4 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
3 people	df6156c2e3	fix(server): wake native status reassessment from committed changes (#17709) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents, tasks and their durable native results. > - Changed evidence, task authority or review retirement can require a new status assessment. > - Periodic orphan recovery repeatedly reads history to find these changes. > - This change gives reassessment an owner driven by committed changes and saved deadlines. > - Existing result, assessment, decision and task rows remain durable truth. > - The status committer still verifies current sources and authority before writing. > - Settled or insufficient evidence becomes quiet until a supported producer changes it. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17702 (merged), #17679 and #17680. This is slice 50, now based on master. It owns native status reassessment; workspace settlement, retained sessions and other orphan duties remain separate. **What happened?** Periodic recovery repeatedly inspects completed native results. Removing that scan without complete writer coverage or current authority checks could strand new evidence or commit an old result over newer work. **Expected behavior** Reassess from existing durable facts after relevant outer transactions commit. Retain real retry/lease deadlines and restart/drain recovery. Preserve current authority, quality-review and supersession checks. Make no recurring SQL when work is settled or dormant. **Steps to reproduce** Complete a native result awaiting evidence or review, leave it idle, then approve a real work product or retire the selected automatic review. Its saved result should advance once when authorized, or record the existing nonterminal business gate, without a periodic scan. ## What Changed - Extract reassessment and its pure status policy from finalization recovery into their owning modules. Add a scoped worker using the existing delivery coordinator and scheduler; no queue table or migration is added. - Retain the three durable discovery triggers: changed work-product history, authoritative task status/version, or retirement of the selected automatic completion review. Preserve selected-source, ownership, effects, retry and lease fences under the existing committer. - Notify from actual task/work-product, claim release, approval, interaction, OAuth, event evidence and workspace-settlement owners before their transaction writes. Keep provider calls outside short transactions and nested writes behind outer commit. - Scope ordinary milestone/finalization/coalesced-input wakes to an issue/run. Keep genuine company authority restoration explicit. Real Photon and coalescer regressions cover all three response/status queues. - Move the current parent's required quality policy into the owner and apply it to every reassessment that could complete a task. An unmet review records the existing in-progress decision and next action, avoiding an operational retry loop. Preserve conversation/session reset locks and the workspace omission-barrier signal. - Skip reassessment in periodic recovery while preserving explicit/startup recovery and the historical supersession guard before independent workspace work. Document the source contract, producer inventory, failures and qualifications in the linked audit. ## Verification - Broad source `9fddb3f0b1157df32b64fb1f22e9d6e9624470e8` passes **2731 distinct cases in 28 complete files**, with no skips: 2458 producer/owner/authority/workspace/quality cases in 394.43 seconds and all 273 governed-response cases in 53.74 seconds. Nineteen dedicated fresh PostgreSQL 17 databases migrate through 0413; eighteen embedded-only invocations preserve fresh-per-call isolation through the existing recovery helper. All 22 temporary imports restore exactly and all 28 hashes match. - Final runtime source `5ea3b0fd016bf7e63ba82a7044825a46a0cd2082` passes **1211 cases in five complete affected files** in 108.23 seconds after the narrowly reproduced evidence-trigger fix: all 43 worker, 145 corpus, 32 finalization-recovery, 968 native-session and 23 quality-review cases. Four fresh databases plus the quality helper's own fresh fixture use PostgreSQL 17. Its one adapted import restores exactly; all five hashes match. The other 27 broad-run test files are unchanged. These qualifications are source-scoped and not cumulatively double-counted. - Required/optional real regressions reproduce retry loops on retired-review and evidence-approval paths before repair; both become SQL quiet afterward with unchanged assertions/time limits. Controlled removal of only ordinary scope guards reproduces two coarse-hint SQL failures; exact guard restoration passes. Real producer, outer transaction, claim, authority, 103-item backlog, retry and drain cases pass. Photon transport is mocked; callbacks, locks and observed SQL are real. - Normal merges preserve 12661 parent/unrelated entries, 35 owned entries and 21 automatic shared results, with five original conflicts reviewed explicitly. The