mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-07 07:23:08 +02:00
DottaandPaperclip
4f9894df44
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Heartbeat recovery keeps assigned issues moving when a run or continuation path disappears > - Accepted issue-thread interactions can create a continuation wake after an agent previously parked for review > - The recovery sweep could requeue that accepted-interaction wake while the queued-run gate cancelled it using the older pre-acceptance park summary > - That cancellation path had no bound, so recovery could repeat the same wake and cancellation indefinitely > - This pull request makes accepted-interaction evidence supersede the older park and caps repeated recovery cancellations at three attempts > - The benefit is that accepted work resumes normally, while genuine repeated failures become a visible dependency wait or escalation instead of a cancel loop ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #9331 The accepted-interaction continuation recovery added by #9331 can encounter a stale continuation summary written before approval. The sweep requeues a continuation carrying the accepted interaction timestamp, but queued-run invalidation cancels it because the older summary says to wait for review. Recovery then sees the accepted interaction without a successful run and requeues again. This PR prevents that stale-summary cancellation and adds a bounded fallback if three equivalent cancellations have already occurred. ## What Changed - Let queued continuation wakes with a parseable `interactionResolvedAt` bypass a pre-acceptance waiting-for-review park summary. - Count consecutive unsuccessful continuation runs for the same issue and agent since interaction acceptance; after three review-park cancellations, convert a real dependency wait or use the existing visible escalation path. - Add focused regression coverage for the park bypass, unchanged non-interaction park behavior, below-cap requeue, cap escalation, and successful-run skip. - Document the accepted-interaction precedence and bounded requeue contract in execution semantics §9.2. ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts -t "accepted interaction continuation recovery|accepted interaction recovery after its continuation succeeds|requeues accepted interaction continuations stranded"` - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-stale-queue-invalidation.test.ts -t "pre-acceptance review park|continuation summary parks executor work"` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` ## Risks - Low risk: the park bypass only applies when the queued context contains a parseable interaction resolution timestamp. - The retry bound is scoped to unsuccessful `issue_continuation_needed` runs for the same company, issue, agent, error code, and post-acceptance time window. - No schema, migration, API, or UI changes. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, exact model ID `gpt-5.5`, high-reasoning coding mode with repository tool use and command execution; context-window size was not exposed by the runtime. ## 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>