, cell binding and transfer sessions. Preserve nonprivate selector behavior. - Bind private cell report assets to the actual installed pinned producer, selected cell, canonical path and exact bytes before the existing scans and archive checks. Pass that verified owner into both real launcher packaging calls. - Exclude installed build staging from the private evidence walk. Retain the real standard-file cap and reject unknown nested carriers. - Add the existing dotted chat report grammar. Preserve other report families and legacy task IDs. - Use the existing public announcement dismissal control in one external-link/upload E2E test so a real announcement cannot cover its composer button. Preserve the open menu and existing timeout. - Document source compatibility and operator gates. No workflow, product, dependency, lockfile, case callback, query, clock or budget changes. ## Verification - 132 distinct focused controls are closed. The current affected owner suite passes 39 controls under a nondefault temporary directory. The other 93 unchanged controls retain their previous passes. The initial registry, map-order and test-tooling failures remain recorded. - Two actual launcher call-expression controls fail on the prior source because canonical trace files are dropped. Both pass after the private-owner wiring. These controls do not claim full launcher lifecycle or actual E2E qualification. - Temporary paths use the real operating-system temporary directory, including the handoff check. - The controls check all 244 IDs through real private routing, cell binding and original-run approval. They reject unknown IDs, aliases, wrong profiles, traversal, private duplicates and excess private cells. - The controls preserve actual nonprivate 33-ID and duplicate selector behavior. - A real synthetic Node-only failed Playwright test produces the report and automatic trace. The control uses actual package, seal, archive, receipt and restored validation paths with mock AWS transport only. - Owning TypeScript `--noEmit` check passes. No local product server, browser, model, database, SDK build or evaluation was run. - Prior-head CI run 40906120388 failed one E2E test because the real announcement footer intercepted its Add to composer click. The other 28 tests in that shard passed. The narrow fixture uses the existing UI dismissal pattern. The added handler passes an isolated noEmit check against the real Playwright Page type. An additional strict check of the whole browser test fails on five unchanged shared-fixture type errors; checking that unchanged shared file alone gives identical diagnostics. The initial shell exit was misreported and corrected in the validation record. Browser verification is deferred to the next normal CI run; no local browser or server was started. - Repository-wide local build and test commands were not run because this is a scoped source change. Normal required PR checks will provide the repository CI result. ## Risks A registry entry is not proof that a target or feature is ready. A future target must use the exact matching private helper and producer contract, retain any stronger target scanners, and produce fresh source fingerprints. Existing running jobs keep their pinned workflow and target sources. All original attempt limits, declared inputs, private storage checks, fatal scanners and exact administrator-controlled run approval remain in force. The new cell report contract accepts only canonical assets from the actual pinned Playwright installation. Other assets and layouts still fail closed. No private evidence or generated report is included in this PR. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool use and code execution. The runtime does not expose a finer 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
b81b870732 |
Add QA smoke journeys and OpenCode run traces (#18098)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Product E2E journeys verify saved application behavior across deployments. > - Task creation and questions need reusable smoke selections and exact run attribution. > - Operators also need to inspect the OpenCode execution behind a measured question. > - Company observability does not currently support native OpenCode. > - This change adds the journeys and a bounded projection of normalized OpenCode run events. > - The projection follows the configured capture policy and retains the current run identity across warm reuse. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related foundation: #17262. Related alternative: #17989 exports metadata from OpenCode's native OTLP stream. This change uses normalized run events to support the existing content switches and per-run linkage. It does not forward the native stream. The two PRs overlap in launch registration and must be reconciled before both land. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Reusable Product E2E smoke selections and company observability for native OpenCode. **Current behavior** The journey catalog lacks reusable task creation and attached-agent question checks. Native OpenCode is marked unsupported for company observability, so a successful destination connection test does not prove that agent traces will appear. **Proposed behavior** Add explicit task-create and ask-question selections. Verify saved state and exact company, issue, agent, model, environment and successful run attribution. Export normalized OpenCode turns, tools and usage to the configured OTLP destination. Honor each capture switch and redact known secrets. **Reason and benefit** CI can run a small measured smoke selection, retain its screenshots and checks, and link results to traces belonging to the same run. **Breaking changes** Existing selectors remain unchanged. OpenCode export is opt-in through existing company settings. Legacy OpenCode stays unsupported. ## What Changed - Add reusable task creation and question journeys, configured-agent capability, owned-fixture checkpoints and strict evidence validation. - Add an OpenCode-owned projection of normalized run events. No provider SDK or raw payload schema enters heartbeat coordination. - Extend the private launch union and reserved environment allowlist for native OpenCode. With export disabled, no receiver request runs. - Keep destination headers in the parent wrapper and out of the actual provider child environment and configuration. - Bound each turn to 64 tool and 64 usage entries, 8 KiB per text field and a 1 MiB request. Use a three-second request deadline, four concurrent exports, and no retries or idle worker. - Pass the rotated runner authority to each proxy turn. A retained process no longer attributes later turns to its original launch run. - Update settings copy, observability documentation and capability maps. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed after the implementation changes. - Adapter launch/redaction: 9 tests passed. Projection and actual proxy: 12 tests passed before the review fix; the expanded projection suite passed all 12 cases after the fix. The proxy test exercises two runs in one process against a real local HTTP receiver and a fake provider. - Full OpenCode driver/projection suite: 72 passed, one existing response_wake test timed out at five seconds. A focused check then passed both existing omitted-continuation cases and the new trace export case. The timeout cause remains unconfirmed. - Runner package TypeScript and Rust `cargo check` passed. Map and UI token checks passed. - Prior journey validation: 273 tests across 12 files and the journey TypeScript check passed. - Broad local `pnpm test:run` encountered native-runtime integration failures with repeated embedded PostgreSQL initialization failures and was stopped. All 16 failing cases passed in an isolated run outside the filesystem sandbox (961 unrelated cases unselected). The broad local run is not a clean acceptance result. A later focused database-backed chat/heartbeat run passed all six selected observability cases, including native OpenCode launch and successful allocation (1,809 unrelated cases were unselected). - All CI gates passed for `21085f880d8babc9efeb22d0623db99613d33093`, including packaged-runner, clean-install, browser and build checks: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40884658995 . Greptile reviewed the same commit at 5/5 with no unresolved findings. - Verified OTLP JSON acceptance and indexing with an explicitly synthetic transport marker. No live OpenCode model trace or deployed smoke acceptance is claimed yet. ## Risks Export is best effort. Abrupt termination, recovered in-flight turns without a new submitted event, limits or receiver failure can lose traces. Export failure does not change task success. The projection represents observed normalized events, not raw native model spans or hidden reasoning. Known-secret redaction is not an OS isolation boundary. UI changes can break journey locators. Deployment adapters retain credential, ownership and cleanup responsibility. Both the controller and native runner bundle must be updated before live qualification. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, code execution and browser tools. The exact serving model ID and context 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 (targeted suites; broad local limitation 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
|
018c4c9c9b |
Retain approved manual E2E evidence in private history (#18134)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and their work. > - The manual AWS E2E workflow records browser and model evidence. > - Public repository Actions artifacts are not a restricted evidence store. > - Some chat evidence needs the existing private-history store. > - A target flag must not grant archive access or enable a public fallback. > - This pull request binds restricted runs to protected exact-source approval and retains their standard evidence with trusted transfer code. > - Operators can retain complete evidence without changing scanner verdicts or scenario outcomes. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Manual AWS E2E evidence retention for exact reviewed chat-feature selections. **Subsystem affected** The runner E2E manual workflow, standard evidence handoff and private-history transfer. **Current behavior** Manual cell and merged evidence use Actions artifacts. In a public repository, repository readers can download those files. Scheduled private history does not authorize a manual target to use its role. **Proposed behavior** Classify sensitive selections in the trusted workflow. Require one protected original-run approval. Verify existing private storage before target setup or model secrets. Retain scanned standard originals and final packaged results through a workflow-pinned runtime. Deny public artifact and history fallback on failure. **Reason and benefit** Preserve inspectable standard evidence in restricted storage without treating a private bucket as permission to retain credentials. **Additional context** Related source work is separate: #18067 changes paid runner routing, #18100 changes scoped input delivery, and #17888 changes report catalog parsing. This pull request does not include or revert those changes. ## What Changed - Add a trusted manual classification and exact run, attempt, workflow, target, selection and launcher approval contract. - Add a protected manual private job. Prepare a second workflow-pinned checkout and isolated publication dependencies before archive credentials. - Seal standard originals and final result bytes with exact inventories. Reject credential contamination, unscanned carriers and changed files. - Use existing immutable private-history archives and transfer receipts for cells and merged reports. Keep the existing bounds. - Use per-cell exact-key read sessions and a separate report writer. Check every inline policy against the 2,048-character STS limit. - Scan and seal fresh generated report logs and files with the actual report-step credential roots before transfer. - Require a positive nonprivate route for Actions uploads and public history. Private failures have no public fallback. Preserve normal catalog semantics for nonprivate selections with more than 32 IDs or duplicate IDs. - Authenticate generated-report fonts and every reserved trace-viewer static asset against the exact trusted producer path and bytes, including HTML and JavaScript. Keep standard cell evidence and unknown carriers closed. - Document the first eight supported IDs, deployment gates and the operator trust boundary. ## Verification - 57 new pure, actual-helper and actual-workflow-shell controls pass. - 50 affected existing workflow, routing, target and private-history controls pass. The final committed workflow security controls also pass. - Targeted helper/test and actual launcher noEmit checks pass. - `actionlint -shellcheck= -pyflakes= .github/workflows/runner-full-stack-e2e.yml` passes. - Parent `2f46336d7` required CI is green. The server 11/12 shard first failed on database cleanup/test timing and passed one bounded recheck with unchanged source. The original failure remains recorded. - The preserved docs-only parent `d721c170f` had 59 terminal, nonblocking checks and fresh Greptile 5/5. Three later review comments exposed a genuine static-report asset failure and nonprivate selector regression; their parent counterexamples remain recorded. - The reviewed parent passes 76 focused controls across nine files. The final dependency preflight successor passes all six affected controls, including two new actual `prepare` subprocess controls, and targeted helper/test noEmit. Unchanged suites were not repeated. A synthetic Node-only Playwright HTML/blob/JUnit report and the real dashboard renderer/brand stager pass the actual sealer, strict archive and immutable receipt path; only AWS transport is synthetic. No browser or product setup runs in that test. - Default cell fonts/SVGs, unknown report files, forged paths, altered static bytes, recomputed inventory tampering and registered credential matches remain rejected. Eligibility and remaining-byte checks run before body reads in both sealer and transfer validator; both independent parent read-order failures are preserved. - The pre-credential target comparison also binds the new generated-report asset helper byte for byte. A genuine tampered-dependency parent failure is preserved. - Six additional actual sealer/validator controls expose the standard-extension trace-owner bypass on the parent. All 34 affected controls pass on its correction, including the real producer/archive/receipt test; targeted noEmit passes. Ordinary dynamic report HTML outside the reserved trace directory is unchanged. - Final head `43683c4e0` passes both required gates, `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`, in normal CI run `40849916302` attempt 1. All 59 rollup checks/statuses are terminal and nonblocking (55 success, two neutral, two skipped). - Fresh exact-head Greptile is 5/5; automated review is terminal and all technical threads are resolved. Human CODEOWNER approval remains a separate gate. Earlier source, genuine counterexamples and CI history remain preserved. - Full local build and live E2E were not run. This task prohibits local SDK/native/server builds and paid or AWS operations. Normal pull request CI must pass before merge readiness. - No existing artifact bodies, archives, media or provider reasoning were inspected. Synthetic owned fixtures prove the privacy boundaries. ## Risks - Deployment still needs the existing private bucket, role and protected environments. Both environments need the exact original-run approval variable. - Targets need the compatible handoff protocol and a separately reviewed exact launcher digest. Existing target branches do not become ready automatically. - Complete duplicated originals and packaged evidence can exceed existing archive limits. Such a transfer fails; files are not silently removed. - Required evidence omissions remain fatal to PASS. Safe failed evidence is retained with an explicit missing list and incomplete required-evidence verdict. Credential contamination still blocks all original uploads. Restricted storage does not waive PNG, HTML, blob or scanner checks. - This is operator-approved source execution. Target processes can inherit the job's OIDC request environment and may re-assume a role. Inline session attenuation is not isolation from malicious approved source. - Operator authorization must bind the actual exact source and original run. A proven administrator-controlled record may supply it without an environment reviewer UI. No new approval UI or environment change is required by this PR. - Required repository CODEOWNER review is still pending. Commented reviews and review requests are not approvals. This PR stays open and unmerged. - This PR does not deploy infrastructure, change IAM, dispatch workflows, publish report payloads, change grades or transfer prior scenario passes. ## Model Used OpenAI `gpt-6.1-sol` in Codex. Used code execution, source analysis and tool calls. The host does not expose the context window size. Independent peer review used the same model family in a separate agent. ## 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> |
