Files
PaperClipAI/doc/evals.md
DottaandPaperclip 846336e5a0 test: harden agent chat setup, interruptions and restart evals (#13762)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip lets people manage agents through ongoing conversations.
> - Chat users can change instructions while a provider is already
working.
> - Existing chat evals wait for each turn to settle before the next
message.
> - They cannot prove delivery during active work or the saved effect of
a correction.
> - Existing fixtures also enable Agent Chat through the API rather than
the settings UI.
> - This PR adds bounded browser workflows and checks their persisted
outcomes.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #13741, #13752, #13750.

**What happened?**

The chat suites cover planning, delegation, status, and recovery. They
lack active-turn follow-ups and the experimental settings lifecycle. A
sequential conversation can pass even if messages sent during work are
lost.

**Expected behavior**

A follow-up submitted during a provider turn survives and affects the
final reply. A changed launch day appears in the saved plan. Disabling
Agent Chat rejects new messages while preserving history; re-enabling
resumes the same conversation.

**Steps to reproduce**

Run the explicit `agent-chat-stories` suite. It selects three local
cases for each native Claude and Codex profile. An ordinary provider
command waits for a fixture brief file so the browser can send the
follow-up at an observed active-run boundary.

## What Changed

- Add six opt-in Product E2E cells for settings, active follow-ups, and
plan corrections.
- Drive experimental settings through the UI and verify disabled sends
are rejected by the public API.
- Use a bounded file wait in the actual isolated agent workspace, with
provider-written readiness and an undisclosed brief reference.
- Grade persisted user messages, final replies, native run outcomes, and
exact saved plan fields.
- Accept active-turn steering or one queued successor; reject lost
input, duplicate input, and stale outputs.
- Allow one steered run or two sequential runs throughout the shared
harness, while preserving exact counts for other cases.
- Require a single marker-bearing response attributed to the final
provider run.
- Unload the development browser client before restarting the server,
avoiding reconnect/navigation races without weakening the post-restart
memory check.
- Add browser regressions for restart isolation and asynchronously saved
settings switches.
- Document prepared-agent setup, native onboarding limits, and the
separate API-tool rollout gate.

## Verification

- Eval TypeScript check passed.
- Eval support suite: 436 tests passed in 39 files.
- New oracle calibration: six tests passed, including plausible invalid
outcomes.
- Browser support regressions: seven tests passed; the restart
regression was observed failing before the fix.
- Catalog discovery selects exactly six local native cases and leaves
default paid selection unchanged.
- [Consolidated existing native chat
report](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-35643286055-1/):
master `b82661b56`, 33/34 passed, all cleanup passed. The failure was a
browser navigation timeout across restart; the page request returned 200
and the chat rendered.
- [Nine targeted restart/replay
cells](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-35645850088-1/)
passed on `1fe2fe275`, including the original failure, across native
Claude/Codex and local/Daytona; all cleanup passed.
- [Initial six-story
campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35644832817)
retained all six failures: asynchronous switch assertions, unavailable
fixture paths, and rich-text escaping in raw command comparisons. The
corrected fixtures preserve the same behavioral assertions.
- [Six-story campaign
v2](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-35646270035-1/)
on `8232773a0`: 4/6 passed (both settings cases and both Claude
interruptions). Codex could not see the host-temp fixture outside its
workspace; this failed before follow-up delivery was exercised.
- [Four affected interruption
cases](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-35647760635-1/)
all passed, including cleanup, on definition v3 / `ad6ac0545`. Files
live inside the actual agent workspace and the observed run workspace is
verified. Both providers saved Friday in the real plan with the
undisclosed brief reference; follow-ups persisted while the original run
was active. Together with both unchanged settings cases from v2, all six
new scenario variants have passing live evidence.
- Final head `ad6ac05456646c09d3452e320279457625353948`: 54 successful
checks, two intentional skips, zero pending/failing checks; mergeable
and clean. Fresh Greptile 5/5, zero unresolved findings.
- Full typecheck, tests, build, and browser CI passed remotely. One
earlier head encountered a signoff-policy browser timing failure; the
final head passed that shard.
- Local pnpm wrapper could not fetch its version/signature metadata in
the restricted environment; local eval checks used the installed Node
executables. Repo-wide validation was completed by GitHub Actions.

## Risks

These are eval-only changes. The file wait is a timing fixture in the
isolated agent workspace, not a production runner hook. Native Codex
host-filesystem isolation stays unchanged. It has a two-minute limit and
is released in `finally`. The prepared-agent settings case is not full
native onboarding: the wizard currently offers legacy adapters. The
disabled-entry assertion uses full document navigation, which clears the
prior React Query cache; preserved history is checked through the public
API and re-enabled chat. No production prompt, rollout default, adapter
behavior, or credential policy changes. Active-task reassignment and
worker-crash recovery remain outside these new cases.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with repository tools and code execution. The exact
deployment model ID and context window are not exposed in this task.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-21 16:18:06 -05:00

12 KiB

Paperclip evaluation guide

Paperclip has two live eval families with different questions, owners, and evidence. Choose the family before selecting a model, profile, or case.

