mirror of
https://github.com/alkimake/paperclip.git
synced 2026-06-16 19:00:38 +09:00
6 commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Dotta
|
7a9b3a6037
|
[codex] Harden recovery issue handling (#4600)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - The control plane must recover stranded agent work without creating new operational loops > - Stranded recovery issues can themselves fail, and exposing raw retry errors in comments can leak sensitive adapter details > - New local companies also should not force a hire-approval gate unless operators enable that policy > - This pull request hardens recovery issue handling, redacts retry failure details in issue copy, preserves `maxConcurrentRuns: 1`, and flips new-hire approval to an opt-in default > - The benefit is safer automatic recovery and smoother default company setup without hidden migration conflicts ## What Changed - Added migration `0071_default_hire_approval_off` and updated company schema/import/export/docs so hire approvals default off and serialize only when enabled. - Added migration `0072_large_sandman` with a partial unique index preventing duplicate active stranded recovery issues for the same source issue. - Blocked failed `stranded_issue_recovery` issues in place instead of creating nested recovery issues. - Redacted latest retry failure details from recovery issue comments while still linking reviewers to run evidence. - Allowed `maxConcurrentRuns: 1` to be honored by heartbeat concurrency normalization. - Added focused regression coverage for recovery recursion, redaction, migration ordering, and concurrency behavior. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db run check:migrations` - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server server/src/__tests__/recovery-classifiers.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts --pool=forks --poolOptions.forks.isolate=true` - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server server/src/__tests__/agent-permissions-routes.test.ts --pool=forks --poolOptions.forks.isolate=true` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts --pool=forks --poolOptions.forks.isolate=true` exits 0, but this host skipped the embedded Postgres tests with the existing init guard. - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts --pool=forks --poolOptions.forks.isolate=true` exits 0, but this host skipped the embedded Postgres tests with the existing init guard. ## Risks - Migration risk is low but this PR intentionally owns both new migrations to avoid separate PR migration-journal conflicts. - Recovery comments now require operators to inspect linked run evidence for details instead of reading raw errors inline. - The hire approval default changes behavior for newly created/imported companies only; existing persisted company settings are not changed except by the SQL default for future rows. > 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 - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub workflow, reasoning mode active. Context window not exposed in this environment. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
5a0c1979cf
|
[codex] Add runtime lifecycle recovery and live issue visibility (#4419) | ||
|
Dotta
|
641eb44949
|
[codex] Harden create-agent skill governance (#4422)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Hiring agents is a governance-sensitive workflow because it grants roles, adapter config, skills, and execution capability > - The create-agent skill needs explicit templates and review guidance so hires are auditable and not over-permissioned > - Skill sync also needs to recognize bundled Paperclip skills consistently for Codex local agents > - This pull request expands create-agent role templates, adds a security-engineer template, and documents capability/secret-handling review requirements > - The benefit is safer, more repeatable agent creation with clearer approval payloads and less permission sprawl ## What Changed - Expanded `paperclip-create-agent` guidance for template selection, adjacent-template drafting, and role-specific review bars. - Added a Security Engineer agent template and collaboration/safety sections for Coder, QA, and UX Designer templates. - Hardened draft-review guidance around desired skills, external-system access, secrets, and confidential advisory handling. - Updated LLM agent-configuration guidance to point hiring workflows at the create-agent skill. - Added tests for bundled skill sync, create-agent skill injection, hire approval payloads, and LLM route guidance. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/agent-skills-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/codex-local-skill-injection.test.ts server/src/__tests__/codex-local-skill-sync.test.ts server/src/__tests__/llms-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/paperclip-skill-utils.test.ts --config server/vitest.config.ts` passed: 5 files, 23 tests. - `git diff --check public-gh/master..pap-2228-create-agent-governance -- . ':(exclude)ui/storybook-static'` passed. - Confirmed this PR does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml`. ## Risks - Low-to-medium risk: this primarily changes skills/docs and tests, but it affects future hiring guidance and approval expectations. - Reviewers should check whether the new Security Engineer template is too broad for default company installs. - No database migrations. > 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 - OpenAI Codex coding agent based on GPT-5, with shell, git, Paperclip API, and GitHub CLI tool use in the local Paperclip workspace. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Note: screenshot checklist item is not applicable; this PR changes skills, docs, and server tests. --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
f98c348e2b
