Commit Graph
47 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandPaperclip 75666224d4 fix(native): use the deadline for remote health retries (#18324)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agent work and its execution state.
> - Remote Runner processes use health reads to check their saved
process identity.
> - A failed health request cannot prove that the process stopped.
> - Three fast gateway errors can exhaust the old retry limit in half a
second.
> - The caller already gives these reads a shared 30-second recovery
budget.
> - This pull request uses that budget with backoff for read-only
failures.
> - A short gateway outage can then clear without stopping the existing
turn.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A transient HTTP 502 during sandbox process supervision caused an active
native Codex turn to fail. The probe stopped after three attempts, even
when most of its 30-second budget remained. The run reported
`notification_transport_failed` and required workspace recovery.

**Expected behavior**

Retry read-only transport failures within the existing deadline. Keep
process identity conflicts authoritative. Do not repeat a signal after a
lost acknowledgement.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Start a read-only process verification with a 30-second deadline.
2. Return HTTP 502 from its first three transport reads, then allow the
next read to succeed.
3. The old helper rejects after three reads. The fixed helper returns
the successful observation.

Related repairs: #16451 introduced bounded remote probes. #16835 and
#17799 require proof of process exit before replacement. This change
retains those guards.

## What Changed

- Use the existing absolute deadline instead of a three-attempt limit
for read-only probe failures.
- Back off from 250 milliseconds to two seconds. Clip each request to
ten seconds or the remaining budget.
- Preserve the original error and diagnostic when the deadline is
exhausted. Reject non-finite deadlines before an RPC.
- Add a red/green regression and a repeated-gateway-failure case around
a real listening process.
- Update execution semantics and both recovery maps.

## Verification

- Before the fix: the new probe suite failed two behavioral assertions.
The gateway case returned its HTTP 502 error instead of the later
successful observation.
- After the fix: 75 focused probe, diagnostic, process-supervision and
adoption tests pass. The diagnostic failure tests use a controlled clock
for their full 30-second budget. Their error and redaction assertions
stay unchanged.
- Map alignment and module-boundary checks pass.
- Full workspace typecheck and build pass at final commit
`ddd42f66378ebc36ec1d7e0ca1f45943473561b3`.
- The broader affected suite against disposable PostgreSQL passed 994 of
997 tests; its three startup/database timeouts passed unchanged in
isolation. The initial full default local run encountered embedded
PostgreSQL startup failures and did not complete. The four diagnostic
tests that assumed the old short retry timing now use a controlled clock
without weakening their assertions.
- Incident evidence came from Linux AMD64, Node 24.22.2, Core commit
`0c70cedce9a803bdc201324528abb35e423e7cd0`, native Codex `gpt-6.1-sol`,
and a shared ChatGPT subscription. Two separate runs recorded the same
supervision HTTP 502 within one second.
- A disposable live Daytona sandbox check passed on Linux x86_64 and
Node 24.22.1. Three injected gateway failures recovered in 3.31 seconds
on production source from `e54a355fa179022caaa6854302ff56bd85de0229`
(unchanged by the final test-only commit). The real Node listening
process had one launch, retained its exact identity and saved file
across a second read, and produced a confirmed Stop receipt. Sandbox
deletion succeeded. This is process-supervision integration evidence,
not a Codex task or model execution.
- Fixed-revision hosted acceptance and recovery of the original
conversation require rollout. This PR does not claim either. The
duration of the original provider outage remains unknown.

- Final commit `ddd42f66378ebc36ec1d7e0ca1f45943473561b3`: required `ci
/ verify` and `ci / e2e` checks pass; Greptile is 5/5 with no inline
findings. The separate Paperclip Review service has not completed an
assessment and remains queued. It is not a required branch check.

## Risks

- Persistent fast transport failures cause more read-only requests
within the same deadline. Capped backoff limits their rate.
- Missing or changed identity still returns immediately. Failed health
reads still cannot authorize replacement, process signals, or provider
replay.
- Signal requests still have one attempt. The timeout budget and
execution permissions do not change.
- No schema or package changes.

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-6, through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection,
and shell tool use. The exact deployment model ID and context-window
size are not exposed by this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-30 10:50:49 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip ed8fae8dbb fix(workspaces): preserve completed shallow sandbox exports (#18221)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip coordinates agent work and preserves its results.
> - Remote execution copies completed workspace changes back to the
host.
> - An agent can fetch a published branch with shallow Git history.
> - A full Git bundle omits the shallow boundary metadata and can fail
host connectivity checks.
> - This pull request carries the boundaries through the full-bundle
fallback and imports through normal Git fetch.
> - Recovery must also recognize completed native work on a reusable
lease without treating it as ordinary executor reuse.
> - Completed work can be saved without another provider turn, while
existing host history remains connected.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
Sandbox finalization can fail with a missing parent commit after an
agent checks out a separately fetched shallow branch. Re-exporting a
full bundle repeats the failure because Git bundles do not encode
shallow boundaries.

**Expected behavior**
Import the completed branch and saved files. Preserve existing host
ancestry and concurrent host edits. Keep normal Git connectivity and
workspace merge checks.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Prepare a sandbox from one host commit.
2. Fetch a different published branch with depth one and check it out.
3. Save a result file and restore the sandbox workspace.

**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduced against master before this repair. The regression fails with
the missing-parent error before the production change.

Related public context: #15268 covers rewritten history integration.
This repair handles shallow bundle transport before integration.
Searches found no equivalent open repair.

## What Changed

- Export shallow boundaries beside the full bundle when the delta import
lacks history.
- Unpack into a temporary shared bare repository. Keep parent
connections already available on the host and import with Git's shallow
fetch protocol.
- Reject malformed boundary values and retain existing connectivity,
branch, and concurrent-work merge guards. Keep boundary probes within 15
seconds without consuming the separate 60-second Git import budget.
- Let source-bound preservation recover reusable leases only for the
finalizer-selected, accepted successful native result and matching
completion contract. Retain provider-stop, physical ownership and
host-writer checks; ordinary reusable sources remain blocked.
- Classify invalid Git metadata separately from omittable unsafe
archives. Keep native finalization failed and preserve service-owned
file recovery; carry the sender's dedicated rejection across the command
boundary without transient retries.
- Share the failure allowlist across bounded run/activity projections
and cancelled-preservation selection. Migration `0416` rebuilds the
matching partial index; task chat retains the non-retryable recovery
notice.
- Add real Git, filesystem sandbox and database recovery regressions.
Update execution semantics and affected verification maps.

## Verification

- Red: real filesystem sandbox restore failed with the same
missing-parent/revision-walk error before the export repair.
- Green: 240 focused Git, workspace restore, sandbox transport and
native-finalization tests pass. Coverage includes both transfer paths,
malformed/oversized metadata, a genuinely shallow host with its original
boundary intact, and concurrent host work with both merge parents
verified.
- Red/green: a 14-second simulated probe left the final real Git fetch
only 45,893 ms before the budget split. It now retains over 55 seconds
after the probes; a 16-second probe exhausts its own budget before host
import.
- Red/green: an oversized read progress report was retried three times
before its distinct metadata classification. It now aborts the first
read before payload consumption, leaves the host tip unchanged and does
not retry.
- Red/green: the real metadata error was swallowed by best-effort export
and native finalization incorrectly returned success. Both regressions
now pass; all 240 focused Git/restore/native-finalization tests pass. A
PostgreSQL/filesystem fault-injection test also verifies retained files,
failed run, service-owned recovery barrier, no preservation receipt and
no new wake.
- Red/green: duplicate metadata produced 47 Git process starts before
deduplication; the bounded-work regression now passes. Oversized byte
and boundary inputs fail before Git probes.
- Recovery red: both reusable lease policies exhausted recovery despite
a selected accepted successful result. The assembled
PostgreSQL/filesystem path now passes for retained and both reusable
policies, including idempotent re-admission after exhausted automatic
recovery, saved files, no agent wake, and once-only existing-result
finalization.
- Source verification controls reject ordinary reusable leases,
rejected/failed/unselected results, another physical allocation owner,
and an active host writer without changing recorded state.
- The 78-test PostgreSQL/filesystem recovery/source suite passed before
the metadata classification correction. Its new persisted
metadata-failure regression also passes. Full workspace typecheck and
build pass at final head `69f10daab2`.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` pass.
- Full local `pnpm test:run` attempts did not finish. They are not
counted as passes. Early focused runs exceeded 5-second and 30-second
fixture deadlines; the final serial suite passed all 176 tests with a
30-second per-test budget in 56.8 seconds.
- Red/green: both bounded PostgreSQL projections dropped the new code in
oversized results. All 19 source/projection cases now pass, plus an
actual index-predicate test that excludes a metadata repair hold and
still selects ordinary cancelled work.
- Red/green: an oversized sender `.git/shallow` lost its error type
before host validation. The real transport test now verifies one typed
rejection, no shallow-payload read, and an unchanged host tip. All 465
command/sandbox/task-chat tests pass, and token/migration gates pass.
- Full typecheck/build pass after these final contract corrections at
`69f10daab2`; all 20 PostgreSQL source/projection/index contracts pass.
All current-head CI checks passed; Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved
review threads. Merged #18230 supplies the CI-cache and Linux
shell-fixture baseline repairs; their duplicate changes have been
removed from this PR. The final Runner lane passed after one justified
rerun of an unchanged authentication fixture timeout (all 11 fixture
tests also pass locally). Previous CI failures and incomplete local runs
remain recorded; live deployment and retained-run recovery remain
separate verification.

## Risks

- The fallback creates a temporary shared bare clone. Metadata is
limited to 64 KiB and 256 unique boundaries, duplicate/parent probes are
cached, and Git import has a 60-second command budget plus a separate
15-second boundary-probe budget. It runs only after a missing-history
import failure.
- Incorrect boundaries could hide real host ancestry. The importer
retains available parent connections, and regressions cover that case.
- The full-bundle fallback can transfer a bundle twice. This preserves
the existing fast delta path; removing that extra transfer is outside
this correctness repair.
- Preservation eligibility expands only for completed native exports on
reusable leases. It creates no provider turn and leaves ordinary
reusable leases ineligible. Database/filesystem regressions cover result
selection and competing physical/host ownership.
- The migration rebuilds one partial index; no tables, columns or user
records change. There are no agent execution admission, model, trust,
recovery permission, workflow or lockfile changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, code execution, and browser tools.
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>
2026-10-29 20:02:53 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 88a35cf4e7 fix(recovery): retain workspaces when restart recovery blocks (#17839)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Native restart recovery decides whether an interrupted provider
session can continue.
> - An unusable checkpoint must stop provider replay.
> - The failed run can still own a remote sandbox and files that need
saving.
> - The blocked restart path recorded failure but omitted the existing
workspace preservation obligation.
> - Saved user comments then waited for cleanup that had no
file-recovery owner.
> - This change records that obligation in the same transaction as the
failure.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A native run failed after its provider reported a terminal connection
error. Restart recovery rejected its failed checkpoint and marked the
run failed. Its prepared workspace and active sandbox lease had no
preservation record. A later user continuation waited for the old
environment to stop and could not start.

**Expected behavior**

When restart recovery blocks a run, preserve its exactly bound workspace
through the existing stop-and-save service. Keep provider replay
blocked. Stop proof and saved files must still precede any successor.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Prepare a native run with a remote workspace descriptor and its
matching lease.
2. Persist a permanently failed provider checkpoint.
3. Run native restart recovery.
4. Observe a failed run with an active lease and no required
workspace-recovery record.

Refs #17801 and #17439. Those PRs add lease-settlement notifications and
remote controller adoption. This change records the missing preservation
obligation in the current restart failure producer.

## What Changed

- Call the existing native workspace preservation service before the
blocked restart transaction commits.
- Keep the existing company, coordinator ownership, source lease and
descriptor checks.
- Add real PostgreSQL cases for exact binding, an unrelated source, a
live owner, and rollback when preservation cannot commit.
- Verify that preservation creates no replacement run or wake and
retains the provider attempt count.
- Document the transaction and recovery contract.

## Verification

- Updated the existing branch with master at
`09c05c55050fede448196637cbaa543a154da76e`. Both sides of the
overlapping test additions remain. The production fix is still two added
lines.
- Current source verification: macOS arm64, Node 25.6.1, and disposable
Homebrew PostgreSQL 16.14. No deployment or live task replay was
performed for this branch update.
- **113 tests pass** across `native-failed-workspace-recovery.test.ts`
and `native-restart-recovery.test.ts`. Run them with
`PAPERCLIP_TEST_DATABASE_URL` set to a disposable database ending in
`_test`. Coverage includes exact source binding, live-owner protection,
transaction rollback, no replacement run or wake, cancellation
preservation, and orphan preservation.
- Full local `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. Map checks,
module-boundary checks, and the PR diff whitespace check pass.
- Local verification limits remain explicit. The embedded PostgreSQL
probe fails during `initdb`. The full `pnpm test:run` invocation hit
that startup failure and was stopped. A broader restart integration
invocation against disposable PostgreSQL did not finish while
checkpoint-backlog work remained pending and was stopped. Neither
invocation is a passing acceptance result. Hosted CI must qualify the
updated head.
- Prior-head evidence retained: the preservation regression first failed
because its required fields were absent. The original verification
passed 105 locally available cases and skipped nine real-runner process
cases because the local binaries were unavailable. Previous-head hosted
CI passed full typecheck/build, test shards, Runner checks, and browser
shards. Those results do not qualify the updated head.
- Prior live-repair evidence retained: an audited call to the existing
preservation service registered the missing obligation for an exactly
bound source. Normal workers confirmed termination, released the source
lease, and preserved the prepared files before an assigned continuation
started. This was an earlier repair, not acceptance of the current
branch update.
- Updated-head hosted CI passes on
`a22feeb54daa2e9325a55d0ccd86515e64cbd47d`, including typecheck/build,
all test shards, Runner checks, and browser shards. Apex is 5/5 on the
same commit with no actionable findings or unresolved review threads.
GitHub reports a clean merge state. The patch is not deployed. The
original provider connection failure remains unexplained by this change.

## Risks

- Preservation adds database work only when a restart classification
becomes terminal. It adds no recurring scan or timer.
- A failed preservation write now rolls back failure settlement. The
existing owner can retry instead of leaving cleanup without an owner.
- A live coordinator or mismatched source remains protected. This change
neither destroys the sandbox nor starts provider work in the recovery
transaction.
- Existing cleanup must still prove termination and preserve files. A
terminal run alone does not authorize continuation.

## Model Used

OpenAI `gpt-6.1-sol` through Codex in T3 Code, with xhigh reasoning
effort, repository inspection, tool use, and code execution. The runtime
does not report the context-window size. Earlier implementation used the
OpenAI Codex model recorded in the PR history.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-29 13:06:28 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 6a932bb979 fix(daytona): preserve workspace exports under disk pressure (#18172)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and preserves their work when execution
stops.
> - Remote workspace recovery must save the retained files before
another executor can start.
> - Daytona directory export first writes a complete tar on the source
sandbox.
> - When that disk is full, each preservation retry fails while writing
the same temporary archive.
> - This change streams an archive after a storage-capacity failure,
without another full copy on the sandbox.
> - Existing source ownership, archive validation, and task admission
gates remain in force.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Related: #14402 established safe workspace export and retained-source
recovery. This PR handles the remaining temporary-archive storage
requirement.

**What happened?**
A sandbox ran out of disk space. The provider could no longer save its
state, and workspace preservation then failed with tar `No space left on
device` or `Wrote only ... bytes`. Repeating the export could not
resolve that failure because it required free space on the same disk.

**Expected behavior**
Export retained files without needing a second full copy on the source
disk. Reject incomplete transfers and unsafe archives. Preserve the
source and newer host files if export fails.

**Steps to reproduce**
Run the capacity regression with real tar and a file-size limit. The
original export fails during archive creation. The fixed export
transfers the same bytes through a real PTY. The credential-gated live
test uses a real Daytona sandbox and `/dev/full` as the archive sink to
reproduce ENOSPC without filling a provider disk.

**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduced on `27be859044`; fix rebased onto `6d59f5ef7e`.

**Deployment mode**
Source checkout on macOS arm64; live provider verification on a
disposable Ubuntu 24.04 Daytona sandbox with SDK 0.203.0.

## What Changed

- Fall back only after archive storage-capacity errors. Keep the
ordinary bulk download path.
- Transfer 40 KiB archive chunks over a raw PTY. Wait for each host
write acknowledgement and a final receipt acknowledgement. Send long
scripts only after raw-mode readiness.
- Require successful tar exit and complete framing before the existing
host archive validator can import files. Keep the bounded safe-link
retry and exclude rules.
- Bound total archive bytes by the provider-reported disk allocation,
preserve a 1 GiB host free-space reserve, and bound terminal cleanup to
five seconds while closing the host file independently.
- Add real-tar/PTY regressions, stream failure tests, a credential-gated
provider test, and recovery documentation.

## Verification

- Red before production changes: the capacity regression failed on the
real tar write with exit 153. Green afterward: unchanged bytes, file
mode, confined links, and source files survive. A tar producer that
fails after sending bytes cannot overwrite newer host files.
- 43 focused tests pass. Missing receipts, nonzero exits, transport
loss, invalid base64, oversized frames, stalled transfers, and late
connection cleanup fail closed.
- Live Daytona test passes: stop/start, actual tar ENOSPC, matching file
hashes and modes, unsafe-link filtering, intact source, then another
stop/start and export with a later saved file. The disposable sandbox
was deleted. Initial default-sandbox creation hit account quota; the
successful test used a 1 GiB image. Large output bursts exposed a real
socket closure, corrected by bounded chunks and verified in the
successful run.
- Repository `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. `node
scripts/check-maps.mjs` passes. Standalone plugin typecheck passes.
- Standalone plugin build and final typecheck pass. The final broad
plugin run passed 482 tests, skipped seven credential-gated cases, and
hit one existing 30-second archive-listing timeout. Earlier runs hit
both large-listing cases. Both timeouts reproduce with unchanged
`file-sync.ts` from master `6d59f5ef7e`, with 22 other archive-listing
cases passing on both base and fixed source. Parallel, serial, and
GNU-tar local runs retain those timeouts. The serial local `pnpm
test:run` was stopped after 36 minutes once the complete current-head CI
test suite passed; it is not counted as a full local pass. GitHub
Actions on production-code head
`9ffbd9e56e283a01c22f005c022b8f6838cf0143` passed typecheck, all general
and serialized test shards, Runner verification, build, E2E, and canary
dry run.
- Review fixes have passed the live Daytona test again. Sparse-file
budget enforcement, rejection before host writes, low host reserve, and
stalled provider cleanup are covered by the 43 focused tests. Greptile
is 5/5 and security scanning passes on
`9ffbd9e56e283a01c22f005c022b8f6838cf0143`; both review threads are
resolved.
- Test portability: `d2280108f5` verifies GNU tool versions and Python
before running the real-PTY regression. All 43 focused tests pass with
prerequisites installed; restricting PATH to the macOS system tools
cleanly skips the three integration cases. Standalone plugin typecheck
passes. Current-head CI passes typecheck, build, all test shards, Runner
verification, E2E, and canary dry run:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40910736373.
Greptile and Paperclip Review both assess the final head 5/5, security
checks pass, and no review threads remain unresolved.
- Paperclip Review assessed the final head 5/5 with no actionable
defects after the test-portability fix. Remaining accepted tradeoffs are
recorded under Risks.
- This is live provider-boundary acceptance. It does not prove a full
task Retry journey, repair lost provider session state, or recover the
original deployed task.

## Risks

- Streaming requires Bash and GNU tar, dd, and base64. Missing tools or
transfer failure reject export and retain the recovery obligation.
- Acknowledged terminal transfer is slower than bulk download,
especially across high-latency links. Very large exports can still reach
the configured deadline. The ordinary bulk path is unchanged.
- The fallback checks host free space before every 40 KiB write; this
deliberately favors a strict reserve check over reducing local syscalls.
It carries archive-download error context but does not yet emit a
dedicated transfer span. Provider cleanup is bounded; a kernel-stalled
local filesystem operation can still delay completion and file close.
- This change does not increase sandbox capacity or reconstruct provider
state that failed to persist. The plugin must reach the target
installation before recovery can use it. No merge, deployment, or
original-task replay is included.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code
editing, shell execution, and automated testing. The exact serving
variant and context-window size are not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-29 11:41:01 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip c74171d620 fix(recovery): retire superseded native workspace retries (#18077)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip coordinates agents while retaining their work and
execution authority.
> - A failed native run can schedule an exact-session retry and retain a
sandbox.
> - An explicit task Retry can already have completed successfully on a
successor.
> - Recovery correctly refuses the old run after its task execution lock
changes.
> - It nevertheless leaves that old retry scheduled and its workspace
without a preservation owner.
> - This change retires that proven superseded retry and registers
exact-source preservation together.
> - Existing stop receipts and saved-file verification still control
workspace switching.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A native sandbox run failed before starting a provider turn. An explicit
Retry completed on a linked successor. The original coordinator remained
in `retryable_failure` with an active sandbox lease. Restart recovery
returned `issue_execution_lock_changed`, while the ordinary sweep kept
delaying it. A pending workspace selection then made every new task run
fail during setup.

**Expected behavior**

Stop replaying a failed retry after its linked explicit successor has
completed. Preserve the original files through the existing system
worker. Keep the current task, ownership, pending choice, and unresolved
action outcomes intact.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Persist a failed, unowned native run with a prepared remote workspace
and `retryable_failure` coordinator.
2. Complete a same-company/task/agent explicit Retry linked to that run.
3. Release the task's old execution lock and schedule a workspace
selection.
4. Run startup or ordinary retry recovery. Observe the old retry remain
scheduled and the selection fail with an unfinished-recovery conflict.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Regression reproduced against `644937c931`. The current repair is based
on refreshed master `60b8089a44`.

**Deployment mode**

Native Runner with remote sandbox workspaces. The reported runtime used
ACPX Claude with per-turn lifecycle. The original provider
session-resume rejection is not independently reproduced or claimed
fixed here; this PR addresses the subsequent stranded recovery.

Related: #17839 records preservation when restart classification becomes
terminal. This change handles the earlier lock-mismatch return and
ordinary retry admission after a completed explicit successor. It uses
the same preservation service and does not require that PR.

## What Changed

- Share a narrow superseded-retry settlement between startup recovery
and the ordinary retry sweep.
- Require a failed source with no coordinator owner or process, its
exact prepared source lease, and a completed linked successor under the
same company, task and agent.
- Atomically retire replay and register preservation. Do not alter task
state or create another provider run.
- Add PostgreSQL lifecycle/safety regressions, a real-file preservation
and workspace-selection regression, and execution/map documentation.

## Verification

- Red: both startup and ordinary admission regressions left the old
coordinator in `retryable_failure` with no preservation obligation.
- Green: the same two cases retire the retry and retain the exact lease
without another run or task mutation.
- The assembled PostgreSQL/filesystem regression passes: workspace
selection remains blocked before preservation, the existing service
saves `saved.txt` and preserves newer local work, then the normal
selection guard applies the pending shared workspace.
- All 90 native retention/resumption cases pass. Three neighboring
startup-recovery cases pass, including the blocked-owner inventory. Full
recursive typecheck and full build pass at runtime head `23ddb213b4`;
final `19d7738ae3` only moves the function comment into execution
documentation. Map, module-boundary and diff checks pass. The duplicate
full local Vitest run was stopped after 20 minutes in its first long
general shard once the complete current-head hosted test gates passed;
no complete local-suite pass is claimed.
- Current-head CI has 53 passing checks and two intended Storybook
skips, including full typecheck, all test shards, build, Runner
verification, browser shards and both aggregate gates. The separate
`commitperclip PR Review` job is still queued on `ubuntu-latest` with no
assigned runner; its outcome remains pending. Greptile reviewed exact
head `19d7738ae3` at 5/5, with zero unresolved threads.
- Live acceptance passes on exact final source `19d7738ae3`: a
disposable Daytona Linux sandbox, the current immutable staging fleet
snapshot, SDK 0.203.0, a Darwin arm64 source host and Node 26.4.0. The
real native workspace preparation/export and provider stop/start paths
preserve an unpredictable report and newer host files. The ordinary
workspace-selection guard stays blocked until preservation commits, then
applies the pending shared workspace.
- The old workload's start count and side-effect marker each remain one.
Recovery creates no new run or native result. The sandbox finishes
stopped and is then deleted by the probe; a final provider read confirms
it is absent.
- A second live acceptance also passes on the original runtime's older
immutable snapshot with the source explicitly archived before recovery.
It verifies cold source reopening, the same report/newer-file checks,
one workload start and side effect, pending workspace application, and
confirmed deletion. Its initial probe attempt used immediate
archive/deletion reads and failed during asynchronous cleanup
observation; bounded provider-state polling fixed the probe without a
product change. The abandoned probe allocation is independently
confirmed absent.
- Scope: database fixtures represent the already-failed run and
completed explicit successor. The old workload is a persistent shell
process with observable file/side-effect markers, not a paid Claude
turn. This qualifies the repaired recovery handoff and real provider
preservation; it does not reproduce the initial ACPX session-resume
rejection.
- The original hosted task has only been inspected read-only. No rollout
or original-task recovery is claimed.

## Risks

- Incorrect successor classification could retire legitimate work.
Matching requires the server-persisted explicit Retry link, same
company/task/agent, later successful committed execution, no current
source execution lock, no recorded process, no coordinator owner, and no
workspace finalization owner.
- Retirement is not a stop receipt. The exact source remains retained,
unknown effects remain unknown, and workspace switching still waits for
the existing worker's stop and file-persistence proof.
- A failed preservation transaction rolls back retirement. No new scan,
retry budget, schema or public API is introduced.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use and code execution.
The host does not expose a more specific model ID or the context-window
size.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass — focused suites and live
acceptance; full-suite status 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 — separate template-review job
still queued as noted above
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups —
exact head `19d7738ae3`
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-28 15:15:19 -05:00
d30c8f42b8 feat(ui): keep writes durable through temporary disconnects (#17960)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start -->
https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/123/changes/paperclip/123
<!-- entire-trail-link-end -->

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - People save tasks, write documents, make decisions and send board
messages.
> - A disconnect can hide a response after the server accepts a write.
> - Recovery must keep the original account, task and request key.
> - The merged connection foundation in #15754 handles reads and shared
outage state.
> - This change adds bounded write recovery and explicit actions when
recovery stops.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Temporary failures could lose edits, report accepted writes as failures,
or require people to copy and send input again. A retry could target a
newly selected task or account. Restoring attachments could create a
second task.

**Expected behavior**

Keep the draft, its owner and its target. Retry only operations with a
server contract that prevents duplicate writes. Verify uncertain
results. Show conflicts and permanent failures, with an explicit resend
or cancel action.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Save a task title during an outage, then open another task before
recovery.
2. Restore a task creation that needs files, selecting those files in
another order.
3. Lose a document or decision response, then interrupt the verification
read.
4. Switch accounts while a create, upload or connected-channel
publication is pending.
5. Type and erase a new-task draft before the first account lookup
completes, then reopen it.

This PR carries the write layer from #15769 and its review fixes. It
targets master after #15754 merged. Related test cleanup #16952 already
covers the unchanged copy-link toast test; this PR does not duplicate
that work.

