Commit Graph
5 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 02a2299173 feat(codex): default Codex to gpt-6.1-sol, half the gpt-5.6-sol price (#19623)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Codex agents run through Paperclip Runner or the legacy
`codex_local` harness, and the runner E2E suites run paid Codex cells
> - The shared Codex default and many selections preferred `gpt-5.6-sol`
> - The reviewed OpenAI rate card in
`server/src/services/codex-pricing.ts` (`openai-standard-2026-09-30`)
prices `gpt-6.1-sol` at $2 input / $0.10 cached / $10 output per 1M
tokens, and `gpt-5.6-sol` at $4 / $0.40 / $20
> - So every default run and every paid Codex eval cell cost twice as
much as necessary
> - This pull request moves every place that prefers or selects
`gpt-5.6-sol` to `gpt-6.1-sol`, and keeps historical facts, rate cards
and compatibility fallbacks on `gpt-5.6-sol`
> - The benefit is half the token price for new default Codex agents and
for the Codex E2E and TestOps cells

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The default Codex model for new agents and the Codex model that the
runner E2E suites and TestOps plans select.

**Subsystem affected**
Adapters (`adapter-utils`, `codex-local`), server native runtime
fallback, UI AI connection pools, Paperclip Runner devtools and live
evals, runner E2E catalog and TestOps mappings.

**Current behavior**
New Codex agents without an explicit model store `gpt-5.6-sol`. The
runner E2E `runner-codex` profile, the Reliability `queue-steer` plan
cell, the Product regression TestOps mapping and the ACPX Codex
qualification selection all use `gpt-5.6-sol`.

**Proposed behavior**
They use `gpt-6.1-sol`. Existing agents that store a model keep it.
`gpt-5.6-sol` stays selectable.

**Reason and benefit**
`gpt-6.1-sol` costs half as much per token on the in-repo reviewed rate
card. The current OpenAI pricing page (retrieved 2026-11-06) shows the
same short-context rates and also lists long-context rates of $4 / $0.20
/ $15 for `gpt-6.1-sol` against $8 / $0.80 / $30 for `gpt-5.6-sol`.

**Breaking changes**
None for stored configurations. See Risks.

## What Changed

Changed defaults and selections (all now `gpt-6.1-sol`):

- `PAPERCLIP_RUNNER_DEFAULT_MODELS.codex` in
`packages/adapter-utils/src/paperclip-runner-permissions.ts`. This also
changes `DEFAULT_CODEX_LOCAL_MODEL`,
`resolvePaperclipRunnerModel("codex", …)`, runner config normalization,
`codex_local` → Paperclip Runner conversion, the UI new-agent and
agent-config defaults, the composer default model and the public MCP
effort lookup.
- `codex-local` `models`: the 5.6 entry is now the literal
`gpt-5.6-sol`, because it used to be `DEFAULT_CODEX_LOCAL_MODEL`. The
list order and contents do not change.
- AI connection pool: a new OpenAI member profile uses
`PAPERCLIP_RUNNER_DEFAULT_MODELS.codex` instead of a hard-coded
`gpt-5.6-sol`.
- Paperclip Runner devtools ACPX Codex default and preset, the
`runner-codex-sol` local provider smoke, and the `acpx-codex-sol` live
workflow candidate.
- `tests/acpx-qualification-models.ts` Codex selection (runner E2E and
runner acceptance ACPX Codex profiles).
- Runner E2E: the `runner-codex` profile follows the default, so all
native Codex cells move. This includes the `runner-codex` cells among
the 52 standard `everyday-workflows` cells and the seven Codex
reliability cells. `runner-codex-mini` stays on `gpt-5.4-mini`. The
Reliability plan `queue-steer` `steeringProfile` is now
`['runner-codex', 'gpt-6.1-sol']`. Its executionId
(`everyday-workflows.runner-codex.daytona.queue-steer`), its fullName
and its TestOps case identity do not change. No separate profile is
necessary.
- `product-regression-testops.mjs`: the declared model for every
`runner-codex` case is now `gpt-6.1-sol` (it was already that for
`configured-repository`).
- `tests/runner-e2e/installed-cli.ts`: the credential-free installed
startup proof opens a session on the default model.
- `tests/runner-e2e/scheduled-prices.json`: add a `gpt-6.1-sol` price
(`openai-standard-2026-11-06`, including 30m/12h cache writes and
long-context rates from the OpenAI pricing page). The weekly scheduled
Codex cells need an exact price for their model, or admission fails
closed.
- Storybook: the composer model picker fixtures, the connection pool
stories and host, and the agent settings preview show `gpt-6.1-sol` as
the default.
- Docs: `doc/DEVELOPING.md` (the Codex conversion default) and
`tests/runner-e2e/EVERYDAY-WORKFLOWS.md` (local matrix, reliability
extras, `queue-steer` row).
- Tests that assert the default now expect `gpt-6.1-sol`. New
assertions: the default has the `0.159.0` CLI floor, the compatibility
fallback is floor-free, the `queue-steer` plan cell runs `runner-codex`
on `gpt-6.1-sol`, and all native Codex everyday cells (standard and
reliability) use `gpt-6.1-sol`.

