mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-07 16:11:46 +02:00
DottaandPaperclip
0f5fafe16b
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and their work. > - The Runner connects provider sessions to task state, replies, and delegated work. > - Full-stack tests found lost final replies, rejected helper calls that stopped the parent, and unnecessary process restarts. > - A completed child could also receive a new assignment wake that the scheduler then cancelled. > - This change fixes those boundaries and gives agents clearer teammate instructions. > - The tests retain strict completion and process-continuity requirements. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A generated attachment comment could suppress an agent's final reply. A known Codex helper could stop its parent when it requested a Paperclip tool. Native Daytona processes restarted between turns because Paperclip minted an unused GitHub broker token. Reassigning a completed child queued a run that immediately cancelled. Revision instructions also allowed agents to do work assigned to a named teammate themselves. **Expected behavior** Keep the final reply. Reject helper tool requests without borrowing parent authority or stopping the parent. Keep an unconfigured sandbox process alive between turns. Treat assignment-only changes to completed tasks as metadata changes. Preserve explicit teammate assignments during revisions. **Steps to reproduce** Run the retained Runner E2E cases for file handoff, teammate reuse, Daytona warm continuity, and Legacy Claude interview/plan acceptance. The focused regression tests reproduce the reply, helper, process-lifetime, and assignment-wake defects without provider calls. **Paperclip version or commit** The live lifetime and completion campaign used `db3857807`. This PR replays the changes on master `c65fc9e3c`. See Verification for the limits of that evidence. **Deployment mode** Isolated local instances and native Runner sessions in Daytona sandboxes. Related work: #13546 handles a different queued-run issue after an issue-lock compare-and-set failure. This PR prevents the unnecessary assignment wake earlier. #13410 covers retained user services; this PR covers the provider process. No duplicate fix was found. ## What Changed - Exclude generated deliverable-binding comments from final-reply deduplication. Preserve the attachment and explicit user-facing replies. - Reject Paperclip tool and input requests from known Codex helper threads without terminating the parent. Keep unknown-thread rejection intact. - Explain how to hire or reuse a persistent teammate and preserve named delegation on revisions. Update generated protocol fixtures. - Use stable, token-free GitHub wrappers for unconfigured native sandboxes. Preserve credential isolation, configured-account rotation, and cleanup after partial staging failures. - Do not queue assignment-only wakes for done or cancelled tasks. Keep explicit reopening behavior. - Make warm-continuity fixtures create real review cards. Read the persisted final response selected by production presentation logic. Missing selected evidence still fails. ## Verification - Before rebase: 560 focused route, native-executor, and launcher tests passed. The new regressions were reproduced before their fixes. - Live E2E: Legacy Claude interview/plan acceptance passed 3/3 repetitions. Daytona warm continuity passed 2/3 full repetitions. Each successful run retained one process and provider session for all three turns. - The remaining Daytona repetition stopped after a same-URL browser reload left the page blank. Both completed turns retained the same process. Its failed verdict remains unchanged; this PR does not claim the blank-page cause is fixed. - Reports: https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-e2e-lifetime-race-20260920/investigation.html and https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-e2e-behavior-followups-20260919-results/investigation.html - Post-rebase `pnpm build` and `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. All 414 Runner E2E harness unit tests and its typecheck passed. Codex protocol tests: 88 passed, 2 ignored. - Latest-head CI: 55 successful checks and 2 intentional skips. Greptile: 5/5 with no review threads. The unchanged workspace exposure tests hit a fixed-port collision on the first CI attempt; their local suite passed (25 tests, 3 platform skips), and the CI shard passed on one retry. - The duplicate local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after the full hosted general and serialized test shards passed. It did not finish locally and is not counted as a local full-suite pass. ## Risks Configured GitHub accounts retain run-scoped credential rotation and can still restart warm processes. That limitation requires a separate design. Known provider helpers cannot use Paperclip coordination tools directly; they must return findings to the parent. The delegation prompt is an instruction, not an enforced guarantee; Codex Mini hiring/reuse failures remain open. No schema or workflow changes are included. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository tools, code execution, and parallel coding agents. The exact deployment suffix and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## 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 issues and shared reports) - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run focused tests locally and they pass; full hosted test shards also 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>