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping descendant execution and wake behavior coherent. > - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts, server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc. > - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments` migration. > - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto `paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind. > - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to `0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single PR. > - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration conflicts. ## What Changed - Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree pause, cancel, and restore operations. - Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue detail subtree controls. - Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to `0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream `0065_environments`. - Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200 OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201 Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts` - `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx` ## Risks - This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases. - The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream `0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final `0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that lands. - The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could have assumed. > 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 - OpenAI Codex coding agent in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not exposed inside 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
09d0678840
|
[codex] Harden heartbeat scheduling and runtime controls (#4223)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through issue checkout, heartbeat runs, routines, and auditable control-plane state > - The runtime path has to recover from lost local processes, transient adapter failures, blocked dependencies, and routine coalescing without stranding work > - The existing branch carried several reliability fixes across heartbeat scheduling, issue runtime controls, routine dispatch, and operator-facing run state > - These changes belong together because they share backend contracts, migrations, and runtime status semantics > - This pull request groups the control-plane/runtime slice so it can merge independently from board UI polish and adapter sandbox work > - The benefit is safer heartbeat recovery, clearer runtime controls, and more predictable recurring execution behavior ## What Changed - Adds bounded heartbeat retry scheduling, scheduled retry state, and Codex transient failure recovery handling. - Tightens heartbeat process recovery, blocker wake behavior, issue comment wake handling, routine dispatch coalescing, and activity/dashboard bounds. - Adds runtime-control MCP tools and Paperclip skill docs for issue workspace runtime management. - Adds migrations `0061_lively_thor_girl.sql` and `0062_routine_run_dispatch_fingerprint.sql`. - Surfaces retry state in run ledger/agent UI and keeps related shared types synchronized. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run src/tools.test.ts` from `packages/mcp-server` ## Risks - Medium risk: this touches heartbeat recovery and routine dispatch, which are central execution paths. - Migration order matters if split branches land out of order: merge this PR before branches that assume the new runtime/routine fields. - Runtime retry behavior should be watched in CI and in local operator smoke tests because it changes how transient failures are resumed. > 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 - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent runtime, shell/git tool use enabled. Exact hosted model build and context window are not exposed in this Paperclip heartbeat environment. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
Dotta
|
1266954a4e
|
[codex] Make heartbeat scheduling blocker-aware (#4157)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through issue-driven heartbeats, checkouts, and wake scheduling. > - This change sits in the server heartbeat and issue services that decide which queued runs are allowed to start. > - Before this branch, queued heartbeats could be selected even when their issue still had unresolved blocker relationships. > - That let blocked descendant work compete with actually-ready work and risked auto-checking out issues that were not dependency-ready. > - This pull request teaches the scheduler and checkout path to consult issue dependency readiness before claiming queued runs. > - It also exposes dependency readiness in the agent inbox so agents can see which assigned issues are still blocked. > - The result is that heartbeat execution follows the DAG of blocked dependencies instead of waking work out of order. ## What Changed - Added `IssueDependencyReadiness` helpers to `issueService`, including unresolved blocker lookup for single issues and bulk issue lists. - Prevented issue checkout and `in_progress` transitions when unresolved blockers still exist. - Made heartbeat queued-run claiming and prioritization dependency-aware so ready work starts before blocked descendants. - Included dependency readiness fields in `/api/agents/me/inbox-lite` for agent heartbeat selection. - Added regression coverage for dependency-aware heartbeat promotion and issue-service participation filtering. ## Verification - `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` - On this host, the Vitest command passed, but the embedded-Postgres portions of those files were skipped because `@embedded-postgres/darwin-x64` is not installed. ## Risks - Scheduler ordering now prefers dependency-ready runs, so any hidden assumptions about strict FIFO ordering could surface in edge cases. - The new guardrails reject checkout or `in_progress` transitions for blocked issues; callers depending on the old permissive behavior would now get `422` errors. - Local verification did not execute the embedded-Postgres integration paths on this macOS host because the platform binary package was missing. > I checked `ROADMAP.md`; this is a targeted execution/scheduling fix and does not duplicate planned roadmap feature work. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex via the Paperclip `codex_local` adapter in this workspace. Exact backend model ID is not surfaced in the runtime here; tool-enabled coding agent with terminal execution and repository editing capabilities. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |