Commit Graph
2 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandPaperclip d0b67bfe71 feat: queue approvals and answers during active runs (#13539)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Users guide running agents through messages, questions, and approval
cards.
> - Messages already wait in a queue when an agent is running.
> - Card responses did not appear in that queue. Some question answers
also steered a later run without a user click.
> - A fast approval could invalidate the agent's review handoff and
cause it to stop its own run.
> - This pull request gives card responses the same queue controls and
preserves the exact response during delivery.
> - Users can wait for completion or explicitly send the response with
Interrupt or Steer.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #13517, which is merged. This PR targets master and adds queued
interaction responses on top of the onboarding changes. Related
continuation work: #10519 and #12866.

**What happened?**

Accepting a proposal while its source run was active left a saved
response outside the message queue. The agent could then lose its review
path, reassign the task, and cancel itself. Answers to older questions
could also steer another active turn without a click.

**Expected behavior**

Save the response immediately. Queue its continuation behind the active
run. Deliver it after completion, or when the user explicitly chooses
Interrupt or Steer. Preserve approval revisions and answer choices.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Let an agent publish a confirmation card while its run is still
active.
2. Accept the card before the agent finishes its review handoff.
3. Inspect the message queue and the task's next run.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced on da8a3876c with the onboarding changes from #13517.

**Deployment mode**

Local development from source. The fix covers legacy adapters and native
Runner turns.

## What Changed

- Project resolved cards into the existing queue as immutable responses.
Keep answers and exact approval revisions.
- Require an explicit click to steer a response into a compatible native
turn. Use Interrupt when a fresh session is required.
- Preserve typed response context through interruption, cleanup waits,
and normal queue promotion. Keep the direct answer channel for a
provider blocked on its original question request.
- Accept the source run's review handoff after its card resolves. Reject
stale agent reassignment that would orphan a queued response.
- Add deterministic regression tests and an `accept-while-running` case
to the first-task suite. Require recorded timestamp overlap before that
case can pass.
- Keep the first-task skill name out of user-facing messages.

## Verification

- Red-green: the original route failed the queue regression; the changed
route passes it.
- Focused server/UI tests: 139 passed, including 64 queue-route tests.
- Runner harness unit tests: 314 passed.
- Server, UI, and Runner E2E typechecks passed. UI token gates passed.
- Full repository typecheck and build passed. Server typecheck passed
again after review fixes.
- Review regressions: 165 queue/reopen route tests, 53 wake admission
tests, and 18 run identity tests passed. Approval acknowledgement
recovery and both message/approval arrival orders are covered.
- Full local test run: 12,401 passed; three new admission regressions
ran against a cached pre-fix module. A fresh run of that entire suite
passed (53 tests). The complete CI suite passed on the final commit.
- Previous-head CI at `c28e2ef12`: 32 checks passed and 2 optional
Storybook checks skipped. Every server/workspace/browser shard, Runner
verification, build, typecheck/release registry, canary, policy, and
security check passed. Greptile: 5/5, no unresolved threads. Earlier
interrupted CI workers were replaced by this fresh complete run.
- After integrating the updated parent: 314 harness tests, 119
queue/admission tests, 44 onboarding/question-delivery tests, and 13
native recovery tests passed locally. Full repository typecheck and
build passed.
- Clarified the skill wording preference: routine replies describe the
action without announcing the internal skill; direct questions and
permission/security/execution disclosures remain truthful.
- The paid `accept-while-running` scenario is registered for all four
local first-task profiles. It has not been run against a model in this
change.

- Rebased onto the merged parent at `11921075a`; the resulting tree
exactly matches the locally verified integration tree. Final-head CI on
`b53054807` passed: 54 successful checks, 2 optional Storybook checks
skipped, no failed checks. Every new server/browser shard, aggregate
verify/e2e gate, Runner, typecheck, build, canary, and security check
passed on the first attempt. Greptile reviewed this exact head at 5/5
with no unresolved threads.

