mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-13 15:55:46 +01:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5
0b8ba1ac92
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Task chat lets a person send follow-up messages to a running agent, and steer them into the live turn > - A sandboxed run (for example on Daytona) can take minutes to boot before its provider session exists > - A message sent during that boot cannot be steered, so it waits in the steering pane > - The runner then puts the message into its first turn, and the server removes it from the queue, but the view has no signal for this, so the message stays in the steering pane as "queued" > - That stale local entry also hides the queue id, so Steer and Discard fail for every later message > - This pull request tells the view which messages the first turn takes, and drops local queue entries whose run has settled > - The benefit is that a message sent while the sandbox boots shows as sent at once, and later messages keep working Steer and Discard ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A person sent a follow-up while the agent's sandbox was booting. The message stayed in the steering pane with Steer unavailable. After the agent started, the message stayed there. The agent had received it in its first turn. Later, Discard on that message failed with "Couldn't discard. Message is still queued.", and a new message also stayed in the steering pane. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Assign a task to a Paperclip Runner agent that runs in a Daytona sandbox. 2. While the sandbox boots, send a follow-up message. 3. Wait for the agent's first response. The message is still in the steering pane. 4. After the run hands off to a successor run, send another message and try to discard the first one. **Expected behavior** A message sent while the run is starting shows as a sent message. Later messages keep working Steer and Discard. **Actual behavior** The first message stays in the steering pane. Discard fails, and the new message cannot be steered until the page reloads. ## What Changed - `firstTurnQueuedCommentIds` (server, `first-turn-queued-input.ts`) returns the messages in a deferred queue that the target run's first turn already sealed, or will take while it is still starting. It uses the same eligibility rule as `claimFirstTurnQueuedInput`. It reads only lean columns, so the queue poll does not transfer run snapshots or large wake payloads. - The queue read path and the queue mutation path both put these ids in a new optional `firstTurnCommentIds` field on `IssueQueuedCommentQueue`. - The task view puts each of those messages in the conversation as input of that run, at its submission time, and not in the steering pane. - The task view no longer treats a saved message as a pending local queue entry after its target run is no longer live. A request that is still in flight keeps its original target. ## Verification - Red-green server test: `issue-queued-comments-routes.test.ts` "reports the messages a preparing/native run's first turn takes, before and after it seals them" and "reports no first-turn messages once the run's turn already started". Before the fix, `firstTurnCommentIds` was `undefined`. - Red-green UI tests: `IssueDetail.test.tsx` "shows a message the booting run's first turn takes as sent, not queued" (still starting, and sealed) and "keeps queue controls for a new message after the run that took an earlier one hands off". Before the fix, the queue held `['new-message', 'boot-message']` and the queue id was withheld. - Reproduced on staging first: the run's context held a first-turn receipt for the stuck message, and the server queue had no entries, while the view still showed it as queued. - `npx vitest run` for `issue-queued-comments-routes`, `queued-comment-consumption`, `queued-comment-postgres`, `queued-comment-use-cases`: 172 passed. The existing queue-poll byte budget tests still pass. - `npx vitest run src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx src/components/task-chat src/lib/issue-queued-comment-queue src/lib/optimistic-issue-comments`: 1288 passed. - `tsc --noEmit` for shared, server, and ui: no new errors. - `pnpm verify` exits 2 because the change touches `packages/shared`. Required CI supplies the broad coverage. ## Risks - Low risk. The new field is optional and only for display. Delivery still belongs to the first-turn claim and the deferred wake. - If a starting run fails before its first turn, the field goes away and the message shows in the queue again for the next run. This is correct, because the deferred wake still holds it. - The queue read adds one lean run read and one comment read only while a deferred queue targets a running run. ## Model Used - Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, in Claude Code with tool use (shell, file edits, browser). ## 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>