7 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	83076d7e7c	feat: return completed handoffs to Agent Chat (#14408) ... Return completed Agent Chat handoffs through a durable outbox and scope each generated update to its supplied tasks. Add recovery, browser delivery, result access, and calibrated quality coverage. Validated with two consecutive ten-case Claude/Codex campaigns, all CI checks, and a 5/5 review. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-09-29 10:25:52 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	992f720262	fix: make runner task context ownership explicit (#13753) ... <!-- Write all pull request text in Simplified Technical English (ASD-STE100). --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task descriptions, comments, continuation data, skills, and execution rules enter several agent adapters. > - The same source can be rendered by more than one automatic input carrier. > - Failed resumes can also rebuild input from stale or compact context. > - This pull request gives each Paperclip-owned source one delivery owner and preserves the required transport boundaries. > - It adds deterministic adapter, interaction, runner, and browser tests for these boundaries. > - The benefit is more predictable context delivery with explicit evidence for later live qualification. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #13144 removes a duplicate environment payload and bounds wake lists. Related: #11360 addresses Hermes resume behavior. This pull request preserves compatible active-session formats while repairing context ownership and stale question creation. **What happened?** Task descriptions and comments could enter more than one automatic context block. Native transports could wrap a complete model input in a second task envelope. Some legacy and gateway adapters could omit the owned assignment on ordinary tasks or rebuild a failed resume with stale compact context. A continuation could also request a question after newer human comments had arrived. **Expected behavior** Each task or comment source has one automatic model-facing owner. Distinct comment IDs and repeated wording remain distinct. Fresh fallback attempts rebuild the required full context. A question request is rejected when newer queued human direction makes it stale. Harness access policy remains owned by execution configuration. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Build a task with a description and current comments. 2. Capture the actual adapter or runner input. 3. Compare source ownership and task-envelope nesting. 4. Queue a human comment before a continuation requests a question. 5. Trigger a failed resume and inspect the fresh retry input. 6. Run the focused adapter, interaction, runner, and browser checks. ## What Changed - Add shared prompt-section selection at the provider-attempt boundary. - Deliver owned assignment context through native, legacy CLI, ACP, gateway, cloud, Pi, Kimi, Grok, Gemini, OpenCode, Cursor, OpenClaw, and Hermes paths. - Rebuild full or compact context after resume recovery changes the attempt. Add native and Claude ACP tests of actual recovery requests. - Preserve custom templates, loaded instruction files, execution policies, and older active-session formats. - Record continuation source metadata and reject stale question creation under the issue-row lock. - Add explicit Product E2E context-integrity profiles, prerequisite gates, credential-isolation checks, and report fixtures. - Bypass service-worker forwarding for same-origin Vite development modules. A real Chromium test fails with resource exhaustion before the repair and passes after it. Production asset caching keeps its existing policy. - Add browser diagnostics and service-worker module-loading regressions. - Add an explicit zero-retry eval option. The default retry behavior remains unchanged. Each campaign records its effective policy. - Remove the model-facing working-directory sentence from four prompt builders. Existing workspace, sandbox, permission, and custom-template configuration remains unchanged. - Align the everyday workflow assertion with the current 47-entry catalog. Compared with current upstream master, the branch carries the context-ownership implementation and its tests, the explicit context-integrity catalog and evidence harness, and the focused browser regression checks. ## Verification **Merge assessment:** focused regression evidence supports merge. This is not full completion of the original broad qualification matrix. The maintainer has authorized merge after fresh verification of the master integration. - Current head: `bbd52f82114eabf09bc7b1a7e97d54a5b43bbc00`. This integrates current master `2f585ef26a1814fa209715242d1ca791b63e4c4e`. All 14 conflicts are resolved. Cancellation checks, workspace finalization, native Grok support, and both sets of tests are retained. - Current-head Greptile: **5/5**, with no blocking findings. The review names this exact commit. All **59 reported checks are terminal: 55 successful, 4 skipped, zero pending or failing**. This includes the full root general and serialized suites, separate runner checks, typecheck, build, canary, browser E2E, Docker, and security checks. The successful legacy security status is included in that total. - After integration: workspace typecheck and full build passed. Separate runner checks passed: **2,160 TypeScript tests (10 skipped), 582 Rust tests, and 39 preparation