parent's actual squash reconciliation preserves the entire held child tree. The final quality fix changes only its owner and tests. Fourteen added comments are removed with identical nontrivia tokens; no directives are removed and the final comment check is empty. - Database build, server types/build, boundaries and exact-head migration order pass. The database tree is identical to merged #17702: no new SQL, queue table or snapshot is generated. Earlier benchmarks, host limitations, failed assertions and their repairs remain in `doc/plans/2026-10-26-native-status-reassessment-sleep-audit.md` and `doc/idle-native-status-reassessment.md`. - This qualifies targeted external PostgreSQL behavior, not embedded bootstrap on the semaphore-exhausted host, a full local repository suite, deployed sleep or measured fleet savings. Fresh exact-head CI and review remain required. ## Risks - Notifications retain the process-local supported-writer contract. Independent SQL writers and uncoordinated replicas are not covered by a new transport. - Reassessment competes with current authority changes. Existing row/source locks and retries remain required; arbitrary missing identities have no row to lock, so this is not a general predicate-lock guarantee. - Discovery pages 100 rows but retains outstanding candidates in memory. It remains proportional to backlog size, and cancellation occurs between queries. - Other orphan/workspace/session duties and Cloud sleep eligibility remain unchanged. Missing supported producer coverage could strand dormant work, so the producer audit and real callback/transaction tests remain part of acceptance. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools, shell execution and PostgreSQL tests. The runtime does not expose a more specific serving snapshot or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (targeted scope is stated 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> Co-authored-by: Codex <noreply@openai.com>	2026-10-29 03:40:01 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	73d24aa5ac	fix(server): schedule automatic completion review retirement (#17680) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native finalization preserves accepted work and resolves task status. > - A historical cleanup removes automatic completion-review cards that current policy no longer creates. > - The periodic finalization pass repeats that lookup even after all matching cards are gone. > - This PR gives this cleanup its own committed hints and pending-card retries. > - The existing owner retains withdrawal receipts and protects genuine reviews. > - Idle history stops causing recurring cleanup reads. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17679. This is a separate stacked slice for automatic completion-review retirement. Obsolete version-change reviews belong to the parent PR. **What needs to be improved?** `reconcileNativeFinalizations` repeatedly discovers old automatic completion reviews. The discovery helper also converts SQL errors to an empty result, which would let a new event-driven worker forget failed reconstruction. **Why is this improvement important?** Idle tenants should not query for absent cleanup work. Failed discovery must preserve the retry, and removing a historical card must preserve the durable trigger for later evidence reassessment. **Proposed solution** Use the existing card, decision, effect, assessment and contract rows. Reconstruct candidates at startup, signal the existing decision commit, and retry exact pending cards. Keep the direct cleanup call inside active finalization. ROADMAP.md and the related native review work were inspected; this change owns the scheduling migration only. ## What Changed - Add automatic completion-review registration to the shared scoped deadline worker. Reconstruct 100-row keyset pages and dispatch fair batches of twenty. - Signal company/issue IDs before the native decision transaction writes. Keep outer-transaction settlement with the existing work-signal boundary. - Split raw discovery from the public helper's compatibility error handling. Worker lookup failures propagate so the shared scheduler retains dirty scope and retry. - Reuse the complete historical predicate and existing withdrawal owner. Recheck the selected card identity, payload and system author fields in the conditional update. - Preserve the withdrawal reason, chat publication, activity record, direct finalizer call, startup/manual recovery, and subsequent evidence reassessment. - Skip only this duty in periodic reaping. Retain admission, drain/standby, retry and joined shutdown. - Add producer/lifecycle documentation. Add no table, schema migration, provider branch or independent timer. ## Verification - Current source `3f4d35ac0154aedc76cc39486d3758c73b1e6ff4`: all 462 cases across seven complete files pass with no skips in 49.31 seconds. This covers both review workers through the real status-authority corpus, startup/timing, recovery, finalization, external chat and governed milestones. Nested corpus fixtures are not