## What Changed

- Add bounded autosave and submit jobs for supported writes, with
pending, conflict and manual retry states. Retain admitted autosaves
after navigation and preserve newer task revisions.
- Keep each job with its original account, task and operation. First
account resolution adopts admitted startup work; a later account change
cancels old work. Remount inline and document editors when their owner
or document subject changes.
- Preserve task-creation keys and immutable request snapshots through
file reattachment. Restore generated document keys before comparing
reselected files. Reject changed requests instead of creating a second
task.
- Check the original account scope before creates and each upload. Save
successful upload receipts before stopping on an account change.
Identify attachments by content digest and metadata.
- Verify uncertain document and decision results. Replay only plain,
keyed comments automatically; combined reassignment, reopen and
run-setting changes require receipt reconciliation or cancel. Settle
each request once when a receipt races its retry.
- Scope drafts and connected-channel publication reads to their owner.
Keep unowned older records unread and unreplayed, with an explicit
confirmed discard action after Activity inspection. Preserve typing
through the first session lookup, keep erased text erased, and report
browser persistence only when storage succeeds.
- Wait for the first account lookup before sending startup status
changes or decisions. Retry failed required lookups with a fixed limit
and surface exhaustion to the original action. Preserve uncertain
comment keys on account cancellation. Check the account generation
before a comment retry calls its sender and again immediately before
POST after asynchronous preparation. Retire only that request’s
optimistic echo on completion.
- Return an ordinary comment’s accepted same-company, same-task,
same-user receipt before workspace reopening, task status changes or
wakeups. Reused keys with changed text still conflict. Complete
reference and activity records through the same finalizer for initial
sends and accepted retries. It locks the task before its comment,
matching task and company deletion, comment removal and tombstoning,
rejects removed or tombstoned comments, repairs references and inserts a
missing activity record in one transaction, and publishes after commit.
- Remove reader-only record and comment-body size caps so accepted
browser writes remain readable, including JSON-escaped comment requests
in local and session storage. Update four existing Storybook fixtures to
use owned draft keys.
- Document the write contracts and add regression and real browser
recovery coverage.

- Add the exact reviewed-save recovery regression for both composer
implementations and reloads. Align receipt completion, both comment
deletion methods and company deletion with task deletion by locking
tasks first. Cover real task and company deletion races.

## Verification

- The exact reviewed-unknown-save regression fails in all four cases on
original commit `1ed0af4186`. It passes with this PR for both composers,
before and after reload. Cancel keeps the text and uploaded receipt. The
retained draft sends, and the next message also sends. Run `pnpm exec
vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui
ui/src/components/composer-recovery.test.tsx`.
- The new real PostgreSQL task-deletion race fails with SQLSTATE `40P01`
on parent commit `f3253a00c4`. The company-deletion race also fails with
`40P01` on `e8cf0e02dd`. All six receipt tests pass after the final
lock-order fixes. They cover company deletion, task deletion, comment
removal, tombstoning, concurrent cross-task references and interrupted
reference repair. Run `pnpm exec vitest run --project
@paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-receipt-postgres.test.ts`.
- The full UI run passed 9,656 of 9,659 tests across 816 files. Three
cases failed under that run: two large-tree timeouts and one
plugin-panel assertion. All 67 tests in those two files passed in an
isolated rerun. These failures remain recorded; this does not claim a
clean full UI run.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, token gates and map checks pass on
the final change. The local full repository test command was started,
then stopped when the delivery moved to this existing PR. Fresh PR CI
must provide the full-suite gate.
- A local Storybook walkthrough used the real rich editor. Cancel kept
the restored text, Send cleared it after the simulated save, and a new
draft enabled Send again. Storybook simulates submission; it is not
staging acceptance.
- Earlier verification on `f3253a00c4` recorded five browser journeys
for title saves, cached-task offline recovery, startup recovery,
accepted comment replay and session lookup failure. Those results remain
prior-head evidence. No new staging deployment is claimed.

- On `e8cf0e02dd`, all CI checks passed after one browser-shard rerun.
Its first failure copied page text instead of YAML in an unrelated
agent-configuration test. On final commit `35131d4380`, Greptile is 5/5
with no unresolved review threads. The first CI attempt has two failures
outside this diff: runner close-attachment suspension and
scheduled-retry teardown. The scheduled-retry file passes all 14 tests
in isolation; the isolated runner test still fails locally. The single
standard CI rerun passed both jobs, and the aggregate verification gate
passed. All CI checks are green on `35131d4380`; Apex is 5/5 on that
same commit with no unresolved findings.

## Risks

- Automatic replay requires server duplicate prevention or result
verification. Uncertain combined mutations require receipt observation
or cancel and a fresh intentional send.
- Old unowned form drafts remain stored but are not assigned to an
account. Unowned channel records can be retired after Activity
inspection; this never cancels an accepted remote update.
- Browser storage and hashing can be unavailable. Storage failure is
reported honestly. Without a digest, replay can duplicate an upload
rather than silently drop a selected file.
- Detached autosaves remain bounded and check account ownership on each
attempt. Conflicts or exhaustion retain the draft for explicit recovery.
- No schema, credential or agent permission change is included. This PR
does not claim staging deployment or original-task acceptance.

## Model Used

Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`) produced the original
implementation with tool use. OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, assisted with
restoration, integration, verification and review fixes. This Codex
session does not expose its exact serving 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 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: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Amy (Opus) <claude@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Dotta <bippadotta@protonmail.com>
2026-10-28 10:52:06 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 09ad9adce2 feat(server): adopt running remote agents through durable controller checkpoints (#17439)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip must keep admitted remote work alive while its main server
is replaced.
> - Runner owns recovery mechanics and exposes opaque checkpoints
through #17097.
> - The server owns company scope, encryption, Stop, tool authority and
execution ownership.
> - A successor must prove current ownership before it adopts the
original execution.
> - Checkpoint bursts must also leave capacity for normal requests and
lease renewal.
> - This PR persists and adopts that authority through the existing
runtime boundaries.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Remote agents retain the original execution during a bounded main-server
outage.

**Current behavior**

A server restart can lose the controller's local state and connection.
An unsafe replacement could repeat a turn or an uncertain mutation.
Checkpoint writes in the request pool can also delay ordinary requests
during an aligned burst.

**Proposed behavior**

Restore encrypted control records from Postgres and adopt the original
runner under a fenced lease. Recover known tool receipts through current
tool authority. Give control checkpoints a shared pool capped at two
connections per database owner.

Depends on #17097. Successors are #17455 and #17456. Qualification and
presentation remain separate review slices.

## What Changed

- Add company/run-bound encrypted checkpoint records and migration 0394.
Keep the SQL idempotent after renumbering against current master.
- Recover startup and expired ownership through native runtime and
heartbeat. Preserve the sandbox lease, admitted runner artifact, harness
configuration, native session and active turn.
- Keep Stop, finalization, preparation ownership and stale-writer
fencing transactional. Preserve graceful detach and natural crash
takeover.
- Recover committed tool receipts through the existing authority.
Reauthorize reads and hold uncertain mutations.
- Bound startup retention with the existing coordinator and preserve
zero idle scans.
- Share at most two checkpoint connections per database client. Keep
application and liveness capacity separate. Close the checkpoint pool
during shutdown; late writes cannot reopen it.
- Count SQL across both application and checkpoint clients. Prove
request/liveness progress, command recovery and failure after pool
shutdown with real Postgres.

## Verification

Project creation recovery now uses the existing project activity receipt
owner. It retains authenticated input normalization, fingerprint checks
and current run authority after the receipt lock. An absent receipt
returns no result before mutation. The new lost-HTTP-response and
no-effect regression uses real API routes and Postgres. The seven
transport cases pass locally. This Mac skips all 20 database cases. On
current source `5de803c2cd`, Linux [job
122593415890](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40620576702/job/122593415890)
executes all 20 project-tool cases successfully (9.480 seconds),
including the committed-project lost-response regression. Its shard
passes 1,627 cases with three unrelated skips. Server typecheck passes.
The transport regression initially has two failures; a subsequent
incorrect expectation about schema defaults was corrected before the
final pass. Ordinary execution adds no checkpoint writes or recurring
work.

Current candidate `5de803c2cd` includes the project-creation receipt
recovery fix and master `2cd747d1b6`. Migration 0394 retains the prior
idempotent checkpoint DDL. Every master SQL file and journal entry is
preserved. Snapshots 0390–0394, migration checks and server typecheck
pass.

The ordinary warm-turn regression fails on its second turn before
`a219ab51ad`. After correction, three completed warm turns select the
correct prior checkpoint and preserve the original session. All 288
provider-wiring cases pass. The control plane, external persistence
callback, identity rotation and filesystem are real; the backend and
database-load seam are scripted. The 13 warm admission/configuration
variants also pass after final master integration. This does not qualify
an underlying harness.

At current source `5de803c2cd`, Linux [job
122593415907](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40620576702/job/122593415907)
passes all 940 native-session-executor cases (61.431 seconds), including
the warm external-checkpoint behavior; the shard passes 2,358 cases with
one skip. Current [Runner job
122593415475](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40620576702/job/122593415475)
passes the native recovery lane: 115 passes and five container-only
skips, including the encrypted restore guard, fresh preparation (63.189
seconds), blocked claim lock (1.226 seconds) and recovery beyond 101
blocked owners (3.897 seconds). The first lane passes 2,215 cases with
one skip. The SQL cost test reports zero idle and streaming SQL for both
output volumes; this is component evidence, not a production capacity
claim. At prior candidate `1ff7bb44f4`, Linux job 122549307215 passes
all 938 native-executor cases, including the three-turn
external-checkpoint regression. Job 122549306469 passes the native
recovery lane with 115 passes and five container-only skips, including
the encrypted-restore session guard, fresh preparation (63.664 seconds),
claim-lock contention (3.961 seconds), and 101-owner recovery (3.824
seconds). This Mac skips the real-Postgres suite. The earlier full local
executor attempt has 921 passes and 16 failures during embedded-Postgres
initialization before assertions. The original fixture collisions and
their corrections remain recorded.

At earlier candidate `8fbe62b41d`, server shard job 122535673841 has
3,876 passes, one failure and one skip in an unchanged expiry-worker
retry/drain timing test. The same server/database tree on qualification
source `b64cac6951` passes all 20 expiry cases and all 3,877 shard
cases. The single diagnostic retry, job 122541891915, passes all 20
expiry cases and all 3,877 shard cases (one skip). No assertion was
weakened. The original failure remains recorded and its exact timing
race is not proven. All Actions checks and legacy status passed on
`8fbe62b41d`, with completed Greptile 5/5 and no open feedback. The next
candidate `1ff7bb44f4` also passed all Actions checks and Greptile 5/5.
Its Paperclip Review remained queued before the new master conflict
required integration. The new candidate needs fresh exact-head CI and
reviews; old checks do not qualify it. Migration generation is
checkpoint-only, all master SQL and journal entries remain unchanged,
and migration checks, server typecheck and all 13 warm-owner variants
pass after integration. The first migration check was blocked by TSX
sandbox IPC; its permitted repeat passes. The first warm-test command
used an incorrect path and ran no tests; the corrected command supplies
the 13-case receipt.

All 16 database pool-lifetime/options/teardown cases pass after granting
loopback permission; the first batch had two EPERM failures and 14
passes. Earlier semantic-tool/HTTP recovery, adoption, encryption-batch,
zero-streaming-write and idle-SQL receipts remain source-attributed in
the [qualification
record](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/2ff66f57da0da35bac1c19a2366ea4b84d87a986/doc/plans/2026-10-22-hot-upgrade-qualification.md).
That record retains earlier assertion, setup and cleanup failures and
their corrections. No failed gate is waived.

The historical 300-session component campaign passes four after phases:
steady read p99 is 107–108 ms at 500 reads/s and 100 writes/s;
aligned-burst read p99 is 103–105 ms after the bounded pool, versus
584–689 ms before. This comparison isolates the persistence corrections.
It does not measure the final stack's hosted active-agent capacity. The
hosted zero-agent API pair leaves SQL and CPU essentially unchanged, but
both arms fail absolute latency gates and candidate peak cgroup memory
fails its gate. The active-agent/viewer matrix, different-artifact
upgrade and rollback remain open.

Run `PAPERCLIP_TEST_DATABASE_URL=<owned-disposable-postgres> pnpm
--filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/services/native-runtime/native-runner-restart-recovery.integration.test.ts`.

Previous head `f2db8a6568` had one failed workspace setup gate: [job
122555672441](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40608984238/job/122555672441)
passes all 4,169 UI tests and 285 CLI cases (one skip), but the company
import/export suite reaches its 30-second health deadline during doctor
startup. Its output does not reach the server-start step. The CLI,
server, database, shared, adapter and plugin trees are identical on
qualification source `a866619d7b`, whose [job
122555886663](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40609057937/job/122555886663)
passes that fixture and all 286 CLI cases. The one diagnostic retry,
[job
122561057225](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40608984238/job/122561057225),
passes the formerly failing fixture and all 286 CLI cases. All Actions
checks and legacy status on `f2db8a6568` pass. Its exact-head Greptile
completed at 5/5 with no open feedback. The current integrated head
requires fresh checks and a completed Paperclip Review before merge. The
original failure remains recorded; its exact timing cause is unproven. A
repeated failure requires investigation and repair rather than another
retry.

All current-head CI, legacy status, exact-head completed Greptile 5/5,
resolved feedback and ordinary GitHub merge eligibility remain required
before merge.

The latest integration preserves master’s published Copilot v70 profiles
and every published migration. Checkpoint migration
`0394_conscious_whizzer.sql` was generated with `pnpm db:generate` and
retains the prior idempotent DDL. The Runner vendor rebuild and replay
parity checks pass. Server typecheck and all 13 warm-owner variants pass
after that rebuild. The imported report-lock patch is byte-identical to
master; its intentional patch-context whitespace is retained, and the
feature delta passes whitespace checks. No hosted experiment was run.

## Risks

The pool adds up to two active connections per instance, shared across
agents. Checkpoint delivery can wait behind that bound; it still
requires its commit. Steady component-test Postgres CPU rises by about
1.7 percentage points of a two-CPU allocation. These corrections do not
remove the stack's control and renewal writes. The migration and key
must survive replacement. Fresh-database tests and local load do not
establish different-artifact hosted upgrade or rollback continuity.

## 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
- [ ] 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>
2026-10-27 21:39:23 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 663fe667d6 fix(recovery): reconstruct missing native workspace obligations (#17877)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - A failed native run can still own prepared files in a remote
sandbox.
> - Cleanup must preserve those files before another executor can start.
> - Older failure producers can omit the preservation record.
> - A saved message then waits for cleanup without a recovery owner.
> - This change reconstructs that record during user continuation and
orphan cleanup.
> - The existing worker saves the files, verifies stop, and returns
input to normal admission.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A failed native run retained a prepared workspace and an active sandbox
lease. It had no file-preservation obligation. Cleanup protected the
files. The next user message waited for a stop receipt that no worker
owned.

**Expected behavior**

A new message registers the missing maintenance work at once. Existing
orphan cleanup recovers historical saved input. Ordinary Retry remains
available. Saved input can start once, after verified preservation and
containment.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Persist a failed native run with an exact prepared remote workspace
and its active lease.
2. Leave its finalizer terminal and unowned. Omit the workspace recovery
record.
3. Send a user comment or run orphan cleanup.
4. Observe that no preservation worker starts and the comment remains
deferred.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced on `bd382eee536f4ada680072b1cc19100163c3d04a`.

**Deployment mode**

Native Runner with a remote sandbox. Local verification uses disposable
PostgreSQL 18 and real temporary workspace files.

Refs #17788 and #17800. Those fixes preserve future deadline failures
and register historical preservation on Retry. This change adds
automatic recovery for new and saved messages. Refs #17839 for the
separate restart-failure producer repair.

## What Changed

- Register missing preservation before an authenticated continuation
waits for remote cleanup.
- Reconstruct the same exact-source obligation during the existing
orphan lease sweep.
- Notify the existing preservation worker in the registration
transaction. Do not add a timer or history scan.
- Test ephemeral and reusable sources, live owners, active executors,
mismatched sources, rollback, lock contention, Retry and saved-input
delivery.
- Document the recovery contract and feature-map behavior.

## Verification

- Red: both new orphan-recovery cases fail on unchanged production code.
Four ownership and source negative controls pass.
- Red: a new comment starts no preservation work without the admission
repair.
- All 461 test cases across five affected suites pass across the local
runs. One existing 30-second timing case timed out under concurrent
verification; its isolated rerun passed with the same deadline and
assertions.
- The three final-head entry journeys pass again: HTTP Retry, HTTP
comment creation, and historical saved-input recovery.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass on final head
`8fab8b2ba9049f640fd884094a2007a69465e6da`. The affected server
typecheck and build also pass.
- The integration journey holds the provider stop reply, checks that no
successor starts, preserves real files and newer host edits, and checks
one saved-input successor.
- Module-boundary checks, map checks and `git diff --check` pass.
- Native macOS PostgreSQL cannot start because host semaphore capacity
is exhausted. Database verification uses separate disposable PostgreSQL
databases for each suite. An earlier shared-database attempt caused
fixture interference and is not counted as a pass.
- Greptile gives 5/5 with no findings or unresolved threads on
`8fab8b2ba9049f640fd884094a2007a69465e6da`. All final-head GitHub checks
are settled: 55 passed, two Storybook checks skipped, and one neutral
Paperclip review. Full CI test, build, typecheck, Runner and browser
lanes pass. No full local `pnpm test:run` pass is claimed. The fix is
not deployed. This PR makes no claim of a live hosted model turn or
recovery of the original incident.

## Risks

- Registration grants maintenance authority only. Existing coordinator,
descriptor, allocation, stop, file-receipt and execution gates remain
effective.
- A locked source remains held. Its one-second lock timeout does not
prevent an unrelated source from registering recovery.
- New preservation writes wake existing work. Settled sources produce no
new recurring work. Historical discovery uses the existing orphan
cleanup lifecycle and its backoff.
- Provider lifecycle is simulated in local integration. PostgreSQL, HTTP
routing, file export/merge, the worker and queue admission are real.
- No schema, credential, model, trust, retry-budget or assignment
change.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository inspection, tool
use and code execution. The runtime does not expose the exact 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 tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-27 09:50:50 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip bd382eee53 fix(recovery): explain retained source verification failures (#17773)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Workspace recovery must prove the identity of retained work before
it uses an allocation.
> - The verifier rejects several different contracts with the same
`source_binding_invalid` code.
> - A saved Retry can therefore stop before file preservation without
enough evidence for a safe repair.
> - Operators need a bounded observation of the selected source without
another attempt or weaker guards.
> - This pull request records closed failure reasons and adds an
explicit read-only inspection on the run page.
> - The benefit is a precise next diagnostic step while the saved work,
intent, and ownership fences remain intact.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #17741, #17053. This is a diagnostic follow-up. It does not change
recovery admission or the retained-source acceptance policy.

**What happened?**

A retained-source recovery exhausted in `verify_execution` with only
`source_binding_invalid`. Run and task diagnostics could not distinguish
an invalid reference, lease policy, source binding, or reopened
allocation. The normal recovery-actions read can also revalidate
recovery state, so it was not a safe substitute for a current read-only
inspection.

**Expected behavior**

Record an allowlisted reason at the rejected guard. Allow a reader to
inspect one exact task/run/action without changing its attempts, saved
input, receipts, or ownership. Clearly separate the recorded failure
from current identity observations.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Prepare a terminal native run with a retained-source action and a
lease policy of `reuse_by_environment`.
2. Attempt source verification. The guard must still reject that policy.
3. Open the failed run and choose Inspect recovery, then Inspect current
source. The diagnostic should name `lease_policy_not_retained` and the
allowlisted policy.

## What Changed

- Split existing source-binding guards into closed reason codes. Keep
each acceptance predicate and physical recovery action unchanged.
- Persist validated, path-free reason/policy detail with future system
recovery failures. Keep historical generic records compatible.
- Add an explicit query on the existing task recovery-actions GET. Exact
company/task/run/action selection bypasses read revalidation. Run
selection lists at most 20 actions; inspection stops before per-lease
lookup when a record has more than eight sources.
- Add a manual inspection control on native export-failure run pages.
Keep resolved retained actions inspectable. Show recorded failure and
current recorded-source identity separately.
- Update execution semantics and feature/access recipes. The shared type
is the normalized server/UI contract; it contains no provider payload or
secret.

## Verification

- RED: the prior verifier failed both reason assertions for rejected
warm policy and foreign-run lease binding. GREEN: the final focused
source/HTTP, system-state, and UI suites pass 23 tests. The UI follow-up
passes 8 tests after the review fixes.
- HTTP tests prove exact selection, cross-company denial,
resolved-action access, reused-allocation rejection, redaction, and
unchanged actions, runs, leases, tasks, wakeup receipts, workspace
operations, and activity. A nine-source case proves bounded inspection
while the existing worker verifier still accepts all nine valid sources.
- Review follow-up: show allowlisted saved detail beside a changed
current observation, preserve all listed actions, and follow
exact-action selection in verified/limited/error tests. The prior
component fails the saved/current drift regression in an in-memory RED
control; the current component passes. UI typecheck/build pass again.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. Token gates, maps, module
boundaries, and `git diff --check` pass.
- Rebased onto master `46de15ff4b` without conflicts. Range-diff proves
both diagnostic commits are unchanged. On new head
`a7e2bc87fcea75e76b6b736304d1287257f71174`, all 23 focused tests, full
typecheck/build, token gates, maps, and module checks pass again. Both
fresh reviews are 5/5 with zero unresolved threads. Final exact-head
GitHub status is CLEAN: 55 success, 2 skipped, 1 neutral, no pending
checks or failures. The [ci / verify
aggregate](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40387002325/job/121802415824)
passed in eight seconds. All test/build/typecheck/E2E lanes passed.
- Existing full workspace recovery suite: 56/56 pass (103.5 seconds)
before the byte-equivalent rebase. `pnpm test:run` hit repeated embedded
PostgreSQL initialization failure before database-suite assertions and
was stopped. No full local suite pass is claimed. The owned external
`_test` database provided the focused HTTP/source verification. The
prior browser attempt also stalled at Network.enable before its click;
that attempt did not establish browser acceptance.
- Current-head local browser acceptance passes through the actual run
page: Inspect recovery lists the exact action, Inspect current source
shows recorded generic failure separately from the current rejected
policy, and reload resets inspection to the explicit control. Explicit
selection works again after reload. The app used isolated data, an empty
inherited environment, a paused synthetic agent, and no provider
credentials. Final state remains failed/exhausted with zero attempts,
zero wakeup receipts, zero workspace operations, and unchanged original
generic failure. The local app and temporary tab were stopped. This
proves the diagnostic journey, not the deployed source's actual lease
policy or its recovery.
- Final merge verification at
`a7e2bc87fcea75e76b6b736304d1287257f71174`: GitHub reports CLEAN and
mergeable. Both repository-required checks, `ci / verify` and `ci /
e2e`, pass, as does the exact-head Greptile check (5/5, zero unresolved
threads). The separate [Entire
trail](https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/paperclip/trails/7) has no
recorded reviewer approval; no such approval is claimed. It is not a
configured GitHub merge gate.
- Initial local setup failures were distinct from product assertions:
localhost sandbox EPERM required scoped local access; a browser harness
import path was corrected. A test UUID type inference error and
historical native-export UI selection gap were corrected before the
green run. The live task remains blocked; this diagnostic does not claim
it recovered.

## Risks

- This change improves evidence. It does not prove provider termination,
local descriptor integrity, or successful file preservation, and it does
not repair the original source.
- Current inspection spans multiple database reads. It is an
observation, not a historical cause or execution authority. It performs
no provider/filesystem calls and starts no retry or executor.
- The optional persisted detail is backward compatible. Unknown values
and extra fields are excluded. Oversized source lists remain uninspected
through this explicit diagnostic path; physical recovery rules do not
change.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex based on GPT-6, with code execution and browser tools. The
exact serving model ID and context window were not exposed in this
session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-27 08:21:28 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 0cb3fc7db5 fix(runner): retain ACPX transport failure details (#17837)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Paperclip Runner reports provider failures to the execution and
recovery services.
> - Those services read the terminal event's structured `error` field.
> - The ACPX transport-failure path wrote its code and message only at
the top level.
> - The session facade therefore replaced that cause with `error: null`
and the generic message "Provider turn failed".
> - This pull request uses the existing structured error contract while
retaining the old fields.
> - Recovery can retain the actual redacted cause without reopening the
failed provider or assuming a retry is safe.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A native ACPX run can lose its failure details between runnerd and the
session facade. The transport-failure producer emits a failed turn with
top-level `code` and `message`. The facade reads `error`. The server
receives a generic provider failure and cannot use the original cause to
explain or classify recovery.

**Expected behavior**

Retain the transport code and redacted cause in the structured terminal
error. Keep failed sessions closed, provider termination unproven, and
automatic replay disabled.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Open a native ACPX session and start a turn.
2. Send malformed activity from the sidecar after it acknowledges the
turn.
3. Poll the native provider events.
4. Observe that `turn.failed.error` is absent even though the producer
has a transport code and cause.

Refs: #16366, #17543. Those changes cover legacy process-session
diagnostics and session-ensure errors. This change repairs the native
ACPX polling terminal contract.

## What Changed

- Add the existing transport code and redacted message to the terminal
event's structured `error` field.
- Mark that error as non-recoverable. Keep the previous top-level fields
for existing readers.
- Add a real sidecar fault fixture and a native-provider regression. It
checks one failed terminal, retained error details, a closed session,
and no provider reopening.
- Document the failure contract and verification scope in execution
semantics and the recovery map.

## Verification

- Red: the new fault test failed because the structured transport error
code was null on the original code.
- Green: all 26 native-provider integration tests pass with the fix.
- Three session-facade terminal tests and three native-runtime
provider-failure classification tests pass.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass.
- Hosted test partitions, native Runner checks, typecheck, build,
browser shards and canary passed. Two final aggregate jobs received no
runner for several minutes. The first CI attempt was cancelled after
saving its status, and only those two cancelled jobs were resubmitted.
Both aggregate jobs passed on attempt 2. The current head has 55
successful checks, four expected skips and successful Snyk status.
- `git diff --check`, `node scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs`, and
`node scripts/check-maps.mjs` pass.
- The full local Vitest suite is not run for this patch. The local
filesystem fell below 500 MiB free during verification. The preceding
full-suite attempt crashed embedded PostgreSQL; focused checks and CI
are used without claiming that attempt passed.
- Live incident: verified the exact predecessor sandbox was destroyed
and workspace recovery completed. An audited user retry through the
normal task-retry service started one new native run. That attempt
preserved the original question but failed before provider startup with
a missing workspace-sync descriptor binding. The startup race is fixed
separately in #17838. A later audited retry completed successfully,
saved its useful answer and restored its workspace. The agent API
handoff failed; an audited operator repair through the normal issue
service completed the required user assignment in Review without
repeating the comment or provider work. This verifies recovery admission
on the existing deployment; the new Runner change is not deployed yet.
- Evidence limit: the historical terminal had `error: null` and its raw
sidecar frame was not retained. Fault injection proves this producer
defect and the same loss of diagnostics. It does not establish which
transport fault caused the historical turn to end.

## Risks

- Recovery now receives a specific transport failure code. The error
remains non-recoverable and `providerTerminalObserved` remains false.
Stop proof, effect reconciliation, workspace preservation, retry limits,
and normal execution authority still govern any successor.
- This change preserves diagnostics. It does not make a malformed or
lost provider connection healthy.
- No schema migration, credentials, provider selection, or model
settings change.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, source inspection, tool use,
and code execution. The runtime does not expose the exact 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 tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-26 21:34:29 -07:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 94819b6ded fix(recovery): preserve live heartbeat preparation ownership (#17838)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Heartbeat prepares each run before it starts the native provider.
> - Startup recovery can run while that preparation is still active.
> - The native input and coordinator exist before workspace
synchronization saves its descriptor.
> - Recovery checked the later native executor registry but missed the
earlier heartbeat execution registry.
> - It could claim the live run and dispatch a second executor against
incomplete workspace state.
> - This change gives the recovery claim the existing live heartbeat
registry and checks it before changing ownership.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Startup recovery can claim a native run that the same server is still
preparing. The second execution reads the admitted native input before
workspace synchronization has saved its descriptor. It fails with
`native_workspace_sync_descriptor_binding_missing`. The original
preparation then finds a failed run and cannot start the provider.

**Expected behavior**

Leave live preparation with its current executor. Do not change its
native coordinator or dispatch another executor. An inactive run must
still pass the existing recovery checks.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Start heartbeat runtime selection for a remote sandbox.
2. Hold workspace synchronization after native input and coordinator
persistence.
3. Run native startup recovery with the heartbeat execution still
active.
4. Observe an unintended `bootstrap_incomplete` claim and a second
execution.

Refs #17439 for broader remote controller recovery. This change repairs
the current heartbeat startup race. It does not add checkpoint storage
or remote adoption. A separate diagnostics correction is in #17837.