||
|
github-actions[bot]andlockfile-bot
|
31b927e301 |
chore(lockfile): refresh pnpm-lock.yaml (#18097)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start --> https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/211/changes/paperclip/211 <!-- entire-trail-link-end --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip uses a dependency lock for reproducible builds. > - Dependency changes on master need matching lock entries. > - Paid eval reports also pin a reviewed offline correction. > - Reports must install before paid model work starts. > - This automated PR keeps the lock and report proof together. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Dependency manifests on master changed after the last committed lock refresh. **Expected behavior** Frozen installs must match those manifests. Eval reports must retain matching offline lock proof. **Steps to reproduce** Run a frozen install before and after this lock refresh. ## What Changed - Refresh the dependency lock from the manifests on master. - Include the matching offline report correction and hashes. ## Verification - Pinned pnpm resolution completed with lifecycle scripts disabled. - The report proof refresh accepted the reviewed committed baseline. - Required PR checks and reviews must pass before merge. ## Risks Dependency changes require review. Unknown report lock baselines remain blocked. This update changes no permissions or paid enable gates. ## Model Used None — generated by pnpm and the deterministic report-lock updater. ## Checklist - [x] Thinking path and problem description included - [x] Generated lock and matching report proof included - [ ] Required CI checks and reviews pass Co-authored-by: lockfile-bot <lockfile-bot@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
github-actions[bot]andlockfile-bot
|
efd65c1125 |
chore(lockfile): refresh pnpm-lock.yaml (#18059)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start --> https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/189/changes/paperclip/189 <!-- entire-trail-link-end --> Auto-generated lockfile refresh after dependencies changed on master. This PR only updates pnpm-lock.yaml. Co-authored-by: lockfile-bot <lockfile-bot@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
287b04d72f |
fix(evals): keep report dependency proof with lockfile refresh (#18063)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start --> https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/192/changes/paperclip/192 <!-- entire-trail-link-end --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and runs paid Product E2E evaluations. > - Paid work needs a report that can install its trusted dependencies. > - The report uses a reviewed offline lock correction. > - New UI dependencies can make that correction stale while its lock hash still matches. > - The lockfile bot must refresh the correction with its lock changes. > - This PR also checks manifest consistency offline before model admission. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Current master declares new CodeMirror and YAML UI dependencies. Its committed lock omits those UI importer entries. The existing report correction accepts that lock, but a frozen install then fails with `ERR_PNPM_OUTDATED_LOCKFILE`. This can waste completed paid work before the report fails. Refs #18059. That bot PR supplies the matching lock. This PR keeps the root lock bot-owned and supplies its exact offline report correction. The correction changes 21 importer lines and leaves all package records unchanged. **Expected behavior** The existing bot includes matching report proof in its dependency PR. Paid authorization rejects stale manifests before model work. Report installation still accepts only reviewed hashes and applies no registry resolution. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run a frozen pnpm 9.15.4 install on master at `7f10cc058568e3c1ac133cf24f3b4000cbdfca0e`. 2. Observe the missing UI importer entries. 3. Apply the reviewed correction in this PR. The frozen install passes. ## What Changed - Add an explicit refresh mode that derives the offline patch and hashes from a known committed lock and the bot's resolved lock. - Keep the existing unknown-lock, patch hash and output hash guards. - Include the proof files in the existing lockfile bot PR. New bot PRs use complete descriptions; existing descriptions stay intact. - Validate the frozen lock against current manifests offline before paid admission, using the existing pinned pnpm version. - Refresh the current correction and document this process. The root lockfile is not committed here. ## Verification - 24 focused report-lock and workflow-security tests pass. They cover offline replay, tampered input/patch/output rejection, real Git refresh, unknown-base refusal and unchanged proof. - A full frozen install passes after the reviewed correction, with lifecycle scripts disabled. - A fresh source archive validates offline with an empty package store. - A deliberate manifest change fails that same offline check with `ERR_PNPM_OUTDATED_LOCKFILE`. - Both workflow files parse as YAML. All 95 shell steps pass Bash syntax checks. - `git diff --check` passes. These checks make no model requests. - Full repository checks and fresh reviews must pass on the final PR head before merge. ## Risks - Dependency changes must still pass review. Refresh refuses an unknown committed baseline. - The bot now commits two additional proof files. Its write permissions and target branch stay unchanged. Existing PR descriptions are preserved. - The paid authorization job adds an offline manifest check. It runs no package lifecycle scripts. - No budget, provider credential, environment permission, schedule or paid enable gate changes. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning and code execution tools. The exact serving variant 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 - [ ] 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
|
7f10cc0585 |
feat(evals): show full task conversations in E2E reports (#18055)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Product E2E tests verify tasks through the application and retain reports. > - A final screenshot cannot show the complete task conversation. > - Debugging a result requires the earlier requests, replies, and answers. > - This pull request captures task conversations before fixture cleanup and adds them to Test details. > - Reviewers can read each task thread without a running test instance. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The task evidence shown in Product E2E campaign reports. **Current behavior** Most task results show screenshots and checks. Screenshots show the final visible state. They omit earlier messages and long replies. Only the first-task suite has a conversation view. **Proposed behavior** Every standard runner attempt captures the saved conversation before cleanup. Test details show full task messages, requests, answers, and native agent progress. Related tasks have separate threads. Failed attempts also retain available history. Partial captures are labeled. **Reason and benefit** Readers can debug a task by reading its conversation. They do not need to reconstruct it from a screenshot or private run logs. GitHub searches found no duplicate PR or issue for this change. This is an improvement to test reporting and does not overlap a planned core feature in ROADMAP.md. **Breaking changes** None. The result adds an optional `taskChat` field. Old results still render. A result without a task has no chat section. Older reports need retained conversation evidence before they can gain this view. ## What Changed - Capture comments through all pages, task briefs, visible request copy, recorded answers, and native progress before fixture cleanup. - Include delegated tasks and standing chats. Preserve available history when a read fails. Report capture limits explicitly. - Add a closed, credential-redacted conversation format to normalized results. Exclude reasoning, raw tool payloads, and provider session metadata. - Render task conversations inside Test details. Retain them through report aggregation and dashboard regeneration. - Add capture, publication-format, regeneration, and browser tests. Update the evidence and security contracts. ## Verification - Report tests: `node node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts task-chat.test.ts first-task-report.test.ts report.test.ts history.test.ts` — 103 tests passed after review fixes. - Browser tests: `node node_modules/@playwright/test/cli.js test --config tests/runner-e2e/report-playwright.config.ts` — 6 tests passed after rebase. - Targeted TypeScript check of the new capture, renderer, validator, report, and browser-test files passed. - Tests cover a 1,105-message thread, a long final reply, event pagination, partial capture, company access, credential redaction, HTML escaping, and report regeneration. - Review regressions reproduced two failures before repair: the task-run API uses `runId`, and item reviews save verdicts in `result.items`. Capture now follows these contracts. Both regression tests pass. - Greptile reviewed commit `471236438e03e54cc4ad85de6653adf45835063c` at 5/5 with no new findings. The separate Paperclip review execution stopped without an assessment and ended neutral. Its cause is not established; this is not a completed Paperclip assessment. - Execution discovery passed for `core-compatibility.runner-codex.local.message-marker`. No paid provider run was started. - Full local commands were attempted. `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` stop because the DB package cannot find `tsx`. `pnpm test:run` stops because the general-server lane cannot find `vitest`. These package dependency links are absent in this checkout. - [Remote CI on the final commit](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40728689517) passed: typecheck and release registry, all general and serialized test shards, Runner static/Rust/Vitest checks, build, canary dry run, all eight browser E2E shards, and final verification. Security and contributor checks also passed. - Open a new task-based result and expand **Test details**. Read **Task chat** and expand each related task thread. Results without tasks keep their existing layout. ## Risks - Published reports now include fixture conversation text. Capture retains only reviewed display fields and redacts credentials. Fixture authors must keep this text suitable for public reports. - Long threads increase report size. Collection has a 30-second request-admission budget and page limits. It labels incomplete evidence and does not change the workflow grade. - Old reports cannot recover conversation text from screenshots. New attempts must retain the evidence. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6). The exact serving snapshot and context-window size are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, code execution, repository tools, and browser 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 - [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
|
d8bd8fe9fb |
feat(evals): browse E2E suites across targets and models (#18027)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - E2E tests show whether people can complete real app and agent journeys. > - Operators need to choose a suite and inspect its evidence across deployments and models. > - The history page listed campaigns without a suite browser or clear coverage filters. > - QA smoke also appeared separate from the other retained E2E measurements. > - This pull request puts suites, deployment targets, and named selections in one history browser. > - The benefit is that a passing subset stays distinct from a full suite run, with direct links to evidence. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #18009 added clear per-test details and links to the tested application. This PR extends the shared E2E history browser. **What happened?** The public directory called full app testing “Product E2E Evals” and made users choose campaigns before they could find a suite. The history list could not filter independently by tested app, agent execution, model, or run selection. A recent passing subset could be mistaken for a full suite result. **Expected behavior** Browse current and retained suites in one E2E category. Keep QA smoke in normal campaign history. Show the latest matching run and latest full suite run. Preserve the recorded definition and denominator when filters change. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open the E2E history directory. 2. Find a suite, then compare a narrow passing run with a full run across execution environments and models. 