PaperClipAI

Jannik/PaperClipAI

0 Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git synced 2026-10-10 12:07:09 +02:00

Commit Graph

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	cc67d4e1d8	fix: preserve steering and recover stopped task conversations (#15015 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - A task conversation must let a user guide a running agent and resume stopped work. > - The active run owns its input protocol, even when the user changes the next model or effort. > - Queue delivery waits for a provider receipt, which must be able to persist during the request. > - A stopped startup also needs a clear user action that passes normal task admission. > - This pull request fixes steering delivery, makes queue actions immediate, and restores explicit continuation. > - The benefit is a responsive conversation that can recover without losing saved input. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What happened? A queued message could change from Steer to Interrupt while a native run prepared. A steer request could wait on its own database lock and fail to deliver. A stopped startup could then leave the conversation without a working Retry or message continuation. Interrupt also waited for the server and showed a toast. Expected behavior The active run keeps its input protocol. Steer delivers input to that run. Steer and Interrupt clear the submitted queue rows and show the input in the conversation immediately. Failed delivery restores the latest queue with an inline error. An eligible stopped run offers Retry, and authenticated user input can start a fresh turn through normal task admission. Steps to reproduce 1. Start a task with a native Paperclip Runner. 2. Change the selected model or effort while that run prepares. 3. Queue a message and press Steer. 4. Observe the provider receipt and queue state during the request. 5. Stop a startup before its provider process begins, then try Retry or send a new message. 6. Repeat queued delivery with a legacy runner and press Interrupt. Paperclip version or commit Reproduced on the parent of this branch, `59c07ede7`. Deployment mode Authenticated private deployment. The fixes also cover local task conversations. Related work: Refs #12834, Refs #13354, Refs #13275. The open refactor in #13160 moves the same queue route; it does not fix the receipt lock or stopped-run continuation addressed here. ## What Changed - Select queue behavior from the active run's immutable dispatch and runtime resolution. - Leave the run row unlocked during provider acknowledgement, then lock and read it before merging the receipt. - Retain queued input if the target run stops during that wait. Keep inline delivery errors visible after empty queue updates. - Permit exact Retry and authenticated continuation after verified native startup cancellation. Preserve pause, approval, budget, ownership, and process-stop gates. - Carry undelivered native queue input into a fresh turn once the old execution is confirmed stopped. - Show Steer and Interrupt input in the conversation and clear submitted composer rows immediately. Restore the latest queue inline on failure. Remove delivery toasts. - Keep optimistic delivery stable across stale polls, empty queues, and paginated history. Preserve classic Interrupt error handling. - Document recovery and optimistic delivery behavior. Add regression tests across server, shared queue projection, and UI boundaries. ## Verification - Red-green regression tests reproduced the queue protocol, receipt lock, stopped-startup continuation, and optimistic delivery failures. - The focused server route, continuation, queue, and runner boundary suites passed during implementation. - The queue-route suite passes with 78 tests. The three complete conversation UI suites pass with 347 tests. - UI typecheck, production build, and `pnpm check:token-gates` pass. - Workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. The local monolithic `pnpm test:run` is still running; remote CI verifies the complete suite on the latest commit. - All CI gates pass on `bd9031ad56abfcde13d13a13488c1b9217c2fd3a`, including the full test shards, runner verification, browser E2E, typecheck, release registry, and canary dry run. - Greptile reports 5/5 for that commit. Both review threads are resolved. ## Risks This changes queue display and explicit continuation admission. The UI must restore rejected delivery without losing other-session edits. The server must preserve concurrent provider result updates and must not resume a process whose stop is uncertain. Focused tests cover these boundaries. This change has no database migration. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, an agent based on GPT-6. The exact runtime model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser inspection. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-02 22:07:14 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	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
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	0d8bbf7cf4	refactor(server): move the queued-comment queue mutations into the wake-queue module (#13145 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The server coordinates issue execution and agent wake events > - Queued comment mutations belong to the wake queue that owns their state > - Route-local database writes split queue rules across two layers > - This pull request moves those mutations into the wake-queue module and keeps route authorization and response mapping > - The benefit is one transaction boundary with company-scoped writes and a shared checked response contract ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What existing behavior does this improve? The queued-comment edit, reorder, and discard endpoints write queue state directly from the route layer. Subsystem affected server/ — REST API and orchestration services. Current behavior The route layer owns database transactions, locks, queue writes, and wake-row writes for queued comments. Proposed behavior The wake-queue module owns these operations. The routes keep authorization, input checks, error mapping, and response mapping. Reason and benefit The module gives all queued-comment callers one transaction boundary and applies company predicates to every adapter read and write. Breaking changes None. The endpoints keep their existing paths and response behavior. ## What Changed - Move queued-comment edit, reorder, and discard operations into the wake-queue module. - Add company predicates to seven queue writes. - Use the shared queue contract type for mutation responses. - Add module tests and route tests for the moved operations. ## Verification - `server/src/modules/wake-queue`: 128 tests pass across 6 files. - `server/src/__tests__/issue-queued-comments-routes.test.ts`: 19 tests pass. - The server TypeScript check reports the same 141 pre-existing errors before and after this change. - GitHub Actions must pass the required pull-request checks. ## Risks The change moves transaction and lock ownership across module boundaries. The new adapter, use-case, and route tests cover the moved behavior. No database schema changes occur. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, current agent runtime, tool use and code review support. ## 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 08:41:59 -07:00

