6 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	09ad9adce2	feat(server): adopt running remote agents through durable controller checkpoints (#17439) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip must keep admitted remote work alive while its main server is replaced. > - Runner owns recovery mechanics and exposes opaque checkpoints through #17097. > - The server owns company scope, encryption, Stop, tool authority and execution ownership. > - A successor must prove current ownership before it adopts the original execution. > - Checkpoint bursts must also leave capacity for normal requests and lease renewal. > - This PR persists and adopts that authority through the existing runtime boundaries. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Remote agents retain the original execution during a bounded main-server outage. **Current behavior** A server restart can lose the controller's local state and connection. An unsafe replacement could repeat a turn or an uncertain mutation. Checkpoint writes in the request pool can also delay ordinary requests during an aligned burst. **Proposed behavior** Restore encrypted control records from Postgres and adopt the original runner under a fenced lease. Recover known tool receipts through current tool authority. Give control checkpoints a shared pool capped at two connections per database owner. Depends on #17097. Successors are #17455 and #17456. Qualification and presentation remain separate review slices. ## What Changed - Add company/run-bound encrypted checkpoint records and migration 0394. Keep the SQL idempotent after renumbering against current master. - Recover startup and expired ownership through native runtime and heartbeat. Preserve the sandbox lease, admitted runner artifact, harness configuration, native session and active turn. - Keep Stop, finalization, preparation ownership and stale-writer fencing transactional. Preserve graceful detach and natural crash takeover. - Recover committed tool receipts through the existing authority. Reauthorize reads and hold uncertain mutations. - Bound startup retention with the existing coordinator and preserve zero idle scans. - Share at most two checkpoint connections per database client. Keep application and liveness capacity separate. Close the checkpoint pool during shutdown; late writes cannot reopen it. - Count SQL across both application and checkpoint clients. Prove request/liveness progress, command recovery and failure after pool shutdown with real Postgres. ## Verification Project creation recovery now uses the existing project activity receipt owner. It retains authenticated input normalization, fingerprint checks and current run authority after the receipt lock. An absent receipt returns no result before mutation. The new lost-HTTP-response and no-effect regression uses real API routes and Postgres. The seven transport cases pass locally. This Mac skips all 20 database cases. On current source `5de803c2cd`, Linux [job 122593415890](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40620576702/job/122593415890) executes all 20 project-tool cases successfully (9.480 seconds), including the committed-project lost-response regression. Its shard passes 1,627 cases with three unrelated skips. Server typecheck passes. The transport regression initially has two failures; a subsequent incorrect expectation about schema defaults was corrected before the final pass. Ordinary execution adds no checkpoint writes or recurring work. Current candidate `5de803c2cd` includes the project-creation receipt recovery fix and master `2cd747d1b6`. Migration 0394 retains the prior idempotent checkpoint DDL. Every master SQL file and journal entry is preserved. Snapshots 0390–0394, migration checks and server typecheck pass. The ordinary warm-turn regression fails on its second turn before `a219ab51ad`. After correction, three completed warm turns select the correct prior checkpoint and preserve the original session. All 288 provider-wiring cases pass. The control plane, external persistence callback, identity rotation and filesystem are real; the backend and database-load seam are scripted. The 13 warm admission/configuration variants also pass after final master integration. This does not qualify an underlying harness. At current source `5de803c2cd`, Linux [job 122593415907](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40620576702/job/122593415907) passes all 940 native-session-executor cases (61.431 seconds), including the warm external-checkpoint behavior; the shard passes 2,358 cases with one skip. Current [Runner job 122593415475](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40620576702/job/122593415475) passes the native recovery lane: 115 passes and five container-only skips, including the encrypted restore guard, fresh preparation (63.189 seconds), blocked claim lock (1.226 seconds) and recovery beyond 101 blocked owners (3.897 seconds). The first lane passes 2,215 cases with one skip. The SQL cost test reports zero idle and streaming SQL for both output volumes; this is component evidence, not a production capacity claim. At prior candidate `1ff7bb44f4`, Linux job 