mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-28 20:21:50 +01:00
DottaandPaperclip
9b7d5b35eb
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip coordinates agent work through Runner.
> - Scheduled Product E2E campaigns need measured cost and time
forecasts.
> - The saved forecast samples came from October 21.
> - The October 27 qualifications retain final usage for all 19 model
requests.
> - The Claude measurements are hosted; the Codex measurements are
local.
> - This change refreshes the samples and keeps measurement hosts
separate.
> - Operators can inspect the latest evidence without treating it as
current qualification or an invoice.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #17127 and #17946.
**What happened?**
The scheduled forecast still uses the older pilot amounts. It reports no
hosted measurement and does not record the measurement host per sample.
**What did you expect to happen?**
The forecast must retain the latest complete model receipts and their
source hashes. It must keep local and hosted timing cohorts separate. A
changed definition must remain unqualified.
**Steps to reproduce**
Prepare the daily or weekly forecast from the default branch. Inspect
its saved measurement date, totals, and hosted fields.
## What Changed
- Refresh four samples from two intact request ledgers and four retained
Product results.
- Record measurement hosts, final request counts, and original campaign
outcomes.
- Add historical hosted totals. Current hosted totals still require
matching evidence for every selected cell.
- Keep hosts in separate per-cell cohorts. Preserve definition drift and
unknown slow-tail estimates.
- Document the model-cost scope and timing limits.
## Verification
- Forecast and scheduled-preflight tests: 33 passed.
- The extraction replays both hash-checked ledgers, requires final
receipts, and checks the retained pricecards. The four samples cover 19
final requests.
- Daily historical model subtotal: $0.428650100; summed attempt time:
107.286 seconds.
- Weekly historical model subtotal: $0.793676500; summed attempt time:
158.093 seconds. The Codex samples are local.
- Full Product support suite at the initial head: 4,510 passed, seven
failed, three skipped. A clean 6b9e5f3a baseline with the same installed
dependencies reproduces the same seven failures: two Copilot image
assertions, four workflow-selection shell assertions, and one database
startup test.
- Product typecheck also fails on that clean baseline because the shared
installed Runner workspace exports are stale. The fresh CI build remains
the typecheck gate.
- No provider request, new live campaign, budget change, or schedule
activation is part of this PR.
## Risks
- These are successful-attempt measurements, not a prediction of failure
frequency or a campaign invoice.
- The feedback source fingerprint changed after the samples.
Current-compatible totals remain unknown; no historical fingerprint is
rewritten.
- Hosted worker cases passed, but their original workflow failed during
report dependency setup. That outcome stays visible.
- Hosted detection deliberately accepts only the measured GitHub Ubuntu
environment. Other host labels remain unqualified until declared with
their own evidence.
- The weekly selection still has no complete hosted timing measurement.
Infrastructure, storage, and observability charges stay separate from
model spend.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 based, with tool execution and extended reasoning.
The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed in this
session.
## 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>