mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-12 18:06:11 +02:00
DottaandPaperclip
01ddc26a37
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Scheduled routines track each dispatch in `routine_runs` and link it to an execution issue > - Moving an execution issue to `blocked` or `cancelled` correctly records a failed run state for operator visibility > - When that issue later resumes or completes, the run can retain the earlier failure reason and completion timestamp > - That stale state makes an active or successfully completed routine appear failed > - This pull request reconciles the run back to a live state on resume and preserves cleared failure details as completion context > - The benefit is that routine run status consistently reflects the current execution issue lifecycle without losing useful recovery history ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #9201 ### What happened? A routine execution issue that temporarily moved to `blocked` or `cancelled` caused its linked routine run to become `failed`. If the issue later returned to an active status or reached `done`, the routine run could keep the stale failure reason and terminal timestamp. ### Expected behavior Active execution issues should have an `issue_created` run with no failure or completion timestamp. Completed execution issues should have a `completed` run with no active failure reason, while retaining any earlier transient failure in structured trigger context for diagnosis. ### Steps to reproduce 1. Create a routine run linked to a routine execution issue. 2. Move the issue to `blocked` and synchronize the run state. 3. Move the issue back to `in_progress` or forward to `done` and synchronize again. 4. Observe that the run previously retained stale failed-state fields. ### Environment - Reproduced on `master` at `da549123cc`. - Core server behavior; not adapter-specific. - Covered with the embedded PostgreSQL routines service test harness. ## What Changed - Load the linked routine run while synchronizing execution issue status. - Restore transiently failed runs to `issue_created` when their execution issue resumes active work. - Clear stale failure state when an execution issue completes and retain the earlier failure under `triggerPayload.transientFailure`. - Add regression coverage for both resumed and completed execution issues. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts` — 57 tests passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed. ## Risks - Low risk: the change is limited to routine execution issue/run reconciliation. - A completed run now stores a prior failed-state reason as structured transient context instead of leaving `failureReason` populated. - No schema, migration, API contract, or UI behavior changes are included. > 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 - OpenAI Codex using GPT-5.4 with reasoning, repository tools, GitHub CLI access, code execution, and focused test execution. The runtime did not expose a context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>