## What Changed

- Pass the existing heartbeat live execution registry to native recovery
claims.
- Check the current registry after locking the run and before any
takeover or coordinator change.
- Return the existing waiting disposition for live preparation. Keep
workspace descriptor validation unchanged.
- Add a PostgreSQL regression at the real runtime-selection boundary and
an assembled heartbeat recovery regression with the real claim service.
- Document the preparation interval and its recovery behavior.

## Verification

- Red: the new runtime-selection test observed an unintended bootstrap
claim on the original code. The heartbeat regression also failed because
recovery dispatched the live run.
- Green on current head `88bec51f10d61eb851eec849e82a80bb198555c7`: all
144 runtime-selection, heartbeat recovery, workspace-preparation and
restart-policy tests pass.
- These cases check an unchanged coordinator, no duplicate recovery
dispatch, a running source run, and normal recovery after the execution
leaves the registry.
- The full native restart integration file passes all 22 available
cases. Nine real-runner process cases are skipped because local Runner
test binaries were removed to recover disk space. The passing cases
include remote startup, old preparation fencing, ownership conflicts,
Stop, and concurrent recovery.
- Direct full server TypeScript check passes: `pnpm exec tsc --noEmit -p
server/tsconfig.json`. Hosted CI passes on this head, including full
test partitions, typecheck, build, native Runner checks, serialized
suites, browser shards, canary and both aggregates. Apex is 5/5 with no
actionable findings. The current head has 54 successful checks, two
expected skips and successful Snyk status.
- `git diff --check`, module boundary checks, and map checks pass.
- A wider local safety run stopped with PostgreSQL error 53100 and
ENOSPC after 64 tests passed. Recursive typecheck also stopped with
ENOSPC. These attempts did not pass. Generated files in this worktree
were removed to free space. The full local test suite and build have not
been run for this change; hosted CI must supply those results.
- Live evidence: a production startup recovery claimed a new run during
outward workspace staging. The second preparation failed before provider
startup. Its exact sandbox was later destroyed with successful cleanup.
The patch is not deployed. A later audited retry on the existing
deployment completed successfully and saved the requested answer once.
An audited operator repair through the normal issue service completed
the final user assignment in Review after the agent API handoff failed.
This acceptance verifies recovered work, not deployment of the new
guard.

## Risks

- A live heartbeat remains responsible for its own completion and
cleanup. Recovery must not compete with it. The registry is
process-local; existing durable ownership checks still govern other
controllers.
- An executor that is still active remains protected until its cleanup
removes its registry entry. This adds no timer, polling loop, schema or
credential change.
- Missing or corrupt workspace descriptors still fail closed. This
change does not authorize replay of unknown provider actions.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, source inspection, tool use
and code execution. The runtime does not expose the exact serving 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 tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-26 21:34:15 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 208a093d19 fix(chat): preserve resumed review waits and retry newer saved input (#17725)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start -->
https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/36/changes/paperclip/36
<!-- entire-trail-link-end -->

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - GitHub review agents publish findings and wait for an authorized
reply or head change.
> - Review tools could retain the requester after resume while
completion lost that same wait proof.
> - A yielded report could then queue its own continuation or repeat a
missing-wait error.
> - Ordinary Retry could also select an older failed turn while a newer
saved request had no admission.
> - This change shares the existing authority proofs and canonical
admission owners.
> - Current access, publication, execution and budget gates remain
required.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #17318. Builds on the canonical saved-input retry owner in #17733.
Related #16550 covers deferred legacy comments after ownership waits.
The separate recovery repair in #17724 owns the cleanup-to-saved-input
handoff; this PR does not add a second admission owner.

A resumed review could publish an assessment, then turn its
`response_wake` into an immediate `issue_status_changed` wake. A
provider that omitted its continuation could instead repeat a completion
error. A newer linked-human message saved during a budget hold could
also remain unstarted because Retry selected the older failed source.

## What Changed

- Resolve passive review waits through the accepted requester ledger
used by GitHub tools. Require the latest reviewed head, exact company,
task, agent, repository and processed publication under current access.
- Fill omitted/null yielded continuation from that server proof. Permit
an inherited normal tree resume only through its accepted parent
identity. Permit an ordinary follow-up only after this run has a
processed useful reply linked to its exact inbound message. Reject
acknowledgements, partial assessments, pending or uncertain writes as
that reply proof.
- Recheck the same run/review/head/source proof during feedback,
finalization and final status commit. Preserve explicit malformed-input
rejection and Done policy. Add no monitor permission or publication
grant.
- Keep heartbeat and publication projections narrow. Preserve both
published Copilot v62 identities and generate source-bound v63 from the
pinned merged base. No v63 live qualification is claimed.
- Certify the structured isolated-directory binding failure only at its
pre-allocation boundary and only through canonical task Retry. Other
workspace validation reasons and unknown effects remain denied.
- Route Retry to eligible newer saved input through the existing
canonical owner. Preserve the old result and skipped receipt. Require
current principal, source, App, runtime fence, budget, native ownership
and exact cleanup proof.
- Recover absent historical App metadata only through an earlier trusted
processed response receipt and an immutable non-null endpoint claim.
Explicit malformed or conflicting metadata stays denied.
- Revalidate execution through the exact claimed wake, coalesced task
Retry and resolved user-continuation receipt after admission. A second
normal Retry can recover the exact never-started authorization failure
with unchanged saved input. Require empty execution evidence, exact
diagnostics and no allocated or active executor.
- Explain when a recorded result prevents exact replay. Ordinary board
Retry directs a new task message to continue from saved work. Inherited
requester identity alone never grants replay.
- Keep accepted board-message preparation failures with the canonical
task Retry owner. Certify the exact unchanged comment, original user
wake, accepted same-user identity and absence of provider execution. Pin
that source, recheck it at admission, and bind identity initialization
to the coalesced intent and exact claimed successor receipt.
Uncertifiable sources retain an actionable fresh-message refusal.
- Return safe named authority categories for board Retry refusals.
Update execution documentation and capability maps. Add no schema or
polling loop.

## Verification

- A fresh external review request exposed a separate isolated-directory
preparation failure before allocation. Its first normal Retry saved an
intent but admitted no successor. This follow-up certifies only that
exact structured preparation boundary through the existing canonical
Retry owner, with trusted failed settlement and no executor, lease,
result or output. A real HTTP/queue regression reproduces the missing
successor before the repair. Twenty-three current-source safety cases
and the final 98-case Retry/HTTP group pass, including a fresh click
after a denied intent, source revocation, accepted results and the older
direct API remaining denied. The warning case uses actual configuration
preparation and production event append; unknown warning shape or
provider provenance stays denied. Full workspace typecheck, build, maps
and diff checks pass. Renewed hosted normal Retry now succeeds on the
final combined source: it preserves the exact saved request and linked
requester, starts one native successor in a fresh attempt workspace,
publishes the current-head 2/5 assessment and commits In review with
passive response wake.

- A later hosted normal Retry published a low-score assessment but lost
its accepted source identity because the previous attempt failed before
identity initialization. It repeated continuation errors, then submitted
Done. This is failed acceptance, not a successful qualification. The
initializer now retains the exact source only after execution-time
failed-chat Retry authorization; generic Retry and Done policy are
unchanged. A real queue/initializer regression fails with a null source
on the previous code and passes with the newer saved source. Two real
database completion cases verify that source yields the authoritative
wait and commits In review. Renewed hosted normal Retry now retains the
accepted source and exposes the authoritative current-review wait. It
completed after two semantic feedback corrections (wrong contract
revision, then wrong criterion IDs); the correct contract was present in
emitted input. The third finish was accepted and committed In review,
with no missing-wait loop or Done escalation.
- Repeated board-message preparation failures now walk their canonical
intent, failed dispatch and accepted parent identity, rechecking each
contained predecessor. A production queue regression fails the second
ordinary HTTP Retry before the repair and passes afterward. Changed
source, contradictory execution evidence and cyclic receipts remain
denied; traversal stops after twenty links.

- New inherited omission cases failed before the repair. The final full
PostgreSQL 18 wait/status suite passes **252 tests** under Node 24.22.
It covers omitted/null input, malformed-first recovery, same-head
resume, exact-source replies, changed heads, revoked access,
pending/uncertain/mixed publications, final commit revalidation, no
duplicate review and no self-wake.
- **15 existing publication tests passed before the pinned merge** on a
separate fresh database. They retain default partial-delivery and
failure-fallback behavior. Context reads remain below the unchanged 16
KiB heartbeat and publication response limits with large saved output
present.
- Saved-input tests cover a real signed PR webhook, production
accounting-budget refusal, normal policy recovery and canonical Retry.
Historical producer-shaped tests prove the missing-App case red, then
check trusted prior receipts and malformed, late, revoked or mismatched
proof. A broader order-coupled test was reproduced on the prior source;
its global fault injector now targets its own authorization query. The
43-case sequence passes without changing production behavior or its
safety assertions.
- New signed-ingress and real heartbeat execution tests reproduced the
admitted-successor failure, then the next normal Retry failure. The
final pinned merged source passes 249 full GitHub review/publication and
Retry cases on a fresh database, including all 49 saved-input cases. A
separate 74-case Retry/HTTP run also passes. Exact dispatch negatives
cover source, company, agent, task, successor, receipt, pause,
assignment, accepted success, controller and cleanup proof. Bootstrap
contradictions remain denied. The canonical Retry suite passes 16 cases
through its supported external PostgreSQL test connection.
- The normal board HTTP route reproduced the unusable inherited-result
refusal. It now returns actionable guidance without starting a
successor. The actual UI Retry hook and banner tests pass 12 cases.
- A production-shaped accepted board comment followed by a pre-provider
qualification failure reproduced HTTP 409 before the repair. The final
real HTTP/queue test certifies one canonical successor and preserves the
accepted identity. It rejects changed source, actor, task, agent,
result, controller, process, profile, allocation and receipt evidence. A
post-acceptance source change keeps the same intent pending. Execution
revalidation rejects removed or mismatched proof. The probe stops
deliberately after production identity initialization; it does not claim
provider execution. The final source passes the 75-case Retry group, the
focused two-case board/inherited-policy group and 19 canonical Retry
cases. Full workspace typecheck, build and map checks pass.
- Full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. Map,
module-boundary and diff checks pass. Full local `pnpm test:run` remains
unverified. The 256-case explicit-native suite cannot initialize its
packaged PostgreSQL because libzstd is absent; an existing
command-scoped fallback did not resolve it. Current-head remote
full-suite checks are required. Merged-source full GitHub+Retry (249),
separate Retry/HTTP (74), full wait/status (252), profile/history and
completion (75), and visible Retry hook/banner (12) checks pass. The
fresh owned PostgreSQL 18 databases applied all 377 migrations.
- Actual Rust Runner, OpenCode 1.18.34 and exact DeepSeek used unchanged
production-generated synthetic contexts. Resume finished with an
explicit server wait. The author-reply trial omitted continuation twice:
its first report failed the existing empty-criteria check; the corrected
second report still omitted continuation and received the exact server
wait. It completed once with no missing-wait loop or Done escalation.
Controller acknowledgments were synthetic; these probes do not establish
hosted publication or board state.
- Hosted combined testing proved automatic admission of the exact saved
author reply, a useful GitHub answer and committed passive wait. It
required two malformed-continuation rejections before a nullish fallback
succeeded. A later normal Pause/Resume completed in one finish with
explicit response_wake and no new review/comment. The admitted normal
Retry then exposed the execution guard gap repaired here. Those remain
checkpoint results. On the final combined source, renewed normal Retry
completed actual native provider work and GitHub publication, committed
the passive wait, released ownership and cleaned up its environment. A
subsequent ordinary unmentioned author reply woke once, made no GitHub
tool calls or new assessment, and completed its first finish with an
explicit response wake. Both exact leases expired with successful
cleanup and the queue was empty. However, final destination inspection
found a separate automatic fallback overwrote the existing summary with
a generic no-final-response message. External summary preservation
therefore remains failed acceptance; the separate publication repair in
#17726 owns that producer. Full combined publication preservation has
not passed. These hosted runs include the pinned-base native additions;
they do not qualify Copilot v63.
- Current-head automated review is 5/5 with zero unresolved threads. All
current-head CI gates passed (54 successful checks/contexts, four
skipped, none pending). The earlier login-cleanup idle-work assertion
also reproduced locally while its controlled baseline passed; its cause
remains unknown, but the exact assertion passed in the fresh
current-head CI shard. No timeout, assertion or production workaround
was added. This PR is ready for review within its source, authority,
native finalization, state, wake and cleanup scope. The independent
automatic fallback publication regression is tracked by #17726; no
complete combined workflow pass is claimed.

## Risks

- The latest saved review defines the durable head boundary. Ingress
must record a new head before admission. A reply receipt proves delivery
only for its exact saved source; a shared GitHub comment ID alone cannot
authorize this wait.
- Historical App recovery cannot infer identity without direct proof or
an earlier valid server response receipt. It never replays that
response.
- This does not infer review-score policy from instructions or override
Done. No deployment, merge or repair of historical tasks is claimed by
the PR.

## Model Used

OpenAI `gpt-6.1-sol`, with reasoning, repository inspection, code
editing and test execution. The context-window size is not exposed in
this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused database and
native suites; full local suite limitation described 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 (verified on immutable latest
head)
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
(verified on the latest head)
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-26 22:22:47 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip f0877a9c7c fix: recover native work and requalify saved computers (#17724)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start -->
https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/32/changes/paperclip/32
<!-- entire-trail-link-end -->

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and preserves their work after an
interruption.
> - Native Stop must confirm termination and save the workspace.
> - Task and run views must show the current recovery receipt.
> - A new external reply can arrive while that cleanup is pending.
> - The reply must return to its original chat owner after cleanup.
> - A successful fresh retry also becomes the task’s bound workspace for
its next ordinary turn.
> - Managed computer updates can invalidate a saved snapshot
qualification.
> - This pull request fixes those instructions, acknowledgements,
handoffs and the existing native-agent Test path.
> - The operator can continue with new input while the stopped turn
remains preserved.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Stopped native runs could keep the initial workspace-repair instruction
after files were recovered. Native Stop could also leave the shared
cancellation state at requested after remote termination was confirmed.
A new GitHub reply saved during cleanup could then remain queued because
cleanup did not ask its original inbound owner to reconsider the
receipt. After a managed snapshot update, an existing native agent could
also need qualification while the generic environment Test required
instance-admin access.

**Expected behavior**

Show the current saved-work state. Acknowledge Stop only after exact
termination proof. Let an authorized operator use the existing
saved-agent Run test to qualify its current computer. After cleanup,
recheck the saved reply's current authority and admit it once as new
input. Preserve the stopped run and uncertain external effects.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Stop an active native turn before it returns a semantic result.
2. Send a new authorized external reply while cleanup is pending.
3. Let workspace recovery and provider cleanup finish. Inspect the run
instruction, Stop acknowledgement and queued reply.

Related work: #17594 preserves native processes through controller
outages. #17401 addresses a separate bootstrap failure. This pull
request does not replace those fixes.

## What Changed

- Use the exact run's workspace recovery receipt for task and run
guidance, including the Activity ledger.
- Retire an obsolete exact-session notice through the existing bounded
reconciler. Preserve the separate no-replay hold.
- Write the shared native Stop acknowledgement only after the audited
Stop intent and every exact remote lease receipt match.
- Delegate saved external input to the live inbound owner. Recheck its
source, actor, endpoint, principal and conversation generation. Promote
the same receipt in the transaction that creates its new run.
- Use that owner from the cleanup callback and existing stranded-queue
catch-up after a lost callback or restart. A denied source cannot abort
other items.
- Reuse the current private task directory after a successful fresh
retry. Re-read the company/task/workspace binding and validate the
canonical stable or attempt namespace without recreating missing files;
keep a later fresh retry separate.
- Extend the existing agent-scoped qualification owner to native agents.
The clean saved-agent Test qualifies its exact computer before runtime
testing. Reuse a current proof; require a real probe and verified
cleanup for a stale proof. Preserve draft tests and metadata-only
external/pool previews.
- Update execution semantics, capability maps and the recovery
verification recipe. Add a production-page Storybook interaction for the
normal native Test.

## Verification

- **Red:** persisted recovery states returned stale instructions; an
exact terminated native lease left shared Stop requested; the real
GitHub subscribed-message fixture left zero successors after cleanup.
The controlled baseline restored the previous production source,
reproduced the failure, then restored the fixed bytes with matching
SHA-256 hashes.
- **Green:** 382 durable-chat, native-continuation, Stop and recovery
tests pass. The real GitHub/PostgreSQL handoff matrix passes 12/12. It
covers callback, application restart, callback/sweep race, valid input
behind a deleted source, and denial for unknown stop, wrong allocation,
paused endpoint, revoked principal, deleted or changed source, changed
conversation generation and foreign scope. Repeated callbacks preserve
one receipt, its actor, one successor and the unchanged stopped
predecessor.
- **Workspace continuation red/green:** the real PostgreSQL preparation
flow created a fresh attempt and saved a marker, then rejected the next
ordinary turn with the same binding mismatch observed in deployed use.
The repaired preparation and filesystem suites pass 86/86: stable and
attempt-root reuse, saved-marker preservation, a later clean sibling,
changed current bindings, foreign company/task, closed workspace,
traversal, missing path and symlink refusal. No task row reset or
old-turn replay is used.
- **Qualification red/green:** a native saved-agent qualification
returned 422, and its normal Test skipped qualification. The repaired
path passes 224 qualification/immutable-snapshot/environment tests and
176 UI/upgrade tests. It covers revoked authority, foreign or changed
computer, current-proof reuse, failed/missing proof, draft settings,
settings changed during the probe, and external/pool previews. On exact
current source, the real local Harness / Runtime UI also qualified a
newly saved disposable Computer with missing proof through actual
Daytona, then completed the actual OpenCode/OpenRouter hello probe using
`openrouter/deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash-1017`. Supported availability
changed from Legacy-only to Paperclip Runner after proof persistence.
Qualification and runtime leases both completed normal release/cleanup.
The five prior task run IDs were unchanged; no task wake was created.
This is macOS source-server/UI with real Linux Daytona and provider
services, not a hosted UI claim. Test probes are archived by the
existing inspection contract; release does not claim physical deletion.
- Full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, token, map and diff
checks pass at `f6450f4739fc8141815b8b7c35fde22a655c5f90`. The broad
local `pnpm test:run` passed 24,899 tests and reported one existing
nested-clone test timeout at 15 seconds. The complete failing file then
passed 21/21 with the normal timeout; the exact case also passed on the
pinned earlier baseline. The broad runner stopped before its later
groups. No timeout or production workaround was added. Prior head
`f6450f4` has 53 successful checks, two conditional Storybook skips and
Greptile 5/5 with no inline threads. New workspace-reuse head
`fcb13399ec70f92f71bd8250081251dca3f48962` passes workspace typecheck,
full build, 86 scoped tests, maps and diff checks; Current-head CI has
53 successful checks and two conditional Storybook skips; Greptile is
5/5 with no inline findings. Deployed ordinary-turn reuse acceptance
passed as described below.

- **Hosted Stop proof:** the real GitHub issue-mention path used native
OpenCode, `openrouter/deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash-1017`, Daytona and an
exact low-trust task boundary. Normal UI Stop interrupted an active Bash
call. Native and shared acknowledgements matched the exact lease.
Automatic recovery saved exactly `STARTED\n` (8 bytes), with no finish
marker. Reload showed Stopped and saved work recovered. Only the
original cancelled run remained. Normal five-minute cleanup completed
its exact provider-destruction transition.
- **Limits:** the provider buffered command output, so the marker was
read after recovery. The approved local provider credential could not
inspect the hosted sandbox; its 404 is not deletion proof. Cleanup
success comes from the exact lease's platform destruction transition. An
earlier hosted stale instruction disappeared after rollout with
unchanged raw run/action data; that historical cause remains
unexplained. Original incident holds and publication receipts were
untouched.
- **Hosted handoff proof:** after QA deployed the combined candidate
containing `46b2e99`, startup admitted the previously saved GitHub
author reply without another comment, Retry or manual action. The new
native run used the exact original wake receipt and saved comment. It
completed once, committed an external-response wait, preserved the
stopped predecessor, emptied the queue and left the task In review. The
answer appeared in the original GitHub conversation. Workspace
finalization and the exact lease's normal destruction transition
succeeded.
- **Hosted workspace proof:** on the combined candidate containing
`fcb13399`, normal Retry preserved the original authenticated GitHub
request and completed a fresh native attempt. One later ordinary
same-head author reply then completed in the exact same workspace ID and
attempt directory, with no Retry/fresh directive. Its input tree digest
matched the Retry's finalized digest; final copyback preserved that
digest. The persisted assessment row and all five prior run records were
unchanged, exactly one new reply run completed, and the task returned to
In review with an empty queue and no live run. Both exact leases
completed normal verified destruction. This used real native OpenCode,
the exact DeepSeek/OpenRouter model and Daytona, without workspace-row
repair or a new remote marker.
- **Publication limit:** the workspace audit compares the persisted
assessment and run history. The ordinary reply exposed a separate
destination-summary fallback that changed the visible GitHub summary
despite the preserved assessment row. The publication track is repairing
that behavior; this proof does not claim the visible summary was
preserved.
- **Deployment boundary:** current-head CI/review and hosted same-source
Retry/ordinary-workspace reuse acceptance passed. The separate
visible-summary publication failure remains owned by the publication
track. Combined hosted UI confirmation of the native-agent Test path is
coordinated separately. Actual missing-proof UI/provider qualification
has passed in the isolated local instance above; prior hosted Stop and
same-input handoff proof remains separate. No merge or deployment is
performed by this pull request.

## Risks

Recovery state and termination receipts must match the exact source run
and allocation. Missing or foreign proof keeps the hold. The chat owner
must retain the original receipt and actor and recheck current
authority. Cleanup cannot grant authority or replay the stopped turn.
Existing native ownership, Stop, budget, permission and uncertain-effect
guards remain in place.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6.1 Sol (`gpt-6.1-sol`) through Codex, with reasoning,
repository tools, source editing and test execution. The context-window
size is not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (affected suites and
isolated failing file pass; broad timeout retained 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 (current fcb has 53 successful
checks/two conditional Storybook skips)
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-26 22:21:58 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 832c44f26a fix: resume user follow-ups that reassign a task (#17821)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The execution control plane saves user messages while an earlier run
needs recovery.
> - A user comment can also assign a task back to its agent.
> - That update creates an assignment wake, but continuation accepted
only comment wake reasons.
> - The saved question could stay blocked after workspace recovery and
confirmed process cleanup.
> - This pull request admits assignment wakes that carry a valid,
undelivered user comment through the existing continuation checks.
> - The same rule applies to new messages and saved requests already
waiting for recovery.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A human follow-up that also assigns a task back to its agent produces
`issue_assigned`. After a native run stops during handoff, the
continuation policy rejects that wake reason. The question remains saved
behind the execution recovery hold even after the workspace is recovered
and the old sandbox is destroyed.

**Expected behavior**

Deliver the saved human question once after the existing stop,
ownership, authority, and execution gates pass. Assignment alone must
not grant permission to continue.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Finish task work by assigning it to a human for review. Let the
native run stop with `issue_reassigned` and retain its recovery hold.
2. Recover the workspace and confirm destruction of the old sandbox.
3. Post a new human question while assigning the task back to the agent.
4. Observe that the assignment wake stays deferred instead of delivering
the question.

Refs: #17288, #14156. These related changes cover legacy reassignment
and assignments without comments. This change covers a human comment
carried by an assignment wake behind a native or legacy continuation
hold.

## What Changed

- Share the comment-bearing wake classification between continuation
admission and saved-request recovery.
- Accept `issue_assigned` only through the existing persisted
user-comment validation and execution gates.
- Add database regressions for new and saved assignment wakes,
concurrent recovery, single delivery, and unchanged prior run results.
- Check that bare assignments, invalid authors and comments, changed
ownership, active execution, and pending approvals or questions retain
their holds. Cover native and legacy cleanup paths.
- Update execution semantics and both recovery maps.

## Verification

- Red: both new and saved assignment-with-comment cases stayed deferred
without a successor on the original code.
- Green: the final continuation suite passes all 284 tests. The four
companion recovery, retry, and queue suites pass another 208 tests.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass.
- `git diff --check`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `node
scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs` pass.
- Apex review is 5/5 on `56c9c2d90dcda55b3f760946c9aba6aee448c361`, with
no unresolved review threads. The only earlier finding concerned the
contribution rule against new source comments; those comments were
removed.
- Full `pnpm test:run` is still running locally. CI is waiting for the
`paperclip-public-pr-x64` runner fleet; the superseded workflow was
cancelled so the current head could proceed. No passing CI claim is made
yet.
- Live recovery: corrected one existing saved wake to the supported
comment reason. The normal server admitted one successor with the exact
saved question and prior-run context, then started real tool calls. This
verifies admission on the existing deployment; the new source change is
not deployed yet. The resumed turn later failed with a separate provider
terminal event whose error was null, followed by a workspace restore
failure. The task is blocked again on that failure. Its useful answer
has not been delivered, so end-to-end completion remains unverified.

## Risks

- Assignment wakes now reach continuation validation when they carry a
comment. The persisted comment must still belong to the task and
requesting human, follow the stopped run, and remain undelivered.
- The existing stop proof, cleanup, current assignment, approval, pause,
budget, and competing-execution checks remain effective. Regression
cases cover both native and legacy paths.
- No schema migration or data rewrite is required for saved requests.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, source inspection, tool use,
and code execution. The runtime does not expose the exact 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 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>
2026-10-26 20:19:16 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 718c73dafe fix(native): require verified remote process exit receipts (#17799)
Require fresh ESRCH or an exact matching zombie generation before treating a remote Runner as stopped. Preserve uncertain ownership through adoption and transport close, retire local controller resources after failed close, and check Node before remote launch.

Bind the shared transport change in Copilot profile 62 while retaining historical profile decoding. Add red-green process, permission, launch, adoption and cleanup regressions.

Thanks to @hsm-lv for the original investigation in #17073.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-26 21:39:04 +00:00
DottaandPaperclip 8373d78679 fix(recovery): register missing native preservation on Retry (#17800)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip lets people manage agents and their saved work.
> - Native runs can leave a prepared remote workspace after a control
deadline.
> - The deadline repair in #17788 records preservation for future
failures.
> - Older failed runs can still have an active lease without a
preservation owner.
> - Retry correctly refuses another executor, but nothing can finish the
missing preservation.
> - This pull request registers the exact prepared source through the
existing recovery services when the user retries.
> - The bounded maintenance worker can then stop the provider and save
its files before normal admission continues.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A historical failed native run has a prepared workspace and an active
retained allocation. It has no workspace preservation record. Ordinary
Retry cannot prove that the old executor stopped and has no maintenance
owner to produce that proof.

**Expected behavior**

A deliberate Retry registers missing preservation for the exact unowned
source. Existing recovery proves termination and saves the files.
Existing admission then checks current user authority, effects, pause
and budget gates before one successor can enter the queue.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Persist a failed native run with a prepared workspace, an active
lease and a terminal, unowned finalization.
2. Omit the workspace preservation record, as an older deadline handler
did.
3. Call the normal task Retry route. Before this fix, preservation
remains absent and Retry cannot continue.

**Paperclip version or commit**

The regression fails on `46de15ff4b99bbee59c38f32f4f30b80ad5bbd24`,
which already includes #17788.

Related: Refs #17788 (future deadline failures), #17741 (committed
recovery wakes), #17733 (connected Retry authority). #17773 adds source
diagnostics and does not repair this missing registration.

## What Changed

- Use native workspace preservation inside the existing issue-locked
Retry transaction. A live finalization owner remains held.
- Adopt a valid unowned preservation obligation through the existing
bounded maintenance service. Bind it to the deliberate Retry intent
without resetting an active generation.
- Add real PostgreSQL regressions for exact, mismatched and owned
sources. Verify that registration cannot create a termination receipt or
a successor.
- Exercise the HTTP route, worker, real temporary file merge and queue
admission with the stop reply held. Duplicate requests admit one queued
turn after preservation.
- Extend connected GitHub and Telegram Retry coverage for missing
historical preservation. Document the contract and access boundaries.

