Files
PaperClipAI/tests
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5 0502cc9fac test(chaos): retry a blocked M1 subtask and check the parent's stall wake (#20147)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The restart chaos harness grades the M1 scenario: a parent task
delegates two subtasks across restarts
> - When a subtask's run failed recovery, the harness only clicked Retry
on the parent. The parent's Retry is correctly held behind the blocked
subtask (#20109), so the task waited until its deadline
> - A real board user would also click the subtask's Retry. #20098 also
added a wake for a parent whose subtask stalls, and the grade did not
check it
> - This pull request clicks the board Retry on a blocked subtask
(graded as a needed Retry) and checks that the parent got exactly one
stall wake per stall
> - The benefit is that M1 grades the full user path and proves the
stall wake from the product's own activity record

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #20098, #20109, #20094

**What happened?**
In wave `w-20261109T003126-s9701`, the M1 parent t05 rested blocked
behind a blocked codex subtask. The harness clicked Retry on the parent.
The product held that Retry ("waiting on a blocked task") as designed.
Nothing retried the subtask, and the task waited 38 minutes until the
wave deadline. The wave also could not show whether the parent got the
new `issue_blocker_stalled` wake.

**Expected behavior**
The harness acts like the board: it clicks Retry on a blocked subtask
that offers one, and it counts that as a needed Retry. The M1 oracle
checks the parent's activity for one `issue.blocker_stalled_wake` per
stalled subtask.

## What Changed

- `observer.ts`:
- For M1, the observer checks the parent's subtasks every 10 s while the
parent is open, independent of the parent's rest window.
- Each blocked subtask is recorded as a stall: the subtask plus its
latest recovery action, from `GET /api/issues/:id/recovery-actions`.
- When a blocked subtask's interruption offers Retry, the harness posts
the board Retry. It clicks once per subtask; a click that was not
accepted can be tried again on a later check.
- The parent's `issue.blocker_stalled_wake` activity entries are
collected as `stallWakes` through `GET /api/issues/:id/activity`.
- `grader.ts`: R3 fails with `retry_needed_on_subtask_<n> (<ids>)` when
a subtask needed a board Retry, unless the parent's own Retry already
failed R3.
- `workloads.ts`: the new M1 check `parent_woken_once_per_stall` is
added when a subtask stalled. Each (subtask, recovery action) stall must
have exactly one matching wake. A stall with an unknown action matches
any wake for that subtask.

## Verification

- `npx vitest run` in `tests/restart-chaos`: 203 passed. New tests
cover:
- an observer test: a blocked subtask gets one Retry click, and the
parent is still watched;
  - the R3 subtask-retry grade;
- the stall-wake check: woken once, not woken, woken twice, two stalls
of one subtask with only one woken, and no stall.
- G1, which also has subtasks, is unaffected: the existing governance
tests pass.
- `node scripts/typecheck-test-projects.mjs tests/restart-chaos`: clean.

## Risks

- The harness now acts on subtasks, which it did not before. It clicks
once per subtask and only when the product offers Retry.
- The stall-wake check reads activity through the board API. If the API
omits these entries for a board user, the check fails visibly instead of
passing.

## Model Used

- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, with tool use and code
execution in Claude Code.

## 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>
2026-11-08 20:12:03 -06:00
..