122549307215 passes all 938 native-executor cases, including the three-turn external-checkpoint regression. Job 122549306469 passes the native recovery lane with 115 passes and five container-only skips, including the encrypted-restore session guard, fresh preparation (63.664 seconds), claim-lock contention (3.961 seconds), and 101-owner recovery (3.824 seconds). This Mac skips the real-Postgres suite. The earlier full local executor attempt has 921 passes and 16 failures during embedded-Postgres initialization before assertions. The original fixture collisions and their corrections remain recorded. At earlier candidate `8fbe62b41d`, server shard job 122535673841 has 3,876 passes, one failure and one skip in an unchanged expiry-worker retry/drain timing test. The same server/database tree on qualification source `b64cac6951` passes all 20 expiry cases and all 3,877 shard cases. The single diagnostic retry, job 122541891915, passes all 20 expiry cases and all 3,877 shard cases (one skip). No assertion was weakened. The original failure remains recorded and its exact timing race is not proven. All Actions checks and legacy status passed on `8fbe62b41d`, with completed Greptile 5/5 and no open feedback. The next candidate `1ff7bb44f4` also passed all Actions checks and Greptile 5/5. Its Paperclip Review remained queued before the new master conflict required integration. The new candidate needs fresh exact-head CI and reviews; old checks do not qualify it. Migration generation is checkpoint-only, all master SQL and journal entries remain unchanged, and migration checks, server typecheck and all 13 warm-owner variants pass after integration. The first migration check was blocked by TSX sandbox IPC; its permitted repeat passes. The first warm-test command used an incorrect path and ran no tests; the corrected command supplies the 13-case receipt. All 16 database pool-lifetime/options/teardown cases pass after granting loopback permission; the first batch had two EPERM failures and 14 passes. Earlier semantic-tool/HTTP recovery, adoption, encryption-batch, zero-streaming-write and idle-SQL receipts remain source-attributed in the [qualification record](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/2ff66f57da0da35bac1c19a2366ea4b84d87a986/doc/plans/2026-10-22-hot-upgrade-qualification.md). That record retains earlier assertion, setup and cleanup failures and their corrections. No failed gate is waived. The historical 300-session component campaign passes four after phases: steady read p99 is 107–108 ms at 500 reads/s and 100 writes/s; aligned-burst read p99 is 103–105 ms after the bounded pool, versus 584–689 ms before. This comparison isolates the persistence corrections. It does not measure the final stack's hosted active-agent capacity. The hosted zero-agent API pair leaves SQL and CPU essentially unchanged, but both arms fail absolute latency gates and candidate peak cgroup memory fails its gate. The active-agent/viewer matrix, different-artifact upgrade and rollback remain open. Run `PAPERCLIP_TEST_DATABASE_URL=<owned-disposable-postgres> pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/services/native-runtime/native-runner-restart-recovery.integration.test.ts`. Previous head `f2db8a6568` had one failed workspace setup gate: [job 122555672441](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40608984238/job/122555672441) passes all 4,169 UI tests and 285 CLI cases (one skip), but the company import/export suite reaches its 30-second health deadline during doctor startup. Its output does not reach the server-start step. The CLI, server, database, shared, adapter and plugin trees are identical on qualification source `a866619d7b`, whose [job 122555886663](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40609057937/job/122555886663) passes that fixture and all 286 CLI cases. The one diagnostic retry, [job 122561057225](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40608984238/job/122561057225), passes the formerly failing fixture and all 286 CLI cases. All Actions checks and legacy status on `f2db8a6568` pass. Its exact-head Greptile completed at 5/5 with no open feedback. The current integrated head requires fresh checks and a completed Paperclip Review before merge. The original failure remains recorded; its exact timing cause is unproven. A repeated failure requires investigation and repair rather than another retry. All current-head CI, legacy status, exact-head completed Greptile 5/5, resolved feedback and ordinary GitHub merge eligibility remain required before merge. The latest integration preserves master’s published Copilot v70 profiles and every published migration. Checkpoint migration `0394_conscious_whizzer.sql` was generated with `pnpm db:generate` and retains the prior idempotent DDL. The Runner vendor rebuild and replay parity checks pass. Server typecheck and all 13 warm-owner variants pass after that rebuild. The imported report-lock patch is byte-identical to master; its intentional patch-context whitespace is retained, and the feature delta passes whitespace checks. No hosted experiment was run. ## Risks The pool adds up to two active connections per instance, shared across agents. Checkpoint delivery can wait behind that bound; it still requires its commit. Steady component-test Postgres CPU rises by about 1.7 percentage points of a two-CPU allocation. These corrections do not remove the stack's control and renewal writes. The migration and key must survive replacement. Fresh-database tests and local load do not establish different-artifact hosted upgrade or rollback continuity. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools and code execution. The runtime does not expose a more specific model 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 - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-27 21:39:23 -05:00
Nicky Leach	ea727dc3c2	Preserve plugin session continuity through warm execution and checkpoint recovery (#17820)	2026-10-26 20:25:10 -07:00
Nicky Leach	aa0037a137	Support Codex warm plugin task reuse and recovery (#17390)	2026-10-23 19:14:14 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	a3e8fa568a	Reduce repeated work during plugin Runner admission (#17377) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and their execution authority. > - A plugin can host Runner tasks on a persistent execution host. > - Admission checks must observe current lifecycle state and credentials. > - The current runtime reader also resolves files, skills, and connections for each check. > - Some providers also repeat the same project authentication check during submit. > - This pull request adds a compact fresh reader and an explicit submit-time validation contract. > - Providers can remove repeated work while Core keeps lease and scope checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Plugin Runner startup before task submission. **Current behavior** One measured startup made 30 full runtime reads during bootstrap. These reads took 5.759 seconds. Each guard can resolve instructions, skills, and connection assignments even when it only needs current identity and lifecycle state. Providers that already enforce project authentication in submit must also perform a separate Core preflight. **Proposed behavior** Use a lifecycle-owned runtime identity reader for guards. Keep the full runtime reader for synchronization inputs. A trusted provider can declare `projectAuthCheckAtSubmit: true` in its prepared result. Core pins the exact configuration, provider, and project set on the lease. The provider must reject authentication conflicts before credential installation or task start. Providers that omit the flag retain the existing preflight. **Reason and benefit** Estimated savings with a paired consumer: 4–5 seconds from compact runtime checks, plus roughly 0.5–0.9 seconds from removing the duplicate authentication operation. These estimates overlap and are not a measured deployed result. Refs #17367 for the separate run-log HEAD optimization; this PR does not duplicate it. **Breaking changes** No migration. The SDK adds a host method and an optional prepared-result field. Consumers that use them require this Core host version. Older providers retain their existing flow. ## What Changed - Add `agents.getRuntimeIdentity` across SDK, RPC, host service, and test fixtures. - Reuse the existing company, plugin ownership, readiness, and capability checks. Read lifecycle state and protected instance secrets fresh on every call. - Skip instruction, organization, skill, and connection hydration in the compact reader. - Allow explicit submit-time authentication enforcement, with prepared scope pinned and checked again at dispatch. - Emit fixed preparation, project-auth, submit, and connection timing phases. ## Verification - 72 targeted SDK capability, plugin task-owner, and environment-task mediator tests passed. - 33 real embedded-Postgres lifecycle and secret tests passed, including pause, content revision, company isolation, plugin disablement, and secret rotation. - SDK and server TypeScript checks passed. Local Runner/eval TypeScript outputs were built to satisfy server type resolution. - Local Postgres required missing library aliases in ignored dependencies; no product source was changed for that repair. - Full repository suites are delegated to GitHub CI. No live rollout or speedup claim. ## Risks The submit-time flag delegates enforcement to a trusted provider. It is not proof that prepare already checked authentication. The provider must check before VM credential installation or task admission. Core still checks exact prepared scope, active lease, run identity, credential type, and dispatch fencing. Existing providers keep the separate check. Roll back a paired consumer before rolling back this host. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 (Codex), with code execution and repository tools. Exact deployment build and context-window size are not exposed. ## 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 following the relevant 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 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>	2026-10-23 14:54:25 -07:00