3. Find the QA smoke measurement and open its retained screenshots. **Paperclip version or commit** The previous report UI was at `8279c99008`. This branch is rebased on current master. **Deployment mode** Static E2E history and campaign reports generated from retained measurements. ## What Changed - Call full-product testing “E2E tests.” Keep Runner protocol evals separate because they use a mock control plane. - Add a searchable suite sidebar that includes current suites and suites found only in retained history. - Add correlated suite, coverage, deployment target, execution, provider, model, profile, runtime, result, date, and named-selection filters. Keep filters in the URL for reload and back navigation. Sidebar suite links clear other filters; the Suite dropdown keeps deliberate intersections. Incompatible suite/preset URLs explain the empty selection and link to the suite runs. - Show latest matching and latest full run links. Distinguish full, subset, unfinished, and unknown coverage from the recorded suite definition and execution counts. Keep failed full runs visible. - Retain the tested application URL and runtime mode in new history records. Older records show “Not recorded.” Browser-only journeys do not gain an inferred agent or model. - Add an index-only refresh command that can import a reviewed public campaign once. It rejects private Cloud bundles and does not replace retained campaigns or upload evidence. - Keep existing report URLs, test IDs, commands, and measurement timestamps stable. Campaign links carry suite/profile/environment; target/model/provider/runtime remain history-level filters. - Add unit and synthetic browser regressions, including mobile navigation, long source refs, sidebar filter reset, and empty-selection repair. Inset dropdown carets in the shared report styles. Document direct Node entry points without adding package.json shortcuts. - Add a prominent Reset all filters button, blue active-filter borders and tint, and visible active counts for the main and advanced filters. Reset clears all 13 history filters, sidebar search, URL state, and the attention view. Campaign-page filters use the same active styling. ## Verification - Post-rebase focused Vitest: 127 tests passed across 10 files. The latest follow-up selection passed 100 tests across 9 files. E2E support TypeScript passed after both changes. - The synthetic Chromium journey covers full and subset coverage, unfinished selections, correlated filters, browser-only QA selection, URL/back/reload, and desktop and touch navigation. The expanded journey verifies 13 active history fields, the collapsed advanced-filter count, reset of every field and sidebar search, and active border color changes that revert after reset. It makes zero provider calls. - Hub Python tests: 7 passed. The browser harness also exits promptly when Chromium is unavailable; its HTTP server closes on launch failure. - Real history verification covered 419 campaigns and 59 suites. All 418 previous campaign records remained deeply equal after importing the reviewed QA campaign. Publication used the authoritative history ETag. Only mutable index/history/pointer files were written; immutable campaign bundles stayed unchanged. - A live browser walkthrough passed from the two-family eval hub through QA smoke, Basic app journeys, target filtering, the retained report, screenshot gallery, history, and the logo link. The QA URL was clickable and the image loaded. No browser JavaScript errors occurred. The original QA normalized results and all three PNG hashes remained unchanged. - Live [E2E history](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/?view=history), [core compatibility suite](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/?view=history&suite=core-compatibility), and [QA smoke runs](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/?view=history&preset=qa-smoke). - The live follow-up verified the incompatible Stock harness/QA-smoke URL, the repair link to 21 Stock harness campaigns, and sidebar navigation that clears preset/model filters. Dropdown carets were inspected in dark, light, and mobile views. No JavaScript errors occurred. - The final live follow-up verified reset of history controls, URL state, sidebar search, and the attention view, plus reload/back restoration and mobile touch reset. Active filter borders and tint were inspected in dark and light views. Campaign-page reset restored all three QA cases. All 419 history records and original QA measurement/evidence hashes stayed unchanged. - Full repository typecheck, test, build, and E2E CI gates passed on final head `1334cb79a5`. Both enforced aggregates, `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`, completed successfully. Fresh Greptile review scored that exact head 5/5 with no unresolved review threads. ## Risks - Historical metadata can be missing. Unknown targets and runtime details stay explicit instead of being inferred from a worker environment. - Full suite coverage follows the saved definition and selection. Filtering to one model does not redefine that denominator. The latest full-run shortcut can cross coverage selections and says so in its detail text. - This changes shared report presentation. It adds no application runtime or database changes. The browser harness and index refresh do not invoke models. - Public history publication must keep its existing conditional-write and retained-evidence boundaries. Private bundles, raw logs, credentials, and screenshots are not part of this PR. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, code execution, and browser tools. The exact backend 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
|
8fe5d5defc |
fix(evals): honor the shared feedback read deadline (#18026)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Product E2E evaluations must retain feedback from each paid attempt. > - The collector reads saved feedback and native tool events before teardown. > - A five-second request limit can stop a valid read before the shared read deadline. > - This pull request gives event reads the remaining shared read budget. > - The total deadline and reserved checkpoint time stay the same. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A paid Ask attempt passed the product grade but retained partial feedback invocation coverage. The collector recorded `events_read_failed`. Its event endpoint later returned HTTP 200. The retained timing is consistent with a request that exceeded the five-second request limit. This change fixes that deterministic failure path; it does not prove the cause of every historical partial read. **Expected behavior** A valid read that takes eight seconds can complete within the 30-second collection deadline. A stalled read must still time out and leave time to save the available feedback. No read or paid attempt is retried. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Return a terminal native run and an empty saved-feedback list. 2. Make the event read take eight seconds and respect the supplied request timeout. 3. Run `collectAttemptFeedback` with a 30-second deadline. 4. Before this fix, the read times out after five seconds and invocation coverage stays partial. Related accounting and reporting work: Refs #18010. ## What Changed - Use the remaining shared read budget for event API requests. Keep the five-second cap for other reads. - Add regressions for an eight-second event response, a stalled event response that preserves saved feedback, and a stalled early feedback read that still permits the event scan. - Document the read budget, reserved persistence time, and no-retry behavior. ## Verification - Red: the initial two regression tests fail before the fix. The other 42 feedback tests pass. The early-read starvation review regression then fails against the first implementation (44 pass), and passes after narrowing the change. - Green: 58 tests pass across feedback collection, interrupted recovery, process shutdown, and scheduled finalization. - Full Product support run: 4,609 pass, three skip, and the retained embedded PostgreSQL bootstrap test fails on this host. The log remains available. This is not a full local pass. - Local Product typecheck fails on installed workspace export mismatches outside the changed files. Hosted CI must check the exact commit with clean dependencies. No local full repository build pass is claimed. - Original paid grades, partial feedback receipts, and accounting journals remain unchanged. This repair makes zero provider calls. ## Risks - A stalled event read can consume the remaining read budget. Other endpoints keep their five-second cap. The shared deadline still reserves up to five seconds for the final checkpoint. - A slow event page can leave later runs uninspected. Those runs remain partial or unavailable. The change does not treat missing evidence as success. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning and code execution tools. The exact serving variant 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 - [ ] 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
|
8279c99008 |
fix(evals): clarify report details and link tested applications (#18009)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Product E2E reports help operators inspect real application journeys. > - A worker environment does not identify the application that a journey tested. > - Reports hid that URL and gave missing diagnostics too much space. > - Standalone reports also sent the logo link to a missing parent page. > - This pull request shows the recorded target and checks in the shared report. > - The benefit is a clear report with useful links and inspectable diagnostics. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A standalone Product E2E report had no application link in test details or the screenshot gallery. Its details showed several empty diagnostic sections before useful information. The logo could resolve to the page host root and return 404. Campaign notes added outside the report shell could overlap the fixed sidebar. **Expected behavior** Show the recorded application URL beside each test and screenshot. Put recorded checks before optional diagnostics. Keep campaign context inside the shared layout. Link the logo to the evaluations directory. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Render a retained campaign at a standalone page path without a history index. 2. Open a test with screenshot evidence and missing startup timing. 3. Inspect test details and gallery information, then click the report logo. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced in the report renderer at `39e811c9c5`. This branch applies the fix to current master. **Deployment mode** Static Product E2E HTML report generated from retained normalized results. ## What Changed - Add optional recorded `targetUrl` metadata and resolve existing Product E2E and provider-connection targets. Only HTTP and HTTPS links without embedded credentials are shown. - Show the target URL in test details and screenshot gallery information. - Put recorded checks and execution facts first. Keep raw usage, timing, and startup details under Diagnostics. Preserve missing metadata as unknown. - Keep campaign titles, descriptions, notes, and evidence links inside the shared report layout during retained-evidence regeneration. - Fix standalone navigation and let the brand lockup wrap at narrow sidebar widths. - Match report profiles by suite and recorded provider/model before falling back to an inferred profile. - Add report regressions and document the retained metadata contract. ## Verification - Focused report tests: 86 passed across 8 files on the isolated branch. Command: `node node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts report-target.test.ts report-navigation.test.ts report-catalog.test.ts first-task-report.test.ts report.test.ts dashboard-regenerate.test.ts`. - Browser verification covered dark desktop widths 1440 and 1000, light intermediate width 780, and dark mobile width 390. It covered the drawer, URL links, gallery keyboard navigation, focus return, and the logo destination. - The published retained report keeps all 3 original passing cases and 7 recorded checks. Its campaign and screenshot bytes remain unchanged. This presentation refresh made zero provider calls. - Full `pnpm build`, `pnpm -r typecheck`, and the eval TypeScript check passed after rebuilding the reused package dependencies. The first typecheck attempt had stale local dependency builds; those errors are resolved. - The local `pnpm test:run` attempt hit repeated embedded PostgreSQL bootstrap failures in server suites. I stopped that attempt and retained its log. It is not counted as a passing check. Current-head CI remains the full test gate. - Review follow-ups add provider/model and cross-suite profile regressions. Malformed campaign presentation metadata is rejected before any report or retained-result writes; ten malformed input cases verify that retained results stay unchanged. ## Risks - This changes presentation across Product E2E reports. Historical reports without a target show “Not recorded” rather than an inferred URL. - Unknown startup reuse data remains in raw metadata but no longer creates an empty table. - Standalone logo links open the shared public evaluations directory. Campaign history links still use a matching history index when present. - No application runtime, database, or measurement verdict changes are included. Private QA configuration and raw campaign evidence stay outside this PR. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, code execution, and browser tools. The exact backend 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 - [ ] 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
|
3bd0d81c7b |
fix(e2e): follow proven workspace deferrals during onboarding (#18008)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Product E2E journeys verify the user outcome through the browser and scoped APIs. > - An onboarding child can wait while its parent owns their shared workspace. > - The server records that no provider work started and schedules a durable replacement. > - The journey rejected that expected wait, and feedback counted it as unknown legacy execution. > - This pull request follows the exact replacement and records the distinct no-provider evidence. > - The child must still finish through native execution and produce the independently checked download. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17940. **What happened?** The fresh-workspace journey failed with `onboarding_first_task_failed` when a child encountered shared-workspace contention. The cancelled admission had an explicit `workspace_wait` receipt with `providerWorkStarted: false`. Its linked replacement was still scheduled. The runtime had not been selected. The default `legacy` value did not represent a provider execution. **Expected behavior** Keep both rows and their run-limit cost. Follow only the unique replacement for the same company, agent, and issue. A pending replacement must not pass. Real failures and contradictory execution evidence must still fail. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a native onboarding parent and accept its child-task proposal. 2. Observe the child admission while the parent still holds their workspace. 3. Present the server's no-provider cancellation and its durable scheduled replacement to the journey and feedback collectors. ## What Changed - Add a shared predicate for the explicit no-provider workspace-deferral receipt. Reject runtime, process, output, usage, and cost evidence that contradicts it. - Follow exact, unique retry lineage during onboarding. Wait for active or scheduled replacements without repeating browser actions. Preserve the campaign deadline, run cap, native artifact attribution, and download oracle. - Retain per-run feedback inspection classifications: `native_events`, `provider_not_started`, or `incomplete`. Require exhaustive event reads. Keep pending work and uncertain execution partial. - Add causal regressions and document the evidence contract. Historical failed attempts keep their original grades. ## Verification - Red: the new journey regression failed with the observed `onboarding_first_task_failed` before the repair. The new feedback cases also failed before the repair. - Green: 70 journey tests and 74 feedback-family tests passed. The final affected journey/feedback gate passed 275 tests plus 137 Node checks. Five retry-lane reset cases failed before the review correction and passed after it. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck` passed after the retry-counter correction. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed before the final rebase. - The full local `pnpm test:run` and harness unit gate encountered embedded PostgreSQL startup failures. The harness gate passed 4,574 tests and failed its database-startup test. The final focused journey/feedback gate and all 137 Node checks passed. CI will provide independent full-suite results before merge. - Current-head CI passed 55 checks; two checks skipped and one was neutral. Greptile is 5/5, with zero unresolved review threads. - Live Cloud verification will use the reviewed harness and Operations revisions. This PR does not claim that a fresh Cloud campaign has passed. ## Risks A broad cancellation exemption could hide real failures. The exemption requires the server's explicit receipt, unresolved runtime selection, no contradictory execution evidence, and exact durable lineage. Missing successors remain pending until the existing deadline. A successful native child and valid downloaded bytes remain required. No server behavior, approval policy, or budget policy changes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, `gpt-6.1-sol`, with reasoning, source inspection, tool use, and code execution. The host does not expose its configured 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