double-counted. - Five separate fresh PostgreSQL fixtures migrated through parent 0409 before setup. Database build, server typecheck/build, module boundaries and target migration order pass. The whole database source tree matches the parent; no migration or table is added. - Normal integration preserves substantive owned edits and unrelated upstream blobs. Actual landed-parent ancestry and fresh current-head Greptile 5/5 and clean CI remain required. This is worker and integration acceptance, not deployed sleep qualification. - The inherited P2 fix changes only two fixture prefix values. All production code, other fixtures, assertions and timing limits are unchanged. The full 72-case corpus also passes again on the same database in 12.95 seconds. Retained PSC/OUT rows and an unrelated sentinel remain unchanged after both runs. The repeat is not double-counted among the 462 distinct cases. The parent audit retains the original collision and rejected cleanup attempt. - CI correction: the 40f head fails the passive native-presentation initial idle observation in chat shard 1. An unchanged local pair passes. A controlled committed hint plus a 600 ms held run attempt makes the original one-second observation fail; the identical probe passes with the established five-second observation bound. This demonstrates the coalescing boundary, not the unrecorded exact CI token timeline. No unchanged-head CI retry was used. - The probe is removed. The only permanent code change is that initial poll bound. It still requires zero active work and no deadline, followed by two minutes with no SQL, transaction or provider writes. Production code, worker/business deadlines, rollback and committed-settlement assertions are unchanged. All 274 cases in the named GitHub agent-review workflow pass in 232.06 seconds. Other cases in the large file are outside that named selection. The earlier 462-case selection retains identical source. Both owning audits preserve the failure and scope limits. Fresh updated-head CI and reviews remain required. - Master integration: independent master `49fe8b87a49aa5a8985a08dd3d5ce57bdd24756c` adds one company-skill cleanup assertion. A normal merge preserves both complete binary patches. All production code and the accepted GitHub integration file are unchanged. The full six-case cleanup-removal suite passes in 8.16 seconds on fresh PostgreSQL. Database history is unchanged. ## Risks - A normal native decision can cause one scoped lookup even when it creates no historical card. It retains no periodic scan when settled. - Startup reconstruction cost scales with historical data and joins. No constant-cost or fleet-savings claim is made. - Process-local signals cover instrumented writers. Independent SQL writers and concurrent older controllers need explicit integration. - Retirement and status reassessment are distinct obligations. The existing durable withdrawal receipt and remaining finalization owner are preserved. - Failed withdrawals retain retries while exact pending cards remain. A database lookup failure must not be interpreted as completion. - Other finalization and recovery duties remain. Cloud wake coverage and host-sleep eligibility are unchanged. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, shell tools, and PostgreSQL tests. The runtime does not expose a more precise model ID or context-window size for this turn. ## 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 Remote acceptance: head `be668fb975f119efeb4830405d4bb1ab65791f87` has 53 successful gates, verified with `gh pr checks` (no non-passing checks). Greptile reviewed that head at 5/5. There are no unresolved review threads. The PR remains draft and unmerged. Current published head `181bf800a79449961e09c995f2785dd7f8060bb3` has passing CI, fresh Greptile 5/5 and Ponytail 5/5 with no actionable findings. Earlier failures remain recorded in the audits. --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-28 23:40:45 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	5f0da562db	fix(server): wake chat lifecycle milestones from committed changes (#17606) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Connected chats show safe notices when a run starts, waits, finishes, or fails. > - A recurring scan projected these notices even when no eligible work existed. > - Eligibility depends on committed run state, conversation lineage, and current authority. > - Existing database rows can reconstruct that work after restart. > - This PR wakes a scoped worker from those writes and removes lifecycle polling. > - Native progress events keep their separate existing owner until the next migration. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** The chat maintenance timer repeatedly scanned run lifecycle state. Empty and settled instances still queried the database. A run-status event alone cannot replace the scan: prompt receipts, continuation receipts, identity changes, and restored authority can make a run eligible later. **What did you expect?