Deliberately kept on `gpt-5.6-sol`:

- Rate cards: `server/src/services/codex-pricing.ts` and
`packages/paperclip-runner/src/evals/model-pricing.ts`. Old receipts
need them. (The runner eval rate card has no `gpt-6.1-sol` entry. An
unpriced candidate is reported as unpriced, not as zero. I did not add a
rate there because that card has its own version and source.)
- The remote Codex CLI compatibility fallback. A new
`CODEX_LOCAL_COMPATIBILITY_FALLBACK_MODEL = "gpt-5.6-sol"` replaces the
default in `codexModelFallbackCandidates`. `gpt-6.1-sol` needs Codex
0.159.0 or newer, so it cannot be the floor-free last resort. Fallback
behavior is unchanged.
- `tests/runner-e2e/provider-usage.ts`: the implicit request
cache-policy attribution stays qualified only for `gpt-5.6-sol`. I did
not verify that policy for `gpt-6.1-sol`. A `gpt-6.1-sol` response that
omits the write-TTL split keeps its cache-write cost unknown, which is
the existing behavior for unqualified models.
- `tests/runner-e2e/scheduled-measurements.json`: historical
`gpt-5.6-sol` measurements. They no longer match the current suite
definitions, so the forecast reports them as historical only. The
forecast tests now build their synthetic cohorts on the current
definition hash.
- Model catalogs that list `gpt-5.6-sol` as available (`codex-local`,
`cursor-local`, `opencode-local`, Speko voice diagnostics, Pi picker
fixture).
- The `gpt-5.6` → `gpt-5.6-sol` alias for old stored configs.
- Dated or evidence docs: `doc/plans/*`, `doc/adapter-model-audit-*`,
`QUALIFICATION-*`, `doc/connections/MEMORY.md`,
`doc/connections/TASK-REVIEWS-VERIFICATION.md`,
`tests/runner-e2e/CHAT-FEATURES.md`, the Slack eval evidence, and the
S49 soak signature text (the soak failure happened on `gpt-5.6-sol`).
- Test fixtures that parse, price, migrate or round-trip an existing
`gpt-5.6-sol` value (Rust runner tests, driver tests, pricing tests,
stored-config tests, stories that show an existing agent).

