Commit Graph
5 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandPaperclip 835a022936 perf(server): wake delivery queues from transaction-aware work signals (#15625)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI-agent work and its delivery to users and
agents.
> - Five delivery queues scan the database even when empty.
> - Each queue already has durable rows; empty polling wastes idle
hosting capacity.
> - Producers can register intent inside their existing database
transaction.
> - Central transaction tracking can wake consumers after the outer
commit without extra caller wrappers.
> - A lost response needs reconciliation against PostgreSQL before an
empty queue is safe to leave idle.
> - This change uses one scheduler for outstanding work and lets
settled, empty queues go quiet.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Supersedes the closed #15614. Related idle-safety work: #15522 and
#15599.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Delivery scheduling for feedback exports, chat completions, connection
continuations, question answers, and tool-action receipts.

**Current behavior**

Feedback scans every five seconds. Four delivery queues scan on the
heartbeat interval, normally 30 seconds. Startup and some event paths
also scan them.

**Proposed behavior**

Each producer awaits one intent registration before its queue write. The
existing `createDb` transaction boundary tracks nested savepoints and
wakes the consumer after outer settlement. Startup scans restore durable
work. Pending rows, failures, and unresolved transactions retain retry
deadlines. Empty, settled queues have no timer or recurring scan.

**Reason and benefit**

Normal delivery starts after commit. Central tracking removes
caller-specific post-commit plumbing. PostgreSQL transaction status
resolves lost responses without new tables or a permanent uncertainty
latch.

**Breaking changes**

No API or schema changes. The notification scope is one DB owner and its
dedicated child pools. Direct SQL, separate roots, and other processes
require an explicit wake/recovery integration. This path requires
PostgreSQL 14+ transaction-information functions; embedded PostgreSQL
uses 18.

## What Changed

- Add one named-deadline scheduler and app-owned coordinator for five
existing queues.
- Instrument `createDb().transaction()` centrally, including nested
savepoints. Dedicated child connections share their owner's signal
scope.
- Register work before the five queue insert paths. The first
registration obtains the outer XID; unrelated transactions issue no
extra SQL. Tool receipt insertion gains a small transaction around its
existing insert.
- Query `pg_xact_status` only for rejected, tracked transactions. Probe
before scanning the queue. Retain the idle hold while PostgreSQL still
reports an in-progress transaction or the probe fails. Release it after
settlement and reconciliation.
- Remove unconditional delivery recovery scans and caller-specific
completion post-commit actions. Retain the existing task-scoped
completion activity fast path and durable claims.
- Coalesce wakes without postponing an earlier deadline. Retry
outstanding rows and failures; suppress dispatch during idle drain while
allowing transaction and queue reconciliation; suppress both during warm
standby. Cancel deadlines and await active delivery sweeps on shutdown.
- Serialize feedback flushes. Vote routes return after saving. Uploads
have a 30-second deadline and shutdown cancellation; unfinished exports
remain recoverable.
- Document the writer contract and update the dated sleep inventory.

## Verification

- Final head: `a4609956841107ad60c4cb50fe2acb05636b1363`.
- Passed: all final-head hosted checks, with 54 successes and two
intentional skips. The full test matrix, typecheck, build, canary, and
aggregate verification passed in [run
37940948440](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37940948440).
- Passed: Greptile 5/5 on the same head, with a successful check run and
zero unresolved review threads. The branch is mergeable.
- Passed locally after the final rebase: 50 coordinator, scheduler, and
startup tests; server typecheck; server build.
- Passed locally before the final import-only rebase: repo-wide
typecheck and build; 237 PostgreSQL producer/delivery and database
signal tests; feedback, native-question, and idle-safety regression
tests.
- Real PostgreSQL tests hold transactions open after an injected client
response loss, then commit or abort. They verify that an empty scan
cannot clear an in-progress transaction. Another test terminates a real
backend and verifies recovery without replay.
- Coordinator tests cover an hour with no empty-queue timers,
pending/error retries, worker replacement, concurrent writes,
earliest-deadline preservation, rollback during idle drain, committed
work during drain, standby, and shutdown.
- Local `pnpm test:run` was started and stopped after embedded
PostgreSQL startup failures appeared. It did not finish and is not
reported as a pass. Later local database reruns had skipped suites;
those skips are not claimed as verification. The earlier PostgreSQL
tests did execute and pass, and the final hosted full matrix passed.