## Verification

- Red: the new historical-state regression fails on the base commit
because `workspaceRestoreRecovery` remains absent. The mismatched and
owned negative controls pass.
- Green: the three focused historical-state cases pass with the fix
against isolated local PostgreSQL 17.
- The local HTTP journey restores saved files and retains newer host
edits. It admits no successor while the provider stop reply is held. It
admits one successor after verified preservation. The real GitHub and
Telegram admission paths wait behind that recovery.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and
`git diff --check` pass.
- Green: 152 tests across four relevant suites, including all connected
Retry safety cases. The six new cases pass again on final head
`b8900801a3181fa673ea45f1129f968bbb08d1fd`.
- Final-head GitHub checks: 55 successful, two intentionally skipped
Storybook checks, and one neutral Paperclip bot review. Greptile is 5/5
with no unresolved threads. The Paperclip bot stopped before finishing
and supplied no approval.
- The full local command imported an earlier fixture revision before its
assertions were corrected. It reported those two stale connected-fixture
assertions and later hit the host PostgreSQL semaphore limit again. It
was stopped after final-head CI completed. It is not counted as a full
local pass; the complete CI test lanes passed on the final head.
- The first local rerun hit the Mac PostgreSQL semaphore limit before
assertions. Verification moved to an isolated disposable PostgreSQL
container. Early assembled fixtures also exposed the existing
destruction-cleanup gate; the retained-workspace fixture now uses its
actual `keep_running` disposition. This fix does not weaken cleanup.

## Risks

- Retry now registers maintenance for historical native failures. Exact
descriptor, allocation and coordinator checks remain owned by the
existing preservation service. Physical recovery still requires its
existing exclusive owner and provider stop receipt. Registration alone
grants no execution authority.
- No database migration or provider protocol changes. No model, trust,
assignment, retry-budget or external identity changes.
- Local recovery uses real database, filesystem, HTTP, worker and
admission code. Only the provider lifecycle boundary is simulated. No
hosted allocation or live model turn has been verified for this new
change.
- The workspace recovery test file crosses 1,000 lines because this case
shares its real database, filesystem and assembled route fixture.
Keeping it there avoids duplicating that fixture or extracting unrelated
production behavior.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools and code
execution. The exact model identifier 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>
2026-10-26 16:22:36 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 46de15ff4b fix(recovery): preserve native workspaces after control deadlines (#17788)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip lets people manage agents and their saved work.
> - Native runs can prepare a remote workspace before provider
execution.
> - A finalization deadline can stop a run outside its normal exception
path.
> - That handler marked the run failed without recording its prepared
files for recovery.
> - Retry then waited for a lease whose preservation had no durable
owner.
> - This pull request records the exact source in the deadline
transaction through the existing recovery service.
> - Existing containment and file recovery can then settle the source
before another executor starts.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A native run failed at its control deadline with a prepared workspace
and no accepted result. Its environment lease remained active. The run
had no workspace preservation record. A saved Retry waited for remote
cleanup without a preservation operation to finish that cleanup.

**Expected behavior**

Record unfinished files when the deadline marks a native run failed. Use
the existing stop-and-retain worker. Keep accepted results, exact source
binding, and current task ownership authoritative.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Persist a native run with a prepared workspace, an active lease, and
an expired control deadline.
2. Reconcile the deadline twice.
3. Inspect the source lease and the run's workspace recovery record.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced against `a67a18c171816b097f46eae78fc58c7e55c9c565`.

**Deployment mode**

Hosted native Runner with a remote sandbox. The regression uses real
local PostgreSQL and no provider mocks.

Related: Refs #17741 for committed Retry delivery. Refs #17073 for
remote process-exit verification. This change records file preservation
after a deadline; it does not change either policy.

## What Changed

- Call the existing native workspace preservation service in the
transaction that fails an abandoned run.
- Preserve files after reassignment without changing the current task
owner or state.
- Add real-database cases for prepared, finalized, mismatched,
reassigned, and accepted-result states. Repeated reconciliation retains
one source obligation and creates no successor.
- Document the deadline behavior and its existing access boundaries.

## Verification

- Red: on unchanged production code, the prepared-workspace case failed
because its recovery record was null. Finalized and mismatched controls
passed.
- Green: all 10 deadline reconciliation tests pass. The existing native
workspace recovery suite passes all 48 cases.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm build` passed.
- Map checks, module-boundary checks, and `git diff --check` passed.
- Current-head CI passes on `23bf2aa4b50d2c4b74a9ee2ee47034ae542d25c2`:
all GitHub Actions CI lanes, including grouped/serialized tests, Runner
verification, typecheck, build, E2E, and Canary Dry Run, succeeded. Two
Storybook-only checks were skipped. Greptile is 5/5 with no findings.
Superagent Security Scan also passed. Entire Gates reports passing
checks/findings and fails only because no reviewer has approved trail
#10.
- The first server shard 11/12 attempt passed all 1,750 assertions but
reported an unhandled early process-exit rejection in the unchanged
workspace-exposure fixture. Its focused local suite passed (28 passed, 3
skipped); one CI rerun passed.
- Full local `pnpm test:run` was started, then interrupted after the
complete CI lanes passed to avoid duplicate work. No full local suite
pass is claimed. Local targeted tests, typecheck, and build passed.
- On the affected staging instance, the existing deployed preservation
helper registered the exact failed source. Normal Retry then drove
actual sandbox stop, file recovery, and a persisted successful recovery
receipt. A successor reached a separate remote process-fingerprint
failure before provider execution. The automatic deadline change is not
deployed; task execution recovery remains incomplete.
- Initial local setup attempts did not reach product assertions: skipped
dependency lifecycle scripts left native PostgreSQL library links
absent, and the restricted shell blocked localhost binding. The
package's link hydration and an authorized isolated listener resolved
those setup prerequisites. One new negative-control assertion also
required null-safe access; the final red run retained only the intended
behavioral failure.

## Risks

- File preservation must not certify provider termination. The existing
stop receipt, source binding, copyback, and admission checks remain in
force.
- Preservation failure rolls back the deadline transaction, leaving its
durable deadline eligible for another bounded attempt.
- Reassignment preserves old files without changing the new owner's
task. Accepted results retain their current finalizer.
- No schema, credential, provider, or polling change. Historical failed
runs still require scoped recovery; this patch does not replay them.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository inspection, code
execution, and browser tools. The exact serving 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 (targeted suites; full
local suite interrupted after CI passed)
- [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 (CI lanes pass; external Entire
reviewer-approval gate remains pending)
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-26 14:18:53 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 0373f9f261 fix(recovery): wake retained workspace preservation after Retry (#17741)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and their saved work.
> - A stopped run can owe workspace preservation before saved input can
continue.
> - Retry saved a recovery request but did not wake the worker that owns
preservation.
> - Older recovery records could also take the bounded scan slots before
a due request.
> - A second Retry could change the revision while the physical owner
was still saving files.
> - This pull request wakes a separate worker after commit, selects due
work first, and keeps the active owner's revision.
> - Saved work can progress without replaying the stopped provider turn
or blocking other finalization.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

An operator approved a saved design and selected Retry after native
workspace finalization failed. The API accepted one canonical request.
The source remained scheduled at zero preservation attempts for more
than 30 minutes. No new provider turn started. A local regression also
found that repeated Retry during export invalidated the physical owner's
completion revision.

**Expected behavior**

Committed Retry must wake bounded source preservation. Due recovery must
progress ahead of passive cleanup obligations and unrelated history.
Duplicate requests must keep one physical attempt. Saved input must
still pass normal admission after verified recovery.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Retain a terminal run with an exhausted workspace recovery and saved
authorized input.
2. Let the delivery coordinator become quiet, then request Retry.
3. Observe the recovery state and physical preservation receipt. Repeat
Retry while the export is held.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Observed on served commit `4b89eec644d6e1a99d58926e77ae58927c3fa87b`.
Local baseline: `a1f77821b9cd5c9c846fdf7a0fa5cc620ad2b6bb`.

Related work: Refs #17053, #17267, #17094. This change repairs explicit
Retry delivery. It is separate from the run instruction projection in
#17724 and historical unsafe-export discovery in #17687.

## What Changed

- Notify a dedicated workspace recovery duty from the transaction that
saves Retry, recovery admission, adoption, or recovery progress.
- Reconstruct work and saved retry deadlines at startup. Fill each free
export slot independently, track physical work for idle drain, and join
the dedicated worker's exports on shutdown.
- Drain one bounded pass through completed cleanup and saved-input
obligations. Restart that pass after committed changes without
repeatedly rechecking paused input.
- Share source eligibility between deadline selection and candidate
consumption. Keep resolved files-only obligations and ignore unrelated
resolved or cancelled history.
- Select due unfinished preservation before passive historical records.
Rotate past source locks held by other workers and retain the indexed
source lookup.
- Bind the canonical Retry intent without changing an active physical
attempt's generation or revision. Preserve that binding across later
progress writes.
- Add real producer, physical preservation, startup, deadline, idle, and
independent finalization regressions. Document the delivery contract.

## Verification

- Red controls: Retry without a notification stayed scheduled; duplicate
Retry invalidated the active export; whole-batch waiting stranded a
third Retry; a scan without cursor rotation starved a source behind two
actual advisory locks. Removing unfinished-first selection left HTTP
Retry scheduled behind five real recovered sources still owing cleanup.
The fixture explicitly verifies their eligibility with the worker's
actual query filter.
- Further red controls: the previous worker visits only two of three
eligible completed sources. Disabling the committed-change cursor reset
misses a new earlier source arriving while two callbacks are held. Both
pass with the final worker.
- Green: the public Retry HTTP route, registered production worker, real
file copyback, duplicate canonical receipts, and public recovery receipt
reload passed on an owned local fixture. Its agent is paused to keep
this files-only check from starting a provider turn.
- Full workspace recovery suite passed 56 tests, including the
foreign-lock regression.
- Execution-control lifecycle suite passed 24 tests. It covers idle SQL,
stored deadlines, cancelled and resolved history, independent
finalization, and shutdown. One, three, and seven paused completed
sources are each visited in a bounded pass, then stay deferred without a
successor or SQL during 90 seconds of fake-clock idle time. A committed
earlier source is evaluated when it arrives during two held callbacks.
- Both GitHub and Telegram `automatic_running` continuation regressions
passed with the new canonical intent binding.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm build` passed.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `node
scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs` passed.
- Local `pnpm test:run` could not complete: embedded PostgreSQL
repeatedly failed to start. The owned run was stopped after this setup
failure repeated. Latest-head CI supplies broad coverage.
- Earlier setup failures included a localhost sandbox denial and loss of
the owned disposable Docker database. These were separate from the
product red controls above.
- Local database tests use an explicitly named disposable PostgreSQL
`_test` database. That opt-in database is reset before the suite.
Default embedded test behavior is unchanged.
- Exact-head CI is green at `ef7dcf1ba1060864c9d216c33b51f4d9f8f57fbd`;
Greptile and Ponytail both rate it 5/5, with no unresolved review
threads. Earlier CI caught the indexed discovery assertion and two exact
chat intent-binding regressions; all three were fixed and pass locally
and in CI. A separate chat shard lost contact with its self-hosted
runner without a product assertion result. A later shared runner
shutdown interrupted several jobs; one infrastructure rerun passed
before the final test-and-worker follow-up triggered a fresh green run.
- No staging deployment is part of this PR. The original approval
remains saved; deployed recovery still needs acceptance after rollout.

## Risks

- More recovery writes now wake a bounded maintenance duty. Completed
history must not keep it active. Idle and deadline tests cover this
boundary.
- Resolved files-only obligations must remain eligible without granting
replay. The startup regression checks that path.
- Provider stop proof, copyback ownership, source binding, retry
budgets, and normal execution admission remain required. There is no
schema or public API change.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex based on GPT-6, with code execution and browser tools.
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>
2026-10-26 10:28:12 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 338bf75761 fix(chat): admit task Retry after GitHub reconnect (#17733)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agents and their tasks.
> - Task Retry must preserve saved input and enforce current access.
> - A GitHub reconnect invalidates old runtime callbacks.
> - Retry reused that old callback authority and rejected valid new
intent.
> - Retry also replayed an older failed request when a follow-up was
already saved.
> - This change admits a deliberate Retry under current authority and
transfers saved input once.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16965, #17053 and #17317. These repairs preserve work and contain
old executors. This change fixes the subsequent chat admission boundary.
A search found no overlapping open reconnect/admission fix.

**What happened?**

Ordinary task Retry returned `chat_failed_run_retry_not_authorized`
after the same GitHub App reconnected. The endpoint was healthy, but the
saved request still carried its old runtime generation. A newer queued
follow-up also made Retry reject the older failed request instead of
continuing the follow-up. No successor was admitted.

HTTP qualification found two related defects. Concurrent clicks could
omit the canonical chat action from a response. Signed-in board dispatch
also passed an incomplete task resource to the permission resolver,
which rejected a permitted mutation.

**Expected behavior**

A deliberate Retry checks current authority for the same App, sender,
repository, conversation and task. It continues saved input once. A
later reconnect, changed App, revoked access or changed source prevents
dispatch. Old runtime callbacks remain invalid.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Admit a GitHub request and record a failed native run.
2. Save a follow-up while execution is blocked.
3. Reconnect the same GitHub App.
4. Click ordinary task Retry.
5. Before this change, admission returns 409. Without reconnect, the
newer input alone also causes 409.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Baseline source: `41c42895fa862c586ff841f8c50200d93ffc83a4`.

**Deployment mode**

Source checkout on macOS. Regressions use real PostgreSQL transactions
and the assembled chat, HTTP route and heartbeat admission services.
Provider boundaries are simulated. No hosted recovery is claimed.

## What Changed

- Record the admitting App identity for new GitHub deliveries.
Historical deliveries can use their original working-comment binding.
Reauthorize deliberate Retry under a pinned current generation and
credential-reference fingerprint.
- Select the complete saved-input queue from the failed run's actual
conversation before replaying the older failed batch. Keep exact-run
Retry bounded while ordinary task Retry supports larger queues. Transfer
its receipts with the dispatch transaction. Recover the same ownership
after restart or a lost response. Release unadmitted input after a
definitive rejection.
- Preserve canonical chat action IDs across concurrent clicks. Supply
current task status and assignment fields to board mutation checks.
- Keep exact-run Retry, stale webhook, containment, source integrity,
publication, pause and budget checks. Update recovery contracts and
verification recipes.

## Verification

- Red: all three new PostgreSQL regressions failed on unchanged
production code. Reconnect failed at chat authorization. Newer input
failed at the obsolete-source guard. The combined case also failed.
- Green: 61 selected chat integration cases passed. These include 27 new
cases and 34 existing cases for containment, retained-source recovery,
exact batches and source revocation.
- A further red/green PostgreSQL regression reproduces the 51-message
overflow identified during review. All 51 messages reach one successor,
including a later Retry of that successor. A separate 52-message
consumed-batch regression also passes.
- A competing conversation retains its own deferred message. Distinct
automatic policy contexts are checked independently; revoking only the
later policy blocks the whole unadmitted batch. Batch validation still
rejects a later message with a changed App binding or deleted source. A
real PostgreSQL query capture reduced the 51-message preparation from
1,103 calls to fewer than 180.
- All 16 durable task Retry tests passed.
- The real HTTP route returns 202 and admits one queued successor for
concurrent deliveries. Fault injection covers rollback during input
handoff, response loss after dispatch commit, and permission loss when
resuming an existing durable wait. A wait only adopts input after
current admission succeeds; a one-shot settlement marker keeps status
projection read-only. A new deliberate Retry works after another
reconnect or a failed successor.
- Current-App, repository, sender, source edit/delete, reassignment,
endpoint pause and board-permission controls passed. Historical
deliveries remain unchanged.
- Final-head CI: 55 checks passed, three expected skips. The unchanged
minute-bucket rate-limit assertion passed locally against PostgreSQL and
on its one CI rerun. Greptile reviewed the final commit at 5/5 with no
unresolved threads.
- Workspace typecheck and full build passed. Map alignment, module
boundaries, UI token gates and `git diff --check` passed.
- Hosted task recovery and a live provider turn remain unverified. The
local tests hold agent capacity to inspect admission without starting a
model or publishing a GitHub response.

## Risks

- A deliberate GitHub Retry can admit old saved input under current
connection authority. It requires the same App binding and current
access. It pins that admission; it does not rewrite the historical
delivery or make stale callbacks valid.
- The durable chat queue has an optional admission callback. It
transfers input only when the transaction contains a valid queued
execution or saved wait. Other chat consumers have no callback and
retain their behavior.
- No migration, Cloud dependency, deployment, configuration change or
workspace cleanup is included.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, source inspection, code
execution and GitHub tools. 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>
2026-10-26 10:26:45 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip ad861a7f94 fix(runner): allow bounded controller admission before welcome (#17735)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and preserves their work across
execution failures.
> - Native Runner authentication exchanges a one-use bootstrap ticket
for a connection lease.
> - The controller must admit the connection and persist that lease
before it sends welcome.
> - Runnerd waited only two seconds for welcome, even when its
connection setup budget allowed more time.
> - A slow valid welcome therefore looked like a consumed-ticket failure
before provider work could start.
> - This pull request uses the existing ten-second connection setup
budget for welcome.
> - The benefit is reliable startup during bounded controller delays,
with the same authentication and replay checks.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A valid native Runner bootstrap can fail while the controller completes
admission. The runner then reports `bootstrap connection failed closed;
provide a fresh one-use ticket`. A later recovery attempt can report an
indeterminate authority and hide the startup error behind a finalization
deadline.

**Expected behavior**

A valid welcome can arrive within the connection setup budget. An
earlier execution or reconnect deadline still ends the wait. A missing
or invalid welcome never permits bootstrap-ticket replay.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Run the real Runner WebSocket transport against an authenticated
controller.
2. Hold the welcome for three seconds after the client proof arrives.
3. Before this change, authentication fails with `WebSocket
authentication message deadline elapsed` and `bootstrap_maybe_consumed:
true`.
4. With this change, the runner accepts the bound lease and restores the
normal read timeout.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced against `a1f77821b9` before the production change.

**Agent adapter(s) involved**

Native Paperclip Runner. The transport is shared by its provider
drivers.

Related: #17401 reduces repeated work in warm-recovery admission. This
change covers delayed welcome delivery for fresh authentication too. It
does not replace that optimization. #17594 addresses a separate lifetime
failure after controller outages.

## What Changed

- Use the ten-second connection setup budget for the authenticated
welcome.
- Keep the execution/reconnect deadline as an earlier bound.
- Add real WebSocket regressions for a delayed welcome and a shorter
lifecycle deadline.
- Add a real Runner process test proving a delayed admission starts one
provider and keeps it through two turns.
- Document the startup contract and its recovery verification scope.

## Verification

- Red: the delayed-welcome regression failed against unchanged
production code with a message deadline and `bootstrap_maybe_consumed:
true`.
- Green: all 402 Runner core library tests pass. The suite includes
authentication, ticket fencing after a lost welcome, identity rejection,
replay, and no repeated provider effects.
- Map and module checks pass.
- Workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. The new process
integration test passes (one provider process, one thread, two turns,
suspended with an empty outbox).
- Live acceptance at this branch's production Runner build passes on
macOS arm64 with pinned OpenCode 1.18.34 and
`openrouter/deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash-1017`: delay admission by three
seconds, create a file, suspend, resume the same provider session under
a fresh run authority, read the first file, and write a second file.
Both useful outputs match exactly; final runner state is suspended.
- Preserved setup failures: a non-pinned executable was rejected, and
the debug binary exceeded cold provider startup admission. The pinned
executable and release binary passed. The first harness also tried to
reuse a completed task object; the follow-up used the normal resume
path. Exactly two paid model turns ran.
- The full local `pnpm test:run` was attempted and stopped after the Mac
exhausted PostgreSQL semaphore capacity (`could not create semaphores`);
it is not a local full-suite pass.
- Current-head CI is green at
`df5d5494c9f9f444114aaf12e095a554110d2e14`: all checks passing or
non-applicably skipped, zero failures or pending checks. The additional
Superagent security scan triggered by ready-for-review also passed.
These include all general/serialized test shards, Runner Rust/Vitest,
E2E, typecheck, build, and the final verify gate. Greptile reviewed that
exact commit at 5/5 with no findings or inline comments.
- This proves the actual native Runner/provider path locally. It does
not prove rollout or recovery on a hosted Linux/amd64 execution
environment.

## Risks

- A stalled welcome can take up to eight seconds longer to fail when the
configured lifecycle allows it. Shorter execution/reconnect deadlines
still take precedence.
- Authentication proofs, credential expiry, identity binding, and
one-use-ticket fencing remain enforced.
- This does not repair provider-side grammar errors or authorize replay
of an indeterminate historical run. Recovery of existing work requires
the normal stopped-owner and retained-state checks.
- No schema or migration change. A new Runner binary must reach the
execution host before this change affects remote runs.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code
execution, and browser tools. The exact serving submodel identifier and
context window were not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-26 10:25:59 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 4b89eec644 fix: check selected workspace projects before offering retry (#17552)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Task recovery explains access failures before a user retries saved
work.
> - A task project and its selected workspace are separate settings.
> - Moving a task can retain files from a project that the agent cannot
access.
> - The recovery notice checked only the task project or a past failure
record.
> - This pull request checks the projects required by the current
workspace selection.
> - The notice now offers Retry only after those project checks pass.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Follow-up to #17509. Related: #13230 concerns workspace binding
consistency; this fix changes recovery presentation only.

**What happened?**

A task could show “Project access is ready” after moving to an allowed
project while keeping a repository from a denied project. Typed failures
could also keep the notice blocked after an authorized workspace
replacement.

**Expected behavior**

Use the current task, workspace, and source project requirements. Honor
a valid pending selection for the next admission. Keep stale, archived,
or missing selections blocked without offering a project-permission
repair.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Assign a low-trust agent to a task whose selected source belongs to a
denied project.
2. Persist a project access failure.
3. Move the task to an allowed project without changing its selected
files.
4. Reload the task. The notice must still explain the access block.
5. Select an allowed source through the workspace API. Reload the task.
The notice must offer an explicit retry without starting work.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced after #17509 on master. The regression failed on the old
projection and passed with this change.

## What Changed

- Batch the current workspace project requirements for tasks with
project access failures.
- Check retained workspace and source projects, plus valid pending
workspace selections.
- Keep unknown historical denial projects unnamed. Do not expose
unrelated project identifiers.
- Keep unavailable workspace selections in the non-retryable failure
state. Adding project permissions cannot repair these selections.
- Add real database regressions for project moves, pending and applied
repairs, stale revisions, archived pending selections, and
foreign-company workspaces.
- Update the recovery contract and verification recipe.

## Verification

- Red-green regression with the real issue update service and execution
access check.
- Focused tests: 17 tests passed across `agent-project-access.test.ts`
and `task-interruption-presentation.test.ts` after rebasing on current
master.
- Browser: the retained source stays blocked when the task project is
allowed. Manage project access opens Permissions / Trust with Allowed
projects and Add project.
- The normal workspace API accepted an allowed pending selection.
Returning to the task showed “Project access is ready” and Retry.
Permissions and run count did not change.
- Full repository typecheck and build passed before the final
presentation adjustment. The final adjustment passed server typecheck,
server build, and all 17 focused tests. The stale, archived, and
foreign-workspace cases failed before this adjustment. Map and
module-boundary checks passed.
- Browser: an archived pending workspace shows the existing failure
notice without Retry or a project-permission action.
- `pnpm test:run` was attempted and stopped after 15 native runtime
database tests failed because embedded PostgreSQL could not initialize
on this host. The focused database tests passed on isolated PostgreSQL
18 in Docker. All technical CI checks passed on `a6e9f977`. Fresh CI and
review are required for the presentation adjustment. One Runner shard
passed on its single rerun after a provider shutdown failure. A fresh
local Runner build also passed that case and its reuse sibling. The
prior Paperclip Review could not publish its assessment. Its saved
presentation finding is addressed. Merge waits for a fresh published
review and all checks on the current head.

## Risks

- Presentation must follow workspace selection precedence. Tests cover
retained bindings, valid pending changes, stale changes, and company
isolation.
- This adds at most three bounded reads for tasks with a project access
failure. It adds no reads for this purpose on unaffected tasks.
- Dispatch remains the authorization authority. This change does not
grant access, move files, or start execution. No migration is required.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository inspection, code
execution, and browser tools. The exact serving model identifier and
context window were not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] 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>
2026-10-26 07:30:27 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 5c3dce09b5 fix(runner): preserve verified remote artifacts across controller releases (#17512)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and owns their task authority.
> - Remote native agents can keep working while their controller
restarts.
> - The controller must authenticate the same runner and verify its
provider files before recovery.
> - The current path compares a retained provider pack with the new
controller release. A release change can reject intact files.
> - The new controller binary digest can also reject the original daemon
during PRP authentication.
> - This PR records the admitted release authority in private controller
state and uses it for exact process reattachment.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A remote Claude session started and used tools. After controller
shutdown, recovery failed with
`runner_remote_provider_artifact_incompatible`. The transport combined
stderr into stdout, so the error omitted the verifier reason. The
historical rejected manifest is unavailable. This PR reproduces
controller release drift as a cause; it does not claim that the
historical mismatch is proven. Reaching pack verification implies the
earlier exact-process/controller-identity checks passed. That supports a
preserved-state recovery path but is not a direct inspection of the
deployed volume.

**Expected behavior**

A compatible, unchanged remote runner can reattach after a controller
release changes. Full package hashes, exact process scope, protocol
capabilities, and authenticated runner identity must still pass. Fresh
launches use the current release.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Verify and admit a remote native session with release A.
2. Preserve its runner process and replace the controller with release
B.
3. Reattach the original process. The old path compares its pack with B
and fails at `manifest mismatch`.
4. With this fix, the controller reads its saved A authority and
verifies all A hashes. Changed files still fail.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced from master `470cb34c0e42cb9d0b232d0bcf5d45cc7b0a81ca`;
rebased onto `a3675ddcdf`.

**Deployment mode**

Native remote runner on a Daytona-backed Paperclip Computer. Local
acceptance uses isolated Linux containers and actual packaged artifacts.

Related work: #17361 and #17448 handle runner upgrade and qualification
permissions. #17097 and #17439 add durable controller checkpoints and
server adoption. That stack can skip remote artifact preparation with a
saved checkpoint. This PR fixes the current file-backed path and retains
full provider-pack verification; it has no checkpoint schema or
empty-disk controller recovery.

## What Changed

- Save the complete verified pack manifest and authenticated runner
version/digest after successful session admission.
- Bind the receipt to company, agent, workspace, session, runner,
environment lease, remote directory, and provider descriptor. Keep it
outside guest backup directories.
- Reuse the saved authority for exact reattachment. Keep current release
selection for fresh launches and explicit session replacement.
- Fail closed for mismatched or corrupt receipts. Historical sessions
without a receipt retain the current release integrity gate.
- Report bounded, redacted verifier output from both transport streams.
Warn on receipt write failure while returning the already admitted
session to its owner.
- Add scope, persistence, replacement, storage failure, and backend
wiring regressions. Update recovery documentation and the feature map.

## Verification

- Test-first red: the original selection chose release B instead of A
after controller recreation. The new receipt regression passes. A
separate red test showed the missing stdout diagnostic; it passes after
the diagnostic fix.
- Authority and diagnostic suites: 49 tests pass. Backend pack, process
adoption, and harness persistence selection: 47 tests pass.
- Actual Linux provider image: complete A manifest/artifact verification
passed; controller source-revision drift failed on the old path; saved A
authority passed; a modified ACPX sidecar failed its SHA-256 check.
- Actual native Linux runner: authenticated a session, detached the
controller, changed the controller manifest and binary, then
authenticated the original PID and provider session with saved
authority. There were zero duplicate spawns, zero new provider turns, no
stop/suspend, and the workspace file remained. This probe used the real
runner with a deterministic Codex fixture; it is separate from the real
ACPX package integrity proof.
- Full workspace typecheck and build passed. The full native executor
suite first hit host PostgreSQL semaphore exhaustion. The complete
changed files then passed 864/864 tests with separate real PostgreSQL
databases in a disposable Linux container. The temporary local fixture
changed only database provisioning and used normal repository
migrations. Current-head CI also passed the full required test, Runner,
browser, typecheck, and build lanes.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` passed. These
structural checks do not prove live recovery.
- Current head `48fca2ae33d99f7f6d2fe12f431cf76d25185c70`: 55 successful
checks, two conditional skips, no pending or failed checks; fresh
Greptile 5/5 with zero findings and zero unresolved review threads.
Commitperclip quality review passed.
- No original task was retried or changed. Existing Daytona access could
not resolve the original sandbox or its image; a fresh staging Claude
recovery is not claimed.

