Commit Graph
11 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
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
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
4611d6e95a fix(restore): retry sandbox copy-back before holding the task for repair (#15920)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Legacy sandbox runs copy the agent's workspace files back to the
host when the run settles.
> - When this copy-back fails one time, the server keeps the sandbox and
puts a board-owned repair hold on the task.
> - The hold blocks new messages. Only an operator API runbook can clear
it. The board shows that runbook text, so users do not know what to do.
> - Many copy-back failures are transient: a dropped transfer, a
provider error, or a merge lock that another restore holds.
> - This pull request retries those failures automatically while the run
still has its merge baseline and before any host file changes.
> - The benefit is that most failures repair themselves, and the
remaining holds explain the situation in plain language.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #14590 (related: no-replay recovery holds)

**What happened?**
A legacy sandbox run finished its work, but one workspace copy-back
attempt failed. The task then showed "Recovery needed" with
operator-only steps ("verify its exact stop receipt … record
workspaceRepairEvidence"). Messages from the user stayed saved and were
not delivered.

**What did you expect?**
Paperclip retries a transient copy-back failure automatically. If a
repair is still necessary, the task says clearly what happened and who
must act.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run an agent in a legacy sandbox environment.
2. Make the workspace copy-back fail one time, for example with a
dropped transfer or a held merge lock.
3. Open the task. It is blocked behind a repair hold, and new messages
wait.

**Additional context**
Separately, distinct live events can render toasts with the same title
and body (for example, two runs of the same agent that both succeed).
The toast list showed both, and the desktop app forwards each one as a
notification.

## What Changed

- `packages/adapter-utils/src/sandbox-managed-runtime.ts`: retry the
workspace copy-back up to three times in total, with a 2 s and then a 5
s backoff. A retry occurs only when the failure is `restore_failed` or
`restore_lock_timeout` and no host workspace file was written. The merge
now marks the first host write in `beforeApply`, which runs under the
merge lock before any write.
- Unsafe archives, permission failures, and failures after the merge
started writing are never retried. Each retry uses a new temp directory
and a new imported Git ref.
- New optional `workspaceRestoreRetryDelaysMs` input, so tests can
shorten the backoff. Nested repository restores receive the same value.
- `ui/src/components/ExecutionBlockerNotice.tsx`: for a workspace repair
hold, the notice now says what happened in plain language. The stored
operator runbook text moves under "Technical details".
- `ui/src/context/ToastContext.tsx`: also dedupe toasts on their visible
tone, title, and body inside the existing 3.5 s window.
- `doc/workspace-restore-locks.md`: document the automatic retry.

## Verification

- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils exec vitest run
src/sandbox-managed-runtime.test.ts src/workspace-restore` (218 tests
pass). New tests cover:
  - a retry after a dropped transfer,
  - a retry after a merge-lock timeout,
  - a stop after three attempts,
- no retry for an unsafe archive, a permission failure, or a failure
after the merge started writing.
- The existing step-diagnostic test now uses failures that persist
across retries. It still expects one diagnostic per failed step.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/context/ToastContext.test.tsx
src/components/ExecutionBlockerNotice.test.tsx
src/context/LiveUpdatesProvider` (120 tests pass).
- `tsc --noEmit` for adapter-utils passes. `node
scripts/check-token-gates.mjs` is clean.
- Not fully run: the full adapter-utils suite has two failures in
`github-launcher*.test.ts`. They read the managed GitHub credentials of
the local sandbox environment and do not touch restore code. UI `tsc -b`
reports five errors in `PluginOrganizationSwitcher.tsx`, which is not
changed here, because the plugin SDK is not built in a fresh install.