## Risks

- One XID query is added per transaction that registers delivery work.
Nested transactions share that ID. Registration must be awaited before
writing; new enqueue paths must follow this contract.
- Work signals are local to a DB owner and its dedicated child pools.
Independent roots, direct SQL, or other processes are not observed.
Startup scans recover already committed rows, but do not fence late
transactions from a previous process. Cross-process ownership and
database failover require separate work.
- A database outage or genuinely unresolved transaction keeps an idle
hold until status can be reconciled. No timer clears uncertainty by
assumption.
- These changes remove five empty polling loops. They do not implement
whole-instance sleep, database teardown, or an external waker. The
earliest deadline covers only the registered queues.
- Waiting tool reviews retain their existing retry cadence until their
receipts can be delivered.
- Feedback vote responses no longer wait for the remote upload. Sharing
consent and the saved vote response are unchanged.
- Real hosting-provider sleep and cost savings have not been measured.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. Used reasoning, repository inspection, code
editing, and command execution. The runtime did not expose the exact
model revision or context window.

## 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>
2026-10-09 10:01:26 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip d0b67bfe71 feat: queue approvals and answers during active runs (#13539)
## Thinking Path

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

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

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

**What happened?**

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

**Expected behavior**

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

**Steps to reproduce**

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

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced on da8a3876c with the onboarding changes from #13517.

**Deployment mode**

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

## What Changed

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

## Verification

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

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

## Risks

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

## Model Used

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

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-16 14:44:36 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 889947c238 feat: add experimental native chat connectors (#13038)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - People also ask agents for work in their existing chat tools.
> - Each external conversation needs one task and a current authorized
source.
> - Retries, Stop, and provider failures must not duplicate work or
expose private data.
> - The first chat PR establishes the opt-in provider and data
contracts.
> - This PR adds experimental channel integration and its durable
control plane.
> - Users can request work from connected channels and inspect delivery
in Paperclip.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #13100 and #13092. This is the second of exactly two chat PRs.
Foundation #13100 is merged and changed 143 files. Runner prerequisite
#13092 is also merged. This PR changes 400 files against master, below
the 500-file review limit. It contains no wireframe images or HTML
galleries.

## What Changed

- Add native Slack, GitHub, Microsoft Teams, Telegram, and Discord chat
connections. Keep chat disabled unless the operator enables experimental
chat connectors. Preserve the production GitHub tool connection and its
normal setup path.
- Bind each provider bot identity to one immutable Paperclip agent. Bind
each admitted external conversation to one task. Paperclip owns tasks,
runs, permissions, and audit records.
- Add durable admission, per-conversation queues, questions, task
controls, progress, final replies, images, files, and delivery receipts.
Board comments remain internal unless explicitly sent to the channel.
- Check current identity, provider reach, resource access, credentials,
runtime generation, and exact source before provider effects. Keep
private responses private. Never send raw reasoning, private logs,
credentials, or tool arguments.
- Hold uncertain sends for explicit audited resolution. Make Board
Send-to-channel atomic and idempotent. Keep reconnect and setup
credentials in Paperclip secret storage.
- Preserve current native-runner authority across retries, lost
acknowledgements, and recovery. Keep immutable input and completion
contracts separate from newer user input. Receipt reconciliation cannot
launch a provider.
- Reconcile chat close/new ordering and provider-effect lock order.
Audit resource access changes in the same transaction. Submit only the
selected resource from each UI toggle so stale pages cannot undo
unrelated access changes.
- Drain Codex stdout before certifying process exit. Bound the drain
with the existing shutdown grace. Preserve observed terminal authority
without treating an undrained process as successful or reusable.
- Incorporate master `018ca5da` with its ACP Stop, mobile task layout,
runner packaging, and official lock changes. Preserve dedicated
chat-answer continuations in both directions when ordinary queued
comments are adopted after Stop.
- Fence late adapter readiness behind an earlier Stop for the same run.
Preserve verified cleanup for registered adapters. Handle single Stop,
agent pause, duplicate Stops, and failure release without creating a
false cancellation receipt.
- Incorporate master's `6dd48cad4` wake-queue extraction. Preserve exact
failed-chat retry authorization and lineage, retired question-source
suppression, and the block on generic recovery that would discard the
admitted source. Fresh deferred input retains its separate promotion
path.
- Incorporate master `2a05b5ed3` and its queue-admission extraction,
simplified transaction ports, and separate runner CI job. Preserve exact
durable receipts, actor separation, and dedicated-answer isolation
through the new module. A failed receipt insert rolls back the
accompanying deferred-wake merge.

