Files
PaperClipAI/tests/runner-e2e/chat-catalog-history.test.ts
T
f4337bb5fb test(evals): land the chat catalog eval harness on master (#19614)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The chat-feature evals measure whether agents complete real chat
requests through the product
> - The chat catalog eval harness and its repairs live on the
`chat-eval/master-candidate` branch, not on master
> - Today's work made 139 of 242 chat evals pass in verified single-case
live runs. Each product fix landed on master as its own pull request
> - The eval-side changes (setups, graders, fault seams, evidence
capture) still exist only on the candidate
> - This pull request lands the harness on master. Master stays the
source of truth for product behavior
> - The benefit is one tree: evals run against master commits, and
product fixes reach the evals as soon as they merge

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #19441, Refs #19599, Refs #20270, Refs #20334, Refs #20342, Refs
#20344, Refs #20354, Refs #20360, Refs #20373, Refs #20382, Refs #20409

**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The chat catalog eval harness and the product it evaluates live on a
long-running branch outside master. Eval fixes do not reach master, so
master-based eval runs use old setups and graders.

**Subsystem affected**
`tests/runner-e2e` chat catalog harness, plus a small set of product
changes that exist only on the candidate.

**Proposed change**
Land the harness on master. Every product fix from this eval work
already merged to master as its own pull request. Conflicts keep
master's product behavior.

## What Changed

- Most of the diff (808 of 851 files) is under `tests/runner-e2e/`:
chat-catalog domains, scenarios, descriptors, the TestOps manifest,
private evidence tooling, and their tests.
- Graders now check saved state, setup literals and rendered or clicked
links. Many keyword and regex checks on free-form replies are removed.
Each changed grader has a bumped `oracleVersion` and calibration tests
(a valid reply, a reworded valid reply, and broken variants that must
fail).
- The shared link helper `hasLink` no longer treats a list link (for
example `/COM/issues?view=mine`) as a link to every task without a URL
key.
- Setup fixes build real state through supported product routes: routine
history, agent grants through the board grant route, budget holds with a
real cap, and a storage-layer archive fault for
`inbox-search.archive-partial-failure`.
- Browser boundary journeys (sign-in, chat-disabled, onboarding) now
write the standard pass evidence files.
- Retargeted cases, approved by the maintainer:
`agent-chat.chat-disabled` (Conference Room gate),
`agents.restore-instructions` (no saved instruction history),
`access.manage-membership` (member permission edits stay board-only).
- The private evidence trusted files (`manual-private-handoff.ts`,
`manual-private-retention.ts`, `manual-private-report-assets.ts`) are
byte-identical to master.
- Product files outside `tests/` (43 files, +1,328 −49) carry
candidate-only changes that master does not yet have. Most are tests.
The main code changes are in `request-human-input.ts`,
`heartbeat-run-summary.ts`, `native-completion-feedback.ts`,
`native-run-finalizer.ts`, `openapi.ts`, `secrets.ts` and
`IssueChatLongThreadPerf.tsx`.

## Verification

- `pnpm vitest run chat-catalog-domains chat-catalog-contract.test.ts
chat-catalog-consistency.test.ts unit-launcher.test.mjs
--testTimeout=180000` in `tests/runner-e2e`: 269 files pass, 3,550 tests
pass.
- `node --test chat-full-catalog-testops-manifest.test.mjs`: 10 pass.
- `node tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs <HEAD> --check`:
no change.
- `tsc` for `server` and `tests/runner-e2e`: clean.
- Live single-case verification: 139 of 242 cases passed on paid runs,
and a person read the saved evidence for each. These are single-case
runs, not one full-cohort run.

## Risks

- Large diff. Most of it is test-only, but the 43 non-test files change
product code paths. Review those files first.
- Some graders are now less strict on reply wording. A person must read
replies for meaning on those cases.
- 42 cases need disposable outside accounts (Notion, Slack, GitHub,
Daytona and others) and stay blocked. `access.invite-teammate` stays
failing until local agent isolation lands, because the runner's durable
state keeps a live invite token.
- The paid workflow compares the trusted private-evidence files with
master. They are unchanged, so this risk is low.

