mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-09 07:10:34 +01:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5
06bbcea12f
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Budget admission and run accounting decide whether any task in a company may start > - #19497 made pending accounting an admission hold and settles a stopped run's lost receipt as an unpriced charge > - Restart-chaos waves still stopped whole companies. A lost Codex receipt with complete token counts settled as unpriced because the rate card only prices complete receipts. Under the default blocking policy that hard-stopped the company at 0.38 of 3000 cents. In another storm, a resumed run's continuation was refused by its own task's recovering-accounting hold. Separately, unpriced charges with zero tokens or a known partial cost hard-stopped a company at 120 of 2000 cents > - This pull request prices a lost receipt's observed usage from the rate card, lets a task's continuation pass its own recovering accounting, and stops restart-derived or evidence-free unpriced charges from tripping the blocking policy > - The benefit is that a restart no longer pauses a company by itself, while genuinely unpriced usage still blocks ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Follow-up to #19497. Refs #19606. **What happened?** - Wave A (K6 crash loop): native Codex run `5037b8d1` was killed mid-turn. Its receipt was lost, but `usage_json` held gpt-6.1-sol with 28690 input and 220 output tokens. The charge was written `cost_status=unpriced`, `pricing_provenance.source=unknown`, because `priceCodexReceipt` returns early when `!receipt.complete`. 0.2 s later the default `unpricedUsagePolicy=block` opened a hard incident at 0.38 of 3000 cents. The company was paused, and 6/6 tasks were blocked with `canRetry=false`. - Wave B (K1 storm): Claude run `2a7a8abf` resumed after the restart. `reserveRunBudget` refused its interaction continuation with "New work must wait while a native run recovers its unfinished accounting", so the task could not settle its own recovery. A 0-token unpriced charge and an unpriced charge with a known 0.81-cent cost then hard-stopped the company at 120 of 2000 cents. **What did you expect?** A restart-lost receipt with known numbers is priced as an estimate, and no restart-derived accounting state pauses a company by itself. A task's own continuation is never held by its own accounting. Real usage above the limit, and genuinely unpriced usage, still stop work. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Give a company a hard-stop budget with the default unpriced-usage policy. 2. Kill a native Codex turn after it has reported tokens, so the final receipt is lost and native recovery ends in terminal failure with a verified stop. 3. Observe an unpriced charge for known tokens, a hard incident, and a paused company. ## What Changed - `run-cost-accounting.ts`: when a lost receipt settles and its usage has known tokens and no known cost, price it with `priceCodexReceipt`/`priceAnthropicReceipt` as a complete per-run checkpoint. The charge is `estimated`, its provenance keeps the rate-card source, and its evidence says "final receipt lost; observed usage is a lower bound". The estimate is also written to the run's usage so a later receipt reconciles against it. Zero observed tokens, and per-model usage, stay unpriced (unknown is never shown as zero, and aggregate totals never take one model's rate). - `budget-exposure.ts`: - The pending/recovering accounting hold excludes the run being admitted and earlier runs of the same task (same `native_issue_id`). A task's continuation and finalization can therefore settle its own accounting. Other tasks stay held, and those runs still count as spend. - The blocking unpriced-usage policy no longer counts these unpriced charges: the settled final charge of a lost receipt (restart-derived, any usage; later growth still counts), a charge with a known partial cost, and metered API or subscription billing with no observed tokens. Unknown billing with no tokens (for example Cursor Cloud) and complete-receipt usage that has no price still block. - `budgets.ts` / `budget-reservations.ts`: admission accepts the admitted `runId` and passes it to the exposure read. `reserveRunBudget`, the final dispatch recheck and the read-only admitted recheck all supply it, so a continuation that reserves can also dispatch. - Daytona wave s12 (run f1d98917, a blocked remote recovery with a 0-cent held reservation and every lease destroyed) is closed by #19606. A Retry for that same task passes the hold through the same-task exclusion here. ## Verification - `closed-native-receipt-accounting.test.ts` (embedded Postgres): - Lost Codex (gpt-6.1-sol) and Claude (claude-sonnet-5) receipts with observed tokens settle as `estimated` rate-card charges with the lower-bound evidence. The company stays active and admission is clear under the blocking policy. - A lost receipt for a model with no rate card stays unpriced but opens no incident and no pause. - A task's continuation reserves budget past its own recovering accounting, while another task's run is still held. - Unpriced charges with no tokens on metered billing, or with a known partial cost, do not hard-stop. - Complete-receipt usage with no price still blocks. - The six new cases fail on master and pass with this change. - Existing budget and accounting suites pass locally: budget-enforcement-scoping, budgets-service, heartbeat-cost-accounting, run-cost-accounting, native-stop-accounting, cost-data-quality, budget-live-attempts, budget-live-usage. Server typecheck passes. ## Risks - A lost receipt's estimate is a lower bound. The provenance says so, and a later complete receipt still reconciles. - Restart-derived unpriced charges no longer trip the blocking policy. Usage lost with a killed provider is not counted against that policy, which is consistent with budget enforcement being best effort. Unknown-billing and complete-receipt unpriced usage still block. - The same-task exemption relies on `native_issue_id`. Legacy runs without it keep the old behavior. ## Model Used - Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, via Claude Code with tool use (shell, file editing, embedded Postgres tests). ## 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>