## Risks

- A copy-back that fails before the merge can take about 7 s longer
before it reports a failure. Lock timeouts can take up to about 97 s in
total (three 30 s lock waits plus backoff). Settlement already waits for
the copy-back.
- The retry logic depends on `beforeApply` running before the first host
write in `mergeDirectoryWithBaseline`. That is true today, and a comment
marks it.
- A Git bundle import before the merge can leave unreferenced Git
objects after a retry. They are harmless, and the existing ref cleanup
still runs on each attempt.
- Content-based toast dedupe can hide a second toast with identical text
inside 3.5 s. That is the intended behavior.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`, Anthropic) in the Claude Agent
SDK, with tool use (shell, file edit, code search) and a subagent for
code exploration.

## 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

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip Agent <agent@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-10-11 21:44:11 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 40bb466d78 fix(ui): align chat connection and recovery cards (#15771)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Task pages show external chat connections and recovery notices.
> - These cards use different widths, colors, and spacing.
> - The difference makes related task information harder to scan.
> - This pull request gives these cards one shared surface.
> - The benefit is a consistent task page for chat and email users.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

The external chat banner and recovery notice have different backgrounds,
padding, and widths. The first banner needs more space above it.

**Expected behavior**

Connection, recovery, workspace repair, and task email cards use the
same surface. The chat cards have the same width.

**Steps to reproduce**

Open a task with an external Slack conversation and a recovery notice.
Compare the two cards. Open the Tasks / Context notices story to compare
the updated cards with an AgentMail email card.

## What Changed

- Add a shared token-based surface for task context cards.
- Put chat recovery notices in the same width container as the
connection banner.
- Add space above the connection banner.
- Apply the surface to task email cards and workspace export repair.
- Add a Storybook view with per-card width, color, padding, and corner
checks.
- Give the workspace recovery card its own React key to prevent
duplicate connection banners.

## Verification

- Passed `pnpm check:token-gates`.
- Passed 57 tests for ExecutionBlockerNotice, WorkspaceExportRecovery,
and the external chat banner.
- Passed UI typecheck and UI production build.
- Captured desktop and mobile browser screenshots from the real
components with fixture data. The three cards have equal widths,
backgrounds, padding, and corners.
- Full local typecheck needs Cargo, which is absent in the task
environment. Full tests and build could not complete within the
environment memory limit. Remote typecheck, build, all test shards, and
security checks pass on commit e225a8e47. The Canary Dry Run also
passes. Storybook visual/deploy jobs are skipped by workflow policy.

## Risks

- Low risk. Recovery notices move outside the chat panel. Their actions
and API calls stay the same.
- Verify narrow screens and both task layout modes.

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. Tool use and code execution. The runtime
does not expose an exact model variant 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>
2026-10-10 10:38:26 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip f1c44b7b56 Preserve remote work when required workspace restore fails (#15479)
Persist exact source-retention obligations before run finalization and protect them across cancellation, restart and task changes. Require board-authorized repair evidence without replaying old work or changing current task ownership, state or locks. Hide an unavailable retry action and document operator recovery and retention costs.

Validated with 674 scoped regressions, 224 combined integration tests, full typecheck/build, independent safety reviews and green CI with Greptile 5/5. No historical file recovery is claimed.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-07 13:29:44 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 9b3fe260ba fix(tasks): surface Codex ChatGPT model rejection (#15299)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work.
> - Native Runner runs report provider errors and can also save a structured failure result.
> - Codex rejects a model that the user's ChatGPT account cannot use.
> - Master now diagnoses this rejection, but the task's compact run data omits its message. The thread can still call it a generic run failure.
> - Users need the account restriction and a clear step to repair the model selection.
> - This pull request shows the existing diagnosis as “Model unavailable” on the task.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Codex returns HTTP 400 with `invalid_request_error` and the message `The 'gpt-6.1-sol' model is not supported when using Codex with a ChatGPT account.` Master now stores an actionable diagnosis for this rejection. The task thread still labels it “Run failed” and does not receive its error text in compact run data.