## Verification

- `npx vitest run` on every server, UI, adapter-utils and codex-local
test file that mentions `gpt-5.6-sol` or the default, plus all of
`packages/adapter-utils` and `packages/adapters/codex-local`: 5,483
passed. Three timeouts under load (`sandbox-managed-runtime`,
`acp.quota`) passed when rerun.
- `packages/paperclip-runner`: `vitest run` for `src/eval`, `src/evals`,
`src/drivers/acpx`, `src/drivers/codex`, `src/cli`, `src/contracts`,
`src/backends`: 2,641 passed.
- `node --test tests/runner-e2e/reliability-testops.test.mjs
tests/runner-e2e/product-regression-testops.test.mjs`: 28 passed.
- `node tests/runner-e2e/run-unit.mjs`: all model, catalog, reliability,
scheduled and TestOps tests pass. Failures remain only in
`copilot-protection-flow`, `denied-target-isolation-flow`,
`pi-controls-flow`, `workflow-target` and `unit-launcher`. These five
also fail on unmodified master in this local environment (filesystem
watch and git environment), and they do not touch models.
- `vitest run --config tests/runner-acceptance/vitest.config.ts`: 19
passed.
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner -- --list --suite everyday-workflows --group
reliability`: the seven `everyday-workflows.runner-codex.daytona.<case>`
cells show `gpt-6.1-sol` with `OPENAI_API_KEY,DAYTONA_API_KEY`.
`--matrix-json` gives 16 reliability cells with the same credentials as
before. `--list --all` shows no `gpt-5.6-sol` cell.
- Typecheck: `adapter-utils`, `adapter-codex-local`, `server`, `ui`,
`paperclip-runner` (TypeScript), and `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`.
- `pnpm check:token-gates`: clean.
- Not run: paid cells, Rust tests (no Rust change), the browser suites,
and the full `pnpm -r typecheck` / `pnpm build` (CI runs them).

## Risks

- Agents without an explicit model change model on their next save or
normalization, and Paperclip Runner rows with a blank model use
`gpt-6.1-sol` at execution. Stored models, including `gpt-5.6-sol`, are
never rewritten. No migration is necessary.
- `gpt-6.1-sol` needs Codex CLI 0.159.0 or newer with ChatGPT sign-in.
The runner pins `@openai/codex@0.160.0`. On a remote target with an
older image CLI, the existing compatibility check falls back to
`gpt-6-sol` and then `gpt-5.6-sol`, and that probe now runs for
default-model agents too. A legacy `codex_local` agent created with the
new default on a host with an older Codex CLI gets the existing
actionable "upgrade Codex" Test result.
- Qualification: the native Codex profile uses `adapter_constant` model
qualification, so it follows the default. No qualification gate is
dropped. The ACPX Codex qualification selection moves to `gpt-6.1-sol`.
Its next qualification run uses the new model. The provider-usage
cache-policy attribution stays limited to `gpt-5.6-sol`.
- Runner E2E history: the Codex cells change their suite definition
hashes, so earlier `gpt-5.6-sol` results are a separate cohort and do
not count as current.
- The `gpt-6.1-sol` scheduled price uses the file's existing `expiresAt`
(2026-11-19). It needs the same review as the other entries before then.
- No `.github/` change. The Reliability queue-steer cell keeps the
`runner-codex` profile id, so the existing workflow credential and setup
steps still match.

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

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic), model ID `claude-opus-5-5`, running in
Claude Code with tool use (shell, file edits, web fetch of the OpenAI
pricing page).

## 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

Related: #19604 (commits the Reliability TestOps identities; this PR
changes only `steeringProfile` in the same file).

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

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-06 15:35:34 -06:00
DottaandPaperclip 9b7d5b35eb fix(evals): refresh forecasts from complete request receipts (#17975)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip coordinates agent work through Runner.
> - Scheduled Product E2E campaigns need measured cost and time
forecasts.
> - The saved forecast samples came from October 21.
> - The October 27 qualifications retain final usage for all 19 model
requests.
> - The Claude measurements are hosted; the Codex measurements are
local.
> - This change refreshes the samples and keeps measurement hosts
separate.
> - Operators can inspect the latest evidence without treating it as
current qualification or an invoice.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #17127 and #17946.

**What happened?**
The scheduled forecast still uses the older pilot amounts. It reports no
hosted measurement and does not record the measurement host per sample.

**What did you expect to happen?**
The forecast must retain the latest complete model receipts and their
source hashes. It must keep local and hosted timing cohorts separate. A
changed definition must remain unqualified.

**Steps to reproduce**
Prepare the daily or weekly forecast from the default branch. Inspect
its saved measurement date, totals, and hosted fields.