## Risks

This prevents recurrence for sessions admitted with the new receipt. It
does not retroactively recover the historical failed run. Saved
authority exists only after this change has admitted a session. It
cannot repair an ambiguous historical launch or restore a receipt on an
empty replacement controller. A stale protocol or modified pack remains
a hard failure. Receipt write errors warn without losing the live
session handle, but later recovery still needs matching authority. The
broader checkpoint stack changes the same server preparation and
runner-artifact option and will require a deliberate integration.

## 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
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-24 16:44:50 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip d0c8f0b090 fix: explain project access denials and add an authorized repair path (#17509)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Low-trust agents may read only the projects in their allowed scope.
> - Workspace setup correctly stops a task outside that scope.
> - The task previously showed a generic failure, and agent settings did
not offer an additive repair.
> - This pull request explains the denial and lets authorized operators
add projects while preserving other restrictions.
> - The saved task then offers an explicit retry. Saving access does not
start work.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
A project access denial appeared as an ordinary failed attempt.
Operators could not add a second allowed project from agent settings.

**Expected behavior**
The task should explain the denied access and link to a working
permission editor. The editor should preserve existing scope and
restrictions, enforce operator authority, and retain drafts after a
failed save.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Assign a low-trust agent to a task whose project is outside its
allowed projects.
2. Let workspace setup deny project access.
3. Open the task, follow Manage project access, add the project, save,
reload, and return to the task.
4. Confirm that the saved message remains and Retry task is a separate
action.

## What Changed

- Record a typed, non-retryable project denial before provider dispatch.
Project denials do not enter automatic continuation or provider comment
policy.
- Project current and historical setup denials into a safe task notice.
Keep unrelated failures, prior assignees, and approval/pause/budget
gates separate. Recheck current project authority, including standard
trust and root-issue grants. Accepted retries keep their working state.
- Add board-only project-access reads and additive saves under the agent
row lock. Enforce company scope, agent-management authority,
pending-approval restrictions, and an audit record for new additions.
- Add the production notice and searchable multi-project editor,
including read-only, saving, cancellation, and failed-save states.
Preserve the return-to-task query through canonical agent redirects.
- Register board-only project-access routes in OpenAPI with a strict
request schema.
- Add production Storybook examples and API/persistence/concurrency
regressions. Retain the approved design snapshot and update the behavior
maps and implementation contract.

## Verification

- Passed: `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `pnpm build-storybook`,
`pnpm check:token-gates`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `node
scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs`.
- Passed: 11 permission/projection tests and 30 run-completion tests
against an isolated PostgreSQL database. These cover historical
failures, concurrent additions, idempotent audit, preserved
restrictions, foreign projects, read-only users, agent self-grants, and
no automatic wakeup.
- Passed: all 27 OpenAPI route tests, including route coverage and the
new board-only request/response contract.
- Browser: the real app displayed a historical denial; Manage project
access opened the editor; saving retained the original project and
survived reload; Return to task showed the ready notice. Saving created
one audit event and zero runs. Explicit Retry returned 202 and reached
the separate sandbox requirement, which remained enforced. No external
provider was used.
- All five production Storybook interaction checks pass: blocked task,
save, cancellation, failed-save recovery, and read-only settings. These
use fixture callbacks; durable authorization is covered separately
above.
- `pnpm test:run` was attempted locally but stopped after repeated
embedded PostgreSQL startup failures caused by macOS semaphore
exhaustion. Full-suite CI is required before merge. The separate UI
suite passed all 9,095 tests. The 41 focused server regressions also
passed after rebasing onto the latest master. A further 26
recovery-classification tests pass, including a red-to-green regression
for automatic continuation after a project denial.

## Risks

- No schema migration. The new endpoint only adds same-company project
IDs and preserves the rest of the stored policy.
- The historical notice recognizes one exact setup denial message. It
does not display arbitrary run errors or disclose a different source
project's identity.
- The retry still passes all current admission and isolation checks. The
notice does not promise that other execution requirements are satisfied.
- Related open work: #13309 covers inherited secret restrictions; #11234
covers the broader repository catalog. This change does not replace
either policy surface.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with code execution and browser tools. The precise
runtime model ID and context-window size were not exposed in this
session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue
template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused server and full UI
suites; full-suite infrastructure limit 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>
2026-10-24 16:16:29 -07:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 837add0caa fix(recovery): deliver review-path repair instructions to agent prompts (#17353)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip keeps agent tasks moving through owned execution and
durable waiting paths.
> - A consumed review path gets one repair wake before board escalation.
> - That wake records an instruction to save a new monitor or another
real review path.
> - The canonical wake builder omitted that instruction from the agent
prompt.
> - This pull request delivers it through the existing
disposition-repair section.
> - The repair limit and execution authority stay unchanged.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

An agent opened a pull request and promised to watch CI and external
review. It ended without scheduling a monitor. Its bounded review repair
also ended without a maintained path, so the task became blocked for a
board decision. The saved repair context contained the instruction, but
the canonical wake payload and rendered prompt did not.

**Expected behavior**

The repair prompt tells the agent to save a one-shot monitor before
promising another check. Both fresh and resumed sessions receive that
instruction and the one-attempt limit.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create a review-path recovery with `decideIssueReviewPathRecovery`
for a task whose review path was consumed.
2. Pass its recorded context through `buildPaperclipWakePayload` and
wake serialization.
3. Render a fresh or resumed prompt. Before this fix, it has the wake
reason but no repair instruction.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Base: `9c442cf48e6`. Current head:
`f38d65891c8d9f2b38eb76a8578e870debc2b1e6`.

**Deployment mode**

Observed on managed sandbox execution with the legacy Claude ACP
adapter. The corrected canonical payload serves the shared adapter
prompt path.

Refs #15764 introduced the bounded exhausted-repair disposition. This
change preserves that limit. Open monitor-retry work such as #17171
addresses an already scheduled check; this defect occurs before a check
exists. Searches found no duplicate for this missing prompt field.

## What Changed

- Build the review-path repair disposition in its owning recovery
module, using the server instruction and fixed one-attempt bound.
- Project it into the existing canonical `dispositionRepair` field. No
new adapter field or execution protocol is added.
- Ignore arbitrary replacement instructions and attempt-limit values. A
pending repair keeps its instruction across a connection-pool retry that
changes the wake reason. Ordinary wakes without the typed repair marker
ignore raw instruction text. Existing legacy disposition repairs retain
their values.
- Add a regression across the real recovery decision, wake builder,
serializer and fresh/resumed prompt selectors. Update execution guidance
and the affected recovery maps.

## Verification

- Verified red before the source fix: two regression cases failed
because the instruction was absent; the sibling repair case passed. The
same cases pass after the fix.
- Passed 194 focused and safety tests across wake preparation, review
recovery, adapter prompt handling, and database-backed liveness
escalation. The connection-pool retry case also failed before its
correction and passes after it.
- Replayed the recorded incident wake through the fixed boundary. The
old canonical prompt lacked its saved instruction. The corrected
serialized prompt includes it with a 1/1 bound. This replay did not
execute a provider turn or change the source task. Private evidence
stays outside the repository.
- Passed `pnpm -r typecheck` after the pool-retry correction. Passed
`pnpm build` on final head `f38d65891c8d9f2b38eb76a8578e870debc2b1e6`.
Map checks and `git diff --check` pass.
- [Full
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40005890857)
passed on that head: 54 checks passed and two optional checks were
skipped. This includes the full test shards, typecheck, build, and
browser suites. The local `pnpm test:run` attempt was stopped after the
CI test shards passed. No complete local full-suite pass is claimed.
- [Apex
review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/17353#issuecomment-6372160694)
is 5/5 on the final head, with no open findings. The first review found
the pool-retry case. Its regression and correction are included. The
branch has no merge conflicts.
- Test setup first required the plugin SDK build, then an empty
credential-history database boundary. Those setup errors are not the
claimed red. The temporary recorded-wake probe was removed before final
validation.
- Hosted follow-up acceptance is not run. The source task remains
blocked and needs a retry after rollout. This PR does not claim that
prompt delivery itself schedules a monitor or that every model will
follow the instruction.

## Risks

- This fixes instruction delivery. The agent must still save a valid
monitor or another waiting path. The existing bounded escalation remains
if it does not.
- The wake stays a normal-model repair. It does not become status-only
recovery and can continue useful work. Existing ownership, approval,
budget, pause, and monitor admission gates remain in place.
- No schema, credential, telemetry, API, model, or retry-budget change.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, assisted with diagnosis, code editing,
shell execution and verification. The exact serving model ID and
context-window limit 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 (194 focused and safety
cases; full coverage passed in CI)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-23 12:07:07 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 3f1ad6b25b fix(chat): resume task Retry after retained-source containment (#17317)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agent work through task and execution ownership.
> - A task Retry must retain the user's request while the system
verifies an old executor.
> - Connected conversations also retain their external principal and
accepted source batch.
> - Chat Retry admission required containment before it could save a
wait for that recovery.
> - A saved chat receipt could also remain deferred after containment
became available.
> - This pull request lets the exact recovery-bound request wait and
resume through its chat owner.
> - Normal admission still checks containment, current access and policy
before one successor starts.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

An ordinary task Retry on a connected conversation failed with
`failed_chat_retry_not_authorized` while its retained remote executor
still needed verification. The new recovery generation existed, but the
chat action failed before it could save a dispatch wait. This occurred
after the repairs in #17267 were confirmed live.

The local regression found a second gap. A processed chat action with a
deferred wake was not reconsidered after containment. Re-entering normal
admission also tried to insert its existing durable receipt again. A
historical hold for the same failed run could also hide the current
Retry's workspace strategy, so the request still waited after the old
executor was contained. Preparation could then read that sibling instead
of the recovery record that owned the fresh successor, losing the
fresh-workspace decision.

**Expected behavior**

Save the exact authorized Retry while its matching recovery generation
verifies the executor. Once containment is recorded, reconsider the same
chat receipt through normal admission. Start one successor with the
original source batch. Keep publication, principal, pause and budget
checks.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Admit a GitHub or Telegram request and record a failed native run
with a retained remote lease.
2. Leave the executor's termination unconfirmed and exhaust its prior
recovery generation.
3. Use ordinary task Retry to create a new recovery generation.
4. Process the connected Retry. The old admission code fails instead of
retaining a wait.
5. With a deferred receipt, record exact containment and reconcile
again. The old dispatch path leaves it stranded.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced from `412914cfa78d5abefcc34d3eb8d4bb86e461caac`. The branch
is rebased onto current master.

**Deployment mode**

Hosted tenant for the reported failure. Isolated local PostgreSQL and
the assembled heartbeat/chat services for the regression.

Refs #17267 and #16965. This change does not add a Cloud dependency or
change the absence protocol.

## What Changed

- Permit a saved admission wait only for the exact current task Retry
and active source recovery generation.
- Keep promotion and execution dependent on independent containment
proof.
- Bind a Retry to active automatic recovery without replacing its
generation, attempt count or deadline.
- Share the current exact Retry strategy across historical holds for the
same run. Retain each hold's stop and effect checks.
- Select the canonical recovery record that proves the committed fresh
successor during workspace preparation.
- Let task receipt reconciliation return the same deferred action to its
chat owner.
- Recheck current board and external authority, then update the existing
wake atomically with its successor.
- Preserve the exact chat source batch. Keep generic board-comment
filtering unchanged.
- Add GitHub and Telegram cases for waiting, containment, one successor,
stale generations, source edits, endpoint pause and supersession.
- Update recovery documentation and capability maps.

## Verification

- Red: real PostgreSQL tests reproduced the admission rejection for
GitHub and Telegram. Six active-recovery cases then failed on the
generation-ID assumption. Two same-run historical-hold cases remained
deferred after containment on the old strategy lookup. A preparation
regression then returned no readiness when the historical hold was
stored first.
- Green: 73 selected chat integration tests and 394 continuation, task
Retry, workspace recovery, recovery-state and workspace-preparation
tests passed. The chat tests use the real chat admission and heartbeat
queue. Unrelated capacity stays occupied so no real provider starts.
They assert no executor before containment, one successor afterward,
unchanged source leases while waiting, preserved recovery budgets, and
denial after authority changes. A separate source hold still blocks
work. Both sibling insertion orders pass through the committed-readiness
lookup and real workspace preparation: the new directory has independent
Git storage and files, and unpublished old work remains intact.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff
--check` passed after the review fixes. The source build passed on
`f6660efa48e37a80cd9857217a537606de85b5c8`.
- The local host reached its PostgreSQL semaphore limit. Successful runs
used a test-only loader to reduce disposable cluster connection and
worker limits. No repository database helper or application setting
changed.
- The full local `pnpm test:run` began before the final review edits,
failed in its first server phase and was stopped after those failures.
Later phases did not run. This is not a full local pass. The transient
Retry-notice case passes after fixture isolation; the four Discord
close-owned publication cases also pass in isolation. Other broad-run
failure causes are not established.
- Exact-head CI and security checks pass on
`f6660efa48e37a80cd9857217a537606de85b5c8`; Greptile is 5/5 with zero
unresolved review threads. Optional Paperclip Review completed neutral
with a 5/5 static assessment of all 11 changed files and no findings; it
did not run tests or hosted acceptance. All 57 current-head checks are
terminal: 54 success, two skipped and the optional neutral review, with
no failures or pending checks.
- The real hosted workflow confirmed that the deployed absence repair
recorded containment. A later ordinary UI Retry was accepted and saved a
durable request, but it remains behind the historical source hold. The
useful existing review remains unchanged. This follow-up is not
deployed; a live successful successor and final task disposition remain
unverified. No missing files are claimed recovered.

## Risks

- The existing task reconciliation sweep can restage a deferred chat
action. This reuses its receipt and generation; it does not grant new
execution or publication authority.
- Dispatch must keep the board Retry identity separate from the
connected request's principal. The regression checks these bindings and
preserves current chat authorization at each phase.
- Historical holds reuse a strategy only from the locked same-run
recovery that names the current Retry intent. A different run, malformed
recovery record or independent source hold remains fenced.
- Unknown executors without a matching active recovery still fail
admission. Promotion and execution require containment even when
admission saved a wait.
- No schema or API shape changes. No credential changes, manual
deployment or service restart.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository tools, code execution and
browser verification. The exact served model 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
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-23 07:51:34 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 4c57da3708 fix(recovery): continue Retry after verified sandbox absence (#17267)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - Task Retry must reconcile a stopped native execution before starting
another one.
> - A retained sandbox can disappear while workspace preservation is
pending.
> - A tenant-key error does not prove absence, especially after
credential rotation.
> - This pull request accepts only a short-lived Cloud observation bound
to the exact source and current preservation owner.
> - Normal Retry admission can then continue in a fresh workspace
without claiming that missing files were recovered.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A native run stops with workspace preservation pending. Its Daytona
allocation no longer exists. Recovery tries to reopen it, then cannot
confirm a stop. The ordinary Retry remains deferred behind cleanup and
repeats a transient failure.

**Expected behavior**

Cloud must independently confirm absence in the recorded provider
organization. Core must verify that proof and settle executor
containment under the current physical owner. Normal Retry admission
must enforce all existing gates and create at most one successor. The
old run must remain failed and missing files must remain unavailable.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Persist a failed native run with a retained Daytona lease and an
exhausted workspace-recovery generation.
2. Remove the exact provider allocation so reopen and stop cannot
confirm it.
3. Request ordinary task Retry.
4. Observe that recovery reports `provider_unavailable` and leaves the
Retry deferred.

**Paperclip version/commit**

Reproduced on source based on `6d44b80a5edbcc9f69bfc3d520994e70aa9fab6d`
with the prior preservation and Retry repairs present.

**Deployment mode**

Cloud tenant with native Runner and a retained Daytona source. The local
acceptance uses real Core, Cloud, PostgreSQL, signatures, native Runner
and UI, with deterministic model and provider HTTP boundaries.

Refs #16962, #16965, #17053. These repairs cover completion proposals,
durable Retry and retained-source reopening. They do not establish
absence of a missing provider allocation. Related #16809 preserves
orphan sandbox leases; this change requires independent proof before
settling an absent allocation.

## What Changed

- Add an HTTPS client for a purpose-separated, host-bound Cloud
sandbox-absence capability.
- Verify signature, audience, stack, expiry, source identities and
current physical-owner token.
- Settle only executor absence with a metadata and owner
compare-and-set. Preserve source protection and record that workspace
contents are unavailable.
- Leave successor creation, approval, pause, budget and uncertain-effect
checks to normal Retry admission.
- Document the protocol and update the recovery maps.

## Verification

- Red: the new persisted-state regression returned
`provider_unavailable` and scheduled recovery on the unfixed code.
Expected: `source_unavailable` with a contained old execution.
- Green: 384 focused tests pass across workspace recovery, signed
absence, explicit continuation, ordinary Retry, workspace preparation
and provider-owned fresh workspaces.
- Signature tests reject forged, expired and mismatched proofs. HTTP
failures or missing configuration grant no authority.
- Two missing allocations are both reconciled before Retry. A simulated
interruption reuses the first durable absence receipt.
- Concurrent Retry admission produces one queued fresh successor. It
records no successful old result and no recovered-file claim.
- Browser acceptance at this change: one ordinary Retry, two provider
absence reads for two retained sources, one fresh native execution,
useful confirmation and Done after reload. The old run remains failed.
Existing saved review and newer local file bytes remain unchanged. The
deterministic model does not perform external publication; this is local
protocol acceptance, not live provider recovery.
- `pnpm typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`
pass.
- A complete local `pnpm test:run` pass was not obtained. The first run
hit a 15-second timeout in an unchanged status-card test. It was stopped
to apply review fixes before the remaining phases ran. The unchanged
status-card suite then passed 25/25 in isolation with the repository
short temporary-path convention.
- CI exposed a chat nonduplication assertion that compared unordered
database rows. The assertion now sorts both complete row sets by run ID.
Its focused test passes.
- All 58 current-head checks are terminal on
`1e2e881f6b6b1ae1fbfe1f2b2922657ce46e1470`: 55 success, two unaffected
Storybook skips, and one neutral advisory review. Required CI, build,
E2E and security checks pass. Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved
threads. The optional Paperclip review is neutral advisory 5/5 with
nine-file source coverage and no findings; it did not independently run
tests.
- One unchanged native-runtime test timed out at five seconds on its
first CI attempt. Its suite passed 33/33 in isolation; a single retry of
that lane passed without code changes.

## Risks

- The companion Cloud endpoint must ship before this consumer. Older or
unavailable Cloud versions return no proof and retain the current hold.
- A valid absence receipt permits a fresh workspace attempt. It cannot
restore missing remote files, establish task success or authorize
repeating an uncertain external effect.
- This PR has not been deployed. The original task remains unrecovered
pending rollout and reconciliation of its existing Retry.
- No schema, credential, provider-resource or fleet changes are
included.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, source inspection, code
execution and browser tools. The exact backend variant and
context-window size are not exposed by this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused scope above; full
local run limitation recorded)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-22 22:31:52 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip eaacadeba3 fix(recovery): let preservation owners reopen retained sources (#17053)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Recovery must save retained workspace files before ordinary
execution can resume.
> - The environment runtime blocks access to retained sources to prevent
unsafe reuse or deletion.
> - The recovery worker also used that ordinary resume path.
> - The guard returned no lease, so recovery reported an invalid source
binding before it could save files.
> - This pull request gives the physical preservation owner a separate,
source-bound resume path.
> - Ordinary execution and destructive cleanup keep their existing
guards.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16965.

**What happened?**

A retained workspace with a workspaceRestoreRecovery marker could not
recover through the real environment runtime. The runtime returned null
before calling the provider. Recovery classified this as
source_binding_invalid. Earlier recovery fixtures replaced the runtime
facade, so they did not exercise this guard.

**Expected behavior**

The verified preservation owner can reopen its exact stopped allocation
to save files. Other callers remain blocked. Recovery preserves newer
local files and does not start another agent or repeat a completed
external action.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Seed a terminal source run with a retained sandbox, a recovery
action, and the workspaceRestoreRecovery lease marker.
2. Give the source a verified stop receipt.
3. Call recoverRetainedWorkspace through environmentRuntimeService.
4. Before this change, the recovery action returns to blocked with
source_binding_invalid. No files are copied.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced on master at 65f59e339a. The
same failure was observed in a served build containing #16965.

## What Changed

- Add an internal preservation resume method. It validates the exact
company, task, run, action, lease, environment, current physical owner,
and stop-only cleanup claim before provider access.
- Keep ordinary resume and destructive cleanup blocked for protected
sources.
- Run all retained-workspace fixtures through the assembled environment
runtime. Add a failing-before/passing-after protected-source regression
and four rejection cases.
- Use the same runtime path and protection marker in the opt-in Daytona
interruption probe. Allow a verified immutable snapshot UUID as its
input.
- Document the authority boundary and verification recipes.

## Verification

- Red: the protected-source regression failed with expected recovered,
received blocked. It recorded source_binding_invalid before provider
resume.
- Green: 235 tests passed across workspace recovery, durable task Retry,
and environment runtime. These include saved files, newer local files,
bounded retries, competing owners, and no extra run or wake.
- pnpm -r typecheck and pnpm build passed. The initial sandboxed
typecheck could not open a tsx IPC pipe; the same command passed with
local process access.
- node scripts/check-maps.mjs and git diff --check passed.
- Live Daytona qualification passed using the same immutable snapshot ID
as the affected deployment. Export was interrupted after a real
download; a second controller restored the files and verified one
original agent start, one simulated external action, one saved snapshot,
and a stopped retained source. The disposable sandbox was deleted after
verification.
- Greptile reviewed 804dfe24ef at 5/5 with
no actionable findings or unresolved review threads.
- Full current-commit CI passed:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39540771747.
Required ci / verify and ci / e2e passed. Superagent, Socket, and Snyk
checks passed.
- Full local pnpm test:run did not pass: 22,992 tests passed, one
managed-run identity test timed out at 60 seconds, and 100 tests skipped
across the first general-server phase. The command stopped before its
later phases. The unchanged agent-identity.test.ts suite then passed all
11 tests in isolation in 15.53 seconds. The original timeout remains
recorded; it is not reclassified as a full local pass. The same commit's
complete CI test matrix passed.
- The optional Paperclip Review completed with a neutral advisory 5/5 on
the same head and no actionable findings. It inspected all eight changed
files and connected code. It did not independently run tests or the
provider probe.
- Hosted ordinary Retry recorded one durable intent and no successor run
while file preservation remained blocked. The existing published review
stayed unchanged. Hosted recovery remains unverified until this
follow-up is deployed. A Retry acknowledgement alone does not prove
recovery.

## Risks

- Recovery can reopen a retained sandbox. The dedicated path requires
the current physical ownership claim and the exact source's stop-only
intent. It does not clear the ordinary protection marker.
- Provider failures retain the source and use the existing bounded
recovery budget. The provider cannot substitute another allocation.
- The live probe uses a disposable sandbox and simulated
agent/external-effect counters. It does not prove a live LLM or GitHub
review journey.
- No schema, public API, permission, budget, pause, or approval changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository inspection, code execution,
browser verification, and test tools. The exact served model variant and
context window are not exposed by this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused suites; full suite
still running)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-21 07:27:45 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip d33b40a5c3 fix: recover saved work and provide reliable task Retry (#16965)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The control plane must retain work when an execution or workspace
export fails.
> - Retained-workspace holds can leave saved input waiting with no
usable Retry action.
> - Users cannot verify process ownership or repair provider
allocations.
> - This pull request gives system recovery a durable budget and gives
each deliberate Retry a durable intent.
> - Safe recovery can preserve files, settle an accepted result, or
prepare an independent workspace.
> - One task state keeps infrastructure diagnostics out of the ordinary
conversation while preserving real permission and approval gates.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A task with a retained workspace can show recovery, failed-run and
saved-message warnings at the same time. Historical runs without native
workspace descriptors cannot use the native restore path. Old recovery
metadata can prevent a new attempt even when an independent workspace
would be safe.

**Expected behavior**

Paperclip owns bounded infrastructure retries and file preservation. A
user can request another attempt with ordinary Retry. Thinking appears
immediately. The service preserves completed effects and current user
controls. It does not claim that starting fresh recovered the old files.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Retain a failed run and its workspace after export or process-stop
failure.
2. Save a follow-up while the recovery hold is active.
3. Open the task and try to continue without infrastructure credentials
or operator certification.

Refs #16906, #16835, #16883. This extends their recovery and receipt
contracts. Related work: #16962 and #16963.

## What Changed

- Add task-level Retry with company-scoped authorization, all-status
idempotency and durable admission before physical work. Keep exact-run
Retry compatible.
- Add typed recovery phases, finite persisted backoff, historical
adoption and durable local failure diagnostics.
- Preserve native workspaces or verified historical snapshots. Admit an
independent fresh workspace only after execution containment. Keep
old-source preservation and cleanup obligations separate.
- Carry completed publication and API receipts forward. Fence uncertain
mutation retries across replacement runs. Preserve connected-chat
identity and authorization.
- Re-enter normal dispatch for saved input. Reuse accepted results
through the existing finalizer.
- Use one task interruption projection across the thread, composer and
task list. Show optimistic Thinking, ordinary Retry and genuine user
gates.
- Add PostgreSQL, filesystem, API, browser-fixture and controlled
provider coverage. Document the behavior and update the feature/access
maps.

## Verification

- All GitHub Actions CI jobs pass on
`6d8c6d27d50586d8548b31d03b47f6d73a0ee11d`: typecheck, all
server/chat/workspace and serialized suites, Runner checks, eight
browser shards, canary and build. The required merge gate passes.
- Greptile reviewed the final commit at 5/5, with no actionable findings
or unresolved review threads. Its two earlier P1 findings are fixed.
- Full recursive typecheck and build pass locally on the final commit.
All 16 task Retry cases pass against isolated real PostgreSQL. The
unrelated-success case and both stale Retry cases fail on the previous
code and pass after the fix.
- The corrected gateway fixture passes its uncertain-mutation and
independent-read case. Four real HTTP API cases pass for definite
403/422 rejection, completed-effect reuse, and uncertain-effect fences
across deliberate and automatic retries. These focused gateway/API
checks used a temporary database lifecycle harness on an existing
healthy local PostgreSQL process. The standard repository helper is
unchanged.
- Earlier qualification covers 291 task UI cases, saved-file copyback
and ancestry, current Agent Chat ownership races, nine chat Retry API
browser cases, and six assembled browser recovery fixtures. A real
API/PostgreSQL/native-runner journey showed Thinking in 25 ms despite a
delayed response, admitted one successor in a separate workspace,
retained original files, and survived reload.
- The controlled Daytona test interrupts export, joins the controller,
restarts it in a separate process, and verifies one agent start, one
external sentinel operation, retained file contents and no premature
cleanup. It does not establish abrupt-kill or live LLM/GitHub
acceptance.
- The full local `pnpm test:run` was attempted and was not green: an
OAuth row-lock timing assertion failed, and a later suite exhausted
macOS PostgreSQL semaphores. The ten OAuth timing cases passed on rerun
against a separate database. Later embedded database initialization
failures remain recorded; the final CI matrix passes.
- Security scanning passed on production-code commit
`63953edf069b111c6becc3144dffa6deb52f68b5`. Its only successor changes
one test-fixture identity line. The final scan is neutral/inconclusive
because its pinned merge-base checkout failed or timed out. Both rerun
API requests returned 404, so no fresh successful scan is claimed.
Socket and Snyk checks pass on the final head.
- The optional Paperclip Review remains queued behind an earlier run in
workspace finalization. Its prior completed assessment was incomplete
because a comparison tool was blocked by the platform filter. It is not
counted as a completed code review. GitHub does not require this check
for merge.
- Hosted acceptance remains pending deployment. Local and CI results do
not establish recovery of a hosted task or its retained files.