** Committed changes wake projection. Startup reconstructs eligible work. A completed pass stops until another relevant change arrives. Failed work retains recovery without scanning settled history forever. **Steps to reproduce** Configure an automatic chat endpoint. Finish its work, or leave it unused. Observe recurring lifecycle projection queries from the chat maintenance callback. Stacked on #17592. Related foundation: #15625. This PR owns lifecycle milestones only. ## What Changed - Preserve upstream coalesced Cloud membership writes together with locked membership restoration and its committed chat notification. - Signal milestone eligibility from the real Slack account-link transaction. - Register the lifecycle worker with the existing delivery coordinator. Remove lifecycle projection from the periodic chat callback. Keep native progress in a separately named lane and preserve the explicit combined API. - Reconstruct company/issue scopes from the existing selector. Drain bounded batches with company fairness. Retry failures, retain writes through drain/resume, and disarm settled work. - Signal from supported run, presentation, interaction, receipt, lineage, conversation, recovery, and authority writers. Preserve their transaction ownership, including nested savepoints and uncertain settlement. No new table is added. - Preserve provider authorization, authored-final suppression, responsible-user continuity, deduplication, the 24-hour selection window, and raw-output restrictions. Keep provider interpretation in its owner. - Preserve PostgreSQL timestamp precision in lifecycle pagination. Rejected submillisecond candidates must not repeat the same page and starve later notices. - Document producer coverage and alternate-writer dispositions in `doc/plans/2026-10-25-chat-run-milestone-sleep-audit.md`. ## Verification Published head: `1d056f68c5b1005933b9e12de8745bf1c4cbeeca`, targeting master after #17592 merged at `7d75ae0569e41786640cf09647ae8849411d2f22`. A normal merge integrates the actual landed parent. The entire 77-path milestone patch is binary-identical to the locally verified preparation across that ancestry reconciliation; both unrelated master paths are preserved. The four earlier producer/test integration conflicts retain scoped milestone and voice notices, current onboarding completion admission, and expanded identity query/read-scope coverage. - **330 distinct selected cases pass on the verified unchanged patch:** 305 across 14 complete suites (all five milestone worker suites, run identity, board claim, Cloud provisioning, auth session routes, Cloud actor authentication, stale-lock recovery, GitHub credentials, project Git authorization, and app admission wiring), plus 25 selected real chat producer cases. The remaining 1,590 chat integration cases were skipped, not passed. - The real producer cases cover saved milestone discovery, GitHub and Slack identity changes, account-link rollback/reconfirmation, ordinary ingress reactivation, post-close action/delivery receipt settlement, all ten authority-restoration paths including Cloud synchronization, and changed native review metadata. - Worker coverage verifies outer commit, rollback, uncertain-write recovery, restart, bounded batching/fairness, timestamp precision, retries, drain/resume, and settled SQL quiet. Authorization and existing publication deduplication remain with their owning services. - Server production typechecking, build, and module-boundary checks pass. The tests above were executed separately. Production typechecking excludes `src/__tests__` and does not replace those runs. Each database owner uses its own newly created and app-migrated PostgreSQL fixture. - [Current-parent acceptance and preserved failure ledger](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/1d056f68c5b1005933b9e12de8745bf1c4cbeeca/doc/plans/2026-10-25-chat-run-milestone-sleep-audit.md#current-parent-integration-and-acceptance-october-28) records commands, counts, producer scope, conflict dispositions, and limits. Earlier combined-stack counts and failures keep their original revision scope; local acceptance does not erase old CI failures. - No new migration, queue table, dependency, workflow, or shared scheduler contract is introduced. Parent migration 0397, bounded consent recovery, voice cleanup/retention repairs, and runner checkpoint restoration remain present. - **Exact-head Greptile is 5/5 and all 55 current checks are clean.