**Expected behavior**

Show the account restriction on the task and in the run error. Tell the user to choose a supported model or clear the task's model override before retrying.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Use a Native Runner Codex agent signed in with a ChatGPT account.
2. Select a model that produces the rejection above and start a task.
3. Let the runner save its generic failed result. Inspect the task's failure marker and recovery notice.

**Additional context**

Refs: #15304. That merged PR diagnoses the provider failure and preserves worker and review recovery rules. This PR adds its task-facing message and guidance without changing that diagnosis or those rules.

Refs: #13134. That PR improves model discovery for ChatGPT accounts. This PR exposes the rejection when a configured model still fails at execution time.

## What Changed

- Return a bounded model rejection message in compact issue-run data.
- Show “Model unavailable” and model-change guidance in the task thread and recovery notice.
- Add database and UI regression tests, including both the original rejection text and master's fixed diagnosis. Document the new failure message.

## Verification

- Focused merged-branch validation: 279 tests passed across activity service, native provider failure observation and PostgreSQL integration, TaskChatThread, and ExecutionBlockerNotice.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `pnpm check:token-gates` passed on the merged source tree.
- Greptile reviewed conflict-resolution commit `1db39c4e636a92e2e76ba224b71c6f1e2f556c81` at 5/5 with no findings or inline comments.
- All 55 check runs completed without failure on that commit. The two optional Storybook jobs were skipped. The legacy Snyk status passed. The branch has no merge conflicts.
- UI regression assertion: the task's failure marker says “Model unavailable” and retains the account restriction. It no longer says that this failure happened after a final response.

## Risks

- Provider recognition and recovery are owned by the existing master implementation. This PR exposes only bounded error text for failed runs with `native_provider_model_rejected`.
- Historical runs with the generic `adapter_failed` code are not reclassified. No stored run is rewritten.
- Existing retry and reconciliation gates remain in place. No schema migration or model configuration change is required.

## Model Used

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

## Checklist

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

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-06 08:05:25 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip cc67d4e1d8 fix: preserve steering and recover stopped task conversations (#15015)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - A task conversation must let a user guide a running agent and resume
stopped work.
> - The active run owns its input protocol, even when the user changes
the next model or effort.
> - Queue delivery waits for a provider receipt, which must be able to
persist during the request.
> - A stopped startup also needs a clear user action that passes normal
task admission.
> - This pull request fixes steering delivery, makes queue actions
immediate, and restores explicit continuation.
> - The benefit is a responsive conversation that can recover without
losing saved input.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A queued message could change from Steer to Interrupt while a native run
prepared. A steer request could wait on its own database lock and fail
to deliver. A stopped startup could then leave the conversation without
a working Retry or message continuation. Interrupt also waited for the
server and showed a toast.

**Expected behavior**

The active run keeps its input protocol. Steer delivers input to that
run. Steer and Interrupt clear the submitted queue rows and show the
input in the conversation immediately. Failed delivery restores the
latest queue with an inline error. An eligible stopped run offers Retry,
and authenticated user input can start a fresh turn through normal task
admission.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Start a task with a native Paperclip Runner.
2. Change the selected model or effort while that run prepares.
3. Queue a message and press Steer.
4. Observe the provider receipt and queue state during the request.
5. Stop a startup before its provider process begins, then try Retry or
send a new message.
6. Repeat queued delivery with a legacy runner and press Interrupt.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced on the parent of this branch, `59c07ede7`.

**Deployment mode**

Authenticated private deployment. The fixes also cover local task
conversations.

Related work: Refs #12834, Refs #13354, Refs #13275. The open refactor
in #13160 moves the same queue route; it does not fix the receipt lock
or stopped-run continuation addressed here.

