mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-09 16:02:36 +01:00
Dotta
d8b0eae687
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The chat catalog needs fixed source and explicit conditions for each measurement. > - The latest timeline run delivered a complete account within its original deadline. > - Its assertion missed ordinary exitCode notation and a command with an omitted subject inside a named worker bullet. > - The reviewed source corrects those bounded textual checks while retaining independent history and command proof. > - This pull request pins that immutable source for one full-ten measurement. > - Original failed grades and unresolved Company timing remain visible. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #19392, #19086, #19388. This follows the prior source pin. The latest timeline response correctly described requirements, a real failed command, saved pause, human reassignment, repair and successful verification. Its original grade still failed one narrative assertion. This pin carries the reviewed correction without merging the full catalog or its production overlays. ## What Changed - Pin source `936c3bbe0e83ca15616254f23d9023b2065fc5fb`, tree `e5c64d67935497164b098e31e995f87ba7875d06`. - Advance only the timeline oracle from v11 to v12 in the candidate snapshot and manifest. - Retain all 244 current queries, contexts, expected outcomes, model, credentials, clocks and human/native accounting. - Record one planned full-ten bounded measurement at native cap 2 and zero automatic retries. - Change only the manifest, its target assertion and the exact candidate descriptor snapshot. ## Verification - I verified the immutable source branch readback before I published this pin. - The new narrative control fails on the parent. The fixed source passes 300 timeline, native-proof and declaration controls, including all 242 lazy declarations with zero fixture callbacks. - The response from result 5094 is accepted by the local diagnostic. The original grade is retained as FAILED; this is not a new native PASS. - Fresh full runner E2E types and the SDK guard over 506 inputs pass in the qualified source graph. An earlier isolated worktree type attempt had dependency-alias errors; the clean source qualification supersedes that setup gap. - Controller: `node --test tests/runner-e2e/chat-full-catalog-testops-manifest.test.mjs tests/runner-e2e/chat-full-catalog-testops-adapter.test.mjs tests/runner-e2e/chat-full-catalog-testops-reconcile.test.mjs` — 40 controls pass. - The snapshot equals the committed source descriptor bytes. All 244 rows compare equal to the prior pin except the timeline oracle version. - Source descriptor SHA256: `19185aa5298c93d159c3d8547661fd6ef22185e74be1c18b8497bae2ef8051c7`. - Controller manifest SHA256: `822494b170139a8204ff36b33891e2f4960ac0aba6800e9856f2d25dd24de7c6`. - Launcher, protected evidence wire and the accepted 506 SDK inputs remain unchanged. The source SDK registry stays `efa70621e9fb42aa185f7ee616a1a726aa3eccb367e67e28817cedf26ef2ade8`. - Exact pin head `31f47fcdfb600e6b15b35ed50c2a447d03681f06` has 56 successful checks and three configured skips. Both protected checks pass. Greptile is 5/5 for this head with zero open threads. Paperclip Review completed neutral at 5/5. GitHub reports CLEAN and MERGEABLE. These checks do not qualify the unrun native experiment. ## Risks - Original timeline result 5094 remains FAILED. All three native runs succeeded and the account was complete in 248,876 ms, but the original narrative check failed. Local calibration does not rewrite that grade. - Original Company result 5093 ended without first-CEO completion. Its model/runtime timing cause remains unresolved. This source makes no Company runtime or latency fix claim. - The full-ten measurement is unrun. It is a bounded experiment, not proof of deterministic timing, reliability or an all-ten pass. - Company retains two base human inputs plus at most one independently verified UI approval, minimum two and maximum three native runs, and 480,000 ms. Timeline retains three native runs, one human input and 720,000 ms. No condition is waived. - Secret journeys still require independent semantic safety review. Metadata shape alone does not establish that a proposed name is non-sensitive. - The interaction-accept and API-search overlays remain separate, reviewed, unmerged core PRs. This pin does not merge them or the full catalog. The 196/244 admission gate stays fixed. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6.1 Sol (`gpt-6.1-sol`), with reasoning, repository tools and code execution. The host does not expose an exact context-window size. No model or paid provider was called for local controls. ## 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