Files
PaperClipAI/server
DottaandPaperclip 6cb6ac3b8e fix(github): allow review publication to finish before tool timeout (#16275)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agent work and its published results.
> - GitHub review bots publish task-scoped assessments through the tool
gateway.
> - A submission saves its assessment and publication intent before it
waits for GitHub.
> - The gateway's ten-second default can expire while those provider
requests continue.
> - GitHub can then show a completed review while the agent receives a
timeout and blocks its task.
> - This pull request gives GitHub bot tools the existing sixty-second
maximum by default.
> - The caller can receive the confirmed publication result without
manual task repair for ordinary slower responses.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A GitHub bot's `submit_review` call returned `504 tool_timeout`. Its
saved assessment continued to publish a summary and completed check
after the caller stopped waiting. The agent treated publication as
unconfirmed and blocked the task.

**Expected behavior**

A valid GitHub response that takes longer than ten seconds should return
its confirmed publication receipt within the gateway's supported
deadline.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Configure a report-only GitHub review bot and admit a PR review
request.
2. Delay the summary-comment PATCH response by eleven seconds.
3. Submit a complete assessment through a real run-scoped tool gateway.
4. Before this fix, the caller gets a timeout while the durable action
publishes one summary and a neutral check.
5. With this fix, the caller gets `completed`, `processed`, and the
assessment score. Retrying does not add another comment.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced from master at `2c17d3ca52a7840f280f1dd87975a2ad77de3b35`.

Related changes: Refs #16259 and #16263. Those changes repaired
connection recovery. This change addresses the subsequent submission
deadline.

## What Changed

- Use a sixty-second default for `paperclip_github_chat` tools in run
execution and board tool tests.
- Preserve explicit shorter deadlines and the existing maximum.
- Add PostgreSQL-backed regressions through the real gateway for delayed
publication, explicit deadlines, neutral checks, and duplicate
prevention.
- Document the deadline and the durable publication behavior.

## Verification

- Red: the eleven-second publication regression failed with
`ToolGatewayHttpError(504, tool_timeout)` after the summary and neutral
check were published.
- Green: the same regression passed after the repair.
- GitHub review workflow suite: 122 tests passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed.
- `pnpm build`: passed.
- `pnpm test:run`: running; results will be recorded before handoff.
- Live local verification is running against a dedicated test App on
[the disposable test
PR](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-permissions-smoke-20260926-pap57-fee7428e/pull/9).
A test-only preload delays one real GitHub PATCH response by eleven
seconds. It is not part of this change.

## Risks

GitHub bot calls can occupy their execution slot for up to sixty seconds
by default. Calls that exceed that limit can still time out. Durable
publication may continue after any caller timeout, so a timeout alone is
not proof of a failed write. This change does not add automatic task
reconciliation for arbitrarily slow or unavailable providers. No schema
or credential changes are required.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with code inspection, editing, test execution, and
browser verification. The exact deployment 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
- [ ] 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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 06:52:33 -05:00
..