mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-12 14:19:00 +01:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5
88835e624a
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The restart chaos harness proves that real agent tasks survive control-plane restarts > - In a K4/K6 wave with the M1 multi-agent scenario, one subtask failed. Its parent waited on it, and the harness kept watching for over 50 minutes > - When the operator stopped the wave, the harness wrote no grade files, so the 17 finished tasks had no grade > - Separately, master's harness test for time to first activity failed after #20077 changed how time is measured from run creation > - This pull request makes M1 fail fast on a blocked subtask, grades the finished tasks of an interrupted wave, and aligns the speed grade with #20077 > - The benefit is shorter waves with a grade for every task, and a green harness suite on master ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #20071, #20077, #20088 **What happened?** Wave `w-20261108T181313-s9701` (local, codex and claude, A1/C1/M1, K4 and K6) ran 71 minutes against a planned 30. Task t05 (M1) delegated CHA-8 and CHA-9. The CHA-8 run failed after a K4 restart (the defect that #20088 fixes), and CHA-8 went to `blocked`. The observer kept waiting for CHA-8 to finish. After SIGINT, the harness threw before grading, so no task had a grade file. Also, `wave-speed.test.ts` fails on master: #20077 changed `runMetrics` to measure from the start of `heartbeat.queue`. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run an M1 task whose subtask run fails and leaves the subtask `blocked`. 2. See the observer wait until the parent deadline. 3. Send SIGINT to the harness and see that no grade files are written. **Expected behavior** A blocked subtask ends the wait, and the parent is graded as a failure with a `task_child_blocked` timeline entry. An interrupted wave grades every finished task and fails the wave. ## What Changed - `observer.ts`: `childrenPending` treats a `blocked` subtask as settled, so the parent rests and is graded. The timeline records `task_child_blocked` with the subtask ids. - `observer.ts`: `markUnfinished` closes an open task at interrupt as unfinished (`timedOut`, last seen status) and records `task_unfinished_at_interrupt`. - `main.ts`: an interrupt now sets the harness error and grades the wave, instead of throwing before the grade. The wave still fails. - `wave-speed.ts`: `firstActivityMs` uses `runMetrics().firstActivityAfterRunCreatedMs` from #20077, so there is one definition of time from run creation. - `wave-speed.test.ts`: the fixture starts `heartbeat.queue` when the comment wait ends, as in real runs. ## Verification - `npx vitest run` in `tests/restart-chaos`: 172 passed. Before this change, the wave-speed test failed on master. - `node scripts/typecheck-test-projects.mjs tests/restart-chaos`: clean. ## Risks - A subtask that is `blocked` only for a short time and then resumes would end the parent's watch after the 60-second grace. The grade then shows a failure that a longer wait could avoid. M1 subtasks have no blockers, so `blocked` means a stuck subtask. - An interrupted wave grades tasks while its server is still up. If the server is already down, artifact collection fails, and those tasks are graded as failures. ## 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>