mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-07 16:11:46 +02:00
DottaandPaperclip
6681104692
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The runner translates provider events into durable task execution.
> - Provider notifications can refer to another thread or a descendant.
> - Root validation treated these notifications as fatal, and later
layers could lose the original failure.
> - This pull request classifies event identity and preserves structured
terminal failures.
> - The server can then choose safe recovery without weakening tool
authority.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #13038. This change incorporates the shared protocol-integrity and
bounded-cleanup prerequisites from that PR. It does not include the chat
feature. Related failure classification work: #13028.
**What happened?**
An informational provider notification for another thread could
terminate the root session. A failed stream could then become a
missing-result error and lose its cause.
**Expected behavior**
Ignore unrelated informational notices with bounded diagnostics. Reject
invalid authoritative events. Preserve the original failure code and
recovery meaning through cleanup.
**Steps to reproduce**
Run a native Codex task. Deliver a notification for an unrelated thread,
or close the stream after a structured failure. Inspect the root outcome
and recorded failure.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduced before e20010472. This branch includes the current
session-goal contract from that commit.
**Deployment mode**
Built from source. Native runner with Codex.
## What Changed
- Classify root, provider-confirmed descendant, stale, unrelated, and
invalid provider events.
- Keep tool requests bound to their original execution authority.
- Preserve typed failures through transport, session, and durable
control-plane cleanup.
- Keep bounded cleanup failures separate from the primary execution
failure.
- Add compatible shared contracts for continuation context, execution
status, and explicit reconciliation. The dependent PR adds their server
and UI consumers.
## Verification
- Runner TypeScript and ACPX suites: 1,733 passed, 7 skipped. Node
contracts: 38 passed.
- Real provider-process fixtures cover 300 descendant identities across
restart, the 4,096-identity capacity boundary, and rejection of
continuation after terminal acknowledgement and restart.
- Repository build, typecheck, and full `pnpm test:run` passed on the
rebased stack (18,448 tests passed, 49 skipped). The full Rust workspace
passed with `--test-threads=1`; parallel execution exposed an existing
fixture port-reservation race. All latest-head CI checks passed. One
unchanged artifact-document concurrency test failed on the first CI run
and passed on its single rerun.
- Added notification, streaming failure, protocol integrity, cleanup
quarantine, and durable failure tests.
## Risks
Provider event classification must retain the new session-goal behavior
on master. Descendant notifications must never gain root tool authority.
Shared contract fields are additive. This PR does not migrate data or
start replacement provider work.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The exact deployment ID and context window
were not exposed. Used reasoning, tool use, code execution, and browser
automation.
## 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>