checks**. Other passing checks include 621 Product E2E harness units, 376 focused shared/adapter tests, 160 real-database/API tests, 86 Hermes tests, 18 browser-support checks, and Product E2E typechecking. The complete root suite passed in CI. The duplicate local monolithic root run was stopped after that CI result; it is not counted as a completed local pass. - New native recovery coverage retains full assignment, completion contract, and explicit skill selection after safe replacement, for old and prepared input formats. Full native session test file: **136/136 passed**. - New Claude ACP coverage captures actual fresh, resumed, and missing-session fallback requests. It verifies one assignment copy, comment order, identical text under distinct comment IDs, and full fallback context. Full file: **33/33 passed**. Both affected TypeScript checks passed. - Existing deterministic tests cover source revisions, approval and trust boundaries, completion validation, custom templates, compatible sessions, standalone driver wrapping, and maintained adapter transport requests. - Provider-free browser support: **17/17 passed** after the master merge. Service-worker unit tests: **33/33 passed**. The module-overload regression failed before the repair and passed after it in real Chromium. ### Fresh live comparisons The new batch ran exactly four Product E2E attempts. **All four passed on the first attempt; no retries.** Each has six terminal matchers plus the existing browser lifecycle and invariant checks. | Exact case ID | Control | Candidate | |---|---|---| | `core-compatibility.runner-codex.local.plan-revise-accept` | Passed | Passed | | `local-session-integrity.runner-acpx-claude.local.structured-question-restart-resume` | Passed | Passed | The plan case checks a revised canonical plan and revision-bound approval before completion. The question case restarts the server before submitting the answer, then verifies the continuation completes. Control source is `dfa4e1bda8d50a1a01746603251a9128dbe9d0d6`. Candidate source is `79fcdb5dece501d28064ea9da306603881b46f0c`. They use identical frozen definitions and provider versions: Codex `0.156.0` with `gpt-5.6-sol`; ACPX `0.13.1` / Claude ACP `0.73.0` with `claude-sonnet-5`. The September 24 head added master browser recovery and test-only changes. The September 28 head also integrates newer master changes, including cancellation, workspace finalization, and native Grok. These are frozen-source live results, not exact-head live runs. The candidate received one description copy where the control initially received three. The submitted initial plan envelopes were 7,969 versus 19,097 characters. Question envelopes were 7,592 versus 18,919. These are structural measurements, not whole-provider token or dollar savings. ### Earlier evidence and failed attempts - The preceding fresh batch has four effective passing pairs: OpenCode comment continuation and assigned skill, native Codex comment continuation, and native Claude comment continuation. It retains **11 attempts: eight passed and three failed**. - Original failures remain recorded: missing local PostgreSQL library links before task creation; host-sleep cleanup after task/page checks passed; and a Claude **control** session-open rejection before a model turn. Setup was repaired identically on both worktrees. The permitted unchanged infrastructure retries passed. The underlying Claude provider startup error was not retained and remains unknown. - Older R2 retains **17 passes and one failure** across 18 attempts, including eight both-pass native/legacy Codex/Claude pairs. Its OpenCode blank-page failure led to the service-worker repair. R2 is historical evidence: master changed the native fixed prompt and removed duplicate wake environment data afterward. - The September 24 CI run initially failed one unrelated preview readiness test (`ECONNREFUSED` on its local fixture). Its test and production code match master. Isolated local verification passed **28 tests, 3 skipped**. One unchanged CI retry passed the full shard: **831 passed, 1 skipped**, including all **31 preview-exposure tests**. The aggregate CI gate passed afterward. The precise startup cause remains unknown; a port race is a hypothesis, not a proved cause. ### Limits The original wider profile/workflow matrix, repeated trials, and remote Daytona qualification are incomplete. These results support a focused merge recommendation, not statistical equivalence or universal harness qualification. Some usage receipts are missing in both variants, so no token or dollar savings are claimed. The $500 ceiling was preserved using conservative allowances; failed attempts and unknown charges remain in the ledger. Reproduce the focused additions with `pnpm exec vitest run packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/acp.test.ts` and `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner exec vitest run src/native-session-runtime.test.ts`. Full checks use `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm test:run`, `pnpm build`, and the separate runner checks. Paid evals require the frozen definitions, profiles, and credentials; do not use `--all` as a substitute for the selected cases. ## Risks - Context placement changes can affect model behavior. Deterministic checks cover the selected paths, but live qualification remains incomplete. - The stale-question guard can reject a request when queued human comments arrived during the run. This is intended. - New stored inputs and model envelopes retain compatibility readers for older active sessions. - Custom templates may intentionally repeat content. - Removing a model-facing working-directory sentence does not change filesystem, command, sandbox, or permission configuration. - The worker bypass applies only to same-origin development module paths. Cache-policy tests preserve private-response handling and production asset caching. Mounted HTTP fixture changes remain test-only. - This PR does not claim measured token savings or statistical equivalence across every harness. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, exact model gpt-6-astra, with repository tools and code execution. Bounded supporting work used gpt-5.6-luna and gpt-6-luna. The serving context-window size is not exposed in this task. ## 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 described the issue in-PR using the required issue fields - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket id - [x] I have run the focused local checks and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect these changes - [x] I have considered and documented risks above - [x] All current-head Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups for the current head - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-09-28 14:49:14 -05:00
3 people	a6c4e7a8d1	fix(heartbeat): cancel obsolete execution continuations before dispatch (#13761) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - A comment can queue execution before the task changes state. > - The task may be completed, cancelled, deleted, or reassigned before setup checks ownership. > - The ownership guard must prevent that obsolete execution from starting. > - This pull request records that guard outcome as cancellation and settles the wake request. > - Missing history and authorization errors remain failures that operators can investigate. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A comment can queue a run just before a user marks its task Done. The ownership guard stops setup before adapter dispatch, but the run becomes a setup failure and can put the agent into an error state. **Expected behavior** Cancel obsolete work when the typed task ownership guard rejects it. Keep genuine setup errors visible. Do not change the task's terminal state or current owner. **Steps to reproduce** Queue a task continuation, then mark the task Done or Cancelled before continuation setup. The run should settle as cancelled without invoking the adapter. Deleting or reassigning the task must also prevent dispatch. Missing source history or explicit user authorization must still fail. **Paperclip version or commit** Refreshed against master `b2e9e82f053af14777fd68e8834fff6bb64c84c4`. Related: #13546 covers lost issue-lock claims, and #13888 covers persisted continuation decisions and retry budgets. This change handles the final continuation ownership guard during setup. Thanks to @MrBlackTongue for the original typed cancellation implementation and regression coverage. This update preserves the contributor's commits, resolves the master conflict, and narrows cancellation to task ownership invalidation. ## What Changed - Add a typed `StaleExecutionContinuationError` for `continuation_task_ownership_changed`. - Use existing cancellation settlement for that typed guard, including the run, wake request, issue execution ownership, and agent state. Suppress immediate recovery of obsolete work. - Preserve failure classification for missing source context, missing user authorization, and untyped errors, including an untyped error with identical text. - Cover Done and Cancelled tasks with real database checks. Retain company and assignment guard coverage. Verify cancellation performs no adapter dispatch or automatic replay. - Document the cancellation event and its error classification in the run-log guide. ## Verification Current head: `b875486e81`. - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm build`: passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts server/src/services/execution-continuation.test.ts --maxWorkers=1 --no-file-parallelism -t 'authorized continuation context|obsolete continuation setup|untyped continuation setup failures'`: 17 passed; 316 unrelated tests excluded by the name filter. - `pnpm test:run`: local full run is still finishing. It is not a clean pass: the observed failures are three company-skills cache checks (`EACCES` while renaming read-only cache directories on macOS), one tool-access assertion, and one comment-wake timeout. The three cache failures reproduce in isolation in unchanged code. The tool-access check passes in isolation, and the entire comment-wake file passes (29 tests), including explicit feedback after completion. Final full-run totals will be added when available. - [CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36282532652): all gates green on this head. An unchanged Runner workspace-diff test initially returned no diff; an isolated check passed, and the failed job plus its dependent gate passed on retry with no code change. Original failed job: 108517010989. - Greptile: 5/5 on the full current head, with no unresolved review threads. Branch is current with master and conflict-free. - Diff check and local secret/PII scan passed. No customer data or private deployment identifiers are included. ## Risks The classification change is limited to the typed ownership guard. A task with missing history remains a failure rather than being treated as an expected cancellation. Existing company, task-owner, terminal-state, and authorization checks still prevent dispatch. Cancellation retains its specific reason in the run log and does not grant a retry. No schema, dependency, or API changes; no migration is required. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex assisted investigation, implementation, code review, and test execution. The exact serving model identifier and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used - [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 described the issue in-PR following the bug issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket id - [x] I have run the focused regression tests locally and they pass; full-suite results are tracked above - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation - [x] I have considered and documented the risks - [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 merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Devin Foley <devin@paperclip.ing>	2026-09-26 17:43:33 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	e26d787928	Shorten continuation prompts and verify question tool guidance (#13574) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents must continue tasks using user answers without losing earlier requirements or approval gates. > - The wake prompt mixed human decisions with prior tool evidence and repeated detailed question instructions. > - Those instructions belong with the question tool, with a short routing hint in the wake. > - The Runner evals need to prove that answers, approvals, and completed work survive later turns. > - This PR shortens the prompts, separates authenticated answers, and adds continuation tests with useful screenshots. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13517. This is a follow-up to the merged onboarding skill and Runner E2E work. Related #13539 covers responses received while a run is active; this PR preserves its cases and adds continuation coverage. Existing continuation/recovery and question PRs were searched; none covers this prompt/documentation and eval change. **What existing behavior does this improve?** The instructions sent when an agent continues a task, the native human-input tool documentation, and the evidence captured by Runner full-stack E2E. **Current behavior** The wake repeats a long question-tool guide. Human answers appear alongside untrusted prior results. Screenshot capture can finish at DOM load while the task still shows a spinner, even when backend behavior checks pass. **Proposed behavior** Keep earlier requirements unless the user changes them. Treat clarification as distinct from approval. Give authenticated human responses a scoped field. Keep tool and agent results as evidence. Put detailed question behavior in the tool descriptor and retain one routing sentence in the native wake. Wait for the correct task and loaded conversation before taking screenshots. **Reason and benefit** Reduce repeated prompt text and make authority boundaries clear. Test that real question cards, later answers, approval gates, and completed child tasks still work. Make screenshots useful for human review. ## What Changed - Shorten shared continuation instructions for legacy and native runners. Separate authenticated user responses from tool results and agent summaries. - Remove the detailed question guide from native wake prompts. Keep its behavior in the canonical `request_human_input` descriptor and existing payload schema. Regenerate semantic contracts and fixture hashes. - Add five continuation cases across four local profiles. Add a dedicated choice-then-text case for native Codex and native Claude. All 22 cells join the shared full E2E campaign. - Cover revised scope, clarification without approval, hostile instructions in a handoff file, and reuse of a completed child after restart. Keep production instructions and fixed user facts. - Capture continuation screenshots only when the intended task and conversation have rendered. Add provider-free browser regressions for loaders and wrong-task capture. - Preserve current master’s extra tool and onboarding cases. The default campaign now contains 166 cells; 35 manual everyday cells remain separate. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed after replay on current master. - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit`: 340 passed. Harness typecheck passed. - `PAPERCLIP_PLAYWRIGHT_CHANNEL=chrome pnpm test:e2e:runner:browser-support`: 4 passed. These tests failed against immediate screenshot capture and passed after the fix. - Focused continuation and native-input tests: 36 passed locally. The tool-authority suite could not initialize embedded PostgreSQL locally, including one isolated retry; its 17 assertions did not run locally. The full remote server shards passed on this PR commit. - `pnpm build`: passed after replay on current master. `pnpm test:run` was attempted locally but hit the same embedded PostgreSQL initialization failure; the remaining local run was stopped after complete remote CI passed. This is not claimed as a full local test pass. - [Full PR CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35232755685): passed on `6a22128c14f4552d0613a6d9a25955db4a1ed02f`. All server/chat/workspace/serialized shards, browser shards, Runner checks, typecheck, build, canary and policy checks