mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-07 07:23:08 +02:00
DottaandPaperclip
b3eb03fcba
Builds on merged #14575 and targets `master`. ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Operators use optional Sentry reports to diagnose failed agent runs. > - The shared reporter currently converts each saved error message into a new exception. > - This loses the original stack and cause chain, and omits available adapter and provider diagnostics. > - This pull request selects, redacts, and bounds useful diagnostics before it sends them to Sentry. > - Operators can locate the failing operation and correlate upstream failures without copying arbitrary run data. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #14573. That change preserves ACP provider failure details in the run record. Refs #14575. That merged PR adds recorded exit codes and signals. This PR covers stacks, causes, and structured diagnostics without duplicating those fields. A thrown setup or adapter error currently appears in Sentry with the reporter's stack. A saved provider failure can contain useful details that never reach the Sentry event. Both cases use the same shared reporting path. ## What Changed - Pass caught setup and execution exceptions, and structured adapter error metadata, through successful terminal status transitions. - Snapshot a fixed set of execution, adapter, provider, and exception fields. Preserve up to four exceptions in the cause chain. - Remove registered secret values, declared runtime environment credentials, unknown inherited environment values and encoded credential forms, and credential patterns before truncation. Mark truncated fields and bound provider details and stacks. - Rebuild sanitized Sentry exceptions with the original stacks and causes. Use an adapter stack preview when available. Omit a fabricated reporting stack when the source has no stack. - Keep contexts local to each event. Preserve the optional DSN gate and existing error-code/adapter fingerprint. - Document the fields, limits, and omitted data. - Settle leftover chat fixture outbox rows only after assertions and worker shutdown, so subsequent tests cannot claim earlier cases’ pending actions or provider I/O. This fixes the CI shard contamination exposed during verification; production chat behavior and test timeouts are unchanged. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. - `pnpm build` passed. - 86 focused diagnostic, Sentry, and startup tests passed after the rebase, including the real `@sentry/node@10.71.0` SDK with an in-memory transport. - Tests cover cause chains, HTTP status and request IDs, long provider details, secret redaction, failed secret resolution, cyclic causes, size limits, and context isolation. - Five targeted heartbeat integration cases passed, including thrown and returned errors containing an opaque environment-bound credential. The earlier full heartbeat integration run also passed its integration cases. - The focused suite also passed with an unknown inherited environment value set to `1`; reporting tests use a controlled environment and separately verify short-secret redaction. - Before the fixture cleanup, the full chat shard reproduced the CI Telegram timeout at `pending recovery before restart` (354 passed, 1 failed). After the cleanup, the same shard passed all 355 tests. No timeout or production behavior changed. - Latest-head CI (`0ae9e70df321d66dda025c3a7ba4787e169e0a4f`) passed typecheck, build, all 12 server shards, all 3 chat shards, workspace and serialized suites, browser shards, Runner checks, canary validation, the real Sentry SDK contract, and security checks. Required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e` passed. - The branch has been rebased onto `master` after #14575 merged. All 55 applicable checks passed on this head (2 unrelated Storybook checks skipped). Greptile re-reviewed the current 11-file diff at 5/5 with no findings or unresolved review threads. - Local monolithic full-suite attempts were interrupted to apply fixes; full-suite success is not claimed from those runs. ## Risks - Error messages and stacks can contain credentials. The reporter uses existing redactors and the run's encrypted secret registry, reads only known fields, and skips capture if registered-secret resolution fails. - Unknown environment values remain private by default. Unrecognized short values can mask benign matches; known public settings are explicitly allowed. - Diagnostic text is bounded and can be truncated. Truncation is explicit. Data discarded upstream cannot be recovered. - These additional fields go to the operator's configured Sentry endpoint. Arbitrary request/response objects, headers, configuration, prompts, and stdout/stderr are not copied. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool use and code execution. The exact serving model ID, context window, and configured reasoning level are not exposed in this session. ## 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>