mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-14 00:26:28 +01:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5
bce79f186f
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The chat catalog evals check that a chat agent answers the person and saves the right records > - An agent can end its turn on a question card; the product then records `interaction_owns_conversation_response` and posts no reply comment > - The privileged settle step and some graders still waited for a reply comment, so valid card-ended turns timed out or failed > - This pull request adds one shared rule for when a pending card counts as the turn's response, and uses it where the case allows a card > - The benefit is that card-ended turns are graded on what the person saw, while cases that need a written reply stay strict ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #20588 (request_human_input version fix found by the same runs). Refs #20590 (chat review cards link their document). **What happened?** In the full chat eval run on master `f4337bb5fb`, agents ended turns on pending question or review cards. `developer-labs.component-reference` timed out in the privileged settle step, which required a reply comment. `goals.align-existing-work` refused the foreign goal in a question card, but the grader read only reply comments. `questions-and-approvals.reject-and-revise` returned its draft in a review card bound to the draft revision, but the grader and the result check required a reply link. **Expected behavior** A pending card counts as the turn's response only when the product decided that the card owns the run's response, the lead's own run created it, a person can answer it, and it is not a governed approval. Each case still grades the content it requires. **Steps to reproduce** Regrade the retained evidence of the cases above with the old graders: they fail on the missing reply comment although the card is on the chat. ## What Changed - New `chat-catalog-domains/turn-response-card.ts`: `turnResponseCards()` returns pending cards from runs whose `presentationDecision.reasonCodes` contains `interaction_owns_conversation_response`. A card must be created by the lead, be human-answerable (a text question, two or more choices, or an ordinary confirmation) and not carry `toolAction`, `secretProposal` or `connectionAuthorization`. - `settlePrivilegedChat` treats such a card as a settled turn. The privileged graders still require their written guidance, so `developer-labs.component-reference` now fails at grading instead of timing out. - `goals.align-existing-work` reads the card from the run woken by the foreign-goal request as that phase's answer. A leaked foreign text, or a card that does not refuse, still fails. Oracle `paperclip.chat-catalog.internal.goals-align.v2`. - `questions-and-approvals.reject-and-revise` accepts a review card bound to the draft's exact saved revision. The result check opens the draft from the card's document link (needs #20590). Oracle `paperclip.chat-catalog.plan-review.v6` for both plan-review cases. - Descriptors updated for oracle versions and `sourceFiles`. ## Verification - `turn-response-card.test.ts`: the retained cards pass; other run, other agent, answered, other company, user-created, non-human resolver, single non-text choice, governed confirmation, and a run that replied all fail. - Offline regrade of retained evidence (master `f4337bb5fb` full-cohort run): `goals.align-existing-work` cross-company check passes with the card and fails without it; `reject-and-revise` `real-local-review-draft` passes with the bound card and fails with no card or a card bound to another revision. - `npx vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-domains ...clock tests --testTimeout=180000`: 269 files passed (one file needed the plugin SDK build locally, then passed). - Consistency and contract tests pass. `npx tsc --noEmit -p tests/runner-e2e` is clean. SDK public input pins are unchanged. - Paid run [42855262851](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42855262851) on a temporary branch with this PR, #20588 and #20590 (OpenCode, local): `reject-and-revise` and `revoke-personal-grant` passed; `goals.align-existing-work` failed only `phase-bound-strategic-context-explanation` (keyword check, unchanged here); `developer-labs.component-reference` ended on a question card again and now failed at grading (`existing-question-reference`, `reference-only`) instead of timing out in settle. This run's agents replied in text in the two passing cases, so the card branch of `reject-and-revise` is covered by the offline regrade only. ## Risks - `settlePrivilegedChat` now stops waiting on a card-ended turn. Privileged cases whose graders need a reply fail sooner and with the real failed check; none pass more easily. - Changed oracle versions start new history for `goals.align-existing-work` and both plan-review cases. - The remaining keyword check `phase-bound-strategic-context-explanation` in `goals.align-existing-work` is unchanged and still fails the retained reply; it needs its own fix. ## Model Used - Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), agentic coding with tool use 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>