passed. The isolated native Runner build and security checks also passed: 57 successful checks, with two expected Storybook skips. - Greptile reviewed the exact PR head at 5/5, with no findings or unresolved review threads. The PR has no merge conflicts. - [Live question-docs report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-e2e-question-docs-35227647794/): 3/3 passed at source `83dd132f2` before replay on master. Native Codex and Claude each asked a choice, waited, asked a text question, and saved both answers. Claude also passed a completed-child restart case. All three native turns are checked for absence of the old question block. - [Earlier continuation report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-e2e-continuation-35154943615/): all five continuation cases passed on native Claude. The report retains campaign and revision provenance and separately shows two unresolved onboarding behavior failures. - [Before/after prompt report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-prompt-comparison-20260917/): full text, current recorded Claude inputs, and reproducible reference-token counts. The controlled wake comparison removes 401 reference tokens; the net counted input reduction is 339 after charging the larger tool description. These are text-size estimates, not measured billing savings. ## Risks - Prompt wording affects model behavior. Live results cover the stated cases, not every provider or conversation. Legacy profiles are registered but were not rerun for this change. - The optional continuation field changes prompt data only; there is no database migration or new production API. - Authenticated answer projection excludes generated summaries and agent-resolved interactions. It preserves the answer’s question or approval scope. - The screenshot guard can expose UI loading failures that earlier runs hid. Backend grading alone no longer makes those captures valid. - The two prior onboarding failures remain separate product issues: work before acceptance and a missing saved plan. This PR does not claim the entire onboarding suite passes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser verification. The exact deployed model identifier and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass — targeted tests above; the full local database-startup limit is documented - [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>	2026-09-17 09:32:54 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	f2c5e54dca	fix(runner): preserve handoff work and publish requested files (#13355) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and their tasks. > - A task keeps its instructions, progress, and files when its assigned agent changes. > - The replacement runner lost the interrupted run's context and could overwrite an existing draft. > - A saved message also stayed attached to the former agent and could reopen the task after the replacement finished. > - File tasks could report Done with only a local path that the user could not open. > - This pull request transfers handoff context and saved messages, and makes requested files accessible through the existing attachment contract. > - Users can change agents and collect completed work without repeating instructions or confirming bookkeeping. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13338. Builds on merged #13354 for queue admission and #13353 for remote workspace retry. #10123 concerns restricted recovery-model escalation; this change instead covers ordinary native handoff and file completion. **What happened?** Codex wrote a draft before a user assigned the task to Claude. The replacement lacked continuation context and replaced the draft. A queued user message could later restart the former agent and reopen the completed task. Separately, a runner could finish a requested file but return only a machine-local path. Remote native runs had no bound file publication tool. **Expected behavior** The replacement reads and preserves existing work, receives saved messages once, and keeps each message's author. The former agent stays stopped. A requested file has a working attachment or accessible work product before Done. Text-only tasks do not require attachments. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Ask Codex to save three newsletter names and then wait. 2. Queue an instruction to keep those names and expand the draft. 3. Use Interrupt and assign to select Claude. 4. Verify the original names survive, the result has a working download, and only the source and replacement runs exist. 5. Ask either provider for a Markdown checklist and open the file from its completed response. ## What Changed - Carry the exact same-task interrupted run's summary, semantic receipts, and history into handoff context. Tell the replacement to inspect existing files before editing. - Adopt saved ordinary task comments into the successor's receipt under the task lock. Preserve authors and separate mention, chat, and interaction contracts. - Prevent a former-assignee comment wake from reopening a completed task or starting a stale execution. - Reject workspace-only, fabricated, and cross-task file completion references with actionable runner feedback. New file output also needs a matching current-run publication receipt and asset filename/size/hash, or an accessible work product registered by the current run. Prior output can remain context alongside a current file, or be verified and re-registered