Nicky Leach	412914cfa7	Read native plugin task output files on the execution host (#17285)	2026-10-22 23:38:09 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	e5351b240a	Verify native Runner setup through plugin tasks (#17029) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work for AI agents. > - An environment plugin can own a Runner task. > - The merged launch-preparation contract lets the execution owner build the provider configuration. > - Core still needs a task process owner and a setup test that uses that configuration. > - This PR connects the task API to the Runner process-owner contract. > - Operators can test a plugin environment before Core sends it task work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Runner, plugin SDK, and agent environment tests. **Problem or motivation** A task-only environment cannot use the shell-based setup path. Core must verify the Runner hello exchange and process cleanup through dedicated task operations. **Proposed solution** Add a lease-bound task driver and use it for a bounded setup probe. Keep heartbeat admission and task execution in #16978. This PR follows the merged launch-preparation contract in #16997. **Alternatives considered** A provider declaration alone cannot prove that Runner and the provider connect. A shell bridge would give the plugin an unnecessary command interface. ## What Changed - Pass structured Runner launch data to process owners. Support an external connection and explicit detach. - Add typed launch authentication checks and checkpoint operations. Check lease, run, project, and retained-task authority. - Connect launch preparation, PRP, termination proof, and credential handoff to the task driver. Reject local environment overrides during installed-account setup. Pass saved-account identity and credential home directly from Core. - Run a short-lived setup probe through the existing agent environment test API. Require a verified provider hello and cleanup. Keep saved Copilot account checks metadata-only through a dedicated task operation. - Update the Copilot source identity because the shared transport source changed. Keep provider behavior and the earlier identity fixture. ## Verification - CI passes on `f987adec7`: 55 successful checks and 5 expected skips. Standard Greptile and Apex are both 5/5 with no open findings. The branch merges cleanly with current master. - Repository typecheck and build pass after the rebase onto the workspace-provider contract. Server typecheck and build also pass after the final setup fix. - The 110 focused lease, SDK, setup, Copilot, and route cases pass after the rebase. All 14 setup cases pass after the final change. These include a real local Runner with a test provider. The saved-agent model-discovery case also passes. - Apex found that Core's relative workspace marker failed the driver path check, and non-Codex sessions omitted the observed model. Both failures were reproduced and fixed. The probe leaves physical workspace selection to plugin preparation. The transport reads each provider's observed model and exposes it to the driver. All 14 setup cases, 6 transport peer cases, and both existing real Runner/OpenCode cases pass. Runner build and server typecheck pass. - The coverage audit removed two redundant cases, repeated fixture code, and two extra real Runner launches. It kept authorization, credential selection, cancellation, lost replies, termination proof, checkpoint identity, and provider setup checks. - The Copilot source-identity check passes. The added-line secret and PII scan passes. The unmerged v52 attestation was regenerated after the shared transport fix. - CI on `13faeff02` caught one stale Copilot digest assertion after attestation regeneration. The literal now matches the candidate attestation, and all 49 installation cases pass. That CI lane otherwise passed 1,818 cases. - An earlier CI run hit an unchanged UI toast timing test. The separate fix is tracked in #16952. Current CI passes that shard. CI also caught a stale model-discovery assertion in this change; the assertion is fixed. - The local full-suite run was stopped when master changed. The final CI run supplies exact-head full-suite validation. No live Cloud or provider test was run. ## Risks - Native hello tests require a saved Core account or the installed account. Local environment overrides are unsupported for installed-account probes and fail before the provider runs. - A native task provider must declare launch preparation and authentication-check version 1. It must keep the checked configuration fixed through submission. Core rejects providers that cannot make this guarantee. - A lost task reply does not prove process termination. Core retains grants until the provider proves termination and Core saves required state. - This PR does not enable native heartbeat dispatch through plugin environments. Cloud deployment and live provider validation remain separate. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. Tool use includes code editing, local tests, and the GitHub CLI. ## 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 following the relevant 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 issue details - [x] I have run focused tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-20 18:13:09 -07:00