Files
PaperClipAI/tests
DottaandPaperclip caf120105c test: prepare neutral native connection guidance evals (#15407)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agents need to discover connections, obtain consent, and continue
from saved decisions.
> - We want to reduce repeated instructions only when measured behavior
supports the change.
> - The existing decline tasks tell the model not to retry. One
provider-decline check can pass without an explanation or an observed
service counter.
> - This PR adds neutral tasks and stricter saved-evidence checks before
any connection instruction reduction.
> - Production instructions remain unchanged. The new cells are
configured, not live-qualified.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15218. Refs #15389.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The Product E2E connection workflow evaluation and its instruction
measurement provenance.

**Current behavior**

Some decline prompts supply the policy they intend to test. The
provider-decline workflow does not require a saved post-decision
explanation. Its old no-call check can use a missing fixture counter as
zero. OpenCode has no connection cases in the original Everyday matrix.

**Proposed behavior**

Add an explicit-only suite with five connection stories on native Codex,
ACPX Claude, and OpenCode. Require an explanation attributed by exact
run ID after a saved decline. Observe the provider fixture counter.
Preserve the original cases and grades.

## What Changed

- Add fifteen configured cells with one attempt, twelve-minute
deadlines, and verified 1,000-cent company and agent budget stops.
- Remove procedure hints from the three new decline prompts. Keep a
user-permitted explanation fallback and the existing positive controls.
- Require saved decline state, one decision, unchanged connections,
observed zero service calls where applicable, and a post-decision
explanation from a successful run on the same task.
- Add negative grader calibration and test the actual fixture budget
payloads. Exclude the suite from default and generic selection.
- Extend the existing full-catalog measurement source manifest with
connection descriptions and schemas. Add an audit of fixed text, tool
descriptions, returned instructions, and unqualified behavior.
- Rebase on master `a6306ba606eb87c89b9ef0344e9fe8e0025580f9` and
preserve its new Cursor suites. No production, credential, workflow, or
lockfile change.

## Verification

- Before rebase: Product E2E support passed 1,424 TypeScript tests and
128 Node checks. Six catalog measurement tests, repository
typecheck/build, Product E2E typecheck, and exact fifteen-cell discovery
passed.
- The full pre-rebase repository test run was stopped when master
advanced. Its partial result is not a pass.
- After rebase and the review correction: repository build/typecheck,
Product E2E typecheck, 1,799 TypeScript support tests (one skipped), 128
Node checks, six measurement tests, and exact fifteen-cell discovery
pass. The duplicate local full-suite run was stopped incomplete after
about 20 minutes once complete CI passed; no local full-suite pass is
claimed.
- Review found that the initial grader read `runId` instead of public
`createdByRunId`. A regression calibration reproduced both rejection of
valid public comments and acceptance of the wrong alias. The fix uses
the actual field and binds the evidence type to the shared
`IssueComment` contract. A subsequent type-only import path correction
passes Product E2E typecheck.
- Final source `0de306b9664bfbdebb6709ddb54c95152740d1ad` passes
[complete
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37560250545):
51 successful checks and two intentional Storybook skips, plus separate
Snyk success. Fresh Greptile review is 5/5 with the single review thread
resolved and no new findings. The PR is clean and mergeable.
- Local commands: `pnpm build`, `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm
test:e2e:runner:unit`, `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`, and `pnpm
test:e2e:runner -- --list --suite native-connection-guidance`. The
measurement uses
`PAPERCLIP_NATIVE_PROCEDURE_MEASUREMENT=/tmp/connection-measurement.json
pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/native-procedure-measurement.test.ts`. Validation
used pinned pnpm 9.15.4.
- No paid provider campaign was started. There is no baseline/candidate
behavior result for these new cells.
- The audit records 654 UTF-8 bytes of fixed connection guidance. A
clean capture at `a04b8c6a452315625014888335d45670a2094fb6` confirms 41
supplied tools, 53,341 normalized bytes at start/resume, 50,949 at
compact continuation, and a 48,195-byte authenticated OpenCode MCP
catalog. These are byte counts, not tokens, bills, vendor-private prompt
sizes, or savings from this PR.

## Risks

- This is eval preparation. Passing support tests do not establish live
model behavior or qualify an instruction reduction.
- The explanation oracle checks attributed saved output. It does not
prove cognition or arbitrary prose truthfulness. One saved interaction
also does not prove the absence of repeated idempotent tool calls.
- Successful new authentication and tool refresh, existing-connection
agent grants, independent work while waiting, explicit retry after
decline, and blocking when mandatory work remains still need separate
coverage.
- Notion setup decline does not execute a real Notion service. Positive
service approval uses an already installed deterministic service; it
does not qualify new connection creation.
- The original historical failures remain unchanged. Future comparisons
must freeze source, fixture, model, input, and grading controls and
retain every actual attempt.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools, and code
execution. The exact serving model ID and context-window size were not
exposed in this session; they are not inferred. No model provider was
invoked by the eval suite in this PR preparation.

## 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>
2026-10-06 21:28:16 -05:00
..