## Risks

- Responses now wait instead of implicitly steering another active turn.
A provider blocked on the original question still receives its answer
directly.
- Approval receipts cannot be edited, discarded, or reordered as
comments. This preserves the recorded decision.
- Interruption must still prove that the prior execution stopped. The
tests cover cleanup waits and duplicate delivery.
- The new paid overlap case can be unexercised if the model finishes
before the click lands. It cannot pass without evidence of overlap.
- No database migration is required. This repairs the existing approvals
and execution controls; it does not implement the roadmap's work-stream
queues.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The exact deployed model ID and
context-window size were not exposed in this session. Capabilities used:
agentic reasoning, repository inspection, code editing, terminal
commands, and test execution.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-16 14:44:36 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 11921075a4 Add first-task onboarding skill and Runner E2E coverage (#13517)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The first task helps a new user define and approve useful work.
> - That workflow needs reusable instructions and tests against the
production experience.
> - Native Codex and Claude must load the assigned skill, including
after resume.
> - Maintainers need recorded conversations and precise failed checks to
judge regressions.
> - This pull request adds the first-task skill and a suite in the
shared Runner E2E harness.
> - It keeps behavior results separate from informational quality scores
and incomplete recordings.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The first onboarding task and the Runner E2E report used to review it.

**Current behavior**

Onboarding embeds its policy in a hidden brief. Native Codex drops the
skill-instructions setting at the Rust boundary. The shared E2E harness
has no onboarding suite or full conversation view.

**Proposed behavior**

Assign and invoke `/first-task` for the onboarding task. Send selected
Codex skills as structured protocol inputs. Run twelve scenarios across
legacy Codex, legacy Claude, native Codex, and native ACPX Claude.
Include all 48 cells in full campaigns. Show recorded chat, question and
approval cards, exact checks, instructions, and billing in the shared
dashboard.

**Reason and benefit**

Measure the real onboarding experience before changing prompts.
Distinguish infrastructure failures, behavior failures, and unexercised
journey steps.

**Breaking changes**

No database migration or production API change. First-task instructions
now live in an assigned skill. The user-edited persona is preserved; the
skill includes the maintainer-approved proposal-mode mapping and
saved-plan requirement.

Related: #11043 is earlier onboarding work. #13422 already fixes native
Claude model pinning, context delivery, and read permissions on master;
this branch includes those fixes through its base. The new Claude
recovery test supplements them.