** No Ponytail review is present, which is an explicitly authorized nonblocker; no failing review is waived. Older reviews and parent checks are not current passes. Actual failing Ponytail findings must be fixed; an absent/stopped/paused turn without a verdict is an authorized nonblocker. Active unfinished Ponytail uses its original request/start timer, with a 25-minute monitor cutoff respecting the user's 30-minute maximum. - No complete local repository matrix, live provider tenant, external alarm, physical host/database suspension, or fleet savings claim is made. Native progress remains a separate following slice. ## Risks - A future eligibility writer must notify the existing projection boundary. Independent SQL writers or another active server process are outside this process-local signal contract. - Authority and lineage remain sensitive. The worker uses the existing selectors and publication policy; it does not grant execution or disclosure authority. - Native progress and other publication maintenance still have recurring work. This PR removes one reason, not the entire chat maintenance timer. - Worker quiet does not prove database suspension, host sleep, or external alarm coverage. Cloud sleep blockers remain unchanged. - Merge eligibility requires passing current-head CI and Greptile 5/5 after this actual-master reconciliation. Subsequent stack slices retain their own gates. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed. Used repository inspection, reasoning, shell execution, PostgreSQL tests, browser E2Es and GitHub tools. ## 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 available in this session) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run the documented focused 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>	2026-10-28 11:07:54 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	c9021c6721	fix: require explicit native completion reviews (#13314) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native runs report their outcome through paperclip_finish. > - The server previously turned incomplete reports into human approval requests. > - Those requests could block a later successful run, even when no person had requested review. > - This pull request creates review cards only for explicit attention requests and withdraws proven old fallback cards. > - Agents receive useful completion feedback, while explicit approval gates and task state protections remain in force. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #13266 removed reviews caused by policy upgrades. This change removes the separate completion fallback. **What happened?** An agent reported needs_review while waiting for checks without requesting a human decision. Paperclip created a generic Native completion review. A later successful report could not complete the task because that old card remained pending. **Expected behavior** Ordinary low-risk work completes after a valid done report, a successful run, and workspace finalization. Incomplete work stays with the agent. Explicit approval requests remain visible and must be resolved. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Complete a native run with needs_review and no attention requests. 2. Continue the task and submit a successful done report. 3. Observe that the old implementation leaves the task in review behind a generic confirmation card. ## What Changed - Require explicit attention requests to create native review cards. Route each request independently and preserve pending or declined decisions. - Withdraw only pending system cards with matching old decision, assessment, effect, contract, and prompt provenance. Preserve history and explicit or answered requests. - Reassess an affected current result without overwriting later task edits, runs, contracts, or workspace failures. - Return pending approval links and required actions through the completion tool. Reject contradictory done reports and empty review requests before accepting a result. - Allow one corrective continuation for incomplete results, then expose a recovery action. - Update status fixtures, database regressions, runner tests, and the completion contract documentation. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed after merging current master. - `pnpm build` passed after merging current master. - The combined branch passed 89 completion and Agent Chat tests. Other targeted tests passed: 170 external-chat and reconciliation tests; 50 runner-resume and control-plane tests; 13 arbiter tests; 7 chat delivery tests; 21 runner completion and runtime-context tests. - The full local test attempt exposed old review fixtures and a missing fake-provider binary. The fixtures are fixed and the helper is built. All affected suites pass in fresh reruns. The timing-sensitive Discord test also passed on rerun. - All latest-head CI checks passed, including build, typecheck, general and serialized tests, runner verification, browser tests, and canary dry run. Greptile is 5/5 with zero unresolved comments. ## Risks - Cleanup changes existing pending cards. It requires exact system provenance and only applies to low-risk agent-claim contracts. It does not delete history or dismiss explicit requests. - Status still commits after the turn and workspace finalization. Completion feedback reports current constraints and does not claim an early status commit. - Incomplete reports now request a bounded corrective run instead of an automatic approval. Repeated failures expose recovery. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with repository inspection, code execution, and test tools. The exact deployment identifier and context window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-09-12 13:00:04 -05:00