mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-07 16:11:46 +02:00
DottaandPaperclip
ef617bee5c
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source control plane people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Backend execution safety is part of the control plane contract: agents must stop at budget hard limits, stale execution paths must not create duplicate live work, and checkout ownership must remain authoritative. > - The recovery branch bundled these release-gate checks with broader unrelated work. > - Reviewers need a narrow PR that isolates only the backend safety behavior and regression coverage. > - This pull request keeps budget incident creation idempotent so repeated evaluation does not duplicate release-gate telemetry or approvals. > - It also adds focused coverage for idle timer skips, stale queued-run behavior, and live checkout conflict preservation. > - The benefit is a smaller, reviewable release-gate slice for budget hard stops, stale execution recovery, and ownership-safe issue mutation. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #8866 This PR extracts a focused backend safety slice from the closed broad recovery PR. The underlying problem is that release-gate behavior needs direct regression coverage before review: budget hard stops should not duplicate incidents/logging on repeated evaluation, timer wakes should respect the no-actionable-work skip policy, stale queued runs should remain invalidated, and active checkout ownership must survive conflicting checkout attempts without side effects. ## What Changed - Made budget incident creation report whether an incident was newly created, so soft/hard threshold activity logs are emitted once per incident window. - Added embedded Postgres budget release-gate tests covering soft incident idempotency, hard-stop pause/cancel behavior, budget override resume behavior, and telemetry redaction. - Added heartbeat coverage for skipping generic timer wakes when the agent opts into `skipTimerWhenNoActionableWork`, while preserving legacy/proactive timer behavior. - Added stale execution lock route coverage proving a conflicting checkout returns `409` without overwriting live checkout or execution ownership and without writing checkout activity. ## Verification - `./node_modules/.bin/vitest run server/src/__tests__/budgets-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-stale-queue-invalidation.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-stale-execution-lock-routes.test.ts --no-file-parallelism --maxWorkers=1` - First run: 3 files passed, 98 tests passed; `issue-stale-execution-lock-routes.test.ts` failed during import because the isolated worktree initially lacked dev dependency links for `supertest`. - `CI=true NODE_ENV=development pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts` - Recreated worktree dev dependency links; emitted unrelated plugin SDK bin warnings because plugin SDK dist files were not built under `--ignore-scripts`. - `./node_modules/.bin/vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-stale-execution-lock-routes.test.ts --no-file-parallelism --maxWorkers=1` - Passed: 1 file, 7 tests. - `git diff --check` - Passed. ## Risks Low to medium risk. The production code change is intentionally small and only suppresses duplicate threshold activity logging for already-open budget incidents, but it affects budget release-gate observability. The new tests use embedded Postgres and should catch regressions in budget hard stops, timer wake gating, stale queue invalidation, and checkout conflict preservation. > 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 OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent, tool-use 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>