mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-09 05:41:56 +02:00
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The Runner prepares and saves each task's provider configuration before launch. > - A sandbox image can have a supported Codex CLI that is too old for the selected model. > - The current version check stops that task even when the image can run a similar model. > - This pull request selects a compatible model before it saves a fresh execution. > - The task continues with a visible warning, and recovery uses the saved effective model. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description - Refs #15053. This fixes the same CLI and model mismatch for fresh remote Runner tasks. It does not change subscription onboarding. - Refs #14721. This adds a bounded startup choice for Codex CLI compatibility. It does not add user-defined fallback chains or quota failover. - Related PR: #15399 added the model-specific CLI checks that this change preserves at launch. ## What Changed - Check the preinstalled remote Codex CLI before saving a fresh execution that uses a model with a verified CLI minimum. - Select the closest compatible older model in the same class, then the stable Runner default. Consider each candidate once. - Save the effective model before checkpoint selection. Keep the requested agent and task settings unchanged. - Add a task warning and a local `runner.model_fallback` run-log event with both models and the CLI version. - Share executable discovery with the launch verifier. Preserve explicit artifact and install settings, saved executions, and existing artifact checks. - Add regression tests and document the selection and warning behavior. ## Verification - Red: the three new provider-configuration regression cases failed before the fix. They kept the incompatible requested model. - Red: both rejected-probe cases failed before the review fix. They now defer to launch verification. - Green: targeted provider configuration, remote preflight, task warning, and launch-verifier tests pass (680 tests). - `pnpm -r typecheck` passes. - [Full CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37713759744) passes on `eb273fc32661526d90a864b42c73a7da61dd62da`: 47 successful jobs, including all general and serialized Vitest groups, browser shards, Runner verification, typecheck, build, and the canary dry run. - Local extended verification: three serialized shards pass (115 suites). HTTP route tests hit intermittent 15-second timeouts. The authorization suite passes on rerun (130 tests). The document suite passes on both master and the PR head in the same isolated setup (6 tests). The local general run was stopped after the equivalent full CI matrix passed. - `pnpm build` passes. - Server typecheck and build pass again after the probe-error review fix. - `git diff --check` and `pnpm check:module-boundaries` pass. - Example: request `gpt-6.1-sol` on Codex 0.158.0 to use `gpt-6-sol`; on 0.156.0, use `gpt-5.6-sol`. The warning names the requested model, effective model, and CLI version. - This PR has not been deployed to staging. ## Risks - A fallback can have different capabilities. The task warning makes the substitution visible. Later runs can use the requested model after the image CLI is updated. - Preparation adds two remote commands for models with a verified CLI minimum. Failed or invalid version probes retain the existing launch checks. - This only handles known CLI and model mismatches before a fresh provider launch. Authentication, capacity, and artifact failures keep their existing behavior. - No database migration is required. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool use and code execution. This session does not expose the exact deployment model ID, context window size, or reasoning setting. ## 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>