Author

SHA1

Message

Date

DottaandPaperclip

cc67d4e1d8

fix: preserve steering and recover stopped task conversations (#15015 )

## Thinking Path

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

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

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

**Expected behavior**

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

**Steps to reproduce**

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

**Paperclip version or commit**

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

**Deployment mode**

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

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

## What Changed

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

## Verification

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

## Risks

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

## Model Used

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

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>

2026-10-02 22:07:14 -05:00

DottaandPaperclip

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

Nicky LeachandPaperclip

0d8bbf7cf4

refactor(server): move the queued-comment queue mutations into the wake-queue module (#13145 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The server coordinates issue execution and agent wake events
> - Queued comment mutations belong to the wake queue that owns their
state
> - Route-local database writes split queue rules across two layers
> - This pull request moves those mutations into the wake-queue module
and keeps route authorization and response mapping
> - The benefit is one transaction boundary with company-scoped writes
and a shared checked response contract

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The queued-comment edit, reorder, and discard endpoints write queue
state directly from the route layer.

**Subsystem affected**

server/ — REST API and orchestration services.

**Current behavior**

The route layer owns database transactions, locks, queue writes, and
wake-row writes for queued comments.

**Proposed behavior**

The wake-queue module owns these operations. The routes keep
authorization, input checks, error mapping, and response mapping.

**Reason and benefit**

The module gives all queued-comment callers one transaction boundary and
applies company predicates to every adapter read and write.

**Breaking changes**

None. The endpoints keep their existing paths and response behavior.

## What Changed

- Move queued-comment edit, reorder, and discard operations into the
wake-queue module.
- Add company predicates to seven queue writes.
- Use the shared queue contract type for mutation responses.
- Add module tests and route tests for the moved operations.

## Verification

- `server/src/modules/wake-queue`: 128 tests pass across 6 files.
- `server/src/__tests__/issue-queued-comments-routes.test.ts`: 19 tests
pass.
- The server TypeScript check reports the same 141 pre-existing errors
before and after this change.
- GitHub Actions must pass the required pull-request checks.

## Risks

The change moves transaction and lock ownership across module
boundaries. The new adapter, use-case, and route tests cover the moved
behavior. No database schema changes occur.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, current agent runtime, tool use and code review
support.

## 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 08:41:59 -07:00