e7ea2e2961 |
fix(evals): export grades for expanded qualification batches (#18010)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Product E2E campaigns retain each attempt and its independent grades. > - Braintrust receives product and cleanup grades for each retained attempt. > - A six-case qualification produces twelve scores. The export allowed only eight. > - Experiment creation succeeded, but grade insertion stopped before dispatch. > - This fix allows fourteen scores so the six- and seven-case batches retain every result. > - Operators can inspect failed and successful grades without running an agent again. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #17044 **What happened?** A retained six-case Product E2E campaign created its Braintrust experiment, then failed with `Experiment ingestion allowance exhausted`. Its twelve deterministic scores exceeded the eight-score cap. No insert request was sent. Agent results and model accounting remained saved. **Expected behavior** The bounded qualification batches must export both grades for every selected attempt. Failed grades must remain visible. **Steps to reproduce** Create an experiment through `openExperimentIngestion`. Insert six or seven events with `product_pass` and `cleanup_pass` scores. The old limit rejects the insert before it reaches the transport. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on master `cff331f6ca0a652b5e41641c68dfa5fa584c22ae`. **Deployment mode** Local Docker controller built from source. The failure is in the shared Product export path. ## What Changed - Raise the finite experiment score cap from eight to fourteen. Keep the three-request, 4 MiB and 60-second limits. - Add regressions for the six- and seven-case batches. Keep the failed product grade in each test batch. - Verify that the receipt collector accepts the old eight-score policy and the new fourteen-score policy. It rejects a fifteen-score policy. - Document the seven-attempt export ceiling. This change does not add agent calls or automatic retries. ## Verification - Before the fix: both new batch regressions failed with `Experiment ingestion allowance exhausted`. - After the fix: 67 tests pass across experiment ingestion, ingestion accounting, experiment projection and scheduled finalization. - Command: `node node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts tests/runner-e2e/experiment-ingestion.test.ts tests/runner-e2e/ingestion-usage.test.ts tests/runner-e2e/scheduled-finalization.test.ts tests/runner-e2e/braintrust-experiment.test.ts --configLoader runner --cache=false`. - `git diff --check` passes. All 58 current-head checks are acceptable, including typecheck, build and tests. Both reviews are 5/5, with no unresolved threads. - Live agent attempts will not be repeated to verify this reporting fix. Recovery uses the saved results and a separate bounded ingestion receipt. ## Risks - New exports can submit at most six more deterministic scores per experiment. These are saved grades, not model judge calls. - Larger campaigns still fail closed. Existing receipt files keep their original policies and traffic counts. - This fix does not resolve the plan-lifecycle behavior failures observed in the qualification. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, tool use and code execution. 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
|
cff331f6ca |
fix(evals): retain local controller cost origin (#17990)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Its eval journals retain model costs and operating reservations under one cap. > - The operating policy records the controller's execution origin. > - The schema currently accepts only GitHub-hosted and AWS Fleet origins. > - A local controller must therefore use an inaccurate label or fail admission. > - This PR adds the local origin and keeps the hosted-only schedule gate. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17986. No duplicate open PR or issue was found in the operating-overhead/local search. **What existing behavior does this improve?** The Product E2E operating allowance and its retained journal policy. **Current behavior** At master `40c1ab36cd`, an unscheduled local controller cannot set `runner: "local"`. The generic allowance validator rejects it. Local qualification can use the same accounting controls but cannot record its origin correctly. **Proposed behavior** Accept the local origin in the generic allowance. Keep all component, price, cap, expiry, and receipt rules. The scheduled validator still requires `github-hosted` and rejects a local allowance. **Reason and benefit** Local qualification can retain an accurate execution origin without claiming that its reservations are billed GitHub charges. ## What Changed - Add `local` to the operating allowance's runner type and validator. - Exercise local journal creation, model admission, retained overhead, restart, and reconciliation in the existing boundary test. - Check that a local allowance fails Product scheduled admission. - Pin new hosted Runner controller admission to `github-hosted`. Preserve original labels when reading historical manifests; those reads cannot authorize a new worker. - Exercise the hosted-origin rejection and historical/local reads in both source and copied portable runtimes. - Document the local label and its accounting limits. ## Verification - Before the fix: the new local persistence case and schedule-boundary assertion failed; eight tests passed. - Focused ledger, overhead, operations, and scheduled finalization tests: 71 passed across five files. - Controlled Runner source and portable tests: 86 passed. The new hosted-origin regression failed before the fix. - Full Product support suite at the first commit: 4,524 passed, three skipped, and one retained embedded PostgreSQL bootstrap failure. The same database failure was previously reproduced on a clean baseline. - Separate Node test phase on the host: 137 passed. - Actual Linux controller: database lifecycle tests pass. After installing its missing `zip` utility, the full Product suite has 4,527 passes and one Copilot parent-version coverage failure. That same failure reproduces on clean master `40c1ab36cd` with the same Linux filesystem and dependencies (14 passes, one failure). Copilot files are unchanged. The initial seven ZIP-related failures and the watcher failure remain retained. - The final fresh Linux semantic check passes: `GOMEMLIMIT=2GiB GOGC=50 GOMAXPROCS=1 node node_modules/typescript/bin/tsc --singleThreaded -p tests/runner-e2e/tsconfig.json`. The parallel compiler OOM is retained. No semantic checks were omitted. - Both fresh reviews are 5/5, with the addressed thread resolved. Hosted Build first failed during unchanged Pi setup prefetch with an operation timeout. One job rerun recovered; the original failure remains retained. All 58 latest-head checks are now acceptable. - No paid model requests, sandbox creation, schedule changes, or historical journal edits. ## Risks - The caller supplies this origin. It must describe the actual controller. - `local` does not prove zero compute cost, provide a default allowance, or release a hold. - Both maintained hosted admission paths require the GitHub-hosted controller origin. A previously accepted hosted policy with an AWS/local label now fails new admission. Historical reads preserve the original evidence. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool use and code execution. The exact serving 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
|
40c1ab36cd |
feat(evals): register explicit Daytona feedback persistence (#17986)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Product E2E evals check real server, browser, runner, and provider behavior. > - Feedback persistence already checks saved complaints and suggestions with exact bodies and run attribution. > - Its catalog registers only local cells, so a Daytona campaign cannot select the same workflow. > - This PR registers the existing workflow for the two native Daytona profiles and tests their gateway bindings. > - Remote cells stay explicit-only and unqualified until a bounded live run passes. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17980 and #17975. No duplicate open PR or issue was found in the Daytona feedback search. **What existing behavior does this improve?** The `feedback-persistence` Product E2E suite and its explicit execution selectors. **Current behavior** At master `d54f776ca0`, the suite has only local Claude and Codex cells. Selecting the matching Daytona ID fails before admission. The gateway manifest already supports these native remote profiles. **Proposed behavior** Register four cells: local and Daytona for each native profile. Reuse the existing saved-body and completed-tool oracle. Require an immutable image and Daytona credentials. Keep one attempt, one expected work run, five-minute local and inherited 15-minute remote case timeouts, and the existing 60-minute provider creation TTL. **Reason and benefit** A bounded remote qualification can check both a simple task and real feedback persistence. Local evidence remains separate from remote acceptance. **Breaking changes** Explicit `--suite feedback-persistence` now lists four cells instead of two. `--all` still excludes the suite. Daily and weekly manifests still select their existing exact local IDs. ## What Changed - Register the two native Daytona feedback cells and increment the suite definition version. - Address the remote cold-start review: inherit the base task's 15-minute Daytona deadline and retain the five-minute local limit. The regression failed before the fix and now passes. - Check immutable-image requirements, credentials, lifetime, and shared gateway connections in existing contract tests. - Fix the config type in the TTL catalog test added by #17980. Keep its runtime lifetime assertions. - Document remote selection and its unqualified status in the existing eval guides. ## Verification - Before the catalog change, the registration regression failed: one failed and 16 passed. - Focused catalog, feedback, operations, ledger, manifest, and summary tests: 114 passed across six files. - Read-only discovery lists exactly the two Daytona feedback IDs. - The Node test phase passes separately: 137 tests. The retained Vitest database failure prevents the unit launcher from reaching that phase. - Full Product support suite: 4,523 passed, three skipped, and one embedded PostgreSQL bootstrap failure. The same database failure was reproduced on a clean baseline before this PR. - Fresh Linux Product typecheck passed at the review-fix commit: `GOMEMLIMIT=2GiB GOGC=50 GOMAXPROCS=2 node node_modules/typescript/bin/tsc -p tests/runner-e2e/tsconfig.json`. The default run and the ineffective JavaScript-heap attempt exited 137 and remain retained. The compiler launches a native child process; its memory controls let the unchanged semantic check complete. Host typecheck still has 15 stale installed DB/Runner export errors; the two TTL test typing errors are fixed. All 58 latest-head checks are acceptable (success, neutral, or skipped). Both fresh reviews are 5/5, with no unresolved review threads. - The updated credential-free Linux controller discovers both planned remote IDs and launches Chromium 151.0.7922.34. Runtime build inputs are unchanged from the prior controller. The Daytona image content ID is still `b55f03dc9c633db300b70206a691ff45a8e779e56a3c546f9358e3282d3597c9`. - No model requests, sandbox allocation, or paid schedule changes. ## Risks - Selecting the whole explicit suite now includes remote cells and requires Daytona configuration. Use exact IDs for a bounded paid campaign. - Registration and contract tests do not prove live remote behavior or token accounting. Remote qualification remains pending. - The shared dependency checkout limits the local host typecheck. The fresh Linux semantic check passed. Earlier compiler OOM failures and the database bootstrap failure remain retained. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool use and code execution. The exact serving 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
|
d54f776ca0 |
fix(daytona): bound ephemeral eval lifetime at creation (#17980)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip manages agent work through Runner and sandbox providers.
> - Product E2E runs paid work in disposable Daytona sandboxes.
> - A controller deadline cannot stop remote compute after the
controller crashes.
> - Inactivity cleanup does not establish an independent wall-clock
lifetime.
> - Daytona supports a lifetime in the creation request.
> - This change exposes that option in the Daytona driver and verifies
the provider expiry.
> - Ephemeral evals can retain a finite lifetime even when their
controller is unavailable.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #17947 and #17978. No duplicate creation-lifetime PR was found.
**What happened?**
The ephemeral Product E2E fixture configures inactivity stop, archive,
and delete intervals. Ordinary task leases do not supply a requested
expiry. A crashed controller therefore has no confirmed wall-clock
sandbox lifetime for its cost bound.
**Expected behavior**
Each ephemeral eval sandbox must carry a provider-enforced lifetime from
creation. The driver must reject invalid bounds and reject a sandbox
whose provider expiry is missing, expired, or later than the configured
remaining lifetime.
**Steps to reproduce**
Acquire a Daytona lease from the ephemeral fixture. Inspect the creation
request and returned expiry. Before this patch, the request has no
lifetime and the lease has no expiry unless its caller supplies one.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Current source based on master at
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4c314117d2 |
fix(evals): bind active image identity and isolate routing checks (#17978)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agent work through Runner. > - Product E2E uses a content hash to identify its Daytona image. > - The hash must include the active provider identity declaration. > - The active Copilot fixture advanced past the manually listed image inputs. > - The runner routing test also captured later YAML steps as shell commands. > - This change binds the active fixture and stops shell extraction at the next step. > - Operators can verify image identity and routing against the current source. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17937 and #17947. The related Copilot work includes #15563. This change repairs the shared image contract; it does not add a Copilot qualification claim. **What happened?** Two image tests fail because the active Copilot identity fixture is absent from the image hash inputs. Four routing tests execute later workflow YAML as shell commands after checkout and dependency steps were added to the authorization job. **Expected behavior** The image hash must change when the active identity fixture changes. The routing tests must execute only the selected routing step. **Steps to reproduce** Run the Daytona image and paid runner routing unit files on current master. Six assertions fail before this patch. The same failures occur on the clean |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9b7d5b35eb |
fix(evals): refresh forecasts from complete request receipts (#17975)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip coordinates agent work through Runner.
> - Scheduled Product E2E campaigns need measured cost and time
forecasts.
> - The saved forecast samples came from October 21.
> - The October 27 qualifications retain final usage for all 19 model
requests.
> - The Claude measurements are hosted; the Codex measurements are
local.
> - This change refreshes the samples and keeps measurement hosts
separate.
> - Operators can inspect the latest evidence without treating it as
current qualification or an invoice.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #17127 and #17946.
