mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-15 01:52:55 +01:00
ff8ec41e6a1236694d28f463b60c7d136442f9c9
5
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandClaude Opus 5.5
|
946c098bf3 |
fix(opencode): bind the attached run's contract after a restored launch (#20001)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native OpenCode agents run through runnerd and a small OpenCode proxy. The proxy checks each `paperclip_finish` claim against the run's completion contract. > - Each follow-up run has its own contract revision. #19874 lets runnerd keep the OpenCode process across a contract change, and sends the new contract on `turn/start`. > - When runnerd starts again for a follow-up, it restores the saved session first. The restored proxy launches with the saved run's contract, but its environment already names the new run. > - The proxy applied the `turn/start` contract only when the run id changed. Here the run id did not change, so the proxy kept the saved contract and refused every correct finish claim. > - This pull request makes the proxy rebind whenever the turn's contract differs from the one its session holds. The stale-revision error also names the expected revision. > - The benefit: a queued-comment follow-up finishes on its first try, and an agent that sends a stale revision can repair it. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #19874 (warm runs carry their own completion contract). **What happened** A user sent a follow-up comment while an OpenCode agent was working. After the first run finished, Paperclip started a continuation run for the queued comment. The agent updated the plan and called `paperclip_finish` with the current revision `2`. The tool refused it twice with "Semantic result completion contract revision does not match". The error did not name the expected revision. The agent searched for it for 3 minutes, and cleanup cancelled the run. Root cause: runnerd restores a saved `session_open` session before it applies `run.attach` (`provider_backend.rs`: "execute() restores the durable provider before dispatching run.attach"). The restore launches the OpenCode proxy with the saved contract (revision `1`). Runnerd's environment already names the new run, so the proxy's `PAPERCLIP_RUN_ID` is the new run. `attach_run_in_place` keeps this provider for a changed contract (#19874) and sends `paperclipCompletionContract` revision `2` on `turn/start`. The proxy compared only the run id. The run id matched, so the proxy skipped `attachRun` and kept revision `1`. **Expected behavior** The continuation's first `paperclip_finish` with the current revision is accepted. If a claim has a stale revision, the error names the expected revision. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Use a native OpenCode agent with warm follow-ups (the default). 2. Start a task. While the agent works, post a follow-up comment, so that it queues. 3. Let the first run finish. Paperclip starts a continuation run with completion revision `2` and restores the saved OpenCode session. 4. The agent calls `paperclip_finish` with `contractRevision: "2"`. 5. Before this fix, the tool refuses it with "Semantic result completion contract revision does not match". The chat eval `steering.discard-queued-message` (runner-opencode) shows this in run events: `session.resumed` carries revision `2`, and both `paperclip_finish` results fail with the mismatch. ## What Changed - `opencode-app-server-proxy.ts`: record the contract that the session opened with. On `turn/start`, call `attachRun` when the run id changes or when the supplied `paperclipCompletionContract` differs from the session's contract. - `opencode-proxy-task-envelope.ts`: add `sameOpenCodeProxyCompletionContract`. - `opencode-server-driver.ts`: the stale-revision error now ends with `Use contractRevision "<expected>".`, like the criteria error. - Tests: a real-proxy regression for the restored launch, a driver test for the new error text, and a `repair-revision` mode in the fake OpenCode fixture. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run src/cli/opencode-proxy-input.test.ts src/drivers/opencode/opencode-server-driver.test.ts src/cli/opencode-app-server-proxy.test.ts src/cli/opencode-proxy-thread-read.test.ts` in `packages/paperclip-runner`: 88 passed. - Red/green: without the source changes, both new tests fail. `binds the current contract when a restored launch already names the attached run` never sees the finish call reach the controller. `names the expected revision in a repairable stale-revision tool error` does not find the expected revision in the error. - `npx tsc --noEmit -p packages/paperclip-runner`: no errors in the changed files. (My worktree is missing a link for `@paperclipai/paperclip-eval-kernel`, which causes unrelated errors in `src/eval/workflow-harness.ts`.) - End-to-end: the chat eval `steering.discard-queued-message` (runner-opencode) with this fix cherry-picked. The run link goes in a comment below. ## Risks - Previous-release story (`rules/upgrade-safe-run-state.mdc`): this change does not change a persisted shape. The regression test uses the saved-state shape: launch parameters from the saved run, environment and `turn/start` from the new run. A runnerd that does not send `paperclipCompletionContract` behaves as before, so the proxy keeps its launch contract. The proxy and runnerd ship in the same runner artifact. - The proxy can now call `attachRun` for the same run id when the contract changes. `attachRun` resets the per-run result state. This occurs only at `turn/start`, when no turn is active, and only when the contract is different. A result for the earlier contract is not valid for the new contract. - The error text changed. No code parses it. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`) in Claude Code, with tool use (shell, file edit, test execution). ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] 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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5
|
dcaada5f59 |
fix(native): carry each warm run's own completion contract (#19874)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - A warm runner (`lifecycleMode: warm`) keeps runnerd and the provider
process alive between runs, so a follow-up message can start fast.
