mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-12 06:10:44 +01:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5
a9ae1b69c3
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The Runner relays an agent's Paperclip tool calls and keeps them across control-plane restarts > - #20069 refuses a `paperclip_finish` or `paperclip_block` decided before an earlier returned result reached the agent > - The guard filters by turn id, but each committed event carries the run's one identity turn id, so provider turns are not separated > - When a restart loses a provider turn, a call of that turn gets its result but never its provider completion > - The guard then refuses every later finish of the run, so the run exhausts its retries and the user must click Retry > - This pull request makes a new provider turn end the pending calls of the previous turn > - The benefit is that an agent can finish after a restart that lost its turn ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #20069 **What happened?** A restart chaos storm (local, Codex, A1/C1, K2 drains for 30 minutes, 116 tasks) had one failure. Task t110 needed a user Retry. Its run was drained twice. The first drain lost the provider turn while a `read_agent_instructions` call was pending. After that, all four `paperclip_finish` calls failed with `terminal_call_before_results` and named `read_agent_instructions`. The run ended with `native_session_retry_exhausted`. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a Codex run that calls a Paperclip tool. 2. Drain the control plane while that call is pending, so the Runner restores the session and reports `provider_turn_lost_on_restore`. 3. Let the agent continue in the new turn and call `paperclip_finish`. **Expected behavior** The finish is recorded. The lost call belongs to a turn that the agent will not see again. **Actual behavior** The Runner refuses every finish with `terminal_call_before_results`. The run fails and needs a user Retry. ## What Changed - `unseenReturnedToolCalls` forgets the calls it tracked when a `turn.started` event begins a new provider turn. - A new test reproduces the t110 event order: a call in a lost turn, then a new turn that reads, sees its result, and finishes. ## Verification - `npx vitest run src/live/terminal-call-freshness.test.ts` in `packages/paperclip-runner`: the new test fails before the change and passes after it (7/7). - `npx vitest run src/live/runnerd-codex-transport.test.ts -t terminal`: 10 passed. - `tsc --noEmit -p packages/paperclip-runner`: clean. - Evidence: the kept Runner control-plane state of t110 shows the call `exec-0f3d1b90` (generation 1) with a `semantic_tool.result` command but no `tool.execution.completed`, followed by `turn.failed provider_turn_lost_on_restore` and new `turn.started` events. ## Risks - The t03 case of #20069 stays covered: the stale block and the earlier calls are in the same provider turn, with no `turn.started` between them. The existing t03 tests still pass. - If a driver emits `turn.started` inside one provider turn, the guard can miss a stale call of that turn. No current driver does that. ## 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 Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>