**What happened?**
The scheduled forecast still uses the older pilot amounts. It reports no
hosted measurement and does not record the measurement host per sample.
**What did you expect to happen?**
The forecast must retain the latest complete model receipts and their
source hashes. It must keep local and hosted timing cohorts separate. A
changed definition must remain unqualified.
**Steps to reproduce**
Prepare the daily or weekly forecast from the default branch. Inspect
its saved measurement date, totals, and hosted fields.
## What Changed
- Refresh four samples from two intact request ledgers and four retained
Product results.
- Record measurement hosts, final request counts, and original campaign
outcomes.
- Add historical hosted totals. Current hosted totals still require
matching evidence for every selected cell.
- Keep hosts in separate per-cell cohorts. Preserve definition drift and
unknown slow-tail estimates.
- Document the model-cost scope and timing limits.
## Verification
- Forecast and scheduled-preflight tests: 33 passed.
- The extraction replays both hash-checked ledgers, requires final
receipts, and checks the retained pricecards. The four samples cover 19
final requests.
- Daily historical model subtotal: $0.428650100; summed attempt time:
107.286 seconds.
- Weekly historical model subtotal: $0.793676500; summed attempt time:
158.093 seconds. The Codex samples are local.
- Full Product support suite at the initial head: 4,510 passed, seven
failed, three skipped. A clean
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
6987c2f20b |
test(upgrades): qualify controller replacement with immutable artifacts and phase evidence (#17455)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start --> https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/105/changes/paperclip/105 <!-- entire-trail-link-end --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip needs evidence that an admitted execution survives a main-server replacement. > - Runner mechanics and server adoption belong to #17097 and #17439. > - A healthy HTTP endpoint does not prove recovery of the original execution. > - Qualification must identify the serving artifact, natural ownership, authenticated attachment and resumed processing separately. > - It must also retain failed runs and measure normal-operation costs. > - This PR extends the existing qualification machinery and acceptance record. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Operators can assess upgrade continuity from phase evidence tied to exact artifacts and profiles. **Current behavior** A same-artifact restart or synthetic executor pass cannot establish different-artifact upgrade and rollback support. Idle SQL gates also do not measure active-run capacity. **Proposed behavior** Use immutable A/B artifacts and strict phase receipts through the existing supervisor. Preserve failed evidence and add measured before/after workload costs. Builds on merged #17097 and #17439. The base is now `master`. #17456 follows for review convenience. This PR lands qualification machinery and the evidence record. The remaining hosted gates stay open for deployment qualification; merging this machinery does not claim those experiments passed. ## What Changed - Extend the main-server supervisor and installed-artifact verification for actual serving revisions, forward migrations and compatible rollback. - Distinguish HTTP readiness, natural ownership, authenticated attachment, resumed processing and backlog settlement. - Retain the original reconnect grace and execution identity checks. Never substitute a new task or edited lease for continuity. - Reuse real-harness and Daytona qualification paths, with exact profile and artifact provenance. - Bind current Copilot attestation inputs in the Daytona image fingerprint. - Keep one acceptance record, including both failed file-only stress phases and the final passing bounded-pool comparison. ## Verification After retargeting to master, all 158 focused qualification cases across 13 files pass, with E2E typecheck. The first 12-file batch has four report-lock test failures and 133 passes. Master #17811 had committed the exact already-approved output lock, while that fixture assumed HEAD must be the uncorrected input. The fixture now checks both pinned forms, executes the committed-lock path, and reconstructs the pinned input to retain all rejection tests. The production helper, policy hashes, patch and dependency resolution are unchanged. The corrected batch explicitly includes both process-preservation suites; the prior 146-case receipt has its own source and selection. Current candidate `8f1d6ec02f` integrates master `09ad9adce2`, including the merged server slice. Its diff contains only qualification code and documentation. The [qualification record](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/8f1d6ec02f5bf6c90e7b27da8156953cabd9a180/doc/plans/2026-10-22-hot-upgrade-qualification.md) is the acceptance ledger and retains source-attributed failures and hosted limits. On the eighth integration, all 146 cases across 12 focused qualification files pass, including report-lock preparation, workflow security and workflow targeting. E2E typecheck passes. The earlier 118-case result remains attributed to its prior source. The first sandbox invocation has 117 passes and one failure because process inspection was denied during inert fixture cleanup. The permitted repeat passes all 118 and a targeted process check finds no remaining fixture daemon. The earlier 96-case receipt remains source-attributed in the ledger. The latest two review regressions first fail: an intermediate replacement can cite another runner/session despite a valid final step, and malformed receipt JSON aborts evidence packaging. Each replacement now binds run/company/issue/runner/session, and corrupt receipts retain explicit invalid metadata plus sanitized diagnostics while other logs and receipts still package. These checks prove qualification machinery with injected supervisor operations, configuration subprocesses and real filesystem packaging. They do not qualify a hosted harness. Three request-reader cases, 14 artifact/configuration/cache/history cases, and three lost-partial-receipt cases fail before their respective corrections. The final collector preserves sanitized startup, readiness and recovery phase receipts through packaging and temporary-root deletion. Earlier embedded-Postgres initialization, report-catalog drift, CI scheduling/cleanup failures and fixture collisions remain recorded with their corrections or limits. The previous Greptile service error is retained as historical review evidence, not a current review pass. The record includes prior source `9bb9d3417e`'s actual Linux contention/fairness successes and the ordinary-warm regression proof from the server slice. The historical 300-session component campaign passes four after phases and retains earlier burst failures. Those component costs do not establish hosted capacity. The hosted API-only pair has zero agents/viewers, fails both absolute latency gates and the candidate memory gate, and does not complete the active-agent/viewer matrix. The strict ten-agent same-artifact restart remains attributed to its original artifact. It does not qualify this updated stack. Actual A→B/B→A, the normal drain-free Cloud rollout, and other hosted harnesses remain open. No new provider turn, deployment or hosted qualification was run during merge preparation. Prior source `57d3767eac` jobs 122590643944, 122590643983 and 122590644161 ended after runner shutdown/cancellation without final Vitest results. The shutdown cause is unproven. No retry was issued before this source was superseded by the required server recovery fix. These attempts remain failures/incomplete evidence. Fresh exact-head CI, legacy status, completed Greptile 5/5, resolved feedback and normal merge eligibility remain required. ## Risks Different-artifact A→B/B→A, the normal drain-free Cloud rollout path, other hosted harnesses and the complete concurrency/viewer matrix remain open. Frozen branch builds are development-build evidence. This PR owns qualification and evidence; production defects must be fixed in their earlier owning slice. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools and code execution. The runtime does not expose a more specific model ID or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
e4b30163bb |
fix(evals): preserve the complete trusted controller artifact inventory (#17943)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start --> https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/103/changes/paperclip/103 <!-- entire-trail-link-end --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages real agent work. > - Controlled Runner evaluations record model spend and traces. > - A trusted build creates one portable controller with a complete file inventory. > - GitHub artifact upload omitted one hidden dependency metadata file. > - The next job correctly refused the incomplete inventory before any paid worker started. > - This change preserves all inventoried bytes without relaxing verification. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17889, #17929. **What happened?** [Run 40585138437](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40585138437) failed at copied controller verification. Its artifact contains 294 files; its signed inventory expects 295. The only missing file is `server/node_modules/protobufjs/node_modules/@protobufjs/pool/.npmignore`. No extra files exist. Every paid worker was skipped and no model request ran. **Expected behavior** The trusted controller artifact preserves its full inventory, including hidden package metadata. The strict verifier rejects any actual change or missing file. **Steps to reproduce** Build the portable runtime, upload the directory with the action's default hidden-file exclusion, then verify the downloaded artifact against the original receipt. ## What Changed - Enable hidden files only on the fresh trusted controller code upload. - Download that exact upload and run a real artifact-service round-trip test before any private preparation. The test fails if the upload drops hidden files again; it tests the actual transport instead of matching a YAML flag. - Keep the strict byte inventory and trusted source/receipt checks. - Document why this code artifact differs from private attempt evidence, which still uses the protected archive. ## Verification - Exact retained artifact comparison: one missing `.npmignore`, zero extra files. - `actionlint .github/workflows/runner-protocol-live-evals.yml` passed. - Protocol workflow security tests: 14 passed. - The artifact-service integration test is explicit-only locally. The controlled workflow supplies the real downloaded artifact, trusted source and receipt digest. - No product runtime, provider routing or grading code changed. CI runs broader checks. Fresh controlled workflow qualification follows merge. ## Risks Hidden files are allowed only in the code-only output of the provider-credential-free build. Raw private evidence and credentials do not enter that upload. The artifact verifier still requires every file and SHA-256 from the trusted receipt. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository inspection and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context window 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 - [ ] 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
|
a8bd012635 |
fix(evals): apply reviewed lock corrections to reports and qualification images (#17937)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start --> https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/98/changes/paperclip/98 <!-- entire-trail-link-end --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and records their work. > - Product E2E campaigns measure real agent behavior and model spend. > - A paid hosted run completed both cases and all ten model receipts. > - Its report job could not install dependencies from the committed lock. > - The trusted checkout needs a reviewed dependency correction. > - This change applies a reviewed lock correction before the frozen report install. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #17928 **Description** The report in [run 40576181788](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40576181788) failed with `ERR_PNPM_LOCKFILE_CONFIG_MISMATCH`. Both paid cases had passed. The worker and build jobs already restored the resolved source lock, but the report did not. **Steps to reproduce** Dispatch the bounded daily campaign on the default branch with a stale committed lock configuration. Workers use the resolved lock. The report uses the stale lock and fails before report generation. **Expected behavior** The report installs frozen dependencies from a verified lock for the exact trusted source. Evidence can be reported without repeating paid work. ## What Changed - Apply a reviewed lock correction from the trusted report checkout before its frozen install. Use the same correction for the qualification image build, which also requires a compatible frozen lock. - Pin the original lock, correction and output SHA-256. The trusted authorization job rejects unknown inputs before any paid work. - Apply the same correction to trusted manual history publication. Qualification image builds apply it only when their target equals the workflow revision; other targets keep their own lock. - Update existing Claude ACP and postgres patch identities and link the declared yaml dependency. Existing package tarball integrity entries stay unchanged; the declared yaml dependency adds exactly yaml@2.9.1 with pinned integrity. - Keep runtime registry resolution and worker target locks out of the credential-bearing report. - Test valid correction, idempotence and changed-lock, changed-patch and wrong-output rejection. ## Verification - Focused workflow and lock-correction tests: 36 passed. - `actionlint .github/workflows/runner-full-stack-e2e.yml` passed. - Original worker evidence: 2/2 passed, ten final model receipts, zero unresolved model requests. - The original report was regenerated from retained evidence with zero provider calls and saved privately with replay provenance. - Broader repository checks run in CI. Prior full Product checks passed for #17928. ## Risks The correction is tied to the reviewed committed lock. Dependency input changes need a reviewed correction update. No new registry version or lifecycle script can enter the privileged report through this fix. The original failed workflow stays failed. No root lockfile is committed. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository inspection and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context window 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 - [ ] 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
|
5787962454 |