## Verification

Current head: `afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a`, incorporating
master `2a05b5ed3457ea33efd6895520447d1d97fe98d8`. The conflicts are
resolved. This successor fixes two test-harness boundaries exposed by
CI: per-case route-module preparation and actual durable-save completion
before intentional runner termination. Production code and all existing
test/turn deadlines are unchanged. [Exact-head Greptile
review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13038#issuecomment-5587250594)
is **5/5**, completed September 10 at 13:20:55 UTC, with no actionable
findings or open review threads. [Fresh exact-head
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34481724341)
passes **all 24 jobs**, including Build and both required aggregates.
Normal exact-head guarded merge was attempted and rejected by the
remaining branch approval policy: CODEOWNER review is required and no
human approval is present. Normal **squash auto-merge is enabled** as of
September 10 at 13:36:26 UTC. Requested CODEOWNERS have been notified;
no approval bypass or self-approval was used. Earlier-head results below
remain historical evidence, not qualification of this successor.

- Final exact-head Linux evidence: 995/995 chat integration cases; 36/36
agent-skills routes; 35/35 runner live-session cases, including real
process kill/resume; 1948 runner Vitest cases with three existing
benchmark/platform guards; 870/870 API-authority cases; and 104 browser
cases with four existing optional skips. Rust, conformance/replay, full
repository build, typecheck, canary, all server/workspace shards, and
both required aggregates pass with normal CI concurrency. Earlier failed
attempts remain recorded below.

- Latest test-only qualification: 141/141
route/permissions/authentication cases pass in separate cold forks, with
plain server types and independent review clear. The real-runner suite
passes 35/35, with plain runner types and independent review clear. A
controlled premature-save acknowledgement fails as expected; matching
ownership/effect/process evidence, rejected saves, real turn outcome,
test abort, and pre-kill liveness are covered. No local reproduction of
the original CI scheduling failure is claimed. The preceding [CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34479680858)
passes 21/24 jobs, including all 995 Linux chat cases and browser
aggregate (104 passed, four existing optional skips); only Build, the
skills serialized shard, and the required verification aggregate fail.
Its exact-head Greptile review was 5/5. Both failed job logs are
retained.

- Final fixture qualification: all eight focused Discord cases and all
995 chat integration cases pass. The exact modal statement/PID is
observed before taking the real connection lock; the test then proves
its actual blocking relationship before mutation. Original SQL
execution, provider behavior, negative assertions, and 1s/15s timeouts
remain unchanged. Independent review is clear and test/production hashes
remain frozen. The preceding [CI
attempt](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34477184777)
passed 22 jobs, including Build/runner, typecheck, canary, all other
test shards, and browser aggregate (104 passed, four existing optional
skips); the two fixture failures and failed verification aggregate
remain recorded, not relabeled as a pass.

- Current queue-module composition: 308/308 recovery/batching/queue/Stop
tests; 995/995 full chat integration; 89/89 module tests, including real
PostgreSQL receipt-insert rollback; 24/24 workflow/module-boundary
tests; plain server and UI types. All four actual local process/ACP
browser paths pass in 1.4 minutes. Fresh databases, no skips or retries,
stable reviewed source hashes. The initial boundary failure is retained;
its no-op service wrapper was removed without changing recovery context
or weakening the check. An exploratory standalone test-directory
typecheck fails because its new upstream transformation config is not a
standalone typechecking project; standard CI/build does not invoke it,
and no configuration was weakened to suppress those diagnostics.

