mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-06 21:05:21 +02:00
DottaandPaperclip
e936ea3905
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Pipeline health reports give operators early warnings when a workflow step cannot run cleanly. > - Failed stage automation is surfaced as an `automation_failed` health warning for the affected item. > - A single item can have repeated failed automation rows for the same stage, especially after retries or repeated failed attempts. > - Rendering every matching row creates duplicate warnings that make the pipeline look noisier than it is. > - This pull request deduplicates failed automation warnings by the item/stage pair before adding them to the health report. > - The benefit is that repeated failures for the same item in the same stage produce one actionable warning, while distinct items still remain visible. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #8866 Bug: pipeline health could emit duplicate `automation_failed` warnings when the input contained repeated failed automation rows for the same live item and stage. Reviewers should expect one warning per `stageId:caseId` pair, not one warning per backing execution row. ## What Changed - Deduplicated failed automation warnings with per-stage case tracking in `computePipelineHealth`, avoiding collision-prone composite string keys before pushing `automation_failed` warnings. - Added shared Vitest coverage for a single automation failure, duplicate same-stage same-item dedupe, separate warnings for different item IDs in the same stage, the same item ID in different stages, and colon-delimited ID collision cases. - Kept pipeline route behavior unchanged; this PR only changes shared warning rendering and direct shared tests. ## Verification - `pnpm vitest packages/shared/src/pipeline-health.test.ts` - 1 test file passed - 5 tests passed - PR #9090 remote checks on `bbbb2d4627f5be17ca210dedb9edb91edd047df8` - All Paperclip CI/status checks passed - Greptile Confidence Score: 5/5, 0 comments added, 0 unresolved Greptile threads No route test changed because this PR does not change the route's failed-automation query or normalization behavior. ## Risks Low risk. The change only suppresses duplicate `automation_failed` warnings when both `stageId` and `caseId` match. Distinct items in the same stage still produce separate warnings. > 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, GPT-5 coding agent in the Paperclip local adapter environment; exact model snapshot and context-window metadata were not exposed in the runtime. Tool use and code execution were enabled. ## 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>