fix(evals): report setup-inclusive model token totals (#17946)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start --> https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/108/changes/paperclip/108 <!-- entire-trail-link-end --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip Product E2E evaluations run real agent requests. > - Model accounting includes setup, canceled requests and earlier attempts. > - Heartbeat token totals can omit setup requests. > - The shared gateway journal retains final normalized usage for those requests. > - Reports should expose that usage once, with coverage and conflicts visible. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17928. **What happened?** The two-case qualification reports showed complete model dollars from the shared ledger, while their headline heartbeat tokens omitted setup. For example, the verified Codex campaign has nine final requests, including setup requests, whose aggregate is only available in private receipts. **Expected behavior** The existing ledger report shows all-request token totals, a setup subtotal and missing/conflicting usage counts. Heartbeat and request totals remain separate. **Steps to reproduce** Run a budgeted native marker case with an asynchronous setup probe, then compare the heartbeat totals with final request observations in its retained ledger. ## What Changed - Aggregate final provider/gateway usage once per model request, including setup and canceled requests. Ignore provisional observations and infrastructure reservations. - Expose uncached input, cache-read input, cache-write input and output separately. Label reasoning as included in output. Preserve agreeing optional reasoning from partial final receipts only when it fits the complete output count. - Check every final provider/gateway observation for conflicting supplied fields, including partial receipts. Exclude ambiguous requests and report their conflicting coverage. Missing token usage remains visible. - Preserve retained reports without the optional token field; validate new counts and totals before dashboard regeneration. - Keep the journal-bound experiment identity stable when adding derived token presentation, so old accepted experiments can still be linked without a reimport. Journal changes still invalidate the receipt. ## Verification - Focused report and scheduled-operations tests: 54 passed. - Eval TypeScript check passed after refreshing ignored Runner declaration outputs. - Regression covers duplicate sources, provisional usage, setup, canceled requests, missing usage, conflicting final usage, infrastructure exclusion and invalid retained totals, including nonzero totals with zero contributing requests. All 32 partial-field subsets are checked in both observation orders. - Regenerated both real retained Claude and Codex reports successfully with all final request tokens and existing experiment receipts, using zero model calls. - Broader checks run in CI. No model calls are needed for report generation. ## Risks The subtotal requires final normalized gateway/provider token observations. Older journals and other telemetry sources can have incomplete coverage, which remains explicit. Token totals do not establish invoice reconciliation. The change does not alter paid selection, routing or budgets. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository inspection and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context window 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 - [ ] 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
|
64a42d2cf0 |
fix(evals): honor the Daytona setup attempt deadline (#17947)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start --> https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/110/changes/paperclip/110 <!-- entire-trail-link-end --> ## Thinking Path > - Budgeted Product E2E cases must attribute asynchronous hello probes to setup. > - Daytona can take longer than local startup to provision an isolated environment. > - The setup helper imposed a 45-second local limit on both environments. > - A qualified remote marker stopped while the agent was still verifying. > - Remote readiness should use its existing finite attempt deadline. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17936. **What happened?** The bounded Daytona marker campaign stopped at the setup helper after 45 seconds while the agent was still verifying. The case permits a 15-minute attempt and the environment allows up to five minutes to provision. It recorded zero model requests; retained cleanup passed and a provider-side company-label query confirmed no sandbox remained. **Expected behavior** Daytona readiness can finish within the existing attempt budget. Local setup keeps the current short limit; observed errors, holds and identity changes still stop either environment immediately. **Steps to reproduce** Run a budgeted native marker against a cold Daytona environment whose readiness takes longer than 45 seconds. ## What Changed - Pass the execution environment to the budgeted setup helper. - Use the existing finite attempt deadline for Daytona; retain the 45-second local limit. - Set a five-minute saved-account hello-probe allowance only for explicit budgeted Daytona fixtures, matching the environment provisioning allowance. A later qualification exposed the inner probe’s separate 90-second timeout. - Keep the gateway in the setup phase until the same agent is ready. Model limits, attempt limits, cleanup and automatic retries are unchanged. - Update the operations guide with the two timing windows. ## Verification - Focused setup and operations regression suites: 48 passed. - Eval TypeScript check passed. - A fixture regression verifies the five-minute probe allowance is remote-only and preserves gateway credential routing. The timing regression advances the observed clock past 45 seconds: Daytona reaches ready while local setup still stops. Existing tests retain identity/error/hold and attempt-deadline guards. - Fresh real Daytona qualification follows this correction with one attempt and the existing $20 stage cap. ## Risks A failed remote setup can now consume more of its existing attempt window. It cannot extend that deadline, increase model allowance, or automatically retry. This change does not claim the prior failed campaign passed. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository inspection and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context window 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 - [ ] 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
|
d40f9ac377 |
fix: enforce first-task completion decisions and retain E2E evidence (#17940)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people delegate work to agents and approve proposed work. > - The onboarding first task asks for scope, proposes a task, and waits for a human decision. > - An answer to its opening question supplies scope. It does not approve a proposal. > - Task creation already checks the saved proposal decision. > - Native completion used the general completion policy and could mark the onboarding parent Done without that decision. > - This PR checks the trusted decision before completion feedback and again when the native status is committed. > - The first task stays in review until a saved human decision permits closure. Ordinary completion and acknowledged refusal keep their current behavior. > - The Product E2E guard also retains closed scalar evidence so future failures show which boundary condition was observed. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #17914. Profile compatibility follow-up to #17922. **What happened?** A native onboarding run can submit a valid low-risk Done result after only the opening answer. The native finalizer then marks the first task Done even though no human has accepted or rejected a proposal. **Expected behavior** The opening answer must not permit completion. A trusted saved proposal decision must permit it. A saved rejection permits acknowledgment and closure, but does not authorize new work. A later pending proposal must keep the task in review. **Steps to reproduce** Create a server-owned onboarding first task with an answered opening question, no proposal decision, and a valid low-risk completion contract. Pass a Done result through native completion feedback, the control-plane port, and the finalizer. Before this fix, the persisted status is Done. The regression expects In review. Ordinary completion and acknowledged rejection pass as controls. ## What Changed - Share the trusted latest-proposal and human-response checks with completion admission. Keep task creation acceptance-only. - Refuse premature native completion feedback. Keep an already saved premature result in review during finalization. - Check the decision again under the existing task and run locks before committing Done. - Cover accepted decisions, saved refusals, forged context, pending or changed proposals, and a real database race. - Retain a closed scalar receipt when the existing E2E pre-acceptance guard fails. Validate and display it without task content, IDs, filenames, or raw rows. Preserve the original failure, blocked dependents, and historical reports. - Include the evidence module in the journey definition hash. Bind the receipt to its exact failure code and check its closed keys against the full type. - Repair base-branch profile drift found by the full harness check: include the active Copilot v66 fixture in image hashing and update stale Pi version/hash expectations from #17922. Keep all older image inputs and strict hash checks. - Update the onboarding feature and agent access maps and E2E evidence documentation. ## Verification - Semantic regression before implementation: one failure and two passing controls on PostgreSQL 18. The failed assertion observed Done instead of In review. - The local database uses an owned disposable container with an immutable image digest. Actual migrations, feedback, control-plane port, finalizer, and status commit run against PostgreSQL. A temporary test adapter replaces only the embedded database transport because this host has exhausted its PostgreSQL semaphores. - Native control-plane suite: 55 tests passed, including 17 new controls. Existing task-creation admission: 25 passed. Existing completion feedback: 19 passed. - Credential-free E2E support: 206 Vitest suites passed, 4,407 tests passed, and two skipped. All 137 Node support checks passed. Harness typecheck passed. - The failure-receipt regression had 11 failed assertions before capture was implemented. Two failure-code binding assertions fail without their gate. Eight placement/binding cases first validate the receipt-free control, then reject the misplaced receipt. - The untouched base reproduced the three profile compatibility failures. The narrow repair passed all 83 affected tests before the full harness run. - Private workflow preparation and credential-free onboarding preview: nine compatibility checks passed. Ownership, recovery, evidence, shared-contract and workflow compatibility: 77 passed. The actual provider preview also confirms immediate success deletion, earlier declared failure eligibility, limits, and zero retries without credential access. Map checks and git diff checks passed. - Required repository typecheck passed for the product fix. The combined branch build passed. The local full repository suite was stopped after repeated PostgreSQL startup failures; a separate initdb probe confirmed host SysV semaphore exhaustion. No shared IPC resources were changed. [Hosted CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40591020873) passed the full database suites, typecheck, build, runner checks, serialized suites, and browser shards on final head `1ac4c23605a03bfd1f1f8a017b14ce29fda85f6b` (55 success, two expected skips, one advisory neutral). - Independent source review approved the product guard, atomic race regression, evidence contract, and maps with no actionable findings. Both automated reviews are 5/5 on final head `1ac4c23605a03bfd1f1f8a017b14ce29fda85f6b`; prior findings are fixed and resolved. Final CI is green and the PR is conflict-free. - No Cloud workspace, provider call, release publication, or deployment is part of this verification. These tests do not identify a historical Cloud failure or qualify live onboarding. - Local dependency installation uses the existing CI-generated lockfile from #17811. No lockfile change is included. ## Risks - Existing onboarding runs without a trusted saved proposal decision remain in review even when the agent reports success. This is the intended approval boundary. - Decision changes can race completion. The status commit checks the decision under its existing locks and uses the existing status-race recovery path. - A saved refusal permits closure only. Creation admission still rejects it. - Evidence readers reject malformed receipts and unrelated failure codes. The version-1 key registry is checked against every receipt field at compile time. Existing attempts do not gain evidence after the fact. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6.1 Sol (`gpt-6.1-sol`), ultra reasoning, through Codex. Used repository inspection, code execution, and collaborating coding agents. The runtime did not report a 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 references) - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket 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
|
2c70d04bf6 |
feat(evals): account for explicit Daytona model requests (#17936)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip evals need complete model-spend evidence. > - The bounded Product E2E controller already owns request admission and token receipts. > - Its loopback endpoints cannot serve a Daytona agent. > - Explicit remote cases therefore need a scoped transport to the same controller. > - This PR exposes only authenticated model and OTLP endpoints through one owned quick tunnel. > - Remote requests keep the same budget, request identity, usage journal and cancellation drain. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17928, #17929, #17523. **What happened?** The operations manifest and fixture reject Daytona. The parent gateway and native trace relay bind loopback, so normal remote agent traffic cannot use their cost accounting. **Expected behavior** An explicit native marker or feedback case on Daytona can route requests through the bounded parent. Upstream provider and Braintrust keys stay on that controller. Every paid request keeps its usage receipt and the attempt retains ordinary feedback and cleanup evidence. **Steps to reproduce** Use the explicit `remoteGateway: "cloudflare"` manifest option for a native Codex or Claude Daytona marker/feedback case. Without that option, the remote selection remains rejected. The parent verifies its public health nonce before fixture setup. ## What Changed - Add a deadline-limited bridge with exact model/OTLP paths, separate scoped tokens, streamed responses and owned tunnel cleanup. - Start one HTTPS quick tunnel with a private home and no provider credentials or ambient Cloudflare configuration. Do not retry creation or paid work. - Admit only explicit native Daytona marker/feedback cells and require the provisioning credential before opening the journal. - Bind fixture model/OTLP endpoints to the assigned remote origin. Keep provisioning access in the fixture/server controller. - Preserve final token usage when a remote client disconnects during shutdown. - Document the manual route. Daily and weekly selections remain local. ## Verification - Full Product E2E unit suite: 4,370 passed and 2 skipped across 206 files, plus 137 Node checks. - Focused remote/usage/operations/trace checks: 71 tests passed; final bridge/drain checks: 15 passed. - Product E2E typecheck passed. - Tests cover missing tunnel executable, expiry, authentication, blocked paths, token separation, missing provisioning credentials, endpoint assignment and listener cleanup. - The cancellation regression uses the real gateway and ledger with a synthetic upstream. It retains the final receipt once after remote disconnect. - Latest source and architecture/cleanup checks: 167 passed; eval typecheck passed. Both reviews are 5/5 and exact-head CI is green. Live qualification follows merge. ## Risks The explicit route sends synthetic eval requests and scoped attempt tokens through Cloudflare. Those tokens expire with the existing campaign deadline and budget. Upstream keys stay on the controller. Public readiness has a finite wait; failure stops before fixture setup. The operator still needs the existing immutable Daytona image and verified native artifacts. Source and deterministic tests do not establish live remote acceptance. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository inspection and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context window 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
|
bf3ef12f3a |