## What Changed

- Refresh four samples from two intact request ledgers and four retained
Product results.
- Record measurement hosts, final request counts, and original campaign
outcomes.
- Add historical hosted totals. Current hosted totals still require
matching evidence for every selected cell.
- Keep hosts in separate per-cell cohorts. Preserve definition drift and
unknown slow-tail estimates.
- Document the model-cost scope and timing limits.

## Verification

- Forecast and scheduled-preflight tests: 33 passed.
- The extraction replays both hash-checked ledgers, requires final
receipts, and checks the retained pricecards. The four samples cover 19
final requests.
- Daily historical model subtotal: $0.428650100; summed attempt time:
107.286 seconds.
- Weekly historical model subtotal: $0.793676500; summed attempt time:
158.093 seconds. The Codex samples are local.
- Full Product support suite at the initial head: 4,510 passed, seven
failed, three skipped. A clean 6b9e5f3a baseline with the same installed
dependencies reproduces the same seven failures: two Copilot image
assertions, four workflow-selection shell assertions, and one database
startup test.
- Product typecheck also fails on that clean baseline because the shared
installed Runner workspace exports are stale. The fresh CI build remains
the typecheck gate.
- No provider request, new live campaign, budget change, or schedule
activation is part of this PR.

## Risks

- These are successful-attempt measurements, not a prediction of failure
frequency or a campaign invoice.
- The feedback source fingerprint changed after the samples.
Current-compatible totals remain unknown; no historical fingerprint is
rewritten.
- Hosted worker cases passed, but their original workflow failed during
report dependency setup. That outcome stays visible.
- Hosted detection deliberately accepts only the measured GitHub Ubuntu
environment. Other host labels remain unqualified until declared with
their own evidence.
- The weekly selection still has no complete hosted timing measurement.
Infrastructure, storage, and observability charges stay separate from
model spend.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 based, with tool execution and extended reasoning.
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>
2026-10-27 23:13:08 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 52a66af29d perf(evals): tighten measured campaign resource ceilings (#17381)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Product E2E checks real provider behavior under a campaign budget.
> - Its request and trace limits also determine the operating-cost
forecast.
> - The initial limits greatly exceed the measured marker and feedback
cases.
> - This pull request lowers those defaults while keeping the same
selected cases and full model context limits.
> - The benefit is a smaller bounded resource envelope with explicit
quota failures and readable historical evidence.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #17365
Refs: #17371

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The resource ceilings for bounded Product E2E campaigns and their OTLP
relay.

**Current behavior**

Daily and weekly campaigns allow 60 and 120 model requests. The native
relay defaults to 256 MiB of expanded source and 16,384 records per
attempt. Both October 23 two-case qualification campaigns used ten model
requests. The largest native attempt used 6,531,801 expanded source
bytes and 2,455 records.

**Proposed behavior**

Use 30 daily and 60 weekly model requests. Default native exports to 16
MiB of expanded source and 4,096 records. Preserve the older explicit
relay maxima so prior receipts remain valid and deliberate controller
overrides still work.

**Reason and benefit**

The smaller limits leave headroom for the measured cases and reduce the
maximum source traffic in the operating forecast. They do not change the
daily or weekly dollar cap, model context ceiling, per-request
reservation, selected cases, or attempt policy.

**Breaking changes**

A new bounded attempt that exceeds the smaller default trace allowance
receives a quota error. It cannot silently omit required evidence.
Existing receipts remain readable. No paid recurrence is enabled by this
change.

## What Changed

- Set scheduled model request caps to 30 daily and 60 weekly.
- Add smaller native relay defaults while preserving the existing
explicit maximum and historical receipt validation.
- Exercise default count and expanded-source exhaustion through the HTTP
relay. Keep a regression for larger historical receipt policies.
- Document the measured basis, default capacities, and failure behavior.

## Verification

- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit`: 4,095 Vitest tests passed, two existing
skips; 137 Node contract tests passed.
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`: passed.
- `git diff --check`: passed.
- The relay test accepts two 3-MiB log payloads, rejects the third
before upstream dispatch, and retains its quota receipt.
- Read-only replay of the prior real hosted campaign preserved all five
ingestion receipts and 123,044 payload bytes exactly. Its accounting
journal remained byte-for-byte unchanged; zero provider calls.
- Full repository typecheck, tests, build and reviews are pending hosted
CI. No paid model call was made for this change. Live qualification of
the smaller defaults remains open.