## What Changed

- Select queue behavior from the active run's immutable dispatch and
runtime resolution.
- Leave the run row unlocked during provider acknowledgement, then lock
and read it before merging the receipt.
- Retain queued input if the target run stops during that wait. Keep
inline delivery errors visible after empty queue updates.
- Permit exact Retry and authenticated continuation after verified
native startup cancellation. Preserve pause, approval, budget,
ownership, and process-stop gates.
- Carry undelivered native queue input into a fresh turn once the old
execution is confirmed stopped.
- Show Steer and Interrupt input in the conversation and clear submitted
composer rows immediately. Restore the latest queue inline on failure.
Remove delivery toasts.
- Keep optimistic delivery stable across stale polls, empty queues, and
paginated history. Preserve classic Interrupt error handling.
- Document recovery and optimistic delivery behavior. Add regression
tests across server, shared queue projection, and UI boundaries.

## Verification

- Red-green regression tests reproduced the queue protocol, receipt
lock, stopped-startup continuation, and optimistic delivery failures.
- The focused server route, continuation, queue, and runner boundary
suites passed during implementation.
- The queue-route suite passes with 78 tests. The three complete
conversation UI suites pass with 347 tests.
- UI typecheck, production build, and `pnpm check:token-gates` pass.
- Workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. The local
monolithic `pnpm test:run` is still running; remote CI verifies the
complete suite on the latest commit.
- All CI gates pass on `bd9031ad56abfcde13d13a13488c1b9217c2fd3a`,
including the full test shards, runner verification, browser E2E,
typecheck, release registry, and canary dry run.
- Greptile reports 5/5 for that commit. Both review threads are
resolved.

## Risks

This changes queue display and explicit continuation admission. The UI
must restore rejected delivery without losing other-session edits. The
server must preserve concurrent provider result updates and must not
resume a process whose stop is uncertain. Focused tests cover these
boundaries. This change has no database migration.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, an agent based on GPT-6. The exact runtime model ID and
context window are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning,
repository tools, code execution, and browser inspection.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-02 22:07:14 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 7a52dcdc74 fix: repair MCP validation and cancelled execution recovery (#14951)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The tool gateway gives agents access to connected services. Recovery
controls what happens when a run stops.
> - Generated tool names can exceed the provider limit after the MCP
client adds its prefix.
> - The same invalid definition can fail each automatic retry. A
cancelled run can also hold saved messages without showing its cause.
> - This pull request bounds tool names, stops configuration retries,
and retains cancellation evidence.
> - It shows the stopped run and admits saved input only after the
existing safety checks pass.
> - The benefit is a clear recovery path that preserves operator Stop
and prevents duplicate message delivery.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A long connected MCP tool name makes the provider reject the entire
request. Automatic recovery repeats the invalid request. Separately,
unexpected legacy cancellations can leave saved input behind a recovery
hold. The notice does not identify the stopped run or its cause.

**Expected behavior**

Complete MCP names fit the provider limit. Tool-definition errors
require configuration repair. Cancelled runs retain their source and
reason. The recovery notice shows the cause and saved-message count.
Verified unexpected cancellations can start a fresh turn through the
existing admission checks.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Assign an App gallery connection with a long application key and tool
name to a Claude agent.
2. Start a run. The provider rejects a name over 128 characters,
including its MCP prefix.
3. For cancellation recovery, stop a legacy provider turn without an
operator Stop request and send a user message while the recovery hold is
active.
4. Inspect the recovery notice and the deferred message queue.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Rebased onto master at `cf8ad63c806685bfd7c48e3ed4a919d61a7c55f1`.

**Deployment mode**

Hosted or self-hosted server with legacy Claude or Codex execution.

Related public work:

- Refs #14017. That PR caps name segments. This PR preserves existing
short names and uses stable hash aliases for long complete names. It
also covers classification and recovery.
- Refs #4510. That PR adds a cancellation-source column. This PR records
bounded evidence in the existing run result, without a migration.
- Refs #12552 and #4506. Those PRs suppress recovery after operator
cancellation. This PR preserves operator intent and uses the existing
continuation gates.