fix(evals): qualify model spend separately from operating costs (#17928)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agent work and its budgets. > - Product E2E campaigns must explain each model request and attempt. > - The current completion gate also requires complete operating-cost evidence. > - Long-lived observability and storage charges can block a campaign after its model receipts are complete. > - An operator can now choose model-request readiness in a retained allowance. > - The report keeps full accounting, operating holds and model readiness separate. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17889, #17523, #17452. **What happened?** A hosted campaign could pass both product cases and retain complete model receipts, yet fail readiness because operating charges were unresolved. **Expected behavior** An explicit model-readiness policy permits complete model receipts to qualify a run. Unknown operating charges stay visible and reserved. Missing model receipts and budget violations still block qualification. **Steps to reproduce** Use a campaign with four unresolved operating reservations and one completed model request. The regression checks readiness before and after the final model receipt, then checks an operating overrun. The default policy retains the original full-accounting gate. ## What Changed - Add the explicit `accountingReadiness: "model_requests"` allowance policy. Bind it into operating-bound configuration when present. - Derive a model subtotal and receipt-coverage projection from the retained journal. Show it beside full accounting and retained holds. - Use the selected readiness policy in scheduled finalization. Keep product, cleanup, feedback, trace and budget checks. - Refresh two existing eval prerequisites found by the full unit suite: the active Copilot image identity and the model-account catalog mapping. - Document the policy and its limit: it does not certify a full-lifecycle operating-cost ceiling. ## Verification - Regression failed on the old implementation with `Invalid operating overhead fields` and passed after the change. - Focused accounting/operations/finalization checks: 54 tests passed before the final policy assertions. - Existing image/catalog failures reproduced, then their 12 checks passed after the metadata repairs. - Product E2E unit suite: 4,360 passed and 2 skipped, plus 137 Node checks. Product E2E and workspace typechecks and workspace build passed. - Review regressions: 35 focused accounting/finalization checks passed on |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8548173fc9 |
feat(evals): connect hosted Runner costs and traces (#17889)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and measures their behavior with Runner evaluations. > - The cost controller, native tracing, private receipts and portable runtime are on master. > - The maintained live workflow still launches the provider CLI directly. > - Independent workers need one shared selection and disjoint budget allocations. > - Reports must keep unresolved allocations when a worker produces no evidence. > - This PR connects the maintained workflow to the existing controller and private archive. > - Operators can inspect known costs, conservative holds and trace evidence before qualifying paid recurrence. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17452, #17469, #17493, #17506, #17523. **Current behavior** The live Runner workflow does not use the merged cost/tracing controller. Attempt-only aggregation cannot reconstruct a campaign when every worker archive is absent. Ordinary Actions artifacts in this public repository are readable by authenticated public GitHub users. **Proposed behavior** Controlled runs prepare one manifest, bind every selected request, enforce disjoint allocations and retain evidence in private storage. The report starts from the full retained manifest. Missing workers keep their allocations. The workflow rejects retries, unsupported providers, changed requests and absent or stale operating bounds before provider work. **Reason and benefit** The maintained workflow needs auditable costs and traces, including failures and missing receipts, before paid recurrence can be qualified. ## What Changed - Add controlled mode as the manual default and the only scheduled mode. Legacy mode remains explicit for other manual provider qualifications. - Prepare the full request selection and one shared manifest. Bind current run, first attempt, code, definitions, executable hashes and exact profile allocations. - Verify the copied controller and manifest before provider credentials. Require the controlled target to equal the trusted workflow revision before private archive access. - Reuse private archive retention for the controller policy, cell attempts and canonical report. AWS credentials remain transfer-step outputs. Controlled raw evidence is never uploaded as an Actions artifact. - Replay a retained manifest with partial or empty worker evidence. Count operating holds once and preserve known partial charges. - Pin the controller to an explicitly reviewed compatible lockfile digest. Reject resolver or byte drift before a frozen, script-free install into a job-local store. Record the lock digest in the runtime receipt and verify it again in private preparation. - Build the portable controller without secrets, private environment access or OIDC. Private preparation verifies that artifact and performs no dependency install. OIDC jobs use no mutable dependency resolution or shared cache. - Add synthetic source/copied-runtime tests, executable workflow admission tests, private archive tests and an operator runbook. ## Verification - Controller, campaign, portable runtime and workflow tests: 104 passed. This includes real aggregation from an isolated reporter without source dependencies, safe diagnostics, driver drift, distinct evidence binding and reviewed-lock drift. Real private Codex/Claude requests also pass through an independently verified copied runtime with fake transports. - Private transport and workflow contracts: 35 passed. Executable/static workflow guards: 13 passed. - Paired private report tests: 166 passed; Evalbook discovery: 7 passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`: passed. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`, `actionlint .github/workflows/runner-protocol-live-evals.yml` and `git diff --check`: passed. - `pnpm test:run` hit repeated local embedded PostgreSQL initialization failures in unrelated DB-dependent server tests. Its owned process tree was stopped after preserving the log. This is a local verification limitation; current-head CI remains required. - An earlier head hit one unchanged Rust cleanup assertion. The exact test passed locally and the final head passed the full Rust lane; the initial failure log is retained. - On the final head, one unchanged chat idle-queue assertion failed once in CI. Its single scoped retry passed. All test jobs and the final aggregate gate passed on commit `2e328fa53dd296174d59d19f14f068aeeb0b82d8` (CI run 40535692048, attempt 2). - No paid model, Braintrust or cloud calls. No live variables, secrets, schedules or resources changed. ## Risks - Controlled mode fails closed until a reviewed `RUNNER_PROTOCOL_EVAL_CONTROLLER_POLICY_JSON` and a compatible private eval SHA exist. `all` does not silently become a supported subset. - The reviewed policy must cover setup, model requests, trace/gateway processing, archive transfer and retained storage. Hash binding does not establish vendor billing bounds. This PR does not enable recurrence or release historical holds. - The controlled policy must pin `controllerLockSha256`; it never accepts a resolver-generated digest automatically. No lockfile is committed. A changed compatible lock needs review. - Legacy browser verification now requires the committed frozen lockfile. A stale lockfile fails closed; controlled preparation has no dependency install. - Workflow cancellation can prevent the final report. The full manifest is retained before provider work and remains the starting point for reconciliation. - The workflow exceeds 1,000 lines because the shared shard anchor, dependencies, environment expressions and credential boundaries belong to one declarative job graph. Request preparation, accounting, archive safety and runtime verification stay in separately tested modules. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6-based coding agent with tool use and code execution. The host does not expose an exact deployment model ID or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run the relevant tests locally and they pass; the broad local suite limitation is 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 on the final head - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups; the secondary reviewer is also 5/5 - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
051b425fdf |
fix(evals): price explicit response model identities (#17808)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Product E2E operations reserve model cost before each provider request. > - Providers can return an exact snapshot name after a request selects a model alias. > - The estimator required the response name to equal the request alias. It left valid snapshot usage unpriced and invalidated its reviewed bound. > - This pull request lets a versioned pricecard declare a small list of exact response names that share its reviewed rates. > - The benefit is correct cost coverage while request selection and unknown-model handling stay strict. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17765 for the shared eval gateway request policy. **What happened?** An eval request can select `gpt-5.4-mini` and receive `gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17`. Even with complete usage, the estimator returns `null`. The gateway also rejects that response identity as evidence for its reviewed reservation bound. **Expected behavior** A pricecard can name exact response identities with the same verified rates. Unlisted snapshots stay unknown. A declared response identity must not become an allowed request identity. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Configure a route with an alias pricecard and an exact response snapshot. 2. Return complete Responses usage for that snapshot through the gateway. 3. Observe that the old estimator leaves the charge unknown and invalidates the bound. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced in the shared estimator and gateway at `507dc70be26c191e372f09e58dc0965e73bf8f57`. **Deployment mode** Other: the credential-free Product E2E operations harness. The same library serves attached deployment targets. ## What Changed - Add optional `responseModels` to versioned eval pricecards. Validate one to sixteen unique exact additional identities. - Reuse one response matcher in cost estimation, reviewed bound checks and supported request-policy cache-write attribution. Cache attribution also requires the reviewed provider and request identity to match. Keep exact request-model admission unchanged. - Admit the field in the strict operations manifest. Include it in the existing whole-price bound digest. - Cover fragmented JSON and SSE forwarding, persisted usage, durable ledger replay, partial responses, unknown snapshots, invalid mappings, stale bound evidence and unchanged request admission. - Document mapping provenance, version changes and preservation of historical ledgers. ## Verification - Focused provider usage, gateway and operations tests: **185 passed, zero skipped** on the cache attribution follow-up. The exact snapshot assertions failed before the initial repair. Three positive cache-write snapshot tests also failed before the follow-up and now pass. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`: passed after building required workspace declarations. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit`: 4,311 passed, two skipped and four failures. The same four failures reproduce on unchanged base `507dc70` (79 passed, four failed in the two affected files): two Daytona Copilot image identity assertions and two Pi catalog/profile expectation assertions. This PR does not change those files or their source inputs. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`: passed again on the exact cache attribution follow-up commit. - The private Cloud consumer passed 57 offline compatibility tests again on this exact follow-up source. These cover the declared snapshot estimate, exact request selection, unknown snapshot and incomplete usage handling, ledger holds, and source export admission. No provider calls were made. - `git diff --check`: passed. - `pnpm test:run`: interrupted after repeated embedded PostgreSQL startup failures in existing native-session and other database suites. The failed attempt is preserved and does not count as a full local suite pass. Only this checkout's verified test process group was stopped; it left no processes running. The first sandboxed workspace typecheck could not open a local tsx IPC socket; the later authorized check passes. An initial runner typecheck also lacked fresh-checkout workspace build declarations; its later run passes. - All forwarding tests use local synthetic response bytes. No provider calls, releases, deployments or paid eval campaigns were run for this repair. ## Risks - An incorrect mapping can apply incorrect rates. The pricecard author must verify provider provenance and change the price version. Validation bounds the list and uses exact matching only. - Existing pricecards remain exact-name only when the new field is absent. Adding or changing a mapping invalidates old reviewed bound evidence. Historical ledgers and receipts are not rewritten. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact runtime deployment ID and context window are not exposed in this session. The agent used reasoning, source editing, terminal commands and credential-free tests. No model inference was used by the eval harness for this repair. ## 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 - [ ] 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 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
2ee36a4c0a |