## Risks

- More verbose future cases may exhaust the new defaults. Such a failure
remains visible and requires evidence before increasing a limit.
- Source-byte ceilings are not Braintrust invoice units. Operating-cost
qualification and reconciliation remain separate requirements.
- Manual controller overrides can still use the earlier larger maxima;
their cost audit must account for the limits actually recorded in the
receipt.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, code execution and tool use.
The host does not expose an exact model build identifier or context
window size for 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>
2026-10-24 07:38:12 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip ed3f067dbd fix(evals): select operating allowance by cadence (#17326)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their operating budgets.
> - Product E2E runs exercise real agents through a bounded gateway.
> - The daily and weekly selections share one repository configuration
variable.
> - Their different request limits need different operating allowances.
> - The existing parser accepts only one allowance, which cannot
represent both reviewed limits.
> - This change selects the allowance for the actual cadence and retains
all existing validation.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #17009.

**What happened?**

The daily selection needs an $11 operating reservation; the weekly
selection needs $21. A shared $21 allowance cannot fit the $20 daily
cap. A shared $11 allowance does not cover the reviewed weekly resource
bound. A configuration containing both allowances was rejected before
paid admission.

**Expected behavior**

Each cadence uses its own reviewed allowance. Missing or malformed
selected allowances stop admission before paid work.

**Steps to reproduce**

Set the operating allowance JSON to an object with daily and weekly
allowances. Prepare either campaign through prepareScheduledCampaign.
Before this change, both calls reject the outer object.

**Paperclip version or commit**

3bd709df8b.

## What Changed

- Accept daily and weekly allowance entries in the existing
configuration variable.
- Select the actual cadence before validating its budget, runner and
expiration.
- Pass only the selected allowance through the existing workflow output.
- Preserve single-allowance compatibility and document the configuration
format.

## Verification

- Reproduced both cadence failures before the fix: 2 failed, 12 passed.
- Focused scheduled operations and operating overhead tests: 20 passed.
- Eval TypeScript check passed.
- Missing selected entries and unknown outer fields fail before creating
a manifest.
- Hosted CI passed at 1c62cc8aeb,
including full typecheck, tests, build and browser shards.
- Greptile and Paperclip reviews both rated the exact commit 5/5 with no
actionable findings.

## Risks

- A map with a missing selected cadence now fails admission. It never
substitutes the other cadence.
- Operators must still provide reviewed rates and resource bounds. This
parser does not prove actual charges.
- This PR does not change limits, credentials, workflow permissions or
enable gates.

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-6 in Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code
execution and test tools. The exact backend 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>
2026-10-23 07:52:41 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 3bd709df8b Operationalize Product E2E accounting, tracing, and scheduling (#17009)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agents and the work they perform.
> - Product E2E tests exercise real agents, tools, setup and cleanup.
> - Repeated runs need retained costs and traces, including failed
attempts.
> - A passing retry must not hide earlier spending or feedback.
> - Recurring work also needs admission limits, private reports and
failure detection.
> - This change supplies those controls while keeping paid activation
behind existing gates.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16996 and #17158. This is the consolidated landing of the reviewed
eval operations stack: #17019, #17024, #17025, #17027, #17030, #17033,
#17035, #17038, #17043, #17044, #17048, #17050, #17051, #17092, #17096,
#17100, #17107, #17109, #17112, #17115, #17117, #17121, #17123, #17127,
#17130, #17133, #17134, #17137, #17140, #17143, #17154. The repository
permits squash merges only. A local rehearsal showed that squashing each
slice into master causes repeated conflicts in dependent slices. This PR
preserves their commits and lands their combined implementation in one
reviewed integration. Superseded slices will close after this merge.