- The preceding head `e02a63d462ce5d47433b0aeb632bb6fd20aab1ba` passed
[all 24 CI
jobs](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34436462958)
and exact-head Greptile review at 5/5. Required CODEOWNER review
prevented its normal merge before master advanced again.

- Final extracted-module composition: 307/307 recovery, batching, queue
and Stop-control tests; 995/995 full chat integration; 49/49 module
tests including eight PostgreSQL adapter cases; and 19/19 issue-update
tests. Plain server types pass. All four actual local process/ACP
browser paths pass in 1.3 minutes. Fresh databases, no skips or retries
in these cohorts, frozen source hashes, and independent review clear.

- The preceding head `3e4e1c1c` passes [all PR CI
jobs](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34415826820),
including Build and required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`. Both the
original Rust failure and the previously load-sensitive lineage fixture
pass with unchanged Linux concurrency. Master advanced afterward and
required this reconciliation.
- Final master composition: 448/448 focused UI tests, 186/186 adapter
tests, 24/24 queue/control tests, and 11/11 packaging tests. Plain UI,
server, shared, and adapter types pass. Token gates and diff checks
pass. Independent server and UI reviews are clear.
- Stop-registration regression: both real-service cases fail against
exact `a95` source and pass with the fix. The full corrected
recovery/control suite passes 265/265. Duplicate-owner and failed-Stop
controls also pass. Plain server types pass. The readiness barrier
prevents provider startup without adding an acknowledgment to an already
terminal run.
- Final qualification strengthens terminal-field equality and repeats
both affected cases successfully on a fresh database. All four actual
local process/ACP browser paths pass again in 1.3 minutes, without skips
or retries. The final screenshot shows Cancelled, a paused subtree,
retained input, and no error toast.
- Two new actual-service regressions fail before the merge fix. They
prove that queued-comment adoption could consume a dedicated chat answer
or add unrelated input to that answer. The fixed four-case cohort
passes, including ordinary upstream continuation and adapter Stop
controls. Full recovery passes 257/257. All four actual local
process/ACP Stop browser flows pass in 1.4 minutes, without skips or
retries, on a fresh database.
- The unchanged runner artifact was qualified with 171/171 transport
tests, 870/870 API-authority tests, conformance 1/1, and replay 11/11.
Six controlled reader tests prove the exit/drain repair. Its local
serial Rust workspace passed 546 top-level cases plus two invoked
helpers; the later passing Linux CI supplies default-concurrency
evidence.
- Prior exact-source full chat integration passes 995/995. Settings
regressions cover concurrent stale pages, 501 destinations, pending
state, rejected updates, and explicit retry. These deterministic tests
do not prove live provider behavior.
- Retained failed attempts and their causes are in the [qualification
log](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a/doc/plans/chat-adapters/2026-09-08-chat-queue-and-webhook-repair.md).
The first merge adapter run timed out while macOS slept for 290 seconds.
Its unchanged repeat passed with a temporary sleep guard. No assertion,
deadline, or CI gate was weakened.

Review commands include `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest
run src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-queued-comments-routes.test.ts` and `pnpm exec
playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts
tests/e2e/acp-stop-continuation.spec.ts`. Database suites require fresh
disposable databases. See the [browser
runbook](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a/doc/plans/chat-adapters/2026-09-04-chat-adapters-browser-e2e-runbook.md)
for provider setup and separate live acceptance steps.

## Risks

- This remains experimental. Deterministic tests and bounded live
evidence do not establish every provider feature, tenant, permission
layout, or media shape. Teams work-tenant qualification is still open.
- Failed and uncertain provider effects remain visible and can require
operator action. A transport receipt does not prove recipient
visibility.
- Native controller and runner artifacts must remain compatible.
Preserve lease ownership, terminal authority, source binding, and
quarantine during future changes.
- Access and audit rows commit together, but activity notifications
remain best-effort. This is not a new durable event outbox.
- The PR operation does not deploy a live server, replace its runner, or
change provider permissions. Remaining live qualification is documented
in the [temporary
handoff](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a/doc/plans/chat-adapters/2026-09-08-open-qualification-followups.md).

