mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-12 06:10:44 +01:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5
99529f9d71
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - When someone messages an agent, the reply must start as fast as
possible, and restart-safety work must not slow it
> - The durable ownership plan makes this invariant 8 ("fast turns") and
asks Phase 1 to turn the Phase 0 baseline into p50/p95 budgets per
adapter
> - Without budgets, a regression in time to first token, agent boot or
restart recovery shows up only when someone reruns the baseline by hand
> - This pull request records the budgets and adds a per-run check that
writes a run-log row when a run exceeds its p95 budget
> - The benefit is that every later phase can show "no regression
against the budgets" from the run log, without new waits on the turn
path
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #19831 (plan, "Performance constraint", rule 4, and invariant 8).
Refs #19846 (the Phase 0 baseline these budgets come from). Stacked on
#19861.
**Problem**
The plan requires p50/p95 budgets per adapter for TTFT, agent boot and
restart recovery latency, and a check against them. Neither exists.
**Expected behavior**
Budgets are recorded in the plan and in code. A run that exceeds a p95
budget gets one run-log row that names the metric, the measurement and
the budget.
**Impact**
Phase 2–5 exit criteria can cite budget breaches from chaos waves and
staging. The check adds no wait before `turn.start`.
## What Changed
- New `server/src/services/native-runtime/native-speed-budgets.ts`: the
local budget table (codex, claude, opencode) for TTFT and agent boot
(cold and warm) and restart recovery latency. Each budget is 1.2× the
baseline, rounded up to 0.5 s. `evaluateSpeedBudget` judges one run
against p95. An unknown start kind uses the looser budget. Remote runs
and adapters without a baseline are not judged.
- `native-run-trace.ts`: the trace takes an optional `budget` subject.
It checks `task.time_to_first_token`, agent boot (end of
`heartbeat.queue` to the end of the first `runner.turn.submit` or
`runner.session.resume`) and restart recovery once each. It writes
`run.performance.budget_exceeded` through `defer`, so the write is
detached from the event path. `finish` now drains diagnostics that defer
more work.
- `native-session-executor.ts`: passes the adapter and environment to
the trace, labels cold or warm at the existing `provider_session` reuse
receipts, and checks restart recovery at a recovered run's first
provider event, measured from the startup recovery `ready` time.
- Docs: budget tables in
`doc/plans/2026-11-07-durable-ownership-and-reconciliation.md` ("Speed
budgets (Phase 1)"), and the new event in `doc/run-log-events.md`.
## Verification
- `npx vitest run
src/services/native-runtime/native-speed-budgets.test.ts
src/services/native-runtime/native-run-trace.test.ts` (in `server/`): 34
tests pass. They cover:
- every budget has p50 ≤ p95;
- the provider-to-adapter mapping;
- p95 judgement, and the looser budget when the start kind is unknown;
- one breach for a slow boot, and none for a second submit or a fast
TTFT;
- a deferred TTFT breach is written before the trace closes;
- restart recovery is checked once;
- remote runs and runs with no budget subject write nothing.
- `npx tsc --noEmit -p server`: no errors.
## Risks
- Low risk. This is a run-log change only (AGENTS.md §5.7, no extra
review). The OTLP and Telemetry paths are unchanged.
- The baseline samples are small (2–12 per cell) on a shared host.
Budgets carry 20% headroom, and the codex restart budget (8.0 s p95) is
tight. Expect some breach rows on a loaded machine. They are diagnostics
and change no behavior.
- Restart-recovery budgets use run 4 of the baseline, as merged in
#19846.
- Restart recovery is measured from the startup recovery `ready` time to
the first provider event, which matches the baseline definition.
- Previous-release story: no persisted run state changes. The new event
is additive.
## Model Used
- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, in Claude Code with
tool use and code execution.
## 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
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>