## What Changed

- Bound gateway names with the full provider prefix in the 128-character
budget. Retain the original upstream tool name for dispatch and
permissions.
- Classify invalid tool definitions as configuration failures before
diagnostic redaction. Stop automatic retries and continuation attempts
for that error code.
- Persist cancellation source, expectedness, initiator, reason, and
time. Preserve recorded Stop intent when adapter results arrive. Report
unexpected started cancellations with closed diagnostic labels.
- Show the run cause, saved-message count, and Inspect run link. Offer
Continue for eligible unexpected cancellations. Require verified
provider stop, empty tool inventory, ownership, and the existing pause,
budget, approval, and dependency gates. Use the existing queue for
single delivery.
- Add regression coverage and update the execution, MCP gateway, and
run-log documentation.

## Verification

- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passed.
- Ran `pnpm test:run` and completed its workspace and serialized groups.
Initial resource and timing failures passed on isolated reruns. All 149
serialized route suites passed.
- Reran the changed server, adapter, and UI suites after the rebase.
Coverage includes long-name upstream dispatch, configuration retry
suppression, cancellation evidence retention, privacy labels, oversized
run projection, and concurrent saved-message delivery.
- `pnpm test:e2e tests/e2e/legacy-failure-continuation.spec.ts` passed
all six browser scenarios. The recovery notice shows the run cause and
inspection link, and each recovery entry point reaches one new response.
- Added database-backed checks for active, removed, paused, unavailable,
and disabled chat connections. The final continuation and
recovery-notice suites passed 167 tests. Externally bound chats hide
board Continue and show a usable next action.
- All 55 GitHub checks passed on
`42afbf1371dcaeb72646e3d8f65c19ff7cddf8de`. Two unrelated Storybook jobs
were skipped by their normal conditions. Greptile reviewed that commit
at 5/5 with no findings and no open review threads.

## Risks

- Long tool names change to aliases. Existing short names stay
compatible. The original connection and upstream name remain the
dispatch authority.
- Invalid tool definitions no longer get automatic retries. An operator
must repair the configuration before a new attempt.
- Continuation changes apply only to positively identified unexpected
legacy cancellations with complete empty tool inventory. Operator Stop,
unknown historical cancellations, outstanding tools, and unverified
provider termination keep their holds.
- No database migration. The added projection fields are optional.
Cancellation reason and initiator IDs remain local run evidence; Sentry
receives only closed source and initiator-type labels and expectedness.

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository editing, shell
execution, and GitHub tool use. The runtime does not expose the exact
model variant 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>
2026-10-02 13:47:59 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 5842185e4f fix: surface native cleanup quarantine and add chat qualification evals (#13775)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and their work.
> - Agent Chat needs reliable native execution before native runners
become the onboarding default.
> - Existing stories covered idle reassignment and controller restart,
but not an executing worker handoff or worker process loss.
> - Status answer tests also need to reject stale claims and invented
facts.
> - This pull request adds six opt-in full-stack cells with independent
state assertions and retained evidence.
> - The probes exposed a misleading Retry across server projection and
recovery-banner paths; the fix reports the blocked recovery honestly.
> - The tests preserve failures without changing recovery policy,
production prompts, or onboarding defaults.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #13762. Related: #13765 (Retry targets the latest failed attempt),
#13753 (task context ownership), #13746 (native recovery work).

## What Changed

- Add active reassignment with saved draft and plan preservation,
old-worker cancellation, and successor completion checks.
- Preserve recovery-needed projection when native cleanup fails before
its coordinator exists, refuse a generic retry that would immediately
fail again, and replace the recovery banner's misleading Retry with
Inspect run.
- Add verified local worker process loss with a required successful
continuation; retain a failing qualification result when recovery is
unavailable, while independently verifying the UI/API refuse doomed
retries.
- Add two-turn factual answer checks for current blockers, stale claims,
inactive backlog work, and unknown facts. Retain prose for separate
semantic review.
- Add positive and negative oracle calibration and document fault
isolation, cleanup, billing, and qualification limits.

