mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-09 16:02:36 +01:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5
6c7cc2c5d6
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Native runs have an execution recovery budget of three provider attempts, so a run that keeps failing stops retrying > - A graceful shutdown (deploy or SIGTERM) drains native runs: it suspends them for reattachment by the next server > - When the runner did not survive, the next boot resumed the turn and charged one attempt > - Restarts that the run did not cause used up its budget, so recovery stopped and the task needed a manual Retry > - This pull request does not charge an attempt for resuming a run that a graceful drain suspended > - The benefit is that deploys and graceful restarts no longer exhaust a healthy run's recovery budget ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** In restart-chaos testing, native runs reached `execution_recovery_budget_exhausted` (3/3) only because of server restarts. In one wave, two restarts crossed each of two runs. In a second schedule (K1, then K2 when ready, then K2 again), each drain correctly suspended the local ACPX Claude run, yet the fourth boot blocked it with `native_restart_recovery_blocked`. Every resume after a drain was classified `resume_dead_runner` and charged an attempt (`nextNativeProviderAttempt` in `native-restart-recovery.ts`, applied by the executor's execution claim). **Expected behavior** A restart that the run did not cause should not consume its recovery budget. A graceful drain records `restart_suspended` and `awaiting_runner_reattach`. The resume that follows should keep the attempt count. **Paperclip version or commit** `master` at `4ef3fa4271`. **Steps to reproduce** Start a native local run. Send the server SIGTERM three times while the run is active, with a full restart each time. The third resume is blocked with `execution_recovery_budget_exhausted`. ## What Changed - `suspendedByCleanDrain()` in `native-restart-recovery.ts` recognizes a run whose most recent recovery claim is older than the drain's `restart_suspended` entry. Ownership waits and deferred blocks between the drain and the next claim do not erase it. The next claim consumes it. - A scan that waits for the old controller to exit (`awaiting_evidence`) records one history entry per reason, so repeated scans cannot push the drain record out of the bounded history. - Restart claims carry `chargesProviderAttempt`. It is `false` for a claim that follows a clean drain. - `nextNativeProviderAttempt()` takes that flag. The executor passes it when it takes the execution lease, so a drained resume keeps the current attempt. - The first execution is always counted: a run drained at attempt 0 (no execution claimed it yet) still charges its first provider start. - A run drained during its third attempt may continue that attempt. The local resume and remote bootstrap gates skip the `>= 3` exhausted check only for a non-charging resume, and the executor still refuses a fourth attempt. - A crash restart (no drain record) still charges one attempt. Reattachment to a live runner still charges none. - `doc/execution-semantics.md` states the rule next to the three-attempt budget. ## Verification - New test in `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-native-restart-suspension.test.ts` (embedded Postgres, real heartbeat drain and restart recovery): - Red before the fix: the claim after the drain had no `chargesProviderAttempt: false`. - Green after the fix, for drained attempts 0, 1 and 3: the crash claim charges (`true`). After the drain, a controlled backend lets the executor take its execution lease and records the saved `native_run_finalizations.attempt` at provider dispatch: 1, 1 and 3. Attempt 3 is claimed instead of blocked. - Red at the executor: when the executor ignores the flag, the drained attempt-1 resume saves 2. - Ownership-wait case: the drained controller (the test process) is still alive, so two scans wait. The history keeps `restart_suspended` followed by one `awaiting_evidence` entry. After the controller is gone, the claim does not charge, and attempt 3 continues. - Classifier cases (local resume and remote bootstrap): attempt 3 after a crash is still `execution_recovery_budget_exhausted`. Both new cases were red on the previous revision. - `heartbeat-native-restart-suspension.test.ts` 12/12, `native-runner-restart-recovery.integration.test.ts` and `native-runner-ownership.test.ts` 94 passed. - `tsc --noEmit` for `server` passes. ## Risks - A run that itself makes the server shut down gracefully, again and again, would no longer be stopped by this budget. Graceful shutdowns are operator or deploy actions, so this is unlikely. A crash loop (SIGKILL, OOM) still charges an attempt on every restart, and a resumed turn that fails still goes through the existing failure and replacement budget. - This changes only the attempt count. Ownership checks, checkpoint verification and the exhausted gate are unchanged. > 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, via Claude Code with tool use (shell, file edits, test execution). Extended reasoning enabled. ## 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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>