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex assisted with implementation, tool execution, testing, and
review. The work records `gpt-6-astra` assistance. The environment does
not report a context-window size. No private reasoning traces are
included.

## 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>
2026-09-10 10:06:45 -05:00
Dotta bc9ba7cd26 feat(runner): project native runs into task threads (#12321)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The experimental Paperclip Runner can execute a guarded Codex run
and persist provider-neutral events.
> - The task page still reads direct-adapter transcripts and cannot
present those native events.
> - Structured runner questions must also use the existing task
interaction experience.
> - Runtime selection must use the persisted run mode, not an adapter
name or a current feature flag.
> - This pull request projects native events and questions into the
existing task thread.
> - Direct adapters keep their existing transcript, composer,
interaction, and finalization paths.
> - The benefit is a complete native Codex task thread without a
behavior change for existing adapters.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #12202. This pull request replaces that stale implementation on
current `master`.

**What happened?**

The server persists native runner events and structured input requests.
The task page only consumes direct-adapter transcripts. A native run
therefore cannot present a complete transcript, usage, or question flow
through the normal task experience.

**Expected behavior**

Native runs project persisted provider-neutral events into the existing
task thread. Native structured questions use the existing interaction
card. Direct adapters retain their current behavior.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Enable the experimental runner.
2. Start a native Codex run that emits progress, usage, a structured
question, and a final reply.
3. Open the task page.
4. Observe that the direct-adapter transcript path cannot project the
native event records.

**Paperclip version or commit**

`master` at `67f9867bc`.

## What Changed

- Add the canonical structured-question validator and shared contract
exports.
- Materialize native input requests as existing task interactions.
- Validate native answers and deliver them through the durable
question-response receipt.
- Resume the original PRP request with an idempotent `request.resolve`
command.
- Project native messages, tool activity, cumulative usage, and final
replies into the existing transcript model.
- Propagate persisted `runtimeMode` to the task page and select native
handling only for `runtimeMode: "native"`.
- Expire pending interactions through the shared issue service on every
terminal transition, including decisions, stalled reviews, tree control,
and pipeline retry cleanup.
- Queue native run cancellation while a transaction is open and execute
it only after the owning transaction commits.
- Keep nonterminal and non-runner issue paths on their existing service
call shapes and behavior.

## Verification

- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed, including the
Rust runner release build and protocol/catalog drift gates.
- Focused native-thread and lifecycle suites — 18 files and 481 tests
passed during review.
- `issue-execution-policy-routes.test.ts` — 19/19 passed after the final
transactional-queue expectation update.
- `issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts` — 87/87 passed in the
final isolated compatibility rerun.
- GitHub Actions — policy, build, canary, typecheck/release registry, 5
serialized server shards, 8 general-test shards, 3 browser shards, and
both aggregate gates passed on `7793f3193`.
- Security — Snyk, Socket Project Report, Socket PR Alerts, and
Superagent passed.
- Greptile — 5/5 on `7793f3193`; all actionable review threads resolved.
- `git diff --check` — passed.
- Diff against `master`: 44 files.

## Compatibility Boundary

- Native transcript polling only runs when the persisted run reports
`runtimeMode: "native"`.
- Missing or legacy runtime modes continue through
`useLiveRunTranscripts`.
- Legacy questions keep the existing optional free-text choice.
- Native closed select sets can suppress that legacy fallback.
- Terminal cleanup uses the same issue service for native and legacy
interactions; only a bound native question schedules a native run
cancellation.
- Native cancellation happens after transaction commit, so failed or
rolled-back writes do not cancel a still-valid run.
- The durable delivery service checks the original native request before
it considers a continuation run.
- This pull request adds no migration, dependency, workflow, manifest,
or lockfile change.