> - Each run has its own completion contract. The revision changes with
each follow-up, and the agent must name that revision when it finishes.
> - On a warm attachment the transport rebuilt the `run.attach` payload
from its constructor options. Those options belong to the first run.
Every later run kept the first run's contract.
> - The OpenCode proxy checks the finish claim locally against that
stale contract. Every warm OpenCode follow-up was refused ("Semantic
result completion contract revision does not match"), and the agent
looped until the run timed out.
> - This pull request carries each run's own contract into the warm
attachment, and lets runnerd adopt it without a cold provider resume.
> - The benefit: warm follow-ups finish correctly, and they keep the
live provider process, which is the reason to be warm.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #19852 (startup sub-spans), #19846 (TTFT baseline).
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
Warm cross-run attachment for native Codex and OpenCode agents.
**Current behavior**
In a local measurement wave with `lifecycleMode: warm`, 4 of 4 OpenCode
follow-ups looped for 8+ minutes. Each finish call was refused with
"Semantic result completion contract revision does not match". The saved
`runAttachTemplate` after the attachment still had revision `1`, while
the follow-up turn named revision `2`. Codex hid the defect because its
finish claim goes through the controller's tool path, which uses the
current input.
**Proposed behavior**
The attachment carries the attaching run's contract. Runnerd updates the
contract in place for Codex and OpenCode and keeps the provider process.
The OpenCode proxy receives the current contract with the run identity
on `turn/start`.
**Reason and benefit**
Warm follow-ups are the largest TTFT lever in the baseline. A
correctness-only fix (cold-resume the provider when the contract
changes) would make every warm follow-up relaunch Codex or OpenCode,
because the revision changes on every follow-up.
## What Changed
- `attachRun` carries `completionContract` through `NativeSession`, the
harness backend, the Codex harness session and the runnerd transport.
`executeNativeSession` passes the current input's contract. The
transport uses it instead of its first-run `resumeCompletionContract`.
- Runnerd (`codex_provider.rs`, `attach_run_in_place`): a changed
contract no longer forces a cold resume for `codex` and `opencode`.
Codex app-server never receives the contract, and the OpenCode proxy now
receives it per turn. Other providers keep the cold-resume boundary. A
changed tool set still forces it.
- Runnerd sends `paperclipCompletionContract` with each OpenCode
`turn/start`, next to the existing `paperclipRunId`.
- The OpenCode proxy passes that contract to `attachRun` when the run
changes. `OpenCodeHarnessSession.attachRun` replaces its envelope's
contract and validates it.
## Verification
- `src/live/runnerd-codex-transport-warm-attachment.test.ts` (new case):
real runnerd and fake Codex. After a warm attachment with a new
contract, the saved `runAttachTemplate` has the new revision and the
Codex pid is unchanged.
- `src/cli/opencode-proxy-input.test.ts`: the real proxy bundle serves a
warm second run with revision `proxy-v2`. The second
`paperclip/runResult` is produced and names `proxy-v2`. Without the fix
the finish call is refused.
- Each test fails without its part of the fix: the proxy test without
the proxy change; the transport test without the transport change (stale
saved revision); and, with `PAPERCLIP_ATTACH_TRANSITION_RUNNER` pointed
at a runnerd built without the `codex_provider.rs` change, the Codex pid
changes.
- `cargo test -p paperclip-runner-core --lib warm` (11 tests),
`native-session-runtime.test.ts` (232), the OpenCode driver, backend and
warm-attachment suites, and `tsc --noEmit` for the runner package pass.
## Risks
- Previous-release story (`rules/upgrade-safe-run-state.mdc`): no
persisted shape changes. Saved `runAttachTemplate` values carry forward,
and the next attachment writes the current contract. A new runnerd with
an old OpenCode proxy behaves as today: the proxy ignores the new
parameter and keeps the stale contract. An old runnerd sends no
parameter, so a new proxy keeps its launch contract.
- In-place adoption widens the warm-retention path for Codex and
OpenCode to changed contracts. The idle, accounting and pending-work
checks still apply first.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`) in Claude Code, with
tool use (shell, file edit, test execution).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] 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
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d6e6d1c78a |
Stream OpenCode immediately, scope reasoning to turns, and deduplicate instructions (#15708)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and observe their work.