## Risks

- Recovery changes span admission, physical ownership and dispatch.
Incorrect evidence could permit overlapping work. Existing physical
locks and authoritative stop requirements remain in place.
- The migration adds concurrent indexes. It requires the existing
top-level migration runner and retries incomplete index creation safely.
- A fresh attempt can complete while old-source preservation remains
unresolved. The service retains that obligation and does not report
those files as recovered.
- Unknown tool mutations remain blocked until their authoritative
receipt owner resolves them. Generic upstream tools have no universal
result-query protocol.
- Recovery and diagnostics stay inside the stack. No Cloud incident
endpoint, notification worker or new outbound reporting channel is
included.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The runtime does not expose a more specific
model version or context-window size. The model used reasoning, shell
execution, source editing and browser tools. No model subagents were
used for this implementation.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused suites; the full
local run 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
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-20 19:58:53 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 4145b5048a docs: deepen task, approval, secret, and recovery maps (#16994)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Its feature map describes user journeys. Its access map describes
the matching agent paths.
> - The recent index and capability additions improved discovery and
breadth.
> - Broad baseline records still combined operations with different
actors, permissions, and retry behavior.
> - This pull request reviews the existing task, approval, secret, and
recovery capabilities at operation level.
> - Each operation now has its own access boundary, source evidence, and
verification recipe. Source review remains separate from live proof.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #16987, #16990, #16025. These related pull requests are merged.
The search found no open duplicate or matching issue.

**Issue type**

Missing documentation.

**Where is the issue?**

The paired task, questions-and-approvals, secrets, and recovery files
under `maps/feature-map/` and `maps/agent-access-map/`.

**What's wrong?**

Baseline records do not show enough detail to verify who can perform
each action, which state must persist, or what happens after a denial,
race, or retry. A declared scenario tool can also be mistaken for an
admitted production tool.

**Suggested fix**

Split the four areas into source-reviewed operation records. Add compact
checkpoints to their user recipes. Preserve existing capability IDs and
the map schema.

## What Changed

- Promote 27 existing capability records to `operation-reviewed`, with
125 operation records: tasks 32, questions and approvals 39, secrets 28,
recovery 26.
- Give each operation its own API, agent surface, policy, source
evidence, verification recipe, and remaining gap.
- Separate human, legacy agent, run JWT, native binding, mode, and
resource authority. Split operations where those rules differ.
- Correct production completion paths, plan acceptance and handoff,
question dismissal and withdrawal, secret proposal authority, runtime
recovery grants, and explicit duplicate-risk decisions.
- Preserve access gaps found in source, including the binding-proposal
dependency cascade and narrower native/CLI fields.
- Add one checkpoint table per product recipe for saved results, denial,
races, and retries.
- Keep all 191 existing capability IDs. Change only eight Markdown
files. Keep every operation's evidence `source-only` and verification
`not-run`; the subset below does not prove an entire operation across
its actors and surfaces.

## Verification

Source review uses revision `3bbc2104b65caf9f7763938a01260a5673e12f7a`.
Read-only area reviews and a second source review covered the changed
pairs.

Passed:

- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`: 35 paired areas, 191 capability IDs,
valid references and fields. This is structural verification.
- `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs
scripts/storybook-feature-index.test.mjs`: 17 passed.
- `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs`: 308 files, 2,899 stories.
Generated outputs remain ignored.
- Capability comparison with the base: all 191 IDs unchanged; the four
reviewed areas contain 27 capabilities and 125 source-only operation
records.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`.
- `git diff --check`.
- Focused existing interaction and proposal route tests: 80 passed. The
two selected DB-backed suites skipped 119 tests because local embedded
PostgreSQL could not start. These skipped tests are not passes.

Live subset on a fresh local instance with a disposable PostgreSQL
container:

- Created the company and an unassigned task through the browser. Added
a comment and completed the task. The saved status and comment survived
reload.
- Created a managed secret with inert dummy data through the browser.
Its metadata and version survived reload. The metadata response did not
contain the dummy value.
- Created a question fixture through board REST. Invalid input returned
422 and left it pending. Browser dismissal kept it pending and preserved
the draft. Reopening restored the choice. Submission survived reload. A
duplicate response returned 409 and left the saved answer unchanged.
- Used a real issued legacy agent API key. Task read and safe
company-secret catalog returned 200. Full secret listing and run-only
secret list/value routes returned 403. Revoked the key after the checks.
- Read an empty recovery projection. Resolving a nonexistent action
returned 404 and left the task unchanged. This did not execute recovery.
- Closed the owned browser tab and stopped only the verified test
runtime and labelled database container. Evidence survived cleanup. No
provider or model ran.

Limits and retained failures:

- Native embedded PostgreSQL launch failed because the host could not
allocate semaphores. The container-backed app was the successful
alternate environment.
- Full `pnpm test:run` was attempted. Fifteen DB-dependent
native-session cases failed at database startup, and several DB suites
skipped. The run was stopped after repeated failures of that
prerequisite. The full local suite did not pass.
- The sandboxed build attempt failed at the local tsx IPC socket. The
required build passed outside the sandbox.
- The first CI build job passed compilation and production boot, then
its npm-install check was interrupted when the runner received a
shutdown signal. The corrected head passed the full CI run, including
the build and public-install checks.
- Initial Greptile review found the recovery note field and native
search/history limits were inaccurate. Corrected `resolutionNote` and
the production cap of 100, then reran the map checks. Greptile reviewed
the corrected head at 5/5; both earlier threads are resolved.
- An initial harness used a nonexistent generic secret-value URL and
received 404. The actual mapped agent routes were then checked
separately. An initial recovery assertion expected 409; the actual
missing-action contract returned 404. These were harness corrections,
not product fixes.
- Native run bindings, two-person ownership, secret delivery/rotation,
external vaults, provider-stop proof, workspace repair, and actual
recovery execution remain unexecuted. The map does not claim those
journeys passed.

The separate external **Paperclip Review** check is still in progress on
`904509df80cc6de16d36906a410a66786f619b20`. The reviewer reports that
its full changed-file request is pending. CI is green and Greptile is
5/5, but this external review has not published a final assessment. Its
review service must finish that request and assessment.

## Risks

Documentation can become stale as policy and runtime bindings change.
Each operation cites source and retains its verification gaps. The
records describe observed enforcement; they do not authorize broader
access or certify live behavior. This pull request changes no product
code, schema, or permission enforcement.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, `gpt-6.1-sol`; 475,000-token context window; xhigh
reasoning; tool use and code execution. Read-only source agents assisted
the area reviews.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` /
`Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the
relevant issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused map and route
checks; full-suite host blocker recorded above)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable (existing map
regression tests cover this documentation-only change)
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-20 13:59:25 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 9ef434fe79 docs: expose feature map IDs and add a recipe index (#16987)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Its feature map describes user journeys and their verification
paths.
> - The map already defines feature IDs and full capability IDs.
> - The README and child pages did not show those IDs consistently.
> - Readers need those IDs to connect issues, tests, stories, and
evidence.
> - This pull request adds a recipe index and displays the existing IDs.
> - The benefit is clear references across the product and agent access
maps.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Issue type**

Missing documentation.

**Where is the issue?**

`maps/feature-map/README.md`, the child recipes, and their agent access
companions.

**What's wrong?**

The README sends readers to Storybook to browse features. Child pages
show local keys, such as `installation`, without the full
`plugins/installation` ID. Readers must inspect the generator to find
the full reference.

**Suggested fix**

List recipe links and existing IDs in the README. Show each feature ID
and full capability ID in its child pages. Explain capability IDs and
entry-point references. Keep the current keys and anchors.

Related work: Refs #15288. Refs #16052. Refs #15983. No duplicate open
PR or issue was found by title search.

## What Changed

- Add an index grouped by feature area. It lists every recipe, feature
ID, and full capability ID.
- Explain how IDs are formed and used in issues, tests, Storybook, and
evidence.
- Add feature IDs to all product recipes and agent access companions.
- Show full capability IDs beside recipe keys and below access and
Storybook guidance headings.
- Preserve existing keys, heading anchors, and generated ID values. Keep
the latest upstream company capability in the index.

## Verification

- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passes for 34 feature families and 175
capability IDs.
- `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs
scripts/storybook-feature-index.test.mjs` passes all 17 tests.
- `node scripts/storybook-feature-index.mjs` passes on this checkout and
generates the feature indexes and overview inputs.
- `git diff --check` passes.
- A source comparison confirms that the README matches the recipe index.
After removal of the added ID labels, all 68 child pages match the
upstream prose and headings.
- Full workspace checks were attempted: `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm
test:run`, and `pnpm build`. They could not start because the local pnpm
wrapper could not fetch and verify the pinned pnpm 9.15.4 release. This
checkout also has no workspace dependencies installed.
- `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs` could not run because
`storybook/internal/csf-tools` is not installed. The direct map and
index checks above pass without that dependency.
- Remote typecheck, release-registry, and full build checks passed. The
first attempts of [server shard
3/12](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39460473910/job/118758430448)
and [server shard
12/12](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39460473910/job/118758429932)
stopped after their runners received a shutdown signal. The test steps
were canceled. GitHub rejects the rerun request with HTTP 403: "The
workflow run containing this job is already running". Five other CI jobs
remain active. The next action is to rerun the two interrupted shards
after workflow 39460473910 ends. No application changes were made to
address these runner interruptions.
- To inspect the result, open the feature-map README, follow a recipe
link, and compare its full capability IDs with its access companion.

## Risks

- Low risk. The change updates map documentation only. It changes no
application code or ID schema.
- The readable README index and child labels repeat source IDs. Keep
them aligned when a capability changes.
- Generated capability descriptions now include the visible ID prefix.
Generated IDs, labels, navigation order, and verification fields remain
the same.
- Full local workspace checks and catalog generation remain unverified
for the environment reasons above.

> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, model `gpt-6.1-sol`, with a 475,000-token context window
and `xhigh` reasoning effort. The model used local file tools, shell
commands, and GitHub CLI access.

## 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>
2026-10-20 12:00:36 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip d84061b923 fix(runner): recover journaled completion proposals (#16962)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - Native runs preserve provider sessions across controller restarts.
> - A completion event can reach durable storage before the next session
checkpoint.
> - Recovery advanced the event cursor but lost the saved completion
proposal.
> - The completed turn then appeared to need another provider turn to
report its result.
> - This change restores the exact active turn's proposal before
advancing the cursor.
> - Recovery can finalize completed work without repeating its external
actions.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

After a controller restart, a native run could fail with
`native_finalization_missing` even though `run.result.proposed` was
already durable. The recovered driver skipped that event when its cursor
advanced, so the result was absent from its state. Automatic disposition
retries could then encounter outstanding tool receipts and exhaust
recovery.

**Expected behavior**

Restore the saved result for the exact active turn. Wait for provider
termination, then use normal finalization. Do not start another provider
turn to repeat completed work.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Start a native Codex task and save its active-turn checkpoint.
2. Persist its completion proposal, then lose the controller before
another checkpoint.
3. Recover the same run after the provider completes. Before this
change, finalization reports a missing result.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced on `92b238137b`. The repair is based on `7c247243e5`.

**Deployment mode**

Native Runner with Codex. The incident used a remote sandbox; the
regression covers controller event recovery.

Related: #12845 and #15297. The older #12241 addresses provider process
continuity; this change repairs the controller's saved event projection.

## What Changed

- Restore valid completion proposals for the checkpoint's exact active
turn during event replay.
- Reject conflicting, invalid, or incorrectly bound proposals. Ignore
proposals from another turn and prevent adoption after a newer turn
starts.
- Keep provider termination and normal finalization as separate
requirements.
- Add eight behavioral cases using the real Codex driver and a simulated
transport, and document the recovery contract and verification scope.

## Verification

- Red: the new restart regression failed with
`native_finalization_missing` before the production change.
- Green: 254 tests passed across the native runtime, backend adapter,
and Codex recovery suites. The new cases check no repeated provider
work, no early finalization, duplicate proposals, conflicts, invalid
proposals, and stale turn/session bindings.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed locally. All CI gates
passed on `2ac025a15c`; Greptile rated that commit 5/5 with no
outstanding findings. The full local `pnpm test:run` was started after
completing the embedded PostgreSQL installation, then stopped while
still running once the complete CI test matrix passed; it is not
reported as a completed local run.
- Real local acceptance passed on `2ac025a15c` with the production Rust
Runner transport, Codex CLI `0.160.0`, and `gpt-6.1-sol` on macOS arm64.
Persisted the completion proposal while retaining the older active-turn
checkpoint; let the provider finish without persisting its later
controller events; stopped the exact owned runner/provider; recovered
the same provider session and turn. Observed one accepted result, one
durable `turn.start` command, and one line in the receipt file. Hosted
sandbox restart and recovery of the original stopped task have not been
performed.
- Initial setup failures are retained: dependency drift caused
diff-viewer type errors, and skipped PostgreSQL postinstall links
prevented database startup. Dependency alignment and the package
postinstall repaired those local prerequisites. Probe setup iterations
failed on a direct-provider response schema, invalid probe input fields,
and an original provider that still held its writer lock. Acceptance
uses the production transport, validated input, and exact-owner
shutdown. No production code changes were made for those probe setup
failures.

## Risks

- A stale proposal could finalize the wrong work. Recovery requires the
checkpoint's active turn and matching run, session, and source. It
rejects conflicting results and waits for provider termination.
- The change uses the existing paginated recovery scan. It adds no
database query per event or new retry allowance.
- No schema migration or change to task authorization is included.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6, running as Codex with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact served model snapshot and context-window size are
not exposed in this session. The live acceptance probe uses
`gpt-6.1-sol`.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-20 09:09:22 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip bc091f0a21 fix(recovery): recover retained workspaces before saved messages (#16906)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - A stopped run can leave useful files in its original sandbox.
> - The server keeps that sandbox when it cannot confirm file copyback.
> - The task can then save new user input but offers no safe way to
recover the files.
> - A retry of the old agent turn can repeat work that already finished.
> - This pull request recovers files through the existing workspace
owner and delivers only saved human input.
> - The user can recover a task without certifying infrastructure facts
or losing completed work.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16883 and #16835 for publication receipts and verified process
termination.
Related: #16478 clears stale holds after copyback already succeeded.
This change performs the missing export and records its proof. #16901
manages the main GitHub response comment and does not perform workspace
repair.

**What happened?**

A failed run retained its workspace. A later user message stayed saved
behind a file-repair hold. The task asked the user to verify process
termination and file recovery but offered no repair control. Sending a
message could show an optimistic Working state and move the task to Todo
before admission succeeded.

**Expected behavior**

The harness should recover the original files when it can prove
ownership and termination. It should preserve newer edits and completed
operations. Only waiting user input may start another turn. Missing
evidence must keep the source held with a specific explanation.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Interrupt a sandbox run before workspace finalization succeeds.
2. Retain its exact allocation and save a user follow-up.
3. Observe the file-repair hold and missing end-user repair path.

## What Changed

- Add source-bound background recovery for native and legacy runs. An
accepted native result is not required.
- Share the physical copyback lock and durable owner. Resume only the
exact stopped allocation, export files, verify persistence and obtain a
fresh stop receipt.
- Persist retry limits and idempotent requests on the existing recovery
record. Limit each server to two background exports. Add an indexed
candidate scan and a separate cleanup obligation.
- Add a task-editor recovery endpoint. Deny agents and viewers. Reject
caller-supplied stop or repair claims.
- Deliver waiting human input once through ordinary admission. Preserve
pause, approval, budget and assignment gates. Require historical
conversational-adapter evidence for legacy-to-Runner continuation.
- Include exact GitHub publication receipts in continuation context.
Preserve unknown effects and the original failed run.
- Show observed recovery progress, a transient-failure retry action and
specific service blockers. Keep saved messages visible. Suppress false
startup feedback and implicit Todo promotion behind a file hold. Hide
unavailable workspace links.
- Update execution semantics, capability maps and production-component
stories.

## Verification

- Red: the original read model failed the new recovery-progress
assertion; the other 23 checks in that file passed.
- Passed: recovery regressions with 28 cases with real PostgreSQL,
files, tar and Git operations. Lifecycle provider calls are controlled
test boundaries. Coverage includes native/legacy export, concurrent
owners, rollback after export, interrupted archive export with a new
database connection, lost replies, historical discovery, durable retry
limits, separate cleanup and saved-input delivery. The actual candidate
query uses its partial index with 3,000 unrelated history rows. A first
automatic repair can bind verified old-controller stop proof without an
accepted native result. Review also reproduced and fixed export-only
continuation and cleanup lost after a committed repair. Cleanup remains
discoverable without waiting input and after task reconciliation.
- Passed: two GitHub integration cases verify that continuation context
carries the existing publication receipt and does not write another
response. Company and task boundaries are checked.
- Passed: 293 continuation, workspace-sync, platform-receipt and OpenAPI
checks. After file repair, actual dispatch retains pause, cancellation,
approval, real budget-policy and assignment gates.
- Passed: 174 route checks, including editor admission, agent/viewer
denial and rejection of fabricated repair claims.
- Passed: 351 task detail, workspace properties and comment-reopen
checks after updating the new read boundaries and asynchronous
workspace-link expectations. Two new route cases keep held tasks Blocked
when a comment is saved.
- Passed: 265 task-thread and recovery-notice checks. The broader
continuation suite also passed; its new legacy migration case first
exposed a gap that the focused recovery suite now covers.
- Passed after rebase: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. The later
master merge adds an unrelated permission migration; recovery migration
generation and safety checks passed after the merge.
- Passed: token gates, module boundaries, map structure and migration
checks. The recovery index is migration 0360 after current master.
- Browser: inspected the production recovery component and its
retry-to-queued transition with fixture data. The first dev dependency
load failed; a reload after optimization resolved it. This is UI
evidence, not a live provider recovery claim.
- Every test shard passed on final commit `bbbc09efb4`. The older local
`pnpm test:run` was stopped after the complete CI test matrix passed.
Local full typecheck and production build passed. The first CI build
compiled and booted, then lost its runner during the clean public
npm-install check. An isolated retry passed the build, production boot
and clean public npm-install verification.
- Greptile reviewed final commit `bbbc09efb4` at 5/5. All review threads
are resolved.
- The change is not deployed. Hosted recovery remains unverified until
the served revision includes this change.

## Risks

- Recovery crosses process, provider and persistence boundaries. Missing
or mismatched ownership, stop, descriptor or file evidence keeps the
hold. It never selects a replacement allocation or silently starts over.
- File recovery does not certify external action outcomes or authorize
replay. New input still uses normal execution admission.
- Historical sources without sufficient durable evidence can remain
blocked. Destructive reconstruction stays separate.
- The index migration is idempotent. It changes no task data. Snapshot
pruning follows repository policy.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, `gpt-6.1-sol`, with code execution and browser tools.
`gpt-6-astra` assisted earlier investigation. The runtime does not
expose the context-window size.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-19 21:51:46 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 8a3d2cb04f fix(recovery): avoid recursive holds for undispatched waits (#16894)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - Queue admission must stop work while a previous execution needs
recovery.
> - The final dispatch gate can cancel a queued run before it starts.
> - Legacy recovery treats this known wait as an unknown provider
outcome and creates another hold.
> - The extra hold can survive repair of the original execution and
leave saved messages stuck.
> - This pull request uses one database proof to prevent the extra
incident and recognize old false holds.
> - Saved input can then pass through normal admission with the original
work and safety gates intact.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15483.

**What happened?**

The dispatcher writes an `execution_reconciliation_required`
cancellation when an existing recovery hold denies a queued run. No
runtime is selected and no provider starts. Legacy recovery later
creates a `legacy_execution_requires_reconciliation` action for that
cancelled admission. Its settled `replay: blocked` record remains an
effective hold after the real source recovery finishes. The task has
saved messages but no eligible Retry or Continue action.

**Expected behavior**

A verified admission denial stays a wait. It must not create another
provider-outcome incident. Existing false incidents must stop blocking
after the server verifies their recorded source. Real execution,
uncertain outcomes and file recovery stay held. The harness determines
these infrastructure facts; the user does not certify them in a form.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Persist a queued-run gate cancellation with its task-bound
`executionWait` receipt and no execution authority or resource evidence.
2. Run legacy reconciliation. On the old code, it creates a second
incident.
3. Persist the old incident as resolved with replay blocked, then clear
the original source hold.
4. Restart queue recovery with saved user messages. On the old code, no
successor is admitted.

Related work: #15965 covers other pre-start dispatch cancellations but
explicitly excludes this existing-hold code and leaves historical holds
unchanged. #16634 covers stale-cancel classification and queue drain,
without re-evaluating historical effective holds. #15383 covers an
operator Stop during conversation startup. This change addresses the
existing-hold receipt and its persisted false incident; it does not copy
those broader changes.

## What Changed

- Add one database proof for a legacy admission denied by an existing
execution hold. Require the exact dispatcher receipt, matching task
identity, no runtime or process claim, no lease or finalization
coordinator, and no execution events.
- Use the proof before legacy recovery creates an incident and when it
computes effective historical holds. Keep the old audit rows.
- Preserve source file obligations and the original recovery action.
Keep the normal queue, pause, ownership, company and budget checks.
- Add real PostgreSQL regressions for incident prevention, old state,
concurrent queue recovery, message order, conflicting evidence and scope
boundaries.
- Update the execution contract and both recovery maps.

## Verification

- Red: the regression on unfixed source fails on incident
classification, historical hold projection and actual periodic
saved-message admission. The other 24 safety cases pass.
- Green: all 27 new database cases pass. Two safety assertions were
aligned with the existing contract: daily limits stop dispatch after
queue promotion; a human comment can intentionally reopen a terminal
task. The final regression checks the real daily dispatch gate and agent
pause.
- Existing `explicit-native-continuation.test.ts`: 255 tests pass.
Existing legacy recovery and PostgreSQL dispatcher suites: 61 tests
pass.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and
`git diff --check` pass.
- GitHub PR CI run `39313204660` passed on
`ef6009e656b7c9b4c788480dce322874565960ac`. All 54 successful check-runs
and the Snyk status are green. Two optional Storybook checks were
skipped. The independent Paperclip Review completed with a neutral check
and a 5/5 assessment with no findings. Greptile also reports 5/5 on the
same commit. There are no unresolved review threads.
- `pnpm test:run` is still running locally. Its overall result is
pending; no full local suite pass is claimed. The exact-head GitHub CI
suite passed.
- A read-only probe of an affected hosted task verifies the same
database proof and projects no false blocker with the working source. No
live rows were changed. Deployment and a real resumed provider run
remain unverified.

## Risks

- An incorrect exclusion could admit work with uncertain effects. The
proof fails closed on missing receipts, source mismatches,
runtime/process ownership, any retained lease, coordinator, execution
event or file obligation. Real upstream file recovery remains blocking
in the regression.
- The effective-hold query adds indexed existence checks scoped to the
recorded run and company. It makes no provider calls and performs no
database repair writes.
- Historical audit records keep their recorded outcome. Only their
effective blocking status changes when the server can prove the
admission never ran.
- No schema, permission, credential or UI form changes are included.
Live recovery still needs verification after rollout.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, model ID `gpt-6.1-sol`, with reasoning, tool use and code
execution.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-19 15:26:39 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 016e40d532 fix(recovery): preserve shutdown export ownership through finalizer drain (#16843)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Legacy adapters must save sandbox files before Paperclip releases
their source.
> - Graceful shutdown gave each adapter a shared 30-second settlement
wait.
> - When that wait ended, cleanup could stop the sandbox while the
adapter still exported files.
> - That race created a restore failure and blocked the next turn.
> - This pull request keeps export ownership through the finalizer drain
and renews its cleanup fence.
> - A successful late export can release its source and schedule one
bounded continuation.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15857. This corrects the timeout path introduced by the shutdown
settlement fence.
Refs #16478. That repair clears verified historical holds; this change
prevents an active export from losing its source.
Refs #16835. That merged fix handles remote native runner ownership.
This change handles legacy shutdown settlement.

## What Changed

- Keep a late adapter settlement in the shared execution finalizer set.
Wait for it before lease release, recovery classification, and retry
scheduling.
- Renew the exact owned settlement fence every 10 seconds. Use a
30-second lease, one renewal in flight, a one-second database lock
timeout, and a five-second statement timeout. Report bounded failure
categories without raw database errors or credentials.
- Refuse ordinary cleanup while the local adapter still owns settlement.
Preserve the explicit owner stop-and-retain path.
- Give the finalizer drain a further shared 30-second wait after the
initial shutdown drain.
- Document the ownership rule, the acceptance recipe, and the
controller-loss limit.

## Verification

- Red before the repair: the database-backed expired-wait regression
expected cleanup denial but received permission to stop the still-owned
source.
- Green on `615a4382c5`: all 526 tests in `recovery.test.ts`,
`legacy-workspace-restore-recovery.test.ts`, `shutdown.test.ts`, and
`heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` passed.
- The assembled heartbeat regression passed. It verifies no early
release or retry, joining the late owner, successful cleanup, one
durable scheduled continuation, and no duplicate after service reload.
- Safety coverage includes other-controller fencing, controller loss,
exact source retention, stop-only cancellation, completion winning the
status race, and real database lock contention during renewal.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`
passed on the final source revision.
- A broad local `pnpm test:run` crossed the rebase and reported eight
companion supervision failures. It was stopped and its log retained. The
complete companion file then passed all 753 tests on current source.
This is not a passing full local suite; current-head CI covers the
complete repository checks.
- The 34 recovery tests include real lock-timeout classification and
credential-shaped error redaction.
- Current-head CI: 53 checks passed; two optional Storybook checks
skipped. Greptile is 5/5 on `615a4382c5`; no unresolved review threads.
- Live sandbox acceptance remains unverified. Three disposable
local-controller/Daytona attempts used legacy Codex ACP, `gpt-6-astra`,
API-key authentication, and the verified image
`ghcr.io/paperclipai/paperclip-daytona-runner@sha256:a2bd08cefb68d9217bdd75cf87a6b51f1705b18a4796eff3f97b2726a548b8fb`.
ACP initialization exited before model execution on macOS Node 26.4.0
and again on Node 24.21.0; one attempt exposed a local process-session
socket `ECONNRESET`. That does not establish the transport failure's
root cause. No attempt reached the delayed export or second turn, so
this PR remains draft pending faithful live acceptance. Probe setup
defects were retained separately from product failures, and all
test-owned sandboxes were cleaned up.

## Risks

- Shutdown can spend up to 30 more seconds joining finalizers. The
shipped Compose stop grace remains 90 seconds.
- Renewal adds at most one database operation per owned run every 10
seconds during shutdown. Lock and statement deadlines bound database
contention. The local adapter still protects its source if renewal
fails.
- Controller death or an export that outlives the whole process still
needs retained-source repair. This change does not reconstruct a legacy
export after process death or clear historical failed-restore holds.
- No schema or public API changes. Native restart ownership, approval
gates, and retry limits retain their existing behavior.
- This PR has not been deployed. It does not recover an existing
retained sandbox by itself.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository inspection, code
execution, and test tools. The exact backend model identifier and
context window were 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>
2026-10-19 09:19:09 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip f3cd3f4ea8 fix(runner): require confirmed exit before remote replacement (#16835)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Remote runs need one runner to own their process identity and
listener.
> - A health request can fail while that runner continues to work.
> - The active monitor treated a failed request as a process exit.
> - Recovery could then launch another runner against the occupied
listener.
> - This pull request retries health reads and requires proof of exit
before replacement.
> - A brief outage can recover on the same runner without replaying
agent work.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #16341 adds remote recovery diagnostics. Refs: #16686 retries
verification when restoring a saved remote session. This change applies
the shared probe policy to active process supervision.

**What happened?**

The active remote monitor settled its completion promise after a
timed-out or rejected health request. The transport treated that result
as an exit and started process recovery. An existing runner could still
own the listener. Replacement then failed with
`runner_ingress_bind_conflict` until the reconnect deadline expired.
Missing or changed ownership markers also did not prove that the old
process had exited.

