mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-08 12:33:05 +01:00
DottaandPaperclip
32e5eada06
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip must complete work through ordinary human and agent controls. > - The remote chat campaign exposed observer and setup defects as well as product discovery gaps. > - Case 466 rejected a valid handoff that used headings, pronouns and inline HTML. > - Case 487 seeded three daily runs although its declared journey needs six. > - Secure-entry replies used a real bound question card that the observer did not support. > - Team installation omitted its existing strict request schemas from the API search result. > - This PR pins the reviewed coherent repairs and keeps their metadata in sync. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #18921. Refs #18964. Refs #18967. Refs #18968. Refs #18970. Refs #18971. Refs #18972. The previous launch remains unchanged. Case 53 passed its latest native attempt. Cases 466, 487, 580 and 610 still retain their prior failures. The next representative run must test the repaired conditions. The company-secret case follows only after the personal-secret journey proves real secure entry and worker use. Its separate case-local follow-up is held for a later pin; case 578 is excluded from the next four-case selection and has no pass credit. ## What Changed - Pin immutable candidate `e757e447371c4781a3eff3a0ea9dc9c4eceb060a` and its existing descriptor snapshot. - Record the explicit oracle versions and source-file changes for timeline attribution, review fixture allowance, and bound personal/company secret questions. - Keep all 244 case identities, human requests, original run and action counts, time allowances, provider/model, private evidence limits and broader qualification holds unchanged. - Preserve the actual request-body schema affordance for team preview and installation, existing response links and prior help. ## Verification - The final integrated candidate passed 442 owning checks across 18 suites. All 242 declarations loaded with zero fixture callbacks; the existing manifest joins those declarations and two legacy tasks into 244 cases. - The team service fixture passed 29 tests. The frozen candidate API consumer passed 2045 tests after the three-line schema exposure change. These are component controls, not a new native pass. - The stale inventory expectation reproduced one failure with 16 passes. Its unchanged derivation traces five previously reviewed YAML corrections. Updating only the expected constant passed 17 controls, and the existing definition-drift and catalog-tamper negatives still passed. No scenario YAML changed in this candidate. - The existing SDK guard confirms all 506 inputs are unchanged and the reviewed registry remains `efa70621e9fb42aa185f7ee616a1a726aa3eccb367e67e28817cedf26ef2ade8`. No compiler build or registry renewal was needed. - The existing pin, TestOps contract, adapter, reconciliation and streaming controls passed locally. Current master also passed the existing reporting-lock guard with its actual current lock. - The final source includes the reviewed immediate-actor/consecutive-pronoun controls and checks every rendered question title, header and submit label for unsafe instructions. The remaining fixed scanner reasons are diagnostic only. The combined source passed 442 checks; all 131 pin/contract/API/streaming controls passed. - Fresh exact-head [normal CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41847423336) passed: 48 successful jobs and one selector skip, including both required aggregates. Greptile reports 5/5 for this head, with no actionable findings or unresolved review threads. The current optional Paperclip review is queued and is not credited as an assessment pass; its prior-head 5/5 remains historical. The finite source peer review found no material issue and did not claim native execution. The prior CI attempt is retained. No new native pass is claimed by this PR. ## Risks The new source repairs observation and setup, but it does not prove the next native outcome. The secure-entry accounting records one real chat request and one authenticated UI answer as the two declared human actions; it keeps the raw comment count separate. The question path requires the bound pending card, actual resolver audit and delivery facts. Ordinary cases retain their existing accounting. Private scans and archive limits can still reject evidence. Prior failed and unknown attempts remain immutable. ## Model Used OpenAI `gpt-6.1-sol` through Codex. Capabilities used: source analysis, integration and local checks. The host does not expose the context-window limit. The evaluated model stays OpenCode/OpenRouter `deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash-1017`. ## 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>