test: add chat feature scenarios and real task workflow evals (#17794)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agent Chat lets a person assign work through a conversation. > - Feature and API maps do not prove that a natural request produces the right saved result. > - Product E2E already owns isolated fixtures, browser runs, evidence and cleanup. > - This pull request adds a chat scenario catalog and two real task workflows in that framework. > - Independent checks verify the task, its author, the saved output and the reply in chat. > - The benefit is a small executable foundation for broader chat coverage. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** It adds real task creation and delegation coverage for Agent Chat. **Current behavior** Existing maps describe features and agent access. Existing chat evals cover specific protocols and handoffs. They do not connect a broad human-request catalog to independent saved-state checks. **Proposed behavior** Keep 244 planned scenarios across 35 feature areas. Promote two requests into the explicit-only `chat-features` suite. One saves a backlog task without starting work. The other delegates an announcement and returns the saved result to the original chat. **Reason and benefit** A successful tool call or confident reply does not prove the requested result exists. These evals check public API state, attribution and browser access after a real model run. **Breaking changes** No API or data schema changes. Chat instructions now require actual relative task links. The local E2E private-state scanner recognizes Codex account ownership metadata while continuing to reject credentials and model-visible identity leaks. **Additional context** Related prior work: #13969 and #13762. This improves verification of the existing Agent Chat roadmap item. It does not add a new core product feature. ## What Changed - Add YAML scenarios with capability IDs, starting context, user requests and expected outcomes. Validate all area files against their schema, global ID uniqueness and exact feature-map capability coverage. - Add two local native Codex subscription cells. Send the exact catalog request once through Chromium. - Seed only prerequisites through public APIs. Use shipped agent instructions and explicit disposable budget policies for unpriced subscription usage. - Check task ownership, creation audit, no premature execution, current worker-authored output, automatic completion delivery and usable links after reload. - Keep private Codex account ownership metadata distinct from bearer credentials. Scan rollout message content, all tokens and published evidence as before. - Teach normal chat instructions to use relative task links instead of invented hosts. Update tests, maps and the runbook. - Repair existing E2E contract drift: include the active Copilot identity in the image digest and update Pi profile expectations. Keep global catalog cardinality in its owning catalog test. Product E2E owns the new flow and grader. Its existing launch and report paths remain in use. The shared scanner change is limited to owner-private temporary Codex runtime metadata. Other callers retain the full secret scan. No UI, endpoint, schema or permission behavior changes. ## Verification - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed: 35 areas and 191 capability IDs. - Product E2E typecheck and focused tests passed before rebase: 225 Vitest tests and 137 Node tests. Conversation service tests passed 40/40. Five existing runner turn-binding regressions passed. - Historical live measurement used real Chromium, server, database and native Codex with no automatic retries. The initial same-definition batch passed 5/6 cells. Backlog passed 3/3; delegation passed 2/3. One CEO startup failed because the runner did not receive a provider turn identity. The cause is unresolved. - An unchanged follow-up passed delegation three times and backlog twice. Combined evidence is backlog 5/5 and delegation 5/6. Each attempt passed cleanup. Later passes do not erase the earlier failure or prove a runner repair. - Earlier failed revisions exposed an invented task hostname, private account metadata false positives and missing funding for unpriced subscription usage. Those led to the specific changes above; the failed records remain retained locally. - The runbook records campaign identifiers and definition provenance. Generated result artifacts are not committed. Historical live results predate this branch rebase; fresh PR-source live evidence and final validation are recorded below. - Full workspace typecheck and production build passed on the rebased branch. Product E2E typecheck passed. - The full Product E2E support suite first reproduced four baseline failures: two missing active Copilot image-identity inputs and two stale Pi/catalog expectations. The narrow contract fixes above resolved them. The full rerun passed 4,282 Vitest tests plus 137 Node tests, with two skipped. Image checks verify mutation changes the hash, unchanged input stays stable, and an input closure without Copilot is unaffected. Original failed logs remain retained. - The repo-wide local Vitest run has reported two failures in unchanged service files. The Workspace connection test passed an isolated recheck and its full file passed 469/469 unchanged. The recovery test hit a 15-second timeout; its full file passed 89/89 unchanged. The run later hit explicit PostgreSQL `semget` resource exhaustion and was interrupted after those observed failures; no final aggregate counts or full local pass are claimed. Its complete available log is retained. No assertion or timeout was weakened. Matching remote server CI passed on the same source. - On clean PR head `39ad80b523ce194c90aafafd077d48dd9a36b4c5`, backlog passed in `local-2026-10-26T19-24-13-014Z`. The parallel delegation fixture failed during PostgreSQL initdb, before browser or model execution; its failed cleanup grade is retained. A disposable standalone initdb probe then passed. No semaphore sets or kernel settings were changed before that probe/recheck. After confirming no remaining fixture process, its private temporary files were removed. - One separate delegation recheck passed in `local-2026-10-26T19-29-24-800Z`, with one attempt, zero automatic retries and successful cleanup. Both passing current-source cells use definition `3f2c9ba2d03e3dcddde47ddab3b43bc52de977f25e256fceae0a24c9128e204b`. The earlier bootstrap failure and the historical provider startup failure remain distinct. These local results omit automatic source-SHA metadata; the clean checkout SHA is recorded here from the execution session. - The later broad local run reported `could not create semaphores: No space left on device`. A bounded cleanup removed 32 current-user PostgreSQL sets with 17 members, marker 537, a dead recorded creator and zero waiters. No live process or kernel limit was changed by that cleanup. The test process group was subsequently stopped; no broad rerun is planned. This direct later resource failure does not prove the precise cause of the earlier live initdb failure. - Review follow-up adds only static catalog validation and documentation of the existing five-minute journey bound. The executable definition is unchanged. Focused catalog/oracle tests passed 28/28; no redundant live run is claimed. - Final head `30fcb36ac9ae1f0270a589dbfafcec91ca6a03f3` passed all required and underlying CI checks in [run 40391402347](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40391402347), including `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`. Greptile and Paperclip Review both scored this head 5/5, with all review threads resolved. The static follow-up leaves every executable definition input byte-identical to the live-tested source at `39ad80b`. Normal squash auto-merge is enabled. Actual merge is pending eligible code-owner approval for the owned dependency manifest; no protection is bypassed. ## Risks - Live model behavior can vary. One missing turn-start event remains unexplained; this PR does not claim provider reliability or broad catalog qualification. - Subscription costs are unpriced. Explicit fixture funding admits that usage. Run counts and deadlines remain bounded, but the dollar limit cannot cap unknown cost. - Account identity exceptions apply only to known private Codex runtime files. Token reuse, unknown files and model-visible rollout content remain blocking findings. - Deterministic checks establish saved state, output structure, required brief facts and access. They do not score all prose quality. Initial samples also require human inspection. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, code execution, browser and repository tools. The precise model revision and context window are not exposed to this session. Live eval agents used `gpt-5.6-sol`; that is the evaluated model, not a claim about the authoring model. ## 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 local tests; focused suites pass and the interrupted full-run 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
|
313c1db2c3 |
fix(evals): share bounded request policy with qualification (#17765)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and their work. > - Product E2E evaluations send model work through a gateway with cost limits. > - The gateway checks the request body before it reserves money or contacts a provider. > - A qualification probe needs that same check before it records a spending-cap denial. > - Namespace support already exists. Qualification must share that policy without sending a paid request. > - This pull request exposes the pure request validator and bounds the supported local tool definitions. > - The benefit is one request policy for qualification and forwarding. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #17452, #17469. **What happened?** The request validator was private to `forwardEvalRequest`. A qualification caller could not reuse the request policy before admission. A separate check could accept a request body that forwarding rejects before a reservation. **Expected behavior** Qualification and forwarding use the same pure validator. One-level OpenAI namespaces with local function or custom tools remain supported. Invalid tool definitions fail before accounting or transport work. **Steps to reproduce** Use the synthetic native-daemon request fixture in `eval-gateway.test.ts`. It has seven local function tools and one namespace with five local function tools. Call the shared validator, then forward through the fake provider. Run the malformed namespace and tool-count cases to check rejection before side effects. The namespace behavior follows the [OpenAI function-calling guide](https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/guides/function-calling). This change preserves the one-level contract introduced in #17452 and hardened in #17469. ## What Changed - Export `boundedEvalPayload` with credential-free route fields. `forwardEvalRequest` calls that function. - Keep one namespace level with function or custom leaves. Require exact leaf types, nonblank string leaf names, and a closed namespace wrapper. - Limit OpenAI tool definitions to 1,024 per request. Count namespace wrappers and their children. - Add native-daemon-shaped forwarding coverage, malformed and hosted tool rejection, count and depth boundaries, and Anthropic compatibility checks. - Document the shared qualification policy in the Product E2E security guide. - Compile the real observability validator in the test parent. The owned CLI fixture imports JavaScript, so its process group does not include a test-only TypeScript compiler service. The parent resolves the compiler from the root package, which declares that dependency. Production cleanup checks and attempt deadlines stay intact. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts eval-gateway.test.ts cost-ledger.test.ts provider-usage.test.ts operating-overhead.test.ts operations.test.ts`: 173 passed. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm build`: passed. - Separate Node support checks: 137 passed. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit`: 4,271 passed, two skipped, four failed in unchanged Daytona image and Pi catalog contracts. The same four failures reproduce on untouched base commit `a67a18c171816b097f46eae78fc58c7e55c9c565` (79 passed, four failed in those files). - `pnpm test:run`: interrupted and incomplete after required CI completed. Initial database startup failed because this checkout omitted the embedded PostgreSQL package postinstall aliases. The package hydrator restored them, and 14 real database checks passed. Earlier failures and the full output remain preserved; this local full run is not counted as passing verification. Its owned process group exited after SIGINT, with no owned survivors. - An offline full native authentication probe used the real Rust daemon and pinned Codex 0.160.0 Darwin SDK. The same captured request failed the older operations policy before reservation and reached a mock reservation with this policy. The OS sandbox allowed loopback only. It used synthetic credentials, retained no raw model payload, and made no provider calls. - Controller fixture suite: 70 passed. Three cold comparisons each confirmed that the old child started an owned compiler service and the corrected child did not. On Darwin the old compiler also exited cleanly, so this does not prove the exact historical Linux process race. Fresh Linux CI is required. - Independent review passed. The private qualification integration passed 14 exact-source compatibility checks and 67 shared-source tests without provider calls. - Required GitHub CI checks passed on the current head. The separate Entire approval gate still awaits an eligible reviewer; the delegated author account's explicitly AI-assisted approval does not satisfy it. ## Risks Requests with more than 1,024 OpenAI tool definitions or extra namespace wrapper fields now fail closed. New provider schema fields will need review. Anthropic tool handling, model prices, billing restrictions, output caps, and reservation ordering remain unchanged. This offline request-policy proof does not establish a completed model turn or Linux or Cloud onboarding acceptance. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact serving model identifier and context window are not exposed in this session. The model used reasoning, 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 - [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
|
bbe1016d81 |
feat(evals): retain bounded native tracing in the Runner controller (#17493)
Retain bounded native tracing in the Runner controller with attempt-bound relays, private export receipts, offline cost replay, conservative holds and bounded failure diagnostics.
Verified exact head
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
3f91d58dd5 |
fix(ci): provide Copilot auth only to protected paid eval cells (#17743)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Paid runner evals test real provider integrations. > - Copilot cells use the saved-token connection path. > - The two trusted workflows did not pass the Copilot credential to those cells. > - This PR supplies it only when the selected cell needs it. > - Existing environment and actor gates protect access in this public repository. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #15705 and #15706. A search found no open PR that adds this workflow credential binding. **Describe the bug** Copilot Product and direct-protocol eval cells require `COPILOT_GITHUB_TOKEN`. The protected paid workflows do not currently pass that environment secret to the selected execution step. **Expected behavior** Only a selected Copilot cell receives this credential. Ordinary PR, build, catalog, image and reporting jobs receive none. **Steps to reproduce** Dispatch the trusted full-stack workflow for one Copilot cell. Credential validation fails before the task starts, although the protected environment can hold a valid token. **Environment** GitHub Actions in the public `paperclipai/paperclip` repository, with the reviewed workflow on `master` and the `runner-e2e-paid` environment. ## What Changed - Pass `COPILOT_GITHUB_TOKEN` in the paid Product and direct-protocol execution steps, only when `matrix.credentialName` selects it. - Add the missing Copilot protocol-catalog credential mapping and verify it reaches the selected execution matrix. - Add security checks for the selected-cell binding and bounded protected-job scope. Extend the scan that rejects provider credentials in unrelated workflows. - Document the Copilot credential scope. No secret values, account data or private test evidence are in this PR. ## Verification - Product workflow security: 16 tests passed on this head. - Protocol catalog and workflow security: 21 tests passed, including the Copilot matrix regression reproduced red before its fix. - Current-head required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e` are green. Greptile is 5/5 with zero unresolved review threads. - The first CI attempt retained runner-shutdown failures; one failed-job retry passed on the unchanged head. Both attempts remain in [the CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40342429106). - `git diff --check` passed. - A selected-credential scan found zero matching secret values in the seven changed files. - The environment setting was separately checked: `master` only, required approval from existing allowlisted code owners, and administrator bypass disabled. The new secret exists only at environment scope; no repository-wide duplicate was created. - The packaged Copilot runtime verified the selected token and the explicit model without a model prompt. A fresh local UI journey then created an agent, completed its first task and verified the downloaded artifact and cleanup. ## Risks The selected paid cells gain access to one additional environment credential. Missing credentials still fail closed. Default-branch checks, initiating/rerunning actor checks, protected environment access and per-cell credential selection remain in place. This PR adds no trigger and gives no credential to builds or ordinary PR checks. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository tools and browser regression tests. The exact runtime model identifier 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 linked existing issues or described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket id - [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> |