## Model Used

Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), with tool use and code
execution, in Claude Code. Subagents used the same model.

## 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
- [ ] 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-11-10 08:02:11 -06:00

71 lines
6.8 KiB
TypeScript

import { expect, it } from "vitest";
import { chatCatalogHumanHistoryMatches, verifyChatCatalogHumanQuestionAnswer, validChatCatalogHumanCounts } from "./chat-catalog-contract.js";
it("binds the canonical request after genuine setup history and retains native setup run identities", () => {
const input = { implementation: { setupHumanMessageCount: 1, expectedHumanMessageCount: 2 },
human: [{ id: "setup", body: "Remember this detail" }, { id: "query", body: "Use the detail" }],
runIds: ["setup-run", "query-run"], boundary: { humanCommentIds: ["setup"], runIds: ["setup-run"] }, renderedQuery: "Use the detail" };
expect(chatCatalogHumanHistoryMatches(input)).toBe(true);
expect(chatCatalogHumanHistoryMatches({ ...input, human: [...input.human].reverse() })).toBe(false);
expect(chatCatalogHumanHistoryMatches({ ...input, runIds: ["query-run"] })).toBe(false);
expect(chatCatalogHumanHistoryMatches({ ...input, boundary: { ...input.boundary, humanCommentIds: ["injected"] } })).toBe(false);
expect(chatCatalogHumanHistoryMatches({ ...input, human: [...input.human, { id: "hidden", body: "Please finish" }] })).toBe(false);
});
it("preserves zero-setup semantics and refuses impossible setup/total declarations", () => {
expect(chatCatalogHumanHistoryMatches({ implementation: {}, human: [{ id: "query", body: "Original query" }], runIds: ["run"], boundary: { humanCommentIds: [], runIds: [] }, renderedQuery: "Original query" })).toBe(true);
expect(validChatCatalogHumanCounts({ setupHumanMessageCount: 1, expectedHumanMessageCount: 1 })).toBe(false);
expect(validChatCatalogHumanCounts({ setupHumanMessageCount: -1 })).toBe(false);
expect(validChatCatalogHumanCounts({ setupHumanMessageCount: 0.5 })).toBe(false);
expect(validChatCatalogHumanCounts({ setupHumanMessageCount: 0, expectedHumanMessageCount: 0, queryOutcome: "rejected" })).toBe(true);
});
function answerEvidence() {
return { expected: { interactionId: "question", sourceRunId: "initial", userId: "person" }, companyId: "company", issueId: "source", agentId: "ceo", canonicalComment: { id: "query", authorUserId: "person" },
interactions: [{ id: "question", companyId: "company", issueId: "source", sourceRunId: "initial", createdByAgentId: "ceo", addresseeUserId: "person", kind: "ask_user_questions" as const,
status: "answered" as const, resolverPolicy: "human_only" as const, resolvedByUserId: "person", resolvedAt: "2026-11-04T13:30:00Z", result: { version: 1 as const, answers: [{ questionId: "saved", optionIds: ["yes"] }], summaryMarkdown: null } }],
activity: [{ companyId: "company", entityId: "source", action: "issue.thread_interaction_answered", actorType: "user", actorId: "person", details: { interactionId: "question", interactionKind: "ask_user_questions", interactionStatus: "answered" } }],
runs: [{ id: "initial", companyId: "company", agentId: "ceo", runtimeMode: "native", status: "succeeded", startedAt: "2026-11-04T13:20:00Z", contextSnapshot: { issueId: "source", commentId: "query" } },
{ id: "confirmed", companyId: "company", agentId: "ceo", runtimeMode: "native", status: "succeeded", startedAt: "2026-11-04T13:30:01Z", contextSnapshot: { issueId: "source", interactionId: "question" } }],
};
}