> - The native runner carries provider output into the task transcript.
> - OpenCode sends incremental text in `message.part.delta` events.
> - The driver ignored those events and waited for a full part snapshot.
Accepted chats also waited after lifecycle verification was complete.
> - This pull request forwards each valid chunk as it arrives and
removes unnecessary isolated startup work.
> - Valid chunks reach Paperclip sooner without changing completion or
permission rules. The matched browser experiment below does not
establish a reliable end-to-end latency improvement.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
The native OpenCode driver withheld text until OpenCode sent a full
snapshot. A local delayed-provider probe with the pinned OpenCode
1.18.34 runtime showed a 1,496 ms gap between the first native text
delta and the first Paperclip text delta (1,510 ms from provider text).
**Expected behavior**
Forward valid assistant text and reasoning deltas immediately. Preserve
repeated identical tokens, message roles, turn ownership, and final
response selection.
**Steps to reproduce**
Send an empty text part, then text deltas, and withhold the final full
snapshot. The new fixture requires the consumer to acknowledge its first
text delta before releasing the snapshot. The previous driver cannot
pass this handshake.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Baseline: `011e5669bad61c435a4745fb10812bef70376841`. The patch is
rebased onto current master.
**Deployment mode**
Local native OpenCode 1.18.34 on macOS arm64. Live diagnostics use
`openrouter/deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731`. These are narrow
diagnostics, not full Product E2E qualification.
## What Changed
- Keep the macOS verified OpenCode launch pathname until child exit,
with guarded reuse and cleanup on failed launches. This fixes a
reproduced asynchronous executable-lifetime failure.
- Dispatch accepted queued chats immediately after lifecycle readiness
commits, through normal scheduler admission. Preserve ready state if
dispatch fails.
- Validate native OpenCode model access with the real hello probe
without a redundant catalog scan. Keep legacy adapter discovery
unchanged and isolate unspecified native probe directories.
- Map incremental text and reasoning to the existing canonical event
path, using observed part and message identities.
- Keep additive chunks without IDs distinct. Preserve ID-based event
deduplication.
- Clear current streaming part metadata when a new turn starts. Reject
mismatched session/message identities and unknown parts or fields.
- Disable automatic updates, remote model refreshes, and default plugins
in each isolated OpenCode process. Keep assigned MCP tools and default
model reasoning intact.
- Retain the latest cumulative text/reasoning part while its message
role is unknown, including completion metadata after more than 100
chunks.
- Expose `startTurn({ message, reasoningMode: "disabled" })` for one
OpenCode/OpenRouter turn. Carry the selection in the durable command
through Rust and the proxy. An omitted/default option restores provider
defaults on the next turn, including warm and recovered sessions. There
is no environment-level setting or automatic selection policy.
- Group optional Rust turn inputs in `CodexTurnOptions` and dispatch
through `start_turn_with_options`; retain `start_turn` for defaults.
Future turn settings can be added without another feature-specific
method.
- Expose a native-session capability for per-turn reasoning and reject
explicit unsupported selections before dispatch, including direct ACPX
and Codex backends. Runnerd checks the durable selected model as well as
the provider.
- Remove duplicate agent instructions from the shared OpenCode proxy
task envelope for all users. Send one system copy on every turn,
including prepared and resumed turns, because OpenCode reads the latest
user message’s system field. Preserve task constraints and completion
contracts.
- Document startup and streaming behavior. Add regression coverage for
role ordering, repeated chunks, final snapshot deduplication, and stale
turns.
## Verification
### Lower-load browser retry — 2026-10-10
**All 8/8 trials succeeded. In this batch, median Send → first visible
reply fell from 30.586 s to 12.476 s (59.2% lower).** Four fresh-agent
trials per variant, phase order before/after/after/before with two
trials per phase. Every adjacent-phase pair favored the candidate,
although one difference was only 0.301 s. This is evidence for the
readiness/probe changes on this host, not a production percentile or a
guarantee across providers.
| Phase/trial | Variant | Send → reply (s) | Observed ready → run (s) |
Session open → turn start (s) | Model requests |
|---|---|---:|---:|---:|---:|
| 0/0 | before | 45.042 | 25.337 | 3.629 | 2 |
| 0/1 | before | 13.689 | 0.000 | 2.443 | 2 |
| 1/0 | after | 14.696 | 0.000 | 2.526 | 1 |
| 1/1 | after | 13.389 | 0.000 | 2.470 | 2 |
| 2/0 | after | 10.871 | 0.000 | 2.706 | 2 |
| 2/1 | after | 11.564 | 0.004 | 2.443 | 2 |
| 3/0 | before | 41.582 | 21.518 | 2.376 | 2 |
| 3/1 | before | 19.589 | 9.753 | 2.707 | 1 |
Observed ready-to-run median: **15.636 s → 0 s**; zero means execution
began by the first ready observation, not literally zero latency.
