mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-13 15:55:46 +01:00
DottaandClaude
a1ec05a1a4
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native Runner keeps one provider conversation across the per-turn runs of a task. After each turn, the controller reads the settled Runner and provider state out of the sandbox and saves it as the harness backup. > - A per-turn sandbox is released after the turn. The harness backup is then the only copy of the provider session. > - On staging, one dropped sandbox connection (`write ECONNRESET`) during that read lost the backup. The run itself succeeded, because its result was already accepted. > - The next run of the task could not resume the conversation: `PRP provider resume state is unavailable`. When the task was waiting for a reply, the run stopped at "Recovery needed" with no Retry. A person had to send a message to start a new conversation. > - This pull request reads the settled state again when the sandbox connection drops during that read. > - The benefit is that one network reset no longer loses a task's conversation. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #20627 (warm backup restore when the source sandbox is idle) and #20683 (relaunch of a settled runner). This PR changes a different step: the backup capture at the end of a turn. **What happened?** A per-turn OpenCode task ran on a remote Daytona sandbox with reuse disabled. 1. Run A accepted its result. The Runner suspended. 2. The controller read the settled state out of the sandbox. The read failed with `remote checkpoint failed: write ECONNRESET`. `harness_state.backup.persist` and `session.checkpoint.persist` failed. 3. Run A still finished as `succeeded`, because the result was durable. The sandbox was released. No harness backup of turn A existed. 4. Run B started in a new sandbox. It failed in 0.2 s with `native_session_recovery_failed: Error: PRP provider resume state is unavailable`. When the prior turn yielded for a reply, the checkpoint policy does not allow a replacement session, so the task showed "Recovery needed" with only inspect actions. On staging this happened on 4 tasks in 48 hours. In all 3 predecessor runs that I could inspect, the backup capture failed. 2 of them show the `ECONNRESET` in the run log. No deploy happened between run A and run B in one case, so a deploy is not the cause. **Expected behavior** A transient connection drop while reading settled state does not lose the provider conversation. The read is repeated, and the backup is saved. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run the first durable turn of a remote OpenCode session. 2. Make the sandbox `syncOut` of the backup directories fail once with `ECONNRESET`. 3. Call the settled checkpoint. On `master` it throws `write ECONNRESET`, and no backup is saved. The new test `uses the bundled Linux image authority for remote opencode-new-durable-reset without controller overrides` runs these steps. **Paperclip version or commit** `master` at `7435abcc63`. ## What Changed - The settled-state capture (inspect plus `syncOut` of each persistence directory into a pending directory) is now one step that can repeat. The step writes nothing durable, so it is safe to repeat. - A dropped, reset or refused sandbox connection repeats the step, at most 3 attempts, with 1 s and 2 s delays. Each repeat clears the pending directory and inspects the live state again, so the copy always matches the inspected identity. - Any other failure fails at once, as before: a state mismatch, a missing directory, an unsafe archive, or a TLS failure. - The durable backup upload and the local publish run only after a complete capture. They did not change. - `isTransientRemoteCheckpointReadFailure` classifies the error with the existing `classifyRemoteConnectionError`, plus a message match for SDK errors that lose their `code`. - The first completeness inspection and its visibility-window re-reads use the same bounded retry (`retryTransientRemoteCheckpointRead`). A dropped provider-state read keeps its `provider_state_unreadable` refusal for every other caller, but the checkpoint retry looks through it to the dropped read. Undici `fetch failed` and `no response returned` also count as drops. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.test.ts`: 1343 passed. - Red on `master`: the new `opencode-new-durable-reset` case fails with `Error: write ECONNRESET`. Green with this change. - The `isTransientRemoteCheckpointReadFailure` test checks that state mismatches, unsafe archives and TLS failures do not repeat. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passes. ## Risks - Low risk. The normal path has no added wait. A repeat adds at most 3 s, and only after a connection failure. - A repeated read inspects the live state again. If the state changed between attempts, the existing identity checks still refuse it. - A connection that stays down for all 3 attempts fails the same way as before. > 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 - Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, with tool use and code execution in Claude Code. ## 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 <noreply@anthropic.com>