  • Runner Evals: real Runner/provider behavior against a seeded mock control plane. Definitions live in paperclip-evals/evals/paperclip-runner; see the direct live protocol evals.
  • Product E2E Evals: real browser, Paperclip server, database, Runner, provider, and (where selected) Daytona, using an isolated instance and grading oracle. See tests/runner-e2e and Everyday Workflows.

Runner Evals answer whether a real runner/provider can perform a bounded protocol operation against the expected control-plane contract. Product E2E Evals answer whether a person can complete a product workflow through the real Paperclip surfaces and whether the resulting artifact and state are usable. The names describe the system under test; “headless” is an execution option, not an eval category.

Selecting a family

Use Runner Evals for a runner protocol, adapter, transport, native session, tool grant, or one-turn provider qualification question. The workflow checks out an exact paperclip-evals revision, builds the Runner and viewer, runs a live roster, and renders the canonical Evalbook report. The control plane is a seeded test authority, so a passing result does not prove browser UX, production server behavior, database persistence, Daytona behavior, or a real third-party mutation.

Use Product E2E Evals for browser interaction, issue/task lifecycle, approval and clarification UI, project/repository selection, persistence over a controller restart, artifact delivery, billing/evidence behavior, or runner continuity in local or Daytona environments. The harness creates a fresh Paperclip instance per cell and uses public APIs and the production browser surface. The suite's Everyday Workflows are Product E2E even when their results are imported into Evalbook.

Do not combine a partial Runner campaign and a partial Product E2E campaign into one score. A campaign is comparable when its definition/grader, model/profile, environment, and contract match. The evaluated Paperclip revision may intentionally differ for a before/after fix comparison; record it as a comparison axis.

Ownership and codepaths

Runner Evals are owned by the Runner/evals maintainers. Definitions, rosters, case prompts, and the report program live in the sibling private repository paperclipai/paperclip-evals; Runner integration, viewer, aggregation, and publication code live under packages/paperclip-runner and the runner-protocol-live-evals.yml workflow. The public-facing report uses the same Evalbook renderer and Runner Lab viewer as the trusted report after sanitization.

Product E2E Evals are owned by the runner E2E maintainers. The catalog and harness are under tests/runner-e2e; the package scripts are test:e2e:runner, test:e2e:runner:unit, test:e2e:runner:typecheck, and test:e2e:runner:report. README.md, FIXTURES.md, SECURITY.md, and EVERYDAY-WORKFLOWS.md are the detailed sources of truth. The harness starts the server and embedded database, creates the company/agent/task through the real APIs, drives Chromium, and invokes the selected local or Daytona runner.

The explicit-only agent-chat-hardening Product E2E suite covers native chat recovery, hiring, status evidence, and review handoff on local and selected warm Daytona paths. Its fixture contract distinguishes startup cancellation from active response cancellation and HTTP send replay from ambiguous provider action recovery. Select it explicitly; --all excludes it.

The explicit-only agent-chat-stories suite covers the experimental settings lifecycle for a configured native agent and follow-ups during active work. Its fixture-driven file wait and persisted-plan oracle are documented in the Product E2E guide. It does not qualify the native onboarding wizard or change the native API-tool rollout defaults.

Validation ladder

Start with credential-free checks and a catalog listing. For Product E2E:

pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck
pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit
pnpm test:e2e:runner -- --list

For one explicitly selected local cell, configure only the credentials named by that cell in .env.runner-e2e.local, then run a narrow ID:

pnpm test:e2e:runner -- --id core-compatibility.runner-codex.local.message-marker

Use the selectors documented in the runner E2E README for a suite, profile, case, group, or environment. Daytona needs the immutable image digest and DAYTONA_API_KEY; follow the README and fixture security guide. --all excludes manual suites such as everyday-workflows. Select that suite explicitly; use a narrow selector while developing a fixture.

For Runner Evals, the narrowest useful local validation is the report program's help/validation path and the deterministic Runner checks documented in runner-workflow-evals.md. Hosted direct live runs must use the default-branch workflow, an exact 40 character evals_sha, an explicitly selected roster (or the maintained enabled all campaign), and the protected paid environment. The complete hosted command is intentionally kept in the workflow and direct live protocol guide. Live provider runs can spend money; use the existing workflow authorization and the user's stated scope when selecting them.

Failure taxonomy

Record the primary failure class and preserve the evidence that supports it.