Polling interval is nominally 250 ms plus HTTP time.
Session-open-to-turn-start includes controller handling, not just child
startup. All eight ran within the existing startup timeouts; no timeout
or reasoning policy was changed. Host load at fixture creation stayed
**5.47–8.73 on 18 CPUs**, versus 68.9–100.8 in the prior campaign. No
builds/tests ran concurrently with measurement.
Same merged source **b0a0158729a7913882a0e756fe7e27228d72bf53**, release
runner, rebuilt static UI, OpenCode **1.18.34**, model
**openrouter/deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731**, provider-default
reasoning, and empty isolated workspaces in both variants. Only the
readiness worker and explicit-model verification source were toggled;
the launch-lifetime fix and all proxy streaming changes were held
constant. Thus this does not separately measure the original streaming
changes. One browser per phase, two fresh companies/agents/chats per
phase. Measurement begins at capture-phase Send click and ends on
visible Hi text plus two animation frames. Status/thinking is excluded;
emoji can arrive just after the first text. Successful screenshots
inspected. Each variant had three two-request turns using
`paperclip_finish` and one one-request turn; no status lookup was
observed. Reported usage includes settlement after the first visible
reply.
Runner SHA-256
`57f658c220eecd2370ffd3333cd7e5d06d16bb2798af0cf43c84e01c8207c1c3`;
proxy
`bcc02fda2bf35b38a116cd880841aa6c534f6e0b497a96d97369a1e06dcc72ac`;
rebuilt UI tree
`eee238f2eda628c4e8c3660707986da4f8dd9100c814e26938fce3756df2eae4`
(sorted relative path, NUL, binary per-file SHA-256). Worker/probe
variant source hashes are unchanged from the preserved comparison below.
Measured turn cost **$0.00612574**, plus verification probes not
included in that figure. All eight attempts retained; all source/proxy
files restored and test supervisors exited.
Current commit validation: **53 successful CI checks, 4 skipped, zero
failing; Greptile 5/5 on
|
||
|
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> |
||
|
Dotta
|
2e5a24e177 |
feat(runner): add qualified OpenCode runtime (#12588)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Paperclip Runner provides a durable execution boundary for supported providers. > - The current production runtime supports Codex but cannot execute OpenCode sessions. > - OpenCode needs a qualified transport, strict input mapping, and normalized events. > - This pull request adds the OpenCode runtime as one isolated provider unit. > - The benefit is a reviewable provider expansion that does not weaken the existing Codex path. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting: packages/paperclip-runner and the Codex-local adapter configuration contract. **Problem or motivation** Paperclip Runner has provider-neutral contracts, but the production backend factory cannot start a qualified OpenCode session. This blocks OpenCode from using the durable runner path. **Proposed solution** Add the qualified OpenCode app-server proxy, driver, MCP bridge, backend, fixtures, and factory wiring. Keep existing Codex behavior unchanged. **Alternatives considered** Keeping OpenCode only on the direct adapter path would avoid this runtime work, but it would not provide durable runner recovery or normalized provider events. **Roadmap alignment** ROADMAP.md does not list a conflicting provider-runtime project. This change extends the existing Paperclip Runner architecture. ## What Changed - Added the qualified OpenCode app-server proxy and input queue. - Added collaboration-mode and provider-event normalization. - Added the OpenCode MCP bridge and native session backend. - Added strict fixtures and focused unit coverage. - Added only the package exports and adapter configuration required by this runtime. - Kept deferred SDK, lab, eval, and public package surfaces out of this change. ## Verification - GitHub Actions is the authoritative verification environment for this PR. - Run the package type checks and focused OpenCode tests in CI. - Run repository typecheck, test, build, security, and policy gates through the stack-aware workflow. - Local tests were not run because this checkout is resource constrained. ## Risks - OpenCode protocol changes could affect event normalization or recovery. - The driver fails closed on malformed input and unsupported runtime behavior. - Existing Codex selection remains unchanged unless the stored provider is OpenCode. > For core feature work, check [ROADMAP.md](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in #dev before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5.6, with repository tools, code execution, and parallel agent review. ## 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 linked existing issues or described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass — GitHub Actions is authoritative for this resource-constrained checkout - [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 ## Stack - Position: 1 of 4 - Base: master - Next: additional qualified provider runtimes |