## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The task-drain service controls when task execution can start and
stop.
> - The service had compensation paths for states that its validators or
recovery process already handle.
> - These paths added rollback state and a stuck-claim marker without
improving normal drain behavior.
> - This pull request removes the unreachable TTL clamp, audit rollback,
generation counter, and double-fault marker.
> - The result keeps input validation, audit ordering, atomic release,
and orphan recovery.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The task-drain service and its routes manage drain state, audit rows,
and execution locks.
**Subsystem affected**
server/ — REST API and orchestration services.
**Current behavior**
The service clamps a validated TTL value. The routes mutate drain state
before audit writes and then restore state after a failed write. Claim
release also tracks a second durable-write failure with an in-memory
marker.
**Proposed behavior**
The validator remains the single TTL policy. The routes write audit rows
before they mutate drain state. Claim release logs a failed write and
lets the orphan reaper release the issue lock.
**Reason and benefit**
The removed paths cannot handle a valid API request that reaches them.
The rollback can lose the original start time. The marker can keep a
drain non-quiescent until process restart. The simpler flow keeps state
consistent and uses the existing recovery path.
**Breaking changes**
None to the public API. A failed claim release keeps the issue lock
until the next orphan-reaper cycle.
## What Changed
- Remove the service-layer TTL clamp because the shared validator
rejects values above the limit.
- Write task-drain audit rows before drain mutation and remove the
rollback helpers.
- Remove the rollback generation counter and its unused state.
- Remove double-fault stuck-claim tracking and keep the atomic release
path.
- State that the quiescent flag describes work in this process.
- Keep the orphan reaper as the recovery path after a failed claim
release.
## Verification
- Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server test
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-task-drain-admission-release.test.ts`.
- Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server test
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-task-drain.test.ts`.
- Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server test
server/src/__tests__/instance-settings-routes.test.ts`.
- Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server test
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-scheduling-suppression.test.ts`.
- Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server test
server/src/__tests__/execution-lock-orphan-cleanup.test.ts`.
- The five affected test files pass with 70 tests.
- Confirm the full pull request checks pass before merge.
## Risks
The issue lock remains held until the orphan reaper runs after a failed
claim release. This uses the existing recovery path for interrupted
runs. The change does not alter the public API or database schema.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, 400K context window, tool use 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
- [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>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The server admits agent work through heartbeat scheduling and
execution paths
> - Operators need to stop new work before maintenance or a graceful
shutdown
> - A process restart alone does not provide a reusable admission
control primitive
> - This pull request adds an instance API that holds new task admission
and reports process quiescence
> - The benefit is a small, auditable control that lets operators wait
for active work without a restart
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Problem or motivation**
Operators cannot hold new task admission without restarting the
Paperclip process. A restart can interrupt maintenance flows and does
not provide a status signal for active work.
**Proposed solution**
Add `GET /instance/task-drain`, `POST /instance/task-drain`, and `DELETE
/instance/task-drain`. The server keeps the drain state in process
memory, applies it to every scheduling suppression path, supports an
optional TTL up to 24 hours, and reports active wake and run counts.
**Alternatives considered**
A timer would clear the drain after its TTL, but it could keep the
Node.js event loop open during shutdown. A database row would add
storage and query work for process-local state. The implementation uses
lazy expiry and process memory instead.
**Roadmap alignment**
The change supports the roadmap goal for enforced outcomes and safe
recovery actions. It does not duplicate a listed roadmap item.
**Additional context**
This is a server and shared-package change. It adds no user interface
and no database migration.
## What Changed
- Add process-local task-drain state with lazy TTL expiry.
- Add task-drain admission suppression to the shared heartbeat resolver.
- Add instance routes to read, start, and stop a task drain.
- Add validation for positive TTL values and the shared 24-hour maximum.
- Add activity records for drain mutations and tests for status, access
control, validation, and suppression.
## Verification
- Run `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-task-drain.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/instance-settings-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-scheduling-suppression.test.ts`.
- Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared exec tsc --noEmit`.
- Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsc --noEmit` and compare
its known pre-existing errors with the base commit.
- Confirm that pull request CI reaches a terminal green state.
## Risks
The drain state exists only in process memory, so a restart clears it.
This behavior matches the process-local design. A drain without a TTL
remains active until an operator calls the delete route. The status
route reads in-memory activity sets and does not query stale database
rows.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, extended reasoning with tool use and code
execution. The exact runtime context window is not exposed by the
execution 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 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
- [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>
Nicky Leach