## Verification

- Eval TypeScript check passes.
- All 442 eval support tests pass locally. The 89 focused server tests
and server typecheck pass. Six recovery-banner UI tests and token gates
pass.
- Initial new-cell campaign:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35657128077. All
six results are retained; four failed on fixture-contract issues and two
exposed real worker cleanup quarantine.
- All 26 existing native onboarding cells:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35656761484 (26/26
passed on master 846336e5a, all cleanup passed).
- Intermediate handoff/fault campaign:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35657945095 (four
retained failures: two overly strict draft oracles, two real crash
quarantines).
- Final active handoff:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35659014397 (2/2
passed on cf6d4ae3a; both cleanup passed).
- Clarified answer-quality fixtures:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35658262695 (2/2
passed on 4a26f10be; both cleanup passed; all four answers semantically
reviewed).
- Quarantine guard regression campaign:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35659580100 (both
API requests correctly refused with 409/no second run, but exposed a
separate misleading Retry in the recovery banner and a fixture wait on a
non-admitted run).
- Final quarantine guard verification:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35661067305
(147e42f7e: both providers verify Inspect run/no Retry, HTTP 409, one
retained run, unchanged saved plan, and successful disposable cleanup.
Both evals intentionally remain red with
`worker_crash_recovery_unqualified`; no successful continuation exists).
The preceding campaign 35658772755 never ran provider cases because
GitHub artifact finalization returned HTTP 403.
- Full repository CI passes on 147e42f7e: typecheck, tests, build, and
browser gates. One unchanged local-service-supervisor readiness test
failed initially; its six-test file passed in isolation and the failed
shard passed on its single rerun. Latest-head rollup: 54 successful, 2
intentionally skipped, no failed or pending checks. Greptile is 5/5 with
zero unresolved findings.
- See tests/runner-e2e/QUALIFICATION-2026-09-21.md for retained attempts
and semantic review. Published reports:
[onboarding](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-35656761484-1/),
[handoff](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-35659014397-1/),
[grounded
answers](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-35658262695-1/),
[crash guards and unqualified
recovery](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-35661067305-1/).

## Risks

- Paid cells are explicit-only and local-only. The fault fixture signals
only the exact native run PID after checking its identity.
- Live worker-loss probes currently fail on cleanup quarantine for both
providers. The eval must remain red until there is a usable recovery,
even when preservation and refusal checks pass. Verified cleanup with a
fresh attempt versus exact-session resume remains a product decision.
- Structured facts alone do not qualify prose quality; semantic review
remains separate.
- Onboarding uses the existing runtime switch after the real wizard and
before provider execution. Native UI selection and public defaults
remain unchanged.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact served 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>
2026-09-21 18:13:01 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 36dbb7ed1c fix: harden agent chat runner tools and recovery (#13678)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agent Chat turns discussion into plans, tasks, reviews, and hires.
> - These workflows need reliable tool results and task context on the
native runner.
> - Live Claude and Codex tests exposed lost retry requests, invalid
project inputs, and a child startup crash.
> - Recovery also exposed a misleading retry action and missing child
task context.
> - This pull request fixes those paths and adds regression coverage.
> - Agents can continue the original request and operators can inspect a
stopped run.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A failed Agent Chat retry could lose the user's question. Project
creation accepted unsupported icons in its tool schema. Codex could stop
when a helper's MCP startup event arrived before its thread lineage. A
stopped task offered Retry even when the server required execution
reconciliation. Resumed agents could miss existing delegated tasks.
Hiring and review instructions did not describe the native runner's
available tools and source requirements.