  • Product failure: evidence shows Paperclip or Runner behavior violates the authored case or a hard invariant, such as wrong task state, missing approval gate, lost persistence, bad artifact, or incorrect protocol operation.
  • Model/provider behavior failure: the provider turn completed with usable evidence but the model gave the wrong answer, ignored an interaction, failed to complete the authored operation, or violated a semantic assertion. It is scored as behavior, not silently retried as infrastructure.
  • Grading/evidence failure: the case or matcher cannot establish its claim, a required recording/screenshot/result is malformed, or the report contract is invalid. Fix the harness or grader before interpreting the score.
  • Infrastructure failure: the evidence points to provider/profile unavailability, transport admission failure, service startup failure, a missing credential/image, or inability to produce usable evidence. Startup, transport, and timeout symptoms can instead be product defects when evidence implicates Paperclip or Runner; classify from the observed failure and supported cause, rather than the symptom name alone. Preserve the artifact.

Missing usage or price data means unknown, not free. Keep provider-reported costs separate from estimates, and include retry costs when available. Latency, cleanup, billing coverage, and unpriced usage are dimensions of the result and should remain visible alongside the primary class. A timeout after successful product state reads can be a product behavior failure; a failed server-health read may be infrastructure, but inspect its cause. Use the family-specific classifier and read the attempt evidence before changing an analytical label.

Evidence, provenance, and history

An Evalbook report is a presentation of immutable attempt records, not the source of truth. Keep the campaign ID, Paperclip commit, paperclip-evals commit, catalog/roster or definition fingerprint, model/profile, environment, grader version, selected cells, retries, and provider/runtime usage with the report. Public projections follow each family's reviewed allowlist and may include sanitized fixture conversation, named tool outcomes, screenshots, and structured evidence intended for public history. Credentials, secrets, private data, raw unredacted records, and hidden reasoning stay out of public projections.

Distinguish a complete campaign from a partial campaign. A narrow selector, manual diagnostic, missing cell, or infrastructure retry can be useful evidence without being a qualification run. History should retain both, with explicit coverage and completeness, while trend and latest-green views compare only compatible complete campaigns. Refreshing an existing report from retained evidence has zero provider calls and is a new presentation of the old measurement, not a new model run.

Existing public histories are available at Runner protocol history and Runner Product E2E history. The consolidated eval hub is at pages.paperclip.ing/evals.

For a repeatable workflow, use the matching skill: paperclip-evals, add-runner-eval, or add-product-e2e-eval.

Install the authoring skills

The reviewable sources live in this repository's .agents/skills. For a multi-repository workspace, install the three skills at ~/paperclipai/.agents/skills (not ~/paperclipai/skills). From the Paperclip checkout, run:

for skill in paperclip-evals add-runner-eval add-product-e2e-eval; do
  install -d "$HOME/paperclipai/.agents/skills/$skill"
  install -m 644 ".agents/skills/$skill/SKILL.md" \
    "$HOME/paperclipai/.agents/skills/$skill/SKILL.md"
done

This replaces only the three named skill entrypoints. Run it again after updating their tracked sources. Each skill locates the repository independently of its installation directory.

Maintain the public hub

The hub is a static directory with two links to the existing history systems. It displays a dated snapshot, not a live scoreboard. It does not run models, create another result archive, or change the existing campaign URLs.

Build from the public history feeds and check its summary logic:

python3 -m unittest discover -s scripts/evals-hub -p 'test_*.py'
python3 scripts/evals-hub/build.py --output .paperclip/evals-hub

The hub checks need Python 3 and do not call model providers.

For offline checks, pass --history-dir <directory> containing runner-protocol-evals-history.json and runner-e2e-history.json. For a pre-merge preview, pass --docs-ref <branch-or-sha> to link the guide at that revision. The default guide link uses master.

Publish with the Paperclip page helper and the configured page-uploader credentials. Use Bash 4 or newer; macOS's system Bash 3 cannot run this helper. On macOS with Homebrew Bash installed, put $(brew --prefix bash)/bin first in PATH before these commands:

export PAPERCLIP_PAGE_BUCKET=pages.paperclip.ing
export PAPERCLIP_PAGE_BASE_URL=https://pages.paperclip.ing
export AWS_REGION=us-east-1
bash .agents/skills/paperclip-page/scripts/publish.sh .paperclip/evals-hub --slug evals --dry-run
bash .agents/skills/paperclip-page/scripts/publish.sh .paperclip/evals-hub --slug evals

For later refreshes, rebuild in the same output directory and publish with --update. Keep its ignored .paperclip-page/state.json ownership record; without that record, the helper will refuse to overwrite an existing prefix. Verify the public page and its links after publication. This manual refresh does not add a scheduled workflow. Preserve the measurement date when choosing a newer rendering of the same campaign.