## Risks

The main risk is routing a direct-adapter task through native handling
or changing terminal issue behavior. The implementation selects the
native path only from persisted runtime facts, retains the existing
nonterminal call shape, and schedules native cancellation only for a
validated bound native question after commit. Focused and
repository-wide tests cover both paths. Native requests remain bound to
the company, issue, run, and agent; answers are validated, durable, and
idempotent across reconnects.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 family. The client does not expose the exact
deployment ID or context window. Agentic reasoning, tool use, and code
execution were enabled.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run the affected local tests and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated the compatibility notes for this change
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I addressed all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting
merge
2026-08-29 19:26:20 -05:00
Dotta 67f9867bc6 fix(interactions): deliver question answers durably (#12307)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agents can pause a task and ask the user structured questions.
> - The answer is durable in the issue interaction, but delivery to the
next run is not durable.
> - A process restart can therefore leave an answered interaction
without a continuation attempt.
> - Native runners also need a provider-neutral question contract before
the task page can consume native events safely.
> - This pull request adds a content-free delivery outbox and an
optional native steering seam.
> - Direct adapters keep their existing heartbeat continuation path.
> - The benefit is reliable answer delivery without changing runtime
selection or task-page behavior.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #12202. This pull request replaces the question-delivery foundation
from that stale task-thread pull request. The task-thread projection
will follow in a smaller pull request.

**What happened?**

Question answers were stored in the issue interaction. The server then
made one in-memory continuation wake. A server stop between those
operations could leave the answer stored but not delivered. The combined
native task-thread pull request also made this behavior hard to review
separately from UI changes.

**Expected behavior**

The answer and its delivery receipt must commit in one transaction. The
server must retry pending receipts after a restart. Existing direct
adapters must keep the current wake path. A native runtime may use the
optional steering seam, but this pull request does not enable native
steering in production.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create an `ask_user_questions` interaction.
2. Answer the interaction.
3. Stop the server before the continuation wake completes.
4. Start the server again.
5. On current master, no durable record tells the server to retry the
answer delivery.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Current `master` at `4d82f5eae`.

## What Changed

- Add the `issue_question_response_deliveries` table and migration.
- Store only routing state, a correlation ID, and a payload digest in
the delivery row. The answer remains in the existing interaction result.
- Commit an answered interaction and its pending delivery row in one
transaction.
- Add bounded claims, retry recovery, cumulative terminal state, and
content-free activity records.
- Keep every built-in direct adapter and external adapter on the
existing heartbeat wake path.
- Add an optional native steering seam. No production caller supplies
that seam in this pull request.
- Retain the provider-neutral `paperclip.question_set.v1` presentation
on recovered interactions.
- Run delivery immediately after an answer and sweep pending rows at
startup and on the existing server interval.
- Add focused database, service, route, startup, adapter-matrix, digest,
and duplicate-delivery tests.

## Compatibility Boundary

- This pull request does not change adapter selection.
- This pull request does not start runnerd.
- This pull request does not create native run records.
- Direct adapters never call the native steering seam.
- The existing interaction result stays authoritative for answer
content.
- The migration is additive and does not rewrite existing rows.
- This pull request has no UI, dependency, workflow, package-manager, or
lockfile changes.
- The diff has 19 files.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/question-response-delivery.test.ts
server/src/services/issue-thread-interactions.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts` — 4 files
and 120 tests passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed for all applicable workspaces. This
includes Cargo format and check, protocol drift checks, and migration
safety.
- `pnpm build` — passed. This includes the Rust release binary, server
build, and UI production build.
- `git diff --check` — passed.
- Secret patterns were not present in the changed text files.
- The repository token gates currently report violations from unchanged
files on `master`. This pull request does not change those files.

## Risks

The main risk is routing a direct-adapter answer into a native session.
The service checks the persisted runtime mode, and the adapter matrix
proves that all direct adapters use only the existing wake path. The new
table is additive. It has foreign keys, unique correlation constraints,
bounded attempts, and status checks. Activity records omit question and
answer content.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 family. The client does not expose the exact
deployment ID or context window. Agentic reasoning, tool use, and code
execution were enabled.

## 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 or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket ID or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run the affected tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have documented the new contracts and compatibility boundary
- [x] I have considered and documented compatibility and security 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
2026-08-27 12:12:21 -05:00