**Expected behavior**

Retries retain the selected request. Tool schemas match the API. Child
startup information does not gain authority over the parent or stop it.
Recovery actions match the server's requirements. Task context exposes
existing child work. Handoffs contain the material the assignee needs.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Enable experimental Agent Chat in an isolated development instance.
2. Configure native Codex and ACPX Claude agents on Paperclip Runner.
3. Ask for a plan, revise it, approve task creation, and request a hire
and status report.
4. Retry a failed chat turn and check that it answers the original
request.
5. Start a Codex helper before its thread lineage arrives.
6. Resume a delegated task and inspect its existing children and saved
output.

**Paperclip version or commit**

The live failures were found at `f2c5e54dc`. This branch is rebased onto
`86b7ee992`.

**Deployment mode**

Isolated local development instance with native Codex and ACPX Claude.
No database migration or default permission change.

Related work: Refs #13284 for Agent Chat. Refs #13438 for the
server-side API receipt fix, which this branch preserves. The transport
also accepts the earlier HTTP receipt format. Refs #13655 for the
current Codex continuation and helper lineage handling, which this
branch also preserves.

## What Changed

- Preserve failed Agent Chat wake-comment IDs and session generation
from the authorized source run. Reject pre-reset retries.
- Wrap API receipts with the correct semantic call identity. Test
current and earlier receipt formats through real HTTP and runnerd.
- Classify early child MCP startup notifications as information. Keep
foreign completion and result events rejected.
- Constrain project icons on both tool surfaces and regenerate the
protocol contracts.
- Include bounded, company-scoped visible direct child tasks in task
context. Filter hidden tasks before applying the limit.
- Replace the rejected Retry action with Inspect run for native
continuation reconciliation.
- Update hiring, review handoff, status reporting, and development
guidance.

## Verification

- Live tests covered Claude and Codex questions, plan revisions,
approval, task creation, hiring, status, chat reset, failures, and
recovery.
- The recovered task produced its saved checklist and example. A later
follow-up read the existing child tasks and document without creating
more work.
- Full build, repository type checks, token gates, 142 focused tests,
188 runner TypeScript tests, and the Rust notification/descendant
regressions passed after rebase. The separate local full-suite run was
stopped after the complete CI suite passed.
- Review fixes passed the updated route, tool-authority, and icon
regression tests plus server type checking.
- Required commands: `pnpm build`, `pnpm -r typecheck`,
`PAPERCLIP_IN_WORKTREE=false pnpm test:run`, and `pnpm
check:token-gates`.
- At `4ce8047b0`, all 55 applicable GitHub checks pass (two Storybook
checks are intentionally skipped), including the complete
general/serialized test matrix, runner tests, browser tests, build, type
checks, Docker checks, and canary dry run.
- Fresh Greptile review is 5/5 on `4ce8047b0`; all three findings were
fixed with regressions and there are no unresolved review threads.
- Two initial CI service-startup timeouts passed unchanged in local
reproductions and in the latest CI run.

## Risks

- The new event classification is limited to MCP startup information. It
does not authorize foreign task completion, results, or tool requests.
- Task context returns at most 100 direct child tasks and reports
truncation. It excludes hidden tasks and other companies. This improves
delegation context but does not enforce semantic duplicate detection.
- Native reconciliation still requires an operator to inspect and record
prior outcomes. The new link does not replace the recovery API.
- API tools remain opt-in. Claude permission choices remain explicit. No
default permission, schema, or workflow changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 in Codex, with reasoning, repository editing, code
execution, API tools, and browser testing. The exact deployment
identifier and context-window size are not exposed in this session. Live
acceptance agents used OpenAI `gpt-5.6-sol` and Anthropic
`claude-sonnet-4-6`.

## 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>
2026-09-19 09:11:04 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 6cef9743c0 fix: deliver saved user messages after recovery stops (#13327)
Deliver saved user messages after legacy recovery stops. Validate undelivered comments and queue ownership under the task lock, preserve the operator identity checks from #13315, and prevent duplicate successors.

Add a recovery notice with Retry and inline errors, plus service, route, component, and browser coverage.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-12 18:08:04 -05:00