## What Changed

- Retain every attempt's cost receipt, including setup, failures,
interruptions and retries. Separate reported amounts, estimates, missing
costs and reserved capacity in reports and dashboards.
- Add bounded request admission, exact model pricecards, gateway error
accounting, cache policy and reconciliation evidence. Refuse unsupported
routes and requests that cannot fit the allowance.
- Integrate Braintrust gateway traces and OTLP correlation, with secret
filtering and experiment imports. Record phase timing, including setup,
feedback capture and cleanup.
- Collect complaint and suggestion evidence after each attempt,
including recovery after failures. Retain explicit review dispositions
independently from the product grade.
- Add gated daily and weekly selections, measured forecasts,
setup/readiness checks, wall-time limits and retained monitor
notifications. Include declared non-model overhead in admission while
reporting the existing subscription separately.
- Keep recurring history private, bound uploads and retention, and use
isolated archive environments. Keep public publication an explicit
operation. Report and publication jobs install only the committed
lockfile, with scripts disabled and isolated stores; stale pins fail
closed.
- Integrate current master, preserve its Product E2E journey billing and
privacy checks, and test that shared setup receipts do not double-count
estimated agent usage. Preserve upstream fixture repairs.

## Verification

- Complete integration baseline
`0649a5ce7544ab20825c2183d2f421157db49f24` includes master
`a3e1d915a7110a4e115b46396a3f79e6dfb4d05e` and every original stack head
as ancestors.
- On that integration baseline, `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit`: 4,012
Vitest tests passed, two skipped, across 193 files; all 137 Node
source-contract tests passed.
- Focused billing and Product E2E journey contract checks: 24 tests
passed. They cover estimates, unknown receipts, single-owner setup
costs, browser-only execution and private publication guards.
- Monitor and workflow wiring: all 96 Node tests passed. `node
scripts/check-token-gates.mjs`: all gates clean.
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck` passes after the standard Runner
TypeScript build refreshed local declarations. The first attempt
rejected the new master `runner_prepared_launch` union member because
this checkout retained an older generated declaration; the source union
already contained that member.
- Current head `492b0708a1c531a023d9ac10f0f3dc6383cc1754` removes
dependency re-resolution from archive-authorized reporting jobs after
the security scan flagged it. All 15 workflow-security tests pass after
updating the old two-install assertion.
- Hosted [CI run
39965460180](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39965460180)
passes on the current repaired head, including typecheck, build, general
tests, Runner checks, browser shards and canary dry run. Greptile is 5/5
on this exact head with no unresolved threads. The security scan passes
after the fixed lockfile-resolution thread was resolved.
- Paperclip Review returned a terminal neutral check but an incomplete
0-file assessment on the repaired head: its platform blocked both diff
responses as prompt-injection content. This is not a successful code
review. No bypass or fabricated pass was attempted; current-head
Greptile, security and hosted CI are independent gates.
- No paid test, reservation release or recurring-run activation
accompanies this landing. Live route qualification and invoice
reconciliation remain separate evidence.

<details>
<summary>Retained earlier validation failures</summary>

Earlier broad local runs had two 15-second test timeouts (CLI poll
cadence and Retry validation), one embedded-database setup timeout, and
later PostgreSQL semaphore exhaustion. The exact timed-out tests passed
separately without larger timeouts; the broad-run causes were not
established. Those local failures remain distinct from subsequent hosted
CI results. The independent #17158 fix records its Muse fixture
collision, its UUID correction and hosted verification. Local Muse
execution was also blocked by macOS embedded-PostgreSQL startup. No
historical failure is treated as a successful paid qualification.

</details>

## Risks

- Admission is a local control, not a provider invoice cap. Missing
provider receipts or resource charges retain unknown amounts and holds;
estimates do not become billed dollars.
- The bounded path admits only documented local suites and provider
routes. Ordinary legacy or separate Runner protocol campaigns have
different controls. Merging this code does not qualify additional
routes.
- Recurrence still needs the existing enable gates and current
qualification/allowance evidence. Archive permissions and resources must
match the documented private-environment contract.
- Legacy reports may lack complete attempt or phase evidence. Reports
preserve that limitation and do not infer zero usage from missing data.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools and code
execution. The exact deployment 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 (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (targeted checks;
full-suite host limitation disclosed 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>
2026-10-23 07:18:37 -07:00