## What Changed

- Extract and assign the first-task skill while retaining the production
greeting and opening question.
- Carry the Codex skill-instructions flag through thread start and
resume. Resolve explicit task skill references only against assigned
skills and send native skill inputs.
- Invoke an unambiguously selected assigned skill through Claude ACPX’s
native slash-command parser on initial and resumed turns, retaining the
entire task/wake envelope as its argument. Do not carry that invocation
into ordinary tasks.
- Restore the saved single-task proposal modes: confirmation card, or
saved plan with revision-targeted checkbox approval. Explicit plan
requests also require a saved plan.
- Add first-response and complete-journey cases with fixed user facts,
acceptance checkpoints, durable outcome checks, and accounting for child
runs.
- Fail the eval when choice questions have fewer than two real options.
Recognize planning documents without treating them as completed work.
- Add optional, bounded quality judging as explicit post-processing.
- Render full conversations and static interaction cards in the shared
report. Conversations start folded. Show original and regraded results
and incomplete journeys distinctly.
- Keep credential-persistence scanning outside the first-task behavioral
suite; retain public evidence redaction.
- Refresh generated capability references after the API-reference edits.
- Correct shared native question guidance and tool schemas: choices need
at least two meaningful options; open-ended questions use canonical text
fields with the required compatibility payload. Verify both formats
through real tool-authority persistence.
- Disable announcements automatically for every isolated Runner E2E
process and label the gallery environment/provider/target explicitly.
- Remove CI races in the GitHub connection browser test and native
session recovery test by waiting for the actual async work before
asserting its results.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/onboarding-first-task-assets.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-onboarding-first-task-routes.test.ts`: 19
passed.
- `pnpm --dir packages/paperclip-runner exec vitest run
src/drivers/acpx/runtime-host.test.ts
src/drivers/acpx/native-skill-prompt.test.ts
src/cli/acpx-runtime-sidecar.test.ts`: 70 passed. Native command
forwarding and the 1 MiB input boundary both failed before their fixes
and passed afterward. Coverage includes changed skills on reopen,
approval context, and an ordinary subsequent task.
- Runner E2E unit suite: 306 passed. Harness typecheck passed. The 64
first-task fixture and grader tests also pass.
- Full repository typecheck and build passed locally. Server typecheck
and Runner build passed again after the native-command change.
- Full GitHub Actions CI passed on `23e56447b`: all
server/workspace/browser shards, Runner verification, typecheck/release
registry, build, canary, policy, and Docker checks. Greptile reviewed
this exact head at 5/5 with no unresolved threads. The earlier broad
local run had database startup/timing failures that passed isolated
retries; the complete remote suite is green.
- Merge verification against current master: 312 harness tests and 13
native recovery tests passed. Regenerated semantic contracts and fixture
hashes pass their consistency check. Full local typecheck and build also
passed on the stacked queue branch. After merging the latest master and
preserving the GitHub setup timing regression in the split browser
suite, both focused GitHub browser tests passed. Three CI timing/startup
flakes passed local verification and one remote retry; all latest-head
checks are green.
- Real pinned Claude SDK and Claude ACP JSON-RPC probes against a local
mock API confirmed that `/skill-name` expands the assigned skill body
before the model request and retains the task arguments. A prose mention
does not. The probes made no paid model calls. The ACP probe used the
current first-task skill body and retained the wake arguments.
- [Full 48-case campaign and
report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-e2e-first-task-35053063880/):
44 passed after three interrupted Codex cases completed in targeted
reruns. Original results, regrades, and all 51 executions remain in the
report provenance.
- [Claude campaign after the shared-question
fix](https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-e2e-first-task-claude-35099525201/):
10/12 passed with zero single-option failures. All 12 recorded the
current assigned skill and corrected guidance. The failures exposed
skipped skill invocation and a missing saved plan. This PR adds native
command invocation and explicit saved-plan instructions; the subsequent
report below still shows behavior failures.
- [Fresh 12-case Claude
report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-e2e-first-task-claude-35102737804/)
at `78452129e`: 10/12 pass after correcting two false proposal-matcher
failures. The recordings said “Here is the task I will create and
run/complete” in approval cards; the old matcher missed that word order.
Regression tests failed before the fix and pass after it. Original
results and offline regrade provenance remain linked. No agent rerun was
needed. Zero single-option-question failures; two behavior failures
remain: direct work before acceptance on a plain first message, and an
explicit plan request without a saved plan. Neither check was relaxed.
The follow-up `82087ac7e` fixes command-prefix size accounting;
`94aefb1f3` fixes only that proposal matcher.
- Report browser checks confirm folded conversations, rendered cards,
explicit Local/Daytona labels, and no page errors. The published-object
audit scanned 1,306 text files across 2,154 objects with no
credential-format findings or prohibited files. Image pixels and unknown
token formats are outside that scan.

## Risks

- Model behavior is nondeterministic. One campaign is evidence, not a
guarantee. The two remaining Claude behavior failures are visible in the
report and require further product work; this PR does not claim all
onboarding scenarios pass.
- The suite checks persisted Paperclip effects. It cannot prove the
absence of arbitrary external effects.
- Historical recordings can miss later journey steps. These remain
incomplete, never passes.
- Native profiles switch runtime after the production onboarding wizard
because it does not yet expose a native option.
- Quality scores are informational and cannot override behavioral
failures.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools, and code
execution. The exact deployed 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>
2026-09-16 14:24:32 -05:00