internally. Authorized chat attachment reuse retains its verified current-run clone receipt; older receipt shapes require an intact matching source. - Bind remote file reads to the active environment runner and reuse the existing attachment and work-product publication path. - Enforce workspace confinement, regular single-link files, stable identity, a 10 MiB limit, and exact size and SHA-256 checks. Rotate the native session fingerprint for the updated tool contract. - Contain rejected remote signals and protocol-failure cleanup, including logging failures. Preserve the original cleanup rejection for its owner; a rejected operation never supplies stop acknowledgement or cleanup proof. - Allow exactly one maximum-size base64 file through the native SSH command adapter, preserving a finite output cap. - Document handoff and accessible file completion rules. ## Verification - Each observed bug has a failing regression before its fix. Final post-rebase integration passed 732 tests across 13 files before the final receipt and signal guards; final affected results are below. - Publication provenance and compatibility: 8 provenance regressions and 2 compatibility regressions failed before their fixes; the final four affected suites pass 53 tests, including mixed old/new references and real authorized chat reuse. Controls cover old attachments and work products, filename/size/hash/origin mismatch, missing/wrong receipts, current-run publication, same-run durable proof, internally re-registering preserved bytes, and no-new-file follow-ups. - Remote signal rejection: the real Node subprocess previously exited 1 when the production launcher signalled a deleted sandbox. It now stays alive for both a failed signal and failed logging; all 349 executor tests pass. The failed signal still provides no termination proof. - Remote file reader and SSH command boundary: 33 tests passed, including real Linux descriptor reads and the actual SSH adapter subprocess output cap (network executable replaced by a deterministic fixture). Exact 10 MiB bytes pass, one byte beyond the encoded cap fails. - Live local Claude and Codex Stop journeys preserve the saved file, deliver queued instructions once, and reach Done with two total runs. The handoff journey preserves the original names and download with exactly two runs. Both local providers deliver exact checklist files without a completion confirmation. - Live combined Daytona verification passed: the original failed task's Retry reused its sandbox; a selected Git subfolder produced an exact downloadable file; warm and deliberately resumed Claude runs took about 33 seconds. Codex produced a 240-byte download in 33.1 seconds after 134 seconds of contention/backoff. Both cloud downloads retained exact bytes after the two owned sandboxes were deleted. - The sandbox-deletion retest identified a separate ignored promise in protocol-failure cleanup. Two real Node subprocess regressions failed under fatal unhandled-rejection policy before the fix; all 36 protocol, lifecycle, and integrity tests now pass. The original close promise still rejects to its owning runtime. The final live retest passed: a normal Claude Daytona task completed in 132.352 seconds, then its sandbox was deleted. Thirteen samples over 361 seconds confirmed the same controller stayed healthy, the task stayed Done with unchanged run IDs, and its attachment retained exact bytes. The post-deletion browser download passed with zero page errors; all five owned sandboxes are confirmed absent. - Full repository typecheck and build passed on final commit `de64d16f1`. Final-head Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved threads. [Final-head CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34736623758) passed: 32 successful checks and two conditional skips. The earlier mixed-source full local test invocation was deliberately stopped before rebase, so no pristine green full local aggregate is claimed. Its known failures passed in later affected suites. ## Risks - Handoff may adopt only ordinary comments from its validated former owner. Other delivery contracts must remain independent. - File verification fails closed if a remote file changes during reading. The runner must retry publication or explain a blocker. - The updated session fingerprint starts a fresh provider process where needed to install the new tool contract. - No schema migration or historical status reconciliation is included. ## Model Used OpenAI `gpt-6-astra` through Codex, with reasoning, code execution, browser testing, and tool use. The context-window size is not exposed in this task. ## 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>	2026-09-13 08:41:20 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	b1efd65edc	fix: continue interrupted task conversations with bounded retries (#13237) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their tasks. > - A task can outlive a provider process or a server restart. > - Legacy recovery treated unknown tool outcomes as a permanent execution hold. > - That hold could also reject a later user message. > - A conversation turn can use prior history without replaying prior tool calls. > - This pull request lets supported conversation adapters continue within the existing retry budget. > - Users can send a new message after automatic attempts stop. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A server restart could interrupt a local ACP run and leave its task behind a permanent recovery hold. A later user message could be cancelled before the provider answered. The immediate recovery path could also create a successor outside the durable failure counter. **Expected behavior** Continue with a bounded new conversation turn. Preserve a compatible provider session or use full task context when it is unavailable. Do not replay recorded tools. When automatic attempts stop, allow a new user request through the normal execution gates. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a task with a local conversation adapter. 2. Restart the server while the provider is working. 3. Let the previous run become interrupted. 4. Send a follow-up message and observe the recovery hold on the old behavior. Related work: Refs #13075 for durable task recovery. Refs #12946 for retry-limit and checkout-lock handling. This change routes conversation recovery through the existing bounded scheduler. ## What Changed - Mark supported local conversation failures for continuation. Keep native-runner and non-conversation recovery rules. - Carry an interruption notice into the next turn. Retain stopped ACP session history even when a write outcome is unknown. - Clear unavailable ACP sessions so the next bounded attempt can use full task context. - Route immediate failure recovery through the same durable scheduler as process-loss recovery. Release only the predecessor checkout when its retry takes ownership. - Retire obsolete conversation holds using immutable run evidence, in bounded batches with an activity record. Preserve outcome evidence and do not wake historical tasks. - Block actual admission and Resume while a predecessor process or environment lease is still active. Keep the original interruption notice after a rejected wake. Preserve the upstream blocked-wake waiting contract: bounded retry planning can happen during cleanup, while deferred messages and execution remain gated. - Add subprocess and database regression tests. Update the execution contract. - Add the current thread-status field to the native recovery provider fixture so its damaged-journal test reaches the intended boundary. Tolerate an already-exited fixture process during test cleanup while still asserting both processes terminate. ## Verification - Workspace typecheck passed: `pnpm -r typecheck`. - Build passed: `pnpm build`. - Module boundaries passed: `pnpm check:module-boundaries`. - Focused tests passed: 293 recovery/session/dispatch tests, 66 retry and response-gate tests, and 37 native-session tests. Some suites overlap. - Tests cover interrupted writes, missing sessions, concurrent retries, restart persistence, pending questions and approvals, execution gates, and historical holds. - Built the Rust test executables with `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner build:rust` for native-runner verification. - Full Vitest coverage verified locally using the repository’s general and serialized shards, with focused reruns for failures and files not reached after a shard stopped. The ownership-gate regression is fixed and the complete affected server shard passes (1,390 tests). Local parallel runs also hit temporary-directory, resource, and timing failures; those suites pass with canonical temporary paths and sequential reruns. No test timeouts were increased. - Final merged-branch regression run: 577 tests pass across process recovery, retry scheduling, liveness, durable chat, wake-queue application/adapter, dispatch, continuation, native sessions, and task chat. Earlier focused verification also passed 19 native control tests. Token gates and whitespace validation pass. - Browser verification passed all three ACP Stop/continue/pause scenarios, including a rerun after merging the upstream waiting behavior: `PAPERCLIP_E2E_PORT=3397 pnpm test:e2e tests/e2e/acp-stop-continuation.spec.ts`. The interrupted-write case verifies that follow-up completes without a repeated write. - Final-head [CI run 34625037394](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34625037394) passed on `06ac4bd9d150f8b209a96e5fd609c696958794a0`: all 31 reported checks are green, including server/workspace suites, all browser shards, native runner verification, build, typecheck, release dry run, and aggregate gates. The two conditional Storybook checks were skipped. Greptile reviewed this exact commit at 5/5; all review threads are resolved. ## Risks - A new model turn can choose to repeat an action. Paperclip does not replay recorded tool calls and does not certify unknown action outcomes. - Conversation adapters now stop after their retry budget instead of requiring action reconciliation. Explicit Stop, pause, dependency, approval, budget, and ownership gates remain in force. - No schema migration or dependency changes. Historical holds are folded without changing task status or waking work. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and test execution. The session does not expose a more specific model build ID 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>	2026-09-11 12:16:04 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	35fdc0c66b	fix: make task recovery durable and preserve current requests (#13075) ... Make task recovery durable and preserve the latest user request across native and legacy continuations. Keep routine recovery quiet and prevent replay when action outcomes are uncertain. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-09-09 09:14:25 -05:00