mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-04 11:01:16 +01:00
commitperclip[bot]
a00109aa35
> [!NOTE] > Opened by Prospector's automated issue-fix pipeline. A maintainer reviews and decides; nothing here merges on its own. > [!WARNING] > This change crosses a trust boundary. See Risks. ## Thinking Path - Issue #16034 reports a defect in paperclipai/paperclip. - Root cause, as the fixing agent read it: emitAcpxFailure in packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/execute.ts built the run error, summary, and acpx.error message from Error.message alone. It ignored the JSON-RPC error's 'data' explanation and numeric 'code', so every ACP phase failure (create runtime, ensure session, configure session, turn) showed only 'Internal error'. - This pull request: Preserve sanitized ACP JSON-RPC error details and numeric codes in run errors, summaries, and acpx.error records ## What Changed - `packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/execute.ts`: This change is kept from the earlier attempt. The shared failure handler reads the explanation from a string 'data', 'data.details', or 'data.message'. It appends that text to the message unless the message already contains it, and runs the result through sanitizeTerminalSessionFailure. A numeric JSON-RPC code is recorded as errorMeta.rpcCode. Errors without these fields keep their old message. - `packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/execute.test.ts`: The existing harness keeps the earlier it.each case, which covers all four phases, all three detail shapes, redaction, and rpcCode in the acpx.error record. A new case in the same harness covers the checks that only the separate file had: detail text already in the message is not repeated, and a plain Error stays unchanged with no rpcCode. - `doc/run-log-events.md`: Documents the change to the acpx.error record: which detail formats are read and in what order, the rule against repeating detail text, the redaction and 4,096-character title limit applied through the existing sanitizer, and the optional integer 'rpcCode' field. ## Verification - Reproducing test(s), added in this PR: `packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/execute.test.ts` - They fail on the base commit and pass with the fix, each twice in a fresh sandbox. - The repository's compile command passes with the fix applied. - 9 existing test file(s) near the change passed. - The full test suite passes except for the 11 file(s) that already fail on the base commit. ## Risks - Written by an automated pipeline, not a person: review it as you would an outside contribution. - Risk tier of the touched paths: 2. - The scope reviewer found it also changes, beyond the report: Plain Error, non-object throw, string or Node errors with string codes (ENOENT), and data that is empty, missing, non-string or malformed - The scope reviewer found it also changes, beyond the report: messageOverride callers (turn timeout, handshake guard) - It crosses a trust boundary. Check each crossing against what the issue asked for, and against who asked: - data-exposure (packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/execute.ts:3626): Text the ACP child process controls (JSON-RPC error 'data', 'data.details' or 'data.message') is now added to the run error message and summary that users see; it passes through sanitizeTerminalSessionFailure redaction first. - logging (packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/execute.ts:3651): The 'acpx.error' run-log record now carries the provider's explanation in 'message' and a new integer 'rpcCode' field, both supplied by the child, on every failure route that calls emitAcpxFailure without a messageOverride, including the handshake-guard route that suppresses stderr. - data-exposure (packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/execute.ts:3639): The numeric JSON-RPC error code from the child is now copied into 'classified.errorMeta.rpcCode', which reaches the adapter result's errorMeta and the places that store or show it. ## Model Used - opus (Anthropic Claude, via Claude Code), writing and checking the change in an isolated sandbox. - opus (Anthropic Claude, via Claude Code), reviewing it independently. ## Linked Issues Fixes #16034 A search of paperclipai/paperclip's open and closed pull requests found no other pull request that names #16034. ## 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) - [ ] 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) - [ ] 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 - [ ] 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 - [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge <!-- prospector:issue-fix v1 issue=16034 base=5cfa2bf26d3e report=1b07160d9492357f --> Co-authored-by: commitperclip[bot] <284812584+commitperclip[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>