You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
fix(ui): retry the latest failed task attempt (#13765)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip manages work done by AI agents.
> - The task thread lets an operator retry a failed run.
> - Legacy runs with transcript output did not get a failure marker.
> - The thread could therefore offer Try again for an older failure.
> - The server correctly reused that failure's existing retry, even when
it had already failed.
> - This change keeps the latest failure actionable and reports stopped
retry responses to the operator.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
Try again could return success without starting work. An initial setup
failure had an empty transcript. Its later retry produced output and
failed. Only the initial failure had a retry marker, so the button kept
requesting the initial failure's already-failed successor.
**Expected behavior**
Try again targets the latest failed attempt. An already-stopped retry
response shows an error and refreshes the task's run state.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start a legacy adapter task that fails before producing transcript
output.
2. Retry it. Let this attempt produce output and a final failure comment
before it fails.
3. Click Try again in the task thread.
4. Before this fix, the click targets the original failure and replays
the stopped successor.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduced against `1483bb8bcf`; the regression is also present on the
branch base `8813a50105`.
**Deployment mode**
Authenticated server with a legacy adapter. The bug is in the shared
task UI and retry API client.
Related: #11650 adds a different recovery-notice action. This change
fixes failed-run markers and retry response handling. Searches found no
duplicate of this failure case.
## What Changed
- Render legacy failure markers even when the run has a transcript or
final comment.
- Keep later cancelled automatic retries from replacing the failed run's
retry action.
- Reject already-stopped retry responses in the API client so existing
error feedback appears.
- Refresh task run queries after both successful and failed retry
requests.
- Add regression coverage for failed and timed-out attempts, execution
gates with output, and retry response states.
## Verification
- Before the fix, the new regression tests failed: two selected the
original failure, and four accepted a stopped successor as success.
- Targeted task-thread, retry API, marker, and issue-page tests: 279
passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`: passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build`: passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates`: passed.
- Full UI suite: 6,529 tests passed across 626 files.
- [CI run
35650385023](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35650385023):
all 53 checks passed, including full workspace build, typecheck,
unit/integration suites, and browser tests. The redundant local
full-workspace test run was stopped after CI passed; it is not counted
as a completed local pass.
- Greptile: 5/5 on `608ee58c99`, with no review threads or unresolved
comments. The branch is mergeable.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` were attempted. Both stop at the
Runner's Rust checks because this host has no `cargo`. The full
workspace checks passed in CI.
## Risks
Low risk. This changes UI presentation and response handling only. The
server's exact-retry idempotency, authorization, execution ownership,
and recovery gates remain in place. No schema changes or live task
mutations. Existing documentation describes this retry action; the fix
restores that behavior.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-6 (Codex), with reasoning, repository tools, and code
execution.
## 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 (targeted checks;
full-workspace limits described above)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
(existing behavior restored; no documentation change needed)
- [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>
0 commit comments