mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-30 13:20:54 +01:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
e8b78cce5b
<!-- entire-trail-link-start --> https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/234/changes/paperclip/234 <!-- entire-trail-link-end --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and their tasks. > - CI verifies runtime setup and task execution in browsers. > - Shared fixtures and port collisions can fail unrelated changes. > - Copying configuration during navigation can observe incomplete state. > - This pull request isolates fixtures and waits for completed reloads. > - These changes make the existing checks more reliable. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Extracted from #18050 so test stability can be reviewed on its own. Searches for signoff fixture and HTTPS backfill port fixes found no separate duplicate of these three edits. **What happened?** The signoff suite shares company and agent state across scenarios. The HTTPS backfill fixture probes only one listener and can select ephemeral client ports. The YAML reload test reads before navigation and reload readiness are complete. **Expected behavior** Each scenario has its own state. Both app and HMR ports are available. The YAML test reads after the canonical route and reload action are ready. **Steps to reproduce** Run the signoff scenarios in sequence, run the HTTPS backfill test with other local sockets, or run the YAML lost-response reload case during navigation. ## What Changed - Create and clean up signoff company and agent fixtures for each scenario. - Probe both app and HMR ports below the ephemeral client range. - Wait for the canonical agent route and enabled reload action before checking the saved document. ## Verification - These exact fixture changes passed the selected HTTPS test and all 12 YAML/signoff browser cases in the combined change. Those results apply to that earlier source. - Fresh local checks and CI for this isolated branch are pending. No full pass is claimed for this new head yet. - No production source or dependency change is included. ## Risks Test isolation creates more fixture companies. Each case cleans its fixtures. Product behavior and assertions stay the same. No user documentation change is needed. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools and code execution. The exact serving snapshot is not exposed. ## 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 - [ ] 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 Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>