**Expected behavior**

Retry transient read failures on the same runner. Require a matching
ownership marker and proof of process exit before replacement. Preserve
uncertainty when identity or liveness cannot be verified.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Start a remote runner and leave its listener alive.
2. Make one process-health request time out or reject.
3. Observe completion and the restart decision. Before this change, the
monitor settles while the process is alive, and the restart wrapper
permits another launch.

**Paperclip version or commit**

The defect was reproduced on master at `6e89919631`. The patch is based
on current master at `c6a0cf4bce`.

## What Changed

- Reuse the bounded read-only recovery probe for active supervision.
Retry up to three reads within 30 seconds.
- Check the saved process generation when available. Accept only the
specific process-not-running receipt as exit proof.
- Add an exit-confirmation contract to remote process handles. Require
it for restart and shutdown completion. Preserve the cause of
supervision errors.
- Test transient failures, exhausted retries, conflicting identities,
real listening processes, and an authenticated runner with a fake
provider. Keep confirmed-exit replacement covered.
- Document the recovery policy and coverage limits in the execution
contract and maps.

## Verification

- Red: the timeout and transport-error regressions failed before the
patch because completion settled while the runner was alive. The
restart-guard regression also failed because replacement was allowed.
- Green: 14 server supervision cases passed, including a real listening
process. All 120 shared control-plane tests passed. Focused Runner tests
passed for authenticated live-runner fault injection and confirmed-exit
replacement.
- Review regression: a replacement-health test first failed because its
error cause was lost. It passed after preserving the cause and detail.
The four affected transport cases and Runner typecheck then passed.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passed for 35 areas and 176 capability
IDs.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed locally. The sequential
local full-suite run was stopped before completion; no local full-suite
pass is claimed. Final commit `bcc1b1d339` passed the complete CI
matrix: 55 checks passed and two optional Storybook checks were skipped.
Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved conversations. The PR has no merge
conflicts.
- The first real-listener attempt could not bind inside the execution
sandbox. The same test passed with local socket access. The first
package-test invocation used the root configuration and selected no
tests; the package configuration ran all selected tests.
- CI attempt 1: nine test jobs were cancelled together at 12:54:59 UTC.
Their test steps report cancellation. The build and uninterrupted jobs
passed. The interrupted jobs were retried once. That retry exposed one
confirmed-exit message assertion failure in the Runner shard; the other
jobs passed. The compatibility correction preserves the prior message.
The failing case and four recovery cases then passed locally. The
complete CI matrix passed after that correction.
- No live sandbox restoration, deployment, or historical task recovery
is claimed.

## Risks

- A persistent outage now ends supervision with explicit exit
uncertainty. It cannot authorize a competing process. Existing ownership
and workspace recovery checks remain required.
- Health reads can take up to 30 seconds before reporting an unavailable
runner. Retries are read-only and bounded.
- Local launchers keep their existing completion contract. No database
migration or public API change is required.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact serving snapshot 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>
2026-10-19 08:19:37 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 3858d2341d fix(recovery): default saved-monitor waits and keep task recovery quiet (#16686)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - A task must keep a durable path to its next action.
> - A provider can save a task monitor, then fail to yield because it
omits internal continuation fields.
> - An interrupted provider-pack check can then be reported as permanent
artifact incompatibility.
> - The task asks its user to certify recovered workspace files, even
though this is an operator responsibility.
> - This pull request derives the saved monitor continuation, bounds
verification retries, and removes that task form.
> - Normal recovery stays quiet. Unresolved holds retain inspection and
the existing safety checks.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A yielded completion without `continuation` is rejected even after the
provider saves an eligible monitor on the task. Repeated attempts cannot
finish. Remote verification also treats timeouts and missing exit status
as artifact incompatibility. The task recovery notice exposes raw
diagnostics and asks the task user to certify infrastructure files.

**Expected behavior**

Use current persisted task state to fill routine continuation fields.
Retry interrupted verification reads within a fixed bound. Keep normal
recovery in the working state. Show a compact notice only when work
cannot safely continue.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Save an eligible monitor on the active task.
2. Call `paperclip_finish` with `reportedWorkDisposition: "yielded"` and
omit `continuation`.
3. Return a timed-out remote provider-pack command with empty stderr
during recovery. Inspect the resulting task notice.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Source baseline: `aaeff418cf` (master integrated with its current task
visibility and saved-source reconstruction rules).

Related changes: #15824, #16104, #16451, #16493, #16690. This fix
complements saved-result recovery and verified pack reuse. It does not
replace their workspace ownership checks.

## What Changed

- Allow omitted or null continuation at the provider input boundary.
Read current authorized task context and fill a monitor continuation
only for the bound run and an eligible saved monitor. Keep accepted
results strict. Apply this to Codex, OpenCode, both direct and
production-sidecar ACPX paths, and external drivers. Reserve the
semantic call identity during the saved-context read and reject
cancellation or a changed run/turn.
- Bind the shared completion change and continuation helper in a new
Copilot v21 source declaration. Preserve v20 history and its decoder
support. Qualification stays pending.
- Expose the eligible continuation in task context. Completion admission
still checks persisted monitor state. No schedule is created or renewed
by the default.
- Retry read-only provider verification at most twice per command. Hold
exhausted reads with a distinct verification-unavailable cause.
Reattachment cannot renew the read budget through an unchanged
provider-attempt counter. Keep completed verification failures and wrong
versions incompatible.
- Remove the task file-certification form. Hide the notice only for a
matching durable recovery path without an unknown-action replay hold.
Keep missed retries, unsafe outcomes, and unresolved file holds visible.
- Add production-component stories for automatic recovery, blocked and
expired holds, reader access, persisted repair decisions, source
reconstruction, queued continuation, and mobile. Preserve master’s
guarded saved-source reconstruction choice after confirmed source
destruction. Update the execution contract and access maps.

## Verification

- Completion, helper, Codex, OpenCode, ACPX, and profile regressions
pass. After the sidecar review fix, 271 tests across the production
sidecar and three provider suites pass, plus 72 helper/profile tests.
The real sidecar MCP bridge tests cover saved-monitor acceptance,
no-monitor refusal, cancellation, duplicate call identity, and
raw-versus-forwarded semantic receipt hashes. The OpenCode tests also
cover eligible-monitor acceptance and refusal without one.
- The fresh full native executor suite passes all 743 tests. Four
profile, installation-integrity, and ACPX driver suites pass all 168
tests. The earlier CI fingerprint failure required a new immutable
source declaration; its follow-up Docker failure required the matching
context allowlist entry. Both fixes are verified locally. Targeted
server monitor, tool authority, and provider verification suites pass.
The probe tests include a real timed-out subprocess, an unrelated
responsive timer, transport errors, and completed integrity rejections.
- All 90 tests in the merged task notice, reconstruction choice,
recovery display, and lineage suites pass. They cover reader access,
live/missed/mismatched recovery, unknown outcomes, saved messages, retry
refusal, and removal of the file form. Both review findings have
failing-baseline/passing-treatment regressions: identical polling across
retry expiry, and a failed refresh after cached running activity.
- Browser walkthrough passed for automatic recovery, unresolved details,
a 390px mobile story, and the merged saved-source reconstruction and
queued states. The reconstruction control starts disabled and normal
automatic recovery shows only Working. The stories use production
components and fixture API data. They do not prove live cloud recovery.
- Token gates, map checks, and Storybook catalog generation pass. The
exact Docker context integrity command passes locally after adding the
new build declaration to its allowlist.
- Workspace typecheck and build pass on the final source, including the
versioned identity update. The final server and UI guards pass their
focused tests, typechecks, builds, and token gates. The final standalone
Storybook builds. The saved-monitor default retains master’s stricter
child-task visibility filter. Re-review caught an additional
production-sidecar validator before forwarding; the fix now defaults at
that boundary and has passing regression controls. After preserving
master’s new reconstruction capability, 68 targeted reconstruction,
tool-authority, and provider-verification server tests pass. The
current-master integration at `2a80050a0d` has a fresh 5/5 review with
zero unresolved threads. Its complete CI matrix, including Runner tests,
is the merge acceptance record.
- On the final master integration, local typecheck, build, and all 90
recovery UI tests pass. A concurrent runner run hit five 5-second
sidecar startup timeouts; an isolated sidecar run passed 86 tests and
timed out in the unrelated unsupported-bootstrap case. Those local
deadline failures remain recorded; the canonical CI Runner lanes use
their normal deadlines and pass. The unsharded local full-suite attempt
did not complete. It spanned source edits; the fresh native executor run
above passes. An unrelated workspace fixture timed out once and then
failed to reserve 32 contiguous ports on this host. Its unchanged-base
control and CI server suite pass. Full-suite acceptance uses the fresh
latest-head CI matrix; this PR does not claim a passing unsharded local
run.

## Risks

The default applies only to an eligible persisted monitor. An explicit
invalid continuation still fails validation. The added read occurs only
when a yielded report omits its continuation. Admission rechecks current
state after that read.

An interrupted verification command can add one extra 30-second probe.
Completed rejections stay closed. These probes do not change the pack,
launch provider work, or replay external tools. Two inconclusive reads
hold the original run. They do not schedule another reattachment with an
unchanged provider-attempt counter.

This PR’s pending Copilot v21 declaration binds the changed shared
contract, resolver, direct driver, and production sidecar sources. The
previous v20 declaration is immutable and remains decodable, but launch
requires the new exact identity. Qualification remains pending.

Task users lose the file-certification form. Board-authorized
source-only repair remains available through the resolution API with the
original evidence and stop-receipt requirements. This branch does not
deploy or recover historical held runs.

> This is a bug fix and UI polish within existing recovery behavior.
ROADMAP.md was checked.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, `gpt-6.1-sol`, xhigh reasoning, with tool use and code
execution. The host does not expose the context-window limit.

## 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 (changed-area suites; the
full local run limitation is recorded 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>
2026-10-18 21:43:15 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip db11d899cf fix(native): recover remote sessions while preserving warm runs (#16451)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Native agents keep remote processes and conversation history across
warm turns.
> - A completed turn can leave handoff authority only in controller
memory.
> - Losing that controller can block a follow-up even while its sandbox
survives.
> - This pull request verifies durable ownership and reconnects the
exact prior process before handing it to the next run.
> - Healthy follow-ups stay warm. Recovery preserves saved work without
replaying a completed turn.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A remote warm turn can finish without suspended backup authority. A
replacement controller rejects that prior owner even when its exact
process and completed checkpoint remain. A single unavailable identity
probe can also stop an otherwise valid reattachment.

**Expected behavior**

Keep healthy follow-ups warm. Recover a completed session after proving
that its controller stopped and that the successor holds current
authority. Reuse compatible processes; otherwise save and resume the
conversation. Retry unavailable identity reads within one shared
deadline.

**Steps to reproduce**

Use `doc/testing-native-remote-continuity.md`. Its Linux cases execute
real turns through PostgreSQL, TLS ingress, and the Rust runner. They
kill a separate controller process, recover old checkpoint metadata, and
change process configuration. The provider is deterministic.

Related: #16432 and #16441 fix live warm-owner handoffs. #16341 adds
recovery diagnostics. #14695 covers provider process retention.

## What Changed

- Preserve warm process reuse between healthy remote turns.
- Verify a committed prior result, stopped controller, matching
checkpoint and sandbox, and current task/coordinator ownership before
recovering an orphaned warm session.
- Reconnect through the prior run route, then use the existing
authenticated run attachment to change authority.
- Persist a process-configuration digest. Close and save recovered
sessions when old or changed configuration cannot support reuse.
- Retry unavailable state, marker, and process reads within one
30-second deadline. Keep signals and definitive identity failures
single-attempt.
- Record closed recovery diagnostics, including unreadable or malformed
saved state.
- Retire the recovery-only ownership check after verified attachment, so
later warm turns use their current authority.
- Add real-process Linux regressions and refusal controls.
- Expose the existing source-only file-recovery form for retained native
holds, with the same board authority, evidence, and exact stop-receipt
requirements as legacy holds. Recording recovered files does not change
task status or replay a run.

## Verification

- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed; the server check was repeated for the
third-turn fix.
- `pnpm build` passed after the final UI change. The UI typecheck, token
gates, and map checks also pass.
- Four Linux continuity cases passed: warm reuse, controller loss,
legacy checkpoint metadata, and changed configuration. Each creates one
conversation and starts exactly three turns, including a healthy
follow-up after recovery. The fixture uses expired prior leases; the
third turn keeps the runner and provider processes.
- Greptile caught the retained recovery gate; the third-turn regression
now covers it. An initial test omitted the heartbeat’s saved input and
left a test process after failure; the fixture was corrected and its
disposable container reset before the passing run.
- The current focused executor/restart group passes all 749 tests,
including the original failure classifications.
- Native file-recovery and UI tests pass (52 tests), including blocked
tasks and both native and legacy holds.
- After merging current master and retaining its equivalent CI
expression check, the CI policy tests pass (15 tests) and all four
three-turn Linux continuity cases pass again on
`dec418ae55ff21b4fb067132613658cce445f181`.
- `pnpm test:run` completed its general server group with 20,572 passes,
103 skips, and three failures: the skill-audit child process and two
HTTP test timeouts. The same three suites then passed in isolation (89
tests) without code changes. That local command stopped before later
groups; the complete final-head CI, including general, serialized,
Runner, build, and browser gates, is green.
- Greptile reviewed the combined head
`dec418ae55ff21b4fb067132613658cce445f181` at 5/5 with no actionable
findings; both earlier findings are resolved. All final-head CI gates
and the security scan passed. Staging deployment and retained-incident
disposition remain deployment acceptance work.

## Risks

- Recovery requires exact durable evidence. Live conflicting
controllers, replacement sandboxes, Stop/pause, and uncertain effects
must remain blocked.
- After controller loss, tool-contract or process-configuration changes
can restart the provider. Normal healthy follow-ups retain their
processes.
- The new idle-recovery path has Linux fake-provider evidence. Live
Codex/OpenCode and retained quarantined-state recovery still need
staging qualification.
- No database schema, telemetry, or runner protocol changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code
execution, and browser tools. The session does not expose a more
specific model version or context-window size.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (targeted checks and
isolated reruns; full-run limitation recorded 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
`dec418ae55ff21b4fb067132613658cce445f181`
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-15 13:26:09 -05:00
cafa25029c fix(native-runtime): recover unclaimed remote startup (#16349)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The native runtime preserves task execution across server restarts.
> - Remote workspace preparation can finish before the executor claims
its first provider attempt.
> - The recovery classifier required a provider checkpoint even when the
durable coordinator proved that execution had never started.
> - A deployment during this interval therefore left safe startup work
on a permanent recovery hold.
> - This pull request admits that narrow startup state to the existing
same-run bootstrap path. Existing execution and ownership checks remain
in force.
> - The original preparation yields when recovery owns the coordinator.
It cannot fail or clean up the recovered run.
> - Tasks can continue after this interruption without an operator retry
or a duplicate provider turn.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A server deployment interrupted a prepared remote workspace before the
native executor's first claim. The coordinator had attempt zero,
controller generation zero, and no owner, process, provider event, or
checkpoint. Restart classification returned
`ambiguous_remote_recovery_evidence` and blocked the task.

**Expected behavior**

The server should recognize this durable never-claimed state and
continue the original run through normal execution admission. A prior
claim, uncertain ownership, or contradictory execution evidence must
retain the recovery hold.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Prepare a remote workspace for a native run.
2. Stop the controller before the executor commits its first claim.
3. Restart the controller and classify the running native task.
4. Observe that the old classifier blocks it because no provider
checkpoint exists.

Related: #16341 preserves remote recovery failure reasons. #16344
strengthens remote restart qualification. Neither changes admission for
an untouched remote startup.

## What Changed

- Require a server-owned fencing version written only with fresh native
identities. Older unmarked preparations stay held during rolling
upgrades; caller profile data cannot add that marker to an existing run.
- Leave the current server's active preparation with its existing
execution.
- Yield through the controller-detachment path when a different
execution owns the coordinator lease. Lease expiry does not grant
takeover authority.
- Preserve run-scoped gateway tokens during detachment so stale
preparation cannot revoke the recovered worker's tools.
- Admit a valid prepared remote workspace only when the locked
coordinator proves attempt and controller generation zero, no owner, and
no prior session or execution evidence.
- Check launch receipts and provider source events before granting
bootstrap recovery.
- Keep the original run and session. Preserve atomic recovery claims,
executor durable-state checks, and normal admission gates.
- Add real PostgreSQL regression tests for competing controllers and
seven contradictory evidence cases.
- Update recovery documentation, the run-log reason, and both capability
maps.

## Verification

- The competing-controller regressions failed before the ownership fix
and pass for both live and expired foreign leases.
- On the final revision, 77 runtime-selection, restart recovery, real
PostgreSQL, and heartbeat boundary tests pass with no skips, including
all local runner process fixtures. The full native executor file passes
all 698 tests.
- Another 91 live-run route tests pass locally. An earlier CI timeout in
that unrelated file passed on retry; the complete final-head CI passed
without that failure.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and
`git diff --check`: passed locally. The map check verifies structure
only.
- Local `pnpm test:run` did not finish: an early attempt had
build-related collection failures, and later full-suite execution was
stopped after complete CI passed. Targeted suites passed after build
preparation. This is not a local full-suite pass.
- The complete [PR
workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38669996667)
passed on `2baffb3652bfeb4705a30ca3706fbda6c3d72aa4`, including all test
shards, build/typecheck, runner verification, and browser E2E. All 55
applicable review/security/CI checks succeeded; two Storybook checks
were skipped.
- [Greptile
Apex](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16349#issuecomment-6180848957):
5/5 on the same final head, with no unresolved findings.
- No live remote provider restart is claimed by the database regression.

## Risks

- A bare executor can no longer take a foreign coordinator lease after
expiry. A verified recovery claim must transfer authority first.
- Existing preparations without the server-owned fencing marker retain
their recovery hold during rolling upgrades.
- Incorrect admission could duplicate provider work. This path requires
a positive durable never-claimed receipt, rejects contradictory launch
evidence, and keeps the executor's existing durable-root verification.
- Previously claimed or incomplete remote recovery evidence remains
blocked. This change does not clear historical terminal holds.
- No schema, API, dependency, or UI changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, code execution,
and browser inspection. The exact serving snapshot 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>
Co-authored-by: Devin Foley <devin@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 19:32:39 -07:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 6fae6f2cb8 fix(wake-queue): preserve pending work when a queued run is stopped (#16357)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The wake queue releases task locks and can promote saved follow-up
work when a run ends.
> - An operator can stop a queued run before dispatch selects its
runtime.
> - The legacy release path can promote the old follow-up after that
Stop.
> - For an obsolete routine cycle, this can conflict with the current
active cycle after cancellation has already committed.
> - This pull request preserves the deferred input without promoting it
at that release boundary.
> - The benefit is that a queued Stop stays stopped and does not return
an error from starting an obsolete follow-up.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Related: Refs #14300 and Refs #16339 describe other pre-dispatch
cancellation paths. Related PR #16238 changes former-owner wake
selection. This change addresses expected operator cancellation before
legacy runtime selection, without changing those contracts.

**What happened?**

Stopping an unstarted legacy run committed its cancellation, then tried
to promote a deferred wake. When another cycle of the same routine was
already active, the issue lock update failed against
`issues_open_routine_execution_uq`. The cancel request returned HTTP 500
even though the run was cancelled. Without a competing cycle, the Stop
launched the old follow-up.

**What did you expect to happen?**

Release the stopped run's own locks and preserve deferred input for a
later eligible instruction. Do not start the old queue as a side effect
of Stop.

**Steps to reproduce**

Create two cycles of the same routine. Keep the current cycle active.
Give the old cycle an unstarted legacy run with a verified bootstrap
record and a deferred wake. Cancel that run as a board operator, then
release its issue execution. The added database regression reproduces
the failed lock update before the fix.

**Paperclip version / commit**

Reproduced on parent commit `976cdc77ed564dc3e014621505890b647e554a7f`.

**Deployment mode**

A remote runtime exposed the symptom. The regression uses embedded
PostgreSQL and the real wake-queue adapter.

## What Changed

- Recognize an expected operator Stop only when the legacy run has no
runtime-selection time, start time, process-start time, or process
identity.
- Use the existing release boundary to preserve deferred input without
promoting it.
- Add database regressions for ordinary Stop, a competing routine cycle,
repeated release, provider cancellation, runtime selection, and
dispatched-run reconciliation.
- Document the behavior and update both recovery maps.

## Verification

- Before the fix, both queued Stop cases failed. The competing-cycle
case raised `issues_open_routine_execution_uq`. The three control cases
passed.
- `node node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/modules/wake-queue`: 7 files and 214 tests passed, including
all five new database cases.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and all 10 map-script tests passed
locally. The complete CI suite is green on
`8e204eef87f1a593df5c183abef764e4b9eb5fd1`. The remaining serial local
full-suite run was stopped once that unchanged-head CI verification
passed; a local full-suite pass is not claimed. Apex review passed at
5/5 on the same head with no review threads.

## Risks

- The change is limited to recorded operator cancellation before legacy
runtime selection. Selected runtimes, dispatched work, provider
cancellation, and native stop acknowledgement keep their existing paths.
- Deferred work is retained. A later eligible instruction must still use
normal admission and all current gates.
- No schema migration or new authority is required. This regression is
not proof of a live provider stop.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact serving snapshot 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>
2026-10-14 18:18:26 -07:00
976cdc77ed fix(recovery): expose settled holds and their preserved decisions (#16169)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Task recovery preserves work when execution or tool outcomes are
uncertain.
> - Automatic recovery can settle its record while keeping replay
blocked.
> - The recovery-actions API omitted those records unless they held
workspace files.
> - Operators and agent tools could therefore see an empty recovery
history for a task that still had an execution hold.
> - This pull request lists those holds and shows their matching
decision in the existing stopped-run notice.
> - Existing stop verification, continuation, and file repair gates
remain in force.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A cancelled or failed task can retain a settled recovery record with
`automaticRecovery.replay: blocked`. The task remains held, but the
recovery-actions API returns no action. The board notice also lacks that
record's decision.

**Expected behavior**

List settled execution holds that still block replay. Let an authorized
board user inspect the current action and run in Recovery details.
Preserve the existing guarded continuation and required-file repair
paths.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Stop a run whose outcome requires inspection.
2. Let automatic recovery settle its record with replay blocked.
3. Read the task's recovery actions and open its stopped-run notice.
4. Before this change, the action list is empty unless workspace
recovery is required.

**Paperclip version or commit**

This PR includes current master through `66424362a85`.

**Deployment mode**

Authenticated and local deployments with persisted execution recovery
holds.

The original API correction and route regression are by Tao Xie
(@TaoXieSZ). This update preserves those commits and adds the board
inspection path, current documentation, and regression coverage.

Related: #14840 describes controller lease loss. This change exposes
recovery records; it does not change controller lease renewal.

## What Changed

- Include settled execution reconciliation holds with replay blocked in
the company-scoped recovery-actions response.
- Read the matching action from the existing stopped-run notice. Show
its decision under Recovery details, including when active recovery is
empty.
- Reject mismatched historical records in the notice. Bind history to
the current action/run and refresh visible decisions every five seconds.
Keep history read errors visible beside the current guidance.
- Preserve existing run inspection, new-message continuation, and
required-file repair controls. No new reconciliation form is added.
- Update the execution documentation and both recovery capability maps.

## Verification

- Recovery route suite with real embedded PostgreSQL: 80 passed, none
skipped.
- Notice and retry-client suites: 36 passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed.
- `pnpm build`: passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates`: passed.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`: passed. This checks structure only.
- `git diff --check`: passed.
- Full `pnpm test:run` was started. It is not yet a full local pass.
Initial database tests were affected by missing packaged macOS library
aliases; the aliases were restored in this worktree's dependencies, and
the complete recovery route suite then passed.
- All CI checks passed on `09e4461e4d3a0960a4dc8bc270a2a10c628bf524`,
including the full test matrix, typecheck, build and browser checks.
Optional Storybook jobs were skipped.
- Apex: 5/5 on the same head. Both review threads are resolved; the
reviewer confirmed the existing guarded continuation design.

## Risks

- The API response now includes settled records that still block replay.
Consumers must distinguish a settled record from permission to continue.
- Recovery history is supplemental. A failed history read keeps the
current blocker and guidance visible.
- The UI binds the decision to both the current action and run. It does
not certify tool outcomes or grant execution authority.
- No schema, dependency, telemetry, or runtime admission changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution, assisted with the board inspection and verification
follow-up. The exact serving snapshot ID and context window size are not
exposed in this session. The original API work is retained from Tao
Xie's contribution.

## 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;
full-suite limits 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: Devin Foley <devin@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 17:32:35 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip adb69e8f09 feat: default new Codex agents to Paperclip Runner on Linux and macOS (#15683)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source control plane for agent companies.
> - People choose a harness when creating an agent.
> - The server should resolve that harness to a qualified runner.
> - Codex is the first harness in the staged default rollout.
> - Saved agents must retain their execution choices.
> - New Codex agents therefore use Paperclip Runner on qualified
macOS/Linux targets, with an explicit Legacy override.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16028, #15555, #15673, #15422, #15631, #15926, #15932, #16149.

The runtime/install prerequisite and release repair are merged. This
slice owns Codex creation, setup, configuration and preservation. Other
harness defaults remain unchanged. It adds no database migration;
incoming master migrations, required maps and regression coverage are
retained.

## What Changed

- Resolve `runner: auto | paperclip | legacy` at the common creation
boundary across onboarding, API/CLI, hires, built-ins, plugins and
imports. Freeze pending hires and export resolved execution choices.
- Preserve existing runners on upgrades, unrelated edits and import
updates, including compatible accounts, workspace settings, Codex effort
and intentional clears.
- Use the underlying harness picker and branding; put the runner
override in Advanced. Use the shared dropdown and update
production-component stories and creation contracts.
- Support qualified Apple Silicon, Intel Mac, Linux x64 and Linux ARM64.
Linux requires GNU libc 2.39+. Disabled, external, unsupported and
unqualified combinations retain their applicable Legacy execution.
- Test the selected runtime/account/model/environment. Ordinary Connect
probes eligible immutable managed targets and refreshes scoped
discovery. Creation/discovery do not provision. Auth, dependency,
incompatible-setting and cleanup failures remain actionable without
changing runners.
- Keep setup probes read-only, preserve local/SSH isolation and resolve
packaged assets before staging credentials. Bound cleanup reads by the
remaining absolute deadline; physically close every owned ingress socket
before endpoint release. Unconfirmed cleanup retains recovery state.
- Preserve validated completed-onboarding callbacks through startup
recovery. First file-producing work belongs to the child task and uses
the existing dependency/block handoff and task-scoped registration.
- Reuse existing E2E fixtures, artifact checks, reporting and controls.
Keep Docker/Cargo/native compilation remote. Paperclip tarballs contain
no Codex payloads; official optional npm platform dependencies remain.

## Verification

Current tested head: `1c03a8815672d82c264a9b08d4ea1984e8fae107`.
**Merge-ready: required CI, fresh review, package qualification, Mac
core acceptance and Test task/follow-up acceptance pass.** The existing
attachment and native-continuity oracles independently verify both Test
downloads, run attribution and unchanged native/provider/workspace
identities. The maintainer authorized a code-owner-review exception for
this PR only. The first Test setup failure and normal Board
completion-review friction are retained below. Actual post-merge
packages and private Cloud distribution remain separate qualification
gates.

