mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-13 07:12:00 +01:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5
e0e6462a73
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents coordinate on tasks through comments. A comment posted with `resume: true` is an explicit request for more work; on a finished task it reopens the task, for a person or for another agent. > - A comment that arrives while the assignee's run is still settling queues its own run. If the settling run then closes the task, that queued run is cancelled before dispatch as a stale continuation (`continuation_task_ownership_changed`). > - For a person's comment, the outbox saves the unread message first and the release drain reopens the task (chaos s9401/t72). For another agent's explicit `resume: true` comment, nothing was saved. The request was dropped and the task stayed `done`. > - This pull request saves that agent comment too, with its explicit resume intent. The existing release-drain rule for an agent's explicit resume reopens the task and delivers the comment once. > - The benefit is that a parent agent's "do this next turn" request is not lost to a timing race. An agent comment without `resume: true` stays communicative, as before. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** On a hosted staging instance, a parent agent posted a comment with `resume: true` on its child's task: "a changed requirement for your NEXT turn". The child's provider turn had finished 90 s earlier, but its run was still settling (workspace copy-back). The comment queued a new run. 40 s later the settling run applied its `done` decision. The queued run was then cancelled with `continuation_task_ownership_changed`. The task stayed `done` and no run ever read the comment. The cancelled run itself is not shown as a failure (the task is terminal, so task chat hides it, and Sentry skips expected cancellations), so nothing told anyone the request was lost. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run an agent on a task. While its run is still settling, post a comment from another agent with `resume: true`. 2. Let the run close the task (`done`). 3. The comment's queued run is cancelled as a stale continuation. The task is not reopened and the comment is never delivered. **Expected behavior** The task reopens for the explicit resume request, and the comment is delivered exactly once, as for a person's comment. ## What Changed - `deferUndeliveredCommentsOfStaleRun` finds, per owed comment, the comment's own `issue.comment_added` activity record: written by its author (another agent, not the assignee) with `resumeIntent: true`. Merged runs, whose wake is rewritten as comments join, therefore keep each comment's own intent. - `saveUndeliveredUserComments` also admits those comments (`explicitResumeCommentIds`). When only such comments remain, the deferred receipt records the agent as requester and carries `resumeIntent`/`followUpRequested` in its payload and wake context. The release drain's existing rule for an agent's explicit resume on a `done` task then reopens and delivers it. Person-comment behaviour is unchanged. - `doc/run-log-events.md` describes the rule. ## Verification - RED on `origin/master` (`1d67e309e0`): `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/heartbeat-held-comment-wake.test.ts -t "explicit resume comment"` fails: `expected [] to have a length of 1 but got +0` (the comment is never delivered after the stale cancellation). - GREEN: the whole file passes (29/29), including two-requester merged-run tests in both orders, the new negative test (`does not reopen a finished task for another agent's comment without resume intent`) and the existing person-comment and exactly-once tests. - Related suites `ownership-reconciliation-report`, `execution-continuation`, `chat-wake-conversation-batch` plus this file: 118/118 tests pass locally. One `afterAll` cleanup hook in `ownership-reconciliation-report` timed out under local machine load; CI runs the suite fresh. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsc --noEmit` passes. - Not done: no restart-chaos cell. The harness posts follow-ups as the board user, which s9401/t72 already covers; an agent-authored `resume: true` comment needs a two-agent workload the harness does not have. ## Risks - Low risk. Only a comment whose own wake was an agent's explicit `resume: true` qualifies, only on a task an agent run closed, and only when no run read the comment. The assignee's own comments never qualify. - The ownership reconciler's durable backstop (`checkStaleDroppedComments`) still covers person comments only. If the fast path fails, an agent's resume comment is not recovered later. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, via Claude Code with tool use (shell, file edits, read-only staging API reads). ## 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>