it("counts one independently verified UI answer as the second declared credential action without fabricating a comment", () => {
const raw = answerEvidence(), questionAnswer = verifyChatCatalogHumanQuestionAnswer(raw); expect(questionAnswer).toBeDefined();
const human = [{ id: "query", body: "Original query" }];
const input = { implementation: { scenarioId: "secrets.personal-secret", expectedHumanMessageCount: 2 }, human, questionAnswer,
runIds: ["initial", "confirmed"], boundary: { humanCommentIds: [], runIds: [] }, renderedQuery: "Original query" };
expect(chatCatalogHumanHistoryMatches(input)).toBe(true); expect(human).toHaveLength(1);
expect(chatCatalogHumanHistoryMatches({ ...input, implementation: { scenarioId: "secrets.configure-company-secret", expectedHumanMessageCount: 2 } })).toBe(true);
expect(chatCatalogHumanHistoryMatches({ ...input, implementation: { scenarioId: "secrets.company-secret", expectedHumanMessageCount: 2 } })).toBe(false);
expect(chatCatalogHumanHistoryMatches({ ...input, questionAnswer: undefined })).toBe(false);
expect(chatCatalogHumanHistoryMatches({ ...input, human: [...human, { id: "extra", body: "Hidden nudge" }] })).toBe(false);
expect(chatCatalogHumanHistoryMatches({ ...input, implementation: { scenarioId: "questions-and-approvals.multi-part-question", expectedHumanMessageCount: 2 } })).toBe(false);
});
it.each(["wrong user", "missing audit", "duplicate audit", "foreign issue", "unrelated answer", "early successor", "extra successor"])("rejects %s as human-answer accounting authority", fault => {
const value = answerEvidence();
if (fault === "wrong user") value.interactions[0]!.resolvedByUserId = "other-person";
if (fault === "missing audit") value.activity = [];
if (fault === "duplicate audit") value.activity.push(value.activity[0]!);
if (fault === "foreign issue") value.interactions[0]!.issueId = "foreign";
if (fault === "unrelated answer") value.expected.interactionId = "unrelated";
if (fault === "early successor") value.runs[1]!.startedAt = "2026-11-04T13:29:00Z";
if (fault === "extra successor") value.runs.push({ ...value.runs[1]!, id: "extra" });
expect(verifyChatCatalogHumanQuestionAnswer(value)).toBeUndefined();
});
it.each(["anyone", "human_only"] as const)("independently verifies current-human answered %s questions", policy => {
const raw = answerEvidence();
const value = { ...raw, interactions: raw.interactions.map(row => ({ ...row, resolverPolicy: policy, requestedResolverPolicy: policy, effectiveResolverPolicy: policy })) };
expect(verifyChatCatalogHumanQuestionAnswer(value)).toBeDefined();
expect(verifyChatCatalogHumanQuestionAnswer({ ...value, interactions: value.interactions.map(row => ({ ...row, addresseeUserId: "other" })) })).toBeUndefined();
expect(verifyChatCatalogHumanQuestionAnswer({ ...value, interactions: value.interactions.map(row => ({ ...row, resolvedByUserId: undefined, resolvedByAgentId: "ceo" })) })).toBeUndefined();
});
it("rejects unknown or agent-only policies and submitted text in independent accounting", () => {
const raw = answerEvidence();
for (const effectiveResolverPolicy of ["unknown", "agent_only"] as const) {
expect(verifyChatCatalogHumanQuestionAnswer({ ...raw, interactions: raw.interactions.map(row => ({ ...row,
effectiveResolverPolicy: effectiveResolverPolicy as unknown as typeof row.resolverPolicy })) })).toBeUndefined();
}
expect(verifyChatCatalogHumanQuestionAnswer({ ...raw, interactions: raw.interactions.map(row => ({ ...row,
result: { ...row.result, answers: [{ ...row.result.answers[0]!, otherText: "Do not submit a note" }] } })) })).toBeUndefined();
});