- [Current
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38564241625):
all 48 ordinary jobs and required verify/E2E pass. Attempt 1 retained
six simultaneous host-shutdown cancellations. One failed-only retry
passes those six lanes and two aggregates, preserving 40 successes.
Actual integration checkout `53104c1` combines this head with master
`c80`; it is not relabeled as the branch tree. Fresh exact-head Greptile
5/5, 30 resolved threads, no actionable findings.
- [Exact-source package
qualification](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38565287239):
nine applicable jobs pass, nine conditional jobs skip. Four remote
native producers; Linux x64 clean install; Intel Mac, Apple Silicon and
Linux ARM64 native startup/physical cleanup controls. All 18
tarballs/four daemon source/hash/manifest bindings and 343 migrations
through 0344 verify. No Codex payload is packed. These hosted tarballs
are not a published npm canary.
- Normal Apple Silicon installation and credential-free native
startup/cleanup pass using the packaged daemon, with no source build or
provider turn. Fresh installed DB initialization passes. Upgrade
651a→1c03 preserves all three complete execution configs, accounts, ten
recorded run profiles, paused budgets, active incidents, cost summaries
and two historical unpriced events. Historical recovery state is
retained.
- Cleanup regressions: four delayed-read baseline failures become 15
passing deadline/authority controls. No-acknowledgement and prior-error
socket ownership regressions become 12 passing controls. Direct
runtime/server types, maps: 35 areas / 176 IDs, diff checks and
independent reviews pass. Permission/auth/reconnect policy and the
10-second setup budget remain intact.
- Existing source coverage includes creation/selection/imports, pending
approvals, recovery, account/lifecycle handling, mounted forms,
dropdowns and E2E support. Full typechecks/tests/build/token and
applicable Storybook checks pass in the recorded current CI; no
duplicate suite or weakened grader.
- Literal 9546 live Mac proof: ordinary Auto Codex onboarding, useful
document, real completed-child callback/reply, seven successful native
runs, manual follow-up and independently downloaded1,101-byte child
file. Existing Legacy title edit/reload preserves execution; two real
Legacy runs produce independently checked15/34-byte files. These remain
historical source records.
- Current literal 1c03 Mac core acceptance passes independent checks:
ordinary Auto native Codex onboarding without runner override; only
timeout 180 seconds/concurrency 1 saved; six successful native runs and
six serialized turns (maximum overlap 1); both same-task continuity
checks and five mechanical callback checks; actual rendered parent reply
and exact child downloads. The useful handoff advances from revision 1
to 2. Both files are 48 bytes, SHA-256
`8b742bd4e8123a7c078f0a8d9f3449fbfa8a320d7d90be641a2818db3c53d92c` and
`f42db9774fa06e804ab7d596fc8b922a2b638921c418b87d0111151d290a6afe`;
exactly one byte changes and old history remains. The agent is paused
with zero active runs/errors. Both artifact work products have
`isPrimary=false`, and descriptive titles fail a stricter title-helper
assumption; these retained results are scoped editorial follow-up, not
new merge gates. Six source-bound screenshots are uploaded and verified
in the private primary QA report.
- [Literal 9546 managed
proof](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-38485488621-1/index.html):
original 19 assertions and completed judge pass, four native turns,
child-bound240-byte file and session/workspace continuity. Checkout
reports a verified generated target-lock mutation; full final porcelain
was not retained. Signed execution-image identity remains separate from
Core source.
- Actual 651a Test deployment succeeds on one owned/pinned target. One
ordinary Auto API-key Connect then fails native cleanup before hire.
Controller turn/drain/suspend completion and service-recorded
environment cleanup are observed; they do not certify physical deletion
or native authority retirement. Failure/recovery/unknown holds are
retained. No Legacy switch or unchanged paid retry. The two source
repairs above require actual treatment.
- [Current immutable Core
preview](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38570365725)
and matching DB/shared artifacts pass. One owned, pinned Test target
serves exact `1c03`; identical migration history correctly skips the
migrator. Ordinary Auto Codex Connect succeeds and hires native; saved
native selection and QA bounds survive reload. The initial child
preparation attempt fails before provider work, with actual stdout
identifying `renewal_deadline`; its trigger remains unknown and the
failure is retained. Normal Board **Try again** and **Resume** recover
the child to Done, producing a browser-verified 44-byte file, SHA-256
`0a8458b1efcc2d7a0d815689458c4caab039a46c7c7a3e5805de6bc8b1a96ecc`. The
actual parent callback reports the completed child document/file. The
existing validator requires a parent-owned attachment, so recovery
enters normal Review; after byte checking, normal **Approve completion**
reaches parent Done. No forced status or duplicate parent file is used.
The validator is unchanged from integrated and current master.
Autonomous initial callback-to-Done is not proven. The same-child
follow-up completes document revision 2 and publishes a second
independently downloaded 44-byte file, SHA-256
`22022257300fae762784632d08d3bbe0bab61e2ce81f91864a14dcd7aa464591`; only
the revision digit changes. The unchanged existing native-continuity and
attachment oracles pass. All ten recorded runs are terminal: nine native
successes and the retained pre-provider setup failure. The QA agent is
paused with zero active runs. The pre-existing parent evidence scope
mismatch is a separate follow-up, with ordinary completion review
exercised rather than a forced status or relaxed validation. This
unsigned Core preview remains distinct from post-merge private Cloud
composition.

## Risks

- Saved agents are not migrated. Explicit runner changes use normal
configuration/session rules; historical runs retain their recorded
execution.
- Native readiness depends on verified assets and server-owned target
qualification. A Legacy probe, HTTP200 or successful account save cannot
prove native readiness.
- Recovery exceptions remain restricted to validated
completed-onboarding reports; process-loss, ownership and terminal-state
safeguards remain active. Unexecuted live journeys stay open.
- Linux ARM paid tasks, Windows, Alpine and 32-bit ARM remain deferred.
Cold Cargo cache misses are recorded; no warm-cache speedup is claimed.
- Historical invoices/physical cleanup remain unconfirmed and held.
After merge, exact published npm canary, signed standard image/migrator,
private composition and serving/live acceptance still require
qualification. Production deployment/default promotion is not
authorized.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, tools, code execution and
parallel agents. Exact serving snapshot and context-window size are not
exposed.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used with available 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 linked public issues or PRs above
- [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 the stated focused tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation
- [x] I have considered and documented risks
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green on the current candidate
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open findings on the current candidate
- [x] I will address all reviewer comments before requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 11:33:02 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 5ea3f905cf fix: preserve workspace finalization during watchdog recovery (#16247)
Keep task completion separate from runtime and workspace settlement. Permit verified board file-only repair of successful legacy retained-source runs without authorizing replay.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 18:35:27 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 433d94ee0b refactor(maps): generate indexes from local story and feature metadata (#16214)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Feature recipes and Storybook help contributors find behavior,
examples, and verification steps.
> - Independent feature changes currently update shared catalogs,
indexes, and review hashes.
> - Those shared files cause merge conflicts and repeated bookkeeping
during parallel work.
> - This pull request stores metadata in each feature recipe and story,
then generates the combined views.
> - Contributors can merge independent work without editing a common
index. Git and PR evidence retain change and review history.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Maintaining the product, agent-access, and Storybook maps while multiple
agents change different features.

**Current behavior**

A story or recipe change can update `catalog.json`, `INDEX.md`, review
hashes, verification tables, and tracked generated navigation. Two
unrelated changes then conflict in the same files.

**Proposed behavior**

Each story declares capability links and classification in
`parameters.paperclip`. Each feature recipe declares its navigation and
optional verification guidance. Startup, build, and UI typechecking
discover these sources and generate ignored indexes and Storybook pages.

**Reason and benefit**

A routine change edits its own source files. Aggregate metadata is
rebuilt from the merged checkout. There is no sidecar registry, shared
review journal, or hash acknowledgment to maintain.

**Breaking changes**

The tracked Storybook catalog and index paths are retired. Consumers use
`ui/storybook/generated/` or `maps/generated/` after generation.
Contributor instructions and the existing feature-gap browser suite use
the new paths. Story and overview IDs remain stable.

## What Changed

- Move the existing annotations into 262 story files. Preserve
classifications, capability associations, exports, and explicit IDs.
- Discover all 35 feature recipes. Store section/order beside each
recipe and move durable verification routes out of the shared table.
- Remove tracked catalogs, inventories, overview pages, and inline
preview ordering. Keep authored preview behavior in `preview-base.tsx`.
- Generate the Storybook guide, feature/access Markdown indexes, gap
report, page-reference inventory, and preview wrapper automatically.
- Update the map contracts and maintenance skills to use Git history and
revision-specific PR/CI evidence.
- Add schema, identity, regeneration, and actual Git merge tests. Run
these through the existing UI Vitest suite. Add focused browser
navigation checks.

This is one coordinated migration. Most of the 367 changed files contain
only moved metadata or deleted generated content. Review the generator
scripts, map contracts, Storybook configuration, and tests first. No
product API or authorization behavior changes.

## Verification

Passed:

- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`: 35 paired areas and 175 capabilities.
- `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --check`: 262 suites and 2,485
authored stories after incorporating current master.
- `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs
scripts/storybook-catalog.test.mjs
scripts/storybook-feature-index.test.mjs`: 28 tests, including
independent branches merged in both orders with identical generated
output and no tracked changes.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
storybook/map-tooling.test.ts`: the CI entrypoint runs those map tests.
- `pnpm check:token-gates`.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` before the final master rebase.
- `pnpm build-storybook`: all 2,517 original story/docs URLs retained.
Current master contributes exactly four additional recovery stories.
- Focused Playwright navigation checks: search and open a feature
without examples; expand verification guidance and check source links;
retain capability order and follow a related Foundations suite.

The final clean Storybook build passed after deleting every ignored map
output. Post-rebase UI typechecking and both browser tests passed. The
working tree stays clean after generation. The concurrent-cleanup
regression fails with `ENOENT` without the fix and passes with it.

All GitHub CI gates passed on `00fc7ec18e`, which also received Greptile
5/5 with no unresolved findings. The final merge commit `1c3c5143a6`
incorporates master and resolves only the two modify/delete conflicts by
retaining removal of the aggregate index and catalog. Master’s new
workspace feature and access guidance is preserved. Map validation,
catalog generation, overview generation, all 28 map tests, and diff
checks pass after conflict resolution. The maintainer explicitly
requested merging without another Greptile review. CI has not been rerun
to completion on this merge commit. The local repository-wide `pnpm
test:run` was stopped before completion after the earlier CI matrix
passed; it is not reported as a local pass. No screenshot baselines or
production acceptance are claimed.

To repeat the browser check against an owned Storybook server:

```sh
PAPERCLIP_GAP_STORYBOOK_URL=http://127.0.0.1:6136 pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/storybook-visual/feature-gap-stories.config.ts map-navigation.spec.ts
```

## Risks

- Existing branches need a one-time rebase to move their catalog changes
into local annotations. The PR incorporates the recovery changes from
current master.
- Changing the same story or capability can still produce a meaningful
conflict. This removes the shared aggregate bottleneck.
- The generator uses Storybook's existing CSF parser. Literal-only
annotations and parser regression tests protect the current contract.
- Generated Markdown is available after running the generator; the
published Storybook provides a browsable guide.
- Shared source changes still require review. Removing hashes removes
mechanical acknowledgments; it does not establish runtime parity.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository inspection, code
execution, and browser-test tools. The exact deployment model ID and
context window were not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green on the previously reviewed head
`00fc7ec18e`; final conflict-resolution checks are documented above
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
on `00fc7ec18e`; another review was waived by the maintainer
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 15:27:23 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 5a6d0d08a7 fix: record verified workspace file recovery from tasks (#16104)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Recovery must preserve files and show the next operator action.
> - A stopped run can leave a file repair hold after its recovery action
is resolved.
> - The task notice shows that hold but has no form to record verified
file recovery.
> - A chat connection can also replace the file repair instruction with
a chat retry instruction.
> - This pull request adds a file recovery form and preserves the file
repair instruction.
> - The form records evidence for the original run and keeps the current
task status.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A retained workspace file hold can block a task after its recovery
action is resolved. The task page offers no file recovery form. A chat
binding can hide the required file repair instruction.

**Expected behavior**

An authorized board member can record verified recovery of the original
files. The server checks the original stop proof. The task keeps its
current status and does not start another run. Chat instructions must
not replace file repair instructions.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create a stopped legacy run with a retained workspace recovery marker
and a resolved recovery action.
2. Open its task page, including a task with a chat connection.
3. Observe that the file hold has no supported form to record verified
recovery.

Refs: #15857, #15824, #16095. Those PRs address shutdown export, native
finalization and workspace source isolation. This PR uses the existing
file repair API.

## What Changed

- Add a board-only file recovery form with evidence and an explicit file
verification confirmation.
- Preserve the current task status when recording file recovery.
- Project whether the original recovery marker supports file recording.
- Keep file repair instructions when a task has a chat binding.
- Add UI, route and Storybook examples for success, denial and
chat-connected file holds.
- Document the recovery flow and update the affected Storybook catalog
entries.

## Verification

- Merged master `c8efdbfba43` and resolved both rounds of catalog/index
conflicts. Upstream review notes and classifications are preserved,
together with all four retained-file recovery examples and their stable
story IDs. Both fix branches also combine without merge conflicts or
catalog fingerprint drift.
- Passed locally after conflict resolution: 47 tests covering the file
recovery UI, execution blocker notice and retained workspace repair
route. The earlier ownership-route pass also covered 196 tests.
- Passed: UI token gates, the complete Storybook catalog check with no
drift errors, feature and agent map structure checks, and all 17
catalog/index script tests. Verification inventory counts match all 262
authored suites and 2,485 story IDs. The upstream production
verification obligations remain intact.
- Passed: full workspace typecheck, build and Storybook build on latest
head `10ac22b35d0a4fe469cf620914845c509046da48`. The built index retains
all four file-recovery story IDs.
- Latest head `10ac22b35d0a4fe469cf620914845c509046da48` has 54
successful checks and two intentionally skipped Storybook checks. Apex
is 5/5 on that exact commit, with no unresolved findings. The full
general/serialized suites and all eight browser shards passed in CI.
Local tests use the focused suites above. Storybook browser interactions
have not been executed locally.
- Manual check: open a task with a retained file hold. Verify that
evidence and confirmation are required. Record verified file recovery.
Confirm that its status stays unchanged and no run starts. Repeat
without board runtime access and with an unverified stop receipt.

## Risks

- The form records an operator attestation. It does not recover files
itself or prove external action outcomes.
- A stale source or missing stop proof must remain rejected by the
existing server route.
- No database migration or automatic task retry is added.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 (`gpt-6`), used through Codex with reasoning, repository
tools, code editing and test execution. The exact context window size is
not exposed by this environment.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 13:47:10 -05:00
0b0e53029f fix: recover saved workspace results automatically (#15824)
## Thinking Path

- Paperclip preserves accepted agent results before workspace copyback
and result commitment.
- A replaced controller can leave a physical copyback owner receipt
behind. A lost database lock or expired lease cannot prove that its
tar/Git children stopped.
- Infrastructure recovery should belong to the runtime and deployment
harness; task users should not investigate processes or attest shutdown.
- New receipts record the exact deployment. The harness independently
verifies that deployment fully stopped and signs a short-lived proof
bound to the stack, run, owner and deployment.
- The existing guarded reconciler then finishes the same accepted result
without a new agent turn. Legacy receipts retain the documented
administrator API after independent platform verification.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

An accepted native result can remain at `workspace_finalizing` with an
abandoned physical copyback owner. Repeated recovery sweeps could
replace specific instructions with advice to start new agent work. The
first version of this PR exposed a shutdown-evidence form in the task;
that asks end users to resolve infrastructure details.

**Expected behavior**

Automatically verify and recover the exact stopped deployment, preserve
the original accepted result and existing approval/monitor waits, and
show only a quiet task status. Unknown or live workers must remain
fenced. Older receipts without platform identity need independently
verified operator assistance through the administrator API.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Persist an accepted native result and a copyback receipt from a prior
controller.
2. Replace that deployment before workspace finalization commits.
3. Let the normal finalization reconciler revisit the saved result.
4. With a platform-bound receipt and a fully stopped deployment,
recovery should finish automatically. With missing, live, unverifiable
or changed ownership, it must not write files or create another provider
turn.

Related public work: #14402 introduced copyback ownership; #9687 handles
dead-run finalize barriers; #15795 handles terminal stale-run cleanup.
This change addresses an accepted result whose physical copyback owner
prevents commitment.

## What Changed

- Record Railway project, environment, service and deployment identity
on new physical copyback owners.
- Request read-only platform verification from the managed cloud
harness. Require an Ed25519 stop receipt with a disjoint purpose,
configured signing key, exact stack/run/owner/deployment binding and
valid expiry.
- Keep live, unknown, malformed, unavailable and legacy owners fenced.
Compare the whole prior receipt during ownership takeover, under the
existing dedicated advisory lock.
- Persist platform proof and audit automatic takeover. Resume normal
finalization of the same saved result, preserving task ownership,
approved boundaries, monitors and pending confirmations.
- Remove process metadata, shutdown evidence, confirmation checkboxes
and infrastructure-repair forms from task views. Suppress the duplicate
technical owner-recovery card. Show “Restoring saved work…” only from
server-confirmed recovery or queued operator recovery; platform identity
alone shows the operator-assistance fallback. Remove the status when
recovery resolves.
- Share current-task, current-running-execution, accepted-result,
authoritative-reviewer and newer-execution checks between automatic and
operator recovery. Validate after the provider lookup, atomically with
the owner claim, and again before file publication; closed or superseded
tasks cannot start copyback.
- Keep the separately authorized exact-owner API for operator recovery
of legacy receipts, with active-lock, live-controller, stale-result and
newer-execution rejection. Generic dismissal cannot bypass the copyback
fence.
- Replace obsolete form stories with production-backed automatic,
queued, legacy, completed and mobile examples; retain stable suite IDs.
Update the operator runbook and scoped Storybook catalog.

## Verification

- Red/green: new platform-proof tests failed before implementation; the
database takeover regression failed against the original ownership
guard; reduced-UI assertions failed against the original form. All pass
after the changes.
- Passed: 59 physical-owner/finalization database tests using isolated
PostgreSQL, including real reconciler commitment from all three
saved-result phases through both automatic and operator recovery. They
preserve result identity, exact saved file bytes, pending approval and
overdue monitor waits, and create no new run or wake request. Unknown
evidence and changed ownership remain fenced.
- Passed: 162 focused proof, cloud identity, recovery route,
recovery-card and reduced-UI tests.
- Passed: full workspace typecheck and build, final server/UI
typechecks, token gates, and Storybook build.
- Browser inspection: desktop task composition shows only the quiet
status; completed example removes it and retains the approval-wait
message. Mobile shows the existing bottom navigation with no horizontal
overflow. These are fixture UI observations, not live provider
acceptance.
- A companion harness change implements the actual provider check,
signed receipts, server-token authentication and bounded/coalesced
provider reads. Its full typecheck and test suite passed: 3,240 passed,
92 skipped, zero failures. This application alone cannot enable platform
verification.
- The updated full application `pnpm test:run` was stopped after
repeated local embedded-Postgres startup failures; it is not claimed
green. The same affected recovery suites pass against isolated
PostgreSQL. CI passed on final head `9ad5c3529e`: 54 successful checks,
two intentional skips, and successful legacy Snyk status. Greptile is
5/5 with no unresolved findings.
- Global Storybook catalog validation is green: 225 files, 2,224
stories. Its 17 catalog/index tests pass. Master was merged and the
inherited index metadata was reconciled after source review.
- Review correction red/green: two UI and two database assertions
reproduced misleading progress / missing server recovery state; all pass
after server-confirmed state was added. All 153 focused server tests and
68 UI tests pass on the final recovery code, including repeated-sweep
idempotence. Full workspace typecheck/build, token gates and Storybook
build also pass.
- Safety regression red/green: stale-task copyback and publication tests
failed against the previous guard. The final suite covers changes during
proof lookup, closed/cancelled tasks, replaced execution/checkout, newer
and queued legacy runs, reassignment and rejected/unbound results, plus
the real reconciler selecting closed or superseded tasks. Files remain
untouched and no workspace operation starts.
- No staging mutations, deployment, live provider probes or live
production recovery were performed. The three historical receipts lack
deployment identity and still require independent operator proof.

## Risks

Automatic takeover requires the companion harness release and configured
runtime-identity keys. Deploying only this application leaves
unavailable evidence fenced. Legacy receipts are not retrospectively
assigned a deployment identity. An authorized operator can still make an
incorrect attestation through the fallback API; its administrator gate
and exact-owner safeguards remain. Provider history that is missing or
deeper than the bounded lookup defers automatic recovery. Copyback can
still fail under its existing retained-workspace policy.

No migration, telemetry change or cloud provider credential delivery is
required. The companion harness PR also has passing CI and a 5/5 review;
neither branch is deployed.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with repository inspection, browser verification,
tool use and code execution. The exact serving model ID and
context-window size were not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run the relevant 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>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <paperclip@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Devin Foley <devin@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 10:14:45 -05:00
83e13db8fa fix(inbox): keep automatic recovery cleanup out of personal participation (#16063)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The personal inbox uses issue activity to identify a person's
participation.
> - Issue reads can cancel stale recovery actions and record that
cleanup as the reader's action.
> - This adds unrelated tasks to the inbox and refreshes their activity
timestamps.
> - A workspace owner hold can also alternate between creation and
cancellation after a task finishes.
> - This pull request corrects cleanup attribution, excludes historical
read cleanup, and retains one exact owner hold.
> - Agents can read authorized issue activity to diagnose the same
problem themselves.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15742 excludes logs by the execution-recovery actor from activity
timestamps. This PR covers reader-attributed stale recovery cleanup,
personal inbox participation, exact workspace owner holds, and sandbox
issue activity access. I searched open issues and PRs for recovery inbox
and activity bridge fixes. I found no duplicate for this defect.

**What happened?**

Loading issue lists cancels stale recovery actions under the reader's
identity. The personal inbox treats those rows as user participation.
One completed issue had hundreds of such rows and no edits or comments
by the affected reader. A retained native workspace owner repeatedly
creates a verification action that read projections then cancel. Sandbox
agents cannot inspect the issue activity because the reverse bridge
rejects the route.

**Expected behavior**

Automatic cleanup belongs to the system and does not add an issue to a
reader's inbox. Historical cleanup rows remain auditable but do not
count as participation or recent activity. An unresolved physical
workspace owner keeps one stable verification action. Agents can inspect
activity only for issues their identity may read.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Finish a task whose native run retains an unverifiable workspace
owner receipt.
2. Repeat workspace recovery checks and GET requests for issue detail,
compact lists, and recovery actions.
3. Observe new recovery action IDs and reader-attributed cancellations
in the activity history.
4. Query the personal inbox for that reader and observe the unrelated
task.
5. From a sandbox agent, request GET /api/issues/:id/activity and
observe Route not allowed.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Observed at f5346c05b9. Regression tests
use current master behavior.

**Deployment mode**

Authenticated hosted instance with native and legacy sandbox agents. The
inbox defect is independent of the adapter.

## What Changed

- Attribute automatic stale recovery cleanup to the recovery system
actor.
- Exclude exact historical read cleanup rows from personal inbox
membership, unread counts, and both activity timestamp queries. Keep all
audit rows and explicit user recovery decisions.
- Retain owner verification holds only while the exact company, run,
issue, and owner fingerprint still match. Apply the same rule to reads
and background recovery.
- Make repeated checks for the same owner hold leave its identity,
attempts, and timestamps unchanged. Keep physical takeover blocked.
- Allow GET issue activity through the sandbox bridge. Keep the existing
company and issue-read authorization and reject broader audit routes.
- Add regressions and update the runtime API and recovery documentation.
Refresh generated source references for the documentation edits. Update
the paired activity, inbox, and recovery maps.

## Verification

- Focused Vitest verification: 315 tests pass across five files. The
updated terminal owner hold regression also passes. The files cover
issue service, recovery routes, activity authorization, sandbox callback
bridge, and native workspace finalization.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass locally. The full general
and serialized unit test matrix passes in CI on the latest commit. The
duplicate local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after about 30 minutes once
that full CI coverage passed; it did not report a local full-suite pass.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passes for all paired areas and
capability IDs.
- Apex is 5/5 on commit 44c3787888. Its
access map finding is fixed and resolved. All CI checks are green on
this commit.
- The new regression repeats reads and background sweeps for done and
cancelled tasks. It checks one unchanged hold, zero physical copyback,
zero personal inbox participation, and system cleanup after the exact
receipt is cleared.
- Historical cleanup tests preserve explicit recovery decisions,
nullable metadata, unread counts, and the original audit rows.
- Authorization tests permit an authorized agent and reject
cross-company or issue-boundary reads. Bridge tests reject write
methods, extra path segments, and company-wide audit routes.

## Risks

Existing inbox items can disappear if their only participation evidence
was automatic read cleanup. No data migration or audit deletion is
needed. An unresolved workspace owner remains visible after task
completion; this preserves the physical writer fence. A stale or cleared
owner does not retain the hold. Issue activity access expands only the
sandbox transport allowlist and still uses existing controller
authorization.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code
editing, shell execution, and test tools. The session identifies the
model family as GPT-6. A more specific runtime model ID and context
window size are not exposed.

## 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>
Co-authored-by: Amy (Opus) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-10-12 19:25:15 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 7d9b93aee2 docs: establish paired feature and agent access maps (#16025)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Contributors use the feature map to understand and verify product
capabilities.
> - Agents need APIs and usable entry points within their permission
boundaries.
> - Product recipes and agent access need separate records with shared
capability IDs.
> - This pull request establishes that contract and gives maintenance
ownership of both maps.
> - The benefit is repeatable access review without changing product
behavior or permissions.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #15983, which added the portable verification skills and updated
the feature map. This is its contract-only follow-up. Related: #15288
added the original feature map.

**Issue type**

Missing documentation and maintenance contract.

**Where is the issue?**

The product map, its missing agent access companions, and the
verification skills.

**What's wrong?**

There is no shared convention for API presence, agent entry points,
permission boundaries, access gaps, or evidence. An API declaration does
not prove that a permitted native or remote agent can use it.

**Suggested fix**

Keep the product and agent access maps as siblings under `maps/`. Reuse
capability IDs. Record representative source inventory separately from
operation review and live proof. Keep both maps aligned through the
maintenance skill.

## What Changed

- Move the existing product map to `maps/feature-map/`. Preserve its
recipes and Poteto format. Update relative links and add companion
links.
- Add `maps/agent-access-map/` with 35 area files and 171 matching
capability IDs. Seed representative API operations, agent paths,
policies and known gaps from the reviewed source inventory. Mark entries
as `baseline`, `source-only`, and live verification `not-run`.
- Define the shared contract in `maps/README.md`. Track API presence,
agent availability, policy, evidence and review depth separately.
Require operation enumeration before marking a broad capability
operation-reviewed.
- Extend `maintain-verification-skill` to reconcile both maps and
inspect actual route policy and production tool admission. Update
creation, verification, notices and contributor references to use the
shared contract.
- Add `scripts/check-maps.mjs` and ten regression tests. Check matching
areas/IDs, indexes, references, contract fields, API method/path
examples, justified exceptions and evidence-state consistency.
- Keep the coverage inventory unchanged. Preserve skill invocation
policies and both MIT license blocks. No product API, permission, UI,
runtime helper, migration, dependency or workflow changes.

## Verification

- Passed: `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` reports 35 paired areas and 171
matching capability IDs. All local map references resolve.
- Passed: `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs` runs ten tests.
Fixtures cover missing companions, renamed/orphan/duplicate IDs, broken
references, missing operation fields, empty exceptions, missing API
examples, empty policy fields, and verified evidence without passed
verification.
- Passed: metadata validation for all three verification skills. Skill
and contributor links resolve. Invocation policies and both license
blocks are unchanged.
- Compared relocated recipes with current master. Contents differ only
in relative links and companion links. `coverage.json` is byte-for-byte
unchanged. Master's updated read-only interaction test reference is
retained.
- Passed: `git diff --check`. The branch starts from current master and
contains only this contract change.
- Repository-wide typecheck, tests and build were not run locally for
this documentation and Node structural-check scope. Live agent access
was not exercised. Those gaps are explicit in the baseline entries; the
structural check does not certify behavior. CI and automated review are
pending.

## Risks

- The companions are representative source baselines. They are not
complete operation inventories or passed agent journeys.
- The checker cannot establish actual permissions, native tool
admission, operation completeness or truthful live evidence. Maintenance
must inspect source and verify with the actual permitted agent context.
- External links to the old product-map directory may need updates.
Repository references have been updated.
- Existing access gaps and board/user restrictions remain recorded. This
contract does not change authority or implement missing paths.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex assisted with this change. The session does
not expose the exact serving model ID, configured context-window size,
or reasoning setting. Capabilities used: source analysis, file edits,
shell commands, and structural regression tests.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [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>
2026-10-12 14:52:28 -05:00